Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

New Analysis Video of the STS-75 Tether Incident

page: 5
75
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   
First off, to all the skeptics out there, the amount of video footage and eye witness reports GLOBALLY do not prove that there are aliens per say, but do in fact prove that there is " something going on here" . It may be our government or it may be something else. But the true fact is that "something is out there".

In regards to this footage, and all you idiots who say it is meteorites or ice or whatever. Are you really that stupid? If that is such a common event, then show me one video that displays the same characteristics. You can't because this type of movement does not occur naturally!

Now I'm not saying " O its a UFO or aliens " But what I am saying is that it is not a natural phenomenon.

Check out www.marsanomalyresearch.com for very intensive and conclusive photographic evidence that we are being lied to!!!

Lets just entertain the idea that it is in fact some type of craft per say, Man made or alien or whatever. Who it is is not important, what is important is the amount of craft that are there! This is not just a couple of dots on the horizon people!!! If these are actually craft, look at the sheer number of them!! That is what astounds me, who they are is not important, but how many their are is important.

No naturally occurring phenomenon changes trajectory and velocity like that! NONE.


Prove me wrong and show me a meteor or " ice " or whatever that does that.




posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:24 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:29 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:32 AM
link   
So what would be the possibility it would actually partially be caused from the tether itself?

Causing particles in space to be visible by this accident by somehow the transfer of the energy contained in the tether to surrounding particles when it breaks off. Combine that with the usual ice particles and debris seen in space and you get a pretty little light show.

After all this was a huge screw up when the thing snapped and it all seemed at first to center around the tether with a few exception. As the tether got further and further away more particles seem to light up around it.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


I think we can summarize your last three posts simply as:

NASA says 'there's nothing to see here, move along'

Well, we know that's what NASA's response is. Isn't it always? You have to remember that for many at ATS, NASA is the 'defendant', accused of fraud and gross deception. Which means quoting members of NASA in support of NASA's 'findings' is pretty meaningless. It's rather like the defense in court waving a piece of paper and saying "I have here a written statement by the defendant which clearly and eloquently states how upstanding and innocent of all charges he is and which completely validates the account of the events he gave us earlier."

Oh well, case dismissed then.

[edit on 8-6-2009 by Malcram]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Malcram
 


Greetings Malcram!

Check out this video - it shows the STS-75 tether UFOs appear out of nowhere




*I like this video.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Another good one. I've been impressed by the video evidence in this thread. I really don't know what exactly we are looking at. All I know is that I have to strain credulity infinitely more to pretend that they must all be particles and ice crystals etc. than I do to entertain.......other options
. It's one of those cases for me in which the 'prosaic explanations' are not actually prosaic upon closer examination - because the prosaic stuff just DOES NOT DO what these things are recorded doing.


[edit on 8-6-2009 by Malcram]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Malcram
reply to post by JimOberg
 


I think we can summarize your last three posts simply as:

NASA says 'there's nothing to see here, move along'

Well, we know that's what NASA's response is. Isn't it always? You have to remember that for many at ATS, NASA is the 'defendant', accused of fraud and gross deception. Which means quoting members of NASA in support of NASA's 'findings' is pretty meaningless. It's rather like the defense in court waving a piece of paper and saying "I have here a written statement by the defendant which clearly and eloquently states how upstanding and innocent of all charges he is and which completely validates the account of the events he gave us earlier."

Oh well, case dismissed then.

[edit on 8-6-2009 by Malcram]


I think, differently, that your attitude is 'we don't need to ask the defendant for an explanation, string him up.'

Why bother with primary witnesses at all?

Why bother with the lighting conditions at all, 'glowing plasma' is so much more thrilling.

Why bother with reality at all?

Well, I'm the guest, and it's your sandbox, so go right ahead.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darthorious
So what would be the possibility it would actually partially be caused from the tether itself?

Causing particles in space to be visible by this accident by somehow the transfer of the energy contained in the tether to surrounding particles when it breaks off. Combine that with the usual ice particles and debris seen in space and you get a pretty little light show.

After all this was a huge screw up when the thing snapped and it all seemed at first to center around the tether with a few exception. As the tether got further and further away more particles seem to light up around it.


Well your actually partially right the act of releasing the satellite would have caused debris and ice around the shuttle.This would have caused far more than normal anyhow. And the part i don't get is how people think that it would be unusual for things to be traveling in different directions. if you were to release marbles eventually after bouncing around they would all have different trajectories.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   
"Well, we know that's what NASA's response is. Isn't it always? You have to remember that for many at ATS, NASA is the 'defendant', accused of fraud and gross deception."

Yes. If it's nothing but ice particles, lens abberations and all that, then why the on-slought of explanations from Oberg. It sure didn't take long for NASA to send him in here, this post is barely what? Not even 24 hours in and already touched a nerve.

[edit on 8-6-2009 by Jimmy2theR]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Malcram
reply to post by JimOberg
 


I think, differently, that your attitude is 'we don't need to ask the defendant for an explanation, string him up.'

Why bother with primary witnesses at all?

Why bother with the lighting conditions at all, 'glowing plasma' is so much more thrilling.

Why bother with reality at all?

Well, I'm the guest, and it's your sandbox, so go right ahead.



What about those huge transluscent objects flying in from over the shuttles' right side? You can see them as they go on their path, hit the earth's atmosphere, turning into a black sphere, then as they enter, they become white pulsating spheres hovering over inside the atmosphere. Taken with UV and Infra-red cameras. A well known filmmaker we all know here at ATS has a film coming out that has incredible details on these particular scenes that I am sure is going to make you think more about them being ships or some kind of bio-organism, rather than these lame explanations you always rely on explaining away these anomalies. I'm sure you never even noticed this footage. Jimmy2theR



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
this video is for anyone that doesn't think the original footage and the analysis tracking match up.





after seeing this , i have no doubts about the accuracy of the video in the Op.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 01:54 PM
link   
EXPLAIN THE CHANGE IN TRAJECTORIES !!!!!

Yes, it is plausible it could be ice or whatever...but

Never mind what it "actually is" ice, debris, marbles, .......

The main point is that these objects are changing speed as well as direction!!!!!!!

How can any piece of ice or debris change direction ??????



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by i_want_the_truth

In regards to this footage, and all you idiots who say it is meteorites or ice or whatever. Are you really that stupid? If that is such a common event, then show me one video that displays the same characteristics. You can't because this type of movement does not occur naturally!



how many videos of satellites literally breaking apart are there? oh right, just this one. there is a lot of debris. if you want to understand gravity, parabolic arcs and line of sight read my previous posts, but i don't expect you to.

and if you want to see debris, watch any undocking in space.

1:45



[edit on 8-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by Malcram
 


Greetings Malcram!

Check out this video - it shows the STS-75 tether UFOs appear out of nowhere




listen to the original video.
"just moving into sunrise..."
objects are bound to emerge from the earth's shadow.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by i_want_the_truth
EXPLAIN THE CHANGE IN TRAJECTORIES !!!!!

Yes, it is plausible it could be ice or whatever...but

Never mind what it "actually is" ice, debris, marbles, .......

The main point is that these objects are changing speed as well as direction!!!!!!!

How can any piece of ice or debris change direction ??????


allow me to quote myself, because people seem to not read intermediate pages.


Originally posted by JScytale
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.



Originally posted by JScytale
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...



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 02:49 PM
link   

how many videos of satellites literally breaking apart are there? oh right, just this one. there is a lot of debris. if you want to understand gravity, parabolic arcs and line of sight read my previous posts, but i don't expect you to.

and if you want to see debris, watch any undocking in space.


Those videos show rockets losing there lower stages and ect. This is not any kind of proof that ice and ect. can change there trajectory. How does showing some rockets compare to this threads discussions?

Once an object is in motion, it will follow that motion until acted upon, i.e. earth's gravity. If this is the case, then ALL objects would react in a similar way. Granted, there may be some variance but in general, they will all be moving in the same general direction. We are talking about an about face 180 degree turn around, as well as velocity changes. This is not a matter of perspective, or parabolic arcs. The tether is only 20 miles out you dummy.
Gravity, parabolic arcs and line of sight do not react the same way this thread's video depicts.

Why don't you just say it was some swamp gas.

You need to look at the threads opening video, How does your video of rockets have anything to do with this at all....

I asked for proof of debris or anything that reacts the same way the video depicts, which you have not done.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale
reply to post by afgang
 


......In my eyes, 99% of these objects are pretty much conclusively micrometeorites and debris.


sorry to burst your bubble, but this isn't a logical statement.

micrometeorites and debris, which have NO intelligence...

'fly' to a spot near the tether and remain at a .5 sec stand still and THEN shoot from a standstill in space and launch in the opposite direction....as the EC stated.. in a delta-V direction...

you did watch the video ... didn't you and read the external content..

this type of movement denotes either remotely controlled objects from the shuttle or elsewhere or they are self-powered and are being controlled from within the light sources themselves.





new topics

top topics



 
75
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join