Is this Nibiru ???, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

reply posted on 5-8-2010 @ 07:37 PM by discobiskit

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
it is difficult for me to imagine someone (especially young) discovering a planet via their computer by examining data acquired and studied by thousands of proffesionals before them. but, congradulations, maybe you proved the academic and proffesional system is bunk compaired to what is available at your fingertips.

don't believe everything you see on the computer. including this post.

ats is fun,
et

was this aimed at me?? i am 32 lol

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 07:54 AM by discobiskit

*UPDATE*

I have just recieved some interesting information on the this from someone who is investigating it.....

"Further research through the astronomy databases has brought up the following image taken in the vicinity , but not at the exact coordinates. This was originally from the IRAS infra-red search, taken in 1983. If this is the same object, then it has moved in the decades between IRAS and the time that the Microsoft Worldwide Telescope program shots were imaged."

part quote taken from Darkstar1 website. link to the image taken is below.

i214.photobucket.com...

Here are the IRAS coordinates for this image, taken in 1983

IRAS 06508+2252 IRAS source name
RA1950 06 50 53.7 "h:m:s" Hours RA, equinox 1950.0, epoch 1983.5
DE1950 +22 52 48 "d:m:s" Degrees Dec, equinox 1950.0, epoch 1983.5

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 09:02 AM by ngchunter

Originally posted by discobiskit
i214.photobucket.com...

That picture shows a DSS image, not an IRAS image. Just making sure that was intentional. I presume the arrows are supposed to show where the IRAS object would be?

Here are the IRAS coordinates for this image, taken in 1983

IRAS 06508+2252 IRAS source name
RA1950 06 50 53.7 "h:m:s" Hours RA, equinox 1950.0, epoch 1983.5
DE1950 +22 52 48 "d:m:s" Degrees Dec, equinox 1950.0, epoch 1983.5

Incorrect. IRAS 06508+2252 coordinates are as follows:
06h 53m 54.9s, +22d 49' 01"
The coordinates you list are for coordinates precessed to 1950. No one uses that anymore. If you enter those coordinates into a modern database of DSS images like Stsci, it will show you an incorrect area of the sky. Here is the red filtered DSS image showing the correct coordinates for IRAS 06508+2252
aladin.u-strasbg.fr...
If you carefully study the image you'll find a dim star or light source in the DSS images corresponds to those coordinates.

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 09:08 AM by discobiskit

i just copied what was found all the information is on here...

www.darkstar1.co.uk/googleearth.html

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 09:12 AM by discobiskit

That picture shows a DSS image, not an IRAS image. Just making sure that was intentional. I presume the arrows are supposed to show where the IRAS object would be?

the reply i received i beleive the arrow is pointing to the object that i found but in a new location

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 09:50 AM by ngchunter

Originally posted by discobiskit
the reply i received i beleive the arrow is pointing to the object that i found but in a new location

Huh? If you mean to say the arrow is supposed to point to that IRAS source, it doesn't. Whoever made that image was using 1950 coordinates as if they were epoch 2000. The true location of the IRAS source was quite a ways away and does not appear to be related to your DSS image (though I've already explained what I am certain is the cause of your anomaly). The aladin link I gave above shows its true location in the DSS imagery (center of the image).

[edit on 6-8-2010 by ngchunter]

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 10:13 AM by discobiskit

reply to post by ngchunter

like i say check the darksector1 site the info is all there maybe i misunderstood it.

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 10:28 AM by ngchunter

Originally posted by discobiskit
reply to post by ngchunter

like i say check the darksector1 site the info is all there maybe i misunderstood it.

I'm trying to explain that the darksector1 site info is incorrect; they used the wrong epoch for their coordinates to generate the DSS image and correlate it to the out-of-focus plane bokeh in your image. It even says it on their site; equinox 1950. Those are 1950 precessed coordinates. Why they used that is beyond me unless they were intentionally trying to make it seems as if it was closer to your bokeh than it really is. Perhaps it was an honest mistake and they grabbed the wrong coordinates, either way all I know for sure is that it's wrong.

[edit on 6-8-2010 by ngchunter]

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 10:49 AM by discobiskit

reply to post by ngchunter

cheers for pointing that out i have emailed them an enquiery into it..... it does say epoch 1983.5 as well on the coordinates after equinox 1950.0

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 11:55 AM by Phage

reply to post by discobiskit

The background stars are in exactly the same locations. It is the DSS image, it is not from IRAS.

It does not appear on inspection of DSS (visual) and IRAS infra-red images.

www.darkstar1.co.uk...

Yes, we know that, it is only on the red filtered DSS image. The one that was made as a plane flew over the telescope.

[edit on 8/6/2010 by Phage]

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 02:25 PM by discobiskit

*update again guys*

i recieved a reply from my email regarding the question about the image......

"The image I posted was actually from the US Naval Observatory, not IRAS. Sorry about that. I joined the wrong table with the image"

"part of the problem is that my astronomer friend is Italian and a lot of the accompanying prose he sends me is difficult to figure out. He sent me a big pile of data all at once and it's taken me a while to figure out what table goes with which image. The fact that another image exists in the scientific literature showing a similar object in the vicinity. Any substantive movement over time is indicative of this object being in the solar system (if these anomalies are indeed the same). I will try to clarify the dates with my friend a little better."

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 02:32 PM by Phage

reply to post by discobiskit

The "similar object in the vicinity" is likely to be the other flash shown in the wide angle view of the plate.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 02:48 PM by ngchunter

Originally posted by discobiskit
The fact that another image exists in the scientific literature showing a similar object in the vicinity. Any substantive movement over time is indicative of this object being in the solar system (if these anomalies are indeed the same). I will try to clarify the dates with my friend a little better."

Yeah, like phage said, there are at least two such bokehs on the same plate and probably more if I went and scanned the rest of the plate. That means they were recorded in the same exposure as the plane passed overhead. In total it probably took no more than a second to occur, leaving strobe flashes behind on the film which are defocused because the telescope was focused on the much farther stars. Thus you're left with seeing the reflection of the telescope's optical system (this is the natural consequence of defocused points of light in an image, called bokehs en.wikipedia.org... ). Even the edge of the plate itself is visible in the shape of the strobe flash from the navigation light near the bottom right edge of the plate:
archive.stsci.edu...
That's where it looks like part of the picture has been cut out; it wasn't cut, it was simply outside the film plate's field of view which is why you see the same shaped "notch" in the shape of the bokeh next to it.

[edit on 6-8-2010 by ngchunter]

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 07:12 PM by Esoteric Teacher

Originally posted by discobiskit

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
it is difficult for me to imagine someone (especially young) discovering a planet via their computer by examining data acquired and studied by thousands of proffesionals before them. but, congradulations, maybe you proved the academic and proffesional system is bunk compaired to what is available at your fingertips.

don't believe everything you see on the computer. including this post.

ats is fun,
et

was this aimed at me?? i am 32 lol

if it is your reflection in the computer screen on the youtube link, then you look like a young 32 year old. take it as a compliment if it is your reflexion in the computer screen on the youtube link.

reply posted on 6-8-2010 @ 07:50 PM by discobiskit

[edit on 7-8-2010 by discobiskit]

Pages: << 1 2 3 >> ^^TOP^^