Agreed

[edit on 7-3-2009 by mckyle]

Originally posted by Phage
Brought to you by Jaime Maussan...again.
Mister birds, balloons (including flying horses), and hoaxes. One of the men who is singlehandedly contributing to making ufology a laughing stock.

Phage, I have to agree with you about Jaime Maussan. There have been proven hoaxes where he still claims are real. He makes a living ($$) out of this, unfortunately, to the serious field of UFO research.

A colleague invited him to speak at a conference, and I always remember this. Mr. Maussan requested $10,000 in advance; 2 first-class airline tickets; 5-star hotel accommodations and 50% of the proceeds from the conference. Needless to say, he did not speak.

That said, I still find this NASA video to be bona fide and not a hoax. In my opinion, the flashing objects filmed are not natural. You can put any labels you want. This is my objective opinion.

[edit on 7-3-2009 by Exopolitico]

That's right ufoorbhunter.

Let's not forget how during Apollo they had two feeds being broadcast (secret frequencies) to two locations on Earth: one in Camberra, Australia and the other one in California. What we saw (Armstrong stepping out, etc.,) was a picture of a television. In other words, there was a camera filming what was being displayed on a TV. That is why it was so blurry.

So yes, NASA likes to blur, smudge, obfuscate, hide, [keep adding here], etc.

N.A.S.A. = Never A Straight Answer.



[edit on 7-3-2009 by Exopolitico]

Thanks to the OP... S&F for the great find

I don't want to discuss the presenter, I'll take it on face value for now that this is genuine, untampered (not a word apparently... though it should be so it stays) NASA footage.

Adding to the collection of NASA footage I have already seen this gives even more evidence as to the existence of ET watchers. If I put a camera in the woods would I catch Bigfoot? Probably not. But it seems whenever theres one in space we always capture a UFO, of seemingly intelligent design performing 'impossible' maneuverability and speeds.

This can't be down to chance... all those objects moving through the galaxy, trade routes perhaps. They know we know. And there's no reason they haven't made contact long ago... I want a live Kelper Satellite feed... and why not? who pay's for these things? the taxpayer? well surely that's not too much to ask then huh?

Disclosure... or rather telling the damn truth for once, as I like to put it, is LONG overdue...

Stop paying your taxes until they cooperate. We have the right. the need. the mentality and the humility to know the truth.

Very interesting!

The black objects look indeed as birds, at least at a first glance, it's just strange how the first one stops at one point and seemingly stays there, not flapping wings or anything.. I may be wrong though. The footage is not so clear.

Anyway, I was just wondering (seriously), is it possible that space debris from some other mission is self illuminated and blinking? I thought not but I have serious doubts about it.

In my opinion, most is space debris. However, there are some frames that are more suspicious.

I do not think we are alone. I like to think that if beings can travel through space like we travel to work everyday, they would have some sort of long range viewer. I just can believe they would be that close and watching what we were doing. Especially since they don't want the populous of this planet to know they are there.

It really doesn't matter who presented the information if it is accurate. I think most thinking adults can come to their own conclusions, and not mutter "These.. are.. u..f..o..s.." with a glassy-eyes stare as if the dude put them in a trance. I think we can evaluate them on their own merit. Bringing this guy into the equation is nonsensical, it doesn't matter. All that matters is if these are genuine, and non-touched.


The actual videos are interesting. The 'object' seems to approach, stop, retreat. Also seems to be some sort of an effect across the object.

If these are genuine, I hope folks give them more consideration and study, and stop worrying about who produced them.

To aid this topic of ... Hey...NASA more UFOs, I give you more UFOs, which
I have posted on You Tube under "NASA UFOs"...44 NASA UFO video segments, to be precise...all under.......... "secretnasaman". so,
please check them out!. ... 44 videos are just too many links to put on this single post..

So find your favorite...
44 should be enough! enjoy..cheers

Excellent video, great find.
Some of those images are quite compelling.

I just hate the title because it's composed all wrong.

"Hey...NASA More UFOs!"
Shouldn't it be "Hey NASA...More UFOs!"
Maybe even "Hey...More NASA UFOs!"

My....only problem with the thread in fact.

Sorry alyosha1981 if I'm being overly picky on that point.



Stars n' flags.

- Lee

Savior and Phage,

Nice try on trying to derail the thread! So quick to hop on threads like this, offer none of your own suggestions as to what we may be looking at, look for some detail ( i.e. maussan ) that can be used to twist the thread away from the important part of the thread ( i.e. The actual footage ), oh and make sure its in the first few pages as it would be no good to try derail 10 pages into the thread now would it!

Great Footage OP and nice find! I would find it difficult to believe that this footage is faked in any way so that just leaves the question what the hell are we looking at????

The original NASA footage was the reason why I got any particular interest in the subject of UFO's.

I've just watched this new footage and I have to say I'm not particularly impressed at all with this footage. The first part looks nothing more than Camera glare to me, a reflection of light. As somebody already stated, the launch footage scenes to me look nothing more than birds.

The actual footage in space is a little bit more interesting, but nothing of spectacular value. It's Just the same blobs of light which don't show any intelligent movement and are consistent in their movement and path way. My gut instinct tells me that they're probably something conventional as if they were not, NASA would not publish them in the first place and if they were of any interest, then they were being released on purpose, a tease if you like.

I don't hold much faith in all these super Ufologists. Jaime Maussan, David Sereda, Jose Escamilla and all the others who have jumped on the bandwagon to simply make money out of the gullible. They hold these fancy conventions to simply make money from books, videos and all kinds of crap.

If you're indeed interested in this phenomena, do not put your faith in these people as they'll leave you feeling cheated and stupid.

[edit on 7-3-2009 by paul76]

Originally posted by mckyle

Originally posted by RFBurns
I doubt very seriously the guy could alter any of it without it being immediately detected.

Show me where I mentioned anything about altered NASA vids?

What I said was that anything associated with Maussan will be perceived by some as tainted, because of his track record.

I personally found the NASA vids very interesting. No conclusion to what they are, but certainly interesting.

Did I specifically say that YOU said that? No. You know darn well what I meant in what I wrote. But in case you dont..here is its meaning.

It means that the guy "Maussan" could probably not alter the actual NASA footage without it being detected right off. It is a comment about Maussan, not you. And there is not even a hint of suggesting that YOU suggested that Maussan could alter the footage.

Talk about second guessing. You seem to be doing enough of that yourself.




(dont you just love it folks when the posts you make get twisted up to make the twister sound authentic?)



Cheers!!!!