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 2
wallarookiller

Secret UFO NASA Transmissions - Smoking Gun

261 posts in this topic

Bee, my son showed me this video just last night...I think it's absolutely wonderful.

:tu:

hi Lilly...yes it's brilliant..........people are having a lot of fun with parodies of the South Korean Gangnam Style song...

and the original on YouTube is approaching a record one billion views !!!

The NASA Johnson Style one is great...

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Human eye (cornea, aqueous humor, etc) is the filter, though wideband -> link (see graphs in appendix; eye transmittance of our little brothers, but human wouldn't differ much)

what exactly is the point you are trying to make.....?

Bearing in mind what Einstein said....

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/19421-if-you-can-t-explain-it-to-a-six-year-old

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bee, sorry you didn't get around to my questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what people have been trying to explain, in many & imaginative ways, is that you can actually see light outside of the Atmosphere, and whoever that "expert" or "Ufologist" was, he was just the usual charlatan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I discussed the prosaic nature of such views in my '99 FAQs", What is it about my explanation of stuff appearing at sunrise that you are unwilling to believe?

Frankly....if you can't be bothered to quote the relevant bit of your 99 FAQs....or even indicate at what number (s) the information can be found...

I don't really care what you have to say about it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bee, sorry you didn't get around to my questions.

please see above......thankyou....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly....if you can't be bothered to quote the relevant bit of your 99 FAQs....or even indicate at what number (s) the information can be found...

I don't really care what you have to say about it....

Try 49, 50, and especially 66, if that's not too much trouble.

http://www.jamesoberg.com/99faq.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what exactly is the point you are trying to make.....?

[...]

The point is that the eye (more precisely cornea, etc) has finite transmittance spectrum, that is, acts like a filter placed "in front of sensors", i.e. photoreceptor cells. So basically, HST wouldn't be able to take images using VIS filters (as you implied).

As for "grating", thats what image looks like, when taken using grism (combination of prism and grating):

grism23.gif

(link)

[...]Bearing in mind what Einstein said....

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”

http://www.goodreads...-a-six-year-old

Thats neat... How you would explain six year old that 2+2 is not equal 17.42 (I'm assuming you know arithmetics, don't you)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try 49, 50, and especially 66, if that's not too much trouble.

http://www.jamesoberg.com/99faq.html

ok....I'll take a look....have a think about it and get back to you later or tomorrow.

You don't think it's a giant fried egg then..?... :D

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for "grating", thats what image looks like, when taken using grism (combination of prism and grating):

grism? Sounds a bit unsavoury. I think I'd prefer prating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that the eye (more precisely cornea, etc) has finite transmittance spectrum, that is, acts like a filter placed "in front of sensors", i.e. photoreceptor cells. So basically, HST wouldn't be able to take images using VIS filters (as you implied).

I'll have to get back to you as well......because basically you seem to be trying to say that it is not JUST reflected light that we humans see.....

I'm not sure what you're saying about HST....

And mixing the two together isn't helping. As you know we have come up against each other many times in the past (oooo errr matron)...

and you often seem to throw out complicated technical info that doesn't have much to do with the root of the matter and just confuses everything...

IMO....

:)

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll have to get back to you as well......because basically you seem to be trying to say that it is not JUST reflected light that we humans see.....

Of course we can see light other than reflected light.

Otherwise lightbulbs and fire would be invisible as they are sources of light, not reflections of light.

What's the difference between a photon that comes straight from a light source like the sun and a photon from the sun that has reflected off something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway I can't be bothered to argue about it all at the moment...tis the season to be jolly.... :santa:

I'm just quietly doing a bit of research on the subject here and there when it takes my fancy.

Of course we can see light other than reflected light.[/size]

Otherwise lightbulbs and fire would be invisible as they are sources of light, not reflections of light.

What's the difference between a photon that comes straight from a light source like the sun and a photon from the sun that has reflected off something?

The simplicity of your post is impressive....

And this seems to be the crux of the matter and naturally gives food for thought.... :D

Peter Lindemann is no slouch.....

http://peswiki.com/e...demann#ARTICLES

And he must surely have considered this....when making his informal remarks about visible light....etc etc..... :blink:

IF his 'musings' have merit then it must be to do with the earth's atmosphere creating a different visual affect...

dunno....it's all a bit of a mystery.....

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

more on topic...

Martyn Stubbs reveals secret NASA tape of a giant Flying Fried Egg....floating in space.... :w00t:

Appears at 2:43....

[media=]

[/media]

:innocent:

.

Unearthly scene, but pretty common on shuttle video feed.

I discussed the prosaic nature of such views in my '99 FAQs", What is it about my explanation of stuff appearing at sunrise that you are unwilling to believe?

Stuff appearing at sunrise...recorded in the Ultra Violet part of the spectrum...?

You do realize the video was taken at orbital sunrise, don't you? Can you agree to that fact?

I don't know...it's hard to know what the hell is going on in that clip...

Which mission was that scene from, by the way? You should be able to figure it out, there are enough clues.

well I already saw the video information on YouTube... :)

It said...

An STS-75 clip from the Martyn Stubbs NASA Archives

From your 99 FAQ....you are saying that it's all down to 'dandruff' and the Fried Egg is an object coming into view...?

(in the Ultra Violet part of the spectrum..?)

Do you have the right answers...? You obviously think you do....and I suppose everyone can make their own mind up about it...

.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IF his 'musings' have merit then it must be to do with the earth's atmosphere creating a different visual affect...

Why do you think his "musings" have any merit?
dunno....it's all a bit of a mystery.....
It's not really. To anyone with a basic knowledge of science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course NASA has known of extraterrestrial existence...a while now, but will not disclose that to the public.

Just think, if the Curiosity rover finds evidence of life on Mars, NASA will not make that public announcement, instead that information either be leaked be a someone in NASA and/or be covered up.

Why else would they debunk unidentified objects in footage they captured and was seen by the public?

Just another part of conspiracy.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stuff appearing at sunrise...recorded in the Ultra Violet part of the spectrum...?

Whatever part of the spectrum of reflected light from the sun, why shouldn't stuff coming out of Earth's shadow become illuminated and seem to 'appear' from nowhere?

As for ultravioolet, I don't see any evidence for that wavelength, since the cameras used are visible-light cameras, and I have the operating specs that prove that. What contrary evidence is there?

I don't know...it's hard to know what the hell is going on in that clip...

This is an important step forward. How do you now propose to make yourself better equipped to know what the videos are showing? If you could determine the time the video was taken [a datum that Stubbs is concealing from you] could you find out if it coincided with sunrise? And if it did, would that be a clue as to the identity of the dots?

From your 99 FAQ....you are saying that it's all down to 'dandruff' and the Fried Egg is an object coming into view...?

No. Where did you read that, where was I unclear? Which number, plesse.

Do you have the right answers...? You obviously think you do....and I suppose everyone can make their own mind up about it...

Did you make your mind up already, before knowing any important facts or context? Do you consider that to be a prudent way to decide on such momentous claims?

Before reaching any judgment, isn't it important to establish the factual basis of the event, and only then speculate? Or should you avoid facts and stick to speculation alone?

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course NASA has known of extraterrestrial existence...a while now, but will not disclose that to the public.

Just think, if the Curiosity rover finds evidence of life on Mars, NASA will not make that public announcement, instead that information either be leaked be a someone in NASA and/or be covered up.

Why else would they debunk unidentified objects in footage they captured and was seen by the public?

Just another part of conspiracy.

I've never seen footage that I considered NASA debunking and ET craft..... Either the footage is ambiguous or their explination is sound....

I don't see how you can say they are debunking.... Is there a specific video you are referring to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simplicity of your post is impressive....

And this seems to be the crux of the matter and naturally gives food for thought.... :D

Peter Lindemann is no slouch.....

http://peswiki.com/e...demann#ARTICLES

And he must surely have considered this....when making his informal remarks about visible light....etc etc..... :blink:

IF his 'musings' have merit then it must be to do with the earth's atmosphere creating a different visual affect...

dunno....it's all a bit of a mystery.....

.

I love the way that despite the fact that literally dozens of people have told you the same thing, you still say "IF his 'musings' have merit". You're so indefatigable, or perhaps you just don't listen to what people keep telling you. It's really not a bit of a Mystery; what he says is not true. I don't know how much clearer it can be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

grism? Sounds a bit unsavoury. I think I'd prefer prating.

Hah, but its longer by 2 letters than grism, and it comes from grating prism, not prisming grating...

I'll have to get back to you as well......because basically you seem to be trying to say that it is not JUST reflected light that we humans see.....

[...]

Archi answered this already.

If Lindemann's claim would be true, you would not see reflected light either.

BTW, even in space there is glass/air between source of light and the eye.

[...]

I'm not sure what you're saying about HST....

And mixing the two together isn't helping. [...]

Again, if Lindemann's claim would be true, HST would be "blind" in visible light spectrum.

[...]

and you often seem to throw out complicated technical info that doesn't have much to do with the root of the matter and just confuses everything...

IMO....

:)

Ok, lets start from the beginning... It’s a warm summer evening, circa 600 BC, you’ve finished your shopping at the local market, or agora, and you look up at the night sky. There you notice some of the stars seem to move, so you name them planetes, or wanderer...

:innocent:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you think his "musings" have any merit?

I don't know if they have or not....I came across his 'musings' 5 days ago...(post 31, page 3)

and I'm just looking into it. I'm curious to see if they do have any merit....is that a crime... :)

I love the way that despite the fact that literally dozens of people have told you the same thing, you still say "IF his 'musings' have merit".

no....not literally dozens of people.....around half a dozen.

747...

You're so indefatigable, or perhaps you just don't listen to what people keep telling you. It's really not a bit of a Mystery; what he says is not true. I don't know how much clearer it can be.

I have listened to what people are telling me...but I don't automatically believe what they say....

Anonymous people are saying things on a forum....and Peter Lindemann is saying what he's saying.

It's quite a complex subject, as I am finding out (in just 5 days)....At the moment I don't know who to believe...

So I'm suspending judgement.

I'm getting on with other things like work and Christmas preparations....so I am taking my time to look into a bit.

If that's ok with you.... :P

@ bmk.....hummmmm.....I always have the feeling you are trying to tie me into knots with your posts.

Sorry if you actually ARE trying to help and I'm just not getting you...

.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Where did you read that, where was I unclear? Which number, plesse.

That's the impression I got from the numbers you gave me...49, 50 and 66...

Perhaps it would make things much clearer if you talked us through the video and said what you think is happening

and what the different things were on this actual video...???...(and what cameras/electromagnetic spectrum were used at what time)

[media=]

[/media]

it's up to you of course if you want to...

Did you make your mind up already, before knowing any important facts or context?

I haven't made my mind up about any of it....

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if they have or not....I came across his 'musings' 5 days ago...(post 31, page 3)

and I'm just looking into it. I'm curious to see if they do have any merit....is that a crime... :)

no....not literally dozens of people.....around half a dozen.

747...

I have listened to what people are telling me...but I don't automatically believe what they say....

Anonymous people are saying things on a forum....and Peter Lindemann is saying what he's saying.

It's quite a complex subject, as I am finding out (in just 5 days)....At the moment I don't know who to believe...

So I'm suspending judgement.

I'm getting on with other things like work and Christmas preparations....so I am taking my time to look into a bit.

If that's ok with you.... :P

@ bmk.....hummmmm.....I always have the feeling you are trying to tie me into knots with your posts.

Sorry if you actually ARE trying to help and I'm just not getting you...

.

This is another thing that you always do, assume that because someone says something on a Web site somewhere, or on a video on YoTube, then he must be an expert. Why do you choose to disregard the words of Anonynous people on a forum, but assume that there must be something in what this Peter Lindeman person (Lindeperson?) says, because he says something on a Web site, or on You tube?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is another thing that you always do, assume that because someone says something on a Web site somewhere, or on a video on YoTube, then he must be an expert.

no that's not what I assume

Why do you choose to disregard the words of Anonynous people on a forum,

wrong again....I said I don't automatically believe them

but assume that there must be something in what this Peter Lindeman person (Lindeperson?) says, because he says something on a Web site, or on You tube?

oh dear...you're wrong AGAIN.....I don't automatically believe him either....

:hmm:

.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear, I'm sorry to be so Wrong, but why do you think there might be something in what he says, rather than anynynous people on a Fourm? Might these anynonynous people on a Fourm actually know just as much about it, particularly about such a basic question as whether Light can be seen outside of an Atmosphere, as he does?

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 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.