NASA STS Tether Incidents: Help Requested

To attempt an end of ridicule from my family and friends, i'm requesting for help from my fellow ATSer's.
Can anybody somehow prove that the STS video's, especially 75, are authentic?
Where's the evidence that someone didn't just edit them? Is there a NASA Original circulating? or perhaps a manner in which the videos can be authenticated?

Thanks in advance.

NASA calls them ice crystals in several segments of the official video segment linked here.

www.nss.org...

This is the most official video I could find of STA 75.

type in sts 75 in the search on right hand of page

you'll get what u need

Originally posted by UFOTECH
NASA calls them ice crystals in several segments of the official video segment linked here.

www.nss.org...

This is the most official video I could find of STA 75.

When does ICE behave like that? Come on seriously? NASA lies to us, our government lies to us. They will NEVER tell us or ADMIT to ET life or technology.

reply to post by xweaponx


Just repeating what they were saying. My own opinion is withheld on this one but I really like some of the work done on this subject so far. It is great TV to say the least.

reply to post by Crabmeat


Search for "David Sereda" on YouTube, and you will find whole feature-length documentaries about this subject. He presents an excellent case for pro.

Hope this helps.

Originally posted by Crabmeat
To attempt an end of ridicule from my family and friends, i'm requesting for help from my fellow ATSer's.
Can anybody somehow prove that the STS video's, especially 75, are authentic?
Where's the evidence that someone didn't just edit them? Is there a NASA Original circulating? or perhaps a manner in which the videos can be authenticated?

Thanks in advance.

If you are so afraid of ridicule I suggest you move away from all the UFO subjects
and make your life more easy.

Sometimes you need to have some courage in your life to challenge people in order
to defend your ideas and proclaim your beliefs. But you better be a good son and
brother as well as good fellow to your friends, go ahead and please them, deny UFOs
and make your life more easy.

By the way don't you ever suggest that those NASA videos could have been tampered
by someone, you don't know what you are talking about. Those footages are pieces
of documented history and they surely don't have to be authenticated for you so
you can avoid that ridicule. Think about it.




[edit on 26-4-2009 by free_spirit]

Originally posted by Crabmeat
To attempt an end of ridicule from my family and friends, i'm requesting for help from my fellow ATSer's.
Can anybody somehow prove that the STS video's, especially 75, are authentic?
Where's the evidence that someone didn't just edit them? Is there a NASA Original circulating? or perhaps a manner in which the videos can be authenticated?

Thanks in advance.

Well mate, you can start by consulting a video analyst, and have them state so as well. Some of the versions out there, esp. the originals, you can actually hear the astronauts commenting on some of the things they see. Yes, mate, we are nut jobbies, thats for sure, but I dont think thats one that has much tampering with it. nevermind the naysayers.. go to a video analyst. Oh. if it helps,. research educational channels did a special on NASA/JPL rumoured coverups. THey were very throrough. That very video was on discovery channel, and history channel. As noted as they both are, I dont think they are about to risk reputation on phoney evidence. You can also contact their main offices for this information as well. possibly get print outs, manuscripts, and video p footage as well. for a fair price.
Good luck , and cheers

Google STS-75 and my name for some skeptical comments and analysis, and I can post more if you want it, here. Seems to me the 'UFO interpretation' of these scenes is based on folks without any experience in how space images look naturally, and for their own make-believe thrills have conjured up this vast (well, maybe not so big -- only half vast) conspiracy theory that makes relatives and friends snicker. Maybe your relatives and friends are right on this. If you can live with that, follow the steps above.

-- Jim Oberg

Here's a review by George Earley in 'UFO Magazine' :

UFOMAG.COM: UFO Magazine Online
September 2002
BOOK REVIEW
Evidence: The Case for NASA UFOs
Three hours, VHS. Los Angeles: Terra Entertainment, $24.95. (800) 723-9479
Ever since John Glenn reported "fireflies" drifting outside his orbiting space capsule, undereducated space enthusiasts have been fantasizing about some form of "space life" tracking our manned and unmanned space flights. David Sereda is the latest of such enthusiasts.
In his lecture, Mr. Sereda-whose background, as spelled out on his website (www.nasaufos.com), shows no particular qualifications for anything resembling scientific analysis of space shuttle activity-gives us his interpretation of some NASA shuttle video footage, asks a lot of rhetorical questions, mixes in some scientific-sounding jargon, infers a lot, but presents nothing in the way of solid, scientifically testable evidence.
According to the introduction by Dan Ackroyd, whose scientific background includes playing both a ghostbuster and a coneheaded alien, the evidence Sereda unveils in this video is "irrefutable and undeniable." It will further, Mr. Ackroyd intones dramatically, prepare us for the vital revelation that "we are not alone in the multi-verse." Oh! for a dollar every time I was promised that proof during the past 50 years! I suspect younger readers will wait another 50 years and still not see that revelation fulfilled. Certainly there is nothing in this video to warrant any enthusiasm about forthcoming alien-human contact.
Much of Mr. Sereda's "evidence" revolves around his interpretation of video footage, shown with yawning repetitiveness, taken during the STS-75 space shuttle mission some years ago.
Basically, what we see are a lot of spots of light of different sizes, moving about on the screen-some fast, some slow, some bright, some dim. Frankly, I was reminded of one-celled critters in a drop of water, filmed through a microscope. If these are alien ships, not only are there an awful lot of them, but also they seem to have no greater purpose in mind than to move randomly about. Not once did one of these two- to three-miles-in-diameter (by Sereda's reckoning) alien ships cruise up close to exchange a friendly wave with shuttle mission commander Andy Allen.
In fact, writing back in early 2001, Allen flatly stated that "As far as the question about floating objects that we see, it is mostly debris and Orbiter-induced particulates. We see a lot of dust, ice, and other debris collected in the vehicle during ground processing (it's very clean, but not perfectly clean) that will dislodge or float up in zero gravity. We also see a lot of crystals and particulates as remnants from water dumps, RCS firings, OMS [thruster] firings, etc." But what does Allen know, eh? He's only on the scene. He's only been trained for years for the job of mission commander. He is merely trusted with the task of taking a multi-million-dollar ship up into orbit and safely returning it and its crew to earth. How can that job compare with Sereda's six years of watching anonymous blobs float about on a television screen while intuiting his own truths? After all, mission commander Allen is paid by the government! He's taking money from the same government Mr. Sereda is convinced is orchestrating a massive cover-up of visiting space life. Why, he is as untrustworthy as this reviewer, whose social security check is seen by many conspiracists as the means to pay me off for being skeptical about Mr. Sereda and others of that ilk and their wild speculations.
Sereda knows about the conventional explanations for what is shown on those videos. People with far greater technical knowledge than he possesses have explained it to him over the years. He remains unconvinced . . . perhaps because making money from this video, and the book of the same title from which it was adapted, is quicker and easier than acquiring the scientific knowledge to truly understand what they are telling him.
The video degenerates badly during the last half of the second cassette as Sereda drags in crop circles, the Dogon tribe of Africa and their alleged astronomical knowledge, visiting aliens (half fish and half human) who allegedly brought civilization to the ancient peoples of what is now the Middle East, and a great deal more wild speculation.
It's the Procrustes effect at work here: establish a frame of belief and then trim or stretch your "evidence" to fit the frame.
In fairness, I must note the video is a grand soporific . . . insomniacs might find it more effective than counting sheep. Caveat emptor, you all. –

George W. Earley George W. Earley has spent over 50 years studying and assessing the varying and often contradictory claims of ufologists. His home sits on an old glacial moraine of Mount Hood, overlooking a large meadow that UFOs continue to avoid.


[edit on 26-4-2009 by JimOberg]

Try also:

www.unexplained-mysteries.com...

and

www.virtuallystrange.net...
Oberg statement, “Skeptical Inquirer”, 2000 Feb 22

www.csicop.org...

www.ufos-aliens.co.uk...
‘UFO Magazine’(UK) with give-and-take (March-April 2001)

www.etcontact.net...
Billy Cox news story, Florida Today, June 2, 2000

www.rense.com...
Oberg explanation, ‘Rense.com’, 2000 May 10

www.rense.com...
Callaghan response, ‘Rense.com’, 2000 May 14

www.virtuallystrange.net...
Oberg statement, “Skeptical Inquirer”, 2000 Feb 22

www.virtuallystrange.net...
Oberg response to Callaghan (2001 Dec 14)

www.ufos-aliens.co.uk...
‘UFO Magazine’(UK) with give-and-take (March-April 2001)

www.etcontact.net...
Billy Cox news story, Florida Today, June 2, 2000

Always be suspicious of any famous UFO case report that avoids talking with the primary witnesses. Always.

Chuck Shaw statement (Lead Flight Director, STS-75 mission)

RE: STS-75 Question //
Date: 03/03/2000 9:26:59 AM Central Standard Time
From: SHAW, CHARLES W. (CHUCK) (JSC-DA8) To: JamesOberg@xcom

Hi Jim,

I was the Lead Flight Director for STS-75, and was on console for the tethered satellite deploy operations and at the time the tether broke. Operations had been nominal up to the point Jeff Hoffman called down that the tether broke, and then we saw the status in telemetry a couple of seconds later. The behavior of the satellite and the tether remnant on the satellite was exactly as we had expected for a tether break case.

In the footage of the video, etc. which was examined in GREAT detail post flight in hopes of finding SOMETHING to aid in what had caused the tether break, we never saw anything that was "unexpected". Your comments as to artifacts and small debris/dust/ice particles/lens reflections/blooming/etc., are all quite common and we have seen those things in virtually every shuttle mission's video. What was present in the video and the data that was examined post flight was all within this type of artifact and/or expected results.

Post break, we called upon tracking and imaging resources world wide to be able to establish a trajectory for the satellite and tether remnant, in order to determine the feasibility of a rendezvous and recovery, in addition to being able to command the satellite transmitter on to gain some science data from it, even though the tether was broken. At no time did any of these tracking data show anything unexpected, and we were LOOKING for unexpected things (like extra pieces of tether, or debris from the satellite and/or science booms) that could cause us to not want to fly up in the vicinity of the satellite

As it turned out, the arcing of the voltage in the tether to the deployer structure burned the tether in two. Rather ironic that the experiment worked so well to show the ability of the system to generate power, and in fact worked so well as to fatally damage the experiment!

I have always been fascinated by UFO investigations, and "personally" I hope we are not really alone in this wonderful universe.

Hope this helps, Chuck

Chuck Shaw, Flight Director
Mission Operations Directorate, NASA
Johnson Space Center, Houston Texas

Crabmeat, was any of this helpful? Or did too much reality shut down the discussion too abruptly?

it's all helpful.

thank you all so very much. i'll start with the biggest skeptic in my family. my brother. he requested links to nasa talking about the mission, and for nasa's opinions on the videos. this will be an interesting night indeed.

Originally posted by Crabmeat
it's all helpful.

thank you all so very much. i'll start with the biggest skeptic in my family. my brother. he requested links to nasa talking about the mission, and for nasa's opinions on the videos. this will be an interesting night indeed.

Well, I'm on your brother's side...

...but more to the point, I hope, I'm trying to be on accuracy's side.

The UFO versions aren't, as I see it.

You can get in touch directly via my home page www.jamesoberg.com.

Here is another place to go and see the video evidence for yourself:
-just Google Martyn Stubbs and ask for all the videos on the web!

Originally posted by secretnasaman
Here is another place to go and see the video evidence for yourself:
-just Google Martyn Stubbs and ask for all the videos on the web!

But that's the gimmick -- just show the video, refuse to provide contextual information about lighting, dynamics, thruster activity, and most of all,

primary eyewitness reports.

In other words, keep the viewers ignorant of all the explanatory, exculpatory information. A perfect formula for misdirection and disinformation.

Crabmeat, any results you care to share?