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.

 

NASA Images Large Spherical Objects Inside Corona of SUN

page: 3
46
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
...If it has been altered by NASA then I do believe NASA has some explaining to do. They need to be forthcoming why taxpayer OWNED images are being altered by a taxpayer OWNED administration...


You don't own the images. They do. You can whine and moan all you like about how they operate, but the fact is, that MOST government-run research agencies don't let you get anywhere near their data for a LONG LONG time. NASA are one of the more open agencies. They do the hard work getting the data, and it is up to them how and when they display it.

PLUS, up above I explained in some detail how these images work, and how you can get hold of the completely unedited originals as soon as they arrive from the spacecraft. There is absolutely nothing stopping any of you doing that - have you??

The spacecraft is out in deep space, and being pummelled by HEP's, CME's, flares, and other intense radiation, as well as encountering debris of all kinds. Stuff will get on the sensor/lens. Sensor artefacts will appear. Compression and contrast enhancement artefacts will appear. On these initial images, at least.

NASA provides these low-res versions very quickly, using a quick and dirty process on the original FTS files which are always available and verifiable. If those initial low-res versions contain artefacts that might be mistaken for real objects, and that Nasa knows are not real objects, why shouldn't they obscure them? (By the way, I didn't check - how was it verified that these weren't simply missing blocks of data - if you get a tiny glitch in a JPEG data stream, you will often lose a square...)

Perhaps you, if you were the boss over there, might have a little team to put comments on every image explaining what is being seen.

Would you? Would that be the best use of 'your' money?

Or might it be better to let the people who know what they are doing, continue..?

As I stated above, you will find that after a few weeks or so, these images will be replaced with better processed versions, ones that remove most of the known garbage and use the dark-averaging frames (some of which have not yet been collected) to process the images into a much better and more accurate form. BUT THE ORIGINAL FTS FILES WILL STILL BE THERE, UNALTERED.

Now you can second guess what they do with the publically displayed jpegs, and make all sorts of complaints about the process, but frankly, if you don't understand how the process even works, or what image defects might appear (and have done since these cameras first started operating), do you think anyone who matters is going to listen?

Oh, and I'd love to hear anyone who claims these are real 'spheres', to explain how it is they seem to be lit from a direction AWAY from the Sun? What incredibly bright object would be doing that? I know that contrast enhancement can easily give that same 'bright edge' effect, where it gives a false edge or 'halo' around high contrast edges or 'hot pixels'. Do a bit of research on sharpening haloes and contrast enhancement.

So, what's more likely:

Image artefacts in the form of pixel 'spikes' that are being over-enhanced.*
OR
Huge spherical objects that only appear briefly in the cameras, and never in a corroborated location - note that no two of these images shows the specks in the same place. And that no other solar observatory is seeing.

Forgive me if I go with option one, and that I don't rush out and get the washing in...

* - NASA happily admits they over-process the initial images, to give them more 'drama'.

I would also suggest serious investigators look at the SOHO galleries to see examples of what those sensors pick up during CME's... The Stereo cameras use different systems, but you'll get the picture.




posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 04:48 AM
link   
reply to post by RiotComing
 


I care..

I was the AC who posted that....

Here it is s3.photobucket.com...

It does seem like they're a much more excitable bunch at the other forum... not saying that's a bad thing, there are some interesting theories proposed and they've gleaned some interesting images that I don't believe anyone either here, there or anywhere outside of NASA (or some observatory) can explain... but why the cover up, makes no sense to me if these are just photographic anomolies, lens tricks or otherwise. Why block out an area of pixels about twice the size of earth and then not update the latest image for close to 9 hours?

This thread and topic deserves more attention from ATS. I don't care who got the scoop first, it's a topic well worth research and discussion. I've seen most of the historical anomolies listed on SOHO and nothing like this has been discussed so stop passing it off as something you've seen before. You haven't, because its new its now and these objects have been there, moving erratically around the sun, up to 4 (or more) at a time in the images collected and now they've started to censor.

One theory was that the sun was ejecting coronal mass plasma as a result of the recent comet strikes, and as they cooled they formed spheres... or planetoids I suppose, given their size.

Some of the images look geometric in shape and do give wuite the eerie Sci-Fi feel...

Calling any and all SOHO 'experts' of ATS. Please shed some light and/or opinion.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Just for the record, SOHO and STEREO are two ENTIRELY different missions/ spacecraft, and they are looking at the Sun from very different angles. Indeed that is the whole point of the two Stereo spacecraft.

It seems a little odd that this point wasn't made clear when the claim (or was it just an 'intimation'..?) was made that the black square is obscuring something referred to on this thread. You guys DO know the difference between Stereo and SOHO images, and that the 3 spacecraft (SOHO, Stereo 'Ahead' and Stereo 'Behind') are NOWHERE near each other?

How exactly did you line up that little missing square with any of the objects being referred to on this thread? I'd like to see your geometry.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 05:30 AM
link   
reply to post by CHRLZ
 


I'm not an astronomer, nor a mathematician. You're the 'ameteur astronomer' so why not take a look at the images you've been pointed to e.g. STEREO Behind EUVI 195 and run a series of the snapshots in a slide show. There's plenty of the 'anomalies' which move at varied speed and are seen in various different locations. In the 200+ shot slide show you can even see one of your 'pixel artifacts' traversing the sun - pretty impressive for the same 'artifact' to follow that set line... don't you think?

Take a look for yourself, and before you start bashing anyone who hasn't taken any cosmology course but has an interest, try reviewing and explaining the entire series of shots from the SOHO website (solar and heliosphere observation - hmm, can't help but think that's what all the satellites are doing, regardless of name, and that's why they named the site accordingly, eh?).

Finally, do you think you could perhaps find the courtesy to post with a little less arrogance in response please? Because we all don't have perhaps the same experience, knowledge or background as you does not mean you have to speak down to those who have genuine questions and are providing information on an 'as seen' basis. Thanks in advance.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 06:02 AM
link   
Hey ya'll....


I too am not an astronomer, mathematician or a scientists but why is it, an object(s) so close to the Sun, can cast a shadow at all?
Is it being suggested that some part of said-object is NOT getting hit by the sun's rays? I find that difficult to imagine but.....these things are really quite intriguing. And if that blacken-out photo (supposedly by NASA) is real well............that speaks volumes, no?



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 06:15 AM
link   
reply to post by TwoPhish
 


You mention in your post about how the objects in the images must be getting struck by the suns rays. And from thier proximity yes of course one would assume that. But remember that here on earth , scientists have learned how to bend, slow down, and tie light into knots (no really look it up). Not a massive leap of imagination to suggest therefore that if we on earth can do it, then there maybe other things that can bend light. For all we know thier might be some kind of naturaly forming material that does this and perhaps that is what these objects are made of. Not saying they are alien craft, just saying perhaps theres more odd kinds of cosmic junk out there than we know how to account for ?



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueBrit
 


True true! I guess at this point of our early evolution, anything is possible for we truly know so little.
But what would be revolutionary at this point is, NASA explaining this phenomena to us idiots (smile) seeing they know it all and cover it up too!

I've always been a firm believer, after reading Zacharia Sitchin's publishing's (translation) on how there is indeed a twelfth planet (actually, 10.....well no, really 9 again....seeing Pluto was demoted) orbiting our Sun in a 3600 year cycle and what gives this even more credence is, he was recently featured in the NY Times. Now why would such a reputable venue such as this newspaper, cover an article on such a theory?
It's things like this that make me pause and say 'hmmmmmmmmmmmm'.


Here's the article for those who missed it.
www.nytimes.com...



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pr0t0
... You're the 'ameteur astronomer' so why not take a look at the images you've been pointed to ...


I have looked at quite a lot of those images. As an aside, I think that "You're the 'ameteur [sic] astronomer', so why not.." comment sounds a little insulting if not arrogant, but I wouldn't say that publicly... (O;


Originally posted by Pr0t0
There's plenty of the 'anomalies' which move at varied speed and are seen in various different locations.


Indeed there are, but how did you determine their speed if they only momentarily appeared? Are you claiming they are all real? I'm suggesting that many are artefacts or sensor strikes.

If you, I or anyone shows objects that persist, and/or are seen by other cameras/observatories, then I'll *happily* agree that those are real. The rest are likely not to be, but further investigation is warranted. Investigation, not just posting images that show other anomalies. That won't help unless you do the homework that ties them together. Note that in my painfully lengthy posts above, I have taken some time to explain the imaging process. I have pointed out that the archived, original raw images are available, and that NASA is not hiding stuff as is being suggested here.

If you can dispute any of that information, or if you have questions about it, then ask away and I will clarify - I'll post links to the archive, show you where you can get software to process the raw FTS files, and so on.

At the moment all I am seeing is some guesses about stuff appearing randomly on low-res, preliminary images. Stuff that has all the hallmarks of processing artefacts and/or sensor 'strikes' by HEP's/radiation .


Originally posted by Pr0t0
In the 200+ shot slide show you can even see one of your 'pixel artifacts' traversing the sun - pretty impressive for the same 'artifact' to follow that set line... don't you think?

I can't be arrogant, but you can be sarcastic? Hmm..

Anyway, if that's the case then yes, that object will likely be real. The next step is to determine how close it was to the sun/spacecraft, and work out what it was. Does that object in any way correspond to the 'huge spheres' being claimed on this thread? Do the 'spheres' act/look like your object?

Forgive me for not guessing which set of 200 images you are referring to, but if you claim that probably-real object is related to the 'spheres', by all means give details. I don't have a fast or cheap connection, so I'm fairly fussy about what i download. If it's not to do with the 'spheres', then post a new thread.


Originally posted by Pr0t0
Take a look for yourself, and before you start bashing anyone who hasn't taken any cosmology course..


'Bashing'? I call it pointing out the facts. Point out where I have done the bashing, or where I'm wrong, and you (they) will get an apology.


Originally posted by Pr0t0
try reviewing and explaining the entire series of shots from the SOHO website (solar and heliosphere observation - hmm, can't help but think that's what all the satellites are doing, regardless of name, and that's why they named the site accordingly, eh?).


I've been Soho watching since it started - it is one of NASA's most remarkable achievements, especially when you consider what the initial mission plan was.. I know Stereo far less well, but I do know digital sensors/imaging VERY well - call me immodest on that.


Originally posted by Pr0t0
... post with a little less arrogance in response please?
... does not mean you have to speak down ..


I apologise if I am 'speaking down'. And I'll happily defer to anyone's superior knowledge, but I'll expect them to back it up.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 08:35 AM
link   
I posted these over at GLP, and I figured I would post them here, to get some opinions, I will state that I have no idea what these are. I filtered a couple of the photos in PS, simple color filters, and found that the objects seem to have some geometry to the when enhanced.

So far I'm thinking they are satellites that are closer to the telescope, and are appearing to be within the sun's corona, but what do I know.

The objects are certainly a mystery.

Would like to hear some opinions on this certainly.









posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by CHRLZ
 


Having re-read my own post, you deserve an apology. Long night, very little sleep and I could have read and interpreted your post in a manner not befitting how you actually wrote and meant it. But no excuses are warranted and so I won't hide behind any.

My sincere apologies for being so abrupt, and seemingly rude.

Back on topic, I found the Behind 195 slide show fascinating as I say one particular object does cross as though it's in some kind of orbit. It's really difficult to tell the size of the object without knowing it's distance between the satellite and the sun, and I just don't have the knowledge to predict / estimate that.

Would you agree that we are seeing more activity (since the recent lull in solar activity that's a granted) around our sun with regards to comets, flares and so on?



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
Quite fascinating to say the least... I'm wondering if they might be moon or planet sized objects that have been pulled into the suns gravity. I would imagine if these objects were in close proximity of the sun they would soon be melted and absorbed by the suns corona.

Also intriguing is the image manipulation by NASA, if that IS indeed an original altered image from the NASA SOHO site and not just someone trying to spin the story for website traffic. If it has been altered by NASA then I do believe NASA has some explaining to do. They need to be forthcoming why taxpayer OWNED images are being altered by a taxpayer OWNED administration...

Let me re-iterarte what I said before: If the object that is in the 7:00 position (relative to the Sun) in this image is a real object, such as a moon or small planet, then its shadow is wrong:

The OP's Second Image

I'd same it's an image file artifact and not a real object.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Good observation.
Thanks



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


I'm a bit confused. That image (with the black square) is from January 23. The images in the OP are from January 18.

These are separate images, not the same image "edited". How do you know that one of these "objects" are under that black square? Do you have the image without the black square showing this "object".

As I said, I think they could be image file artifacts (as I showed in my post above).

[edit on 1/23/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by skepticantiseptic
 


When a Member is able to logically examine a situation and provide factual evidence of his or her own opinion there are other members who provide no facts or any evidence must resort to name calling. Its a shame to behave in this manner. Simply provide the evidence or facts or at least something to back up your idea on what the spheres are or ask the questions from those that are able to identify what the spheres are. The reason a Member is able to debunk the "Alien UFO Theories" is because to date no evidence, facts, or clear pictures have been provided to establish that they do exist. We are attempting to find anwsers and correct anwsers not pure speculation based on corrupt evidence or simply someones uneducated opinions.

[edit on 1/23/2010 by DJMSN]



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 09:44 AM
link   


Let me re-iterarte what I said before: If the object that is in the 7:00 position (relative to the Sun) in this image is a real object, such as a moon or small planet, then its shadow is wrong:

The OP's Second Image

I'd same it's an image file artifact and not a real object.


That's what I was getting at. Not only are the shadows inverted but how can something so close, to such a massively BRIGHT object (aka, the Sun) cast any shadow at all? I mean, if you stuck an ant, under a 100 watt bulb, the light would envelope the ant completely, no?

So even if my analogy is off with my ant-thing there still is no doubt that this 'thing' is defying physics as...........we know it to be.

Is it possible, this (these) object(s) are really a lot closer to the camera than we think? That would at least help explain the shadow-conundrum but that wouldn't necessarily help explain away, what they are.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:57 AM
link   
A good video: "Planet Size Ufos found near the Sun"


[edit on 23-1-2010 by Imagir]

[edit on 23-1-2010 by Imagir]



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Many of the same objects have been tracked since the 18th and this can be seen in the slide shows if they're still available on the soho page...

I went to see the latest image around 1 am GMT last night and found that several pixels were missing. No one can be sure what was under them, but many others had taken screen shots leading up to then, and it simply seemed unusual that such a large area was missing ... but I simply reported what I'd seen, no conjecture as to what it covered.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   


This is supposedly a close-up of one of the objects.

Here are some additional links:

Link 1
Link 2
Link 3
Link 4
Link 5
Link 6

[edit on 23-1-2010 by loam]



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 

reply to post by Pr0t0
 



Hmm. Can either of you give a link to that image on NASA's website? I'd enjoy an official URL.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
UPDATE!
Today 2010 Jan 23
stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov...



And




new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join