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

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

log in

join

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 




That leaves us with two possibilities,


Thank you NGC I can see where this leads...
All the variables that are involved in this thing and its out in space millions of miles away, and we're relying on images from a government that has been known to deceive its people, and NASA has recently been caught hiding evidence of UFOs etc, etc, and you think that there are only two possibilities left. That is truly amazing how you Exploration type people think and I'm very happy that you've shown me the true nature of science. You are such great contributors to this thread, thank you for your extremely awesome work in checking this out. Should anyone check, they would clearly find me to lacking in any real credible evidence, that would lead to one looking rather dismissive. Thanks again...




posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Does anyone know the speed of the camera??? 1/10000sec???


Minutes rather than seconds or fractions of a second.


STEREO SECCHI: 2.5 minutes cadence in 17.1 nm, 10 minutes cadence in the other EUVI bandpasses. COR1 will take pB images with a cadence of 10 minutes, COR2 will alternate between B and pB every 15 minutes. HI1 and HI2 will observe B with cadences of 40 and 120 minutes respectively.

source

Edit: My bad, a 'cadence' is a sequence of exposures.

From what I can gather, the minimum exposure time of the COR1/COR2 instruments is 1 second, so it's probably a few seconds per exposure, perhaps tens of seconds.

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



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by AllTiedTogether
 



i have and i am about to offer you some support, please be patient. also to save time check out 20090123_0754_c2_1024 on Soho, 1 minute after your earlier photo

also

20090211_1400_c2_512,

might offer some solice



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 





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.


That's the wrong way to think also... I am not actually providing details for you guys but for those that are actually reading this. I'm sure someone is reading this...

Here's a comet that has been spotted... Different speeds, different graphic depictions in the picture.
Here




These lists do not include all potentially visible asteroids. Additionally, not all asteroids listed here will be visible in the images (they may be too faint). These lists are just a guide for the brighter ones

Source

On this page you will find ASTEROIDS that have been spotted and observed. WOW... So asteroids can show up and they have coordinates too..


Rgds



[edit on 18-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]

[edit on 18-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
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?



Since the topic is "Attention! Are there Meteors Heading this Way Right Now?", can you explain why a discussion of the frequency of meteor sightings is off topic?

I have also been directly addressing a number of your posts. I admit I have not addressed them all but I've been given no reason to expect that you would pay any more attention to my pointing out that what you see as a "formation" of "objects" is far more likely to be an effect of cosmic rays on the CCD of the camera than anything else since it shows in a single frame.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 12:08 AM
link   


Since the topic is "Attention! Are there Meteors Heading this Way Right Now?", can you explain why a discussion of the frequency of meteor sightings is off topic?


since the discussion is about the OP and the fact that asteroids have been seen using the solar telescope that has been shown above to provide proof of ASTEROIDS being visible within their pictures.... Nobody is disputing that meteors happen all around the world but this is between the earth and the sun and not in the earths atmosphere...

I really am quite surprised that you haven't been getting more stars for all the great work you've been doing in collaboration with a fellow ATSr in the exploration department. I'm glad it didn't get put somewhere where someone could actually think that this may be possible given the fact that its all happened before.

The stars haven't moved since last night and I haven't seen it in the HOT or TOP topics when it has 350+ hits and 62stars. It hasn't shown in the recent threads on my end either even when someone posts.... Looks like none is going to know and this is only between the three or four of us who are actually doing the talking. Great thanks again guys...

I love science...




[edit on 19-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 06:52 AM
link   
I have to say that this is a good post that was added. Thanks to the OP. I know its about meteors heading our way yet it also brought up many other useful things. All things that we have researched and have proof of. So I have to say that we all got some major home work done. We cant prove or disprove I guess that those are meteors but either way there was alot of things going on with the sun. And we all learned alot. Truthfully I have to say that if there was some meteors coming our way and the government thought they could hide it they most likely would.

This is the same government that is killing us daily. And put us in the financial crisis we are now in. In fact my aunt told me just the other day that she could remember back in the 80s some strange goings on in the skys. She told me it stayed quiet for a month then the US said they were doing some sort of experiments. So yeah they keep crap quiet all the time.

Like she said only time will tell. And the government only shows us what they want to anyways. So most likely any really good photos would have been removed or fixed.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
That is truly amazing how you Exploration type people think and I'm very happy that you've shown me the true nature of science.

You mean critical analysis and not jumping to conclusions about conspiracies based on assumed guilt? I find it amazing you think that hot pixels are actually real objects, but at the same time you assume that the people giving you the images are trying to hide it from you. Guess what? They're not hiding anything. They openly solicit help from regular citizens to find real objects in their images.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
I am not actually providing details for you guys but for those that are actually reading this.

I am reading it, and I described what you drew before you drew it.


Here's a comet that has been spotted... Different speeds, different graphic depictions in the picture.

Thanks, once again the real object appears in consecutive images, lots of consecutive images.


On this page you will find ASTEROIDS that have been spotted and observed. WOW... So asteroids can show up and they have coordinates too..

You didn't pay attention to a word I said did you? Glad you're finally trying to use correct terminology though. As I said before, I spent an entire summer hunting for objects in these images. Objects DO show up, that's normal, but they appear in multiple, consecutive images and show a consistent motion. Your image showed none of that. As phage said, they look consistent with cosmic ray strikes.

[edit on 19-2-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   

You didn't pay attention to a word I said did you? Glad you're finally trying to use correct terminology though. As I said before, I spent an entire summer hunting for objects in these images. Objects DO show up, that's normal, but they appear in multiple, consecutive images and show a consistent motion. Your image showed none of that. As phage said, they look consistent with cosmic ray strikes.

Sometimes articulation is overlooked, when ideals of ego are prevelant.

I am interested in the line up of the 9 lights. It does appear from YEARS of research this is a signifcant anomoly and worth exploring further.

Certainly I would be intersted in obtaining a duplicate arrangement of 9 lights to compare exposure and elements. Is this a hard ask?



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by apacheman
Just 1999 AQ10, due to arrive in three or four days, passing within .0112 AU:

ssd.jpl.nasa.gov...

Anyone taking bets on whether it will hit the moon?

Moon will be at apogee then.


It gonna hit the moon, I saw a movie and it hit the moon..Nice of hollywood to tell us, dont you think ! ?

Regarding the night sky, I cant see the sky here in Norway cos they are spraying all day long here, it has realy escalated the last 2 months.
Early in he morning just before day break and all day long...



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Nobody is disputing that meteors happen all around the world but this is between the earth and the sun and not in the earths atmosphere...


There are bound to be meteoroids between the Earth and the Sun, but since meteors orbit around the Sun (like everything else in the solar system), and they tend to stay in those orbits, and since Earth pases through roughly the same area of space every time it orbits, we can tell where the meteoroid streams that we cross the orbits of are.

There are many meteoroid streams who's orbits do not cross Earth's orbit, and there's absolutely no point worrying about these.

Even if you were seeing meteors in the solar images (which you could not since they are way too small, and if they were big (and close enough to the sun) you would see movement over consecutive frames), chances are, the orbits would not even come close to crossing Earth's orbit. The solar system is a fairly big place!

If there were somehow meteors in an orbit, as you are claiming, that would threaten us, we would have seen them entering our atmosphere before. People have been photographing meteors and calculating orbits for them for the last century. Meteor streams don't just suddenly materialize out of nowhere.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 10:38 AM
link   
LoL i cant beleive this is still going,

OK OK!!!

Maybe its a Astroid (MAYBE!!) Can we proove it, hmm no! and if it was can we proove its projection, (thats a defnet NO! and chance says they shall miss earth by a long shot!) can it be somthing else? Yes many things it could be.. Alien Space craft in a solid matter, That close to the sun i doubt it very much.

This is dragging on a bit now and just going round in circles!

Over and Permanently out of this pointless conversation,..




posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by guessing
I am interested in the line up of the 9 lights. It does appear from YEARS of research this is a signifcant anomoly and worth exploring further.

Are these lines of craters anomalies?




Is this line cometary fragments an anomaly?


If there were any real significance to the 9 hot pixels seen, why don't they appear in any other exposure and why do they look like cosmic ray strikes?
stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov...
Why are they so small but are made of maxed out values? That's what a very hot pixel looks like.
Note the cosmic ray strike near the 2 o'clock position near the sun.
stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov...
vs
stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov...
Note that in the above picture with the hot pixels, the pixels are maxed out and drop off very rapidly, just like in the 9 hot pixel image.


[edit on 19-2-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Again I tell you that you are awesome there NGC... Keep up the great work showing that my questions about how this happens and how that may happen and, how I asked for people to check on this and to check on that and, also how I asked for info about shutter speeds for the Coronal camera etc... these are all things that show that I JUMPED to conclusions...

Yet you when I ask a question about something, you come out with a comment that doesn't answer squat and only derails from the OP. You also just attack me because I ask questions that none of you seem to answer and the real funny thing is that when I ask the questions, you don't know where the answer is... that is why I ask... because I've provided a question that is based on a picture and data and you provide nothing to refute it but say its not possible....

Again you guys are awesome and I hope that you continue to show your intelligence by the freaking awesome data that you are providing to this thread...

I really don't know whether you realize this, but you are not really being listened to here. You may get stars from your buddies but that doesn't show that you have substance within your text. Only a buddy who mindfully clicks like the chicklet keys your clicking...

Rgds and keep clicking there buddy



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by guessing
 


thank you for the great response and for showing that the current thinking is not the norm... I believe that the nine objects are not a coincidence and that the pictures that show the 24 in a row is a good example of what they are capable of doing....

As I said earlier, if there are other pics available from other sources then maybe that would cover the time in between the nine and the next frame of the frame prior.

I noted that at the time 20090123 075600UTC, that Orion's belt was pointing approx over Australia. Orion's belt is usually directed towards something of significance during launches and other significant times... I used Stellarium and checked what it was over during this time from Earth and the other planets. I used the time 20090123 045600UTC also, because of the sequence of numbers which is another thing that occurs regularly during significant events. Here is a page that give you an example of what these significant events may be... Here.

One researcher agrees that R Hoaglands theories are more than theories as to the coincidence levels...

The point is, one loses perspective when the odds get that high ... they are "impossible" odds. They are called that for a reason ... it's because NASA events cannot be so consistent with the "star ritual" pattern and be random, and that's precisely what those impossible odds indicate -- that there is a pattern being followed, and it is the one discovered by Richard Hoagland.
Here " target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">Source



Here's what some have called a Solar Torpedo..Here
This object heading towards the sun could have be within the closest area of the sun itself before it is picked up by the camera. It would be great to have a distance or speed of this thing....

I know its not camera artifacts or noise, and I'm not even a science geek..

As for a hard ask, it appears that it is hard to show. I don't think NGC proved anything by showing us that holes can be in a line. Assuming that because hole are in a line means that whatever created it was also in a line when it created it is a stretch of the odds. But NGC has already shown that the odds happen everyday. Going by his odds you should be able to go horse racing and come back richer everyday.

Rgds and thanks for actually providing thoughtful dialogue in my thread.

Many Rgds






[edit on 19-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]

[edit on 19-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]

[edit on 19-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Again, NGC has shown his ability to show that things can happen and that the odds are not what we believe. He sites that a picture with apparent meteor hits on a celestial body as proof that meteors travel in a row like ducks.

From these picture we are to believe that a bunch of objects were all lined up before they struck the surface. We don't have to see the objects we just assume that they were all in a row. Same with the picture of the objects all in a line in space, we are to assume that they are all in line and in perfect form following one after another in a row. I guess that would mean that Orion's belt, the three stars there are following in a row.... With this, he has proven that things all the time follow each other in a row and the odds of this happening are about everyday...

The second one had a line up of meteors that overlapped each other also, this is another anomaly that occurs regularly too, right NGC. The third explains itself that about 15 or 20 meteors hit all at once and in another straight line... I wonder, do you have pictures? Just wondering if you were hiding something?

As for the third picture of the celestial line up.... I believe this one shows the Shoemaker-Levy fragments and is shown here. Should it NOT be the SL fragments, then maybe you can show with your expertise that they were all lined up in row like ducks to prove how awesome you are.

As to WHY they are not seen in before and after photos, like I stated about ten times earlier, the pictures are taken every 10 or 15minutes depending on the telescope taking the pictures. But you go on and forget about using critical thinking, just keep on throwing things that you supposedly know out so you can collect those reply points and get those stars...

I'll give you one too... Your incredible..


Thanks again for all your magnificent work...



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by AllTiedTogether
 


And some would call it a comet.

This comet was first seen on the eve. of 28 April in the C3 images as a faint dot on a sequence of 6 images. It very rapidly got brighter and brighter as it got closer to the Sun. As it entered the C2 frames it had a tail at least half a million miles long and was brighter than mag 1. The discovery was shared with myself, T. Lovejoy, M. Boschat and R. Gorelli.
www.mikeoates.org...

This is what it looked like in the C3 images. Not too easy to see.
science.nasa.gov...

Notice that it is visible in a sequence of frames.

[edit on 2/19/2009 by Phage]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thank you Phage... Much appreciated.

Interesting pictures and very informative...

This would lead me to ask then that if this is what I would see for a comet then what is it that I see in the the one below? We have nine objects that are taken by a camera that are freezing it. They are round and not like a light being caught by camera with light radiating outwards. Also, this comet has been noted and logged as being a member of the system and probably has orbit data.

The nine objects that we see below have yet to be mentioned by anyone and I don't believe they are logged with orbit parameters. They have text files that accompany these pictures and they have only that this is a coronal picture, leading me to conclude that they didn't see this or that they are hoping that others didn't see it. This fact is the one that prevents me from believing that it is a regular orbit and known by the big guys. If it was something that would have been noted prior to its showing up, I believe they would have put a comment in their pictures or shown it on their brag sheet they have for their other comets etc.




This if very interesting though and may help in getting an idea of what the speed would look like and how they would be represented in the pictures given the difference in speed.

Thanks again for the Link

Rgds


[edit on 19-2-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
these are all things that show that I JUMPED to conclusions...

Well considering you refuse to consider the mostly likely explanation that it's just noise, yes you're jumping to the conclusion that it's not noise. The crater strings and shoemaker photo were to demonstrate to another poster that a line of "objects" is not automatically anomalous.


you provide nothing to refute it but say its not possible....

Actually I provided the images on either side of your image as well as another image showing a single-frame with momentary maxed pixels as proof that it's not a real object - unless you're saying all hot pixels in any image are always real objects. You've ignored the evidence you don't like.


I really don't know whether you realize this, but you are not really being listened to here.

I've noticed that for a while. You seem to think the questions you ask can somehow override the overwhelming evidence that this is just noise, all while ignoring said evidence.

[edit on 19-2-2009 by ngchunter]





new topics
top topics
 
67
<< 18  19  20    22  23 >>

log in

join