Someone Please Explain To Me - The Theory that Jupiter Ignited - while behind the Sun right now

Originally posted by questioningall
Someone took these photos (again thinking planet x) from England,
so the question is,,,, is it Jupiter?

No, that's Venus.

www.earthsky.org...

Earth & Sky
Moon and three planets challenging before dawn

Tonight is Saturday, Feb 21 200
The moon - and the planets Mars, Mercury and Jupiter - will rise shortly before the sun tomorrow morning.

This will be an observer's challenge because these objects are low in the sky, and near the coming sunrise. But these objects will make an interesting pattern on the sky's dome - almost a line - and they will be worth a look! For this challenge, it would be best to grab a pair of binoculars and make sure you have a southeastern horizon without lots of obstructions. If there are clouds or lots of buildings low on the horizon, these objects will likely be hidden from your view.

Which of the planets are you likely to see most easily? Jupiter is the brightest of the planets - then Mercury. You'll probably be able to spot the two of them with your eye alone. Mars will be much fainter and tougher to see against the twilight glare.

Go look for yourself.

Originally posted by Sargoth
Does anyone have a powerful telescope to see the details of Jupiter?

I do, thought the details don't show up well without looking in the eyepiece directly. The live video just can't do it justice at the moment. What I might be able to do though is stack a series of images over the course of a minute, average them together, and pull out enough detail to see the cloud bands (I assume that's what you mean by "rings" - no ground based scope can see jupiter's tenuous rings). If I did that would it settle the issue for you or would you claim I faked it? If the latter, why would anything ever change your mind?

Originally posted by Sargoth
ngchunter, I've been thinking about the comet issue. I'm just speculating here, but I think the reason a comet couldn't ignite Jupiter is because it was an explosion. You need an Implosion with the right elements. That's my guess.

To create an "implosion" you must encapsulate the object - how is galileo or cassini possibly going to encapsulate the entire planet with any explosive, let along reach critical mass with plutonium 238 all around the planet at once? It's impossible. Cassini and galileo are harmless for the same reason the comet was harmless. Neither are capable of surrounding the planet and exploding all at once with enough force to start fusion, which would be significantly more force than that which is used in hydrogen bombs considering that the latter are optimized by using deuterium and tritium.

[edit on 21-2-2009 by ngchunter]

Originally posted by rivos
If anyone has any information to thoroughly convince me this is something normal, I welcome it. Though I'd like to think I'm "on the fence" as they say, I'm, at this time, leaning toward the least accepted theory that "something wicked this way comes".

It's venus. I've checked twice in the last few days and even presented it live here.

Originally posted by Sargoth
The photos of the Hale Bopp companion are SOLID Proof in my opinion. I know I should believe you and not my lying eyes right.

It's these claims that have resulted in mass suicide in the past. The fact is, the "object" is a bright star near the comet's pseudonucleus. In fact, in this photo the "object" has two bulges and trailing consistent with the direction of the star trails, proving it's just another star - it bleeds together unlike the other stars because it is brighter than the other stars.

I could recreate the same effect with the comet that's currently out there, but I know if I do that someone will come along and claim that no matter what I say I'm lying and there's a real "object" by the comet. I don't want that blood on my hands.

Tell me though, where is the spaceship in this photo of Hale-Bopp, also taken by an amateur, not an "disinfo agent"?


[edit on 21-2-2009 by ngchunter]

ngchunter, if you could image Jupiters spots and bands, (that is what I meant) and it looked normal, it would definitely ease my mind. I will still be interested in following the situation out of curiousity. And are you saying it can be imaged now, clearly. It's not to close to the sun? If so, by all means do it.
Let's not argue about weather the Plutonium could or couldn't ignite Jupiter or Saturn. I really don't care. I'm just glad it didn't work.
Now if you want to argue about The Hale Bopp companions, please post all the photos in both links so every one will see them. Also post the photos of the the"Tower" the structure near the sun that Phage thinks is a digital artifact. Do you think it's a digital artifact? I'd like as many people as possible to see it and say what they think it is.

According to Sheldan Nidle at paoweb.com, Nibiru and the other ships can cloak themselves. I was at the meeting when he said this about 3 weeks before the companions were first spotted.


The Tower- scroll about 2/3 down www.tmgnow.com...

More ufo videos
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Sargoth
And are you saying it can be imaged now, clearly. It's not to close to the sun? If so, by all means do it.

Heh, define "clearly." It's relative. It can be done, but conditions are far from ideal, of course. It won't look nearly as good as my best image of jupiter. I'm fairly certain I get show a trace of the cloud bands; I know I can spot it by eye, but getting it in a camera is always much harder.

Now if you want to argue about The Hale Bopp companions, please post all the photos in both links so every one will see them.

It's not my responsibility to try to present your "evidence" for you. Your sun tower is nothing more than blooming in a camera lacking an anti-blooming gate. I'm not sure if I'd call that a camera error as it's intrinsic to the design.
www.threebuttes.com...

Do you have an explanation as to why the "object" trails in the same direction as the stars while the comet appears motionless? And where are the background trailing stars to compare against in this photo?

I can get the exact same effect in better resolution with Comet Lulin:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/980cb2e8276e.jpg[/atsimg]
If anyone attempts to misconstrue the above image, I have the full image to put it into context.

[edit on 21-2-2009 by ngchunter]

We would all love to see what ever you can do to image Jupiter. I can't explain the photos. That blooming did look similar to the tower. So the blooming is a digital atifact?
I shouldn't have posted the 3rd night vision video. It could be birds.

reply to post by Sargoth



Maybe this will help.
The sun, cosmic rays, blooming, hot pixels and how some people see things that don’t exist
www.badastronomy.com...

Originally posted by Sargoth
We would all love to see what ever you can do to image Jupiter.

As soon as time or weather allow in the next couple days (the latter was not permissive today) I'll do my best with it.

I can't explain the photos. That blooming did look similar to the tower. So the blooming is a digital atifact?

Blooming is a consequence of the type of CCD used. It's just a side-effect of that particular design. Here's a good explanation:
www.ccd.com...
They could have chosen a CCD with an anti-blooming gate, but there are severe penalties for doing that; lower well depth means less dynamic range, lower quantum efficiency means less sensitivity, which is critical when doing any kind of filtered imaging. Generally, all professional astronomical CCDs lack an anti-blooming gate for those reasons.

Here is Jupiter imaged with my Celstron C130mm Mak (5.1" scope). I enhanced the detail with Photoshop to show the cloud belts.


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/31f64e64625b.jpg[/atsimg]

I'm sorry about the poor image but it was the best I could do since my view of Jupiter is limited.

Here is the original image before enlargement:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0cef82d9c30d.jpg[/atsimg]



[edit on 22-2-2009 by griffinrl]

[edit on 22-2-2009 by griffinrl]

reply to post by griffinrl


Nicely done! Thanks, you might have just saved me another early morning lol.

reply to post by ngchunter


Thanks NGC. I imaged the planet with my Phillips SPC900NC webcam. This is a stack of about 6 decent photos. I did enhance the contrast a bit with Photoshop to bring out the detail of the cloudbelts so that others would see that the planet is still intact. Other than enhancement and enlargement I did no other modifications to the image.

Originally posted by griffinrl
reply to post by ngchunter

 

Thanks NGC. I imaged the planet with my Phillips SPC900NC webcam. This is a stack of about 6 decent photos. I did enhance the contrast a bit with Photoshop to bring out the detail of the cloudbelts so that others would see that the planet is still intact. Other than enhancement and enlargement I did no other modifications to the image.

Good work!

Maybe this will put an end to the nonsense.

Thank you for those photos of Jupiter. Does it solve the case, not totally for me. (I'm a stubborn SOB). But it's going in that direction. Will you be able to get better images soon? What's the cause? Weather conditions, inadequate telescope, Jupiter's position?
Thank you for the blooming info. I apologize to Phage on that one. Why wouldn't the Millenium group have known about that stuff. It seems pretty basic.

reply to post by Sargoth


I don't know how I could get a better image than that one Sargoth. I'm not sure what else you would need...I mean it clearly shows the planet is intact. The cloud belt detail alone shows that. And sure once you own telescopes you always have "aperture envy" But this is the planet that I photographed and I know it's Jupiter. I can't do much better than that.

But yes I have issues with the weather here as well as the position of the planet at this time. I took this one with a 5" scope which ain't too shabby IMO.

[edit on 22-2-2009 by griffinrl]

Originally posted by Sargoth
Will you be able to get better images soon? What's the cause? Weather conditions, inadequate telescope, Jupiter's position?

Never insult the size of a man's telescope. It's quite insulting lol. I'm half kidding, of course. Griffin's scope isn't your typical store-bought piece of trash, it's quite nice in fact. I don't see how Jupiter could have undergone a change to a star and still have intact cloud bands. I'm going to make every effort to get another photo/video of Lulin tomorrow since that's when it's going to be at its brightest. My weather's worthless at the moment, but that's forecast to change tomorrow. Unfortunately, that's not conducive to getting Jupiter as well. Wednesday morning's doable though, if the weather's good. I'm not sure how much better my image will be though, I've only got an extra 3" of aperture. The trick is to get a clear shot of the horizon right where Jupiter rises. That'll be easier said than done, but I'll try.

Why wouldn't the Millenium group have known about that stuff. It seems pretty basic.

A very good question. Perhaps they don't know because they don't want to know.

LOL...thanks NGC. That's the best that I could do with what I have to work with. Actually I'm quite pleased with that picture considering my gear. But my new wife is quite taken with the astronomy hobby and so it won't take too much negotiating to get a new scope. We're thinking about a big monster Dob next...but that will let me talk her into putting a little dome in the backyard possibly

reply to post by questioningall


Here is a good link that explains while Jupiter does not have enough mass to become a star, it does give off it's own energy.

www.newton.dep.anl.gov...