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.

 

UFOs In The Nasa Archives 2012 Alien UFO Film.

page: 2
25
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Mythkiller
 


marked for later




posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 04:24 AM
link   
Interesting video, I love watching anything from outer space. However I did not appreciate what was pointed out as "UFO"s because I spent half an hour watching lint on photographs. Nothing resembled a constructed vehicle, craft, or station. There was very little video evidence and what little there was we have already explained the source of the mystery.

I want to believe that we have common visitors and have proof of such. But I don't want to bring this forward as evidence. In fact if this is all we can come up with, I would be rather dismayed.

Is it worth deciphering? Absolutely. Is it worth presenting as evidence? Absolutely not.
edit on 20-2-2012 by Dynamike because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChakaBoy
The tether incident bothers me a bit, it is a little sketchy.


The think about bokehs is that all the object in the view would have the same notch in the same direction. We have argued this for several errr hundred pages here... but watch that video ;0

New Analysis of the STS-75 Tether Incident -2010
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here is an example of heart shaped bokeh made with a cutout. You will see all the out of focus lights are heart shaped all in the same direction



In the tether film they are all in different directions, some have two... and one of them starts with one... develops 2 and ends with on in the other direction as it moves. While you can recreated bokehs that look like the 'critters', a camera has only ONE lens and so all bokeh in the frame would have the same aberration. Watch it closely again and pay attention to all the different shapes and directions of those notches and explain why some have two while others have on in the same frame

Skeptics work really hard trying to debunk this but even your video says that this MAY explain it. But look at his experiment his model already has the notches cut in to them


You can mimic anything... doesn't mean you have solved the case. That thread I linked you to has LunaCognita's motion tracking. After all those pages it's still 50-50



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
The think about bokehs is that all the object in the view would have the same notch in the same direction. We have argued this for several errr hundred pages here... ......In the tether film they are all in different directions, ....


Incomplete and misleadibng comment, Zorgon. Every blip with a notch has the notch in the same clock position when it's in the same field-of-view position. As they move across the FOV the notch does 'rotate', but synchronized to where on the FOV the blip is located.

To me, this is overwhelming evidence that the notch is a camera-related lens effect of some sort.

To imagine that the notch is REAL requires the objects to all be coordinating their rotation with their knowledge of which shuttle camera is observing them. I suggest this hypothesis collapses from its own profound ridiculousness.



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
A compilation of edited footage put together to evoke some kind of speculations due to the way it is edited and 25 minutes to boot with very little input by the OP poster.

Tell me in a nutshell, why should I spend 25 minutes watching this?

In fact the very question I ask is supposed to be a requirement here when any, and not only a lengthy Youtuber video is posted! Somehow I feel I will never get back the 4 minutes it took me to post that.



Why spend 25 minutes watching this?

Maybe because you are curious?

25 minutes isn't that long...On a conspiracy website that deals with the ET phenomena? Very few of these films do not raise a whole host of questions, naturally. I was cruising through looking for some further insight before I watched it myself. Hard to find it wading through the commentary and so I guess I will have to watch the thing and get back to you. I see Mr Oberg is here, making it simply irresistible, lol and OP does offer:

Very interesting compilation of NASA footage and photos showing anomalous objects in the background and in reflections of astronauts helmet visors as well as many others.
so at least I have an idea and btw I'll watch for your threads and see they reach high standards as well, as a favor - know you would want that.

edit on 20-2-2012 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   
7:19 is conclusive proof of Santa clause.

Thanks for the share



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
A compilation of edited footage put together to evoke some kind of speculations due to the way it is edited and 25 minutes to boot with very little input by the OP poster.

Tell me in a nutshell, why should I spend 25 minutes watching this?

In fact the very question I ask is supposed to be a requirement here when any, and not only a lengthy Youtuber video is posted! Somehow I feel I will never get back the 4 minutes it took me to post that.


There is an easy answer to your dilemma.....errr.... just dont watch it!!!

edit on 20-2-2012 by DARREN1976 because: (no reason given)
If yo feel like your wasting your time here, then why bother coming here and reading stuff, when all your going to do is complain and bait people?
MODS:- sorry for being off topic but it really gets my goat when someone comes on here bitching at the OP about "getting their wasted time back!" when no one has forced them here, they choose to come here and read this stuff of their own free will!! You really need to start being a bit stricter with people that come here just to bait others, as I said, nobody's forcing them to be here...
PEACE!!!

edit on 20-2-2012 by DARREN1976 because: (no reason given)


Some good food for thought OP!! Flagged this..
edit on 20-2-2012 by DARREN1976 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by chaztekno
There are a couple of UFO's on that film that cannot be explained away with the usual camera faults and trickery. I sure would love to have access to all NASA's footage, they must have years worth by now just sat there doing nothing, never to be even viewed again having served its initial purpose. The tax payer paid for it all as well so why can't it all be released for the public to study at its own pace and leisure? what are they scared of?.


Are you really so clueless?

For starters: anarchy, public demand of worldwide military effort to control and expel these visitors, an in-depth look at something we don't freakin' understand and haven't been able to capture in any real capacity, and a complete overhaul of the "secret developments" sector of our military.

Just for starters. I don't think our government...or any government, really...is keen on such a drastic change in their outfit and procedure. Not even if it means actually telling the truth for once.



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   
The problem with compilation videos is that there might be some good stuff in there but it is drowned out by the nonsense. Also, no one will spend very much time looking at each piece and revealing how it was already debunked footage.



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   
In the video it says that the images are NASA's, where would i find these imagines?

Example: NASA IMAGE AS12-48-7090KR

Thanks in advance



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Some great footage in there, will take more time this evening to watch again in detail as keep getting distracted by work lol



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Watched the entire video while at work. Shhh...don't tell!

Anyway, I found a lot of the images to be, well, rather ordinary.

One poster mentioned the ufo that looked like a drop of water rolling on the glass. That was my exact same thought when I saw it. Condensation build up, then plop!

Several of the ufos looked to me like strings or lint... maybe scratches on the camera lens?

And the moon anomalies. Frankly, the structures looked like rock formations to me. Except, perhaps, for the spire-like object.

I have no idea how to debunk photos, it took me six hours to figure out how to photoshop a picture of my son holding a fish. I wanted to make the fish "clearer" because it was wiggling so much it was a blur. So I'm not going to be able to analyze the photos or anything, all I can give is my initial impressions.

Overall, very interesting video! S&F!

::



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
There may well be plenty of things in there that are artifacts, however there is a good 20 minutes of very probable evidence. You can't throw the baby out with the bath water!
edit on 20-2-2012 by jaws1975 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jaws1975
There may well be plenty of things in there that are atifacts, however there is a good 20 minutes of very probable evidence. You can't throw the baby out with the bath water!


Then why can't the youtubers just post baby pictures and SKIP the bathwater?

So much of these 'classic' space UFO videos have long ago been prosaicly explained, and others are deliberately made un-investigatable by not giving their time/date or even space mission. That's almost 'cheating'.

After you've been through a few dozen that are evidently prosaic if unearthly -- hey, it IS 'outer space'!! -- you've got to ask for specific cases that have been thoroughly investigated from ALL angles, and concentrate on THEM.



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Great video... just imagine the footage that has never been released.



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
Great video... just imagine the footage that has never been released.


Imagination is not evidence.



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
Every blip with a notch has the notch in the same clock position when it's in the same field-of-view position.


Nope

I will have to do some screen caps later to show it seeing as people seem to see what they want to see


Been meaning to anyway I will get back to you.

In the meantime have you had any luck getting a copy of that from NASA? Martyn Stubbs did okay capturing those but I would really like to see NASA's copy. With your contacts at NASA should be easy enough, yet for some reason you side track on that issue

Hmmmmmm what is up with that?
edit on 20-2-2012 by zorgon because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Some footage I've not seen before, not bad. The one thing I found interesting is the Houston controller using the phrase "Tally Ho" on two separate occasions.Did anyone else catch that? Brings up the question of code words being used when a possible UFO is sighted.Are there any known code words being used now or in the past that anyone knows about?
Personally I think a lot of the footage could be space junk or artifacts but there were some interesting ones.

I went back and checked and the use of the phrase"Tally Ho" was first used by the astronaut at 5:47 then later by the controller at 6:09.
edit on 20-2-2012 by mark1167 because: add text



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChakaBoy
reply to post by TRiPWiRE
 


Is the environment in outer space the same as the environment flying overseas, as far as moisture goes?
Hmmm


No. But to think that the object in question is anything but a water drop is a little bit bold. How moisture got there, I don't know but I'm sure it's possible. Maybe it’s from on-board or possibly condensation that appeared before / during taking off.
Zero gravity would then cause this condensation to gather and ball into a droplet, wouldn't it? Hmmm...



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon


Originally posted by JimOberg
Every blip with a notch has the notch in the same clock position when it's in the same field-of-view position.


Nope

I will have to do some screen caps later to show it seeing as people seem to see what they want to see



Hey, Zorgon, you are still confused about basic laws of optics?


those notches are just a lens effect in that specific NASA camera:



Another conclusive little analysys of the same principle, look for the following 3 minutes video extracted from STS-75 :



It may be neccessary to watch several times the movie, concentrating to every area selected.

So, i have delimited 4 area in the frame, with different colors. The shape of every different big disc (small discs cannot be seen well due to low quality of the video) when it is in that area is unique to that zone:



If notches are details from actual alien ship there (or critter), then why the notches are not consistent in all the frame, but it is specific, in fact unique to certain areas? Can be UFO's aware for their position in the image captured by some NASA camera, and morphing accordingly? And why do they do this?
If any big disc is in the red rectangle area, it will have the shape of a disc with two notches in the upper part of the disc.
If any big disc is in the blue rectangle area, then it will have the shape of a disc with one notch upper and one notch bottom of the disc.
If any big disc is in the green rectangle area, then it will have the shape of a disc with one notch in the bottom of the disc.
If any big disc is in the yellow rectangle area, then it will have the shape of a more squashed oblique disc with one notch in the bottom of the disc (not exactly disc anymore).

And there is NO exception, the notches are obedient to the NASA camera.

This is logical an argument that the notches are NOT details from the UFO's, but are only camera effects. Bokeh (out of focus images of out of depth of field objects), has this property, taking the shape induced by the lens or constructive inside elements (iris, mechanisms inside)


But there is more evidence related to bokeh: the "cat-eye" effect related to bokeh shape:

CAT EYE EFFECT .....................


more of this at: www.abovetopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join