Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

This is definitely A UFO!

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 02:35 PM
link   
This is definitely a UFO. An unidentified floating object!

But what is it? Space Junk? But what kind of junk? Is it a defunct Darpa project? An alien craft that was a victim in our secret space war? Or, is it a bundle of tools that an astronaut lost while repairing some outer part of the space station?



I first saw a link for this video posted by makemap here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

I did an ATS search and found this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com... and here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Both these threads are over 3 years old and many of their links aren't working anymore. I thought it might be a fun watch for those who haven't seen it yet, and maybe get some new ideas as what this thing is!




posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 02:43 PM
link   
It isn't a UFO, because it's been identified.


It's space junk. I posted this in the other thread to an explanation, (and there are others out there too) I searched for one that I remember seeing which was more comprehensive but couldn't find it.

edit on 2-12-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Did you ever watch that movie "Joe Dirt"? When I consider the possibilities I become absolutely squeamish!

Remains of a space station Port-O-Pottie?

Bored astronaut space toys?

Piece of a defunct satellite?




posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


HAHA! That's funny. Same video, different title. "The Black Knight Satellite-Alien Tech Hidden in Plain Sight."

So, following your link:




Now, experts say, China’s test on Jan. 11 of an antisatellite rocket that shattered an old satellite into hundreds of large fragments means the chain reaction will most likely start sooner. If their predictions are right, the cascade could put billions of dollars’ worth of advanced satellites at risk and eventually threaten to limit humanity’s reach for the stars. www.nytimes.com...


Was this thing the target that they blew up? Or is it part of it afterwards? Or is this something else, and still a threat?
edit on 2-12-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Here's another explanation.


Originally posted by Phage
The images are from STS 88 and were all taken within minutes of each other. It is the same piece of debris in all of the images.
The guys were a little sloppy on STS-88

During spacewalks debris, both small and large, are often thrown off the station for convenience, although sometimes tools unintentionally slip away. Such was the case in December 1998 when a slidewire carrier and a worksite interface were lost by the STS-88 crew while conducting an extravehicular activity (EVA) for ISS. These objects were large enough to be tracked by the U.S. SSN and were cataloged (U.S. satellite numbers 25564 and 25565). Three other objects were also released by STS-88 spacewalkers, one inadvertently (an insulation blanket) and two by design (antenna spools), although only the former was officially cataloged (Debris, 1999).

ntrs.nasa.gov...

I think this may be the insulation blanket.


Here are the original images.
eol.jsc.nasa.gov...
eol.jsc.nasa.gov...
eol.jsc.nasa.gov...
eol.jsc.nasa.gov...
eol.jsc.nasa.gov...
eol.jsc.nasa.gov...



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by littled16
 





Remains of a space station Port-O-Pottie?


What if it's an alien Port-O-Pottie!?



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Eeeeeeewwwwwwww!!!!!



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by windword


Was this thing the target that they blew up? Or is it part of it afterwards? Or is this something else, and still a threat?

 


Sorry, I believe I linked the NYTimes article just to point out what Space Junk was to people. Or perhaps I mixed my references, I'm trying to see the relevance in my own post right now.



ETA: Yes, I must have posted the NYTimes just to point out space junk in general. Although it really has nothing to do with STS-88 really. I do believe the article used a picture from STS-88 though, unless the triangular object was from another mission, but if memory serves correct I think it's from the same.
edit on 2-12-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Yeah, I saw that. That why I put "lost tools" as a possibility in my OP.

Still, Phage said "I think it might be...." Leaving us open to the possibilty of it really being secret alien technology, hidden in plain sight!



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Well yes, it is either the insulation blanket it or an invading force of alien dwarves with reproductive organs located on their knees.

I'm currently involved in starting a kneepad company with an out-of-this-world marketing scheme.

edit on 2-12-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Cool! I'm always looking for cool kneepads to kneel on while worshiping the New World Order.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by littled16
reply to post by windword
 


Did you ever watch that movie "Joe Dirt"? When I consider the possibilities I become absolutely squeamish!

Remains of a space station Port-O-Pottie?

Bored astronaut space toys?

Piece of a defunct satellite?



Sorry could not resist this...





posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Space junk I would say.

I sometimes see satellites and junk in the night sky.

Difficult to see how big they are as well, which is annoying, but like all things UFO, even the best videos seemed to be mocked down to hoax status.

What planet is in the video link anyway? Krypton?



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Space junk is the reason I never use DEFINITELY in a thread title!

Or positively, or absolutely, or definitively.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic911
 


It's definitely space junk, and it seems that it's been identified as such. But what kind of junk is it. It's possible that it's a small tool packet, or it's possible that it's a large "something weird looking thing". It doesn't look like a satellite, it kinda looks like a DARPA plane, I've seen pictured.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Cosmic911
 


It's definitely space junk, and it seems that it's been identified as such. But what kind of junk is it. It's possible that it's a small tool packet, or it's possible that it's a large "something weird looking thing". It doesn't look like a satellite, it kinda looks like a DARPA plane, I've seen pictured.



See, there's that word again...definitely, but its closely followed by "and it Seems...." That seems counter-intuitive, doesn't it? I'm not debating what the item is, only how we describe things we see and report on.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic911
 





See, there's that word again...definitely,


Yeah. I got that the first time you said it. I was just pulling you chain. I use definitely because, even though it's been called space junk, it's still unidentified as to what kind of junk it is.

Just calling it junk doesn't answer the question of what it is or where it came from.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 




Just calling it junk doesn't answer the question of what it is or where it came from.

A most tantilizing question. Where did it come from? And thus, the eternal frustration of the pro-UFO camp. Man, the frustration just sucks, doesn't it?!
Its the reason from time to time I stay away from the UFO forums.





new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join