Astronaut Takes Photo Of UFO From ISS

a reply to: everyone

No need to take anyone's word for it. Look it up. It's true. Their records of producing and/or promoting hoaxes speaks for itself. It's like the old saying, fool me once...

originally posted by: everyone
a reply to: draknoir2

My comment obviousy goes both ways not trying to persuade anyone of one thing, no bias. The 2 replies i got to it (yours included) where quite agressive and defensive and biased to the drum off "dont say that! they are hoaxers ,believe me"

That was aggressive?

Probably just seems that way to someone who is on the defensive after aggressively accusing others of beating their bias drum without first checking into it.

a reply to: draknoir2

You do have a tendency towards snide comments, Drak.

Also, why do the hoaxers have anything to do with this image? It originally came from Scott Kelly.

originally posted by: wildespace
It is indeed an illuminated window in the ISS itself: eol.jsc.nasa.gov...

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: draknoir2

You do have a tendency towards snide comments, Drak.

Also, why do the hoaxers have anything to do with this image? It originally came from Scott Kelly.

One person's joke is another persons snide comment. I guess it all depends on how offended you wish to be.

What do the hoaxers have to do with posting a mundane piece of footage hyped as a UFO photographed by an Astronaut [who never mentions it in such a context]? That's what you're asking?

a reply to: draknoir2

Oh, no, you don't offend me personally (many people are too easily bothered, honestly) but it's not hard to see how they could be taken quite negatively.

The issue was using them as a way to dismiss the chance of the image being anything rather than attempting to find the actual truth of the matter. "The hoaxers had this on their website, nothing to see here move along."
Thankfully we did find what it was, though.

This is an Alien/UFO sub forum of a conspiracy website. If anything anyone posts here truly angers anyone then a little perspective is in order, especially considering what's going on in the real world.

Nothing I post here has any anger or malice behind it, and more often than not has some content intended as humorous [subject to interpretation]. If one finds having their statements challenged to be offensive, then they are going to be offended at some point.

originally posted by: draknoir2
This is an Alien/UFO sub forum of a conspiracy website. If anything anyone posts here truly angers anyone then a little perspective is in order, especially considering what's going on in the real world.

Nothing I post here has any anger or malice behind it, and more often than not has some content intended as humorous [subject to interpretation]. If one finds having their statements challenged to be offensive, then they are going to be offended at some point.

I find this post rather offensive.

originally posted by: ngchunter
a reply to: everyone

No need to take anyone's word for it. Look it up. It's true. Their records of producing and/or promoting hoaxes speaks for itself. It's like the old saying, fool me once...

Maybe you should read the message in my post again.

Not sure if I missed it, but why can't Astro-Scott just re-tweet HIS interpretation? I'm sure at the very least he can quickly refute (or confirm) any "ISS overhang equipment" or other plausible explanation.

Instead of allowing all this speculative bantering, why not follow-up your tweet with a quick or since YOU (Scott) took the photo and sent the tweet out in the first place.

And what of NASA? Along with Scott and, now, the MSM grabbing it (with the usual ridicule and snickering), wouldn't it just be easier and mutually beneficial to tell us what the 'official' reaction is? Why stay silent? What good does it do to distribute something like this, ignite a firestorm of inquiry, and then crawl back into your hole (or space station) never to say another word about it?

originally posted by: Outrageo
Not sure if I missed it, but why can't Astro-Scott just re-tweet HIS interpretation? I'm sure at the very least he can quickly refute (or confirm) any "ISS overhang equipment" or other plausible explanation.

Instead of allowing all this speculative bantering, why not follow-up your tweet with a quick

or

since YOU (Scott) took the photo and sent the tweet out in the first place.

And what of NASA? Along with Scott and, now, the MSM grabbing it (with the usual ridicule and snickering), wouldn't it just be easier and mutually beneficial to tell us what the 'official' reaction is? Why stay silent? What good does it do to distribute something like this, ignite a firestorm of inquiry, and then crawl back into your hole (or space station) never to say another word about it?

Perhaps Scott Kelly has more important things to do than to browse the MSM or ATS and offset the hoaxers who claim he posted a UFO? Perhaps NASA itself, for that matter, has better things to do. But hey, feel free to bring it to the attention of the astronaut-of-the-day at either the KSC or JSC visitor center, I'm sure they'd be happy to talk to you on camera and confirm what I have already stated and what Wildespace has already so clearly confirmed. Look at this pic that was taken just moments before the one in Scott's tweet:
eol.jsc.nasa.gov...
Tell me that isn't part of ISS. Specifically it's the window on the Destiny laboratory. You can even seen the same part which is visible in the newer image you've posted above. Now does Scott Kelly really need to waste his time retweeting for all the conspiracy theorists who say otherwise?

originally posted by: [post=20055673]....

And what of NASA? Along with Scott and, now, the MSM grabbing it (with the usual ridicule and snickering), wouldn't it just be easier and mutually beneficial to tell us what the 'official' reaction is? Why stay silent? What good does it do to distribute something like this, ignite a firestorm of inquiry, and then crawl back into your hole (or space station) never to say another word about it?

How many of the NASA and astronaut explanations of the past fifty years have the UFO writers and even mass media published, except to mock? Why should they bother after decades of being steamrollered by hucksters and hoaxers?

I doubt Kelly is even aware of the freak-out that the tinfoilhatters are whipping up over an ordinary space goodnight message.

a reply to: JimOberg

Because a reasonable amount of the time they are worthy of mockery. Wasn't there something about an astronaut seeing something really weird and their explanation was "He got confused and saw a star."?

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: JimOberg

Because a reasonable amount of the time they are worthy of mockery.

Wow. So that is how you treat people who put their lives on the line for the sake of science and humanity. I'm sorry, at my current level of disgust I must check out of the thread before I something that will get me banned. The truth has been found and presented, you can choose to mock it if you wish. It won't make it any less true. For the record, it is my opinion that those who claimed this was a UFO deserve mockery, not Scott Kelly, not any astronaut at all.

You seem to have completely misunderstood what I was saying, as I was talking about mocking certain utterly ridiculous explanations, not NASA or the astronauts themselves.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: JimOberg

Because a reasonable amount of the time they are worthy of mockery. Wasn't there something about an astronaut seeing something really weird and their explanation was "He got confused and saw a star."?

I'm open to discussing a few specific examples of this. WHICH explanation for 'space UFO' claims do you think deserves mockery?

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
You seem to have completely misunderstood what I was saying, as I was talking about mocking certain utterly ridiculous explanations, not NASA or the astronauts themselves.

And I want a few documented examples, not your vague recollections. Please show me.

Hmm, I may have to retract my statement as I'm having quite some difficulty actually finding anything I feel is reliable. This has some interesting stuff, though I feel the site is a bit biased.

Assuming the Hubble Repair thing is true, "They were actually inside the shuttle" seems like a pretty lame excuse.

I'll have to retract for now, though. Didn't manage to find anything.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
Hmm, I may have to retract my statement as I'm having quite some difficulty actually finding anything I feel is reliable. This has some interesting stuff, though I feel the site is a bit biased.

Assuming the Hubble Repair thing is true, "They were actually inside the shuttle" seems like a pretty lame excuse.

I'll have to retract for now, though. Didn't manage to find anything.

If I come across excessively hard-a$$ on this it's because I've known astronauts who died because unusual stuff outside was NOT seen and identified in time to use the warning to avert or evade catastrophe. Everything weird is NOT easily explainable or brush-offable. So 'noise' that masks or distracts from finding the nuggets of vital information adds to the danger of space flight.

Those 'nuggets' could conceivably be even more important in terms of scientific discovery. When I worked there we disregarded or concealed NOTHING, since there was always the potential of valuable realizations.

I'm glad you and others are watching and tagging apparent weirdnesses, the regular staff is supposed to but they - WE -- have missed stuff in the past, and friends died.

Just explaining. Don't let me discourage you. Look, wonder, warn, question. Thanks for your pushiness and candor -- those are traits of a good flight control teammate.

Still, I gotta admit, 'fishing boats' SOUNDS pretty ridiculous as an explanation. It WAS accurate, but still....