No!!!!!!!!!!!

I'll try one LAST time:

1st - I was addressing the need for caution with ancient texts.

2nd - I was using the sited UM-Thread as simply, what I see as an EXCELLENT EXAMPLE for the need for care and caution.

3rd - Because OTHERS (NOT ME) saw w/supplied site reference as proof - of seeing a "UFO" when there was none. This was being "seen" through "biased 21st Century eyes", the OP of the thread and his referenced website... >> NOT ME.

4th - Which again is my point. Caution and Care w/ancient texts, pictures and such.

I also supplied the sites as reference to your post:


5th -Showing you that people have/are doing this....with the referenced sites. (Other People are doing this - > NOT me....)

If you don't get what I'm saying, "then I guess I'm just not 'clicking' with you on this one." I accept that we have a mis-understanding and say, "let's move past this one...." Because I do not know how to make it any clearer. I really don't.


Most Respectfully - Jj -

I'd never confuse hieroglyphs with "flying Saucers"!!!





Fine, so where does my point that schizophrenics are part of the population and can NOT BE STOPPED from posting this *crap* come into play?




See my response to your "1st", above.

Ok, first I never said that you did confuse. WOW... ok, let's see if we can 'clear this up'.

I sited to Sky, the need for "caution" with "ancient texts". I site why - with the picture and the UM-thread as to where I was coming from.

Then you asked and I quote:


So I was showing you the thread that Fantasycat started, that acutally did this "connection". With the link to their thread they started and the referenced thread they were getting this from.
I was showing you this was 'no joke'.
No way was this ever directed at you EXCEPT to answer your question, "Are you joking?" - No I wasn't joking - this was really going on. Nothing more.....

OK?? Sigh...........

Jj.....

Time travelers I say, only here for a short stay, debris probably. So why arent they appearing, shy perhaps?

I don't see why not! After all, saucer-shaped flying objects were reported centuries ago and identical sightings of saucer-shaped flying objects continue well into the 21st century.


98
Rome: Conrad Wolfhart, Lycothenes, a medieval writer reports, “At sunset, a burning shield passed over the sky at. It came sparkling from the west and passed over to the east.”

776
Charlemagne’s castle at Sigiburg. As the Saxons were laying siege to the castle, flying shields that were reddish in color appeared in the sky and rained down fire on the attacking army.

1133
Japan: A large silvery disk is reported to have come close to the ground.

1180
Japan, Kii province: A term equivalent to our "flying saucer" was actually used by the Japanese approximately 700 years before it came into use in the West. Ancient documents describe an unusual shining object seen in the night as a flying "earthenware vessel." The object, which had been heading northeast from a mountain in Kii province, changed its direction and vanished below the horizon, leaving a luminous trail.

1517
Rumania, Moldavia: A large blue glowing disk appeared and remained in the sky for some time.

1895
England, Oxford: A disk was seen rising above some trees and disappearing into the east

1917
Fatima: The sun appeared against the clear blue sky as a flat silver disc revolving on its own axis and sent forth shafts of red, violet, yellow and blue light in all directions. Witnessed by up to 70,000 people.

1926
China: Nicholas Roerich sees a daylight disc UFO in a clear blue sky in northern China.

July 1947
Roswell: Disk-shaped flying object seen flying toward direction of the Foster ranch. Afterwards, large debris field discovered on the Foster ranch by Mac Brazel.

July 1947
Section II: Technicians at Secret Test Base Observe Mechanical UFO

At Muroc AFB (now Edwards AFB) and adjacent Rogers Dry Lake, scientists and engineers test and develop the latest aircraft, including secret projects. Althoroughly familiar with anything that flies, the base technical personnel had no explanation for the UFOs which maneuvered over the area July 8, 1947. Twice that morning, disc-shaped objects were observed cavorting overhead. Then about 11:50 AM, a crew of technicians at Rogers saw a round white, apparently metallic object descending, moving west nortwest against the wind. They observed thick projections on top which crossed each other at intervals, suggesting either rotation or oscillation.

Official Report

http://www.nuforc.org/Muroc.html

It's obviously not though, since so far, not one skeptic has cknowledged these to be ET spacecraft.

Snozz -
On #2 - Here is a little science experiment to do.

Get some various size/weight marbles, even some ice-cubes of various sizes.

Now put them on a top that will NOT be damaged by the marbles or ice, but that there is enough room/space for them move about.

Now push one or another ice and/or marble and see what happens.
... How do they move?
... What kind of angles do they move in.
... Notice what happens when one 'piece' is moving in a set direction and what happens when it is hit by another.
.... Is the angle changed?
.... Is the speed changed?

Now change the amount of preasure you use to push and notice how the speed, angles and such are.
... How do they move?
... What kind of angles do they move in.
... Notice what happens when one 'piece' is moving in a set direction and what happens when it is hit by another.
.... Is the angle changed?
.... Is the speed changed?

Now granted this is small scale, but I think you'll see my point.

You can also see this principle with a Pool Table and Pool Balls.
... How do they move?
... What kind of angles do they move in.
... Notice what happens when one 'piece' is moving in a set direction and what happens when it is hit by another.
.... Is the angle changed?
.... Is the speed changed?

I think this proves your assumption of # 2 --> WRONG.

Jj -

But, nothing strikes any of the UFOs that change their velocity and direction. If I missed it, please point them out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f-nB8Ait-M

What I honestly most saw from this movie looked like small meteorites passing by the various space crafts (the ones that just pass by and do not change trajectory). I believe that on average about 10 metric tonnes of meteorites hit Earth every day and for the moon about 1 metric ton, which is a lot of small rocks. Thus I would be surprised if astronauts hadn't had any footage showing objects flying by.

However, in the start of the movie there is an object abruptly changing trajectory, but to me that more looks like a small piece of debris that is pushed by some thruster exhaust. Problem is that we have no distance measure to calibrate from, so we have no idea how big this object is. But my best guess (and that is all that is is) is that it is a small piece of ice passing by said exhaust and therefore pushed away.

Best,
Badeskov

Actually, the object of STS-48 had nothing to do with an ice particle. Note the background didn't change after the flash, something the skeptics overlooked. Of the other UFOs, none were struck by any object and I repeatedly replayed the video over and over again. If stuck, they would have been destroyed yet they remained intact.

Beware what NASA says.

Bades -
One of the other things I checked out was: Various Air/Space defence technologies. Guess what I found out, without my friend in Military Intel, breaking any 'codes'. These systems are tested FREQUENTLY, very, for obvious reasons. Even during the time frame of these Shuttle Videos.

Based on what he was totally free and able to tell me was - These systems are tested at various level in and out of Earth's atmosphere. Which means these could easily be DROANS. Which with their being computer controlled/Operated to various and sundry movements, speeds and such - Well - this is a very reasonable answer - wouldn't you say? They are not subject to "G-Force" at all. No more than any other robotic system in space.

I continue to find it curious that some put the "ALIEN" equation at the head of the "list" of "What is this?" and "MAN" at the bottom of the list. It should be the other way around! Man should be at the TOP OF THE LIST of possiblities and "Alien" at the BOTTOM, the VERY BOTTOM.

These pictures easily and rationally could fit. Very easily.

Jj -

PS: Sky - the point that I was making to Snozz was the "problem" with his "IF/THEN" logic of his point # 2. Nothing more and nothing less. Just showing by example that there are other answers to this equation of #2. That it wasn't "cut and dry" as he tried to suggest.

3. Unexplained Phenomena?

Why would the backround have to change? I assume you’re implying that a thruster firing would result in noticeable rotation rates. In attitude-hold mode, the shuttle autopilot commands very small RCS thruster firings to maintain position, not change it. The small pulses of the RCS thrusters result in very small rate corrections that would not be noticeable in the video. Not too different from the small steering wheel inputs that are typically needed to keep a car tracking in a straight line down a highway. Steering corrections are being made, but the car doesn’t necessarily turn noticeably left or right.

Also, keep in mind that a translational jet firing (i.e. a nudge sideways, front-back, or up-down) wouldn’t create ANY noticeable background change because the orbiter doesn’t rotate at all.

The skeptics haven’t overlooked this issue; they just understand how the shuttle systems work. The brief flash in the STS-48 video is perfectly consistent with a short RCS thruster pulse.

Well done -

Jj -

Sure, we have tested devices in space and in fact, an F-15 was used to fire a missile into space and smash a satellite to bits. Once again, those objects are not ice particles and judging by the fact that when they maneuver and change their velocities you do not see any firing of thrusters.

Note that the background sky remains stationary despite the flash. There is no vibration nor the slightest movement whatsoever and there are two objects flying in different directions, one from a stationary position.

"NASA had stated that the
brief flare was the firing of an attitude adjustment jet,
required just prior to the waste water ejection procedure.
Further, they explained that the object seen to make a right
hand turn was merely a small ice crystal reacting to the
thruster fire. The problem with this is that, based on
actual NASA audio logs of the mission, an attitude
adjustment and subsequent waste water ejection procedure
occurred just after Event 2! The NASA explanation was
patently wrong."

Umm, Sky - what part of the word "DROAN" did you not get?? OR computer controlled??

I quote from my post:


The bold to point out what I stated: Yes this would rule out ICE, I totally agree.

Jj -

Some skeptics still cling to the 'ice particle' theory and I never believed for an instant the objects were ice particles. Someone found it very convenient to throw in 'ice particles' without thinking that someone else would do further checking.

Admittedly, I am still trying to figure out why this cannot be an ice particle. Ice particles are constant companions to the shuttle, so why not?

Best,
Badeskov

ok, but in all fairness - I didn't even mention ICE in that post. So that is why I was more than a 'tad confudeld'..

So can I entertain the idea, that you accept this as A possible answer?? (or should I ask??)

Jj-

I highlighted some major points as to why noticed motion would not have/need be seen: But enough to move "ice" and such around, like the "pool ball" example I gave to Snozz to think about. Yes this would be enough "push" in a Zero G enviorment, w/out it causing effects inside the cab.

Basically this is to cut down INERTIA so that the crew are not always haveing to "HOLD ON". There is a reasonable logic to this, which isn't that easily dismissed.

Jj -

If we are here, then they are there.

Sorry Jj, I think it was me that introduced the ice particle into the discussion - didn't mean to implicate you in any way

Best,
Badeskov

See my PM to you --- All is fine!

This quote appears to be taken from www.darkconspiracy.com as a part of a reprinted email newsletter. The author doesn’t really provide any evidence to back up his assertion.

Actually, a bit of Googling reveals that both sides of the issue appear to agree that telemetry records show vernier thrusters L5D and R5D firing during the timeframe of the video. These are small, down-firing jets located on the orbiter’s aft OMS pods. There is, of course, some debate as to whether or not these thrusters could have caused the observed behavior in the video, but not that the thrusters fired (see example discussion here).

The vernier thrusters are tiny, with only 24 pounds of thrust each (reference). A short pulse from these jets will not create any noticeable vibration or changes in attitude. They provide only a tiny nudge to fine-tune the orbiter’s position. I'm not quite sure which two objects you're referring to moving in different directions, but that's not necessarily unusual as there are mulitple possible sources for small debris near the orbiter in flight. It's quite common to see things drifting in different directions.

Why thanks, Jj. I appreciate that and will pass the compliment right back to you. I've really enjoyed your posts, and you're much faster at it than I am (as seen by our respective post counts).

Pericynthion

Now here is an interesting point: 24# of thrust - would do what to anything outside the shuttle when hit? Be it ICE, ROCK, Piece of metal you name it. Remember the pool ball - marble - ice? Take that into this equation. It would cause >MOTION. Which is pretty much the point some of us see and understand. It would cause motion. >> I am not saying ICE or ANYTHING was hit - but the very real possiblity of it is there.

With part of the video in quesiton, I think military droan target practice is a far more realisitc answer to PART of this video. Ice and rock or such is not removed out of the equation in parts of the video either.

The bottom line is: "Alien" is NOT at the top of the list. There are some very real HUMAN answers or 'mundane' answers that are at the top of the list FAR above "alien".

Jj -

I mean seriously where is the evidence to assume that the US, well any other country for that matter is hiding a UFO?

It could very well be possible that we are but the point is their is just no evidence.

~Moro

This would be precisley correct.
The verniers are used in attitude hold and station keeping for very miniscule moments which hold the vehicle at a given attitude. They fire all the time in this mode, in various places.

When you think about it for a minute, a 24 pound thrust engine will provide an initial velocity to the 250,000 pound vehicle (approx.) of a very small fraction of an inch per second. These thruster firings are basically tiny "burps" of the verniers. A one second burn of two verniers, providing a pitch rate to the vehicle (for example) will impart a rate of a little less than 1/10 inch per second.

You cannot see a visible rate during attitude hold vernier firings. However, these little engines do spit out some high velocity exhaust from their 110 PSI chambers. That will most assuredly cause a visible rate to a tiny, virtually massless piece of ice or other particulate that may be (and almost always is) floating around the vicinity of the orbiter, and which may be in the path of the engine's exhaust.

Pericynthion and MID, thanks a lot for the very detailed info; as usual you present a treasure trove of information

Best,
Badeskov

Glad we agree on that "ICE" thing but apparently, there are those who disagree.

The object reacts to an incoming object that had nothing to do with the firing of thrusters. Also:

http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc519.htm

Actually, there are clues that point directly at Wright-Patterson AFB.



What evidence did we have in 1963 that the A-12 existed? What evidence did we have that "Have Blue' and 'Tacit Blue' existed. What about Boeing's "Bird of Prey' aircraft? There were no evidence they existed while "Black" yet they were flying in the skies on a regular basis regardless of the lack of evidence on their existence. The government hides many things from the public and the government is very careful in making sure that certain evidence is withheld from the eyes of the publc and I know that from direct, firsthand experience.

In the videos, there are no objects that make contact with the UFOs in question before those UFOs changed their headings and velocities, and that fact is very clear in the videos.

Now, an object hitting another object at orbital velocities will disintergrate both objects and to give you some insight as to what I am talking about, a flake of paint did serious damage to a window of one of the space shuttles. In one of the videos, a sphere is seen close at hand yet it changes its position without any external contact from any object whatsoever.

The example given earlier is hardly worthy to be an example of what has been seen in space concerning the objects moving at sharp angles. Theres no gravity, it's in a vaccume..etc..

I think I know which video you're referring to, but I'd like to make sure. Could you please point me to that clip?

You know - you just showed me here you can 'buy' into 'top secret' planes and crafts that R in operation before they are released as to their existance. Even the "experts" from ALL fields - Government, Military and so on, did not know about these - until they NEEDED to know. Up to that point, "We didn't have this (technology)-(capablity)-" Cause honestly, they really didn't know. Why would or should they??

Now w/the above in mind - I hope you can see and understand the very real and strong possiblity of Zero-G proto-types and such that could, yes easily be what is being seen.

As I have stated in a number of posts: Even the "experts" - government, military, to other so called 'experts' - they do NOT know everything that is 'going on.' When you have the the time and chance to read the suggest book and the documentation and paper trail that he presents - the Zero G crafts are really very seriously in "alpha" - "Beta" or other wise working. Maybe they will not be made "OFFICIALLY KNOWN" - for the obvious reason of "Stealth" - "Spy" and such that would be needed. What better cover story - then to have everyone think - "This is "alien"??" It's there on a silver platter ready to be served and believed and we 'give it to them openly."

Remember the "Magician" - Mis-direction. Focus here, "Alien" - instead of over here.... The 'aliens' get the focal point - and the crafts continue under that guise. This really isn't that hard to see, believe and understand.

Jj -

This is just one video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f-nB8Ait-M

I am not giving anyone any pointers, because this is just a quick assessment. But the jumpy object could be one to whose orbital position, the shuttle overtook. The STS caught up, and passed the object.

Thanks for the link. Are you referring to the object at time 1:20? If so, please take a look at my previous post back on page 4 (link). It was buried pretty quickly in the midst of a posting frenzy, so nobody ever commented on it. I'd be interested in your opinions.

If this isn't the right part of the clip, please give me the time code and I'll take a look.

You will note that there were no evidence of their existence before they were revealed to the public and that was a point that I wanted to make in response to those who claim there is no evidence the government is hiding UFOs. Eventually, evidence will be revealed on secret crafts that are currently flying in our skies, evidence for those crafts which are lacking today. After all, the military doesn't release flight schedules nor locations of its secret aircraft to the newspapers.

As far as certain technology is concerned, I know that such advanced technology was not ours by the fact that we had yet to understand how to eliminate sonic booms yet UFOs have been tracked in our skies at hyperonic speeds for decades and yet, no sonic booms. That fact was also noted by the Belgian government in 1990.



I can accept a test vehicle over ice particles and I have been aware of such test for years and I noted earlier a similar test using the F-15 as a launch platform. I even witnessed the intercept of a missile over the Pacific not long ago but some of those objects in orbit are not ours and I have been aware that NORAD has been tracking UFOs in space as well.

It is lame to puff up one's accusations about objects in NASA videos, by ascribing them to "alien" probes. The obvious must be eliminated first. Let someone counter my proposal that this is just so much space "stuff".

And that quote at the beginning of the video was about a fellow astronaut. More puffery!!!

That is one of them. Time codes: 20-30, 43, and of course, 1:20.

I went to your link and observed the drop of water on the window, which was not convincing to me because I tend to look deeper at the heart of the matter than the average person. For instance, I look at the little details in light definitions and noticed how the water affects the light passing through. Note how light is affected by the drop of water and compare that light reflection with the light reflection on the solid object in time code: 1:20

I wanted to add that light reflections are very important and that is why I have slammed the sloppy works of UFO hoaxer, Billy Meier. I have attacked him for his hoaxed photos, which are so poor when proper lighting conditions and arrangements on his models are taken into consideration that I cannot understand how anyone could have accepted his hoaxed UFO photos at face-value and I have attacked him for the damage he has done to UFOlogy as well.

skyeagle: So, what you're saying is that we are being visited by ETs?

your whole reality is based on what corrupt governments tell you..antiquated science and tv...yet your reality is the WORD...cause you say so....oh boy

Since no one can say definitively what they really are, one can then say definitively that they *are* UFOs...unidentified flying objects.

And we should accept your reality cause you say so? Pot, kettle, black.

You know if we ignore his fantasy posts and only acknowledge the real and serious stuff he posts, do you think he'll get the message?

Jj -

Yes! Not just adding my own 1968 experience Vietnam, but I can add a list of senior military officials, intelligence officials, commercial and military pilots, cosmonauts and astronauts as well. There are scientist and engineers, some involved in NORAD's space surveillance systems, who have gone on the ET record that NORAD has been tracking UFOs in space. Dr. Carl Sagan was aware that the Air Force was tracking such objects and attempted to obtain space surveillance data the Air Force was throwing away.

Project Mogul and Skyhook balloon scientist in New Mexico have also recorded their own UFO sightings and their conclusions were that the flying saucers they were tracking were those of ET. The Air Force's EOTS and its Intelligence reports on flying saucer maneuvers pointed their fingers at ET. The Air Force issued orders for its pilots to shoot down flying saucers during the 1950's not to mention that cadets at the Air Force Academy were told to take UFOs seriously while at the same time the Air Force was presenting a whole different picture to the public on UFOs. Eventually, the public found out about that little book at the Academy and afterwards, it was taken off the shelf. Those are little clues that something is going on but there are those who are ignoring those clues or just don't take them seriously enough to understand what they depict.

In regards to Roswell, it was the recovery of a downed flying saucer and the military would never have concocted such a sensational story over a downed classified project. The name of the game in that respect is to not bring any attention to that of a downed classified project but as it was, the Air Force's announcement that they recovered a downed flying disk is what brought world-wide attention to the Roswell area, including the attention of Joseph Stalin. I detailed how the military covers up its downed classified assets as I did on how the military covers up its own classified projects from they eyes of its own personnel, even those who possess top secret clearances on secret bases. If they do not have the proper clearance, they are still denied direct access to certain classied projects whether they work at the so-called Area 51 or any other secret base for that matter. There was a time when personnel at a secret base were told to enter buildings and close the window shades. That night, a classified aircraft landed and was immediately towed into a hangar and the hangar doors were shut. Only after the craft was safely hidden from view were personnel at that secret base cleared. So here was a real case where personnel possessing top secret clearances at a secret base were denied to even see what flew in that night. Take into consideration that particular base was already flying another type of secret aircraft.

Similar details were noted in last Fall's issue of an Air Force publication. I posted this article several times before so in case you missed it, here it is for your review to give you some insight as to what happens when secrets crash. You will note that the military does not concoct a downed flying saucer story to cover-up its classified assets.



Compare the way we really do business when secrets crash with the initial report of the recovery of a downed flying saucer at Roswell report issued to the press by the Air Force in 1947. Some time after my sighting in 1968, I decided to investigate the UFO enigma for myself to see what was going on and I was shocked at what I was uncovering on UFOs.

What it all boils down to is that the public is not being told the whole story on UFO reality and that is where little clues become very important in deceiphering certain bits of information in an effort to ascertain what is really going on behind the closed doors of the government. There are high govenment and military officials stating on the record that ET is here, along with other highly credible people, and there are tons of data tapes and other evidence backing their statements but is anyone listening?


I must add that the Air Force knew that no weather balloon nor a Mogul balloon train nor test dummies and accident victims of the 1950's were ever involved in the Roswell incident. They were just simply cover stories for what really crashed in New Mexico in July 1947.

Im done posting here...because my reality differs from the skeptics; i've been asked to not post anymore...i have 33 years into studying the UFO alien phenomena...but the cover-up is to important...good luck and farewell....