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: Is not an alien force already among us? Looks like you got a object
right in front of you, Mark. You looking out there? Discovery,
we're sending you an orbiter. 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 is really impressive. There are, on
the other side of the coin, 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 life
forms 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's 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 analyzing
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 skeptics who regard that, and the work of SETI in particular, as either a diversion
from more important things or a gigantic waste of
time, resources, and money. It's a curious fact that
NASA is forbidden by Congress to take communications or signals from the very intelligent
life-harboring planets 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 US 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 extra terrestrial 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 signaling his intentions to step forth from his
earthbound environment the phenomenon we now
term UFOs signal back? Throughout the documented history of those early pioneering
man 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 across 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 sizable 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. 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
Theater 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. These spheres appeared
over Stirling, Scotland during the summer of 1998. Local resident Brian 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 NASAs 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 meteorite 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 are 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 that we have. 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 waste 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 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 of December, 1996, space shuttle astronauts onboard 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 appearance. And as the sequence rolls, note how the camera
onboard 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
un-docking mission with Mir provided breathtaking images. It also provided further puzzles. Thanks to an amateur
astronomer known as Willie, 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 Mir Space Station to emerge on the other side? And was this appearance of
dozens of anomalous objects caused by the flushing of a
toilet onboard the space shuttle or something else? Assuming then that this
is Mir space debris, would it not be considered
dangerous to those onboard both the space shuttle
and Mir 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 sprung 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 utilize their
satellite dishes to monitor and record transmissions
beamed down to Earth from the space shuttle. But what if one of those
individuals had the means to utilize 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 Birdsall, editor
of "UFO Magazine" in Britain, took a call on his mobile phone. The caller was Martyn Stubbs, a cable TV station manager
from Vancouver in Canada. For the next 45 minutes, Graham listened intently as
Martyn proceeded to recount an extraordinary story in which
he claimed to have accessed NASA's downlink 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 2 1/2 thousand hours, Martyn 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 Martyn in person. - This is very hard. Joining him
would be Brian Borshoff, project director of the
Phenomena Exhibition who flew in especially from Australia. After spending an entire week
in the company of Martyn, engaged in, for the most part, viewing countless hours of NASA footage, the staggering implications
of what he'd uncovered soon became apparent. - To substantiate something. For although
Martyn 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 Callahan and Brian Borshoff travel thousands of miles to
touch base with Martyn Stubbs in the first place? Call it intuition. Call it good luck. Call it what you will. But on hearing Martyn 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 Martyn recount
that story in his own words? - Hi, I'm Martyn 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
downlink 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 can 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 a CCD camera and 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 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's mission or each 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. You obviously...
Well, the STS-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 5 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 the 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 space walk for seven days and fix it. Right. - 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. It was a curiosity that of
why no one 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 it, and it wasn't available since '48. I've been an editor for 25
years, as well as everything else. And I spend an awful lot of
my day looking at videotape at amazingly fast speeds, reviewing people's programs for
critique reasons and things. Sure. - 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 had to get a video
tape recorder, an SVH machine, an older model, funny enough,
not the digital model, that literally when you roll the thing, it would break frames into fields. And in reality, there are
60 individual pictures that make up one second of video. And that's when I found them. So you were finding these
on one of those 60 frames? One of them 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." 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 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 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 when I found it was in a scan field, and then 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? - Very fast! So 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 destroy my discovery. I wanted them to tell me
that it could be hoaxed. You wanted to
critique it as heavily 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 physicists and astrophysicists. 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
pixelization process down and found it was still there. So they really didn't expect to
see anything in the beginning? - No. No. 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 is still spectacular. And probably I guess that they felt they might be
able to explain to you as something perfectly
legitimate or normal for. - 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 where they were all, what they were trying to do to me. Sure. - But the amazing thing
about this other phenomena, 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 baffled? - There's a professor at Simon
Fraser, Professor Weinberg, 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 we would have to bring, we would have to go right to NASA. And eventually we had a lecture at the Planetarium here in Vancouver by one of the Hubble poobahs, the chief Hubble designers, engineers. That must have
been a great opportunity too. - 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, he could throw
the ice crystal theory. Because it was a very
small sample at that point. It was only 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... He accepted that
it was a phenomena of some sort. - He just, well, they're
comfortable at 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 that's just all kinds
of stuff you don't understand about ice crystals." So he didn't have any. It was the Hubble fellow
at the Planetarium, and 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 the second he said who
he was, there was back talk, things like, "It's that
guy, bah, da, bah, da." And the phone went down. In other words, we have
communication was cut off. Not a very
good public relations exercise. - No! No! But we found it odd that these
are okay and these aren't. So, anyway, that's how it started. So Professor Weinberg,
who's a wonderful man, 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 has worked through the
Canadian Space Agency with him. This Professor Weinberg studies
the effects of space travel on the brain. - Right.
- And shapes. And whether they, you know,
why they come home depressed. Elizabeth Bondar, our
famous first woman in space, it isn't generally known in
Canada, but she was depressed, massive depression for the first
two weeks after she landed. And so they really had
to study what's going on. Sure. - And they found 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 talk to
Orca whales up there and they photograph 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
'cause no one knows it's there. I didn't know and I went there. So! 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 of this second thing. And so, I remembered that and
I recorded the next shuttle and I knew what I was
looking for and I found it. You mentioned
something to me earlier about the lighting
conditions and the fact that you felt that was self-illuminating. - Well, I needed-Yes, at first
I actually thought, you know, I was my own worst skeptic. I've learned that in television. And you don't present anything unless you're totally researched and sure. But I began to discover that
these were appearing in dark, when the camera, you know
when the Sun went down, when the Sun came up, when
there was a refraction, when there wasn't refraction. I found them under every
lighting condition. And my only conclusion
from looking at the video, and continually looking at it, is obviously they're self-illuminating. Did they change at all under
those different lighting conditions? When apertures change or the Sun goes down or the craft's in a different position, 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 craft structure. When they're moving very
quickly, you'll see this long streak. Right. - But the interesting
thing is, just to 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 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 here, from the ground, I call one, that's one. The space phenomena, spheres, outer space that 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 it. Well, it sounds to me like you had to go through a lot of work to. - I just wonder 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 preponderance sense. You know, I was quite satisfied
with finding two phenomena, two. The first space phenomena. 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 no archetype. Martyn, 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 too? - Oh, good one. Thank you. Yes! Yes. I did everything. I taped through. I taped through two
different cable systems. I taped into direct dishes. And then the most extraordinary
discovery of all was 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 I guess a lot of people were looking
for this spherical thing that knew about them, I was looking for the third phenomena. 'Cause I can see it now, you know? My eye can catch it. And this to me would show that it has nothing to do with my machines and it has nothing 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. - Yeah, 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! And well, it's documented and the... 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
the second phenomena. I didn't want someone
to get diverted on this, - shoot it down.
- Sure. - And then say, "Well, that means that that incredible spherical phenomena that I also documented in great abundance, 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 wanna talk about it. - Yeah. Have you spoken to any other? Have you spoken to NASA or
any qualified people there that 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 California, actually from Topeka Canyon, who used to be a part of,
it's 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 gonna 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 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 these spheres? - No! 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 too. I didn't wanna freak out the
NASA? You know what I mean? 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 NASA player literally discussing what is on the tapes. There's an example of the tether, which is a 12 mile long electrical, $100 million 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. 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... It broke? - Yes. Mysteriously it broke
just in the right place. If it broke a little bit
too close to the shuttle, it would've taken the shuttle out. If it'd broken a little further on, it would've maybe destroyed the
wing or something, you know? Because you hear the astronauts say, "Well, it couldn't have
happened in a better place." And then just to continue on the distance as these things started swarming,
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 second? The spherical phenomena?
- Yeah, the spherical. The spherical phenomena. And... Are NASA commenting on
these things as this is happening? - No! Oh, at one point they asked
and the astronaut says, "Well, it's a little bit
of debris or something." Like you'd think he'd know. "That follows us around sort of." You know, it wasn't
like, "Oh, this is this." And then they dropped it. There's a few of these things in the footage or are there a lot of them? - I laugh at that. There's more than a lot. If you've ever seen a hornet's nest after you've thrown a rock
at it, 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 direct. You know, these things are all moving. Sure. - 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 front of the tether and some absolutely
clearly, no problem at all, they're behind the tether. And if the tether's 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 find it hard to believe that
they could be crystals then. - Yeah, but again, I'm
merely saying that, you know, that I'm just saying what they can't be. I've never heard of a six mile ice crystal that's spotted crystal clear
100 miles away, you know? Et cetera. So there's hundreds of those examples. 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 what I mean? They've already established it
on STS-70 something that it's... I seem to
remember something about fireflies at one time from a long, long time ago. - Shooting stars! 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
the blue haze around the Earth is. You know? 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 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
that 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, 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 gonna 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 phenomena. Sounds like
it might be... Little spherical. 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 Hoberg, 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, that they don't have a chance. I wouldn't be able to
downlink what I've got. I wouldn't be able to
find the things I've 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, Martyn, that they shifted a
satellite at one stage. - Yes, they've done some shifty things and there are military people
as well as the non-military people. For instance, there's
a flight I have where 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 walk because
the fellow flipped around, the astronaut flipped
around, and 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,
"Mark, will you look out there? There's an object right in front of you." And the military fellow says, "I don't know what you're talking about." Now, just think to yourself. 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, "I don't know
what you're talking about." And then his next line is, "Nevermind." And then the third astronaut
says, "Am I missing something?" And he says, "Don't worry.
The lens filter came off." Now confirming the size and
how close it must have been going, and it's flying off at a
10 o'clock and 11 o'clock. Now, when they first mentioned the object, 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'clock, 10, 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're supposed to do. And then they continue
as if nothing happened, as if nothing had happened. Yet it's right on 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're challenging us to find it. And 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's 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 space agency
due to the connections we had. What was their comment? - That it was the most
popular underground tape among the astronauts. 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 I don't hold NASA as
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 wanna emphasize that even for 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 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, 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, I've got them under and
I know which camera, I now know where to look for them. I know what events. In STS-80, when the door wouldn't open, they had the spacewalk scheduled
and the door wouldn't open. I remember watching that and
seeing all of this third phenomena, this 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 the 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 was that flash? What Mark? I saw a light
flash past me just here. Did you see it? I thought it must have been me. What? I just thought
it was my imagination. Yeah, I saw it too, so it's not. There was two of them. There's another one. What are they? I thought I saw the
lights flickering in here. Who'd be taking pictures? What is this? It's just
gone past in front of us. Where are the lights? Which ones? I lost surveillance for a second, but I had that one for the whole time. Yeah, I was
looking at that one too. - The spherical phenomena we've
documented and is very solid isn't the type that would
go in there, float around, and them say, "It's going
really fast, we can't see it." And it's all these popping colored lights. That was 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 gonna 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 this phenomena is
not what I expected to find, this third phenomena. But they seem, I believe they
use the same operating principle because some of the
spherical second phenomenon, which I still emphasize
is our main documentation, can move away at rapid speeds
as the video shows you. Do you believe
the two phenomena are connected? - Yes, somehow. Well, they're very aware of each other. Somebody suggested to me, "What
if they're the same phenomena?" But I've studied them extensively
and the spherical phenomena has different characteristics to it, a kind of a, 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 1/30th of a second has a tour like an iceberg or something, or you know? A glacier and then leaves. Without us even aware of it. - Without us even 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 phenomenon. And what I like about
it is these aren't ice. There's nobody in science in
Canada that I've ever met, and David Sarita, 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. 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 you. 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
Balandin, a former Soviet cosmonaut, who spent six months aboard
the Mir Space Station. In his lecture, Balandin 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, Balandin 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 had to have been
sanctioned by the Russian government, not least because Balandin
was driven to and from the Russian Embassy in Brasilia each day in a diplomatic limousine. Over breakfast and with UFO
researcher Boris Chorinov, acting as interpreter,
Balandin assured Graham Bertel that some UFOs reportedly seen
by both American astronauts and Russian cosmonauts were very real. But when Bertel ventured to suggest that some anomalous things seen in space might be secret star wars devices, Balandin said, "Of course we accept this. But some of the things seen
have nothing to do with these." Since that announcement, other former Mir cosmonauts
have come forward to speak about their UFO encounters. There was a huge sphere. I think it appeared when
we were over Newfoundland. The sea was in the background, there was shining, sparkling
of absolutely even shape. It shone like the balls that
hang on trees at Christmas, greenish in color, 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 Mir 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 Martyn
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? Columbia, Houston. We're looking at our Pallo 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? Hey, Houston,
we're recording that. That's some of the ice crystals that we were dumping
out earlier, and yeah. That's a great combination of the moonlight and the ice and the clouds. And it's a
combination of moonlight making 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. The Mir Space
Station is now visible on the far left-hand side of the screen, about an inch from 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... Camera Charlie, out. The left-hand
side of the screen. It's slowly... Kelli, you're on the camera. Yeah. It is slowly moving closer
to the left-hand side and has very light and flashing to it. We think on the middle of the
screen, way to the left-hand side. Looks like you got an object
right in front of you, Mark. You looking out there? I don't know
what you're talking about. Nevermind. Are we missing something? I don't see anything. Yeah, the
camera filter came off, Mark. It's about your 10 o'clock,
11 o'clock going away. Don't worry about it. Don't worry about it. Okay. Discovery,
we're sending you an orbiter. Stay vector. We see the satellite now. It's like a bright spot
at the end of the tether. And on the other end, the low end, there's also a relatively bright spot, which may be an
accumulation of the tether. And we are downlinking 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. That's correct. It's Bravo. We have the camera Bravo
currently on the tether. Unfortunately, we don't
see the tip of the boom, but, yes, you can see
the brace of this one. Of course we'll drop the
tape we just recorded. We'll record and send it
or break and call you back. Copy that. We dropped. But if you break it,
it's in the right place. True. The left-hand corner there. It stayed in there.
We're seeing some debris. - Yes, Sir.
- We have it. Great picture. It even went pretty quick but that was a matter of as
much as we could have of it. Columbia and the satellite
now 77 nautical miles apart. Again, that call reporting that can see the tether and
see the satellite too. This view showing... The satellite. Again, just moving into sunrise. 81 nautical miles now from the other. You guys getting any of this? Franklin, we see a long
line, a couple of starlike things and a lot of things
swimming in the foreground. Can you describe what you're seeing? Well, the
long line is the tether, and there's a little bit of
debris that kind of flies with us and it's illuminated by
the stars at that angle. This is this large straight 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 and the satellite. And the satellite with 12, approximately 12 miles of
tether still attached to it. Columbia and the satellite
are now just passing over the west coast of Northern Africa. 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? Satellite
now 100 nautical miles. And they're completely un-zoomed and you see the full extent of the tether. I'll try to adjust the focus,
but I can't get better than that. Okay, Claude. Thank you. Gonna zoom in now. It should mirror exactly
what she's doing on the inside. Okay. Right now the handle is installed with the tap in the unlocked position. I'm gonna rotate the tab
to the locked position now, if you're ready. We're ready. Okay, we are fully
seated in the locked position. - Okay, Tammy, we didn't see
any motion on the outside. If you would go ahead and
move it back to the unlocked. Okay. Pulling
back to the unlocked. And again, it's only going
about 3/4 of the way. Will not lie flat and will not
see it, as I mentioned earlier. And Tammy, if you could simultaneous with trying to put
it in the unlocked position, if you would move the handle
a little bit back and forth. Copy that. Okay, that's gonna work now, Bill. Okay. And we can see the handle
moving on the outside. Okay. But 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 1/2
thousand hours of NASA footage recorded by Martyn 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 was
that were looking at. And because this time we are
not talking about footage taken off from some home movie coming but someone that actually
was flying a 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 we prove that
there is something else that we are not aware of. At least 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 coverup, the people who are doing this coverup are an enemy of entire Earth
race because we are not children and we must know if! We must know the truth. It doesn't matter if there are people, that they don't know
how to handle the truth. Well, the majority of us will. And if there is a coverup, I think it's time that the coverup 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 Martyn 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. But when you gather it up, put it back in your
hand, you have something.