It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by The Shrike
Below, I have captured 12 screen grabs from the STS-80 footage normally seen as there may be more. Up front I'll tell you, unqualifiedly, that ice crystals, etc., do not emerge or materialize from the atmosphere and haul off at tremendous speed. They do not emerge or materialize, ...
Originally posted by The Shrike
Originally posted by JimOberg
Here's the report that I prepared about a dozen years ago and have posted around the Internet. Musgrave and Jones, mission crewmembers, have explicitly endoresd it as accurate:
snip
The STS-80 scenes seem to me to be identical in origin to the infamous STS-48 scenes
This has been a sore point since day one back in the early '90s when most of the various UFO forums railed against Oberg's allegedly prosaic explanations. Only a few bought the ice crystals explanation while the rest of us plus luminaries (cool pun!) such as Dr. Jack Kasher, and others analyzed the movement of the objects and found that the footage could not depict ice particles.
Dr. Jack Kasher is no slacker, he is professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Nebraska. Prosaic explanations defy logic, common sense and reason and indicate that many of us have really poor eyesight! I now enjoy a lens transplant and my vision is 20/20, and I'm 74!
Originally posted by The Shrike
There is no reason why a shuttle camera should zoom in on a group since ice crystals are around the shuttle or when they move they do not behave as these "orbs" do and what is the purpose of zooming into a group of "ice crystals". You can tell that the camera zooms in and out because a nearby object (the edge of the shuttle's loading bay) goes from out of focus to focus.
15 Q: Does NASA view these reports seriously?
A: For safety reasons, at the very least, NASA flight controllers do indeed pay attention, and have been doing so for decades. John Glenn’s report of ‘fireflies’ was closely examined as an indicator of how the cooling system – an externally-mounted ‘flash evaporator’ that used water to cool the capsule – may have been malfunctioning. On Apollo-13, observations of ice particles out the window helped quickly characterize the severity of the cryogenic tank explosion. During Apollo missions, reports and images of what came to be humorously called ‘moon pigeons’ provided clues to the status of critical external components such as heat shields and thermal blankets. A Skylab mission was nearly aborted with a rescue flight when ‘snow’ showed that a thruster was leaking precious fuel. A critical international space rendezvous in 1995 was nearly cancelled because of excessive fuel leaks, observed as ice swarms outside the STS-63 window. Structural pieces of shuttle missions have been observed and closely examined by camera zoom, but the most serious shuttle space failure, the ‘Columbia’ disaster, missed a chance to be forewarned when a hunk of the vital heat shield drifted away but was NOT observed by eyeball or camera. For reasons such as these, strange-looking outside stuff gets the immediate attention of Mission Control – and all in public.
See my 1994 briefing: “Mitigation of Hazards of Shuttle-Generated Debris”,
www.jamesoberg.com...
and this Apollo-era NASA study of anomalous external objects
www.jamesoberg.com...
Here’s how a report of a ‘UFO’ might have saved the lives of the Columbia crew during their doomed January 2003 mission: www.msnbc.msn.com...
…and here’s why reports of ‘stuff’ were always made rapidly and openly:
MSNBC // June 13, 2008 // Why NASA watches out for true UFOs
today.msnbc.msn.com...
Originally posted by The Shrike
... You can tell that the camera zooms in and out because a nearby object (the edge of the shuttle's loading bay) goes from out of focus to focus...
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by The Shrike
Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by JimOberg
Why don't you ask Musgrave ?
He's the one reporting to the whole world
that He saw a ufo "on two different occasions"
Asking Musgrave is at best a waste of time. ....People in certain, respected, positions have this need to espouse unsupported beliefs. ///, astronauts do it with religious fervor, I mean how could any thinking person take these people seriously? I certainly don't. I am my only authority and it doesn't matter who says what it's what is in my mind that counts. I haven't lost it yet.
Shrike, thanks for making your view so clear. Astronauts if they disagree with what you want to believe, are lying.
You have constructed the perfect defense against eyewitness testimony.
Sweet.
Originally posted by The Shrike
I happen to be an eyewitness and after I got through describing what I saw there would be no doubt that what I've seen is NOT associated with humans. But not all eyewitness know how to describe accurately and therein lies the rub.
Originally posted by buzzEmiller
reply to post by JimOberg
Jim, you are such a typical type of die hard skeptic of UFOs.. the old 'prove a negative' guy....If you do not know something, or If you have not heard of someone,
.... it must not have happened & they must not be important.
And you are not being truthful when you continually fib to me ( & zorgon) about having your own NASA mastered copy of this amazing STS-80 clip.
Originally posted by buzzEmiller
reply to post by JimOberg
Jim,
I am just saying that I have seen all the 'official' NASA video that they have posted to the web re: each flight & that is all you get,
just a satellite launch or capture.. various crew goofing around & a few beauty shots! You base so much of what you say re: NASA videos like the STS -80..on info & not any raw unedited video from NASA ...just what someone else said...
Originally posted by buzzEmiller
reply to post by JimOberg
Jim, your huge analysis of the STS 80 was a piece of work that was very interesting & thanks for that. But I can not buy it beyond the basic technical teaching moments.
I did not sit in a NASA pr office and watch a tiny bit of tape like you did. ( 20 mins. ) I watched hr. after hr & day by day from every STS 80 flight day unedited video. What I see is a mission that every day gives amazing UFO video (both day & night video)........
NASA is all about secrets..like the automatic secret X spacecraft (NASA won't say what it has been doing is space month after month) ..some say to spy on China..which is building another space station that is shrouded in more secrecy!
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by JimOberg
Why don't you ask Musgrave ?
He's the one reporting to the whole world
that He saw a ufo "on two different occasions"
Come now, did HE say he saw 'a UFO', or are you putting words into his mouth?
Is your claim based on correct quoting, or on your own imagination?
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by JimOberg
Why don't you ask Musgrave ?
He's the one reporting to the whole world
that He saw a ufo "on two different occasions"
Come now, did HE say he saw 'a UFO', or are you putting words into his mouth?
Is your claim based on correct quoting, or on your own imagination?
"Statistically, to a certainty they (or there) are hugely advanced, civilations, intelligences, life forms out there. I believe they're so advanced that they're even doing interstellar travel. I believe it's possible they came here. Nothing that I have seen, personaly, has the signature, has those characteristics which you would attribute to other forms of intelligence or other kinds of craft. Twice I saw what I call my eel, which I don't know the size of it because I don't know how far away it was but it was like a rubber piece of hose which had internal motions in it. Maybe it's eight feet maybe it's ten, I'm not sure. When you can't tell how far away you can't get the size so I'm missing both of those things, size and how far away. But there's no question it had internal motion".
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by The Shrike
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by JimOberg
Why don't you ask Musgrave ?
He's the one reporting to the whole world
that He saw a ufo "on two different occasions"
Come now, did HE say he saw 'a UFO', or are you putting words into his mouth?
Is your claim based on correct quoting, or on your own imagination?
What's worse, calling space anomalous objects ice crystals, "eels", or UFOs? So Musgrave may not have used the term UFO but ......
"May not"??
MAY NOT????
You've just admitted he DID not -- and now you're making excuses for your faking of his words.
Badly played, Shrike.
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by The Shrike
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by JimOberg
Why don't you ask Musgrave ?
He's the one reporting to the whole world
You are the one making the claim the 'snakes' represent something inexplicable, so YOU provide the evidence.
Because Musgrave says HE doesn't believe the 'snakes' are anything extraordinary or extraterrestrial.
Or, like Shrike, will you claim that Musgrave is being forced to lie?
Wait a minit! Please copy and paste in a reply wher I said that Musgrave was forced to lie. I won't expand until you do. BTW, who else can you say have I mentioned as being forced to lie. Let's put the cards on the table.
8:26 PM:
People in certain, respected, positions have this need to espouse unsupported beliefs.
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by The Shrike
There is no reason why a shuttle camera should zoom in on a group since ice crystals are around the shuttle or when they move they do not behave as these "orbs" do and what is the purpose of zooming into a group of "ice crystals". You can tell that the camera zooms in and out because a nearby object (the edge of the shuttle's loading bay) goes from out of focus to focus.
"There is no reason" is just shrike-speech for "I don't KNOW the reason so it can't exist".
This, from my "99 FAQs on Space UFOs", in final preparation: