Ok, lets hear the UFO debunkers debunk this one.

Also not shown on this video (but was shown on the Science Channel program) was a zoom in on the original HD footage of those objects. The Pixels showed something that looked like wings flapping.

It reminded me of the objects NASA called "Moon Pigeons".

Hey Op, didnt work out as well as you planned eh?

originally posted by: nOraKat
Also not shown on this video (but was shown on the Science Channel program) was a zoom in on the original HD footage of those objects. The Pixels showed something that looked like wings flapping.

Now you are making things up.

The farther it gets behind the station it looks higher because of the curvature of the earth. Simple really just take in the point of view angle.

originally posted by: nOraKat
Why are they all the same size?

How do you know that they all have the "same size"? In the photo below, the girl and the Tower of Pisa also have (almost) the "same size"...

haha......... that's cool.
& jiggidy jiggidy......

It's those damn lizards leaving The Earth , now Brexit has finally established !

a reply to: elevenaugust

Bad argument.

3 pieces of ice.. you win.

lol.

originally posted by: kuraijanai2013
No serious debate just ice as an explanation. What happend to my beloved ATS??

What debate are you looking for? It's a crappy video that shows what is most likely ice.

I mean.... It could be anything really...

a reply to: nOraKat

I don't think it was ice. I'm not %100 sure that they're extraterrestrial, but they are definitely UFOs. Also, don't feed the trolls by asking to be debunked. S&F for bravery!

Could be bubbles (in a large tank of water), is it so improbable a conspiracy for NASA to be a mostly fake organisation/front for some true 'space' travels and 'probes' at the irreconcilable limits we face before us above our heads.

ISS fishcam vs. real deal with all the problems and impossible decisions you'd have to make just to keep the real thing 'afloat' in that region of space around the Earth, with many people on-board. NASA probably faked moon landing, and look at some early footage of space walks and you'll see something more resembling puppetry.

The truth is we haven't necessarily been 'outer' space, but things from the other side, the 'outside' come 'inside' of our Earth space (see extra/inter dimensional entities, demons, angels, Watchers, Archons, elves, greys, etc.) The truth is we live in an artificial bubble of sorts, with various subjective agents having their own individual stakes in certain events that take place on this free (yet predetermined) plane of reality. But they are not so different from us, they on some level *are* us, unconsciously, and they are us in the state in which perhaps we created/are creating the legal framework for this physical, material reality.

I think for the most part we do not have contact with these versions of ourselves (often for the better due to their own internal conflicting fantasies) but at times we can open the door for these semi-embodied spirit extensions to extrude into our physical or psychical spaces in several levels of intensity. We can open 'gaps' with psychic energy in which allow certain extra-dimensional 'things' to hook into said cut or gap in the texture of reality and, at least for a short time, manifest themselves in mask-like forms made out of magically crude versions of the 'real thing' as they could feasibly operate in our dimensions, ranging from the 'cartoony' to the flesh and hair and teeth of the wild stitched together into a mishmash abortion of an entity of which should not be able to exist. But let's also look at UFOs in this light, the UFO is not made up of a substance. It is made up of a substance "X" which is always, necessarily, undefined and undefinable. it defies physics, its an element we haven't described, it's not even a physical surface its made up of scalar plasma fields etc.

The UFO is a 'pretend' spaceship that nevertheless works as a space (and time) ship. However there does seem to be some limitations on the duration in which these other-spacely entities can come and visit us. If they are trapped here they tend to not live too long either, at least in my layman's research on the ufo subject. There seem to be many 'rules' for these entities but maybe each species has their own systems.

a reply to: nOraKat

I have a problem with this footage because the curvature of the earth is not visable the way shown from ISS. ISS flies too low unless using some fisheye lens.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

a reply to: zatara

It's a crappy video ..

Well its only the live simulcast High Definition camera feed from the ISS.

Its blurry because:

a) it is zoomed in to a quadrant of the video image so we can try and see it better. The original video image as a whole is sharp as can be.

b) This is a Youtuber who probably got a copy of a copy to do his own narrative over it. The video shown on the Science Channel show - NASA's Unexplained Files (in HD) was much a much better quality than this Youtube video. Like I said, it was the best one I could find without spending too much time looking for it.

a reply to: kuraijanai2013

No serious debate just ice as an explanation. What happend to my beloved ATS??

Quite right. The spaceship on the left is a model YKK Turbo-Star 9000 from Epsilon Indi piloted by a Hrragha named Bosqo Xrvl. The one on the far right is a Nazi Hannebau Vrilshiff from Antarctica carrying Martin Bormann and two of Hitler's clones to the secret Nazi base on Mars. The one in the middle is just a piece of ice. Prove me wrong.

Non-changing trajectory.. constant speed.. tiny white dots that look like they are tumbling in space.. coming from a starkly white background into the black of space so you can't really see where they came from.. how could you NOT come to the conclusion that they are probably ice?

Even videos with tiny white objects making a single change in trajectory and increase in speed (i.e. thruster firing) are.. ice. Here is something I feel actually has merit. Because in a pattern like this.. some ice doesn't slow down.. while some speeds up.. and stops.. to form a circle. And then one stops directly in the middle and lights up. This imo.. is the sort of video that should be discussed and dissected.

definitely looks like ice to me

a reply to: fleabit

Because in a pattern like this.. some ice doesn't slow down.. while some speeds up.. and stops.. to form a circle. And then one stops directly in the middle and lights up.

I don't see anything change direction, slow down, speed up or stop in that clip. "Directly in the middle", not so much, but it doesn't move to that location and stop. It becomes illuminated there.

It seems to me that the shadow of the shuttle has moved as the ship revolves around the Earth (as the shadow of a sundial moves as the Earth rotates beneath the Sun), allowing particles which were not illuminated to become so.


Have you watched the longer clip? Yours is a very select portion of it.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: fleabit

Because in a pattern like this.. some ice doesn't slow down.. while some speeds up.. and stops.. to form a circle. And then one stops directly in the middle and lights up.

I don't see anything change direction, slow down, speed up or stop in that clip. "Directly in the middle", not so much, but it doesn't move to that location and stop. It becomes illuminated there.

It seems to me that the shadow of the shuttle has moved as the ship revolves around the Earth (as the shadow of a sundial moves as the Earth rotates beneath the Sun), allowing particles which were not illuminated to become so.


Have you watched the longer clip? Yours is a very select portion of it.

Yes, the uncut version (posting shorter due to ADD forum). And I am not saying it's proof of anything. I am saying that those objects have mass (shadows), they form a circle, the center object lights up.. and simply is due more investigation than a clip of a few tiny white dots tumbling off into space. And if a light source was produced to brighten objects of same material and near-equal size (and they are oddly all very close in size), they should all light up equally or near-enough once subjected to the light. The center object lights up brightly, the others do not. Coincidence? Perhaps.. but again.. the center object is the one that lit up.

Just saying.. investigate the stuff that has some merit. Reminds me of the thread about a stupid white umbrella in someone's back yard. That thread went on for.. I don't know, over 100 pages? While some threads with excellent content and a lot of work put into them, fades off after a few pages of comments.

a reply to: fleabit

I am saying that those objects have mass (shadows), they form a circle, the center object lights up..

They don't have shadows, unless you are talking about artifacts produced by the low light camera.
They form a "circle" only if your standards are flexible.
As far as "in the center", see the above sentence.