Lou posted the video to YouTube, where in a few days it was viewed over 100,000 times. A thread was started on the conspiracy-oriented website Above Top Secret, which attracted the usual mix of intelligent comment and wild speculation.
Noting the similarity of this event to previous rocket fuel dumps, space author and skeptic James Oberg suggested that a Chinese rocket launched just 30 minutes earlier was a likely candidate. Satellite expert Ted Molczan, who confirmed the identity of the "Top Ten" 1996 Mothership UFO sighting in the Yukon, confirmed that it was indeed the Yaogan 17 rocket, whose launch can be seen in the video below. The Chinese rocket was passing over Melbourne exactly where the object was recorded.
Molczan writes, "The fuel dump by the CZ-4C upper stage that launched China's third NOSS-like triad was seen over Australia, and a long video was made by Lou20764, from Melbourne. The event occurred on 2013 Sep 01 about 19:49 UTC (Sep 02 05:49 local time)." In other words, this is a reconnaissance satellite for the Chinese military, similar to ones that the U.S. Navy has been using for decades.
Oberg and others posted this information to Lou's YouTube page containing the video, but he promptly removed them. Lou wrote, "Not putting up with a organized attack by trolls anymore - I just took out the garbage and I feel good about it." To Lou, anyone who threatened his prized UFO video by providing a rational explanation is simply a "troll." Of course, he left up adulatory comments even if their statements are inaccurate or false. Molczan wrote, "Lou20764 seems to believe he saw some sort of ET craft, and so far has been refractory to other ideas. When Jim Oberg posted a congratulatory note on his having captured the fuel dump and requested some technical details, Lou20764 deleted his messages and blocked him from making further comments. Unfortunate behavior, but it should not prevent us from enjoying the latest fuel dump imagery."
Oberg provides these links for more information on previous sightings of fuel dumps resulting from space activities:
1983 – FATE magazine: Giant UFO Over Two Continents [Europe and South America]
http://www.debunker.com/texts/giant_ufo.html
Worldwide UFO reports sparked by human space activity
http://www.jamesoberg.com/ufo_worldwide.html
‘Mystery Cloud’ Appears Over Eastern U.S. And Canada
http://www.space.com/299-mystery-cloud-appears-eastern-canada.html
The Great East Coast UFO of August 1986
http://www.csicop.org/si/show/great_east_coast_ufo_of_august_1986/
“Smoke Rings” over Africa and Europe
http://transientsky.wordpress.com/2009/10/21/smoke-rings-over-africa-and-europe/
Satellite fuel Dump
http://epvoxpopuli.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=thomas&action=display&thread=540
If this was a chinese satellite I can understand why now it flew over Melbourne. This means instead of orbiting the equator or northern hemisphere, its orbit is that around the two poles.
ReplyDeleteMakes one wonder what really is happening in Antarctica?
On another point. I suppose everyone remembers that "nutbag,whacko" Bob Lazaar of S4 & area 51 fame.
Because he went public the govt purchased a lot more surrounding land & tightened security at the denied Area51. For years the govt denied its existence but since we have all learned that this is where they tested the U2,A12(Blackbird SR-71 airforce) of CIA fame, & F117 & B2 bomber.
If one remembers Lazaar's interviews he talked of UFO propulsion systems running on Element 115. At the time, this was laughed at because it wasnt even heard of back then. Another confirmation of Lazaar being a nutbag.
Well guess what! Low & behold, scientists have just confirmed the existence of ELEMENT 115 !!!!
Still only confirmed by a few molecules in an accelerator:- it is not naturally formed on Earth. When queried Bob said at the time, scientists were just discovering Element 112,but he claimed there was no reason for it not to occur elsewhere in the universe,possibly in another star.
Well there you have it! Bob Lazaar claimed back in the 80's that the propulsion system he looked at worked on Element 115,was ridiculed saying it didnt exist, & now it has just been confirmed.
P.S. I only thought jets in emergency situations did fuel dumps. Dont rockets need to burn all of the fuel in each stage to gain enough thrust to escape the pull of gravity?
Does it take 24min for a rocket travelling at the speed it does to reach its payloads orbit?
Deano, the new Chinese satellites are in an orbit inclined 63 degrees to the equator, which doesn't cross Antarctica, so no, it doesn't make me 'wonder'. Your question on dumping fuel is a fair one, and often comes up. Because of unpredictable variations in engine performance and real-time steering, the required fuel load is uncertain to a small degree, perhaps 1 - 2 % To make it worse, running out of either propellant -- fuel or oxidizer -- creates a bad mixture ratio in the thrust chamber that can make it blow up. So a 'margin' of better-safe-than-sorry propellant is always carried. In recent years it was realized that this leftover fuel could go unstable after a few months and explode, littering the orbit with shrapnel. So now the tanks are vented as soon as the rocket has deployed its payload -- whence the cloud, sometimes spiral-shaped. In some cases, clever mission designers point the venting forward to slow the booster a bit, dropping it to a safe path lower than the payloads -- that usually requires keeping it stable during the minutes of the dump, creating a v-shaped [read 'triangle'] cloud. New analysis by Ted Molczan of the booster's post-dump orbit show that the push occurred during the pass over Melbourne -- so that fully explains what the observers were seeing.
ReplyDeleteNew analysis by Ted Molczan, based on tracking data of the Chinese satellites and their booster, was posted today. He demonstrates that the booster thrusted away from the payloads after deploying them, coincidentally while sunlit and passing over Melbourne. So the 'fuel dump' isn't just speculation, analysis of the tracking data proves it occurred at exactly the time Lou was observing and videotaping his aircraft carrier sized UFO.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.satobs.org/seesat/Sep-2013/0107.html
Deano, geez... It was launched from Jiuquan southward, with a 63 degree orbital inclination and it should have been visible from Melbourne, exactly at the time and place relative to the stars this "UFO" was seen. Go figure.
ReplyDeleteArea 51 was never a secret. It has been publicly acknowledged ever since it was first built! Go check a 1960's public road map of the Nevada area for example... For starters, the construction of the base was publicly announced in LV newspapers in 1954, the base was well-known as a somewhat secret flight test base through the late 50's and the 60's and marked on maps as "Area 51" (from 1959 and onwards) and/or "Groom Lake". It was slowly removed from public maps in the late 1970's, though it remained marked in some until the 80's. This because the flight testing programmes were ramped up there and needless to say, the Ufimtsev business was highly sensitive at that time (Cold War). That's when they began "denying" it, although that was a mere formality.
Nothing Bob Lazar has said has been confirmed in any way. Nor was he the first to suggest these things. His talk emerged in the late 80's, this after the, again, _publicly known base_ had been "connected" to various UFO mumbo-jumbo for at least two decades by various sci-fi authors and conspiracy theorists.
Superheavy elements have been theorised since Mendeleevs days and by the time Lazar talked about element 115, particle physicists had successfully nucleosynthesized exotic, non-naturally occuring elements up to number 109 and they were already underway to go further down the periodic table. Loe and behold, element 115 was publicly discussed _long before_ Lazar even mentioned the element. Case in point: go read some scientific journals for a change, such as Physical Chemistry vol. 78 from 1974, which cointains a lengthy discussion about element 115. Then, it was formally discovered in 2003 and positively confirmed just now. Again, this is not the kind of out-of-the-blue discovery you seem to think, nor does it "confirm" any Lazarian fantasies.
Pardon this brief detour off topic, but I honestly find the ignorance among certain UFO fanatics truly astounding.
Oh, and do pardon my spelling errors. I am not a native English speaker and I am a tad drunk. ;-)
ReplyDeleteThe UFO fanboys only want to hear comments like this...
ReplyDelete**** CONGRATULATIONS ****
Lou20764, you did it! The Truth is Out There and you proved it! You have captured on video INDISPUTABLE proof of an alien spaceship! This video is not like those other fake UFO videos that are obviously CGI, ISS, or rocket fuel dumps, etc.
You're famous now!
Prepare for TV appearances on news and talk shows because there will be plenty of offers coming your way, even a movie deal. And if you are really lucky, you'll get an interview on Third Phase of the Moon.
(Some advice: Be sure to decline offers to debate those pesky skeptic trolls.)
You are now part of history, like Neil Armstrong - First Man on the Moon. Now we have Lou29764, First Man to Prove the Existence of Extraterrestrial Presence. Elementary schools will be named after you.
Your catch phrase, "This is the real deal Neil" will go down in history like the iconic moon landing "One Small Step for Mankind". Congratulations and enjoy your monumental achievement!
Lou the camera guy has started a new youtube thread still insisting it's a real UFO, but allowing alternate views to be expressed, for now. Go read the adulation from the believers...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYv3gu0Bdnw
Pulled due to more 'trolling' and 'haters', i guess.
DeleteMinds that are the most 'open' also seem to be the most sensitive and autocratic.
David ["Dazza"] has compared sat track simulation of the Chinese satellite motion across the sky, to the video of the UFO passing stars, and shows they match precisely. Final nails in this coffin.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2ZtnxYZ8kM
Dazza did a 30-min interview with me where I explained the whole thing:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmILzolG9aM
This is a perfect example of another dumb arse, free-falling into irresponsible speculation and thus robbing the true UFO mysteries of any integrity - I didn't mean alien craft mysteries, I meant the mystery of UFO cases, which if one is to deliberate bi-partisan attention, one should be comfortable in deducing the likelihood of a physical phenomenon, however minor the percentage of genuinely unexplained cases may be. 5%?
ReplyDeleteThis guy was fooled by his own enthusiasm, however, his shame was not assured until he blindly refused the most simple of explanations. No wonder most people feel feel confident when categorizing 'believer's' as a group who place no value on objectivity, science or a sense of reality. I personally put myself in the category of 'an open mind' and yes, within this field of thought, that is a category because despite the belief, sceptics in my experience are most often simply religious cynics masquerading as a character who is open to all likelihood, when in truth they're simply venturing to confirm their own, already held conclusions. And within a matrix of debate which polarizes opinion, involuntary political partisanship is always the fundamental feature, whether we choose to admit it to ourselves or not.
Let's be honest guy's, when did anyone last see a contribution, with conviction which went something along the lines of
' If we are serious about finding answers, it could well have been a top secret military project, or even something more mysterious, perhaps not from this world? As there is strong evidence of a metallic physical object behaving in a very inexplicable fashion, with multiple military radar recordings and multiple pilot sightings, however, I feel inclined to hold the position that the information may be over-represented in some areas and fabricated in others, so for the sake of objectivity I will hold off speculating in either direction until I can personally confirm the information in question'?
Within this field of debate, that's equatable to worshipping Jesus in a mosque, and Allah in a Cathedral
Case in point: Despite the prejudices of common sense belief, or the work-in-progress that is, established scientific knowledge, there is no way at all of measuring the likelihood of either an ET presence or something even more profound as a relative possibility. Irrespective of those facts, its apparent to me that a 'common sense' position within society (and of course, Mr Sheaffer's fundamental pivot) is that an ET presence is in every case the least likely of explanations and we must, therefore, favour every other speculative potentiality, no matter how remote, before ever possibly conceding that there may be more to this world of ours than we are currently privy to.
As I have stated previously, the term scepticism has been stolen, and I would like it back. In exchange you may have the term dogmatic, cynic or something to that effect.