Posts Tagged ‘UFOs’

hotkministry
Uploaded on Jul 3, 2011

It has begun.

Rod Serling! WoOt!

I love Rod Serling. His awesome imagination and exceptional creativity played a very large part in shaping my mind. For that I am grateful to him. The Twilight Zone… Rocks!

And here he is… narrating this rather well done UFO documentary, infusing it with his inimitable style. Not only that, it also features Dr. Jacques Vallee; and two other very nice people, Mr. José Ferrer and… Mr. Burgess Meredith! Whee! How cool is that?

The film was originally released in 1974 as UFOs: Past, Present and Future with Rod narrating. It won a Golden Globe Award. This is the updated version released in 1979 with the new title. I do not know what the ‘update’ consisted of, however, as I have not seen it. Hadn’t seen this one before, either, actually, until last night via a thread by Karl 12.

The film was produced by Allan F. Sandler, directed by Ray Rivas and written by well known UFO researcher Robert Emenegger, who also composed the musical score.

There is a treasure trove of rarely, if ever, seen historical footage and interviews with some significant individuals and witnesses. It is long, but if you have an interest in this subject it is decidedly worth the watch.

It is said that there was US Government co-operation in the production of this film… and that claim is evidenced by the inclusion of interesting interview footage filmed inside the Pentagon. That interview is with Colonel Bill Coleman, Chief of Public Information for the US Air Force from 1969 to 1974.

Well, now. I have heard as may you have, too, of cases where official help is offered as a lure of some sort, perhaps and then reneged on. It may just be that the reneging was not fully implemented in the case of Mr. Emenegger.

From this fine page at Ron Schmidt’s Pegasus Research Consortium site, we note this, quoted thereon, from here

The Holloman AFB UFO landing event was featured in Robert Emenegger’s/Alan Sandler’s 1974 documentary ‘UFO’s: Past, Present and Future’, and in an updated 1979 version ‘UFOs: It Has Begun’. These documentaries were both narrated by Rod Serling. Towards the end of the documentary, a ‘what if’ scenario was presented to the viewer about a landing that could happen in the future, or perhaps already could have happened…

“Let us look at an incident that might happen in the future, or perhaps could have happened already. The premise is that contact is made by extraterrestrial beings with representatives of the United States Air Force at Holloman Air Force Base in the deserts of New Mexico.”

Rod Serling goes on to narrate the Holloman landing event which consisted of illustrations of the landing and the aliens meeting Air Force officials. These illustrations were inter-cut with actual footage from the base. At one point in the re-enactment there is footage of a strange white-yellowish object descending towards the base, with the mountains in the background (some people have suggested it is part of the authentic UFO landing tape that slipped though).

From a 2005 pdf file by Steve Johnson giving a blow-by-blow description of the film we read this…

It is said that the producers of the film were promised unprecedented cooperation from the US military, and the inclusion of many military reports and interviews seems to confirm that suggestion. It is also said that actual footage from a real incident at Holloman AFB would be provided to them and that this would be used as the startling finale to the programme. Unfortunately, it seems the authorities got cold feet and we ended up with some hastily-prepared footage and artwork. But was it all a fiction? During the segment, we are shown a bright light descending towards the desert. Is this a real UFO, or just an out-of-focus aircraft coming in to land?

Why are specific names used, exact times and usage of precise amounts of film? What is the King One area at Holloman AFB? Apparently, in the novelisation of the film, the King One area is described as being on Mars Street in Building 930. I have been unable as yet to find a plan of the AFB with Mars Street or Building 930 noted.

And from an article (in pdf) called A History of Government Management of UFO Perceptions through Film and Television, we read…

There was more comprehensive, high-level cooperation from the DoD for the production of one particularly unusual film, though – the documentary, UFOs: Past, Present and Future (1974), which considered the extra-terrestrial hypothesis in a much more serious light. The film’s director, Robert Emenegger, was given unprecedented access to DoD facilities, including the highly sensitive Holloman Air Force Base and the Pentagon itself. “The Secretary of the Air Force [Robert Seamans] gave the order to co-operate,” explained the director, who was granted time with highranking military officers apparently well-versed in UFO-related matters, among them Colonel William Coleman, a former spokesman for Project Blue Book, and Colonel George Weinbrenner, then head of Foreign Technology at Wright Patterson Air Force Base.

The film even included a detailed reconstruction of what Emenegger claims the USAF told him was a real extraterrestrial landing at Holloman Air Force Base in 1971, complete with artistic renderings of the alleged aliens.

The USAF even provided Emenegger with a few seconds of footage showing what appeared to be an unusual, bright object descending slowly and vertically over the base. These frames, Emenegger claims, were taken from the “genuine” alien landing footage and officially authorised for use in his completed documentary, which, in line with a 49th Parallel, Vol. 25 (Spring 2011) Graham & Alford ISSN: 1753-5794 (online) 14 recommendation by the USAF, presented the incident as “one that might happen in the future – or perhaps could have happened already.”74 Emenegger claims that he was approached by the USAF to initiate this project, which would be in line with his scholarly interest in propaganda, his history as a Vice President at Grey Advertising, and his personal involvement in the Nixon Campaign to Re-Elect the President (CREEP).75 The film also received support from the Army, the Navy and NASA, with the latter furnishing Emenegger’s production with previously unreleased photographs of what appeared to be UFOs taken in space by Gemini astronauts..

Fascinating!

Seems legit, too, at least to this tired mind.

Oh, by the way, here is Angelia Joiner’s Interview with Robert Emenegger at the 2008 X-Conference.

I dunno… I love this stuff. Maybe someday I’ll even go so far as to write up my own sightings…

Anyway, enjoy!

Peace.

Two light ships were recently photographed traveling through space near the Zeta Reticuli star system, one of them quite close up! What these UFOs are is still not fully understood. The fractal nature of the ships is rather beautiful to these tired eyes.

Hehe… that’s the name and description that got conjured up for this piece.

I quite like how this one turned out. It shows rather well the propulsion system and, well,  everything!WAAAH!

Hi res views on hover over at the store…

Available anywhere from 4×6 to pretty darn big on various stock and even canvas, as usual.

I hope you like it.

Peace.

Strange. I keep subscribing to LunaCognita’s YouTube channel, but it just doesn’t stick for some reason.

In any event, the nearly year-old second video in this thread caught my eye in a thread about it at my hangout, ATS, started by Arken. Being, as many of you know, a fan of LC’s work, I needed to share it with you and wound up including the first video shown here, which is a very recent one.

On this first one, Luna uses the frame stacking technique to bring out the details. For the doubters let me just say that this method is 100% legitimate, is used daily by photographers the world over and works really well. It is very handy and I have used it myself with great results. It is not destructive in the slightest, quite the opposite, actually, it does not add anything that is not already there. Luna adds a touch of contrast is added later here to bring the thingies out just a bit more and that is quite alright considering the condition of the initial frames.

One wonders if the objects are what was intended to be filmed.

I would imagine so, as film stock was a finite commodity.

There are some who might say that these are detritus within the camera or the command module. I’ll just say they certainly don’t seem that way to me.

Uploaded by on Jan 18, 2012

Hi again everyone. This presentation focuses on taking a closer look at a 23.5-second segment of 16mm DAC motion picture footage from the NASA archives that was originally exposed over 40 years ago during the Apollo 12 mission (November 1969). This footage was shot with the DAC camera mounted near a window in the Command/Service Module while the spacecraft was in lunar orbit above the Moon.

Unfortunately, this raw footage, as it is officially archived by NASA, appears to have been over-exposed and accidentally ruined when the lens on the 16mm DAC camera aboard the spacecraft somehow became unintentionally fogged over shortly before filming began. Because of this, this film sequence only affords us a blurry, obfuscated view out the spacecraft window, showing an oblique look at the sunlit (and overexposed) lunar surface with a portion of the lunar limb also visible.

While the raw footage is of poor quality, it does however still contain some viable image data that can be recovered and revealed thru enhancement. The application of various frame-stacking and averaging enhancement techniques can allow us to extract significantly more detail from the scene than the raw archive frames of footage alone appear to surrender. These stack enhancements will allow you to see what appears to be at least three unidentified objects transiting in front of the lunar disc that were actually caught on film here.

Unfortunately, the lack of viable image data and over-exposed nature of the raw footage provides does not allow for a high-detail look at these three distinct contrast targets, so that raises the possibility that one of these moving contrast targets is actually a shadow from one of the unidentified objects above being dropped onto the lurain. The high sun angle that we know was illuminating this scene at the time could certainly allow for that possibility, but would require us to make the unsupported assumption that these unidentified objects are very close to the Moon and are scooting just above the lunar surface.

The reality is that there is simply no way to accurately determine or even estimate any range or size data for these unidentified objects shown. What we can say is that multiple objects can be seen transiting the lunar disc here and can be determined to at the time have been located somewhere in 3-D object space between the camera aboard the CSM spacecraft and the surface of the Moon.

Cheers everyone, and thanks for watching!
LunaCognita

Pretty neat, eh?

I think so.

On to the next one.

The description below pretty much says it all as usual. And as usual the production values are to a very high standard which I appreciate being trained as a filmmaker and all. Wish I could find my old After Effects CD in the rubble of my local environs. Had to put in a new C drive array, needs to go back in. Luna’s films always stoke that urge in me and I do actually have a very interesting sequence of still images that are just itching to be a joined together as a movie. The depression always gets in the way, though. Always. Oh, man, I hope they’re not on the dead Glyph, as I can’t afford to send it out for repair and naturally it’s a stripe so the data on it is in cosmic hands. Sigh.

Good gracious, how did that off topic rant get in here? Didn’t derail things too badly, methinks.

Respected realist Phage, who I like a lot, was saying, among others, that some of the irregularly shaped objects you will see are the aforementioned detritus and anomalies with the film or processing or scanning. Maybe some are. Maybe not. I have seen such flaws on many images. Many are quite obvious and some scanner dust artifacts can look pretty strange. Some of them here at the least I would say are surely not flaws.

Man, I haven‘t pored over “originals” in so long and now don’t have much time to do it anyway, but, I finally got a nice big tiff of the image with the notorious Shard on it yesterday. As is so typical, however, I’ve not even opened it yet. But at least I have it. Always wanted it. Go me.

Anyway, I could go on and on like that for ages, so to spare you from further horror I will say here you go…

Uploaded by on Mar 11, 2011

This presentation is a simple compilation of some more anomalous photographs and 16mm DAC film footage that I have archived during my years of research and investigation looking into the activities of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

The images and footage shown here were taken during the Apollo program, filmed by the astronaut flight crews during their journeys to and from the Moon.

Most of what I show here involves “lunar transients” – unidentified objects in space that were captured on film as they transited in front of (or passed near) a celestial body such as the Moon or Earth. I believe many of these objects are not on the lunar surface, but rather were above the lunar surface when captured on film.

I also include several examples of NASA image obfuscation as well, just to help highlight the fact that the space agency also removes anomalous objects from frame in order to “sanitize” scenes prior to official archive release so as to ensure they do not reveal too much of the truth about what is really up there.

Hope you enjoy!
Cheers,
LC

Here are a few links to the last set of images I show, dealing with the detection of cropping obfuscation being employed to sanitize the scenes.
NASA “Gateway” archive link to frame#AS11-36-5319 – shows object off the Earth’s limb.
http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseop/photo.pl?mission=AS11&roll=36&f…

NASA “LPI” archive version of #AS11-36-5319 that does not show the object (residue of the cropping is detectable under enhancement)
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/print/AS11/36/5319.jpg

Cropping proof – second last image shown (AS16-118-18873).
ftp://nssdcftp.gsfc.nasa.gov/miscellaneous/planetary/apollo/a16_h_118_18873.tiff

Cropping proof – Last image shown (AS13-60-8588).
ftp://nssdcftp.gsfc.nasa.gov/miscellaneous/planetary/apollo/a13_h_60_8588.tiff

Thanks, Cary, well done, man, well done.

Peace.

 

Uploaded by openmindstv on Apr 26, 2011

James Moseley has been interested in UFOs since the beginning of the modern era of Ufology in 1947 when Kenneth Arnold had his highly publicized sighting. Since then he has been a controversial figure, often focusing on the personalities and conflicts in UFO research. Beginning in 1954 he published a magazine called Saucer News for many years. Currently he sends out a newsletter called Saucer Smear. He says Saucer Smear is a humor and UFO-gossip journal for the “hard core” flying saucer buffs. Moseley will be sharing with us his history and his views on the hot UFO topics over the years.

• Note: The Interview Starts At 29:30.

I love James Moseley! Editor and still Supreme Commander James W. Moseley, J.S., if you please!

The J.S. stands for Journal Subscriber, a reference to his rank in the strange outfit known as MUFON, the Mutual UFO Network; and is also a reference to his attitude towards same. Hehe.

His Saucer Smear is one of the few refreshing diversions in the lunatic asylum that is UFOlogy; it is the world’s Oldest Continuously Published UFO Journal. It never fails to delight. Well, me at least. Some  other folks, however, have taken exception to Moseley’s no-holds-barred style of reporting, notably my friend’s mentor, the late John A. Keel, who once referred to poor James as “a boil on the ass of UFOlogy.” That line is pure Keel – and never fails to crack me up – much like Moseley’s celebrated prose! Ha!

If one is to have any hope of finding success and personal satisfaction in any form of Forteana – especially UFOlogy – one absolutely must have a healthy sense of humor. It is very much a religion to many involved, you see and there are several factions, all equally as silly. None, I assure you, are destined to figure out one damn thing, but it sure is fun to watch them squabble, as it were, and no one covers it better than James!

I hope I get to meet him someday…

Peace.

Ann Druffel expands on her new book, Firestorm, which tells the important story of Dr. James McDonald.

Her book and presentation powerfully demonstrate what researchers have gone through to bring a truth to the public which the public’s elected and appointed officials did not want acknowledged.

Of all the researchers who intersected with the process and prospects of governmental public disclosure, none was more intellectually suited and had collected more scientifically valid data than Dr. James E. McDonald, a prominent scientist and professor with the Institute of Atmospheric Physics and the University of Arizona at Tucson.

He had unprecedented high-level contacts, and during his scientific career introduced numerous groundbreaking projects in meteorology and climatology under ONR contracts and with top scientific organizations.

Between 1958-1971 he worked closely with science-oriented UFO groups nationwide and in several foreign countries. He gave hundreds of talks on UFOs before top scientific organizations, influencing numerous scientists to take the UFO question seriously and in 1968 was instrumental in bringing about one of only two public Congressional hearing, thus far, on the UFO subject.

Ann Druffel Official Website! – www.anndruffel.com

The book Druffel is talking about is not new, it’s from 2004. My attention was directed towards this video today and I think it is important for people to hear these words and digest this story. I think it is rather nice that she only mentions it briefly a few times, devoting her presentation to this remarkable gentleman’s life and activities.

Ann Druffel is one of those rare serious researchers in this sometimes circus-like field; starting out in the late 40s, before the odd and disruptive things started erupting all over the place. She is one of the original members of the government-destroyed National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, the finest civilian study effort in history.

It is my humble opinion that Dr. James E. McDonald will go down in history, assuming that history is not too horribly corrupted, as the best UFO researcher ever. The only one who comes close, really and also in my always humble opinion, is the rather visionary Dr. Jacques Vallee.

Peace to you all…

Baptism Of Christ By Aert DeGelder, 1710.

“Battesimo di Cristo” 1710
Aert De Gelder
(1645-1727)

Yes, it has been bandied back and forth countless times. But I like it. It’s beautiful. And a tad eerie.

How wonderfully controversial this painting remains. As for my personal opinion, it is not yet sure, regardless of my having stared at images of this painting for many years now, but I admit that I long to lean towards this being an accurate historical document. Certainly that is just my desire, of course.

Unless old Aert just happened to be lucky enough to see something like that. Because he certainly missed attending the event he has depicted by close to two thousand years.

It certainly is intriguing. I will leave you to enjoy it.

Peace.

Battle of LA

Don’t forget to raise a cup of your favorite, as today is the 69th Anniversary of the spectacular Battle of LA, in which the armed forces lobbed 1,430 shells at a meandering UFO, making many direct hits upon the object. The object not only suffered no dents… it didn’t even notice as it continued on towards the sea.

ShadoXAV | January 04, 2011

Caught this UFO while taping time lapse footage of clouds. The clouds were clearing as the sun went down. That is when the UFO was caught streaking across the sky. I thought it might be a high flying jet until it made its two sharp 90 degree turns. I have seen jets make high speed turns at high altitudes but they can’t turn this sharp at high altitudes. I don’t know what it is. If anyone knows what it is please post your comment.

Category: Science & Technology

Uploader Comments (ShadoXAV)

  • Thanks to all that have view this video and left a comment. Please remember that this is a time lapse video and the actual time it took for this object to travel and make the turns is 1 minute 28 seconds. Also the camera is locked down and focus is set to infinity. The sun has gone down and the camera is sitting in the dark. The object is being illuminated by the sun so it is higher then the lower clouds that are dark. The object is not a bug.
  • @theyreoutthere Holliday TX is a few miles South West of Wichita Falls TX. Wichita Falls is 100 or so miles North West of DFW. As far as I can tell from the video, this object passed somewhere between Holliday and DFW but at a high altitude. It was traveling in a North East direction.

Nice catch! Very nice. A refreshing change from the plethora of ludicrous dots in the night sky and the obvious airplane videos that infest and degrade YouTube into near untenability. Here we have a camera set on a proper platform, operating in time lapse and aimed at the upper reaches of the atmosphere. Excellent.

Truth be told, I am also particularly interested in that odd thin dagger like cloud that the object goes near. WTF?

Be that interest as it may, and getting back to the UFO, as the poster says, this is time lapse, and as such, we should only be looking at the latter parts of the vid where it is slowed down to “as it was shot” speed. I should not have to explain why.

Note that the object appears to change shape between frames, sometimes ‘normal,’ sometimes longer, sometimes foreshortened. UFOs have often displayed this characteristic in films past. View it large and note that there is a fluidity of sorts to the motion and although the turns are indeed fabulously tight, they are not exactly 90° in a geekularly mechanical, engineering sense of the term.

Also note the conditions listed above and, further noting the exceptional altitude, realize that this thing is of a pretty substantial size. And yet it exhibits that fluidity that I mentioned.

For these reasons, my opinion of this object is that it is yet another example of a plasma critter. A very nice example. It is a living creature. One that lives in the atmosphere, (its ocean, as it were), at levels even reaching a touch into space.

There’ve never been too many folks looking into these lifeforms, notably Trevor James Constable and Wilhelm Reich in the 50’s, but thankfully there are still a few. For more in depth reportage, look into zorgon’s work on the subject at AboveTopSecret.com. zorgon (Ron Schmidt) is also the top authority on the US Navy Space Command.

Enjoy. Peace.

Will try to write more and sidestep the depression a bit, but until then… this quickie post will have to do. It presents WATT friend and reader (!) LunaCognita’s latest film, an unprecedented proper look at the footage of the lift off of the Lunar Module from the end of the Apollo 11 mission. He pretty much explains what’s what with it below, but, do note that near to and again at the end of this clip there are two unidentified objects seen landing

and they both land…

in the very same spot!

WAAAH!

LunaCognita | December 31, 2010

This presentation shows the 16mm Data Acquisition Camera (DAC) footage that was shot during the Apollo 11 ascent from Tranquility Base. In this ascent footage, the DAC motion picture camera was mounted in the right side forward-facing (LMP) window of the Apollo 11 Lunar Module “Eagle”, providing us a view looking down at the Moon’s surface as the LM ascent stage fires and sends the spacecraft on its way back up to lunar orbit for rendezvous and docking with the CSM “Columbia”.

Rather than just showing the raw footage here as it is cataloged in the NASA film archives, I instead show the footage in a rotation-corrected format in order to always keep the scene in it’s proper “horizon up” viewing orientation throughout the duration of the clip. This proper “horizon up” perspective can be established based on some simple visual criteria, with the goal being to ensure we are viewing the footage with the lunar surface being shown so that the Moon’s horizon that is closest to the camera’s current principle point always remains aligned and level towards the top of the field-of-view (even if the horizon itself is not actually visible at the time). This ensures that the surface scene you are viewing can be accurately interpreted.

As you can see in this footage, the rotation correction to align the scene to the “horizon up” viewing perspective is an absolutely vital adjustment that must be applied first in order to be able to even begin attempting to analyze and interpret scenes such as this one accurately. Because the DAC camera was hard-mounted in the window of the LM during liftoff from the lunar surface, this meant that the standard locked display perspective that NASA provides in their archive clips showing the Apollo ascent footage is ALWAYS displaying the lunar surface scene below in an inaccurate perspective. For over 40 years, the public has actually been watching ascent footage like this from the various Apollo missions where the lunar surface after liftoff is being shown essentially upside down (between 135 to 180 degrees off of the “horizon up” viewing perspective).

The point to this simple presentation is to merely serve as a reminder to everyone who is interested in doing their own analysis of ANY of the Apollo DAC footage or still frames of the lunar surface to always consider the question of “what is the proper viewing perspective for each scene?” The ugly fact is that the vast majority of the Apollo DAC footage and still frames, as they are archived by NASA, are not presenting their lunar surface scenes to you in anything close to the proper “horizon up” viewing orientation that our eyes expect to see. Obviously, unless this improper viewing perspective is corrected for first, you have very little chance of being able to analyze the scenes you are looking at with any degree of accuracy at all.

In addition to the rotation-correction, I also was forced to make several frame-rate adjustments to this Apollo 11 DAC footage, and the reason for that is because just before the four-minute mark after liftoff, the 16mm DAC camera suddenly alters it frame exposure rate, switching from 12 frames-per-second (the proper declared setting for filming the liftoff and ascent) down to 6 fps. I have no idea how or why this sudden frame-rate setting change occurs, because adjusting the DAC camera’s fps setting “on the fly” was certainly not one of LMP Buzz Aldrin’s checklisted duties during ascent, and I see no mention in the Apollo 11 mission and post-mission reports to account for this anomalous occurrence. The Apollo 11 ascent footage, as it is archived by NASA, makes no attempt to correct for (or even draw attention to) this sudden step-down in frame-rate, which results in the raw archive footage appearing to suddenly show a doubling of the playback speed. In addition to this, NASA typically renders their HD digital DAC archive at 29.97 NSTC, resulting in further interpolation stretching being introduced in the digital footage. I have attempted to correct for this effect here in order to ensure that the playback rate of the DAC footage accurately matches the accurate timeframe that I was able to establish using the accompanying raw mission audio track and flown liftoff&ascent charts – essentially using the accurate audio timeline to re-synchronize the inaccurate video playback rate so they match up correctly for the duration of the nearly 10-minute complete sequence of footage showing the Apollo 11 ascent from Tranquility Base.
http://magic-ufo.forum-phpbb.in/t871-…
Cheers everyone,
LC

If you’d like to check it out, there is a nice discussion of this work going on over at ATS. Short so far and very well reasoned.

UFO Abduction. Copyright 2005 Phil Scroggs.

Merry Christmas dear WATT readers… and Happy New Year, too!

Found this fabulously Fortean painting by Phil Scroggs combining the spirit of Christmas and the fringes of UFOlogy a little while ago. Nicely, nicely done.

Thanks very much to you all for reading WATT, those few little hits that come this way are truly appreciated. They even help with depression abatement.

Regarding depression abatement, found out that the St. John’s Wort tablets recommended by a friend do in fact help, but the expense is daunting due to their packaging, no doubt intentional.

I’ve sincerely hopeful wishes that things will be much, much better in the New Year
for each and every one of you!

Not holding my breath for myself here, though, as the Nightmare On The Cob is evolving rapidly and more bizarre events to assist with mind wreckage are no doubt afoot.

But, hey, maybe I’ll get work. Whoa, then I could fix my car! Maybe I’ll sell some art. Maybe someone will… ahh… maybe, maybe, maybe. Maybe not. Actually got invited to contribute to a book this week (along with dozens of others), but, it’s already too late. Depression’s not nice.

Plans for WATT are just to continue as normal, but I really must do that post I said I’d do for spynode on the Navy’s Space Command. Patience, spy… it’s a huge subject.

Anyway, be safe and enjoy your families and friends to the fullest.

Peace.

The Cylindrical UFO above the Airport.

Freakin’ fantabulous, isn’t it?!

This is just like one of those much dreamt of “gun camera” shots that we who dig UFOs want so much to get our hands on. The difference here is that this one isn’t from a gun camera at all, rather it was exposed by one of the four Vinten reconnaissance cameras flying aboard the Aeritalia/Fiat G.91R jet fighter aircraft piloted by Italian Air Force Marshal Giancarlo Cecconi on the 18th of June, 1979.

Aeritalia/Fiat G.91R jet fighter aircraft. Photo by maketarskikutak.I stumbled across this obscure case due to the “bump” of an old ATS thread that was started on 1/11/2010 by a former member known as Imagir. While it was known to internos, it wasn’t known to the late Justin Krog, so, obscure is a most accurate word. Which is unfortunate really since it is an excellent radar/visual case with many witnesses; and, well, I mean, just look at that gol dang picture!

Some great information was added to the discussion on 11/18/2010 by ATS member Mark_Frost when he found a 1996 investigative report by Marco Orlandi of the Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici (CISU) published at the Brazilian site INPU. It’s quite a thorough investigation, covering all that’s known and was originally published in the Brazilian UFO Magazine (Rivista di Informazione Ufology), issue number 17 in February 1996. You really should read that report. Do take the time.

“It was a tank of at least eight meters. Five hundred years from now, maybe someone will tell us why and how to stand there, suspended in the sky, thirteen thousand feet.” – IAF Marshal Giancarlo Cecconi

3 of the 4 Vinten recon cameras on the Fiat G.91R. The 4th is on the bottom of the plane.Clearly, Giancarlo was pretty much gob-smacked by the thing.

I noted with much interest that although Cecconi tried very hard to get a photo of a side view of this object… he could not… it constantly reoriented itself to this nearly head on aspect.

OK, here’s the incident description from the CISU report (translated from Portuguese by Google Translate with slight edits by this author for readability.):

18 JUNE 1979 – 11:30 HOURS

Marshal pilot Giancarlo Cecconi, 14 of the second group of the Hunting Bomber Regiment of recognition of Aeronautics, was approaching to land at Sant’ Angelo Treviso Airport in Treviso. He was returning to base after a reconnaissance photo of the Ligure mountains, on board a fighter G-91R. Unexpectedly, in the sky over Sant’ Angelo Treviso Airport, the presence of an unknown object was noticed. Getting confirmation that the pilot had sufficient autonomy to intercept the object, the center of the city of Istrana radar, which showed the presence of the intruder, Cecconi gives the information to the approach maneuver, i.e., the usual practice of the Air Force to intercept the object that flew in the airspace in a forbidden area. Having also available in film cameras, the pilot hit all four cameras, thus initiating the chase to the object by a distance of approximately 80 meters and a speed  of 300 knots (450-500 km/h). Also land airport personnel following the scene with binoculars. Soon after, the Treviso control tower called  Cecconi by radio with which he communicated with Istrana, warning that the object left a strange blue trail. Cecconi, having approached very same object could not see the trail. When the pilot begins to approach the object, that he was at a distance of 2,100 meters. Then it began to rise and fall, with displacements ranging from 300 to 3,900 feet away. Cecconi made eight flights over the object, always shooting the cameras, getting a total of 82 photos. The UFO was  apparently stopped in relation to hunt G-91R. To the central radar Cecconi confirmed that this was moving with speed and route set. Several times, the pilot sought to position itself to photograph it aside, but failed because the object appeared to ”steer” in order to impose respect for him in the front position without ever exposing himself completely to one side. The appearance of the object resembled a ”tank” in black opaque. Its dimensions were approximately 8 meters long and up to 3 meters in diameter.

An interesting detail was noted by Cecconi, the presence of a sort of “mini” dome, white, not transparent, located at the top of the object, slightly wrinkled. While Cecconi was completing another lap to go back and make other pictures, Istrana called him, stating that at that moment, the object disappeared from radar. After a few seconds, the control tower of Treviso confirmed that those who were following the object with binoculars could no longer see the object. The object unexplainedly resolved within a few seconds. In effect, the pilot could not even see over the object. Soon after the game [Cecconi] landed at Treviso Airport. As usual the experts removed the film (negative) and took them to the laboratory to reveal the distribution.

Images from the INPU site of photos published in the newspaper "Epoca."Note that the above report says that 82 photos were taken. Other reports claim that 84 were taken. That’s a lot of photos and I’d surely bet that most of them are just as exciting as the lead photo here. Out of that total, however, only four have been released. Four! Now ain’t that a crying shame! Madonne!

In late 1979 an Italian ufologist named Antonio Chiumiento got involved and interviewed Cecconi, promising discretion which was later gone back on. Not so nice. What else is new, eh?

The cover-up activities that followed were pretty silly to my way of thinking, but, as usual, pretty effective in burying the whole affair.

It wasn’t until November 2, 1984 that the Ministry of Defense actually responded to the media circus. They said: “The subject matter alone was photographed with machinery on board a fighter and was identified as a rod-shaped flask, made with black plastic bags.” The newspapers immediately pounced on that one and took the same tack as ours do today in further treatment of this news.

The later “excuse” assigned to it by the authorities had morphed from the “privately made balloon” of the media to the commercially available UFO-Solar balloon,  a plastic toy apparently quite popular back then that, when filled with air and heated nicely, was supposedly able to reach such heights. Calls of foul were aired as the toy balloon was only three meters long by one across, a tad smaller than the 8 meters by three meters of the object. Did that phase the newspapers? Nope. I laugh at their next move which was to assert that what was seen was really a top secret toy balloon of a much greater size being tested by the UFO-Solar’s top competitor. Hahahaha! Pull the other one! Seriously. Interesting, though, to note that the product was later banned from the market because it was deemed a danger to air traffic. Hmmm. Note, too, that such things can be bought today… here in the USA at least.

The reality, which had been reported and was known to many laid bare that entire load of official codswallop which was immediately rejected by those in possession of operational gray matter. After all the object had been circled eight times by Cecconi, sometimes quite closely, with folks watching all this on the ground with binoculars.

One pass was close enough that the jet exhaust would have melted a balloon into nothing and I dare say any of them would have simply blown a balloon some distance away. But the object stayed right where it was, constantly reorienting itself to the jet as mentioned above. Ultimately at the end of the five minute encounter the object took off to invisibility at high altitude at a calculated rate of about 590 miles per hour (950km/h). Pretty sporty balloon, that eh, what? The balloon hypotheses is therefore decimated… if you’re into reality.

Two other views of the object from farther away.

In 1984 the case was officially closed by the Italian Defense Ministry. The official conclusion was, you guessed it, the ridiculous “it was a matter of a plastic balloon.”

In 1995 the Italian Ministry Of Defense issued a “final” final statement. The statement follows:

  • No other information or photos are available.
  • No relationship of the pilot or the radar recorders or the meteorological conditions of the day of the sighting is available.
  • The Defense Ministry is at least interested to start a study on the single phenomenon in consideration of the impact on the national security.

And that was the extent of it. They’re good at dragging things out aren’t they? Damn. Sixteen years. I propose we start writing tons of letters demanding at least the unreleased photos… we know they exist… at one point they said they were going to… but didn’t… and what about that last statement in the list? Did they or didn’t they study that ‘single phenomenon’?

I’m out of time again… The entire affair is so long and convoluted with more to it than appears here as to the media attention, or non-attention, at times; more wackiness from the Ministry; there are also other people noted throughout like the fellow who claimed to be the builder of the “balloon” and other weird things, not to mention even UFO Magazine‘s take; as noted it spans over a decade and a half. I highly recommend reading the aforementioned CISU article at the INPU site to follow all the odd little twists and turns this journey into obfuscation takes. It’ll be worth it if you like UFOs.

Peace.

Let this custom Speck case and Apollo 15’s notorious Top Secret Shot protect your iPad from the rigors of reality.

just what did the crew see, anyway?
I really want to know, but I doubt any of us ever will.

This is the mysterious “final” frame from film magazine 83… the very existence of which was totally suppressed by NASA for over 30  long years.

This is image number AS15-83-11234, taken from inside either the LEM or the Command module, no one’s really sure about that. And no one’s talking.

No one knows just what this image shows, (except the crew and NASA), but I have a feeling that this was an exceptionally intense encounter with something quite terrifying and almost completely inexplicable.

Learn what’s known of this exceptionally bizarre incident by reading my earlier post about this strange encounter, which has some great commentary from LunaCognita providing even more vital information.

Enhancement by yours truly back in April 2010, using a 9 layer image stack to get the most detail out of those freaky deaky streamers.

Share this previously classified image with the world while treating your iPad to some serious Speck protection.

Catch all my designs at High Strangeness Art.

A word about the case itself…

Combining luxury with uncompromised protection, this sleek hard plastic case is covered with an easy-to-grip fabric, richly printed with your favorite design. The first of its kind to be offered anywhere, this lightweight and durable custom case allows optimal access to all of the sensors, ports and controls on your iPad, while offering superior comfort in-hand.

Looking down on Dulce. From the top of Dulce rock, looking east/southeast. Photo by snapmouse, a Jicarilla ATS member. Click for 2006 discussion thread.BREAKING NEWS

New information about secret Dulce base
to be revealed at Symposium

ANGEL FIRE, NM • AUG 30, 2010 – Compelling new information regarding the existence of a secret military base jointly operated by the U.S. government and extraterrestrials near Dulce, New Mexico will be revealed at the 2010 Paranormal Symposium and Film Festival September 9-12 in Angel Fire, NM. Dulce researchers and investigators Anthony F. Sanchez, Norio Hayakawa, and Dennis Balthaser are scheduled for an exclusive interview and panel discussion with radio host Jerry Pippin at noon on Saturday during the conference. The public is welcome to attend.

In a widely-disseminated August 28 press release, Sanchez reported he tracked down and vetted a reliable source who claims he worked at the Dulce facility. According to Sanchez, the source is a retired Air Force colonel who has proven his claims, which include his assignment to Dulce as part of a special military medical detachment. Sanchez conducted an extensive interview with the colonel, who related events surrounding a classified 1979 incident at Dulce, and revealed what he learned about the history and circumstances surrounding the harrowing 1940 Dulce Discovery event. Sanchez has included the entire interview in his new book, UFO Highway.

Another shot in Dulce. Photo by snapmouse, a Jicarilla ATS member. Click for 2006 discussion thread.In March 2009, a conference debating the existence of the Dulce base was widely reported in both UFO and mainstream media. The conference was hosted by Hayakawa, who was also responsible for “outing” many Area 51 activities during the 1990s. Nearly 130 people from as far away as Hawaii and New York attended the conference, including Balthaser and other high-profile UFO and exopolitical experts who presented both pro and con arguments about the rumored base. They were joined by eyewitnesses, law enforcement officers and local residents, all of whom presented credible and convincing testimony.

Rumors about the secret government facility near Dulce began in 1967 after a 29-kiloton nuclear explosive was detonated at a depth of 2010 Paranormal Symposium4222 feet near the Archuleta Mesa on the Jicarilla Apache Indian reservation at Dulce, supposedly to produce underground routes for an estimated 300 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The venture was known as Project Gasbuggy. However, according to an August 29, 1959 report in Time Magazine, the minor amount of gas released from the explosion was not only too radioactive for use, it was worth less than the cost of the explosion. Since then, reports of cattle mutilations, UFO sightings, and mysterious illnesses in the Dulce area have been widely circulated, along with allegations of nefarious activities in a secret underground military facility at nearby Archuleta Mesa.

Conference site -> http://www.aspefiles.org/

Hat Tip to Tim Cridland.

First up is a 3 and a half minute excerpt from the SciFi (SyFy) network’s coverage of the event, recently posted by Easynow at the notorious YouTube. I have seen this footage of Rod Dickinson’s through the years and I feel it is authentic… footage of what is the obvious question.  Bill George, an Academy Award-winning visual effects master at Industrial Light and Magic is consulted within and he can’t, of course answer that question – however he also feels that it is genuine and unaltered.

And finally we have an excellent video response of 4 and a quarter minutes to Easynow’s excerpt from our friend LunaCognita – wherein the film is stabilized on the discordantly discoidal nodule and enhanced, lending we the curious a very nice view of it indeed. Props, Luna!

Happy viewing to all…

eeasynow | July 08, 2010

no description available

LunaCognita | July 08, 2010

This particular segment (or segments, rather) of footage we will be looking at in this presentation involves a UFO sighting that occurred on July 4th, 1998 just outside of the town of Somerset in southwest England, filmed by a man named Rod Dickinson.

As always, the enhancements shown here were built from the highest quality copy of the source footage that I was able to obtain. Unfortunately in this case, I was not able to acquire a complete unedited copy of the raw Somerset footage to work with, and it is my understanding that Mr. Dickinson is no longer in possession of the original raw tape. This forced me to use a segmented copy taken from a UFO documentary in which the raw footage had already been broken apart and edited into several short highlight clips. This fact has most definitely negatively influenced the quality and quantity of visual data available for enhancement.

As you will see, the raw footage of this UFO encounter clearly suffers from significant camera shake/instability issues. In fact, I have to say that this is the shakiest, most unstable UFO video footage I have ever personally analyzed. These already brutal instability issues are further magnified by the fact that the raw copy of the footage I was forced to use as the Alpha source file appears to have been subjected to some level of video compression, which, thanks to the brutal amount of shake, creates significant interpolation blurring and frame “ghosting” being introduced/amplified. This effect is blatantly apparent in every copy of this Dickinson/Somerset UFO footage I have ever seen, and the copy I used as the Alpha source file for this presentation is no exception, with a high number of raw frames showing both the actual UFO as well as a second “ghost” of the UFO visible in the same frame, offset 180 degrees opposite of the direction of shake travel.

Just to give you a better idea of how detrimental this ghosting effect was to the stabilization process here, in the segments of footage I show labeled as “Sequence#1” and “Sequence#4”, roughly 50% of the frames had to be eliminated from the stabilization process due to being ruined by blurring and/or ghosting effects. “Sequence#3” was even worse, with close to 70% of the raw frames being garbage and unusable for the same reasons. Still, even with those significant negative factors working against the stabilizing process, I still considered this footage interesting enough to warrant the effort involved in trying to improve the viewability of the scene.

Also, please keep in mind that the term “UFO” does not mean “a spaceship flown by aliens”. It means “Unidentified Flying Object” – an object that is visible in the sky that cannot be positively identified as a known object of terrestrial origin. There is simply no way for us to tell from this footage just what this object is, where it came from, how it got there, or where it went afterwards. By definition, that makes it a “UFO”.

Cheers everyone, and I hope you enjoy this presentation!
LunaCognita
lunacognita@gmail.com

Hey UFOlks,

American Freedom RadioI’m trying to get word out to friends and fans of Jim Moseley that Mack White and I will be having the Supreme Commander on as our guest Sunday, May 23rd from 7-9pm CST.

We’re going to open up the phone lines in the second hour and would really love for you and other friends of his to call in to ask him questions or at least just to say hello and wish him well.

The number to call is (512) 879 – 3805.

Spread the word!

– SMiles Lewis

www.PsiOpRadio.com

Listen via the ANOMALY RADIO and AMERICAN FREEDOM RADIO Networks

www.AnomalyRadio.com

www.AfreeRadio.com

https://i1.wp.com/www.anomalyradio.com/site/wp-content/uploads/anomradlogob.jpg32k Stream Live

ReCasts Daily 7pm CST

Winamp windows Media Player Real  Player QuickTime

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Strange. Very strange.

And disconcerting.

Disappointing, too.

Then again it is NASA. A rather bizarre organization, NASA.

You see, this post was initially inspired by my running across an interesting page at Lunar Explorer Italia last night titled  AS 15-83-11218 and the Stephenville UFO: a VERY SMART image-comparison (by Carlo Contu). As you no doubt have gathered from said title, Mr. Contu noticed that the Apollo image in question and the sportiest image of the infamous Stephenville, Texas UFO are remarkably similar. You know the one, the pretty rainbow colored squiggly line in the night sky…

So I Googled up the image number, all set to do a session in Photoshop. But it wasn’t available nice and large at  NASA History’s Apollo Image Library… in fact they don’t even list the magazine as existing at all! What’s up with that? Note that they do list magazines for which they have no pictures to show yet… so, why not 83?

All was not lost, as they are all shown on the Lunar and Planetary Institute’s Apollo Image Atlas… but the images at LPI are all small, all at low resolution and none are really suitable for delving into in hopes of doing any sort of confident analysis. Some clues came out, though…

Here’s the text at the LPI page for this magazine:

Apollo Image Atlas

70mm Hasselblad Image Catalog

Apollo 15, Magazine ??

Images AS15-83-11218 to AS15-83-11234

Why does it say “Magazine ??”? Huh? What was that? Note, of course, that right below that line, in the picture range it clearly states  AS15-83-xxx to AS15-83-xxx. 83, again, is the magazine number.

Ah, I see, when you go to the individual photos it lists right below them their confusion’s source, they don’t know the Letter sub-designation of magazine 83. Well, why not? And even so does not knowing the letter therefore qualify it’s contents for near oblivion, displayed small and low-res on a sub-site for the Apollo program?

Note: For those not familiar with magazines, they are a removable part of the Hasselblad camera, a film holding ‘magazine,’  pre-loaded with film that eliminates the need to string the film through the camera as in a standard 35mm camera. They just snap on and off the back.

Note, too, that 83 was not the first magazine used by the Apollo 15 crew, so although there seems to be some sort of labeling error, I don’t imagine that there were any other issues with it. The Image Atlas starts at 82… which naturally makes me wonder about the existence of 1 through 81, but that’s not completely relevant here. The ones they do show are otherwise sequential in content.

As you can see below, the images captured are intriguing… to say the least… especially the last one, the swoopy, streaky and oh so freaky AS15-83-11234.

What do they show? I can’t say as I know. I can speculate as well as you can, but unless the impossible happens and the crew of 15 give us a play-by-play description, speculation is all we’ve got. Another thing to speculate about is why are there only 17 pictures? Why did they stop snapping? Must see if I can find anything in the transcripts, but, I rather doubt that if there was anything exciting going on it’d still be within them.

I really do like that last one… what the hell is all that? It’s absolutely fascinating. Was there an encounter with something, something we can barely comprehend, way out there in the cold, vast darkness of space?

Hmmm?

Ah, great, here’s the new vid from LunaCognita that looks into more of the footage shot during the Apollo missions. I posted a bit about the trailer for it a little while ago on this blog.

Actually, I’m holding out hope that this is only a part of a bigger picture… there’s some cool anomaly shots in it to be sure… including a truly inexplicable boomerang shaped thing… you’ll see… but my thirst for more and more weirdness is strong; and the second half presents a visual representation of the results of frame stacking, as explained more below.

Frame stacking is an old technique that can produce some seriously spectacular results unachievable by any other method… it is very commonly used by the astronomical community and professional photographers and photographic printers alike in a process called HDR, or High Dynamic Range photography. That’s printers as in people, not machines, by the way.

A very handy link was found at NASA’s History site in a section on Apollo 12’s approach and landing by Easynow over at ATS… it goes into some detail, with pics, about the DAC camera and its mountings, view angles and other good stuff… please do check it out, it’s pretty cool.

NASA’s Apollo Coverup – A Forensic Look At The 16mm DAC Film Footage

Channel Icon

LunaCognita
March 16, 2010

In this presentation, we will focus on taking a closer look at several interesting segments of film footage from the NASA archives. All the footage shown and analyzed here was originally shot by NASA astronauts during the Apollo missions (1968-1972) on 16mm film, using what was known as the “Data Acquisition Camera” – the “DAC”.

The Maurer “DAC” cameras were modified variable frame rate 16mm motion picture film cameras used by the various Apollo crews throughout their missions to film scenes of interest through the windows of the spacecraft, interior spacecraft activities, as well as to shoot exterior footage during lunar surface “moonwalk” operations and Low-Earth Orbit or Trans-Earth-Coast EVA ops in cis-lunar space.

I included a bit more information on the Apollo DAC camera in the brief writeup I did attached to the earlier teaser/trailer video for this presentation – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo81LM…

FRAME-STACKING
In the last half of this presentation (starting at 4:30), I show various examples where I employ an enhancement technique known as “frame-stacking” against the raw DAC archive footage. In certain cases, frame-stacking can be employed to forensically attack the raw frames of film and produce an enhanced composite still-frame of a stable (or motion-stabilized) scene. It should be noted that “stacking” is by no means a new method of enhancing video or motion picture film footage. It is a digital enhancement technique that has been around a lot longer than most people would probably believe, and in many cases it can provide us an improved look at some of the deeper image detail that is actually buried beneath the random “noise” in the raw footage.

Frame-stacking exploits the fact that the DAC footage, like any motion picture camera or digital video footage, is comprised of many sequential still images shown in rapid succession to simulate the appearance of motion to the viewer’s eye. If the raw footage is providing us with a stable (or motion-stabilized) scene that has no or little movement in the field-of-view, it might appear that the scene is comprised of many individual photographs that all seem to capture the identical view. However, appearances can be deceiving, and the truth is that each of those individual frames making up the raw film footage have slight variances between them, with each one suffering from its own unique random noise artifacts. “Stacking” works by analyzing and comparing all the raw frames that make up a segment of footage, allowing for the detection and subtraction of random noise artifacting from each individual raw frame. Those individual cleaned frames are then stacked together in order to construct a high-resolution composite image of the captured scene.

The first two examples I show in the frame-stacking segment were included merely to demonstrate the effectiveness of this enhancement technique when employed against raw archive footage of a known object – in this case, an Apollo Lunar Module. The first example is film footage from Apollo 9 taken in low-Earth orbit with an automatic 16mm DAC camera mounted to the open hatch of the CSM aiming “up” towards the Lunar Module (which was docked to the nose of the CSM at the time). Astronaut Rusty Schweickhart (LMP) can be seen standing on the porch of the LM, where he was conducting an EVA to test and verify the performance of the Apollo A7-L spacesuit and PLSS life support pack. A magnified split-screen closeup of the LM’s Rendevzous Radar Antenna allows for a direct comparative analysis of the raw footage versus the “stacked” enhancement as an example to demonstrate the improvements in clarity that can be gained.

The second demonstration example is not actually DAC footage, but rather is television footage from the Apollo 15 mission showing the LM “Falcon” sitting on the lunar surface, taken with the tripod-mounted GCTA-TV camera. I chose this example of raw GCTA-TV footage because it clearly suffers from rather severe noise issues, providing another good demonstration of the enhancement potential that frame-stacking can offer. As you can plainly see in both the DAC and GCTA-TV examples showing the LM, the stack enhancements offer considerable improvement in image clarity, allowing us to extract detail that in some cases may appear to not even be detectable when viewing the raw footage.

This presentation here is just the first part of a multi-part series focusing on the truth (and the lies) in the Apollo DAC footage. Hope you enjoy, and stay tuned for more to come!

Cheers,
LunaCognita

Keep them coming, LC, we be diggin’ it…

Apollo 12 – Pete Conrad – SLA panel “Leaving Area at a High Rate of Speed.”

Ha ha hahaha…

So, apparently, we’re to think that discarded pieces of our spacecraft can just take off on their own, eh?

Right.

Well… as you can clearly hear… Pete doesn’t believe it for one second… “Gee whiz” indeed! Good man, our Pete. Right on, man.

Hey, NASA… Take off, eh!

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

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

Apollo 14 , EVA 1 – “We’ve Had Visitors Again”

Edgar Mitchell and Alan Shepard on the Moon discussing the “Visitors”

This exchange always brings a smile… so matter-of-fact… so mundane… so… intriguing!

In my humble opinion, they’re being quite serious — but in a manner calculated to be taken as quite light hearted by the average listener. To hint at something that affected them deeply, (which makes me hold them ever dearer), yet still not break their military secrecy requirements. Same for the “Santa Claus” remarks and others made during the various missions.

Naturally we all want to know exactly what those words really meant; not to mention how they knew the visitors had been there in the first place; but the same loyal and patriotic quality that led to those wonderfully conceived spur of the moment quotes means that they’re not going to betray their oaths.

Although I must say that that may be starting to change in hearing commentary from Edgar Mitchell, who’s in this film, Buzz Aldrin and Story Musgrave. Maybe Neil Armstrong made a hint, but I feel very strongly that the man should be left alone, and I’ll personally clock you if you don’t. The others are willing and able. Respect our heroes.

I will never, by the way, be at all comfortable with the need for classified broadcast channels, oaths of secrecy, withholding of evidence and all the other BS on missions for an allegedly civilian agency that haunts us to this day. The government surely doesn’t think too highly of us.

Apollo 15 – TV Flyover – UFO’s  shadow on lunar surface.

Fascinating. A clip excised from one of the broadcasts this one is… and do check out that lovely hugh speed, independently moving shadow! Woot! Note that the astronaut manning the camera most definitely notices it and does his level best to track it… without mentioning it!

That is really cool.

I speculatively suppose that the command module either just happened to be flying along a regular route, as it were, or they had themselves an escort. I suspect the former as being more likely and that they were just in a right-place right-time sort of continuum…

UFO spotted outside Apollo command module window?

Now this is a good one. And a new one on me! And on a television documentary, no less… very impressive. Good find Easy!

It’s pretty bright out there, so I imagine they were still in good proximity to home, but that object is definitely not something ordinary.

You’d need to go a long way to prove it’s one of those tedious ice particles. The motion just doesn’t say ice to me. You’re welcome to try of course.

The stationary one(s) are likely reflections as far as I can tell, but might be something else as well, I suppose.

– – – –

It’s been slow of late and work is encroaching on quality Fortean time (which I suppose is a good thing =)) so I thought I’d put a few little things together for a postable post.

Many thanks to eagle-eyed Pegasus researcher Easynow for these films.

Dee Andrew of Eye to the Sky

Dee Andrew of Eye to the Sky

This Saturday, February 6, tune in to Eye to the Sky radio with hostess Dee Andrew, and moi, (LOWFI founder Skylaire Alfvegren), master of disaster, as we discuss a number of subjects, including the Fortean mindset, my recent adventures in synchronicity, and undoubtedly, unexplained things in the sky.

7:00 pm (EST) 6:00 pm (CST) 5:00 pm (MST) 4:00 pm (PST).

(Shows are archived on the site, as well.)

listen: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/ufo-paranormal-radio-network

http://www.eye2thesky.net

You kids and your technology!

Madonne! Oh, man, is this good, folks… wicked good, even. Yes, dear readers, once again LunaCognita has managed to knock my socks right off with this video. Needless to say, I can hardly wait for the full version… because there are objects filmed here that I’ve not seen before, and they are spectacular. Where in the heck does LC find this stuff?

I imagine they’ve been ordered from the NASA archives, but how does one know which ones to buy? Connections within the Pegasus Research crew certainly help in that regard, but still… Oh, and, we mustn’t forget that most of the film that was shot hasn’t been released, still, as far as I am aware… oh how we’d all love to see those.

There is so much material at NASA that is classified… one wonders, if there’s nothing of interest up there besides a bunch of cool minerals… then why is there a need for assigning classified status to images, film and research documents at all? Hmmm?

This film can give some insight into that conundrum.

Amusing it is how the trolls and troglodytes commenting at YouTube call this ice and junk falling off the command and LEM modules. Too funny. Junk? Right, we build such fragile craft… Ice? Umm, this is the Moon, dude… Jeez!

Enjoy the mystery…

Hi everyone,
This brief presentation you will see here is just a bit of a teaser/trailer, showing a short segment from a larger video project I am currently in the process of working on. While the full presentation is still awhile away from being complete, I have received more than a few emails asking me about when my next video was going to come out, so I thought that in the interim, I would release this short segment just as a teaser to show a taste of some of the interesting visuals I plan to include in upcoming presentations where I will provide my own analysis of some of the Apollo-era films. All of the footage you will see here was captured on film during the Apollo missions to the Moon, shot by NASA astronauts. Originally exposed on 16mm film, this footage was taken using what was known as the “DAC” – the “Data Acquisition Camera”.Hope you enjoy,
Cheers!
LunaCognita

THE “DAC”
The Maurer “DAC” cameras used to shoot this footage were modified variable frame rate 16mm motion picture film cameras that were used by the various Apollo crews throughout their missions to the Moon to film scenes of interest through the windows of the spacecraft, as well as to shoot exterior footage during lunar surface “moonwalk” operations and Trans-Earth-Coast EVA ops in cis-lunar space during that return-to-Earth phase of the missions.

When it was being used in “automatic” mode, the DAC camera could be set by the astronaut to expose the film within it’s magazine at one of three set frame-rates – 1, 6 or 12 frames-per-second. In the 1 fps mode, the DAC also could be (and occasionally was) used as a still picture camera to shoot single frames of film.

When placed in “semi-automatic” mode, the DAC camera also offered a 24 fps filming capability, although that mode was used somewhat sparingly during the Apollo program as it only allowed for a maximum 3.7 minutes of run time before a film magazine change was required. More typically, one of the three different “auto” modes were used in order to take advantage of the frame-rate control capability to optimize film usage. These slower frame rate settings of course means that when filming in one of those modes, the DAC was functioning more as a sequential still camera rather than a true 24fps motion picture camera (I realize all motion picture film cameras are essentially stop-motion sequential still cameras, so I am referring to the frame-rate playback issues here). The DAC camera could be used as a hand-held movie camera or it could be hard-mounted to various points inside or outside the spacecraft (or to the LRV or the MET during lunar surface ops) in order to provide a stable platform and hands-free filming capability.

LunaCognita
January 20, 2010

YouTube commenter VideoGearHead said… (I thought this was nice…)

1:38 WTF?!!
1:48 busted-up glass dome?
2:21 fractured moon?
Wowa!

5 million stars!

One more thing…and this frosts my jaw the most…I watched the missions to the moon. I remember when I was in the Boy Scouts spending two bucks to have my name put on the Voyager craft. I remember waiting in anticipation to see really cool pictures of our own solar system – Saturn etc. – and remembering them not being what I expected and having to wait YEARS to see them.

Thank YOU for your vision!