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 UFOs new and in Color

page: 1
50
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+18 more 
posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
If anyone can offer an explanation for the UFO that appears from 50 seconds in, then i am all ears.

It just seems to grow. I don't recall seeing this shot here or anywhere else for that matter.
And the way the last UFO flies around and how NASA follow it should make everyone continue to ask questions of NASA as to what they really know.





posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Thanks for the vid, but whenever I see one of these NASA clips only one thought comes to mind. How can an organization with a multi-million dollar budget own such crappy cameras? Some guy with a handy cam in his backyard can take better pics than these.

I know, they probably save the good stuff for themselves and only let this type leak out. Try to show that they're on the up and up while telling us not to look behind the curtain.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by zlots331
 
Yeah and they never bring enough film or DVD's and the camera's cut off all the time right at the good parts.LOL!!!



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by zlots331
 


Thank you for perfectly stating my objections to most NASA vids.


The first bit, although the undefined point of light looks to be moving "out there" away from Earth, I kind of think that the angle implies a conventional satellite.

However, I'm really intrigued by the "pulsing" UFOs that follow. Of course, that raises the question for me -- as always -- IF these points of light or pulsing lights are EBEs, they MUST want to be seen. Surely they have the technology to not be seen. Soooooooooo, if they want to be seen, then WTF!!!!!!! Come closer, ya mooks!!! Just cruise on into camera range, we don't have the ability to mess with you, just cruise on it here, hover, maybe make a thrumming noise to draw attention, and perform some aerobatics for the cameras, then ZIP! away at a speed impossible for human craft.

Otherwise, I just can't shake the feeling that they're intentionally screwing with us.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 07:33 PM
link   
NASA can't know what they are because they are ether ships.
And the ether does not exist to them.
How about that for standard science.
Tesla: ether is an insulative fluid with electrical carriers.
That seemed to work in 1892 and just might have evolved in
to your sparky fliers.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by argentus
 


I've seen a few vids of pulsing objects and the only thing that usually comes to mind is that satellites spin. The spinning would reflect light differently as it passed over the surface of the satellite. Usually the buggers have all kinds of stuff sticking out of them like antennas and such.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   
Seeking an understanding of what is causing such scenes must start with mapping out the technical and operational and illumination context of the scene, which requires knowledge of the mission, the date/time of the event, the eyewitnesses aboard and in Mission Control, etc.

When posters steadfastly refuse to provide such fundamental information, they are sabotaging any hope of a prosaic explanation -- which may be their actual intent.

I suggest they will continue to post such scenes WITHOUT the required data of origin, because they continue to get away with it, as the comments posted above indicate. They demand 'explanations' -- then refuse to provide the information required to seek an explanation. And this is tolerated.

You get what you deserve. Junk.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Gotta admit, the final sequence is the most interesting...changing speed and direction, the camera op trying to keep it centered...usual NASA tapes just let them flit off-screen...not an ice crystal affected by thrust...must be a balloon filled with swamp gas, I guess. Bet it even has the pretty flowered scotch tape, too.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Now thats what I call an alien on your tail.

How can they possibly deny it?

Nice one op starred and flagged.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by zlots331
 


Thanks for the reply. I've thought of that too, however being a habitual satellite watcher, the only ones I've seen so far that exhibit that sort of "flash" are irridium flares.

Of course, that's from Earth surface observation. You could well be right when one considers viewing satellites from orbit. Good points.

cheers



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


I continue to appreciate your perspective Jim. You sound like someone who has been to The Game more than once. I can't find fault with anything you said in your post, nor do I have the credentials to even have the ability.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by zlots331
Thanks for the vid, but whenever I see one of these NASA clips only one thought comes to mind. How can an organization with a multi-million dollar budget own such crappy cameras? Some guy with a handy cam in his backyard can take better pics than these.

I know, they probably save the good stuff for themselves and only let this type leak out. Try to show that they're on the up and up while telling us not to look behind the curtain.


You'd think that with billion dollar budgets, they would at least be modernized enough to have HD or at least cable quality broadcasting equipment. I can get a little 10megapixel video recorder for like $99 that takes better footage than what NASA shows the world. that fact that they don't raises many questions...



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 10:18 PM
link   
Wow those flickering lights look just like the ones ive been seeing..

Here's a vid of a flickering light i filmed.. not from space though


s292.photobucket.com...



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Does it ever occur to anyone that maybe we are asking NASA and the government the wrong questions when it comes to extraterrestrials and UFO's? Maybe NASA and the government say they dont know anything about UFO's cause they do know what UFO's are. Like instead of calling them "Aliens" they call them "Greys" or something. so they can technically say they dont know anything new about them because they know everything about them.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   
THEY ARE SPIRITS....FALLEN ANGELS..THEY DO NOT LOOK THEY ARE MADE OF MATERIAL TO ME!



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 11:37 PM
link   
First, I would like to thank the OP for spending the time to find something from NASA. There has to be a lot of footage.

Second, logically, if I were an astronaut moving at 18000+ mph in a small vehicle that is relatively unsafe from collision with objects moving at similar or higher speeds on my highway, I would be watching in every direction, too.

Third, these appear to be space debris or satellites. What we are all looking for is something that identifiably large (not a particle of ice), not blown out of proportion by bad focus (ice and tether incident), that is moving as if intelligently operated, and is not CG. Tough rules to meet, I suppose, but there seem to be a lot of posts with sensational words to introduce them and draw attention. Now, unless I miss my guess, that's not much different than the guys that make CG UFOs for attention, is it? What's your opinion?

IMHO, there should be a location that these types of posts are dumped into, called "Not much to look at" or "Another One of Those" or something like that.

Now, crop circles might be another thing to focus on instead of this sort of stuff. They are intelligently designed, maybe by aliens or some other dimensional beings, and we know that they are "saying" something. Let's all focus on cracking that code, if you will. They are more tangible witnesses, even though they are circular and ***not*** flying.


That being said, I am sure my words will not make any difference whatsoever, any more than the other hundred or so posts saying the same thing.........................



posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 12:22 AM
link   
More proof that my timeline for disclosure is spot on. Basically disclosure is coming in 30minutes, I dare anyone to top that.



posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by zlots331
Thanks for the vid, but whenever I see one of these NASA clips only one thought comes to mind. How can an organization with a multi-million dollar budget own such crappy cameras? Some guy with a handy cam in his backyard can take better pics than these.

I know, they probably save the good stuff for themselves and only let this type leak out. Try to show that they're on the up and up while telling us not to look behind the curtain.


Wait..dont forget that the quality isnt good because its not Nasa releasing the footage...there are some guys who built satellites to i ntercept Astronauts footage to Earth...for me the proof we're looking at something hot is that the NASA camera was actually following them...they wouldnt follow debris or ice crystals



posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by contemplator
 


Excuse ME what time line and what disclosure If NASA releases these images that doesnt mean there will be disclosure. Disclosure has to be proper like making a contact with an Alien that is disclosure those flying UFOs could be anything u Know



posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 04:56 AM
link   
Extralien good find i really liked the last one the others were good but the last one was not a satellite it changed direction at speed satellites cannot do that S&F




top topics



 
50
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join