Jump to content
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  
Mr. Schwabe

1984 STS-51 UFO --- too good to be true ?

74 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Mr. Schwabe

This is some stunning footage, if real :

http://alienvideo.net/video-shuttle-discovery-sts-51-ufo.php

If anyone has any more information on that event, please post. It looks like the footage was ripped from a documentary -- which you would think had sound. Maybe there is another, better quality video with audio available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bobzilla

Wow that is a pretty cool video. If it is a true video that hasn't been altered, I would like to know what the object is or could be.(Other than an alien craft)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boff

Thats neat. Do you know what the size of the craft would be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Schwabe

I think if it is determined to be real NASA footage, than it has got to be the best evidence of UFOs, along with the STS-75 tether incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazzard

I have seen the STS-75 tether videos, there are some remarkable scenes and convey a powerful impression of "large, distant circular unknowns". The video is visually striking.

What we have here is something simmilar. These ice particles are often found near manned space craft, and are generally associated with the crafts waste systems and other onboard fluids. The forces that are propelling these ice particles are associated with the NASA spacecraft concerned, they will be subject to electrostatic forces and the minute gravity of Shuttle itself, and are likely to continue in random orbits around the ship for hours or days.

A poorly appreciated principle of space travel is that things are always coming off -- or out of -- a piloted space vehicle. Space missions dump excess propellant from engines after the vehicle reaches orbit.

Unused propellant may leak past a hundred different valves in small steering rockets. When the jets fire, bits of propellant can get caught in the exhaust and shoot off at great speeds, while other pieces floating nearby are blasted away by expanding rocket plumes.

Some vehicles discard waste heat by evaporating water against coolant panels, resulting in blizzards of ice crystals. (These were John Glenns mysterious "fireflies" on his first flight.) Piloted missions periodically purge both liquid waste ("the constellation Urion," astronauts joked) and surplus water from fuel cells. These valves can leak or get stopped up with ice which later flakes away.

They do not realy have anything to do with UFOs, except technically, as they are not 100% identified as ice particles, they can be labelled unidentified.

But alien spacecrafts....... :no:

Edited by hazzard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Schwabe

I have seen the STS-75 tether videos, there are some remarkable scenes and convey a powerful impression of "large, distant circular unknowns". The video is visually striking.

What we have here is something simmilar. These ice particles are often found near manned space craft, and are generally associated with the crafts waste systems and other onboard fluids. The forces that are propelling these ice particles are associated with the NASA spacecraft concerned, they will be subject to electrostatic forces and the minute gravity of Shuttle itself, and are likely to continue in random orbits around the ship for hours or days.

.....

You are saying this is similar ? LOL -- "ice particles " is really stretching the imagination on this one. Perhaps you should watch this video once more, because there is no way whatever that thing is is a piece of ice. It is clearly some form of advanced spacecraft.

The only question I have is of the authenticity of the video. Is it actually NASA footage ?

Your extensive post about the ice particles & UFOs on NASA footage explanation is appreciated. You have some excellent points, and they certainly do apply to certain UFO type scenarios, but in regards to STS-75 and this 1984 STS 51 video, the ice particles / propellent / debris explanation falls apart.

In STS 75 you have objects moving in different directions, different velocities, and pulsating with light. They also all have a circular shape with a notch cut out of the side, along with a circular dot in the center.

In this video, our UFO seems to travel at an extremeley high speed, only to stop and rapidly change direction.

Ice particles cannot do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazzard

It is clearly some form of advanced spacecraft.

How could you possibly know what an alien advanced spacecraft looks like!!?

In this video, our UFO seems to travel at an extremeley high speed, only to stop and rapidly change direction. Ice particles cannot do that.

They appear to move in straight lines unless they encounter some force, such as the exhaust plume from a rocket thruster. They dont need propulsion or power sources, just natural inertia.

Edited by hazzard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bobzilla

They appear to move in straight lines unless they encounter some force, such as the exhaust plume from a rocket thruster. They dont need propulsion or power sources, just natural inertia.

Right on :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
morrison1976

As soon as i saw this, and i saw it a while ago i knew it was fake. Not becuase it looks fake, but because it looks so good. If this was real then you would have ufologists and other believers talking about it. Def fake, The sad thing is that people love doing these fakes. It so annoying!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazzard

In STS 75 you have objects moving in different directions, different velocities, and pulsating with light. They also all have a circular shape with a notch cut out of the side, along with a circular dot in the center.

Ah yes, the notched circles -- these are very unusual images, not common on other shuttle videos. But a careful analysis of the many cases of notched circles crossing the STS-75 screen shows a tell-tale pattern: the position of the notch clocked around the rim is a direct function of the position of the circle on the FOV,(field of view). As a circle moves, at different points on the FOV, the notch is in different positions. But as the circle moves across the screen, it repeats the notch position of circles that had previously been at the new position it reaches.

Check this out 'thegrey' , and you can see this consistent pattern.

So, if the notch position is a function of the position on the FOV, we are talking about a camera-related factor here, an artifact of the optical system, and not a "REAL" image of some object. I e, not an alien spaceship.

These notched circles are known as Airy Disks. Its an optical phenomena of camera and telescope optics.

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/A/Airy_disk.html

Sadly, that information is not present in the produced/released videos which have been seen to date. Consequently, viewers can be expected to jump to erroneous conclusions regarding the nature of these videos, based on the pre-selected data shown them versus the data withheld from them.

Edited by hazzard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Duppy Conqueror

Could it not be some sort of space debris?...like a piece of a satellite...it does seem to fly but I noticed it didn't make any spectacular moves ..just straight lines...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
badeskov

It is clearly some form of advanced spacecraft.

Why? It is some grey coloured "blob" sailing by the field of view of the camera? How to deduct that it is in any way advanced?

Best,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
morrison1976

First, the 1984 STS-51 UFO is not ice. Anyone with half a brain can see that it's not ice. Im sick of hearing people come up with stupid pathetic answers, just because they read it from James Oberg or some skeptics website. People need to start thinking for themselves, really!!! I dont think the 1984 STS-51 footage is an alien craft. If it was, then its all the proof we need. I believe its a fake, a very good fake. I tell you what! if skeptics turned around and said it was a bird, then you would get certain people on here saying oh its a bird, nothing more, nothing less, because the skeptics say so. I know there is loads of ufo crap out there, most of it is, but the skeptics will always have an answer, no matter how stupid it sounds because to them we are stupid people. Just email James Oberg and say you believe in ufos, and you will see what i mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Schwabe

The question is, Morrison - how do we verify if this is actual NASA footage. We need to find an official statement by NASA about this particular sequence. If they deny it is even NASA video, we can leave it be. If however, they admit is their own footage, it certainly deserves further scrutiny.

Why? It is some grey coloured "blob" sailing by the field of view of the camera? How to deduct that it is in any way advanced?

Best,

Badeskov

In my opinion, it is some form of advanced spacecraft, if indeed the footage is authentic. Its just the only explanation that makes sense to me - but of course I'm open to other possibilities. Like I said, we need to verify the authenticity.

..

So, if the notch position is a function of the position on the FOV, we are talking about a camera-related factor here, an artifact of the optical system, and not a "REAL" image of some object. I e, not an alien spaceship.

These notched circles are known as Airy Disks. Its an optical phenomena of camera and telescope optics.

Again 'hazzard' you provide another solution, yet it does not even come close to an adequate explanation. How do we account for the pulsating spiral frequency, as seen in the below image ( 3 separate frames ). Are you saying that the pulsating spiral frequency is also a camera related issue ? Even without considering this, the STS 75 circular objects are indeed real because you can actually see them passing behind the tether.

user posted image

Refer to "Evidence: THe Case For NASA UFOs " for further info on this topic --- Sereda covers all of these factors extensively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazzard

The sad thing is that people love doing these fakes. It so annoying!!!!!!!

I agree. It is poisoning the little of whats left of the UFO phenomenas credibillity.

We all tend to envision the capabilities of putative extraterrestrials as being similar to, or slightly more advanced than us, like the believers like to argue, what could an ETsociety thats many millennia beyond us do? This is the million dollar question that should boggle the brain of the most ardent futurist.

For the sake of argument, lets say that someone is out there.

Only civilizations within about 50 light years will have had time to receive our radio signals,(realize that we are technologically advanced). Within that distance are about 5,000 stars.

Even if you believe in highly optimistic estimates regarding the prevalence of cosmic intelligence, its unlikely that another civilization exists within 50 light-years.

Sure, they could spectroscopically sample the light reflected from our atmosphere, and learn that it has large quantities of oxygen and methane, tell-tale markers of biology.

So if they are out there at all, we are probably listed as a world with life, but without the footnote indicating intelligent life.

If biology is common in the galaxy, like some people seems to believe, then Earth might be just another entry in a long list of "living worlds", Its discovery might not excite the extraterrestrials very much.

And despite heated discussion by all concerned, lets admit that interstellar travel doesnt violate physics. Its possible. After all, the Pioneer and Voyager probes are nearly three decades into an inadvertent interstellar journey right now. The kicker, of course, is that these craft will take 70,000 years to cover the distance to even the nearest stars (and they are not aimed that way).

With the physics we know, its extremely difficult to substantially, and safely, shorten that travel time. Sure, it might be theoretically possible to create worm holes or some other exotic way for high-speed cosmic cruising, but that approach is entirely speculative.

Is there anyone out there? Bottom line, we just dont know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
morrison1976

Your right, we just dont know, and thats the problem. We tend to look as things as we only can and only know. There is so much in the universe that we dont know about, or at the moment its just science fiction to us. We have to take into account things like wormholes. Yes i do know that they are not proven yet, ands its a theory that people are taking an interest in. Like everything before this ( dark matter, string theory, black holes etc ) all theories to begin with( and string theory still is) We just dont know how advanced these beings are. All we know is they must be far more advanced than us. I believe they would have technologies we could not even start understand. We are still so primitive. Our technology is moving forward, but we are stuck in the dark ages mentally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chadster

How could you possibly know what an alien advanced spacecraft looks like!!?

They appear to move in straight lines unless they encounter some force, such as the exhaust plume from a rocket thruster. They dont need propulsion or power sources, just natural inertia.

Absence of evidence, doens't mean evidence of abscence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazzard

Absence of evidence, doens't mean evidence of abscence

Remember the Fermi paradox!?

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

The size and age of the universe suggest that many technologically advanced extraterrestrial civilizations ought to exist. However, this belief seems logically inconsistent with the lack of observational evidence to support it. Either the initial assumption is incorrect and technologically advanced intelligent life is much rarer than believed, current observations are incomplete and human beings have not detected other civilizations yet, or search methodologies are flawed and incorrect indicators are being sought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
conspiracysrus
What we have here is something simmilar. These ice particles are often found near manned space craft, and are generally associated with the crafts waste systems and other onboard fluids. The forces that are propelling these ice particles are associated with the NASA spacecraft concerned, they will be subject to electrostatic forces and the minute gravity of Shuttle itself, and are likely to continue in random orbits around the ship for hours or days.

A poorly appreciated principle of space travel is that things are always coming off -- or out of -- a piloted space vehicle. Space missions dump excess propellant from engines after the vehicle reaches orbit.

Unused propellant may leak past a hundred different valves in small steering rockets. When the jets fire, bits of propellant can get caught in the exhaust and shoot off at great speeds, while other pieces floating nearby are blasted away by expanding rocket plumes.

Some vehicles discard waste heat by evaporating water against coolant panels, resulting in blizzards of ice crystals. (These were John Glenns mysterious "fireflies" on his first flight.) Piloted missions periodically purge both liquid waste ("the constellation Urion," astronauts joked) and surplus water from fuel cells. These valves can leak or get stopped up with ice which later flakes away.

They do not realy have anything to do with UFOs, except technically, as they are not 100% identified as ice particles, they can be labelled unidentified.

But alien spacecrafts.......

this is a very clearly described and well thought out explanation.

sometimes its just that people so badly wanna believe, that they wont let go.

review your perceptions.

and try to see the most probable and logical explanation. this seems good to me but im no ufo buff so .............

but this is the line i think ill take as the credible answer

Edited by conspiracysrus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
morrison1976

That is the biggest load of crap i have ever heard. Oh you heard the explanation was ice crystals, so that means it has to be ice crystals. I have read this explanation and seen the footage. I for one dont think its an alien ufo ( suprised ) but it ain't ice either. People really need to start making their own mind up ( real or not) and stop quoting what some de-bunker or ufologist say. Im sure you people have your own thoughts and your own brain, then use it. But if you are gonna de-bunk something, then do it properly!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kobie

That is the biggest load of crap i have ever heard. Oh you heard the explanation was ice crystals, so that means it has to be ice crystals. I have read this explanation and seen the footage. I for one dont think its an alien ufo ( suprised ) but it ain't ice either. People really need to start making their own mind up ( real or not) and stop quoting what some de-bunker or ufologist say. Im sure you people have your own thoughts and your own brain, then use it. But if you are gonna de-bunk something, then do it properly!!!!

i know it just roles out dont it....they think we will follow there skeptical beliefs because they say so...its a never ending debate....even if i described my sightings.....i have no evidence or are complete lying attention seeking bum...OR IM DELIRIOUS!....fully awake and seeing things...i know wot ive seen could be military objects....one of them i'd say yes the other to....very unlikely, but only by my assumptions...so there...that video has not be clarified authentic and has not been modified to any degree....but if it is real there is no scientific reasonings to it behavior to debunk it as ice particles or any form of liquid/fuel...i know that im 100% sure....i dont care because i know other wise with my attained SCIENTIFIC knowledge its that plain simple :mellow:

What gets me is the simply persist with there excuses....i have seen a lot of acclaimed footage and a lot is quite laughable but some are just simply of advanced technology or of a AEBE......people must surely know that for years we are caperble of some to date truely unbelievable and quite amazing tec..... :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
morrison1976

Very true kobie. It just really annoys me. Just like the Rendlesham forest incident. They said it was a light house, Even though the solders knew this was a load of crap. I bet you any money that if we talk about that incident on here, you will get the same l, ot trying to be cleaver and saying, well, it was proved to be a lighthouse lol:_ :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Schwabe

And despite heated discussion by all concerned, lets admit that interstellar travel doesnt violate physics. Its possible. After all, the Pioneer and Voyager probes are nearly three decades into an inadvertent interstellar journey right now. The kicker, of course, is that And despite heated discussion by all concerned, lets admit that interstellar travel doesnt violate physics. Its possible. After all, the Pioneer and Voyager probes are nearly three decades into an inadvertent interstellar journey right now. The kicker, of course, is that these craft will take 70,000 years to cover the distance to even the nearest stars (and they are not aimed that way).

There may be extraterrestrial civilizations that have space / dimensional travel capabilities beyond our comprehension.

To refer to Sereda again, in his documentary he presents a comprehensive theory about how faster than light speed travel is possible.

Faster than Light speed travel is possible if you become lighter than your original mass.

How do you become less than your own mass ? By converting yourself ( or spacecraft ) to a higher frequency wave state ( from the visible spetrum up to the Gamma, X-ray region ) thus becoming lighter.

If you have ever seen the anti-gravity videos by Vancouver inventor John Hutchison, you can see an example of objects transitioning into a higher frequency wave state.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/89365/hutchison_effect/

This could explain why so many UFOs, especially on NASA footage, appear as pulsating, translucent balls of light. And why certain UFOs are only visible using special camera equipment - because they utilizing a method of travel beyond the visible light spectrum.

Edited by thegrey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
badeskov

There may be extraterrestrial civilizations that have space / dimensional travel capabilities beyond our comprehension.

I doubt it, but there certainly could be.

To refer to Sereda again, in his documentary he presents a comprehensive theory about how faster than light speed travel is possible.

Faster than Light speed travel is possible if you become lighter than your original mass.

How do you become less than your own mass ? By converting yourself ( or spacecraft ) to a higher frequency wave state ( from the visible spetrum up to the Gamma, X-ray region ) thus becoming lighter.

Sorry, but he is so clearly wrong in his assertions that it hurts my eyes to read. First, there is only one way of reducing your mass, and this is to go through a matter-to-energy conversion, and in other words that is called annihilation. And, no, you cannot revert the process. So your fancy space ship would end up as a bunch of photons heading off in all directions in space. Neat...

Second, even if you attained the mass of a photon, you'd not be able to break the light speed barrier anyways. Zero mass doesn't pop you above that.

If you have ever seen the anti-gravity videos by Vancouver inventor John Hutchison, you can see an example of objects transitioning into a higher frequency wave state.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/89365/hutchison_effect/

This could explain why so many UFOs, especially on NASA footage, appear as pulsating, translucent balls of light. And why certain UFOs are only visible using special camera equipment - because they utilizing a method of travel beyond the visible light spectrum.

Uhm, let me just quickly quote from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutchison_effect)

"Hutchison later admitted to being "creative" with the footage, citing pressure from the Discovery Channel to create material for the show and an inability to legally reproduce the original effect, according to Tim Ventura of American Antigravity.

Hutchison states that he hasn't actually reproduced his effect since approximately 1991, though he continues to reject charges of fakery, and maintains that his "effect" has been demonstrated many times in the presence of scientists and, he says, members of the US Army Intelligence and Security Command."

Well, nobody else has been able to reproduce this, so that goes in the bin along with cold fusion. So far a lot of the UFO phenomena is being supported by people like Sereda and Hutchison, which in credible science circles are mostly laughed at (to put it mildly).

Sorry, but I need credible proof by credible science. Not mumbo jumbo like this, which if reading between the lines, is to lure gullible people to buy their books.

Badeskov

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.