Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 4 votes

More NASA UFO's?

ufo nasa

  • Please log in to reply
1528 replies to this topic

Poll: Are these UFO's? (51 member(s) have cast votes)

Do these videos contain images of UFO's?

  1. Yes (22 votes [43.14%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 43.14%

  2. No (29 votes [56.86%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 56.86%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#796    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,076 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:31 PM

View Post747400, on 02 November 2012 - 01:28 PM, said:

And the difference from those who see ET everywhere is ...... ?

setting aside the sly dig.....'who see ET everywhere'.....

we trot out lots of different stuff....:)...lots of different cases/info/angles etc etc...

hazz/debunker just go...nah nah nah...no no nah nah.....Exhibit A and nothing else will do. (metaphorically stamping feet and pouting)...lol

.


#797    Hazzard

Hazzard

    Stellar Black Hole

  • Member
  • 11,758 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside Voyager 1.

  • Being skeptical of the paranormal is a good thing.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:53 PM

View Postquillius, on 02 November 2012 - 01:37 PM, said:

I think 747 may have been defending you suggesting there is no difference :innocent:


Thank you for that, quillius,... :rolleyes:

I still await the compelling Exhibit A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

#798    Hazzard

Hazzard

    Stellar Black Hole

  • Member
  • 11,758 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside Voyager 1.

  • Being skeptical of the paranormal is a good thing.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:54 PM

View Postbee, on 02 November 2012 - 02:31 PM, said:

setting aside the sly dig.....'who see ET everywhere'.....

we trot out lots of different stuff.... :)...lots of different cases/info/angles etc etc...

hazz/debunker just go...nah nah nah...no no nah nah.....Exhibit A and nothing else will do. (metaphorically stamping feet and pouting)...lol

.

Hey, thats me, I need science to tell me that any of this is real.

Belief and faith only goes so far.

I still await the compelling Exhibit A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

#799    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,222 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:08 PM

View PostHazzard, on 02 November 2012 - 02:53 PM, said:

Thank you for that, quillius,... :rolleyes:

my pleasure Hazz :santa:


#800    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:37 PM

View PostHazzard, on 02 November 2012 - 02:54 PM, said:

Hey, thats me, I need science to tell me that any of this is real.

Belief and faith only goes so far.

View PostHazzard, on 02 November 2012 - 02:54 PM, said:

Hey, thats me, I need science to tell me that any of this is real.

Belief and faith only goes so far.

Which science?  Whose science?  The institutional science or common sense science.  The two are not necessarily the same.

Posted Image


#801    Hazzard

Hazzard

    Stellar Black Hole

  • Member
  • 11,758 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside Voyager 1.

  • Being skeptical of the paranormal is a good thing.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:51 PM

View Postzoser, on 02 November 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:

Which science?  Whose science?  The institutional science or common sense science.  The two are not necessarily the same.

Common sense science??  Im not sure what that is,... "Whos science",... No wonder you have a problem with reality and factual information.


No, Im talking about the Scientific method.

A body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.

http://en.wikipedia....ientific_method

I still await the compelling Exhibit A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

#802    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:54 PM

View PostHazzard, on 02 November 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

Common sense science??  Im not sure what that is,... "Whos science",... No wonder you have a problem with reality and factual information.


No, Im talking about the Scientific method.

A body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.

http://en.wikipedia....ientific_method

Ah in that case you will be far less likely to succeed.

Posted Image


#803    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:55 PM

More curious footage that shows the large circular objects.  Appearing, moving and staying in a fixed position.  How is this explained?  What are they?



Posted Image


#804    Sweetpumper

Sweetpumper

    Heatseeker

  • Member
  • 10,700 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Avengers Tower

Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:00 PM

That's a scan of someone's stomach after eating pop rocks.

"At it's most basic level, science is supposed to represent the investigation of the unexplained, not the explanation of the uninvestigated." - Hunt for the Skinwalker

"The ultimate irony of the Disclosure movement is that it deeply distrusts officialdom, while simultaneously looking to officialdom for the truth." - Robbie Graham Silver Screen Saucers

#805    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:08 PM

View PostSweetpumper, on 02 November 2012 - 04:00 PM, said:

That's a scan of someone's stomach after eating pop rocks.

If you study it carefully this clip appears to have all the phenomena that Stubbs has identified.  Objects moving in all directions some with the rotation of the earth others not.  Some large some small, some slow moving some rapid.  Towards the end of the clip in the upper left corner an object appears further out compared to the other objects and it's pulsating.

Notice at precisely 16 seconds a smaller object materialises middle left.  Can this really be connected to night/day effects as Jim suggests?  I'm doubtful.

Edited by zoser, 02 November 2012 - 04:13 PM.

Posted Image


#806    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,847 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:18 PM

View Postzoser, on 02 November 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

More curious footage that shows the large circular objects.  Appearing, moving and staying in a fixed position.  How is this explained?  What are they?

To evaluate possible explanations, let's start simple. Is the scene sunlit or not?

Is it day or night?


#807    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ontario Canada

  • Facinating

Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:33 PM

View Postzoser, on 02 November 2012 - 04:08 PM, said:

If you study it carefully this clip appears to have all the phenomena that Stubbs has identified.  Objects moving in all directions some with the rotation of the earth others not.  Some large some small, some slow moving some rapid.  Towards the end of the clip in the upper left corner an object appears further out compared to the other objects and it's pulsating.

Notice at precisely 16 seconds a smaller object materialises middle left.  Can this really be connected to night/day effects as Jim suggests?  I'm doubtful.
Your first paragraph there seems to describe in a general way what you might see filming debris.  Just bits and pieces moving randomly.  These objects with holes, and pulsating, I thought, was generally understood to be an artifact of the optics or scanning of the camera when small objects are out of focus.
I don't think it's even possible to determine for certain, whether or not objects "materializing" can be attributed to the night/day effects and/or some characteristic of the optics.  "Materializing" seems to imply some intelligence at work.  Personally, I like the phrase "came into view".  I certainly don't think any of these objects are large.
My thoughts are that this video is just another random and uneventful day in orbit.
I'm afraid that video was a big snooze for me.

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#808    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:33 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 02 November 2012 - 04:18 PM, said:

To evaluate possible explanations, let's start simple. Is the scene sunlit or not?

Is it day or night?

In this particular clip Jim there is so much going on that that the question seems irrelevant.  Take a look at it and let me know what you think.

Posted Image


#809    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:36 PM

View Postsynchronomy, on 02 November 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

Your first paragraph there seems to describe in a general way what you might see filming debris.  Just bits and pieces moving randomly.  These objects with holes, and pulsating, I thought, was generally understood to be an artifact of the optics or scanning of the camera when small objects are out of focus.
I don't think it's even possible to determine for certain, whether or not objects "materializing" can be attributed to the night/day effects and/or some characteristic of the optics.  "Materializing" seems to imply some intelligence at work.  Personally, I like the phrase "came into view".  I certainly don't think any of these objects are large.
My thoughts are that this video is just another random and uneventful day in orbit.
I'm afraid that video was a big snooze for me.

Lots of activity going on there; some of it may be meteors but that doesn't explain the first object or the second object at 16 seconds.  I don't think you watched it very thoroughly would be my guess.

Posted Image


#810    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ontario Canada

  • Facinating

Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:38 PM

View Postzoser, on 02 November 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

In this particular clip Jim there is so much going on that that the question seems irrelevant.  Take a look at it and let me know what you think.
I fail to understand why you would deem that irrevelant.  In order to conduct analysis every piece of information is important.

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users