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.

 

The SKYLAB III UFO Encounter - The Evidence & Contradictions

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 01:36 AM
link   
The squiggle is a puzzler. It's the most intriguing image in the sequence. It looks like a slower shutter speed and human wobble, but there's no reference to Garriot changing the shutter speed. Why would he either? These images are just five from 680 images and 10 magazines and none of which would require a slower shutter.

The NASA document records that some few photos turned out to be blurred...I guess the next step is looking at the 'blurred' ones and ascertaining if it's due to shutter malfunction or simply a focus issue?



NASA Skylab 3 photo list (Page 49)

It's important to point out that there's reference to the Nikon malfunctioning although a number of images are reportedly underexposed.




posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 

He sneezed?
Got jostled? There are any number of possibilities. One "bad" image out of 4.



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
If you or me had the task of hiding evidence of ET artefacts, would you go to the trouble of 'hiding them in plain sight?'
Yes if it was me would hide them in plain sight because...

A) To many missing images would send up even more red flags;

B) I could release images to the public who usually only see blurry rocks and camera artifacts anyway;

C) I could sit back an laugh as people try to sort it all out, and keep the mystery alive, so we could go about our business

D) I would get a nice paycheck and government pension
, unlike on this side of the fence where if you take money the debunkers cry foul.. but guys like Phil Plat and JimO can charge for their viewpoint and not suffer such abuse


I mean it's not like NASA would EVER mess with photos for 'aesthetic' reasons





posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Kandinsky
 

He sneezed?
Got jostled? There are any number of possibilities. One "bad" image out of 4.


Phage.....

Unfortunately.....

It could be that simple.

However, it still leaves an unidentified object as photographed & observed by the witnesses.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 02:12 AM
link   
"Anomaly" near the Sun:











...and now the Skylab ufo in comparison:








posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


cheers easynow... n thanks to lunacognita.... deep bow


had missed this one...


as usual da folks have ganged up with their prosaic mundane'ties......



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by MolochMarduk
 


MolochMarduk.....

Do you have any more pictures?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by mcrom901
 


hey bud cheers to you too !





as usual da folks have ganged up with their prosaic mundane'ties.


it's ok and should be expected , some people will get upset because it's difficult to sleep at night knowing there are real ufo's flying around and some people get mad because their name is in the video ! ; )



check out ArMaP's video of the STS-80 UFO, might be the best version quality wise i have seen ! wish he would give me a copy of it



(click to open player in new window)



also be sure to check out the "NPC Press Conference" from Sept 27 2010 that was on CNN




link to video
a53.video2.blip.tv...
blip.tv...
www.youtube.com...



article on "Air Force Times"



Former Air Force officers discuss UFO sightings

WASHINGTON - Armed with declassified documents and vivid details, a group of former Air Force officers gathered Monday to go public with an assertion they have kept mostly under wraps for decades: that UFOs visited the bases they were stationed at and caused nuclear weapon system to temporarily malfunction.

The group, convened by UFO researcher Robert Hastings, came to the National Press Club in Washington to discuss their individual experiences and to urge a government that tried to ignore and silence them when they came forward years ago to finally come clean.

Hastings said he believes that visitors from outer space are fixating on nuclear weapons because they want to send a message: Disarm before the world destroys itself.

Robert Salas, a former missile launch officer at Malmstrom Air Force Base, said that 10 nuclear missiles were suddenly and inexplicably disabled in March 1967 at the Montana installation after members of his flight security team saw a "large glowing, pulsating red oval-shaped object" about 30-40 feet in diameter hovering over the front gate. When he reported the incident to his superiors the next day, he was told to keep quiet.

www.airforcetimes.com...




edit on 28-9-2010 by easynow because: add content



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
If you or me had the task of hiding evidence of ET artefacts, would you go to the trouble of 'hiding them in plain sight?'


I think that the goal of the Powers That Be back during Apollo (and Skylab) was to cover up the existence of extra-terrestrial life, but I firmly believe that there was also a second protocol that was in place at the same time and is still in place today. This is the one that some people have a very hard time wrapping their heads around, because at first glance, it admittedly may sound a little crazy.

This very important facet to this cover-up is repeatedly overlooked (and in fact rarely gets much if any mention at all), but I will go so far as to say I consider it the MOST IMPORTANT component of the entire space/ET conspiracy. That point is this:
This cover-up was constructed from day one around the idea that the most amazing, most profound, most assuredly Earth-altering discovery in recorded human history - that we are not alone in the Universe - was NOT GOING TO BE KEPT SECRET FOREVER. The entire conspiracy was designed from the start with that fact in mind!

What you and I and everyone else have been victims of here is a very slow, steady psychological warfare campaign that was launched by the Powers That Be decades ago and has been conducted against us over decades of time. The goal of this campaign that is still being waged against the public today is to SLOWLY condition our "global village" to be able to accept the disclosure of the existence of ET life without mass chaos, particularly from (but certainly not limited to) the religious perspective. I am assuming most of you are familiar with the somewhat famous "Brookings Report" from the early 1960s for example, as it and other documents like it demonstrate that these fears of how the public would react to the news of ET life most definitely were and are clear concerns being examined by the PTB, and the conclusions reached back then clearly express that the PTB felt the bulk of the population of planet Earth was not ready to handle the news. I will argue that controlling how the public will handle the disclosure that intelligent extra-terrestrial life exists is the single most important point behind the entire coverup.

Again, the goal has not been to hide this incredible secret from us forever. The goal has been to slowly condition us over several generations to gradually grow (growing as a global society & civilization I am talking about here) to be able to accept the idea that we are not alone in the Universe - accepting it without a bunch of us crazy humans flying off the deep end and freaking out.

Every single government and intelligence agency on planet Earth is aware of the power that this long-term society-wide psychological conditioning technique can play, because it has been around forever. It is sometimes been referred to as the "Lessened Shock" process, because just as the name implies, the goal is to "lessen the shock" that the news will end up having on society as a whole.

I have also heard this technique being referred to as the "dripping faucet", with the idea behind that name being that if you sit under a faucet that is slowly dripping truth out, eventually, after a long time, that truth is going to soak you to the skin. The whole point is that you are not gonna get wet immediately right after you sit under the faucet, and in fact you might even find the drips of truth annoying and a distraction depending on your mindset going in, but if you sit under that faucet long enough, then you are going to eventually be soaked with the bits of truth coming out of it.

It is like the PTB have been slowly dripping the truth on our society for all this time, with those drops of evidence coming out of the faucet slowly creating a "puddle" in front of us, and that puddle continues to grow and be filtered as the evidence sitting in the archives is slowly found and steadily culled through over time. As all that evidence is sifted through by people like us, we can piece it (or snippets of it) together and present it to the world - in effect doing the "Lessened Shock" disclosure work for the PTB! We are actually conditioning ourselves as a civilization, conditioning the majority to the idea that ET life is first possible, then downright probable, and then finally, factual. We are in effect being forced to piece the clues together on our own to educate ourselves first and, by default, lessen the shock the news has as we slowly convince ourselves of the truth. Again, it doesn't happen overnight. "Lessened Shock" is a long-term, multi-generational psychological conditioning technique aimed at changing the way an entire society as a whole thinks about a subject.

Remember this - the Powers That Be have no reason to go public with the big announcement until they determine we as a species can handle that news, and (far more importantly) until they determine it best suits their overall control agenda to tell us. Whether the aliens are presented to us as being benign and benevolent or aggressive and dangerous will determine the way the global public responds to the news. Obviously, the Military Industrial Complex and the PTB have a lot to gain if they present the aliens as something we should be afraid of rather than just in awe of. It would not be the first time they "false flagged" us and then milked us dry to make us pay to develop better ways to kill things, right? Right???

You can see how the "dripping faucet" has turned into a steady trickle in recent years, thanks to the Internet and it's ability to allow for people like us to have reasoned, logical discussions about what I consider to be some of the most important questions we as a species face right now. No longer is this considered a fringe conspiracy, but rather it is rapidly becoming mainstream, which is exactly what must happen before the PTB can be forced to begin true disclosure.

Cheers,
LC

Just as a side note, if you want to see another example of "Lessened Shock" going on right now that was first implemented one generation or so ago, all you have to do is look at the US Military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. That my friends, is Lessened Shock at work - slowly altering the prevailing mindset of the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines over a generation of time in an effort to make a slow but dramatic shift in policy that during the slow changeover allows the military to maintain the single most important aspect any war fighting machine needs to be effective - something called "unit cohesion". Maintaining Unit Cohesion is what DADT is REALLY all about! They do it this way because it works so well most people can't see that the military is not being forced to change - they have been controlling the shift in mindset since DAY ONE! This is how the game is played!



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by LunaCognita
 
Thanks for the reply, it was well-expressed.

I don't really subscribe to the scenario of a 'PTB' orchestrating events and perceptions on a global scale. It's even hard for me to accept an omniscient influence in the smaller pools of national politics and foreign policy. Life is too chaotic and unpredictable to validate the concept in my experience and understanding. I can see where you and others draw your conclusions from, but I take a different view and like to think that it's also (like yours) an informed view.

Party politics and ambitions show, to me, that there is no consensus that would be strong enough to support the orchestration required for your world view. There's internecine battles and betrayals...different opinions and a multitude of belief systems.

You see a sophisticated cover-up that involves *all* governments and intelligence agencies. I see a fractured world where FSR, Mossad, CIA and MI6 etc are competitive, in conflict and working for their own agendas and that of their nation. As a student of history, I also see one empire after another rise and fall in warfare with neighbours and the failure to adapt to new ideas. Residual, dominant and emerging ideologies constantly vie for position.

'TPTB' can't prevent an ET race from announcing their existence. If it's been going on 'forever,' they could have displayed themselves centuries ago and any panic would be a footnote in history. If they sought to control us (for whatever end), the conditioning of centuries is a waste of time. People are resilient and adaptable...the Brookings Report overlooks this fact, in my opinion.

I agree that the internet has allowed and created an intense debate about the subject of UFOs. The thing is, as I see it, it's led by millions of individuals with their own ideas. This again shows a wild amount of disagreement. Although you interpret it as a subject becoming mainstream, I see it differently. The internet has become a platform for *all* ideas...good and bad. There are credible UFO researchers, credible debunkers, skeptics and believers. It's still nowhere near a mainstream interest in any meaningful sense.

As much as I read, as much as I digest the information and ideas, there's no conclusion in sight. I've seen UFOs that have no current explanation. There are so many accounts I find compelling, incidents that are fascinating and raise profound questions. When all's said and done, they remain a collection of incidents that fall short of being able to conclude that a different life-form is active, in some form, in our world. We can speculate an array of possible scenarios without knowing how close we are to the truth...or how far away.

These are just words on a screen and devoid of inflection or nuance so you could misinterpret them. I've a genuine interest in the subject and looking for answers like anyone else...

To avoid an Off Topic penalty, the Skylab images are interesting in the context of the astronaut's impression of the 'satellite...unmanned.' The photographs were taken because the satellite was an unidentified object to them. All these years later and it remains an unidentified object. They could have been sneezing away and jostling each other for kicks and thrills...who knows?

The fact remains that they saw something unusual enough to photograph it, talk about it and nobody since has identified it.



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Kandinsky,

Your post seems to assume that this whole issue of alien visitors would be a difficult secret to keep.

It is not difficult to keep secret that which only a fringe group finds easy to accept. The whole idea is so outlandish that - excepting some reminders by the TV regarding how outlandish it is - the secret practically keeps itself.

It doesn't matter who comes out and says there are aliens; just the fact that they said aliens exist discredits them. And god help the fool who finds Aliens DNA. Just the act of publicly admitting his discovery will ruin him.

Because Alien DNA can't exist and we all know that. So let's make fun of that nut when he shows up.

It is the height of fashion to do so and we shall gain peer acceptance. Peer.



posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 
I agree with you in general...I usually do recently. The thing about 'alien visitors' is they are so abstract a concept, that people have all these ideas of cover-up and disclosure from one cultural, terrestrial perspective....ours.

They all fail to take into account the participation of all parties. For a cover-up to be successful, it takes collusion with all sides involved. So by accepting the premise that there's an alien cover-up, do we have to also make the step to presuming they have agreed to remain mostly out of sight? By agreement, this demands prior contact and a myriad other scenarios begin to develop.

I've considered and speculated lot of interesting possibilities to account for such a mutually invested cover-up. Read other people's and had a few of my own too. Michael Swords and Jerome Clark have really thought hard on some possibilities. I can accept there are visitors, but the cover-up is a problem for me if it's to get past just speculation at the traffic lights each morning.

I've got the Mark Pilkington (Paracast) interview for this morning's drive to work. No doubt, it'll add another layer to the confusion!

Take it easy Ex



posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


You should not begin to think that multiple parties colluding are a requirement to conceal something.

It is enough that the parties are in competition, to keep a thing secret.

Each does not want the other to know what they have, so like with any technology or concept it is guarded; and guarded by people who rarely know what they are guarding. And even then those individuals know that you don't decide to hide something without being prepared to rub out a few people.

And when you consider that Aliens aren't real, things associated with them are that much easier to conceal.

*For example; let's say you were out driving the roads of the former Soviet Union and you saw a flying saucer being transported by truck across the country, you'd think: "Water tower" or "Display Piece" - and you'd be right. Even if it was an actual alien flying saucer, you'd still be right (or "better off") to say it was a water tower.

Right, because The truck driver knows it is for a water tower too. And the guards on the truck, they also know it is a tank. The paperwork says so too and even gives the capacity of the water tank. Volume of the thing is even written on the side of the tank. The consensus reality would be that you saw a water tank, so if you saw anything else, you'd be a nutcase and not to be taken seriously anymore.




Muahahahahaha.




Edit:


Also,

If someone won't shut-up about what they saw or know, one can dispatch a man to bother them with infra-sound until they complain to their doctor about hearing voices. Then they get their psychological diagnosis and are no longer a threat.

It is cruel, but one can see how it would be effective.




edit on 30-9-2010 by Exuberant1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   
I've been asked to summarize my assessment of the case and it's just been posted here:

www.debunker.com...


Also, I have had email exchanges with some other Skylab astronauts whom
I had known professionally and personally in the 1970's and 1980's, here:



From: James E Oberg Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 07:30:57 -0600
To: Joe Kerwin

Joe, back to Skylab -- what can you recall about "stuff" coming off the
outside from time to time and being spotted on the ATM, or even out
the wardroom window? I'm thinking small insulation blanket fragments,
for example?


From: Joe Kerwin
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 12:10 PM

Out the window(s) definitely, especially early in the mission. Mostly bits of insulation, the light-weight mylar type. Interestingly, it was hard at a glance to know whether they were big and far away, or small and nearby, because the additional clues we have here, e.g. Dimming/loss of detail with distance because of atmospheric haze, are missing in space. They COULD have been interpreted as spacecraft in formation, just at first. That would have been exciting!

Joe

=========


From: James E Oberg To: edgibson37
Sent: Tue, Sep 6, 2011 9:32 am

Dear Ed:

Another spaceflight topic I remain determined to document is the stuff
people see out the windows, and why it's important to identify any
potential indicators of space vehicle troubles. I gave a pitch to NASA
about twenty years ago, linked here:
jamesoberg.com...

On Page 7 it refers to a report I received about a common Skylab ATM
phenomenon, the occasional observation of blips drifting by across the
face of the Sun-- evidently pieces of outer thermal insulation shedding off.

I wanted to ask you if you recalled any of that happening, or who might
have better records of it happening?


From: ed gibson
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 10:59 PM

Yes, I do recall that stray particles were seen in the High Altitude Observatory S052-White-light Chronograph experiment. I do not recall seeing any particles myself but am aware they did happen. More information can be obtained from Robert M. MacQueen, who was the Principal Investigator on the Experiment.

On that same subject, during an EVA to fix the S193 Antenna, we had to get to the innards of its electronics box. We cut away many layers and pieces of aluminized mylar, which blew away from us with the gas expelled from our suits. It was right at sunset. When we commented about the bright red lights in the distance that were following us (pieces that reflected the red light of the setting sun), the National Enquirer launched off on a big UFO story that was all BS.

Call me if you want to discuss any issues further. Kind regards,

Ed



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 04:05 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 



I've been asked to summarize my assessment of the case


Who was it that asked ?




And .... can you tel me if this is true ? .......


Oberg, James

A computer specialist with an MS in computing sciences from the University of New Mexico in 1972. Oberg served in the USAF from 1970 to 1978, then was a flight controller at the NASA Johnson Space Center. In 1997, he started as freelance writer for several popular science magazine such as Astronomy and OMNI, and joined the ultraskeptic association CSICOP. He says that ufology is not serious, that ufologists are not serious, and UFOs a myth and that scientists should not waste too much time with that. As of his own interest in the subject, he says that it is "just in case" there would be something in the UFO phenomenon after all.

Link - wiki.razing.net...


edit on 23-12-2011 by easynow because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 06:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Fair enough but you are still not considering the third party - whoever "flew / controlled / built" the saucer (tank). Secrecy requires collusion on their part also, which there may be many reasons for, personal safety for one.

However, back in the late 40's early 50's, when the saucer / UFO phenomenon first gained traction in popular culture / media, TPTB could have no way of knowing if the third party were intending to put on a display for the general public that could not possibly be covered up.

Much has been written about the military mind set of the time and initially secrecy, of the highest possible level, was the only policy option at the time. I believe this then evolved with the Brooking report a natural and necessary policy background and advisory report of it's time which leaned towards confirming the validity of the original decision and providing some justification of its continuance - especially since there had then been no third party display.

Whether we are now being drip fed towards a soaking conclusion I personally doubt. I think it may take some new discovery as otherwise we are talking about institutions admitting to lying which historically doesn't happen.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 06:14 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Useful info.

Paraphrasing is it being asserted that the images in this thread are a piece of mylar reflecting the setting sun or just being suggested as a possible explanation ?



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by chunder
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Useful info.

Paraphrasing is it being asserted that the images in this thread are a piece of mylar reflecting the setting sun or just being suggested as a possible explanation ?


I'm proposing that a prosaic phenomenon, another of a long series of stuff separating from the outside of the station, would look indistinguishable from what the crew reported this time, and photographed. Since the presumption always lies with the prosaic, this argument removes the requirement for an extraordinary cause.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by JimOberg
 



I've been asked to summarize my assessment of the case


Who was it that asked ?


It was in connection with the on-going production of a TV documentary on such stories.




And .... can you tel me if this is true ? .......


Oberg, James

A computer specialist with an MS in computing sciences from the University of New Mexico in 1972. Oberg served in the USAF from 1970 to 1978, then was a flight controller at the NASA Johnson Space Center. In 1997, he started as freelance writer for several popular science magazine such as Astronomy and OMNI, and joined the ultraskeptic association CSICOP. He says that ufology is not serious, that ufologists are not serious, and UFOs a myth and that scientists should not waste too much time with that. As of his own interest in the subject, he says that it is "just in case" there would be something in the UFO phenomenon after all.

Link - wiki.razing.net...


edit on 23-12-2011 by easynow because: (no reason given)


I'm not responsible for correcting Wikipedia.

My views are made as clear as possible on my home page at
www.jamesoberg.com/ufo.html
where I suggest you go find them.

You seem stuck on secondary and even less direct sources. What's the source of your reluctance to go to original sources?



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 



It was in connection with the on-going production of a TV documentary on such stories

10-4 Thanks


I'm not responsible for correcting Wikipedia.

FYI - those are web pages that were created by whoever owned the 'ufologie.net' site that went offline a while back and apparently Wikipedia decided to host them to get them back online so it's not something the folks at Wiki wrote or had written about you. And just so you know, they aren't the the only ones hosting the ufologie.net content because it's mirrored on other sites as well.




My views are made as clear as possible on my home page at
www.jamesoberg.com/ufo.html
where I suggest you go find them.

Why ? are you scared to talk about it here on ATS ?




You seem stuck on secondary and even less direct sources. What's the source of your reluctance to go to original sources?

stuck on ? reluctance to go to original source ?

Whaaaat ? lol

You are the source Jim and I'm talking to you about it right here

so I did in fact go to the best source possible



edit on 23-12-2011 by easynow because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join