An astronaut’s image and The Tether Incident – something I noticed...

reply to post by depthoffield

Originally posted by depthoffield

Originally posted by mcrom901

you still did not answer my question though i.e. "what is the source of the 'lights'" and you insist that you did so earlier by mentioning... "some lights"... o rly?

Cant't you see it? From the MIR itself.... I'm sure you are a smart person, therefore is clear you are just playing games...

*snip*

. But when unfocused, appear as bokeh discs with notches. NASA camera doing bokeh with notches. q.e.d.

SEE WHAT? what are they? what is the source of the lights which created said bokeh affect.... do you want me to repeat that, or you simply missed again.....

i'm sorry but it seems you are the one who's playing games here...

q.e.d ? what has quantum-electrodynamics got anything to do here.... meh



dust particles popping in from the void?

Originally posted by depthoffield

Originally posted by mcrom901

Originally posted by depthoffield
Bokeh in all the cases cases, from unfocuces sources of light. Which, for STS-75, obligatory means the objects are close, and small, just meters/tens of meters away (it was calculated for some representative objects).

"obligatory"

go back and read your thread please...

You should go to my thread, and all the people interested to really deny ignorance in this subject (sts-75 objects), because there are all the facts that demonstrates the "obligatory" term when speaking about objects in tether sequences must be small and close, meters and tens of meters away in order to fit the video simply because the laws of optics. Here a link to the topic.

yeah yeah... i remember your math & them de obligatory results....

Originally posted by depthoffield
Next, what is the resolution of the NASA camera? Well, this is not clearly described, but this camera produce a TV signal.
While the resolution of the TV signal could be 768 x 576 (interlaced frames), what we have here, the youtube versions, are only 320 x 240 pixels.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Ok, after reading both sides of argument, I think we can get this out of it...

Depthoffield makes for an interesting case with evidence of the notched discs being out of focus light- sources, with an illustration to back it up however on the animation he shows, the light source is clearly from the MIR space station and not something that appears to be floating around outside of the space station, which is what we see on The Tether Incident footage... Though one would be unreasonable not to at least count it as a plausibility that what we see on The Tether Incident footage and others of the like, could not indeed be some sort of out of focus particles whether on the lens or floating around in space, as we know that are is a lot of space debris and junk out there. Ice crystals could also be an explanation - reflecting light into an out of focus camera.
Though that doesn't seal the deal of other incidents, but are mere possible and plausible explanations for what we see on the events being discussed in the thread.

The best cases of NASA footage, where you can't simply say that those are ice crystals, lens artifacts or particles that are out of focus are the following:

1. footage that shows an illuminated object accelerating or decelerating, according to Newtonian physics that can only be the result of the object possesing the ability or indeed the power to slow down or speed up at will i.e. an internal power source.

2. footage that shows an object changing course that should also imply that the object is driven by an internal power source whether under intelligent control or not.

In the video from LunaCognita are examples of footage that meet both criteria for something truly unidentified.

reply to post by SpiritualAwakening


due to plumes from thruster firings....

www.abovetopsecret.com...



furthermore...

www.vgl.org...

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Mclaneinc
Its been proved that these are nothing more than camera artifacts moving quite close to the camera even though it LOOKS like they go behind the tether..

Proven by whom?

When you can explain the motions and flight paths maybe we can talk

And your right Luna does great work

There is more than one UFO in that vid. There is... a lot more than one UFO in that vid. Do you see all of those moving objects... those are all UFO's.

We are not alone. It has been apparent for many years.

Originally posted by mcrom901
reply to post by depthoffield

 

q.e.d ? what has quantum-electrodynamics got anything to do here.... meh

i mean q.e.d. is from qued erat demostrandum

Originally posted by mcrom901

Originally posted by depthoffield
Next, what is the resolution of the NASA camera? Well, this is not clearly described, but this camera produce a TV signal.
While the resolution of the TV signal could be 768 x 576 (interlaced frames), what we have here, the youtube versions, are only 320 x 240 pixels.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I think you are aware that the size of the bokeh disc, as produced by the lens on the senzor, does not depend on the resolution on the senzor itsel, but is a function of focal length and aperture of the lens, also by the distance to the real object which is the source of the bokeh. Here is the explanation.

The resolution of the senzor ,as you quoted me, is just a method of measuring the bokeh size. (like the mountain is not tall or shorter if you measure using feet or meters)

You are "lol"-ing, but is a confused laugh

Originally posted by SpiritualAwakening

In the video from LunaCognita are examples of footage that meet both criteria for something truly unidentified.

There is a very simple explanation of sudden subtle changes in trajectories of the objects in LunaCognita video: shuttle small positioning itself using RCS system, which means that the shutle (camera) is NOT a stable and perfect fixed platform as viewer may expect.

Here is the explanation.

Over a period of minutes, motion of small fluffy light objects also get affected by air drag. Furthermore, near the edges of the field of view, some straight lines are bent a little.

But I'm still intrigued by other gentle course changes. It's been suggested that this is a propulsive effect of sublimation of water or hydrazine molecules off of the 'snowflake'. I need to follow this up with real quantitative physics calculations.

reply to post by depthoffield

Originally posted by depthoffield

Originally posted by mcrom901
reply to post by depthoffield

 

q.e.d ? what has quantum-electrodynamics got anything to do here.... meh

i mean q.e.d. is from qued erat demostrandum

did you use the bayesian inference?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by depthoffield
The resolution of the senzor ,as you quoted me, is just a method of measuring the bokeh size. (like the mountain is not tall or shorter if you measure using feet or meters)

you mean counting the pixels?

Originally posted by depthoffield

Originally posted by SpiritualAwakening

In the video from LunaCognita are examples of footage that meet both criteria for something truly unidentified.

There is a very simple explanation of sudden subtle changes in trajectories of the objects in LunaCognita video: shuttle small positioning itself using RCS system, which means that the shutle (camera) is NOT a stable and perfect fixed platform as viewer may expect.

Here is the explanation.

edit on 14/2/11 by depthoffield because: (no reason given)

furthermore... your selected bit does not account for the overall observed phenomenon i.e. besides the obvious ones which you excluded in your gif... the camera not being stable DOES not equate to RCS.......

www.abovetopsecret.com...