UFO's have always been proven. If they are unidentified and flying in the sky. Then it's a UFO lol.

I want to believe.

Well actually, no, it is going to be very easy to exlain the 'objects' in that video and so many videos like it, as same posted elsewhere herein. But here it is again; That material is ice and other debris from the shuttle on orbit. It fairly flies in a huge debris field. So much so that at about every 30 hours, the RCS motors fire and move the orbiter a couple dozen meters out of its own debris cloud while in space.

Conspiracy groups single out STS-80 and STS-40 for these claims of UFOs near the shuttle on orbit. Actually, every single mission from STS-1 to STS-116, shows the exact same debris type material around the orbiter. The movement of same is from the attitude adjustment firing of the RCS motors (Reaction Control System-jets, rockets, etc) to keep the orbiter on track while it circles the Earth.

Everyone saw and understood this as the first videos and photos were coming in from STS-1, so many years ago. That video and so many like it, shows the overlooked issue of debris cloud and orbiter flying within this mess. Very common scene, but alas, no UFOs.


RAMS

I have watched the video, and I would like to ask a couple questions. Taking into concideration, at the speed that the alien beings must travel, in order to get to their destination, then first of all, why are they going to slow in the video, and second of all, with all the camera's and satellites in space, then why are there only a few proven alien crafts, when there are more "sightings" in an hour on earth?

There are no "proven" alien craft. Many, many objects have been filmed and photographed that may be alien craft, but they also may be secret projects, among other things...

The thing about sightings on Earth is that, they are viewed by people. People have imaginations. People have bad memories. People like to think they witnessed something special. So, naturally, there would be A LOT of sightings on earth, because, well, there are A LOT of people on Earth that don't have the knowledge to identify what they have seen... So it becomes a 'UFO' -- a term interchangable with 'alien craft' for some.

The reason may be that the objects sighted in the video are most probably not space craft.



First off, there are no "proven" alien craft.

And the reason there are more sightings on Earth is because there are a lot more people running around down here than there are in the space shuttle while it's in orbit. In fact, there's a whole lot more.

Edit: Argh! You beat me to it MF. And I think you did a better job as well.

Im sure NASA has the proof....they just like to keep us in the dark......

It wouldn't surprise me if no one at NASA knew. They may be the dupe organization that keeps the appearance of slow, gradual evolution in space travel/technology. The best way to keep pawns is to never let them know they're pawns.

Yeah but if that were the case, then you'd expect them them to actually make slow, gradual evolution.. Now they are talking about moon missions again and replacing the shuttle with simpler rockets.

Actually, many people would be surprised if they knew what has been going on over their heads in space.

...I try...


~edit~ Sky, that is exactly the kind of information that keeps me 'on my toes'. I'm glad you're able to produce things such as this so often.

Thanks!

You would be surprised on what goes on behind closed doors. One of the engineers from Aerojet is revealing even more information. Also, he noted the Iranian UFO encounter of 1976.

Of course.

After being involved in this field... Nothing surprises me!

I wish I could say the same! Just when I thought I heard it all, something else came up and threw everything else on the back burner!

Actually - they HAVE to live in a budget which is just the oposite of the "BLACK BUDGETS". So NASA works w/in the system and the others - well, do not have to work in the system - they WORK the system.

Yes they are likely left in the dark. It's like one company I work for's policy: They only tell the people that NEED TO KNOW - if you do not need to know, YOU DON'T. That includes the President of the Company - He actually knows very little of the 'R&D' of his company. But he is also the 4th Pres. in 15 years. Their policy is: Presidents come and go - so the risk factor of them knowing is just to high.

NASA isn't so much a PAWN as it is just TOO VISIBLE. Imagine what they could do if they had a "BLACK BUDGET"?? We might actually have a base on the moon by now!

BTW: A fun note - how many of you knew: COREL CORNING - is space technology?

LMAO!....I feel a bit emberrassed I never meant to make it sound like I actually thought those were "alien crafts". I was being a tad..sarcastic...and quizzical at the same time. Why would they be going so slow? taking into consideration how far they must have to travel between worm holes and galaxies.

I am with you Snozzberry. Nasa knows whats up. The collection of Nasa vids can hardly be dismissed.

No, but most can be explained...

what they allow you to see can be explained...why did NASA cut there live feeds around christmas time?....as taxpayers dont we have a right to see?....

I agree, many of those look like water droplets or ice crystals or Sattelites or debri. However. a few, IMHO, are nothing that can be explained.

The second video in this compilation (The video that looks like a hurricane going through the clouds) is impossible to dismiss.

Just what the hell could it be?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAmItQyNicU

I would like to see some of you debunkers come up with yer best in regards to the second and third videos shown here.

I am puzzled

those arent ice crystals...the approaching ufo sees the missle; then retreats at an alarming speed....ps the debunkers wont touch this...they'll just revert to a bob lazar thread...

I had answered this earlier in case you did not see it.

Regarding the first and second video, it is easy to exlain the 'objects' in that video and so many videos like it, as same posted elsewhere herein and out on the net. But here it is again; That material is ice and other debris from the shuttle on orbit. It fairly flies in a huge debris field. So much so that at about every 30 hours, the RCS motors fire and move the orbiter a couple dozen meters out of its own debris cloud while in space.

Conspiracy groups single out STS-80 and STS-40 for these claims of UFOs near the shuttle on orbit. Actually, every single mission from STS-1 to STS-116, shows the exact same debris type material around the orbiter. The movement of same is from the attitude adjustment firing of the RCS motors (Reaction Control System-jets, rockets, etc) to keep the orbiter on track while it circles the Earth.

Everyone saw and understood this as the first videos and photos were coming in from STS-1, so many years ago back in April 1981. That video and so many like it, shows the overlooked issue of debris cloud and the orbiter flying within this mess. Very common scene, but alas, no UFOs.

Also, in the video you can actually see the motor fire, its exhaust plume coming out into view, then hit the ice particle, and the particle darts away with the direction of the plume blast that hit it. The third video is gone now. Do you have a link for it.


RAMS

I forgot to add that you can get any mission video from NASA and it cost about nothing save for shipping and then watch these on a big screen and it becomes evident that it is ice and debris we are seeing. Also, forgot to mention, sometimes the onboard crew of the shuttle will actually request ground controllers for a 'control burn' to fire the little rockets onboard the shuttle to move it out of the debris field since it gets so bad they can't see out the windows well enough to do their other work.

RAMS

I just did debunk it, for the second time now, within thise thread topic area. Read the above two posts by me.

RAMS

Answer:
Target Practice. HUH? Yup - target practice.
In order to make sure our GROUND TO AIR - ever upper atmospher, these defense systems MUST be checked and re-checked often to keep them in good working order. So send up droans and well 'shoot them down'. But obviously that cannot be 'stationary' since a missle or such launched from another country: MOVE.

For God's sake could you please drop the whole ice crystal thing. You know its not ice crystals or space debris because none of that stuff can do the things those ufos did. STOP denying the truth.
Case closed.

I am going to go with RAMS on his view of the video.

As for Jjbreen, his interpretation is possible, if more unknowns are assumed. That is called a stretch, and not is required for the purpose of the immediate video- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAmItQyNicU.

In regards to the final segment of the video (I think they said it was Sept. 1996), where a roundish object, somewhere between the STS orbiter and the clouds suddenly becomes visible to the camera, again RAMS would be the more convincing.

If we remove the music and the voice-over, and just look...it seems like billiard balls in space off to the (lower) horizon. The announcer says they move independently of each other, in random fashion. Do they really? Or, are they merely the brightest reflections in a larger cloud of unseen debris?

Without independent corraboration from a satellite, for instance, saying these are UFOs is another stretch.

For me, it is back to square one. Like my sister says, if they know anything, they will probably tell us when they think the time is right.


And, Robert A.M. Stephens is RAMS, and he has a wonderful website. He has had a notable career as an artist, and as an image analyst. If he comes across as anything other than sincere, then I don't know what to say.

you werent being serious here were you?...we send up drones then shoot them down?

Your words are most kind and most well taken in all ways. I went through this argument some 8 years ago with the whole Art Bell bunch and it never stopped. It doesn't matter what is presented, the conspiracy movement will see and think what they will, no matter what the source of facts are.

But, suffice to say, there has been no UFOs ever filmed, observed, from any and all 116 Space Shuttle missions thus far to date. And it is NASA that would be the first to declare such, since that is what they do--go out on the frontier and look---for everything, and anything....


RAMS

how can you know this...do they tell all employees everything?..thats naive....

Limited - The seriously belongs to you. Read on and you'll see why. You put your foot into this one, without any thought.

Wow - you are seriosly clueless aren't. Let me make this as easy and simple for to understand as I can.

What is the purpose of "target practice" - especially in Military Drills, Tests and such? This should only take you 15 seconds or so to figure out.

They even show this being done (tests - drills) on various Discovery Channel and military testing out new technology and such. They even show 'mock' raids and battles.
For what purpose?? Should only take 15 seconds to answer this.

How many buildings, bunkers, tanks, underground bunkers and moving targets are built to just 'blow up', 'shoot' and 'distory'?? A LOT!

Now we have air defense technology that is suppose to shoot down 'in-coming' weapons. Do we just try it once and, "oh it works fine and just let it 'sit' there till the real thing?" NO - it's tested and tested and tested. So umm - what do they test it on??

They send up droans to fire on. To keep it in 'working order'.

This really isn't that complicated - well maybe it might be....

No No No. Not the one that gets shot at. The one that appears at 7:44 into the vid. Check it out. What the hell is it. That aint no storm I don't think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAmItQyNicU

he's saying it's a drone ....i'll go with the ice crystal theory...jj your out there...

It is the truth, actually.

RAMS

Then you would know what nasa and the cia/nsa complex know...theres ufo's running around all over this planet....and your telling me they dont have one film?...why did nasa cut the live feeds recently ?...anyone

You are in complete error. And regarding live feeds, there have always been interuptions and it would be helpful for me if you can be specific on which 'feeds' you are referencing.

Also, out of interest, why are you assured of what you state? Do you have supporting information that can be verified that is not conjecture?

RAMS

Further, here it is again for the third time, and this is the truth. I am not sure the persistance on something that is false, against data that is fact. I do not understand and am I missing something? Please assist in this.

Here it is again:

I had answered this earlier in case you did not see it.

Regarding the first and second video, it is easy to exlain the 'objects' in that video and so many videos like it, as same posted elsewhere herein and out on the net. But here it is again; That material is ice and other debris from the shuttle on orbit. It fairly flies in a huge debris field. So much so that at about every 30 hours, the RCS motors fire and move the orbiter a couple dozen meters out of its own debris cloud while in space.

Conspiracy groups single out STS-80 and STS-40 for these claims of UFOs near the shuttle on orbit. Actually, every single mission from STS-1 to STS-116, shows the exact same debris type material around the orbiter. The movement of same is from the attitude adjustment firing of the RCS motors (Reaction Control System-jets, rockets, etc) to keep the orbiter on track while it circles the Earth.

Everyone saw and understood this as the first videos and photos were coming in from STS-1, so many years ago back in April 1981. That video and so many like it, shows the overlooked issue of debris cloud and the orbiter flying within this mess. Very common scene, but alas, no UFOs.

Also, in the video you can actually see the motor fire, its exhaust plume coming out into view, then hit the ice particle, and the particle darts away with the direction of the plume blast that hit it. The third video is gone now.

Adding to my answer, why is my granular, supported, confirmed, and verified answer, not valid, but your postulation is? Do you have access to interface at NASA that I cannot access? Do you know categorically your claims are true and if so, can you share those with me so I can make some calls and check to see if they are valid.

Very confusing.

Thanks in advance.


RAMS

I had given up on the UFO debate because of some people ridiculing truly fascinating footage without justification.

Since the Apollo missions some civilians have been trawling through NASA footage and pointing out anomalies only to have them explained as "debris" or space junk!

Granted some footage will be of ice and debris but some insightful people have asked "if this is Ice why does it appear to stop and change directions then accelerate?" only to have the same "debris" answers suggested.

We all have to understand the very real possibility that we are not the only Sentient life forms to have ever existed and that when we call something a UFO you are describing something that has a more accurate Designation, for example some Government’s call these anomalies Fast Walkers as opposed to man made Satellites that are referred to as Slow Walkers!

Obviously I can not prove beyond all doubt that Aliens and "Fast Walkers" exist because I have neither but for a De-Bunker to say that the lack of physical evidence confirms they don’t exists is equally vulnerable disagreement because it over simplifies the complex nature of this subject and all the factors that need to be taken into consideration.

For example are the "fast walkers" of human or extra terrestrial design? Until recent admissions the US government let it's citizens believe their experimental Aircraft flying around Arizona Desert were UFO's in an attempt to deflect the media's interest on what had been developed and tested.

As for the "debris" explanation this comes under the heading of "It's our best guess at such short notice answer" these include things like:

Swamp Gas/Reflecting Light/ Out Of Focus
Hazy Disk's/Out of Focus
Ice/Out of Focus
Space Junk/Out of Focus
Dust/Out of Focus
Weather Balloon’s/Torn and Shiny
Odd shaped Clouds

What the De-bunker should be able to show is a direct comparison between the Phenomenons caught on the NASA film and an example of the phenomenon duplicated in the way they described it, be it from Ice or whatever the comparison was.

Obviously you cant just snap a picture in your back garden and say “yeah it looks the same as your UFO!” because they come from different environments and that has a big effect on the outcome of the experiments results, in short to duplicate the results and prove your point everything has to be as close as humanly possible to the original, If you can duplicate it then its not a UFO.

Allot of people who believe in UFO's are now saying to the De-bunkers "ok if I’m wrong prove I’m wrong!" calls are being made to NASA and other Space Agencies to take independent and un-bias group's of civilian scientists into space to test all theories and idea's from both sides involved in the UFO/E.T debate, predictably and unfortunately this request has not been realised and even though you the Tax Paying public normally ends up covering the costs for the launching and operation of these space craft!

Little has been done to answer the Questions even the De-bunkers would like answered.

I really am confused now. I have answered with fact, and yet, anyone who differs based on allegory, does not even respond to the posted data, but talks right on past as if nothing was answered at all: on orbit debris is now UFOs. This is simply not logical.

I do not understand. I posted what is proven as categorical fact. It is based on 116 shuttle missions on orbit, all of which were filmed and documented with on orbit activities and with the 39 reaction control motors on the orbiter, they fire and move a debri cloud around and away from the orbiter, or the orbiter away from the debris cloud. I do not understand why this is not an acceptable answer based on fact. And when the UFO poster is also in turn solicted to post fact for their own claims otherwise, and disspel what all of NASA knows and confirms, there is a running away and ignoring of the very answer that was solictied in the first place.

I trully do not understand the refusal of this fact to be understood.

RAMS

Did I say your explanation is wrong?

No I did not!

I'm afraid you are missing the point I am trying to make what is yes sometimes there is Debris what is confused with being a UFO but sometimes a UFO is dismissed as being Debris and that is the Point you are not willing to accept!

Every Picture or Video with an anomaly is instantly labelled as Debris or out of Focus without consideration of what might be hidden or overlooked.

I bloody new I would regret posting in the UFO thread because I always get some Sceptic jumping on my case telling me they know best and every little last thing that is out there floating in the Abyss of Space is Debris! I guess that includes us does it? Are the Humans drifting in Space Debris as well?

Thank you for the reply. I was addessing the videos that make up the subject of this thread. I was not addressing over all UFO reports as a blanket sweep. But the objects in every mission video to date, including those referenced in this thread topic, is orbital debris. That is a fact based statement of truth.

I am sorry I misread your post point.

RAMS

Hi there. I don't really like to think of myself as a "debunker," but I'm happy to give you my thoughts on what that video clip is showing. I agree with RAMS and the others here who have stated that these objects are nothing more than small ice particles or other debris drifting near the orbiter. This includes the object you're referring to here which appears at 7:44 in your video link.

The video clip in question is from STS-80. A longer version of the clip, along with other video from STS-80 can be found here (YouTube). Your object appears at 3:25 in this particular video. At the time this footage was shot, Columbia had just passed into orbital sunrise, but the Earth below and behind the orbiter was still in darkness. The low-light TV camera in the payload bay was being used to watch thunderstorm activity.

I believe that what we're looking at in the video is a small, out-of-focus debris particle that is drifting slowly away from the camera. While it's near the shuttle, it's in the shadow of the orbiter and so is too dark to appear on the video. At some point, it passes out of the orbiter's shadow and is then brightly lit by the sun. At this point, it pops into view on the video as a bright disk.

So that's my theory. Now, let's take a look the evidence to support it. Here's a screen shot of the object in question:


First of all, we can confirm that the orbiter has passed into sunrise by noting the sun glare in the lower left corner of the image. This is much more noticeable in the other YouTube video I linked above.

Now, the shape of the object is very familiar. This disk shape with a dark center is seen on quite a lot of the footage taken using the low-light CCTV payload bay cameras. Here are a few other examples:

STS-80


STS-75 (The tether video)


STS-?? (YouTube video with no mission identification)



In many of the video clips (including the one I linked above) these disks can be seen to be semi-transparent. The general shape and transparency are all perfectly consistent with the shapes created by out-of-focus point light sources (like small debris or ice particles). To show some more evidence for this, here's a photo I took a few weeks ago of a snow storm at night. The camera is a Canon SD700. I've set the focus at infinity and have used the flash to mimic the sun. I've cropped the image to keep the size reasonable, but absolutely no other image processing has been performed. Every object in this photo is nothing more than a tiny ice crystal (snowflake):




To explain why the object suddenly pops into view, I've created a couple simple diagrams. These were actually put together to describe the behavior of the first object seen in the YouTube video I linked above (also from STS-80), but the concept is exactly the same. Note that this particular object is dimly visible when it first appears, but then suddenly gets much brigher as it moves away. Here's what I believe is happening:



The orbiter is flying along belly-first with the payload bay facing backward. A payload bay camera is looking down and back at the dark surface of the Earth below. It's field of view is shown by the two dashed blue lines. The path of a debris particle drifting away from the orbiter is shown in red. When it initially crosses into the camera field of view, it's in the orbiter's shadow. Because of this, it will either be too dark to show up at all, or will be dimly lit by light reflecting off of other portions of the orbiter. As it continues to move away from the shuttle, it will eventually pass out of the shadow into bright, unfiltered sunlight. Because the camera is still set for looking at the nighttime portion of the Earth below, the particle will suddenly appear very, very bright on screen.

From the camera's point of view, the object's path will look something like this:


Now, keep in mind that the orbiter's shadow is actually a three-dimensional shape. Different particles will pass out of the shadow at different locations and times depending on just how they're oriented relative to the orbiter and it's shadow.

So, does this explanation help?

Adding to this, if the motors number 19,23,22,8,9 fire to keep yaw and vertical position, they would be the motors that would then scatter the debris as seen in the videos. Any of the topside motors would do the same but those line up with the partcles.

Good work.

RAMS

One thing to keep in mind is that all point sources of light will be diffracted through optics. It doesn't matter if its a piece of small debris or a satellite or even a Star.

So you can't just say that because some of the diffraction's are pieces of debris that all diffraction's that look similar to this are also pieces of debris. That's not necessarily true, to say all point sources of light will be diffracted in a similar manner through optics is true.

It doesn't matter if a point source is small, medium, or a really large object if its a point source it will be diffracted and produce a diffraction similar to other point sources.

Thanks, RAMS. And by the way, welcome to the forum!

Regards,

Pericynthion

That's a fair point about diffraction being the same regardless of the distance to the point source, but I really think that what we're seeing here is more focus-related than diffraction-related. Either way, it's important to note that the disk shape is just a camera effect and is not the real appearance of the object. Take another look at the STS-80 video on YouTube (link) and watch the very first object that appears. It begins as a semi-transparent disk, but the shape grows smaller and more distinct as it moves. By the end of the clip, it has become just a bright dot.


Object's Initial Appearance


Object's Final Appearance (Circled)



This behavior is perfectly consistent with an object moving into the camera's field of focus. Since we know the Earth and stars are in focus, the camera's depth of field must extend to infinity -- which then implies that the object must be relatively close to the camera. If the initial disk shape were a pure diffraction effect, we wouldn't expect to see the effect change significantly as it moved (as long as it remained effectively a point source of light). We'd also expect to see a similar effect from the stars which are visible at about 3:00 into the video, but we don't. They just look like dots.

Here's another example from my camera showing the type of effect I think we're seeing:

Focused


Unfocused

I agree, but then again point sources of light that are out of focus also create the same type of disk patterns as a function of the optics.




Here I think you've demonstrated how larger objects somewhat distant can appear with the same diffraction pattern just like small particles. Notice that the Street light in your pic shows a quite similar diffraction pattern we are discussing, but it certainly is not a small object near your camera lens it's simply a point source that is out of focus.

Did you focus the camera out to infinity to get the unfocused pic?

Jeez you people have absolutely NO imagination!

Why do you people need someone from the government to tell you that UFOs are real to believe? They can sell you anything they want, trust yourselves...