Were ETs watching our STS-128 astronauts last week?

If you look at the image below, the yellow arrow points to an orb of some sort seemingly watching the shuttle EVA. It seems too small to be the moon, is rotating and looks like it's above our atmosphere. A You tube link is also posted below. The HD version is clearer if you look for it buried in one of the youtube files. What amuses me is that at about 35 seconds into this posted link, the camera operator tries to get the pesky orb off screen. When I was watching this on live NASA TV, he did in fact get the orb off screen. Maybe ETs like the way we move fridges around in space?




YOU Tube link: www.youtube.com...

P.S. I think someone on you tube is asking the same question in spanish...

Its a bird.

Oh, wait...

Well I wouldnt hold your breath, about it being Extraterrestrial, Since not alot of People go into space many forget to account for the fact that, there's alot of Space junk orbiting our planet, I mean its Probably ridiculous as to how much junk floats around in space. As we cannot rule out anything, we should take into account what kinda debris is floating around our Lil Junkyard.

[edit on 12-9-2009 by 10001011]

reply to post by 10001011


It could be space junk, but I doubt they would have done a space walk with junk that size so nearby. If it was space junk and hit the ISS or an astronaut, it would be fatal considering relative velocities.

but thats the thing we cant tell in this image, it could be 20 feet away or 200 miles away.

they track space debris, so if it was debris they knew it was there, if not, then who knows......

How to track space debris

[edit on 12-9-2009 by 10001011]

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel
It seems too small to be the moon, is rotating and looks like it's above our atmosphere.

Nicolas, that won't do -- it 'seems' too small to be the moon, come on, do some real checking out that possibility. Where WAS the moon during this phase of the flight?

Speculation is always most fun when you deliberately avoid facts. Do better, please.

reply to post by JimOberg


Ok, you got me, I didn't load my favorite astronomy program to check alignments. On the other hand, if it was the moon, you wouldn't see rotation and as the image below shows of the moon from Hubble, you can see moon features. BTW, are you the real Jim Oberg, I'm a big fan

reply to post by Nicolas Flamel


I don't see any rotation and a wide angle lens makes distant objects look small. I think it is the moon.
www.spaceflightnowplus.com...

[edit on 9/12/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage
I tried to watch that but it's asking me for an ID and password, so if I have to pay $7.95 to see a movie I'm not sure this is the one I want to see!

But after I read Jim Oberg's post, I looked at the extreme curvature of the earth visible in the OP video and realized what a wide angle lens it is, so yes it could be the moon.

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel
What amuses me is that at about 35 seconds into this posted link, the camera operator tries to get the pesky orb off screen.

I think you should watch it again.

Is the photographer trying to get the orb off the screen, or trying to keep the camera on the astronauts? Looks like the latter to me.

reply to post by Phage


Hi Phage. To me it looked like rotation because it changed shaped and reflected the light differently over time. Some stills of it are below. They may be video compression errors, but then again the entire video would be blurry. The HD version is on youtube: www.youtube.com...

starting at 06:43. Someone else on youtube said it was space junk that missed them by less than a mile!! which I'm more inclined to believe. But still, if it was ET, of course they would say it's a bird or thermal inversion etc etc.

reply to post by Nicolas Flamel


If it's junk, it would depend on it's orbit as to whether or not they would worry. If it's in the same orbit as the astronauts then the relative velocity could be zero, or close to it.

It's a useful skill to know how to manipulate heavens-above.com and see what the sky looked like from that point. You do need some position data but you can get that from the daily 'Execute Package' sent up to the shuttle crew. All this stuff is available -- not spoon fed, but findable and usable by grownups. This could be a teachable moment!

Here’s the page you want to start from:
www.nasa.gov...

and here’s that particular day
www.nasa.gov...

Are there any clues in the video sound track about where over the Earth they are passing?

[edit on 12-9-2009 by JimOberg]

reply to post by JimOberg


Scanning the net, it seems it was in fact space junk (sure hehe).

Quotes:
At one point Wednesday, NASA considered moving Discovery and the space station into another orbit because of the space junk, and possibly even delaying this spacewalk. But by Thursday morning, the track of the debris became clearer and experts were able to say with certainty that the two spacecraft and 13 astronauts were safe where they were.

Astronauts Informed of Possible Conjunction Maneuver :: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:32:20 PM PDT :: NASA space shuttle Capcom Tony Antonelli informed Discovery commander Rick Sturckow about a possible conjunction with debris from a portion of an Ariane 5 rocket body.

The piece of debris that is being tracked is approximately 19 square meters and is in an elliptical orbit. It is a fairly big piece which makes it easier to track. The closest approach (about 3 kilometers from the station) is expected at 10:06 a.m. Friday.

It the French's fault! (If you belive the mundane explanation)

[edit on 12-9-2009 by Nicolas Flamel]

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel
reply to post by JimOberg

 

Scanning the net, it seems it was in fact space junk (sure hehe).

The piece of the French rocket referred to was always much too far away for the shuttle to ever see it -- and moving too fast when zipping by.

Stuff that hangs around near the shuttle is usually stuff off of the shuttle.

But this one in the top video might not be near at all -- more like 400,000 km or so.

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel
It seems too small to be the moon, is rotating and looks like it's above our atmosphere.

Nicolas, that won't do -- it 'seems' too small to be the moon, come on, do some real checking out that possibility. Where WAS the moon during this phase of the flight?

Speculation is always most fun when you deliberately avoid facts. Do better, please.

No how about you do some research and not be deliberately ignorant? It's NOT the moon, fact. It IS in FACT too small to be the moon. Use common sense people, it's really not hard to do. It is also too pixilated to be close, so it's obviously fairly large.

It seems to be relatively stationary from what I can tell by scrubbing through, this is impossible in space, no?

reply to post by antithesis.


Don't forget the space station and astronauts are moving too. So the relative speed to each other may appear motionless, like the car ahead of you on the highway. An object 19 meters square 3km away might look like the images seen...

well, how much was john q. public permitted to watch???

Originally posted by Maj35t1cI2
No how about you do some research and not be deliberately ignorant? It's NOT the moon, fact. It IS in FACT too small to be the moon. Use common sense people, it's really not hard to do. It is also too pixilated to be close, so it's obviously fairly large.

Too small to be the moon? That's possible -- the moon will be about half a degree wide. How many degrees wide is the image in question? Just saying it feels 'too small' won't cut it. Measure it and compare it to the angular size of the 'moon hypothesis'.

Originally posted by antithesis.
It seems to be relatively stationary from what I can tell by scrubbing through, this is impossible in space, no?

That 'seems' is actually a well-known phenomenon, it's called 'the moon illusion'.

If it's the moon, it will be moving relative to the horizon at about 4 degrees per minute, if it's directly setting (and slower if its motion is slanted relative to the vertical). Can you measure the distance from the horizon, in diameters of the object, at the beginning and end of the sequence, and time the duration of the object's visibility? That might provide a very important determinative datum. But if the ground motion appears to be 'sideways' relative to the line-of-sight to the object, then it might not be setting, and this wouldn't tell us anything useful.