The live feeds pick up views of the Earth in spectacular style. Image Credit: NASA
The Internet has been awash with claims that NASA is covering up evidence of UFOs in Earth's orbit.
The live feeds which stream some truly spectacular views outside of the International Space Station might seem innocuous enough, but according to conspiracy theorists this week these streaming cameras are being conveniently disabled whenever a UFO happens to be passing by.
The bizarre claim stems from footage recorded on July 9th which shows an unidentified object (which was most likely a meteor) appearing in frame just moments before the feed dropped out.
Theorists swooped on the incident, claiming that it showed strong evidence to suggest that we are being visited by extraterrestrials and that NASA is going out of its way to cover it up.
Unsurprisingly however the feed dropping out is not actually all that unusual or remarkable.
"The feed is not switched manually," a NASA spokesman told Popular Mechanics. "It's all done automatically. There's nobody at a control board. We used a space-based data relay network."
"It gives us a very good coverage area, but you do lose signal occasionally - anywhere from a couple of seconds to a couple of minutes. It varies from day to day."
If NASA really was attempting to cover up evidence of otherworldly visitors in Earth's orbit then why show anything at all on the stream ? Why even provide a live feed in the first place ?
If would be fair to say that this particular conspiracy theory has been satisfactorily debunked.
FACT: NASA doesn't purposely blur pictures....that is only the in the imagination of people that do not understand image technology.. Cheers, Badesdeskov
NASA wants us to remain fixed with the silly idea that they know everything about outer space. This is the same firm that still uses gigantic fireworks to put expensive looking tat into orbit - which is mentioned on the news as some kind of great leap for humanity. If NASA was what it claims to be then why is there no Moon Base operations that google can allow you and school children to wonder over.
When have NASA, or any other space agency (there are actually quite a lot besides NASA), ever stated that they know everything about space ? What other way could they use with present day technology ? Lack of funds and lack of political support. A Moon base is not a political priority, so there are no funds for it. Its really that simple.
This has already been addressed, but I will allow myself to also do so. This is utter nonsense, never has NASA made such a claim - ever! And you have a better idea of how to do such? Please explain what NASA (or any other entity for that matter) would need a moon base. Cheers, Badeskov
Are you kidding? I agree enthusiastically with Noteverything and badeskov. This statement of yours is quite bold, so how do you support it? Please link to a reputable source where a legitimate official of NASA, any other space agency, or any astrophysicist has claimed "they know everything about space."
??? Like others, I'm fascinated by how you came to that conclusion. Please explain. Like others, I'd like to know how, more cost effectively, we should be doing it? Also, can you point out just one example of the "expensive looking tat", and elucidate on how you would have designed it. Would you mind giving us an example of this, and also explain why you think it is NASA's fault (or problem) if a media outlet exaggerates the importance of a particular mission? Again, what does it claim, exactly? ??? What made you choose a Moonbase, rather than say, the Hubble telescope, the ISS, SOHO/STE... [More]
Now NASA doesn't have a reputation for not addressing curiosities with careful investigation now do they? No sparkly clean and always honest. That's NASA. Well this one may or may not be something interesting ( aka other than space junk) but brushing off serious and legitimate questions with BS answers will eventually cause distrust. This is just the symptom of a far deeper problem
Double negative, much? You realise you just said that NASA does have a reputation for addressing curiosities (is that a pun?). Actually I would correct that and say NASA only addresses curiosities that are genuinely worth investigating, and until they do, there is nothing much to say.. Like any huge organisation, they make mistakes, and may have a few bad eggs. BTW, I'm assuming by the tone you are being sarcastic, and despite the double negative you are in fact not a NASA fan? If that's the case, can you please be specific, because at the moment I think your arms may fall off from han... [More]
The far deeper problem, IMHO, is the sheer ignorance of people like you who still believe in myths and fairy tales in an increasingly complex and technologically advanced civilization. The operation of these of the shelf cameras has been explained in detail throughout this thread but I am willing to bet you didn't spend a second reading those posts or researching the cameras before posting your angry, juvenile comment. Therein lies the far deeper problem, willful ignorance with the knowledge of the world at your fingertips.
Please Login or Register to post a comment.