Wouldn't this be dead set proof of Life in space? If this isn't proof in plain sight.... I don't

Originally posted by DodgeG1
I can see why some people would think that these are UFO's flying infront of the camera's.

But could it not just be asteroids or something similar to that floating about in space

Could be, but I'm not sure how well asteroids show up in the Ultra Violet spectrum. I'm almost certain they wouldn't pulsate. And if they are asteroids, there's a whole hell of a lot of them that show up all of a sudden at once.

Anyway, I'm drawn to the conclusion that this is SOMETHING other than space debris. But, a UFO that's like 2 miles wide?! It's very possible, but damn if they out there rolling in such fine craft, I wish they'd let us take a gander at them. Take us for a ride!

But, I got to point out (because everyone always busts my chops when I repost subjects) that these anomolies have been discusses multiple times. Here's a few threads:



www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

By the way, check out this video:

Google Video Link

whoops, LoDGiKaL already beat me to it...

Originally posted by LoDGiKaL
the physicist you are refereing to I believe is David Sereda.

And these are propably the video's where mentioned info came from.

hmm, part 1 doesn't seem to be available anymore, anyway, this is part 2.




you know what to look for if your interested.

gr.

thank lodgikal, yes that was the video i was talking about.

i looked last night and could not find it,

did you search for it or did you know the guy i was t talking about?


i suck at search engines.

Originally posted by DodgeG1
I can see why some people would think that these are UFO's flying infront of the camera's.

But could it not just be asteroids or something similar to that floating about in space

Since when do astroids look like Light beings? UFO ? Round cylinder shpaed perfectly proportioned with even a pattern to its structure. lol ASTROIDS

I think NASA should Catch one of them to show us all that it is in fact debris they speak of because if it were a type of space debris then they should have no problem capturing one in some kinda device? right?

You know these objects we see in these videos could be some sort of energy like being that is just part of space like a creature of some sort or a space micro organism I mean if space is as big as they say it is with all teh different galaxies and so forth these UFO would be lil specs in a microscope wouldn't you say?
Even in old pictures by Buzz Aldrin or Neil Armstriong in this video here he talks about how he saw a UFO during his appallo 11 mission, he also took numerous photographs of these objects for others to see some Neil Armstrong also took pictures of these
ufo that are very simular to the ones in the videos.



Also in appollo mission's you can see where NASA refrences these flashing light objects and they even refer to them As a UFO Read Conversations of Capcom and Appollo crew members

It is too bad NASA and our government couldn't just tell the truth allready, I see no point in hiding truth other than for simple control purposes. I hate being misinformed, I hate how society is built apon ignorance, Ignorance Kills.

This is what you call the UFO smoking gun? Is this serious? Please take the time to educate yourselves in basic astronomy before making such lewd claims. While spectacular, this is by no means proof of et's.

fibre cable exploded i guess that would produce some debris. David Sereda is a total crank. This is the guy who claims to have received alien visions since he was 8 and is in possesion of flying saucer blue prints....

he's also promoting the infamous lake erie footage on his new DVD as proof of aliens. That footage was shown to be a hoax here on ATS and the offending user banned.

Anyone else think it looks like a top-down view of an intergalactic highway?

Originally posted by coronamoz
This is what you call the UFO smoking gun? Is this serious? Please take the time to educate yourselves in basic astronomy before making such lewd claims. While spectacular, this is by no means proof of et's.

Please take the time to watch all videos in this thread, then make judgment, it is only relevant.

[edit on 103030p://upFriday by seridium]

Originally posted by Karilla
The tether incident. For those who insist on the swarming objects being debris, I have some questions. Why do they come from all directions. Why do they have different speeds?

Hard to imagine all of the dynamic variables involved when the tether snapped, but I would posit that each individual piece of debris would have been affected by the force of tether snapping individually, hence each particle would and could have its own speed and trajectory after the snap. Some would move quickly from the source of force, some slower, depending on how the force affected each tiny piece independantly.

Imagine throwing a baseball at a plate of glass. Slow it down from real time. All of those shards of glass are not moving at the same speed or travelling in the same direction. There are are nearly incalculable variations involved that send each tiny piece off on its own path and speed sometimes being affected by the path and speed of other objects involved in the breakage. This will send pieces of into directions different from their original paths due to post breakage collisions with other particles.

Why do some flash?

Some flash because there are more than likely some particles that have right angled surfaces on them. When the sunlight or lights from the shuttle hit those flat surface, viola! -a flash. This is very amplified by the fact that this is being viewd in an IR camera, I believe.

Where did the debris come from? The conductor cable joing the tether to the shuttle fried and snapped. Why all the debris?

The frying and consequent snapping of the tether or its anchor will create a LOT of particulate matter and this is relative to what the tether/anchor is made out of. Under normal conditions using standard cameras, none of this would be seen due to the lack of enhancement or looking into the IR band. Using IR would very much so amplify any passive and reflective light within its field of view and would also distort what you are viewing to a degree, depending on its reflectivity properties and the intensity of the light hitting it. I using nightvision on a weekly basis and it does the exact (although much weaker) same thing. Vision through night vision (using IR enhancement) is always distorted in one fashion or another.

I have a question or two about these objects -

What is the reason that these objects all have the same orientation to the camera? Shouldnt some of these objects, if they are scout ships from Reticuli or some similar type of craft, be coming at the camera? At 45 deg. angles? Edge on to the camera? Doing flips? Making some sweeping turns while in view or even dead stopping and changing direction in the cameras view? Or not moving at all? Is it a requirement that these objects must be in motion at all times? Can they not calculate relative position and simply pace the shuttle? Shoot we can do that and we're not that smart. Seems like there is no rhyme or reason to the massive amount of motion being seen in these vids. Seems chaotic and uncontrolled, maybe the result of a chaotic and uncontrolled event? Why is it that most of these objects have the exact same shape and are all either oriented topside of disc or bottomside of disc towards the camera (I use the term "disc" here very loosely)? Are they 2 dimensional and have no other profile?

The very the mundane trying to be explained away as they very fantastic. Such as it is in the world of UFO research eh? And BTW, I do think that there have been/are unknown craft/beings here on Earth, I simply dont use that as an excuse to explain off anything that at first look appears to be unusual as fantastico. Earthly explanations are best used first until there is true evidence of the fantastic. (which in this world appears to have become relative to the observer, didnt know that could work, it doesnt in the court of law)

[edit on 8-6-2007 by Lost_Mind]

Originally posted by sostyles

Originally posted by NGC2736
I think the problem is that once these 'experts' get good at their craft, they feel the need to [rove it by not ever finding something they couldn't have done themselves. It's just a way to impress everyone with their skill.

I agree!

Well, one very simple way to shut up the "experts" is to provide them with unimpeachable evidence that leads to a logical proof of your assertion. There may be a few folks out there who won't listen to reason, just like there are a few folks out there who see alien castles in every lump of dirt on Mars, or intelligently guided alien probes in every bit of frozen pee floating around the Space Station.

You just can't point at some fuzzy video and proclaim it to be proof positive of life in space. In fact, about the only thing you can say for sure about the little blobs is that they're in space. How big are they? What are they made of? Those are a couple of answers you could provide that might help prove your claim.

Yeah, it's easy to be skeptical (recognizing that there is a difference between a skeptic and a debunker) because factual information is so lacking.

As far as the plate glass analogy, indeed there would be large amounts of particles flying around, but you would normally expect them to fly AWAY from the impact, not away from it and then back again, particularly in a vacuum. At the start of the video linked above you can see the end of the tether as it coils under the inertial differences along its length. All debris originating from this will do one of two things, remain floating in the local area if their initial velocity and momentum were low, or speed away from the coiling end of the tether if high. What is not possible is for particles to continually swim past from different directions and at different speeds.

Also, how do you get pieces of debris with right-angles from a snapping cable?

The actual markings that you notice are all in the same orientation are, I believe, focal artefacts. Without being familiar with the shuttle's on-board cameras I can't say for sure, but the same artefacts can be seen with out-of-focus objects using some lenses and particularly telescopes. Mirror lenses (out-moded telefoto lenses that shortened their physical length while maximising focal length) turn points of light into halos when blurred.

Also, given the fact that the tether, which is 12 miles long, appears to be far wider than it should, how can you tell whether all of the objects' flightpaths are exactly perpendicular to the camera?

In the video when they zoom in on that teather it is 100's of miles away from the area where it broke away from you can clearly see them zoom in. So why would the debris fly around it ? and keep following it, makes 0 sense to me when labeled as debris. It is such a coff out, for real explanation

And the debris spoken of in the teather video is the same so called debris as everyone labels it , but what is the debris doing here?vid here

Here is a working better video it seems most videos i posted from youtube.com are not working anymore GO FIGURE?

STS 80 Same type of Debris/Craft/UFO formation over Africa, how can you say this is debris im bemused...STS-80 High res

Since all vids wont load on my end mybe they wont load for you so you can view them here also.
STS-80 all vids here

[edit on 023030p://upFriday by seridium]

Originally posted by Karilla
As far as the plate glass analogy, indeed there would be large amounts of particles flying around, but you would normally expect them to fly AWAY from the impact, not away from it and then back again, particularly in a vacuum.

Yes, the analogy is in an environment with gravity, atmosphere and its pressure. Remove those items and things get a little screwy. The force of the coil snapping occured for all practical purposes within the confines of a cylinder (a cable or bolt or rod). Any failure in an object like that would scatter in a 360 deg. pattern for the most part. Imagine the center of the cylinder with an explosive material replacing the actual steel. This explosive material represents the force of the failure. Now detonate the explosive. The material will radiate out from the point of failure.

At the start of the video linked above you can see the end of the tether as it coils under the inertial differences along its length. All debris originating from this will do one of two things, remain floating in the local area if their initial velocity and momentum were low, or speed away from the coiling end of the tether if high. What is not possible is for particles to continually swim past from different directions and at different speeds.

That really depends on the amount of force involved with the snapping of the tether. Inertia would be relative to the force involved. 12 miles long and high tensile strength would tell me that this was a very explosive separation unless some kind of failsafe was implemented. A lot of these particles would nearly endlessly be richocheting off of the cargo bay, its contents and doors of the shuttle sending them every imaginable direction, inertia be damned.

Also, how do you get pieces of debris with right-angles from a snapping cable?

Metal can be coaxed to do some funny things. Heard of John Hutchinson? Metal in a melted state without heat, merging of unlike materials like wood and aluminum and so on and so on. Once the metal has cooled in the -300 deg. F. shade of the cargo bay or shadow of the shuttle all kinds of shinies could come about. If the metal snapped in the cold side of space it would create some unusual shapes, I would, say from quick cooling process.

The actual markings that you notice are all in the same orientation are, I believe, focal artefacts. Without being familiar with the shuttle's on-board cameras I can't say for sure, but the same artefacts can be seen with out-of-focus objects using some lenses and particularly telescopes. Mirror lenses (out-moded telefoto lenses that shortened their physical length while maximising focal length) turn points of light into halos when blurred.

I agree with this 100%. That is why the objects in the STS 80 vids look identical to these in the tether video. Same camera. Same IR enhancements. Same effect.

Also, given the fact that the tether, which is 12 miles long, appears to be far wider than it should, how can you tell whether all of the objects' flightpaths are exactly perpendicular to the camera?

I admit it is very hard to visually separate the enhanced light emitted from the debris and the massive amount of enhanced light from the tether itself. I am trying to find examples of similar effects of light sources merging and rendering perspective useless but this might take some time for it is the weekend and I must play. Anyone else wants to take that torch feel free to. Basically the overt brightness of the tether being observed in its IR enhanced state overpowers or obliterates the effectiveness of the comparatively minute light relfecting from the debris nearly rendering the perspective on the two objectS in close visual proximity to each other extremely hard to determine.

[edit on 8-6-2007 by Lost_Mind]

Looks like proof to me. What I find interesting are the patterns/shapes within the larger object. It almost looks like surface corridors on the ship. (such as those on the Death Star from SW) The fact that it pulses and doesn't move in a straight line. Come on, if the guys from NASA don't know what it is, of course they will call it space debris. It seems to me that space debris would just move past in a line, rather than all around the boom from many directions and speeds.

For anyone claiming these are just debris out of focus. Do you have any sense of reality? If these debris were floating around unguided, the space shuttle wouldn't even be able to return with this video or even shoot it. Those are clearly gigantic mother ships, probably controlled by the grays.

[edit on 6/8/2007 by Amazon Lights]

[edit on 6/8/2007 by Amazon Lights]

Originally posted by Lost_Mind
Hard to imagine all of the dynamic variables involved when the tether snapped, but I would posit that each individual piece of debris would have been affected by the force of tether snapping individually, hence each particle would and could have its own speed and trajectory after the snap. Some would move quickly from the source of force, some slower, depending on how the force affected each tiny piece independantly.

The tether that was being filmed was aprox. 8 miles or so from the camera was it not? Once something in space is set in motion it continues to travel in set directions unless it is affected by something else. I don't understand how this debris can be from a tether snap that has had the time to drift out 8 miles. Why does the deris tend to come from all directions? The tether snap occured in one place. When debris from the point at which the tether snapped drifts out into space, that's exactly where it's going; out into space ... not this way and that way and back this way again. Even if the debris is colliding with other debris, it should still, even if multiple collisions occur, continue to seperate farther and farther apart, rather than stay confined to a certain area in space (in front of the camera's zoomed in field of vision). That debris is akin to Oswalds "Magic Bullet".

What is the reason that these objects all have the same orientation to the camera?

For the same reason the UFO's seen by witnesses seem to disappear or appear. And for the same reason these are showing up in IR. I would guess they have some sort of cloaking device to hide their presence. I would guess that rather than "hugging" the craft it would be easier for this cloak or shield to be spherical in shape rather that ellipical. To me the pulsing is an indication that there is some sort of energy signature coming from the craft.

These are all just theories. I'm not saying I'm dead set that these anomolies are space craft, but I find it just as hard, if not harder to believe that this is debris.

Originally posted by yuefo
At 4:55, direct your attention to the PULSATING object that enters from the lower left portion of the screen. It travels up above the tether and hovers vertical to the tip. Then, it proceeds straight down to the bottom of the screen.
www.youtube.com...

I need to quote myself here as reiteration. In this link, the video quality is such that you can clearly see dozens of objects pass behind the tether.

But let's set that aside. The debris theorists MUST explain how at least one of those objects makes a complete circuit around the tether (please see 4:55 above) or explain the physics involved in a debris particle changing direction in space. And please note that the old "shuttle thrusters" explanation won't work since they would alter the trajectory of all the objects, not just the one. There's no point in going around in circles about this until the skeptics reply to this one issue.

Originally posted by yuefo

Originally posted by yuefo
At 4:55, direct your attention to the PULSATING object that enters from the lower left portion of the screen. It travels up above the tether and hovers vertical to the tip. Then, it proceeds straight down to the bottom of the screen.
www.youtube.com...

I need to quote myself here as reiteration. In this link, the video quality is such that you can clearly see dozens of objects pass behind the tether.

But let's set that aside. The debris theorists MUST explain how at least one of those objects makes a complete circuit around the tether (please see 4:55 above) or explain the physics involved in a debris particle changing direction in space. And please note that the old "shuttle thrusters" explanation won't work since they would alter the trajectory of all the objects, not just the one. There's no point in going around in circles about this until the skeptics reply to this one issue.

It's just an illusion. They are separate particles moving in opposite directions, where the angle reflected light only makes them appear to be one object changing directions. This sort of thing can be expected when you're looking at white dots against a black background with no reference at all for distance or size or even the shapes of individual particles.

All of this discussion of the possible intelligent movement of frozen pee in space is completely repetitive and pointless when you can't tell how far away or how big anything is.

And besides, it's up to the people claiming these things are somehow intelligently guided craft to prove their assertion, not for others to try to come up with a possible explanation for some curious behavior. Because at this point "I don't know" is still a thousand times better answer than "These are alien UFOs from Zeta Reticuli," or whatever else such ridiculous nonsense.

Positive proof. Got any?

Originally posted by SuicideVirus
It's just an illusion. They are separate particles moving in opposite directions, where the angle reflected light only makes them appear to be one object changing directions.

C'mon man, did you actually watch the object I'm talking about? There was no illusory switch. The exact same pulsating object clearly changes direction. Yeesh.