• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

John Lenard Walson and his videos.

A

Anonymous

Guest
Here is a link to John Lenard Walson's material. He seems to have videoed some unusual orbital structures which dont appear to be normal satellites using a normal telescope with some modifications. He also used a satellite dish to record the sounds emanating from these "structures".

http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
 
Indeed. Curious, too...

[http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=ufosandextraterrestrial&action=display&thread=1191192309&page=6]

Some may remember the name of the 'host'. ;)
 
I don't know what to make of this guy. He seems to be the only one that has produced stuff like this. Why hasn't anyone else? Unless someone here knows of others?
Yes, he's filmed the ISS, which is no surprise as I have seen that through binoculars myself. Wonderful to see the arms of the solar panels, believe me! :shock:
I've seen lots of his videos on Youtube, and somehow, I can't bring myself to believe that the objects are real.
 
Very odd, and I don't mean the videos. There seems to be some sort of feud running across other message boards.

Problem with the the things is lack of context, I've seen the ISS, seen Iridium flares, the other pictures could be anything at at any distance...but I don't think they're ET

And how does Jose Escamilo fit into this http://www.interstellar-themovie.com/ ?
 
The whole presentation is rather disappointing to anyone other than fluffy woo-woos. There is a lack of technical detail about the telescope used (likewise the videocam), and times, dates, positions and directions are all lacking.

The presentation of blurry, jittery images for overlong periods (however good the background music) smacks more of an artistic exhibition than a scientific search for knowledge.

If JLW really has made an advance in optics, he could be making good money selling better cameras and telescopes. But what really bugs me is this:
John has also discovered how to actually hear and record the sounds in real time coming from the particular craft he is videotaping. By carefully aligning a satellite dish receiver with his telescope, he has been able to record some very unusual and intriguing sound from the different spacecraft...
Click to expand...
Everyone knows there is no sound in space, so is he receiving EM signals from these spacecraft (conveniently broadcasting on the same frequencies as our TV satellites, perhaps..?) It's the loose and woolly use of technical language that destroys any credibility this material might otherwise have.


My verdict? Orbs, with delusions of grandeur! :twisted:
 
Timble2 said:
Very odd, and I don't mean the videos. There seems to be some sort of feud running across other message boards.
Click to expand...
Oh God, yeah. The net's rife with them, especially in this sort of subject - we try very hard to keep the FTMB out of it, though we do get the odd incursion (and indeed the occasional twerp starting things from here.)

As for the objects, I don't know what to make of them. As HopoUK said, why hasn't anyone else filmed them? (Cue observations that the CIA have suppressed them all, etc etc..)
 
And now for something slightly different...

Spider 'attacks' Nasa space shuttle Atlantis
By Megan Levy
Last Updated: 2:12pm GMT 13/12/2007

A giant spider has attacked the space shuttle Atlantis as it attempted to blast off into space.

At least, that's how it appeared when the inquisitive arachnid crawled onto Nasa’s launch camera at Cape Canaveral in Florida at the weekend.

For 26 seconds, the magnified beast could be seen on webcam appearing to take a bite out of the shuttle’s nose cone as it sat on the launch pad awaiting lift-off.

Then, just as abruptly as it appeared, the spider wandered off screen.

The Atlantis launch was eventually delayed – although the eight-legged encounter was not to blame.

Faulty fuel tank sensors, a problem that has plagued Nasa since 2005, forced controllers to delay the mission until Jan 2 at the earliest.

The Atlantis and its crew of seven, including a German and a French astronaut, will eventually attempt to install a new laboratory on the International Space Station.

http://tinyurl.com/3cfva6

Video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSI5jIY0Zk4
(Not for arachnaphobics! ;) )
 
It's funny that he has these large copyright notices on his videos while at the same time uses other peoples copyrighted music.
 
You can see the strings on some of those "spacecraft"... :lol:

There are a couple that look like tadpoles, too.

Convinced? NOT!!! 8)
 
It's fake, it looks like he is filming various bright stars at high magnification using a telescope whose optics have severe problems or else he is using a 'cling film' or distorting optical filter, or a double glazed window with dirt and raindrops on it. He obviously doesn't have a polar aligned scope, coz he keeps having to move the star back into the FOV as it moves at the sidereal rate. The shimmering seen is the atmosphere, which becomes more noticeable at high magnifications. The moving clip is probably due to a droplet of water slightly rolling down whatever dirty double glazed window hes looking through.
 
Yep, it's my betting that by accident - maybe he splashed tea on his lens or something - he found a neat way to get some spooky effects and he's been making the most of it every since. I'm no astronomer but these images just look plain ridiculous.
 
Whatever these images are i hope they encourage more people to use telescopes to look up in orbit. Theres lots of interesting things up there that merit attention. water droplets or not..... :lol:
 
To me the images are reminiscent of things seen in seawater through a microscope - krill, diatoms, etc.
 
Hm - you could have hit the nail on the head there...

Maybe he inversed the colour and fiddled with the background a bit and - presto - giant alien space ships. That would also explain why he is so reluctant to explain his "tachnique"!
 
The more I look at them, the more convinced I am that these are little water critters. If you look at the last video at Part 7, you can see a pulse!

The rest of the "videos" are actually stills in which he zooms in and out and moves the camera left and right (to pretend actual movement, I suppose).

If he showed actual videos, you could probably see immediately that these things are alive and not machines... :roll:
 
So he found the remains of a meteor stuck in a crater - simply astounding!!! :lol:
 
Jeff rense is giving oxygen to this diatom, he would do well to out this, i hesitate to say hoaxer, as I think he might actually just be really stupid.
 
The sarcastic negative comments are a bit over the top chaps. He is doing something that no one else is doing at the moment. A bit of an open mind and some civility wouldnt hurt.
 
azuredoor, sorry to say this but abovetopsecret does not have a good reputation with UFOlogists or conspiracy researchers. And the fact that the site has barred/censored Walson is ludicrous. Walson is not making any big claims, here. He is saying that he has filmed "structures" that dont conform to normal satellite structures. Whats wrong with that? His site also shows him being filmed with the camera set up with his telescope. So its not like he is hasnt been upfront about it.

Like i said earlier a bit of civility and open debate on his material would be more constructive than baiting it. Even if they are not UFO's we can still have fun figuring out what they really are...... :D
 
wowsah156 said:
Walson is not making any big claims, here. He is saying that he has filmed "structures" that dont conform to normal satellite structures. Whats wrong with that? His site also shows him being filmed with the camera set up with his telescope. So its not like he is hasnt been upfront about it.
....
Even if they are not UFO's we can still have fun figuring out what they really are...... :D
Click to expand...
Whats wrong with that? The fact that his results aren't reproducible by others, especially those with better equipment?

His site also shows him being filmed with the camera set up with his telescope. So its not like he is hasnt been upfront about it. Not upfront enough apparently:
The author, now banned from AboveTopSecret.com for hoaxing, has been asked several times to provide pristine exif data, present a fast shutter speed image taken seconds before or after capturing the "ships" or provide a clearer image of a known object as has been done by more than one of our members who have the same grade of telescope as the hoaxer.

Needless to say none of these things were provided and the author decried the request as an attempt to "control" him and stated he was leaving ATS forever
Click to expand...

Even if they are not UFO's we can still have fun figuring out what they really are...... Which is what we're doing! The concensus seems to be homing in on deliberate manipulation of dodgy video material.
 
Hi Wowsah, I dont have any opinion on the reputation of ATS, many many people post there, including walson, so I suppose that would def degrade their reputation.

Even if they are not UFO's we can still have fun figuring out what they really are
Click to expand...

They're stars, filmed at fairly high magnification, though a telescope with severe optical problems (or JLW special filter). The 'structure' that you see is due to severe mangling of the star's Airy disk, which can be seen at fairly high magnifications when the scope is slightly defocused The colour variations are due to different stars he films. The shimmering sometimes visible is the atmosphere of course. The jerky movements you see are because JLW doesn't have an equatorially mounted scope so he has to constantly adjust the scope in so that the star stays in the field of view (as it drifts at the sidereal rate). They are not diatoms, they are not satellites and they are certainly not UFOs. I have been an amateur astronomer for over 10 years now and I am 100% certain that what I just described is what 'they' are.

Check out his latest 'efforts', reeks to high heaven of hoax, check out the cheesey bum and bass music, and the zooming into eyeball effect, soo embarassing, what a plonker. wowsah, dont fall for it!!

http://www.rense.com/general81/myst10.htm
 
azuredoor , for the sake of argument if these structures are stars, as you say they are , then why the weird lengthy geometric structures? And what are these "stars" constellations, if so?
 
Ok, I have not got an opinion as of yet. Yes, the clips are lengthy, annoying and badly cut [not to mention the music]. I don't know what they show but I think I know what they are not. For once I don't think they are microscope images. I also can't see any CGI being applied [but I am open to the idea]. If he really managed to photograph the moon surface [regardless of the silly triangles] then I believe he can manage to capture any other far closer objects. I also can't see how the "structures" can be stars. Even when I take pixellation abnormalities into consideration [I find that as absurd as labelling a large silver disk as "Venus"]. Could they be debris or satellites from different angles? Far more likely than being stars.
Is he behaving like a twat?
Quite so. However could he be an amateur who really doesn't give a damn if people believe him or not? Possible. I have known "eccentrics" that just wanted their paintings hung up without wanting to sell them, if they would have been asked to reveal more insight into their work, they would have put two fingers up. That doesn't mean their paintings were less valid than anyone elses.
Could he be a hoaxer?
Yup, could be, but we don't know yet how he does it. Either way he seems to have given us enough new material to have a thread about it. If his material would be so blatantly obviously fake we wouldn't even have a discussion about it, as we are though he's doing something right. Hoaxer or not.
 
I suppose that even though it is perfectly obvious to me what these objects are, the onus is on me to prove it by duplicating the JLW efforts, so I went and did my own version for you to compare, the scope i used was much smaller than walsons, and my camera is hardly high def, or colour, but you get the idea, would look lovely in high def colour and more magnification im sure

default.jpg


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvaPt_2VTWo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top