It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Alien Existence - Evidence: NASA Footage

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:31 AM
Hey huys, I'm new on ATS, I have been using science and philosophy forums, as I am after a more civilized and intelligent conversation. I've been really into the Alien thing lately, but my threads always get closed for rediculous reasons, I found this website, and it looked great, so I'm going to give it a go, it will be nice to have people that are more on my level when it comes to this subject. Anyways, I posted the following on a science forum, it was even in the pseudoscience section, but got closed instantly, for no apparent reason, but not before one of the moderators replied in attempt to debunk me, everything they said was utterly and completely, scientifically void, and I just couldn't handle the mockery and skepticism anymore, when this is a subject of extreme scientific importance, with profound implifications, in every aspect. So, the following, is exactly what I posted on a few forums, but to no avial, I hope you guys are a bit more enthusiastic about it. I will also, in the near future, be examining, a lot more NASA footage.

OK people, here we go, NASA footage. I have watched "Evidence: The Case for NASA UFO's" and the arguments, analysis, and scientific methods used to eliminate the possibilities of comets, space dust or camera faults are impeccible and fully conclusive. I have found on youtube, two of the most controversial pieces of NASA footage ever captured. The youtube scenes are exactly the same in every way, as the ones on the the film "Evidence: The Case for NASA UFO's" and all other footage I have seen of the exact same scenes, and I have watched these scenes a lot of times, from a lot of different sources (which I encourage), and have shown a lot of people. The question here should not be "is this footage real", I assure you, it is, and NASA will assure you, if you ask someone working there, and the people who watched it live on national television will also tell you it is genuine. The question here should be, "what are these unidentifyable objects", and this has been the question throughout the scientific community since the footage was shown on national television. One thing to remember, is that these crafts are usually only visible within the lower light spectrum (moving towards the higher frequencies), and these NASA cameras are capable of viewing things in these lower spectrums. Also, I highly recommend the skeptics watch "Evidence: The Case for NASA UFO's", you will have an extremely hard time disproving the evidence presented.

The NASA footage:

NASA claims that the objects in the first video are ice crystals glowing in the sun. Ice crystals? How does that work exactly? How about when the camera zooms in, and we can clearly see several of these crafts pass behind the tether? Well, some obviously pass behind the tether, therefor, we can use the tether as a measuring device, and eliminate NASA's most favourate excuse, space debri floating past the camera, and assuming they are right behind the tether, estimates place them between 2-3 miles wide, the largest UFO's captured on NASA footage....I'm not sure what ice crystals look like, but if they do get that big, why do they all look like they are made of energy, why do they pulsate, why do they all look the same, a circle with a black center and a small notch cut out of the side, and why do they appear like this on every piece of NASA footage containing these unidentified objects? That's quiet peculiar...and I'm not sure what crap NASA has come up with for the second video, but why do they not get pulled into the Earths gravitational field, and why do they seem to be doing something intelligent? Notice the one shoot past, close to camera as it moves towards Earth, looks quiet similar to the ones from the first piece of footage doesn't it? They all move into a formation above the Earth and increase their luminosity dramatically...also quite peculiar.

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:33 AM
I assume there are a fair amount of them, because they were swarming the tether, investigating it, NASA also reported that some electronic settings had changed, settings only adjustable by remote control, but lets not get into this. Comets and space crystals shouldn't even be visible in space until they start burning up in our atmosphere, and start letting off light, I assume this is why they are claiming they were ice crystals glowing in sun, one could also say, that's an awful lot of ice crystals floating around, and there are not hundreds, a lot of what you see are stars, you know, the ones that don't move relative to each other...The last point I want to make, is that water, let alone, ice crystals, shouldn't even even exist in space, the extreme radiation from the sun should instantly cause the ice to melt, and vaporize in a furry of nuclear reactions and transmutations.

This footage is from a while ago when they started doing live feeds using the cameras that could see into the lower light spectrum, which these crafts are only visible in, well most of the time, they are highly quantized energy crafts, making them capable of faster than light space travel (if you want a better description of the physics, I suggest you watch the second part of the following videos, might take a while to get to it, these are the the two parts of "Evidence: The Case for NASA UFO's", they are from different sources, so they may overlap slightly). Shortly after these UFO's were shown on national television, NASA stopped doing live feeds...also peculiar.

He's also says his "Galaxy Clock" theory gives insight into the formation of the galaxies, why they have black holes in the center, and why they have the spiraling shape. I do not really understand his theory properly, but I have just found a 60 page PDF file on his theory (to big to attach, so I uploaded it here:, which I have yet to read. It took an abnormal amount of effort to find, as it didn't seem to exist where it supposedly use to be, if you find the page where it is said to be on Google, and chose to view it in HTML, it seems to work, but the last 10 or so pages were missing and the pictures weren't showing, but I eventually found the full PDF version. It isn't actually a PDF format, it is a "P file", not sure what that is, but it works fine in Acrobat Reader.

When the two pieces of contreversial footage I have presented here, are examined by me or other highly trained experts, one conclusion is eminent, these things definitely do have methods of producing propulsion, these things can make intelligent monouvers, and some of these monouvers would produce G forces that would be powerful enough to create nuclear explosion, were these objects made of normal matter. They are infact, highly quantized, existing on a higher wave state, and capable of breaking light speed, and maybe even time. If there were this many objects made of normal matter, floating around space, we would have lost numerous space craft and satellites, and it just wouldn't be safe to travel through space in the way we currently do, not to mention, the mere size of some of these objects would pose extreme danger to Earth. The tether incident was filmed very close to Earth, close enough so that the tether could travel through the Earth's Ionosphere, so why were objects, that are at least 2-3 miles wide, in such vast numbers not being pulled into the Earths atmosphere and impacting the Earth? NASA scientist's have admitted to unidentifiable objects entering the Earths atmosphere, they estimate millions enter the Earths atmosphere every year, yet no satellites ever get struck, nor do such huge objects ever get seen burning up as they enter the Earth's atmosphere, nor do they impact the Earth, the odds against all these things are extreme. It also seems, in the hours of NASA footage where these objects are captured, they always look very similar, heightening the probability that these are Alien space craft, and NASA always makes up some excuse as to what these objects are, and most of these excuses are plain, out right lies, as they are scientifically impossible.

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:08 AM
error editing, see next

[edit on 4/2/09 by depthoffield]

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:09 AM
In fact, the tether incident and similar NASA sightings was fully explained here or there.
They are just ice particles or space debris particles floting around the shuttle. All the "effects" can be logical explained by those little particles, like disk appearance, notches, transparency, changes in trajectory etc etc. All of them. You should really have an open mind and try to understand the facts, physical, optics, gravitational orbital trajectories, camera artifacts etcetera.
Sorry, but david Sereda is a con-man and speculated with relative succes effects visible on movies recorded not easy understandable by people.
This is about.

Look one simple effect, as David Sereda with one CD and a ruler call critical thinkers as "morons" saying "look is moving behind the tether"..

The fact is image artifacts and optical effects can make illusions. How easy is to assume 2..3 miles ships in some airy discs inside the lens.

and look also here:

in fact, there is many topics i believe regarding rational explanations of this. But if someone looks only for 2...3 miles ships, it may miss the real explanations.

[edit on 4/2/09 by depthoffield]

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:11 AM
reply to post by CHA0S

The first video I was kind of sketchy on. But I also did notice the pulsating and the seemingly similar shape they all shared. The second video however, is unmistakeable! No way is that anything other than an intelligent display directed specifically at the shuttle! Excellent videos!
The orator on the second video reminded me of a recent event that we might want to give a bit of focus to. Maybe it was just because of his british accent that i remembered this but the London Times recently gave some attention to a man named David Cameron who happens to be the British Conservative Party Leader and who happens to also want the position of Prime Minister....a position which he is intent on running for. Mr. Cameron has officially declared that if elected he would impose a completely different approach to the topic of ET's and UFO's. The new approach is "To be completely open and frank in sharing any information related to alien-lifeforms." God I hope this guy gets elected!!! Here is the exact quote:
David Cameron vowed today that if he was elected Prime Minister he would bring an end to the era of government secrecy over UFOs and extra-terrestrial activity.

Speaking at one of his “Cameron Direct” public meetings, the Conservative Party leader pledged that a Tory government would be “entirely open and frank” in sharing any information about alien life-forms.

At the meeting in Tynemouth, North-East England, he was questioned about a string of recent mysterious incidents. “I have no idea if there is intelligent life out there,” he replied. “I do believe in freedom of information and openness and this question has been asked from time to time, and I think we should be as open and clear as possible.”

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:23 AM
reply to post by depthoffield

I think you are wrong my friend!

There are many videos showing these same objects, some pulsing, some traveling behind objects etc - some of the nasa footage shows the camera man filming just these objects - why? why would a nasa astronaught be filming ice crystals that lets face it are not just outside the ship but miles away esp seeing as they have to zoom in on some of them? These are not ice crystals with a hole in & a notch , these are not optical illusions either but if thats what you want to believe thats up to you.

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:31 AM
"they are going behind the tether" is precicely the freaking point! This is not an optical illusion, I have read numerous reports, where filmaking experts examine the footage and conclude that it impossible for these to be optical illusions, or "dust" caught in the lens (which I will try and find), and airy disks never look anything like what those look like, plus, the camera zooms in, and these objects grow larger as they zoom in, this will not happen with airy disks, they will just blur more, and these objects are clearly in focus the whole time, the cameras are built to keep things in focus at large distances, as well as objects at close distances, but I think the main give away, it that in the hours of NASA footage, these "objects". always have the same traits, the pulsating, the black hole in the center, the notch in the side, and any moron can see that they are clearly passing behind the tether.

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:37 AM
Of course if those objects are a bit bigger, they become of extreme importance: the big question is: what is this debris, from where was broken, is this jeopardising the mision, the return? This is important. I remember space missions delayed one or more days because of some debris, and delayed until further investigations conclude that it is not important for the mission.
As a conspirative thinkink, look, they filmed alien spaceships! When it films debris, the question is: why they film it, it means is extremely important, they are UFO's"..if they were not purposely filmed debris, then "they know they are UFO's but hide them from public, so they ignore them". Either way... they are UFO's. How easy... But in reality, they can be and are much more trivial phenomenons. But beeing trivial...we don't like them. We want UFO's!

Anyway, debris particles explains ALL the observed effects. And debris is COMMON, is a product of the mission. Like dust in your room at home. Keep studying this explanation, because it really explains all the facts and it is NOT an extraordinary claim. If you believe that those are ALIEN UFO's because defying physical laws...maybe you don't understand well those laws.

Hey, explain the "behing the tether ILLUSION" ("freaking point") in my youtube example before. Can you? You should'n ignore that FACT.

And look at some airy disc here:

[edit on 4/2/09 by depthoffield]

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 10:18 AM
Firstly, the cameras they use a very standard compared to NASA cameras, NASA's are made to ingnore "airy disks", and close objects, like dust floating past the lens, secondly, and more notable, is that these objects are being zoomed in on, as I stated before, and the youtube video you gave, showing an "airy disk", was nothing but the zooming in on a star, which does not show a true airy disk effect. Now, in the first video, the out of focus pin head looks nothing like the objects in the tether incident, but then again, they are not right up, close to the lens, so this just shows that these objects must have been fairly close to the lens, and anything to far away from the lens will be invisible in the blackness of space, and as I said, small, close objects arn't picked up anyway, but if some how they were, they must be very close to the lens, in which case, the zooming and quality of the camera cancels out the possibilty that these are some sort of debri, floating past the lens, because if they were this close, the zooming would have unoticable effects on the size of these particles, and just make them totally invisible in most cases. It just doesn't add up what so ever, and people can try to replicate the effect, and make airy disks look like the objects in the tether incident, but they will never get it, and they don't even look like they are really passing behing the twig in the youtube video, nor are they so defined, and make it so clear, that they are, infact, passing behing the tether.Anyways, I'm tired as hell, I'll get back to you tommorow, if you respond.

[edit on 4/2/09 by CHA0S]

[edit on 4/2/09 by CHA0S]

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 11:41 AM
Very hard to judge a video, that was shot in space, with an eqipment i don't know, in an environment i never saw which makes a claim no scientist up to now officially supports. You know, i am pretty sure about alien presence on earth, its just that i tend in this special case to believe the debunkers.

Just for the reason, that i don't have any knowledge whatsoever in the field in question.

Science is just a bunch of money and status hungry WORKERS, who lost all their idealism in the run for the most obvious interpretation of the most boring things you can possibly imagine. I dislike these guys

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 11:42 AM

Originally posted by CHA0S
...any moron can see that they are clearly passing behind the tether.

Just as any supposed "moron" can see, as the video demonstrated, how a tiny object in the foreground can appear to be larger and move behind a much larger object in the background. This website, obviously staffed by morons, has still frame shoots showing the objects moving in front of the tether, along with a similar optical illusion where it appears the space station in front of the cross-hairs in the space-shuttle's windshields.

If these objects are as big as you claim (2 to 3 miles?) why are they not visible from the ground, when the tether itself was visible?

Originally posted by CHA0S
why do they all look like they are made of energy, why do they pulsate, why do they all look the same, a circle with a black center and a small notch cut out of the side...

It is due to a known phenomenon first described by George Airy.

Originally posted by CHA0S
...and I'm not sure what crap NASA has come up with for the second video...

So you haven't even bothered trying to find other explanations, you just immediately jump to the conclusion aliens are driving the phenomenon. Nor have you bothered to find out what an ice crystal looks like before declaring the NASA explanation bunk.

By the by, before you start implying that people are morons, you might want to try getting some basic facts right...

Originally posted by CHA0S
Comets and space crystals shouldn't even be visible in space until they start burning up in our atmosphere...

Originally posted by CHA0S
last point I want to make, is that water, let alone, ice crystals, shouldn't even even exist in space...

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 12:16 PM

Originally posted by CHA0S
Firstly, NASA's are made to ingnore "airy disks",
the zooming and quality of the camera cancels out the possibilty that these are some sort of debri, floating past the lens, because if they were this close, the zooming would have unoticable effects on the size of these particles, and just make them totally invisible in most cases.

Very wrong! You don't know what are you talking, sorry...

The lens is a lens, they all produce airy discs when objects are out of depth of field interval. I know what you quote here, Sereda with his keys suspended 4..5 inch before his camera and appearing focused same as distant background. With this, he owned many non-technical people.
But... this is con-man work!

Sereda hide 2 important things:

1) he filmed in day light, when it is plenty of light, so the camera lens close down more the iris because too much light. More closed iris, means more depth of field. The same situation here in my experiment, with the same setting, in daylight without focus, the distant background and the keys are well focused, sharp:

Sereda's experiment:

my experiment:

and here the animation:

But, when the light is not enough, the lens opens the iris to the maximum to gather more light, so the depth of field shrink, ask every photographer. So, in low light. the keys are not anymore sharp as background, look here the low light experiment:

and here the animation:

You know, that NASA filmings are in low light environment in this tether incident...

2) Sereda "forget" to zoom his lens... because, when zooming, the depth of field of the lens, again, shrinks. In fact, even in daylight situation, when the iris is closed down to minimum, the keys cannot be sharp anymore, look here:

and the animation:

Now, look here, and see that NASA cameras are zoomed when they see the discs (which are out of focus airy discs, nothing more):

See this?

And now, FINAL PROOF, if you have eyes, that those are little particles floating around the shuttle, closer enough to becaome out of focus if camera zooms to infinite where the tether is. Look, the camera tries for a second or so to change the focus, from infinite where the tether is, to closer distance,

and what we see:
logical, tether became thick because became out of focus, but some discs..WHAT?! became focused and shrinks to brighter sharper points? WHAT?! Of course, because they are POINTS, little bright particles closer to the lens. Little particles of debris floating closer to the lens. These are FACTS. You see them?

[edit on 4/2/09 by depthoffield]

[edit on 4/2/09 by depthoffield]

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 12:34 PM
reply to post by CHA0S

I have been using science and philosophy forums, as I am after a more civilized and intelligent conversation.

I think it will be more intellegent to use the search bar...
Man, that´s just ignorant.

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 12:39 PM
reply to post by depthoffield

Good stuff. Starred.

For OPs reference (or anyone else reading this) the best introduction to how cameras and lenses work, IMHO, is Ansel Adams' The Camera, part 1 of his photography series. It applies to all cameras and is plain English (with the math in the appendix).

There's plenty of websites about the same subject too. Cambridge In Colour is good (although with more of a digital emphasis than Adams' book):

[edit on 4-2-2009 by jackphotohobby]

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 01:44 PM
reply to post by CHA0S

There's no surprise that this STS-75 video has caught your attention. The first couple of times anyone sees it, they are well and truly puzzled and amazed. Clear soundtrack, NASA source and entirely believable. The video is 100% real. If you have time (it's a biggie) there's a thread here, on ATS that eventually concludes that they aren't aliens swarming the tether. There's every type of point/ counterpoint you could want and video explanations too. It's exemplar material for anyone with an interest in UFOs

If you want to check out another video try the STS-80 footage 'UFOs over Africa' here. Last time I checked, it was still unexplained.

I've just discovered the incident at Shag Harbor, really interesting story. Check it out here and the thread ( by Karl 12) is here.

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 01:49 PM
Well this is a repost you should have used the search function STS

I have a thread from way back with every nasa video like this and pages of disscussion.

Find it HERE

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 02:55 PM
Its just ice particles or frozen urine in the debris cloud surrounding the shuttle, this comes up every few weeks.

> "How does that work exactly?"

Urine is jetted out along with waste water from fuel cells and other sources, and ice crystals in their multitude are released into the cloud around the shuttle, this happens frequently as proved here.

There is an interesting website about waste water dumping here.

"several of these crafts pass behind the tether?"

DepthofField posted how this happens here.

"2-3 miles wide, the largest UFO's captured on NASA"

It is unlikely a 2-3 mile wide non terrestrial spacecraft as these are very visible as shown by the Guernsey UFO case here which was observed from afar by the crew of an aircraft, and also in other sightings. Such craft would be very visible and the trained cameraman would focus on that instead of the broken experiment.

"and a small notch cut out of the side," "they are made of energy, why do they pulsate"

The pulsating may be the crystalline structure rotating and presenting differing reflective facets of its structure to the cameraman.

The notch is part of the mechanism for adjusting the iris which appears when the camera is out of focus. Other aspects of the out of focus airy disc are explained here.

The camera uses a crummy image intensifier that blooms and changes brightness when maxed out, there is some other footage of detritus here that states this at the bottom (though this is also labelled as alien spacecraft).

"do they not get pulled into the Earths gravitational field"

They do eventually but it takes time, many also drift away to be replaced routinely by more outjetting of waste water.

"Comets and space crystals shouldn't even be visible in space"

They are very visible, sometimes obscuring stars as on Apollo 7 when a navigational fix could not be taken because of all the crud floating around (scroll down 3/4).

[edit on 4-2-2009 by stringue]

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:05 PM
Well, I think, I've been well and truly proven wrong here, but that was what I wanted, just to be able to talk about this footage and see what was going on, thanks for the input. Really like this website! Cheers.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 01:42 AM
Oh wow someone who sees the evidence from the other perspective and then admits they are wrong... That is a very rare thing around here and I for one would like to say welcome!

posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 09:30 AM
Thank you

new topics

top topics


log in