It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Comet C/2013 A1 post-encounter with Mars, explosion or plasma discharge, or normal?

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 03:19 AM
link   
Dr.Fritz Helmut Hemmerich made a video from 1200-meters at Tenerife in the Canary Islands showing Comet Siding Spring immediately after its Mars encounter.

Short video of the explosion, made between 21 h and 22 h UT UT. 75 shots of 40 sec duration.

Recordings from tonight in Tenerife (1200 meters altitide). Hyper Star 14 "with 460 mono Atik. SWAN_band filter.




Anyone else see this?

Were their any ATS members watching NASA's live feed who caught a glimpse of this 'alleged' explosion?

According to many viewers of NASA’s live feed of the close passage of Comet Siding Spring to the planet Mars on October 19, 2014, NASA suddenly cut off the feed??.

A youtuber called BEarthwatch uploaded this video:



One comment from a viewer of the above video:

I knew once they cut the live feed, that something was up. Talking about dirty snowballs is getting to be moronic for those that understand their lies, but they do like to use the dirty snowball reference on the ignorant masses that don't know any better. Thanks for the upload. My best regards.


Any substance in this?

Cheers ATS, because I know we'll get to the bottom of this rather quickly.

Link to source


edit on 10-20-2014 by skyblueworld because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 03:32 AM
link   
No idea.
Looks cool in the first video.
This one is all slowed down
Comet
edit on 20-10-2014 by Thorneblood because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 03:35 AM
link   
a reply to: skyblueworld

I'm by no means an expert, but how exactly does he determine that it's "not a lens flare". Just out of curiosity.

And is there supposed to be a tie between him talking about blowing the comet up and the explosion you saw? Maybe they figured out it's heading right for us and are trying to give it a Bruce to knock it off course.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 03:43 AM
link   
a reply to: DuckforcoveR

No correlation between him talking and the title of the thread which mentions an explosion, it's just a question of what it is we're actually seeing in the first video, because i simply don't know.

It could definitely be a lens flare, which is why i posed the question if anybody else seen it?



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 03:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Thorneblood

Nice find, I wonder why NASA cut the feed then?

hmm



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 04:30 AM
link   
No there is no substance, though the Electric Universe people will be sure to explain how they're right and the entire scientific community is wrong as usual..

You're looking at boring lens flares and artifacts. Don't forget that to be able to see the comet and also the many stars in the images Mars ends up incredibly overexposed - it's bright to look at even with the naked eye in a telescope. It overloads the optics and CCD creating these effects.
It's the same effect as when you try and take photos of the Sun with a camera, only when people do that the same style of artifacts are called Planet X/Nibiru/etc instead of 'magnetic plasma clouds' or whatever it is this time.

Incidentally there was no live NASA feed - the second video was taken from the Live Feed provided by Slooh - a privately funded network of robotic telescopes. As usual though, perps of these theories have to try and give themselves some credibility by lying.
Again, lens flare - but it's up to you to make your mind up.

Electric Universe promoters seem to conveniently forget that plasma physics are a key part of mainstream ideas. But we don't subscribe to their ideas that you can unravel the universe just by looking at pictures and making assumptions, nor that electricity and magnetism have an exaggerated importance as they do.

They also happily admit that they throw math out of the window and it's meaningless for proving their theories - which is very convenient as it enables them to ignore the actual measurements from instruments that disprove their ideas.

For instance, they like to try and answer the riddles of existence by looking at pictures of comets, but choose to ignore the fact there is an array of five instruments on board of Rosetta which is designed to give accurate conclusive data just in this field alone - not to mention the numerous either scientific payloads. Or that the project scientist for Rosetta's field of expertise is Space Plasma Physics.

If their theories were correct, we would be wondering why are various spacecraft have all failed, and why our numerous landers all suddenly vanished in a massive electrical discharge - but not only is this not the case but our landers and spacecraft are still going strong decades later in some cases.

The Electric Universe promoters like to believe that they can answer all questions through visual examination and lab experiments - but the same way you cannot accurately make a lab model demonstrating the effects of large scale gravity on a small scale (not forgetting all objects with mass exert a gravitational field) - experiments using magnetism and electricity will not necessarily be accurate for demonstrating their effects on a cosmic scale.

We have numerous spacecraft throughout the Solar system carrying numerous high precision instruments generating massive volumes of data which will take decades to fully analyse, not to mention numerous ground based systems generating even more data again.
Yet all of this is ignored and they choose to follow the example of Nibiru believers and name lens flares as evidence of their theories as seen here and fiddle with things in a lab making the assumption that it will apply on a scale many order of magnitudes larger.

For us, the Universe is our lab - no pretending required.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 04:35 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

Awesome post, case closed, thank you!



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: skyblueworld

pictures from sol 784 should be interesting, from the look of recent images it seems they've been prepping to get shots

ill keep my eyes peeled and jarred

funbox



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 09:37 AM
link   
AgentSmith covered it all. I just wanna add that there must have been thousands of amateur astronomers observing and capturing the comet's passage near Mars. If there indeed were any "explosion" or any sign of unusual activity from Mars, they would have surely been talking about it. Unlike the usual Youtube "experts", amateur astronomers know what they are talking about , and can rule out stuff like lens flares, clouds, or other mundane factors that affect their observations.

The Electric Universe "theory" is a joke, and has nothing to do with science. It's all just pointing of fingers, name-calling, speculation and fantasy, cherry-picking data and quoting out of context. I usually like alternative theories, and I tried really hard to find any credibility in the EU theory, I really did. But the more I look at it, read their articles and watch their videos, the more ludicrous it becomes.
edit on 20-10-2014 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Suspicious Observer is on the case!



"The cutting of the feed was suspicious"

If that man says it is, then it is.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Why not ask the author of the video himself?

Video as posted in the "comet watch" Facebook group: www.facebook.com...



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

The author of the video doesn't seemed to know what he filmed either. More data will come in soon enough though by NASA and ESA e.t.c.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: skyblueworld

Not really, it would be helpful to see the recording fully in context without any editing - but there wouldn't be anything sinister about it. I can even believe that it may have been because someone didn't want to be inundated with pointless questions about optical artifacts in their email inbox on Monday morning, thought I doubt it.

Ironically though, they probably shouldn't have worried if that was the reason because searching Twitter for 'Slooh cut feed' brings up zero results while 'NASA cut feed' brings up various people getting angry with poor NASA for 'hiding something again' - and it was nothing to do with them as I mentioned! Pretty sad when people can't work out when they're watching something on a website called slooh.com that it's not nasa.com..

Of course I'm not saying that's why it was cut, assuming it was to begin with. It's more likely someone was thinking, urgh that artifact is ugly let's get a better shot from one of other telescopes on the network.

Usually when you see these things in context or think about it logically it's nothing special.

If you take the word of self proclaimed enlightened people then it's easy to think NASA, ESA, etc all hide mountains of information but it's not true. Apart from some data being temporarily withheld for standard proprietary periods so the principal investigators responsible for various instruments get first dibs at the data, everything is out there.

You want access to raw NASA/ESA Hubble data so you can make your own images? It's right here

Or maybe review the terabytes of raw lunar data from JAXA's SELENE mission?

Whatever mission and instrument you think of, the chances are it's either already easily accessible or available on request - outside of the proprietary period when applicable.

You have to bear in mind, that it's more complicated than just 'NASA' owning an entire mission and it's various instruments. A long, complicated process over many years where various institutes put forward ideas for scientific instruments and experiments is carried out before the final payload is decided. Then, each institute/organisation can have their own rules regarding data for the instruments they have fought to have included and then built, so you may get images straight away from one instrument but not from another. Or you may get magnetic field readings but not radiation readings, etc. Everything is available eventually as far as I'm aware.

I've completely digressed, sorry, but the point was regardless of what some people will have you believe NASA do not hide things like they try and imply. And in this case, NASA has nothing to do with it anyway! They didn't provide the feed, it was provided privately using a private set of telescopes. So why people are accusing NASA again boggles the mind...

Logical explanations -

a) The stream director wanted people to see a nicer shot without optical artifacts
b) Someone didn't want to answer hundreds of emails/tweets accusing an artifact of being something else

edit on 20-10-2014 by AgentSmith because: fixed bb code



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: skyblueworld
a reply to: wildespace

The author of the video doesn't seemed to know what he filmed either.

How did you arrive that that conclusion? Did the author expressely stated that he had no idea about what he filmed? Or are you just putting words into his mouth to further the conspiracy claims?



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   
And here we have the explanation from the video author:

the burst is effected through some very fast moving clouds, which altered the exposure of some of the 75 shots. The "plasma burst" exists only in the insane brains of a certain kind of people, who wish to have some "events" and "proofs" for their "theories".
- www.facebook.com...



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

I know that there is a crowd who have jumped onto the band wagon regarding what was seen, and without enough data, it's just a patient waiting game for it.

A few screenshots of when Slooh did cut the feed:







It still raises questions as to why? Although I'm not expecting anything sinister in the motive, they did what they did for a reason, knowing people were watching and observing.

Check the video I posted by suspicious observer, he's even commented on his youtube page for people to be patient.


jump to conclusions, and some of the conclusions already being published are of the worst kind - they are hasty, make our online community appear crazy, and do not reflect diligent examination. #


And I fully agree with him.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: wildespace
And here we have the explanation from the video author:

the burst is effected through some very fast moving clouds, which altered the exposure of some of the 75 shots. The "plasma burst" exists only in the insane brains of a certain kind of people, who wish to have some "events" and "proofs" for their "theories".
- www.facebook.com...


Sorry buddy but all I see is content not found.
Perhaps we've got to be friends to see his posts on Facebook?



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: wildespace

originally posted by: skyblueworld
a reply to: wildespace

The author of the video doesn't seemed to know what he filmed either.

How did you arrive that that conclusion? Did the author expressely stated that he had no idea about what he filmed? Or are you just putting words into his mouth to further the conspiracy claims?


I already explained, we're not seeing what you're seeing. Not all of us use Facebook...



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

Do you have the exact name of the group please? Even when I'm logged into Facebook the link says it's not available or a closed group.. :-/



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyblueworld
a reply to: AgentSmith

I know that there is a crowd who have jumped onto the band wagon regarding what was seen, and without enough data, it's just a patient waiting game for it.

A few screenshots of when Slooh did cut the feed:







It still raises questions as to why? Although I'm not expecting anything sinister in the motive, they did what they did for a reason, knowing people were watching and observing.

Check the video I posted by suspicious observer, he's even commented on his youtube page for people to be patient.


jump to conclusions, and some of the conclusions already being published are of the worst kind - they are hasty, make our online community appear crazy, and do not reflect diligent examination. #


And I fully agree with him.

Those pictures just show them repositioning the telescope during the exposure. Nothing more. They probably didn't expect certain low information people to latch onto it. It's so common that astronomers like me don't even think about it when it happens.

Check out 1:56:34 of this video to see the same sort of effect in a video I shot of Mars in infrared:



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join