More NASA UFO's?

[zoser]

Zoser...

The anomaly in the upper right corner is simply a reflection of the tip of the space station. If you brighten the original just a little bit, you can see the panel which extends toward the upper right at an angle.

Edit:

Here, this might help:

Edit:

I agree Boon. It's the top of the ISS. I didn't see it at first.

Well done

In fact you don't need to brighten it; look the top of the ISS; it's the same shape.

Edited November 3, 2012 by zoser

[bee]

Has anyone come across this object? Is it one of ours? Is it a hoax?

Zoser...

The anomaly in the upper right corner is simply a reflection of the tip of the space station. If you brighten the original just a little bit, you can see the panel which extends toward the upper right at an angle.

Edit:

Here, this might help:

booN....do you mean the International Space Station?

I'm not bothered whether it's the Space Station or not...that would make it 'one of ours'....

but I can't see which bit is being reflected and where the rest of it is

http://www.google.co...XKdKT0QXMoYGgDQ

If it is a space station ... I'm wondering why it would have been included in the video if there was such an obvious answer....

[bee]

It's not about one side against the other; not for me anyway. There is just too much evidence for the ET hypothesis; no amount of clever argument or clever science can alter that fact.

no smoke without fire.....

.

[booNyzarC]

booN....do you mean the International Space Station?

I'm not bothered whether it's the Space Station or not...that would make it 'one of ours'....

but I can't see which bit is being reflected and where the rest of it is

http://www.google.co...XKdKT0QXMoYGgDQ

If it is a space station ... I'm wondering why it would have been included in the video if there was such an obvious answer....

Yes, that's what I mean.

Do these images help?

Adding for search engines... s110e5912 STS-110-E-5912 UFO explained/debunked...

Edit to add:

Extremely brightened to the point of adding artifacts, but it does bring out the relevant areas of similarity as well.

I'm sure Chrlzs could do a better job of this, but hopefully you can see the reflection with this.

Edited November 3, 2012 by booNyzarC

[S2F]

no smoke without fire.....

.

And if the smoke isn't smoke?

[bee]

Yes, that's what I mean.

Do these images help?

Thanks....

I don't know yet...I'll have to have a think about it....

Adding for search engines... s110e5912 STS-110-E-5912 UFO explained/debunked...

what did that mean...it was inbetween your pictures....?

it seemed out of place

.

[booNyzarC]

Thanks....

I don't know yet...I'll have to have a think about it....

I edited the post with an overly lightened picture of that area. Do you see it now?

[bee]

Extremely brightened to the point of adding artifacts, but it does bring out the relevant areas of similarity as well.

very Starchyesque......

.

[synchronomy]

That's a Russian cargo vessel causing the reflection is it not?

[bee]

That's a Russian cargo vessel causing the reflection is it not?

is it....

the plot thickens.....lol

.

[booNyzarC]

very Starchyesque......

.

I'm going to start drinking now... and try to forget that you compared me to Starchy...

I trust you see it now though, right?

[bee]

I'm going to start drinking now... and try to forget that you compared me to Starchy...

cheers (literally)

.

[booNyzarC]

cheers (literally)

.

[1963]

Just in case anyone is interested...Here is where I stand on 'NASA UFOs'...The youtube video's are all [well a lot of them] fascinating...but near-enough all of them that I consider to be genuine, also have the potential for mundane explanations!...Yes even Jim's ice/micro-debris fits-all explanations have a great deal of credibility in many cases!

...

And in my honest opinion...There are a plethora of astronautical-UFO sightings, and just maybe...some of them are of a clear-cut extraterrestrial intelligently-operated machine type encounter!...unfortunately I have so far seen no indisputable conclusive evidence of this to call it.. 'A Fact'...but the one thing that I am pretty certain of , is that even if all of the stories of astronauts routinely being 'paced', 'buzzed', or otherwise being 'observed' by an alien species , [or quite possibly , many species] , the government policy of dissembling the truth about alien presence [that I firmly believe has been utilised for decades] will undoubtedly extend to NASA!...No matter how cleverly denied by the likes of our friend James Oberg et al.

And as a wholehearted proponent of the ETH that also follows the doctrine that 'the government' [

or at least the 'authorities therein' that are supposed to know the truth,..know a damn site more about the visitations than us, but for some reason they are not willing to share their knowledge

] therefore logic dictates that I have no choice other than to believe that this is the case, and the 'legal get-out jargon' in this 'NASA Federal Register Notice' document,[in which I understand it to mean that it is not legally obliged to tell the truth!..?] is nothing more than I would have assumed that a government-controlled organisation such as NASA would have!....

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/FOIA/exempt.html

I have read the convincing accounts given by many former astronauts and other NASA and NASA related employees about sightings and strange UFO/ET events that they 'allegedly' have knowledge of..[some of them are too persuasive for me to doubt!]...but I have yet to find the 'smoking gun' among them!

And until the day comes that either the government or NASA itself decides that it is time for public 'Disclosure' of everything it knows about ETV,..then an astronaut's claims about 'alien visitation' can be treated with no less scepticism than the claim of Joe Bloggs from down at the breakers yard!..[though I am probably just as guilty as most people in the fact that I tend to initially view an astronauts story with a little more deference than the average Joe's story!...but when it comes down to it , I know that the parameters of validity are the same! ]

So even though I do believe many of the accounts given by NASA employees [but by no means all of them]...I have to view them as very interesting, but 'unsupported' and mainly anecdotal evidence just like any other !

As a matter of interest, ...here is a piece of testimony from 'Mercury Astronaut and all round NASA top guy'..Deke Slayton...[a guy that is considered as straight as they come, even by hardened-sceptics!] ..about a personal UFO sighting of a very-real 'miniature flying saucer', whilst flying a P-51 fighter in Minneapolis in 1951.....

"Donald Slayton a Mercury astronaut revealed in an interview he had seen UFOs in 1951: "I was testing a P-51 fighter in Minneapolis when I spotted this object. I was at about 10,000 feet on a nice, bright, sunny afternoon. I thought the object was a kite, then I realized that no kite is gonna fly that high. As I got closer it looked like a weather balloon, gray and about three feet in diameter. But as soon as I got behind the darn thing it didn't look like a balloon anymore. It looked like a saucer, a disk. About the same time, I realized that it was suddenly going away from me -- and there I was, running at about 300 miles per hour. I tracked it for a little way, and then all of a sudden the damn thing just took off. It pulled about a 45 degree climbing turn and accelerated and just flat disappeared."

Donald "Deke" Slayon, NASA Mercury Astronaut

http://ufopartisan.blogspot.co.uk/2009/10/astronaut-deke-slaytons-amazing-ufo.html

...and here is the original 'Project Blue Book' entry from when he originally reported the encounter....

http://www.bluebookarchive.org/page.aspx?PageCode=MAXW-PBB9-660

....notice the Blue Book evaluation of this remarkable encounter?..yes that's right!.."A BALLOON"!...

Cheers.

GORT...KLAATU BARADA NIKTO.

[zoser]

is it....

the plot thickens.....lol

.

I'm not entirely clear how the reflection occured, but I can see that t

Just in case anyone is interested...Here is where I stand on 'NASA UFOs'...The youtube video's are all [well a lot of them] fascinating...but near-enough all of them that I consider to be genuine, also have the potential for mundane explanations!...Yes even Jim's ice/micro-debris fits-all explanations have a great deal of credibility in many cases!

...

And in my honest opinion...There are a plethora of astronautical-UFO sightings, and just maybe...some of them are of a clear-cut extraterrestrial intelligently-operated machine type encounter!...unfortunately I have so far seen no indisputable conclusive evidence of this to call it.. 'A Fact'...but the one thing that I am pretty certain of , is that even if all of the stories of astronauts routinely being 'paced', 'buzzed', or otherwise being 'observed' by an alien species , [or quite possibly , many species] , the government policy of dissembling the truth about alien presence [that I firmly believe has been utilised for decades] will undoubtedly extend to NASA!...No matter how cleverly denied by the likes of our friend James Oberg et al.

And as a wholehearted proponent of the ETH that also follows the doctrine that 'the government' [

or at least the 'authorities therein' that are supposed to know the truth,..know a damn site more about the visitations than us, but for some reason they are not willing to share their knowledge

] therefore logic dictates that I have no choice other than to believe that this is the case, and the 'legal get-out jargon' in this 'NASA Federal Register Notice' document,[in which I understand it to mean that it is not legally obliged to tell the truth!..?] is nothing more than I would have assumed that a government-controlled organisation such as NASA would have!....

http://www.hq.nasa.g...OIA/exempt.html

I have read the convincing accounts given by many former astronauts and other NASA and NASA related employees about sightings and strange UFO/ET events that they 'allegedly' have knowledge of..[some of them are too persuasive for me to doubt!]...but I have yet to find the 'smoking gun' among them!

And until the day comes that either the government or NASA itself decides that it is time for public 'Disclosure' of everything it knows about ETV,..then an astronaut's claims about 'alien visitation' can be treated with no less scepticism than the claim of Joe Bloggs from down at the breakers yard!..[though I am probably just as guilty as most people in the fact that I tend to initially view an astronauts story with a little more deference than the average Joe's story!...but when it comes down to it , I know that the parameters of validity are the same! ]

So even though I do believe many of the accounts given by NASA employees [but by no means all of them]...I have to view them as very interesting, but 'unsupported' and mainly anecdotal evidence just like any other !

As a matter of interest, ...here is a piece of testimony from 'Mercury Astronaut and all round NASA top guy'..Deke Slayton...[a guy that is considered as straight as they come, even by hardened-sceptics!] ..about a personal UFO sighting of a very-real 'miniature flying saucer', whilst flying a P-51 fighter in Minneapolis in 1951.....

"Donald Slayton a Mercury astronaut revealed in an interview he had seen UFOs in 1951: "I was testing a P-51 fighter in Minneapolis when I spotted this object. I was at about 10,000 feet on a nice, bright, sunny afternoon. I thought the object was a kite, then I realized that no kite is gonna fly that high. As I got closer it looked like a weather balloon, gray and about three feet in diameter. But as soon as I got behind the darn thing it didn't look like a balloon anymore. It looked like a saucer, a disk. About the same time, I realized that it was suddenly going away from me -- and there I was, running at about 300 miles per hour. I tracked it for a little way, and then all of a sudden the damn thing just took off. It pulled about a 45 degree climbing turn and accelerated and just flat disappeared."

Donald "Deke" Slayon, NASA Mercury Astronaut

http://ufopartisan.b...mazing-ufo.html

...and here is the original 'Project Blue Book' entry from when he originally reported the encounter....

http://www.bluebooka...e=MAXW-PBB9-660

....notice the Blue Book evaluation of this remarkable encounter?..yes that's right!.."A BALLOON"!...

Cheers.

GORT...KLAATU BARADA NIKTO.

The Donald Slayton case sounds very intriguing. Why would he make up a story like that?

[zoser]

booN....do you mean the International Space Station?

I'm not bothered whether it's the Space Station or not...that would make it 'one of ours'....

but I can't see which bit is being reflected and where the rest of it is

http://www.google.co...XKdKT0QXMoYGgDQ

If it is a space station ... I'm wondering why it would have been included in the video if there was such an obvious answer....

It just says to me that few people are looking into these cases as seriously as we are. Martyn Stubbs for example never mentioned in the interview that some of the spherical objects could be storm phenomena. From the magnification shots it looks as if they could well be (see post 871).

I believe that there are a huge number however that we will never be able to explain.

[ChrLzs]

...

Extremely brightened to the point of adding artifacts, but it does bring out the relevant areas of similarity as well.

I'm sure Chrlzs could do a better job of this, but hopefully you can see the reflection with this.

Thanks for the implied compliment <immodest>, and yeah I prolly could </immodest>, but your version is perfectly adequate.

I havta say I find it a little depressing that a 'researcher' wouldn't, as a matter of course, actually *look* at the image and ask themselves "now.. what would an internal lens reflection look like..?" before dragging it here. Yes, the old lens flare - oft attacked by researcher wannabes, but also very often the culprit.

Thing is that NASA (like anyone with even a modicum of knowledge and experience with cameras) would not even think twice about posting such images or bothering to explain to the completely inexperienced that they WILL see reflections and other obvious artefacts. Isn't the Interweb wonderful - anyone with the ability to type words into google can become a 'researcher' and waste this forum's time with stuff like that...

Forgive my jaded reply - I don't have much posting time right now, and coming back to the forum and having to wade thru page after page of silly claims like this just makes me a little angry to be wasting so much time - time that could be better spent on genuinely interesting investigations..

[/rant]

{added..}

BTW, I now a feel a bit guilty, as I gather it was Zoser who posted this and he has now accepted the explanation on the chin and in good faith. Kudos to you for that, Zoser - but now that you understand a little bit about lens reflections, will you please try to be a little more selective?

[bee]

It just says to me that few people are looking into these cases as seriously as we are. Martyn Stubbs for example never mentioned in the interview that some of the spherical objects could be storm phenomena. From the magnification shots it looks as if they could well be (see post 871).

I believe that there are a huge number however that we will never be able to explain.

good morning zoser....

You got your post 871 screen shot from this video...?

[media=]

[/media]

.and I'm not at all sure about it's authenticity....

I would be happier about it if there was some link to the source...but there's just a lot of waffle

SOURCE: NASA / ISS

Released Footage from July 2012 - This is some of the best UFO footage yet I've seen coming from the ISS! This is actual outer space footage taken in July 2012 from the International Space Station. It's very well known that UFO's like to go ABOVE the weather storms with active lightning where they can gather plenty of energy from space.

[snip]

FAIR USE NOTICE: These pages/video may contain copyrighted (© ) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of ecological, POLITICAL, HUMAN RIGHTS, economic, DEMOCRACY, scientific, MORAL, ETHICAL, and SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior general interest in receiving similar information for research and educational.

started having a look for the raw source of this 'footage' but no luck so far..

I don't like the way the person who made the video is trying to draw us to 'ships' and 'crafts' all the time...

this is the kind of video that I would expect Intelligence Service Employees to make...maybe even using some of the Stubbs

footage to base it on. Stubbs is a problem for the 'authorities' and they are bound to try and weaken/confuse the subject.

well that's my opinion, anyway...

there are lightning storms going off all the time around the earth and I'm sure Martyn Stubbs knows this

and has factored it in to the presentation of his videos.....

[bee]

BTW, I now a feel a bit guilty, as I gather it was Zoser who posted this and he has now accepted the explanation on the chin and in good faith. Kudos to you for that, Zoser - but now that you understand a little bit about lens reflections, will you please try to be a little more selective?

talking about being selective.....

I think you must have missed my post where I showed you ACTUAL lens reflection on the STS 75 tether footage...(before it broke)

note how utterly different to the Tether Incident Footage it is.

basically you don't have a leg to stand on regarding lens reflection being the cause of the famous thether incident footage...

even Oberg disagrees with you about this....

[media=]

[/media]

[TSS]

started having a look for the raw source of this 'footage' but no luck so far..

I don't like the way the person who made the video is trying to draw us to 'ships' and 'crafts' all the time...

this is the kind of video that I would expect Intelligence Service Employees to make...maybe even using some of the Stubbs

footage to base it on. Stubbs is a problem for the 'authorities' and they are bound to try and weaken/confuse the subject.

well that's my opinion, anyway...

there are lightning storms going off all the time around the earth and I'm sure Martyn Stubbs knows this

and has factored it in to the presentation of his videos.....

There was nothing secret about this footage when it was released, which was back in early 2000, it was available for anyone to buy through the UK version of UFO mag, that's when I got it, on VHS video. It was then played at a screening at a leeds UFO conference early in 2000 too. Again, anybody could attend, there was no big deal about it being broadcast. If anything it was remarkably underwhelming(even back then). So why, 13 years later do you think the authorities would now have a problem with it? ...and even if they did have a problem (which there is no evidence of) why don't they just slap copyright over it so yt have to pull it!

[bee]

There was nothing secret about this footage when it was released, which was back in early 2000, it was available for anyone to buy through the UK version of UFO mag, that's when I got it, on VHS video. It was then played at a screening at a leeds UFO conference early in 2000 too. Again, anybody could attend, there was no big deal about it being broadcast. If anything it was remarkably underwhelming(even back then). So why, 13 years later do you think the authorities would now have a problem with it? ...and even if they did have a problem (which there is no evidence of) why don't they just slap copyright over it so yt have to pull it!

hi Sky Scanner.....are we talking about the same footage....the uploader says it's from July 2012...?

[TSS]

hi Sky Scanner.....are we talking about the same footage....the uploader says it's from July 2012...?

Hi Bee,

I'm referring to Martin Stubbs, he's released several vids, the first was entitled "The Secret NASA Transmissions" in early 2000. You say Stubbs is a problem for the authorities, but he's been doing this for 13yrs now, most of which is just a rehash of the original tape. they never had a problem with his "secret tapes" because they weren't secret, never have been...so why would they have a problem now?

[bee]

Hi Bee,

I'm referring to Martin Stubbs, he's released several vids, the first was entitled "The Secret NASA Transmissions" in early 2000. You say Stubbs is a problem for the authorities, but he's been doing this for 13yrs now, most of which is just a rehash of the original tape. they never had a problem with his "secret tapes" because they weren't secret, never have been...so why would they have a problem now?

but they were only NOT secret because Stubbs released the footage.

that he obtained from a feed for NASA employees

Although JO tried to say the footage was live through NASA TV ....FOR THE PUBLIC.....he evaded actually being able to show/prove this.

edit...and I think the Tether Incident footage IS a problem for the status quo / authorities...or what ever we want to call them.

that is my opinion on the matter...

.

Edited November 4, 2012 by bee

[TSS]

but they were only NOT secret because Stubbs released the footage.

that he obtained from a feed for NASA employees

Although JO tried to say the footage was live through NASA TV ....FOR THE PUBLIC.....he evaded actually being able to show/prove this.

.

If that were true, then why was he never pursued for hacking into a private channel, stealing footage, and releasing it to the public? Can you prove that the channel wasn't accessible by the public, because if you can't isn't it a leap of faith to say he is a problem for the authorities because the footage was secret, when infact all you have to confirm this is that he put "secret" in the title. Also, why wasn't ufo mag prosecuted for illegally distributing illegal content (if the footage was stolen as you say)? Why wasn't the Leeds conference stopped from broadcasting illegal footage too?

[bee]

If that were true, then why was he never pursued for hacking into a private channel, stealing footage, and releasing it to the public? Can you prove that the channel wasn't accessible by the public, because if you can't isn't it a leap of faith to say he is a problem for the authorities because the footage was secret, when infact all you have to confirm this is that he put "secret" in the title. Also, why wasn't ufo mag prosecuted for illegally distributing illegal content (if the footage was stolen as you say)? Why wasn't the Leeds conference stopped from broadcasting illegal footage too?

your guess is as good as mine....I expect they didn't want to draw attention to it all.

Keep it all within the 'UFO community'....and avoid it bursting into Main Stream Media...perhaps.

If the images are travelling through the air (or whatever)....could this be classed as hacking?

NASA is funded by the public...although Stubbs was in Canada....it could be argued that the footage belonged to the public (and was therefore not illegal?)

But it was Stubbs who brought it to the public's notice....

.