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.

 

New STS-63 UFOs - The Smoking Gun?

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2009 @ 04:46 AM
link   
Here is a new STS-63 UFO which was spotted by the MIR and subject to a zoom-in.

STS-63 is the mission where a practice rendezvous was performed by the shuttle Discovery And the MIR Space station.


From Martyn Stubbs NASA UFO Archives - The NEW STS-63 UFO


*Note: As MIR is filming both the shuttle and the UFO - We know that the object cannot be Mir or the Shuttle (which is clearly visible).

Does anyone what what the UFO could be?

[edit on 20-5-2009 by Exuberant1]




posted on May, 20 2009 @ 04:54 AM
link   
Link is broken, please check



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 04:56 AM
link   
reply to post by RE2505
 


I was editing while you were posting your reply.

It is fixed.



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


hmh, i'm by no means an expert (nor a skeptic)... but i'm leaning towards sattellite of some sorts, or space debris/junk. if that's out of the question (somebody in the know is invited to correct me here), than i'd say i have no clue what it could be. other than, well... a UFO of some sort or another .-)



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 10:56 AM
link   
I wouldn't even say it was a UFO as it doesn't seem to be flying. It's a stationary object reflecting light. As for "smoking gun"........lol



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Does anyone what what the UFO could be?


i know what it's not:

the smoking gun



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   
If the object had been moving then I would suspect something. It's just stationary which makes me think that perhaps it's a star, planet in view, satilite...(clearly I'm no expert however).



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by RE2505
I wouldn't even say it was a UFO as it doesn't seem to be flying. It's a stationary object reflecting light. As for "smoking gun"........lol


If the object was stationary it would appear to decrease in size rapidly due to the velocity of the shuttle Discovery and Mir.

The object is moving in a similar orbit and at a similar speed as the MIR station and shuttle.

Surely one of the debunkers can find a satellite on which to blame this UFO.


...Alas, no one has been able to conclusively identify the object, which was clearly both noticed and zoomed-in on by Cosmonauts onboard Mir.

*STS-63 was a mission with alot of problems. The Russians delayed the practice rendezvous several times and made many changes, perhaps this UFO had something to do with their decision-making process...


[edit on 20-5-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by beautyfrompain
If the object had been moving then I would suspect something. It's just stationary which makes me think that perhaps it's a star, planet in view, satilite...(clearly I'm no expert however).


It is moving BFP


And to which planet or star - I'm gonna have to ask you to be a bit more specific.



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by beautyfrompain
If the object had been moving then I would suspect something. It's just stationary which makes me think that perhaps it's a star, planet in view, satilite...(clearly I'm no expert however).


It is moving BFP


And to which planet or star - I'm gonna have to ask you to be a bit more specific.




I am going to retract this star and planet theory I had. I am clearly aware that it isn't.



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by beautyfrompain
 


Don't Retract it yet. It might still be applicable to other footage of the rendezvous.

For example; Here is a video with plenty of UFOs exhibiting anomalous motions. However, many of the bright objects can be accounted for by stars.

However, since the shuttle's thruster is not oriented anywhere near the direction of the UFOs in this video, it cannot be used to account for their anomalous motions, nor can parallax.

Here is the video:



*For those of you who are interesting in researching the incident further; here is the Uncut Footage (Courtesy of the Martyn Stubbs UFO Archives):




posted on May, 21 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   
I have yet to post the "full" sequence on You Tube, but it is going to go up, as I now have no choice! The full sequence shows a Russian shot of the shuttle...& the light that is on the OP, slowly moving across the shuttle to reach the point where we see it zoomed in on & then the zoom out.
After that, the object moves more & is still staying with the shuttle. Finally ground control asks for a camera view from the shuttle, & we get a B&W view of Mir.
...AND the object is also on the NASA feed!...so give me some time to find it & I'll put it up today at You Tube under secretnasaman.

This posts quick clip, needs translation!..what are those Russians saying when they pan over, zoom, focus & then quickly zoom back???...any ATS members who speak Russian...please help us out here!!



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 02:40 PM
link   
On OP video at 0:12 there may be a notch on it? Like the famous floating blobs with notches during the 'tether incident'. Bit small to tell. But if you tap on the mouse and slow it down to a few frames a second, you can kinda see something like that. Not sure.

And from 0:13 - 0:18 there's a smaller sphere behind the main one.
I'm sure about that.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 02:54 PM
link   



...Alas, no one has been able to conclusively identify the object, which was clearly both noticed and zoomed-in on by Cosmonauts onboard Mir.



That's almost entirely because Martyn and Exubie refuse to provide the checkable context of the scene -- like, duh, date and time?

Game's rigged. Idle guessing is unverifiable. Exubie seems to like it that way -- that's the rules he sets up whenever he posts this stuff.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
However, since the shuttle's thruster is not oriented anywhere near the direction of the UFOs in this video, it cannot be used to account for their anomalous motions, nor can parallax.


Nice try, Exubie. I'll bet you have no earthly (or even unearthly) idea which direction the shuttle thrusters are oriented. So to provide pseudo-evidence, you just 'make up' this assertion about the thruster orientation to convince people who still consider you a reliable source of factual information.

Well, maybe I spoke too soon. Maybe you DO know the shuttle's orientation during these scenes. What is it, please, and how can anyone else verify it?

How about something simpler. Is the scene shot in daylight or darkness?
That sure could help set the visual context of the dots.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
How about something simpler. Is the scene shot in daylight or darkness?
That sure could help set the visual context of the dots.


Are you trying to say it's the sun?


And isn't 'space' dark?



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by sum-one

Originally posted by JimOberg
How about something simpler. Is the scene shot in daylight or darkness?
That sure could help set the visual context of the dots.


Are you trying to say it's the sun?


And isn't 'space' dark?


Space is 'dark' in the shadow of something -- and so are things in that 'space'. You have asked an excellent question with lamentable consequences for UFO interpretation proponents.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

How about something simpler. Is the scene shot in daylight or darkness?
That sure could help set the visual context of the dots.




Jim,

Did you not even watch the video in the OP?

You have a tendency to ask questions which would have been answered had you only bothered to view the data you are attacking.

In any case, I see you have been unable to conclusively identify the object in the OP. Perhaps your analysis has not been as extensive as you would have us think


[edit on 21-5-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by sum-one

Originally posted by JimOberg
How about something simpler. Is the scene shot in daylight or darkness?
That sure could help set the visual context of the dots.


Are you trying to say it's the sun?


And isn't 'space' dark?


Space is 'dark' in the shadow of something -- and so are things in that 'space'. You have asked an excellent question with lamentable consequences for UFO interpretation proponents.


In the shadow of something? Like what?

And I think you are trying to say that UFO's must be made of reflective material? But this isn't necessarily so.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by secretnasaman
I have yet to post the "full" sequence on You Tube, but it is going to go up, as I now have no choice! The full sequence shows a Russian shot of the shuttle...& the light that is on the OP, slowly moving across the shuttle to reach the point where we see it zoomed in on & then the zoom out.
After that, the object moves more & is still staying with the shuttle. Finally ground control asks for a camera view from the shuttle, & we get a B&W view of Mir.
...AND the object is also on the NASA feed!...so give me some time to find it & I'll put it up today at You Tube under secretnasaman.

The full sequence is now up on you Tube...sorry for the 4 hr. wait!

Also re: What Jim Oberg is saying about me!!! No problem, UFOs are important.
Jim Oberg is a believer in free speech, and so am I. I can take a hit from him, as it's only natural & human. I am happy he is an fellow ATS member & after all, I did hit him first, so enjoy this world famous skeptic, because he is a big step up from Bill Nye, the science guy!



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join