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.

 

[Martyn Stubbs] Giant UFOs on Newly Released Video

page: 2
19
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Jimbo,
You can't expect us to believe that the multiple objects in the video are all the moon....

*Did you even watch the video before coming up with your moon theory?


Did you ever listen to the audio track? It seems to be a compilation of sequences taken over many hours duration.

Why don't you ask Martyn for the exact date/time of the 'giant UFO' scene so we can load it into heavens-above and see what's on the celestial sphere in that direction?




posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
You can't expect us to believe that the multiple objects in the video are all the moon....


Actually, Stubbs did not claim the image was NOT the moon.

He claimed it was not the mooM.

Maybe he really knows it was the mooN all along and is toying with you to see how ridiculous he can sound and still have people fall for it.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Hello, Mr. Oberg,

ussually i agree with you, and i understand (feel with my own insight) your points, that there are people jumping to exotic speculations on purpose.

But here i have another opinion.
In the OP movie, it could be moon at first glance, but there are clues that just exclude the moon explanation.

here 3 clues:
1) first clue: at 3:06, the bright object dissapear, apparently beyound Earth. But if looking closely, it dissapear in front of Earth. Of course it could be moon yet, with some kind of imaging effect, but i don't think so.
2) second real clue: after the object suposedly beeing moon dissapear, the clouds/Earth surface still maintain the same luminosity. It should be must loose brightness if that object was moon and the brightness of the Earth Surface was from it.
3) third real clue: the shadows of the clouds... this shadows show us where was the source of light. It is not that object. Of course, what illuminate the Earth Surface was indeed the moon, the narrator also describe this, but that object is not the moon.


What can it be?
A) Mundane explanation: Of course, a little larger singular piece of debris, which we know is quite common. Beeing a bit larger, could stay in sincron (holding more to that little atmospheric drag) with the shuttle a longer period of time before drifting slowly away. This very probable hypothesys should be eliminated before jumping to other much lower posibilities.

B) Exotic explanation: whatever our imagination can build. I guess it shoud be a lost dead soul... or a Pleiadan ship..or whatever.. We need real proofs in order to accept one wild thoery or another..until then, let the imagination ride free.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Actually, Stubbs did not claim the image was NOT the moon.



Mr Stubbs also did not claim the image was not of a lot of things.


What he did not do or say is not in dispute as it has not been said or done - You are the one who is implying that the moon accounts for multiple objects....

Poor form.


[edit on 2-9-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
What he did not do or say is not in dispute as it has not been said or done - You are the one who is implying that the moon accounts for multiple objects....


I am suggesting that the moon may be responsible for the bright object in many of the videos -- never more than one object at a time. And with the passage of time, the Moon would appear in different portions of the sky relative to the horizon.

You're right, this cannot be confirmed without knowledge of the actual times of the scenes.

Martyn refuses to provide these data.

How convenient.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by depthoffield
Hello, Mr. Oberg,

ussually i agree with you, and i understand (feel with my own insight) your points, that there are people jumping to exotic speculations on purpose.

But here i have another opinion. In the OP movie, it could be moon at first glance, but there are clues that just exclude the moon explanation.

here 3 clues:
1) first clue: at 3:06, the bright object dissapear, apparently beyound Earth. But if looking closely, it dissapear in front of Earth. Of course it could be moon yet, with some kind of imaging effect, but i don't think so.


I don't see it disappearing in front of the Earth. It is partially visible through the atmospheric haze on the limb, but this is still possible for a position behind the Earth.


2) second real clue: after the object suposedly beeing moon dissapear, the clouds/Earth surface still maintain the same luminosity. It should be must loose brightness if that object was moon and the brightness of the Earth Surface was from it.


I don't see any need to imagine the moon is the source of the cloud illumination. Nighttime cloud views can appear bright under maximum gain in the cameras.

Again, we need the actual date/time of the video to eliminate the moon and/or provide another celstial sphere candidate.


3) third real clue: the shadows of the clouds... this shadows show us where was the source of light. It is not that object. Of course, what illuminate the Earth Surface was indeed the moon, the narrator also describe this, but that object is not the moon.


I cannot determine the direction of shadowing on the clouds. To make this judgment, show the cloud image to some neutral observers WITHOUT the bright sky object, and ask them to determine the direction from which illumination is flowing. If they select a region of the sky near where the bright object really is, that would be significant.




What can it be?
A) Mundane explanation: Of course, a little larger singular piece of debris, which we know is quite common. Beeing a bit larger, could stay in sincron (holding more to that little atmospheric drag) with the shuttle a longer period of time before drifting slowly away. This very probable hypothesys should be eliminated before jumping to other much lower posibilities.


We would have to know the state of sunlight illumination in the vicinity of the shuttle. Without the date/time, this requires other clues that are absent in these scenes.




B) Exotic explanation: whatever our imagination can build. I guess it shoud be a lost dead soul... or a Pleiadan ship..or whatever.. We need real proofs in order to accept one wild thoery or another..until then, let the imagination ride free.


We need contextual information to move from speculation to real investigation. Martyn refuses to provide it. Seems most folks around here approve of that coverup. Delicious irony!!!



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

You're right, this cannot be confirmed without knowledge of the actual times of the scenes.



I am right.

You really did not watch the video:




*This is the information NASA provided on the NASA feed which was what Mr Stubbs recorded from (I trust you still know how to interpret the data on this screenshot). You may now crosscheck with other sources - however, I doubt that any will confirm that the moon could account for multiple objects...
==
=






[edit on 2-9-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
The location it is over is Scotland, probably sending messages out to Earths people. Eastern Aisles.

What people should look to see is what new messages have been pronounced since the following footage.

A mothership craft hovers over probably to do a gathering of people, through a photosonic light, what seperates the body from matter is sound.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
(just ignore the UFOs for now...)

*Check out the image manipulation that occurs over the span of the video.

These two shots are just thirty seconds apart:





Nice Camera

[edit on 2-9-2009 by Exuberant1]


I contacted NASA a while back to get spesific technical information about the cameras used on the space shuttle, and a nice felllow called Nicholas Fry at the "helpdesk" located a very useful link with information about the close circuit television system they use.


I think what Exuberant calls "image manipulation" can be explained by this:

An automatic light control is available for each camera. Its modes compensate for scene brightness by eliminating a fraction of the brightness. It then adjusts the light level of the scene by controlling (1) the silicone intensified target tube high voltage, (2) lens aperture (iris) and (3) automatic gain control. As a result, more detail and contrast are available in the brighter areas of a scene. Light or dark areas of a camera scene can be enhanced or subdued by means of gamma commands. More contrast can be obtained within light or dark areas. Zoom capability magnifies or reduces the size of objects in a camera's field of view by adjusting the focal length of the lens. The minimum focus for standard lenses is 3 feet, the maximum is infinity.

A LOT more information about the space shuttle cameras can be found under "CLOSE CIRCUIT TELEVISON SYSTEM" here:
science.ksc.nasa.gov...

I also agree with Jim Oberg that it's frustrating that Martyn Stubbs does not provide more information about the footage he posts at YouTube. It would be very useful to know which missions captured the different pieces of footage and also the excact time and date. Perhaps it could help us identify at least some of the objects/lightning phenomena seen in the videos.

But perhaps Mr. Stubbs isn't really that interested in people knowing the TRUTH about his UFOs?



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Well the first object to me is obviously the moon.
Then I see some stars along with something suspicious.
And lastly I can't tell what I'm looking at.
It would be nice to have more info than that last part of the video.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 05:04 PM
link   
Weather Baloon!

This is a weather baloon!

What else?

A swamp gas... may be.
Yes a swamp gas!
Or... or The Moon... No. The Mom... or the Noon.



Not there is worse blind than who does not want to see



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Great vid!

I see the Moon clearly.... however i can't work out what those four spherical shapes are.... i thought maybe they were just dust or dirt on the camera but then they move about in an odd way.... they must be pretty big! When the four of them are in shot together they aligned to make what would be a huge stealth UFO of Triangular shape.....

I gave a star..... i'll flag it too



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Hi guys,

this is my first post just joined the forum. In my humble opinion. This is not the evidence we are all looking for. Just to many options. I watched the video twice. It could be the moon. It could be something else as the voice states the moon is almost full. Doesnt look like a full moon to me but anyways.

Any how its a great post and a great video,
We will only know its what we are looking for when no one cant even try to explain it because its right there and cant be mistaken for anything else. I joined this site in hope to find answers reall ones. I believe one day it will all come out. That day no nasa rep or fed rep can say well this is this or that. It will be obvious to all of us and history will be re-written.

Night

[edit on 2-9-2009 by NIGHTRID3R]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   
no no no silly's...it was just me astral projecting..
lol

I like the idea of a plasma formed species. Definitely raises the eyebrow



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 07:27 PM
link   
STARS!

The voice-over in the last segment gives us some clues as to the location of the shuttle when it took the last bit of footage that shows a bright object and a few others descending towards the horizon. I used Stellarium to check the skies "Just over the equator" in the pacific ocean, looking west. I set the date to feb 29, 1996, and rolled the time along until I saw a bright star just above the horizon. Comparing the result with a frame from the video, we get a near-perfect match!

The former UFOs in this segment of the video can now be positively identified as belonging to the constellation Sirius Major. I reckon the other clips from this sequence could also be attributed to ordinary celestial objects.

Here is a composite image, generated by rotating, scaling, and colorizing a still from the video, and blending it with 50% opacity over the star chart:



Here are the two images isolated for comparison:



Verdict: Stars!

[edit on 2-9-2009 by zerotensor]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by zerotensor

Verdict: Stars!


Agreed!

Nice work!

*I wish I could give you 2 stars



[edit on 2-9-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   
The very last clip, however, shows video from the "TOP" UV camera, which was specifically designed to detect electrical phenomena in the ionosphere, as well as the electron beam associated with the tether experiment. It clearly is picking-up something that is *not* a star. While it could be some debris from the shuttle or even the errant tether satellite, it very well may be one of those soliton plasma "critters" about which we have been speculating. I don't remember the mission number, but there is a well-known piece of video out there which shows these orbs flying all over the place in and around the tops of thunderstorm clouds.



As rumor has it, one of the scientists aboard the final, ill-fated flight of Columbia had acquired some incredible footage of these things using a super high-tech camera, but the data was lost forever when the shuttle broke up over texas during reentry.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by zerotensor

Verdict: Stars!


Excelent work!

For me, it was NOT the moon especially because the brightness of the Earth didn't change a bit when the bright object goes away until dissapearing. Also, i felt that the moon should be so bright relative to the very low light situation here, and should be effectively spoiled the image if was in the frame.

It was Sirius, the brightest star on the sky...

So, this is one more reason, now argumented, why beeing "sad" when people make exotic statements...look for the title: "Giant UFOs are not the sun, the moon or stars!" Did you think that he will change the title or delete that movie, or at least label the known objects? I don't think so.


Also, regarding frames from the movie when overall brightness of the scene is changed (modified ) by the operator, and imediattely taken as a "obfuscating action" for some folks here... Ziggystar60 just explained what is all about... The dinamic range of the scene is very great, so, in order to see details in bright or darker areas of the scene, you, as an operator of the camera, naturrally have to select different modes of the camera (gain, iris, gamma etc). Just that.

Also, to remember how a bright point of light (Sirius here) can appear when overexposed in NASA images in appropiate conditions...as an oval shape...shape which is just a camera artifact.


yeah...giant ufo's...



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Cool! The last step would be to confirm that the shuttle's orbit was over that region at that time -- let me go try to get that done.

So there were enough internal clues -- and enough external tools -- to unravel this after a few false starts. Very nice work, all around.

I'm happy to have my initial suggestions superseded by more detailed investigation -- my work here is done.

J



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 07:12 PM
link   
What the heck IS this???



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join