It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by RFBurns
I seriously doubt the camera difference issue as being the defining reason why those slits are there, or why there is a hole at the center, and why that slit morphs from one side to another.
That almost sounds like a desperate cry for support of your theory.
I think these images are from several hours after the breaking of the tether, so I don't know if they had resumed the water dumps.
Originally posted by secretnasaman
Because NASA would never allow anything to put the satellite and experiment in danger, there was no water dumps during the tether deployment.
Wrong, when the camera is focused on infinity everything from what the lens "considers" the closer limit to infinity are focused, not everything, and that is what the people that think that these were ice crystal or other thing like that are trying to explain, that if the camera was focused on to infinity then objects closer to the camera would appear highly out of focus.
The camera lens would have been focused on infinity and therefore nothing could be out of focus.
Unfortunately, some people (from all sides of any discussion) like to use "bully posts" for some reason, but I think we should just ignore those posts.
Some rude people on this thread with their bully posts,( a typical debunker tactic) are like a "black hole" because they do the same things to most people's minds that black holes do to light: absorb them all into their false presentation!
Once more, what the "ice crystal" people mean is that those things are close to the camera and that what makes people think that they pass behind the tether is a camera artifact. I will post a video from an experiment I made sometime ago as soon as I can find it and upload it to the new ATS Media Portal.
When the "tether incident" happened, the shuttle Columbia was drifting from 77 to 100 nautical miles away. How did stray water ionize to form ring shaped "DONUTS," that travel 100 miles away in seconds and then pass around, in front of and behind the tethered satellite, revealing themselves to be 2-3 miles in diameter. The amount of water needed to form a ring 2 miles in diameter, let alone 50 of them, is too large. No shuttle ever has that amount of water to release as it would overburden a mission.
I don't think that anyone suggested that explanation, but I could be wrong.
If anyone is suggesting that the balls of light (the donuts) were merely "ionized plasma" (gas) and we let them try to tell us the Columbia had enough gas to fill 50, two to three mile wide balls of light with gas (impossible), we are still left with the fact that plasma cannot form a perfect, angular architecture, cannot bend in sharp distinct angles and cannot hold any real shape (even a perfect circle) when it is not confined in a containment system.
Yes, it would have been better, but neither cameras are mine, they were both borrowed by my boss, and while I can have the Canon at home (because it's not that good as a video camera and we rarely need a video camera), having both cameras at home would be a little abusive from my part, but it can be done.
Originally posted by RFBurns
Would have been a better example of that if you had taken photos of the same object right after one another IMO.
You can also see detail in this out of focus image that I just took.
Why are people saying its out of focus effects due to lens manufacture when on these objects, detail can be seen, the pulsing going from center to outer edge, the morphing of that slit moving from one side to another?
The two photos you posted show the object in the same conditions, not one on focus and the other out of focus, if those disks are out of focus lights they are all out of focus, they just look sharper some times, like anything in any video of moving objects.
And if we were to say out of focus effect, why does the out of focus image I postead still show the slit on the side, as well as the center hole as they show up when in focus as well?
No, to me, at least, it has always been out of focus ice particles reflecting the light.
So first its ice particles...as was claimed by the debunkers years ago, then its some sort of light effect reflection from pannel lights in the shuttle, now its the lens type and how its manufactured causing these objects.
Originally posted by Exopolitico
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mikesingh
The donuts are not pulsating. This has been answered. They are tumbling, rotating. Because they are irregularly shaped the intensity of the light reflected by them varies with the rotation.
They are totally out of focus. That is why they appear to hold the same shape and orientation. We are not seeing the particles, we are seeing the distorted image of an out of focus object. The circular shape we see, as has been demonstrated, has nothing to do with the actual shape of the particles but with the characteristics of the camera.
[edit on 2/5/2009 by Phage]
Phage. With all due respect. I would be so curious to know which branch of the US government you belong to. You are telling us that the objects do not pulsate? Are you looking at the same videos? I am yet to see one single post of yours that ever agrees with anything plausible. If I didn't know better, I would say you are a paid intel disinformation agent/debunker.
What can you say about the objects that stop and change direction? That's right, there is a Phage logical explanation coming.
Don't you know we are very aware that secrecy alone was not enough and was escalated by paid disinformation agents?
I bet there will be more members who will agree with me than you probably think. Members, if you agree with me, just star me to prove a point. Thank you.
[edit on 6-2-2009 by Exopolitico]
I don't know how you can be so sure of that, but that's OK, usually the sceptics are the ones accused of being sure of their own opinions.
Originally posted by RFBurns
These aint no lens anomalies of out of focus ice particles. Out of focus objects on video or stills do not show detail on the object surface.
Are those really two frames from the original NASA video? I ask because the first looks like a frame of a screen grab and not a frame from a video.
The photos I posted btw are of two different objects from that entire video, different times during the length of the video, of two seperate objects.
Probably never, as I do not see any way of we ever really knowing what those things were.
Lens anomalies...sheesh...when will this nonsense end!
Because these are not lens anomalies, they are a side effect of the way the lens are made and how their internal structure affects the light (even invisible to us) that passes through the lens elements.
If these are lens anomalies why dont we see the exact same objects in other UV video footage from the shuttle???????????
We should see these things on a regular basis in every video, UV or not (this has nothing to do with the wavelength), ever taken with any camera, as long as it shows out of focus points of light.
We should see these things on a regular basis in every UV video ever taken on all the shuttles, not just during some tether experiment.