NASA secret files

Originally posted by JimOberg
Thanks for checking over the “99 FAQs” and providing me insights on how they can be written more clearly so as to be less prone to misinterpretation and misrepresentation.

Jim, you got 99 answers but the truth ain't one. Seriously though, there's gotta be at least one more thing you can debunk on your site. I got two words for ya, "Dinosaur Scissors".

Originally posted by Mclaneinc
Can I prove its a perfect circle, no, no more than you can proves its not...Pointless and circular.

What I can say is that thing in the video would be classed as a lottery winning chance of just happening at that time with so many ongoing coincidences.

A very insightful comment.

Since hundreds, even thousands of hours of such videos have been recorded, what are the chances that once and awhile something that looked vaguely symmetric would appear?

Because -- stay with me on this, now -- if your argument that the 'circle' could NOT happen by chance because it's very unlikely, and hence must be evidence of an extraordinary cause, is true, than -- nobody should ever win the lottery.


What IS non-random about the STS-80 video -- and the other famous 'space UFO videos' -- is that they occur under very unusual lighting conditions. Now, I'm the one who discovered this, nobody else bothered to look, and anybody now can check and verify it -- but its implications are profound. Which is maybe why the fact is suppressed by UFO proponents.

They are discussed in questions 74 and 75 of my “99 FAQs”.

74 Q: What unusual features of sunlight illumination in space contribute to artificially creating ‘space UFO’ videos?

A: The best example of such unearthly and unfamiliar conditions is what I call “twilight shadowing”, which can make small nearby sunlit particles appear to suddenly ‘appear’ or ‘disappear’ in the camera field of view. Normally, in daylight the shuttle is bathed in direct sunlight as well as reflected sunlight from Earth’s surface, which backlights the vehicle diffusely, filling in the down-sun shadows. But in the brief periods after orbital sunrise and before sunset, the shuttle is passing over a swath of the Earth that is still in darkness – and not reflecting any ‘back lighting’. This is the period when people down in those regions, whose skies are still dark, can see sunlit satellites passing hundreds of miles overhead. For several minutes at the end of Each night pass, a camera aimed in accordance with the sprite search experiment will see any nearby particles suddenly ‘appear’ at sunrise, and more may appear as they drift randomly out of the shuttle’s invisible shadow. Here’s a graphic of this effect: www.jamesoberg.com...



75 Q: What does this have to do with ‘space shuttle UFOs”.

A: The connection is striking and the implications are profound. The BEST images of the most famous ‘space UFOs’ were seen during these rare, brief intervals of ‘twilight shadowing’. Far from being an unbelievable sequence of freak coincidences, this correlation is clearly a reflection of ‘cause and effect’. It shows that the lighting conditions most suited to observing sunlit near-shuttle small objects are exactly the conditions under which “UFOs” appear.

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by ZetaRediculian

 

I don't know about what Jim does, but I often sneak into the bathroom and pretend I am...well, you know....and the ipad makes this a lot easier to accomplish.

You guys make me laugh

Kidding aside...Jim is a real space engineer with loads of experience. That much I'm sure. Let's not get overboard with the conspiracy

... and somebody who ranges the edge of the 'known', where he has been known to make wrong guesses before.

It goes with the territory.

What I find worth my time here is enthusiastic and intelligent defense of interpretations different from my own, so I can look for the reasons for those differences, either internally or externally.

Originally posted by draco49

Originally posted by JimOberg
Thanks for checking over the “99 FAQs” and providing me insights on how they can be written more clearly so as to be less prone to misinterpretation and misrepresentation.

Jim, you got 99 answers but the truth ain't one. Seriously though, there's gotta be at least one more thing you can debunk on your site. I got two words for ya, "Dinosaur Scissors".

Been there, already done that. Wanna see a picture of them? I thought Jeff had already published them.

Originally posted by JimOberg
Been there, already done that. Wanna see a picture of them? I thought Jeff had already published them.

No, I'm familiar with them I think even you would have to admit that the exchanges involving Kaleri and Gennady are a bit... unusual.

reply to post by JimOberg

“Apparently” is inaccurate, Mario. You have closed your eyes and mind to evidence contrary to your cherished beliefs. For Cooper, I performed and published extensive interviews with his contemporaries, with documentation and parallel records, and with searches for independent investigations. I examined other stories he has told about his own space experiences, compared to the same context of existing documentation and other witnesses. Nobody else, to the best of my knowledge, had ever done this [please correct me if I’m wrong]. Based on THIS unprecedented research, which you seem to dismiss with a wave of ‘just one man’s opinion’, I concluded his stories have diverged from original events farther and farther over the years. For Mitchell, I read and analyzed his ESP paper [I doubt you’ve ever done that, or even can find ANYBODY else who has -- correct me if I'm wrong], and assessed other checkable claims of his, against other witnesses. This seemed to me to be a proper approach to gauging the credibility of similar stories he tells about related themes. Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn’t – but don’t pretend it’s ‘just an opinion’. Can it be true that you just don’t recognize real research when you are shown it?

Dear Jim. I was merely quoting your words. I was making a point by the way we choose words as you do too. When you know something...you don't say I think...thinking implies your opinion which is always subjective expression, unless it is knowing with certainty. It may be words play to you, but I take this seriously. Until you know with certainty, I'm gonna doubt the official version of everything. I'm not disputing your research, not that I've seen much of it. I'm taking your word for it (i'm not that distrusting). If you feel I missed some important info while forming my opinion, feel free to point out specifically. I can't go out scouring the internet randomly. there is so much stuff in the UFO space. I don't pretend to know it all, nor have I seen all the "evidence". I have already stated earlier that I was willing to look at the astronauts comments on the circle thingy. You are making me the bad guy simply for not immediately jumping to your wagon.

What is this passion that drives you to investigate/debunk those man/videos ? How come you care so much? A personal thing ?

And when you get around...please answer...hyphothetical government disclosure...would it happen? back then? or even now ? Pretend that they know...you are a scientist...but you must have some imagination.

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Prove my car is not a transformer...except now I am borderline mentally ill....same.

people win lotteries

But its a circular and now silly argument and as from my sig I suffer mental illness its also dafter than I am.

As for winning lotteries, come on, I was half heartedly joking but lets look at it..

Numerous objects appear to move and then stop in position forming what 'looks' like a near perfect circle, then another object moves almost if not dead centre in the alleged circle. This object then starts flashing and in what looks like a response the others in what looks like a controlled return also flash in a set way.

That, is way past lottery win.....

So we have ice crystals moving via thruster jets and stopping on their own in space?

Another crystal just happens to arrive and again stop in the middle and then the crystals start spinning at a rather fortuitous rate.

Happens all the time...

Originally posted by draco49

Originally posted by JimOberg
Been there, already done that. Wanna see a picture of them? I thought Jeff had already published them.

No, I'm familiar with them

I think even you would have to admit that the exchanges involving Kaleri and Gennady are a bit... unusual.

edit on 6/11/2012 by draco49 because: (no reason given)

Would you please link to the exchanges that you found unusual?

Originally posted by Mclaneinc
That, is way past lottery win.....

So we have ice crystals moving via thruster jets and stopping on their own in space?

Another crystal just happens to arrive and again stop in the middle and then the crystals start spinning at a rather fortuitous rate.

Happens all the time...

So what did the eyewitnesses to the event say about it?

Or have you already played your 'all-astronauts-are-liars" trump card?



IF the formation was deliberate on the part of some entity, how did they know which shuttle camera to pose for?

And why did the 'formation' occur during the same 'twilight shadow' phase that MOST notorious 'shuttle UFO videos' occur in?

I'm arguing that the particular [and relatively rare] lighting condition provides the best situation where small sunlit particles look bright and impressive, so it's cause and effect.

Just what is it, that you are arguing? That the lighting condition is an accidental coincidence? That I'm lying about it but you don't want anybody to check it themselves? That people should not be TOLD about the weirdly consistent lighting conditions in these kinds of videos?

That YOU would rather not KNOW about that lighting condition? And you'd rather other people not be told, either?

Please offer a defense for clinging to your ignorance over this remarkable feature of these videos.

Originally posted by JimOberg

A very insightful comment.

Since hundreds, even thousands of hours of such videos have been recorded, what are the chances that once and awhile something that looked vaguely symmetric would appear?

Because -- stay with me on this, now ]-- if your argument that the 'circle' could NOT happen by chance because it's very unlikely, and hence must be evidence of an extraordinary cause, is true, than -- nobody should ever win the lottery.

Ah condescending mode..Always nice...Shall I polish your shoes after?

I did not say it could not happen..I said it was unlikely...

I have also detailed it slightly better in a later post.

The point being, just because Nasa says it does not make it fact, remember Mars is a dead hostile world with no ability to support life...Oops.

This isn't about if Nasa are hiding Aliens for me, its about Nasa admitting they don't know what is out there.

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
And when you get around...please answer...hyphothetical government disclosure...would it happen? back then? or even now ? Pretend that they know...you are a scientist...but you must have some imagination.

Didn't i respond to that several posts back?

If I've skipped other responses myself, please remind me.

reply to post by JimOberg

IF the formation was deliberate on the part of some entity, how did they know which shuttle camera to pose for?

I guess that would be "intelligent" entity. They have no doubt mastered the ancient art of posing for cameras. Since they travel the stars. Maybe I give them way too much credit

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
And when you get around...please answer...hyphothetical government disclosure...would it happen? back then? or even now ? Pretend that they know...you are a scientist...but you must have some imagination.

Didn't i respond to that several posts back?

If I've skipped other responses myself, please remind me.

You vaguely danced around without answering directly. But guess that's an answer too.

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by JimOberg

 

IF the formation was deliberate on the part of some entity, how did they know which shuttle camera to pose for?

I guess that would be "intelligent" entity. They have no doubt mastered the ancient art of posing for cameras. Since they travel the stars. Maybe I give them way too much credit

Sorry I wasn't clear:

There are multiple cameras on a shuttle. Something looking circular in one view might not look that way from another angle.

Besides, nobody on the shuttle was watching. Were they posing for Martin Stubbs and Jeff Challender via downlink TV?



I think the issue of the strangely unique lighting condition that I identified, is significant.

Since nobody has responded to it, perhaps they agree and hope nobody notices.

And Story Musgrave has an opinion about this video too. He was on the mission.

Why not ask him?

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
Universe holds no secrets for these guys. If they can film it, they can explain it.

Not true at all.

You seem to be convinced they're hiding something, you need to consider the other possibilities.

a) They simply don't know the answer so they shrug it off as a glitch or whatever so they don't appear to not know what they're doing.

b) They're telling the truth, there's no proof that they're lying.

There is so much that NASA do not know about the universe.

There's also usually a completely plausible explanation for a lot of things in NASA videos that people claim to be aliens/UFOs, such as ice crystals and space junk.

Regardless of what these images, or objects are in the videos....we all know there are unexplained unidentified craft that have been reported for thousands of years, and referenced in literally every culture, on every continent.

And NASA claims they have no knowledge of such things? Why have they not lost their credibility when their own astronauts have come right out and said they saw things, and that NASA basically avoided the topic, or ignored it all together?

Answer that

The same applies for commercial and private pilots such as myself who have indeed seen things that cannot be easily explained, are clearly far far more advanced than anything known to us, and when reported to air traffic control, are always taken as a joke and at worst the pilot is accused of being on drugs, or drinking, and risk losing their credibility if not their job

The thing that really rattles me about humanity... they are born blind and follow a path set out for them since birth. Yet, when these human species reaches "adulthood" they apparently know everything about pretty much everything.

Why is it taking humanity so long to admit they are spiritual beings living a human experince? What is so wrong and repelling about looking at what and who you TRULY are. Making your ONE human experience (life) a fake reality of what is and what isn't, as well as who you THINK you are.. is pretty insulting to your own spirit and consciousness. Your much much muuuuch bigger and most unique then you could EVER belive.. Human beings have potential for amazing abilities. The thing is, the ones on top of the 'pyramid' (pun intended) who are operating soceity and brain washing you, making you belive things and ignore what and who you truly are from birth.. are the same people who know the universe is full of intelligent and spiritual life. They just don't want YOU to belive it, and you fight and discredit people like myself who actually have experienced many things average people (skeptics, de bunkers, non - belivers etc..) have not. Why? Because we follow our hearts and do not ignore our spirit and naturual connection to the cosmos.
You can be what you are ; a spiritual/mutli-dimensional being who exists in a cosmos FULL of dimensional and intelligent life... OR .. you ignore what you are and follow a blind path which is randomly selected to you via birth (society)... whatever you choose is your idea on what you are as a BEing of the universe. This is based on your experiences in your 5 sensory reality, the things youve read and been conformed to do (school, job, die.. ) ...

People like myself who know what they truly are and have had experiences which society has no answers for (ONE consciousness, other dimensions, energy manipulation, mind powers-psychic, contact, seeen starships.. etc etc..) do not care about your opinions. I KNOW your opinions are based on ack of knowledge and lack of experience, so you discredit anything your reality hasnt understoood or experienced, so you are a "skeptic" or the like.. The spiritual beings of Earth are not acting like Hollywood fantasy.. they are living a life with eyes wide open

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by draco49

Originally posted by JimOberg
Been there, already done that. Wanna see a picture of them? I thought Jeff had already published them.

No, I'm familiar with them

I think even you would have to admit that the exchanges involving Kaleri and Gennady are a bit... unusual.

edit on 6/11/2012 by draco49 because: (no reason given)

Would you please link to the exchanges that you found unusual?

During ISS Expedition 8

Kaleri: "So, dinosaurs are needed here. You can’t do…can’t do anything without them."
MCC: "Say it again??"
Kaleri: "I say when the dinosaur is here. YES! I have them here!"
Kaleri: "Uh…these are with me now!"
MCC: "Yes. Let them be with you."
Kaleri: "Understood."

Then, during Expedition 9, 6mo later:

Padalka: "They are diminishing in numbers to the right. 2711 then 2720 and 2726 to the left and the numbers are diminishing."
MCC: "Yes, the numbers are diminishing. Don’t pay any attention to that, you are on the right way."
Padalka: "How about that? It’s interesting labelling. Thank you. And they put the labels on the other side…FROM the other side."
MCC: "OK, now it’s clear. That’s understood."
Padalka: "And yes, you are right. We need the “Dinosaur Scissors”. How copy?"
MCC: "Yes, copy Genna. But you have the “Dinosaur Scissors”?"
Padalka: "Yes, of course. No other way. I have everything. And just a second ago, pulled the “Dinosaur” out of the casing. Well, I have cut one of them…the other."
MCC: "Good."
Padalka: ”Well, I have got…wires, and I’m re-installing the “Dinosaurs”…done.”
MCC: ”Have you cut the wires?”
Padalka: ”No, thank you.”
MCC: ”A late reminder.”
Padalka: ”Well, the “Dinosaur Scissors” are in the case…is in…the tool is in the casing, but I’ll…”
MCC: ”Understood.”
Padalka: ”OK, but I have done it without the “Dinosaur Scissors”, without cutting the wires. I just moved the wires to the side, and they can be removed easily. So we are on the right way. So I’m, they [are] mating, and they are connected. How copy?”
MCC: ”Copy. How’d it go to the mating connector?”
Padalka: ”Removed and…they mating! Done! They mated. I’m closing the flap. One is closed.”
MCC: ”Copy. Genna, and the smaller part of the connector is to be put into the same clip, but the major part of it into the side one, where the covers were… where the flap was.”
Padalka: ”Oh, understood. Very good Vladia. OK, Vladia, I need to use the “Dinosaur Scissors” again. How copy?”
MCC: ”Copy.”

A few things strike me as unusual. First of all, Kaleri is not using the word "dinosaur scissors", he repeatedly says "dinosaur". Second, if we are to assume that he is actually referring to the hand-tool, his conversation makes absolutely no sense. And MCC's responses don't make any sense. In the audio, he sounds quite surprised when talking about the "dinosaur" and MCC sounds equally surprised and hesitant in their response, a very cryptic "let them be with you". Kind of an odd way to discuss the use of a simple hand-tool, IMO.

Even more bizarre is Gennady Padalka's exchange. It appears as if he's gone out of his way to repeatedly talk about the "dinosaur scissors", requesting "copy" after each mention. Again, if they are referencing a simple hand-tool that they undoubtedly practiced with during repeated training sessions, why all the explicit mentions of its use OTA? It comes off as an over-reaching effort.

Obviously, there's not a whole lot to go on in terms of evidence of anything in particular, but Kaleri's conversation is more than a little unusual, especially when listening to the audio. And Padalka's conversation wouldn't be so odd on it's own, but when taken in context with Kaleri's conversation, it comes off as very odd.

I know the "official" story about the two incidents, and I'm not convinced of anything nefarious taking place. However I am left with a feeling that something about those two exchanges is a bit.... off.

i for one loved this post S&F for you. people who try to explain away everything refuse to accept what they are seeing with their own eyes. it somewhat baffles me. but if they ever see one in person, they will be shaken to the core. they won't be swallowing the b.s. of some mundane explanation, i can promise you that. they will know that the technology is not ours, or at least that we weren't the ones who developed it. the truth will come out eventually, but it may take a while.

reply to post by Mclaneinc


Circular formation:


Not Circular:


I believe what you are seeing is an optical illusion. Human brains construct geometric shapes from dots. Random points against the curvature of the earth appear as a circle. Like you were looking at a circle from an angle...because that is what our brains expect to see.

Gestalt Psych

Reification is the constructive or generative aspect of perception, by which the experienced percept contains more explicit spatial information than the sensory stimulus on which it is based.

For instance, a triangle will be perceived in picture A, although no triangle has actually been drawn. In pictures B and D the eye will recognize disparate shapes as "belonging" to a single shape, in C a complete three-dimensional shape is seen, where in actuality no such thing is drawn.

Reification can be explained by progress in the study of illusory contours, which are treated by the visual system as "real" contours.

See also: Reification (fallacy)

After closer examination, I conclude that this is actualy a orb-craft triangle formation cluster f@#!