Is THIS Really A UFO Fleet?

When a person sees a daylight UFO with enough detail so that no other conclusion is possible, the reality of UFOs strengthens. When a daylight sighting of a "fleet" can be proven to also be UFOs as opposed to a fleet of balloons, the experience is more powerful than a single UFO. Especially the fleets that seem to emerge from one or more "craft". Night sightings are problematic because of the loss of visual detail that can help come to a firm conclusion. Once in a while fleets are also seen at night. Of course, when we have videos of these events these videos can be examined by experts to declare the contents real UFOs or something else.

Then we come to Space UFOs or SUFOs. That's where the controversy begins. For some reason, even though we have earthbound sightings daily, SUFOs seem to be beyond acceptance by most of those connected with the space industry. I saw 3 "stars" from earth one evening and I wonder what they would have looked like seen from space. My "stars" sped off from a standstill to what I guess are thousands of miles per hour almost instantaneously. We see that happening in NASA videos but when you ask "autorities" such as our James Oberg we get the usual "ice crystals", shuttle debris, etc., reasoning. People such as Oberg and other NASA spokespersons "laugh" at us because when we look at NASA footage such as from STS-48, 80, and many others we accept that by the objects' behavior they could not possibly be ice crystals or whatever.

Is it possible for UFOs to mass up in space resulting in a fleet? If what we see in such a fleet does not behave like ice crystals can there be another explanation rather than SUFOs? For those of you who have not seen NASA videos showing ice crystals coming off the shuttles, let me tell you that I have. And what one sees are not orderly objects slowly drifting, appearing from nowhere and speeding off, do not come to a stop, do not change direction, IOW words, behave as if with intent to do whatever they're doing. They do not perform haphazardly as ice crystals do.

SUFOs are seen at a distance because the shuttle cameras take in a wide view sometimes showing a large part of the earth and sometimes we see zooming in to get closeup of SUFOs which is unnecessary if they were ice crystals and were in close proximity to the shuttle. Ice crystals do not travel with the shuttles as have been claimed. According to Newton's words, an object will stay at rest or stay in motion and ice crystals stay in motion while SUFOs do not.

I found this video on YouTube titled "NASA UFOs from nowhere!" and the video either shows SUFOs or something else but what you see are not ice crystals, at least to my thinking. I have selected 8 screen grabs showing how an "empty" space is soon filled with white objects. In the video, the "fleet" arrives at approx. 2:26 and boy does it get crowded right away! They arrive slowly but steadily and when you look at various parts of the scene you see individuals going in different directions, one grows bright or "blooms", gets big all the while drifting slowly and de-blooming and moving off the screen's left edge. You'll also notice individuals in the background speeding right to left and left to right but not fast enough to call them meteoroids. It's a purposeful speed. Those are the ones that make you think. At 3:12 look at the right edge for the big, white object that rises vertically.

And the show ends with the camera panning down to the shuttle's payload bay and the rear of the shuttle. I put the video on the bottom so that you can see the photos first and then see at what point they originate.

I know up front that some or most of you will vote for ice crystals and in reality, that will be an assumption as it is my assumption that they are not. But I can't say for sure that this is a SUFO fleet, but I can't commit myself to say that they are, indeed, ice crystals. I've seen real ice crystals and these just don't cut the cake!

1 - "Empty" space.


2 - Fleet arrives.


3 - Look at the right edge, middle. The awkward white arrow points to an arriving white object that will bloom.


4- The object pointed out on Pic. 3 is about to bloom.


5- Blooming starts.


6- Blooming increases and "blinds" the camera.


7- Arrow on the right edge shows emerging object that is going to drift up.


8- Arrow at top shows object from #7.


In Preview I noticed that the video did not embed and I have no idea what has happened since the last time I successfully embedded a video. I'll appreciate a member embedding the video for me although it's a shame that I can't have the video here with the photos so that you can compare the video with the screen grabs.

If you're a Mod, please help me with this embedding problem, I don't know what to do. But I have followed the directions that I used in the past which are as follows:

Take everything after the equal sign - youtube.com/watch?v=buWBonjaVT4 -
and center the code between these two brackets.

I don't do the above, of course. I click on the VID: YOUTUBE and put the code in the box and ATS puts the link here. But all I wind up with is a black, blank screen and when I click on the YouTube link it takes me to YouTube where a similar black, blank screen says something about a malformed URL id.

Here...

I would still say ice crystals that are exposed due to coming out of the shadow of the orbiter. The low light level camera starts to bloom because of the overexposure. I personally see nothing strange about this, and to think that there is a fleet of UFO's out there there with that density.... it certainly would have caused a lot of commotion by the crew.

This has already been discussed multiple times before.

One example

Another

More.

Even More

Still More

That should be enough to demonstrate this topic has been more than thoroughly discussed on ATS, and that this thread brings nothing new to the table.

OP, to post YouTube clips, just use the alphanumeric part of the URL after the =. It won't show up in the preview, but will work once it is posted.

As far as the contents of the video, I think the objects are just ice crystals illuminated by the sun and on-board lights. Cameras operated in space must use an exposure which makes even the faintest light source appear brighter.

Hm, PLEASE correct me if I am wrong but I have a theory about confirming/debunking the ice crystal explanation. Basically (and this is probably not entirely right, so please correct me so I can edit this) when electrons in an atom absorb photons, they jump up to a higher energy orbital, then they quickly jump back down to the original orbital thus releasing the photon. In addition, every element releases different wavelengths/frequencies/whatever of photon thus changing the color. A spectroscope can be used to isolate the different colors and therefore determine the element(s). If this is correct, can we not use a spectroscope on these unidentified objects (NOT UFO's as in ET's, just unidentified objects because we do not know for sure what they are) and determine what they are made of? Ice crystals would be water or somesuch similar. I would assume a space craft would need to be made of metal. If spectroscope shows metal then you have some evidence to at least eliminate the ice explanation(although not necessarily proving it is indeed a craft), if not, move on to the next possible evidence

Originally posted by webpirate
This has already been discussed multiple times before.

One example

Another

More.

Even More

Still More

That should be enough to demonstrate this topic has been more than thoroughly discussed on ATS, and that this thread brings nothing new to the table.

Based on your reply which includes 5 sources I was ready to pull the plug on my thread but I looked at each of your sources and they were all about the STS-75 footage and this thread has no similarity. So you are WRONG! This is new material and has not been discussed before.

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni

Here...

Thanks, I appreciate it. Just for the hell of it, I took your coding and inserted it in my post and it still didn't embed! I wish I knew what the problem is.

Originally posted by charlyv
I would still say ice crystals that are exposed due to coming out of the shadow of the orbiter. The low light level camera starts to bloom because of the overexposure. I personally see nothing strange about this, and to think that there is a fleet of UFO's out there there with that density.... it certainly would have caused a lot of commotion by the crew.

If what you say was correct then ALL of the "ice crystals" would "bloom" instead of selectivity. Notice only one "ice crystal" bloomed. Additionally, it seems you haven't seen ice crystals detach from the shuttle 'cause when they do they don't look like what you see in the photos/video.

Originally posted by DaTroof
OP, to post YouTube clips, just use the alphanumeric part of the URL after the =. It won't show up in the preview, but will work once it is posted.

As far as the contents of the video, I think the objects are just ice crystals illuminated by the sun and on-board lights. Cameras operated in space must use an exposure which makes even the faintest light source appear brighter.

Thanks for the explanation but if you noticed I said what you said and I did it. I also took the coding of the embedded video and put it in my post and it still didn't show up. I've tried 3 ways: using the full YouTube URL, using the coding after the = and using someone else's coding. No success. I used to be able to embed videos using the = system.

Originally posted by Antifoiler
Hm, PLEASE correct me if I am wrong but I have a theory about confirming/debunking the ice crystal explanation. Basically (and this is probably not entirely right, so please correct me so I can edit this) when electrons in an atom absorb photons, they jump up to a higher energy orbital, then they quickly jump back down to the original orbital thus releasing the photon. In addition, every element releases different wavelengths/frequencies/whatever of photon thus changing the color. A spectroscope can be used to isolate the different colors and therefore determine the element(s). If this is correct, can we not use a spectroscope on these unidentified objects (NOT UFO's as in ET's, just unidentified objects because we do not know for sure what they are) and determine what they are made of? Ice crystals would be water or somesuch similar. I would assume a space craft would need to be made of metal. If spectroscope shows metal then you have some evidence to at least eliminate the ice explanation(although not necessarily proving it is indeed a craft), if not, move on to the next possible evidence

Well, you sound like you have a fine mind but a bit too technical for me. I base my views strictly on the fact that ice crystals that have detached from the shuttle do not look anything like what you see in this and other videos. I wish I could find my videotape containing footage of ice crystals detaching from the shuttle and going on their way and you would understand my stick-to-itness. I hope we have members that would be willing to participate in the kind of research you mention.

reply to post by DaTroof

As far as the contents of the video, I think the objects are just ice crystals illuminated by the sun and on-board lights.

Space Ice Crystals....

Hmmm...
Space Icebergs or UFOs fleet !
S&F.

CRITTERS

I'm no expert, but to me it looks like a close up of an asteroid belt. The blooms you see could be from collisions?

Originally posted by The Shrike
When a person sees...

Cool video. I Googled ice crystals, but couldn't get any footage about them without UFOs being involved. I understand you know what ice crystals look like coming off the shuttle. Maybe you could explain what are different aspects that make the video posted different than the one showing 'for sure' ice crystals?

I think it's interesting that some of the objects were already in the frame before becoming illuminated. It'd be great to know the shuttle's position in relation to earth, since we know the camera is facing above and slightly forward of the shuttle (I think it's facing a little forward). Any idea where the sun is in relation to the shuttle? If the sun is facing the left side of the shuttle (looking straight at the shuttle from the front), then these things are moving towards the sun. Maybe the objects were passing either above or below earth.

Ice crystals coming off the shuttle itself, suddenly being illuminated, having hundreds more moving in from ahead the shuttle, seemingly only ahead and above, makes for a very specific scenario. But I still think more likely than thousands of UFOs showing up, which is even more specific.

I was gonna guess that the camera was panning, but some of the stars (?) at the beginning of the video don't move (maybe look again?), though the objects are. Maybe the difference in brightness comes from adjustments made to the camera on-the-fly. The object that blooms is probably the coolest part. Even then you can call it an anomaly amongst anomalies.

I have no idea what these things could be, but NASA was only interested enough to watch them for at least two minutes. I don't think too much of the tether thing either after seeing the objects being recreated for non STS-75 reasons. I wouldn't doubt that someone with knowledge of photography would have more insight.

I hope they are ice crystals. One UFO is awesome, but hundreds border on intimidating.

S+F! Thanks for posting.. I hadn't seen this one yet however I am not convinced this is a fleet. The exposure and high resolution (i believe it'd be high and now lot) really distorts anything reflecting/emitting light. Although some of the objects do appear to pulsate or go faster (which would be impossible as all should be about same speed as gravity pushes these objects), this doesn't prove anything. Pulsate could mean spinning for all I know and the faster objects could just be closer to camera which would give the relative perception they're going faster.

Good find and thanks for posting either way!

Originally posted by webpirate
This has already been discussed multiple times before.

One example

Another

More.

Even More

Still More

That should be enough to demonstrate this topic has been more than thoroughly discussed on ATS, and that this thread brings nothing new to the table.

Closed.