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.

 

Reopening the case file: NASA UFOs

page: 12
110
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Yes that whitish blur is likely a reflection thats not what I'm talking about.

So you say that that UFO is actually the Earth? If in fact that was the Earth it would be blue.

That is of course if the camera was a color camera and if I recall correctly they did in fact use color cameras for these missions.

The fact that you can see it means that light is reflecting off of it. If light is reflecting off the earth then the water molecules in the earths atmosphere would reflect a blue color and make the Earth appear to be blue. Which is why in every picture taken of the Earth from outer space the Earth is blue.

Also there is clearly something in the center of this object a round lump perfectly in the center. Never seen an earth photo that had one of those.

-Alien




posted on May, 24 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
One of the laws of motion: an object in motion will stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force.

So, referring to the second anomaly i mentioned, how did this thing first of all just seem to appear from nowhere. Also, how did it make a turn with no visible propulsion system? And, the object was obviously not acted upon by an outside force.

Even if you wanted to explain this away as some advanced human technology then you would fail because even if the government or NASA was 100 years ahead of us they still couldn't make things just appear out of nowhere.

But lets just say they could build this thing. Why would they use a piece of super high-tech technology to spy on their own outdated satellites and or space vehicles?

The only thing that can make sense of all this is the fact that this thing is extraterrestrial technology.


These effects have been discussed in some detail on previous pages so if you're really interested in a prosaic explanation I suggest you wade through them.

Things can 'appear' when they pass from shadow into sunlight. This can actually be seen on some shuttle videos.

Things can change course when they are pushed by gas plumes from any of a hundred sources on the exterior of the shuttle, usually a high-speed plume (10,000 ft/sec) from a thruster firing. Telemetry records show exactly such firings for some famous zig-zag videos, so in recent years folks who post 'shuttle UFO' videos on youtube have stopped providing the date/times of the videos, perhaps so that flight telemetry records cannot be checked for thruster firings. Tacky.



posted on May, 24 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Weedwhacker, you are a pilot right? Perhaps you can explain these?



-Alien



posted on May, 24 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
You seem to know what a lot of this "debris" is. Could you explain two things for me?. both are in the first YOUTUBE video posted by the OP. The first one is at :40 and the second one is from 2:16 to 2:40.


The first one labeled 'Apollo16 over the moon' was a real baffler for a long time, a NASA photo tech once told me it was actually the Earth -- but when I checked the geometry, Earth wouldn't have been anywhere near there.

It was unambiguously identified as a prosaic piece of manmade hardware about eight years ago, but apparently the posting youtuber figures his target audience would never be able to track down the very persuasive published explanation. So he omitted it. Figured you didn't need to know the full story.

It would be good for you to develop the skills to locate the explanation on your own rather than be at the mercy of youtubers who have a very low opinion of your capacity for independent research. Prove them wrong!

The video labeled 51-A is explained exactly as you were told, a drop of juice of some kind on the inside overhead window of the shuttle cabin. The images were being made with a handheld 16-mm cine camera, which explains their jerkiness. The crew actually reported the window contamination -- a common occurrence on shuttle flights, they just wipe it clean when needed -- and that also is a published report.

The refraction behavior was also duplicated on ATS some years ago by an indepdendent investigator who had both the curiosity -- and the capability -- to look it into himself. Track him down, or redo the experiment.

You don't need to -- you shouldn't -- rely entirely on anybody's word, mine included. Go and check up -- it really can be done.



posted on May, 24 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Weedwhacker, you are a pilot right? Perhaps you can explain these?



Come on, this is a lame gimmick -- run away from a case that seems to about to have a prosaic explanation, to flaunt another one, and another one, ad infinitum. Let's stick to the OP's specific arena of discussion.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Yes that whitish blur is likely a reflection thats not what I'm talking about.

So you say that that UFO is actually the Earth? If in fact that was the Earth it would be blue.

That is of course if the camera was a color camera and if I recall correctly they did in fact use color cameras for these missions.

The fact that you can see it means that light is reflecting off of it. If light is reflecting off the earth then the water molecules in the earths atmosphere would reflect a blue color and make the Earth appear to be blue. Which is why in every picture taken of the Earth from outer space the Earth is blue.

Also there is clearly something in the center of this object a round lump perfectly in the center. Never seen an earth photo that had one of those.

-Alien



Hi Alien Abduct, it is not the Earth in my opinion.
But if I am correct, here is NASA's explanation for it.
Do you see the resemblance?




www.nasa.gov...

edit on 25/5/11 by spacevisitor because: Made some corrections and did some adding



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 02:55 AM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


THAT certainly clears it up for me!!

My idea of the Earth, in the shot, was based solely on the fact that depending on image quality, and focus and depth of field issues (in photography) ... plus, any other factor to diminish quality and clarity....the "gibbous" appearance could look like the Earth, from Lunar orbit. The apparent size was about right. Of course, not knowing the celestial arrangements, and positions at the time, it was just an impression.

This, though...shows it to be yet another reflection, and wraps up the "mystery".

I think, too.....it goes a long way to illustrate the craft of deception, in many of these "videos" that are compiled....whether the video author intends to deceive, or not. It is certainly a case of caveat emptor, isn't it?

In other words (and in English).......Don't "buy into" things so easily....



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Well heres some more here say, and the source though a servicemember whom was part of the presidental marine white house gaurd, i must say was self admitedly mental, but years ago, being a young intel and op's S-3
man, i asked him repeatedly what had left him so mental and about aliens etc...

"You wouldnt dare believe!" was all I ever got... that and a strange review of my clearence during my service, prior to my acts warrenting said lol, i wish now i had pushed, but it always seemed to make the poor guy freak to much whatever "it" was he was left wacked out... for the here say files and we did have fire op's in manual for ufo encounter's, but i didnt think much of it, we also had other crazy stuff too

As a hypnotist, a seeker and study of persons and my self I must say i have watched persons not see things right in front of their eyes due to it not fitting their mental model of things real, and vise versa, and have been sure of things that all logic concluded was factual only to find later more-other info or just time that said was incorrect, so as a believer whom has seen "things" I still have to remain as open minded in all directions as i can be...

Im trained in aircraft recognition, I was Air defence artilery based, and yet i still make mistakes in identifing aireal phenomonon, so i do have a base in formal training day-nite friend-foe-unknown ident.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


Well that clears it up for me too. Thanks guys for your efforts to point these things out for me. I will look into the 'drop of liquid thing now'.

-Alien



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


Well that clears it up for me too. Thanks guys for your efforts to point these things out for me. I will look into the 'drop of liquid thing now'.

-Alien


Hi Alien Abduct, during looking into the 'drop of liquid thing' do not forget to read also this thread from free_spirit,
It’s quite interesting.

Apollo 16 Hoax by NASA exposed !!,

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


Thanks, I just read it. After reviewing the evidence it does appear that NASA has done a small amount of manipulation of the film but I remain convinced that it is in fact the "floodlight boom". As Weedwhacker pointed out, if NASA was trying to cover up something (Which I believe they are but as a whole and not in this particular case) they would have simply removed that part of the film and not leave such a blatant anomaly.

-Alien



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   
At 5:30 - 7:28 on this video. (the second youtube vid posted by the OP) Is this really Dr. Edgar Mitchell speaking? Because if it is then this is a very highly credible source.


By the way he isn't the only astronaut saying this, Buz Aldrin and even Gordan Cooper also say this.


-Alien

edit on 5/25/2011 by Alien Abduct because: (no reason given)

edit on 5/25/2011 by Alien Abduct because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


2:17 into the second clip might show forward beam display as a Grey orb pases the satellite.
That seems to be the closest UFO to the cameras.

A forward beam agrees with the Tesla propulsion method.

As for the rest, light can take any shape and in these cases so does the dark.
A Tesla ship might exhibit such qualities and so far through the years it
looks like it does.

ED: posted at youtube:

2:23 beam in front of orb going it that direction agrees with Tesla propulsion method of being pulled by ether force. In a transformer a coil of wire pushes ether onto the second coil that sets up an opposing voltage force. When the second coil in in a motor the coil spins. Rotating magnetic fields are actually set up by voltage pulses and when done with a large mass of copper winding against the ether the ether pulls the coil. The 1st coil becomes the 2nd and forced to move.

edit on 5/25/2011 by TeslaandLyne because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
At 5:30 - 7:28 on this video. (the second youtube vid posted by the OP) Is this really Dr. Edgar Mitchell speaking? Because if it is then this is a very highly credible source.


Yes, it is really Dr. Edgar Mitchell speaking there, here is that whole interview with him on Kerrang Radio.


Posted by ufonotebook | 23 juli 2008
Edgar Mitchell UFO interview on Kerrang Radio 23 july 2008.




And here is the reaction of someone from NASA about what Dr Edgar Mitchell said there.


Posted by GRIDKEEPER | 23 juli 2008
Nasa Response re: Edgar Mitchell interview on Kerrang Radio




edit on 25/5/11 by spacevisitor because: Made some corrections and did some adding



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacevisitor

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
At 5:30 - 7:28 on this video. (the second youtube vid posted by the OP) Is this really Dr. Edgar Mitchell speaking? Because if it is then this is a very highly credible source.

Yes, it is really Dr. Edgar Mitchell speaking there, here is that whole interview with him on Kerrang Radio.


It's always useful to have imaginative and creative people such as Dr. Mitchell working at or beyond the fringes of 'known science', because they can champion very far-out ideas that more traditional thinkers don't see any merit to. After decades of confidence that he and his team would be able to document and reproduce psi effects, Dr. Mitchell has inadvertently demonstrated that the problem is far knottier than he originally thought. His Apollo ESP experiemt paper showed random results -- one reason perhaps the raw data has never been published on the Internet. And that's a useful result, even if it's so disappointing to him. It is the fate of >99% of the 'fringe science' denizens, but when it occasionally pays off (e.g., Wegener), the sacrifices of the others are worth it.

His experience is relevant to 'NASA UFOs' only insofar as he has stated there weren't any when he was an astronaut -- he never saw, or heard of any of his colleagues seeing, anomalous space objects. He was never briefed by NASA about that possiblity, and was never told of any constraints on speaking about his space experiences of any kind.

That's helpful regarding widespread claims by some posters here that astronauts MUST be told to lie about space UFOs since when they speak publicly, they deny ever encountering them. To some, that's PROOF of a coverup.

For example, Aldrin's teasing stories about his crew watching a parallel course tumbling object. These were even seen in telescope images taken from Earth on later missions -- all of them on and only on the outbound leg. Aldrin has never made any secret of what prosaic object he was sure he was looking at.

Cooper is a much more interesting, and possibly tragic, case.

First, he's never claimed to have encountered any UFOs on his space flights. Such stories that claimed he DID, he has denounced as hoaxes.

Second, he left NASA in 1970 a very bitter man, because his astronaut colleagues and managers concluded he wasn't up to commanding a moon mission, and replaced him on an Apollo crew. Estranged from the spaceflight professional community, he drifted into other associations.

The most pitiable was his cynical exploitatiohn as a front man for a series of aerospace industry scams in the 1980s in which investors lost millions of dollars because they trusted Cooper's naive endorsements of a series of bogus projects. Cooper really did believe in them -- he invested all his own money, too, and like all the others, lost it all. The scammers used the line, "He's an American hero, you can trust him," and it worked again and again for the gullible. A familiar refrain?

Meanwhile his space stories got wilder and wilder. He regaled audiences about his Gemini-5 capsule being drilled by impacting meteorites -- but the capsule on display (and the official post-flight reports) show not a speck of damage. He described how he had saved the space shuttle program from a fatal design flaw by relaying a telepathic message a friend had received from space aliens, to NASA contacts -- even though official records and the memories of top program engineer reveal no such problem. He claimed he took photos with a handheld camera in orbit on which you could make out auto license plate numbers, and he claimed to have seen such an optical impossibility with his own eyes. And he told versions of Jim Mcdivitt's Gemini-4 'beer-can UFO' that were more imaginary than accurate.

His own UFO stories, which I've been investigating for thirty years, also grew and grew with each retelling. They bear no relation with the testimony of all other parties involved, as detailed in my own published reports -- and I interviewed dozens of people and have letters from them. Cooper just seemed to enjoy telling good stories to the last public audiences that would welcome him, the fallen 'space hero', and these were the UFO conventions and late-night talk radio.

It was a sad descent from the 'Right Stuff'....

One bizarre coincidence -- the Apollo crew he trained on as Commander in 1968-9, before being grounded for inadequate abilities, included as his Lunar Module Pilot none other than Edgar Mitchell. What I wouldn't give to have listened in on their off-duty speculative conversations. I've asked Mitchell - he has politely declined to provide any information.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Thanks JimOberg that was interesting. Some of that stuff I have read already and some of it was new. But as another poster stated I need to do my own research/interviews and try not to put too much credence into what other people say.

You say Cooper never admitted the seeing UFOs (on missions). I found this on youtube with a simple search.


Another thing that I might mention is that there are just sooo many ranking and credible government officials stating their stories of what they have seen when it comes to ET. Not just them but the thousands of pilot FAA radio transmissions, police officers doctors and otherwise normal citizens also reporting sightings. Plus what about some of the well documented cases and in come cases some physical evidence had been left behind.

I have done a lot of research over the years and tho there is a lot of hoax and misidentified UFOs there are enough that remain unrebutted and undisputed that leaves me convinced that there is indeed Extraterrestrials visiting us here on planet Earth. The chances of them ALL being either a lier or crazy or misinformed is so slim it would be silly to conceive the thought.

-Alien


edit on 5/25/2011 by Alien Abduct because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Thanks JimOberg that was interesting. Some of that stuff I have read already and some of it was new. But as another poster stated I need to do my own research/interviews and try not to put too much credence into what other people say.

You say Cooper never admitted the seeing UFOs (on missions). I found this on youtube with a simple search.
[link]


What did that have to do with his space missions?

Regarding the "I Know what I Saw" program, Fox really wierded me out with his using his own father as a foil for establishing credibility of manifestly untrue statements.

When he says the Edwards story has never been explained, he denied the existence of a widely distributed and Internet-posted 1984 investigation report of mine, shown here:
www.zipworld.com.au...

When he said the film was never seen again, he denied the existence of the specific Blue Book report available from the National Archives, as described by that report a quarter century ago.


The chances of them ALL being either a lier or crazy or misinformed is so slim it would be silly to conceive the thought.


Can you apply that same logic to other kinds of reports?

There are innumerable reports of human levitation.

Is it possible they ALL are mistakes, hoaxes, and confabulations? Must at least SOME of them reflect a genuine levitation event?

There are millions of reports of personal communications from supernatural beings, gods, demons, djinn...

Is it possible they ALL are mistakes, hoaxes, and confabulations? Must at least SOME of them reflect a genuine divine event?

Through history there have been a million reports of mermaids.

Is it possible they ALL are mistakes, hoaxes, and confabulations? Must at least SOME of them reflect a genuine fish-human hybrid event?

Throughout history there have been innumerable reports of human immortals, who cannot die.

Is it possible they ALL are mistakes, hoaxes, and confabulations? Must at least SOME of them reflect a genuine counter-death being?

I suggest that once a cultural phenomenon becomes established it will naturally repeat itself indefinitely, without any need for extraordinary stimuli.

The proof of the stimulus is not in the number of the claims, but in the quality of a few of the claims.

The astronaut UFO stories are directly relevant to this issue. The stories are widely regarded as among the strongest category of UFO evidence. I am suggesting that this is not proven, and that all of the stories can have prosaic causes -- some perhaps not discoverable by amateur investigators.

There is no logical necessity to believe that SOME stories are legit BECAUSE so many other stories are bogus.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 03:02 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I think the majority of objects sighted,are some sort of space debris. IMHO. Still,you never know when your going to see something that cant be explained.

Once again,S&F for making me want to believe........



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 

Jim, you and I were discussing Dr. J. Allen Hynek on another thread, and you know that his job as director of the Blue Book Project for the Air Force was to "Debunk" all sightings. I knew him and he use to laugh about trying to come up with different stories all the time. And when he left, he became one of the leading UFO Researchers. He said that he found there were too many ufo events that he could not debunk and became a believer.

Gordon Cooper has stated this many times. Did he except these scientific findings.

edit on 5/26/2011 by coolottie because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by spacevisitor

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
At 5:30 - 7:28 on this video. (the second youtube vid posted by the OP) Is this really Dr. Edgar Mitchell speaking? Because if it is then this is a very highly credible source.

Yes, it is really Dr. Edgar Mitchell speaking there, here is that whole interview with him on Kerrang Radio.


It's always useful to have imaginative and creative people such as Dr. Mitchell working at or beyond the fringes of 'known science',


I think that especially because we have had and still have such people as Dr. Mitchell, who are working at or even beyond the fringes of 'known science', or thinking 'outside the box', instead of having only those traditional thinkers we are not living in a cave anymore.
It looks pretty clear to me that the fringes of ‘known science’ are constantly moving further outwards and never seem to be reached.
So in other words, we cannot without people like Dr. Mitchell.
And all the things he said about already Earth visiting Aliens from wherever, is not beyond the fringes of 'known science' anymore but clearly ‘forbidden science'.

And look what you said yourself about it in your answer to SLAYER69.


Originally posted by JimOberg
I have no problem with the idea that some non-human intelligence(s) could be observing Earth, even visiting.

They need not be interstellar -- they could be long-ago earthborn spacefaring species. Or from somewhere/when else.

Given the technologies required for such travel, I have no problem with imagining they could do so without ever being spotted.

I can imagine a number of reasons why they might want to remain un-observed [in which case they're probably tearing their tentacles out in frustration wondering who it is we seem to be catching glimpses of],

I can alternatively imagine several reasons why they might prefer to make their presence known gradually [i.e., not land on the White House lawn]. And why this tiny planet may be justified in being treated this way.


So, the only difference with what you and Dr. Mitchell and so many others are saying is that he/they claim that your ideas and/or imaginations are a already a reality.


Originally posted by JimOberg
That said, I am puzzled why we don't seem to notice activities in the galaxy that are unambiguously artificial -- engineering works, high-energy engines in transit, mega-Chernobyls, even amateur primitive (e.g., radio) playfulness.


Why for being so puzzled when such activities do happen right in our skies [and therefore most likely also in space in my opinion], so right under our noses so to say, what do you think those clearly intelligent controlled UFOs or UAPs are then as described for instance here?

www.nicap.org...

www.narcap.org...

So what do you think is operating these clearly intelligent behaving objects/crafts then may I ask?


edit on 26/5/11 by spacevisitor because: Made some corrections and did some adding

edit on 26/5/11 by spacevisitor because: did some adding



new topics

top topics



 
110
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join