NASA STS-114 UFO Footage - Can it be debunked?

page: 3
96
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by John Matrix
 
I noticed the second object too,
more noticable in the first video
though I don't think it's a lightning bolt.
both objects end up on roughly the same course.




posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Say what you want about the event. But if nothing was there, why try to follow it with the camera. Over come that simple logic PLEASE...

Not some techno jargon about this or that...


Simple logic of tracking the object means that there was something there.



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
I am not an expert, but I am thinking and, am it possible it is simply a satellite repositioning itself. I used to live in an urban area; as such I cannot see much of the night sky because the city lights bled it all out. I remember the first time I went backpacking and I saw a 'star' that had been sitting still for as long as I had been gazing at the sky suddenly get up and move some distance and then stop again. I was sort of freaked out at first. It was explained to me the next day that it happens all the time and it is simply a satellite that looks like a star repositioning itself. I have been backpacking many times since then and I can tell you that this is quite common place and everyone who does backpacking knows that this happens all the time.

With that being said the 'suddenness' of the objects stopping and changing direction seems alarming and would take a great deal of thrust if down with conventional propulsion systems currently found on earth.



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   
I am sure the well known debunker regulars are pouring over their notebooks right now to try to come up with a link to lens anomaly or ice particle or debris or some other rediculous explanation, and surround that with big words and indimidating, fancy theories to explain this one.

I say good luck to them.

This cannot be debris from the shuttle. The object is too far away when it enters the frame.

This cannot be a lens anomaly. No lens anomaly brings something into the frame and manuvers as this object does.

This cannot be an ice particle. It would have burned up as it moved closer to the atmosphere and became nothing, plus ice does not do 180 degree turns and move off in another direction with no other outside force nearby to make it move.

This cannot be space junk. Again, it would have begun to burn up as it got closer to the atmosphere. Free falling..or floating in this case, debris or ice does not slow down as it approaches the atmosphere. It will speed up and increase velocity, and then begin to burn up.

Im not sure what to make of it..other than it is not any of the above. It could be either a controlled craft or one of them "space critters". Either way, IMO..it is definately something other than ice, debris, lens anomaly, junk, light refraction, video glitch or whatever else is in the debunker bag o scuses.

I cant wait to hear this one explained away.




Cheers!!!!



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boston Tea Party
I am not an expert, but I am thinking and, am it possible it is simply a satellite repositioning itself.


A satellite cannot re-position itself like that. As fast as that object is going when it enters the frame, the thrusters on any satellite would not have enough thrust to slow it down and overcome the intertia plus gravity pull, and then reverse direction. We dont see any thruster plume from this object either....so that pretty much rules out satellite re-positioning.


Cheers!!!!



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by RFBurns

I cant wait to hear this one explained away.



It was explained with elite detail, but perhaps you are being naive to accept the logic. This is truly an amazing video and easily can lead you down a puzzling tunnel. But why do you automatically assume it is an intelligently controlled spacecraft from an unknown region just because you, yourself, cannot explain it.

I do not mean to rag on or demean you, but it is disappointing when individuals like yourself become so close minded.



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
If you look at the stop of the monitored object, you can see but very faint, an object below that is moving from rigt to left simular to the bright one.
It appears to me that the bright object is in pursue of the faint object.

GYMRA



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by John Matrix
 


oh Cool - I thought I was the only one that noticed the lightning bolt @_@



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 01:38 PM
link   
What exactly do you want debunked? A youtube video? I thought people had learned their lesson about posting crap from youtube.

Regardless, please state what it is that you feel should be "debunked" because until you do, I don't see anything interesting in there.

Oh yeah I forgot NASA is always hiding it from you right?



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by nablator
{}. Small debris is what they are. {}

If you believe that no force exists in space, yes. But if you do a bit of research you will find that typical atmospheric drag is 30 micropascals at ISS altitudes, around 400 km. For comparison, solar radiation pressure in the vicinity of the Earth is 4.6 microPascals, and solar wind pressure is typically a few nanopascals. The acceleration of a particle is inversely proportional to its size, because force = surface x pressure, proportional to the square of the size, force = mass x acceleration (Newton's second law) and mass is proportional to the cube of the size.

The constant pressure of 30 µPa pushes a small particle (ice, probably). The smaller it is, the faster it accelerates.


Little atmospheric drag is one force. I have to agree with this. That's why, in time, in a matter of months if i remember, all the very little particles of space debris fall to earth and burn when hit the more denser atmosphere. And because little atmospheric drag too, that's why satelites or ISS have to raise their orbits from time to time.




Originally posted by fxmodels

Actually I believe there is plenty of doubt that these are UFOs. In fact I think this is an example of what happens when people view things that are outside of their day to day experience.
{}
My first thoughts on this video are that this is indeed space debris, most likely ice. Ice particles can be found floating around the shuttle and launched satellites.
{}
You cannot ignore the science and call something a UFO and say something like "there is no doubt these are UFOs". That is irresponsible and leads to junk science which as we have seen, can get us into major trouble!

Marc


Agree with this too. Too often people ignore the little but big facts.

And i think too of what we see in OP it's debris (ice or junk from shuttle activities)

And not only those 2 particles. But all of them. Because, if you speed up and play forward and back a little, you can see there are many "lights" there changing relative position one to another. And , do not forget, they are not stars since they are seen on the Earth as background.




Originally posted by RFBurns
I am sure the well known debunker regulars are pouring over their notebooks right now to try to come up with a link to lens anomaly or ice particle or debris or some other rediculous explanation, and surround that with big words and indimidating, fancy theories to explain this one.


And i'm sure that the regular believer who thinks proud by himself he is an open mind person, will see there a fleet of alien spaceships, or critters, from the 4-th dimension, defying laws of physics, making inteligent maneuvers etcetera. Of course, no need for argument, just the proof is only in what he saw there. :p





This cannot be debris from the shuttle. The object is too far away when it enters the frame.


Too far away?!? ... How you judge the distance? you assume? Then you should not forget that a point of light can be with equal chances a 1 milimeter size particle a few meters away, a centimeter size object tens of meters away, or a 1 kilometer sized at hundreds of miles away. It involves "depth of field" and similarity theorem. Fancy but don't be intimidated (joking about your language in your post). This reminds me about faker Billy Meier with his models...big ships at big distances..or not.





This cannot be a lens anomaly. No lens anomaly brings something into the frame and manuvers as this object does.


Here i agree with you. It clearly shows it is independent from lens movements.





This cannot be an ice particle. It would have burned up as it moved closer to the atmosphere and became nothing, plus ice does not do 180 degree turns and move off in another direction with no other outside force nearby to make it move.


No, it can be ice particle. Why you say about burning in atmosphere since the particle could be small and meters or tens of meters away? You know that shuttle flies at 400 km altitude, and atmosphere can be enough dense to burn speedy objects at maybe 60 km altitude if i remember. Do you really think that any ice particle or junk can be seen at ~~340 km away ??
And yes, particles can APPEAR to make 180 degree turns, just like a bullet, if you are the shooter and see its trajectory, the flying bullet APPEAR to make 180 degree turn from up to down movement..but in reality, the bullet moves on a balistic trajectory, and what you see it's a PROJECTION of the trajectory FROM YOUR POINT OF VIEW.





This cannot be space junk. Again, it would have begun to burn up as it got closer to the atmosphere. Free falling..or floating in this case, debris or ice does not slow down as it approaches the atmosphere. It will speed up and increase velocity, and then begin to burn up.


see previous.





Im not sure what to make of it..other than it is not any of the above. It could be either a controlled craft or one of them "space critters".


it could be, if we have proofs that they exist (but not another similar junks), but, what it is much more probable: alien/critters defying laws of physycs, or ice or junk that are COMMON in shuttle activities and not broke any law?





Either way, IMO..it is definately something other than ice, debris, lens anomaly, junk, light refraction, video glitch or whatever else is in the debunker bag o scuses.


No, it is NOT definately. You should ELIMINATE the common ice/junk solution to make "definately" conclusions.






[edit on 23/2/09 by depthoffield]

[edit on 23/2/09 by depthoffield]



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Hi, inquisitive persons.

For the new comers in UFO stuff, it could seem hare-brained.
For the old UFO fans, you will understand this:

About UFOs, here are my logics, that I did NOT invent:

1- Some UFOs come from someWHERE.

2- Some UFOs come from someWHEN !

3- Some travel by moving.

4- some travel by thought.

5- all in the universe is entangled. [What the BLEEP!? down the rabbit hole].

6- There exist: space/time & time/space,
meaning:
**WE** can move 3 ways in space, in one time line.
**THEY** can move 3 ways in time, in one space. (without moving).

7- One day, science will tell us:
! All universe's matter is made of solid light !

8- The new ***theory of everything*** !
www.abovetopsecret.com...

9- Some UFOs are build in a factory by 3rd density entities. like us.
Some UFOs are though formed !
Some entities don't even need UFOs.

10- and stuff I forgot. . . B-)

And if I may add: read the Ra material of my signature,
or the [My Favorite Sites] box, in my profile,
and you will get a lot of answers !

Blue skies.



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Could they be within our atmosphere? If so maybe this is an explanation.

www.eurekalert.org...



Prof. Colin Price, head of the Geophysics and Planetary Sciences Department at Tel Aviv University, are the catalyst for a newly discovered natural phenomenon he calls "sprites." He and his colleagues are one of the leading teams in the world studying the phenomenon, and Prof. Price leads the study of "winter sprites" ― those that appear only in the northern hemisphere's winter months. "Sprites appear above most thunderstorms," explains Prof. Price, "but we didn't see them until recently. They are high in the sky and last for only a fraction of a second." While there is much debate over the cause or function of these mysterious flashes in the sky, they may, Prof. Price says, explain some bizarre reports of UFO sightings.



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   
Sprites? That made me smile, new one on me, sure beats marsh gas. What about a Chinese Lantern? Sorry I'm joking on this. To be honest I do think this is very interesting footage. It looks like the ufo orbs, or critters as known to others. These things are out there, this appears to be yet more evidence for what many of us already know.......... UFO Orbs are real.



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   
This is my first post to the board, so I'd like to say "Hello" to everyone. I'm genuinely interested, and would like to know how people arrive at the conclusion that this video automatically shows evidence of being controlled by a form of intelligence, and not of some unknown natural phenomena? I am aware the object does not appear to travel in a straight line. I mean this sincerely, and am not attempting to "bait" anyone. What is it you can see, that I obviously can not?
Thanks you.



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 03:01 PM
link   
All I have to say is: THANK YOU FOR POSTING!!! STARRED AND FLAGGED!!

Where are all the debunkers? I'm sure they're convening on how to say this object changed direction when the shuttle booster was activated.

There is nothing in nature that can move, stop and change direction again in a zero-gravity environment. Only an intelligently operated machine can accomplish that.

Good job!!

[edit on 23-2-2009 by Exopolitico]
Edited to add "zero-gravity environment."

[edit on 23-2-2009 by Exopolitico]



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ziltoid_the_Omniscient
Could they be within our atmosphere? If so maybe this is an explanation.

www.eurekalert.org...



Prof. Colin Price, head of the Geophysics and Planetary Sciences Department at Tel Aviv University, are the catalyst for a newly discovered natural phenomenon he calls "sprites." He and his colleagues are one of the leading teams in the world studying the phenomenon, and Prof. Price leads the study of "winter sprites" ― those that appear only in the northern hemisphere's winter months. "Sprites appear above most thunderstorms," explains Prof. Price, "but we didn't see them until recently. They are high in the sky and last for only a fraction of a second." While there is much debate over the cause or function of these mysterious flashes in the sky, they may, Prof. Price says, explain some bizarre reports of UFO sightings.


Sprites probably explain some incidents and observations, but they are only visible from above storm clouds. The STS-114 footage is definitely not sprites. They are an outcome of storms on Earth and discharge on the outskirts of the atmosphere. They are pretty impressive and this vid doesn't quite capture it...



There's more about them here. Whatever it is in the STS-114 video originates from outside the Earth's atmosphere. Good suggestion all the same



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
When the truth about UFOs does come into the light- I am personally going to beat the ass of every single NASA employee I find for lying. Anyone want to help?



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exopolitico
All I have to say is: THANK YOU FOR POSTING!!! STARRED AND FLAGGED!!

Where are all the debunkers? I'm sure they're convening on how to say this object changed direction when the shuttle booster was activated.

There is nothing in nature that can move, stop and change direction again. Only an intelligently operated machine can accomplish that.


...or Autumn leaves, water, fire and politicians


Point taken



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Exopolitico
 



Have you never kicked a ball into the air? They do this here on earth all the time, without being intelligently controlled therefore I would say its not that simple to state this as conclusive proof of UFOs as from the video we can not identify what the obect is and what forces are acting upon it.

I do have to say though fantastic footage and certainly something very interesting is going on.



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   
How the hell can it be sprites? They only last a fraction of a second, this what ever it is clearly is in shot for longer than that. Also, it's moving towards earth, then it slows down and actually stops, before moving away from earth. And away from earths gravity. If it was being effected by earths gravity, then it wouldn't have stopped, and it wouldn't have taken the path it did.





top topics
 
96
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join