Attention! Are there Meteors Heading this Way Right Now? Pictures/Very Clear

page: 20
67
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   
I don't understand how a skeptical group can apparently believe all that NASA etc have told them about what these images detail. They may say that these pictures display noise but does noise have a definite shape to it and travel in formation? Does the fact that nine objects are spotted just before major activity on the farside of the sun, that is documented and acknowledge by some of you, yet you dismiss it as not linked. What can link these things? Where is the line that separates possibility and clear bunk?

I worked in the technology section in the military, finding the unknown and working with many engineers on new innovations etc that had to deal with military applications. In all the times working with engineers and scientists I had never experienced the shut down of the thought process as I've witnessed here. Those that I worked with at least would work anything I suggested and then prove it unfeasible before providing any conclusion to my thought. Most of the time the theory was put into play so it could be proven workable or not conclusively.

I guess those that are in the Space Exploration group of threads can't possibly believe that space travel is possible and that maybe there's a conspiracy in the government to keep this away from the general public's eye.

I only hope that someone passes this to someone with the ability to check on my work. This is extremely disgusting in my opinion.

Peace and Love to you ALL




posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   
From my limited knowledge, the sun turns on its axis, yes?

Well then, soon enough it's "far side" will face us and we'll see if something funky or not is going on.

The OP mentions working with scientists and engineers, but is basically telling us that all of them are liars...






posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
I don't understand how a skeptical group can apparently believe all that NASA etc have told them about what these images detail. They may say that these pictures display noise but does noise have a definite shape to it and travel in formation?

NASA didn't tell me anything, I made the identification from experience distinguishing noise from real objects in solar images such as this. You assume it "traveled" because you're starting with the assumption that it's some kind of real object, and yes, radiation, cosmic ray strikes, and other sources of noise can have definite shapes.


Does the fact that nine objects are spotted just before major activity on the farside of the sun,

These are not objects. And the activity you mentioned comes from what is labeled as bad data.


Where is the line that separates possibility and clear bunk?

Whether or not it appears in consecutive images. This does not.

[edit on 18-2-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Then the next picture if taken directly after it would show them to have moved to another position. But lets remember that the NEXT picture that was taken was 10 or 15 MINUTES late, not a second or whatever...

No joke. Unless the objects are incredibly tiny and incredibly close to the spacecraft, you wouldn't see any motion in pictures taken a matter of seconds apart, it takes minutes for it to become apparent. SOHO and STEREO always take pictures minutes apart and objects moving in those pictures always appear to move a few pixels in that period of time.


That would be like expecting the aircraft that you took a picture of to be there ten minutes later even though they are going supersonic over you....

An aircraft is orders of magnitude closer to you the observer than an object somewhere around .5-1AU distant. Unless these objects are traveling at or near the speed of light, in which case they'd be streaks if they even showed up at all, even in exposures that are a fraction of a second long, they will still be close to their previous position in the next frame and the frame before that.

Allow me to demonstrate:


By the way, those dots on the bottom that move slowly over the course of days instead of minutes; those are stars.

[edit on 18-2-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattguy404
From my limited knowledge, the sun turns on its axis, yes?

Well then, soon enough it's "far side" will face us and we'll see if something funky or not is going on.


The "activity" began intermittently beginning on February 4. So yes, it would have been visible on the nearside.

[edit on 2/18/2009 by Phage]


jra

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
They may say that these pictures display noise but does noise have a definite shape to it and travel in formation?


Yes, square. Like the thousands of square pixels that make up the image. Since those nine dots weren't in the images before or after. It's a very good bet that it was noise. You example of taking photos of jets flying at supersonic speeds is flawed. You do realize that the STEREO image covers a huge amount of space and with 10 - 15 mins between images, you're not going to see a major change in the position of an object.


I guess those that are in the Space Exploration group of threads can't possibly believe that space travel is possible...


How did you arrive at that odd conclusion?


...and that maybe there's a conspiracy in the government to keep this away from the general public's eye.


By displaying it publicly for all to see? (if one were to accept your claims of what we're seeing in these images that is)

Do you really believe the US Government (or any Government) is compitant enough to keep things like this a secret?


I only hope that someone passes this to someone with the ability to check on my work. This is extremely disgusting in my opinion.


What I find disgusting is your attitude. You're complaining because you're not getting the replies nor the attention you were hoping for and bitching about it. That's really mature...

[edit on 18-2-2009 by jra]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
If its all about maturity I apologize guys but I'm just a little concerned and dismayed that people don't seem to be looking at what I'm saying. If you have checked it all out and watched the footage I've suggested using all the telescopes available and you can show what I'm seeing as explainable, then I will acknowledge it and take what you've provided for info also.

Think of it this way.. The camera is pointing at the sun for photos. What is the field of view in line with the sun? What is the field of view at the camera end? This field of view will appear like a Long Pointy Thing(LPT) if you draw lines from the suns end to the satellite camera's end.

Now if you had an object that moved in front of the camera within the LPTs path, that would be visible within the picture taken at probably a shutter speed of less that 1/2000seconds... Now this thing is traveling at some speed that is unknown. The next time the camera snaps a picture, ten minutes from the first picture of the object, the object has traveled a distance appropriate to its speed. If it is still in the LPTs cone then it will have its picture taken again. This could aid in estimating speed. If it is gone then it has probably left the camera's field of view or LPT.

If the object was close and traveling at a high rate of speed then the object would appear as a streak like many that are seen in this thread. If the object is farthest from the camera, and traveling at high speed it would appear to be moving across as the one above shows the object traveling WSW to ENE in the left corner. You would see the dot follow a path from picture to picture.

Now if you had two objects that were traveling at the same speed and one was 1000 miles from the suns corona, so your able to see it on in the corona picture, and you had another 1000miles from the camera lens, and they were both visible as dots on the picture, if you took a picture ten minutes after first seeing these two objects, what do you think you would see? I think the closer one to the camera would appear to overtake the one closest to the sun, if the one closest to the camera would even be visible still. It depends on the speed of the object and whether it traveled out of the LPT or field of view of the camera before the next picture.

You must remember also that the pictures I'm talking about are from two separate satellites. One is sending data from in front of the earth and other is behind the earth. These pictures from two satellites show donut shaped objects as well as other things that match up with solar activity and fireballs and other things that may explain this. The times coincide to certain anomalies or noise as some have called them. Does noise get picked up by two sats that are separated by quite a distance as they travel ahead and behind earths orbit?

The science can work with this. Don't think of this as me trying to throw all we know about certain things out the door. Think of it as me trying to suggest that maybe there is a conspiracy to prevent people from knowing the whole truth. Then we can work on this together and figure if its real or not.

Rgds



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 07:50 PM
link   
[reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


The place where the ones above were quoted from were different then where I quoted the next ones from. I also showed prrof then some idiot said even that was wrong but its proof. It also proves that its just the ones reported to them and the ones that THEY have put up, And only ones from the USA. This does not include the international ones. Most of the same folks use these same places. But I have seen some extra folks at one place that I go to. In fact there was a few new reports there for the past 3 days. But I am not adding those.

134 From Jan, 1, 2009 to Feb 15th 2009
67 From Jan, 1, 2008 to Feb, 15, 2008
78 From Jan, 1, 2007 to Feb, 1, 2007
57 From Jan,1, 2006 to Feb,1, 2006
38 From Jan, 1, 2005 to Feb, 1, 2005

As I have stated in most of my replies about this there are no duplicates. Because when more then 1 person calls it in they put it a,b,c ect

AMS

 
Mod Note: Excessive Quoting – Please Review This Link

[edit on Thu Feb 19 2009 by Jbird]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Here's a diagram of what I've been talking about.



This shows what one would expect to see if you were given three objects that were various distances between the sun and camera and they were traveling at the same speed.

Notice that the objects remain in line with the one above it but do not remain in the camera's field of view or LPT. The first and second one had a picture taken of them twice at a ten minute interval and the third didn't even make it for the show. But I bet if you saw the pictures of this you would say that the one in the middle is traveling the fastest. The satellite's orbit will also have an effect on the position of the objects each ten minute picture.

Hope this helps visualize my points...
Rgds


[edit on 18-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]

[edit on 18-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Here is the same description with an idea of what the resulting picture would be like....


So, given all the substantiation that I've provided I think the objects that are seen flying around in these frames from the satellite are a little more than noise and flutter.

Should you wish proof that it is possible that the nine objects that I've pointed out could be some type of formation heading towards the sun, I can provide it. The odds of nine objects traveling in a line like that would be astronomical in the odds wouldn't it? Well what if I told you that something like this happened as recently as 1994.



Yes, 24 objects were seen lined up in a row heading towards another sun like object. These 24 objects eventually produced a detonation that was 100 times brighter than our present sun. That's pretty big. I mean pretty big odds being busted so early, only 15 years ago, and now the same thing is happening and you also have the new messiah telling you to look up for a sign of a bright liight that will be seen during the day too. And Arther C Clarke told us this exact scenario.

Maybe they did it behind the sun... Maybe they hit the sun... Maybe just decided to hurl asteroids at us like they did with the set up of the Shoemaker-Levy asteroids. And the mysterious death of this man.


Anyone getting the link here?


[edit on 18-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by pmbhuntress
 


Why compare only the first six weeks of the year? Is there reason to believe fireballs are seasonal?
August 2007: 80
December 2007: 85
November 2008: 146
January 2009: 91

It is a mistake to try to use a voluntary reporting system for statistical purposes. This is a record of observed fireballs which were reported. I didn't know about AMS until last year. Before that, I would not have known there was any sort of clearinghouse for such reports. Don't you think there may have been an increase of reports rather than observations over time? There are too many variables involved to come to up with any trends in the data. There is no way to correlate such a system to the actual number of occurrences. There is no way to know the actual number of occurrences.



[edit on 2/18/2009 by Phage]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by pmbhuntress
As I have stated in most of my replies about this there are no duplicates. Because when more then 1 person calls it in they put it a,b,c ect


Yeah, but you didn't make it clear in the original post. That list is quite misleading without what you said above being stated at the same time. That is all I was pointing out.


Originally posted by pmbhuntress
This does not include the international ones.


And?

Like cometary meteor showers (Perseids, Leonids, etc), sometimes you get years that are duds (30 per hour), and other years you can get a full blown storm (1000+ per hour - even 100's of 1000's in exceptional storms).

We pass through different regions of space every time we make an orbit around the sun, and there are a host of other factors that make what we encounter fairly random from year to year. We can never be 100% sure of what to expect, and there are always patches of space were we can encounter more objects than others, and that is what is happening at the moment. It's nothing unusual, thats just the way things are. I might start to get worried if fireball rates went up to 10x that of normal, but this is just a little "blip".

This is a subject that we are only just starting to unravel, mainly due to the work put in by amateur observes working together with professionals. One thing we do know is that patches of space like this come along from time to time - get used to it. As long as they are burning up long before they hit us, enjoy the show!



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Here's a diagram of what I've been talking about.



This shows what one would expect to see if you were given three objects that were various distances between the sun and camera and they were traveling at the same speed.

You know, you could have just read what I originally posted where I said that the objects would have to be very small and very close to the camera for them to completely vanish within minutes. If you had actually read what I said you would have realized I didn't need you to draw me a diagram. If that were the case, we should also expect them to occupy more pixels as they ought to appear brighter to the camera being that they're incredibly close. Furthermore, the odds of them passing that close to the camera and just happening to get caught in any exposure at all (seeing as how their apparent angular velocity would be incredibly high if they're that close and the frequency of exposures per second is very low) is incredibly low unless the true relative velocity difference between them is incredibly low - the only way the latter is possible is if the objects come from the STEREO satellite itself, much the way the shuttle sometimes sheds ice and debris. That leaves us with two possibilities, either the spacecraft is shedding tiny bits of debris that happened to pass in front of the camera for an unknown reason, or it's just noise which is expected with a CCD pointing straight at the sun all day every day.

The track record of satellites of this type tells us that objects are infinitely more likely to show up when they're close to the sun. Why? It's the simple matter of volume; how much volume of space does the part of the field of view close to the satellite contain versus how much volume does the field of view contain close to the sun? If a random bit of rock shows up somewhere randomly in the volume contained by the field of view cone extending for 92 million miles, odds are far greater it will be in the further half of the cone than the closer half. In fact, odds are incredibly, amazingly low that it will ever find itself in an area close to the camera. If they weren't low, then the satellite would have been destroyed by a random bit of this debris striking it a long time ago.

If for some unknown reason the amount of space debris/asteroids/whatever out there has suddenly increased to the point that the stuff is even passing right by the satellite frequently, then we should see infinitely more at greater distances at the same time that we see a few passing right by the camera. The entire field should be filled with objects gradually moving in various directions that take minutes to leave the field as well as the few random bits that just happen to pass right near the craft.

[edit on 18-2-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Is there reason to believe fireballs are seasonal?


Actually Phage, yes, they are. Have a look at this page.

Edit to add: You make a good point about relying on the voluntary reporting data. Any number of factors could influence this data. Good work as usual Phage


[edit on 18-2-2009 by C.H.U.D.]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Can I ask why you respond to others that mention things that are not directly related to what the OP is about and yet you've put others in line on this very thread for being off topic?

If you wish to not participate in what I have to offer may I ask that you refrain from responding in the thread as it is derailing from the actual info that is being provided.

If I can maybe have a mod move this to another forum....

Maybe the CURRENT EVENTs or BREAKING NEWS area....

This is ridiculous trying to get people to at least look before they respond that I don't know what I'm talking about.

If you agree with what I have stated in relation to the camera then maybe a little acknowledgment that it could explain the nine objects lined up coinciding with the 24 objects all in a row that struck Jupiter. If you can see this as a possibility please Star it so others will see this. This needs to at least be seen by some of the more conspiracy thinking ATSrs.

To many ducks all in a row.....
Rgds and I appreciate your input that has been put forward so far. You are by far a more intellectually advanced person than myself. Believe it or not I only made it to grade eight and then joined the military. Within 20yrs I helped decide on million dollar contracts on my studies of certain things. I'm a great trouble-shooter... Usually found the links to things before the technicians did and they usually called me to assist for big system troubles.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
If you wish to not participate in what I have to offer may I ask that you refrain from responding in the thread as it is derailing from the actual info that is being provided.

We are participating. You obviously do not appreciate the fact that we're critically analysing your claims, but you do not get to shut us out just because you don't like what we have to say.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 10:11 PM
link   


we're critically analysing your claims


Thanks for all the collaboration there... You guys are great, I know where to go when I need something explained that defies logic.

Has anyone seen all the pictures from the telescopes for the period 10Jan to 2Feb at least? Lots to go through but very interesting when you look closely. Others on this thread have found things making unusual moves in succeeding pictures also. If you can think openly like this then you can accept that there is a possibility that an intelligence somehow is guiding some of those objects that were captured in print.

Does anyone know the speed of the camera??? 1/10000sec??? I've asked that about four times now and nobody wants to answer valid questions but is willing to jump all over me for not thinking like a college student.

See those dots and donuts that come up throughout the telescope images, on almost all of them, it would be just a bit easier to understand if you at least knew the camera's shutter speed equivalent.


Rgds



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Has anyone seen all the pictures from the telescopes for the period 10Jan to 2Feb at least? Lots to go through but very interesting when you look closely. Others on this thread have found things making unusual moves in succeeding pictures also.

I see the exact same effect when a bright object just happens to enter the field of view of the behind stereo satellite exactly one year before, in 2008 instead of 2009. It's a lens flare, and it happens every time such a bright object comes and goes. I posted those on the other thread, just so you know.

[edit on 18-2-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 





If that were the case, we should also expect them to occupy more pixels as they ought to appear brighter to the camera being that they're incredibly close.


That would have to lead to you making an assumption that the objects are the exact size and shape to reflect the amount of light and the spectrum of light that each solar telescope registers, and the fact that maybe a "void" didn't obscure it, given that if it measure certain spectrum and the sun emits enough of a "noise" to cover the perfect pixelation to obscure it to look random, then I guess you are right in that assumption. I have again been proven wrong by the wizards...

Is anyone out there able to confirm that I actually have been right on my assumptions? Other than the usual people that are on here getting the stars for all their hard work in proving that we have nothing to worry about. I actually don't believe this is in the mainstream anymore and believe that ATS is blocking this thing. Not everyone can think like I've witnessed on this thread. If so, we are doomed, all doomed....

***Also, for about the tenth time, I am not talking about the lens flare. there is no lens flare in the OP and in the pics I've provided. Thanks




[edit on 18-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
That would have to lead to you making an assumption that the objects are the exact size and shape to reflect the amount of light and the spectrum of light that each solar telescope registers, and the fact that maybe a "void" didn't obscure it,

A void? What are you talking about? If the objects are somehow invisible to light, then why would they show up in one exposure but not the others? Your logic isn't even self-consistent.





top topics
 
67
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join