CERES. Contact May Have Been Made.

originally posted by: auroraaus
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

what about "inhabitable" ?

2nd.

We find extremophiles everywhere. Many places could harbor some form of life. As of now there is only 1 place where it has been found though.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

youtu.be...

Its a pretty broad statement that they have ALL been proven false. And who is doing the proving? How about the objects flying in and out of the atmosphere in the link i posted above from the space shuttle. Im sure that somebody has "proven" that this is ball lightning or some other atmospheric phenomenon, but they never really actually proved it did they?
just because something seems impossible to fathom because someone has been told differently their whole life doesnt mean that it isnt real. And remember, we couldnt fly until 100 or so years ago. Other entities being all over the place, especially near a place like earth is completely likely and personally i think very probable. And the powers that be gain nothing and possibly lose everything by letting the cat out of the bag.

originally posted by: drumcrusher
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

youtu.be...

Its a pretty broad statement that they have ALL been proven false.

They have all been proven to have mundane explanations. If you choose to believe in extraordinary explanations with no proof, while simple explanations account for everything seen that is up to you. It's a ridiculous approach to take though.

ETA: Hint: That exact video has been posted numerous times, with different headlines, from multiple hoaxers trying to breathe fresh life into an old already explained video.

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.

Yea dude i can tell by your name you have it all figured out. Guess i got here right when open minded people left the room. And what proof do you have for why those spheres flew in then out of the atmosphere? Was that a 2 mile wide plate that your mom threw at you for being an ass all the time. Ha. People like you are lame to hang out with, but im sure you already know that. reply to: OccamsRazor04

a reply to: drumcrusher

Actually people are always wanting to hang out with me and always have, good try though.

ETA: If you think it's a UFO explain why it can't possibly be any of the other explanations.

originally posted by: drumcrusher
Yea dude i can tell by your name you have it all figured out. Guess i got here right when open minded people left the room. And what proof do you have for why those spheres flew in then out of the atmosphere? Was that a 2 mile wide plate that your mom threw at you for being an ass all the time. Ha. People like you are lame to hang out with, but im sure you already know that. reply to: OccamsRazor04

What proof do you have that they were ever in the atmosphere or that they were two miles wide, since neither of those can be determined from the video.

And lay off the personal attacks. Just because you have nothing to support your silly position doesn't mean you have to resort to childish insults.

a reply to: auroraaus

This is the correct way to think. It is known that life can exist anywhere in any condition, it all depends where that life flourished first. We only breath oxygen and require water because we evolved here on earth. However even on earth it has been proven that the most inhabitable places even here can be lived in. Like the deepest parts of the ocean where even the best submarines cannot go or that there are fish and bacteria that can live in sulphuric acid. Here is a good video to show this,

Youtube Link

The line I tend to use to describe this goes. The giraffe has a long neck to reach the tall trees and leaves..... creationism point of view. You could say, the giraffe has a long neck and decides to eat the leaves on the tall trees. Situational evolution.

a reply to: spirit_horse

I was talking about NASA or the NSA's use of a program or process to airbrush out objects in the Apollo Moon photos. It would not surprise me that if they get closer and did discover something that would be paradigm changing that some agency would cover it up. The cover up because I believe they have done it before with moon photos. I use Photoshop since it seems to be used by modern society to describe any modification of photos. It has become its own term now it appears.

It has, you are right. And yeah, they would lie to us if somebody with enough power told them to do so. At this point we can only speculate how this picture was made and why we don't get more high resolution close-ups to see, or some infrared-views. I hate them for this.



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.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: chosonone

I think this is a situation of ongoing underground construction. The bright radiating source may be some type of lighted entrance to the underground, a drilled hole, possibly in preparation of designing something underground.

And they only need light during daylight, and as soon as the sun stops shining on them they turn the lights off?

Makes a lot of sense.

Actually I was also wondering about its night and daytime effect if it was some type drilling operation for construction.
It'd be possible the lighting from inside the hole or pit would be obscured by direct sunlight over it.
As the lighting source rotates to darkness, it just can be seen brighter and clear.
Lights are usually always on underground I don't think turning it on and off will make much sense unless you want to save electricity.

And.... another anomaly yet not discussed so far.


photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

Straight lines of some sort of construction near a 'somehow' illuminated crater.
Think we just made contact, bite me!



Cheers!

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Was just looking at this photo myself, was an interesting photo I stopped at too. I sure think that CERES is certainly going to give us many surprises. Sadly this may be surprises for NASA rather then the rest of the world.

a reply to: BlackProject

Sadly this may be surprises for NASA rather then the rest of the world.

Think I catched your drift, but I'm not sure.
Could you please elaborate on that further?

a reply to: PublicOpinion

I think it has become common knowledge that governments of the world not just NASA are very good at covering their tracks when it comes to finding new information. If we was to look at the hacker Gary Mckinnon who hacked into NASA and found various traces of what I am talking about. If you haven't heard of him, you should probably read a little about him. It is an obvious that this man isn't lying either as they wanted to extradite him due to, as they put it 'damaging computers'.

A NASA photographic expert said that there was a Building 8 at Johnson Space Center where they regularly airbrushed out images of UFOs from the high-resolution satellite imaging. I logged on to NASA and was able to access this department. They had huge, high-resolution images stored in their picture files. They had filtered and unfiltered, or processed and unprocessed, files.

Here is the link for you: Gary Mckinnon

It is an obvious that he stumbled upon one of NASA's greatest secrets, that is they are not so transparent as they make out.

originally posted by: grey580
Yeah I've been saying this.

Looks like city lights.

There are other points of "light" in your rotation gif which show a "glow" or reflection, only to fade away as Ceres rotates. Clearly those are reflective patches, one quite large.

So, we have similar areas right next to the "city" which we can compare it to. Is it not logical that the other, brighter area claimed to be a city, but which behaves similarly as those which are most likely reflective areas, is also a reflection?

If would be very exciting if this light were artificial (which I do not believe it is), but I for one would still find it interesting to know the natural material it is comprised of.

a reply to: admirethedistance
It is not ice or salt. It is generating its on light. But that does not mean it is not natural. 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.

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.

a reply to: BlackProject

It is an obvious that he stumbled upon one of NASA's greatest secrets, that is they are not so transparent as they make out.

Thanks a lot for your detailed answer, then I did catch your drift correctly.
I think we could state this as a plain fact by now.

...

a reply to: RoyBatty

I never saw this region in a picture of the dark side, did you? Could you show me how you managed to verify this, please?
And to answer your question I would like to ask you this: why did Gallileo see the masts of those Venetian ships, he observed approaching the harbour, first?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: BlackProject

It is an obvious that he stumbled upon one of NASA's greatest secrets, that is they are not so transparent as they make out.

Thanks a lot for your detailed answer, then I did catch your drift correctly.
I think we could state this as a plain fact by now.

...

a reply to: RoyBatty

I never saw this region in a picture of the dark side, did you? Could you show me how you managed to verify this, please?
And to answer your question I would like to ask you this: why did Gallileo see the masts of those Venetian ships, he observed approaching the harbour, first?

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 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.