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.

 

NASA footage Has anyone seen this before?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Surely someone has seen this before and it is probably old news but i haven't.

the bit im going on about in the link starts at 2:22 in the video, i just find it very weird that an object this size is left unidentified, im only presuming its a huge object due to it been 6000 nautical miles from where they are observing it from. now surely something that size would have been detected from earth?

i dont know guys i would just like to hear your opinions




posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


Where is the video



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


We cannot see the link simples.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


sorry heres the link


www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   
I'm always wary whenever it is Jaime Maussan presenting evidence. He seems to instantly assume everything is proof, when there has been other more logical explanations for what it is someone has caught on camera.

He reminds me of Steve Kulls, the 'Bigfoot Detective' who was convinced Matt Whitton and Rick Dyer had a frozen Bigfoot in a coolbox.

I get the feeling if someone presented Maussan with a frozen 'grey' in a coolbox he'd say it was legit before looking into other possibilities as to what it could be (ie a rubber suit).



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ALadInsane
 


ok so your wary of him fine but that doesnt answer the question what do you think about what Aldrin is saying and the footage?



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


The object they are seeing is NOT 6000 miles away. They asked where the S-IVB was and Houston responded 6000 nautical miles away. If you listen carefully they were asking to make sure its was NOT the S-IVB that they were seeing. The object there were looking at was close.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 07:35 AM
link   
I'm just tagging this so i can watch it later on thank you.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


There's two things about Aldrin:

1) He's been flirting with the press over UFOs, moon bases, monoliths for the last couple of years now. Key thing is, he doesn't really say anything. He merely speculates along with the rest of them. He never alludes to anything that he may or may not know from his NASA days.
2) From what little he has said down the years (none of which has ever been in the form of a shocking revelation), it is jumped on, over scrutinised and taken out of context. Alex Jones did this over a monolith on a moon of Mars.

I take whatever Aldrin says with a pinch of salt, much like how he delivers it, particularly when it is Maussan presenting cuttings from an interview that match the material being presented.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


If I am correct the video refers to Lonesome George , an alleged ET device stationed between the Earth and Moon .


Lonesome George



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 

The object could have been one if the SLA panels. Here's an explanation:

They weren't sure how far the object was from them. The talk of "6,000 nautical miles" was NOT the distance to the object, but rather the estimated distance of the S-IVB booster engine.

The S-IVB booster was the third stage of the rocket that launched them, and was jettisoned earlier in the flight. NASA was tracking the S-IVB, so they knew where it was. The reason for the talk regarding 6,000 nautical miles was because the Apollo 11 crew asked Houston how far the S-IVB was from them, because they thought the object they saw may have been the S-IVB.

However, the S-IVB was 6,000 miles away, so it could not have been the object that they saw.

The S-IVB booster had four flower-petal-like "SLA Panels" that formed the connection between the top of the booster and the command module. These SLA panels also covered the Lunar module (LEM) that was tucked away in the upper part of the S-IVB. When the command module separated from the S-IVB, the petal-like panels were opened up, floating free, at which point the the command module turned around and grabbed the LEM. After docking woth the LEM, the command module/LEM continued on towards the Moon.

Some people have said the object could have been one of the four SLA Panels from the S-IVB. It has been suggested that one of these free-floating SLA panels may have had the momentum to free-float the same general direction toward the Moon as the command module/LEM, and that's what Apollo 11 saw. In space, there is no good way to judge distance and size -- there are no points of reference by which to judge these things. SLA panels are more than 20 feet long, so if it was an SLA panel that they saw, then it could have been relatively close to the astronauts. Due to the blackness of space and the white-painted panel, the SLA panel could have been a few miles away and still have been visible.

SLA Panel Diagram
SLA Panel Separation


edit on 1/11/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: added links



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   
There's another powerful statisitcal argument that the object was associated with the S4B and SLA panels.

A number of Apollo crews referred to flashing lights pacing them on the way out to the Moon, along trajectories that matched those that would have been followed by cast-off booster components.

There are no reports, to my knowledge, of any such objects pacing them on the way BACK from the moon, when of course there were NO cast-off booster components on such trajectories.

This asymmetry suggests that the reports are due to a stimulus that was exclusive to the outbound leg of the flight -- and booster components fills that bill.

A similar argument, although weaker since there are only two examples, involves crew descriptions of beercan-shaped objects on Gemini-4 and Gemini-7 and no such shapes seen on other Gemini flights.

Gemini-4 and Gemini-7 were the only two Gemini missions tasked specifically to attempt formation flying with their beercan-shaped booster second stage. So we have a perfect one-to-one overlap of a potential stimulus and of reports of a particular shape.

This suggests a causal relationship.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
...A number of Apollo crews referred to flashing lights pacing them on the way out to the Moon, along trajectories that matched those that would have been followed by cast-off booster components...

Jim --

To be clear, were the "flashing lights" perhaps caused by a tumbling object (such as a piece of Apollo hardware) reflecting more sunlight/less sunlight/more sunlight as it tumbled, hence the "flashing" effect?


edit on 1/11/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   
thanks for all your input guys, this now makes alot more sense to me now especially the 6000 nautical miles
i feel stupid now.

however i know people are saying buzz aldrin talks BS but of all the people you would want this information off would in not be an astronaut who says hes seen UFO's first hand
is there any way of debunking what he says? not to my knowledge there isnt.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
just a realy random thought when watching the video posted by gortex


can an unknown object in space be classed as an unidentified "FLYING" object, isnt everything in space not technically floating? so there for when NASA describes an object as a UFO does that mean it has some kind of propultion?

or am i just been stupid if you think so just yes i can take criticism afterall thats why everybody on ATS is here to try and get answers, cheers guys



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by simples
thanks for all your input guys, this now makes alot more sense to me now especially the 6000 nautical miles
i feel stupid now.
no worries



however i know people are saying buzz aldrin talks BS but of all the people you would want this information off would in not be an astronaut who says hes seen UFO's first hand
is there any way of debunking what he says? not to my knowledge there isnt.

Well, even though there are perfectly earthly theories as to what they saw (e.g., the SLA panels), NASA officially is still not sure waht they saw, so it is technically a UFO. Plus, Buzz has always been a bit of a showman, and I think he enjoys making the mystery bigger than it really is.

BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, don't forget, astronauts are people too. Astronauts, such as Aldrin, are allowed to have personal opinions on ETs and UFOs, just like you and I have personal opinions. Aldrin may have all of the evidence shown to him how the object he saw could have been and SLA panel, but that doesn't necessarily mean he is convinced that's what it was, just like I'm sure there are others here on ATS who aren't necessarily convinced that's what it was.

If Aldrin thinks it may have been a ET, then that's fine -- but that's his personal opinion, and not necessarily based on any first-hand knowledge he has on this event -- other than what the rest of us know.

Basically, since Aldrin's personal opinion is based on the same knowledge about this object/event that anyone else has, hi opinion is not necessarily any more valid than anyone else's, simply because he is an astronaut.


edit on 1/11/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


I didn't say he talked alot of BS, I said he says very little and skirts round subjects. It's the people that look too deep into what he says that are the distributors of the BS.

Not arguing with you dude, just pointing out that I didn't say Aldrin talks BS



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 10:05 AM
link   
i know you didnt call it BS that was just me dont take offence, i know what your saying hes only human and its his own opinion but hes more credible then you or i and he knows alot more about what floats around in space and the parts of the module or space shuttle hes in than you or i.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by JimOberg
...A number of Apollo crews referred to flashing lights pacing them on the way out to the Moon, along trajectories that matched those that would have been followed by cast-off booster components...

Jim --

To be clear, were the "flashing lights" perhaps caused by a tumbling object (such as a piece of Apollo hardware) reflecting more sunlight/less sunlight/more sunlight as it tumbled, hence the "flashing" effect?


edit on 1/11/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)


That was the crew's interpretation -- since the flash rate was constant and relatively slow (1-2 seconds)...



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


Technically they're falling. Granted they are in Earth's orbit.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join