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

Originally posted by Arken
You want our facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
Old Classic tactic!

What facts are weedwacker distorting?

Originally posted by Jay-morris
The problem we are having here is arragonce and ignorance...

The behavior of those who insist this video shows a cover-up or alien craft belies the weakness of their position. Their arguments so far have relied on ignoring the evidence, personal insults and simple base statements that everyone else is wrong without providing a cogent reason, but nowhere do they provide any substance.

reply to post by Arken


Very interesting post, there indeed does seem to be something to watch.

reply to post by Arken


You may wish to have a Moderator edit this, as in the manner you present it, it appears that I wrote,

"Seems that I've touched a wasp's nest"

Those are NOT my words. They are yours.

I find this post that I am replying to very disingenuous, and deceptive. The deception exists, also, in the original video. With such fiery defensiveness of that video, one must wonder at its provenance..........


Why did you dodge this question, I posed?:

Originally posted by weedwhacker
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)....

Hmmmm?

Did you answer it? Or, was THIS your (non)-response?:

Originally post by Arken
And... as usual... You and your Master you point at the Straw and not the Pole in the eye!

You want our facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
Old Classic tactic!

Veiled (and laughably incorrect) accusations aside......seems ironic that YOU distort reality, to fit some sort of imagined fantasy.

So...my question is the same: Why did the video maker emphasize that last phrase, at the end of the video?

"Copy Thanks"

I wondered if that was ignored, by you....or, if it affected your overall impression about the video clip. There is a reason to ask, and it is getting at the core of the tactics used, there.....IF the choice of those words used was intended to be misunderstood, as I suspect.

What does the word "copy" when used in a radio transmission in that way, mean (in your mind)?? Simple question.

I can't believe it, but I'm going to have to agree with weedwhacker on this one here.

First time for everything ya?

Originally posted by nanochicken
reply to post by TheUniverse

 

I tend to think the object was blinking instead of spinning. The camera is at a fixed point so if you see light reflected from one angle of an object you should be seeing light reflected from all angles of the object even if it tumbles end over end (unless it's an incredibly thin object) - meaning there should be a constant light that changes in intensity but is there constantly. Say light from the sun hits the moon on the upper half, producing a half-moon. If the moon were to spin as it orbited around the Earth, the light placement would stay fixed on the upper half as the moon spun. The imperfections in the moon's surface would cause the light curve to change, but light would still be constantly reflected. In order for the light to disappear and reappear, the light source would have to be constantly moving.

Ah, but the surface of the moon is curved allowing for a 'gradient' of sorts in the reflection. An object with flat sides will appear to flash when spinning, because the entire surface only lines up with the sun and your eyeball for a brief second.

Nothing to see here folks

Nasa would never stream feed in real time because that would be stupid. Any media that says is "live" isn't really live there's always 1-3 minute buffer to allow time to edit if necessary and in some cases there's 5-10 min buffers depending on media that's being feed to the stream. I really think people are wasting their times with Nasa live feeds something like that I would assume would have 5-10 min buffer.

The only way we would see anything out of the ordinary from Nasa video is some inside source intentionally released the video to the internet either than that I guarantee you will not see anything from Nasa live.

I don't see anything in the video other than some stuff flying by. Whats the point of this? I didn't see any aliens waving or flipping us off or anything...

Originally posted by samaka
Nothing to see here folks

Nasa would never stream feed in real time because that would be stupid. Any media that says is "live" isn't really live there's always 1-3 minute buffer to allow time to edit if necessary and in some cases there's 5-10 min buffers depending on media that's being feed to the stream. I really think people are wasting their times with Nasa live feeds something like that I would assume would have 5-10 min buffer.

The only way we would see anything out of the ordinary from Nasa video is some inside source intentionally released the video to the internet either than that I guarantee you will not see anything from Nasa live.

I don't question your sincerity but aren't you just making assumptions out of your imagination? There are times when space events can be seen directly by amateur astronomers -- engine firings, water dumps, satellite deploys -- and they seem to occur very close to the broadcast times. Mission events such as docking are also rebroadcast via Mission Control in Moscow. These events are announced in advance per clock time, and seem to occur very close to those times when watched on 'NASA TV'.

I've noticed about a 3-second delay between air-to-ground I get from phone dialup and the signal over the cable channel carrying 'NASA TV', which is a reasonable signal processing delay interval.

In all the years I wandered through Mission Control in bldg 30 at JSC I never came across any cubbyhole that appeared to contain dweebs with fingers on red 'kill' buttons. There is a cutoff button for real emergencies, at the regular PAO console in the main control room, but the only times I ever heard of that being used was with Challenger and Columbia.

Could it be that to make yourself feel smarter you're willing to call a bunch of strangers all liars? That's not very nice, especially without evidence, and contrary to available evidence that you seem to want to not know about. Tsk tsk.

.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Arken

 

Very deceptive video by the UTube uploader.

The first 1:50 or so, footage of...yes, just ordinary debris. "UFOs" as in Unidentified Floating (or, 'FreeFall') Objects. Obvious, as they have a rotation component to them and that makes them "flash" in sunlight, rhythmically.

Further deception is after that mark, the same clip used before, (when it was slowed "half-speed" and looped) is yet again shown, this time the "full sequence", with the audio soundtrack.

"Stop playback"? Deception three, as if it's some devious command. Here:

The primary function of the record and playback subsystem is to record unprocessed space shuttle instrumentation data during tests and launch countdowns. These recordings can then be played back for posttest analysis when firing room personnel are troubleshooting space shuttle or LPS problems. The subsystem consists of instrumentation tape recorders, telemetry demultiplexing equipment, direct-write recorders, and computers to provide data-reduction capabilities. The subsystem also provides certain functions in support of the CCMS and CDS portions of the LPS. These include the playback of data from downrange instrumentation tapes sent to KSC for data analysis by systems engineers.

science.ksc.nasa.gov...


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.....

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

Weedwhacker is correct. Anyone with any knowledge of aerospace will concur with his statements. I happen to be a commercial pilot, and have also studied NASA and ESA missions for several years.

I also teach aeronautics and concur with Weedwhacker that this very normal and usual event.

Am I a space expert no. Have I watched this happen on other ISS dockings, yes.

These debris items appear to be moving at a great rate of speed because they are relative to the fixed camera position. They could be speeding because of their orbital plane or a phenomenon called "solar sailing". Google it.

I also witnessed this during a maintenance mission to the Hubble space telescope. It is very common.

Before you refute this explanation, please understand this is coming from someone who actually does believe in Extraterrestrials and Alien species.

I get a kick out of people who troll youtube trying to find/come up with content to paste on ATS. They take a normal occurrence, and try to attach some enigmatic and mysterious spin to it.

What is up with people who are literally scrambling around the internet trying to find content for this site? If you found the content on the internet, you are not the source of news but rather the repeater of already shared/viewed news.

If you have something that is original post it here on ATS. If you are repeating something already on the net just to get an article on ATS and hope that it gets enough activity to get featured on the homepage, then you are here for the WRONG reasons.

Just my 2 cents.

reply to post by weedwhacker


Ever thought of becoming a politician? That was well done.
You managed to completely avoid the main question the person was asking, AND after your answer (which didn't even address it properly) they didn't even come back to state that you didn't answer the poster's original question.

Hat off to you good sir/ma'am.


reply to post by coolottie

I was always wondering if something that small could cause that kind of damage in space. I assume it'd have to be heading straight at you [major speed]?

reply to post by NuclearMitochondria


Errrrmmmmm....my partial, on-topic answer was in the post. Perhaps those who criticize "politicians" would do well to further their reading comprehension skills....but then, the talking heads on TV and radio blab panels shouting at each other wouldn't have any fodder, anymore....:

Originally posted by weedwhacker
It should be patently obvious that any secrets (and, yes a DoD contractor, NASA has secrets. So do Boeing, Northrup-Grumman, etc)...

Those would be valid areas to search for 'conspiracies'. Sorry, I don't think it's necessary to spell it out in detail for anyone. (Hint, though...."Area 51"??)


To suggest, though, that I, a): Should compile and post a laundry list of off-topic 'conspiracies' that are intriguing, but not related to space and, b): That this is somehow important, in any way to the credibility of what I wrote discussing this topic?

I don't see the point.

reply to post by weedwhacker


Actually there is a point. I for one do not have much knowledge on this subject. I could easily have read the opening lines and been sucked into agreeing on the surface with this report. But some of us actually want to learn the truth and not just eat what is fed to us.
I'm trying really hard to understand why you come at people the way you do. I understand it must be frustrating when people run with ignorant ideas as truth and you feel like you are talking to a wall when trying to explain facts to them. But you should take a step back and see how your comments on this site may hurt your name here. If you want your opinions respected speak respectfully towards others. If you notice, both you and Phage are making the same type claims. Yet as normal he sticks to the facts and keeps out pompous / pretentious overtones which is more than can be said for others.I actually was all for receiving the info that was given out so there was a point to it as far as I'm concerned.Some of us don't have all month to research every little detail and appreciate when someone puts things down easily for us. Again, for someone who seems to want everyone to respect his opinion, I think you've gone about it the wrong way in this thread. There is a tactful way of doing things in life, this wasnt it.....

reply to post by coolottie

I watched a NASA video back in 2007 that really let the cat out of the bag but can't find it now. It even discussed their the physics behind some of the UFOs. I sure wish I had downloaded it.

Do some searches here on ATS, you may very well find it. It would be hard to believe it escaped the notice of all the eyes we have scouring YT for that kind of thing.

reply to post by weedwhacker

You refuse to look at the fact that one of those round pulsating objects went right behind the Tether. The Tether is 12 miles long. There fore the object was estimated to be about 3 miles in diameter. Now I don't care if you call it Ice or Space Junk or I call it UFO or living Critter, the object that went under the Tether is 3 miles in diameter.

Look at it. 12 mile Tether, Object passes under it. Do the math.

Everyone knows you and Jims opinion, if you so whole heartly believe, great. but constantly going to every UFO thread to argue with everyone and just get the theads derailed or closed [like my 2] Why do you go to threads about things you are really interested in or make threads just to prove your points.

reply to post by coolottie


Not true. This is covered in great depth, and those who don't close their eyes to the rational explanations, understand exactly the optical illusion, due to the nature of optics, focus, distance etc.

There were NO "giant spaceships" in that video. This has been proven, conclusively, by several people.

That is so cool probably the best video i have ever seen on here!

Originally posted by Phage
You call it a "live stream" and then you claim that "pause the playback" has something to do with it with what is being seen.

A live stream is not a playback. A playback is a repeat of something which had already been recorded. The most likely explanation is that another data stream was being transmitted to Houston at the same time. A "playback", and Houston asked that it be paused.

As Weedwacker demonstrated.

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

Phage and Weedwacker sitting in a tree D-E-B-U-N-K-I-N-G

Seriously, I cant wait until my civilian flight into space. I hope there's a guy next to me who looks like the dude from third rock from the sun telling me what all this wacky space dust is.

reply to post by Arken


This is not enough. It's a point of light and could be anything.

reply to post by Arken


The "cold" tone of the way she said that....very curious.