Analysis of NASA Video Feed
Solar Eclipse as Seen From Turkey
There's a Surprise You won't Believe!
August 11, 1999
Updated August 17, 1999
By Marshall Masters
Former CNN Field Producer, Science and Technology Features
Closing Comments by gary d. goodwin
Email from professional videographer
The images shown on this page, were captured from QuickTime movie of a NASA feed. In this video clip, three unusual objects appear during the instant of the full eclipse. I have named them Objects A, B and C. These objects were captured by the camera, and not the result of a technical defect.
What caught my attention, were the camera movements. I could see that the cameraman was trying to acquire something that had appeared in the overscan area of his camera viewfinder, in the upper right hand corner of the image viewing area.
I first detected Objects A and B on a Real Networks G2 80K video clip taken from the CNN site on 11-Aug-99. I reviewed that clip several times and determined that the objects were not caused by a lens flare, a defective camera imaging chip, or a dropout on the recording tape stock.
At that point, I brought my findings to the attention of Earl Crockett and Gary Goodwin of the Millennium Group. What I wanted to know, is if these objects were something explainable, such as a reflection from a building or an airplane that had crossed the camera's point of view.
Gary Goodwin examined my findings, and was able to find the QuickTime clip of the exact same NASA feed. QuickTime 4 clips have a much better resolution than Real Networks G2 clips, and Gary found a third object, which I've titled Object C. He sent me this clip and asked me to confirm the third object, which I did. He also asked me if the clip had been "edited" in any way.
I installed QuickTime 4 Pro on my PC and used it to capture the images shown on this page, directly from the clip. I used Microsoft Paint to add comments to the BMP files generated by QuickTime and then used CompuPic to convert those images to the GIF and JPEG formats for use on this web page.
These images are presented in order below. (Click on any image to view a full size JPEG version.) My conclusions follow the images.
Please keep in mind that video captures images in 1/30th of a second. Many of the captures shown in this still sequence represent fractions of sections. For the typical television viewer, these split-instant images are a blur. On the other hand, experienced video professionals learn to spot aberrations such those shown in the images below.
[Comment from gary: "It is my opinion that during the first few frames of second 16 (not shown here) the camera moves/pans/slews away from the sun and then aquires the objects A and B. It is difficult to see, but can be seen on the QuickTime movie provided below." This question has come up in many emails the last few days - hope this clarifies this issue. Object *C* is NOT in front of the moon!]
I can only speak as a video producer and a professional photographer. I am not a trained astronomer. What these objects are is not for me to say. But, I can say the following:
August 15, 1999
As I viewed this QuickTime movie for the first few times there were a few things that immediately struck me. I am, as always, more than happy to leave the conclusions up to you. I greatly appreciate Marshall's efforts and his expertise on this film. He is nothing but a gentleman and an intelligent one, interested in the same truth that we are seeking.
1) In the first few seconds of the film, watch as the ring of the visible sun disappears behind the moon. When it is almost gone and barely visible, the small portion of the ring left, smears and moves toward the top of the frame. In many previous images, that NASA provides the public of comets and other objects, the frame is inverted or turned inside out if you will. I'm unsure of exactly why this is done, but my suspicions are that it is to confuse the layman as to direction and keep them from drawing any conclusions of relationship between two or more objects. This practice was seen over and over in the observance of Hale Bopp. One time the body was aligned one way in the frame and then another time aligned another way. Very confusing. Of course the answer to this confronting question will be that "telescopes invert images". Well of course they do, however, all astronomers - even amateurs as myself knowing this can easily align them properly for the lay public prior to their exhibition. Other images of the eclipse that I have viewed clearly show the solar disk disappearing behind the moon in the lower left hand quadrant, where it actually occurred visually.
Please excuse me for being long winded about this, but the point here is that if this is true, the camera appears to move to the upper left when moved. Again, this is merely my opinion and could very well be wrong. The importance of this matter is that - in this direction - lies our friend Comet Lee.
2) In my opinion, as a lay person, the film appears to be edited, cut if you will after the sun is completely blotted out. The film does not appear to return after several key elements occur as point out by Marshall above. When it returns the corona suddenly cuts on to what's called the *Diamond Ring*, in one frame - these frames are as many as thirty frames a second and clicking thru each frame reveals that compared to other movies of the eclipse, it has been cut into the middle of the eclipse. Again the Diamond Ring is in the wrong visual position.
3) In the middle of the sequence, there appears several objects. The object that caught my attention more than any other, is referred to as object *C* above. You can clearly see a center brightness or spot, surrounded by a "cloud of haze". The center appears to be in a very familiar shape. This shape is what we at TMG refer to as the *horseshoe* and was seen in Hale Bopp as it passed perihelion. It almost appears as a quarter moon shape, or golf club head shape. The foggy cloud also appears to sweep back toward the other objects - *A* and *B*.
Now just a few questions to end with:
Is this the comet? It appears to be in the correct position and the construct suggests a comet indeed.
Is there more film of these objects, that we could take a look at? I really doubt that we will ever see the rest of this film. So we are once again left to ourselves to come to our own conclusions.
What was the person told that edited this piece of film? Was he/she told anything? It must've needed to be up in a hurry as this was a NASA feed. But of course absolutely still possible to be done. I wonder if the editor was told nothing, as to keep the info in the inner circle. Again, just conjecture - you decide.
If this is a comet, then what are these objects in its apparent tail? To be honest, I personally am not a follower of Nostrodamus, and have not followed his writings. But considering the previous piece by Colonel James Ervin, when I saw these images and identified what I believe to be a comet, and at least two accompanying objects in the tail, I got goose bumps real quick. I suppose the argument could be that I am seeing something that I want to see. But believe me, I do not want to see this or believe him. Take a good look yourself and let us know what your opinion is. I am interested.
Meanwhile we'll wait for more criticism from our friend at JPL, yet we will continue to ask for access to the data and images. We will likely not get it. We will not make predictions as we have been accused of doing. We will not claim aliens in the tail of the comet, as we have been accused of saying. We will not kill ourselves or compel anyone else to, as we have been said to be associated with. We will wait for the truth. And we will invite Mr. Morris to an open dialogue if he so desires. We have no hard feelings toward him or any other individual.
But how long can the people of the world be told they are ignorant, that they are unable to understand?
gary d. goodwin
I recieved this email from a fellow that provided me with obvious legitimate credentials identifying him as a professional videographer. He asked that I not use his name. Those associated with film would liekly recognize this fellows name.
In a message dated 8/16/1999 7:00:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time:
O.K. can use. But I reworked it a bit. I had forgotten about one other possibility. I am an Independent Producer / Director, my latest documentary on a famous artist. Rather not have you print my name. You're obviously being watched.
I can only tell you, as a professional Videomaker that clearly something is not right with the sequencing of the imagery; after the moon completely overtakes the sun, and we then see the objects, we then get what we call a "jump cut" to the return image of the eclipse, where the moon is just encompassing the sun again (except with a much brighter end glow). Get it?
Twice in a row. This was edited. Unless two things.. 1. The cameraman yanked out (or electronically subtracted) a few neutral density filters he was using for the occasion, to get better exposure on objects, which MIGHT account for the sudden change and a certain backlash of light (causing a repeat effect). But I don't think so because it was too dramatic a change and the first shot seemed to secure a total block for light to splash back.
Strangely, when I called up the video, and at the last frame of the eclipse before objects were seen, I took a crayon pencil and outlined the arc on my screen and then advanced to the eclipse arc after the objects and found a good BUT NOT PERFECT match. Comments anyone?
The other possibility is that the station cut between two cameras, and the other camera was at some far away point from the first possibly accounting for the repeat. But I don't think so either. How far away would you have to be to account for roughly two seconds of delay?
About Object C: the supposed Comet. It bothers me its distinct image last only one frame of QuickTime. A flash a light escaping the eclipse gave it luminance??? Was there "missing time" (no because the other objects didn't skip a beat) or graphic manipulation (easy to do these days), but they would have required time to exercise manipulation being that it was live (First of all today "Live" can mean a thirty second delay. They could possibly have a channel they could cut to in a hurry on the board, or no one noticed it at the time but if millenium's tape was obtained after the broadcast I'd be suspicious).
Also the most frightening of it all is how Object A is NOT A DOUBLED IMAGE because of a motion pan (Trailing). The object holds together throughout the pans right and left indicating to me that if this IS an object, it is elongated and bigger than you think.
RETURN TO PART ONE
RETURN TO PART TWO
RETURN TO PART THREE
RETURN TO PART FOUR
RETURN TO PART FIVE
RETURN TO PART SIX