It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NASA UFO 2009 Shuttle Atlantis may 11, at 11.42

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by m0r1arty
Whilst I agree with your most recent post about secrets, and why those with power want to keep them and dislike the internet. I do have to at
I didn't see a saucer shape - and if you did then I'm going to assume that you'd be a great candidate for seeing ice particles too.

In the second video I saw 1 white object pass by the the shuttle, but with any lack of depth to put it in - it may have been either orbital around the Earth or running parallel to the shuttle in the opposite direction.

I'm not going to say "Definitely not a UFO", because they were in space, existed and are unidentified. But I'm pretty sure that without further knowledge we can't say "Ice Particle" or "Saucer".


Well I've just done some screen captures off the YouTube full screen and zoomed in on the object, took a few caps as it flits by in the second video..




NowI know it's a tad blurry (we are capturing off YouTube after all!!) but heck, it looks like a classic saucer shape to me, even with the wee dome on top, like a spinning top. You can see the light it's giving off below it as it spins across the screen. Apologies for the red bits along the border, it's from the Snipping Tool in Vista which bled onto the pics as I zoomed in and cropped the borders out, but some red bits remain. It certainly has the classic movement of a flying saucer skipping past as it moves across the screen.

And guys, just one other thing.. I notice a few of you are saying "ok ok so there's a definite moving object on the screen, that doesn't mean it's Alien"

...well in my opinion, if it's not alien.. then you should be even more appalled that NASA aren't telling you the truth about what they have flying up there in space. If it's not ET, it's one of 'ours'. Which means we have a secret space program that the general public don't know about. I've always believed that NASA has been an elaborate cover for such a program.

Stephen Greer always said that we have the ETV (extra terrestial vehicles) and the ARV (alien reproduction vehicle), which are the crafts we have reverse-engineered since the Roswell incident in 1947. So, in my opinion, the object I have captured onscreen here is one of 2 options: and ETV or an ARV. It doesn't matter which one it is.. NASA are deceiving us whichever way you look at it.


[edit on 12-5-2009 by RiotComing]




posted on May, 12 2009 @ 05:04 PM
link   
The objects appear to be space debris floating around the shuttle. As we all know, the astronauts are always watching out for space debris.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
I watched both vids and didn't see anything. Bummer. But I do have a question. How come when I look out at night and see stars, or look through my telescope I see stars. But you NEVER see any stars from any NASA shots? Thats just weird.




posted on May, 12 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
If many of you have a little time to spend in understanding more some aspects of reality, please look at the archives of the movies of the Shuttle missions. I did this, and notice many aspects. The archives are here: www.nss.org...



In direct relation with the OP movie, and a bunch of youtube movies, please look at the specific missions. Pay attention:



STS-3 Look at ~4min 46 sec and see a lot of debris explained by the astronauts themselves
Picture example:




STS-35 Look at ~6min 14 sec and see how astronauts describe a water dump seen in aproppiate sun angle condition
Picture example:




STS-44 Look at ~2min 15sec to see ice debris or ~2min 32sec ...or ~14min 41 sec for a water dump with individual "rebel" particles
Pictures examples:









STS-75 Look at ~0min 54sec to see ice debris explained by the astronauts themselves
Picture example:




STS-92 Look at ~2min 14sec to see a singular debris floating away from the payload bay
Picture example:




STS-102 Look at ~ 2min 53 sec to see ice debris from the engines, as explained by the astronauts themselves
Picture example:




STS-104 Look at 15:21 and then follow below 15:39 to see ice debris ejected when shuttle is undocking from the ISS
Picture example:




You really have to see the movies, those sequences, and explanations, if you want to deny some ignorance.




You see, ice and debris in space is pretty common... beyond many people think.



[edit on 12/5/09 by depthoffield]



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by tombangelta
Could there be any correlation between this mission and the announcement at the recent UFO conference about full disclosure by the current administration.



I hope so.........................


i only read about this launch a few days beforehand which i thought peculiar, which then got me thinking.

the conspirator in me wanted some large sighting or something.

but as a previous poster said, this is a highly dangerous mission due to the amount of debris around, with the way the objects were moving in the picture, just looked like debris to me.

good vids though



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 05:18 PM
link   
Hey guys, i would just like to point out that the chance of this being a alien UFO is ridiculously small if you look at the amount of stuff we humans have put up there.

According to the U.S. Space Command there was 2,671 satellites in orbit in June 2000. There's also 6096 pieces of large debris.

(source: www.space.com...)

Also i would like to point out that any large enough object being illuminated by the sun will appear as a bright white dot while zooming past relatively close to the shuttle.

According to me, there's not much that speaks for this being an alien UFO. I say it's just a satellite or piece of large debris passing by.


EDIT: By the way, take a look at the pictures in the link, that should give you a good idea how much crap we've actually put up there.

[edit on 12-5-2009 by Deran]



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by RiotComing


Well I've just done some screen captures off the YouTube full screen and zoomed in on the object, took a few caps as it flits by in the second video..




NowI know it's a tad blurry (we are capturing off YouTube after all!!) but heck, it looks like a classic saucer shape to me, even with the wee dome on top.....

At first I thought you were joking, then I realised you were actually serious!!!

And then, it gets better:


Originally posted by RiotComing
Stephen Greer always said that we have the ETV (extra terrestial vehicles) and the ARV (alien reproduction vehicle), which are the crafts we have reverse-engineered since the Roswell incident in 1947. So, in my opinion, the object I have captured onscreen here is one of 2 options: and ETV or an ARV. It doesn't matter which one it is.. NASA are deceiving us whichever way you look at it.


I think the only one being deceived here is yourself. I think a psychiatrist would have a field day with you and his ink blots.

And don't get me started on "Dr." Greer.

This post - and particularly this mindset - is sadly all that is too wrong with
current Ufology. Sad indeed.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Ink blots? Be careful what you say, "psychiatrist would have a field day" is a little bit on the offensive side. All I was doing was blowing up the images that another poster couldn't see properly. You really have to see them in motion to see that it's far too big to be just space debris or ice.

As for Steven Greer. He did a lot more for getting the UFO issue out in the open than you have done. It's amazing witnessing the vitriol and denial I am seeing here on this thread... and here I was thinking I was among friends on a conspiracy site!



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 06:49 PM
link   
I cant believe how people are so quick to jump to wild conclusions re space visitors etc. Of course the moving objects are merely human created object, be it satellites or other debris.

Come on poeple, its crack pots who make these outlandish claims of aliens based on this weak evidence who give the entire disclosure project a bad name and keep it out of mainstream.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 06:53 PM
link   
I don't think its nothing more then meteor that is lighting up as it starts entering our atmosphere. Move along nothing to see here...



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeonStar
I cant believe how people are so quick to jump to wild conclusions re space visitors etc. Of course the moving objects are merely human created object, be it satellites or other debris.

Come on poeple, its crack pots who make these outlandish claims of aliens based on this weak evidence who give the entire disclosure project a bad name and keep it out of mainstream.


For goodness' sake, I'm not saying they are space visitors, I'm saying they seem to be intelligently-piloted and could very well be 'our own'. ARV. Completely consistent with the Disclosure Project testimony. Has nobody here seen The Secret NASA Transmissions?


All this "putting ufology to shame" and calling people like myself and the OP 'crackpots' (I'm about as down-to-earth and real as one can get I assure you).. overreacting a tad don't you think? We are on a conspiracy message board and it's natural to contemplate these possibilities. That's why we are here.. right?


[edit on 12-5-2009 by RiotComing]



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by RiotComing
As for Steven Greer. He did a lot more for getting the UFO issue out in the open than you have done.

Well, for a start, you don't know anything about me. And you certainly don't know about any achievements I may have made.

As for our good friend "Dr" Greer....... let's just say I'm glad I don't have to try and sleep every night with his conscience. Assuming he has one.


Originally posted by RiotComing
It's amazing witnessing the vitriol and denial I am seeing here on this thread... and here I was thinking I was among friends on a conspiracy site!

That's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black, considering a very large number of your posts start out with a more or less denigrating'poke' at people who may potentially dare to question the argument being presented.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by mckyle

Originally posted by RiotComing
As for Steven Greer. He did a lot more for getting the UFO issue out in the open than you have done.

Well, for a start, you don't know anything about me. And you certainly don't know about any achievements I may have made.


Fine then. You have the opportunity right here and now to reveal to the world at large, your efforts to break the reality of UFO visitation to us all. Hit us with what you've got!


Originally posted by mckyle

Originally posted by RiotComing
It's amazing witnessing the vitriol and denial I am seeing here on this thread... and here I was thinking I was among friends on a conspiracy site!


That's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black, considering a very large number of your posts start out with a more or less denigrating'poke' at people who may potentially dare to question the argument being presented.


Of course they start out that way! But that is not 'vitriol and denial' - it's a vote of support for the OP!! On a conspiracy site no less!! Wow, who would've thought, eh?

And.. furthermore, I never personally attack the character of any of my fellow members here, regardless of the argument I present. Whenever I come out with a post along the lines of "where are all the debunkers", you should see it as a challenge to mount an ad hominem-free debate. Never attack the credibility or integrity of your fellow ATS members, irrespective of which side of the fence you are on.


[edit on 12-5-2009 by RiotComing]



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by RiotComing

Of course they start out that way! But that is not 'vitriol and denial' - it's a vote of support for the OP!!

[edit on 12-5-2009 by RiotComing]


No. Support for the OP's argument would probably consist of either analysing the counter-argument and then pointing out its weak or erroneous points. Or better still - actually offering up solid evidence that gives support to the OP's argument.

This is quite different to your generalised scatter-gun attack on anyone who dares to question the OP's argument. Nothing of great value there.

[edit on 12-5-2009 by mckyle]



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by mckyle
 

Well, one man's junk.. another man's treasure.

I see you conveniently dodged my question regarding what you have done of note to raise the profile of ufology. To have a higher profile than Steven Greer you must be a well-noted name of sorts. I ask you again, what have you organised to get the ufo issue out in the open?

Anyway, I'm tired of this off-topic bickering / derailment. And I'm sure other readers are too.




[edit on 12-5-2009 by RiotComing]



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by RiotComing
 


Seriously those are just a mess of compression marks and resizing algorithms… they really hold not analytical value at all. I'm sick of seeing people trying to analyse compression marks.

So if you don't understand anything about image or video compression then please don't try your hand at analysing images, its just ridiculous.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by RiotComing
 


Okay, but the fact that the governments of the world cannot be trusted doesn't mean those were UFO's buzzing around behind the space shuttle.

Those could be anything that reflects. I'm not saying it's not an alien craft, but I certainly can't say with confidence that it is.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 08:13 PM
link   
I see something moving but it really could be anything. I'd love for it to be a UFO, but impossible to tell.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 08:51 PM
link   
one thing moving can be anything. 2 things moving very fast at the same time in a precise moment looks suspicious. 2 things moving and camera switching should mean something to me.



[edit on 12-5-2009 by digitalwarrior]



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by modern
reply to post by RiotComing
 


Seriously those are just a mess of compression marks and resizing algorithms… they really hold not analytical value at all. I'm sick of seeing people trying to analyse compression marks.

So if you don't understand anything about image or video compression then please don't try your hand at analysing images, its just ridiculous.


They weren't supposed to be of analytical value. They were simply resized (from an already lossy source) for the benefit of those who couldn't make out the shape of it. Like I said, in motion, it looks like a flying saucer moving across the screen. Someone said "well how can you make out the saucer shape, so I did what I could with the basic tools I have on my comp (Print Screen button on keyboard-to-YouTube, MS Paint, and Vista Snipping Tool).

It's obvious that the people commenting on my pics haven't even looked at the video in the first place, to see that it certainly looks saucer-like in motion. You can see it, from around the 2min 16s mark (they even put up a big blue sign saying "look here", you can't miss it).



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join