Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Mothership with orbs hovering around ISS - NASA cuts feed

page: 2
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 05:07 PM
link   
UFO mothership' claim near space station reflects badly

Analyst says it's a matter of camera catching light off the orbiting lab's windows


By his reckoning, this video doesn't make it past that first elimination round. For one thing, the object in question is in a different plane of focus from Earth, he said. A camera set to focus on maximum distance would capture both the Earth and any other faraway object in the same focal plane. This implies the white blur is actually not far away, but instead nearby: a reflection hitting the camera from the window inches in front of it.

Second, the fact that this object raised no alarm bells with the ISS crew or ground control suggests they've seen it all before. "It was simply assumed by the ground control folks that this was a reflection in the window, because most of them are," D'Antonio said.

And third, the use of a low-light camera positioned a few inches back from the window is a setup ripe for "picking up even the most subtle reflections on the window," he said.




posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Jaellma
 


No because it obviously would be a waste of our time. You are convinced it is a mothership and orbs, what more could possibly be said to dissuade you of that belief? You are free to believe that, I don't care and it doesn't bother me but don't expect everyone to believe that as well when logic and experience lead us to believe it is something more mundane and common.

As far as I know, motherships and orbs don't exist. Windows and reflections do. I am most often going to believe it is something I know exists and have seen, before I believe it is something that is theoretical and has never been documented.

Again, the burden of proof is not on the people offering suggestions of windows and reflections. We both know where this is headed so I will just leave it at this.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by sputniksteve
 
Well speak for yourself. I proposed a theory based on photographic evidence and asked for others to comment on it with backup evidence to the contrary. The only person to do so, to date, is the poster, Pauligirl.

I asked for evidence to the contrary and she found it. That was all I was asking for. If you had spent less time arguing and posted WHY you thought it was something else, we probably wouldn't even be having this conversation. To say what it is not without any real back up data is just pointless.

And oh, by the way, so sorry you only know what exists based on what you have seen. I, on the other hand, have been privileged to witness UFOs on a couple of occasions, so I know they exist.

So maybe when it hits you in the head, you will probably come around. Good luck.
edit on 14-9-2012 by Jaellma because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jaellma
reply to post by sputniksteve
 
Well speak for yourself. I proposed a theory based on photographic evidence and asked for others to comment on it with backup evidence to the contrary. The only person to do so, to date, is the poster, Pauligirl.

I asked for evidence to the contrary and she found it. That was all I was asking for. If you had spent less time arguing and posted WHY you thought it was something else, we probably wouldn't even be having this conversation. To say what it is not without any real back up data is just pointless.

And oh, by the way, so sorry you only know what exists based on what you have seen. I, on the other hand, have been privileged to witness UFOs on a couple of occasions, so I know they exist.

So maybe when it hits you in the head, you will probably come around. Good luck.
edit on 14-9-2012 by Jaellma because: (no reason given)


I can only speak for myself, I never said I was speaking for you. I didn't spend my time arguing with anyone, and I don't know how much more explanation it takes to say "it looks like a reflection in a window". Do I need to post a link to a window manufacturer? Are you looking for links to other instances where reflections were witnessed? I don't believe any of that would change your opinion on what this video shows.

Don't be sorry that I only believe what I have seen. Do you expect that I should believe in UFO's just because you saw them before? Me saying this is not a mothership but a window reflection does not mean I don't believe in UFO's or Aliens. It doesn't mean anything other than I think this is a reflection instead of a mothership. You can't possibly extrapolate my disbelief in this being a mothership to my disbelief in anything UFO/Alien related. Well you can but it's not logical or fair.

My mind is very open, I think it is more likely that there are Aliens and UFO's than not. That has nothing to do with my ability to see a reflection and call it a reflection instead of assuming it is a mothership and orbs.

You make the claim this is an Alien Mothership and orbs. You don't offer any proof or evidence that either of those existed before this video or during this video. Then you demand proof that windows make reflections and claim it is not a valid opinion without that proof.

Do you not see the hypocrisy in this at all? How does this make sense to you?
edit on 9/14/2012 by sputniksteve because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:20 PM
link   
I'm waiting for the day a large mother-ship blasts the ISS to smithereens on video with many people watching in record mode. Then listen to NASA try and explain that.
edit on 14-9-2012 by CovertOperator because: re-structure comment



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
I give this video a 5 out of 5 on ridiculousness. The Star Wars style sub titles + the music put this one over the top.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by sputniksteve
 


"The streaming video views of Earth and the exterior structure of the station are from cameras mounted outside the laboratory complex, orbiting Earth at 17,500 miles an hour at an altitude of 220 miles. "

www.nasa.gov...



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   
well lets think about this till the experts get here
so the last post has a link saying that the camera is outside...no window pane to shoot thru.....if correct, is it possible that there is some type of light reflection in the camera lenses themselves...most cameras have a couple of panes of glass that make up the lenses...or could it be some type of ..i dont know..pixelation effect in the camera.......

i doubt an object would reflect like that..(opinion) and if it is an object it is massive or very small an close by...just GUESSING from the view we have...and if is just a reflection why do they change the view?



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by gguyx
reply to post by sputniksteve
 


"The streaming video views of Earth and the exterior structure of the station are from cameras mounted outside the laboratory complex, orbiting Earth at 17,500 miles an hour at an altitude of 220 miles. "

www.nasa.gov...



But there are still inside cameras
Live Space Station Video

Live Space Station Video includes internal views from cameras in the International Space Station's Destiny Laboratory and Harmony module when the resident astronauts are on duty. Earth views from external cameras on the station’s structure will be available during crew off-duty periods.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   
I have a pretty good track record of keeping my mind open and entertaining all sorts of whaked out # on this site. I am always the first one running to the defense of people who try to open our minds to new information and ways of thinking, even when EVERYONE else is screaming "HOAX" and "FAKE", I still defend people who bring the possibility of a different version of reality then the ones we are taught in school.

However,
You are on your own on this one my friend.
This TO ME is so clearly a reflection that EVEN "I" can't entertain it being anything else.
If I am wrong, then I stand corrected.

However, I do thank you for trying.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 01:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Pauligirl
 


Do we in fact know which camera was in use at the time?

I was merely pointing out that there are external cameras as well. As to internal camera elements reflections changing with time, this is to be expected as the angle of the sun changes with orbital position, but a reflection from the interior would not change if the light source was inside the ISS (barring movements of ISS crew, blocking said light).



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by gguyx
 

Good question. Somebody really familiar with the ISS might be able to recognize the structure in the foreground and place the camera location from that. I'm not that familiar with it.

As mentioned by others, there is no independent movement of the "object" which strongly implies reflection, as does its semi-transparent and fading nature. Based on these types of clues, I'm 99.9999% sure it's a reflection, but I can't exactly explain it because I don't know the camera location, and exact geometry of the setup which I'd need to know to explain it.

But if I had to guess, I think what's being reflected is part of the space station itself, and perhaps the "orbs" above it are glinting sunlight reflections off the solar panels at slightly different angles.

And in this case, the reason the reflection fades from view when it moves into the shadow, is because the source of illumination is the sun.

If I really thought it was that important I might try to find the exact camera location and trace the light ray paths of the reflection. However, I don't think it's important enough to do that. As one of the youtube comments said:

"If you think this is a UFO, I feel sorry for you".



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Jaellma
 


That's a weather balloon floating in swamp gas being mistaken as the planet Venus.....



Instead or trying to mock sceptics in the most unoriginal way possible why not tell us if you think this is indeed an alien controlled mothership? Or were you just experimenting to see how many stars you would get and knew your post wasn't appropriate?

If it was a ship something that size would have been noticed by at the very least an amateur astronomer.

Too many people here wanting to believe so badly that it gives them a bias so big it clouds their judgement.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by gguyx
reply to post by Pauligirl
 


Do we in fact know which camera was in use at the time?


No, and that's the information I was looking for. Soon as I figure out who to email, I'll ask the question.


I was merely pointing out that there are external cameras as well. As to internal camera elements reflections changing with time, this is to be expected as the angle of the sun changes with orbital position, but a reflection from the interior would not change if the light source was inside the ISS (barring movements of ISS crew, blocking said light).


Then I misunderstood you. I thought you were saying the stream came only from external cameras.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Pauligirl
 


You may start by contacting Jurgen Nett the guy who recorded this transmission, he must know
more of the complete sequences. Here is his channel under nickname dirtyyminds.
www.youtube.com...



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by free_spirit
reply to post by Pauligirl
 


You may start by contacting Jurgen Nett the guy who recorded this transmission, he must know
more of the complete sequences. Here is his channel under nickname dirtyyminds.
www.youtube.com...


Thanks. I've emailed him and Life's Little Mysteries, that first carried the story.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
teh ISS station is a sham



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by sputniksteve
reply to post by Jaellma
 


What would make you think they would put a camera used for this stream on the outside of the ISS? Why would they do something as difficult as that when they could mount it inside the ISS behind a window where it is accessable?

Also when you make a statement like "this shape of reflection has never been seen before" it is up to you to provide evidence proving your claim. After all you are the one making a claim.


Why would they mount the camera inside behind a window? That would limit it's range of visibility. If anything it would be mounted on a mast so they can then use it to view various exterior components of the station. Besides how many "windows" does the station have? I'm pretty sure they're limited and confined to certain areas. I'm sure there's information regarding the placement of cameras on ISS.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl
UFO mothership' claim near space station reflects badly

Analyst says it's a matter of camera catching light off the orbiting lab's windows


By his reckoning, this video doesn't make it past that first elimination round. For one thing, the object in question is in a different plane of focus from Earth, he said. A camera set to focus on maximum distance would capture both the Earth and any other faraway object in the same focal plane. This implies the white blur is actually not far away, but instead nearby: a reflection hitting the camera from the window inches in front of it.

Second, the fact that this object raised no alarm bells with the ISS crew or ground control suggests they've seen it all before. "It was simply assumed by the ground control folks that this was a reflection in the window, because most of them are," D'Antonio said.

And third, the use of a low-light camera positioned a few inches back from the window is a setup ripe for "picking up even the most subtle reflections on the window," he said.




There's something inherently wrong with that explanation. The camera was not focused on earth. It was focused on the door/hatch they were monitoring. It then obviously directly pans to the object and then goes off line. It appears the focal length didn't change with the pan. Someone that was monitoring the camera and the hatch closure manually panned the camera to that object. Do you think they panned to a reflection?
edit on 15-9-2012 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   
I'm just thinking. I had dinner with Scott Kelly back in 2008. My ex and he went to Maritime at Fort Schuyler together. We met him and another classmate of theirs in Manhattan. We all got pretty drunk on some good wine.

That night he told us he was selected for command of the ISS. I wasn't really into following anything about UFOs back then, but I did ask him if he ever saw anything strange. He laughed and said" Ah that's classified." Then we went back to BSing about other stuff the rest of the night. Maybe I should have pressed him more LOL

Must be pretty cool to have an F-14 at your disposal. He flew up that day from Texas in his jet, to see his folks and have dinner with us.

I talk with her from time to time. Maybe I can get some more access to him.
edit on 15-9-2012 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join