reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
Hi Maybe....Maybe Not,
Just to add a bit to what Easynow mentioned, I would say that yes, the contradictions in the evidence chain all matter and should be part of any
discussion about this case I think, though some things can certainly be argued to matter more than others.
The Channel-A tape debacle was so very convenient for NASA, because can you imagine the conversation the astronauts must have been having amongst
themselves during the sighting itself? My god, that would be WILD to listen to or even read the transcripts of their 10 (or is it 20??) minutes of
chatter as they tried to speculate and ID this red thing they were seeing out the wardroom window, right? I am not surprised by the official claim
that the Channel-A tape was not running at the time, but I personally don't believe that convenient little excuse.
The cataloging error in the Photo Index also matters because you have to keep in mind that for at least 3 and a half decades after Skylab, the only
way you could ever get a look at any Skylab imagery was by mail order catalog, paying a good chunk of change for every single frame you wanted to see,
but first, you actually had to order the index catalog and choose your frames you wanted to spend your hard earned money on based on those simplistic
little descriptions provided. Because of the way the Index Catalog was set up, it lists each frame twice using two different cataloging formats, so
basically, depending on which format you decide to leaf through to select the images you want to buy, you have a 50% chance of coming away thinking
that frames SL3-118-2138 thru to 2141 showed either a "satellite, unmanned", or were "Blank".
What I believe you are seeing here with those cataloging errors is NASA helping to "bury" a frame or frames of film in the archives, leaving them
hidden in plain sight with incoherent labeling in the Index catalog. For decades, very few people ever bothered to buy those specific frames because
many thought from looking at the ordering catalog the frames were probably blank. It was a totally different world before the Internet, and it is easy
to forget how insanely spoiled we are today with the online access to archive info we have. Appreciating that fact is why I consider the old catalog
error related to this Skylab III incident to be something that does matter, and can be used to point towards the possibility of at least a partial
coverup of evidence. Either that, or it is just another coincidental error that just happened to help NASA bury evidence in the process. Incidentally,
the same convenient cataloging errors happen numerous times in the Apollo archives - frame #20680 from Apollo 17 is a good example of a "buried"
frame that was kept hidden through multiple cataloging "errors" over the decades. Nobody ever purchased that frame for all those years because it
was plainly labeled as being "Blank" in the Apollo 17 Index catalog, and is still miscataloged today in places. The Lunar and Planetary Institute's
Apollo Image Atlas still fail to even acknowledge 20680 exists at all. NASA has a track record doing this with controversial imagery.
The duration of the sighting contradictions is also interesting, because Beano's statement of "20 minutes or more" is 100%+ longer than the
estimate given by Lousma and Garriott. 20 minutes of tally time gives them 10 extra minutes of observation and 10 more minutes of discussion about the
UFO, and 10 minutes more to get more camera systems online and potentially shooting more images of this thing. That is one heck of a large time
discrepancy. Too bad we dont have those pesky Channel-A tapes to give us an accurate timing of the sighting!
The issue of whether Skylab or the UFO passed the terminator first is the one that I dont really get too worked up about. It would have been nice to
be able to have that info without the contradiction of "followed us" or "led us" because then it would have been worthwhile to accurately recreate
the visuals of the scene in the Orbiter sim to see how it would have looked through the wardroom window on Skylab during the period of the sighting. I
still should probably do that modeling anyways, just to create some hypothetical visuals based off Skylab's known orbital track info, but I dont
think it will add much in the way of hard evidence due to the contradictions, other than I suppose it would help people visualize the astronauts
eye-view of the scene a bit better.