New Analysis Video of the STS-75 Tether Incident

Originally posted by zorgon

Show me how a 0.1 diameter wire can reflect enough sunlight to over power a camera 100 nautical miles away

You can't can you

I don't think he can.

Wouldn't he have done so if he could?

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by JScytale
i must say, though, I *am* flattered my accusation of your original post being off-topic got to you enough for you to continually accuse me of the same.

I will ask one more time...

Show me how a 0.1 diameter wire can reflect enough sunlight to over power a camera 100 nautical miles away

You can't can you

TTFN

distance doesn't matter for any reason other than apparent size of the object in space as there is no atmosphere to diffract the light along its course to the camera.

en.wikipedia.org...

sunlight is extremely bright in space for the exact same reason. there is no atmosphere to filter it.

en.wikipedia.org...

it is very easy for a small point of brilliant light to overexpose film.



i assume you are familiar with how fireworks look to the naked eye.

Originally posted by zorgon
I asked you to explain to me how a 0.1 inch wire can reflect that much sunlight to cause the effect we see.

I haven't really seen anything to dispute the explanation that effect is produced by a combination the tether materials, a charged particle plasma field surrounding the wire and sunlight reflecting off this mix could account for it.

Why is the tether an issue for you, when it's the least interesting feature in the frame?

Originally posted by Raybo58

Originally posted by zorgon
I asked you to explain to me how a 0.1 inch wire can reflect that much sunlight to cause the effect we see.

I haven't really seen anything to dispute the explanation that effect is produced by a combination the tether materials, a charged particle plasma field surrounding the wire and sunlight reflecting off this mix could account for it.

Why is the tether an issue for you, when it's the least interesting feature in the frame?

agreed.
he is quite stubborn.

reply to post by zorgon


Remember the tether critters?

There is one at 0:33 into this video:


(content from STS-80....)

It looks like one of these - from the STS-75 tether mission:

(I like the differing direction on the notches; Thanks for Uploading the pics)






And it is Pulsating!

[edit on 10-6-2009 by Exuberant1]

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by zorgon

 

Remember the tether critters?

There is one at 0:33 into this video:

Pulsating!

and facing directly towards the camera so it's "donut hole" is aimed directly at us while traveling along a straight line. why am I not surprised?

remember objects that arent uniform in their reflectivity will appear to flash or pulse if they are spinning while in a source of light.

if out of focus, guess what that looks like?

Originally posted by JScytale
and facing directly towards the camera so it's "donut hole" is aimed directly at us while traveling along a straight line. why am I not surprised?

remember objects that arent uniform in their reflectivity will appear to flash or pulse if they are spinning while in a source of light.

if out of focus, guess what that looks like?

Agreed. It doesn't really add any new perspective.

However 1:38 caught my eye. I'm sure it's something mundane and obviously being brought into view by the rising sun, but the mass below the bright spot sure looks like one of the obelisks from "2001".

Agreed. It doesn't really add any new perspective.

However 1:38 caught my eye. I'm sure it's something mundane and obviously being brought into view by the rising sun, but the mass below the bright spot sure looks like one of the obelisks from "2001".

i didn't actually watch far enough to see that because attention was called to the "critter". very interesting, but notice it is very similar to the horizon - maybe it is the horizon itself reflecting off of the camera's lens?

if that is light reflecting off fo something solid, its *very* interesting. the curvature is what caught my eye and led to the previous explanation though.

[edit on 10-6-2009 by JScytale]

RE thickness of wire some people have put 0.1, 0.1 what cm,mtr,inches feet? IIRC its 1cm thick!
Second the bulk of people on here always claim that NASA hides everything interesting SO if any of these objects were UFO'S or life forms NASA would cover it up! YOU GUYS ALWAYS SAY THAT!
We have no point of reference to judge SIZE or SPEED of these objects.

This point made by dragonridr

Im going to post a question to you since you believe these oject were over 81 miles out beyond the tether explain to me why when the camera oscillates on it's pan/tilt unit following remote aim adjustment. If the so-called UFOs were really behind the tether, then why was their displacement considerably greater than that of the tether during the oscillation? The only plausible explanation is that the so-called UFOs were actually in the foreground. This basic principle (motion parallax) can be appreciated by anyone with a pair of eyes! Where are the photographers i know this playing with my digital camera come on. End of quote



We really need as much info on the camera as possible it is possible using the correct aperture setting to have enough depth of field that anything from a few feet to infinity will be in focus and any objects closer than a few feet would still show and be out of focus!

I have just taken a quick video will post later to prove a small object can be out of focus less than 3 ft from the camera and still show when focused on objects many feet,yards and miles away. When I say small I mean less than 2mm across!

[edit on 10-6-2009 by wmd_2008]

Originally posted by wmd_2008

We really need as much info on the camera as possible...

Read through Zorgon's posts.

He has already provided information on the imaging system...
(Tether Optical Phenomena Experiment).




[edit on 10-6-2009 by Exuberant1]

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by JimOberg

 

So you were there in space and saw this event with your own eyes, not just on a film?

You are one of the astronauts conducting this test?

If this is true, I certainly can't dispute your direct experience, so please state that this is a fact.

I said I saw the tether as it flew free in space. Dozens of other amateur astronomers did as well, as I have explained before, from the ground.

Why do you keep tripping yourself up with deliberate misinterpretations and silly garblings?

Originally posted by zorgon

Low Earth Orbit Spacecraft Charging Design Guidelines
NASA/TP—2003-212287

The most famous sustained arc event of all led to the breakage of the TSS-1R electrodynamic tether, and the loss of the attached satellite. Figure 8 shows the burned, frayed and broken tether end still attached to the Shuttle after the break. Incidentally, the tether continued arcing long after it and its satellite were drifting free, until finally it went into night conditions where the electron density was insufficient to sustain the arc. - Page 27

This is just one of many documents from your 'boss' NASA that contradicts everything you are saying.

Always the digs about 'my boss' -- I'll bet they wish they had had more control over me when I blew the whistle on their sick safety culture before Congress in 1997, when I contradicted what THEY were saying...

I note you do not provide a link for the external source quoted above. Please do so.

Originally posted by zorgon
As to the tether footage itself... you are all forgetting one important thing...

NASA DID NOT RELEASE THIS TO THE PUBLIC

If this statement is untrue then link me to the ORIGINAL film from NASA itself.

The video we are discussing was captured by a PRIVATE satellite receiver in Canada by Martyn Stubbs, who is a member here under secretnasaman

There IS NO OFFICIAL NASA version of this available to the public. This was intercepted. There was even a long court battle over this film years ago that is all but forgotten to decide ownership.

If NASA has now decided to release their copy of this film, please link me to it as I must have missed it.

Again, Zorgon, you are equating your own ignorance with the state of the entire world's knowledge. You've never heard of it -- therefore it can't be true.

These videos came out in real time over NASA TV. That's where I saw them. That's where Stubbs saw them -- no 'private' secret channel, but the public channel.

NASA released them as they were occurring. I know it's more exciting to imagine 'insider information', it's a real thrill -- but it's make believe.

Note that in the UFO versions, the distant video and the swarm are portrayed as scenes happening immediately after the break, as NASA cameras continuously tracked the receding tether.

In fact, those scenes were DAYS after the break, after the shuttle had resumed normal operations -- including water dumps.

But that's not the way the UFO mythmakers have falsely portrayed it, is it?

Originally posted by zorgon

Here is the TOP camera WITH the NASA description and the TOP data in the image and mention of the 'glow data phenomena' This is fact proof that the TOP camera was used in the tether filming

NASA UFOs on STS-75 UV "TOP" camera

Cool! TOPS did get downlinked, with TOPS-generated data displayed.

Where's the tether in these views?

The tether views as published do not have the top and bottom lines of TOPS-generated imaging information.

Thanks for providing, from your own research, proof that the famous "tether videos" are NOT from the TOPS camera.

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by JScytale
how hard is it to understand that whether or not there was a plasma sheath changes nothing in this debate?

Sure it does... it refutes Jim Obergs 'testimony' goes to credibility as you are so fond of saying

how hard is it to understand that no matter what spectrum of radiation the film was sensitive to, the tether would still be completely bathed in sunlight?

How hard is it for you to understand that the tether is a very thin wire about the thickness of a match stick. Explain how something that thin will reflect that much sunlight from 100 nautical miles. And its insulated so its not all that reflective.

Zorgon, I guess that when eyewitness testimony from experienced observers describe seeing the tether at those and greater ranges, your best response is, "I know it's impossible, so it can't be true."

Isn't that supposed to be the constipated mindset of UFO debunkers?

Instead, you and your friends provide the best examples of it, around here.

Shame on you. Open your eyes and mind.

reply to post by JimOberg


I see you were unable to link Zorgon to the original film from NASA itself....

As has been stated: The video we are discussing was captured via satellite receiver in Canada by Martyn Stubbs.

*There is now a thread about Mr Stubbs and how he obtained the video:

Documentary: The Secret NASA Transmissions

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by JScytale
i must say, though, I *am* flattered my accusation of your original post being off-topic got to you enough for you to continually accuse me of the same.

I will ask one more time...

Show me how a 0.1 diameter wire can reflect enough sunlight to over power a camera 100 nautical miles away

You can't can you

TTFN

Paul Maley, one of the world's foremost satellite observers, can -- here
www.eclipsetours.com...

So what's your excuse for disbelieving HIM, too?

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by zorgon

Show me how a 0.1 diameter wire can reflect enough sunlight to over power a camera 100 nautical miles away

You can't can you

I don't think he can.

Wouldn't he have done so if he could?

Exubie, why don't YOU believe Paul Maley's observations?

What you "think", and what reality DOES, seem to often be in a state of disconnect.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by wmd_2008

We really need as much info on the camera as possible...

Read through Zorgon's posts.

He has already provided information on the imaging system...
(Tether Optical Phenomena Experiment).

... which his own evidence now proves could NOT have been the source of the famous 'tether/swarm' views, because the TOPS-generated data lines are absent.

Originally posted by JimOberg

... which his own evidence now proves could NOT have been the source of the famous 'tether/swarm' views, because the TOPS-generated data lines are absent.

Please specifically cite and link to this evidence from Zorgon's posts and then provide reasoning for why you think that specific link or source corroborates your claims.

If you don't do that; then you've just made another unsubstantiated claim....