Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
Alisdair.MacDonald

More NASA UFO's?

Are these UFO's?   51 members have voted

  1. 1. Do these videos contain images of UFO's?


Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

1,529 posts in this topic

A lot of the best UFO videos I've seen--not this one, which doesn't look real to me--show objects that are self-propelled and self-luminous, moving at a much faster velocity relative to the space station or the shuttles. Very often these fast objects are being filmed well below the shuttles or space station, but someones also moving by rapidly as they head out into space.

In my opinion, these are the "real" UFOs, although I have often wondered whether they are ours or "theirs"--or both.

Edited by TheMacGuffin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I answered the question ! now wheres my Tee-Shirt ?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I answered the question ! now wheres my Tee-Shirt ?

Ask Imaginarynumber1 he is in charge of the Tee-Shirt dept. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kool ! HEres some we do in Big-D !

Be there Oct,20th Forest Lane Reunion ! 1,200 plus rides to See and hear ! A Tradition from the 70`ss

post-68971-0-80402600-1346617891_thumb.j

Edited by DONTEATUS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey quillius,

I don't see why that should be the case, to be honest. There are many thousand satellites in orbit and add to that all the debris, such as spent rocket stages and the like, which gives you a lot to actually see when the light and reflectivity is right. If something wasn't at a range where it posed a danger, why go through the trouble of trying to identify it unless it was truly spectacular? And this was in my opinion not at all spectacular.

Cheers,

Badeskov

My own thinking on this is that crews RARELY see other satellites or 'space debris', they are too far away and moving TOO fast across the sky. Exception -- Iridium flares and occasional 'close' [500-1000 km] passes of bright, large satellites or NOSS triplets. My analysis persuades me that essentially ALL the dots and 'stuff' in the shuttle video is shuttle-generated 'dandruff' of various kinds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My own thinking on this is that crews RARELY see other satellites or 'space debris', they are too far away and moving TOO fast across the sky. Exception -- Iridium flares and occasional 'close' [500-1000 km] passes of bright, large satellites or NOSS triplets. My analysis persuades me that essentially ALL the dots and 'stuff' in the shuttle video is shuttle-generated 'dandruff' of various kinds.

The astronauts testify to the contrary. Jim you seriously need to do some research and listen to the people themselves and stop clinging to some classic party line. Nobody really believes it anyway.

[media=]

[/media]

Lots of links to other testimonies.

http://www.youtube.c...c.1.XlO27zD5RXU

Edited by zoser
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of the best UFO videos I've seen--not this one, which doesn't look real to me--show objects that are self-propelled and self-luminous, moving at a much faster velocity relative to the space station or the shuttles. Very often these fast objects are being filmed well below the shuttles or space station, but someones also moving by rapidly as they head out into space.

In my opinion, these are the "real" UFOs, although I have often wondered whether they are ours or "theirs"--or both.

"Self-luminous" is YOUR guess, and would require you to show tghey were NOT illuminated by the sun. That would require you to determine the lighting conditions of the time of the sighting, as well as where in the field of view the shuttle's own shadow is lying out, leaving nearby objects dark.

I don't think you've EVER done that for a single case [counter-example welcome] . You're just guessing, guided by the answer you WANT to get. Hopeless.

Ditto your assertion the dots are moving "at a much faster velocity relative to the space station or the shuttles" -- when all you can actually measure is the angular velocity, and for objects close to the camera -- a few meters or so -- even small absolute drift creates a high relative angle rate. Without knowing the actual range to an object you are not justified in claiming an absolute velocity for it -- but that hasn't stopped you, either.

Step back and consider: your 'assumptions' already contain the conclusions you THINK you are 'proving' with real evidence.

As we'd say in Mission Control, a classic 'self-eating watermelon' [Chuck Shaw's phrase].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The astronauts testify to the contrary. Jim you seriously need to do some research and listen to the people themselves and stop clinging to some classic party line. Nobody really believes it anyway.

Aldrin is talking about seeing an object associated with his own vehicle's booster rocket. How does that break the pattern I'm suggesting?

Other youtube videos involve vehicles performing rendezvous with, or departing from, the shuttle or the station. I'd classify them as 'associated vehicles', but none appear to be random, independent satellites or debris.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aldrin is talking about seeing an object associated with his own vehicle's booster rocket. How does that break the pattern I'm suggesting?

Other youtube videos involve vehicles performing rendezvous with, or departing from, the shuttle or the station. I'd classify them as 'associated vehicles', but none appear to be random, independent satellites or debris.

JIm

Watch and listen to the material. Otherwise you are just expounding your own wishful thinking and it's not valid. They were there; you were not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The astronauts testify to the contrary. Jim you seriously need to do some research and listen to the people themselves and stop clinging to some classic party line. Nobody really believes it anyway.

...Lots of links to other testimonies.

http://www.youtube.c...c.1.XlO27zD5RXU

Thanks for the chuckle. I'm the guy who actually HAS talked with the astronauts and flight controllers in Houston.

Your explain-away reality-avoidance semantic trick about me 'clinging to some classic party line" is also a joke since it's my original research -- not the mindless eyes-closed echo chamber of the UFO internet sites -- that's independent, original, and first-hand reality-based. And for the EVA myths, the most dangerous.

You're right to be afraid of it, and to try to discourage newbies to close their minds to it. Be very afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the chuckle. I'm the guy who actually HAS talked with the astronauts and flight controllers in Houston.

Your explain-away reality-avoidance semantic trick about me 'clinging to some classic party line" is also a joke since it's my original research -- not the mindless eyes-closed echo chamber of the UFO internet sites -- that's independent, original, and first-hand reality-based. And for the EVA myths, the most dangerous.

You're right to be afraid of it, and to try to discourage newbies to close their minds to it. Be very afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aldrin is talking about seeing an object associated with his own vehicle's booster rocket. How does that break the pattern I'm suggesting?

Listen to Aldrin at the 2:00 mark. He explains why they asked Houston "where was the S-IVB"...they didn't want to say on the radio something was tagging them and they didn't know what it was..Houston replied "6000 miles away", so clearly the object was not the booster.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen to Aldrin at the 2:00 mark. He explains why they asked Houston "where was the S-IVB"...they didn't want to say on the radio something was tagging them and they didn't know what it was..Houston replied "6000 miles away", so clearly the object was not the booster.

Listen to Aldrin patiently explaining to reality-resistent UFO buffs that he and his spaceshipmates are quite satisfied the flasher was one of the SLA panels off the LM garage on the S4B. They were spotted on other Apollo missions too, always on the way OUT to the moon [never on the way back], and even occasionally photographed from Earth telescopes.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen to Aldrin patiently explaining to reality-resistent UFO buffs that he and his spaceshipmates are quite satisfied the flasher was one of the SLA panels off the LM garage on the S4B. They were spotted on other Apollo missions too, always on the way OUT to the moon [never on the way back], and even occasionally photographed from Earth telescopes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zazxF7Y6Vw8&feature=related

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Afanasyev story

And what leads you to assume the narrator is telling you what the cosmonaut actually said?

What do you suppose his direct quotations, in the Russian media, actually report?

Jeez, why are you such an eager co-conspirator in your own deception?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what leads you to assume the narrator is telling you what the cosmonaut actually said?

What do you suppose his direct quotations, in the Russian media, actually report?

Jeez, why are you such an eager co-conspirator in your own deception?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Popovich story

You're running away, stand and discuss the evidence you first offered.

You want a prosaic explanation for the Popovich story?

Fine, let's start with the basics -- time, date, and location of the incident.

You do know that those are critical to judging whether such reports have -- as most do -- a prosaic explanation, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that's what, 4 or 5 testimonies that took me 5 minutes to find? I've watched them all before and these are only the classic ones. Goodness knows what I would find if I spent any time on the matter.

It's all there Jim, but if you refuse to listen to the people who were there or make some cynical claim that they were all hallucinating , then that's your choice.

I'll choose otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[media=]

[/media]

Heh, according Afanasyev, object was 40 cm (link in Russian, but you can manage to translate it), not 40 m as s#!t we made up "Sightings" did.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh, according Afanasyev, object was 40 cm (link in Russian, but you can manage to translate it), not 40 m as s#!t we made up "Sightings" did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're running away, stand and discuss the evidence you first offered.

You want a prosaic explanation for the Popovich story?

Fine, let's start with the basics -- time, date, and location of the incident.

You do know that those are critical to judging whether such reports have -- as most do -- a prosaic explanation, right?

Popovich was well aquainted with aerial phenomena.

He wasn't some janitor emptying ashtrays at Star City.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Popovich

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[media=]

[/media]

rf_fp.gif

Say what?!!!

Oh, boy... Grasping straws at its finest.

Next you'll bring J.Maussan's evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cooper story

How about the version of the story told by the other witnesses? Ever seen that?

Ever read the Blue Book report on it?

How about an investigation of this incident by James McDonald, the ufology pioneer, in the 1960s?

If you haven't seen this evidence, why not? And why reach a conclusion without it? How is it justified to deliberately disregard wider insights into such events?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever read the Blue Book report on it?

I can't believe you are referencing Blue Book. Their mandate was to explain away sightings while gathering as much evidence to the contrary as possible. From swamp gas to discrediting respectable citizens they "reported" everything.

Once they had sufficiently stereotyped witnesses as the wearer's of tinfoil hats, they were disbanded.

Blue Book credibility = ZERO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that's what, 4 or 5 testimonies that took me 5 minutes to find? I've watched them all before and these are only the classic ones. Goodness knows what I would find if I spent any time on the matter.

It's all there Jim, but if you refuse to listen to the people who were there or make some cynical claim that they were all hallucinating , then that's your choice.

I'll choose otherwise.

But you haven't even read my investigative reports, or anybody else's -- how is that NOT 'hallucinating', that any single witness tells you ALL you need to know about such an event. That's make-believe at its best.

And in the Afanasyev case, which you fell for so easily, the English narration has nothing at all to do with the actual comments the cosmonaut is making. They were fabricated by the program's producers to sucker in their target audience -- hyper-gullible eager-believers. Do you really want to be counted among such a population? You choose that?

Afanasyev elsewhere discussed a sheet-of-paper-sized flap of something that came off an approaching cargo drone while he was aboard the Mir. All the 'facts' that the program offered about his mission are phony -- date, location, year, even destination -- just thrown into the narration because the program trusted that its intended audience would never check and never know -- or care -- any better.

And they obviously were right.

That makes you PROUD of yourself?

Edited by JimOberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.