Comet 67P: images from the Rosetta probe show a shining object on the surface and other anomalies

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: Arken

Bah. Literally ANYTHING that shows up in NASA or ESA images that looks artificial is explained away as "dust", "ice", or "cosmic rays". I would take their explanations with a grain of salt. They desperately need us to think the universe is a vast sterile desert and will never admit to evidence otherwise.

Where is your evidence of that slanderous accusation?

Actually you couldn't be more mistaken.

ESA, NASA and the astrobiology community in general all are on a full court press to convince the public our galaxy is likely populated with other life as they seek funding to build instruments to detect it.

Unlike you I will provide evidence to support my statement:

October 2012


December 2013


May 2014


July 2014


August 2014





But hey why let facts get in the way of your conspiracy fantasy.

Occam's razor. There is far more ice, dust and cosmic rays in the universe than aliens and these people are highly trained to know what they are looking at. Can you say the same honestly?

a reply to: SecretKnowledge

To those people saying that it might be dust or a particle near the camera, if that is correct, then what is leaving the shadow there?

If you look at the photo of the "antenna", about an inch to the right of the antenna there is what looks to be a black "antenna" about half the height of the original one. It is parallel with the original one and has a round top. It looks like the base of it is sitting in a dug-out square.
Kind of hard to explain but does anyone else see what i mean?

I see it. It looks like either an antenna or mechanical arm...something slender.

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

for the interesting share. At least we don't got to look into this image and describe the undescribed as just rocks

And when it comes back as nothing on the rock, does that count?

a reply to: wildespace

Shouldn't you also take with a grain of salt when ANYTHING that looks artificial is explained away as UFOs, aliens, alien structures, etc? Some (usually people who want to sell their books and DVDs) desperately need us to think that aliens are everywhere around us, and that the governments know about them but want to keep us in the dark.

By the way, how can a small collection of white pixels look artificial?

I cannot speak for anyone else, of course, but I fully believe that there are aliens everywhere around us, that the government keeps the public in the dark about it...and I didn't need to read a book or watch a DVD in order to arrive at that conclusion.

originally posted by: VoidHawk
The "antenna" is interesting.?

Yes it is, even just as a curiosity. In wildspace's picture there looks to be two, the one in question and another in a sort of grotto above at the left-hand edge of the picture, the grotto seems to be the cause of the peaked shadow to the right of it.
As for the shiny object, the researchers are in a better position to make some judgement on it as they will have a better specimen to look at than this compressed internet version, and their opinion is pretty clear. I wonder if they mention 'the antenna/s' elsewhere.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Yes because its described

a reply to: JadeStar

But hey why let facts get in the way of your conspiracy fantasy.

Occam's razor. There is far more ice, dust and cosmic rays in the universe than aliens and these people are highly trained to know what they are looking at. Can you say the same honestly?

Do you also keep your mind open to the possibility that it may very well be you who are subscribing to a fantasy instead? That these highly trained people are simply keeping the public confused and occupied with debates on whether or not this or that is a particle of dust or a cosmic snowflake or something, to obfuscate, misdirect and distract?

And even if they're not actually conspiring to conspire against the rest of us, can you say unequivocally that they know it to be a fact that this was space confetti or dust or anything else that can be easily explained away? And if so, could you please provide some evidence showing that it was proven beyond all reasonable doubt to be accurate? Because unless it has been proven, it does not qualify as "fact".

Also, it would be much appreciated if you could post some links or videos regarding your assertion that there is far more ice, dust, etc. than aliens, particularly since you are referring to not only our galaxy, but the entirety of the Universe? I, for one, was unaware that we had mapped the whole Universe and cataloged every particle in it...do you have anything to support that statement? Thanks in advance!

What if this craft was left there on that comet by our human ancestors, thousands of years ago, and now the comet is coming around again, we're taking the same opportunity that they did to send a craft there.

a reply to: blackhatchet

What if this craft was left there on that comet by our human ancestors, thousands of years ago, and now the comet is coming around again, we're taking the same opportunity that they did to send a craft there

Now that is a truly intriguing speculation indeed. Would be most awesome if it were a time capsule or something, yeah?

originally posted by: blackhatchet
What if this craft was left there on that comet by our human ancestors, thousands of years ago, and now the comet is coming around again, we're taking the same opportunity that they did to send a craft there.

in light of Hoagland's ideas on the artifacts being all over the solar system and the fact I TOO see artificiality in the 'pyramids' and other features like the moon Iepitus and monolith like objects on one of the moons Phobos or Demos of Mars. Something interesting is out there even if it us just natural. Too many hard to believe shapes out there to poo poo them all as natural an all observations by Arken and others as delusional. You wil notice Phage doesn't chime in so much on these anymore and to be fair i think he is seeing the light that possibly cant be explained away. I also think he is fairly tired of fighting the tide of data that suggests ancient civilization theory holds water with a lot of people with good reason.

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: JadeStar

But hey why let facts get in the way of your conspiracy fantasy.

Occam's razor. There is far more ice, dust and cosmic rays in the universe than aliens and these people are highly trained to know what they are looking at. Can you say the same honestly?

Do you also keep your mind open to the possibility that it may very well be you who are subscribing to a fantasy instead? That these highly trained people are simply keeping the public confused and occupied with debates on whether or not this or that is a particle of dust or a cosmic snowflake or something, to obfuscate, misdirect and distract?

No because I've actually met some of the people you see in those videos I posted.



Conspiracy theories tend to fall apart when you realize that there is no motive which serves any of these people to "hide or obfuscate "the truth".


We're scientists (well i'm still one in training), the whole reason we enter this and other sciences is to UNCOVER truth not to hide it. Those who truly uncover the remarkable go far and might even win this thing called the Nobel Prize which you may have heard of.

The people involved in astrobiology also tend to be fairly independent thinkers (it goes with the territory) and are not likely to enter into such sci-fi inspired conspiracy to hide that which they are looking for.

That's a ludicrous accusation pure and simple.

When we find alien life it will be the biggest story of humankind and its probably less than 20 years away but no amount at untrained people looking at common stuff like dust, rocks, ice crystals in space and jumping to a conclusion that because they don't understand it it therefore must be ET is going to will it into being.

Also, it would be much appreciated if you could post some links or videos regarding your assertion that there is far more ice, dust, etc. than aliens, particularly since you are referring to not only our galaxy, but the entirety of the Universe? I, for one, was unaware that we had mapped the whole Universe and cataloged every particle in it...do you have anything to support that statement? Thanks in advance!

Sure. It's a matter of size.

There is more dust, sand and ice crystals on Earth than animals and people.

Think about the carpet on the floor of the house you grew up in. Did you need to map it down to each thread to know there were more fibers of carpet in your house than people living in it?

Of course not. It's simple logic

See there are these things called telescopes that allow us to do the same with objects in the universe. We use them to look at the universe and catalog the density and distribution of different objects.

We see vast clouds of dust and ice which gives a pretty good estimate of how much of the stuff there should be in the universe.

Here's a pretty picture of some which is forming other solar systems as we speak:



The amount of dust and ice in the universe is a number so big that it is unfathomable and we have observational evidence in support of it.

Observed ETs? 0 so far which means there is more dust, ice, rocks in the universe than ET.

A rational mind is a terrible thing to waste on this stuff. I realize not everyone here is science literate but basic logic isn't much to ask is it?

Plus, the object to the left of the white disc area is extremely unusual. And the pic with the monolith looks pretty solid as this thing is out in the open with a lot of room to see what is, or in this case isn't, nearby to cause one to believe it is natural.

a reply to: JadeStar
I thought that NASA lived by the Brookings report, no?

As far as the white object goes, maybe it is a blown pixel, or a cosmic ray strike, or a piece of ice somewhere beyween the camera and the comet. IDK, but it is peculiar looking.

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: JadeStar

But hey why let facts get in the way of your conspiracy fantasy.

Occam's razor. There is far more ice, dust and cosmic rays in the universe than aliens and these people are highly trained to know what they are looking at. Can you say the same honestly?

Do you also keep your mind open to the possibility that it may very well be you who are subscribing to a fantasy instead? That these highly trained people are simply keeping the public confused and occupied with debates on whether or not this or that is a particle of dust or a cosmic snowflake or something, to obfuscate, misdirect and distract?

No because I've actually met some of the people you see in those videos I posted.

Conspiracy theories tend to fall apart when you realize that there is no motive which serves any of these people to "hide or obfuscate "the truth".


We're scientists (well i'm still one in training), the whole reason we enter this and other sciences is to UNCOVER truth not to hide it. Those who truly uncover the remarkable go far and might even win this thing called the Nobel Prize which you may have heard of.

The people involved in astrobiology also tend to be fairly independent thinkers (it goes with the territory) and are not likely to enter into in such sci-fi inspired conspiracy to hide that which they are looking for.

That's a ludicrous accusation pure and simple.

You appear to give credit to what is really a mythical honesty in academia in a world where powerful people worship money for their God. Reality is money corrupts a lot of people. Power corrupts a lot of people and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Those in power have a very vested interest in you and i not noticing things they do so they get to keep their power. How much do you think a powerful man would do to give his power up? You see, you are misunderstanding what makes this world tick and it is dangerous to all for so many to be ostriches.

a reply to: JadeStar

Conspiracy theories tend to fall apart when you realize that there is no motive which serves any of these people to "hide or obfuscate "the truth".


We're scientists (well i'm still one in training), the whole reason we enter this and other sciences is to UNCOVER truth not to hide it. Those who truly uncover the remarkable go far and might even win this thing called the Nobel Prize which you may have heard of.

The people involved in astrobiology also tend to be fairly independent thinkers (it goes with the territory) and are not likely to enter into in such sci-fi inspired conspiracy to hide that which they are looking for.

That's a ludicrous accusation pure and simple.

It is interesting to note that you did not answer any of the questions that I asked you. I am a scientist myself (not in training), so I do understand how people can mistake scientific theory/speculation for fact and how easy it is to fall into the trap of complacency...I mean, if a scientist said it then it must be true right? And everyone knows that scientists are never wrong. Ever. And they also never publish findings that are questionable and open to debate...or even flat-out (gasp!) wrong. Ever. So no reason to examine any other possibility.

So which Nobel prize winner was it that mapped the vastness of the entire Universe? And which one proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that what we're seeing in those pictures is just ice, or dust or anything else that's safe and "normal"? We're still waiting for that evidence from you. If you're not able to locate that information (because it doesn't exist), then the possibility still remains that what we're seeing could actually be more than ice or dust. And all the mockery and ridicule, blanket statements and supposition in the world (dare I say Universe?) will not make it "truth".

ETA: I just caught the posturing you were trying to exhibit...missed it the first read, must be the sleep deprivation...about having met people from the videos. That does not in any way, shape or form bolster the credibility of your assertion. In fact, you actually lost points for trying too hard to be cool and important, but nice try anyway.

originally posted by: Fylgje
a reply to: JadeStar
I thought that NASA lived by the Brookings report, no?

Only in the minds of conspiracy buff's like Richard Hoagland.

The fact is the Brookings Report was a now very old paper which was simply a set of recommendations. It was one of many different such reports which NASA has commissioned to examine the ramifications of discovering extraterrestrial life since the 1950s. Most of these reports are completely at odds with the Brookings report and most newer such studies don't have anything close to the conclusions that the Brooking Report reached.

None of these reports NASA lives by. They were merely a collection of thoughts, sometimes recommendations but non-binding. The only thing close to a report NASA lives by is the Decadal Surveys among astrophysics people and they have recommended for 30 years or more, missions to look for ET life in our solar system and beyond it.

Here are excerpts modern report NASA is trying to "live by" (budget dependent) which calls for the building of a large space telescope to find alien life:

It wasn't made in the 1960s but 2013:






I realize part of accepting conspiracy theory is ignoring evidence to the contrary but science is the opposite. You MUST accept evidence to the contrary or your point/research/etc is useless/worthless/unsubstantiated.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: JadeStar

But hey why let facts get in the way of your conspiracy fantasy.

Occam's razor. There is far more ice, dust and cosmic rays in the universe than aliens and these people are highly trained to know what they are looking at. Can you say the same honestly?

Do you also keep your mind open to the possibility that it may very well be you who are subscribing to a fantasy instead? That these highly trained people are simply keeping the public confused and occupied with debates on whether or not this or that is a particle of dust or a cosmic snowflake or something, to obfuscate, misdirect and distract?

No because I've actually met some of the people you see in those videos I posted.

Conspiracy theories tend to fall apart when you realize that there is no motive which serves any of these people to "hide or obfuscate "the truth".


We're scientists (well i'm still one in training), the whole reason we enter this and other sciences is to UNCOVER truth not to hide it. Those who truly uncover the remarkable go far and might even win this thing called the Nobel Prize which you may have heard of.

The people involved in astrobiology also tend to be fairly independent thinkers (it goes with the territory) and are not likely to enter into in such sci-fi inspired conspiracy to hide that which they are looking for.

That's a ludicrous accusation pure and simple.

You appear to give credit to what is really a mythical honesty in academia in a world where powerful people worship money for their God. /quote]

Who in astrobiology is worshiping money as god?

Most of us just really want to find aliens and whatever else might be out there. Yes that takes resources but I think you are barking up the wrong tree. (cough, financial industry seems more to do with what you're talking about).

I also get the distrust of academia, "smart people" or trained professionals among those who don't understand often confusing language or stuff they unfortunately were not taught or willingly didn't learn in school but that doesn't give validity to wild accusations about cover ups of ET life.

a reply to: JadeStar

Of course not. It's simple logic

Perhaps. But it is still only a speculation, logical or otherwise. Which is my point.

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: JadeStar

Conspiracy theories tend to fall apart when you realize that there is no motive which serves any of these people to "hide or obfuscate "the truth".


We're scientists (well i'm still one in training), the whole reason we enter this and other sciences is to UNCOVER truth not to hide it. Those who truly uncover the remarkable go far and might even win this thing called the Nobel Prize which you may have heard of.

The people involved in astrobiology also tend to be fairly independent thinkers (it goes with the territory) and are not likely to enter into in such sci-fi inspired conspiracy to hide that which they are looking for.

That's a ludicrous accusation pure and simple.

It is interesting to note that you did not answer any of the questions that I asked you.

I suggest you read my response again. I realize it's pointless to argue with people who have a near religious belief in NASA conspiracies to hide ET life.

Arguing against your or anyone's religion no matter how many facts I or anyone bring to the table contrary to it is a fools errand and a waste of time.

You're entitled to believe whatever you want but if truth is what you're after you have to be open to the possibility that due to many factors you've been duped by people on the neverending UFO lecture circuit who prey upon people with less rational / uncritical / uneducated minds.

a reply to: JadeStar

I also get the distrust of academia, "smart people" or trained professionals among those who don't understand often confusing language or stuff they unfortunately were not taught or willingly didn't learn in school but that doesn't give validity to wild accusations about cover ups of ET life.

Which "wild accusations about cover ups of ET life" are you referring to? Has anyone made any of those here? Actually, I haven't seen one other person besides yourself even mention aliens.