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.

 

Real UFOs

page: 9
64
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
 


i'd say more like Godzilla's





posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


thanks!

and woah!!! imagine now.. with all this increase in UFO and alien symbology worldwide and mass sightings all over the world every day..

i wonder if it's really busy up there...

[edit on 17/05/09 by Raider of Truth]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Odessy
 


You know strangely.. the crafts look very...familiar :/

i've seen that big one(in the 1st pic and pointing downwards to earth) somewhere before..i'm 100% sure of it!

also someone said it could be the "Black Knight" Satellite which was orbiting earth when Man first went into space.

[edit on 17/05/09 by Raider of Truth]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   
huhuhuhuhuhu this stuff must be huuuuuuge!



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   
None of those look like spacecraft. They all appear to be satellites or space debris. A lot of them just look like ripped up hunks of metal with light reflecting off of them.

I'm a believer in UFOs, but I don't think anything here is that extraordinary.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
Saw alot of strange aircraft that was far advanced of anythiing known here during the georgan war in the night sky.. weird...



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 12:04 AM
link   
Why are we even bothering......this is undoubtedly space junk...tumbling. Nasa wouldn't waste its time unless it needs tracking cos it's in low orbit...which it probably is and could be a 'risk' to populated areas...this has been posted and tracked as space debris...fact...get over it!
It's clear and wonderful...and all those 'fantastic' things we'd like to believe exist...but it's not an alien ship!

We are still waiting................ until then............



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 04:19 AM
link   
There is a strange shaped tumbling object at 33 seconds in this video looks just as crazy a shape, no idea what it is, or if it is legit.
www.youtube.com...

Similar here
www.youtube.com...

These are all UFOs as in "Unidentified Flying Object", I have no idea what they are nor does it seem anyone else has.

[edit on 5-8-2009 by peaceonearth]



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 04:33 AM
link   
Debris, or an advanced craft maximum. But "material, solid" things like these are unlikely to be used as vehicles by our "alien friends"... Someone has mentioned light balls, or for example the tether incident.

They are more likely to have alien origins/hidden tech.



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 04:47 AM
link   
Thank you OP. I needed a good laugh today. The pics had me going for awhile I'll admit. Truly something you have to look at twice before you realize how silly it was to think an E.T. craft could possibly be shaped the way it was in the pictures. Space junk all of it. An aluminum pie pan would have been much more believable, however still remaining nothing more than trash.



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 04:54 AM
link   
I've looked at the pictures & read the whole thread...

...no ET's here.



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 05:16 AM
link   
To all of you who 'obviously' see space junk, debris, pieces of satellite, etc,

Let's expose your trail of thought here just for once,

You "saw straight away that this was just..." and so on.

Okay, let's get down to it. You're experienced and qualified satellite and debris-trackers, apparently.

Tell us; what are we looking at?

Debris? What type of debris?


Originally posted by Alienmojo
I don't think space garbage makes a ufo.


And neither does an unidentified object become 'debris' just because 'somebody' says so. It could be identified as debris if somebody can say what it is, or what it is a piece of, and where it could possibly come from.



So, throw all your professional skills in here and tell us what this is? Someone dropped his cam recorder, Yuri Gagarin's old lunch box still floating around?

As already mentioned, NASA and other space agencies keep a track of larger debris and junk.

NASA has this to say about junk, debris and STS-88:

"During spacewalks debris, both small and large, are
often thrown off the station for convenience, although
sometimes tools unintentionally slip away. Such was
the case in December 1998 when a slidewire carrier
and a worksite interface were lost by the STS-88 crew
while conducting an extravehicular activity (EVA) for
ISS. These objects were large enough to be tracked by
the U.S. SSN and were cataloged (U.S. satellite
numbers 25564 and 25565). Three other objects were
also released by STS-88 spacewalkers, one
inadvertently (an insulation blanket) and two by design
(antenna spools), although only the former was
officially cataloged (Debris, 1999).
The sizes of debris vary dramatically from small,
untrackable debris (normally less than 5 cm in diameter
with today’s SSN) to the 10-m diameter KRT-10
antenna which had to be kicked off the rear of Salyut 6
by a crew member when it failed to eject automatically."


ntrs.nasa.gov...

So what is it? The slidewire carrier, the worksite interface, the insulation blanket or the antenna spools? Too bad NASA themselves weren't capable of clearing that up,




posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heliocentric

Okay, let's get down to it. You're experienced and qualified satellite and debris-trackers, apparently.

Tell us; what are we looking at?

Debris? What type of debris?



I am not an experienced and qualified debris-tracker.


But I still don't think it is possible to answer your question. There is just WAY too much junk and debris floating around up there!


Between the launch of Sputnik on 4 October 1957 and 1 January 2008, approximately 4600 launches have placed some 6000 satellites into orbit; about 400 are now travelling beyond Earth on interplanetary trajectories, but of the remaining 5600 only about 800 satellites are operational – roughly 45 percent of these are both in LEO and GEO. Space debris comprise the ever-increasing amount of inactive space hardware in orbit around the Earth as well as fragments of spacecraft that have broken up, exploded or otherwise become abandoned. About 50 percent of all trackable objects are due to in-orbit explosion events (about 200) or collision events (less than 10).
....
From the image below, it's evident how explosions of spacecraft causes even more scattered debris. Even after the end of the mission, batteries and pressurised systems as well as fuel tanks explode. This generates debris objects, which contribute to the growing population of materials in orbit, ranging from less than a micrometer to 10 centimeters or more in size.


www.universetoday.com...



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by ziggystar60
 

G'day again ziggystar60


That's the problem with trying to be definitive about these things.

There's just way too much stuff up there.

That's why I believe you must apply some analysis & common sense & arrive at reasonable conclusions, rather than quickly jumping to the "it's an alien spaceship" point of view.



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ziggystar60
I am not an experienced and qualified debris-tracker.


But I still don't think it is possible to answer your question. There is just WAY too much junk and debris floating around up there!


Exactly.

That way, you manage to explain away what you're looking at, but you don't have to do the effort of backing up your claims with anything substantial.

Oh, it's debris. Anybody can see that. What type of debris? Who knows, there's soo much of it up there, but it's debris alright. You can see that because it's got that 'debris' feel to it, right? Or... NASA said it is debris, so that's what it must be. Right?



Originally posted by paradigm619
None of those look like spacecraft.


So, how does spacecraft look like?


Originally posted by wyskyjohn
Debris, or an advanced craft maximum. But "material, solid" things like these are unlikely to be used as vehicles by our "alien friends".


So, why would they not use solid craft, and what is this information based on?

[edit on 5-8-2009 by Heliocentric]



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by kroms33

Originally posted by peaceonearth
Same here denied access


Now it is saying that I have to wait 5 minutes for it to process.. LOL so hopefully I will get a Hi-res image...


On that screen right click on the ftp link (under browser download instructions) and download immediately......well it does with Firefox on my PCLOS laptop.

The artifacts look like debris and lets face it there is a shed load of crap up there. Human rubbish I might add.

The most scary thing I read was that if the debris continues to build up within 20-30 years we will be earth "grounded"!!!!!!!!!! so forget new moon landings and mars missions.



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 08:06 AM
link   
wow just wow.... no more blurry saucer photographs.... amazing detail lets get this puppy to the front page...



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heliocentric

Tell us; what are we looking at?

Debris? What type of debris?
...

So what is it? The slidewire carrier, the worksite interface, the insulation blanket or the antenna spools? Too bad NASA themselves weren't capable of clearing that up,


There's the hint of two assumptions here that are a little unjustified. The first is because something isn't explained it is necessarily inexplicable by science as we know it.

The second is that Nasa's principle obligation when it puts these pictures in the public domain is to explain in detail how they do NOT show alien technology or anomalies.

There's no reason to suppose that there is anything remotely sinister, other-worldly, or beyond our knowledge about the object or objects shown in the pictures from the OP. There's plenty of evidence, as posted by the likes of Phage, to suggest that this is debris of some kind rather than anything more complex. So on the balance of evidence, though I 100% admit I can't prove it either way, I would suggest to you that it's probably space debris.

I wish it wasn't, too, if that's any help...

LW



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by LoneWeasel
There's the hint of two assumptions here that are a little unjustified. The first is because something isn't explained it is necessarily inexplicable by science as we know it.

The second is that Nasa's principle obligation when it puts these pictures in the public domain is to explain in detail how they do NOT show alien technology or anomalies.

There's no reason to suppose that there is anything remotely sinister, other-worldly, or beyond our knowledge about the object or objects shown in the pictures from the OP. There's plenty of evidence, as posted by the likes of Phage, to suggest that this is debris of some kind rather than anything more complex. So on the balance of evidence, though I 100% admit I can't prove it either way, I would suggest to you that it's probably space debris.

I wish it wasn't, too, if that's any help...

LW


Don't get me wrong here,

I'm not wishing these were Alien spacecraft,

If they are they are, and if they aren't they aren't,

I believe they can be interpreted as debris, but you know as well as I do that we wouldn't be here debating these pics unless there was some odd quality to (some) of them,

So, nothing is written in the stars so to speak, what we have to go on is the pictures, and what NASA has said about them.

I'm trying to improve the quality of the debunking in this thread. I wish people used a little less 'common sense', and instead used open-minded analytic reasoning.

What does the pictures show, not what they probably show based on the assumption that...

Because: IF they were to show something that we cannot explain as other than some type of artificial unknown craft, then they are extremely important pics.

Imagine if it was some type of spy probe, and the responsible people at NASA automatically shrugged them off as debris, that would be a big miss, wouldn't you say?

The question I would like to ask is, only six pictures taken of these objects?

Someone should buy NASA a bigger SD card.

[edit on 5-8-2009 by Heliocentric]



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Forget Space Tourism....Richard Branson needs to put together a Waste Management Company. That's another fortune waiting to happen! Talk about a captive audience.

I'm voting debris...although that last photo has me scratching my head.




top topics



 
64
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join