Here’s a change of pace. A UFO video that I DON’T believe.
A video has been posted on The Liberty Digest that claims that The Space Shuttle Columbia (STS-107) was shot down by UFO’s. The destruction of Columbia on reentry and death of her crew was tragic enough. There is no place for video shenanigans which use the tragedy to further personal agendas. To joke about the crash is in bad taste but to pass something off as fact in beyond the pale.
Like this:
Q: What do the Columbia crash and Ted Bundy have in common?
A: They both left bodies in four different States.
See? That was funny because we were joking. This video just lies and lies poorly.
Watch the video before I rip it apart….
[youtube_sc url=”http://youtu.be/b3hEUfRq-vg”]
WOW! Wasn’t that Earth shaking? Read the following and replay the video and listen closely starting at 9:24.
9:24 Gemini VII: “Gemini Seven Gemini Seven How do you read?”
9:27 Houston: “Loud and clear. Seven. Go ahead.”
9:29 Gemini VII: “I have a bogey at 10 o’clock high. “
9:31 Houston: “This is Houston. Say again, VII. “
9:34 Gemini VII: “Said we have a bogey at 10 o’clock high. ”
9:45 STS 73 Catherine Coleman :“We have an unidentified flying object.”
9:52 Apollo 12 Pete Conrad- “It seems to be tagging along with us.”
So much for NASA transmissions.
Always remember to avoid obvious mistakes when photoshopping a picture.
The video goes on to explain that the shot of the International Space Station was to “calibrate their camera”. I take test shots with my camera all the time but the ISS was on the other side of the planet when Columbia was on her re-entry trajectory. I think the hoaxers added the ISS shot as cool filler material.
Come to think of it, where did the pictures of the “wreckage” come from anywhere? After Columbia the ISS started to document the condition of Shuttles AS THEY UNDOCKED FROM THE ISS. There was some effort to get pictures of shuttle launches from the ISS. Maybe that’s where the hoaxers got this idea from. Once again, orbital mechanics prevent the ISS to be close enough to see the rentry. If the ISS were close enough it would also be on a reentry trajectory and burn up in the atmosphere.
First of all, I agree it is a hoax and in bad taste. Secondly, he does call bullshit himself on the logo thing at about 13:15. I think we simply have an elaborate video project here. I myself have made 3D rendering video and it is not a big thing to create the debris fields. Also, I want to point out they are NOT moving as they should, but as you might THINK they should if not taking physics into account. The force that made those parts move that far away that fast would be still making them move away at that speed. In what is still suppose to appear as a relative weightless moment and all pieces moving together, why are the pieces not still moving apart and expressing simple laws of entropy and inertia? You are seeing what Hollywood would show as a dramatic debris field. It is not realistic, but intended to show in a handy video frame the dramatic image of a destroyed craft. A real one would have very little of those parts still near as they would be scattered and still following the original trajectories from when they were separated in what ever accident or event removed them from the original structure. They would not move away and then follow at a handy distance for filming. Then there is the obvious question of where those images are coming from. If you wanted to go the other way with this, the images could have been taken from sooner than stated and eventually the debris would have moved out of range of the camera and fallen into the atmosphere. We are shown images, given sound bites and information as those in charge decide we should get it, almost always with certain delays to allow editing and censoring. We only have the publicly stated time table to place these events with and can’t take them as absolute if the event itself is under examination. I give the points though for making some of the other pieces of debris in enough detail that the slightly fuzzy images of it make it look good. The untrained observer would tend to be very impressed. The final giveaway is the name is gone. They clearly show the fuselage near the cockpit and every ship had the name clearly painted over the escape hatch and starting under the far left cockpit window. There is NOTHING there. Not that part of it is damaged, but there is no hint of any name at all there. There are dents and smudges, but where you can clearly see the black and white lines, the area where there should be a name is entirely blank…bullshit flag thrown.
When are these idiots going to get a life. They always have to claim something stupid. Next they’ll probably say Elvis pulled the trigger. Grow up guys and get a life.
I too believe this be a hoax. As I was watching I asked myself who is close enough to take videos. Also it appears the shuttle is at an altidude high enough to spread debris over the planet for months not just in Texas and on east. With that said, as far as I know no damage on the left wing was ever seen or even looked for by personal on the ISS. With that said , I can buy into the megalighting theory. If there was a thunderstorm over southern California along the flight path a spirit or sprite could have developed above the the thunder storm and emitted a mega strike as the shuttle passed being attracked by the plasma stream of the heat sheild. In other words being in the wrong place at the right time. Just an observation.
the sts107 has the nasa logo !!!! if it´s a hoax or not, well… no comment there
If it exploded why isn’t anything spinning? None of the debris is spinning at all! Also, who is videotaping the debris?
Totally, TOTALLY BOGUS!!!
Usually I do not read article on blogs, but I wish to say that this write-up very
forced me to check out and do so! Your writing style has been amazed me.
Thanks, quite great post.
Dear Alien Visitor,
Usually, I don’t let SPAM survive on this site. However, I find your site link interesting and have decided to show mercy. At least it’s not selling Viagra.
Cheers.
So duplicate it genius. Prove it can be done, show us your debris field skills.
Dill,
So I take it that you’re also raising the bullshit flag?
Thanks for the Comment,
Walt
check the date on this video.
Thanks Alec.
Here’s the info on the video Alec mentioned:
“Uploaded on Feb 4, 2009
A video I made to show how the Shuttle may look if it was destroyed in space. Filmed from the ISS or maybe another Shuttle. All made with real photo’s of the Shuttle then I used Photoshop to make it look damaged and in pieces. Then I put it in space using After Effects.”
So it was a CGI project that some asshat then took and posted. Excuse me the dude that did the video straight up said it was fake. I don’t think he was involved with the asshat that posted what we’re talking about here.
1. Who took the photo’s?
2. Ejecta do not travel in perfect parallel.
3. Explosions bend things.
4. The outline of the shuttle is superimposed – literally outlined.
5. The debris would not end up any where near the landing site, if the craft broke up before the final “burn.” The Shuttle must alter course + decelerate, “burn.” Then I believe there is another “burn” to decelerate before entry, to reduce friction and heating. So the debris would be pointed in the wrong direction and remain in a decaying orbit.
6. There is no Pop-corn. None of the surfaces are peeled outward, inward, or melted?
7. Some of the lettering appears to span the voids in the hull.
Brave Souls. Remember them, and
forget this silliness.
Thanks db, excellent comment.
Walt