Comments by "jim oberg" (@jimoberg3326) on "WatchMojo.com"
channel.
-
WOW! I completely believe you. I'm going to have to modify my FAQ:
It’s a sad distinction that aside from the crew, I may have been among the first to realize what was happening when, that Saturday morning, at home south of Houston, sitting at my PC to monitor the approaching landing, I got an exultant note from a friend in Waco with the report, "Columbia just passed overhead with a magnificent fireworks display, awesome!". Since I'd watched several earlier shuttle fireball passes over Texas on its way to landing in Florida, I knew that was NOT the way it was supposed to look. I turned on NASA TV to hear the fruitless comm checks, and see Leroy’s face realizing what it meant. My immediate concern was whether the crew, in pressure suits with parachutes, could have been thrown free. My phone began ringing. Within an hour I was live on ABC-TV News national broadcast [by phone] assessing first impressions and the rapidly diminishing chances of finding any of them alive. Soon I had a new contract with NBC and a new career path.
Please contact me. jameseoberg@comcast.net
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
#6 space tether -- scam:
The bizarre-looking tether and swarming dots video continues to fascinate viewers, particularly those who have been deliberately kept ignorant of fundamental context features of the event. The UFO community has been willfully incomplete in its internet descriptions of the event, with the apparent intent to mislead their audience. A fuller set of relevant contextual information can be found at
http://www.jamesoberg.com/ufo-sts-75_tether_swarm.html
First and most important, the swarm sequence occurred four days -- FOUR DAYS – after the breakaway [the fake impression that the edited version clearly intended to make was that the swarm showed up quickly in response to the break]. This was after the tether had fallen behind the shuttle in its orbit, and the faster shuttle pulled so FAR ahead that like a fast race car on an oval track, it 'lapped' the slower tether and overtook it from behind.
During this time, the shuttle crew started other experiments and resumed normal orbit housekeeping activities, such as routine waste water dumps. THAT is what the fraud about the length of the interval was meant to conceal.
Proof of the four-day separation can be seen in these daily video reports of the mission:
Flight Day 4 Video Highlights [Tether Deploy]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWU9SGJV4ZA
Flight Day 5 Video Highlights [Tether Break/Flyaway]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU9q1N9B-MM
Flight Day 9 Video Highlights [Tether Fly-Under with debris]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlIF0P9j0cM
As the shuttle overtook the tether, there were hours of observation time as they neared it and passed below [and off to the side] of it. Occasional blizzards of dots can be seen in this interval as ice flakes from that day’s water dump broke free and drifted off.
Normal behavior of these small particles, entrained by thruster plumes or other cabin gas releases, affected by the slight but still measurable air drag [when out of the shuttle’s slipstream], and possibly pushed by micro-jetting from sun-side sublimation, can be seen in this video of a routine water dump.
https://youtu.be/npSrbQSmjQA
The crew had time on the fly-by to get really good 70-mm handheld photography of the tether, and there were some dots in the images too. These views showed the tether hair-thin, and the dots as fuzzy out-of-focus objects that must have been within a few feet of the overhead window.
Since there is no connection between the tether break and the dot swarm sequence, the obvious question would be why the dots waited to show up until the shuttle caught up with the lost tether -- because if they had been there all along and were really as big as some UFO promoters claimed, they would have been big and bright enough to have been seen in the daytime skies of Earth as they passed across hundreds of millions of witnesses. Do the math, they would have been as big as the full moon.
Nobody saw them. That's because the dots were associated with the mearby SHUTTLE, not the distant tether.
The crew saw that the dots were close [and thus small] with their own two eyes. Binocular vision is an accurate range determinator out to tens of feet, perhaps as far as a hundred – as any baseball outfielder can demonstrate every game.
Nothing went BEHIND the tether. The video cameras observing it were ruggedized external units designed for monitoring crew spacewalk activities in the payload bay, in normal visible light. Because of the enormous range of brightness that would be encountered, the pixels were designed to protect the cabin TV displays by using a ‘max out’ limit of brightness, and peg ‘high’ at light gray. So anything bright crossing a zone that’s ALREADY ‘overbright’ isn’t going to change the pixel max level, it’s already as high as allowed. Hence the illusion of being eclipsed by a far-fatter-than-reality tether image. Also, in the camera itself, very bright pixels would bleed over to neighboring ones, making all bright objects [stars, satellites, cities, lightning, anything] slightly wider on screen, as seen by the artificial ‘fatness’ of the tether image [which was sunlit, NOT ‘glowing’ on its on]. The Mission Control console operating manual of this camera is shown at http://www.jamesoberg.com/INCO-CHB-CCTV1.PDF.
This information may be shocking to you. There's proof of it all. The reason it was withheld from you is obvious – to push you into an inaccurate assessment of the video. You and millions of other folks were victims of a deliberate UFO industry fraud. And it was so easy for them
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1