100% proof of U.F.O.S in space - You cannot debunk this one

Hey, nice find but some of this is old footage, including the "tether incident" footage. Some of it though is real and cannot be explained. Unfortunately the tether film is dust that through the infrared lens can be deceptive and appear that it is on the far side of the tether while in reality its between the shuttle and the tether. But I have to stress that some of the other footage including the camera feed showing the objects moving out of earth's orbit are legit and haven’t been explained away as mere debris.

Everything in that video looks to me like particles, not craft. Sorry. These particles are likely very close to the camera, so as they zoom in, the particles go out of focus even more. That's totally what it looks like.

reply to post by franspeakfree


Interesting material. Terrible presentation.

100% proof it is not. Do not claim that it is. Do not bring Issac Newton's good name into it... ridiculous. You don't know what forces are at play. You don't know what the objects are, or what's happening in their environment.You don't know the range of the objects.

You had good material... even if we'd all seen it a million times before. You spoil your post with your poor analysis of it.

Originally posted by Rockstrongo37
Hey, nice find but some of this is old footage, including the "tether incident" footage. Some of it though is real and cannot be explained. Unfortunately the tether film is dust that through the infrared lens can be deceptive and appear that it is on the far side of the tether while in reality its between the shuttle and the tether. But I have to stress that some of the other footage including the camera feed showing the objects moving out of earth's orbit are legit and haven’t been explained away as mere debris.

I agree some of the scenes have not been explained, or that any explanations, if made, have not been published. I'd like to point out that the main stumbling block to developing an explanation is in the poster's refusal to specify the date/time of the video so its technological context can be determined and more direct witnesses contacted. Without that info, constructive investigations usually stall out pretty quickly.

hi guys ... just like anyone here i like the idea of ufos being up there but all those little white moving dots of something aint proof, sorry ... anyone here ever seen a picture of our planet taken from a distance of 20.000km? no? well, earth is surrounded by a heapload of junk ... just take a look ... and thats all the tiny white dots moving around, satellites and junk, here's the pic

www.theglobaleducationproject.org...

first off, logic..follow me for a minute and think..

Since when does 'meteorites' decide NOT to slam into a Space Shuttle or any equipment that is launched in outter space which is traveling at a high rate of speed regardless of the size?

How can Satellites never fall like rain every single day if there's so much 'space debis/ metorites"??

You can launch a very small pebble at the speed of sound and do the math on the damage it will cause.

what is the probability?
what are the odds???

how this space debis 'seemingly know' how to dodge all the space equipment without a scratch?? !! I"m talking about the streams of what 'seems to be' meteorites in the STS videos.

how is this even possible given the large amount of 'space debris' that we see in the STS vids????

We must think logically.

reply to post by JimOberg

That's what Richard Hoagland says. But I never found it to be true.

Fun to believe, sure.

Reality-based, nope.

For the benefit of others who may not be familiar with the debate over the STS-48 video, and the ensuing 1 minute shuttle transmission delays, see this link from Michael Bara. Also search ATS for Bara, Hoagland and Credulity Kills for much more about STS-48 etc.
Fun to read? yes.

Again videos we all know about - even if they are previously unseen videos.

The objects and lights are the same as on other videos - no reason to think the explanation isn't the same.

With these videos we can apply the good old:

"Seeing is believing" - however this time we need to change the phrase to

"Believing is seeing".

Originally posted by Komodo
first off, logic..follow me for a minute and think..

Since when does 'meteorites' decide NOT to slam into a Space Shuttle or any equipment that is launched in outter space which is traveling at a high rate of speed regardless of the size?

How can Satellites never fall like rain every single day if there's so much 'space debis/ metorites"??

You can launch a very small pebble at the speed of sound and do the math on the damage it will cause.

what is the probability?
what are the odds???

how this space debis 'seemingly know' how to dodge all the space equipment without a scratch?? !! I"m talking about the streams of what 'seems to be' meteorites in the STS videos.

how is this even possible given the large amount of 'space debris' that we see in the STS vids????

We must think logically.

And the logical thing could be something like:

Maybe these objects are very small and close to the camera.
Light is pretty intense in space and even a small particle can be seen as bright.

With no true reference point there is no way of knowing if it is a huge craft or a speck of dust.

reply to post by franspeakfree


The pro UFO show UFO Hunters did an episode where they did artificially recreate what was seen on the NASA videos. They are probably ice crystals that are in between the window panes on the shuttle. Even the blinking was reproduced, so these may not be the absolute proof that we are being visited by aliens that many want us to believe.

Well this is old but interesting material. While I tend to lean towards the OP's general belief that there is something to the ET/UFO phenomena, I have to agree that this is not 100% proof.

Some have brought up the point that we aren't aware of all the forces at play in our outer atmosphere or at the boundary of space, and that is a legit beef. At the same time, we all understand the law of motion, and NASA and other entities have assured science that, at cuurently attainable speeds, it still applies even outside or at the edge of our or other spatial bodies' gravitational pull. It especially applies when they have to determine and calculate the vector, speed, and course of our equipment we send to other bodies in space.

I feel the most important thing about this video is that an MSM outlet is actually displaying it without ridicule for the average Joe to see and contemplate! Even if it is old, and even questionable, to us, at least the rest of the planet that has access to Yahoo is being exposed to it without being encouraged to laugh at it, or to laugh at the possibility of intelligence around, on, or even within our planet.

S&F to make sure there is a well rounded debate

Originally posted by eniac
Interesting material. Terrible presentation.

100% proof it is not. Do not claim that it is...You don't know what forces are at play. You don't know what the objects are, or what's happening in their environment.You don't know the range of the objects.

You had good material...You spoil your post with your poor analysis of it.

Fran does present intriguing material, however she also commits several logical fallacies in making her case. As stated in my earlier post, there is the base assertion (it is proof because she says it is proof and others must demonstrate otherwise) and negative proof fallacies (if we cannot provide an alternative explanation, then it proves her theory).

But also commits an argument from silence fallacy...

Originally posted by franspeakfree
I am suprised at the lack of comments I would have thought other members would have jumped on this like a rash. Notice how the debunkers stay away and all is quiet.

Being that just because no one has answered her, that it somehow proves her claim.

She also commits an argument from personal belief fallacy; she claims no one is able to explain these videos though explanations have been offered. She dismisses them because she personally finds them unbelievable, and thus the alternative must be true.

Originally posted by franspeakfree
I don't buy it either and its refreshing to hear that others don't aswell.

In fact, her entire claim is a God in the Gaps fallacy for the new millennium, that is because something is unexplained it is therefore unexplainable. In other words, because no one can offer an explanation, it must mean aliens are somehow involved.

Did I somehow get linked to some other vid? I didn't see no 100% proof of UFOs. There's nothing to debunk here - that's why the "debunkers" stay away. Why bother?
Quote from the video:
"..many refuse to believe this is simply space debry.."
That say it all. They refuse to believe it because it doesn't support their beliefs.

Just because NASA doesn't explain everything you see in the video doesn't mean that it's something they can't explain. The explanations would be space debry/ice crystals/and other stuff that some people refuse to believe.
The only explanation some people would believe: "Those are alien piloted aircraft"

[edit on 4/6/2009 by DGFenrir]

First off .. I am a blieve there is alien life out there.

IMO this footage does not prove it and it's a stretch to claim "You cannot debunk this one"

The most common explanation for these anomolies is debri/ice particles that change course as small thrusters are fired to position the craft.

Looking at the footage at least one of the objects seem to precisely follow the camera as it pans right and left....which would lead me to believe it is a lense artifact...flare or ice particle etc.

I appreciate the enthusiasm and I am a believer, but this didn't rock my world.

[edit on 4-6-2009 by maybereal11]

Originally posted by franspeakfree
I say this is proof that U.F.O.S in space exist, prove me wrong otherwise. Tell me how objects can move in different directions and speeds when there is no natural force controlling them?

"I believe my Aunty Gertie to be the devil. It's true because you can't prove me wrong!"

You can't make a claim about space and sit there expecting someone to prove you wrong based on ridiculous claims. If it weren;'t for the experienced members of ATS this place would be like GLP - EVERYTHING is a conspiracy. God is an astronaut. Oz is over the rainbow. Obama is a demon.

People like Phage keep you mentalists in check.


[edit on 4-6-2009 by KIRKSTERUK]

Originally posted by HolgerTheDane
With no true reference point there is no way of knowing if it is a huge craft or a speck of dust.

Holger, we aren't quite that helpless.

First, we often see the particles against shuttle structure, such as the tail -- so the existence of at least some small close particles is proven by that.

Second, we often see streams of particles emerging from water dump ports, flash evaporators, or leaky thrusters. More proof of existence, as above.

Third, we sometimes see particles 'appear' in the camera field-of-view simo with orbital sunrise at the shuttle's altitude. This is strong indication the particles are NEAR the shuttle, if they experience sunrise at the same moment.

Fourth, in the minute or two after sunrise, with some particles already visible, we occasionally see new particles APPEAR in mid-screen. When these are cases of the shuttle aiming the camera down-sun after sunrise, the case involves the shuttle also casting a shadow in the same direction. Particles emerging from that shadow must be close -- tens of feet, little more -- from the shuttle.

After several minutes, the shuttle begins passing over sunlit ground, and there is enough scattered light to 'fill in' its shadow zone. Particles in it are no longer fully invisible, just dimmer than in full sunlight. By this time, enough scattered sunlight is reaching the camera optics that automatic gain control dims the whole field-of-view way down and small particles usually fade away.

Watching front/back passage of small images at a greater distance is tricky since the camera optics tend to broaden the image, smeared over several pixels no matter how small or narrow the actual item. Protection against over-bright damage in the optics leads to full-white fields 'graying out' (you can see this effect in lightning bursts, or bright passing cities on the ground) in their centers. A white dot crossing the line-of-sight of an already grayed-out field will NOT show up as a white dot on top of that gray field -- the field, already over-bright, STAYS grayed out, giving the striking illusion that the white dot is passing BEHIND the grayed-out field of the other object.

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex [snip]
In fact, her entire claim is a God in the Gaps fallacy for the new millennium, that is because something is unexplained it is therefore unexplainable. In other words, because no one can offer an explanation, it must mean aliens are somehow involved.

...which also proves that Jimmy Hoffa and Judge Crater must be on Mars.

Well said, by the way. I hope the comments are read and remembered all around.

2 Cents;

I'm a believer, I'm all for disclosure.

The title of this thread is misleading. These are UFO's in space because we don't know what they are and they are moving through air, but this is in no way 100% proof of ET visiting Earth. Period. One day we will have that, but this is not it. All this is is food for thought, old food by the way. Stop getting our hopes up man!

i totally agree, these NASA ufos are undebunkable... some not shown are the circular formation of objects that assebles behind the shuttle arriving from different directions... and yet others are the objects shot against the earth's suface, appearing, moving in different directions , along wiht the teathered incident ( shown at the end of the movie in this post ) are undebunkable...
for me it made a difference form "believing" and "knowing" that something is going on...

these are always great posts, and reassuring for those in search of certainties when their faith in disclosure falls ill ;-)

I am of the opinion that there is life on other planets and that they come here and that the world's governments have been covering this up for years.

However I don't know what I am seeing when I watch those videos.

Could they be alien spacecrafts or space dwelling organisms.

Sure.

Could they be something else.

Yup!

But for anyone to watch those videos and say they know 100% what they are is ignorance, plain and simple.

Vas