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.

 

STS-80 Astronaut Comments on Claims His Crew Observed UFOs

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by spacevisitor

What would Tom Jones think then what Catherine Coleman did saw on the NASA STS 73 flight, its clearly not one of those ice crystals or debris particles in my opinion.


Funny you should ask -- I took the unprecedented (for the world of UFOria) step of directly asking her to explain that comment -- and will report. Hint: She pointed out that there were no windows in the Spacelab module, a technical fact that you can verify.




posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by UofM.Physicist
reply to post by JimOberg
 


The University of Michigan had a team working on the tether project. Nobody I know who worked on the project thinks the objects filmed on the infrared cameras were 'debris'. Nobody.


Now they're 'infrared' cameras? Weren't we just told a day ago that they were 'ultraviolet' cameras?

How about what they really were: ordinary visible light cameras in the payload bay.

PS. Why won't anyone you say 'doesn't believe', speak for themselves with their real names?


Nobody I know who worked on the project thinks the objects filmed on the infrared cameras were 'debris'. Nobody.


Here's why I believe your statement is true. You don't KNOW anybody who worked on the project.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Sorry, I misspoke by calling the cameras infrared. They measured ultraviolet radiation, not infrared. I didn't work on the project. I do know people that did. None of them believe the objects were debris.





Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by UofM.Physicist
reply to post by JimOberg
 


The University of Michigan had a team working on the tether project. Nobody I know who worked on the project thinks the objects filmed on the infrared cameras were 'debris'. Nobody.


Now they're 'infrared' cameras? Weren't we just told a day ago that they were 'ultraviolet' cameras?

How about what they really were: ordinary visible light cameras in the payload bay.

PS. Why won't anyone you say 'doesn't believe', speak for themselves with their real names?


Nobody I know who worked on the project thinks the objects filmed on the infrared cameras were 'debris'. Nobody.


Here's why I believe your statement is true. You don't KNOW anybody who worked on the project.




posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Can you please explain the point you are trying to make with your thread?

You said the STS-80 shuttle crew or at least a member of this crew, did not see UFOs and/or extra terrestrials during their trip(s) into space. Are you saying UFOs and extra terrestrials do not exist?

Or are you saying the STS-80 crew never saw UFOs and/or extra terrestrials because others have suggested they did see UFOs and/or extra terrestrials?



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dastardly666
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Can you please explain the point you are trying to make with your thread?

You said the STS-80 shuttle crew or at least a member of this crew, did not see UFOs and/or extra terrestrials during their trip(s) into space. Are you saying UFOs and extra terrestrials do not exist?

Or are you saying the STS-80 crew never saw UFOs and/or extra terrestrials because others have suggested they did see UFOs and/or extra terrestrials?



The story that the crew watched UFOs out the window was made up by Clark McClelland, who has posted it and had it linked respectfully from many UFO stes. Both Musgrave and Jones have denied it, and have said that the videotaped dancing dots look like normal shuttle-generated debris effects they are professionally familiar with.

I had published a technical study of the video ten years ago on the internet explaining the objects as nearby sunlit small debris, some emerging from the shuttle's shadow and suddenly 'appearing' [becoming sunlit]. For ten years, UFO promoters kept using the video with no balanced reference to the alternate prosaic theory.

Note that the UFO stories from STS-80 were popular for years before anybody bothered to ask the astronauts who were there (or the flight controllers who ran the cameras). Direct eyewitness testimony was AVOIDED, possibly because it would have provided evidence explaining the video as prosaic and non-ET.

Note the hostility of many posters on this thread who did NOT want the witness testimony. They wanted themselves -- and you -- to NOT know the full story.

These are the folks whining about 'coverups'! Sound a tad hypocritical?



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by UofM.Physicist
Sorry, I misspoke by calling the cameras infrared. They measured ultraviolet radiation, not infrared. I didn't work on the project. I do know people that did. None of them believe the objects were debris.



A less generous reader might suspect you did not 'misspeak', you got caught at making something up out of your imagination, and were called out on it.

With that track record, can you complain that some readers will ask you to provide a little more backing for other assertions you have made?

There was a UV camera on STS-75 that operated at night observing dim plasma. The famous videos of the swarm are taken in daylight -- when operating the UV camera could damage it -- and do not have the data displays along the screen's periphery that characterize downlink from the UV camera.

The people you know -- correction, claim to know -- on the project can confirm this. Can you invite any of them to come on the thread and directly discuss this question, please? What would they be afraid of?



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 09:25 AM
link   


The story that the crew watched UFOs out the window was made up by Clark McClelland, who has posted it and had it linked respectfully from many UFO stes. Both Musgrave and Jones have denied it, and have said that the videotaped dancing dots look like normal shuttle-generated debris effects they are professionally familiar with.

I had published a technical study of the video ten years ago on the internet explaining the objects as nearby sunlit small debris, some emerging from the shuttle's shadow and suddenly 'appearing' [becoming sunlit]. For ten years, UFO promoters kept using the video with no balanced reference to the alternate prosaic theory.

Note that the UFO stories from STS-80 were popular for years before anybody bothered to ask the astronauts who were there (or the flight controllers who ran the cameras). Direct eyewitness testimony was AVOIDED, possibly because it would have provided evidence explaining the video as prosaic and non-ET.

Note the hostility of many posters on this thread who did NOT want the witness testimony. They wanted themselves -- and you -- to NOT know the full story.

These are the folks whining about 'coverups'! Sound a tad hypocritical?



Thanks for the reply.

I am on the fence with regards to aliens and UFOs. I believe alien life does exist but I do not think every light and craft seen is alien. But some of the explanations given to disprove a UFO not being alien are weak.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by EarthwormJim
OK OK so those are now IFOs but what about every other shuttle mission where other astronauts saw UFOs?Are they lying?


You've lost me. Aside from Cady Coleman's stupid joke about Mike LA's butt, what other astronauts have reported seeing UFOs in space? Names and dates, please.


Didn't want to waste space on redundancy.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Well, here's some names and what they supposedly said (out of context of course). It's a start. Some other intrepid person can spend/waste time verifying it (in the end its all moot anyway, ad infinitum). What do the dates have to do with the veracity of their supposed claims anyway? Just curious.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 09:17 AM
link   
In reviewing my STS UFO files I located the exact email from Story Musgrave, only six weeks after the mission, stating unambiguously he had seen no UFOs on the mission.

STS-80 launched on Dec 2, 1996, and less than six weeks later there were Internet stories of a video of a UFO fleet encounter. I was still working at Mission Control, I had worked with Musgrave since his own first shuttle flight in 1983, and sent him two emails which he responded to a few days later.

From: James.E. Oberg@usahq.unitedspacealliance.com
To: SMUSGRAVE@CA1.jsc.nasa.gov
Date: January 23, 1997 8:26 AM

Dear Story:
The ‘net is buzzing with reports of a video clip from STS-80 showing dancing UFOs out the window (no mention yet of snakes!). Are you aware of any real events that might have given rise to this folklore?

Date: 1/27/97 7:55 AM
HAD MY BEST EVER TRIP IN THE WINDOWS. LOTS AND LOTS OF TIME. I SAW NOTHING ON THIS FLIGHT THAT IN ANY WAY COULD REPRESENT EVIDENCE OF AN EXTRATERRESTRIAL PHENOMENON. // STORY

Date: January 23, 1997 3:39 PM
Re: STS-80 video puzzle solved

Hi:
I checked out that STS-80 downlink video over lunch hour and found it was just a mesoscale lightning low-light level CCTV view, post sunrise, with various Orbiter-generated sunlit debris scooting back and forth through the field of view. It occurred on FD 12 during your post-sleep and the INCO was playing with the PLB CCTV. Nothing to get excited about!

Date: 1/27/97 7:28 AM
THANKS, JIM. PROBABLY NO NEED FOR ME TO KNOW WHAT GENERATED THIS DISCUSSION. // STORY

edit on 24-8-2013 by JimOberg because: typo in launch date



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


If my car is picked to be sent to space, open a door would be a problem and a true mess with the leaks (fuel, water, etc.) ... but a space vehicle producing that amount of debris ... these astronauts are brave men.
One can talk truly in so many ways ... and don't address the facts. Deny the information that others have the right to know, as human beings, is wrong.
Evidence, or proofs, that UFO exists as an unexplained phenomenon is out for everybody to see. It's not scientific to just ask for proofs on any claim. Science begins with observation. Repeatedly, the ones that are in a good position to do the observation either do it and do not report it to the rest of the society, or fail to observe due to prejudice (these people cannot call themselves scientists, they are other things ... they are not men of science).

Excuse me for my bad english.
Regards



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:56 PM
link   
another load of twaddle, if its not swamp gas, chinese lanterns, or weather balloons its chunks of ice conveniently passing within a few feet, I don't suppose there is any way that they could be mistaken for UFO's no no of course not how silly of me to consider such an unfounded occurance as that..... apart from the revelation of it being ice it is the usual blah blah blah,,, and nothing new just a repeat of the same denial of the existence of anything other than that super duper creature called man...... hmpf!



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by flipflop
another load of twaddle, if its not swamp gas, chinese lanterns, or weather balloons its chunks of ice conveniently passing within a few feet, I don't suppose there is any way that they could be mistaken for UFO's no no of course not how silly of me to consider such an unfounded occurance as that..... apart from the revelation of it being ice it is the usual blah blah blah,,, and nothing new just a repeat of the same denial of the existence of anything other than that super duper creature called man...... hmpf!


What's taken me awhile to realize is just how UNEARTHLY outer space scenes can look to those who aren't familiar with them. Trying to force-fit interpretations based on earthside experience and evolution can be misleading, often spectacularly so. That's why I composed my "99 FAQs" about 'space ufo videos', to share the eye-opening and mind-opening experiences of people who HAVE spent enough time observing in this new environment, to starting getting clues about what's the 'new normal' in the rest of the Universe.

Please check it out and suggest where it needs clarifications and better explanations. Nobody else has ever tried to really explain this in layman's terms.

www.jamesoberg.com/99faq.html



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 04:40 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Extraordinary observations need adequate answers. When you see objects/lights doing things they were not supposed to do, a proper answer should be "after proper investigation, using all the equipment in hand (radar, observation in different wave lenghts, etc.) we came to the conclusion that it was ice particles, debris, etc.". That would defuse all the talking (but nooooo, "the shuttle don't have a radar to do the job ..." "we have no way to measure distances", "we can only take some pictures"). It's a question of trust on the organizations. What you find is systematic lie and coverup and nothing ever reaches society. The only serious investigation that comes to my mind on UFO's is the Hessdalen lights project, in Norway (not that well funded), and the only reason to that to be happening is because of ethics ... in a society where ethics count you can't say to someone "you saw nothing, you're ignorant". In the Hessdalen case one can surely dismiss everything and call it the result of "unknown geological phenomenon" ( would look pretty in the "science" picture ... but to be honest, when someone don't know or don't have the evidence and do such declarations, out of an authority the society didn't gave him, he/she is only looking for acceptance in the science scene (those crazy people! ... hahhh, they are pity worth).



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2timesOO
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Extraordinary observations need adequate answers. When you see objects/lights doing things they were not supposed to do, a proper answer should be "after proper investigation, using all the equipment in hand (radar, observation in different wave lenghts, etc.) we came to the conclusion that it was ice particles, debris, etc.". That would defuse all the talking (but nooooo, "the shuttle don't have a radar to do the job ..." "we have no way to measure distances", "we can only take some pictures"). ....


Is it possible that such studies have occurred and been released and then simply ignored by the 'UFO community'? I was hoping that a number of detailed analyses posted on my page would fulfill exactly that sort of task. If you browse through the listed reports, do you find any that approach the standard you have defined?

On the other hand, your statement about "extraordinary observations" and about "objects/lights doing things they were not supposed to do", you hit the nail right on the head: when speaking of visual phenomena on space missions, a layman has no reasonable basis on which to judge what is "extraordinary", or what things are "supposed" to look like.

If you insist on interpreting images using the assumption they occur on Earth, in an atmosphere, under normal gravity, on what basis do YOU require they look the same off Earth, outside the atmosphere, in zero G, and in the alien environment out there? How would such mental and conceptual constraints mislead you, do you imagine?

That's what my "99 FAQs" were created to address. Please advise me on how they fall short so I can improve them.

It's not a matter of skimming their titles. To get the intended benefits will take hours of reading and thinking about the points made -- some factual, some philosophical, some suggested based on specific research.

But I've tried to cover the essential features of this new arena of human activity and perception, based on my own decades in Mission Control and close association with many of the men and women from many countries who have been out there.

Without appreciating the fundamental differences between Earth and Unearth, my experience suggests that any attempt to make realistic, reliable interpretations of unearthly images is doomed to failure -- and so far, the widely published results confirm this.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   
STS-80 astronaut Tom Jones has restarted his blog discussion of the UFO video, here's a chance to interact with a first-hand witness. skywalking1.wordpress.com...

Here’s the first discussion he hosted, in April-May 2011: skywalking1.wordpress.com...

I would also strongly suggest looking over the spaceflight operations background material at www.jamesoberg.com...




top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join