The NASA Sightings

There are so many sights that NASA sees you see? I do, but only sometimes. LOL. At any rate I thought a UFO Magazine Forum thread dedicated to NASA Sightings and the like might be a hoot. I'll start with shuttle mission STS-118 and a video clip from August 19, 2007 about noon-time Eastern:



A link to a "zip" format of the hour of raw capture streaming footage that originally contained the clip, here.

Cheers.

Fix'

It looks like space debris to me. There are no maneuverings to suggest the object was intelligently controlled.

Many of the objects seen in the videos of NASA turn out to be ice crystals. There was an episode of UFO Hunters where they reproduced such effects in a test. UFO Hunters was able to show objects that looked like they were blinking during the show.

kidflash2008 wrote: "It looks like space debris to me."

Thank you kidflash2008, I'm not sorry that your opinion as "garbage' has been met by that video clip. I have a different opinion - I don't claim it "looks"' like anything other than "something" that is passing the orbiter in the opposite direction of travel to Endeavour and the Earth at an altitude of less than 218 miles. Note how long this item stays in view - then watch some daytime footage of the STS on-orbit at 17,500 MPH. Some will understand - some won't or can't.

'Not much space debris that moves in orbit of the Earth from East to West. Wink. A simple-fact of orbital mechanics.

Ice-crystals? That's Oberg's "bunker-position" isn't it? LOL. Not that I don't enjoy James Oberg's fine entertainment value elsewhere on the portions of the internet where he and certain others tend to dwell or lurk in disinformation and data-neutralization on behalf of... a "position". Yawn. Hmmm, or is that "de-bunker'? I'm skeptical that I've chosen the "right" words. No matter - it's just a bit of video... right? No one believes what they "see" anyway... right? I "love" when de-bunkers drag out the "ice-crystals" - they have no "down cards" to flip when that occurs.

Funny; the reactions these "little clips" draw from those who would choose to be reactionary in one manner or another. Tells one much.

Here's another potential "ice-crystal" for you kidflash2008 - Please name instances of the "many" ice-crystals identified "in the videos of NASA" and reports by NASA officials you claim to support that hypothesis if possible? Smile. Bigger smile. Then find one, "just one" that looks anything at all like what has been shown in the clip I've posted above and I'll be happy with it identified as an "ice-crystal". I await your post kidflash2008.

I didn't "say" anything about "UFO Hunters" or "blinking" - you did kidflash2008. Blink, blink. An intereststing tactical behavior - three-card Monte anyone?

You posit and post in complaint using non-sequitors and I find your analysis which must be based on "critical-thinking" skills or some militaristic-dogmatic training "meme" at some level - "most amusing"' kidflash2008.

Let's see... should I post another of the 70 or 80 NASA Sighting clips I have now or wait until the debunkers come and then keep them on their "back foot" as they whine in protest and defamatory innuendo? Sport.

Maybe later - I'll gauge reaction and behavior for a bit and "see" what NASA "flies" in this area next.

Fix'

P.S. or PSA? Serve truth - keep a de-bunker's mind occuppied with fact.

First of all, I am not a debunker but a skeptic of a lot of what gets shown. I am not an expert on video but am telling it how it looks to me. Too many people make more out of what is seen.

If I am a debunker, why do I think Kecksburg PA and Roswell are extraterrestrial in origin? Why do I think the Summer of 1952 Saucer invasion is one of the biggest cover-ups in history?

I do question videos or stories of UFO sightings. I think people who purport to be ufologists should do the same.

It could very well be that the object shown in the above video is extraterrestrial, but it is not doing any unusual maneuvers. There may be (and probably is) a natural explanation for it. I did happen to catch the UFO Files episode where they did such experiments and repeated the exact same effect. Occam's Razor works to help answer the above, but it may not be the only answer.

I am proud of my military service, but was not brainwashed by it. I use what I learned in the military to look at many cases and see what I can find that does not make sense to me. Read my input in the Roswell forum to see what I questioned on that case.

kidflash2008 wrote: "First of all, I am not a debunker but a skeptic of a lot of what gets shown. I am not an expert on video but am telling it how it looks to me."

OK. If you say so kidflash2008. So you are a self-confessed "de-bunker" of just some of what is shown. OK... and you've established you are not an expert on video. 'Skeptic for most - de-bunker for the balance - got it.

kidflash2008 wrote: "Too many people make more out of what is seen."

OK. If your "reality" supports that notion of what you perceive of others visual perceptions - a psychic judge?

kidflash2008 wrote: "If I am a debunker, why do I think Kecksburg PA and Roswell are extraterrestrial in origin? Why do I think the Summer of 1952 Saucer invasion is one of the biggest cover-ups in history?"

Why indeed. Enormous smile.

kidflash2008 wrote: "I do question videos or stories of UFO sightings. I think people who purport to be ufologists should do the same."

That's quite a prescriptive edict. I am glad you consider that "thinking" kidflash2008.

kidflash2008 wrote: "It could very well be that the object shown in the above video is extraterrestrial, but it is not doing any unusual maneuvers. There may be (and probably is) a natural explanation for it."

Funny, just one post ago you were claiming it was either "space debris" with "ice crystals" as a "fall-back" secondary position. Not doing any unusual navigation? Um, it's going "the wrong way"; from East to West - but I already pointed that out and "you" choose to dismiss that too. But y'know that's OK by me - no problem here - continue on as you feel "fit" to do so.

kidflash2008 wrote: "I did happen to catch the UFO Files episode where they did such experiments and repeated the exact same effect. Occam's Razor works to help answer the above, but it may not be the only answer."

So which TV program is it kidflash2008, "UFO Hunters" or "UFO Files"? Exact same "effect" - so now it's an effect according to your USAF training? Please demonstrate if you feel so inclined to share such wisdom borne of altruistic-service.

Occam's Razor? An obsolete notion that those who tend to over-simplify amongst other tactical notions used as a shield far too frequently NOT to be noticed. Big happy-sleepy yawn.

kidflash2008 wrote: "I am proud of my military service, but was not brainwashed by it. I use what I learned in the military to look at many cases and see what I can find that does not make sense to me."

How would you know if you were or were not affected mentally by such training? I use what I learned in the military, diplomatic corps, intel and private industry as a public-service to look at many cases I "see" and I "see" those who would "look" at the same cases and come to conclusions and behaviors "that do not always" make a sense nor point the way forward in a positive manner and I make note. Sometimes I point these "sensibilities" out... other times I choose to garden in retirement.

kidflash2008 wrote: "Read my input in the Roswell forum to see what I questioned on that case."

Yes, yes... I have read of such things on the publicly accessible internet. Duly-noted by me that kidflash2008 wants me to believe that he finds "no source of event" in any US government and military conduct during the Kecksburg event nor Roswell - especially the United States Army Air Force during Roswell. Sir, Yes-sir; kidflash2008 says "alien as event source" - I'm not entirely convinced what the origins of either event are yet kidflash2008, but you are assisting in the coalescence and firmament of potential choices. I do see "a whole lot of human" both positive and perhaps negative in both events amongst other potential species. Your position of choice was understood the first time I read it kidflash2008. Keep saying it - if that's what your agenda requires kidflash2008.

Quite a dissertation on how you aren't a "de-bunker" - a little over sensitive kidflash2008? Has this or something similar happened to you before? One could be reasonably forgiven for thinking, "he doth protest too loudly" over something professed with such confidence and bravado as "space debris" such a short time ago. I merely mentioned "ice-crystals" as a laughable "go to" as some not-too-terribly unlike James Oberg are wont to use. Do you consider yourself in the same league as James Oberg kidflash2008? I didn't consider you as such in any way, but I "could" come around to the idea with enough self-directed study of such behaviors.

Cheers, kidflash2008

Fix'

It is true that I can get a little sensitive when I am referred to as a debunker. I should not be so thin skinned, but I am human after all. I should also realize some of what is stated is not meant to be negative about me (or anyone else) and I should not interpret it as such. I can also change my mind on what I think is in the video (as anyone else can). I have rewatched it over and over and it does look to be a solid object and not a small piece of debris.

I am a skeptical believer (if that makes any sense) as I am looking for the truth. There are many really good cases out there that I think should really be studied to find more evidence.

As for Kecksburg PA and Roswell, I have written about why they were probably extraterrestrial in origin.

Some of the statements I did make should of been thought out a little bit better, and I apologize if I offended you. I do realize I sometimes seem to contradict myself, but again, that is a human failing.

I have no agenda here or anywhere else.

Goddess Bless,

Lloyd

I should also let you know that I do find your research into the Glocke and Kecksburg to be fascinating. I am open to all other theories as to what happened at those sites.

My theories are only opinion and speculation and in no way should be interpreted to be the only ones out there.

Goddess Bless,

Lloyd

To some what is seen appears lobular and rotating slowly while traveling on it's tangential trajectory opposite of the spin of the planet. Plasma comes to mind as do the early NASA photos showing lobular oddly-shaped phenomena. Apollo 11 has an excellent example - (I'll put that together with the other Apollo archive footage later).

This one I'd call a potential "near-miss" of sorts. It's important to note the velocity and direction of Endeavour (both known) AND the object passing in the opposite direction. No doubt much better quality footage exists for those who can exercise the ability to file FOIA requests in the USA. I found it interesting that the INCO (camera operator) did not immediately notice this (maybe eating lunch) and then "adjusted" focus as they are often wont to do when "things" pass within visual perception. I bet PAO or IG might have had a wee-chat with that individual about paying attention given the 30 second or so network broadcast delay.

If one looks earlier in that orbit during the daytime one can see the position of our Planet and STS-118 very clearly. Since there was "no burn" executed to adjust Endeavour's orbit one could imagine or maybe digitally superimpose the daytime outline of Earth into the clip and the striking path of the "unknown" would be more noticeable.

I'm of a mind because of the tangential direction away from Earth and STS-118 to suspect what is in the clip was NOT in Earth orbit at all and passed between the Earth and STS-118 moving at an incredibly precise and improbable velocity. Some might say, "It looks like "they" had a look". There are many, many other anomalous examples of unusual NASA and Roskavia events.

No worries kidflas2008. You've explained your position very well and I think I'm capable of empathizing with any reasonable position even if I might personally disagree with that stance. Honesty is cool - I've no problem with that.

One must be wary of agenda - so true; hidden and overt. I choose to "watch" a variety of alternative subject matter websites - debunking is every bit the industry and enterprise that "the false prophets" possess and then some. Frown. Both are "legal businesses" - I'd prefer no one had to contend with while hunting and gathering. I choose this site to post on because it doesn't have the legacy "baggage" and politics of so many "run-of-mill" Walmartian cut and paste venues.

I am unprepared to decide whether this NASA Sighting clip's unusual appearance is of human or alien or natural origins but "it" sure looks "out of place". I've not been through all the footage I was given nor the footage I've collected myself. Most "little things" are easily explained, explanation of other things? Not-so-easy.

Fix'

"Not much space debris that moves in orbit of the Earth from East to West. Very Happy Wink. A simple-fact of orbital mechanics."

just to add my 2 cents. The object is at a higher altitude than the orbiter. And as such is moving at a slower relative velocity. if it was moving from east to west I doubt the object could be seen as anything other than a streak of light, as we're talking thousands of MPH closure rate, assuming they are moving at the same velocity in opposite directions.. I think it's just moving in the same direction at a slower speed because of its higher altitude.

I'm sorry dayanx' I should have explained more fully. D'Oh! My bad.

The orbiter is travelling "butt-first" and "upside down" in relation to the planet and is the standard orbital orientation of the vehicle to reduce MMOD damage. The camera perpective is from the aft port corner of the STS payload bay looking "forward" to the crew compartment but in the direction of where the shuttle has just come "from".

I can see how easy it is to confuse the perspective - in one way it is upside down. Again my apologies. If you'd like I can demonstrate with some pics and supporting data. Just ask.

You are quite correct the relative velocity is very "pedestrian" considering Endeavour is at 219 nautical miles altitude and booking at 17,500 MPH. Not an expected charcteristic of an orbital body travelling against the spin of the Earth at such a low altitude.

If I could superimpose the Earth below with it's daylight spin shown the velocity of the object against the direction of the planet would be more easily seen. The object also crosses the orbital path of Endeavour moving port toward starboard and does not conflict with your observation of it gaining altitude nor being "overtaken" relative to the orbiter. A very precise bit of navigation to one way of thinking.

I'm of the opinion it's moving in a straight line and has it's path come between the Earth and the orbiter moving away - relatively. You have very good eyes dayanx. If you'd ever like any footage to look at just ask, if I have it and it was public - it yours.

Cheers,

Fix'

Oops, I'm used to driving a car all the time. I was assuming too much. Yeah I understand what you're saying now. If I have good eyes, its because I was an artist in a former life :p

Hi dayanx.

No. You were NOT assuming too much. You were being quite reasonable and your two-cents are worth far more to me than face-value and greatly appreciated. I did NOT provide enough information for a reader to understand the orientation of the orbiter, the planet and whatever that is appearing the video clip. It was I who assumed too much; I sometimes incorrectly take for granted many things that seem like "ho-hum" details to me because of a familiarity with the subject material and I fail to appreciate adequately that the reader may not have such a familiarity. It is good to learn lessons even in advanced years.

I may be guilty of this "error of omission" more than I realize - so if I write something that leaves folks "not understanding" or lacking enough information to come to an understanding I'd really like to be made aware of that and to be given the opportunity to explain as fully as needed to add to the body of knowledge.

You not only have "good eyes" dayanx, you think very well too. Many folks would look at that particular clip and not give it a second thought. You gave it "more" than a second thought and tried to figure out what was shown. It's cool to have several sets of "eyes on".

Thanks dayanx,

Fix'

If the object in the video is one of ours, did the Defense Department let it slip through? There are a lot of articles at: http://www.rense.com/ which are about the United States (and other countries) having a secret space program.

I don't know kidflash2008, SAC and later Space Command can track objects as small as 10 centimeters if they want to... since the 1960's. I am sure they are very capable sensing systems and aspects of those systems are most assuredly classified access.

At one time Maxime Faget was approached about designing a re-usable space vehicle for a three-letter agency associated with the great state of Virginia. He had a very unique re-entry solution - very different to what we see in the STS OV's.

It may have been built "black" across several other projects that "failed". It "could" explain much.

There may be the odd line-drawing left unintentionally on public ports in Langley. Before this request Faget was involved in "Brass Bell" (and others); yet another project that got "rolled" into other programs much the same way.

I have another NASA clip that may "fit" the notion of "secret space capability" better but I'll dig that out as time allows.

I hesitate to agree that whatever is shown just "slipped through" kidflash2008 - I can't be sure. If human or alien, I can think of only a few reasons worth navigating so close to Endeavour. If natural? There are protocols for "moving" the OV's orbit and post-return to flight those protocols were "beefed-up" with more clearance margin. I will try and find the specification on the NASA reports server. It may be in the CAIB report.

Cheers kidflash2008 ,

Fix'

"Out There: The Government's Secret Quest for Extraterrestrials" by journalist Howard Blum has a great opening dealing with an unknown object being tracked by NORAD. There are many interesting facts uncovered in the book, which deals with the government's involvement in UFOs. The book is not sensationalist, but very down to Earth. It raises many more questions than it can answer, and many who read it wanted a definitive answer to the question of UFOs and our government.

I think the unanswered questions speak volumes alone. If the government did not care, why do they spend so much time on the subject. On a side note, the FBI could not prove the MJ-12 documents were fakes.

It is a good book to check out at the library. (Amazon has some on sale for as little as $.01)

Elsewhere on the intertubes some are making a fuss about some stuff during a space walk yesterday at a bit before 5PM Eastern. It's a bit of a stretch but here's what Mother caught for us at about that time. I don't see anything that screams "other" but something not attached to ISS/Shuttle is presenting "a black-centre flare" to the lens. I'd have to dig a bit to confirm but it "shouldn't" be the Sun and it isn't part of the Canadarm II. Here is an excerpt from the footage Mother archives. Nothin' special.



The full hour zipped is available upon request by PM or as soon as the file dump-site chooses to obey it's own rules and accept the upload I'll post a link.

Fix'

I couldn't see anything unusual in the video. Thank you for sharing it, and I will watch it again to try and catch the object in question.

The round thing at about 10 o'clock kidflash2008, I guess. Watching at 8x or 16x shows clear movement of the arm (due to the astronaut's input perched on the end) and the round thing with the black centre does not move until the INCO or PAO or IG or whoever toggles the feed. The distance from the arm to the round thing changes as the arm reacts to the astronaut. They work on a time-delay and just at the end the "whatever" seems to move more. Not very spectacular but not apparently attached to the ISS/Shuttle either. Quite possibly entirely with out interest.

Cheers,

Fix'

I now see the object. It is interesting, and hopefully someone can blow up the image for a better look.

I did kidflash2008. I did. Too plain. White light circle around a black center. Not unlike an eclipse (this was not "the" eclipse) - just more questions that never will be asked or answered - truthfully or honestly. Wink. A US Citizen must "ask" via US methods and channels - FOIA. All legal-like, see? Well "seeing" is the point I suppose... Need times and dates and events to "ask" about?

Some more interesting bits today on the Southern swing... and not just the Southern Lights South of Aus. About 17:20 - 17:30 Eastern. I'll eventually get to "the pile"... it's really boring stuff to review - and I love space flight. Weeks of the stuff and I'm like two missions and a bit "in" to "the pile" since RTF. Some good bits marked for extraction. That's what winter is for right?

Should be into another Southern swing at about 19:00 Eastern. NASA-TV. Yawn.

Fixer

P.S. Just a thought but it "could" be a SPHERES experiment or SPHERES gone operational by another agency. But then it would be covert and we all "know" nothing covert ever happens in low Earth orbit, don't we - Ms. NSA? Or DARPA-Lady?

Thank you for blowing up the enigma. You are correct it does not answer any questions and raises more. Time for NASA to sweep this under their massive rug with their massive broom.

NASA-broom? Yikes, pretty expensive schmutzhaken. Couple of bits of "debris" from yesterday and the day before saved from the dust-bin of "what's the use-ville". Wink.





If a tree fall's in the forest...

Fix'

Edit to add this one from today at about 21:59 Eastern.

Hello i'm in the U.K. and have collected as much N.A.S.A. U.F.O. footage as I can. I think that the STS 80 footage is fantastic, in my view the best ever. After forming a circle a sphere moves into the centre and lights up. If this isn't saying 'HELLO' I don't know what is?