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.

 

Airy disk theory, heres somthing cool to add to it

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2006 @ 03:53 PM
link   
k i was outside with my cell phone i desided to aim at the sun an take a picture sure enough it come out with a hole in the middle of the sun. I have no way of getting the picture on line so all i can say it try it yourself. point straight at the phone an take a picture.

i this this this is no evidence that the ships are fake because i see that unless the camera was moving the same speed as the object the airy disk would deform an not leave a steady hole an notch. i tested this also when i wave the phone around an take a picture or tilt it at an angle the disk doesnt come out the same.

oh yea this wont mess up your camera phone, unless you do this continuaslly(sp)

[edit on 19-5-2006 by DalairTheGreat]



Dae

posted on May, 19 2006 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Aye, the whole "airy disk" explanation is rubbish, those things were pulsing and moving of their own accord, not some visual event we are all familiar with and eaisly recognised.

Blimey, I just thought, I hope we are talking about the same thing! Those 'pacman' blobs in uv floating around the nasa tether?

If it is, what do you reckon about that dudes theory that the pacmen were going behind the tether? Im thinking, how are they all going behind, not one seem to go in front. Im thinking that the luminosity from the tether was so bright that it looked like it was going behind but was actually in front, that the brightness shone through the pacmen (which looked translucent too) giving the impression they were going behind. I dunno, not nickpicking but he did call anyone who didnt realise that they were going behind the tether were morons...



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 05:24 PM
link   
this was not to say the disk where fake. this is just a simpl experiment to show its real



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 09:57 PM
link   
has any one else tried this



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 09:57 PM
link   
has anyone else tried this,or know any other simple experiments



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Cellphone-cameras are absolutely dreadful. Any anomoly that might show up can be and should be dismissed as the result of an incredibly crappy camera.

Now, if you were to verify your results with a decent camera, then you'd have somewhere to go from. But I've taken cell-cam photos before and half the time, the target of the picture doesn't even show up, let alone have any decent picture-quality.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 06:28 PM
link   
this isnt a experiment to show detail, its to show proof, the same thing would probably happen on a regualr camera.

just because your camera doesnt take good pictures has nothing to do with it



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Well why don't you try it on a camera? Any reasonable investigation would call for that....

My point is, a cell-phone camera is highly unreliable and all sorts of things show up in them. They are useless for "proving" anything.

[edit on 22-5-2006 by firebat]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join