Honestly, I don't know what that is. Could be an antenna, could be an "artifact", the video isn't great quality, there's a lot of ghosting. But I don't see how an object can spin like that and stay upright and not wobble if it's on a wire and the wire isn't at the axis of rotation which it doesn't look like it is from that animated gif.
I love how you are so quick to dismiss that it could be a wire. Is it that difficult to just admit that it might kinda sorta look like a wire maybe? It sure does to me.
In other words, I don't see it anymore as a wire as I do a reflection created from all of the light dancing around the whole launch as it spins it's way up and out.
When I look at the image I see the line. What is the line? I don't know. I agree that it could be the things that you have listed above but, I also believe, that it COULD be a wire. Again i'm shocked at peoples inability to acknowledge that it might be a wire.
Hey, simmer down. Stop being all 'judgy' on what you think people are willing to dismiss or not. I originally posted that I thought it was a different satellite being deployed which had a definite antenna protrusion which could have accounted for the 'wire', but as I stated, I wasn't 100% sure. Tom did the due diligence and corrected me on which satellite it was, so I had to look deeper. It's compelling footage no matter which side of the fence you're on, so worth a look.
Upon review I looked at it again, and again, frame by frame. Coupled with looking up the specific satellite schematics and such. Tom comes at it from a "look at the wire" perspective, I come at it from a "what else could it be" perspective. Neither angle is right and neither is wrong. Maybe we meet in the middle.
My personal determination, 27 frames of a straight line protruding off-center from the spinning instrument, supposedly in space - a video medium I'm not too familiar with, none of us are - that kind of comes in and goes out presented at a post flight conference video with super poor resolution, 1984 NTSC reso with reflected light and blown out aspects of the image doesn't really land me, personally in the "that's a wire" camp.
The mantra of space debunkers has been, "If we can show one piece of evidence that NASA faked something, then the whole shooting match has been faked." So if you're going to go by that standard, this one fails. It's just not strong enough to take down the mantle of space travel.
But that's not to say the notion wasn't examined nor entertained. Better evidence is simply required.
So saddle off your high horse.