Martyn Stubbs' NASA UFO: UFOs and SETI

This is a work of fiction. Any resemblance to anyone, living or dead, is coincidental and unintentional. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world and yet I ask you it's not an alien force already amongst it's like you got an object right in front of you Martin you're looking out there discover you are sending you an order to stay vector Sparkling bed of diamonds out there. Is that a real picture or are we just getting some video fuzz? I don't know what it is. That one was really impressive. There are, on the other side of the corner, at least five proofs that the objects were not ice particles, therefore spacecraft. And they were either extraterrestrial or terrestrial, obviously. We have an unidentified flying object. For over 2,000 years, humankind has speculated that it is not alone in the universe. But it wasn't until September 1959 that American astronomers first put forward a practical, technically feasible proposition to search the cosmos for lifeforms other than ourselves. Less than a year after that, the idea was translated into practice. Since then, SETI, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, has fired the imagination of millions around the world. However, the practicalities of SETI make the proverbial search for the needle in the haystack pale into insignificance. In fact, it has been calculated the quest is more akin to delving for a two-inch bodkin in a haystack 35 times the size of Earth. All sky surveys up to a distance of 70 million light years made at Harvard, Buenos Aires and Ohio since the 1970s have failed to detect any evidence of omnidirectional transmissions. After years of analysing hundreds of billions of signals, fewer than 100 have given the appearance of artificiality, and none of these could be relocated in repeated surveys. The world of astronomy, then, remains divided between the true believers, who think they will find evidence of extraterrestrial life in our or other galaxies, and sceptics who regard that, and the work of SETI in particular, as either a diversion from more important things things or a gigantic waste of time, resources and money. It's a curious fact that NASA is forbidden by Congress to seek communications or signals from the very intelligent life harbouring planet SETI hopes to find. NASA is forbidden therefore to spend its time, resources and money on seeking out contact with extraterrestrial intelligence. But what if that extraterrestrial intelligence were to establish contact with NASA, directly or indirectly? What then? And where does NASA and its U.S. Congress stand when it comes to UFOs? Could a small proportion of the residual evidence gleaned from millions of worldwide UFO observations and case histories point to an extraterrestrial presence already in our midst? Should claims and statements made by credible professionals and observers be ignored? Should intensive and documented interest shown in the UFO phenomena by every strand of the military and intelligence community, be simply tossed aside? Should countless photographs and film footage taken of the phenomenon over the years be looked upon as worthless? Should radar tapes, which have recorded the phenomenon on 400 occasions, be deemed as flawed? Should Congress then pay lip service to NASA, the scientific community at large, and its military and intelligence chiefs? Or is it time that politicians began to address the most important issue of our time? Is man, as some would have us believe, a unique species to this universe? One that evolved over the eons to finally stand upright and walk this planet? One that was able, in the course of less than a century, to progress from horse-driven carriages to putting a man on the moon? How was this staggering technological progress achieved over such a short period of time? Is it pure coincidence, then, that midway through this period, reports of flying saucers began to emerge from around our world? At the precise moment when man was signalling his intentions to step forth from his Earth-bound environment, the phenomenon we now term UFOs signalled back. Throughout the documented history of those early pioneering manned missions into space, one can find numerous references made by both astronauts and cosmonauts to witnessing and sometimes describing curious anomalous objects seen while in orbit around the Earth. John Glenn likened these to fireflies and for a time NASA actually believed they had stumbled living critters, according to one of its retired astronauts, Scott Carpenter. The years went by, and with each passing decade, there appeared no let-up in reports of UFO activity. But in the late 1980s, those reports took on far greater significance with the arrival of the camcorder. In the space of a few short years, what was once regarded as an extremely rare event, to capture a UFO on film, has now become commonplace. And while a sizeable proportion of that video footage leaves most unimpressed, like the phenomena itself, a small residue of what remains can be termed impressive. In July 1991, millions of people throughout Mexico stared skywards to observe a solar eclipse. That day, several UFOs appeared in those same skies. Skeptics would later conclude that these were nothing more than planets or stars, but the video evidence, recorded independently at several different locations, suggested otherwise. Much has been said, written and claimed as to why more UFOs have emerged from Mexico than any other nation on the planet during the 1990s. Indeed, there are those who would argue that most, if not all, of the 5,000 plus hours of amateur camcorder footage taken of UFOs in the skies above Mexico this past decade alone is nothing to write home about. That the bulk of the footage can easily be explained, that some has been deliberately manufactured, while the rest has captured nothing more than passing aircraft, balloons, meteors, or falling space debris. Thank you for watching. has been deliberately manufactured, while the rest has captured nothing more than passing aircraft, balloons, meteors, or falling space debris. Dependent on your point of view, the objects depicted in these sequences are either balloons or UFOs. Interestingly, during filming, the camera operators and those closest by never refer to these objects as balloons. Others liken them to spheres, a term first used alongside Foo Fighters when describing anomalous objects seen by Allied pilots operating in the Pacific theatre of World War II. Outside of Mexico, there have been other recorded instances where spheres have been seen and captured on film. Here are two recent examples. There are a lot of people who say, well, I don't know, I don McPhee borrowed a camcorder from his cousin after being puzzled by the repeated appearances of these objects high overhead. Some were seen to hover close to, and then descend, into or through the clouds. Elsewhere, some were seen to emerge from the clouds before darting away at incredible speeds. And take this as another example. Filmed in broad daylight over central London in July 1999, Christopher Martin was on hand to record the moment when this sphere appeared amidst one of the world's busiest air corridors. Was this a balloon? Or something else? But the term sphere is not just used to describe anomalous objects seen from the ground. Curiously enough, just two months after the Mexico eclipse, similar sphere-like objects were recorded by the crew of the Discovery Space Shuttle. Anomalous objects seen on the STS-48 mission footage, taken on the 15th of September 1991, have been explained away by NASA as nothing more than ice crystals, whose sudden movement was caused by the release of directional jet nozzles from the shuttle itself. What, though, are the mysterious meteor-like streaks seen in the same sequence? And what of this counter-explanation to NASA's ice crystal theory by Dr. Jack Kasher of Nebraska State University? There were at least five proofs that the objects were not ice particles, therefore spacecraft, and they were either extraterrestrial or terrestrial, obviously. That's the dichotomy. While many still remain unconvinced that the STS-48 footage captured intelligently controlled spacecraft in mid-flight, it was the catalyst that would persuade both UFO researchers and amateur astronomers alike to pay much closer attention to space shuttle missions in the future. And, as you will learn later, what showed up on the STS-48 footage would prove to have a profound effect on this individual, one that would eventually lead him to an extraordinary discovery. During 1996 there were two notable events. In August of that year, NASA announced that it had unearthed fossilized evidence contained in a Martian meteorite and discovered 12 years earlier in the frozen wastes of Antarctica which would appear to suggest that life, albeit billions of years old, once existed on the red planet The declaration, which is yet to be embraced by the scientific community at large created created headlines around the world, and more or less ensured that NASA would have no difficulty in raising the necessary funds to embark on an ambitious, unmanned series of mission probes to Mars in the future. Three months later, on the 1st December 1996, space shuttle astronauts on board STS-80 filmed something remarkable. Scores of anomalous objects could be seen skirting Earth's upper atmosphere below but then from beneath a high bank of cloud emerged a large sphere almost plasma-like in appearance and as the sequence rolls note how the camera on board the space shuttle zooms in on a cluster of anomalous objects which appear to congregate on the Earth's horizon. Interestingly, during that same mission, astronauts would point their cameras towards Brazil, more specifically Sao Paulo. Were they expecting something? Whatever suddenly streaked into view would appear to suggest they were, but what was it? A short time would pass before anomalous activity was filmed again, only this time in close proximity to the Mir space station. The STS-84 docking and undocking mission with Mir provided breathtaking images. It also provided further puzzles. Thanks to an amateur astronomer known as Willy, some of the footage transmitted by STS-84 was disseminated around the world. Hardly surprising, since it contains several remarkable scenes. Determining which one has most appeal, or greater mystery, is debatable. But why does this particular sphere suddenly come to a direct stop, hover momentarily, then move up and behind the mere space station to emerge on the other side? And was this appearance of dozens of anomalous objects caused by the flushing of a toilet on board the space shuttle, or something else? Assuming then that this is mere space debris, would it not be considered dangerous to those on board both the space shuttle and mere space station? To answer that question would require detailed analysis of pristine STS-84 footage, but NASA refuses to release any of it, and the question is surely, why? Signals from space can and do take on many forms and while some dishes scattered around the world listen for faint traces of extraterrestrial intelligence from afar others are designed to receive signals transmitted from much closer to home During the 1990s, millions of miniature-sized dishes sprang up across Britain as satellite technology came of age. Both here and in countries abroad, many individuals chose to erect more powerful dishes to locate and access a wide variety of transmissions beamed back to Earth from scores of overhead satellites. In theory, the more powerful the receiver, the more choice it would offer. And, as we've already seen, some of those individuals chose to utilise their satellite dishes I'll see you next time. The more powerful the receiver, the more choice it would offer. And, as we've already seen, some of those individuals chose to utilise their satellite dishes to monitor and record transmissions being down to Earth from the Space Shuttle. But what if one of those individuals had the means to utilise an even greater array of satellite-receiving dishes to record and subsequently log every second of NASA transmissions from not one solitary space shuttle mission but from several covering a period of almost five years. What then? That incredible scenario first came to light late one evening in the summer of 1999 when Graham Birdsell, editor of UFO magazine in Britain, took a call on his mobile phone. The caller was Martin Stubbs, a cable TV station manager from Vancouver in Canada. For the next 45 minutes, Graham listened intently as Martin proceeded to recount an extraordinary story in which he claimed to have accessed NASA's downlinked transmissions, originating from numerous space shuttle missions that stretched back over a period of several years. And, amidst all of this carefully logged footage, footage that amounted to over two and a half thousand hours, Martin further claimed to have stumbled across something equally extraordinary, palpable evidence for the reality of not one but two extraterrestrial life forms in order to fully verify these and other equally amazing claims russell callahan was dispatched to vancouver last august to meet up with martin in person joining him would be brian borsch project director ofomena exhibition, who flew in especially from Australia. After spending an entire week in the company of Martin, engaged in, for the most part, viewing countless hours of NASA footage, the staggering implications of what he'd uncovered soon became apparent. For although Martin had come across countless further examples of mysterious sphere-like activity, his trained eye as an experienced TV editor had picked out something else, something that he would find compelling, something that others would later find amazing. At the conclusion of their visit to Vancouver, a tri-party agreement was reached, one that would ensure worldwide public disclosure, through methods and means that would soon become apparent in the weeks and months to follow. But why, on the strength of one phone call, did Russell Callaghan and Brian Borschoff travel thousands of miles to touch base with Martin Stubbs in the first place? it intuition call it good luck call it what you will but on hearing martin relate his extraordinary story he sent out a signal far more powerful than that generated by any satellite and what better means to demonstrate the point than by having martin recount that story in his own words hi I'm Martin Stubbs and I'm a resident of Bowen Island, Canada. Bowen Island is a small island of about 3,000 people just off the coast of British Columbia. The city we directly commute to on a little ferry, 20-minute ride, is the great city of Vancouver. And it's here that I was able to discover, through NASA's own video downlinked from the shuttle, two types of phenomena that, from my estimation, should not be there. The first phenomena is a spherical phenomena. It's the best I could do in terms of explaining it and the second phenomena is a phenomena that is virtually invisible to the human eye but when filmed with the CCD camera and the broke you break the video into frames and there's 30 frames per second then you split the frames into fields because each frame contains two scan fields and it is in those fields we have discovered our second space phenomena it's not a matter of finding something that is a reasonable doubt scenario. It's more about, let's just keep collecting, studying, and analyzing, and eventually the jigsaw puzzle will come together, and it's finally happened. I held a very privileged position in the city of Vancouver. I was in charge of, for the past 20 years actually, community access cable stations. And those are public stations that use volunteers, interns, make all their own programming and put it out on the cable system here in british columbia and throughout the rest of canada we have 90 cable saturation so it's the equivalent of having a full channel and in my office i had um old log tapes from logging the station available and they were supposed to be turned over after a few times so I just piled them up and I had VCRs I had the means and I talked to our technical department and asked them if they could give me my own dish and they did and I set my machines and went about my normal daily life of managing two of these facilities and I just would go home at night after each shuttle mission or each day of the shuttle mission and break the tape down and I just found myself in the unique position of having the means to do it. I was in a position to do it, and I had all the motivation. The second the shuttle countdown began, I recorded, and I stopped recording when it was at a full stop. Right. So it was a pretty demanding exercise. Well, the SDS-61, which was the Hubble Space Telescope mission, was 36, I seem to recall, 36 tapes with eight hours per tape. So these are, you know, you just had to keep going. Some flights are five days, some are 11 days, 14. The Hubble Space Telescope mission, I chose that mission not because I knew about a CCD camera or anything. I chose it because NASA had decided to make this the showcase mission. It is a very important mission. The Hubble Space Telescope is the very most delicate and important thing, and these gentlemen were going to spacewalk for seven days and fix it. So it was even interesting for me to just watch them work in this environment. And from the very first moment, the first download came, I found our spherical phenomena. Did you set out to try and find the phenomena, or did it start off as a sort of self-education exercise in watching the mission footage? It was everything. It was a self-education thing. was a curiosity that of why no one from 19 from the year 1991 till 1994 had bothered to look at any other footage and i was quite naive and wasn't aware it was all being downloaded because i bought into the popular culture or the urban myth that they were scrambling at it and it wasn't available since 48 i've been an editor for 25 years as well as everything else and i can i i spend an awful lot of my day looking at videotape and at amazingly fast speeds reviewing people's programs for critique reasons and things my eyes are trained and i kept seeing something so when i started breaking the frames down i found you still couldn't find it you'd go from this frame to this frame and there'd be a quick movement so then i i had to get a videotape recorder an sv SVH machine, an older model, funny enough, not the digital model, that literally, when you rolled the thing, it would break the frames into fields. And in reality, there are 60 individual pictures that make up one second of video. that's when I found them so you were finding these on one of those 60 frames is one of the I found in fact the first one I found I only found one right and then I thought well I should be able to if this is real I should be able to do it again and then I found two and it just went from there what should we really be seeing how did you Thank you for watching. this is real i should be able to do it again and then i found two and it just went from there what should we really be seeing how did you know that we were looking at something that was that that shouldn't be there that was unusual i mean well the first thing is that in my career usually in one second of video no movement happens you can you can look at 60 frames and you know the way the movement goes not very much happens it's not like those flip things where the little thing moves when you flip the pages literally in 60 of those nothing happens something was happening literally between 1 30th of a second and 1 30th of a second because there's 30 frames per second so it was just sort of a let's look at this and and it when i found it was in a scan field and then it the way it works is it scans and scans very fast but the phenomena seemed to have disappeared by the second scan so it was moving very fast. So having, being a manager and being in charge of a television station, part of my staff is a technical staff. So I started consulting our technicians on, to, to, to destroy my, my discovery. I wanted them to, to, to, to tell me that they could be hoaxed. You wanted to critique it as heavily as you could. I wanted them to tell me that somebody could fake this. You can't. Then I took the sample, to make a long story short, eventually made it up to the scientific community and to a think tank and a behavioral lab and a physicist, an astrophysicist. And they kind of, you know they just humored me at the start by the end of our meetings they had their hands on the control they were running up to the screen and they were holding meetings they broke the entire pixel pixelization process down and found it was still there it it so they really didn't expect to see anything in the beginning but by the time you finished they were excited i think they expected probably that we'd have more of a real-time phenomena which which which which it's still spectacular and probably i guess that they felt they might be able to explain to you as something perfectly legitimate or normal. Well, you never know who's in the Skeptic Society of British Columbia. For instance, the X-Files actor, William Davis, who is the cigarette-smoking man in the X-Files, is a member of the Skeptic Society. So I never knew with these scientists what they were trying to do to me. Sure. We'll be right back. is a member of the skeptic society. So I never knew with these scientists what they were trying to do to me. Sure. But the amazing thing about this other phenomenon, the one that's virtually, I would say it's invisible, although it isn't once you see it. You begin to see it all the time, is it blew their minds. It blew their minds. Did they offer any explanation for what they thought it might be or are they as as there's a professor at simon fraser professor weinberg who who literally said it had to be what it it had to be actually there doing exactly what it was but he could not, he said would have to bring we would have to go right to nasa and eventually uh we had a lecture at the planetarium here in vancouver by one of the hubble poobahs the chief chief hubble designers engineers i that must have been a great opportunity it was a great opportunity and what was interesting is when we showed him the spherical shapes on video clips on video stills he was comfortable which meant you know he you know he could throw the ice crystal theory or because it was a very small sample at that point it was only the at the first time i'd ever done it at that point he confirmed that what you were showing him were ice crystals or no he just thought that that was basically um he accepted that it was a phenomena of some sort he he just well they're comfortable with nasa because james oberg who's the nasa debunker in my estimation had basically briefed them all that don't worry about all this stuff you see because uh that's just that's just all kinds of stuff you don't understand about ice crystals um so they they he didn't have any you know it was the hubble fellow at at the planetarium after the lecture with the head of the planetarium. He sat there comfortable. But when the still frames of this second phenomena were shown to him, he stormed out of the room. Did he say anything? Did he give any reason? He made some huffs and puffs and stormed out of the room. Now, we found, I mean, that's very unusual kind of reversal. And we obtained, we meaning an artist friend and I, who's got more guts than me, I guess, in terms of walking through front doors which you're not supposed to he picked up the phone after he got the number and phoned this fella and he got hello and what and the second he said who he was there was backtalk things like it's that guy and the phone went down in other words we have communication was cut off no it's not a very good exercise for the no but we found it odd that you know these are okay and these aren't so anyway that's how it started so he professor weinberg was a wonderful man um said to me something he's never said to anybody before he actually sat down, sort of rolled his hands through his head and whatever hair he had, and said, you know, I believe there are things out there, and it's just a matter of an et cetera, et cetera. Well, my friend, my partner, could not believe he knows this gentleman that's worked through canadian space agency with him this professor weinberg studies the uh effects of space travel on the brain right and shapes and whether they you know why they're why they come home depressed elizabeth bondar our famous first woman in space. It isn't generally known known in Canada but she was depressed a massive depression for the first two weeks after she landed and so they really had to study what what's going on and they found that that this that they were missing shape that there was the familiar shapes that we see every day not in the space program. And that's what these people were doing, working with the Canadian Space Agency to suggest putting shapes in parts of the shuttle or redesigning things to familiarity for your subconscious. Right. It says they talked to orca whales up there and they photographed the brain and put pictures in front of you and then colors flash and they photograph it. It's the only place at the university you can get a parking spot because no one knows it's there i did i didn't know and i went there so um and he told me things he said get another flight duplicate the phenomena that you've got duplicate what you did try to get the two different colors, try to get multiple, multiple ones in a shot, because the STS- 61, I was quite naive, especially this, this, this second thing, and so I, I remembered that, and I recorded the next shuttle, and, and i knew what i was looking for and i found it you you mentioned something to me earlier about the lighting conditions and and the fact that you felt they were self-illuminating well i needed um yes at first i i actually thought you know the you i was my own worst skeptic i've learned that in television you know you don't present anything unless you're totally researched and sure but i began to discover that that these were appearing in uh dark dark when the camera got you know when the suns went down when the sun came up when there was refraction when there wasn't refraction i found them under every lighting condition and And my only conclusion from looking at the video and and continually looking at it is obviously there there's a self illuminating did did they change at all under those those different lighting conditions when when apertures change or the the Sun goes down or the crafts in a different position do they do they appear to be any different no in fact they appear to be different just from every time you capture them sometimes you capture them when they seem to have slowed down and you see more of a of a craft structure when they're moving very quickly you'll see this long streak but the interesting thing is um after i you know just use after a thousand of them and i photographed still photographed them you lay them side by side and you start to see common things you start to see markings you start to see kind of shape you know it's not so you've almost been able to to classify them in a way well actually i've been calling them the second phenomena but the way i see this is everything to date that has been shot by humans from from here from the ground i call one that's one the space This phenomenon of spheres, outer space, that's shot from NASA's cameras is two. And I thought it would stop at two. But this phenomena I call number three. There are two space phenomena. And this third phenomena, I don't blame people for not discovering it or anything. I don't think anybody has tried not to discover to discover it well it sounds to me like you had to go through a lot of work I just wonder how many how many people of my technical television background have tried this and I don't think a lot of scientists have I just know that professor Weinberg was absolutely knocked out of his, he just couldn't believe it. And as I built the sample up, I didn't believe it more. I couldn't believe, I mean, it's reached the point. But I don't want to take anything away from the spherical phenomena. The second phenomena, to me, is absolutely unimpeachable in a preponderant sense you know I was quite satisfied with finding to what phenomena to the the first space sure and I still am but This third phenomena is so against all of what we expect it to be, that it's intrigued me much more. It's not, no archetype, no... Martin, going back a little way, you mentioned being your own worst critic, if you like, or debunker, have you endeavored to find video footage or feed from other sources to compare with yours? Oh, good one. Thank you. Yes, yes. I did everything. I taped through two different cable systems. I taped into into direct dishes and then the most extraordinary discovery of all was i i recorded cnn's live feed of a recent shuttle i think it was sts 86 or 84 one of them of the docking and even though um i guess a lot of people were looking for the spherical thing that knew about them uh i was looking for the third phenomena because i can see it now you know with that my eye can catch it and this to me would would show that it has nothing to do with my machines and has nothing to do to do with the dishes, and this looked like good. And it also was a great chance for me to prove to myself that... That what you were saying was really there. I believe that if this is there, it has to be there all the time. It can't not be there and be there. And so I figured I'd take the biggest chance of all. And so I broke down the CNN footage. There they were. Even on the CNN footage? Yes. Well, it's documented. I don't think CNN even knew what they were seeing. But what stunned me is that was almost, well, how much more do you need, you know? I really did not, I didn't want to come forward with the third phenomena and then the second space phenomena until I was able to be absolutely certain that this had some substance to it i didn't want to lose um the second phenomena i didn't want someone to to to to get diverted on this shoot it down and then say well that means that that that incredible um spherical phenomena that is is is i I also documented in great abundance. I didn't want that to be dissed. After you'd collected this material, you mentioned the gentleman at the planetarium that decided that he didn't want to talk about it. Have you spoken to any any other have you spoken to NASA or any qualified people there that might might be prepared to comment on what you've seen it's so hard to tell this story but again I then met a physicist from from California actually from Topeka Canyon, who used to be a part of a think tank there, red, blue, or blue-green, or something like that. Sure. Who cares what it's called? But the fact is, he was very, very interested in the scientific end as well. We stayed away from anyone that was going to have gray aliens and things in it. You know, we were really looking to substantiate it as just there. And he started corresponding with the astrochemistry department at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. And the extraordinary thing about that is that he didn't communicate on my behalf with just that department. He communicated with the head of the astrochemistry department. And I've turned over the documentation which outlines the whole set of email conversations in which at no time does he say that the spherical phenomena is not on the tape. What he does is basically comment accepting the premise. Do the emails discuss both phenomena or just the spheres? No, that's the interesting thing. We decided that it would be better to continue our work, which is massive. I have massive amounts from every flight of these spherical phenomena. I have examples of these things 300 miles away, close to the ship. So I feel there's enough there to... I didn't want to freak out the... You felt that there might have been a bit much to have answered all at once. Well, I'd already seen Professor Weinberg's reaction, and you really have to be right with them to hold their hand. And I just felt that he might stop the emails. We were absolutely knocked out that this man started talking to us. It was the first time that I've ever heard of a senior major league JPL Nassau player literally discussing what is on the tapes there's an example of the tether which is a 12 mile long electrical hundred million dollar satellite controlling electrical an electrical experiment yes I'm not a scientist I apologize for that but you know I'll get you these details but they and this tether they are busy showing us from the moment it broke to the moment it's 300 miles away and at every point yes mysteriously it broke just in the right place if it broke a little bit too close to the shuttle it would have taken the shuttle out if it had broken a little further on it would have maybe destroyed the wing or something you know because you hear the astronauts say well it couldn't have happened in a better place you know and then um just to continue on the distance, as these things started swarming it, and as this thing drifted away, they're continually showing us, or NASA I guess, through the downlink, this $100 million satellite. And the phenomena followed the satellite. This is the spherical phenomena and um unless they're commenting on on these things no at one point they asked and the astronaut says well it's a little bit of debris or something like you'd think you'd know that falls us around sort of that's you know it wasn't like oh this is this and then they dropped dropped it. There's a few of these things in the footage, or are there a lot of them? There's more than a lot. If you've ever seen a hornet's nest after you've thrown a rock at it, you know, that's what it's like. And how do you count the hornets? So they're all going in different directions. And I use tricks like fast forward, because when you go in fast forward, if they're all stars, they all go in the same direction. You know, these things are all moving. But what was very interesting is they're saying, how far is the tether? Well, the tether is now 100 miles. And they zoom with their incredible zoom in on it. And you see some of these spheres in in front of the tether and some of absolutely clearly no problem at all they're behind the tether and if the tether is 12 miles and these are half the size of the tether going behind it at 100 miles away they're not specks of ice well even for me i'm i find it hard to believe that they could be crystals then if yeah but again i'm merely saying that you know i'd like that that i'm just saying what they can't be and they i've never heard of a night of a six mile ice crystal that spotted crystal clear a hundred miles away you know etc so um there's there's hundreds of those examples um then they've called them on the different videos one time they said they were shooting stars and meteors then the same phenomenon appears on the next flight and it's ice crystals and then the next phenomena appears on the next flight and it's debris you see you see what i mean they've already established it on sts 70 something that it's that's i think remember something about fireflies at one stage from a long, long time ago. I believe this spherical phenomena first appeared to John Glenn as early as 1962, and it continued. We have documentation from various publications that shows that they know clearly. They didn't have an answer for three to four space flights they had an answer to what you know the blue haze around the earth is you know it's uh they had an answer to just about everything else but there's this very interesting thing about three or four flights in where it says john glenn's fireflies spotted over Perth. They're still calling them John Glenn's fireflies. And we have an astronaut making the comment on the 25th anniversary of the moon flight. He says, it's hard to believe, but he says, it's a fact that we thought that John's fireflies, again, Glenn's fireflies, were living critters now at no time have i i've read everything and at no time have i ever heard that before that nasa concluded originally that the fireflies were alive so so they were still calling them john glenn's fireflies four flights in there's another interesting thing. If you look at John Glenn's original photos, which I have, which he bought a camera at a Cocoa Beach drugstore, even though the shuttle or the whatever capsule, I've forgotten. Even though they had a camera on that, he took his own. And when he saw the fireflies, and it's all documented and you it's even in the movie the right stuff he holds the camera up while the fireflies are above his head and he says i better film or you guys are going to think i'm nuts and when you see those pictures and you see the pictures of the shuttle today and the mirror, you see the same phenomenon. Sounds like it might be an interesting exercise to show John Glenn the footage that you've now got and let him comment on that. I challenge NASA, JPL, Story Musgrave, astronauts, and especially James Holberg, to debate me, because it's one of those situations where if they haven't done the homework I've done, and they don't have the video I have, and they haven't done the research, and that they don't have a chance, I wouldn't be able to downlink what I got. I wouldn't be able to find the things I found and do it consistently like I have been able to do if NASA really wanted to hide it. Although you did mention to me, Martin, that they shifted a satellite at one stage. Yes, they've done some shifty things, and there are military people as well as the the non-military people for instance there's a flight i have where there's it's basically the entire flight was the control room except for the spacewalk the spacewalk was to test the new backpacks and it's a famous uh walk because the fellow flipped around the astronaut flipped around couldn't stop so that's what made the news but if you look at the whole spacewalk and everybody in the media had the chance there's a point where he says there's not mark will you look out there there's an object right in front of you and the and the military fellow says I don't know what you're talking about. Now just think to yourself, if, if I said there's a bee about to sting you, wouldn't you go, I wonder where that is, or something other than, I don't know what you're talking about. First of all, what do you mean you don't know what I'm talking about? If I'm in outer space and I'm flying around and my partner says there's an object in front of you, I wouldn't say,'t know what you're talking about and then his next line is never mind and then the third astronaut says am I missing something and he says don't worry the the lens filter came off now confirming the size and how close it must have been going and it's flying off at 10 o'clock and 11 o'clock now when they first mentioned the object the the shuttle camera you couldn't see it so i wasn't looking for it they drew my attention to it i looked and there the object emerged and the third thing he's saying to the third astronaut is don't worry about it don't worry about it you know it's the camera filter and then he even confirms off 10 11 o' 11 o'clock, you know. And then there's a pause and the control room below tells him to stay vector. Shut up. Stay on course. Continue with what you were supposed to do. And then they continue as if nothing happened. As if nothing had happened. Yet, it's right on tape. Audio tape audio video and you see the object they're referring to so but my point was they didn't hide that from me they they're challenging us to find it and i my only question is how come there aren't more of us out there finding it? This is a big world, and most humans love mysteries. And the video is available, and many people have home dishes. And even though NASA moved the satellite almost onto the horizon after they found out what we were doing, we still were able to get the satellite. I just don't see, I don't see, I've had no agents at my house. I've communicated with the Canadian Space Agency, but I can't, for their protection, at this point, I can't give you the name, but let me just say that we ran it by our own country's space agency due to the connections we had. What was their comment? That it was the most popular underground tape among the astronauts. You know, that it was the one they all wanted to have a copy and show their friends at night. Like, that was the reaction. This is a great tape. We love looking at it. Everyone just thinks it's the greatest. No, the Canadian Space Agency has been very cooperative. That's what I'd like to say. The Canadian Space Agency has been cooperative. I communicated with Washington headquarters and received an answer. And we've been receiving answers from JPL in California everyone's talking to us no one's threatening us and all the video has been totally available the whole time so that so I don't hold that NASA is is going out of their way I think they make it difficult like anybody. When I used to hide Easter eggs for my niece and nephew, you don't make it too easy. My dog doesn't make it easy to find the bones he buried. But, and it's not easy to do. This is very hard. I want to emphasize that even for me me this has been a very hard but fun thing to do and I think the preponderance I think you have to do what I did you have to record every moment of every flight over a period of years if you're if you're looking to substantiate something of this magnitude and importance i took what professor weinberg of simon fraser university said very seriously if you really want to do this duplicate it get it in every lighting condition get it under every circumstance get it in every circumstance you can and the one that made me happiest funny enough was almost the last flights i recorded because i got it in black and white there was a ccd camera put on one of the flights and i thought that's the charge coupling device which is a electronic way rather than the old tubes these big tubes that are slower on their scans so as soon as the faster scanning and tube ccd was on the black and white i challenged myself again you should be able to find them and i did so i've got them in black and white but i've got them under and i know what which camera i I now know where to look for them, I know what events. In STS-80, when the door wouldn't open, you know, they had the spacewalk scheduled, and the door wouldn't open. I remember watching that and seeing all of these, this third phenomena, the second space phenomena, but the third phenomena, all around the door. And they were moving the door and trying to get it open. And I'd never seen this phenomena do that before. And then a flight or two later, the astronauts were commenting right on the feed that there was something had come through the door they were seeing these flashing colored lights what i just thought of it my imagination yeah i Yeah, I saw it too, so it's not. There's two of them. There's another one. What are they? Let me show you the whole time, and I was just at that was the This is the first time I got some kind of a feel that the astronauts have seen phenomena three, the second space phenomena. It's something that should be this challenging. I don't know why most people think something this different is just going to be nuts and bolts, 30 feet across, nice big friendly gray aliens come out, recognize themselves in all the ads that have been appearing in car companies, turn on the TV and watch the new Roswell series, visit the X-Files. You know what I'm saying is that that this this is a this this this phenomena is not what i expected to find this third phenomenon but they seem i believe they they use the same operating principle because some of the spherical second phenomena which i still emphasize this is our main documentation um can move away at rapid speeds as the video shows you um do you believe the two phenomena are connected yes somehow i i think well they're very aware of each other somebody suggested to me what if they're the same phenomenon but've studied them extensively, and the spherical phenomena has different characteristics to it. Let's just put it at that, leave it at that. They're not in color. This is a totally different phenomena. This one never goes at real speed. It's as if something comes up to your nose and in one-thirtieth of a second has a tour, like an iceberg or something, or a glacier, and then leaves. Without us even being aware of it. Without us even being aware of it. And if it chooses, for whatever reason, to look at something, it tends to slow down. And that's why I believe it appears when there's a $100 million satellite disrupting the air. It appears when the Hubble Space Telescope is being repaired. It appears whenever something is happening. It's an amazing phenomena. And what I like about it is these aren't ice craters. There's nobody in science in Canada that I've ever met, and David Syrida, my partner in terms of the research end, not a partner, let's just say he's as interested as I am and he volunteered to take on that role, nobody said to him what this is. Nobody suggested anything except that it must be what it is and but they don't know where to go with it they don't know what to do with it they don't know how to react it's easier if you can sort of argue that may or may not be something but once you just look at it it stuns. In December 1997, in the Brazilian capital of Brasilia, representatives from over 50 nations took part in a major international UFO congress. Among them was Alexander Ballandine, a former Soviet cosmonaut who spent six months aboard the Mir space station. In his lecture, Ballandine conceded that he and many other cosmonauts had seen UFOs. We cosmonauts had a golden rule, he said. If you see something strange, keep watching it, because you may never see something like it again. Later, Ballendine shook the assembled audience when he claimed that future anomalous images observed and or recorded in space would be shared between the Russian Space Agency, NASA, and a special forum of UFO researchers. This was an unprecedented announcement, delivered from prepared notes that would have to have been sanctioned by the Russian government, Not least because Ballendine was driven to and from the Russian embassy in Brasilia each day in a diplomatic limousine. Over breakfast, and with UFO researcher Boris Choronov acting as interpreter, Ballendine assured Graham Bertzel that some UFOs reportedly seen by both American astronauts and Russian cosmonauts were very real. But when Bertzl ventured to suggest that some anomalous things seen in space might be secret Star Wars devices, Ballendine said, of course, we accept this, but some of the things seen have nothing to do with these. Since that announcement, other former mere cosmonauts have come forward to speak about their UFO encounters. It was a huge sphere. I think it appeared when we were over Newfoundland. The sea was in the background. It was shining, sparkling, of absolutely even shape. It shone like the balls that hang on trees at Christmas, greenish in colour and all shimmering. It was impossible to take your eyes off it." And if further proof were ever needed that the Russian Space Agency meant what it said, then this sequence, captured by Russian state television from within mere mission control, can only be described as proof positive. Note how the camera pans around the control room before settling on the main viewing screen. Was the subject of their attention these anomalous objects seen in close proximity to the Mir space station? Intriguingly, here's the exact same sequence, only this time recorded by Martin Stubbs from NASA's Downlink. Compare the two. These objects are patently of interest to those watching in Russia, so might the same be true of their counterparts at NASA? We'll be right back. Columbia, Houston, we're looking at our payload bay camera, and it looks like a lot of moonlight glinting off the ocean, a whole sparkling bed of diamonds out there. Is that a real picture, or are we just getting some video fuzz? Houston, we're recording that. that's some of the ice crystals that we were dumping out earlier and yeah, it's a beautiful picture. That's a great combination of the those ice crystals sparkle and maybe as well as some of the sun starting to come up on the horizon. Well thanks for the picture. Thank you. The Mir space station is now visible on the far left hand side of the screen, about an inch from the bottom of this particular picture. And there were also a number of shooting stars in that view. The camera has now moved to a point. Okay, the Mir space station is the small flashing light in the center about an inch from the left-hand side of the screen, it's slowly, it is slowly moving closer to the left-hand Thanks for watching! It is slowly moving closer to the left-hand side and it has a very light flashing to it. We think in the middle of the screen way to the left-hand side. Looks like you've got an odd situation, Martin, can you look out there? I'm not sure what you're talking about. Never mind. Are we missing something? I don't see anything. Yeah, we think the camera filter came off the button. It's about your 10 o'clock, 11 o'clock going away. Don't worry about it. Don't worry about it. Discovery, we're sending you an orbiter to stay, Vector. Transcribed by ESO, translated by — © B Emily Beynon Thank you for watching. Transcribed by ESO, translated by — I don't know. Transcribed by ESO, translated by — Thank you. Transcribed by ESO, translated by — We'll be right back. © BF-WATCH TV 2021 I don't know. © BF-WATCH TV 2021 and we see the satellite now it's like a bright spot at the end of the tether. And on the other end, the lower end, there's also a relatively bright spot, which is maybe an accumulation of the tether. We are down-linking camera delta now. Okay, we copied and understand as you're viewing it on the monitor, the satellite is at the top of the tether. Thank you for watching. is at the top of the tether, unfortunately we don't see the tip of the boom, but in a few seconds you'll see the tether break, and this one of course was not attended, it just recorded, it could not be bumped either, so it will record steadily the whole break and coil back of the tether. Copy, Claude. Here we go. We're going to take off. You have the... Again, this is a view of the satellite. Well, if it had to break, it did it in the right place. The left-hand corner there, straight as an arrow, so it seems from here. Yes, sir, we have it. Great picture. It came and went pretty quick, but that was about as much as we have of it. Columbia and the satellite now 77 nautical miles apart. Again, that call reporting that the crew can see the tether and see the satellite. It's beautiful. This view showing the satellite, again just moving into sunrise. 81 nautical miles now from Columbia. You guys getting the image? Franklin, we see a long line, a couple of star-like things, and a lot of things swimming in the foreground. Can you describe what you're seeing? Well, the long line is a tether, and there's a little bit of debris that kind of flies with us, and it's illuminated by the sun at such low angles. There's a lot of stray light, and it's getting washed out quickly, but Claude is trying to do a quick good job here adjusting the cameras. Copy that. In that description by the crew, this is the tether in the satellite. The satellite with 12, approximately 12 miles of tether still attached to it. Columbia and the satellite now just passing over the west coast of northern Africa. The two spacecraft now 90 nautical miles apart. Thank you. The two spacecraft are now 90 nautical miles apart. Controllers for the satellite did have communications with it during the close pass between Columbia and the satellite. Columbia-Houston, that's a much better view, a lot more contrast visible. And how wide does that tether appear to be? It seems to resemble a much wider strand than we'd expect. Can you describe which way the satellite is visible on that strand? Thank you. I'm going to zoom in now. I should mirror exactly what she's doing on the inside. Okay. Right now, the handle is installed with the tab in the unlocked position. I'm going to rotate the tab to the locked position now, if you're ready. We're ready. Okay, we are fully seated in the locked position. tammy we didn't see any any motion on the outside if you would go ahead and move it back to the unlocked okay i'm pulling back to the unlocked and again it's only going about three quarters of the way will not light back and forth. Okay, and we can see the handle moving on the outside. Okay, and any indication that the lock is being actuated? No, we can't see any indication of that, and it just may be a bad angle and too dark. Amidst the 2,500 hours of NASA footage recorded by Martin Stubbs, we have seen countless examples of the spheres, the first space phenomenon. But until now, few have ever come across, least of all seen described, what has been labeled the second space phenomenon. Those that have have been left speechless, including eminent scientists, astrophysicists and, as we have learned, highly placed figures within the Canadian Space Agency. Someone who was prepared to comment publicly after being shown less than five minutes of the footage was Guido Nigro, director of the SETI radio telescope at Golden Grave Observatory in Western Australia. What, we asked, did he make of it all? Well, I was very well impressed, and not only myself, but also other people that were looking at it. And because this time we are not talking about footage taken off from some home movie about but someone that actually was blind in Space Shuttle. So, automatically that gave us the fact that the picture must have been real, genuine. Well, I was very well impressed. And maybe this will prove that there is something else that we are not aware of, at least from our mission. If the footage that we saw came to be true and really are showing an alien spacecraft or something like that, I say that if there is a cover-up, the people who are doing this cover-up are an enemy of the entire Earth race because we are not children and we must know the truth. It doesn't matter if there are people who don't know how to handle the truth. Well, the majority of us will, and if there is a cover-up, I think it's time that the cover-up goes. Guido could have easily dismissed this sampling as ice crystals at best, or errant nonsense at worst. The fact that he chose to do neither is symbolic perhaps of the potential importance both he, and a great many others, attach to the footage. The onus surely now rests with people like Guido, and others elsewhere in the scientific community, to determine whether or not the second space phenomena is a genuine phenomenon. And were that proven to be the case, two burning questions would need to be addressed. Is it extraterrestrial, and is it intelligent? If the answer to either is deemed yes, we could have arrived at an historic moment. For Martin Stubbs, it would be the vindication of what he, and millions like him, have always maintained, that we are not alone in the universe. His, after all, was a chance discovery, a fleeting glimpse of something that sped across his television monitor that most would fail to notice. He focused on that. He looked for more of the same under different conditions and found them in abundance. But found what exactly? Some of the greatest scientific discoveries known to man have often been born from chance events but is it remotely conceivable that one of the greatest discoveries of all time could have been similarly unearthed by a humble cable tv manager operating out of a small community station in vancouver history will surely go on to determine the truth provided that is others within the scientific community are equally prepared to explore the limitless possibilities now before them but who among them will be courageous enough ambitious enough to step forward and examine this evidence there will be many who will choose to ignore it, blinded by self-imposed scientific dogma and bland indifference towards all who champion the extraterrestrial hypotheses. But those that do express an interest may well find themselves embarking upon one of the greatest scientific treks of all time. I can't explain it because I don't really think that's my job right now. I'm merely a person who's gathering grains of salt together and putting them in front of you. It's as if you have a carpet and you throw you have a handful of salt and you throw the salt on the carpet you look and you don't think there's any salt there when you gather it up put it back in your hand you have something Thank you for watching. We'll be right back. I don't know.