UFO - Space Ship Found On Google Sky?!

reply to post by iexplore


I think we need to show a bit of common sense regarding google earth and maps-many anomalies show up, its the nature of the photographic method.

reply to post by iexplore


mate you are a deadset genius, with a sense of humour to boot.. I also know for one thing its not a rock..

it would be nice to know dimensions we are talking about here, distances etc..

could be anything from a refractive lens distortion on the image capture device, to space junk to the Aetherius foundation spaceship.

Originally posted by iexplore
Hi everyone,
So this is my first post around here and I wanted to share a strange "object" I found whilst using Google Sky.
This "object" is completely symmetrical, appears to have a central body, sphere head and wings joined at the rear.
Below are images of this "object"...

Closer Image:

Closer Again:

Using Photoshop I added a simple "Plastic Wrap" filter and also adjusted the lights and darks using the "Curves" feature:

What do you make of this?
The coordinates in Google Sky are:
3:44:27.80, 18:26:34.77
Something else I noticed when modifying the lights and darks around this "object" is another completely symmetrical "object".
The following image shows where the obvious "object" is and I have circled where I see something more once the contrast has been adjusted:

You can see a slight highlight (depending on the brightness of your monitor in the picture below:

And once the contrast has been adjusted the following "object" appears:

These to me are extremely strange (especially the first one) and through many hours spent using Google Sky they are the only symmetrical objects (which actually look like space ships) I have found!
I would love to hear you opinions on this...
[edit on 10-4-2009 by iexplore]
[edit on 10-4-2009 by iexplore]

it looks like one of the missing pieces from legos, or tetris or pacman and ms pacman forgot to eat one of those blue guys after powering up

is there anyway to determine the size of these objects? Can anyone figure that out?

Space ships dont need to be aerodynamic to fly in space, think that out first. Two , how could it not just be an artifact in the picture? I think we are looking too hard to find things that arent there, a little too much matrixing

LOL,it does look like a Bird of Prey or some other type of warp drive craft from star trek.It even looks a little like the Daedalus fro SG1,lol.It is prolly the ISS though,good find though.

It almost looks like it could be hubble but it doesn't look to be an exact match. It could also be any number of classified geostationary satellites the public doesn't know about (spy satellites). Lots of possibilities here. One would pretty much expect lots of satellites to show up in the google sky images though.

-ChriS

reply to post by BlasteR

The telescope which made the photograph was tracking the object and the other stars in the image (there is no apparent motion for the length of the exposure, anywhere from 10 to 60 minutes).

The only Earth orbit in which an object would follow the same the same track as the stars is a geostationary orbit. A geostationary orbit can only be positioned over the equator. This object is 18º26' north of the equator so it cannot be in a geostationary orbit. Because it is being tracked it cannot be in any other Earth orbit. It is not a satellite.

Wait a minute...that's not right. A geostationary satellite would also move against the star field. No Earth satellite can appear stationary relative to the stars.

[edit on 4/11/2009 by Phage]

[edit on 4/11/2009 by Phage]

I've no idea what it is...

Unless the Penelope arrived back at earth much sooner than planned!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Phage


I did some research and came across this google website mentioning all the software partners that contributed to "google sky"..

earth.google.com...

We'd like to thank our partners for the work and data they've contributed to this endeavor. It wouldn't have been possible without them.

Sloan Digital Sky Survey
Visit at: www.sdss.org...
Funding for the SDSS and SDSS-II has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, the Max Planck Society, and the Higher Education Funding Council for England. The Participating Institutions are listed at the SDSS web site.

Digital Sky Survey Consortium
Visit at: www.stsci.edu..., www.caltech.edu..., www.roe.ac.uk..., and www.aao.gov.au...
The Digitized Sky Survey (DSS) was produced at the Space Telescope Science Institute under U.S . Government grant NAG W-2166. The images of these surveys are based on photographic data obtained using the Oschin Schmidt Telescope on Palomar Mountain and the UK Schmidt Telescope. The plates were processed into the present digital form with the permission of these institutions.

The Second Palomar Observatory Sky Survey (POSS-II) was made by the California Institute of Technology with funds from the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Geographic Society, the Sloan Foundation, the Samuel Oschin Foundation, and the Eastman Kodak Corporation. The Oschin Schmidt Telescope is operated by the California Institute of Technology and Palomar Observatory.

The UK Schmidt Telescope was operated by the Royal Observatory Edinburgh, with funding from the UK Science and Engineering Research Council (later the UK Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council, which is now part of the Science and Technology Facilities Council), until 1988 June, and thereafter by the Anglo-Australian Observatory. The blue plates of the southern Sky Atlas and its Equatorial Extension (together known as the SERC-J), as well as the Equatorial Red (ER), and the Second Epoch [red] Survey (SES) were all taken with the UK Schmidt.

NASA/Space Telescope Science Institute
Visit at: www.stsci.edu...
Imagery courtesy of NASA/ Space Telescope Science Institute

I also stumbled across a nasa computer program called "JTrack-3d" which shows you the positions of over 900 satellites. The program plots a 3-dimensional map of the satellites' current positions in orbit. My first thought was that this might be used to track down and verify that it isn't any of the known satellites in orbit. But that would be next to impossible. It's an interesting program but you can't even reset the date/time (I tried).

I don't know all the layering in google sky because I use "Stellarium", but it would be interesting to see what layer the unknown object shows up on (I don't think this has been mentioned yet) just out of curiosity.

-ChriS

Hmm first it looked same like the other grey rubbish but indeed it looks weird, i dont think its a spaceship though. Peace.

Couldnt resist sorry:





[edit on 11-4-2009 by Patox]

[edit on 11-4-2009 by Patox]

ArMaP - "I just moved a little to look for another similar looking objects and I found this one."

I agree that there are thousands if not millions of strange looking objects that can be seen in Google Sky but one must admit that there's quite an obvious difference between the following 2 pictures





I've used Google Sky for who knows how many hours and had never come across anything as symmetrical as what i've posted...there must be more Google Sky users on here who can pitch in on whether they have ever seen anything similar?!


falcon51 - "if you find anything strange email me at [email protected]"

Thanks alot falcon...I've made a note of your email address and will be in touch should anything else pop up


romanmel - "This "object" reminded me of images captured in the telescope of John Lenard Walson on youtube."

I had seen that vid before and was quite intrigued by the objects he recorded...there's obviously some controversy around how the video was shot though?!


Outcast2 - "There is a rectangle. Looks like the photo overlay you see over various "protected" areas on Google Earth."

I have come across many of those squared out areas but am not convinced on whether it's a glitch when combining the images together or if their purpose is to hide something?!...Only NASA could let us know for sure but we all know that "real" information of that kind is not going to be provided


Angus123 - "Def a Klingon Bird of Prey. Or an anchor that somehow made it into orbit."

lmao! I personally like the anchor theory...maybe it's from Noah's arc lol


Curio - "How on earth can you put any size on that thing using just that image"

Math's can obviously be used in more ways than I know but I totally agree and would like to know more from 'stanlee'...


skeptic_al - "Dude, like why would you need wings in space?"

Maybe in the same way that our own "Space Shuttle Atlantis" needs wings?!



I don't know but would presume that wings provide lift when re-enterting the Gravitational planet which the space ship first came from more so than being needed in actual space flight?!




Peggasus - Your YouTube link does not work?


stewartw2 - "I think we need to show a bit of common sense regarding google earth and maps-many anomalies show up, its the nature of the photographic method."

I totally agree that anomalies show up in all kinds of photos but I have not come across or seen an anomaly like the one I posted before?!

I would love for someone else to find 'anything' in Google Sky which even closely resembles the pic(s) I posted


NeonStar - "mate you are a deadset genius, with a sense of humour to boot.. "

A rare bread then lol

"it would be nice to know dimensions we are talking about here, distances etc.. "

Indeed it would but unless 'stanlee' can extend on his mathematical conclusion (I would estimate the "wing" to be about 250 ft easy Im not throwing a random number out there...) then unfortunately there's really nothing to go by!


ManBehindTheMask - "Space ships dont need to be aerodynamic to fly in space, think that out first."

I agree that it's not a MUST but i've never seen a space shuttle, rocket, aeroplane are anything else for that matter which "humans" have created to not be aerodynamic (for their job) or symmetrical at least?!..


BlasteR - "I did some research and came across this google website mentioning all the software partners that contributed to "google sky".."

Thanks alot for finding and sharing that information...looks as though i've got a few hours of reading to do

reply to post by BlasteR


The scan of the plate I posted earlier is from POSS II-F. You can find all of the plates used on Google here:
stdatu.stsci.edu...

Unfortunately they are all compressed but by using them you can tell if what appears in Google is on the plates or if it is an artifact created by Google (which does happen).

Look-it obviously is the ISS:

news.astronomie.info...

The ISS usually shows up fairly clearly,
whereas the Google image is very faint,
so it is either, extremely far away or almost in
front of the photographic lens.
The ISS's solar panels do not extend as far
as the "panels" or "wings" of the Google object.
One poster has said that aerodynamics are
non-essential in space,
that's true,but only as long as an object is in space
that's why NASA,bless them,put wings on the space shuttle

qwertz - "Look-it obviously is the ISS"

I agree that it does look very similar to the pic you posted of the ISS (good find by the way but as a previous poster stated...

"The images on Google Sky come from the DSS consortium, which has digitized the images from the Palomar and Schmidt sky surveys. The images were originally made from the late '80's to the late '90's."

I know that the first 2 parts of the ISS were launched and assembled in 1998 - if we take the images seen in Google Sky as the "late 90's" - how far developed would it have been in comparison to the following image of the ISS which was (from what I gather) taken in 2004:

ISS image

Surely the developments over 5 years 1999-2004 (as a minimum) would suggest that when the Google Sky images I posted we're captured the ISS was no where near in the form that it was in 2004?!

[edit on 11-4-2009 by iexplore]

[edit on 11-4-2009 by iexplore]

[edit on 11-4-2009 by iexplore]

reply to post by iexplore


Thanks for the input. I too do not know if it is an artifact in the way the scans are done and/or compiled.

Yes, NASA would be the place to know and I agree that the answer may not be forthcoming. Problem is that NASA might well give a reason, but is it reliable?

I'm not of the belief that NASA is concealing the "mother ship". But there possiblity of disinformation is there so their value limited.

Outcast2 - "Problem is that NASA might well give a reason, but is it reliable?"

I would say NO! Regardless of 'aliens' (which obviously if found and proved to the 'general public' would have a HUGE effect on the reality of ourselves in relation to the actual 'universe')...anything which is funded and hence ultimately controlled (in terms of what is released) by the Government cannot be trusted or taken as reliable evidence as to what is known!

There is too much going on behind the scenes (ie: not made public) of even every day businesses to even start to grasp the vastness of what's 'really' going on behind the scenes of the 'worlds government' and how they are releasing information/technologies etc...as and when 'they' feel the 'general public' is ready for it!

I personally don't need the goverment to decide on when 'i'm ready' for new knowledge...but can fully appreciate that to make moves (ie: release what is 'currently' unknown knowledge to 'our world') takes balls!

The reality is...there's NO going back for the government once 'they decide' what 'fictions' become 'fact'

[edit on 11-4-2009 by iexplore]

reply to post by iexplore

I have come across many of those squared out areas but am not convinced on whether it's a glitch when combining the images together or if their purpose is to hide something?!...Only NASA could let us know for sure but we all know that "real" information of that kind is not going to be provided

NASA has nothing to do with the the majority of the images seen in Google Sky. The plate which contains your image was originally made by either the Palomar or Schmidt observatory and digitized by the Catalogs and Surveys Group of the Space Telescope Science Institute STSI. Google obtained the scanned images from them.

Your "space ship" is almost certainly a deep space object. This is apparent by the fact that the telescope tracked it along with the other stars on the same plate. The exposure time was on the order of 1 hour. Any object which was not being tracked would be streaked (at best) or not visible at all. The chances that a "space ship" or any other object would have the same tracking data for the location of the telescope are astronomical .

Zooming a scanned photograph to the point of ridiculousness does not reveal hidden information. It adds information that was never there.

[edit on 4/11/2009 by Phage]

Phage - "NASA has nothing to do with the the majority of the images seen in Google Sky."

I know that the 'majority' if not 'all' the images seen in Google Sky have nothing to do with NASA...BUT ultimately don't you think that IF they wanted to (ie: World Governments and NASA)...they have 'many' people who decide on what is displayed to the 'general public' in the photos which are provided? (obviously this relates to 'Outcast2' post about 'squared' out areas of Google Sky)

"Zooming a scanned photograph to the point of ridiculousness does not reveal hidden information. It adds information that was never there."

I understand what you are saying but wouldn't that apply to galaxies, planets etc?!...Surely zooming in on an image of a planet/galaxy which is thousands of miles/light years away is amplified is it not?!..but it still exists!

[edit on 11-4-2009 by iexplore]

[edit on 11-4-2009 by iexplore]