Visual aid to help put to rest the "Black Knight" photos.

Originally posted by FireMoon
... If that's man made junk in the photos and it probably is of some sort, then it's simple, it's large enough to be listed in the international cataloguer so what's the problem Jim?; show us the entry for it

No sense in playing games, here is a link with the NORAD satellite catalog:
planet4589.org...

Look up object number 025570, international designator 1998-067C
EVA debris -- Trunnion pin cover [NASA]
Launch 1998 Dec 4
Reentered 1998 Dec 14 - 1998 Dec 10
LEO/I 92.26 379 x 391 x 51.6

There's multilevel evidence this is a trunnion pin cover/thermal blanket. Yet, there will still be believers holding on to their alien space probe... satellite... or whatever. It's people like that, that do absolutely nothing to help further put the gap between the ones that take the subject seriously, and the tin-foil hat crackpots.

Just concede.

Originally posted by FireMoon
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

Ahhh diddums,, did someone rattle your gilded cage?

Yes when you threw the toys out of yours, yours bumped into mine

Originally posted by Whateva69
reply to post by Ectoplasm8

 

You lost me at ... Jim oberg and phage

Whenever I see Jim Oberg has 'debuked' something I know there is more to it.

Originally posted by Loopdaloop

Originally posted by Whateva69
reply to post by Ectoplasm8

 

You lost me at ... Jim oberg and phage

Whenever I see Jim Oberg has 'debuNked' something I know there is more to it.

Skepticism is a good attitude, and folks who have the evidence on their side never fear it, so it's fine with me.

Just be sure to apply it equally, or you reveal subconscious biases that could be harming your overall judgment.

so what was it that was detected by radar in feb 1960 and seen by cameras at grumman corps and reported by gordon cooper it could not be this piece reports of this go back to the 1920 and 30s and it was travelling east to west ?? confused now

Originally posted by Ectoplasm8
There's multilevel evidence this is a trunnion pin cover/thermal blanket. Yet, there will still be believers holding on to their alien space probe... satellite... or whatever. It's people like that, that do absolutely nothing to help further put the gap between the ones that take the subject seriously, and the tin-foil hat crackpots.

Just concede.

There's multilevel evidence this is a trunnion pin cover/thermal blanket.

Sorry to say this but the image you posted it doesn't match.

tin-foil hat crackpots.

Really? well then since you put that way it doesn't help your cause.

reply to post by Ectoplasm8


Looks convincing to me except for one small issue. In picture number 7, is that a hand? And in number 1 is that an arm? If so, then the scale of that trunnion pin cover is very small. How big is the Black Knight object?

Originally posted by elouina
reply to post by Ectoplasm8

 

Looks convincing to me except for one small issue. In picture number 7, is that a hand? And in number 1 is that an arm? If so, then the scale of that trunnion pin cover is very small. How big is the Black Knight object?

Your questions are spot on, the STS-88 object is about one meter across and very thin.

Well, that's the point. There IS no "Black Knight object", there are a disconnected collection of 'space mystery' stories force-fit into one artificial narrative.

Asking hard questions has forced proponents of the prosaic explanation to work harder, do their homework, get the testimony and images.

It's worked out well.

reply to post by JimOberg

Well, that's the point. There IS no "Black Knight object", there are a disconnected collection of 'space mystery' stories force-fit into one artificial narrative.

Your still going with there is no Black Knight object? if this object clear space junk you have to put out more hard convincing evidence as the image in the op thread does not match the size and the way its shape.

The White object the object that you used in your debunking is "rounded shaped" the Black Knight object isn't.

Remember the Black Knight object has being photographed in the 1960s not 1998.

Agent_USA_Supporter you just gotta be "that guy" don't you?.



After spending a few years on this site I've come to the conclusion that it's pointless interacting with these sort of people. You could show them 2 copies of the same photo and they'd still tell you that the 2 pictures don't match. Or the cliche "it's like comparing apples and oranges" when really it's just the same apple posted twice...

reply to post by freelance_zenarchist

After spending a few years on this site I've come to the conclusion that it's pointless interacting with these sort of people. You could show them 2 copies of the same photo and they'd still tell you that the 2 pictures don't match. Or the cliche "it's like comparing apples and oranges" when really it's just the same apple posted twice...

Gave you a star as you earned it. And yeah i agree with you on there, its almost as if urging and debating with well known war mongers. Yeah i remember those types.


Its like comparing Apple to an Apple Juice or more rather comparing Dragon Flys to butterflies.

Originally posted by geobro
so what was it that was detected by radar in feb 1960 and seen by cameras at grumman corps and reported by gordon cooper it could not be this piece reports of this go back to the 1920 and 30s and it was travelling east to west ?? confused now

On what basis do you believe that Gordon Cooper reported anything like this on his Mercury flight? Best I can tell, it was a fairy tale invented by Frank Edwards, perhaps [my theory] based on a story from Clark McClelland. What did Cooper himself claim about this, and where is it documented, please?

On what basis do you believe that Gordon Cooper reported anything like this on his Mercury flight? Best I can tell, it was a fairy tale invented by Frank Edwards, perhaps [my theory] based on a story from Clark McClelland. What did Cooper himself claim about this, and where is it documented, please?

it is on the forbidden history website ? what about the sightings in the 60s that are reported and when did this item re enter the atmosphere

Originally posted by geobro

On what basis do you believe that Gordon Cooper reported anything like this on his Mercury flight? Best I can tell, it was a fairy tale invented by Frank Edwards, perhaps [my theory] based on a story from Clark McClelland. What did Cooper himself claim about this, and where is it documented, please?

it is on the forbidden history website ? what about the sightings in the 60s that are reported and when did this item re enter the atmosphere

please be more specific in your responses, these are too general to be usable. check out the 'insert url' feature.

the NORAD SPACECOM list, which has nearly 40,000 entries, gives 'December 14' as the reentry date of the thermal cover that was lost overboard during the spacewalk on Dec 9, 1998. considering how light it was, and that the proto-ISS was in a very low 'assembly orbit', that seems reasonable to me.

reply to post by JimOberg


jim it is the reports from 1920 onwards that i am interested in i read years ago that in 1952 a object came out from behind the sun then reversed course and went back round ? .

many reports of objects before mankind had the technology seem to surface and are tracked by radar and the russian probe that was on it's way to phobos that transmitted a picture of a metal object before it vanished or stopped transmitting any info on those .

35 years ago when less than 20 people had been in space from the west i met a spaceman at a happy clappers church in scotland dammed if i can remember who it was any clues as it is bugging me

Originally posted by geobro
reply to post by JimOberg

 

many reports of objects before mankind had the technology seem to surface and are tracked by radar and the russian probe that was on it's way to phobos that transmitted a picture of a metal object before it vanished or stopped transmitting any info on those .

Please make a little more effort in providing links or citations to stuff you just remember -- and thanks for the meeting the astronaut story with the admissiuon your memory isn't that good. Neither is mine. We need to keep checking each other and providing verifiable references.

When we do -- as on this and the previous STS-88 thread -- we dig up NEW stuff that provides STRONG evidence of an explanation.

If we just swap garbled memories, we're wasting each other's time. IMHO.

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by geobro
reply to post by JimOberg

 

many reports of objects before mankind had the technology seem to surface and are tracked by radar and the russian probe that was on it's way to phobos that transmitted a picture of a metal object before it vanished or stopped transmitting any info on those .

Please make a little more effort in providing links or citations to stuff you just remember -- and thanks for the meeting the astronaut story with the admissiuon your memory isn't that good. Neither is mine. We need to keep checking each other and providing verifiable references.

When we do -- as on this and the previous STS-88 thread -- we dig up NEW stuff that provides STRONG evidence of an explanation.

If we just swap garbled memories, we're wasting each other's time. IMHO.

i know what you mean about the memory jim mine is gone after working as a contractor for brown& root and halliburton .using bad stuff

i am not a doctor but would reccomend folic acid and vitamins b6 and b12 for your memory .

i thought you might be a sponge of information on space stuff as i cannot remember every site i have visited over the years on this subject but a.t.s has a load of good members who seem to find everything even sorting the wheat from the chaff and rocks stay well and sorry to hear about your memory as without memorys we are only hollow shells

Just got an update from my old friend Duncan Lunan, whose name is widely misused and abused by the mythmakers:

He was responding to a query:

From: mark
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 12:28 AM
To: duncanlunan@
Subject: BLACK KNIGHT

DUNCAN LUNAN . HELLO: I WOULD LIKE YOUR HELP ON THIS, WHAT WAS THE
FREQUENCYS THAT THE HAMS GOT THE SIGNALS ON FROM THIS BLACK KNIGHT
SATELLITE BACK IN THE 60S (IT LOOKS LIKE NO ONE KNOWS!.) WHY IS THIS? DO
YOU KNOW THE HAMS THAT GOT
THE SIGNALS (HAMS CALL #)

Lunan answered him [CC to me]

I'm sorry that I can't be much help to you. 'Black Knight' as it's now
described never existed, as far as I know, and had nothing to do with me if
it did. No radio hams received signals from the two lost Discoverer
capsules because they carried only short-range transponders to help recovery
forces locate them during descent or in the water. Geoffrey Perry's group
at Kettering Grammar School, who were the most advanced amateur satellite
trackers in the world, never reported any mystery satellites.

I'm attaching a piece which is about to go up on my website, in a probably
hopeless attempt to set the record straight. What truly baffles me is that
people keep making up more and more nonsense about 'Black Knight' and me,
while there's little interest in the fascinating case of the Green Children,
and apparently no interest in the circumstantial evidence for Past Contact
which Alan Evans and I published in 1998.

Best wishes,
Duncan.

He attached a fiule titled "Black Knight Rebuttal"

Part 1:

Black Knight rebuttal”.Space Probe from Epsilon Boötis
At the first meeting of the Interstellar Project John Macvey had brought up the idea of Prof. Ron Bracewell, of Stanford University, that a probe from another civilisation might have tried to contact us by radio in the 1920s and been responsible for the effect called ‘long-delayed radio echoes’ (LDE). James Strong of the British Interplanetary Society had suggested that such a probe might be located at the L4 or L5 point in the orbit of the Moon (not ‘in orbit round the Moon’, as the press was later to insist). Research begun by the late George Sassoon later confirmed that the major source of LDE was indeed the L5 point, with a possible repeater at L4.
I followed up the lead John Macvey had given me and looked up the original papers on LDE, published in Nature in the late 1920s. At first sight the variations in echo time looked random. However, Bracewell had suggested that the first message from a probe might be a TV image of a constellation, and it occurred to me that a set of star map coordinates would be a random series of numbers. When I tried graphing the signals to see if that would work, to my astonishment I found what appeared to be a readable message, giving Epsilon Boötis (Izar) as the origin star of the spacecraft, and its arrival date as 11,000 BC. I thought that I would have to translate all the LDE patterns before anyone would take that seriously, and I worked out translations for a much longer series of LDE received in 1929, before I submitted my paper to the British Interplanetary Society. It was refereed by the late A.T. Lawton, who mentioned it in a lecture in December 1972 and provided the Sunday Telegraph with a front-page scoop. It made national news overnight and then was eclipsed on Christmas Eve by the terrible earthquake in Nicaragua. The subsequent evolution of the story in the media would be worthy of Gilbert and Sullivan: for example, a completely accurate account of it appeared in the US National Enquirer, whereas Time magazine got it wrong and never printed a promised correction, but is the one most often cited to this day.
The actual paper was published by the BIS as 'Space Probe from Epsilon Boötis', in Spaceflight, April 1973. It became apparent that some of the 1920s records I had worked on weren’t accurate, and that facts I had deduced about the Epsilon Boötis system were incorrect, so I withdrew the translation. ('Long-Delayed Echoes and the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis', Journal of the Society of Electronic and Radio Technicians, September 1976.) By that time Lawton had published his own natural explanation for LDE, which I have never accepted but was widely accepted as a refutation.
“Man and the Stars” came out in 1974 and I was then contacted by two very talented people, Alan Evans and Jamie Bentley, both of whom liked my approach to the possibility of past contact with extraterrestrials, and proposed a search for evidence to prove it, if it had happened. In the course of our enquiry Epsilon Boötis came up again, apparently as a time marker rather than indicating the origin of the visitors. We think that we have strong circumstantial evidence for at least one visit to Earth, in the period 3000-2500 BC: this was published as ‘Epsilon Boötis Revisited’, Analog, March 1998.[link]

part 2

Two years earlier Analog had published my separate research into the mediaeval mystery of the Green Children of Woolpit [link], which if true, appears to be ‘the X-files in the 12th century’. After I returned the proofs of ‘Epsilon Boötis Revisited’ to Analog it occurred to me that there could be similar circumstantial evidence for that in positional astronomy: Alan Evans confirmed that there was. At that point all three enquiries, into long-delayed radio echoes in the 1920s, ancient positional astronomy at Stonehenge and the Pyramids, and a very human mystery in 12th century England, become different aspects of a single enquiry into Past Contact. I’ve published my own speculative interpretation in “Children from the Sky”, but it really does appear that we’re on to something big.

Black Knight – nothing to do with me.
Unfortunately much media interest and numerous websites print only spurious stories about me, building on the misreporting of the Epsilon Boötis story in the 1970s. For the record, I am not a professional astronomer, I am not a radio amateur, I am not a professor and have never been a staff member of Glasgow University. I was not alive in the 1920s, was not born until 1945, and I have never heard of any ‘voices’ supposedly heard by astronaut Gordon Cooper in orbit in 1963. As for ‘Black Knight’, the only real one I know of is the British sounding rocket used in the late 1950s for upper altitude research and missile warhead development in the late 1950s, afterwards developed into the Black Arrow which put Britain’s one and only independent satellite into orbit in October 1971. For its story see “A Vertical Empire” by C.N. Hill, Imperial College Press, 2001, and “Black Knight, Britain’s First Ballistic Rocket” by C.N. Hill, British Rocketry Oral History Programme, 2007.
In the 1950s Clyde Tombaugh, discoverer of Pluto, supposedly discovered a previously unknown satellite of the Earth. Tombaugh did conduct a search for natural satellites of the Earth in the early 1950s using Baker-Nunn tracking cameras, which were the most advanced of their day. The conclusion was that apart from the Moon, there was nothing orbiting the Earth which was baseball-sized or bigger. Tombaugh confirmed that to Patrick Moore in person. (Patrick Moore, “On the Moon”, Cassell, London, 2001). If it had existed, it would have been much closer to us than the L1 point between Earth and Moon, very much closer than the possible Bracewell probe at L5. The L4 and L5 points, also called the Equilateral or Trojan points, are equidistant from the Earth and Moon, and as far away as the Moon itself.
In UFO literature the issue is compounded by stories about a mystery satellite found in polar orbit in 1961 and supposedly designated 'Black Knight', though I never heard the name at the time. A second satellite was discovered in a similar orbit, but both were soon identified.
The Discoverer satellites, later renamed ‘Corona’, were spy satellites orbited by the USA between 1959 and 1972, returning their film to Earth by parachute. The search for one such payload is the ‘MacGuffin’ behind Alistair MacLean’s Ice Station Zebra, which was inspired by an actual search for one which came down off Spitsbergen In December 2012, a release of previously classified documents revealed that another was lost in the Pacific near Hawaii in 1971, and recovered in 1972 using the submersible Trieste 2. The capsule had separated from the parachute during descent and broken up, so the recovered film was unusable. (The Times, ‘How US Searched for Film that Fell to Earth’, reprinted The Australian, 27 December 2012.) In 1959 and 1961, the Discoverer 5 and Discoverer 23 capsules ended up in near-polar orbit between 600 and 1000 miles up higher orbit, instead of returning to Earth, because the retrorockets fired in the wrong position. (J.W.R. Taylor & Maurice Allward, “Satellites and Space Travel”, Ian Allan ABC, 1960; Kenneth Gatland, “Spacecraft and Boosters”, Iliffe, 1964). It took time to find them but there was no doubt about what they were.
Nevertheless it’s now claimed on numerous websites, without asking me, that I translated signals from ‘Black Knight’ and that it was the Bracewell probe, although the decade is wrong, if Bracewell’s probe existed that was 240,000 miles away in the orbit of the Moon, and the ‘lost’ Discoverer capsules and ‘Black Knight’ were at 1000 miles up or less. None of it has anything to do with Clyde Tombaugh, or with me.