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.

 

Can Someone Explain Why There is not Glass in the Atmosphere?

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra
I came across this thread earlier today by accident. I generally don't wonder into BTS, but I did today for some reason.


its got moved here
least it aint a religion thread well a full blown one.




posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra
I came across this thread earlier today by accident. I generally don't wonder into BTS, but I did today for some reason. I read this whole thread. I was left quite speechless. I was going to comment earlier, but I just didn't know where to begin or what to say.


I must admit I have not behaved myself in generating the proper diplomatic responses to earlier posters, I hope I haven't frightened you away. I am glad however that this topic has struck some kind of intrigue for you, as well it should, for anybody who is objectively looking for truth. I also wish to express my cognitive limitations as which, I confess there are much more brilliant persons in this earth than myself who, with their foundational cosmologic groundwork established, can more accurately and scientifically explain your's and other's questions.

I believe I've come across as a know-it-all, which may have been used as a subconscious defense mechanism to combat the overwhelming negativity.

As with all new ideas and theories, there are valid questions that should be addressed. I welcome all and any. I may not be able to accurately answer them all, but there is, I'm almost certain, someone who can. This is where I make an open invitation to you and others to help. I believe revival is inevitable.

But physically speaking, there are too many characteristics that allude to glass-divided light entering our atmosphere. I need not bring them up again as you can simply look back at the previous pages.

In this chasm that has separated religion and science for milleniums, this topic seems to be a very valid attempt at synergizing the two, like never before in recorded history. With this in mind, I am kept on the verge of patiently waiting for the whole world to recognize this veiled truth. It is honestly quite hard to temper my zeal sometimes. But I keep in mind that God's promise to me and to the whole world, that in the last days the earth with be "full" of the knowledge of the Lord(his reality).


Why is there no reflection of the Earth's surface on the 'glass' sphere above us?


I'm not certain. But it is possible that the sudden green flash of light on the sun's "top" as it exits the horizon is an inverted reflection of the ground. In other words, our perception of the sun in upside down.


Why are the Moon and other planets normal sphere's yet the Earth inverted?


Honestly, I believe the moon is inverted. I believe it is bowl-shaped.
There is another thread I started that deals with this notion. It is speculative, but I believe valid.


How do you explain the orbits of the outer planets? (Mars - Pluto)


I believe they orbit around the celestial sphere, not the sun. However, I must reiterate, my degree is in graphic design, not cosmology. Take this as you wish.



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra
What if everything around you isn't quite as it seems. What if all world you think you know, is an elaborate dream and if you look at your reflection, is that all you want it to be? What if you could look right through the cracks. Would you find yourself afraid to see?" - NIN: Right Where it Belongs



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Green Flash Origin?

This certainly looks like earth's reflection....


Are mirages a direct result of glass refraction?


"Mirage: A refraction phenomenon wherein an image of some distant object is made to appear displaced from its true position because of large vertical density variations near the surface; the image may appear distorted, inverted, or wavering.









posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 09:38 PM
link   
No, mirages are caused by heated air rising from the ground, the heat layer acts like a mirror to reflect objects. Objects on the horizon will appear more likely to show up in a mirage. That's why they are all horizon pictures or sunsets. Sorry not caused by glass. If you understand the dynamics of reflections in glass, in order for those relections to appear as they do the glass would have to be right above the object. In a way if you climb on the roof you should be able to hit the glass.



[edit on 7/11/2005 by GoldEagle]


jra

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 01:01 AM
link   
How would you account for mirages on the surface of the ground? Also those ones you show are still look pretty low, just how high up is this 'glass' supposed to be? Also we'd see reflections all day every day. Not just once and a while. I don't believe the 'green flash' is an example of a reflection. Being just a flash and all. There is no reason why the glass would reflect the sun as green either.

This brings me to my next question. Looking at your diagrams. How does the sun in your theory of the universe set below the horizon? I have trouble understanding your diagrams, so perhaps i'm missing something. As far as i can tell, the 'glass' does not intersect the ground, thus the 'glass' should not be having any sort of affect at what would be at our horizon (even though technicly there would be no horizon in an inverted spherical world). If you theory were true, wouldn't the sun curve upwards and disappear?

Also another question to do with the Sun. In your diagrams, you show the sun and the moon as the same thing? With the Sun on one side and the Moon on the other? (also the moon doesn't look bowl shaped in the diagram). How do you account for days when the we can see the moon and the sun together? Or how does the night side see the moon and the other side have the sun at the same time? If i understand your diagram, the Sun orbits around the inside of the glass sphere right? So how does that all work exactly?

I also have some brief technical questions. It looks like the sun shines down on the Earth like a spotlight. How wide of an area does it cover with it's light? Also would you know what the IoR (Index of Refraction) of the 'glass' is? Thank you.



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra
How would you account for mirages on the surface of the ground?


Ground mirages or inferior mirages can occur in hot desert, I think that the sand(glass) acts as a reflector when combined with the heat.

Sky mirages, or superior mirages only occur in arctic regions. I tend to believe there is a rim, or opening in the arctic circle which causes a mirror reflection. The sun inversions we see I believe are because the heat of the sun refracts and lifts the 'edge' of the glassosphere, so we see the division.


Also those ones you show are still look pretty low, just how high up is this 'glass' supposed to be?


The perception of the glass being low is not a true indicator of its altitude.
In my diagran Actual vs. Percieved, I attempt to show the horizon as a inverted curve which is opposite to the concavity of the ground. This is why we percieve the earth to be convex. So, because of this false perception, the edge of the glass is rarely seen.


Also we'd see reflections all day every day. Not just once and a while. I don't believe the 'green flash' is an example of a reflection. Being just a flash and all. There is no reason why the glass would reflect the sun as green either.


Well, no, the green and blue for that matter would be reflections of earth, not the sun. And as far as seeing reflections every day, keep in mind that the sun's direction is downward. Take a friend and keep him outside the house while you hold a flashlight pointing at him through a window. He will see reflections of elements outside, but will not see any reflection of the flashlight. He's seeing the first generation image. From space then you might ask, where then is the reflection. Well, I tend to believe the glass has a polarizing effect on light, allowing light in, but keeping it from exiting. This is why we don't see the dark region of a waxing or waning cresent. It's invisible for the most part.


This brings me to my next question. Looking at your diagrams. How does the sun in your theory of the universe set below the horizon?


Forgive me for not clarifying them. To me they make perfect sense, that's probably because I can understand them better. To answer your question, the sun never really sets. It continuously circuits the inner space. The horizon line I alluded to gives the impression of a setting sun. It gets cropped due to the optical inversion.


As far as i can tell, the 'glass' does not intersect the ground, thus the 'glass' should not be having any sort of affect at what would be at our horizon (even though technicly there would be no horizon in an inverted spherical world).


Well yes the glass does not intersect the ground. The glass optically inverts the earth. An opposition in curvature is the result of this phenomena. So, the actual convex celing of the sky is changed in appearance and made to appear as a domed vault.


If you theory were true, wouldn't the sun curve upwards and disappear?


The sun actually does curve upward. We just don't see the correct path. We see the opposite; except for the brief revealing of its true couse and right-side-upwardness in the event of a double-exposed mirage at the horizon.


Also another question to do with the Sun. In your diagrams, you show the sun and the moon as the same thing? With the Sun on one side and the Moon on the other? (also the moon doesn't look bowl shaped in the diagram).


The diagram shows only hypothetical positions of the two. I have a flash animation which can shed light on this. I'll have to find it though.


How do you account for days when the we can see the moon and the sun together? Or how does the night side see the moon and the other side have the sun at the same time? If i understand your diagram, the Sun orbits around the inside of the glass sphere right? So how does that all work exactly?


The sun completes one circuit around the celestial sphere every 24 hours. The moon, about every 25. They both go the same direction. Not sure what else your asking about this.


It looks like the sun shines down on the Earth like a spotlight. How wide of an area does it cover with it's light?


About half the earth.


Also would you know what the IoR (Index of Refraction) of the 'glass' is? Thank you.


Mathematically, no. Maybe someone else could figure that out.

Best wishes on your quest for truth.
Steve



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldEagle
No, mirages are caused by heated air rising from the ground, the heat layer acts like a mirror to reflect objects.


Heat does play an important role in causing mirages. However, long distant mirages as seen in deserts would never be possible if the earth were convex.




posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   


To:bui@mms.arc.nasa.gov,Robert.B.Chatfield@nasa.gov,Michael.S.Craig@nasa.gov,James.A.Eilers@nasa.gov,Donald.B.Herlth@nasa.gov,Laura.T.Iraci@nasa.gov,R ichard.W.Kolyer@nasa.gov,Max.Loewenstein-1@nasa.gov,Leonhard.Pfister-1@.nasa.gov,James.R.Podolske@nasa.gov,Phillip.B.Russell@nasa.gov,Hanwant.B.Singh@ nasa.gov,Antonio.A.Trias@nasa.gov


Dear sirs and madams,

My name is Steven J. Christopher, and I am introducing to the world at large a new understanding of the cosmos in which we live and breath.

And that is that there is simply a layer of glass in the sky which distorts our perception.
Please thoroughly read the following discussion on the topic:

www.belowtopsecret.com...

Could you all have been fooled by your organization?
Or are you part of the CU?

best wishes.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Dear,
Mr. Tim Killeen, Director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research;
Mr. Richard A. Anthes, NCAR President;
Mr. Jack Fellows, Vice President for Corporate Affairs, NCAR

I'd like you to visit this discussion link which asks the question, whether there is a layer of glass up in the sky.
I am a graphic artist by trade, so please overlook my scientific shortcomings.

However, I believe even a novice can understand the overwhelming evidence of the glass filtered light we absorb here in the earth.

Here is the link:
www.belowtopsecret.com...

best regards!
Steven Joseph Christopher



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   
I think I was an unintentional recipient to their discussion, but just got a few emails from them......



Rick Anthes wrote:
Ignore it--it's crazy and there are other much more important things to do than get involved with discussions of this type!




Susan Montgomery-Hodge wrote:

Rick, Tim, and Jack:
I went to this link; it's a chat room discussing this guy's theory of there being a glass dome over Earth's atmosphere! I don't know if you want to reply or ignore, but one of the "chatter's" response best describes this theory:

" Craziest theory i ever read on ATS once. Beats the flat earthers even."

Susan


Steve Christopher wrote:

Dear,
Mr. Tim Killeen, Director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research;
Mr. Richard A. Anthes, NCAR President;
Mr. Jack Fellows, Vice President for Corporate Affairs, NCAR

I'd like you to visit this discussion link which asks the question, whether there is a layer of glass up in the sky.
I am a graphic artist by trade, so please overlook my scientific shortcomings.

However, I believe even a novice can understand the overwhelming evidence of the glass filtered light we absorb here in the earth.

Here is the link:
www.belowtopsecret.com...

best regards!
Steven Joseph Christopher


--
*********************************************************************
Susan Montgomery-Hodge montgoms@ucar.edu
Executive Assistant phone: (303) 497-1653
President's Office fax: (303) 497-1654

University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR)
1850 Table Mesa Drive (P.O. Box 3000, 80307)
Boulder, CO 80305
**********************************************************************
"The best thing for the inside of a person is the outside of a horse."



--
******************************************************************

Dr.Richard A. Anthes
Phone: 303-497-1652

President
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
P.O. Box 3000
Boulder, CO 80307-3000

For delivery via express mail, please use:

1850 Table Mesa Drive
Boulder, CO 80305

*****************************************************************



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Ground mirages or inferior mirages can occur in hot desert, I think that the sand(glass) acts as a reflector when combined with the heat.


Sand doesn't melt and turn into glass at the mere 105°F in the desert, and if that is what you meant, I have no idea what you're getting at with the whole mirage theory.


By the by, Mods? I have a request that you move this thread back to ATS. Just because one of you who said this whole thing is bogus happened to be in power to move it, doesn't mean that's what should have been done. This man has a full blown debate going here and he deserves more respect than "this is bull it's going to General Chit-Chat where it belongs". How can a thread like this belong in a forum which is dedicated to "posts of unrelated nature" when there is a better, more suitable forum out there (like where it originally was from - Science and Technology)

Plus we deserve more than one point for each well thought out explanation as to why there is no glass in the atmosphere we have. Not that I'm saying there isn't any glass, but this guy's puttin up one heck of a fight.

Have more respect people.

[edit on 7/22/2005 by diehard_democrat]



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by diehard_democrat
Sand doesn't melt and turn into glass at the mere 105°F in the desert, and if that is what you meant, I have no idea what you're getting at with the whole mirage theory.


Yes, I knew this when I typed it, Diehard. I just meant that perhaps the sand gives the illusion of glass. In any event, it is much more feasable to understand seeing oasis' 1000 miles away if the world was concave and the sand acted as some sort of reflecting medium.



By the by, Mods? I have a request that you move this thread back to ATS. Just because one of you who said this whole thing is bogus happened to be in power to move it, doesn't mean that's what should have been done. This man has a full blown debate going here and he deserves more respect than "this is bull it's going to General Chit-Chat where it belongs". How can a thread like this belong in a forum which is dedicated to "posts of unrelated nature" when there is a better, more suitable forum out there (like where it originally was from - Science and Technology)

Plus we deserve more than one point for each well thought out explanation as to why there is no glass in the atmosphere we have. Not that I'm saying there isn't any glass, but this guy's puttin up one heck of a fight.

Have more respect people.


It really makes my day for you to say that.....thanks!

I U2Ud Byrd, after he moved the thread to BTS, a couple times with my grievance, here's the dialogue:

ME:
Gee thanks, you not only killed the thread but did not respond to any of the evidence I provided pointing to glass in the sky. That goes for everyone who responded.

I don't think you're being very objective. Your mind seems to be made up that we live on a swirling spheriod.

This is a scientific topic and deserves to be put back in Fragile Earth. If you can disprove it, then I'll gladly and humbly admit my shortsightings. So far you havn't.

So I'm asking that you put it back and let it get some exposure, so for your skewed viewpoint, can attract some brainiac who can disprove it.

ok?


BYRD:
BTS topics are for subjects that are imaginative and speculative and are not backed by current (non-tabloid) news sources or scientific papers. The sole exception to this is the aliens thread and some of that may get moved.

It's a perfect topic for BTS. You can always run through scholar.google.com... or your local library's EBSCO databases to find scholarly research papers that prove your point and then, of course, it's more suited to ATS.

But until you have some sort of real science with it, it is one of those topics that is perfect for conversation on BTS.

ME:
Well, I'm not a scientist and I already thoroughly check many scientific sources and have not found any mention of glass in the sky.

This is why I'm addressing it here. So someone who is more scientific can verify it. All I know is that when I initially posted it, it drew 100 hits in the first hour, now it's dead.

But if it one day pans out to be true. Do you really want to be viewed as the guy who tried to suppress it? Why can't you just let it get some more exposure? If you use common sense you would have no problem believing there is glass - but then again maybe the visual proof is too overtly obvious.

ME:
ok bud, let's see what happens.

BYRD:
Yes, I realize that you think none of us has ever heard of Anaximenes of Miletus and that our knowledge of science is even less than what it was in 600 BC. babbage.clarku.edu...

Me:
hmm, I never heard of him. but checked out the link you gave...no glass.

BYRD:
And I'm sure you think we're too stupid to understand any of the cosmology from Aristotle through the Dark Ages:
www.cs.csubak.edu...

ME:
Never studied what he taught, so I must be the stupid one, but after checking your provided link - NO GLASS!.

BYRD:
...and we've never heard of Newton or Copernicus or Herschel ...
www.cs.csubak.edu...

ME:
No, I assumed you knew of Newton. But his conclusions are all skewed because he neglected the GLASS. And I believe gravity is NOT a REAL force.

Copernicus, never taught glass was present. Copernican system is ficticious anyway.

Hershel, don't see him mentioning glass either.

BYRD:
So... you're quite welcome to pretend that all those scientists and astronomers never discovered anything and never existed over in BTS. That's what BTS is for!

ME:
thank you, I'll choose to believe that all of their work has been severly skewed because they neglected the glass in the atmosphere.

....AND YOU SHOULD TOO!!!.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 09:50 AM
link   
This is rugburn:


This is glassburn:



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Are you claiming that that space capsule rammed through the glass layer and gave the heat shield that appearance? You claimed that all the atmoshpere is below the glass and held up by pressure. The space capsule would have been quite cool before hitting the layer of glass without air friction and would not have had enough heat to melt it. The space capsule would have crashed into the layer of thick glass or shattered through it.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by diehard_democrat


By the by, Mods? I have a request that you move this thread back to ATS. Just because one of you who said this whole thing is bogus happened to be in power to move it, doesn't mean that's what should have been done.

[edit on 7/22/2005 by diehard_democrat]


My $0.02 - This is some of the wackiest stuff I've ever seen theorized. But I have to agree 100% with diehard_democrat (and there's a phrase I thought I'd never be associated with. Nothing personal, only a reference to the name). Plumbo seems to be very serious about this idea and has gone to great lengths to defend it. I think his effort and commitment warrant it being treated with more relevance than general chitchat.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldEagle
Are you claiming that that space capsule rammed through the glass layer and gave the heat shield that appearance?


Negative. Eased through, not rammed. You remember how they have to approach it at just the right angle. The abrasive shield, much like frit on the tiles of the space shuttle, acts like sand paper against the glass surface. As it skids across the glass, it eventually gets hot enough to melt the glass and plop through. This is also why it was very critical for the heat tiles on the shuttle to have a flush surface. A mere inch in protrusion would create an inbalance in heat distribution. Like a big grit of sand in a fine paper.


You claimed that all the atmoshpere is below the glass and held up by pressure. The space capsule would have been quite cool before hitting the layer of glass without air friction and would not have had enough heat to melt it. The space capsule would have crashed into the layer of thick glass or shattered through it.


If heat friction does not exist above the airless atmosphere, then all celestial collisions containing non flammable elements would stay cool at the point of impact. Just my guess.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 03:18 PM
link   


If heat friction does not exist above the airless atmosphere, then all celestial collisions containing non flammable elements would stay cool at the point of impact. Just my guess.


Ok first whats an "Airless Atmosphere"? And second "non-flammable elements"?

And no they(whatever they are) would not stay cool on impact due to heat induced from pressure(in big impacts ie. Planet V Planet) and kinetic force of impact not friction.

So you are implying that every space mission we've flown , has had to break through 50km of glass on exit and entry?



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Merkeva
And no they(whatever they are) would not stay cool on impact due to heat induced from pressure(in big impacts ie. Planet V Planet) and kinetic force of impact not friction.


well there you go....
so the space shuttle or orbiter "re-entering" do create heat by pressure and kinetic force of impact with the glass.


So you are implying that every space mission we've flown , has had to break through 50km of glass on exit and entry?


Where did I say 50km thick? I never said that.
The glass is thin enough for a spacecraft to crash through on exiting earth's atmosphere without being damaged, like a bullet through a window. I don't know the thickness.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Ok I stand corrected on the 50km thing. Can you answer as to why you have suggested that comets melt through the glass, after coming to a halt,comets,which I remind you are generally bigger and faster than the space craft you claim to have:

"crashed through on exiting earth's atmosphere without being damaged, like a bullet through a window"



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join