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.

 

Original 'Solar Obliteration' episode found..

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 01:41 AM
link   
Let's stay On Topic here folks..

Yes.... Even responding to a rude post is Off Topic..

Thank you

Semper




posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 02:32 AM
link   
John, I remember thinking this was nothing more than airborne seeds, spider webs & insects when the technique first came out. I tried the method myself and only got results when seeds were clearly floating about.

I think the "best images" that you linked to showing the "rods" (sorry!) confirms without any doubt that insects are the culprit for the most part.

You will notice that there are few similarities between these images and those that Constable allegedly took. Constable's "critters" were huge amoeba-like things looking rather like drops of liquid on the photographic paper during exposure. I always found it suspicious that no one else has filmed or photographed the exact same things.

Surely our digital cameras would be picking the "critters" up every time we took a shot of the sky if they existed!



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 02:32 AM
link   
spent all day thinking about this
if a special optic is used like night vision or infra red or even the method described in this post
then why not combine mulipule spectrums and overlay them to find what they find in different wave lenghts of light

just a thought

xploder



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Johnbro
When the TV show 'Monster Quest' clowned Escamillia the way that they did, I couldn't catch my breath from laughing so hard.


Johnbro I'm watching that episode now.

I'm curious why you think you are filming something different than Jose and others bugs/rods videos?

What makes you think they might be vehicles?


















posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by XPLodER
spent all day thinking about this
if a special optic is used like night vision or infra red or even the method described in this post
then why not combine mulipule spectrums and overlay them to find what they find in different wave lenghts of light

just a thought

xploder



An even better idea is setup multiple camera's with varying shutter speeds and compare them.

Check out this clip around 7:45




posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 03:23 AM
link   
reply to post by freelance_zenarchist
 


very nice video the time/shutter speed does show very convincing evidence of artifacts

mmmm ill do some more thinking on this topic

xploder



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by freelance_zenarchist
 


Freelance_zenarchist.....

It's all just rubbish.....

The "solar obliteration technique".....

"Rods".....

Yup.....rubbish :shk:

Do you remember what Springer said in my last "rods" thread?

Should ”Rods” Threads Be Consigned To The Hoax Forum?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 4-9-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


ahh the voice of reason heya bud
i think anything the poster knows is false is a hoax
if a thread is started by someone that has just encountered the subject care should be used to explain the shutter speed evidence or the author may think censorship is being used
conspiracy anyone
evidence should be used everytime then move to hoax
my opin

xploder



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 05:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


Don't worry about me friend, all of my marbles are still here.


I wonder about Johnbro though, he's got some pretty big balls to try and resurrect this rods junk in 2010. I agree this should be moved to the HOAX forum.





Originally posted by ArMaP
Edit: four hours? Sorry, that's too much, specially with a guy that talks in such a boring and irritating voice and way of speaking.



hahaha and that's just the first half!

I don't mind the way he speaks, he's kinda like the Bill & Ted of quantum mechanics.



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 06:03 AM
link   
reply to post by freelance_zenarchist
 


Freelance zenarchist.....

Yup.....

"Solar obliteration".....

"Rods".....

Unfortunately, the science is against him & therefore the op is.....



Cheers mate
Maybe...maybe not



[edit on 4-9-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Whaddaya guys think?? You're gonna hurt my feelings? : ) Try, Try again.

Yeah, I've seen 'A-Rod.' He is the third baseman for the New York Yankees. Also leads the league in strikeouts - and was once suspended for violating the substance abuse policy of the MLB.

I agree with you. The 'RODS Phenomenon' is ludicrous. Yet, you continually reassign the responsibility of that farce upon me. Maybe it is because you have noted some paralells in resemblance - but I think it is more likely a tactic of discrediting my studies.

Some of you folks spend so much time and energy on this thread; that it is almost as if you have a stake in it. Might I add, that - this little fact has not escaped my attention - and is highly-suspicious. If it is so much 'marlarkey' - why waste your time here??

I believe that what the skeptics are really trying to convince folks of is; "Don't try it." "Move along! Nothing to see here!"

--

For those out there who aren't trying to 'save the world from dis-information' - ---

'Solar Obliteration' was the first installment of a developing story. It has evolved far beyond it's modest beginnings. Remember, I am 15 years ahead of you folks on this topic.

The true jist of the story:

Scientifically; the visible light spectrum is but a narrow band of what exists. For more than 50 years now - military units across the world - have proven that direct light can be used to conceal what is really there. One application of this is called 'Camouflage.' Look it up if you don't believe that it exists.


98.9% of the Universe is outside our visual range – ( known as a ‘Hertzean Wave.’) Hertz demonstrated that there are long, transverse waves that travel at the velocity of light and can be reflected, refracted, and polarized .


There are many ways to discover things unseen , Infra red , Ultraviolet , Mathematics , Electron Microscopes etc. Using filters on videos and photographs is a very ordinary & standard practice.


The CCD elements of videocams have the ability to detect and record aspects of light that the human eye simply cannot. It is apparently prominent in the wavelengths that are near the infra. To understand near infra-red light, you first have to understand the word spectrum.


A spectrum is the distribution of colors produced when white light is dispersed by a prism or what is known as a diffraction grating. With respect to the spectrum, there is a continuous change in wavelength from red, the longest wavelength, to violet, the shortest wavelength.


Primarily, 7 colors are usually distinguished. They are violet, indigo, red, green, yellow, orange and red. Just beyond the red end of the spectrum, there exists an mostly-invisible light, known as near-infrared. This is really old stuff, discovered by William Herschel – more than 200 years ago.


So, you can throw away my images, I don’t care. ‘Rods’ – well, hey… I would love to see them burn on Denny White’s woodpile. ( Loved the fact that you found that video, Freelance. I can use that in the future. )


Digital video cameras – and even web cams – come equipped with either CCD or CMOS light sensor chips. These light sensing chips are far better than a person’s eye when it comes to detecting the near-infra.


Manufacturers of these devises actually intentionally install filters to reduce this effect. (DSLR = ‘Limiter’) But these cameras are only capable of recording good images of still objects – and are pretty weak at getting good shots of UFO’s.


Without that filter – a video of a person would look more like Kirlian photography. (Probably would not be a good selling point for Sony : )


But these filters also reduce the video camera’s ability to detect UFO’s. A DSLR can see some infra-red; but it would require a much longer exposure time. (Unfortunately, the UFO’s just won’t stand still long enough for this.)


And if the air is not quite still, the moving parts of the image will inevitably be blurry. I believe that this is the reason why there are so few (if any) clear shots of UFO’s.

Knowingly or not, I think this type of aspect is at least partially responsible - for why T.J. Constable was so successful to when he filmed what he refers to as ‘Critters’ - in IR.


Back then, T.J. Constable was using what was, in actuality – a near-Infra-Red lens filter. It records near-Infra-red light. A camera that records what is known as Deep-Infra-Red is referred to as a F.L.I.R. That technology concentrates on recording heat signatures.


The modern version of technology that most closely replicates what Mr. Constable was doing is referred to as ‘Night Shot Mode.’ Folks can read up on that technology at ‘maxmax.com.’


Again, folks can totally dismiss ‘S.O.’ method. As I am not selling any videos or books, what possible impact could it really have on my life? Is it potentially going to ‘ruin my reputation?’ Have any of you really thought that through? Hmmm.


But I have had 15 years to study this since the ‘SIGHTINGS’ episode. I know one helluva lot more than I could post up at ATS. That other stuff was Kindergarten – compared to what has been learned since. It truly is now just a nostalgic piece of UFO Folklore.


Hey, people ( mostly ) no longer believe in the ‘Face on Mars’ – but it will forever remain a piece of the history of the development of this genre.’ I prefer to think of it as being akin to the job of a police detective. You follow up on all leads – and can be wrong 1,000 times. But, in the end… you only need to be ‘right’ once.


I am currently a musician for a living. And we have an old saying in the biz; “It’s only a wrong note – if you stop playing.”

Freelance – as far as your statement ‘John must have some pretty big balls’ – well, I was unaware that that information had leaked out to the public. : )


I think that you skeptics really just want my information removed – so that you can get back to pushing your version of ‘reality.’ So, far – it is not working. But if the moderators remove my materials in just 2 minutes from now; I have already achieved my purpose here. And you can only speculate what that truly means.

‘Hiding in the light’ - “Johnbro’



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnbro
I think that you skeptics really just want my information removed – so that you can get back to pushing your version of ‘reality.’

I can only speak for myself (although you are not going to read this), but what I would like to see was a real test of this technique, to know if it really works or not.

When someone finds a new way of doing things he/she should test it to see if the results are correct or if they are affected by something unexpected or if the idea is based on wrong assumptions.

All techniques that, after being tested, show repeatable results should be made known to all people, that way not only will people start using it as they may also develop their own techniques based on that one.

PS: and I never want any information removed, even wrong information has its value, if it's proved as wrong.



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by Johnbro
I think that you skeptics really just want my information removed – so that you can get back to pushing your version of ‘reality.’

I can only speak for myself (although you are not going to read this), but what I would like to see was a real test of this technique, to know if it really works or not.
When someone finds a new way of doing things he/she should test it to see if the results are correct or if they are affected by something unexpected or if the idea is based on wrong assumptions.
All techniques that, after being tested, show repeatable results should be made known to all people, that way not only will people start using it as they may also develop their own techniques based on that one.
PS: and I never want any information removed, even wrong information has its value, if it's proved as wrong.


ArMaP.....

I agree.....

That's what is required regarding all such wild claims.....scrutiny.

Please note I have quoted you in full because Johnbro stated (extremely rudely) that he has you on "ignore". This way, he will be able to see your polite, logical response.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
That's what is required regarding all such wild claims.....scrutiny.

And that applies not only to wild claims, it should be applied to all claims and all ideas, if we don't test our own thoughts how can we be sure of being in best path?



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Maybe - I don't think that you are who you represent yourself to be. I believe that you would be removed ( again ) - if they knew your true identity.

I also think that you are a bit of a goaltender here at ATS. You can go around and insult and accuse... yet you cry when it is done back to you.

Arma has been insulting me for years, here at ATS. So, I am not actually concerned whether or not my comments make you upset. You certainly don't care if you offend me.

I think that you are attempting to bait me into a site violation. You might not be the brain-truss that you believe yourself to be. We'll see.

IMO - Folks like you do not innovate, nor create - so you go about the business of being destructive. 'Tired' is the word that comes to mind.

I don't start problems here. But there is no shortage of psuedo-intellectuals assailing my work. And I have a tendancy to 'push back.'

Please do... go create your own thread.

Better yet... go devise some aspect of any science or discipline ( in whatever state of development - or proven authenticity ) - and successfully place it before millions of people.

When you have achieved the aforementioned - then come back and 'tell me like it is.'

---

Ironically, on the S.O. section of my website... I also have included an image... recorded by 'Arma' on August 25, 2006 - doing the 'S.O. technique' over Portugal.

I think that is rather funny. Don't you??

Have a nice day!

-----



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnbro
Ironically, on the S.O. section of my website... I also have included an image... recorded by 'Arma' on August 25, 2006 - doing the 'S.O. technique' over Portugal.

I think that is rather funny. Don't you??

I don't see what's funny about it, as I said before, I tried the solar obliteration technique before, that's why I think it doesn't show what you think it shows.

And the name is "ArMaP".



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnbro
 


Johnbro.....


Maybe - I don't think that you are who you represent yourself to be. I believe that you would be removed ( again ) - if they knew your true identity.


Who do you think I am?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnbro
I have already achieved my purpose here. And you can only speculate what that truly means.

‘Hiding in the light’ - “Johnbro’


Ussually people promoting mundane things as "misteries" (bugs/birds/solar obliteration as rods, lens flares/blitz reflections as ghosts, debris in space as aliens ships, infrared night shots as strange crafts etc etc), despite debunked or showed that they just pushed the (mundane) things up into the boundaries of human knowledge and beyound, they all ussually knows one simple rule: there is ALWAYS young fresh AUDIENCE receptive to their "stories" no matter how wrong these are. And they address THIS AUDIENCE. And the purpose for doing this, is ussually just simple personal interests, benefits.



[edit on 4/9/10 by depthoffield]



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 06:14 PM
link   
This is the photo I took back in 2006 to try the solar obliteration technique.

(click for full size)



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnbro
 


wow - yor " fave pic " is an insect - says it all really



new topics




 
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join