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.

 

100% proof of U.F.O.S in space - You cannot debunk this one

page: 9
80
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by franspeakfree
I accept that there is space junk and debris up there my goodness we get told this in every thread that involves NASA. But and its a big but, why don't we see more white dots travelling in the same manner if all we see are space debris surely they would be travelling at the same speeds in orbit, would they not?


Thanks for elaborating, because it helps us all see the reasoning -- sound, time-tested, ground-based reasoning that has well served eyeballed-creatures for hundreds of millions of years -- that can trick us when applied, unjustifiably, to a new, unearthly environment where the same laws of physics are manifested in very different form.

The answer to your final question is 'no', for reasons I just posted above.




posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by franspeakfree
reply to post by heyo
 


Well said heyo, its refreshing to see that there are others on this site (judging my u2u's there are alot) that can see whats going on.

For the record I accept that some of the white dots in many videos we see can be explained as ice crystals but to say everything is ice crystals is a getting a little thin now.

I mean to say that years ago many UFO sightings were explained as venus and then we progressed to flares then to swamp gas now its chinese lanterns whats next
come on I thought this site was all about denying ignorance?


Fran, many UFOS to this day STILL are caused by Venus, or balloons, or misperceived ordinary aircraft, or on rare occasions, pranks and hoaxes. Don't be ignorant of that. Don't mock answers you don't want to believe -- you shouldn't get your reality education from 'Comedy Central'.

The question you pose, properly and with constructive detail, is whether there are motions seen in any of these videos that cannot be made by particles acting under known forces. My answer is 'no' and I have tried to defend that answer in detail. This does not mean that not one of these dots could actually BE something truly extraordinary -- just that such an explanation is not forced by the observed motions.



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 07:47 AM
link   
This was a huge let down.

First off your title is annoying... you have 100% proof of something you can't identify? Wow well done. There is nothing to debunk here.

I hate how now any half interesting thread will get buried underneath piles of crap like this.



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 07:51 AM
link   
The trouble is with the tether video, is that i cannot see one of those orbs change direction, as if controlled by intelligence, they all go in one direction with no change. however, the fact that some are stationary does make me ponder?



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by franspeakfree
 


With all of the video's showing UFO's in near earth orbit and audio of transmissions of astronauts saying they see flying objects a person would have too be in heavy denial or stupid to the point of being a vegetable to not know that there's all manner of craft and who knows what else up there. Shesssh.....It's so obvious. Any attempts by the agenda folks and skeptics to discredit whats obvious seem ludicrous at this point. Thanks for your post!



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Fran, many UFOS to this day STILL are caused by Venus, or balloons, or misperceived ordinary aircraft, or on rare occasions, pranks and hoaxes. Don't be ignorant of that. Don't mock answers you don't want to believe -- you shouldn't get your reality education from 'Comedy Central'.


Now then now then Jim play nice, you know what I am saying don't try and spin it. Yes venus and balloons can be perceived as UFO'S but what I am saying you cannot use the same old stories all the time to cover up the truth.

In regards to the forces that can move the ice particles in one direction then another,I accept that but in the fist picture the object in question is far away from the shuttle to be influenced by its thrusters.

I am listening to what you are saying and I take it onboard and I am not th sort of person that says that every light in space is a ufo on the contrary. I am saying that these objects in question are U.F.O'S thats 100% Unidentified Flying Objects. Can you identify them, can other members identify them ?no. Therefore, they are indeed UFO'S.

If we take the first two videos we can clearly see lots of white dots scattered all around, for the record I am not saying that these are intelligently controlled craft.

What I am saying is that the white dots that act differently than the others and indeed, change direction and speed are intelligently controlled. You know this I know this and the flurry of u2u's that I have received this confirms what I am writing.



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by franspeakfree

Originally posted by JimOberg


What I am saying is that the white dots that act differently than the others and indeed, change direction and speed are intelligently controlled. You know this I know this and the flurry of u2u's that I have received this confirms what I am writing.



On the tether video could you please point out which white dot changes direction?

thanks

[edit on 5-6-2009 by Briles]



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Briles
 


Hold fire briles I did not mention the tether video, this video has been discussed many times here and IMHO this video is a clear example of ufos in space.



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by franspeakfree
reply to post by Briles
 


Hold fire briles I did not mention the tether video, this video has been discussed many times here and IMHO this video is a clear example of ufos in space.


Fran, what do you think of the prosaic explanations for this video, offered by several investigators including me?

Do you agree that the most famous scene -- the swarm and the distant tether -- does NOT immediately follow the break, as generally claimed, but was taken DAYS later?



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 



Jim hang on two tics you keep flitting from post to post without sticking with the original thread. You can understand why people would think that others have agendas and try to murky the waters of existing threads.

I don't believe you have addressed my post above. Forget about Briles this member I believe has got confused in amongst the other posts. Because the tether has been discussed before I think we should concentrate on the other 2 videos. Which to my knowledge has not been discussed before. I could be wrong?

[edit on 5-6-2009 by franspeakfree]



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by franspeakfree
reply to post by JimOberg
 



Jim hang on two tics you keep flitting from post to post without sticking with the original thread. You can understand why people would think that others have agendas and try to murky the waters of existing threads.

I don't believe you have addressed my post above. Forget about Briles this member I believe has got confused in amongst the other posts. Because the tether has been discussed before I think we should concentrate on the other 2 videos. Which to my knowledge has not been discussed before. I could be wrong?

[edit on 5-6-2009 by franspeakfree]


No, it's right to stay on theme per thread, and continued guidance is proper. I'm with you on this aim.



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by franspeakfree

Originally posted by JimOberg

Fran, many UFOS to this day STILL are caused by Venus, or balloons, or misperceived ordinary aircraft, or on rare occasions, pranks and hoaxes. Don't be ignorant of that. Don't mock answers you don't want to believe -- you shouldn't get your reality education from 'Comedy Central'.


Now then now then Jim play nice, you know what I am saying don't try and spin it. Yes venus and balloons can be perceived as UFO'S but what I am saying you cannot use the same old stories all the time to cover up the truth.


Explanations, if they fit, never wear out. We had a long conversation on 'whispers' not too long ago about a UFO report from Siberia by pilots waiting to take of from Barnaul Airport, because a UFO was parked at the end of the runway. It turned out -- it really was Venus. There is no 'expiration date' on proper prosaic explanations -- although I am indeed agreeable to returing 'swamp gas'...



In regards to the forces that can move the ice particles in one direction then another,I accept that but in the fist picture the object in question is far away from the shuttle to be influenced by its thrusters.


Well, that's the crunch. How far away do you 'know' it to be, and how do you know it?



I am listening to what you are saying and I take it onboard and I am not th sort of person that says that every light in space is a ufo on the contrary. I am saying that these objects in question are U.F.O'S thats 100% Unidentified Flying Objects. Can you identify them, can other members identify them ?no. Therefore, they are indeed UFO'S.


You're playing with semantics. How many UFOs fly over your house every day, by that definition? Every aircraft whose flight number you don't know -- a UFO. Every star at night whose name you don't know -- a UFO. Every dot in the car headlights whose insect species you don't know -- a UFO. You must live in a genuine UFO hotspot!

Of course you don't mean that. What we both mean by "candidate UFO" is some apparition whose behavior/appearance is markedly different from the behavior/appearance of ordinary objects. The problem with space videos is that people have a very inadequate appreciation of just how 'ordinary' objects behave in space.

And the second problem is that converting an apparent UFO into a real one -- graduating from 'candidate' to 'full-fledged' -- requires investigation of the context and circumstances of the video, and that requires that its time/date and names of witnesses be available.

How do you justify skipping those steps?




If we take the first two videos we can clearly see lots of white dots scattered all around, for the record I am not saying that these are intelligently controlled craft.

What I am saying is that the white dots that act differently than the others and indeed, change direction and speed are intelligently controlled. You know this I know this and the flurry of u2u's that I have received this confirms what I am writing.


Whoa, are you claiming that I secretly know the dots are genuine UFOs and that I'm faking ignorance of this for some ulterior purpose? Please reconsider the way you worded this.



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Ya...great job posting a lovely dance of dust near an aperture lens set to infinity..gr8 job..jeez. That tether shot..with the particles floating around? are JUST particles of dust and what have you at an extreme close proximity to a camera lens set to infinity as there is nothing to focus on in space. People are STILL on this damn video with the tether im sick of it already..its been debunked..NEXT! I have seen similair artifacts here on earcth when shooting video in a meadow at low light conditions during spring when pollen is floating around like crazy.......man im getting tired of the SAME syndicated nonsensical trash being posted and discussed..anyone else?

New Age believers seem to be more desperate than usual the way they grab at straws.

How do most of you even function in life? Seriously. I never witness ONE single original thought here...i see people falling over themselves to congratulate any number of posters here on posting the 'copied plagiarized work' of anothers writings and then handing us their cheesy explanations. Meanwhile not a single one of you geniuses can produce one iota of proof, not even a great argument. I see hoax after hoax...mixed with regurgitated neo-scientific explanation borrowed from some other 'guy' that wrote something or spoke at some nebulous seminar somewhere. I will say this though..this site provides all of us with hours upon hours of entertainment and the site should be branded as such..For Entertainment Purposes Only...Nothing Read here is True .....the very discussions alone amongst most of you are funny..people here trying to sound 'educated' and theological. Nice.

[edit on 5-6-2009 by jeddun]



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Fran, I watched the video again. What is the time hack for the scene where you say objects far from the shuttle are changing direction?

And I suppose it would be overreaching to ask, how can we find out the origin of this scene so we check the records for thruster activity?

Or isn't that important?



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Hi jim, i just want to mention that over the last 6 weeks i have witnessed satallites (hmmm) slow down and stop & not move again during my sky watch,

have seen the brightest star in the sky that was stationary during a watch suddenly move off out of nsight in 30 secs,

seen two stars? suddenly flare up for 5/6 secs then dim back to other stars brightness in unison only for them to move off together after a few minutes

and various satallites? undeniably change direction as well as a cluster of bright stars appear one night out of the blue and not been there since.

Now unless i am mistaken these objects which were all high in the atmosphere cannot possibly be explained away by your theories as things dont just stop/go/change direction unless they are intelligently controlled.

Your obviously an intelligent man, which is why i believe you know what these are or that these incidents are occuring especially given your status with nasa.

Dont forget im just looking up from the ground and am seeing this so you either have this opinion because you are in the know and are desperately trying to debunk the subject or you are blindly ignorant to the possibility because you have not taken the time to look or research yourself because you just believe it isnt happening which means your opinions are irrelevant.

Like i said i think its the former but in case its the latter i would suggest spending a few hours on a clear night doing some sky watching because you will be in for a shock.

To anyone that reads this please spend a few hours in a low light polluted location watching for satallites and you will soon see what im on about.

Regards


[edit on 5/6/09 by cropmuncher]



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   


have seen the brightest star in the sky that was stationary during a watch suddenly move off out of nsight in 30 secs,


That is the thing I was mentioning earlier. It's brighter than Venus isn't it?

I'm sorry but that's not Venus and if CNN is airing commercials about it then it must be something besides Venus.

[edit on 6/5/2009 by watchtheashes]



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by cropmuncher
To anyone that reads this please spend a few hours in a low light polluted location watching for satallites and you will soon see what im on about.


I hope you're keeping good logs, and comparing events with www.heavens-above.com, because separating signal from noise takes a lot of discipline and hard work and careful observation and records keeping. But it can be worth the effort.

I envy you your skies and endorse your advice. Get outside and look up. I've got fairly clear skies here in rural Galveston County, and an observing platform about ten feet above the ground with views down to within 3 to 5 deg of the horizon -- but recently I was watching the skies from the Chisos Mountains in Big Bend and was reminded of what you really can see.

Haven't seen the sorts of behavior you've reported, but some even weirder -- and we need more eye/brain sets out there scanning for the unexpected -- which I don't doubt shows up from time to time.

Clear skies, good buddy!



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg


I hope you're keeping good logs, and comparing events with www.heavens-above.com


Oh yes



because separating signal from noise takes a lot of discipline and hard work and careful observation and records keeping. But it can be worth the effort.

true & i do


I envy you your skies and endorse your advice.


To be honest my skies are not as clear as i would like yet i still managed 25 moving objects in an hr 2 weeks ago which considering heavens above stated 35 in total over 24hrs inc the dimmest seems a result to me.

Its more timing/luck i believe & the fact you have to keep looking.


Get outside and look up. I've got fairly clear skies here in rural Galveston County, and an observing platform about ten feet above the ground with views down to within 3 to 5 deg of the horizon -- but recently I was watching the skies from the Chisos Mountains in Big Bend and was reminded of what you really can see.

I envy your location - sounds stunning.


Haven't seen the sorts of behavior you've reported, but some even weirder -- and we need more eye/brain sets out there scanning for the unexpected -- which I don't doubt shows up from time to time.

Clear skies, good buddy!


Nice to know were on the same page mate



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
 



Oh God, the burden of proof statement lol. If i lie in a box for ten years, then get out and burn the box, the burden of proof does lay with me to prove that i was in the box, yet it doesn't change the fact of how obvious it was to me that i was inside said box.
the burden of proof belongs to the one who wishes to disprove what seems to be glaringly obvious.......



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Regarding the STS-75 videos (the satellite attached to the 12 mile tether).
I have some questions for those of you with more knowledge in the field.

I see different people mentioning debris, ice, or dust particles as an explanation for the phenomenon. Now what I would like to know is if there is an average size for these particles. How large can they be, or is there no limit?

I am just an average joe and have no real knowledge of space or physics, but I feel the need to point out some things that need clarification.
Several of you mention these could be small dust particles floating very close to the camera lens. How can this be possible when there are several of these objects that float behind the tether?
I understand video cameras have flaws and sometimes small objects in the foreground can appear further off, but if you reexamine the video you will notice several objects clearly floating behind the tether.

You do not even need to look closely, it is very obvious. Watch the parts in the video where they zoom in to one of the ends of the tether. You will see more detail on the objects. Some of these appear to be pulsating as if filled with some electric energy. They look like blood cells. If you watch these scenes, you will notice several of these objects pass behind the tether, and you can clearly discern the tether in front while the object passes behind.

How can these be dust particles close to the lens?

If they are indeed objects floating around the tether, these things are huge. If the tether is 12 miles long, then you can get a rough measurement of the object passing behind the tether. Some of these objects look to be 3 miles long, and that is if they are right behind the tether.

Please take a look at this youtube video. It shows the scenes I am referring to. Forward it to the 7 minute mark and you will see and illustration showing the estimated size of these object based on the length of the tether.
www.youtube.com...

EDIT:

Here is another video, "lawbringer" posted, that better explains my argument:
www.youtube.com...

[edit on 5-6-2009 by blasfemaz]

[edit on 5-6-2009 by blasfemaz]



new topics

top topics



 
80
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join