NASA is studying UFOs again

originally posted by: easynow
a reply to: JimOberg

Where is NASA's unidentified objects pie chart that reflects the real world ?
Why is NASA immune from the UAP phenomena ?

We're going around in circles, I'm asking for verifiable NASA--possessed evidence and I keep getting whines about how 'the dog ate my homework'. Sigh.

a reply to: JimOberg


Wouldn't evidence like what your asking for be secret classified information ?


Are you asking people to post secret classified info ?

a reply to: easynow

So you've got nothing to offer. Shocker.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: easynow
a reply to: JimOberg

Where is NASA's unidentified objects pie chart that reflects the real world ?
Why is NASA immune from the UAP phenomena ?

We're going around in circles, I'm asking for verifiable NASA--possessed evidence and I keep getting whines about how 'the dog ate my homework'. Sigh.

And many people are 'NASA-possessed', but they have no verifiable evidence, either!

originally posted by: easynow

Did you notice the narrator has trouble expressing a coherent explanation? It's like "The telephone game" in overdrive, what he says is so distorted.

"When flying through Earth's shadow between the sun...eh...between the Earth and the sun, the spacecraft passed through the Earth's shadow and the crew saw a bright light in the middle of the darkened Earth..."

The Earth doesn't cast any shadow between the Earth and the sun, so that makes no sense. Maybe he meant in the Earth's shadow between the earth and the moon?

This is a reflection of a bright object behind me called a "glory" that I've seen many times (the sun in this case), so maybe what they saw was a similar glory phenomenon except the moon was behind them so the moon was the source of the reflection instead of the sun like in this image?

earthsky.org...

I think that more or less fits the astronaut's description that there was a weather system where they saw the reflection, so it would be the droplets of water in the weather system doing the reflecting.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

What's more interesting is the photograph they use, which doesn't exist. The crew describe the phenomenon as being 'about the size of Venus', so not as big as portrayed. It's almost as if people fabricate evidence to suit their narrative...

a reply to: turbonium1

For once you're right. No-one has seen aliens.

However, HG Wells published War of the Worlds in 1898, so the idea of alien life and spaceships was a thing in the 19th century.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Dick Gordon explained this to me in detail, he said the light turned out to be a reflection of the moon [behind them] off the Indian Ocean [ahead of them] while they were in Earth's shadow on final descent to splashdown. They couldn't see the moon itself. The geometry turned out to perfectly match what they had seen. I have no explanation for the confusion of the commentator.

originally posted by: JimOberg
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Dick Gordon explained this to me in detail, he said the light turned out to be a reflection of the moon [behind them] off the Indian Ocean [ahead of them] while they were in Earth's shadow on final descent to splashdown. They couldn't see the moon itself. The geometry turned out to perfectly match what they had seen. I have no explanation for the confusion of the commentator.

OK now you have a mystery to solve Jim.

According to you, Dick Gordon told you it was a reflection of the moon off the Indian Ocean.
According to the astronaut in the video who I think is Pete Conrad, it was a reflection of the moon off of some clouds in a weather system.

The Indian Ocean is not made of clouds, so those two explanations are not in agreement. Maybe the resolution could be as simple as it was reflecting off of some clouds above the Indian Ocean, but, if that's what happened, either Dick Gordon or you omitted a critical part of the explanation.

The "glory" reflection of the sun I posted above is a reflection that happens when there are clouds, so I was posting that as an example of a type of reflection that might be be consistent with Pete Conrad's explanation of a reflection off of some clouds, except for the reflection source being the moon instead of the sun. It wouldn't explain the reflection off the Indian Ocean and in fact there would need to be clear skies to reflect off the ocean itself, so in that sense there is a significant contradiction between Pete Conrad's "clouds" explanation, and the "no clouds" explanation you recall from Dick Gordon, although they are both consistent in saying the moon is the source of the reflection. But reflected off of what? The stories don't agree.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: Arbitrageur

What's more interesting is the photograph they use, which doesn't exist. The crew describe the phenomenon as being 'about the size of Venus', so not as big as portrayed. It's almost as if people fabricate evidence to suit their narrative...

So are you saying the photo shown in the video is entirely unrelated? Maybe an artist's impression, or a lens flare shot? And there's no photo of the "venus sized" light they saw?

a reply to: Arbitrageur

As far as Conrad and Gordon's recollection is concerned, I suspect Gordon's is more likely.

Here's the transcript at that point (irrelevant bits removed):

history.nasa.gov...

241:27:03 Conrad: Houston, 12. We - we're better night-adapted now, and by golly, we can see India, and we can see the Red Sea, and we can see the Indian Ocean quite early. It's amazing how well we can see, for that matter. We can see Burma and the clouds going around the coastline of Burma, and we can see Africa and the Gulf of Aqaba; it looks like the same photograph Dick and I took on [Gemini] 11.

...

241:29:32 Conrad: I can tell you, there's a couple of ripdoozer thunderstorms down there that are really - really letting go.
241:29:40 Weitz: From what can you see of the geography there, can you tell where the thunderstorms are, Pete?
241:29:46 Conrad: Okay. I'll give you a fix on this one that is really bright.

241:30:04 Conrad: I'm going to give you a fix and say that it's about 2,300 miles to the southwest of the tip of India. There seems to be a weather system out there, and it's got thunderstorms all the way along it.
241:30:28 Weitz: Roger, 12.
241:30:52 Conrad: It's - Venus is just below the Earth, and we can see Venus quite clearly, well, you can see all kinds of stars, but Venus is just below the Earth. This is - This is really a sight to behold, to see it at night time like this.
241:31:10 Weitz: Roger.

...

241:32:10 Weitz: Hello, 12; Houston. For your information, weather does not have any surface reports from that region, but the satellite picture does show quite extensive cloud coverage of the area you're reporting the lightning.
241:32:26 Conrad: Okay. I got a - Unfortunately, we've got our Earth map stashed away. I wish I had it out. I'm not sure that I'm giving you the absolute exact location. And the other thing is, it looks like, just north of India and I'd say all up through China and Russia, if that's what we're looking at, the whole area in there looks like it is completely covered with clouds.
241:32:54 Weitz: Roger. Understand, Pete.
241:33:04 Conrad: Also, also, right in the center of the Earth now, we have some real bright light shining, staying on - that - that Dick's looking at with the monocular. It's really bright.
241:33:20 Weitz: Roger. Understand. Does it appear to be coming from your nadir point, which should be just off the Eastern coast of India now?
241:33:28 Conrad: Yes. Looks like it's coming just about out of the center of what we're looking at. I would say south of Burma and east of India.
241:33:39 Weitz: Roger. That's just about your nadir. [Long pause.]
241:34:11 Conrad: I can't imagine what that is.
241:34:21 Weitz: We can't either. We're checking for possibilities.
241:34:27 Conrad: It's a steady light, and it appears in size to be as big as any of the thunderstorms flashing.
241:34:39 Bean: Yes. It's as big as Venus at least. [Long pause.]

Here's what they would have been looking at:

I did that in Celestia, but someone else has simulated it:

vimeo.com...

and here's the weather satellite from about 5 hours earlier of the region around India:

It's not impossible for the moon to reflect off cloud systems, and there clearly were some in the region, but I wonder if Conrad is conflating his recollection of seeing thunderstorms and the reflected moonlight. It's perfectly possible that two different 'experts' gave perfectly reasonable explanations to each of them and they are both accurately reporting what they were told. Either could be right.

In terms of the photographic record, this is the magazine in question:

www.lpi.usra.edu...

There is nothing like the image they show, neither is it in the 16mm footage:



It's a shame they weren't given better camera settings by Houston (they were quite annoyed about that) - the 'eclipse' event was anticipated but no-one thought to tell them what settings to use, or give them specific film for it. Venus is definitely in the photographs they took (possibly Jupiter as well) but they've had to allow for the bright sun's "diamond ring".


Edited to add: The ocean reflection explanation is referenced briefly here

www.nasa.gov...

Unfortunately, they had no color film left for still photography, but used the 16 mm film camera to capture color images of the eclipse. As their eyes adapted to the dark portion of the Earth, they made out landmasses such as India and even city lights. In the center of the Earth’s dark disc they reported seeing a large bright circle that turned out to be the glint of the full Moon reflecting off the Indian Ocean

Other space agencies use the ISS, and other space agencies have missions in space. Probably a big waste of time trying to get NASA to discuss UFOs. Maybe we should look into the other agencies.

originally posted by: game over man
... Probably a big waste of time trying to get NASA to discuss UFOs. .

What exactly do you think NASA would say if they were allowed?

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: game over man
... Probably a big waste of time trying to get NASA to discuss UFOs. .

What exactly do you think NASA would say if they were allowed?

Maybe they would tell the truth, who knows?

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

Maybe they would tell the truth, who knows?

How would you recognize the truth?

You didn't fall for that 'National Enquirer' fairy tale about aliens welcoming Apollo-11, did you?

Unfortunately, to know the truth is to see it yourself in order to know. Unless you see zig zaging 'star' in a night sky back in 70s, no way you can convince anyone. I mean, it is not the matter of 'believe'.

Jim,

Forgive my ignorance, but I'm not sure about your general stance on UFO's/UAP's. Do you believe some of them may involve non-human intelligences, or just as of yet unknown atmospheric phenomenon, pilot error, planets, satellites, etc.?

It's an honest question on my part. Not trying to stir up anything.

In this topic, you somewhat show mr Hyde, while you usually conduct yourself as Dr. Jekyll.

a reply to: Skeletonized


Stock answer....

It’s not intelligence level that I’ve realized is the major barrier to public authentic assessment of these outer space scenes – it’s lack of effective awareness of really how unearthly, alien, and counter-intuitive counter-instinctual the new space environment really looks. That’s why I wrote my “99 FAQs About Space UFO Videos” essay several years ago, based on my 20+ years inside Mission Control in Houston, and my personal fascination with the amazing UFO stories associated on the internet with space flight.



Please, for the special insights it can give you to break free of earthbound perceptual patterns, see it here --



www.jamesoberg.com...

originally posted by: easynow
According to the discussion in this video, NASA is now investigating UFOs again.


@1:20 "They're looking into it"


NASA Administrator Bill Nelson on CNN about recent UFO Sightings
Link - www.youtube.com...



Aren't UFO objects a launch and flight safety risk ?


If so, how is it possible they actually stopped investigating the UAP phenomena ?

What this really means after decades of NASA pooh-poohing the UFO subject, is that they simply are not competent to "look in" to the UFO subject.

The Pentagon suddenly comes clean with a few statements verifying some things, and NASA is going to look into it again?

NASA is in the business of building and flying earthly space craft and using that as a tool to learn new science. You can't get a job at NASA investigating UFO's.

This is all just a preliminary public relations program because of all this new stuff coming out. The military side of NASA remains classified and that side's UFO information remains secret.

80+ years of UFO reports but NASA has never reported any.

zero, none, nada, zippo



Why is NASA immune from the UAP phenomena ?