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.

 

Three UFOs Flying Around ISS. Ground Control order: 'Endeavour please pause the playback!'

page: 2
60
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


You seem to have inflated your own self-importance:



Seems that I've touched a wasps nest!



Wondering....in your mind, and impression from the video: What was the author's intent in highlighting those last words, from the radio transmission? Was there a reason for that emphasis?

(See my point about 'deception' by the uploader)....





edit on Mon 23 May 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 23 2011 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Excellent post. The truth is always good and helpful. Star!



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Arken
 


Once again, nothing extraordinary to see here. It is the result of people not understanding (and, not bothering to research) technical jargon, and mis-interpreting it.

This is extremely common in aviation and aerospace, by laypersons.....


Said the NASA Spokesperson!



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dastardly666

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Arken
 


Once again, nothing extraordinary to see here. It is the result of people not understanding (and, not bothering to research) technical jargon, and mis-interpreting it.

This is extremely common in aviation and aerospace, by laypersons.....


Said the NASA Spokesperson!


Says a person with common sense. Are you trying to argue that a laymen who googles a couple articles in a couple minutes is fully understanding of aviation and aerospace?

It's like saying I got my drivers license. I can now compete in the Indy 500.
edit on 23-5-2011 by zarlaan because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Read through these pages to get a more realistic impression of what was going on. Those scenes were never live, since the same shuttle antenna is used for radar and for hi-rate comm (the Ku-band antenna), and doesn't get switched over the comm mode until the shuttle gets inside about 100 feet. The station TV is always through its own antennas so no outages there. The video of the approach view from the shuttle wasn't played back until the following day, just before the dark matter telescope was deployed -- it needed to briefly preempt the playback to get real-time views of the telescope being grappled -- as the following log entries demonstrate.

Anybody who claims they saw that scene being downlinked in real time -- and then interrupted -- is lying. There is no comm link from the shuttle available in that phase to do the downlink.

Caution: there's a lot of space jargon being posted here, so it's going to be a challenge to figure it out, but I suggest it's worth it -- and worth checking this private website EVERY time there's a mysterious youtube video that is proibaly being misinterpreted/misrepresented by some kid.

Anyhow -- here’s where the grown-up space nuts followed the mission at this phase:
forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

05/18/2011 09:55 gmt
“Ku mode from radar back to COmm on orbiter, station ku returns but just black”

05/18/2011 09:55 gmt
“Station video back; Kyle Herring says should get orbiter video via Ku in about 11 minutes (less than that now)”
forum.nasaspaceflight.com...


05/18/2011 16:27 gmt
“Had to do a bit of troubleshooting on the playback, but here comes some playback already. Ahead of schedule.”
[as the captured images show, this is playback of the final approach to docking, the last 30-40 feet or so seen from the shuttle, both the centerline camera and I think another one side-viewing from inside the payload bay.]

05/18/2011 16:51 gmt
“Can't get any more video down due to Ku not coming back strong and for a viable duration until hours after crew sleep. So no FD highlights etc.”
forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

Flight Day (FD) 4 thread
forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

05/19/2011 05:31 gmt
“Roberto Vitorri down linking some recorded video from the center line camera during the rendezvous. Nice view of station. (One in higher res for more detail.)”
forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

05/19/2011 05:45 gmt
“ground asking Endeavour to pause playback”
[note this is 20 hours after the docking]


05/19/2011 05:51 gmt
“AMS is going to take up majority of Ku as the ground team(s) prepare for unberth, but we should get some video...”

05/19/2011 06:07 gmt
“replaying the last of the docking video”

05/19/2011 06:08 gmt
“Ground ready for AMS grapple”

edit on 23-5-2011 by JimOberg because:



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


What is the point, anymore?

Look at this thread, as another example of the gullible flocking, to flag...and post ignorantly, without any comprehension.

Despite the facts, the science, the easy to find truth.

What a sad state of affairs.......



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Two Things

1) Regarding this particular piece of video, I agree with the comments by wheedwhacker and phage in the sense that they were probably talking about a different data stream, the "live" feed that reach our puny pcs it's NOT a downlink of the actual cameras onboard, that's very very obvious, and they have countless oportunities to edit and stitch a video as they please. They are not THAT dumb...

2) If an object is seen moving with a constant speed along a static line with observed properties CHARACTERISTIC of a known object/phenomenon, there is NO need to fixate on turning it into something incredibly more complex and improbable.
Nonetheless there are OTHER videos from the ISS that show phenomena that I (me) can't explain because they have OBSERVED PROPERTIES (ie: changing speed and direction, coordination between various objects) that DO NOT FIT (as do the ones we are discussing in this thread) any known phenomena (or however the hell that word is spelled, damn convoluted language!)


BUT, by all means, keep on looking, I'll always support the instinct to look beyond what it is in plain sight. What we must NEVER lose is the only method we know to (redundance not whistanding) know effectively. The scientific method.


Sadly this thread will probably turn quickly into a classic flamewar, I applaud the initial intention.

edit on 23/5/2011 by drakus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


Personal opinion, Urine dump from the ISS.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by JimOberg
 


What is the point, anymore?

Look at this thread, as another example of the gullible flocking, to flag...and post ignorantly, without any comprehension.

Despite the facts, the science, the easy to find truth.

What a sad state of affairs.......

WW: After reading several of your posts, I admit I tend to agree with your line of thought (in this area). And I also share your frustration when you consider that we might be wasting our time and potential in pointless tail-chasing. However, I think that we also "lose" the work we've done when we "lose" our comprehension of how other people think.
I, too, feel irritated when people say "OMG thats grunbreikin!!1!" without even using a couple of neurons in processing the information. But you need to understand that there's a reason why people think "that way" (Or that they think in a very loose way), and it has a lot to do with the initial spirit of this forum.
The complete lack of training of the critical mind is not an "innocent mistake", it's part of the problem and it's one of the toughest things we need to fight against. But in order to engage that fight we need to see one thing very clearly: Those that weren't trained to use reason and science to understand their reality are not the ones responsible for that. (not for the most part). They are mostly victims as we are.

Stressing as it may be, there's no other way than forward. The only thing we CAN do is make sure we NEVER quit. Even if it means posting millions of times the same information until they read it. And once more again.
Well, that was my daily rant.


Drx



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   
ok so we got the confusion of the statement 'playback out of the way..

....so now how about the unidenified 'obiting' 'floating' 'flashing' object/objects? i guess we can just go with 'nothing but space debris....since i am a 'layman' is there a way to find out the orientation of the vid as compared to trajectory of orbit and the tragectory of u.f. o.f.o"s ?



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by matadoor
reply to post by Arken
 


Personal opinion, Urine dump from the ISS.



They DRINK their urine [after processing].

Mostly, though, the recovered water is electrolyzed for oxygen.

The H2 then goes into a Sabatier reactor to combine with CO2
to create more water, and some methane which is dumped.

It doesn't make ice, sadly [grin].

Ironman astronauts [iron stomach spacers].



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by JimOberg
 


What is the point, anymore?

Look at this thread, as another example of the gullible flocking, to flag...and post ignorantly, without any comprehension.

Despite the facts, the science, the easy to find truth.

What a sad state of affairs.......


You called the video deceptive but you have provided no evidence to prove this.

You claim the flashing object is turning or rotating debris but you provide no evidence to prove this.

If this is your opinion then fine. But don't try to pass on your opinions as fact like you and some others do all the time, without any proof or evidence.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dastardly666

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by JimOberg
 


What is the point, anymore?

Look at this thread, as another example of the gullible flocking, to flag...and post ignorantly, without any comprehension.

Despite the facts, the science, the easy to find truth.

What a sad state of affairs.......


You called the video deceptive but you have provided no evidence to prove this.

You claim the flashing object is turning or rotating debris but you provide no evidence to prove this.

If this is your opinion then fine. But don't try to pass on your opinions as fact like you and some others do all the time, without any proof or evidence.



Not my quote.

But the proof that the video is deceptive is pretty clear from the real-time log at www.nasaspaceflight.com, which I urge you to read. Yes, I know it's hard and will probably dismay you, but you demand evidence, so you better look at the evidence.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by clearmind
ok so we got the confusion of the statement 'playback out of the way..

....so now how about the unidenified 'obiting' 'floating' 'flashing' object/objects? i guess we can just go with 'nothing but space debris....since i am a 'layman' is there a way to find out the orientation of the vid as compared to trajectory of orbit and the tragectory of u.f. o.f.o"s ?


Yes there is and that info is on the www.nasaspaceflight.com log, and the NASA press kit of the rendezvous/docking trajectory. At this pointg, the shuttle was approaching the station from directly in front, along its orbital path.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Dastardly666
 


MY POST stands on its own.

People with eyes, and the willingness to seek to deny ignorance and nonsense can figure it out.

Most people get it....the "proof" of the UTube author's deception is self-evident.

Not to mention, that same individual's nasty comments to me...(as, I did take the time to make an informative post comment on the channel).



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I like your train of thought and I don't want a slanging match like most people on ATS but why ask them to pause it if it's just run of the mill debris? Now the evidence people are using to debunk this is a NASA site if I'm correct, the exact people that have been hiding things for years and the exact people that wanted this paused?

Anyway, definatly UFO(unidentified) could be debris or maybe not. No proof to say otherwise.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Not to mention, that same individual's nasty comments to me...(as, I did take the time to make an informative post comment on the channel).


I tried to post a link to this discussion, look at the error message I got:



You have been blocked by the owner of this video



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dastardly666

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by JimOberg
 

...

You claim the flashing object is turning or rotating debris but you provide no evidence to prove this.

What factor or variable leads YOU to believe it's not debris, space-junk, cosmonaut turdle, or whatever?
The easiest, simpler explanation is that it is debris, WHAT is it there that POINTS to another explanation? The blinking? Well, MANY things seem to "blink", from earth, stars seem to blink, but we can propose a simple, logical explanation for that. Rotation debris in space will appear as blinking objects because there's no atmospheric scattering of light (light isn't "diffused" by gasses) to cast light on the sides of the object not receiving radiaton.
Off course, it COULD always be something else, but there's nothing in that vid implying that...



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Yes....my message is now "This channel is unavailable". However, MY UTube username is not the same as this one, here. Yours, maybe is?

Collusion, in some manner?? (Just that 'conspiracy' angle, we all want that....right?)



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by David291
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I like your train of thought and I don't want a slanging match like most people on ATS but why ask them to pause it if it's just run of the mill debris? Now the evidence people are using to debunk this is a NASA site if I'm correct, the exact people that have been hiding things for years and the exact people that wanted this paused?



Wrong.

NASA sites have URLs like nasa.gov, and this site is a .com.

Thre is a difference. Look at its home page, like, do something simple and easy, if it's not too hard.

You went and made a convenient -- and incorrect -- assumption to avoid having to confront the evidence.

You seem to have a well-developed defense mechanism against inconvenient realities.

This is a teachable moment if you realize WHY you so quickly conjured up a fantasy to protect the beliefs you seem to enjoy.

Or is there some other explanation?



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join