UFO or space junk or what?

[Caustic Logic]

First UFO post here, sorry if I'm replicating previous questions, but a friend of mine linked me to this youtube video of "black transforming(?) UFO" of the "black spacecraft fleet" NASA has been hiding. Best evidence? NASA photos.

Cited NASA STS088 mission, five key photos, frames 65-70 show an object(s) somewhere between the camera and the Earth. First, I'm not sure what's taking the pictures here, when, etc. so any nerdy details anyone has are good. Did someone already do a good explanation of this?

On the pictures, I found the originals in very high resolution available here. Just re-type the 65 at the end to 66, etc. to see the others. For frame 71 is there but with no picture. There's a 72. Something mysterious is up, I'll be back if I can find it elsewhere.

Anyway, here's the thing, shaped differently each time. I think it's space junk, perhaps something just lost or jettisoned.
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q...es-all-six.jpg
Too big to post and I forget how to re-size. Anyone else feel free. Most poses look like the same thing at different angles, but some are real bafflers. My friend took issue with the light shining on it not being right. I think he's referring to frame 70 here. The full res shows the sunlight angle at the time, barely breaking the cloudtops in orange, and this is way up in space, catching plenty sun in this and previous frames. The light (reflection?) patterns in 70 are truly odd-looking, and the shape definitiely ship-like. But, otherwise it looks like space junk. So...

[ImaginalDisc]

The video makes the claim that those pictures were removed from the NASA site, but the link you provided to the pictures falsifies that claim right off.

Not terribly honest folks so far.

As for what the object is, there's no way to judge its size or distance.

[Caustic Logic]

Originally Posted by ImaginalDisc

The video makes the claim that those pictures were removed from the NASA site, but the link you provided to the pictures falsifies that claim right off.

Didn't notice that, in the sidebar. Ah but don't worry, the brave internetzers has them saved at the site you just must visit for the truth! In fact, the link is star-people.nl (re-founded and babel-fished) explains:

Quote:

We received an email by saying that the photos were removed from the NASA site. Now we do not always crazy, and at the time that we support this open tfp server NASA came directly copied everything equally. Below the article you will find the new links to the images now have a few more. We have them just not on our own server but could put the pictures be removed once we do that yet.

Below you will also have the same link to open the ftp server of NASA. Here are many pictures of the universe, the earth and beautiful natural phenomena as volcanic eruptions. We all photos as bijlangs, and there are many, find the best and just put this in an article. Be prosecuted.

I'm sure that's not quite what they wrote. No update on why NASA cares so much about pictures of space junk they're still offering to the public anyway. Don't click the link. I think these are the people behind the spooky hypno-aryan aliens rave fliers people were talking about a while back, with the RFID obsession

Quote:

Not terribly honest folks so far.

As for what the object is, there's no way to judge its size or distance.

There might be ways to triangulate the distance/size nexus, but I don't know 'em. Somehow it looks smallish and closer than UFO-seers might see it as.

Okay so this is nothing new - Space Shuttle Database Mission ID STS088 12/04/1998-12/15/1998. link

Referring to the composite image of all six stills (linked above), here's what I see:
65: An astronaut jetpack from the back, or something symetrical with insulation and metal parts
66 - same thing from the side - protuberance near one end, shiny. Structured tip at right, shiny, flat side on bottom (this rotation) and puffy-looking, top right angles along bottom right. Looks like black leather jacket with Kiss boots out the sleeves.
67 - something a bit flatter-seeming than above, with separate parts. Major protubeerance The V from vendetta guy in full cape, pushing a pushbroom, upside down.
68 - velcro-attachable seat cushion. That's all I can see. Looks like a small hoop at lower right.
69 - interesting view. Flat side, expaansive, catching full light. Twin prongs at one end, puffier opposite, with flap at other end. 67 makes more sense compared to this.
70 - looks kinda like a flying saucer merged with a stealth bomber, with bright lights on one wing and three dimmer lights along the right.

The answer is simple: The members of KISS actually died on a fateful attempt to record an album on the moon.

[Caustic Logic]

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic

On the pictures, I found the originals in very high resolution available here. Just re-type the 65 at the end to 66, etc. to see the others. For frame 71 is there but with no picture. There's a 72. Something mysterious is up, I'll be back if I can find it elsewhere.

Bingo. One of my regular contacts has patches to where the Russians keep their backups of deleted western files. Frame 71 of the sequence was deleted and we can see why! I've got my own save posted now:

Sequence ending BEFORE this shot, suspicious. AFTER, obvious.

[ImaginalDisc]

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic

There might be ways to triangulate the distance/size nexus, but I don't know 'em. Somehow it looks smallish and closer than UFO-seers might see it as.

Eeeeerm. . .

OK, back of the envelope time.

The ISS is 375 KM up, and orbits at a speed of 17,500 miles per hour. Now, you coudl measure the distance across the frame it moves and compare it to time elapsed, but that wouldn't be very helpful since its distance is unknown (it's less than a couple hundred kilometer, because it's between the camera and the Earth). The aparant size of the object doesn't change between the shots, so that tells me one thing - it's not moving much with respect to the ISS that's orbiting at 17,500 miles per hour. So this tumbling object isn't moving much with respect to the station. That suggests that it's essentially sharing the same orbital trajectory (minus the drift,) which in turn suggests it's some junk drifting away.

Or it's a lump and irregularly shaped evil NASA space ship that delierately got within frame of the ISS camera and it zooms through space by tumbling in a piece of road trash.

[leafman91]

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic

I'm sure that's not quite what they wrote.

That's because you were using Babel fish, which tries to translate everything literally, never mind the different sentence orders, double meanings, accentuations, verb forms and all the other things only a real person can take into account.

A fun timekiller is to pick a random word and keep on translating and retranslating it from one language to another and seeing what word you come up with in the end. It is also the perfect testimony to just how s***ty Babelfish is.

[Stray Cat]

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic

Bingo. One of my regular contacts has patches to where the Russians keep their backups of deleted western files. Frame 71 of the sequence was deleted and we can see why! I've got my own save posted now:
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q...t_frame_71.jpg
Sequence ending BEFORE this shot, suspicious. AFTER, obvious.

This is a joke yes?

[Caustic Logic]

Originally Posted by Stray Cat

This is a joke yes?

It would be pretty bad to base a genuine prank on, no?

On Babelfish, I included that for a combo explanation/entertainment.

I was hoping someone here with UFO debunk experience could point me to a previous analysis of this. it's been around for almost 11 years now but I didn't find anything in Google from the mission name.

[Caustic Logic]

Originally Posted by ImaginalDisc

Eeeeerm. . .

OK, back of the envelope time.

The ISS is 375 KM up, and orbits at a speed of 17,500 miles per hour. Now, you coudl measure the distance across the frame it moves and compare it to time elapsed, but that wouldn't be very helpful since its distance is unknown (it's less than a couple hundred kilometer, because it's between the camera and the Earth). The aparant size of the object doesn't change between the shots, so that tells me one thing - it's not moving much with respect to the ISS that's orbiting at 17,500 miles per hour. So this tumbling object isn't moving much with respect to the station. That suggests that it's essentially sharing the same orbital trajectory (minus the drift,) which in turn suggests it's some junk drifting away.

Or it's a lump and irregularly shaped evil NASA space ship that delierately got within frame of the ISS camera and it zooms through space by tumbling in a piece of road trash.

Very cool specifics I had no clue of, but this one is listed as a shuttle mission (see above). But this is moving little relative to the shuttle then, right? So it's probably using some of the same trajectory, meaning, it is probably from the shuttle, slowly succumbing to resistance and gravity? I'm definitely not an expert in this field. But I got a friend in a rabbit hole and this one's in space. And the Oceans, and over Mexico City, etc. but one thing at a time.

[Stray Cat]

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic

It would be pretty bad to base a genuine prank on, no?

So you want me to believe that the photo numbered 71 hasn't been badly photoshopped? or am I missing something?

[Caustic Logic]

Originally Posted by Stray Cat

So you want me to believe that the photo numbered 71 hasn't been badly photoshopped? or am I missing something?

Lol. I meant it's a joke hoax, not an actual hoax I mean anyone to believe. So yeah, badly photoshopped. It would look better smaller.

[Stray Cat]

That's a relief then... I guess I passed the "I can spot a fake" test.



Thanks


But why am I now suspicious that you are testing 'fake' here so you can fine tune it for some other reason?

[ImaginalDisc]

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic

Very cool specifics I had no clue of, but this one is listed as a shuttle mission (see above). But this is moving little relative to the shuttle then, right? So it's probably using some of the same trajectory, meaning, it is probably from the shuttle, slowly succumbing to resistance and gravity? I'm definitely not an expert in this field. But I got a friend in a rabbit hole and this one's in space. And the Oceans, and over Mexico City, etc. but one thing at a time.

Maybe google led me astray, but I though these photos of Earth were an ISS mission.

[Caustic Logic]

Originally Posted by ImaginalDisc

Maybe google led me astray, but I though these photos of Earth were an ISS mission.

Well I was using Google too, and you seem more versed in these issues by a long shot so...

But here's my source; The video and NASA photo pages list it as mission STS088, while another NASA site has

Program: Space Shuttle
Database Mission ID: STS088
Launch Date: 12/04/1998
Land date: 12/15/1998.

And now I see something you might have missed - in the list on that page STS is always linked to shuttle missions, ISS to space station missions. (what is a space station "mission?") It's an STS mission. Now, applicable specifics might be useful here (hint hint).

Also, anyone here ever flown a shuttle and can tell me just what that thang is?

[ImaginalDisc]

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic

Well I was using Google too, and you seem more versed in these issues by a long shot so...

But here's my source; The video and NASA photo pages list it as mission STS088, while another NASA site has

Program: Space Shuttle
Database Mission ID: STS088
Launch Date: 12/04/1998
Land date: 12/15/1998.

And now I see something you might have missed - in the list on that page STS is always linked to shuttle missions, ISS to space station missions. (what is a space station "mission?") It's an STS mission. Now, applicable specifics might be useful here (hint hint).

Also, anyone here ever flown a shuttle and can tell me just what that thang is?

Mission STS088 is described as:

Quote:

STS088-703-019 (4-15 DECEMBER 1998) --- The U.S.-built Unity connecting module (bottom) and the Russian-built Zarya module are backdropped against the blackness of space in this 70mm photograph taken from the Space Shuttle Endeavour. After devoting the major portion of its mission time to various tasks to ready the two docked modules for their International Space Station (ISS) roles, the six-member STS-88 crew released the tandem and performed a fly-around survey of the hardware.

Source.

Yes, it's an almost 11 year old set of photos we're talking about here and of course I totally missed the relevant data NASA helpfully included right at the bottom of the link you porovided in the OP.

Quote:

Date: 19981211 (YYYYMMDD)GMT Time: 213739 (HHMMSS)
Nadir Point Latitude: -51.2, Longitude: -64.6 (Negative numbers indicate south for latitude and west for longitude)
Nadir to Photo Center Direction: Northeast
Sun Azimuth: 261 (Clockwise angle in degrees from north to the sun measured at the nadir point)
Spacecraft Altitude: 212 nautical miles (393 km)
Sun Elevation Angle: 23 (Angle in degrees between the horizon and the sun, measured at the nadir point)
Orbit Number: 119

Emphasis added.

[Caustic Logic]

Originally Posted by ImaginalDisc

Mission STS088 is described as:

Yes, it's an almost 11 year old set of photos we're talking about here and of course I totally missed the relevant data NASA helpfully included right at the bottom of the link you porovided in the OP.

I missed that too. That altitude puts it around the ISS orbit, no?

And this was interesting: the crew "released the tandem and performed a fly-around survey of the hardware." What's a tandem? I don't think this is it as they aren't flying around this.

In fact to see what it was doing, I took the six hi-res frames and lined them up. The zoom level is the same for the first 4, but the rotation and centering changed. I was able to match cloud formations, with steady offset - moving down and slightly right - at a steady rate between shots. (or is this the opposite of the station's orbit path?)

The last two, frames 69 and 70, seem centered way different with neither outer curve nor familiar cloud patterns to match it in. and maybe zoomed different. The object appears far smaller, and the light appears well later, with deeper orange and shadows, so perhaps a time gap. I couldn't find matching cloud patterns to line these up with the first four, but lined them together by clouds and not planetary curve, so the distance between the two positions is exagerrated a bit.

Anyway, at mid-res, here is the result once it's as lined up as I can get:

http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q...ebris_path.jpg

Seems to be tumbling from the left hand foreground down towards the Earth with a slant to the right.

ETA: No jokes this time, just science.

[Cainkane1]

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic

First UFO post here, sorry if I'm replicating previous questions, but a friend of mine linked me to this youtube video of "black transforming(?) UFO" of the "black spacecraft fleet" NASA has been hiding. Best evidence? NASA photos.

Cited NASA STS088 mission, five key photos, frames 65-70 show an object(s) somewhere between the camera and the Earth. First, I'm not sure what's taking the pictures here, when, etc. so any nerdy details anyone has are good. Did someone already do a good explanation of this?

On the pictures, I found the originals in very high resolution available here. Just re-type the 65 at the end to 66, etc. to see the others. For frame 71 is there but with no picture. There's a 72. Something mysterious is up, I'll be back if I can find it elsewhere.

Anyway, here's the thing, shaped differently each time. I think it's space junk, perhaps something just lost or jettisoned.
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q...es-all-six.jpg
Too big to post and I forget how to re-size. Anyone else feel free. Most poses look like the same thing at different angles, but some are real bafflers. My friend took issue with the light shining on it not being right. I think he's referring to frame 70 here. The full res shows the sunlight angle at the time, barely breaking the cloudtops in orange, and this is way up in space, catching plenty sun in this and previous frames. The light (reflection?) patterns in 70 are truly odd-looking, and the shape definitiely ship-like. But, otherwise it looks like space junk. So...

I'd give anything in the world if during my lifetime if we could discover an alien civilization. I wouldn't care if they had spaceships or lived in a bronze age. However I don't believe UFS are spaceships as bad as I would love them to be

[Caustic Logic]

Originally Posted by Cainkane1

I'd give anything in the world if during my lifetime if we could discover an alien civilization. I wouldn't care if they had spaceships or lived in a bronze age. However I don't believe UFS are spaceships as bad as I would love them to be

Are you implied, citizen, that UFO belief is driven by desire to simply believe and not the hard facts? The very nerve! If this isn't a real UFO, then why did NASA pull it from their site? (rinse and repeat...)

[Stray Cat]

For any number of reasons which may even include the speculation as to it being an alien craft (though I doubt it). But it's silly to jump to a conclusion in the absence of evidence.