CERES. Contact May Have Been Made.

a reply to: fixer1967

It very well could be a large deposit of a radioactive material. Uranium glows green, Plutonium glows aqua, Radium glows blue, Radon glows purple just to name a few. What ever it is the public will never know the truth. NASA may never even know them selfs.

We all know the difference between a less intense glow and a more intense illumination/ reflection.
Show me one example where the glowing deposit could be seen from 1400km distance as well. We have lot's of pictures from earth by now, including natural occuring Uranium etc.. There must be at least one to prove your point and I wasn't able to find any.
Could we spot one of said desposits from appr. 400km distance (altitude of the ISS)?



I say we couldn't. But prove me wrong, please!

originally posted by: RoyBatty

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: spirit_horse

Anyway... wanted to share another GIF I stumbled upon.

photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

The source of light might be inside, if I see this correctly.

Could you please explain why not one of these lights is on the dark side? Why are the lights on the "day" side but turn off when rotation reaches "night"? Seems a bit counterproductive.

If you allow me to chime in on the subject of light going off in darkness, I think it works like this.
As the source of light nears the edge of darkness, it's completely obscured because of the angle we're seeing is from the Dawn space probe. If it were to move along with the source of light, would the light be visible or not?
I'd bet that the light source doesn't go off at all as it rotates to the other side.

a reply to: chosonone

As the source of light nears the edge of darkness, it's completely obscured because of the angle we're seeing is from the Dawn space probe.

Exactly. Like obscured hulls from these Venetian ships, Gallileo watched approaching the harbour. We will always see their masts first, due to their approach over the horizon.

We may not be supposed to get a glimpse on this spot, while it illuminates the dark side. But thats just me beeing in my head. And thanks for chiming in, much appreciated!

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: chosonone

We may not be supposed to get a glimpse on this spot, while it illuminates the dark side. But thats just me beeing in my head. And thanks for chiming in, much appreciated!

I agree, this light source isn't just bright enough to be visible in a pitch black environment, and that is a vacuum of space and away from the camera angle we're dealing here.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: RoyBatty

As I responded to PublicOpinion, following JPL's link here, you can see a full rotation. The dark side displays no lights whatsoever. That alone should raise flags, no?

A full rotation? We never saw that spot on the dark side, did we? It just peaks into view after appearing at the horizon. The angle (point of view) is completely off to catch a glimpse of this region on the dark side, at least in this GIF. Thought you might have had another picture in mind, but you obviously didn't.

Did you look at the link I posted? Half of Ceres is pitch black. There are NO LIGHTS whatsoever.

a reply to: RoyBatty

Dude, I posted it here recently, check the last page.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
And I can't say how often I've hit the reload-button to watch this GIF over and over again. There is no whole rotation to be seen, as you mentioned, and this illuminated spot was simply not in the field of view as it approached the sunside of Ceres. We did point that out twice but you keep ignoring it.

What are you talking about? Another set of pictures?

...

a reply to: chosonone

I agree, this light source isn't just bright enough to be visible in a pitch black environment

Didn't write this and I don't agree, lol.
I think this source of light would be easily visible on the dark side if we were allowed to catch a glimpse on that.

originally posted by: OnionHead

originally posted by: spirit_horse

originally posted by: OnionHead
Stupid question. If this were indeed a city then wouldn't SETI have already picked up a signal. I've always liked the idea of SETI, surely if intelligent life is out there to be found then you'll hear them before you see them?

I think you better reanalyze stupid before you color yourself as such trying to call the OP's question stupid.

Stupid question, but what do you mean? Sometimes the Irish might use 'stupid question' at the start of a question, or figure of speech (Is it an Irish thing? I've no idea actually). It's more of an ignorant question, as I could go onto google and do some short research on how SETI actually works. So, it was more of me starting of a question warning you all that it might be stupid or ignorant, in fact even lazy

Regardless not sure how that's misinterpreted as an insult to the OP. This is the internet though, and I'm very hard to offend so I wouldn't worry too much.

Fair enough! I apologize if I read that wrong. It appeared you were calling his question stupid. I didn't realize you were refering to your question, but I can see how things get started on the internet. Thanks for the clarification!

ah yes the old noctoluminescent variety of
ice and salt, of course. All those saying case closed its salt and ice;
how does salt and ice illuminate itself when Ceres is in the dark ?
And why only that crater?

a reply to: chosonone

I get this, 100%. But can nobody concede that it is curious that not one tiny light is visible on the dark side? I am seeing many various light reflections, but yet not ONE is visible on the dark side.

This is basic logic.

a reply to: wisper

Don't play too long with ya tools. Looks awesome, nice manipulation of the gradation curve if I am not completely off again. Very intriguing, let me correct myself: MOAR!

i couldnt believe nasa posted that picture without heavily editing the lights and just assuming we wouldnt make a big deal out of it!

originally posted by: Christosterone
I LOVE the idea of alien life....heck, I believe we will find proof of extraterrestrial life in this generation...

But dude, this is a really thin thread.....like sheets of atoms thin...
There is a 0% chance this is a city.....way more likely to be a photo anomaly/artifact than a ridiculous city...

Posts like this discredit those of us who truly believe in life existing everywhere in our galaxy....there is simply no chance a civilization capable of traversing the expanses of space would pick a crater on Ceres to build a society...
Sorry but that's the truth.
-Christosterone

a photo anomaly LOL ive heard that one before! are you sure youre not a nasa pr guy? do photo anomalys usually happen in the center of creators? give me a break.

a reply to: RoyBatty

And you guys 'n gals really think we would see every picture NASA was able to shoot? Even if it would touch such a sensible matter like, for funs sake, factual prove for alien existence on Ceres?

Really?

...

a reply to: Korg Trinity

You know what I would consider really sad (for you)?
It's the prelude of your rant, you know... the part where you insulted your fellow ATSliens for sharing their view on the matter, just - of course - to rant about some people insulting others. And finally, maybe the best part after all, you seem to really believe your sad but funny story. Something I would consider pretty hilarious. No offense mate, but you better reconsider your logics twice.

NASA said it's not ice. It may be salt or an unknown element.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: RoyBatty

And you guys 'n gals really think we would see every picture NASA was able to shoot? Even if it would touch such a sensible matter like, for funs sake, factual prove for alien existence on Ceres?

Really?

I am not asking for you to look at additional photos, just the ones that you're already looking at. With "lights" only on the bright side of Ceres and not dark, and use logic to deduce that artificial light MIGHT be seen on the dark side as well if they were indeed artificial.

I am not moving the conversation forward and this is getting repetitive, so I will bow out, mind boggled.

*thanks Korg!

" While all of this was happening, Christopher Russell, the Dawn mission’s principal investigator, suddenly announced that his team is “shying away from there being ice on the surface.”

After pushing the ice explanation and running a poll to reinforce it, now you’ve suddenly changed your mind? What is it?

"The general consensus on the team right now is that water is definitely a factor on Ceres, but that the spots themselves are more likely to be just highly reflective salt, rather than water".

Russell claims the team failed to get the quality of measurements they wanted to prove the spots were ice or water. Is it possible that the team actually found water … and something else that they don’t want us to see? Did NASA shut down Dawn on purpose, release the “salt” story and keep it in a holding pattern until officials decide what to do about this discovery? "

So the ice explanation is refuted even by NASA. If the salt theory is also wrong, i wonder what the sceptics will come up with. swamp gas? image artifact?

a reply to: RoyBatty

Go look at your links again and count the frames. I counted 19. The lights only appear in the last few frames then wink out at frame 1 again with only a 45 degree movement. There are no other frames of the full rotation. it begins half way with the lights on the dark side obscured by Ceres.

something is definitely going on there and how else can we find out ? And the powers that be are not letting go of that information. Good Luck on trying to find out.