|
|
NASA Footage
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In the hearts and minds of MacNNers
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!
This time I won't offer any analysis.
Killjoy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Dakar the Fourth
Killjoy.
Ok, I'm lying. The analysis will come after people comment on this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
Watched the whole thing, and no UFOs came into view, just orbital debris, some of it with rotations.
If something had changed course, now that would have been interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
Sooo, whats the big stink here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
Thats some fine tether footage, really. Blew. My. Mind.
Oh Horsepoo, I have a feeling we're going to see a lot of fun threads from you.
|
-"I don't believe in God. "
"That doesn't matter. He believes in you."
-"I'm not agnostic. Just nonpartisan. Theological Switzerland, that's me."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by TheWOAT
Sooo, whats the big stink here?
Nothing but horsepoo.
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Things to understand:
Tether is 81 nautical miles from Columbia
The tether is 12 miles long
Considering this, so called "debris" passing behind tether would be around 1-2 miles in diameter
And considering that, wouldn't you say that Columbia is in grave danger if it's floating in a sea of 2 mile long "debris"? It's everywhere.
Columbia is in orbit around Earth...moving...if it wasn't, it would start dropping back down to Earth due to the planet's gravitational pull
Considering this, so called "debris" is defying gravity they're moving in different directions from Columbia, some towards Earth, some away, some are just remaining still as Columbia moves away from them...that makes no sense.
Things to consider:
So called "debris" all looks the same...discs with a hole in the middle and a notch in the outer edge (my take on this, someone threw away giant 2 mile long CDs...except, we can safely say they're not 'compact')
So called "debris" sometimes transparent and not reflecting sunlight
So called "debris" sometimes pulsating light
Still doubting? More footage of these same entities/crafts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0jpUPLqLhA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF6QmQf13VU starting at 1:17
(
Last edited by Horsepoo!!!; Jul 10, 2008 at 06:27 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Glad I'm not an American...giving tax money to NASA to film a tether in a huge debris field. So smart. Come on, guy, muster up some brain power. You can do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status:
Offline
|
|
Looks like the need to install some traffic lights.
|
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!
Things to understand:
Tether is 81 nautical miles from Columbia
The tether is 12 miles long
Considering this, so called "debris" passing behind tether would be around 1-2 miles in diameter
And considering that, wouldn't you say that Columbia is in grave danger if it's floating in a sea of 2 mile long "debris"? It's everywhere.
Columbia is in orbit around Earth...moving...if it wasn't, it would start dropping back down to Earth due to the planet's gravitational pull
Considering this, so called "debris" is defying gravity they're moving in different directions from Columbia, some towards Earth, some away, some are just remaining still as Columbia moves away from them...that makes no sense.
Things to consider:
So called "debris" all looks the same...discs with a hole in the middle and a notch in the outer edge (my take on this, someone threw away giant 2 mile long CDs...except, we can safely say they're not 'compact')
So called "debris" sometimes transparent and not reflecting sunlight
So called "debris" sometimes pulsating light
Still doubting? More footage of these same entities/crafts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0jpUPLqLhA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF6QmQf13VU starting at 1:17
Doubting what exactly? That there were bits of something (just looking at it I'm assuming the debris is in fact near the lens, not further away, because of the way it comes in/out of focus) on a very very boring video of a tether. I saw no blinking lights, no pulsing lights. Just because you don't know what something is does not make it into what you want it to be.
Not sure what you expect us to believe but, uh, doesn't seem to be much to believe.
|
-"I don't believe in God. "
"That doesn't matter. He believes in you."
-"I'm not agnostic. Just nonpartisan. Theological Switzerland, that's me."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I see debris which doesn't change course and a big space hot dog.
BOOOOOOOORING!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by sek929
I see debris which doesn't change course and a big space hot dog.
BOOOOOOOORING!
Big 2 mile long round debris with a black hole in the middle and a notch on the outer edge...glows and turns transparent...changes velocity. I'd hate to be near that debris...looks possessed. You guys are killing me. Activate neurons...now! Come on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status:
Offline
|
|
How on earth do you consider them to be 2 miles in dia.?
That could be dust 30 ft in front of the camera, notice how blurry those dots look, maybe since they are not in focus or at the same distance as the tether?
I'm open to anything, but you are filled with nonsense lately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by sek929
How on earth do you consider them to be 2 miles in dia.?
That could be dust 30 ft in front of the camera, notice how blurry those dots look, maybe since they are not in focus or at the same distance as the tether?
I'm open to anything, but you are filled with nonsense lately.
Tether is 12 miles long...you'll see some "debris" behind it that takes up almost 1/6th of the tether. Pause at 1:32 and 1:44.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status:
Offline
|
|
You assume it is behind it, ever heard of depth of field?
So you are convinced that there were dozens of alien spacecraft whizzing around in space.
Barring the mathematical impossibility of life originating close enough to us in order to navigate the universe in the timeframe of humans existing on this planet, do you realize that millions of particles do indeed float in the space that surrounds our planet?
I could point a telescope into the sky right now and get all sorts of fuzzy disks whizzing across my lens. Oh noes! Teh government coverup!!1!
I for one welcome our out-of-focus overlords.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by sek929
Barring the mathematical impossibility of life originating close enough to us in order to navigate the universe in the timeframe of humans existing on this planet, do you realize that millions of particles do indeed float in the space that surrounds our planet?
You'll have to explain this one...why is it a mathematical impossibility?
If by particle you mean 2 mile long "debris" moving in random directions unaffected by Earth's gravity...then yeah...I do know.
You'll also have to explain depth of field...I'm obviously stupid. Depth of field must be some magical way to make things going in front of a solid object at 80 nautical miles look like it's going behind it.
(
Last edited by Horsepoo!!!; Jul 10, 2008 at 07:18 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status:
Offline
|
|
First off, we have the probability of intelligent life capable of space travel.
Then, we have the probability of said life occurring during the same timeframe as our own civilization, which is a speck of dust on the history of not only our world, but our universe.
Thirdly, we have the probability of intelligent, space-faring peoples in our timeframe anywhere within traveling distance of our galaxy and/or solar system.
Fourthly, we have the probability that these brethren of our time have traveled through the vacuum of infinite distance to buzz around in out-of-focus areas near NASA cameras.
Fifthly, we have the probability, that given my previous 4 statements true, that our measly human government (global conspiracy I guess?) is capable of keeping said aliens at bay since their will is stronger than that of a race able to travel light years distance.
Keep believing.
Aliens exists? Yeah, most likely. But what would bring them here in the 10,000 years we've been a cohesive race?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by sek929
First off, we have the probability of intelligent life capable of space travel.
Why would that probability be low?
Then, we have the probability of said life occurring during the same timeframe as our own civilization, which is a speck of dust on the history of not only our world, but our universe.
Why would it have to occur in the same timeframe as our own civilization? There are solar systems that are a billion+ years older than our solar system. Like our neighboring solar systems.
Thirdly, we have the probability of intelligent, space-faring peoples in our timeframe anywhere within traveling distance of our galaxy and/or solar system.
If the neighboring solar systems have had anywhere between 5000 years to a billion years head start on our civilization, they for sure could travel to our solar system. Easily.
Fourthly, we have the probability that these brethren of our time have traveled through the vacuum of infinite distance to buzz around in out-of-focus areas near NASA cameras.
Ok?
Fifthly, we have the probability, that given my previous 4 statements true, that our measly human government (global conspiracy I guess?) is capable of keeping said aliens at bay since their will is stronger than that of a race able to travel light years distance.
You live in the US don't you.
Keep disbelieving. You can tell people that you heard it first from Horsepoo...they'll laugh at you because somedude called Horsepoo was right and you were wrong.
Aliens exists? Yeah, most likely. But what would bring them here in the 10,000 years we've been a cohesive race?
Why wouldn't they come to visit Earth? Earth is a lot more interesting than the other planets in our solar system...it has life...wouldn't they be interested in studying us like we study animals?
(
Last edited by Horsepoo!!!; Jul 10, 2008 at 07:39 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm dumbfounded, you succeeding in not refuting a single point I just made. You did, however, make all sorts of assumptions that (surprise) validate your own beliefs. I think you'd fit in well with religious fanatics, able to make up your own rules and follow them as laws.
It's not the singular probabilities but the sum of all to come together and have Aliens buzzing around us for decades but being hidden by the government.
Until Hubble captures a green man in a shiny suit giving Earth the finger I'll stay believing sensible things.
You can take this as my last reply to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by sek929
I'm dumbfounded, you succeeding in not refuting a single point I just made. You did, however, make all sorts of assumptions that (surprise) validate your own beliefs. I think you'd fit in well with religious fanatics, able to make up your own rules and follow them as laws.
It's not the singular probabilities but the sum of all to come together and have Aliens buzzing around us for decades but being hidden by the government.
Until Hubble captures a green man in a shiny suit giving Earth the finger I'll stay believing sensible things.
You can take this as my last reply to you.
Ok. The alien would be CGI though...and you know it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Korea
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Tiresias
Thank you for refuting everything I've said with absolutely nothing.
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why all the "debris" floating around looks the same. Come on...there's gotta be someone that will answer that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Korea
Status:
Offline
|
|
Light diffusion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Tiresias
Light diffusion.
Bravo! Everything is clear (or rather fuzzy) now. Thanks. Irrefutable proof that the debris is not debris but "light diffusion".
I don't know if I should laugh at you or cry for you.
Anyone else wanna give this a try?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Korea
Status:
Offline
|
|
Fragments of debris + sunlight + light diffusion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: BFE
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
I'm a bird. I am the 1% (of pets).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by invisibleX
Doubting what exactly? That there were bits of something (just looking at it I'm assuming the debris is in fact near the lens, not further away, because of the way it comes in/out of focus) on a very very boring video of a tether. I saw no blinking lights, no pulsing lights. Just because you don't know what something is does not make it into what you want it to be.
Not sure what you expect us to believe but, uh, doesn't seem to be much to believe.
You must be blind. Or your eyes are playing tricks on you (the oh-so-powerful shootdown to UFO claims)...you can't see the glow and strobing effect? Really? Just because you're blind doesn't make me blind.
Anyone else about to tell me these things are sometimes glowing and pulsating...especially when the camera is zoomed out?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Tiresias
Fragments of debris + sunlight + light diffusion.
Dude, you already had your chance. Your picture of diffused light looks *nothing* like these moving objects. You didn't explain why these crafts have a black center, and a notch on the outer edge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status:
Offline
|
|
Here is one possible solution to all that material seen floating in the video.
Originally Posted by National Geographic Magazine (March 2004)
Dust in Space
It's downright dirty out there in the cosmos.
Space isn't empty. It's full of schmutz. As the Earth makes its annual journey around the sun, it collects about 40,000 tons (35,000 metric tons) of dust. Not to put too fine a point on it, but space is filthy.
Jets designed to spy on the former Soviet Union now scream through the stratosphere with the peaceful purpose of collecting tiny grains of cosmic dust. Scientists put the dust under the microscope and try to discern its message. They've collected so much that NASA has an online cosmic dust catalog (more evidence that you can find anything on the Internet).
Although hydrogen and helium are the most common elements found in space, the dust is made of heavier atoms born in the hearts of stars and supernovae: oxygen, nitrogen, iron, even a smattering of gold and uranium—pretty much the entire periodic table.
Dust isn't the only stuff sullying space. As many of us learned last fall, solar storms occasionally trigger a "coronal mass ejection," a spew of charged particles that can disrupt communications systems and intensify the northern lights. Even on a calm day, the sun emits a mighty solar wind, a stream of protons and heavy elements racing through space.
Despite all the stuff, not all parts of space are equally dirty. As you get outside the solar system, into interstellar space, particles become few and far between. In fact, our solar system is traveling through an area of relatively empty space right now. The current theory is that a supernova cleared out the region millions of years ago. The signature of that explosion (or maybe there was more than one) would be extremely hot, fast-moving particles, the equivalent of embers from an ancient fire.
A new space probe called the Cosmic Hot Interstellar Plasma Spectrometer, or CHIPS, is looking for signs of those embers in what scientists call the local hot bubble, but so far has only found traces of them. The local hot bubble doesn't seem to be that hot, and the emptiness can't yet be explained. But CHIPS will keep looking.
The way things are arranged gives us clues to our galactic past. "It's like archaeology," says Mark Hurwitz, principal CHIPS investigator. "The galaxy is not in perfect equilibrium. It's constantly percolating, stirred up by supernovae."
Even if our local bubble turns out to be as hot as we think it should be, and as clean (by the scuzzy standards of outer space), it wouldn't be the empty void—the vacuum—that we were brought up to believe in. If you could extract everything from space, all the dust, the zooming intergalactic particles, all the photons from impossibly distant stars, you still wouldn't be left with pure nothingness. Quantum physics tells us that the "vacuum" is shot through with virtual particles winking in and out of existence all the time.
In this universe, void is prohibited.
—Joel Achenbach
Washington Post staff writer
|
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy
Here is one possible solution to all that material seen floating in the video.
2 mile-long dust. With a black hole in it. And a notch or two on the outer edge.
Someone wake me up when they've found a clear picture of space debris that looks like this...I'll believe it's debris when I see it. I actually find it quite funny how people are trying to justify that this is something else...first it was debris...then it was light diffusion...then light diffusion from debris...then space dust. I can here the aliens from The Simpsons right now..."wait, there's even MORE space dust on here!".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Korea
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!
Dude, you already had your chance. Your picture of diffused light looks *nothing* like these moving objects. You didn't explain why these crafts have a black center, and a notch on the outer edge.
I honestly can't be bothered with True Believers.
Carry on Horsepoo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Tiresias
I honestly can't be bothered with True Believers.
Carry on Horsepoo.
Truth hurts doesn't it. You can go back to something closer to your intellect level: the baby bat thread.
Have any of you actually looked at the follow up links I posted?
(
Last edited by Horsepoo!!!; Jul 10, 2008 at 09:15 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: London
Status:
Offline
|
|
Sure.... its almost bad as that hoax in the late 60s when they pretended to land on the moon!
|
MacBook Pro 2.2 i7 | 4GB | 128GB SSD ~ 500GB+2TB Externals ~ iPhone 4 32GB
Canon 5DII | EF 24-105mm IS USM | EF 100-400mm L IS USM | 50mm 1.8mkII
iMac | Mac Mini | 42" Panasonic LED HDTV | PS3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!
2 mile-long dust. With a black hole in it. And a notch or two on the outer edge.
Why are you working on the assumption that what is seen in the video is at the same distance from the shuttle as the tether? Is there anything to make you think that all the material seen floating in the video is at the same distance from the shuttle as the tether? What if some of it is right outside the shuttle? What if some of it is at a distance form the shuttle but not as far as the tether? Why have you latched on to this assumption that what is seen in the video is all at the same depth of field?
|
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
I also find it funny that some people believe that there is a possibility that secret fighter jets and weapons are being developed but that everything else can't possibly be a secret. Oh no...that couldn't happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by richwig83
Sure.... its almost bad as that hoax in the late 60s when they pretended to land on the moon!
Hoax NASA tapes!!!
Keep 'em coming boys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy
Why are you working on the assumption that what is seen in the video is at the same distance from the shuttle as the tether? Is there anything to make you think that all the material seen floating in the video is at the same distance from the shuttle as the tether? What if some of it is right outside the shuttle? What if some of it is at a distance form the shuttle but not as far as the tether? Why have you latched on to this assumption that what is seen in the video is all at the same depth of field?
You should read all my posts from the beginning of the thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'll let you guys in on a secret. The camera is filming at a UV light frequency. You guys know how light waves work right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status:
Offline
|
|
How can an inept government like ours pull off a perfect cover-up?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by BadKosh
How can an inept government like ours pull off a perfect cover-up?
Probably because the major population is just as dumb as the government? They're doing a half ass job by calling it debris in front of millions of viewers. And people are licking it up. I can see people in their living rooms saying "Oh really? It's space debris? Cool. What's on next? Aw sweet, a reality TV show."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Pacific NW
Status:
Offline
|
|
Geometric shapes are common in photography especially with telephoto lenses. The simplest example is the star you frequently see in points of light. With the naked eye, they do not look the same,. A camera see things differently. One reason is the lens and the adjustable aperture ring inside it. They are not round like our eye, and that shows up in out of focus images. Also any lens has defects/aberrations and or simply design constraints that results in light of different wavelengths being refracted differently through the lens.
If you want something similar just take a camcorder outside when the light is just right. An out of focus bit of dust or even a insect also looks like a UFO. In fact there are some idiots who are easily fooled into thinking just that.
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!
2 mile-long dust. With a black hole in it. And a notch or two on the outer edge.
Someone wake me up when they've found a clear picture of space debris that looks like this...I'll believe it's debris when I see it. I actually find it quite funny how people are trying to justify that this is something else...first it was debris...then it was light diffusion...then light diffusion from debris...then space dust. I can here the aliens from The Simpsons right now..."wait, there's even MORE space dust on here!".
|
climber
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by climber
Geometric shapes are common in photography especially with telephoto lenses. The simplest example is the star you frequently see in points of light. With the naked eye, they do not look the same,. A camera see things differently. One reason is the lens and the adjustable aperture ring inside it. They are not round like our eye, and that shows up in out of focus images. Also any lens has defects/aberrations and or simply design constraints that results in light of different wavelengths being refracted differently through the lens.
If you want something similar just take a camcorder outside when the light is just right. An out of focus bit of dust or even a insect also looks like a UFO. In fact there are some idiots who are easily fooled into thinking just that.
I don't have that problem with my camera...and NASA surely doesn't have that problem with their higher quality cameras. This may happen with low quality cameras on very close objects but it won't happen on objects that are 80 nautical miles out. Especially considering this is filmed at UV light frequencies. UV light does not refract like normal light.
Come on guys...I thought you were all science buffs. You guys don't seem to know anything. You're grasping for answers without even trying to understand the video.
Light refractions, out of focusness, low quality NASA cameras, lights that are "just right", anyone else?
(
Last edited by Horsepoo!!!; Jul 10, 2008 at 10:54 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Status:
Offline
|
|
^ I like how you put the burden of proof on the other side. How about YOU proving that this IS alien life.
All I see is dust and debris, refracted in a camera lens. Proof me wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Anyway, good job trying to answer the "debris" question. Light refraction on debris, dust, camera effects. It was a valiant effort.
I'm still waiting for answers as to why Columbia is flying through a "debris" field. Amuse me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Pacific NW
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!
I don't have that problem with my camera...and NASA surely doesn't have that problem with their higher quality cameras. This may happen with low quality cameras on very close objects but it won't happen on objects that are 80 nautical miles out. Especially considering this is filmed at UV light frequencies. UV light does not refract like normal light.
Come on guys...I thought you were all science buffs. You guys don't seem to know anything. You're grasping for answers without even trying to understand the video.
Light refractions, out of focusness, low quality NASA cameras, lights that are "just right", anyone else?
All cameras/lenses (including yours) have these issues. Just because you are ignorant of them does not mean they are not there.
Perhaps it would be best if you explained exactly what you think those spots really are. If the are aliens from another planet, then space is more crowded than a LA freeway at rush hour.
|
climber
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Mastrap
^ I like how you put the burden of proof on the other side. How about YOU proving that this IS alien life.
All I see is dust and debris, refracted in a camera lens. Proof me wrong.
It reacts intelligently. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF6QmQf13VU
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by climber
All cameras/lenses (including yours) have these issues. Just because you are ignorant of them does not mean they are not there.
Perhaps it would be best if you explained exactly what you think those spots really are. If the are aliens from another planet, then space is more crowded than a LA freeway at rush hour.
Bwahahaha. Just because you are ignorant of them does not mean they are not there!
How ironic. Perhaps this should tell you something about "ignorance". Just because you don't think these things are extra-terrestrial crafts or beings, does not mean they aren't.
Just because people thought the world was flat 600 years ago doesn't mean it was. Where's your science god now?
All of you are suffering from "selective science syndrome". You only use a subset of science to explain things and ignore other science notions. This isn't bad but you have to be careful what you choose to dismiss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Pacific NW
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!
Anyway, good job trying to answer the "debris" question. Light refraction on debris, dust, camera effects. It was a valiant effort.
I'm still waiting for answers as to why Columbia is flying through a "debris" field. Amuse me.
Debris would include anything and everything released from Columbia itself, including the propellent from the orbiting trusters. Were they not in the process of separating from the experiment?
|
climber
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Pacific NW
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!
Bwahahaha. Just because you are ignorant of them does not mean they are not there!
How ironic. Perhaps this should tell you something about "ignorance". Just because you don't think these things are extra-terrestrial crafts or beings, does not mean they aren't.
Just because people thought the world was flat 600 years ago doesn't mean it was. Where's your science god now?
Please enlighten me on your camera/lens with perfect optics. And even if you have the holy grail of lenses at your disposal, do you really think they NASA has something that good? after all they were the ones who spent billions putting a horribly myopic telescope in orbit.
|
climber
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|