NASA is studying UFOs again

a reply to: Skeletonized
If the sources of these lights were rotating, you wouldn't see these triangles rotate either, because the triangle is an artifact of the camera so it will only rotate if the camera/aperture rotates.


This is what has to rotate to see the triangles rotate:

It's similar in the tether video but it's not exactly the same. If you want to understand that better, watch the UFO Hunters debunking video I posted earlier, where Tindall shows an analogy of the lens design that creates the donut artifacts. By the way, UFO Hunters are not really debunkers as a general rule, they promoted all kinds of nonsense in their series that wasn't really true in an effort to promote their show and UFOlogy. Bill Birnes on the show was a publisher of a UFO magazine. So my point is when UFO hunters debunks the donuts and they are typically not debunkers, it should make you think. But if you want to believe they are alien space ships instead of out of focus ice particles, feel free, doesn't matter to me.

When the shuttle dumped waste water, I am guessing one reason the nozzle was used to make small particles is so they wouldn't pose any threat. Their velocity isn't much different from the shuttle, and they are very small so no harm if some of them happen to bump against the shuttle at such a low speed.

You're absolutely right that other particles, even if small, can cause damage to spacecraft, if they are not more or less traveling alongside the spacecraft like those ice particles from the waste water dumps. One thing that helps the ISS and the shuttle in their low earth orbits is that their orbits are so low, that even though the atmosphere is very thin, it creates enough drag to de-orbit stray debris. That doesn't eliminate the threat from stray debris which is in decaying orbit, but it does help to reduce it.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Arbi....unbeknownst to yourself....you also single handily debunked the 3-lights triangle UFO....

A reflection I presume?

Does anyone know why NASA is immune to UFOs ?

70+ years of real UFO reports from various military and civilian sources but NASA has never reported any ?

Not even a Foo-Fighter type of object.


How is that possible ?

Came across this on Amazon...



Titled INTERSECT: A Former NASA Astronomer Breaks His Silence About UFOs

Author is Marian Rudnyk

Anybody know of this person and can express an opinion for or against?

Here’s the lead in....

“ An astronomer has no business "believing" in UFOs - but sometimes he has no choice...That’s what happened to me. I was an astronomer and planetary scientist for NASA. I worked at observatories and discovered asteroids. I was on mission flight teams to Neptune and Venus, and much more. UFOs were not my thing.But nothing could prepare me for what would happened New Year’s Day of 2017. I walked outside and saw - not one, not two, not even three - but four disks descend from the clouds right in front of me. One appeared to be damaged. I took pictures and a video, and had no idea that by doing so I would change my life forever. As word spread I was contacted by USAF Space Command. The military response was swift and powerful. I was ripped out the world of sanitized scientific paradigms, and thrust into the very world I had disparaged: the dark, strange and twisted universe of UFOs. Suddenly my allies were the very ufologists I had fought with my whole life. I wish I could take that day back – but it’s too late now…This is that story – my true story – and even now it is still unfolding”

UPDATE: His website rudnyk.com...

Pictures (from his website) he said he took of the 4 objects dropping from the clouds....



His drawing of #4



His vid....

a reply to: Skeletonized

I'll never understand the obvious continued confusion of watching something through a video recording. Also the accusations of some that "debunking", in the sense of an agenda, is going on. The same with the pyramid video. There's no purposeful attempt to just flatly refuse to accept these recordings as spacecraft.

Realize we're seeing a second generation view of the objects through the processing of a camera. It's not the objects as they actually appear in person. Now, the images you see have to bounce through mirror(s), lenses, an aperture, etc. before we see it again. Like the pyramid video, it leaves the opportunity for artifacts to cause the way something is seen. This is the split view of inside a camera and lens and what images have to go through first before we see it:


During the default focus of the camera, which we can use as the basic human view, you can see all the objects relatively distinct:

You can see the "donuts" pass on top of the tether:


Even here, the camera can't fully focus on the donut objects in the foreground and you see them flashing as the camera processes the images. They're not actually flashing in person, it's the interpretation of the camera.

After the camera zooms and focuses in on the tether, the objects surrounding it go out of focus, especially in the foreground. That's why you see some of the donut objects appear semi-transparent and pass through each other:


Similar principle as watching TV and putting your thumb up and focusing on your thumb and you can see it clearly. Then you shift focus to the TV and your thumb becomes semi-transparent.

I'm absolutely no expert on the inner workings of a camera, including the Nikon D4 which I believe NASA uses. But common sense tells me, and in my view should tell others, that we're not seeing the actual image ourselves, but seeing it through the mechanical process and interpretation of a camera.

a reply to: Ectoplasm8
In the debunking video I posted earlier, John Tindall explains the origin of the donut shaped bokeh is the reflector lens. He holds up this for an analogy at 6 minutes in the video, it's a reflector with hole in it, sort of donut shaped, so this is the shape out of focus objects or "bokeh" take:

www.youtube.com...

It's sort of a compact telescopic lens, I have a reflector lens for my old camera too, the internal design looks something like this:
www.handprint.com...

That lens type causes out of focus lights to have a donut shape.

For reference.....STS-75 Daily Activities

Day 4 and Day 5

science.ksc.nasa.gov...

science.ksc.nasa.gov...


Also there’s this.....Camera artifacts of the type found in STS-75 tether footage

Source Vid: m.youtube.com...

I’m fully convinced based on the ground level vid above that the STS-75 space donuts are camera produced artifacts related.........NO UFO’s!

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: turbonium1

If you could post something of quality, that'd be a start.

Surely you see the irony in this?

You ooze it, so how could it NOT be noticed? But, let's go back to the issue..

Additional comments from Nelson ...

NASA now investigating Navy's UFO videos: 'There is something there'

"We are doing a lot. As a matter of fact, I have seen and been briefed on those films you have seen. I have talked to those Navy pilots…They followed it and suddenly it would move in a direction faster than anything they had ever seen," Nelson told FOX 13.

"It’s not just those couple of Navy pilots. This has happened now among a number of aviators. So there is something there. We just don’t know what it is," he continued. "So what I did when I got into NASA a month ago, I asked our chief scientist and the Science Directorate if they would look at it from a matter of science and see if it can shed any further light on this."

Link - www.fox13news.com...











Link - youtu.be...

a reply to: easynow

Nice work adding this...He's been making the rounds on the media.

@Mr. O'berg

What do you think of Mr. Bill Nelson?

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Re INTERSECT...... youtu.be...

Anybody who forbids comments on his video shows he's scared of criticism.

originally posted by: JimOberg
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Re INTERSECT...... youtu.be...

Anybody who forbids comments on his video shows he's scared of criticism.

Oh Contraire.... True ...no comments allowed for youtube...however you should have noticed by hitting the down arrow for more info.....that he does give contact choices...

....”For more information, please feel free to visit me at

Rudnyk.com

twitter.com/MarianRudnyk

facebook/MarianRudnyk .....”

So get into attack mode, NASA Tiger! ... and contact him by those other methods.

I’ll expect a full report, IF you succeed on demolishing him.

By the way, a member is asking what you think about Bill Nelson....so far crickets from you Jiminey....are you preparing to Cave In as a Skeptic???

originally posted by: JimOberg
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Re INTERSECT...... youtu.be...

Anybody who forbids comments on his video shows he's scared of criticism.

Yo you ghosted me lol

Obvious you people religion is against people from the stars.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
By the way, a member is asking what you think about Bill Nelson....so far crickets from you Jiminey....are you preparing to Cave In as a Skeptic???

Here's one problem I see with NASA investigating the Navy's UFOs, regardless of what anybody thinks of Bill Nelson.

Take the Gimbal video, released by the pentagon, as an example. The ATFLIR system used to make that video is an extremely complicated system that sells for something like 2 or 3 million dollars per unit, and the military has a working relationship with the experts who designed and manufactured that system for them. I don't see why NASA scientists would have knowledge of that specific military system, and it turns out that such knowledge is key to understanding what's going on in that video.

The "psychological operations" narrative that's promoted by the likes of TTSA, George Knapp etc is that if a plane were to rotate as shown in that video it might be defying the laws of physics, so it can't be a plane.

But, one extremely obvious (at least it's obvious to anybody who is paying attention) sign that narrative is false is the very fact that the name of the video the pentagon released is called "gimbal". The obvious reason it's called that is that it shows a known gimbal effect in the ATFLIR system. I see no reason NASA scientists would have any particular expertise in the ATFLIR system, and besides since the video is named gimbal that's a strong indication the pentagon has already figured out what's going on in that video and they don't need any help from NASA to know it wasn't really defying the laws of physics.

My speculation is that if NASA really did figure out the truth of what was going on in that video, and they tried to tell the public a story that contradicted the false narrative promoted by George Knapp, somebody would likely tell Bill Nelson and the NASA scientists that if they can't support the false narrative, to just shut up and don't say anything.

If anybody hasn't figured out the false narrative yet, several internet warriors working from their basements have already figured it out. But, they don't have the credibility of NASA scientists so they can be ignored by people who say things like "so the pentagon with its 700 billion dollars a year budget couldn't figure it out, but some keyboard investigator working from his basement figured it out?". Of course the truth is the pentagon DID figure it out, and didn't really hide it when they named the video they released "gimbal", but some people prefer to ignore that simple fact, and believe the false narrative from George Knapp and others for some reason.

Anyway these are some videos from the basement keyboard investigators who already figured out why it's not defying the laws of physics, just like the pentagon did, but the pentagon won't admit it beyond naming the video "gimbal". Other sources promoting the psy-op say they didn't figure it out and it defies the laws of physics (it doesn't):

This video demonstrates the gimbal effect by similar examples, without getting into the technical details.


This video gets into some more details of how the ATFLIR system does what it does, which is the rather complicated part that NASA may have no familiarity with even though I suspect they would be reluctant to claim a video shows an object defying the laws of physics like the psy-op claims:



So I'm not seeing where NASA could add anything to the gimbal video analysis. Maybe they could add some credibility to the analysis of the basement investigators if they told the truth, but even if they were able to figure it out, I don't think that such truthful disclosure would be welcomed by whoever is in charge of running this psychological operation telling us it's showing something defying the laws of physics.

Some notes on Bill Nelson's experience on the space shuttle flight. He was likable, characterized by some training team folks as "an amiable dunce". The funniest story about his presence on the shuttle flight was the crew quickly noticed that whenever they were doing a TV interview or report from the shuttle, he would smoothly insert himself into the background with a clipboard studying it intensely and gazing purposefully around the cabin. At one point, they switched from a camera on the flight deck [where he was in the background] to another camera on the middeck for a different astronaut's report, and they were amazed to see him suddenly appear in that camera background as well. One astronaut joked, 'Well, tomorrow we can tell him we're doing a payload bay survey [with external cameras] and let nature take its course."


They granted that he was good natured [unlike the humorlessly obsessive bully Jake Garn from the previous politico-in-space junket a few months earlier] but he was absolutely clueless -- one morning during wake-up activities Nelson announced that he'd make breakfast for everybody while they were at work on the flight deck, which was a nice idea -- but ten minutes later when they went downstairs to eat, they found him helplessly staring at a console trying to turn on the food warmer. Before flight, when he was training to act as a medical test subject, he was supposed to get immediate post-launch blood pressure data by quickly installing a pressure cuff around his thigh, and an exasperated flight surgeon complained to me, "He can't even fasten the blood pressure cuff himself, and that's a 'monkey mode' task."

In a briefing on shuttle abort modes, he paid rapt attention to the steps that the autopilot and the crew would do under emergency conditions. In one sequence, when the final trick might fail to work, he asked urgently, "And what do we do then?" An astronaut grinned and replied, "Then we go and die." Dead silence, his face went blank, then quietly, "You're joking... right? Uh, right?"

NASA only put him on the mission to buy his vote in a crucial congressional budget dispute where NASA was trying to kill the Pentagon contingency plans for purchasing additional expendable satellite launch vehicles, in order to force all US government launches onto the shuttle. To open up a seat in time for influencing the crucial budget vote, NASA bumped the already-ticketed assigned crewman Greg Jarvis, a commercial payload specialist, onto the next mission. That was Challenger, and so Greg was killed with the rest of that crew -- because Nelson had taken his seat on the previous mission. And that disaster made the Pentagon's desire for alternate launch vehicles critical for security reasons, consequently the plans for a NASA monopoly on launch services were cancelled, and so Nelson's presence had become pointless anyway.

The countdown to Nelson’s mission saw most major payloads being delayed and rescheduled on downstream opportunities, and as the paid-for cargo slots emptied, spare payloads were dug out of warehouses to fill in the holes. Even when every flyable gadget was loaded in, the mission still went forward half-empty. At the final mission review, one official made the embarrassing observation, “Why are we even flying this mission as now manifested?”, instead of just cancelling it and scattering the remaining minor payloads downstream. But everyone knew the unspoken answer – the congressman’s committee vote. In the weeks ahead, after the flight, several different delays threatened the Challenger launch at the same time as USAF officers were demanding Congress provide funding for alternate orbital launch capabilities using expendable rockets [arguing that the shuttle was so complex it couldn’t meet potential military fast launch needs]. NASA HQ put severe pressure on shuttle launch managers to NOT delay too much, their future monopoly would be in doubt. So the fatal decisions were made to launch Challenger – a schedule pressure that never would have existed if NASA had just dropped the previous mission from its schedule as logic and caution dictated. But they didn’t do the safe thing, because Nelson’s presence had been the only reason left to hold to the original schedule.

a reply to: JimOberg

Ahhh so Nelson was(might still be) a bumbling embarrassment.

A Ford/Dukakis type who obviously learned or was also taught, what photo bombing is all about.

Pretty funny Jimmmmm

Perhaps he’ll get his material from ATS too.

Thx for the humorous read!

I’ll reserve judgment on O’l Nel to see how things play out in this UFO Opera.

a reply to: JimOberg

O'berg is Irish right? So you definitely don't have any ancestry that believes in Star People except for the Bible? Is that your belief system? The Bible???

How come you didn't replace Bill Nelson? Since you're implying you're better than Bill Nelson....does he know about this thread?? You're straight up slandering him. Does NASA know you post here?? Do you still work for him, I mean them????

a reply to: JimOberg

Thoughts on Project Paper Clip??

Thoughts on Native people all over the world cultural stories of Star People??

Would you do an interview with Trevor Noah or George Knapp?

Please advise NASA representative.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
By the way, a member is asking what you think about Bill Nelson....so far crickets from you Jiminey....are you preparing to Cave In as a Skeptic???

…..”Here's one problem I see with NASA investigating the Navy's UFOs, regardless of what anybody thinks of Bill Nelson”……..”I don't see why NASA scientists would have knowledge of that specific military system, and it turns out that such knowledge is key to understanding what's going on in that video”…….”I see no reason NASA scientists would have any particular expertise in the ATFLIR system”…..”details of how the ATFLIR system does what it does, which is the rather complicated part that NASA may have no familiarity with”………..”So I'm not seeing where NASA could add anything to the gimbal video analysis.”

Bear in mind …. I’m talking NASA and ATFLIR….here. Not anything to do with the gimbal object itself.

From your text, I’ve parsed out above what pertains to NASA and ATFLIR…..

Of course you would know that NASA also evaluates technologies.

Raytheon’s ATFLIR system is predominantly used on F/A-18’s

Source: www.raytheon.com...

NASA has 3 F/A-18’s

Source: www.nasa.gov...

“ NASA research support aircraft are commonly called chase planes and fill the role of escort aircraft during research missions.”

Given the above and the reading in the linked NASA webpage…… can you confidently say that you are sure…given the roles of the NASA chase planes….that NASA has no reason to possibly evaluate and test the ATFLIR system for their own uses …and or perhaps some operation development association with the Navy and Raytheon?

If not, then I wouldn’t count out NASA trying out the ATFLIR pod attached to one of it’s chase planes. I do not have proof, but it’s reasonable to me.

As far as the basement Gimbal analysis’s videos …. I will say compelling for now.

originally posted by: easynow
Does anyone know why NASA is immune to UFOs ?

70+ years of real UFO reports from various military and civilian sources but NASA has never reported any ?

Not even a Foo-Fighter type of object.


How is that possible ?

and that says it all easynow

I mean how many people are there on here who've seen the "Foo-Fighter type of object" and like you say NASA for some reason in all it's time line admits to none.

It's beyond belief.

If I had the time energy and desire I could trek off right now and given the correct mental state along with chance of them the ufo orbs being up for it themselves, go and make contact with them in probably around one hour taking into account a half hour drive and another half hour to get the communicator going into coaxing them down.

Yet in all the years NASA has been doing what it does it has seen nothing out there?

Quite simply they are hiding the truth from the average person in the street.