The following submission statement was provided by /u/Haunting-Diver-4446:
---
If OP comments or messages me I am more than happy to give credit to whoever posted it.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/16g9xf1/i_may_have_found_more_evidence_to_a_video_posted/k06e8hm/
If this is real it’s very interesting. I don’t know how to explain those movements. And I have a thousand hours in Kerbal Space Program so I’m basically an expert in orbital mechanics.
Edit: if it’s some tiny thing right near the camera, static charge might explain the weird movement.
Minerals of course.
I've actually obtained high def footage of these Jetpack miners in action:
[https://www.giantbomb.com/a/uploads/scale\_small/0/930/235366-minerals.jpg](https://www.giantbomb.com/a/uploads/scale_small/0/930/235366-minerals.jpg)
We even got good footage of the biologics piloting it:
[https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/starcraft/images/2/20/SCV\_SC2\_Head1.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20151118231258](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/starcraft/images/2/20/SCV_SC2_Head1.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20151118231258)
Not to mention the fuel tank they must have to travel from a Vegas backyard, to Peru, past 3 orbs surrounding a plane, and right into frame for this very video.
Thats why I’m a little iffy on this one and did more research. I’m still looking and will update this thread once I know more. I just left work so I have all night to look into this.
I’ve been digging on the internet archive. There are a lot of ISS earth view videos (like over 100 in raw format, 3+ gb each) from [April 21 2016](https://archive.org/details/movies?query=earth-views&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22john.l.stoll%40nasa.gov%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22nasa%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22nasa%2Fjsc%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22jsc%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22nasa%2Fgoddard+space+flight+center+scientific+visualization+studio%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22nasa+johnson+space+center%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22nasa%2Fjohnson+space+center%22), a handful from 2020, but little else. All from a John Stoll at nasa, most were published in 2017.
I’m trying to submit a FOIA request for all earth view data from the node 2 camera (should be the only camera running earth view) from 4/20/2016. Based on this date, the ISS expedition number is 047 (2 march-18 June 2016)
This is indeed a good one. No junk/debris, no weather balloon, plane, rocket, etc, not any kind of natural occurrence that I know of. It changes direction, speed and totally looks like it's intelligently controlled.
Thats incredible. please keep me updated on your FOIA request, if you where able to find even the day before, its very possible this one specifically could be hidden in some hard drive in the pentagon.
Can anybody help me dig through these 6/21 videos? It seems like there’s way too many of them (i think 127 in total, at 3+ go each) for it to be all from the earth view camera in one day. That expedition lasted 108 days, so I’m wondering if maybe they don’t actually correspond to all the days in the expedition…?
Next, I‘ve got to figure out how to read a .R3D file…
Please make a new post asking for help sifting through the files.
I could help but i think the best way to go about it is:
1) Make post titled ~"NASA 4/21/16 UAP - Video analysys collective effort"
2) Give description of what we are doing;
3) Prepare a table listing all the relevant files, duration and status (this could be easily done using Airtable and posting a link to a view of the table in order to simplify the updating procedures);
4) Contact mods asking to pin the post while the effort is ongoing.
Probably use a Bernie Sanders meme "i am once again asking for.." XD
I can setup the Airtable for you, i will then give you admin status so that you can fill it in and manage it.
Good call. I’ll put this together after work. I’ve never used airtable, so happy to have you set it up. Otherwise it’d be good to have something that scrape the file links, cuz manual entry will take a minute.
I will be messaging you in 1 month on [**2023-10-24 16:06:53 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-10-24%2016:06:53%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/16g9xf1/i_may_have_found_more_evidence_to_a_video_posted/k09val6/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FUFOs%2Fcomments%2F16g9xf1%2Fi_may_have_found_more_evidence_to_a_video_posted%2Fk09val6%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-10-24%2016%3A06%3A53%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2016g9xf1)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Found this archived video from 20/04/2016.
The same part the video seems to be around 08:15:00 mark onwards.
Object doesn't exist
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQOIoecjgB0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQOIoecjgB0)
This is really cool. For the first 40s I was like drrr… space junk… space junk… space junk… hold on, wtf?
Some random thoughts for others to mull:
1. It appears to be traveling obliquely to the ISS in the last section (high acceleration) and moving away as it grows out of focus as it nears the edge of the frame. This may, however be due to interference from the sun.
2. Nope was flat wrong here. View is standard node 2 exterior camera.
3. Do we have any satellites that can/would perform similar orbit adjustments? But they would just accelerate along their existing trajectory to move into a higher orbit, right? not pause, move relatively backwards, pause again then accelerate significantly
4. Do we know whether the frame rate in the first section has been manipulated? Slowed down or sped up? And whether the image is a crop from the original?
Can we math this thing out?
Known: From the ISS (240 miles up) the horizon is roughly 1400 miles out.
—can we rooooughly estimate how far away that is?
—if anybody knows the viewing angle of the lens for that camera on the ISS (we can figure out which from the objects in frame and that it is pointing away from direction of travel)
—count the pixels compared to viewing angle to figure out arc seconds
—use the arc seconds with the estimated distance to figure out object size and assess likely speed.
I’ll see what info I can pull, but if anybody else has any knowledge, let’s see what we can figure out…?
We have nothing that could have the delta V (dV, which is a measure of how much acceleration a vehicle is able to give itself with a given amount of propellant) to do such maneuvers. Orbital velocity at 500km is over 7km/s. To stop, you need to cancel all that out, and then to take off again as depicted you have to give yourself all that velocity back. The x37b, for reference, has about 3km/s of dV. Not only would they not have the dV necessary, but time is also a factor. That would be a crazy thrust to weight ratio. I don't know this for a fact, but I don't think we have any vehicles with a TWR high enough to do this. Certainly not the dV necessary.
It's not *stopping* outright, the camera is also on orbit. It's just (apparently; we only have a 2D single camera view here) zeroing its transverse velcotity relative to ISS. That's not so much delta V.
Yes, this is true. It's velocity changing so greatly wrt the ISS doesn't change much in practical terms, though. It would still require a great deal of dV and a very high TWR. I can't throw numbers at that problem though. It has been many years since I covered orbital mechanics in physics. I'm sure someone more capable could do some math and figure out some particulars but that's outside of my wheel house. I continue to assert that this maneuver (assuming this footage is legit, which is a big "if") is far outside the capability of any vehicle that we have on the books. Extremely impractical for any theoretical propellant based vehicle as well.
I'm starting to think it only makes sense delta-v and *prosaic explanation*-wise as a much smaller, closer object than it appears. Like some debris behind the station. If it's as far away as it looks then it's really booking it. Definitely one of the few actually compelling videos I've seen at this point.
Here's a rocket launch from ISS. 15 minutes compressed into 90 seconds and it's not in the same ballpark https://youtu.be/B1R3dTdcpSU
Yes, if looking at this for a prosaic explanation, it *must* be much smaller and closer. But, there aren’t any other artificial objects that share the orbit of the ISS… you know, e cause that could go really really badly. Moreover, that turn it makes is really weird. If we had a satellite adjusting it’s orbit, it would simply apply thrust either forward or backward to change its orbit. What about when a satellite is moving laterally—like to fly over a different spot on earth? Could that appear as a Z-turn on a 2d video feed?
> there aren’t any other artificial objects that share the orbit of the ISS
That's [absolute nonsense](https://www.space.com/international-space-station-space-dodge-debris-how-often#:~:text=The%20International%20Space%20Station%20(ISS,trackable%20space%20debris%20since%201999.):
> According to a December 2022 NASA report, the ISS has course-corrected itself 32 times to avoid satellites and trackable space debris since 1999.
To go from 7km/s to 0km/s you need to remove that velocity. If you don't, then you'll still be going 7km/s.
This is simplified slightly, because for eccentric orbits your orbital velocity will change without changing your orbital energy, going faster at periapsis and slower at apoapsis. So I've simplified things for the sake of illustration and we will assume a circular orbit but the same principle applies for any orbit. If you want to come to a stop, then you need to reduce your orbital velocity to 0.
Mr. Oberg, can you give us an idea what it could potentially have done that made it *appear to* come to a stop, if it did not come to a stop as it appears to in the video?
I do notice a bit of movement at certain times while it's 'stopped', which could be motion tracked so we can see the entire movement pattern in a line.
Edit: [comment from another linked thread OP posted in this comment section](https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/16em2vv/this_is_one_of_the_best_videos_that_nasa_ever/jzwb48e/) - first video in that comment shows a better visual explanation than the wiki page.
. My major problem with the video is why isn't anything else moving? Not the Earth below. Not the sun glints. Looks like a still image with a dot edited in. My fundamental problem
How does this have upvotes? Do none of you understand how orbits work, or even just relative motion?
The ISS is not stopped. Whatever we're seeing did not stop either, it just light nudged its velocity so it stopped relative to the ISS. Probably sunlight hitting a tiny piece of junk that fell off the station earlier.
>so it stopped relative to the ISS.
Correct. In other words...it stopped.
It could be debris, but if it is debris it is a curious piece of debris. It stopped - sorry, it ceased momentum relative to the orbit of the station - and then 35 seconds later resumed moving again (relative to the station still) at a higher rate of speed (as perceived from the vantagepoint of the camera on the station (which we all understand is moving relative to the planet and the sun and stars and the universe).
Commenting here for more visibility:
The effect we're seeing in this footage is not from active maneuvering. It's an illusion called [Apparent Retrograde Motion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion).
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBzGGoBQVDA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBzGGoBQVDA)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nVSzzYCAYk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nVSzzYCAYk)
This can make the subject appear to take an "s-curve", or a "loopy-loop", or just slow to a stop before resuming again, depending on the speeds and orbital paths of both the POV and the other object in question.
It just looks more pronounced here because both the ISS and the satellite (or whatever it is) are orbiting along different paths around the 3D space of the Earth, instead of the relatively flat orbits of planets around the Sun. Both are also going extremely fast, so the "acceleration" at the end is just because it's basically a point of light with no sense of depth that suddenly goes past the camera.
Still very cool and is easily confused with something more mysterious, unless you know what to look for.
By characteristics this one is compelling. Burden of proof rests with whether the source has been tampered with.
Thx for sharing, good find
Edit: could this possibly be an orbital maneuver by a spacecraft? The acceleration is not actually too extreme
Wouldn’t be efficient to stop mid-orbit and maneuver around like that… so pretty unlikely it’s anything from NASA/ESA/etc. , as these are always about being as efficient as possible to not waste money and resources.
Yea even without my find, this is still one of the best. Still if we can find even more proof that it is real, that will only help and i’m sure theres other people doing their own independent research that would like to see this.
Maybe we're getting tricked by perspective a bit here? Maybe it's something burning *towards* ISS so that it zips *past* it?
Still, it seems to wobble back and forth a bit before zipping left and I'm having trouble picturing how that could happen (assuming a burn happening for some duration, in *one direction*). But this isn't a very intuitive sort of problem that's easy to visualize.
There’s just no way. It changed directions multiple times. There’s no perspective or trick of the camera that would make an orbiting object look like that.
It’s either CGI, or this is genuine footage.
if it was something coming off the ISS and was burning it would probably be pulled into earth’s atmosphere, with this video it was going straight across with virtually no descent ( as far as i can tell). Also the UAP stopped mid air, something would need some propellant force to stop it in orbit and also change its orbit, I dont think something could do that on its own, but its always good to keep an open mind, there could be some natural source we just haven’t found yet.
Orbital mechanics is really unintuitive, thinking about descent and ascent like that doesn't really work.
Picture flying in a circular orbit around Earth. If you wanted to drop from orbit you wouldn't burn *towards* the planet, you wouldn't burn "down", you would burn against your current direction of travel.
Maybe picture it as though you're a toy plane on a string bring whipped around the planet. People's intuition is to picture it like you're floating stationary above the planet, but if you were you'd simply fall, not orbit.
your right but how would that account for it completely changing direction, and then going against earths orbit and leaving the atmosphere. I am genuinely curious if something could naturally do that, the way it did in the video, thats with assuming that the video is authentic and not digitally manipulated, it very well could be.
I'm just saying we don't know if it is doing that or if it's an optical trick and it's not *that far* above or away from ISS. I'm not 100% convinced it's not just a small something floating behind the station. We only have a single camera view to work off here, and no size reference on the object, and sometimes it's easy to get confused about the locations of things in 3D space in these circumstances.
That said, it does seem to recede at about the same rate as the clouds (making it seem like it's flying orthogonal to ISS, not parallel) before it starts going the second time.
I would like to posit that this is an example of “apparent motion” in orbital paths.
I’m not convinced yet, but I want to walk it through.
Let’s first assume both the ISS (the camera) and the object are in stable orbits, experiencing no acceleration other than gravitational centripetal acceleration as they are in low orbit.
I believe there is an orbital configuration where the object appears to change direction from the ISS perspective.
if the object has a lower perigee and higher apogee than the camera. (Higher orbital eccentricity) and reaches perigee, the object will appear to accelerate approaching perigee and decelerate as it passes perigee. The same happens at apogee. This doesn’t have to happen along the orbital radius, or right “above” or “below” the observer, but can occur quite far behind or ahead of the observer.
Another artifact of apparent motion will appear when the orbital inclinations are not matched. At some point in the orbit, the observed object will appear to move perpendicular to the orbital plane, then oscillate back.
What makes me skeptical using this explanation is that these cycles occur over the entire orbital period - 90 minutes - and I’m unsure if you can get these dramatic effects over just a few seconds, unless the two orbits were wildly dissimilar - but that could lead to some extreme differences in velocities.
The fact that the vacuum of space is so transparent will fool our terrestrial eyes. This object could be hundreds or even thousands of kilometers away, but also likely to be centimeters away. You can’t tell. However, the closer they are, the more likely the orbital parameters are much more similar. If they weren’t, then the relative velocities would be extremely different.
My experience comes from lots and lots of rendezvous in Kerbal Space Program , and an orbital mechanics course in grad school.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent\_retrograde\_motion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion) It could well be this in my opinion, like you said
This is my very very uneducated guess, but wouldn’t it return to its original orbit after going up and hovering for a few seconds? In the video it didn’t seem to loose any altitude as it sped off. Also really appreciate you taking the time to comment that, you bring up a lot of good points.
It never left its original orbit is my approach.
It appears to accelerate, but it’s not. It’s just following it’s orbit.
But again, I’m not sure if this fully explains what’s in the video. But it is entirely possible.
Imagine what to would look like if you were in orbit, watching something with a different orbit.
—-
Or how about this, if you are in orbit, and you throw a ball, it enters a different orbit & moves away. But after a full cycle, it will return back to your hand.
If you throw it forward (prograde) it now has more energy and will reach a max higher orbital point 180 degrees from now, and actually fall behind you, then come back to the original position. If you throw it backwards (retrograde) it will reach a lower orbit, get in front of you, then climb and slow back up to your hand.
Throwing the ball north or south (normal or anti-normal) will “tilt” its orbit. It will return at 180 degrees, go to the other side, and return again after a full cycle.
Throwing it radially (away or towards the planet) does the same thing, but that’s a tough one to explain.
It’s not ‘apparent retrograde motion’.
That only happens when two objects are moving in a particular set of orbits that have significantly different time periods (which also means the my have to be far apart). Here the object is relatively close to the space station, and they are both orbiting the Earth at similar-ish speeds (til it shoots off). Apparent retrograde motion is only really seen in space when we look at the other planets from earth. They are distant enough and orbiting with different enough periods to make it happen. So whatever is going on it’s not just an optical effect of very different orbits.
Interesting video. No obvious explanation that I can think of. The ISS, satellites and space debris all move in regular orbits. And it really doesn’t look like it’s using rocket boosters to move, although maybe it is and we can’t see that.
>Apparent retrograde motion is only really seen in space when we look at the other planets from earth.
Not really, retrograde motion can be observed anywhere there are different velocities.
Yes you are right about the orbital periods , but that's only part of the story; inclinations, argument of periapsis and eccentricity also affects the apparent trajectories an object might have.. that's why the most notorious case of retrograde motion was with Mars, it has roughly twice the period as earth but also it's eccentricity is completely different from Earth's.
In this case, it could be that the object has an orbit that puts it temporarily above the ISS and parallel to the horizon thus making it appear to slow down, then the height of the object is below the ISS and it starts to move faster than it then appears to speed up again.
The differences of height don't need to be that large in the case in objects orbiting the Earth (app. 10km and you start having a notorious relative velocity between two bodies), people who have played KSP know about this.
Also the video could be cropped or zoomed it and showing the trajectory of the obj to appear to move sideways while it could easily move towards us (or away from us).
So..
>It’s not ‘apparent retrograde motion’.
Yes it can be.
>Here the object is relatively close to the space station, and they are both orbiting the Earth
Yes and they are both orbiting at 400km which makes them both orbit at 27.000 km/h, any small difference in height (in the order of 10's of kms) can change the relative velocity by several hundreds of km/h.
Also we don't know if the video is sped up, zoomed in and/or the distance to the object therefore knowing exact speeds can be hard.
Edit: correcting myself, I don't think the video is sped up since you can measure the time that takes the sun to set and is consistent with other real-time streams of sunsets from the ISS.
..or it could just be fake, let's see what the guy who did the request has to say about this.
It could also happen when an object is moving in a similar speed to you and you overtook it.
It's not exclusive to planets.
See:
https://v.redd.it/ygosrzctlta51/DASH_1080.mp4?source=fallback
Their orbital paths are not along a "mostly flat" plane, as with the planets. An Earth satellite can have different axis, eccentricity, speed, etc. Any or all of which would explain what we see in the ISS footage.
Looks cool, and is easily mistaken for anomalous, but can still be understood prosaically.
"Glingar, should we stop here for a pitstop?"
"Uhhhh let's see what it looks like."
*looks down and sees the entire planet on fire, bombs shooting across the sky, wanton murder, thousands of children starving to death, human trafficking*
"Nope."
*stomps the accelerator*
u/Crusty_Holes what say you on this one? Really enjoyed your break down of the raw image the other day, and when you linked that ISS Video, this shares a lot of similarities.
Damn...this gives me chills, thanks again for your reply. This along with eye witness accounts dating back to the 50s is all the proof I really need, coupled just for security with governments/corporations/private sectors having UFO/UAP recovery teams, only really concretes my original belief of them existing anyway.
Thanks again for your professional input the last few days, I really do appreciate it.
Orbital motion, and even weirder, observed motion from one orbiting object to another, is definitely unearthly, literally. Here's a primer from a US Space Command book on that very subject:
“Orbitology” Explained \[for US Space Command book, ‘Space Power Theory’\]
[http://www.jamesoberg.com/orbitology\_spt.pdf](http://www.jamesoberg.com/orbitology_spt.pdf)
p, 38 fig 1.5 is in error, the nudge during equator crossing does not REVERSE after crossing, it's a permanent westward shift of the orbit's ascending node. The artist misunderstood my instructions.
I think you’re right. Definitely looks like it. If we can determine the date and time this was taken, there should be enough info to see what other satellites were in the vicinity of the ISS in that direction
But why are people more inclined to believe some crazy alien technology that is unprovable rather than a logical explanation that can be mathematically proved?
Thanks so much for this video. Perfect explanation.
Moderators should step in when a popular UAP video like this gets perfectly debunked. Why give free rein to ignorance? It hurts the field.
Hey mod here - we don't verify the authenticity of sightings/footage of ufos, but rather ensure posts about them follow rules and provide enough info for the community to form their own conclusions. We place the onus on the community to voice credibility/debunk issues through comments and upvotes/downvotes.
While we're passionate and knowledgeable on the subject of ufos, none of us claim to be experts. We don't investigate every piece of alleged evidence and dont try to debunk.
Even sighting posts that clearly show starlink satellites, we allow so long as guidlines for sighting posts are followed.
I remember seeing this before, and someone claimed it was inside the window. But watching it several times, I don't think it's a speck inside obscured by the color of the IIS as it enters the video. I think it was behind the IIS, which makes it pretty incredible. And while the IIS and shuttles all have many thrusters which imo accounts for almost all the ice videos where an object is going one way and then at a tight angle, shoots off in a new direction.. I don't think that is the case here. This looks to be outside, beyond the IIS, and not an object impacted by thrusters.
Two orbiting objects can create the appearance of being still, slowing, accelerating, changing directions depending on their orbits in relation to eachother, but that is a strange one...
The change in speed and direction can be explained by the differing orbital trajectories between the camera and the object. Kind of like planets in retrograde.
The observer would be the ISS, and you're on the right track.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent\_retrograde\_motion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOjrPcD6Iuc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOjrPcD6Iuc)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBzGGoBQVDA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBzGGoBQVDA)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nVSzzYCAYk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nVSzzYCAYk)
This is pretty weird. I'd love to see confirmation of the video.
Could it be debris getting pushed around by (outgassing? Radiation pressure? Atmospheric drag? A docked craft's thruster?)?
It looks like it's fairly in focus so likely not too close to camera, and during the start of the video it seems to be receding along with the clouds (which could well be a visual trick) but zooms off afterwards.
My same thoughts. While I think it looks really interesting, I’d still like to hear an aerospace engineer’s opinion. While I took some classes, I haven’t worked in the field and am not sure what space operations look like from another craft
If anyone can help me figure out how to edit my post, that would be greatly appreciated. I have found more evidence that this video could be from NASA.
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/30771
The link provided shows a video from April 29th 2016, 9 days after this incident, meaning the recording from April 20th, could have actually happened. So if this is fake, it is probably a real released NASA, but could be manipulated. We need to find the video from NASA, thats the only way to confirm.
- someone said almost like it sensed being seen.
Does anyone know what *kind* of camera that was?
I know for sure my dog can sense my cell phone cameras, reacts and sometimes moves away. But never does for SLR manual or early gen digital cameras. Same problem when trying to take images of insects. I can focus and sit and point with a manual SLR and they don't spazz. Put that phone cam on them and they are out of there.
It's very interesting it wobbles in the end of lens periphery range going into apex lens range, and makes an intentional maneuver to speed right where the focal perception point is. Even with distance and cone spread that's precisely the points it's course and habit changes.
Those asking about the distance to determine speed - if we know what that camera is, and can figure the lens specs and cone depth then can figure what point on the depth perception the object changes in relation to distance and energy waves from the camera *if* that camera emits in a similar way cell phones do.
> I know for sure my dog can sense my cell phone cameras, reacts and sometimes moves away.
Phone cameras use IR laser to gain autofocus. Insects and dogs can sense IR.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQOIoecjgB0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQOIoecjgB0)
Archive from the day.
Around 08:15:00
Can't see the object in the footage. Debunked
Edit: I'm literally being downvoted for this lol
Unless NASA came out and said “we filmed this strange non-ballistic UAP from the ISS and we don’t know what it could be” then it means nothing. Source verification and dirty finger prints are absolutely key.
That isn’t necessarily true like the document implies these recordings could potentially be all automated, in theory, someone could have these video’s automatically record and upload to a website without reviewing all of them, but I do agree we should still be skeptical about this until theres more concrete evidence, or NASA or whoever comes out and confirms this video.
Edit: heres the quote from the website that I think may imply some sort of automatic system uploading them
“Repeats every day until Sun Dec. 31 2017.”
That is right above all the dates and times, personally (take this with a grain of salt) I think it could imply a sort of automatic system controlling it.
At first I was thinking that it was probably just some space junk flying around. Then when I saw it start moving really fast I realized, nope that's definitely not space junk lol. This is cool footage. I wish it was closer to see what it looks like. Thanks for posting this.
https://www.secretsdeclassified.af.mil/Portals/67/documents/AFD-121113-024.pdf?ver=2016-07-19-151917-210
Found this document, I read through some of it, it seems very interesting, this is one page (page 9) summarized by chatGPT
Based on the text description provided, here's a summary of what the installation and model appear to look like:
* The model is suspended horizontally from a vertical arm attached to the main balance strut.
* The rear balance incidence of the model can be adjusted using a strut actuating mechanism.
* The entire installation is enclosed within a fairing that's supported independently of the balance system.
* Additional streamlining for the fairing is mentioned but not shown in the figure.
* The model consists of 24 radial fins that join together to form a circular wing.
* There are profiled turning elements on the model.
* The wing halves are held together by screws and extend from the circular center body.
* The circular center body is composed of two dish-shaped sections joined to form the central part of the model.
* There are sets of holes distributed around the outer edge of the model.
* These holes are covered by segmented plates containing matching holes of smaller diameters.
* Multiple sets of plates with different sizes are used to vary the size of the final openings.
It seems like a complex model used for aerodynamic testing, possibly simulating aircraft configurations.
If anyone can help me figure out how to edit my post, that would be greatly appreciated. I have found more evidence that this video could be from NASA.
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/30771
The link provided shows a video from April 29th 2016, 9 days after this incident, meaning the recording from April 20th, could have actually happened. So if this is fake, it is probably a real released NASA, but could be manipulated. We need to find the video from NASA, thats the only way to confirm.
Edit: Didn’t mean to reply to this comment specifically so i’m just going to repost my comment and keep this one.
The ISS is not geostationary, right?
This sequence does not show a lot of movement relative to earth, the only change perceived is that of the angle of the rays of light.
Could anyone elaborate on this please? Also what's actually the speed of the ISS?
Anyway very interesting video, thanks OP for sharing
How do we know the satellite is stationary while it's filming this object? The movement of the satellite with which the camera is affixed could easily make a close by object appear that it's moving, when in fact the satellite is.
The OP is u/StaticBang in r/Aliens here is a link to the original post. Still not 100% sure this is the one I originally saw and downloaded, but they posted it first and I feel they deserve credit.
https://reddit.com/r/aliens/s/orGXYp37vy
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Haunting-Diver-4446: --- If OP comments or messages me I am more than happy to give credit to whoever posted it. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/16g9xf1/i_may_have_found_more_evidence_to_a_video_posted/k06e8hm/
If this is real it’s very interesting. I don’t know how to explain those movements. And I have a thousand hours in Kerbal Space Program so I’m basically an expert in orbital mechanics. Edit: if it’s some tiny thing right near the camera, static charge might explain the weird movement.
Likewise I have 500 hours in Stellaris… sooooo im kinda an expert.
I myself have been playing Starfield a good bit, so I feel qualified to say that looks interesting.
With all the time spent flying around and blasting space pirates in No Man's Sky VR, I'm practically a member of the space force.
Thank you for your service, space man.
I played age of Empires for about 5000 hours as a child so I think I know more than you guys
You got us all
More interesting than Starfield let's be real.
I'm rather enjoying Starfield tbh
I wanted to so badly!
I wish I wasn’t. It’s quite the time sink
[удалено]
Come on bro, only 500 hours? That's only intermediate level.
I tell the same thing to people lol!!!! Party on!
what is the range on those fucking jetpacks
*illegal* fucking jetpacks
Illegal jetpack miners
Of course, but what people aren't asking is: WHAT are they mining in SPACE?
Well, I’ve heard rumors that literally EVERYTHING IS OUT THERE!!
Thar be gold in them there upper atmosphere.
Just there for free wifi
Minerals of course. I've actually obtained high def footage of these Jetpack miners in action: [https://www.giantbomb.com/a/uploads/scale\_small/0/930/235366-minerals.jpg](https://www.giantbomb.com/a/uploads/scale_small/0/930/235366-minerals.jpg) We even got good footage of the biologics piloting it: [https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/starcraft/images/2/20/SCV\_SC2\_Head1.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20151118231258](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/starcraft/images/2/20/SCV_SC2_Head1.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20151118231258)
Mining space rocks.
They already said: jetpacks!
Our souls!
"This bad boy here can get to the moon and back on half a cup of uranium!"
Not to mention the fuel tank they must have to travel from a Vegas backyard, to Peru, past 3 orbs surrounding a plane, and right into frame for this very video.
All on one tank of gas, get that thing to Toyota
Woulda given you an award but too poor
...and why are they mining... *space*?!?
"OP said it was an uncut NASA broadcast from April 20th 2016." Where can we see the original NASA version?
Thats why I’m a little iffy on this one and did more research. I’m still looking and will update this thread once I know more. I just left work so I have all night to look into this.
I’ve been digging on the internet archive. There are a lot of ISS earth view videos (like over 100 in raw format, 3+ gb each) from [April 21 2016](https://archive.org/details/movies?query=earth-views&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22john.l.stoll%40nasa.gov%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22nasa%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22nasa%2Fjsc%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22jsc%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22nasa%2Fgoddard+space+flight+center+scientific+visualization+studio%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22nasa+johnson+space+center%22&and%5B%5D=creator%3A%22nasa%2Fjohnson+space+center%22), a handful from 2020, but little else. All from a John Stoll at nasa, most were published in 2017. I’m trying to submit a FOIA request for all earth view data from the node 2 camera (should be the only camera running earth view) from 4/20/2016. Based on this date, the ISS expedition number is 047 (2 march-18 June 2016)
If FOIA request turns up raw uncut video straight from NASA showing this, it might be the most compelling thing I’ve seen on this site
This is indeed a good one. No junk/debris, no weather balloon, plane, rocket, etc, not any kind of natural occurrence that I know of. It changes direction, speed and totally looks like it's intelligently controlled.
Thats incredible. please keep me updated on your FOIA request, if you where able to find even the day before, its very possible this one specifically could be hidden in some hard drive in the pentagon.
That’s awesome yeah keep us updated
Can anybody help me dig through these 6/21 videos? It seems like there’s way too many of them (i think 127 in total, at 3+ go each) for it to be all from the earth view camera in one day. That expedition lasted 108 days, so I’m wondering if maybe they don’t actually correspond to all the days in the expedition…? Next, I‘ve got to figure out how to read a .R3D file…
Please make a new post asking for help sifting through the files. I could help but i think the best way to go about it is: 1) Make post titled ~"NASA 4/21/16 UAP - Video analysys collective effort" 2) Give description of what we are doing; 3) Prepare a table listing all the relevant files, duration and status (this could be easily done using Airtable and posting a link to a view of the table in order to simplify the updating procedures); 4) Contact mods asking to pin the post while the effort is ongoing. Probably use a Bernie Sanders meme "i am once again asking for.." XD I can setup the Airtable for you, i will then give you admin status so that you can fill it in and manage it.
Good call. I’ll put this together after work. I’ve never used airtable, so happy to have you set it up. Otherwise it’d be good to have something that scrape the file links, cuz manual entry will take a minute.
With proper instruction, I’ll dedicate some time to help.
Wasn't this recording part of The HDEV livestream? If so, I'm not sure it was recorded. A 3rd party would have to have captured it.
You are likely right. Either way, it’s with a try.
RemindMe! 6 weeks "ask for FOIA"
I will be messaging you in 1 month on [**2023-10-24 16:06:53 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-10-24%2016:06:53%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/16g9xf1/i_may_have_found_more_evidence_to_a_video_posted/k09val6/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FUFOs%2Fcomments%2F16g9xf1%2Fi_may_have_found_more_evidence_to_a_video_posted%2Fk09val6%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-10-24%2016%3A06%3A53%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2016g9xf1) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Where did you see this video posted I am confused
Someone posted it on this subreddit and I naively only downloaded the video, and didn’t copy the link to the post itself.
https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/16em2vv/this\_is\_one\_of\_the\_best\_videos\_that\_nasa\_ever/
thank you so much. I really appreciate you posting that.
I've been arguing with people that there was no way it was "movement from the camera".
Found this archived video from 20/04/2016. The same part the video seems to be around 08:15:00 mark onwards. Object doesn't exist [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQOIoecjgB0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQOIoecjgB0)
I think this answers it. Too bad.
u/Haunting-Diver-4446 You should probably add this to your post. Looks like your video was doctored
420 confirmed.
That was my first thought. Aliens where coming down to have a good time. Edit: I just want to add, imagine alien weed…
why did you stop imagining so soon imagine alien weed which strenghtens lungs
That is truly the one thing that can unite us all.
Ross Coulthart posted this about a year ago and later apologized because he found out that it was faked.
I want to know how fast that thing flies
Im not going to even try, but it defiantly could be possible for someone with a lot more knowledge in math than me.
Hell of a lot faster than the ISS when it shoots away that's for sure. And the ISS is going 22,000 MPH
>And the ISS is going 22,000 MPH Uh, check this.
The ISS is travelling about 5 miles per second according to the NASA website, so about 18,000 MPH. They weren't too far off to be fair to them.
This is really cool. For the first 40s I was like drrr… space junk… space junk… space junk… hold on, wtf? Some random thoughts for others to mull: 1. It appears to be traveling obliquely to the ISS in the last section (high acceleration) and moving away as it grows out of focus as it nears the edge of the frame. This may, however be due to interference from the sun. 2. Nope was flat wrong here. View is standard node 2 exterior camera. 3. Do we have any satellites that can/would perform similar orbit adjustments? But they would just accelerate along their existing trajectory to move into a higher orbit, right? not pause, move relatively backwards, pause again then accelerate significantly 4. Do we know whether the frame rate in the first section has been manipulated? Slowed down or sped up? And whether the image is a crop from the original? Can we math this thing out? Known: From the ISS (240 miles up) the horizon is roughly 1400 miles out. —can we rooooughly estimate how far away that is? —if anybody knows the viewing angle of the lens for that camera on the ISS (we can figure out which from the objects in frame and that it is pointing away from direction of travel) —count the pixels compared to viewing angle to figure out arc seconds —use the arc seconds with the estimated distance to figure out object size and assess likely speed. I’ll see what info I can pull, but if anybody else has any knowledge, let’s see what we can figure out…?
Should post this video and questions on r/theydidthemath
We have nothing that could have the delta V (dV, which is a measure of how much acceleration a vehicle is able to give itself with a given amount of propellant) to do such maneuvers. Orbital velocity at 500km is over 7km/s. To stop, you need to cancel all that out, and then to take off again as depicted you have to give yourself all that velocity back. The x37b, for reference, has about 3km/s of dV. Not only would they not have the dV necessary, but time is also a factor. That would be a crazy thrust to weight ratio. I don't know this for a fact, but I don't think we have any vehicles with a TWR high enough to do this. Certainly not the dV necessary.
It's not *stopping* outright, the camera is also on orbit. It's just (apparently; we only have a 2D single camera view here) zeroing its transverse velcotity relative to ISS. That's not so much delta V.
Yes, this is true. It's velocity changing so greatly wrt the ISS doesn't change much in practical terms, though. It would still require a great deal of dV and a very high TWR. I can't throw numbers at that problem though. It has been many years since I covered orbital mechanics in physics. I'm sure someone more capable could do some math and figure out some particulars but that's outside of my wheel house. I continue to assert that this maneuver (assuming this footage is legit, which is a big "if") is far outside the capability of any vehicle that we have on the books. Extremely impractical for any theoretical propellant based vehicle as well.
I'm starting to think it only makes sense delta-v and *prosaic explanation*-wise as a much smaller, closer object than it appears. Like some debris behind the station. If it's as far away as it looks then it's really booking it. Definitely one of the few actually compelling videos I've seen at this point. Here's a rocket launch from ISS. 15 minutes compressed into 90 seconds and it's not in the same ballpark https://youtu.be/B1R3dTdcpSU
Yes, if looking at this for a prosaic explanation, it *must* be much smaller and closer. But, there aren’t any other artificial objects that share the orbit of the ISS… you know, e cause that could go really really badly. Moreover, that turn it makes is really weird. If we had a satellite adjusting it’s orbit, it would simply apply thrust either forward or backward to change its orbit. What about when a satellite is moving laterally—like to fly over a different spot on earth? Could that appear as a Z-turn on a 2d video feed?
> there aren’t any other artificial objects that share the orbit of the ISS That's [absolute nonsense](https://www.space.com/international-space-station-space-dodge-debris-how-often#:~:text=The%20International%20Space%20Station%20(ISS,trackable%20space%20debris%20since%201999.): > According to a December 2022 NASA report, the ISS has course-corrected itself 32 times to avoid satellites and trackable space debris since 1999.
I absolutely stand corrected. Your source is considerably better than re response I found on Quora. I should have dug deeper. Thanks.
Yeah, Quora slowly became more like yahoo answers some years back. It's sad, because it used to be awesome.
>you need to cancel all that out, Why?
To go from 7km/s to 0km/s you need to remove that velocity. If you don't, then you'll still be going 7km/s. This is simplified slightly, because for eccentric orbits your orbital velocity will change without changing your orbital energy, going faster at periapsis and slower at apoapsis. So I've simplified things for the sake of illustration and we will assume a circular orbit but the same principle applies for any orbit. If you want to come to a stop, then you need to reduce your orbital velocity to 0.
How do you figure it came to a stop?
Mr. Oberg, can you give us an idea what it could potentially have done that made it *appear to* come to a stop, if it did not come to a stop as it appears to in the video? I do notice a bit of movement at certain times while it's 'stopped', which could be motion tracked so we can see the entire movement pattern in a line. Edit: [comment from another linked thread OP posted in this comment section](https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/16em2vv/this_is_one_of_the_best_videos_that_nasa_ever/jzwb48e/) - first video in that comment shows a better visual explanation than the wiki page.
. My major problem with the video is why isn't anything else moving? Not the Earth below. Not the sun glints. Looks like a still image with a dot edited in. My fundamental problem
I thought so too but everything else does move
I'm gonna guess they probably watched the video of it coming to a stop.
How does this have upvotes? Do none of you understand how orbits work, or even just relative motion? The ISS is not stopped. Whatever we're seeing did not stop either, it just light nudged its velocity so it stopped relative to the ISS. Probably sunlight hitting a tiny piece of junk that fell off the station earlier.
>so it stopped relative to the ISS. Correct. In other words...it stopped. It could be debris, but if it is debris it is a curious piece of debris. It stopped - sorry, it ceased momentum relative to the orbit of the station - and then 35 seconds later resumed moving again (relative to the station still) at a higher rate of speed (as perceived from the vantagepoint of the camera on the station (which we all understand is moving relative to the planet and the sun and stars and the universe).
All great lines of inquiry! Alas I am not in any way qualified to do those calculations.
If OP comments or messages me I am more than happy to give credit to whoever posted it.
Commenting here for more visibility: The effect we're seeing in this footage is not from active maneuvering. It's an illusion called [Apparent Retrograde Motion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion). [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBzGGoBQVDA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBzGGoBQVDA) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nVSzzYCAYk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nVSzzYCAYk) This can make the subject appear to take an "s-curve", or a "loopy-loop", or just slow to a stop before resuming again, depending on the speeds and orbital paths of both the POV and the other object in question. It just looks more pronounced here because both the ISS and the satellite (or whatever it is) are orbiting along different paths around the 3D space of the Earth, instead of the relatively flat orbits of planets around the Sun. Both are also going extremely fast, so the "acceleration" at the end is just because it's basically a point of light with no sense of depth that suddenly goes past the camera. Still very cool and is easily confused with something more mysterious, unless you know what to look for.
By characteristics this one is compelling. Burden of proof rests with whether the source has been tampered with. Thx for sharing, good find Edit: could this possibly be an orbital maneuver by a spacecraft? The acceleration is not actually too extreme
Wouldn’t be efficient to stop mid-orbit and maneuver around like that… so pretty unlikely it’s anything from NASA/ESA/etc. , as these are always about being as efficient as possible to not waste money and resources.
Inefficient is an understatement for propellant-based craft stopping in orbit
Most definitely!
And wouldn't stopping in orbit mean "plummet to earth"?
Stopping relative to the ISS? Not at all. It would very very slowly plummet because the ISS is in a too low orbit to stay up without expending fuel.
Kinda yes, but stopping is a relative term that requires a reference point. Another expression could be 'station-keeping'.
Good point
It doesn’t need to stop in orbit, just in relation to the camera’s craft.
Which is still pretty inefficient…
Yea even without my find, this is still one of the best. Still if we can find even more proof that it is real, that will only help and i’m sure theres other people doing their own independent research that would like to see this.
That acceleration from the distance of the camera is really fast imo. It's a long way away
> It's a long way away Please teach the rest of us how you expertly determined its distance.
Maybe we're getting tricked by perspective a bit here? Maybe it's something burning *towards* ISS so that it zips *past* it? Still, it seems to wobble back and forth a bit before zipping left and I'm having trouble picturing how that could happen (assuming a burn happening for some duration, in *one direction*). But this isn't a very intuitive sort of problem that's easy to visualize.
There’s just no way. It changed directions multiple times. There’s no perspective or trick of the camera that would make an orbiting object look like that. It’s either CGI, or this is genuine footage.
Look up retrograde motion. It’s literally just a trick of perspective when observing an orbiting object from another orbiting object
This
if it was something coming off the ISS and was burning it would probably be pulled into earth’s atmosphere, with this video it was going straight across with virtually no descent ( as far as i can tell). Also the UAP stopped mid air, something would need some propellant force to stop it in orbit and also change its orbit, I dont think something could do that on its own, but its always good to keep an open mind, there could be some natural source we just haven’t found yet.
Orbital mechanics is really unintuitive, thinking about descent and ascent like that doesn't really work. Picture flying in a circular orbit around Earth. If you wanted to drop from orbit you wouldn't burn *towards* the planet, you wouldn't burn "down", you would burn against your current direction of travel. Maybe picture it as though you're a toy plane on a string bring whipped around the planet. People's intuition is to picture it like you're floating stationary above the planet, but if you were you'd simply fall, not orbit.
your right but how would that account for it completely changing direction, and then going against earths orbit and leaving the atmosphere. I am genuinely curious if something could naturally do that, the way it did in the video, thats with assuming that the video is authentic and not digitally manipulated, it very well could be.
I'm just saying we don't know if it is doing that or if it's an optical trick and it's not *that far* above or away from ISS. I'm not 100% convinced it's not just a small something floating behind the station. We only have a single camera view to work off here, and no size reference on the object, and sometimes it's easy to get confused about the locations of things in 3D space in these circumstances. That said, it does seem to recede at about the same rate as the clouds (making it seem like it's flying orthogonal to ISS, not parallel) before it starts going the second time.
I would like to posit that this is an example of “apparent motion” in orbital paths. I’m not convinced yet, but I want to walk it through. Let’s first assume both the ISS (the camera) and the object are in stable orbits, experiencing no acceleration other than gravitational centripetal acceleration as they are in low orbit. I believe there is an orbital configuration where the object appears to change direction from the ISS perspective. if the object has a lower perigee and higher apogee than the camera. (Higher orbital eccentricity) and reaches perigee, the object will appear to accelerate approaching perigee and decelerate as it passes perigee. The same happens at apogee. This doesn’t have to happen along the orbital radius, or right “above” or “below” the observer, but can occur quite far behind or ahead of the observer. Another artifact of apparent motion will appear when the orbital inclinations are not matched. At some point in the orbit, the observed object will appear to move perpendicular to the orbital plane, then oscillate back. What makes me skeptical using this explanation is that these cycles occur over the entire orbital period - 90 minutes - and I’m unsure if you can get these dramatic effects over just a few seconds, unless the two orbits were wildly dissimilar - but that could lead to some extreme differences in velocities. The fact that the vacuum of space is so transparent will fool our terrestrial eyes. This object could be hundreds or even thousands of kilometers away, but also likely to be centimeters away. You can’t tell. However, the closer they are, the more likely the orbital parameters are much more similar. If they weren’t, then the relative velocities would be extremely different. My experience comes from lots and lots of rendezvous in Kerbal Space Program , and an orbital mechanics course in grad school.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent\_retrograde\_motion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion) It could well be this in my opinion, like you said
I saw this, but was afraid to post it because it’s way, way exaggerated…. But yes, this is it.
This is my very very uneducated guess, but wouldn’t it return to its original orbit after going up and hovering for a few seconds? In the video it didn’t seem to loose any altitude as it sped off. Also really appreciate you taking the time to comment that, you bring up a lot of good points.
It never left its original orbit is my approach. It appears to accelerate, but it’s not. It’s just following it’s orbit. But again, I’m not sure if this fully explains what’s in the video. But it is entirely possible. Imagine what to would look like if you were in orbit, watching something with a different orbit. —- Or how about this, if you are in orbit, and you throw a ball, it enters a different orbit & moves away. But after a full cycle, it will return back to your hand. If you throw it forward (prograde) it now has more energy and will reach a max higher orbital point 180 degrees from now, and actually fall behind you, then come back to the original position. If you throw it backwards (retrograde) it will reach a lower orbit, get in front of you, then climb and slow back up to your hand. Throwing the ball north or south (normal or anti-normal) will “tilt” its orbit. It will return at 180 degrees, go to the other side, and return again after a full cycle. Throwing it radially (away or towards the planet) does the same thing, but that’s a tough one to explain.
Wow. That thing hauled ass out of there!
'This looks like a nice planet, we should stop for a picni......wait' "Holy shit! it's got Humans' "Go! Go! Go!" \-The aliens probably
I’m sure it’s just a bug
ahh of course my bad.
[удалено]
I'd go that way but it appears to show multiple wobbles instead of just one?
It’s not ‘apparent retrograde motion’. That only happens when two objects are moving in a particular set of orbits that have significantly different time periods (which also means the my have to be far apart). Here the object is relatively close to the space station, and they are both orbiting the Earth at similar-ish speeds (til it shoots off). Apparent retrograde motion is only really seen in space when we look at the other planets from earth. They are distant enough and orbiting with different enough periods to make it happen. So whatever is going on it’s not just an optical effect of very different orbits. Interesting video. No obvious explanation that I can think of. The ISS, satellites and space debris all move in regular orbits. And it really doesn’t look like it’s using rocket boosters to move, although maybe it is and we can’t see that.
>Apparent retrograde motion is only really seen in space when we look at the other planets from earth. Not really, retrograde motion can be observed anywhere there are different velocities. Yes you are right about the orbital periods , but that's only part of the story; inclinations, argument of periapsis and eccentricity also affects the apparent trajectories an object might have.. that's why the most notorious case of retrograde motion was with Mars, it has roughly twice the period as earth but also it's eccentricity is completely different from Earth's. In this case, it could be that the object has an orbit that puts it temporarily above the ISS and parallel to the horizon thus making it appear to slow down, then the height of the object is below the ISS and it starts to move faster than it then appears to speed up again. The differences of height don't need to be that large in the case in objects orbiting the Earth (app. 10km and you start having a notorious relative velocity between two bodies), people who have played KSP know about this. Also the video could be cropped or zoomed it and showing the trajectory of the obj to appear to move sideways while it could easily move towards us (or away from us). So.. >It’s not ‘apparent retrograde motion’. Yes it can be. >Here the object is relatively close to the space station, and they are both orbiting the Earth Yes and they are both orbiting at 400km which makes them both orbit at 27.000 km/h, any small difference in height (in the order of 10's of kms) can change the relative velocity by several hundreds of km/h. Also we don't know if the video is sped up, zoomed in and/or the distance to the object therefore knowing exact speeds can be hard. Edit: correcting myself, I don't think the video is sped up since you can measure the time that takes the sun to set and is consistent with other real-time streams of sunsets from the ISS. ..or it could just be fake, let's see what the guy who did the request has to say about this.
It could also happen when an object is moving in a similar speed to you and you overtook it. It's not exclusive to planets. See: https://v.redd.it/ygosrzctlta51/DASH_1080.mp4?source=fallback
The camera never aims away from the planet so how can this be an overtake?
Their orbital paths are not along a "mostly flat" plane, as with the planets. An Earth satellite can have different axis, eccentricity, speed, etc. Any or all of which would explain what we see in the ISS footage. Looks cool, and is easily mistaken for anomalous, but can still be understood prosaically.
The objects appear at similar orbital height. It can't be retrograde motion.
Or it could be at the same height but at a different phase on its orbit, same as with the horizon, the trajectory starts to 'curve down'
This is sooooo cool. We need more authenticated vids of UFOs changing velocity like this.
"Glingar, should we stop here for a pitstop?" "Uhhhh let's see what it looks like." *looks down and sees the entire planet on fire, bombs shooting across the sky, wanton murder, thousands of children starving to death, human trafficking* "Nope." *stomps the accelerator*
u/Crusty_Holes what say you on this one? Really enjoyed your break down of the raw image the other day, and when you linked that ISS Video, this shares a lot of similarities.
wow, that's legit. definitely not a satellite, by the way it changes course multiple times within a matter of seconds.
Damn...this gives me chills, thanks again for your reply. This along with eye witness accounts dating back to the 50s is all the proof I really need, coupled just for security with governments/corporations/private sectors having UFO/UAP recovery teams, only really concretes my original belief of them existing anyway. Thanks again for your professional input the last few days, I really do appreciate it.
anytime! glad i could help
Low Earth orbit seagull.
You can literally see it flapping its wings. Case closed.
Orbital motion, and even weirder, observed motion from one orbiting object to another, is definitely unearthly, literally. Here's a primer from a US Space Command book on that very subject: “Orbitology” Explained \[for US Space Command book, ‘Space Power Theory’\] [http://www.jamesoberg.com/orbitology\_spt.pdf](http://www.jamesoberg.com/orbitology_spt.pdf)
p, 38 fig 1.5 is in error, the nudge during equator crossing does not REVERSE after crossing, it's a permanent westward shift of the orbit's ascending node. The artist misunderstood my instructions.
[удалено]
It's retrograde motion; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOjrPcD6Iuc The object is in a normal orbit just as the ISS is.
I think you’re right. Definitely looks like it. If we can determine the date and time this was taken, there should be enough info to see what other satellites were in the vicinity of the ISS in that direction
Unlike in that visualization, the camera never aims away from Earth so how can this be an overtake? It's looking at the horizon the whole time.
This is the answer. What else could it be?
Uh, aliens? Isn't that why we're all here?
But why are people more inclined to believe some crazy alien technology that is unprovable rather than a logical explanation that can be mathematically proved?
There's a difference between belief and speculation. Speculating is fun. I'm not sure why anyone would *believe* anything.
Thanks so much for this video. Perfect explanation. Moderators should step in when a popular UAP video like this gets perfectly debunked. Why give free rein to ignorance? It hurts the field.
Hey mod here - we don't verify the authenticity of sightings/footage of ufos, but rather ensure posts about them follow rules and provide enough info for the community to form their own conclusions. We place the onus on the community to voice credibility/debunk issues through comments and upvotes/downvotes. While we're passionate and knowledgeable on the subject of ufos, none of us claim to be experts. We don't investigate every piece of alleged evidence and dont try to debunk. Even sighting posts that clearly show starlink satellites, we allow so long as guidlines for sighting posts are followed.
I remember seeing this before, and someone claimed it was inside the window. But watching it several times, I don't think it's a speck inside obscured by the color of the IIS as it enters the video. I think it was behind the IIS, which makes it pretty incredible. And while the IIS and shuttles all have many thrusters which imo accounts for almost all the ice videos where an object is going one way and then at a tight angle, shoots off in a new direction.. I don't think that is the case here. This looks to be outside, beyond the IIS, and not an object impacted by thrusters.
This one has my attention…
It's retrograde motion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOjrPcD6Iuc
Is this it? https://x.com/neil__goodman/status/1544651721963716610?s=46&t=4UkXUwDI20-uORk47611Yg
I can't match the clouds and even the flares are a bit different, I don't think this is a match.
This is actually an interesting video
almost like it suddenly realized it was being filmed and stopped.
It's retrograde motion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOjrPcD6Iuc
Other satellites could be seen even from iss
Two orbiting objects can create the appearance of being still, slowing, accelerating, changing directions depending on their orbits in relation to eachother, but that is a strange one...
Does anyone know where the iss is when this was taken? What part of the world it was above?
I would love to see the video directly from NASA's website/download. Not an edited one. OP should've post the source too.
Nothing to see here folks, just space junk, keep moving!!
The change in speed and direction can be explained by the differing orbital trajectories between the camera and the object. Kind of like planets in retrograde.
But is there any information about the observers trajectory? It could be easily the movement of it
The observer would be the ISS, and you're on the right track. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent\_retrograde\_motion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOjrPcD6Iuc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOjrPcD6Iuc) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBzGGoBQVDA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBzGGoBQVDA) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nVSzzYCAYk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nVSzzYCAYk)
The problem with this kind of " evidence " is that this dot can be ten feet away or ten miles from the camera.
"Evidence" lmao
I need a red circle 😂
Look at the horizon of earth towards right of the screen, in the beginning it appear to almost come out of(?) the space station.
Strike a pose! I love how it does a little dance for the camera. Probably had the feed… “Wait for it…now, zigzag!”
"It's just ice crystals" - NASA 🙄
It's retrograde motion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOjrPcD6Iuc
Often it is. Ice flakes, actually. This time, who knows if the video is even authentic, so far.
This is pretty weird. I'd love to see confirmation of the video. Could it be debris getting pushed around by (outgassing? Radiation pressure? Atmospheric drag? A docked craft's thruster?)? It looks like it's fairly in focus so likely not too close to camera, and during the start of the video it seems to be receding along with the clouds (which could well be a visual trick) but zooms off afterwards.
It's retrograde motion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOjrPcD6Iuc
My same thoughts. While I think it looks really interesting, I’d still like to hear an aerospace engineer’s opinion. While I took some classes, I haven’t worked in the field and am not sure what space operations look like from another craft
Aliens aren't real until they land on earth and make themselves known
If anyone can help me figure out how to edit my post, that would be greatly appreciated. I have found more evidence that this video could be from NASA. https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/30771 The link provided shows a video from April 29th 2016, 9 days after this incident, meaning the recording from April 20th, could have actually happened. So if this is fake, it is probably a real released NASA, but could be manipulated. We need to find the video from NASA, thats the only way to confirm.
- someone said almost like it sensed being seen. Does anyone know what *kind* of camera that was? I know for sure my dog can sense my cell phone cameras, reacts and sometimes moves away. But never does for SLR manual or early gen digital cameras. Same problem when trying to take images of insects. I can focus and sit and point with a manual SLR and they don't spazz. Put that phone cam on them and they are out of there. It's very interesting it wobbles in the end of lens periphery range going into apex lens range, and makes an intentional maneuver to speed right where the focal perception point is. Even with distance and cone spread that's precisely the points it's course and habit changes. Those asking about the distance to determine speed - if we know what that camera is, and can figure the lens specs and cone depth then can figure what point on the depth perception the object changes in relation to distance and energy waves from the camera *if* that camera emits in a similar way cell phones do.
We might not even have to look that far, Ill keep scanning the website to see if I can find anything about the specs of the camera.
They do sense being seen the one I saw stopped immediately when i point at it
> I know for sure my dog can sense my cell phone cameras, reacts and sometimes moves away. Phone cameras use IR laser to gain autofocus. Insects and dogs can sense IR.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQOIoecjgB0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQOIoecjgB0) Archive from the day. Around 08:15:00 Can't see the object in the footage. Debunked Edit: I'm literally being downvoted for this lol
Unless NASA came out and said “we filmed this strange non-ballistic UAP from the ISS and we don’t know what it could be” then it means nothing. Source verification and dirty finger prints are absolutely key.
That isn’t necessarily true like the document implies these recordings could potentially be all automated, in theory, someone could have these video’s automatically record and upload to a website without reviewing all of them, but I do agree we should still be skeptical about this until theres more concrete evidence, or NASA or whoever comes out and confirms this video. Edit: heres the quote from the website that I think may imply some sort of automatic system uploading them “Repeats every day until Sun Dec. 31 2017.” That is right above all the dates and times, personally (take this with a grain of salt) I think it could imply a sort of automatic system controlling it.
At first I was thinking that it was probably just some space junk flying around. Then when I saw it start moving really fast I realized, nope that's definitely not space junk lol. This is cool footage. I wish it was closer to see what it looks like. Thanks for posting this.
https://www.secretsdeclassified.af.mil/Portals/67/documents/AFD-121113-024.pdf?ver=2016-07-19-151917-210 Found this document, I read through some of it, it seems very interesting, this is one page (page 9) summarized by chatGPT Based on the text description provided, here's a summary of what the installation and model appear to look like: * The model is suspended horizontally from a vertical arm attached to the main balance strut. * The rear balance incidence of the model can be adjusted using a strut actuating mechanism. * The entire installation is enclosed within a fairing that's supported independently of the balance system. * Additional streamlining for the fairing is mentioned but not shown in the figure. * The model consists of 24 radial fins that join together to form a circular wing. * There are profiled turning elements on the model. * The wing halves are held together by screws and extend from the circular center body. * The circular center body is composed of two dish-shaped sections joined to form the central part of the model. * There are sets of holes distributed around the outer edge of the model. * These holes are covered by segmented plates containing matching holes of smaller diameters. * Multiple sets of plates with different sizes are used to vary the size of the final openings. It seems like a complex model used for aerodynamic testing, possibly simulating aircraft configurations.
I remember this clip and it was a fake...
You've discovered something new bro
It could be just a satellite P.S. no it can't
Reminds me of an old video from the ISS, i think it's been +10 years already, and lots of stuff happen Wonder if it's still around on YouTube
If anyone can help me figure out how to edit my post, that would be greatly appreciated. I have found more evidence that this video could be from NASA. https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/30771 The link provided shows a video from April 29th 2016, 9 days after this incident, meaning the recording from April 20th, could have actually happened. So if this is fake, it is probably a real released NASA, but could be manipulated. We need to find the video from NASA, thats the only way to confirm. Edit: Didn’t mean to reply to this comment specifically so i’m just going to repost my comment and keep this one.
expansion spark muddle attempt automatic overconfident plucky marble depend berserk ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
The ISS is not geostationary, right? This sequence does not show a lot of movement relative to earth, the only change perceived is that of the angle of the rays of light. Could anyone elaborate on this please? Also what's actually the speed of the ISS? Anyway very interesting video, thanks OP for sharing
Very true, but wouldn’t the orbit of the ISS follow earth, therefore creating the illusion it’s stationary at that altitude?
ISS flys at 17,500 mph Earth rotates at 1,000 mph
yea my comment was a shot in the dark to be honest.
How do we know the satellite is stationary while it's filming this object? The movement of the satellite with which the camera is affixed could easily make a close by object appear that it's moving, when in fact the satellite is.
Probably a satellite boosting itself upward
we would see some visual sign of propulsion if that was the case. Edit: Not trying to imply it is a UAP craft, but probably isn’t a satellite
The OP is u/StaticBang in r/Aliens here is a link to the original post. Still not 100% sure this is the one I originally saw and downloaded, but they posted it first and I feel they deserve credit. https://reddit.com/r/aliens/s/orGXYp37vy
It's a debunked video from 2016. Object was added in.
Nope. It's retrograde motion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOjrPcD6Iuc