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.
Originally posted by zorgon
Seems to be a lot of confusion at NASA you know... like these guys trying to figure out what went wrong on the Rover when its wheel jammed
I can understand how they would be confused about when the shuttle would be in sunlight
Although I don't think of myself as a debunker, I can tell you why I haven't commented that new video, it was because it shows nothing new when compared with the one that was the reason for this thread, the (very good) stabilisation does not add anything because it was not the lack of stabilisation that was keeping us from reaching a conclusion based on what we see.
No, it shows the PRINCIPLE, which you maybe learned now.
Originally posted by poet1b
Your cheap parlour tricks verses a NASA study on the subject, which mentions nothing about lens anomalies. Hmm, who are we going to believe?
Originally posted by JimOberg
Maybe you oughta write NASA and have them revoke my console operator specialist certifications. Clearly, they were obtained fraudulently.
The object of the PACs experiment were to: (1) Quantify the particulate sizes and trajectories so as to identify source locations; (2) determine
the severity of events such as dumps, purges, maneuvers, and various
operations and measure t h e i r decay (clearing) times. The experiment design and performance have been presented elsewhere (Green et al., 1987) and will be only briefly summarized here.
Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by depthoffield
why are you repeating the same nonsense ? @ You
that video cannot be used as evidence for anything
Originally posted by JimOberg
If I had to guess, I'd say it was a view of the JPL team in 1999 when the Mars Climate Orbiter disappeared behind the planet and never came out. I won national magazine awards soon afterwards for breaking the story of why that debacle happened.
Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by depthoffield
why are you repeating the same nonsense ? @ You
that video cannot be used as evidence for anything
Originally posted by depthoffield
Well, it ashows evidence for morping BOKEH. Have your read this thread?
Originally posted by bloodline
From my perspective, they are obviously camera artifacts and the video he shows is the nail in the coffin. Did you see my lens picture... that shows the notches?
A guy has done a youtube video to show the effect.
I wouldn't be surprised if the staff here as well as the majority of the community comes out and realizes these are not UFO's. The evidence here is overwhelming IMO. These are not UFO's in space during the STS-75.
Well, it ashows evidence for morping BOKEH. Have your read this thread?
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by depthoffield
Well, it ashows evidence for morping BOKEH. Have your read this thread?
No it doesn't There is no 'morphing' involved in your video the three notches do not MORPH, nor is there the rippling pulsating effect... I will give you a star for persistence though As Easynow says... Hollywood
Compare them side by side... If you cannot see the difference, there is little more to say
Originally posted by depthoffield
But youtube video, with those 3 notches, shows morphing notches. They are longer or shorter depending on the position in the frame...look closer.
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by JimOberg
If I had to guess, I'd say it was a view of the JPL team in 1999 when the Mars Climate Orbiter disappeared behind the planet and never came out. I won national magazine awards soon afterwards for breaking the story of why that debacle happened.
Hmmm seems I need to update that info... so the confused look was not over the rover but the climate orbiter Gotcha... Will send that info to the source I got that from
But the looks are still priceless ...