After a Week of Silence How Orbital's falling satellite sparked a UFO mystery in South America.

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Even in that forum members admit the object moves to slow.



svirrsvarr 3 days ago Not meteorites, way to slow to be that, and they are traveling straight horizontally.


Yet just like Slate they take as a Space satellite decay space debris that moves slow? thats a first time i heard of as such which makes it unlikely.

The drawings are from 7 to 13 i believe.


Again, how did you determine the speed and distance?

The objects in the OP videos appear to be moving just as "slow" as the one in your last post, which you say is a Russian satellite breaking up on re-entry. Here's another example of a "slow" satellite re-entry.


So tell me again how the South American objects are moving too "slow" to be a satellite breaking up on re-entry.
edit on 17-5-2013 by draknoir2 because: (no reason given)


Again , how did you determine the speed and distance that it was the Orbital's falling satellite by looking at the videos? few other users nor Jim still haven't explained the flickering lights.




Here's another example of a "slow" satellite re-entry.

Yeah thats how supposed an satellite re-entry should look with a comet like trail but lets all ignore the facts.
edit on 17-5-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)


Are you playing games? Why won't you answer the question posed? I have not determined the speed... that's my point. I HAVE determined that they all appear equally "slow" - an entirely subjective analysis, as was yours... unless you can/will explain how you arrived at your conclusion. At this point it seems that you will just continue to dodge the questions you can't answer.




posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Even in that forum members admit the object moves to slow.



svirrsvarr 3 days ago Not meteorites, way to slow to be that, and they are traveling straight horizontally.


Yet just like Slate they take as a Space satellite decay space debris that moves slow? thats a first time i heard of as such which makes it unlikely.

The drawings are from 7 to 13 i believe.


Again, how did you determine the speed and distance?

The objects in the OP videos appear to be moving just as "slow" as the one in your last post, which you say is a Russian satellite breaking up on re-entry. Here's another example of a "slow" satellite re-entry.


So tell me again how the South American objects are moving too "slow" to be a satellite breaking up on re-entry.
edit on 17-5-2013 by draknoir2 because: (no reason given)


Again , how did you determine the speed and distance that it was the Orbital's falling satellite by looking at the videos? few other users nor Jim still haven't explained the flickering lights.




Here's another example of a "slow" satellite re-entry.

Yeah thats how supposed an satellite re-entry should look with a comet like trail but lets all ignore the facts.
edit on 17-5-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)


Are you playing games? Why won't you answer the question posed? I have not determined the speed... that's my point. I HAVE determined that they all appear equally "slow" - an entirely subjective analysis, as was yours... unless you can/will explain how you arrived at your conclusion. At this point it seems that you will just continue to dodge the questions you can't answer.


It seems not only i am being attacked by Jim but by you as well which is not surprising.




At this point it seems that you will just continue to dodge the questions you can't answer.

Ironic and now your accusing me of dodging the questions, maybe i should start believing the mainstream news outlets more often then?

But it seems you didn't even seem to understand my post let me then reframe it back.
Usually thats how supposed an satellite re-entry should look with a comet like trail but usually not all satellite re-entrys are slow.

The problem with this one in South America there was nothing to suggest at first to begin to say that it was an satellite which i still dont see it as an satellite.
edit on 17-5-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Ironic and now your accusing me of dodging the questions, maybe i should start believing the mainstream news outlets more often then?


Or you could just answer the damned question.

HOW EXACTLY DID YOU DETERMINE THE SPEED AND DISTANCE OF THE SOUTH AMERICA OBJECTS?



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Ironic and now your accusing me of dodging the questions, maybe i should start believing the mainstream news outlets more often then?


Or you could just answer the damned question.

HOW EXACTLY DID YOU DETERMINE THE SPEED AND DISTANCE OF THE SOUTH AMERICA OBJECTS?


If your going to use caps i am not going even on bothering on replying back. The majority of people dont use caps while replying.

By the way how do you explain the flickering lights in the objects in several of those videos?

And also did you even the thread from the start?





Orbital says that both the mass simulator and the upper stage are expected to stay in orbit for several months before their orbits degrade, causing them to re-enter and burn up in the atmosphere.


"Orbital says that both the mass simulator and the upper stage are expected to stay in orbit for several months "
Several months usually means until fall or winter, even not late august so again how do we know it was the Orbital satellite if the satellite company stated it would stay in orbit for several months?
edit on 17-5-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)
edit on 17-5-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Ironic and now your accusing me of dodging the questions, maybe i should start believing the mainstream news outlets more often then?


Or you could just answer the damned question.

HOW EXACTLY DID YOU DETERMINE THE SPEED AND DISTANCE OF THE SOUTH AMERICA OBJECTS?


If your going to use caps i am not going even on bothering on replying back. The majority of people dont use caps while replying.

By the way how do you explain the flickering lights in the objects in several of those videos?





Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Ironic and now your accusing me of dodging the questions


Yes... so ironic.




How exactly did you determine the speed and distance of the South America objects?

How's that? Is the font to your liking? Text the right size? Are all the conditions favorable for you to answer that simple question?
edit on 17-5-2013 by draknoir2 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by draknoir2
 




How exactly did you determine the speed and distance of the South America objects?

-The videos themselves.
-No Trails.
-Unexplained Light flickering at the bottom of the object.


But yeah like i said lets all ignore the stated facts, and go with the MSM. As in Syria to.

(But people the Rebels are the Good Guys Trust us)



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by draknoir2
 




How exactly did you determine the speed and distance of the South America objects?

-The videos themselves.



What does "The videos themselves" mean?

You looked at the videos and were able to determine the speed and distance? Again, how did you determine this? You are being deliberately evasive, and we both know why.



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 03:32 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Please tell us how to find and view these drawings.



Originally posted by JimOberg
"For a space debris which had being witnessed in two countries and several thousand+ eye witness accounts including some drawings of how the eye witness had seen the object."

This could be very important, please post links to these drawings!



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by draknoir2
 




How exactly did you determine the speed and distance of the South America objects?

-The videos themselves.
-No Trails.
-Unexplained Light flickering at the bottom of the object.


But yeah like i said lets all ignore the stated facts, and go with the MSM. As in Syria to.

(But people the Rebels are the Good Guys Trust us)


This is the problem. You want to see it as a UFO or some extraterrestrial mothership. So any earthly or mundane explanation (in this case, space debris) that contradicts your preconceived notion will naturally be viewed as nonsense in your mind.

You say there are no trails in any of those videos? Have you really looked?
Unexplained flickering? I'm sure it could be adequately explained if you researched it.

Unfortunately this isn't the holy grail we all have been hoping for.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Is this the best trolling? i already told you were to look for the drawings so why do you keep asking?
edit on 18-5-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 01:58 AM
link   
reply to post by WASTYT
 





You say there are no trails in any of those videos? Have you really looked? Unexplained flickering? I'm sure it could be adequately explained if you researched it. Unfortunately this isn't the holy grail we all have been hoping for.





You say there are no trails in any of those videos? Have you really looked? Unexplained flickering?

You must be joking me right? how many times do i have to repeat it? its almost as if you two are just mocking
edit on 18-5-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Is this the best trolling? i already told you were to look for the drawings so why do you keep asking?


Because I can't make heads or tails of your instructions, and need help from somebody -- anybody else? -- who knows.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Is this the best trolling? i already told you were to look for the drawings so why do you keep asking?


Because I can't make heads or tails of your instructions, and need help from somebody -- anybody else? -- who knows.

Perhaps I could help. The drawings are here there and everywhere. They are not on a shelf or under a smelf or in a tree or in a wee! Try looking under your bed because they are not in the shed.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by draknoir2
 




How exactly did you determine the speed and distance of the South America objects?

-The videos themselves.



What does "The videos themselves" mean?

You looked at the videos and were able to determine the speed and distance? Again, how did you determine this? You are being deliberately evasive, and we both know why.



Oh yes the speed and distance. Right. Did you see Iron Man three yet? Apparently the new Star Trek should shed some light on this as well.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
The drawings are from 7 to 13 i believe.


I'm sorry, that means nothing to me. Can anybody explain it to me, please?

Where are the drawings?


Just google "From 7 to 13" and look at the first hit....I think it's a clue




posted on May, 18 2013 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Strange how different sites report different decay dates for the cygnus.

This site reports decay date 24th April

This one 10th May



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by yeebsy
 


Thank you for posting that you should earn more stars, from the first link.



Decay date: 2013-04-27


In other words the Cygnus was already lunched in Early April and was decayed on April 27 of last month. This does seem to settle it.

Of course unless they would claim there were two Cygnus satellites in Orbit.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Of course unless they would claim there were two Cygnus satellites in Orbit.


How about six?

This issue -- assigning IDs to the six objects placed in orbit by the single launch -- has been discussed all along.

forum.nasaspaceflight.com...
edit on 18-5-2013 by JimOberg because: add url



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 11:26 PM
link   
USSTRATCOM has quietly modified their identification of the six objects tracked from the Antares/Cygnus launch, now consistent with independent observers and Orbital Sciences Corp.

Re: LIVE: Orbital Antares A-ONE LAUNCH ATTEMPT 3 UPDATE THREAD
gwiz: 05/18/2013 09:21 GMT »
forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

USStratCom have now altered their identifications, A is now Bell, D is now Cygnus simulator.


This catches them up to the amateur group reported here:
JONATHAN MCDOWELL // 05/13/2013 23:39 gmt
forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

Yes, I agree with Ted. My best guess right now:

Object My guess USSTRATCOM

A 39142 Alexander? Cygnus
B 39143 Bell? Dove
C 39144 Dove Alexander
D 39145 Cygnus Bell
E 39146 Graham? Graham
F 39147 Stage 2 Stage 2





new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join