Ancient Satellite Orbiting Earth

page: 3
39
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010
Not black though... (black color for space is NASA trademark)

Funny, I though black was the trademark of Space.

Again, for those not well-acquainted with photography, you should know that the stars as observed from space aren't these big, glowing, glaring lanterns in the sky, as we perceive them on Earth, filtered and distorted by our atmosphere. From space, starlight is intense, but concentrated into very precise little points.

When astronauts (or optical satellites, for that matter) attempt photography in space, they have to account for 3 major considerations: 1) They need to capture very exacting detail about their subject matter, which is usually the Earth's surface; 2) They cannot take lengthy single-frame exposures because their space vehicle and the Earth are hauling ass in opposite directions from each other and would hopelessly blur the image; and 3) They have to use a very small aperture because of the intense sunlight.

So, most of the time, space photography is executed using fast shutter speeds with a very narrow aperture and a very fast film. As a result, the very tiny points of starlight simply ARE NOT CAPTURED — they're not bright enough to react the film at high speed with a closed aperture, right? You need a great big, brightly illuminated object, such as the Earth or Moon or a nearby planet, to deliver enough light to your film at high speed.

So, yeah, that's why you see so many photos of the Earth and Moon (and Mars, and Jupiter, and Saturn, and all their moons, et cetera) hanging on these uniformly black backgrounds.

In fact, to capture detailed optical images of the stars in space, you need a big rig like Hubble, which can hide from direct sunlight and target the blackness of space for these long-duration exposures. Using Hubble's unique capabilities, they can actually execute exposures lasting many hours, capturing these truly minute streams of photons that provide images from objects 13 billion light years away, objects that no unaided human eye could ever perceive.

So, yeah, if you want up-close images of Earth or Moon or planets with exacting detail, you have to forfeit a starry, starry background.

— Doc Velocity




posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


As Apollo astronots are assumed have travelled to the moon and back,
they might have better chances to encounter unexplained visual phenomena like UFO distingushed from natural celestial bodies, for example stars.
So the astronots:
1) were able to photograph stars in space or on the moon - YES/NO;
1a) if YES, where are photos of the stars?
2) were able to see stars in space or on the moon without optical instruments - YES/NO;
2a) if YES, where are reports of these star sightings?



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010
As Apollo astronots are assumed have travelled to the moon and back,
they might have better chances to encounter unexplained visual phenomena like UFO distingushed from natural celestial bodies, for example stars.

That's only if you assume that UFOs are denizens of space. In all the years of UFO observation, nobody has ever proven that UFOs are from space. For all we know, they could be just another Earthly phenomenon, the products of an intelligent civilization that coexists with us on this planet.

As such, there's no reason to think we'd encounter UFOs in space any more than we'd encounter another manned spacecraft up there.


Originally posted by bokonon2010
So the astronots:
1) were able to photograph stars in space or on the moon - YES/NO

ABLE to photograph the stars? Well, that would depend on their photographic equipment as well as on their skill with a camera. If the camera was designed or modified to take detailed shots of the surface features of the Earth or Moon ONLY, then NO, they wouldn't be able to take shots of the stars.

I mean, every time I saw the astronauts handling camera gear, they WERE NOT messing around with focus and aperture settings. Their gloved hands were no good for such "fine tuning"... They had one consistent gesture when handling the cameras — they'd snap a photo, then rock the thing forward to advance the film, the way scuba divers do. That's it.

Which tells me that the cameras the astronauts were using were designed or modified to be point-and-shoot. No focus, no aperture settings. A very small aperture, no doubt, to give them total depth of field.

Again, in order to take photos of the stars in space, you'd need fast film AND a time-lapse exposure, to allow the film to capture enough starlight, plus you'd probably want a wide-open aperture to permit more light to enter.

However, if you take a time-lapse photo with a wide-open aperture from the Moon's surface, you're going to be very disappointed with the results — because the moon reflects sunlight like a bitch, and your photo would probably be contaminated with light pollution.

This is one of the Moon-landing-hoax arguments, regarding photos on the Moon's surface. The truthers claim that, because there is so little atmosphere on the moon, there is no diffusion of sunlight, and all images should come out in stark contrast, all black & white with no grayscale, right?

If this was a valid argument, then you could, theoretically, take long-exposure starlight photos from the Moon's surface.

However, the Moon photos from the manned landings show that there is LOTS of ambient light on the Moon's surface — that there IS grayscale, there IS light all over the place, traveling in every direction. This is because the Moon's regolith (soil) is so highly damned reflective. It does illuminate things from underneath and on oblique angles.

So, there's really too much scattered light on the Moon's surface to take time-lapse photos that reveal stars.


Originally posted by bokonon2010
1a) if YES, where are photos of the stars?

See above.


Originally posted by bokonon2010
2) were able to see stars in space or on the moon without optical instruments - YES/NO

You may be surprised to know that the astronauts had a very difficult time seeing the stars when they were in the immediate vicinity of the Earth and Moon. Yes, they probably could see them pretty clearly in-transit, between the Earth and Moon, but they had no reason or mission objective to photograph the stars, as far as I know.

Besides, as I stated earlier, if their camera gear was specifically designed for shooting bright surface images, they couldn't have captured starlight if they wanted to.


Originally posted by bokonon2010
2a) if YES, where are reports of these star sightings?

Well, I know that astronauts have been asked about seeing stars while in space and on the moon. Our good friend Buzz Aldrin, who is rather talky, described his feeling of insignificance while standing on the Moon's surface and staring back at Earth... He said all he could see was the Lunar highlands, the Earth, and the Sun, all against a stark black backdrop. No mention of stars whatsoever.

That's probably because he was viewing the scene through his gold-shielded sun visor. Between the harsh sunlight from above and the scattered light on the Moon's surface, his own pupils were probably so constricted that he couldn't see the dim, dim starlight.

Anything else?

— Doc Velocity






[edit on 8/2/2010 by Doc Velocity]



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by SpacePunk
 


Valis - good book.
Thanks for reminding me about it. I should re-read it.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


Could you answer the questions:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
as they presented in terms of logical outcomes
(tip: YES/NO question can be answered by either YES or NO)
so we can compare your literature essays with the facts.

If you CAN'T then you will be presented with choices:
A) it is not possible to distinguish UFOs from natural celestial bodies (stars) or other visuals based on Apollo materials;
B) your knowledge of the subject is not sufficient to distinguish between the facts and your beliefs in moon landings.
(By the way, the second question was about visual observations by astronots, not about photography).



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 06:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by MessOnTheFED!

Ancient Satellite orbiting the earth is it true or hoax ? i came across this article in my mail box so thought it would be very interesting to post here It is said that in 1957 black knight the blip discovered in 1960 a satellite detected shadowing the sputnik 1 craft It was in a polar orbit, something that neither the Americans or Soviets were capable of at the time. This object was dubbed “The Black Knight. It was several times larger and several times heavier than anything capable of being launched with 1960 rockets. It shouldn't have been there, but it was.


This paragraph makes no sense. Not only is there confusion over whether it was detected in 1957 or 1960, it also has this gem: "...a satellite detected shadowing the sputnik 1 craft It was in a polar orbit..."

Well, was it shadowing Sputnik 1 or was it in a polar orbit? You can't have it both ways. Interestingly, Sputnik 1 was shadowed in its orbit by a much larger object - The booster that launched it. People could see an orbiting object, but they didn't realize that the small, mirrored, beeping ball was just too small to see unless you were way out in the country on a very dark night (no pun intended) and knew exactly where to look. What people were actually seeing was the booster. The Soviets said nothing to correct the misperception - They were happy enough that people could see proof of their achievement.

Depending on the geometry, it was possible - and even likely - that the booster wound-up in front of Sputnik. If the satellite separated from the booster while it was pointing in the direction it was orbiting, then the extra nudge from the jettison would have kicked the ball into a slightly higher, longer-period orbit. The booster, in its lower, faster orbit would have slowly pulled ahead of the payload.

If someone was out away from the city lights, looking for Sputnik (the overflight times were published), they could have seen a bright star (the booster) moving across the sky, followed by a much dimmer object (Sputnik 1) trailing behind it. Since the papers only mentioned one object, not two, someone might have assumed that the bright one was the Soviet satellite, and the second, "shadowing" object was something else entirely.

This may be where the legend of the "Black Knight" satellite comes from.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010
So the astronots:
1) were able to photograph stars in space or on the moon - YES/NO;

In space OR on the moon? In that case yes; when away from the bright lunar surface it's possible to photograph the stars if you keep the cabin lights off and are in the shadow of the moon so that you don't over-expose the film with stray light.


1a) if YES, where are photos of the stars?

Right here.
www.lpi.usra.edu...
www.lpi.usra.edu...
spaceflight.nasa.gov...


2) were able to see stars in space or on the moon without optical instruments - YES/NO;

Sure, but only if they kept their eyes shielded from all the reflected daylight.


2a) if YES, where are reports of these star sightings?

From Gene Cernan:
"When you were in the lunar module, looking out the window, you certainly couldn't see stars. Using the telescope was sort of like being in a deep well; it cut out all the reflected light and let you see the stars. It was also generally true that, when you were on the surface in the LM's shadow, there were too many bright things in your field-of-view for the stars to be visible. But I remember that I wanted to see whether I could see stars, and there were times out on the surface when I found that, if you allowed yourself to just focus and maybe even just shielded your eyes to some degree, even outside the LM shadow you could see stars in the sky."
history.nasa.gov...



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   
in regards to the picture and a description:



Even taking a picture of the object hasn’t helped. [ The Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp. announced yesterday that a tracking camera at the Bethpage plant had photographed the object at 8:51 PM last Thursday. But, a Grumman spokesman added, "all the picture shows is a white line, so we still can't even begin to make an identification." ] The white line, difficult to detect, was barely visible even after the photo was enlarged.


and per Sgt Clifford Stone:



......Roughly 30 meters in diameter, highly polished surface. Asteroids don’t have a highly polished surface. It took corrective course changes to avoid collision with another asteroid. That don’t happen. This one it did.

neonsuntan.blogspot.com...



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by spikedmilk
in regards to the picture and a description:

1991 VG isn't even in earth orbit, it's in a heliocentric orbit, let alone a polar one that also manages to shadow sputnik 1, so that doesn't fit the description of the "black knight" at all. It's an interesting object, but black knight it is not.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


The Sky Was Black On The Moon ?:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010
reply to post by ngchunter
 


The Sky Was Black On The Moon ?:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm kind of disappointed that that's all the reply you're going to give me. You're not going to capture stars in the short exposures necessary to properly expose objects on the daylit lunar surface. It's the same story with ISS as is commonly seen during shuttle missions. Unless you shield your eyes from stray light on the bright lunar surface your eyes won't ever achieve dark adaptation to see stars either. Cernan made a concerted effort to do just that. That's not a contradiction, that's a confirmation.

[edit on 6-8-2010 by ngchunter]



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by bokonon2010
reply to post by ngchunter
 


The Sky Was Black On The Moon ?:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm kind of disappointed that that's all the reply you're going to give me. You're not going to capture stars in the short exposures necessary to properly expose objects on the daylit lunar surface. It's the same story with ISS as is commonly seen during shuttle missions. Unless you shield your eyes from stray light on the bright lunar surface your eyes won't ever achieve dark adaptation to see stars either. Cernan made a concerted effort to do just that. That's not a contradiction, that's a confirmation.


Sorry to disappoint you but according to ATS guidelines my conversation has been moved to the ATS thread [link in my previous reply], so your persistent curiosity [with Apollo TV sequel] would not interrupt and discomfort natural wonders of the ET sequel fans. Follow the rabbit hole!

[edit on 6.8.2010 by bokonon2010]



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by MessOnTheFED!
 


i thank the OP for sharing this with us. Great find, and thanks for thinking of us ATSers enough to share. Many of us appreciate it.

i've heard "rumors" from people i consider credible about ancient technologies being made available for study amongst the true powers that be.

i find the subject matter intriguing to say the least, but if true, it is just a piece of a puzzle. given what information does trickle down/up to us, it seems to me sometimes that perhaps "their" success depends upon our ignorance, whomever "they" are.

i know of a few academics who have in the past at least hinted at the possibility we may already live in a post-apocalyptic world and that once we may have been comparable to "modern" technologies.

i thank the OP for sharing this with us. Great find, and thanks for thinking of us ATSers enough to share. Many of us appreciate it.

it is a big puzzle, and each of us may be a piece to it, i think.

maybe there is a way they are keeping us up to date if we "read between the lines". It seems that the information via the MSM seems to be bottlenecked to say it gently. three word catch phrases spoken by politicians, weird phrases "they" agree upon.

sorry, maybe a little off topic.

do i think they have "found" or "observed" alien or had experiences with unknown thingies in outer space?

sure, if i choose to believe what numerous astronauts have reported under oath about to the united nations security councils.

i'm not sure which direction to best direct you for serious inquiry about such things. "information technologies" & psyops projects may be an appropriate place to start when trying to figure out who has their hands on the steering wheel of the information we get to be aware of, i think.

thanks again for sharing this with us MessOnTheFED,
et



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 11:36 PM
link   
I, too. have heard about the ancient satellite which is in orbit around one of the poles. Evidently it was seen by some french astronomer, 6 times, around the time the Russian and American satellites were sent into orbit. I heard on Coast to Coast last night, that no one knows who launched the ancient satellite and that it is orbiting 22 miles above the earth, vs 2 miles. I believe the Atlanteans put this satellite into orbit and heard on c2c last night, that the earth is only 6 thousand years old, but looks like it is millions of years old. This archeologist has found remains of ancient bones, discovered walls that have hieroglyphics, which have drawings of ufos and aircraft on them, and the archeologist said that there were no real cave men, but that they wore clothing, just like we do. They were probably survivors of atlantis, and I think either the atlanteans or the survivors built the pyramids, because they were imbedded in the sand, except for the tips, when the Egyptians found them. This archeologist also said there are signs of an atomic blast, a thousand years ago, or so, because they have found green glass in the desert, which can only be cause by an atomic blast, which heats the sand to temperatures high enough, to produce glass out of sand. I think we are headed towards a nuclear war, unless things settle down in the world, and people start using common sense. Oh, I have also heard, that the governments are ignoring or hiding any discoveries depicting ancient human bones, or dwellings, because they want to push the evolution theory by Darwin, which was never tested. They are trying to use this as an excuse, for reducing the population. I think certain families have inbred to such an extent, that they are mentally ill and cant discern right from wrong ,or fact from fiction.
edit on 29-1-2011 by martya because: (no reason given)
edit on 29-1-2011 by martya because: I edited this post because I noticed a mispelled word.
edit on 29-1-2011 by martya because: mispelled word which I explained in second edit.



posted on Jul, 25 2012 @ 04:40 AM
link   
More D4rk Kn1ght stuff folks:

Mystery Object Discovered in Earths Orbit
www.abovetopsecret.com...
by squiz
started on 10/27/2009 @ 05:51 AM


Originally posted by squiz
OK, couldn't resist posting this for obvious reasons, but this is fascinating whatever the case may be.


MYSTERY OBJECT: Yesterday, astronomers in Arizona, New Mexico and Spain, all hunting for near-Earth asteroids, discovered a "mystery object" orbiting Earth. Temporarily named "9U01FF6," it is small and in an elongated, 31-day orbit. Experts say it is probably a piece of an Apollo-era Moon mission. We'll get a closer look on Oct. 29th when it zips past Earth about 82,000 km (0.2 lunar distances) away. Advanced amateur astronomers can find it using this ephemeris.


www.spaceweather.com...

Haha, have it folks. Do we say it's swinging round for another orbit ready to land next month?


But really, this is cool.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   
It would be amazing to access the Black Knight's computer banks!



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by mblahnikluver
 


You are quite correct, indeed there is a group whom believe that there was once an empire and the more advanced human race that existed then were equal in technology to any other species in the galaxy but were belligerent to many of them and had been involved in warfare, indeed they had an imperial fleet of a million war ship's some mile's in diameter and many colony's, earth was not the capital or even the heart of the empire.

The people's you now know are the remnant of the survivor's of various colony's and there racial trait's are because of these differing origin's, the African race's are the indigenous people of earth, the empire lasted for million's of year's but a group of alien race's joined forces and overwhelmed the human world's but after the racial culling they decided to abide by an ancient galactic accord to not completely extinguish a race and gathered various survivors to deposit them on the technologically destroyed earth eradicating them from all there other world's.

The race's responsible now keep an eye on the earth and knowing that they were not individually a match for the more advanced human's have tinkered with human DNA to inhibit certain brain and other function's as well as to homogenise the genetics of the human's to the planet that they deposited them on integrating them to the eco system, they actively intervene when on rare occasion's but periodically the human's reconstruct a rudimentary interstellar capability erasing the civilisation and using a form of matter destabilisation technology to cause the matter to evaporate over several day's to erase the entire civilisation that has arisen, fist the matter is bathed in the radiation (an optically visible violet light) then it undergoes a process by which it at first loses molecular cohesion and then the atom's themselves undergo a sub atomic breakdown almost like radioactive decay but much cleaner. They then eradicate 99 out of every 100 of the human's leaving only the most primitive alive and maintain a sky watch terrorising them for a period of several generation's, they usually also land several hundred thousand crack high gravity troops' selected from a genetically adapted slave specie's to finalise the attack and these are often remembered as devil's as they are also scaled with genetic engineered armour for none technological specie's control like cat's dropped to kill the mice.





top topics
 
39
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join