New Analysis Video of the STS-75 Tether Incident

ATTENTION Please!!!

Any further posts insulting other members, or making snide off topic remarks, will be removed and the poster possibly warned..(Including anyone's opinion of another posters education!)

Please consider this a friendly advisory..

Thank you

Semper

Gravity: en.wikipedia.org...
Orbit: en.wikipedia.org...
F-22 cut: www.foxnews.com...

**Mod Note: You have an urgent U2U Waiting**

[edit on 7/4/2009 by semperfortis]

---

---

reply to post by skiered

---

you claimed the mass of an object has a bearing on its acceleration due to gravity. you proved with that claim alone that you are either a liar or terrible in your field. sorry.

mass only affects the *force* with which gravity acts. it does not influence acceleration. period.

en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 4-7-2009 by JScytale]

With reference to the pulsating objects in the STS-75 video, here are links to 3 videos that show “waves” & “lines” passing through unfocused objects.

I think this helps to demonstrate this effect can be artificial.

I’ll keep looking for examples & explanations that are closer in appearance to the objects in the STS-75 video.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...


[edit on 4-7-2009 by Sam60]

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Sam60]

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Sam60]

reply to post by Sam60

---

The 2nd video is excellent! It shows the donut shaped artifact caused by the reflector lens configuration and the pulsating effect, though a slightly different pulsating effect, like possibly atmospheric disturbance. I thought the pulsating effect in the STS-75 video might be due to exposure compensation circuitry in the camera, but I'm not really sure of the cause. Seems pretty clear that it's a camera effect of some sort though and not pulsating of the actual object itself. Good luck finding an even closer match but I'd say this was a pretty good stab at it.

Meh I'm not psychic

Ok, I'd pretty much written off the shape of the objects as lens artifacts about 20 pages ago, while still believing that the motion study this thread is based on continued to hold some weight concerning, whatever these things are, to be under intelligent control.

Then someone posted this in reply to one of my video experiments on YouTube...

YouTube Link

And now I don't know what to think.

If this isn't a hoax, then I need to go change my underwear.

And please, God forgive those who feel compelled to add stupid music to something that requires no soundtrack.

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Raybo58]

reply to post by Raybo58

---

In case anybody is curious, here's what the guy who took the video said about it on his YouTube page (his uppercase, not mine):

“AFTER VIEWING THIS YOU MUST WATCH PART TWO MY VIDEO I TOOK DURING THE TIME I LIVED I JERSEY AND WAS BEING TAKEN BY GREYS VERY OFTEN, AFTER BEING BEATEN BADLY ONE ABDUCTION I HAD MANY MEMORIES CAME TO ME, EVEN FLASH BACKS FROM CHILDHOOD, I NEVER KNEW A THING UNTIL 1995, YOU MAY HAVE MEMORIES LOCKED INSIDE,i know the truth through living it.....But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them. 5 For we do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your bondservants for Jesus sake. 6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.”



Apologies to the mod's if this is viewed as being off topic.

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Sam60]

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Sam60]

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Sam60]

reply to post by Sam60

---

hmmmm, ok, well considering the mentally challenged nature of the source, I suppose we have to place this vid in the "Highly Suspect" column.

If all we saw was the extreme close-up, I would have written it off immediately. But the very long zoom out at the end really gives the impression that someone's got a pretty powerful hobbyist telescope. And as it zooms out you can see it go through transitions from the hard focus, to the fuzzy disk, to the point of light. Much of it resembling the tether critters.

reply to post by Raybo58

---

The video you posted has some striking similarities to the videos that are subject of this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The video in that thread purports to show a "spacecraft" filmed off the coast of Turkey, with "aliens" looking out through a notch, much like your video. Even the zooming effect is similar.

I suggest you post your video on that thread. I think it would add to the discussion.

reply to post by Raybo58

---

You can see that the "grey" does not pop-out its head, there is nothing outside the circle made by the out of focus light, and that is a clue that what we see is really out of focus.

I hope you understand what I mean, I think this sentence turned out a little confusing.

that is some amazing footage in that thread. seriously intriguing. i don't think the two shapes labeled as aliens are, however - i never saw them move so in my eyes they are more likely protuberances on the object. i could be mistaken, but then they would need a 100% transparent dome separating their atmosphere from ours, and that isn't too feasible in spaceflight when solar radiation comes into play, unless it could be made opaque. its not conclusive at all, but its seriously good evidence at first glance.

reply to post by easynow

---

On the first video I only changed the focus, on the second video I only changed the zoom.

From the first video:

Camera focused on the bridge lights, 1700 metres away.


Camera focused on the flashlight LEDs, 80 centimetres away.


As you can see, there was no change in distance between the lights (only the change from my own movements), an evidence that I did not used the zoom during this video.

Now, from the second video:

Camera focused on the house on the other side of the street, some 15 metres away, full optical zoom (20x).


Camera still focused on the house, full optical zoom+full digital zoom, to a total of 400x.


PS: while I was writing this post I remembered that I could have made a mistake writing the distance to the bridge, because in Portugal we use the comma as the decimal separation mark and the point for the thousands, so when I wrote "1.700 metres away" that meant one thousand, seven hundred metres away.

I edited the posts and removed the ".", that way everyone understands it (I hope).

Sorry for that confusion.

Since the whole thing has been explained very clearly as overexposure, I wonder why people are clinging to other things like trajectory. That is really a side issue in my opinion. We can debate trajectory of space debris but that still won't make it a UFO in the true sense.

Questions: Why has nobody ever observed UFOs with holes in the middle of them before. Why do they never change angle, but fly as if two dimensional objects? Why do all of them fly with the hole facing the camera? Why would it take 50 or so craft, flown by super intelligent beings to observe a piece of cable floating in space?

Surely, you must know why.



You cannot find just one example - even on this thread?

...From earlier in the thread (posted by Zorgon):




...From STS-80 (flying in formation and pulsating):

YouTube Link

How long have you been researching UFOs?



You didn't even the thread.

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Exuberant1]

An artists impression based on an optical illusion from cameras, what does that prove?

And no I don't know why people cling to side issues, can you tell me?

Before you edited your post, you asked me how long I had been researching NASA ufos, so you're saying these pulsating donuts are mostly observed on NASA missions, with footage shot from NASA cameras? Interesting.

because people are still clinging to the idea that the trajectories are odd, mostly. and your second paragraph was almost my exact point way back at page 8 or 9 or so. it was addressed directly to zorgon who has yet to put forth an explanation. i'll quote it.



[edit on 4-7-2009 by JScytale]

reply to post by Lazyninja

---

Could it be because that it is what the thread is about.




[edit on 4/7/09 by gallifreyan medic]