Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

New Analysis Video of the STS-75 Tether Incident

page: 4
75
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 03:43 AM
link   
one more thing...if they are debris or crystals or paint that are quite visible being effected by a force....there is no chance that the broken part change a little bit its direction or rotation too?




posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by JScytale
 


Greetings Jsclayte,

Unlike Zorgon, you have yet to provide external-source documentation which corroborates your hypothesis.

You should familiarize yourself with the Tether Optical Phenomena Experiment through which this video data was acquired.

*Zorgon has provided the relevant data and links.










posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 03:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by heineken
one more thing...if they are debris or crystals or paint that are quite visible being effected by a force....there is no chance that the broken part change a little bit its direction or rotation too?


well, once it breaks off what it was part of, the only force affecting it is the earth's gravity - there is no drag in space. sure, you could argue there are plenty of other forces at work, but none that would make a visible change in its direction. any apparent changes of direction in space either are the result of viewing a parabolic arc from a strange angle, are the result of an *outside* force like the ships thrusters, or are the result of a force coming from the object itself - which is the good evidence people are looking for.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by JScytale
 


Greetings Jsclayte,

Unlike Zorgon, you have yet to provide external-source documentation which corroborates your hypothesis.

You should familiarize yourself with the Tether Optical Phenomena Experiment through which this video data was acquired.

*Zorgon has provided the relevant data and links.













my first post was an external source. first reply of the thread. all of my arguments since have been referring to that experiment, what it demonstrated, and common knowledge (or what i assume is common knowledge, people surprise you).

[edit on 8-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by heineken
one more thing...if they are debris or crystals or paint that are quite visible being effected by a force....


Indeed.

These critters from the tether footage are maneuvering in multiple directions and at varying speeds and apparently absent any external force (not counting the possible magnetic effects of the tether).

*Do you ever wonder about the extent to which the tether influenced these objects?

It does appear to hold some attractive properties.


[edit on 8-6-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 04:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale

my first post was an external source. first reply of the thread.


Your external source is a youtube video....

Compare these to the links to legitimate scientific papers, studies and documentation provided by Zorgon, and which both corroborate and substantiate his hypothesis with regards to the reasons for the visibility of the plasma-glow around the tether.

You efforts are not very impressive and thus far your claims lack substance.

Zorgon
JSClayte



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


attempting to demonstrate a parabolic arc from a near-head on angle.



notice the trajectory. now imagine a particle following it exactly - it appears to move in one direction, slow down, and make a complete U-turn.

now imagine yourself positioned *exactly* in line with the direction of its motion. it will appear to move, slow down, come to a complete stop for a moment, and reverse its course 180 degrees exactly.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by JScytale

my first post was an external source. first reply of the thread.


Your external source is a youtube video....

Compare these to the links to legitimate scientific papers, studies and documentation provided by Zorgon, and which both corroborate and substantiate his hypothesis with regards to the reasons for the visibility of the plasma-glow around the tether.

You efforts are not very impressive and thus far your claims lack substance.

Zorgon
JSClayte


it is a simple experiment that i have seen recreated on the ATS boards by at least one member with identical results. it explains the shape of the object most frequently quoted as being anomalous, and it recreates it perfectly.

zorgon, on the other hand, did good research to prove that the tether was self-illuminated. whether or not the tether was self-illuminated has absolutely no bearing on whether or not the objects in question were particles or intelligently controlled spacecraft.

do you understand what i mean when i call his post good research but irrelevant now?

it also bears mentioning that he demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of the electromagnetic spectrum when he seemed to imply that because the film was taken by a camera sensitive to UV light, that sunlight could not possibly be responsible for the brightness of the tether. its one thing to understand the science involved, its another to regurgitate facts.

please don't tell me i'm going to have to post a barrage of links proving that sunlight contains a much wider spectrum of electromagnetic radiation than just visible light. you could just pick up some sunscreen and read the label.

[edit on 8-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale
do you know why you see the same explanations raised when doubt is expressed? because those are the explanations logic and common sense lead to.


Well common sense says that an object without its own motive power would continue in the same direction unless acted upon by an outside force. I think a guy by the name of Newton came up with that one


Now applying your logic and common sense, please prove to us what the force is that creates the motion we see in the video... they are moving in various directions, various speeds, make several turns independent of each other etc.

Any grade school space cadet can tell you once a piece of debris is set in motion it would need an outside force to change direction

So please tell me what force accounts for all the motion seen in the video?

I know many out there assume that ice particles and dust would just float around like they do in the atmosphere. That is NOT the case in space.

So please show us and provide documentation and calculations to back your interesting theory

Thanks


Oh and the Earths gravity pulling ice and dust particles down in a parabolic arc? Over that short a time period? You really expect any sane person to buy into that one?




posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 04:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by JScytale
do you know why you see the same explanations raised when doubt is expressed? because those are the explanations logic and common sense lead to.


Well common sense says that an object without its own motive power would continue in the same direction unless acted upon by an outside force. I think a guy by the name of Newton came up with that one


Now applying your logic and common sense, please prove to us what the force is that creates the motion we see in the video... they are moving in various directions, various speeds, make several turns independent of each other etc.

Any grade school space cadet can tell you once a piece of debris is set in motion it would need an outside force to change direction

So please tell me what force accounts for all the motion seen in the video?

I know many out there assume that ice particles and dust would just float around like they do in the atmosphere. That is NOT the case in space.

So please show us and provide documentation and calculations to back your interesting theory

Thanks


Oh and the Earths gravity pulling ice and dust particles down in a parabolic arc? Over that short a time period? You really expect any sane person to buy into that one?



A) read my previous 2 posts.
B) yes. are you aware of how strong the earth's gravitational field is? try jumping for me.

in space, particles will move in a slight to strong parabolic arc. depending on their speed, the arc could be un-noticeable. if an object moves fast enough, the slight arc exactly matches the curvature of the earth. thats what we call orbit. orbit is moving so fast that you fall just quickly enough to drop down the same amount that the earth drops away from your trajectory, in layman's terms.

objects can easily bump into each other. they can be easily influenced by particles too small to notice - and were talking about visible objects in space after a satellite broke. a lot of debris is in space. a *whole* lot. and its not going to just "fall out of the way" immediately because due to momentum, its velocity matches the satellite's + whatever forces caused it to snap off in whatever direction it snapped off into.

bear in mind the shuttle also possesses thrusters that fire frequently to correct its orbit. these thrusters are more than capable of influencing particles.

if you're having trouble understanding how orbit works, try this intuitive, interactive explanation.
spaceplace.nasa.gov...
if you try to debunk this on the grounds that it is on a nasa website, i can promise you newton's ghost is crying right now.

[edit on 8-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Greeting Zorgon,

I have recently discovered some interesting similarity between the new ST-119 UFO and one of the UFOs which was visible on the mission control Screen at NASA during STS-75:



Here is the UFO caught by the cameras on STS-119 along with NASA's contiguous commentary:

"This is a close-up view of Discovery's Orbiter Docking System..."

[Wait, I though the debunkers said it was an ice-particle/debris/camera-defect
]




*Here is another UFO - this one from STS-75. Note the similarities.




And Onscreen at NASA's Mission Control...


[edit on 8-6-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 04:20 AM
link   
For those of you who are interested - here is the Tether Sequence Uncut:


(This video is from the Martyn Stubbs NASA UFO Archives - Thanks Mr. Stubbs!)



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 04:28 AM
link   
posting more examples of the same thing doesn't change what they are... in fact, the person filming makes no comment whatsoever and there is no stress in her voice that would hint that she just aw something strange but is holding back comment. she speaks purely routinely. and this is an apparently huge object directly in line of sight from her.

here's an example of bad 'UFO' evidence:
www.youtube.com...
all of the objects react at the exact same time to a thruster fire after drifting aimlessly in space, as particles matching the shuttle's momentum would be expected to do.

allow me to show an example of very solid evidence of UFOs from a NASA mission.
www.youtube.com...
the object comes to a full stop, and then shoots off. the fact it comes to a full stop and then fires in a completely different direction proves it is not a parabolic arc viewed from a strange angle, this is in my eyes almost conclusive proof of a force coming from within the object.

[edit on 8-6-2009 by JScytale]

[edit on 8-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Haha, I like how this "new analysis" was done in Windows Movie Maker. Professional stuff!



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by KIRKSTERUK
Haha, I like how this "new analysis" was done in Windows Movie Maker. Professional stuff!


i wouldn't criticize the tools used. people use what they have access to. if i was going to criticize anything about the OP's video, it would be the fact that the objects in question are not visible when he is supposedly tracing their paths. for example, the object to the right of the tether that he focuses on at one point. in the original footage at the beginning, it moves in a clear parabolic arc towards or away from the camera. refer to my earlier post on this page for an example of it. in the "traced" footage, there is a lot of wiggling in its trajectory that is not present in the original.

[edit on 8-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale
www.youtube.com...

go to 5:30

that is pretty convincingly debunked by a show dedicated to finding evidence of UFOs. in fact im not sure why people keep talking about the STS-75 incident. If you're interested in some truly good evidence from shuttle missions, watch the full episode, a lot of it is very solid.

UFO hunters give a very good theory to why there are these circular things swimming around. But theres something about the way they move that makes me think they are intelligently controlled. UFO hunters only manage to partially debunk the video, things about it still remian a mystery.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 07:07 AM
link   
The best answer is the old chestnut of 'we don't actually know'
Might be dust, might be ice, might be lots of things.
Due to the camera used and operator error* causing all everything to look similar, we will, in all likelihood, never know.

*well, maybe operator error is a bit harsh, but someone had to calibrate the camera



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


This incident has always been intriguing to me because of the amount of traffic (for lack of a better word) thats in it. Theres what looks to me to be allot of different type of phenomena floating and flying around. I've often wondered if this video shows some organic life forms as well as craft and debris. Theres definitely enough anomalies to show that something is going on even if allot of it is debris. Talk about a pot of stew with allot of different vegetables in it!



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by upnorthtrip

Originally posted by reugen

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by JScytale
 


thanks but i have already seen that video from the ufo hunters. they did demonstrate that these objects that appear to be passing behind the tether and the strange critter shape they have could be an illusion.

what the video in the Op shows is...no matter if these objects went behind the tether or not, they are making delta V shaped maneuvers and at one point in the video you will see one of the objects stop ! and then do a 180 degree turn in direction.

that is what needs to be explained



I think it has been explained hundreds of times, the Shuttle thrusters can fire from more than one direction. Say some ice debris breaks of from the cargo bay and floats out into space and into FOV. Then they fire a thruster (very delicate, it can be done so, proven) which makes the debris float the opposite direction, then they fire a thruster opposite of the other one (to keep the shuttle in place, it can be done very delicate) which makes the debris change direction once more, say a 180 degree turn. As the partcile / debris is passing behind the several mile long tether can be explained away by light exposure, optical illusion but its not just as easy.

So its a 50/50 case, i think its just ice particles, debris floating in space being bounced around by thruster vector.


How many thrusters are in the shuttle?
I see objects coming from all directions.
Why aren,t the thrusters affecting all the objects???
Are they selective?
That makes no sense


[edit on 7-6-2009 by upnorthtrip]


How would the thrusters of the shuttle affect objects when the shuttle is 120 miles away from them?



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 08:56 AM
link   
I love it, easynow!

Star and flag and kudos to you and LunaCognita









 
75
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join