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.

 

Is this Nibiru ???

page: 1
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Hi i would just like to start by saying i am not a science boffin or anything like that i`m just a regular guy who thinks he`s stumbled across something truely amazing! I saw a guy on utube with a picture of what they thought was Niburu with coordinates attached so he went to google sky program and typed in these coordinates.
To his suprise the area had been cropped completely and was the only area like this apparently taken out by the powers that be....so i decided last nite to goto microsoft world wide telescope program and typed the coordinates in there..... alas the picture was clear but there was no sign of a planet which made me think o.k maybe the information they both have was taken at different dates? so i had a look around and i believe i have found Nibiru.


What do you think??





posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
I wish i had some positive input for you, but I am clueless on the topic.

I would not be surprised if google block the cords though.
Good luck with your findings.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by TwoTechnics]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by discobiskit
 


No ill will intended to the Op but...

Personally, I think Nibiru is crap. It doesn't exist. All it really is is a vehicle by which doom jockeys make easy money off scared and gullible people. It will eventually fall out of vogue as people catch on that they've been duped.

I suggest that the Op read some of the great threads on here or at bad astronomy.com where Nibiru is well and truly debunked.

IRM



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:37 AM
link   
No problem i welcome any comments any idea what it is? looks like a planet to me.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Nice find. I am not sure what it is but it looks cool
.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by discobiskit
 

First of all, please get a real screen capture program instead of just filming your monitor. There are free programs out there for use. I can't see the coordinates you're typing in so I have no way of showing you, but I've seen this problem before. WWT and google sky are both secondary sources of info, they are not primary sources of telescopic data, they're just stiched mosaics of all sky surveys. As such they contain mistakes not found in the original data, which in the case of the visible light imagery from the digitized sky survey, have been around for decades. I know I've seen this "object" before in other youtube videos, but if you check those coordinates in the actual sky survey data, there's nothing odd there at all, just the stars you see.
skyview.gsfc.nasa.gov...
Enter those same coordinates and click "DSS" in the Optical box and you'll see what I mean.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Only problem is, in the off chance it were real, you can bet it wouldn't be found on a nasa site.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 

The coordinates are clearly visible as i typed them into info boxes for the viewer to see as the picture was blurry. everyone is entitled to there opinion but u realy think it`s a mistake from a stitched mosaic of the sky surveys :-) was the sky survey data taken the same time as the data microsoft used? or is it continuously updated? planets move u know. this object has not been spotted on youtube in these coordinates if u can find the evidence then i would love to see it then i will agree completely i have seen similar in different coordinates but that would mean it is moving......like a planet lol



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by astrogolf
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Only problem is, in the off chance it were real, you can bet it wouldn't be found on a nasa site.


You're right! We'll only find the truth on Youtube!

IRM



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by discobiskit
reply to post by ngchunter
 

The coordinates are clearly visible as i typed them into info boxes for the viewer to see as the picture was blurry.

I can't see it at all, it's too blurry. Can't you just post here what the coordinates are?


everyone is entitled to there opinion but u realy think it`s a mistake from a stitched mosaic of the sky surveys :-)

Yes, it is. The original sources for these images, which have been around far longer than google sky or WWT, do not show anything there. Microsoft's stitching process lead to errors in the images. No reputable researcher uses these secondary sources as a primary source of sky survey data.


was the sky survey data taken the same time as the data microsoft used?

Perhaps you misunderstood; this sky survey data is decades old. It was not taken at the same time as either microsoft WWT or google sky.


or is it continuously updated?

No, it's not. There are two palomar sky surveys and they have both been completed. They're done and they've been done for a very long time. Each of the surveys only scanned each part of the sky once, there was no "updating" to it.


planets move u know.

Yes, I'm very well aware of that, I track their motion.


this object has not been spotted on youtube in these coordinates

Well I know I've seen it before, but I don't have the coordinates handy. Let's see the coordinates if you think it's novel and see if it exists in the original unstitched sky survey data.

if u can find the evidence then i would love to see it then i will agree completely i have seen similar in different coordinates but that would mean it is moving......like a planet lol

Actually it would mean it's a repeated error, which wouldn't be unexpected. The question is whether or not it's in the original data or not.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by astrogolf
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Only problem is, in the off chance it were real, you can bet it wouldn't be found on a nasa site.

You can get the original data off this non-nasa site:
archive.stsci.edu...
Copies of the original photographic plate prints are also in the possession of multiple universities inlcuding my own alma mater.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by ngchunter]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 11:33 AM
link   
That's very interesting!! Kudo's for doing your OWN research and not just drinking the kool-aid handed to you by those who wish people would just curl up and stay asleep.

I think you should post it everywhere anyhow, and get ALL of the feedback you can from ALL sources....why would you wait to get people's opinion's on HERE before you move forward with this? Lead, do not FOLLOW.

Good Luck! You've now peaked my interest, and gonna do my own reading on this planet!



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   
I typed the coordinates into that link nghunter provided and this picture came out:




The object in the center is the same as the one the OP showed. I don't know or particularly care what it is.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
A little research would help you out. Let me give you some pointers and you can go on your own if you choose to.
1. Google uses the Sloan survey
2. Google has a problem with its stitching algorithm and the failure is seen as a black area
3. MS uses old data from a whole sky survey - the data is heavily modified to stitch it together

The position you indicate is close to RA/DE 6h19m58s/23 27'52". It is in the constellation Gemini. It is nowhere near the famous stitching error site on Google which is in Orion.

BTW, there are all sorts of newer sky surveys including Project Pan-STARRS. Each photo from that effort is 38,000 pixels on a side. Print that at 600dpi and it requires a piece of photographic paper over 5 feet by 5 feet! That project has detected tens of thousands of asteroids in our solar system. No planet would sneak by. Sorry, you are looking at an artifact.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by misterglad
 


Very cool work there. Whatever this is its not a planet or a star. Stars are shining through it. Seems that MS has colorized the image and changed noise to a part of the image.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


Indeed, at last we have the original image to work with and all its quality. It looks like you can see a spider vane and central obstruction in the light, so it looks to be a reflection of the optical system. Indeed a schmidt telescope was used to conduct the sky survey, not to be confused with a schmidt-cassegrain. That is why you see diffraction spikes around bright stars. Each field of view covered about 6 degrees so anything within 6 degrees that was bright enough could be causing this reflection to appear.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by misterglad
 

The object does not appear in the blue filtered image:


Or the infrared image:


It's not there. It is an artifact on the red filter plate.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Good catch. It might have been a local light source then, heavily defocused into the shape of the optical system due to being closer to the camera than its infinity focus point.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Bingo, I found our perpetrator. It was a very local light source; a plane. You can tell in the wider field 60 arcminute image of the plate:
archive.stsci.edu...
Right at the edge of the plate you can see the wing light (one of the navigation lights) form a streak and a bright reflection of the optics in the center, right in line with our perpetrator and an identical light source farther down the center of the image (which forms a parallel line with the wing light streak). What you have here is a wing light streak on the right which is always on and occasionally flashes in sync with a central red light strobe. Because this is a red filtered image, you only see the red navigation light and the central red strobe light, not the green navigational light on the opposite side.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by ngchunter]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by misterglad
 


so it is in the original then nghunter said it was not.... Cool



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join