Jim Oberg's "99 FAQs About Space UFO Videos"

[easynow]

We've now gotten the gigabit video files from NASA covering the six hours or so of the first tether fly-under, and I'm writing a transcript of all crew conversations and observations and we're figuring out which relevant operations -- including ice flake generation activities, of which there are some -- can be extracted for posting. It'll take awhile, any additional questions and suggestions will be appreciated.

This seems to be the right forum to instigate the deepest investigation ever and see what we see. Armap, thanks for the inspiration, perspiration, and pestering.

That's great news indeed and the effort is much appreciated but I have to ask ...

Are You or ArMaP going to post a link to the full-video-file in this thread  ?

Or ...

Is it better to send me the link in a private message ?



You are going to share the full video file with everyone .... right ??

Just wondering 

[JimO]

The three files are up to 1900 mbits, run time several hours each. They can be posted along with supporting documentation:
1. sts75 Flight Plan
2. sts75 flight day 8 'execute package' [plan updates]
3. sts75 video 'Scene List'
4. sts75 post-flight report
other technical data as needed [thruster firings, water dump times]

[easynow]

The three files are up to 1900 mbits, run time several hours each. They can be posted along with supporting documentation:
1. sts75 Flight Plan
2. sts75 flight day 8 'execute package' [plan updates]
3. sts75 video 'Scene List'
4. sts75 post-flight report
other technical data as needed [thruster firings, water dump times]

Ok that would be excellent indeed.

How is the file(s) being hosted ?

A torrent file ? or what ?

And what kind of interface software is needed to unscramble it ?

Thanks 

[1967sander]

Yes I have seen this explanation before and strangely enough not every scientist believes this. I know a few people, among them aerospace dynamics innovation specialists (who do not like to be named) who totally disagree with NASA's explanation. In direct sunlight radiation is tremens, about 3.5 - 5 krad and fluids boil instant. They evaporate at "molecular level". This means that they literally vanish it would be impossible to see them with normal camera's. The video show the sun coming up so temperature in space immediately increases and the fluids / ice evaporates. Can someone explain why we can still see icecrystals although they are lit by the sun?

[JimO]

Yes I have seen this explanation before and strangely enough not every scientist believes this. I know a few people, among them aerospace dynamics innovation specialists (who do not like to be named) who totally disagree with NASA's explanation. In direct sunlight radiation is tremens, about 3.5 - 5 krad and fluids boil instant. They evaporate at "molecular level". This means that they literally vanish it would be impossible to see them with normal camera's. The video show the sun coming up so temperature in space immediately increases and the fluids / ice evaporates. Can someone explain why we can still see icecrystals although they are lit by the sun?

That's easy. your unnamed [perhaps imaginary] "aerospace dynamics innovation" experts [a professional specialization I've never encountered before and 'dynamics' has been MY professional specialization for forty years, hence my grain-of-salt incredulity] are still [like 99.9999% of other humans] mentally stuck on down-to-Earth physical concepts. The few hundred who have BEEN there and the few thousand who helped them operate there have had their minds blown open by unexpected and unearthly things that are NORMAL there but that no earthling had seen or imagined before our generation.

Ice [both water and hydrazine] lingers for appreciable durations, whatever the equations of your friends 'prove'. It congeals from spray into small hunks, crystalline and/or amorphous, or freezes onto nozzle rims and then chips off, which orbit nearby; it accumulates in shadowed portions of the shuttle structure [and there are many], and one famous football-sized hunk that was attached to the outer centerline of a payload bay door actually partially remained through reentry and landing in Florida [where, heated by the tropical air, it quickly melted]. This surprised people who were watching.

The motion of small light ice chips floating near spaceships are also affected by air drag [more intense because they are 'fluffier' and less dense than metal spaceships], and apparently also by propulsive forces of molecules popping off into vacuum -- because that does happen, just not explosively and instantaneously. Nobody expected this in advance -- we were ALL earthbound in our mental models. 

Then they came to know better, they had an advantage, they weren't guessing using obsolete models, they were actually watching. Please, learn from their experience. I tried to share in the 99 FAQs -- how can they be improved? 

[1967sander]

You are fake Mr. O Berg. A typical disinfo agent. Your remark about imaginary friends I consider as a personal attack and so I make you a promise: I will expose you. Trust me I will.

[JimO]

You are fake Mr. O Berg. A typical disinfo agent. Your remark about imaginary friends I consider as a personal attack and so I make you a promise: I will expose you. Trust me I will.

I can take it. Just don't expose YOURSELF here.

Come to think of it, you probably already have.

ADD

Look, you may get away with spreading techo-sounding gibberish as magical incantations in your regular company, but please be more precise here.

I googled "aerospace dynamics innovation specialists", the field of study of your  nameless experts, and here's what I got:

No results found for "aerospace dynamics innovation specialists".

Heck, how much automatic credulity do you demand for your version of what nameless experts in non-existent fields have supposedly told you, when you're nameless and credential-less yourself. You really ought to muster better, checkable factual backing. 

Hold me to those same standards.

[1967sander]

Speaks Russian, dealt with space warfare ... Mr. Oberg? Once an agent, always an agent.

[easynow]

Ok that would be excellent indeed.

How is the file(s) being hosted ?

A torrent file ? or what ?

And what kind of interface software is needed to unscramble it ?

Thanks 

So oooo....

How bout them files ?

Having any luck yet ?

Maybe see them soon ??

Can we get a progress update ?

Something ?

Anything ?

lol

[JimO]

So oooo....

How bout them files ?

Any practical suggestions would be welcome. I had to use a free ftp site that allows five transfers a month before a paid subscription, and I expended three just sharing the originals. I'm also looking them over and correlating with the time tags on the scene lists. We ought to have it out by the 20th anniversary.

We're making progress. Why don't you pester Martyn about HIS copies? Then we can see whose are authentic and whose may have been altered.

[easynow]

Any practical suggestions would be welcome. I had to use a free ftp site that allows five transfers a month before a paid subscription, and I expended three just sharing the originals. I'm also looking them over and correlating with the time tags on the scene lists. We ought to have it out by the 20th anniversary.

So basically your saying ,

Instead of just releasing the raw video to everyone where it can be analized by an objective collective at the same time, your gonna cherry-pick what you want and release the data already pre-debunked.

How nice 

We're making progress. Why don't you pester Martyn about HIS copies? Then we can see whose are authentic and whose may have been altered.

Is this an official accusation ?

or are you just playing games again ? 

[1967sander]

Why does not NASA make these videos available from their website? The videos made by NASA is property of the citizens of the United States so everyone in the US has tthe right to see this footage. Apparantly NASA never was interested in showing it in the first place. It is because of "material uploaded by others" that we know of the existence of this material.

[easynow]

Any practical suggestions would be welcome. I had to use a free ftp site that allows five transfers a month before a paid subscription, and I expended three just sharing the originals.

My suggestion is, share with me the contact info ( exact email address & the person you spoke to) and the exact date/time information you used to get the data file.... so I can contact them and get the same results.

This way I can get my own copy from NASA and that lets you off the hook.

Whatcha think ? 

[JimO]

Why does not NASA make these videos available from their website? The videos made by NASA is property of the citizens of the United States so everyone in the US has tthe right to see this footage. Apparantly NASA never was interested in showing it in the first place. It is because of "material uploaded by others" that we know of the existence of this material.

When did you ever ask for a copy of a video that they wouldn't send you? Is this all mere fantasy, or did you actually get refused something?  Be specific.

Or is it only hearsay and internet myth?

[JimO]

....The videos made by NASA is property of the citizens of the United States so everyone in the US has tthe right to see this footage. Apparantly NASA never was interested in showing it in the first place. It is because of "material uploaded by others" that we know of the existence of this material. 

That's not the way I remember it. Martyn, like many others, watched on public broadcasts over commercial satellites. Everybody had access to those transmissions -- calling them 'secret' is a marketing ploy to thrill the gullible target audience.

NASA also  posts highlights and summaries on its website and I'll go way out on a limb and bet you you've never even looked and have no idea what the link is. Prove me wrong?