NASA STS-75 Tether "UFOs"? from the new guy. The American Roadwarrior

[zorgon]

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



Also this thing is huge, not some silly ice particle

[American-Roadwarrior]

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

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! 

[ArMaP]

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

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

[ArMaP]

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

I don't think it can.

[American-Roadwarrior]

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.

[ArMaP]

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.

[thorfourwinds]

I don't think it can.

What you think doesn't count in this case.   

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.

[thorfourwinds]

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?

[American-Roadwarrior]

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.

[The Matrix Traveller]

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.

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

[The Matrix Traveller]

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..   

[deuem]

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.......

[deuem]

I need this video



and



and from Luna

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

and

the best one for last

[ArMaP]

What you think doesn't count in this case.   

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.

Personally, 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.

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

Did we? Really?

Thank you for your time and attention.

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

[ArMaP]

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.

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

Always, just make the questions.

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

They don't go behind the tether.