Pegasus Research Consortium

Hey Gang,
I'm the new guy on the block and I have a really good feeling I'm going to have a great time here thanks to my buddy 1WorldWatcher who I met and got to know and fully respect in the Inception Radio Network Chat Room.

Now I'm sure there has likely been at least one Tether UFO thread here in the past because it's such a great case to research and study but I'm going to start a new thread here. New and fresh.

Here is generally an order of events which most people go through having to do with this Tether video phenomenon:

1. The video is found and watched.

2. To most people it looks very intriguing as a potential UFO video filmed by NASA on their 75th Space Shuttle mission.

3. a. The viewer with a healthy skepticism knows they must now verify what they believe they see. Potential SAUCERS? SPHERES?
Or is there something else at play here? Could at least part of what we see here be caused by some camera effect? One thing for sure, this looks like it "could" be something amazing.

or b. The viewer having been introduced to the video as "real intelligent craft" now feels they "know" this is "real" "intelligently controlled craft".

or c. The viewer is already completely aware of how this type camera works and is used to seeing it's imagery with it's donut shaped out-of-focus objects and knows right from the getgo that this is only ice debris in a cloud of such debris which surrounds the spacecraft after making routine fuel cell water dumps as many times before (this is the case with the astronauts, ground crew and all other employees having anything to do with this 75th Space Shuttle mission. The video shows nothing unusual).

4. (cont. from 3.a.) The viewer now checks for debunk and/or explanation videos to decide whether or not they are looking at something special.

5. a. The viewer now understands that a "catadioptric" lens used on this camera causes out-of-focus objects within it's view to mimic the characteristics of it's parabolic dish mirror. The overall spherical shape is the overall shape of this parabolic dish mirror. The notches clocked around the perimeter of the spheres are caused by the lens' "snap rings" and these notches are found at particular "clock" locations around the perimeter due to the object's location within the camera's "field of view". And lastly, the dark center of these objects is the camera's iris.

or b. The viewer either cannot comprehend the mechanics of this camera optical anomaly proposed OR outright refuses to even try. Many viewers in this category are also "SURE" that NASA is trying to cover up something here. And this "Roadwarrior" fellow is likely just some "tool" used to throw people off.

I assure you NASA has absolutely nothing here to cover up. NASA does not care what people think about this video. The most likely response NASA will give when questioned about this is LAUGHTER. And that's the cold hard truth.

Here is the link to my youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/americanroadwarrior
It's best to watch the featured video on the channel page and then click on the Tether Playlist just below it.
You will be shown not one, not two, but several different methods of proving that these are NOT large spacecraft.

I'm willing to answer any question or give a reference to one of my videos but due to the unreasonable nature of many "tether UFO believers" who generaly just can't comprehend the highly comprehensible material I've prepared as soon as it has been established that this person is disrespecting me and my material and shooting bullets at my feet trying to make me dance the interaction between us will simply end.

When a student is in a classroom and they do not understand the lesson they do not turn to the teacher and proclaim that the lesson is wrong because they do not understand or cannot comprehend and then proceed to taunt the teacher. No. They should work a bit harder towards learning the lesson and respect the teacher as someone who will assist them as best they can.

you and deum will probly be best buds as he is into video.im not but if your here you probly earned it through your skills.
so until i hear otherwise .i accept what you say as fact in this field.thankyou for joining pegasus and providing your expertise.
i look forward to seeing more of your critiques. : )

my field  is high energy physics and theoretical physics.ask me anything anytime.im usually right.

Hello, I can see we are going to be taking opposite sides on this one till one of us leans, breaks or stands his ground.  I am currently in China and they ban UT where I am. If my dear friend 1WW watcher is reading this, Please Drop this video to me. http://www.youtube.com/user/americanroadwarrior (http://www.youtube.com/user/americanroadwarrior)

When I viewed the show UFO hunters on this event I fully understood that the scheem they came up with was full of holes. I hope that was not you! If so, lets go at it.

#1, I was not there, so I have only the video to work with. I have to trust that or drop it.

#2, The idea of it being the camera and having hundreds of these critters all over the place is hard ot believe.

#3, Follow the trail, they start, stop, turn 90 degres.

#4, They come in all sizes.

#5, When the camera puls in they dont fade out.  If an object is close to the camera, ie Ice floating around, then when you zoom in they blur out.

#6, Deuem can tell if the object is close or far away by how it processes.

#7, If it is only ice and miles away it would have to be huge ice, like icebergs.

#8, I have never processed anything like this before and I have done many camera bounces, flares, ice and so on. These seem to have a lot of power.

#9, It went behind the teather.

#10, The teather was not streached out as far as most people say it was, It has a re-coil of over 1/3 the length as ssn in other photos. So they are not as large as people say.

#11, I need to review you video

#12, Did you see the fantastic video out there with the trails. Maybe one of the members can find it and post it.

#13, If this is camera related then why are the objects moving and not pinned to the camera motion? Why are there many going in many dirrections at the same time? Bet the answer is ice. If this is camera, I want to know why.

#14, Even though I am Deuem, I make mistakes and maybe I am as wrong as you might be. I will keep a very open mind on this, I hope you do also.

#15, Have you ever seen any Deuem work ups of this event. I am also very happy to process some for viewing and discussion....

Good luck, Round 2 Ding.....You may answer the above 1 at a time or all at once. I would like 1 at a time and let the other member join in.

Critters, ya gotta love them. Related to Drapa

Deuem

Howdy everyone!!

Well, glad you finally got a debate going here ARW!! Now we can research a bit more 'Personally' of your deductive finding's and get a bit of closure to this whole 'Tether UFO' debacle my friend.

Robo might not be a video guru, but neither am I so, Deuem, my good friend here has ways of making images talk, we will have to wait and see what we can make of the images with in the footage, which , by the way, I have sent to you Deuem. ;) Check the Drop Box.

I personally see two sides of an understanding here, but really like how you have made mention of the Following with in such teaching's of these events being accepted as out right real UFO footage, I would think our good Host Bill Birnes would be more than happy to oblige a Email for the explanation as well. Guess it is more foot work, but heck, we likes our facts!!! :P LOL

There is a You Tube icon with in the area you create your threads and posts ARW, click on that icon then drop the videos you want to show in the thread or post and they will look as clickable view my friend, like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69EQ-ZLmBxs

That way we don't have to take a trip to the YT store.. ;)

Am looking forward too all that is going to be discussed here, I have not an answer one way or the other to validate or debunk personally, but am sure the discussion will be in-depth none the less. 8)

With Great Respect,
1Worldwatcher

Quote from: American-Roadwarrior on May 23, 2013, 07:29:19 AM.
Here is generally an order of events which most people go through having to do with this Tether video phenomenon:

1. The video is found and watched.

The video was intercepted by Martyn Stubbs... NASA has never released the official copy. Jim Oberg claims its available but no one has yet produced it

Quote2. To most people it looks very intriguing as a potential UFO video filmed by NASA on their 75th Space Shuttle mission.

To others we know them as plasma critters... going to the glowing tether like moths to a flame :D

Quote3. a. The viewer with a healthy skepticism knows they must now verify what they believe they see. Potential SAUCERS? SPHERES?
Or is there something else at play here? Could at least part of what we see here be caused by some camera effect? One thing for sure, this looks like it "could" be something amazing.

The 'camera effect' won't fly here :P They are very big and they look HUGE on NASA's mission control screen

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/NASA_Control_003.png)

NASA knows what they are :P  and they definitely watch them Just watch STS80 clips...

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/NASA_Control_003.png)

Quoteor b. The viewer having been introduced to the video as "real intelligent craft" now feels they "know" this is "real" "intelligently controlled craft".

No they are not spacecraft, they are plasma life forms native to Earth and LEO. Trevor James constable, friend of Martyn Stubbs coined the term "CRITTERS" for them in 1954

Quoteor c. The viewer is already completely aware of how this type camera works and is used to seeing it's imagery with it's donut shaped out-of-focus objects and knows right from the getgo that this is only ice debris in a cloud of such debris which surrounds the spacecraft after making routine fuel cell water dumps as many times before (this is the case with the astronauts, ground crew and all other employees having anything to do with this 75th Space Shuttle mission. The video shows nothing unusual).

No Jim Oberg linked me to a NASA study from 1969 that looks at the 'plasma phenomena plaguing NASA spaceships. The 480 page report AFTER the tether incident covers all sorts of plasma issues and why the tether was glowing like a fluorescent tube long after it broke away. BTW the US NAVY was flying a successful tether at THE SAME TIME that flew for more than two years and they fired lasers at it to test power transfers

Quote4. (cont. from 3.a.) The viewer now checks for debunk and/or explanation videos to decide whether or not they are looking at something special.

STS80 footage clearly shows NASA cameramen are still aware and tracking the critters (in that case over a thunderstorm)

Quote5. a. The viewer now understands that a "catadioptric" lens used on this camera causes out-of-focus objects within it's view to mimic the characteristics of it's parabolic dish mirror. The overall spherical shape is the overall shape of this parabolic dish mirror. The notches clocked around the perimeter of the spheres are caused by the lens' "snap rings" and these notches are found at particular "clock" locations around the perimeter due to the object's location within the camera's "field of view". And lastly, the dark center of these objects is the camera's iris.

Bokeh's in any ONE image would all be the SAME as there is only ONE shutter. In the Tether film they have different shapes and the shapes are changing. Notice the big one going behind the tether in this gif. It has two notches and then only one.  A Bokeh will always have the same shape on any blur in the image, because a Bokeh is a function of the shutter, like these hexagonal ones

(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3177/2848302238_726e15f2af.jpg)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/Tether1.gif)

No skeptic or debunker has yet reproduced the undulating shifting effects in their attempt to recreate them :D

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/dfbd509bca784d12.gif)

Quoteor b. The viewer either cannot comprehend the mechanics of this camera optical anomaly proposed OR outright refuses to even try. Many viewers in this category are also "SURE" that NASA is trying to cover up something here. And this "Roadwarrior" fellow is likely just some "tool" used to throw people off.

Well if you are a tool... then you are in trouble :P Explain the MOTION TRACKING... forget all else. When you can account for the motion of the critters maybe you have something :P

LunaCognita
The STS75 "Tether Incident" (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=418.0)

QuoteI assure you NASA has absolutely nothing here to cover up. NASA does not care what people think about this video. The most likely response NASA will give when questioned about this is LAUGHTER. And that's the cold hard truth.

If NASA doesn't care about this video then WHY will NASA not release the original with time date stamps? WHY is the ONLY copy that we can view the one intercepted by satellite dish by Martyn Stubbs  and WHY was it taken to court to have the film squashed due to copyright issues when NASA is a PUBLIC entity and the film was intercepted on an open channel?

QuoteHere is the link to my youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/americanroadwarrior
It's best to watch the featured video on the channel page and then click on the Tether Playlist just below it.
You will be shown not one, not two, but several different methods of proving that these are NOT large spacecraft.

Sorry your barking up the wrong tree here

Quote from: 1Worldwatcher on May 23, 2013, 09:50:51 AM
Am looking forward too all that is going to be discussed here,

LMAO

NASA say there is nothing there and uses a poor copy of the film from the web....

WHY will they not release their high res copy with data stream if as they say It was streamed publicly? Which BTW it was NOT  Had they not been intercepted by Martyn Stubbs at the time we would never have seen them LD

But nah I am not going to debate it. We spent MONTHS on this at ATS and Open Minds and its all on the website so knock yourselves out.

But lets hear your explanations for the curved trajectories and sudden changes for your 'space debris' theory

Luna Cognita dis an awesome job on the motion tracking and forensic study... To me that settled it long ago

QuoteBut lets hear your explanations for the curved trajectories and sudden changes for your 'space debris' theory

I have seen the debates 'Z', Arw approached me with his theory, we must honor those theories as much as wanting to be honored, so, as far as I am concerned, I have only what "I am Told" for being the truths of the matter, so am watching you follow as you choose, which is Luna Cognita apparently..... I have no answer's, I only have Questions........ 

I hope it turns out for both arguments, but in the long run, neither one of them an hold water, all speculation and conjecture, at least until we can send someone up there we can actually trust, that "Isn't" Biased either way.... :P

So ,  LMAO 2 .......::)

1WW

Quote from: deuem on May 23, 2013, 09:13:47 AM
#1, I was not there, so I have only the video to work with. I have to trust that or drop it.

Well get the full res copy from Martyn Stubbs He is SecretNasaMan at Youtube... and also get STS80 where NASA zooms in on the one over the thunderstorm ArMaP really likes that one :D

Quote#2, The idea of it being the camera and having hundreds of these critters all over the place is hard ot believe.

They are being seen by the THOUSANDS all over the world described as orbs and glowing lights. They have always been here but today everyone is looking and has cameras. They can be seen around any good thunderstorm

Quote#3, Follow the trail, they start, stop, turn 90 degres.

And some have curved trajectories. Space debris CANNOT do that though a few skeptics at ATS tried to argue that it was Earth's gravity pulling them down in an arc.  Really? Earth's gravity pulling down dust particles to cvreate an arc in such a short time?  Uh huh... Nice one :P

Quote#4, They come in all sizes.

Yes the young are small and usually round 'balls of light' while the older ones are more amoeba like and can get HUGE. I have noticed that the young tend to hang out in the atmosphere more. I do have one 20 minute video taken of one giving birth.  :D  But I already covered that

Quote#5, When the camera puls in they dont fade out.  If an object is close to the camera, ie Ice floating around, then when you zoom in they blur out.

Irrelevant to a skeptoid :D  So is the fact that all bokeh in one image would be the SAME ORIENTATION. Just ggogle bokeh images and you will see what I mean. Here is one created using a heart shaped aperture... you will notice they are all aligned the same direction

(http://www.diyphotography.net/files/images/353392636_30c215ff3d.jpg)

Quote#6, Deuem can tell if the object is close or far away by how it processes.

Can't wait :D

Quote#7, If it is only ice and miles away it would have to be huge ice, like icebergs.

Skeptics also ignore the fact that the tether was a very THIN WIRE yet it was glowing and "wider than expected" as the NASA mission control guy says in the recording. The study after explains WHY it was glowing like a fluorescent tube...

Also this press release...

EARLY FINDINGS FROM TETHERED SATELLITE MISSION
POINT TO REVAMPING OF SPACE PHYSICS THEORIES

RELEASE: 96-43

Numerous space physics and plasma theories are being revised or overturned by data gathered during the Tethered Satellite System Reflight (TSS-1R) experiments on Space Shuttle Columbia's STS-75 mission last March.

Models, accepted by scientists for more than 30 years, are incorrect and must be rewritten. This assessment follows analysis by a joint U.S.-Italian Tethered Satellite investigating team of the information gathered during the mission.

Source: Marshal  Marshall Space Flight Center, Press Release

Quote#9, It went behind the teather.

Yes it did :D

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/Tether1.gif)

Quote#10, The teather was not streached out as far as most people say it was, It has a re-coil of over 1/3 the length as ssn in other photos. So they are not as large as people say.

The tether straightened out as it moved away. Plasma discharge was occurring because the copper wire was still collecting energy as it flew through the earths magnetosphere. The circuit was completed by the gases release by the insulation as the plasma heated the wire. The power collected caught NASA off guard and had they installed a simple circuit breaker they would not have lost the tether. They anticipated a very low voltage but seconds after it was extended they got much more power surge than they were ready for...  enough to fry the connection and leave arc holes in the shuttle bay.

All that is covered in the report after the fact... enough electricity to fry an astronaut :D

Quote#12, Did you see the fantastic video out there with the trails. Maybe one of the members can find it and post it.

Yes its Luna Cognita's film  good friend of mine who has been off line lately Its here in his section

Quote#13, If this is camera related then why are the objects moving and not pinned to the camera motion? Why are there many going in many dirrections at the same time? Bet the answer is ice. If this is camera, I want to know why.

The motion and the different "bokeh" effects and the shifting shapes should be enough to shut up any skeptic... They never address those issue... just keep harping on the same 'evidence' they fabricate

#14, Even though I am Deuem, I make mistakes and maybe I am as wrong as you might be. I will keep a very open mind on this, I hope you do also.

QuoteCritters, ya gotta love them. Related to Drapa

Letter from:
Denise M. Stoner
Chief Investigator, Florida (Ex Government Investigator)
Mufon State Section Director
6/8/2009 5:58 AM

[Cilp of relevant portion]
Yes, I do believe at least 50% or greater of these recent sightings (past 15 yrs perhaps) are life forms of some kind.  I wish I could recall the paperwork on a case I had that involved an abduction where the individual never saw an entity such as the "Grays".  He felt the whole works of the craft was a living, breathing entity in itself.  Sightings now include so many balls of light that appear to be glass like on the outside with some sort of swirling living being on the inside.  This "Shape Shifting" going on is perhaps the workings of the plasma or whatever these beings are made up of as they enter our earth.

I have a fascinating photo - original- of a beam of light coming down from the sky to some ranch land.  Within the beam you can see a form that looks like an entity in fetal position waiting to step out of the light.  I am waiting to meet with a photo analyst who can enhance this so we can have a better look at what's going on.  Everyone who has been shown this picture sees the thing immediately.  I will share that with you at some point, if you are interested.  There are so many things going on.  These UFOs have surely advanced beyond our understanding just as we are working to do so here on Earth.

Ron:  You may quote me on the statement regarding my thoughts on the plasma, critters, etc.  These are my thoughts and not those of MUFON.  One of the three questions MUFON asks as criteria to determine whether or not we have a Category 1 (Fly By), Cat. 2 (Landing), Cat. 3 (Entities involved) is: Did the Witness experience poltergeist, ghost or haunting activity, out of body experience or religious transformation.  It must tie in directly with a craft landing.  So, we are mixing these experiences with the angelic forces, plasma-like beings, and so forth.  Along the line someone - and I don't know who - has  discovered there are reasons to believe this is all related to the UFO phenomenon.  Or at the very least, it needs to be explored.

Thanks so much for sharing the info. on the critter birth.  I will take a look...  ...I keep searching because someone has to - I have always enjoyed a good game of cat and mouse.

Warm Wishes,  Denise Stoner

THE CASE FOR THE CRITTERS

By Sander of  the Linden


In the early morning of 25 augusts 1957 two men drew, provide with camera's, the Mohavewoestijn at loose Angelos in. Their aim was UFO's observe and these to film and photographs. One of the men, Trevor Howard Constable, a respected author of aviation books had been confessed and for its biography of Erich Hartmann, wereldberoemde pilot from WO I. Constable had touched interested in the work of scientist will helmet Reich and his discoveries in the field of bioenergy, by Reich 'orgone' energy called. According to Reich this energy is responsible for living on our planet and can with certain equipment be manipulated.

Reich discovered also that during proefnemingen with these equipment in free nature he did not stipulate earlier observed phenomena attracted, which he kept responsible for the ufo perceptions. According to Reich these phenomena life forms earlier not discovered were which lived in the higher layers of our atmosphere. Reich became among other things these statements and researches in the field of the orgone energy as a scientist no longer have been seriously taken. Later he touched in diskrediet and died eventually in the prison. Constable want gladly foto's make of these UFO's and the men stalks their equipment on.

Constable carried out a certain exercise, which aimed at joining energy on one spot the orgone and thereby UFO's to attract. After a couple Constable an enormous entity in the atmosphere perceived minutes above him, which he could however only feel. There was see nothing. To be comrade made rapidly a number of infraroodfoto's. After development of the film proved to be there in ventilates itself above Constable a giant being to be, which seemed most still on an enormous amoeba, completely with nucleï and vacuolen (to see foto's). In the first place were two disappointed because they had thought real flying of photographing dishes. After still what desert sessions appeared however that they were also able these fix dishes, with the traditional klokvorm, on infra-red film. With the naked eye however continued there, outside a vague rimpeling in the atmosphere, observe nothing. Constable thought long and hard after concerning its discoveries and did report of its perceptions in the book 'They live in the sky' (1958).

In this book Constable note that the entities live, biological beings are, which able are their eliminate presence in for our visible the part of the spectrum at discretion to or. Moreover they are able already pulsating with enormous speeds move itself. The fact that she comes be, however, on IR film visible because they radiate heat. Constable call them 'critters', which is to translate rather with 'beestjes'. The traditional dishes (by Constable 'etherships' called) are of another order. These use of a sophisticated propulsion system, which she puts able to accelerate with enormous speed and dealings to carry out. These etherships do not come belong from the universum but, just like the critters to our own planet, however from another dimension, which Constable 'Etheria' calls.

What they exact are not, can also to Constable answer. He states that they exist in their own levensfeer in a separate dimension. This dimension is everywhere present, also for our gone, but for human perception invisibly. Etheria the source and future of people are.

Of course a vast excursion made Constable American scientists, armed with its sharpest foto's and films. But beginning years '60 did not prove be there much basis for onontdekte biological entities in the atmosphere. Everyone had been aroused curiosity to the real flying dishes, such as Kenneth Arnold which had observed in '47 at Mount Reinier. Constable were laughed away, were ignored or were ridiculous made plain. This became a black period in its life. Later he notes down this in 'The Cosmic pulse or Life' (1976) with as subtitel 'The revolutionary biological power behind ufos'. In this book he looks back ietwat disconcerted on this time.

At this moment Trevor Howard Constable active is as a engineer, where he is using the orgone energy able influence it, and rain can let appear on spots where that necessary is (* Internet site).

To the critters. After the discovery of Constable it has been long quiet around these life forms. Much attention went out to UFO's as vehicles for intelligences originating from other planets, such as the Greys van Zeta Reticuli. Abductions, cattle injuries and close Encounters or the Third child have dominated the ufonieuws of the previous decades. Until American Tv-technicus from pure interest the livebeelden which was sent from the Spaceshuttle missions were sent. Using what special satellite dishes are these observe livebeelden for everyone. This technician touched curiously to these pictures because it was not whispered there in space travel rings concerning closer to call perceptions by American, and to what late appeared also Russian crew. Our technician filled tape after tape, and its impatience was shortly rewarded, because after thorough study of the liveopnamen, particularly of space walks, and attempts from the Spaceshuttle repair c.q launch satellites, became clear that there were two phenomena present around the Spaceshuttle, the Russian MIR, and in and around the atmosphere of the ground.

The first phenomenon is to a being that with regard to description strong seems on the critters of Constable. Luminous, pulsative and itself with enormous speed moving phenomena, which appeared moreover able for 'onmogelijke' dealings to carry out, such as haakse turnings and sudden invisibility. On some film pictures seems the space around the Spaceshuttle litteral forgive of swarming, all sides on moving lichtbollen, which gives clear proof of their presence, such as fish curiously descend on diepzeeduiker. Also there are the enormous amoebeachtige beings visible on some scenes, which by the outer edges of the atmosphere 'zwemmen'. The comment of the nasa during the retransmissions is that there 'veel ijsdeeltjes and space detritus (spacedebris)' being to see. Correctly yes. (To see: SECRET nasa TRANSMISSIONS: THE GRANT SMOKING)

The second phenomenon is a sudden, coloured lichtflits, which itself both outside the capsules as well as within the spacecrafts manifests itself. This lichtflits is hardly with the naked eye visible, but was clearly noticed astronauts, who it during the retransmissions nice concerning their 'companion' have. Ergo conclusio: there is much to the hand above our accounts.

To the critters. There are after Constable experiences have been confessed made much ufo perceptions which have in my opinion nothing to do with visitors of other planets, but all belong in the biological category done. In 1961, an Italian photographer made this photograph, on which bizar object with min-of-meer symmetrical projections. Being? Vehicle? See also the next photograph, on which is a flying dragon to see. And then next that a type sees flying jellyfish late, among beautiful cloud parties.

Itself possesses I an unique small film from the years '60, on which are from a plane filmed being to see. It seems still most on an enormous tortoise, with four legs/vinnen. however after a number of seconden there something happens strange: the legs seem join tightly itself to a type membrane, the being turns and within 2 up to 3 video frames from the visibility has totally disappeared. Also on the nasa films is high above the atmosphere flying 'kwallen' to see that appears suddenly and also suddenly disappears, or with inconceivable speed from picture accelerate.

Itself is I, after study of Constable's work (be first book 'They live in the sky' is unfortunately from the trade, 2e hands does copies zo'n € 500, -), the work of will helmet Reich and a large number of films and foto's reached the conclusion that he has it at the straight end. Constable still say themselves concerning its perceptions against ongelovige scientists: 'bind an infra-red camera under a plane and makes prerecordings in ochtenduren'. And 'iedereen is possible waarnemen' them;. In my optiek the work of Constable deserves a thorough realignment, where could open mind contribute livewaarnemingen and enormously to the knowledge of our own planet, its flora and fauna, but above all to the nevertheless this way uncomfortable problem of Ufo-waarnemingen.

* Internet site: http://www.ethericrainengineering.info

e-mail author: slinden@planet.nl

THE CASE FOR THE CRITTERS

TRANSLATED FROM

http://www.ufowijzer.nl/tekstpagina/TheCaseForTheCritters.html

Quote from: 1Worldwatcher on May 23, 2013, 10:33:35 AMat least until we can send someone up there we can actually trust, that "Isn't" Biased either way.... :P

Well Bigelow is working on that, been talking to NASA about private missions (posted that I did)

But we could just catch one here on Earth :D  I am sure there must we a way to confine one, even if they are pure energy. They did it on Ghost Busters :P

Quote from: 1Worldwatcher on May 23, 2013, 10:33:35 AM
so am watching you follow as you choose, which is Luna Cognita apparently....

Well it is obvious you don't know :P I was there from the beginning when Martyn showed these LIVE  I was watching the court case and seeing the video being pulled off the internet. Luna Cognita came along after. 

A lot of people around the net are considering the possibilities of critters and most of the chatter can be traced to either Trevor's camp or my work..

But your right  we all know nothing and I am sure we will be arguing about this for decades.

All I want to see before I kick the bucket is NASA release THEIR COPY  Why is that so much to ask for? They have released other films and those have the time date data feeds at the bottom (which Martyn couldn't intercept as they are added at the receiver

Jim Oberg told me we could order it IF we had the exact time/date info... but to date NO ONE has seen it

So cough up the ORIGINAL NASA or STUFF IT :P

QuoteSo cough up the ORIGINAL NASA or STUFF IT

Exactly. we can only run on 4 cylinders in an eight cylinder engine for so long, I wish the same things you do as far as releasing all these hidden files, and as mush as I respect your prowess with in these fields of research, I remain 'Bummed' by all thing's being human nature and rather mundane for arguments sake.

Catch one in a bottle and bring over too me, or at least that is how frustrated I am with all these Committees and Hearing's and disclosure crap things, cost a fortune to get them going, and really resolve nothing in the long run.

Yesterday evening I was lucky enough to catch an interview with Ken Sewell, one of our countries first Nuclear Physicists for power plants on sub's, he had so much stuff, it became painfully obvious that we as the sheeple of this planet will remain in the shaded areas of understanding..well, at least with in our life times 'Z', as Mr. Lear has stated, another 4-5 decades, and then maybe something will happen by then. Sad but true.

1WW

Hi,  I decided to take Zs gif from above break it up, process it and put it back into a gif again.


(http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/aa458/deuem/ZsGifworkedNT.gif) (http://s1198.photobucket.com/user/deuem/media/ZsGifworkedNT.gif.html)


If you stare at the center it actually looks like it is breathing. The center hole opens and closes.

The cut out also changes shape in relation to the breathing.

Note: I use the word breathing so I can relate to a human action. For all I know maybe it is eating space.

The action also reminds me of jellyfish

Quote from: deuem on May 23, 2013, 01:12:23 PM
Hi,  I decided to take Zs gif from above break it up, process it and put it back into a gif again.


(http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/aa458/deuem/ZsGifworkedNT.gif) (http://s1198.photobucket.com/user/deuem/media/ZsGifworkedNT.gif.html)


If you stare at the center it actually looks like it is breathing. The center hole opens and closes.

The cut out also changes shape in relation to the breathing.

Note: I use the word breathing so I can relate to a human action. For all I know maybe it is eating space.

The action also reminds me of jellyfish

Deuem, is there any way to have you render an image with the Tether with in it? That would be a bit more eye opening I believe. ;)

1WW

No problem, the Deuem rules on that are for one of you to pick the picture(s) and I will run it.

I don't want anyone to say I made it up. Knock your socks off, I did this before. You can clearly see it behind with not even 1 ring overlapping.

Deuem

Quote from: deuem on May 23, 2013, 01:12:23 PM
If you stare at the center it actually looks like it is breathing. The center hole opens and closes.
The action also reminds me of jellyfish

yes that same "breathing" effect is noticed on the big one that NASA has on their mission control screen I posted earlier. I notice I pasted the wrong image. Here is the gif ArMaP made from the mission control screen shots.

No bokeh yet has been able to breath :P

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/bb261ab621b502c6.gif)

Also this thing is huge, not some silly ice particle :P

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/NASA_Control_013.png)

Okay! Thank you for all the great replies so far!  8)

Many of the questions asked about the footage which are all very valid, each and every one deserving a specific answer.

However, I am going to ask each and every person asking questions and requesting answers to first please view and watch very closely the video below. It's important to watch the whole video all the way through without bailing out. The video is only 5:45 minutes long and once you have completed watching it I need you to explain to me how and why this video "does not" debunk and put to rest this Tether "UFO", "saucer" and/or "plasma entity" video.

The video will instruct you mid way through to open it up to full screen in order for you to look at "all" the objects within the field-of-view closely.

Once you have answered this video to my satisfaction I will begin to directly answer your individual questions and/or refer you to specific videos or information.

Thank you in advance for completing this request of mine!  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX0nbnUlKfM

Quote from: zorgon on May 23, 2013, 10:44:49 AM
Well get the full res copy from Martyn Stubbs He is SecretNasaMan at Youtube... and also get STS80 where NASA zooms in on the one over the thunderstorm ArMaP really likes that one :D

I do, but I don't think it's the same thing as in the tether video. :)

Quote from: deuem on May 23, 2013, 09:13:47 AM
#6, Deuem can tell if the object is close or far away by how it processes.

I don't think it can. :)

Quote from: ArMaP on May 24, 2013, 12:10:18 AM
I do, but I don't think it's the same thing as in the tether video. :)

It's similar footage in that the same type camera is being used which gives close zoomed and out-of-focus objects this same donut spherical "saucer" shape caused by it's parabolic dish reflector lens.

Quote from: American-Roadwarrior on May 24, 2013, 01:15:50 AM
It's similar footage in that the same type camera is being used which gives close zoomed and out-of-focus objects this same donut spherical "saucer" shape caused by it's parabolic dish reflector lens.

I think the only similarity is in the type of camera, as this object doesn't look like the ones on the tether video.

PS: I'm one of those that think that what we see in the tether video is a bunch of small objects close to the camera, although I don't have an explanation for the different trajectories. :)

Quote from: ArMaP on May 24, 2013, 12:12:17 AM
I don't think it can. :)

What you think doesn't count in this case.   :P

Since you have previously admitted to not understanding what DEUEMLIGHT is about,
how can you make such a statement?

Personally, we thought Mr Deuem was adding to the discussion BIG TIME.

And, we thought we had covered this line of BS before.

Thank you for your time and attention.

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Bluebird/lg50aa500a.gif) (//http://)

Quote from: ArMaP on May 24, 2013, 01:20:27 AM
I think the only similarity is in the type of camera, as this object doesn't look like the ones on the tether video.

PS: I'm one of those that think that what we see in the tether video is a bunch of small objects close to the camera, although I don't have an explanation for the different trajectories. :)

Egad!

What type of 'small objects'?

Please, just for once, a straight answer to a simple question.

How can they be close to the camera
yet go behind the tether?

Quote from: ArMaP on May 24, 2013, 01:20:27 AM
I don't have an explanation for the different trajectories. :)

There is a common misconception that where the Shuttle is in the upper atmosphere there is NO gravity or wind drag. This is actually not the case. There are definite subtle forces of gravity and drag surrounding the ship. In fact, once you become clear that this IS just small close ice debris (which you are) the video then becomes documented proof of exactly how these ice debris move around the shuttle for several hours before they eventually drift off into space each time they make an excess fuel cell water dump.
There is a video uploaded by a youtube user: Luna Cognita which has been put to a program to add tails on many of the objects in question demonstrating that many of them do not travel in a straight line. I believe that video to be flawed. I believe when that video was produced the program used to create it had the sensitivity turned up entirely too high causing it to actually create tails of objects that don't even exist. There are two ways to check this. First, take a look at most of these tails, they do not have a particle head, they are merely tails with nothing leading them. I believe the program used was picking up on the background noise we see in the video in the background. Second, I challenge anyone to put the Luna Cognita video side by side to the original raw footage and point out to me where these zig-zagging particles are. They simply do not exist.

QuoteThere is a common misconception that where the Shuttle is in the upper atmosphere
there is NO gravity or wind drag. This is actually not the case.

True... A very common misconception...   :(


So called "weightlessness" only exists under certain circumstances, involving velocity and trajectory.

If you could stop an object in "orbit", it will soon accelerate toward the Planet, Moon or Star,
it may be Orbiting at the Time.

We often have satellites full to the Earth, as a result of a decrease in velocity, require to sustain a stable orbit.

We decelerate a craft in orbit, to return to Earth.

It is the Earths "Gravity", which pulls the craft back to Earth.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/conghand/traject.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_stability

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabolic_trajectory

Regarding Zorgons "Critters"

Hell Science claim there are thousands of different Species yet undiscovered on Earth,
Admittedly in our oceans.

We are still discovering "Species" today not in the seas well.

But The NASA I think you will find have had scientists, intently interested in these,
and has been studied for some years now.

There is so little known about "Species" on Earth let alone what is NOT on the Earth.

Really the Human "Species" has barely scratched the surface of "knowledge".

So I will continue to watch to see what comes out of this area of interest..   :)

Being behind the great whit paper omits me from looking at any of the UT vids for more than a quick 3 seconds or so. So if I am going to view them I need them sent to me.

If you wish to stay or this path of yours, can you do us some home work. I want to know the detail of the camera. The focal point, the lens used and the film or chip used.  With those 3 I can do some math workups in CAD and figure out the focus points and distances of certain objects.

On the trails video, I think you ought to go visit it again and see how people do trails. The trail does not have to be made out of the object. It can be an added thing. I have done them before. I have also worked out flight paths of jets from vids. You can do this with UFOs also if you wish. So I say, study trails also. How the computer can make them or how you can step frame the vid and add them yourself.

Some of this stuff we talk about needs a certain level of experience. At this moment I don't know you well enough to make that call. I suggest that you actually try and make a trail and see for yourself so you have that knowledge base behind you. Once we you can do one, then do 20 more and let us know what you think about the trails video and how it was done.  You can go film a car and do one. Film a dog running, a fish swimming. It does not have to be a UFO. This is what I call standards.

One must provide substantial standards when making claims about the un-known. How can someone trust your judgment if we don't even know if you can do it yourself. I am not attacking you, maybe what I am doing is training you how to be better. The people here like reality. We spend more time on actuals than fantasy. So when we roll back to the UFO world we might have some knowledge on our side.

See I don't care if it is ice or critters; I care about how we put our minds together to add new ideas to our group. I believe if you make the grade and stick around a year or so, this thread would have been presented in a different manner. One of choice rather than spoon fed.

Asking for help, makes friends, sticking them makes enemies. I myself like friends. Friends work together. A different approach in your work can add all the knowledge of this site. The people on this site did not just fall of the turnip truck yesterday.

How many critters have you processed? How much extensive work done in this field has been done by you, any books published? And not someone just someone elses work and just copied.

Deuem is going back to sleep now. I suggest the above and then go around the site and look at some of the work here and see how to fit in better.

Deuem

On the close up parts the pixels wash away on zooms. a partial would go full screen and see right through it. On a full screen process, it would process well and everything in the back ground would not. I would have to zoom in, like on a star to get a good process while a chip in a cars window would process at frame level. I have proven this several times before on blind tests. Ask our member Willease about the foot print. No one could believe it until.......

I need this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As-wYmFYb3I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As-wYmFYb3I)

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buWBonjaVT4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buWBonjaVT4)

and from Luna

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=mJpsADFWICs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=mJpsADFWICs)

and

the best one for last

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQqCjTEWz78 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQqCjTEWz78)

Quote from: thorfourwinds on May 24, 2013, 02:47:29 AM
What you think doesn't count in this case.   :P

Since you have previously admitted to not understanding what DEUEMLIGHT is about,
how can you make such a statement?

Because now I know what it does, I just don't know the colour palettes it uses. :)

QuotePersonally, we thought Mr Deuem was adding to the discussion BIG TIME.

Adding to the discussion is good, I just commented one of the things he said.

QuoteAnd, we thought we had covered this line of BS before.

Did we? Really?

QuoteThank you for your time and attention.

Your welcome, although it looks like I'm not.  :P

Quote from: thorfourwinds on May 24, 2013, 02:54:46 AM
What type of 'small objects'?

Pieces of ice, pieces of the tether, etc.

What those objects are is not relevant if we are only discussing how objects close to the camera look like.

QuotePlease, just for once, a straight answer to a simple question.

Always, just make the questions.

QuoteHow can they be close to the camera
yet go behind the tether?

They don't go behind the tether.

Quote from: American-Roadwarrior on May 24, 2013, 03:07:21 AM
Second, I challenge anyone to put the Luna Cognita video side by side to the original raw footage and point out to me where these zig-zagging particles are. They simply do not exist.

I'm not talking about zig-zagging particles, as I haven't seen one, I'm talking about particles that go from the bottom left corner to the middle of the frame, then make a slow turn and end up at the right bottom corner. As far as I remember it, all the changes in direction are from moving up to moving down, never from moving down to moving up or from one side to the other, but I may be wrong, I haven't looked at the video in a long time. :)

Quote from: deuem on May 24, 2013, 01:40:33 PM
I need this video...

Videos sent. I hope it works. :)

Quote from: ArMaP on May 24, 2013, 02:03:29 PM
Videos sent. I hope it works. :)

Looking.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have been looking at the design specs on this teather. The Satellite is 1.6 meters (5.25 ft.) across and the tether was approximately 12.2 miles long (19.7 km) when it broke. It did curl up a lot from bounce back as shown in Luna Cognitas video and again later in a NASA photo ( still working on getting that one )

But what I am really after is the teather cable. I did find the outer wire was 25.4mm in diameter. 1 inch.  So we are talking about an object going behind or in front of a 1 inch item that is miles away. I am impressed. Did the hubble take that photo.

At the time of the Ice Critters (  ;D  ) we are looking at a 1 inch (25mm) cable glowing miles and miles away. If anything is to be looked at is what happened near the head end. At least that is a little larger. 1.6 meters.

Now if your zoom on a camera is powerfull enough to pick up 1.6 meters at miles away then anything in that photo is not 30 feet from the lens. You would be looking at a very narrow area of sky.

Most of all I woulld kindly point out to you to try your own trails and show us what you get on a few moving objects before you tear down Luna Cognita for no reason other than fun. Instead of knocking him, do better than he did..I am sure even he would like to see that. If you could prove that nothing moved it would be the story of the year.

Trails are an accounting of a moving object from frame to frame. Like the video game tron cycles...

Still need theFocal point, lens and film or CCD info to work it out better.

Say an ice crystal is the size of a penny, at 30 feet you can just abput even see it. Now zoom in on the penny and the back ground will go away. say we open the iris up. The back ground will get saturated. Next zoom in on something 12 miles away and see if you can still even see the penny. It should dissapear.

Deuem

Great banter here fellas, Zorgon, I have to agree with you and Luna on this, after watching the videos so many times numerous correspondences arise in my eyes and mind....one of which was camera effect, yet that has no merit due to the non lnear movement of the critters, and the pulsating forms of their shells, and innards.

I would suggest watching the Primer Fields videos series in this case, to recognize the nature of space bound plasma, and the effect resulting from the use of bowl shaped magnets in the creation of such plasma events.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EPlyiW-xGI

In the videos, the apparatus mimics the formation of plasma critters, and also defines the way that all is fractal within space and the entire universe....each lifeform starts as such a spark, or critter, and the subsequent formation of physical bodies such as we are embedded in here on Earth is due to the specific level of electrical inductance and gravitational effects our energy being is immersed in.

When in space, these lifeforms continue to grow into their large sizes due to the near vacuum, and high levels of electrical inductance, many times that here on earth.

What this indicates is that here on the planet's surface, we condense as humans for a short time until our inductance ability wanes through the years, while in space the high available energy level allows for the formation of electrical torus', critters that are at once, created and destroyed, rebirthing at the specific frequency of their inductance from said available energy.

The debate here should be more like..."are these critters conscious, or able to render thought, or are they just random electrical anomalies that occur due to physical properties of the ONE, or aether as science calls it?"

One vote here for semi conscious beings, which don't advance past the stage of their observed form, due to the fact that there is so much energy in space, they cannot attain any solid physical form such as we have as humans in our environment. They remain as plasma, and their curiousity exposed them for what they are.

Cheers!
Le

and now for a totally different theory:

American Road Warrior are you Luna Cognita?
That guy came into the john lear threads and others that several of us partiipated in, took our evidence, made his own video with it, sold it for money and then only credited a couple of the people who had generated the data.  That actually curbed my interest in sharing my views on this type of stuff.  Not even an honorable mention or a thanks for the info.

oh wait. that was jose escamilla (moon rising documentary) but jose was working with lunacognita.  to be fair, he did credit john lear.  no mention of z's work on the topic or mine.  i must've downloaded and scanned, colored, zoomed, brightened, contrasted, texturized, cut out and etc, thousands of pics and put them on my own website so i could show them on the various threads we were involved in. 

here it is. 
http://archive.org/details/SciencemoonRising-FullDocumentary_737

You will find this new's article interesting I found tonight whilst at work!

We need to check out the name's of these PHD Clad folke to find out more  :)

Hyper-Intelligent Superbrains Floating In Deep Space Probably Don't Outnumber Humanity, Say Physicists

QuotePhysicists say there is now good evidence that a legion of floating space brains are not spontaneously bursting into existence throughout the universe.

For about a decade there has been a theory (really a thought experiment) that so-called Boltzmann brains - self-aware conscious entities with no external physical presence - might exist in space.

The idea roughly goes - and we'd suggest further reading - that given a suitably dramatic timescale, energy and matter, it's possible that a consciousness could form into a working mind, of its own accord, in space.

SOURCE:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/05/23/boltzmann-brain-theory-space_n_3324003.html

Like I said a lot of checking to do on that one and even the article writer sorta hints that in the link's embedded in the article, but all the same it make's me at least think of Critters 'being a legion" of floating brains LOL 

And I am a critter believer ;) 

I was able to read a lot of the comments on the teather vids. Can't see the vids but the comments ok.

Also saw that you made a bunch of videos on something you call the black line. Ok I was able to figure that out without the vid.

ArMaP was kind enough to send me Lunas video and I made a couple of screen shots to look at the black line.

So here is a sample of what I got from Lunas vid.

Hum?

(http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/aa458/deuem/Blackline1.jpg) (http://s1198.photobucket.com/user/deuem/media/Blackline1.jpg.html)


(http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/aa458/deuem/Blackline12.jpg) (http://s1198.photobucket.com/user/deuem/media/Blackline12.jpg.html)


(http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/aa458/deuem/Blackline123.jpg) (http://s1198.photobucket.com/user/deuem/media/Blackline123.jpg.html)


It sure looks like that black and my red line are in front of that rather large Ice Critter.

For us Cad guys, the film stated that it was 77 natuical miles away. That is 142.604km or 88.61 miles

I am going to post a couple of other numbers that are a guess to talk about.

1) the teather broke off with 12+ miles of cable out. It then bunched up a lot.
For the math I will use 9 miles. Meaning we are looking at about 9 miles of teather bunched up on the angle with a 1.6 meter or 5foot+ head at the end. The vid shows us it is on an angle so a straight number can not be used even if the entire 12 miles were streached out straight. Also that trather is glowing like a glow bug under that type of camera. Lots of power there for a very well insulated cable that is only 1 inch round. 25mm and 88 miles away hum!

Round 2... ding   

Deuem

Deuem is having an ODD moment.

If a camera is set on infinity, then the focus is at the extreme. When one changes the focus you actually are doing a short zoom, a crop of the original photo, It moves the lenses or electronics inside the camera and you get a crop of the original but in focus.

Thank you for pointing out the focus part.

Now my part! When your video first starts up they are at some 80 nautical miles apart, even further than I wrote before. So what we are seeing is the lens set at infinity which is focused past the tether. Nice camera set up. I want one...

All lenses in the camera are at the extreme mode. They can only be moved in to focus.

So IMHO, it looks like most of the Ice Critters are even further away than I thought they were. They are in focus at the infinity level of that camera. Every lens setup has its own max. Infinity is just a word used in the camera game meaning what ever it can see. Each lens made has a different infinity level. 

When they did a focus, the tether gets larger as it should ( it cropped the picture ) and all the ice critters got smaller as they should. Meaning the lens pulled in to focus on the tether and that pushed the critters farther away in focus making them smaller. If the critters were on this side of the focus they too would have gotten a lot larger. The focus had to be set past the tether to start with because it got larger in the cropped focus. If the focus was on this side to start with the tether would have gotten smaller in the crop but in focus. If you pulled the focus into 30 feet, you would never see the tether at all. Maybe some lights in the back ground.

Using your logic that any simpleton who understands focus can work this out, I think I just did.

I think you should read the camera thread and do some more research on focus and let me know what you find.

The focal plane is the focal plane no matter how it is diced.

And that is what I think happens..... Deuem

QuoteIf the critters were on this side of the focus they too would have gotten a lot larger.

this sounds accurate.

Quote from: undo11 on May 24, 2013, 06:42:27 PM
this sounds accurate.

Indeed!

Good point D!

Quote from: American-Roadwarrior on May 24, 2013, 03:07:21 AM
There is a common misconception that where the Shuttle is in the upper atmosphere there is NO gravity or wind drag. This is actually not the case. There are definite subtle forces of gravity and drag surrounding the ship.

No one is denying that there are gravity effects, but some of those particles are moving away from earth.

Can you show us in ANY of the other NASA videos this same gravity and wind drag in effect?

Can you explain how gravity and wind drag effect different particles at different rates? Gravity is a constant and it does not act instantly on small particles already moving at orbital velocity. Even a large satellite takes a long time to be pulled out of orbit

Gravity is also not selective... it acts on all orbital objects equally

QuoteThere is a video uploaded by a youtube user: Luna Cognita which has been put to a program to add tails on many of the objects in question demonstrating that many of them do not travel in a straight line.

Yes I posted that link... I see you read that post?

QuoteI believe that video to be flawed.

No surprise there LOL

QuoteThey simply do not exist.

(http://cdn5.triplepundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/wearingblinders.jpg)

Enjoy your bliss :D

So lets look at STS80 clip...

Explain THESE as 'ice particles'

Explain how the one in the center moves in and comes to a STOP at 1:40 and lights up.  What gravity or wind drag effect will allow one to STOP?

Then watch the big one move over the storm and brightens up... then STOPS and stays over the storm. Then it stays over that storm and moves off the screen with the orbit. Near the end the NASA camera zooms back in on it as it is almost off camera.

These are NOT close to the camera.. these are NOT camera artifacts and it is clear that NASA is aware of them.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRzOF-eAw7I

You are welcome to believe as you wish, but in my opinion you are simply in DENIAL

8)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/STS80-1.gif)

It reminds me of my now 93 yo grandma's experience whilst in bed with grandpa when he was still kicking about. 

They both saw a ball of white light zoom through their bedroom only later to to ask the neighbour's who lived next door what was going on in their next meeting (who wouldn't ask?) and the neighbor's said they saw the ball's of white light in their paddock. 

Ball Lighting doe's not explain that true story :D

Quote from: Somamech on May 24, 2013, 07:14:11 PM
Ball Lighting doe's not explain that true story :D

Ball lightning or ice particles also do not explain this huge one on NASA's mission control screen that they are watching where the opening closes and opens

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/NASA_Control_006.png)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/NASA_Control_007.png)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/NASA_Control_008.png)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/NASA_Control_009.png)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Critter/NASA_Control_010.png)


Problem with most skeptobunkers is they never look at ALL the evidence...  8)

 Don't know just what 'trick' is used in the video..My personal camera is
attached to an astronomical telescope with focal length of 1900 mm. The
camera ccd size is 7 mm,that gives me 271 x magnification. Many times
the moon will pass behind my unit and a power line. When this
happens, the wire is not visable, though it is 60 feet distance.When the
moon crosses behind a light pole, the pole is not visable, but will
dim or interupt the light from the moon.If I focus on the pole, the moon
is not visable, focus on the moon, pole is not visable.. The video seems
very strange. All my images are taken as video, run through registax.
   Would like to post attachment, but that option is not available
       rubicon

Quote from: deuem on May 24, 2013, 02:32:38 PM
But what I am really after is the teather cable. I did find the outer wire was 25.4mm in diameter. 1 inch.  So we are talking about an object going behind or in front of a 1 inch item that is miles away. I am impressed. Did the hubble take that photo.

The reason the tether is so bright and 'wide' is the plasma glow around it.

You will notice in these images the tether one mile out and you will see the bokehs produced by the camera the hexagonal artifacts upper right corner. So with this camera the bokeh's produced are HEXAGONAL and all the same orientation

The tether deployed to one mile

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/satt1.jpg)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/bow.jpg)

Deployment...

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/boom_deploy.jpg)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/initial_deploy.jpg)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/satellite.gif)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/closeup_boom.jpg)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/end_boom.jpg)

Shortly after the breakreak

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/break1.jpg)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/coil1.jpg)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/coil2.jpg)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/coil3.jpg)

It is important to note that only about a mile of cable was released before the power developed so much to create an arc that fried and severed it.  In the next image you can see that most of it is straight and only the end is coiled...

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/coil4.jpg)

The principle of a tether is basic electricity... you can wind a coils and spin a magnet in it OR you can drag a long copper wire through the earth's magnetic field at orbital speed of 17,500 MPH and get the same result. The problem was that NASA scientists underestimated the potential and didn't bother to add a 100.00 circuit breaker resulting in the loss of a $100 million satellite

Here is the base of the Tether Boom where it was attached to the shuttle bay. Looks more like a TESLA LAB :D

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/boom.jpg)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/tether_reel.jpg)

continued....

The Aftermath....

QuoteIn the case of the TSS-1R tether, its 20 km length produced a maximum of about 3500 V potential between its most positive and negative ends, since it wasn?t oriented perfectly perpendicular to the velocity vector and the Earth?s magnetic field. A satellite at its upper end collected electrons, and an electron gun at the lower end emitted electrons to complete the circuit. When the electron gun was not in operation, a large resistance prevented the Shuttle from being biased thousands of volts negative of its surrounding plasma. However, there remained a large voltage between the tether lower end and the Shuttle orbiter. This enormous bias eventually led to a continuous arc on the tether (see The Continuous Arc, section 4.2.3.1 below), which broke, freeing the satellite and ending the experiment. During the arc, the satellite collected over 1 Amp of electron current to keep the arc going. Probe theory (Cohen et al, 19870010625 N) is usually used to calculate the total current collected by a wire with distributed potentials. However, before the break, TSS-1R demonstrated that a satellite at a high positive potential could collect an anomalously large electron current. See Zhang, et al (20000110580), Stone and Raitt (19990084046 and 20000025437), and Stone, et al (19980202347)

QuoteSustained arcs (continuous arcs) - These are the events that have been attributed with the destruction of on-orbit solar arrays. Generally, the process begins with a fast transient (a so-called trigger arc). Under some conditions, the transient develops into an arc that is fed directly by the entire array, effectively becoming a short-circuit. Such events invariably involve large quantities of energy and can be severely damaging to cells, interconnects or power traces.

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Electric_Universe/ESA_Terra.png)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Electric_Universe/Arcing02.jpg)

QuoteWhen the structure or array capacitance electrically connected to the arc site is sufficiently large, the initial transient arcs themselves can be large enough to produce significant damage. In Figure 9, we see an anodized aluminum plate that has undergone repeated arcing in the laboratory with the ISS structure capacitance attached. Its thermal properties have been completely destroyed, along with most of the insulating surface layer of aluminum oxide.

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Electric_Universe/Arcing03.jpg)

QuoteThe most famous sustained arc event of all led to the breakage of the TSS-1R electrodynamic tether, and the loss of the attached satellite. The image below shows the burned, frayed and broken tether end still attached to the Shuttle after the break. Incidentally, the tether continued arcing long after it and its satellite were drifting free, until finally it went into night conditions where the electron density was insufficient to sustain the arc. Noel Sargent (2002) has investigated whether the TSS-1R arc was seen to disrupt Shuttle communications. Although he has found no record of disturbed communications during the event, for most of the time the arc was shielded by metallic structures from the communications antennas, and when the tether broke, the arc was many meters from the receiving antennas. It remains to be seen whether sustained arcs produce radio noise severe enough to be a communications problem.

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Electric_Universe/Tether_Break.jpg)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/Text_003.png)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/Text_004.png)

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/Text_005.png)

THIS is your "Free Energy" at work :D

here is the part where they were told by the inquiry that a circuit breaker would have prevented this

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/Text_006.png)

NASA on Plasma balls :D

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/Text_007.png)

 
Michael Braukus
Headquarters, Washington, DC                    June 4, 1996
(Phone:  202/358-1979)

Jerry Berg
Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL
(Phone:  205/544-0034)

Enzo Letico
ASI, Washington, DC
(Phone: 202/863-1298)

RELEASE:  96-112

{from NASA's FTP server... address redacted}

TETHERED SATELLITE INVESTIGATION REPORT IS RELEASED

    NASA and the Italian Space Agency (ASI) today released the report of the investigative board appointed to determine factors which resulted in the Feb. 25 tether break and loss of the Tethered Satellite during the STS-75 Space Shuttle mission.

    Findings of the board, included in a 358-page document, identified primary causes which accounted for the tether break during deployment of the Tethered Satellite.

    "The tether failed as a result of arcing and burning of the tether, leading to a tensile failure after a significant portion of the tether had burned away," the report concludes.  The arcing occurred because either external foreign object penetration (but not orbital debris or micrometeoroids) or a defect in the tether caused a breach in the layer of insulation surrounding the tether conductor.  The insulation breach provided a path for the current to jump, or arc, from the copper wire in the tether to a nearby electrical ground.

    The board found that the arcing burned away most of the tether material at that location, leading to separation of the tether from tensile or pulling force.  The break occurred when approximately 12.2 miles (19.7 km) of tether was unreeled, in a period when the tether was experiencing normal stresses of approximately 15 pounds (65 newtons).

    In addition to the two primary causes for the tether break, the board cited, as one contributing factor, that "the degree of vulnerability of the tether insulation to damage was not fully appreciated."  The board noted that the actual environment that the tether was exposed to in flight made it more vulnerable to damage than was expected.  And, it noted that the high voltages under which the system was operating could, over a period of time, have reduced the ability of the tether insulation to withstand electrical breakdown due to contamination found in the tether.

     "The tether itself was a remarkable engineering achievement," said Ken Szalai, who chaired the investigative board, "and produced some startling scientific discoveries." Scientific papers recently presented at an American Geophysical Union conference reported that currents generated by the tether were three times higher than theoretical models had predicted prior to the flight.

     "Constructing a tether that was strong, lightweight and electrically conducting took the project into technical and engineering areas where they had never been before," said Szalai. "Now, with 20/20 hindsight, they know where the system is vulnerable and can improve the design."

    The Tethered Satellite System is a joint NASA-ASI system that was flown aboard Space Shuttle Columbia in an experiment to better understand the electrically charged environment of Earth's ionosphere, and how tether systems behave in it.  ASI had the responsibility of providing the satellite, while NASA had the responsibility of the Deployer, which includes the tether, and the overall responsibility for payload integration and operations.  The provision of science investigations was
shared by ASI and NASA.

    The system was generating 3,500 volts DC and up to 0.5 amps of current during satellite deployment.  That high level of electrical energy resulted from the length of conducting tether extending from the Shuttle, coupled with the 17,500-mile-per-hour speed at which the Shuttle and tether were cutting through Earth's magnetic field lines.

    The board found sufficient evidence to identify two possible causes of the breach in the insulation -- foreign object damage, or a defect in the tether itself.  Debris and contamination found in the deployer mechanisms and in the tether itself could have been pushed into the insulation layer while the tether was still wound on its reel.  The investigation found evidence of damage to copper wire in the tether, and also established that normal forces on the tether while on the reel could push a single copper strand or foreign debris through the insulation.

    The arcing, which began in an intricate part of the Tethered Satellite System known as the lower tether control mechanism, sputtered intermittently for nine seconds as the moving tether passed through deployer mechanisms and then into the boom area of the tether system.  At the time, tether was continuing to play out at one meter per second, or slightly more than three feet per second.

    "This arcing produced significant burning of most of the tether material in the area of the arc," the board found.  The tether was designed to carry up to 15,000 volts DC and handle tensile forces of up to 400 pounds (1780 newtons). It used super-strong strands of Kevlar as a strength-providing member, wound around the copper and insulation.  However, postflight inspection of the tether end which remained aboard Columbia showed it to be charred.  The board concluded that after arcing had burned through most of the Kevlar, the few remaining strands were not enough to withstand forces being exerted by satellite deployment.

    Extensive, rigorous tests performed in support of the investigation established that undamaged tether would not arc, even when subjected to electrical potentials much higher than the 3500 volts experienced during the mission.

    The board was able to exonerate a number of factors which clearly did not cause the break.  These factors include the satellite, the science equipment hardware and operations, which were being conducted prior to the break, in addition to micrometeoroids or orbital debris impact, and electrical storm activity.

    The investigation panel made several detailed recommendations which it said should be followed for any future space missions involving electrodynamic tether systems such as that flown aboard Columbia.  These include more precautions to ensure any such tether systems in the future do not suffer from possible debris or contamination damage and specific attention during design to minimize the possibility of high-voltage arcing.

    The board offered, in the form of observations, its assessment that the STS-75 tether problem "is not indicative of any fundamental problem in using electrodynamic tethers."  it also noted that in spite of the break, a "significant amount" of scientific data was obtained from the Tethered Satellite operations during STS-75.

    The nine-member independent review panel was formed in consultation with ASI and appointed by NASA's Associate Administrator for the Office of Space Flight, Wilbur Trafton, shortly after the tether break.  The board was chaired by Ken Szalai, director of the Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, and included representation from NASA and the ASI.


                          -end-


This was the first public press release  The later investigation was much more precise :D

 
For Release: May 23, 1996

Douglas Isbell
Headquarters, Washington, DC
(Phone: 202/358-1547)

Jerry Berg
Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala.
(Phone: 205/544-0034)

RELEASE: 96-43

EARLY FINDINGS FROM TETHERED SATELLITE MISSION
POINT TO REVAMPING OF SPACE PHYSICS THEORIES

Numerous space physics and plasma theories are being revised or overturned by data gathered during the Tethered Satellite System Reflight (TSS-1R) experiments on Space Shuttle Columbia's STS-75 mission last March.

Models, accepted by scientists for more than 30 years, are incorrect and must be rewritten. This assessment follows analysis by a joint U.S.-Italian Tethered Satellite investigating team of the information gathered during the mission.

During STS-75, a tether system was being unreeled to nearly 13 miles above Columbia's payload bay. Just short of the full distance, its tether broke. Nevertheless, the science instruments on the satellite and Shuttle, which had been operating during the five hours of deployment

operations, sent a flood of readings that were received and recorded by scientists on the ground. "Even the quick-look made to date reveals that this data harvest is rich in content," said Dr. Nobie Stone, NASA TSS-1R mission scientist at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala.

"Perhaps the most significant finding," Stone said, "is that tether currents proved to be up to three times greater than existing theoretical models predicted prior to the mission. With the amount of power generated being directly proportional to the current, this bodes well for technological applications.

"Reversing the direction of current flow puts the system into an electric-motor mode," Stone explained. This harnessed energy could furnish thrust for reboosting a space station, satellite or Shuttle in a decaying orbit.

"Traditionally, the primary source of power for long-term space platforms has been solar arrays," Stone said. "Those cells can only produce power when exposed to sunlight during the two-thirds of each 90-minute orbit when a space station, for instance, is not on Earth's dark side. However, a tether system might provide a constant source of energy," he noted. "It is very efficient and might serve as an effective backup power system."

Other important revelations from the STS-75 mission include observations of the satellite's thrusters interacting with the ionosphere while moving rapidly in Earth orbit. Stone said that, when the thrusters were fired to adjust the satellite's spin rate, the neutral gas emitted became ionized.

The tethered satellite researchers noted that, at that point, "a sudden jump" took place in the level of current flow, while the satellite's potential (voltage) dropped several hundred volts. They traced this effect to the small amount of gas, released from the thrusters, becoming ionized in the vicinity of the satellite. A greater, more efficient current flow was observed. "The effect of neutral-gas ionization is not taken into consideration by existing theoretical models of current collection in the ionosphere," Stone said.

Also, for the first time ever, the high-voltage plasma sheath and wake of a high-voltage satellite moving rapidly in the ionosphere was measured. "This is virtually impossible to study in a laboratory and is difficult to model mathematically," Stone said.

Tethered Satellite System investigators have just begun to scrutinize the data from STS-75. They expect that it will reveal more answers to questions about the workings of the Earth's upper atmosphere, its physics and the electrodynamic applications of tethered systems in space.

QuoteThe system was generating 3,500 volts DC and up to 0.5 amps of current during satellite deployment.  That high level of electrical energy resulted from the length of conducting tether extending from the Shuttle, coupled with the 17,500-mile-per-hour speed at which the Shuttle and tether were cutting through Earth's magnetic field lines.

That is quite an accumulation of force and energy for sure. I knew it was due to arcing scenario, but never knew the magnitude with terminal velocity and arcing  information.

Puts a whole new perspective of 'Alternative Energy' for sure.. Ha ha ha

Too bad this research got botched by this incident, would have been fascinating to see these results and readings of such a DC device.

1WW

US NAVY tether satellite...


This image is taken from Kirtland AFB Starfire optical range as the tether was glowing merrily away  :D

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether2/deploy9.gif)

Deployed  20 June 1996 by the US Naval Research Laboratory.

Tether with shielding...

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether2/cord.gif)
Credit: US Navy

The tether feed spool...

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether2/TIPSTether_lg.jpg)
Credit: US Navy


For the inventors I have all the data that the NAVY allowed me to copy to our website :D Write me for the link

Ok Gang,
I see many people are really in to this.
But I have not seen even one person answer my request on the second page.
It's quite possible I am not needed here.
We'll see  ;)

Quote from: American-Roadwarrior on May 23, 2013, 10:59:11 PM
Okay! Thank you for all the great replies so far!  8)

Many of the questions asked about the footage which are all very valid, each and every one deserving a specific answer.

However, I am going to ask each and every person asking questions and requesting answers to first please view and watch very closely the video below. It's important to watch the whole video all the way through without bailing out. The video is only 5:45 minutes long and once you have completed watching it I need you to explain to me how and why this video "does not" debunk and put to rest this Tether "UFO", "saucer" and/or "plasma entity" video.

The video will instruct you mid way through to open it up to full screen in order for you to look at "all" the objects within the field-of-view closely.

Once you have answered this video to my satisfaction I will begin to directly answer your individual questions and/or refer you to specific videos or information.

Thank you in advance for completing this request of mine!  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX0nbnUlKfM

You going to bail out because we don't fit your hope ?

...Or fill your expectations regarding expertise regarding this topic regarding your knowledge ?

It's all as you make it really.  ;D

Quote from: American-Roadwarrior on May 24, 2013, 10:03:14 PM
Ok Gang,
I see many people are really in to this.
But I have not seen even one person answer my request on the second page.
It's quite possible I am not needed here.
We'll see  ;)

I want a ride on a UFO without memory wipe too, DO I get it ? Nope :P

It does not mean I want to become a NASA Hugger though due to the fact i don't have my request filled out

:P :o

Quote from: Somamech on May 24, 2013, 07:14:11 PM
It reminds me of my now 93 yo grandma's experience whilst in bed with grandpa when he was still kicking about. 

They both saw a ball of white light zoom through their bedroom only later to to ask the neighbour's who lived next door what was going on in their next meeting (who wouldn't ask?) and the neighbor's said they saw the ball's of white light in their paddock. 

Ball Lighting doe's not explain that true story :D

I know of a case, some years ago now, at a now decommissioned RF Surveillance Station
I used to spend a lot of time at, where a large diam. (possibly 5 or so feet in diam.) "Plasma"
of some sort, passed right through the Transmission Room, without damaging any of the transmitters
or Building.

There were both "Receivers" and "Transmitters" at this Station.

The Station Staff, just watch in amazement, as it drifted just above the floor across the floor area,
and disappeared though an external wall without leaving any marks or damage.

Quote from: deuem on May 24, 2013, 05:18:05 PM
It sure looks like that black and my red line are in front of that rather large Ice Critter.

Why? Because they look like they are partially covering it?

Quote from: deuem on May 24, 2013, 06:17:20 PM
When your video first starts up they are at some 80 nautical miles apart, even further than I wrote before. So what we are seeing is the lens set at infinity which is focused past the tether.

The lens set at infinity doesn't mean that it's focused past the tether, it only means that everything that appears in front of the lens, closer than infinity and farther away than some distance specific for each lens, will be on focus.

Quote from: ArMaP on May 25, 2013, 01:50:05 AM
The lens set at infinity doesn't mean that it's focused past the tether, it only means that everything that appears in front of the lens, closer than infinity and farther away than some distance specific for each lens, will be on focus.

When he focused the lens, the tetherr got larger? That would put the original focus past the teather. The focus cropped the shot hence making the tether larger.

All lenses have their own infinity focus range and come in from there. If it was focused on the inside and then moved out to focus the tether it would have gotten smaller.

All lenes have a focus range. Infinity is just a buzz word, not reality.

@ Road Warrior.

Quote
Once you have answered this video to my satisfaction

What do you think we have been doing. Yes, we all watched your video 100%. Members even went through hoops to get it to me. And yes I watched it 3 times, even stepped framed the entire video.

Answer to your satisfaction?  WoW, who are you? What is this, If we don't bow down to your views we are no good? Look at all of the posts here, Have you answered any, or even one of the members questions? You make us all watch some video you put together and then force us to agree?

The name of your video is

Quote
NASA STS-75 TETHER UFO SWARM DEBUNKED BY QUICK FOCUS ADJUSTMENT ANALYSIS & CALCULATION

Maybe I missed it but where is there any "calculation", math, even 1 sum. I looked high and dry for this section of calculations. Where is it. I thought I would have to stay up all night and run numbers to see if you were right! I am sorry but I can't find even one!

I also posted a very long post on the focus part!. Is that not a responce to your demand for satisfacation? Did you even read it? Other members read it and chimed in on the focus. This is what your video was all about. NO?

What Focus Adjustment Analysis did you do?  All I see is the Astronaut changed the focus and you repeated it several times. Where is the intense Analysis of it. Where is the focal plane before and after. What lens did they use. What is the focal point, What, what, what? If you want to do this work and prove it, you have to step up many steps in your work. Pin point the problem so that even a PHD would agree with you. I see nothing in your video except the repeat of the focus work.

It is becoming clear to me after reading all of your YouTube posts that you are very set in your mind and the rest of humanity is BS if we don't see your view. You have posted the same message on videos many times. The minute the page scrolls and your post goes to the next page, you post the sam message again. This is what I call trolling for attension.

I am stepping way out of Deuem charater even responding to you but maybe you need it.Your approach sucks! This site has many briliant people that you could have learned from and your first move is a demand. Great job son!

Learn to work with people! Even if and I say "IF" you are 100% correct. Your appoach needs a lot of work..

If you want to put your name to something you have to do the work yourself. Not just copy it and add some text. Learn how to dig.

Silly Deuem, I thought I was in for a good debate on this...Back to sleep..

Deuem

AW, as for the "question" posed earlier, within your second page post....does not the plethora of replies here exhibit some sort of "answer" to your question?

If not, perhaps you should rethink your idea of what you, indicated by your harsh youtube comments, seem to consider to be empirical proof. Your differing state of treatment of those who question you on youtube shows you are holding back here, and certainly are showing a defined double personality.

Or, are you just behaving here until you see fit to lash out and deliver your apparent disdain for anyone who challenges your narrow method of thinking?

Maybe you are in the RIGHT place..finally, and now you re finding that the folks here are a lot less likely to be bullied or convinced in a ham fisted way, and as one who appears to have pride in his beliefs, you reject that subsequent effort to debunk you as a debunker.

It will ultimately lead you down one of two paths..either hermit with a computer and a shell of a real researcher....or someone who realizes that they don't really know it all yet, and how others can be a great help to your attempts to find truth and reality in a cloudy world of mystery these fields are exemplified by.

Your obvious self definition as a debunker, whether admitted or not, shows you are at an exciting point in your research career, regardless of it's age, and soon you will become one of two...a professional debunker, who doesn't see the forest through the trees...or an adept, who uses the opinions of qualified others as information to be applied towards making the best out of your hard work and effort.

Hopefully we can see you on the other side, as you progress on the path of understanding the reality we are immersed in as simple human forms, and how our open-mindedness to mystery and wonder can become a tool for our further progression into a type 1 civilization.

All the best to you in your search for the truth, AW, it truly is a long winding road, and Im sure as a thinker who seems passionate about his field and interests, you will complete the cycle of a soul who seeks the real meat of the matter in each subject they study, and doesn't debunk anything which cannot be empirically proven one way or another...seeing it for the deeper meaning and truth it contains.

Please don't consider this an attack or tongue lashing, as I have no right to deliver such, sometimes these things just must air out to move ahead in our seeming progress through life's conundrums.

Cheers
Le

Quote from: 08rubicon on May 24, 2013, 08:02:29 PM
Don't know just what 'trick' is used in the video..My personal camera is
attached to an astronomical telescope with focal length of 1900 mm. The
camera ccd size is 7 mm,that gives me 271 x magnification. Many times
the moon will pass behind my unit and a power line. When this
happens, the wire is not visable, though it is 60 feet distance.When the
moon crosses behind a light pole, the pole is not visable, but will
dim or interupt the light from the moon.If I focus on the pole, the moon
is not visable, focus on the moon, pole is not visable.. The video seems
very strange. All my images are taken as video, run through registax.
   Would like to post attachment, but that option is not available
       rubicon

This thread is great , love this kind of disscusion. Rubcon, what you are describing with the focus sounds like what we in the civil engineering  field called  " parallax" or " focusing around an object "  which is a big no no by the instrument man as it gives a false impression that  the line of sight is clear when it really isn't. 

I have observed this effect many times in the field as I was the " instrument man" and it was possible to have an object close to the  transit  go out of view by changing the focus from near to farther away .

Quote from: 08rubicon on May 24, 2013, 08:02:29 PM
Many times the moon will pass behind my unit and a power line. When this happens, the wire is not visable, though it is 60 feet distance.When the moon crosses behind a light pole, the pole is not visable, but will dim or interupt the light from the moon.If I focus on the pole, the moon is not visable, focus on the moon, pole is not visable.

What happens if the far away object is not as bright as the closer one?

Quote from: ArMaP on May 25, 2013, 01:46:37 PM
What happens if the far away object is not as bright as the closer one?

Armap, I can't say what happens with focusing a camera, but my experience with a transit is that a bright object closer to the transit than the object of focus tends to make a bright blurry "cloud" that does tend to make taking the shot difficult; you can't see the near object, just the reflected light off it...


seeker

Quote from: the seeker on May 25, 2013, 02:24:23 PM
Armap, I can't say what happens with focusing a camera, but my experience with a transit is that a bright object closer to the transit than the object of focus tends to make a bright blurry "cloud" that does tend to make taking the shot difficult; you can't see the near object, just the reflected light off it...


seeker

I have had  the edge of a tree online (roughly halfway between the transit and the far sight ) go almost all the way gone , just a slight  blur on the edge of the field of view . If the object online is thin enough and the site is far enough away it will go away totally .

 hoss and armap;
   What I am trying to say is, that any object close to the lens of a long
telephoto camera, or surveyors scope, will not be visable at the same time
as the distant object. In survey work, the close object must be seen for
safety., in astrophotography, the close object is hopefully not seen. As I
photograph at night, there will not be any bright objects closer than my
target..which will be many miles distant. My camera (scope) does not
focus to infinity.In focus at a star, may not be good focus at the moon.I
can focus past a star or before the star.I hopt I am not confusing you
as much as I do myself..wil not spellcheck this..

Quote from: deuem on May 24, 2013, 06:17:20 PM
Deuem is having an ODD moment.

If a camera is set on infinity, then the focus is at the extreme. When one changes the focus you actually are doing a short zoom, a crop of the original photo, It moves the lenses or electronics inside the camera and you get a crop of the original but in focus.

Thank you for pointing out the focus part.

Now my part! When your video first starts up they are at some 80 nautical miles apart, even further than I wrote before. So what we are seeing is the lens set at infinity which is focused past the tether. Nice camera set up. I want one...

All lenses in the camera are at the extreme mode. They can only be moved in to focus.

So IMHO, it looks like most of the Ice Critters are even further away than I thought they were. They are in focus at the infinity level of that camera. Every lens setup has its own max. Infinity is just a word used in the camera game meaning what ever it can see. Each lens made has a different infinity level. 

When they did a focus, the tether gets larger as it should ( it cropped the picture ) and all the ice critters got smaller as they should. Meaning the lens pulled in to focus on the tether and that pushed the critters farther away in focus making them smaller. If the critters were on this side of the focus they too would have gotten a lot larger. The focus had to be set past the tether to start with because it got larger in the cropped focus. If the focus was on this side to start with the tether would have gotten smaller in the crop but in focus. If you pulled the focus into 30 feet, you would never see the tether at all. Maybe some lights in the back ground.

Using your logic that any simpleton who understands focus can work this out, I think I just did.

I think you should read the camera thread and do some more research on focus and let me know what you find.

The focal plane is the focal plane no matter how it is diced.

And that is what I think happens..... Deuem

I see that you are one of the only people here who actually follows directions, Thank you Deuem, I greatly appreciate that.

Focus on your average camera has several digit settings from zero to 30 feet and then anything beyound 30 feet it at it's full extreme on the infinity setting. Now if I'm reading you right, you are making the claim that the focus adjustment is discerning the difference between 8o miles away and further (behind the tether). I'm sorry but I cannot follow your logic.
The only focus difference on the camera would be between anything far away at infinity and anything within 30 feet.
There is no way on the focus dial to focus on objects 80 miles away and further, they all focus on infinity.

Thank you again for following my instructions, I have yet to read more posts to see if anyone else can follow instructions,
Eric, The American Roadwarrior

  Hi A-R;
      You stated that the average camera has several digital settings from 30 ft.
to infinity, and in your origional post you stated that the lens used was
catadioptic..This a mirror lens similar to my schmidt-cassegrain telescope.
The catadioptic is not your average digital camera lens. Please explain to
me the digital focus arangement on a cat lens.
    rubicon

So... which camera exactly was used for this tether video?

Do we have the details and specs from NASA?

Now lets put this CARP to rest...

At 1:16 in the tether video when they are focusing on the tether shortly after it broke we see bokeh artifacts as they focus... they are CLEARLY HEXAGONAL... and more important they are all aligned in the same axis no matter where they are on the frame

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/Vault/Bokeh_001.jpg)

So how does the same camera change the shape of it's lens artifacts later in the video? 

Here is one big Critter. If you watch this one in the video it moves in an ARC curved trajectory across the end of the tether and then changes directions and moves DOWN the screen. The cameraman zooms out at that point to follow it.

When we fisrt see this Critter enter it has ONE NOTCH on top, then develops a second one on the bottom and then the top one goes away. At the same time others in the images have notches in different positions

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/Vault/Critter_001.jpg)

Considering the FACT that the bokehs created by this camera are HEXAGONAL and ALL THE SAME ANGLE (looking at the capture at 1:16) is is obvious to any rational being that they are not the same thing

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/Vault/Critter_002.jpg)

Case closed :P They are NOT camera artifacts...   8)

Your right on the nail there Z, as you put it "Critters" are NOT "Bokeh".

It appears a little more research is required, IMHO.

As I said previously there is more interest within the NASA, than the general public give credit for,
as Z has Correctly pointed out, "Critters" are NOT "Bokeh".

Z has presented some excellent posts in the past regarding "Critters", well worth reading IMO....

Bokeh;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh

QuoteI see that you are one of the only people here who actually follows directions

i don't see the point in answering your questions about the camera since z just showed what the bokeh look like and they don't look like the plasma "critters"

I got it,

They are "Bokeh ice critters",  sounds like "Broken Ice Critters".

Nice job Z, love the split planes on one photo...I will have to try this some time.

Quote from: The Matrix Traveller on May 26, 2013, 03:08:11 AM
It appears a little more research is required, IMHO.

Always :D

QuoteAs I said previously there is more interest within the NASA, than the general public give credit for,

Yes to be fair... NASA does actually study plasma life forms :D  but I guess its not so much in the public news...

have a look at this... posted on How Stuff Works... a site that tends to reach the average public :D

QuoteWhen plasma comes into contact with a dust cloud, dust particles gather an electric charge by sucking up electrons from the surrounding plasma. This core of electrons in turn pulls in positively charged ions, forming plasma crystals. In the scientists' simulations, which were performed on the International Space Station and in a zero-gravity environment at a German research facility, the plasma crystals sometimes developed into corkscrew shapes or even the double-helix shape of DNA. These helix-shaped crystals retain an electric charge and show what the researchers called a self-organizing ability.

Once in helix form, the crystals can reproduce by diving into two identical helixes, displaying "memory marks" on their structures [source: New Journal of Physics]. The diameter of the helixes varies throughout the structure and the arrangement of these various sections is replicated in other crystals, passing on what could be called a form of genetic code.

They even seem to evolve. The formations become sturdier over time as weaker structures break down and disappear.

Are we looking for aliens in the wrong places? (http://www.howstuffworks.com/weird-life.htm)

So here we have NASA 'creating' plasma life forms on the ISS :P

Slowly main stream science is coming around to consider, study and even create plasma life forms. In fact a google search produces millions of results.

One of the first was Jay Alfred, about a year after I started talking about 'Critters'


Plasma life forms
Posted on Monday, 12 November, 2007

QuoteLife-Like Qualities of Plasma: Bohm, a leading expert in twentieth century plasma physics, observed in amazement that once electrons were in plasma, they stopped behaving like individuals and started behaving as if they were a part of a larger and interconnected whole. Although the individual movements of each electron appeared to be random, vast numbers of electrons were able to produce collective effects that were surprisingly well organized and appeared to behave like a life form. The plasma constantly regenerated itself and enclosed impurities in a wall in the same way that a biological organism, like the unicellular amoeba, might encase a foreign substance in a cyst. So amazed was Bohm by these life-like qualities that he later remarked that he frequently had the impression that the electron sea was "alive" and that plasma possessed some of the traits of living things. The debate on the existence of plasma-based life forms has been going on for more than 20 years ever since some models showed that plasma can mimic the functions of a primitive cell.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/column.php?id=111062

The Russians have also studied this in space and you can see the double Helix forming at about 4:00

Plasma in space experiment (English subtitles)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kanYuBptuZ0

And don't forget that Gene Roddenberry first showed us a plasma space amoeba in the sixties :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1yNrWd5klA

So no worries... the CRITTER theory is gaining ground, no matter how many psuedoskeptics try to derail us :D

But most important, it is coming to main stream science now....

New Scientist
Plasma blobs hint at new form of life

Published September 2003   I never saw THIS one  wow....  :o

QuotePhysicists have created blobs of gaseous plasma that can grow, replicate and communicate - fulfilling most of the traditional requirements for biological cells. Without inherited material they cannot be described as alive, but the researchers believe these curious spheres may offer a radical new explanation for how life began.

Imagine that  plasma orbs... explaining how life began :D

QuoteMost biologists think living cells arose out of a complex and lengthy evolution of chemicals that took millions of years, beginning with simple molecules through amino acids, primitive proteins and finally forming an organised structure. But if Mircea Sanduloviciu and his colleagues at Cuza University in Romania are right, the theory may have to be completely revised. They say cell-like self-organisation can occur in a few microseconds.

"a few microseconds"?? uh oh... that will stir up the religious crowd...

::)

QuoteA distinct boundary layer that confines and separates an object from its environment is one of the four main criteria generally used to define living cells. Sanduloviciu decided to find out if his cells met the other criteria: the ability to replicate, to communicate information, and to metabolise and grow.

He found that the spheres could replicate by splitting into two. Under the right conditions they also got bigger, taking up neutral argon atoms and splitting them into ions and electrons to replenish their boundary layers.

Finally, they could communicate information by emitting electromagnetic energy, making the atoms within other spheres vibrate at a particular frequency. The spheres are not the only self-organising systems to meet all of these requirements. But they are the first gaseous "cells".

Sanduloviciu even thinks they could have been the first cells on Earth, arising within electric storms. "The emergence of such spheres seems likely to be a prerequisite for biochemical evolution," he says.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4174-plasma-blobs-hint-at-new-form-of-life.html

So the plasma orbs can replicate by splitting like a cell, they can grow and they can communicate. And since our system is also electric in nature, seems to me we may be related :D

QuoteFocus on your average camera has several digit settings from zero to 30 feet and then anything beyound 30 feet it at it's full extreme on the infinity setting. Now if I'm reading you right, you are making the claim that the focus adjustment is discerning the difference between 8o miles away and further (behind the tether). I'm sorry but I cannot follow your logic.
The only focus difference on the camera would be between anything far away at infinity and anything within 30 feet.
There is no way on the focus dial to focus on objects 80 miles away and further, they all focus on infinity.

I need all the camera specs to go into exact details. But let me try it again without the details.

All cameras have what we call a focus range. A, "from here to there" range where everything in that range should be in crystal clear focus. This also has a lot to do with aperature time. But since this is a video I will pass on that. Meaning that only a certain amount of light can get in before the next frame. Not like a 5 minute timed shot.

When ever I used to buy a new lens, I would first go out side with targets and find the focus areas. Camera on a tripod and 2 targets. Keept moving one out as far as you can and still see it clearly. Move the 2nd target out on the inside and move it till it is in focus. If in too close it will be blurred.

Say you do this test and the max clear is 100 feet and the max min clear is 85 feet, Then you know for that lens the focus range when it is on infinity is 15 feet. Everything on either side of those numbers would be slightly blurred. I would mark my gear on the lens cap. If you wanted to shoot something 125 feet away this would not be the lens to use. Yes you would get a picture but not crystal clear. At home, not here I have a bag full of lenes and most of the time the camera is stored just as the body waiting for the focus choice. Flashes have this same problem.

Now, this camera is a very sofisticated machine. I need to learn more about it. So a lot of the work now is guess work. If you want to post you have calculations, I think you should find this stuff out. First of all is it possible? A standard 35mm camera can not take a photo 80+natuical miles away, even in space. Yes you will get a picture, maybe even a great one but after a few hundred feet or lees, every thing turns to a blur and the pixels are not crystal clear. Blurs are nice, Even our eyes do the same thing.

We need details if you want to continue your idea. What can that camera really do. Maybe it is limmited to 20 natuical miles for any clear shot and the entire video is out of its range. I don't know yet.

Quote
Focus on your average camera has several digit settings from zero to 30 feet and then anything beyound 30 feet it at it's full extreme on the infinity setting.

First of all there is no zero, that is a buzz word. All cameras, even the really cheap one have a minimum focus length. Max is never printed, they all use the buzz word infinity but it is not exactly true. As far as the 30 feet. I guess if it is a cheap camera, 30 feet might be good. I take it your talking about a PHD camera. Push Here Dummy. If so OK. If I wanted to go less than 30 feet or even an inch I would have to change lenses. But in your case we are at the opposite end of this talk. We are talking many miles. Around 80 or so. So the lens needed to be very special to do this. The idea of a lens being able to focus on an object 80 miles away and also on one 30 feet away with out a 2 or 3 day exposure is beyond me. I have never heard of anything like this. An 80 mile focus range?

Step 2, you need to run the math on what the angle of the photo is. See that photo. How far is it from one side of the phot to the other side at 80 miles. Now work that triangle back to the shuttle and see where 30 feet is and what the photo plane is at that point. Probable ssmaller than a penny..
If I have time later I will look at it also. THIS IS MATH! THESE ARE CALCULATIONS!  If you want anyone to listen to what you say, you need to step up over the silly UT comments and dig in with real math. No one can fight math, either they can prove you wrong or agree. That is its reason.

Quote
Now if I'm reading you right, you are making the claim that the focus adjustment is discerning the difference between 8o miles away and further (behind the tether).

Yes, you are reading me right. It looks to me in the video that by focusing the camera, he brought the lens in which pushed objects behind it out. So the camera might have a 100 mile limit on the focus and he cropped the focus into 80 miles. Without camera detail it is hard to be accurate in miles.

Quote
The only focus difference on the camera would be between anything far away at infinity and anything within 30 feet.

I have never seen any camera that can be in focus from 30 feet to 80 miles.  As listed above, find out the actual focus distance of that camera. The Range.

Quote
There is no way on the focus dial to focus on objects 80 miles away and further, they all focus on infinity.

Again the word infinity is just a buzz word. Even the hubble has its focus limits. For long shots the Hubble needs day of the same shot to make a photo. This video camera only had at most what ever the film rate is. The FPS.

Deuem

Good thread here on ATS started by Poet1b (wish he would stop by here) Seems I inspired him a little :D I guess I will have to dig through that mega STS75 thread there and pull out all the good stuff

Are Most UFO Sightings Plasma Life Forms? (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread505424/pg1)

Re. your Comments and "Links", earlier in this Thread Z.

Yes you are 100% Correct.

It is beyond most peoples Imagination at this stage, to fully realise the Extent and just how many
different forms of Pseudo "Processing Systems" may exist in this Universe.

LIFE "interfaces" through so many of these different forms.

Future discoveries will change our understanding of "Intelligence" and ultimately reveal WHAT LIFE actually is.

So often people confuse "Intelligence" as being LIFE, when in fact these 2 are completely different "Components".

"Intelligence" is found in the form of an organised structure involving "Processing", and comes in many, many,
different forms.   :)


Some forms, Life plays with, but don't act as "Interfaces" between LIFE and this Program. (Little Universe)

While others are used as "Interfaces".

Quote from: zorgon on May 26, 2013, 01:24:11 AM
At 1:16 in the tether video when they are focusing on the tether shortly after it broke we see bokeh artifacts as they focus... they are CLEARLY HEXAGONAL... and more important they are all aligned in the same axis no matter where they are on the frame

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/Vault/Bokeh_001.jpg)

I think those are lens flares, not bokeh. We can also see faint circles everywhere on the image, I think those are out of focus objects.

Quote from: deuem on May 26, 2013, 12:27:30 PMt
All cameras have what we call a focus range. A, "from here to there" range where everything in that range should be in crystal clear focus. This also has a lot to do with aperature time.

The focus is influenced by the aperture size, not the time.

QuoteFirst of all there is no zero, that is a buzz word.

My camera can focus on the dust on the lens surface. I suppose that can be considered zero distance from the lens.

This is a piece of paper with a "1" printed by a laser printer, probably size 8. The piece of paper was placed on directly on the lens (with the camera pointing up, obviously).

(http://imageshack.us/a/img827/928/sam11471.jpg)

QuoteMax is never printed, they all use the buzz word infinity but it is not exactly true.

Do you think this image is focused?

(http://imageshack.us/a/img9/5703/sam16501.jpg)

It was taken with the same camera as the previous image (a Samsumg WB5000), that's Jupiter and three of it's satellites.

QuoteI have never heard of anything like this. An 80 mile focus range?

Isn't it possible to take focused photos of the Moon?

QuoteSo the camera might have a 100 mile limit on the focus and he cropped the focus into 80 miles.

"cropped the focus"? What do you mean by that? ???
 

QuoteFor long shots the Hubble needs day of the same shot to make a photo.

That's because of the amount of light that enters the camera, it's not related to the focus.

Quote from: The Matrix Traveller on May 25, 2013, 12:42:29 AM
I know of a case, some years ago now, at a now decommissioned RF Surveillance Station
I used to spend a lot of time at, where a large diam. (possibly 5 or so feet in diam.) "Plasma"
of some sort, passed right through the Transmission Room, without damaging any of the transmitters
or Building.

There were both "Receivers" and "Transmitters" at this Station.

The Station Staff, just watch in amazement, as it drifted just above the floor across the floor area,
and disappeared though an external wall without leaving any marks or damage.

Thanks Matrix :)

That's pretty much what happened to my Grandma/Grandpa on more than one occasion, and I must say it was not a daily occurrence to my grandma/grandpa, just a few in their whole life of living on this property minus the RF Transmitter... Possibly though it may make sense that the farm and other strange event's occurred because of a massive power line supply running through property though  :D  ;)

No I do not think it is focused, all I see is 4 white dots. Show me a photo of the planet like Earth in Goggle earth and it is in focus. How much did you zoom or crop to get that. And you say you can focus on the dust on your lens and really see it? Show a photo of clear dust. There is no way your camera can take a focused shot that far. Lucky if you can get 100 meters. Focus to me means crystal clear, not just light.

Quote from: The Matrix Traveller on May 25, 2013, 12:42:29 AM
I know of a case, some years ago now, at a now decommissioned RF Surveillance Station
I used to spend a lot of time at, where a large diam. (possibly 5 or so feet in diam.) "Plasma"
of some sort, passed right through the Transmission Room, without damaging any of the transmitters or Building.

Can you elaborate on this so I can add it to the reports?

Do you recall those military guys that used to be attached to the Disclosure project who are still claiming 'UFO's' shut down that Nuclear missile site in the 60's?  Their description of what they saw fits the PLASMAs..

Now in the 60's our tech was still sloppy... I find it likely that the PLASMA's energy tripped some sensors that in turn triggered an automatic shutdown... not that the CRITTERS actually intentionally did it. They were just sniffing out the energy source (Like power lines, thunderstorms and the tether :P) and their mere PRESENCE triggered the shutdowns

The thing is if you look at case like these it is far easier to explain with Plasma Critters than Alien spacecraft

 armap;
   That shot of jupiter with the wb5000 is pretty good. I hope you are not
going to tell us you did not refocus from the paper on the lens. The minimum
focus as per the spects on the wb5000 at super macro is 1 cm. This is one
great camera.Hope you show some more images with that unit..
   rubicon

Quote from: deuem on May 26, 2013, 07:33:08 PM
No I do not think it is focused, all I see is 4 white dots.

If they were not on focus you would see four blurred dots, the edges wouldn't be as sharp as they appear.

QuoteShow me a photo of the planet like Earth in Goggle earth and it is in focus.

Wouldn't I need to be in space to do that? :)

QuoteHow much did you zoom or crop to get that.

The image was not resized, only cropped from the original 4000x3000 photo.

This is the relevant EXIF data.

Exposure Time                   : 1/4
F Number                        : 5.0
Exposure Program                : Manual
ISO                             : 800
Max Aperture Value              : 4.9
Focal Length                    : 110.4 mm
Exif Image Width                : 4000
Exif Image Height               : 3000
Digital Zoom Ratio              : 0
Focal Length In 35mm Format     : 624 mm
Gain Control                    : High gain up
Contrast                        : Normal
Saturation                      : Normal
Sharpness                       : Normal
Subject Distance Range          : Unknown
---- Composite ----
Aperture                        : 5.0
Image Size                      : 4000x3000
Scale Factor To 35 mm Equivalent: 5.7
Shutter Speed                   : 1/4
Create Date                     : 2011:10:14 23:32:57.000
Date/Time Original              : 2011:10:14 23:32:57.000
Circle Of Confusion             : 0.005 mm
Field Of View                   : 3.3 deg
Focal Length                    : 110.4 mm (35 mm equivalent: 624.0 mm)
Hyperfocal Distance             : 458.56 m
Light Value                     : 3.6


QuoteAnd you say you can focus on the dust on your lens and really see it?

Yes, sometimes I have problems trying to focus on very close objects because of that.

Show a photo of clear dust.
Didn't you see the photo of the "1"? The piece of paper was put on the lens.
As that camera also makes videos, here's a video of me putting the paper on the lens, with the camera pointing at the ceiling. You can see some dust on the lens when my hand is over the camera, as the darker (when compared to the white ceiling) skin makes the dust noticeable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBHCvg9lHVE
I sent it to your email, I hope you don't mind. :)

QuoteThere is no way your camera can take a focused shot that far. Lucky if you can get 100 meters.

There's a difference between focus, noise and chromatic aberration. While my camera can focus on things very far away (like all cameras), it has a little too much noise and chromatic aberration to make really good photos, but for the price (I didn't pay a thing, thanks to my boss ;D ) it's very good.

QuoteFocus to me means crystal clear, not just light.

Can't you tell the difference between a focused and an unfocused light? ???

Quote from: 08rubicon on May 26, 2013, 09:48:05 PM
I hope you are not going to tell us you did not refocus from the paper on the lens.

No, I am not going to tell that, as I obviously made some changes, from auto-focus to super macro and, accordingly, the focus.

It's not a pinhole camera, after all. :)

QuoteThe minimum focus as per the spects on the wb5000 at super macro is 1 cm. This is one great camera.Hope you show some more images with that unit.

The only thing I don't like in that camera is that, when in video mode, only has autofocus. On of the things I like the most is the possibility of defining the white point just by pointing to something white and pressing the shutter button. :)

Quote from: zorgon on May 26, 2013, 09:18:01 PM

Can you elaborate on this so I can add it to the reports?

Do you recall those military guys that used to be attached to the Disclosure project who are still claiming 'UFO's' shut down that Nuclear missile site in the 60's?  Their description of what they saw fits the PLASMAs..

Now in the 60's our tech was still sloppy... I find it likely that the PLASMA's energy tripped some sensors that in turn triggered an automatic shutdown... not that the CRITTERS actually intentionally did it. They were just sniffing out the energy source (Like power lines, thunderstorms and the tether :P) and their mere PRESENCE triggered the shutdowns

The thing is if you look at case like these it is far easier to explain with Plasma Critters than Alien spacecraft

Hi Z,  what you are thinking may have been the case.
But the case in interest re.
Quote;

QuoteDo you recall those military guys that used to be attached to the Disclosure project who are still claiming 'UFO's' shut down that Nuclear missile site in the 60's?  Their description of what they saw fits the PLASMAs..

The main concern... was it intentional or not ?

This is what placed some, ("Investigators") at that time and still today, into a huge dilemma.    :o

This "Pseudo Intelligent State" just as the human Brain is a "Pseudo Intelligent" Processor,
it is NOT an easy task, to detect whether or not such "Processing" (Critters) involves deliberate
"Interfacing" from an External source.

If it was/is Intentional, then this opens a huge "Can of Worms", around our present understanding
of WHAT LIFE actually is, and HOW our "Environmental experience" is produced
or Presented to us individually.

It is in this area of questioning, which has been, and is of Interest to both National security, as well as Science.


Maybe this is where the Ancient Term, "The Watchers" came from ?    :)

"The Watchers" were/are perhaps, Partitions of "Awareness" i.e. LIFE itself ?

These 3 from "Ancient Texts" are NOT the Same.
(NOT to be taken/interpreted as religious material)

1.      "The Watchers".
2.      "Angels".
3.      "Aliens", described as Bastards and Reprobates. (Cross breads or Hybrids) Human/Alien cross.
          As found in such writings/records as "The Book(s) of E'NOCH".

(( "To bear one's cross", in ancient writings (today made into religious superstition) could be referring to,
the "human Genome". (Cross Bread) ))

Conclusion:
"Critters" may come in various types.

Some are/can be used as "Interfaces" for a large range of different purposes.
While others are purely automatic Pseudo "Processing Systems".

A bit like our various Organic Species on Earth.

Some are "Interfaces" used by an external source (LIFE) some are Not.    :)

i.e. some involve Automatic responses, while others involves The Interfacing of "Awareness" or LIFE...

The "External Source" is often LIFE itself, or a "Partition" of LIFE (NOT of any Universe,
or other "Pseudo world", but instead a Non-Dimensional source.)

 O.K. guys;
   I have a question. First, I know nothing, and I am sure many on this forum
has the answer.. So, we have a wire, 1 in. dia, several miles long, floating
in space. It is not connected to anything on either end. no + no -, no ground,
so no curent flow. It is in the vacume of space, with no water vapor, no air,
no dust.Why does this wire glow to a large diameter that can be imaged
from 80 miles distance.?While the 'dust' 30 ft. away is in the same image ?
   My thoughts. This wire is several feet in length, floating in a generated
magnetic field. The glow is from the interior lighting of the lab where this
experiment was conducted. This would explain how the 'dust' would be in
same image as the wire..Both within the infocus range of most videocams.
   This experiment was conducted in a lab here on earth, not out in space.
  I think this is just another nasa joke on us. The unit this wire was connected
to in the experiment would have been the grounded end of the wire, and
the curent produced by the magnetic field, flowed to the grounded unit.
    rubicon

Late 90s I saw this light orb fly over my head in the night sky. It was silent, moving at a moderate speed straight east and just under the broken clouds above. The light orb was pea size and glowed very bright and made the clouds shimmer along from its light.

I felt that emotion I got when in 88 they took me up in a circular room. I became afraid as I looked up at it and ran into my house slamming the front door shut.


(http://s11.postimg.org/mf5haowgj/ufoclouds.jpg)


I have small green orbs that attach to my bedroom wall and simply sit there and watch me. 1 orb remained there for two hours as the others faded out.

My masterpiece and favorite self produced video among the Tether debunk series:

THE TETHER SATELLITE EXPERIMENT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKk-0wNMJi0

And then just to be fair, one for the other side:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hjcPFeWS_A

And should any of you ever have a moment of clarity, flag me down and say hi!  Tell me about it! ;D

My video series stand on their own. I put enough work into them that I can stand back and watch them either be absorbed or rejected depending on the reason-ability and comprehension of their viewers. I admit they may not be perfect but their certainly a good start.
I always challenge people to find even one error in any video, any description or even any comment I make. I always welcome constructive criticism.

Quote from: American-Roadwarrior on May 23, 2013, 10:59:11 PM
Thank you in advance for completing this request of mine!  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX0nbnUlKfM

I am still waiting to see your calculations on this video

Quote
And should any of you ever have a moment of clarity, flag me down and say hi!  Tell me about it!

Hi flag waving, I am clear. Where are the calculations?????

We like to see some Math if you can fit it in your schedule.

deuem. In the clear.........

Quote from: 08rubicon on May 27, 2013, 02:35:31 AM
This experiment was conducted in a lab here on earth, not out in space.

The tether was in Earth orbit, it was even visible from the ground.
I think I have see one photo and one video (or animation) taken from the Earth's surface.

Quote from: ArMaP on May 27, 2013, 09:21:14 AM
I think I have see one photo and one video (or animation) taken from the Earth's surface.

The photos and video of the tether from the ground were the NAVY tether that was up there for several years and thus people were able to track it

here is one photo taken from Kirtland AFB

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether2/deploy13.gif)

There is also a video showing them firing a laser at it :D

Quote from: 08rubicon on May 27, 2013, 02:35:31 AM
O.K. guys; I have a question. First, I know nothing, and I am sure many on this forum has the answer.. So, we have a wire, 1 in. dia, several miles long, floating  in space. It is not connected to anything on either end. no + no -, no ground, so no current flow. It is in the vacuum of space, with no water vapor, no air, no dust.Why does this wire glow to a large diameter that can be imaged
from 80 miles distance.?

Imagine a fluorescent tube... vacuum inside with gas and particles.  That is why it glows enough to be seen from earth

How? When there was no complete circuit?  Well actually there WAS a circuit. The electrons collected by the copper wire was so much that it created a continuous arc ( which is what caused it to fry and break)  This potential was so strong that the generated plasma burned the insulation, literally vaporized it, thus providing the gas/particles needed to complete the circuit and it then glowed like a fluorescent tube fr the same reason

That is the 25 cent explanation... if you need more I will send you the 480 page report that covers a lot of plasma situations around spacecraft :D 

Like when the Shuttle docks with the ISS... they had to loose that collected potential or their would be a HUGE lightning bolt as the two craft got close to each other. Even an astronaut floating around out there can collect enough that if not grounded by his tether the 'zap' could kill him

There is your free energy  just floating around out there in space :D

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/Text_007.png)

So the ISS produces invisible 8 meter diameter plasma balls :D

Here is a plasma burning out a solar array

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/Arc_002.png)

After...

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/04images/Tether/Arc_003.png)

Oh and BTW if we had the actual NASA version of that STS75 tether video it would have those letters  :D

WHY will NASA NOT RELEASE their copy?

Quote from: American-Roadwarrior on May 27, 2013, 05:46:29 AM
My masterpiece and favorite self produced video among the Tether debunk series:
I always welcome constructive criticism.

Okay #1 at :56 you say"This is leaked footage by a secret NASA agent whistle blower.

WRONG  The video was captured live streaming via a TV station satellite dish operated by Martyn Stubbs in Canada. He is not a NASA agent... he merely records all live NASA transmissions. Had he NOT done so we would NEVER have seen this sequence, because NASA would never and have never officially released it AND fought it in court to have it squashed. Fortunately the judge ruled that because the signals were broadcast on an open unsecured channel, NASA had no claim to the intercepted shots. But for several years while this was in courts it was not available online.

Martyn does go by SecretNasaMan at youtube... :D that was an inside joke

At 1:03 you say the camera can see into the infrared and ultra violet...  Jim Oberg, NASA expert and infamous debunker will argue that one :D

So where is your debunk evidence? All I see is white text stating your OPINION  no data to back it up, no experiments to prove your case, just white text stating 'it ain't so' with crappy music.

Just because you say so doesn't make it so. You call THAT a masterpiece? OY  ya want constructive criticism? Get out of the movie business :P

So you even stole Lockheed Martins trademarked Skunkworks logo AND worst of all... you cowardly disabled comments

Only one thing to say...

Enjoy your bliss :D

Quote from: zorgon on May 27, 2013, 11:25:35 AM
The photos and video of the tether from the ground were the NAVY tether that was up there for several years and thus people were able to track it

No, my memory is working as it should. :)

Here (http://www.satobs.org/tss.html) is a page with a link to a QuickTime video of the tether, as seen from Australia by Dr. Kym Thalassoudis and a photo from Hawaii.

  Thanks, I like that information. Had not thought about the insulation creating the
necessary 'gas' to cause it to glow.
      rubicon