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.
Here is a pretty crazy video. It shows that seems to be two projectiles fired at two different moving objects. The astronaut zooms in on on one of the moving objects, and zooms back out once the object is out of frame. This shows he did see the object, and was trying to get better evidence on tape. Regardless of whether they were shooting at each other or not, the astronaut was watching, and zoomed in.
Originally posted by breakingdradles
NASA UFO Battle
Here is a pretty crazy video. It shows that seems to be two projectiles fired at two different moving objects. The astronaut zooms in on on one of the moving objects, and zooms back out once the object is out of frame. This shows he did see the object, and was trying to get better evidence on tape. Regardless of whether they were shooting at each other or not, the astronaut was watching, and zoomed in.
This may just be some of the space junk, but it sure looks like the astronaut is interested in it if nothing else!
I love these NASA UFO videos! I know most are just debris, but regardless, they are all interesting.
So what do you think, UFO battle, UFOs no battle, or just all space debris?
Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
Originally posted by breakingdradles
NASA UFO Battle
Here is a pretty crazy video. It shows that seems to be two projectiles fired at two different moving objects. The astronaut zooms in on on one of the moving objects, and zooms back out once the object is out of frame. This shows he did see the object, and was trying to get better evidence on tape. Regardless of whether they were shooting at each other or not, the astronaut was watching, and zoomed in.
This may just be some of the space junk, but it sure looks like the astronaut is interested in it if nothing else!
I love these NASA UFO videos! I know most are just debris, but regardless, they are all interesting.
So what do you think, UFO battle, UFOs no battle, or just all space debris?
There is no battle going on. Yes, the astronaut is definitely interested in a hauling UFO, there is more similar footage in "THE NASA TRANSMISSIONS: THE SMOKING GUN." At the same time, we see meterorites flashing by. I laugh at NASA explanations that it's all ice particles, debris, water dumps, etc., when they know damn well that no intelligent astronaut is going to videotape a small object that is near the shuttle so no zooming is necessary. Zooming is done on distant objects which means they are large. These objects that are being videotaped (not the meterorites) are UFOs, plain and simple.
Originally posted by merka
I watched the footage and I see absolutely nothing even remotely resembling a "ufo battle". What am I supposed to look for?
Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
I laugh at NASA explanations that it's all ice particles, debris, water dumps, etc., when they know damn well that no intelligent astronaut is going to videotape a small object that is near the shuttle so no zooming is necessary. Zooming is done on distant objects which means they are large.
Originally posted by depthoffield
When putting a title like this, sure you want attention. How many readers will be deceived when they didnn't see any battle?
Originally posted by depthoffield
When putting a title like this, sure you want attention. How many readers will be deceived when they didnn't see any battle?
Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
I laugh at NASA explanations that it's all ice particles, debris, water dumps, etc., when they know damn well that no intelligent astronaut is going to videotape a small object that is near the shuttle so no zooming is necessary. Zooming is done on distant objects which means they are large.
Skeptical Ed, you are wrong about zooming issue.
It is not necessary to zoom only at big/far objects.
It also need to zoom on little close small objects too. Please take yourself a picture with an ant, from 1..2 meter distance, but without using zoom. Can you see it's shape and identify as an ant? You always need zoom when the objects appear to be small in image, no matter how big/small or distant/close is in reality. The appearance of small or big in an image is called ANGULAR SIZE. If angular size is small, you need zoom, no matter the subject distance or it's real size.
But in this video, i don't see the camera operator pursuing the objects in discussion (which can be very well just debris, because debris is common.).
I see him trying to zoom on the Earth surface, but because the lens beeing hit by the sunlight, the lens flare when zooming greatly spoil the image, so, he cancels the zoom (to maybe later, when sunlight angle to the camera changes enough to not hit the lens anymore).
[edit on 25/9/09 by depthoffield]
Originally posted by zaiger
Space debris slows down now?
Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
I'm not a professional photographer although I could have been and my brother-in-law is a retired professional, award-winning photographer. I've been operating 35mm cameras since 1956 and I've owned many SLRs and lenses.
Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
Neither of these objects are leaving a trail which meteoroids do. []. So it's obvious that the UFOs are not flying as fast as the meteoroids.
Originally posted by breakingdradles
Zooming in on the objects does mean they are not close to the astronaut, rather that they are large and far away.
Originally posted by breakingdradles
So what do you think, UFO battle, UFOs no battle, or just all space debris?
Originally posted by depthoffield
What you call "meteoroids" is also debris. Here is a confusion.
You should know that NASA shuttle's cameras, at least the older ones, have some characteristics. One of them acting here is: image remanence for some time, in low light situation.
And this remanence is better visible on fast moving objects.
So, everything moving fast in image, will show some trail. everything slow or fix, will not show any trail.
I have a NASA sequence when the camera is rotated fast enough to make the STARS in image to make exactly this kind of trails, but only and just when the camera is moving...which speaks for itself the phenomenon of image remanence. I can't post now the example, but I should do soon.