125 replies to this topic

[JimOberg]

<sub>So I'm presuming nobody knows the date.time of these sequences.

Can we guess the motive of the original youtube poster in withholding that information?</sub>

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

JimOberg, on 18 January 2013 - 03:48 AM, said:

<sub>So I'm presuming nobody knows the date.time of these sequences.

Can we guess the motive of the original youtube poster in withholding that information?</sub>

maybe a start?  http://www.facebook....oAlucinanteNews

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

JimOberg, on 18 January 2013 - 03:48 AM, said:

<sub>So I'm presuming nobody knows the date.time of these sequences.

Can we guess the motive of the original youtube poster in withholding that information?</sub>

That's just what I asked, yes. It would be easy enough to track down if they gave that, perhaps.

[Chrlzs]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 18 January 2013 - 01:12 AM, said:

I guess Debris does have a twin who wears identical clothes and walks the same path. Dude, just stick to the classic, the epic, the all encompassing, IT FAKE! 2: Return of the Debunkers.  Where the convoluted stories will guarantee to entertain and perplexed you at the same time.

Question 1 - are all things captured on film/video explainable?
(I have many, many images and a few videos that show unidentified 'stuff' in the sky - some would definitely attract interest here, given the level of desire to 'prove' aliens by simply adding together many similarly unidentified objects...)

Question 2 - Does the fact that something can't be positively identified mean that:
- it is particularly interesting?
- it is of alien origin?
- it is useful evidence of 'something'?
- science has failed?
- that no attempts should be made to offer alternative explanations?

Me, I think a bit of common sense investigation and proper consideration of all the potential factors is worthwhile.  Gee, maybe that's why I don't get naively suckered in by email offers, or fakers like Martyn Stubbs, Billy Meier, Jaime Maussan...

And as an aside.. seriously, when was the last time swamp gas was offered as a solution?  And do you deny that several ufo's over the last decade have been correctly identified as balloons?

Anyway, I await your in-depth research - what sequence do you have difficulty understanding in this particular video?  And can you explain why the 'author' of that production provides no provenance, no technical discussion?  That didn't raise any alarm bells?......

[seeder]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 18 January 2013 - 04:11 AM, said:

maybe a start?  http://www.facebook....oAlucinanteNews

I just looked at the above FB page..if YOU do, and scroll down, there is a vid with following splash screen.


click for big
 issufo.gif   95K   34 downloads

Freudian slip maybe?

Edited by seeder, 19 January 2013 - 12:03 AM.

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

seeder, on 18 January 2013 - 11:45 PM, said:

I just looked at the above FB page..if YOU do, and scroll down, there is a vid with following splash screen.


click for big
issufo.gif

Freudian slip maybe?

It's a Spanish site. can't expect them to spell everything correctly. I think you read too much into it

[Hazzard]

It also says that the ISS "has been orbiting the Earth since 1989".

When in reality the ISS is a modular structure whose first component was launched in 1998.

Edited by Hazzard, 19 January 2013 - 12:55 AM.

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

Chrlzs, on 18 January 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:

Question 1 - are all things captured on film/video explainable?
(I have many, many images and a few videos that show unidentified 'stuff' in the sky - some would definitely attract interest here, given the level of desire to 'prove' aliens by simply adding together many similarly unidentified objects...)

Question 2 - Does the fact that something can't be positively identified mean that:
- it is particularly interesting?
- it is of alien origin?
- it is useful evidence of 'something'?
- science has failed?
- that no attempts should be made to offer alternative explanations?

Me, I think a bit of common sense investigation and proper consideration of all the potential factors is worthwhile.  Gee, maybe that's why I don't get naively suckered in by email offers, or fakers like Martyn Stubbs, Billy Meier, Jaime Maussan...

And as an aside.. seriously, when was the last time swamp gas was offered as a solution?  And do you deny that several ufo's over the last decade have been correctly identified as balloons?

Anyway, I await your in-depth research - what sequence do you have difficulty understanding in this particular video?  And can you explain why the 'author' of that production provides no provenance, no technical discussion?  That didn't raise any alarm bells?......

I was pointing out to all the people who quickly jumped to the conclusion of space junk. Look from 0.34 -1:00, what are the chances that space junks look identical and move in identical path? not saying it's impossible, but what are the chances?

To answer your question:
1. Not all thing captured on film/video are explainable. which is why people shouldn't be so quick to say "It's space debris". Which is why I was alluding to the fact that they should just say "it's fake!" which would be more believable in this situation.

2. If something can't be positively identified, then..
a) it is interesting in this forum about UFOs/ETs if it looked nothing like we what we expect to be flying in the sky.
    b Not necessarily, but not impossible either.
c) I don't know about useful, but it's evidence that there's "something" we can't positively explain.
d) science has not failed, just mean that our science still have a long, long way to go.
e) attempts certainly can be made but just don't expect those attempts to be the definitive answer. We also reserve the right to  laugh if such an attempt seemed pathetic and bs.

When was swamp gas offered as an explanation? you tell me. but it did by the debunkers, which seemed laughable, don't you think?

Yes balloon have been identified. What is your point? That UFOs doesn't exist because some people misidentified balloons? dude, there are people mistaking the Moon for UFO. This only prove there are idiots out there. Which we know all along.

I find it's hard to understand why identical space junks move exactly the same way. Are there that much junks out there that they beginning to find their doppelganger? what are the chances of that? better than the chances of life outside of earth?
I point out the facebook page as possible origin of the video so the "experts" could contact them and ask them? btw, i have never said it was authentic. I was merely point out the fact that many debunkers were quick to dismissed as "space junks". Shouldn't they should have try to see if it's authentic or not before throwing out "debris" "junks" and such?

Edited by SwampgasBalloonBoy, 19 January 2013 - 01:36 AM.

[Classified Document]

Some people would say it's space junk, but space junk dont do that.

[seeder]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 19 January 2013 - 12:45 AM, said:

It's a Spanish site. can't expect them to spell everything correctly. I think you read too much into it

maybe you just didnt get what I read.. or how it could be read... if the ISS really had ufo's flying by regularly...dont you think it'd be worldwide news?

Or do you think its all covered up?

Hence the public feeds..

Edited by seeder, 19 January 2013 - 02:06 AM.

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

seeder, on 19 January 2013 - 02:05 AM, said:

maybe you just didnt get what I read.. or how it could be read... if the ISS really had ufo's flying by regularly...dont you think it'd be worldwide news?

Or do you think its all covered up?

Hence the public feeds..

I though you're alluding to "shigtings" which sound like ****ting since you throw in freudian slip.

it wasn't worldwide news because it wasn't definitive of what it could be and they think it's just SPACE JUNKS?

[JimOberg]

Classified Document, on 19 January 2013 - 01:54 AM, said:

Some people would say it's space junk, but space junk dont do that.

I doubt you really know WHAT 'space junk' can and cannot do, but maybe
it doesn't matter, because I agree that these videos RARELY show the
traditional 'space junk'. I've explained why, in my "99 FAQs About Space
UFOs" [www.jamesoberg.com/ufo.html] which I've urged people to read
as background and basis for further discussion of these strange-looking,
fascinating, and even occasion ally important videos deserve. Without that
background, all discussion to this point has been pointlessly wasted time,
I suggest.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

seeder, on 18 January 2013 - 11:45 PM, said:

I just looked at the above FB page..if YOU do, and scroll down, there is a vid with following splash screen.


click for big
issufo.gif

Freudian slip maybe?

sightings shmightings ......  

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

Space Junks? Seeing one of these in orbit would surely be proof of Ancient Astronauts ....

[TheOtherSide1945]

Hazzard, on 19 January 2013 - 12:52 AM, said:

It also says that the ISS "has been orbiting the Earth since 1989".

When in reality the ISS is a modular structure whose first component was launched in 1998.

this is true. i wouldn't trust this video on this fact alone.