Mind-blowing UFO video

Very nice video. I have to say that some of them remind me of something I read awhile back about possible living organisms in space. Around the end at 9:20 was the most prominent towards that.

The whole UFO phenomenon is one that I really don't understand why they continue to hide it from the public. I mean it's obvious after 40 + years that they are not out to destroy the earth. So I do not see the need for the secrecy. The only possible reasoning I can come up with is for there own further technological advancement without the knowledge of the public. What better way to obtain absolute power. I have to admit it does remind of the show Stargate a bit. I mean humans by nature are destructive and readily paranoid. So maybe it is just the fear that if they let everyone know there would be groups formed to destroy the "alien" presence. The human race is definitely capable of that.

Anyway awesome video and another reason why I wish that I could afford to be a space tourist. Which does bring up an interesting point. If it is that active in space why haven't people like Dennis Tito said anything after the trips up?

reply to post by anubisone


Seen some of that stuff but not all. A lot does look like space debris though... still good stuff though

reply to post by anubisone


Seen some of that stuff but not all. A lot does look like space debris though... still good stuff though

Can someone explain to me what causes the ice particles or debris to make a sudden turn in a direction and almost sudden stop 0:17 ?

Originally posted by RaKais
I'm sorry but... the Thether Incident? The tether is being filmed from 80+ miles away? Isn't it? Are you telling me that several thrusters are going to cause these "particles" to independently perform different manouvers at different speeds, in different directions?

Bear in mind that the tether itself has snapped. This explosive separation produces a mass of particles that will move around in an odd fashion due to zero G.

No, these things, whatever they are, are not particles...

Yes they are. Here's a similar one "swarming" Steven Greer... (CSETI lied that it was an "energy orb" floating over Greer's chakra point). Doesn't it seem a little odd that it is presenting the same face towards the camera as all those in the tether footage?



You are seeing exactly the same effect. A small, airborne, out-of-focus particle caught in bright light up close to the camera. If you've got a camera you can very easily produce your own.

Originally posted by torsion

Originally posted by RaKais
I'm sorry but... the Thether Incident? The tether is being filmed from 80+ miles away? Isn't it? Are you telling me that several thrusters are going to cause these "particles" to independently perform different manouvers at different speeds, in different directions?

Bear in mind that the tether itself has snapped. This explosive separation produces a mass of particles that will move around in an odd fashion due to zero G.

No, these things, whatever they are, are not particles...

Yes they are. Here's a similar one "swarming" Steven Greer... (CSETI lied that it was an "energy orb" floating over Greer's chakra point). Doesn't it seem a little odd that it is presenting the same face towards the camera as all those in the tether footage?

You are seeing exactly the same effect. A small, airborne, out-of-focus particle caught in bright light up close to the camera. If you've got a camera you can very easily produce your own.

First point I can live with. It's rational. but the second? i'm not sure if you are attempting sarcasm or whatever but I shall take it with a pinch of salt. That second point would apply to a still photograph. The Tether incident is live footage. Does an out-of-focus particle in bright light up close to a camera pulsate, swerve eraticaly, change direction and/or velocity? Gravity/explosive wave etc etc should cause GROUPS of particles (if not all of them) to behave in a similiar fashion. Every single one is moving seperately and independently of each other. Again, why would some "particles" not be affected, but some are? And if these were particles up close to the camera, why do they pass BEHIND the tether? Unless the tether is actually a sticker on the lens and we've all been duped, I doubt it's they are that close.

Originally posted by RaKais
Does an out-of-focus particle in bright light up close to a camera pulsate, swerve eraticaly, change direction and/or velocity?

Yes. Trouble is you could only experiment and reproduce the motion effect if you were in a zero G vacuum. You can however reproduce the camera effects down here on earth and duplicate the "orbs", "UFOs", "spirits" or whatever you choose to call the particles.

And if these were particles up close to the camera, why do they pass BEHIND the tether? Unless the tether is actually a sticker on the lens and we've all been duped, I doubt it's they are that close.

They only appear to pass behind it because of the focusing issues of the camera. You can see them pass in front of the tether before the zoom and extreme defocusing. You may note that the particles only take on the typical fuzzy notched orb shape when the camera zooms in to the tether and throws them completely out of focus. Note too that Believers always shy away from explaining why the tether appears to be 1 mile wide. The limited capabilities of the camera are what makes prosaic things look strange.

Originally posted by torsion

Originally posted by RaKais
Does an out-of-focus particle in bright light up close to a camera pulsate, swerve eraticaly, change direction and/or velocity?

Yes. Trouble is you could only experiment and reproduce the motion effect if you were in a zero G vacuum. You can however reproduce the camera effects down here on earth and duplicate the "orbs", "UFOs", "spirits" or whatever you choose to call the particles.

And if these were particles up close to the camera, why do they pass BEHIND the tether? Unless the tether is actually a sticker on the lens and we've all been duped, I doubt it's they are that close.

They only appear to pass behind it because of the focusing issues of the camera. You can see them pass in front of the tether before the zoom and extreme defocusing. You may note that the particles only take on the typical fuzzy notched orb shape when the camera zooms in to the tether and throws them completely out of focus. Note too that Believers always shy away from explaining why the tether appears to be 1 mile wide. The limited capabilities of the camera are what makes prosaic things look strange.

The tether is only one mile wide if you believe that the "ship" (or whatever people think it is) is 2-3 (or is it 3-4?) miles long like some suggest.

I applaud your rational thinking but allow me to show you why I think perhaps there is more to it than "particles" or debris etc.

Dropa Stones

and then...

Unidentified object/particle/debris

Notice the similiarites in the ancient Dropa stones and the unidentified object? The Dropa Stones have some depictions of alien visitation, knowledge of the stars these ancient tribes shouldn't have and other such things.

I'm not debunking you points with theories but it does give you food for thought, yes? Now, these "ufo"s may very well be what you describe, but due to the massive increases of ufo sightings every year along with the mass information released due to the disclosure act that details the military's dealings with "ufo" sightings etc along with these sort of sightings everytime NASA goes into space (just look at all the STC footage on youtube), it just leads me to be a bit skeptical towards NASA's explanations, as you are to my idea that maybe it's more than just space debris acting up.



p.s.

Just in case you don't know what the Dropa stones are

Dropa Stone info - 3 pages

Even if you don't quite buy it, it's still an interesting read.

Originally posted by RaKais

Just in case you don't know what the Dropa stones are

Yes, I'm familiar with the Dropa Stones story. In fact I have a 1st edition of the book Sungods in Exile by Karyl Robin-Evans published in 1978 which is the original source. It's also established as a hoax, unfortunately. Even, I understand, admitted so by the author.

To study and understand the objects presented in the tether footage and other images I strongly recommend personal experimentation rather than reliance on the words or theories of others - including myself. Take photos of dust using the flash and try videoing Venus out of focus and see what you come up with.

Can someone explain to me what causes the ice particles or debris to make a sudden turn in a direction and almost sudden stop 0:17 ?

Combination of differently arranged retro jets on spacecraft, or depending on which vid it is, it may be dust between the two window planes catching the sunlight vs. outside debris or ice crystals. A minute into the video, and I hadn't seen anything that wouldn't be explainable by these two phenomena, which are much more plausible than UFOs staying in the area with NASA watching them.

Originally posted by torsion
To study and understand the objects presented in the tether footage and other images I strongly recommend personal experimentation rather than reliance on the words or theories of others - including myself. Take photos of dust using the flash and try videoing Venus out of focus and see what you come up with.

Thanks Torsion. That sounds more rational than what I've previously heard. I don't think the use of a flash is anything to do with the tether sequence though!

I don't have the equipment but would love to see a decent video demo of somebody producing a similar effect to the tether footage. If you know of one or could start a thread with the relevant material that would be awesome. It would be nice to be able to put this one to bed but examples like the one above are not enough to explain it all away.

Below is the tether sequence with some velocity trails for people who have not seen it.

I'm still not even nearly convinced by these explanations but that's not to say I'm convinced they are wrong. Some of the movements and velocities of whatever they are don't make sense in terms of movements caused by thrusters. There can't be that many thrusters firing to cause all the different movements surely. Also if the thrusters were firing that much the shuttle would move about more. Zero gravity does not make particles move erratically and nor does a vacuum. In fact in a vacuum particles behave more simply as less forces are acting on them as there is hardly anything there.

I'm not saying that there is no simple rational explanation. I'm saying that I have not seen one that explains all of the footage.

Occam's razor out. Maybe some of the objects are plasma critters visible on that type of camera??? There are similar shots of that type of object near to thunderstorms. Perhaps they feed that way (see below)?

There is a funny bit at the end of that clip too with some 'ice particles' flying in formation. I know, they probably are just ice but I love the way they flash...

I know that the stuff about plasma critters looks highly speculative but just throwing it into the mix. No I won't be hanging my coat on it!

Originally posted by Pimander

Thanks Torsion. That sounds more rational than what I've previously heard. I don't think the use of a flash is anything to do with the tether sequence though!

No, the sun is the light source for the tether footage particles. But using a digital camera and flash is a simple way of achieving images of the same translucent "UFOs" and anyone can try it themselves at home. It's just a method of proving that the discs you see in the footage are not true representations. Different camera types give slight variations on the shape. A Fuji camera I once owned produced a flat edge on the disc, others produce wedge-shaped cut-outs or notches like in the video.

Originally posted by torsion
No, the sun is the light source for the tether footage particles. But using a digital camera and flash is a simple way of achieving images of the same translucent "UFOs" and anyone can try it themselves at home. It's just a method of proving that the discs you see in the footage are not true representations. Different camera types give slight variations on the shape. A Fuji camera I once owned produced a flat edge on the disc, others produce wedge-shaped cut-outs or notches like in the video.

I agree that the disk like 'structures' are almost certainly camera artefacts as in lots of footage. As I say though, the movements on the tether footage remain to be convincingly explained - to my mind anyway.

Originally posted by Pimander

Originally posted by torsion
No, the sun is the light source for the tether footage particles. But using a digital camera and flash is a simple way of achieving images of the same translucent "UFOs" and anyone can try it themselves at home. It's just a method of proving that the discs you see in the footage are not true representations. Different camera types give slight variations on the shape. A Fuji camera I once owned produced a flat edge on the disc, others produce wedge-shaped cut-outs or notches like in the video.

I agree that the disk like 'structures' are almost certainly camera artefacts as in lots of footage. As I say though, the movements on the tether footage remain to be convincingly explained - to my mind anyway.

I agree. Whilst I do believe some of these "UFOs" are indeed particles/debris/ice etc, some of the movements don't fit with any logical and/or rational explanation, no offense intended Torsion

for those which still wonder about tether footage, i humble suggest you to have patience and read this topic www.abovetopsecret.com...
which i think answers to many questions of how some inanimate trivial particles can do some kind of "miracles".
Even the distance to relevant particles was determined following simple laws of optics.

Originally posted by torsion

Originally posted by Mythkiller

This footage is undeniably proof of alien craft and/or hidden technology IMHO...

Sorry to disappoint you. Ice and debris. There's lots of it floating around up there. Every time we go into space we leave more junk behind.

The teather footage is truely mind boggling considering that it's (the teather) 12 miles long putting some of the objects passing in it's vacinity at 3 miles in diameter. Good luck debunkers and deniers

Sorry to disappoint you again but the tether footage has been rationally explained a long time ago. Only a few die-hard Believers and truth-deniers are still clinging to it as any kind of ET evidence.

Nothing to see here, folks!

edit on 19-12-2010 by torsion because: classified

Totally wrong!!!! Just who played judge & jury? "only a few..."
Hello there,... nobody proved anything...& all the links somebody is about to dump all over me, leading to the various versions of the skeptics 'tether:case close/solved/analysis' threads are just that...someones analysis.

Even the 'ice/near focus crowd' & the 'no ET in the picture' groupies can not be certain that every object moving about is not a UFO...especially based on their home spun camera knowledge, applied to the vacuum of space & a 500 million dollar experiment. The 'TOPS' NASA science camera, using state of the art camera technology...built especially to photograph the tether phenomena, is in a league way above any skeptics analysis.

There is also the "living critters"...coated in Plasma, that I believe are also seen on the tether video.These must also be considered. So I think the tether video shows many things.

As far as the stuff about hardly anyone believes the video anymore nonsense...that is pathetic. Any google search of the STS-75...tether UFO or whatever, will easily vaporize that ignorant statement.

Wasn't this the last time NASA did any live recordings of their missions? I heard that they used to show their missions live up until after this event.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong and I apologise, I wish I could source this but I heard of this through word of mouth.

Originally posted by depthoffield
for those which still wonder about tether footage, i humble suggest you to have patience and read this topic www.abovetopsecret.com...
which i think answers to many questions of how some inanimate trivial particles can do some kind of "miracles".
Even the distance to relevant particles was determined following simple laws of optics.

edit on 20/12/10 by depthoffield because: sleepy

Thank you though for showing how easy it can be to get lots of researchers to say case closed if you look like you have some technical knowledge!

You determined the distance of some particles in a few seconds of footage. From that you concluded that all of the footage showed objects close to the shuttle (apart from the tether). However, using the same logic you have in that post, using some of the same video as you (see here readers for the source of my quotes of depthoffield), I can easily show that several moving objects must have been further than 105m away from the shuttle.

Originally posted by depthoffield
The phenomenon itself, extracted:




We can see how the tether briefly grows in thickness as a result of out of focus state.

Also, all the stars goes out of focus and almost all fade and then dissapear during the focusing maneuver.

But we can see also, in the same time, that many "orbs" there, actually shrinks down and raise their brightness and many of them became extremely sharp, points of light, well focused bright points of light.

From this you show that the UFO's in that short segment analysed are more in focus as the focus is moved closer to the shuttle and are therefore nearer than the 105m infinite point of focus. You go on to state.

Originally posted by depthoffield
Well, every photographer and optics specialist recognize this "shrinking" shape of the discs, together with increasing brightness, and even transforming in sharpest points for many objects there, as a result of those objects acquiring FOCUS in those moments (for the others, amateurs...well...is a matter of experience). Simply, basic laws of optics, tell there is not any posibility that when an object is more defocused, the object to shrink and become more bright. No, shrinking and gaining brightness or becoming a bright point, is a property of a increasing in focusing.

Now, as the camera focuses closer, and many "critters", or "alien ships" became more or even best focused in exactly that moments... What that it means? It means that those objects aquiring sharpness and getting good focus, INDEED ARE CLOSER TO THE CAMERA, and when the lens is focused on the tether (=infinite), those discs are out of focus images of the same closer objects! Essentially the continous focus changing from infinite to closer and back to infinite really describe a good 3D depth perception of the space near the camera. You can get the same when changing focus when filmimg how snow flakes are falling in front of your camera on winter (i can't do it right now, but it is a simple experiment)

Now take a look at the section of this video (which you used in your analysis) at about 5m0s to 5m25s.

In this section from about 5mthere are obviously moving UFO's that become more in focus when the tether becomes more in focus. Using your logic that means that those UFO's are further from the shuttle than 105m NOT nearer.

It looks suspiciously like you selected a section of the sequence for analysis or were careless not to study other sections. A proper analysis would involve obtaining the original video for a start! You would also need to analyse the whole sequence to see if your findings are consistent or repeatable.

Another criticism would be that a lot of what you assume is the camera focus changing appears like it is just as likely to be someone tampering with the contrast. How have you eliminated that possibility? There is even one point when one of the voices mentions contrast. Most images are altered using software long before they make it to utube and even NASA 'originals', which you don't have, hardly have the reputation of being squeaky clean. In fact the images are such poor quality (NASA, the richest research organisation in the world) the tether is NEVER in focus as it doesn't even look like the tether - as one of the communicators from Houston points out.

In fact if your analysis was more convincing it might help show that it is likely some of the UFO's are not ice particles near the camera.

very interesting video

reply to post by depthoffield

Sorry depthoffield (and mods). I really ought to have posted that on this thread started by you..

Oh well it is where this thread went I guess. I guess I could paste it where it should be?