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.

 

Bright Star - Maitreya - UFO Video & Photos

page: 9
11
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Sirius is supposed to be the brightest star in the sky, and it has been worshipped by many ancient civilizations.

All evidence tells me it is more probably Sirius, however, I have been able to see it at times when it shouldn't be seen. It is supposed to set after the Sun and rises before the Sun, but I have seen it well into the evening hours.

Also Sirius is supposed to be the only star that shines in different colors, but what about the other three which are smaller but also change colors?
edit on 17-11-2010 by ElectricUniverse because: error




posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   
The normal claim for stars changing colors is:


This is because of scintillation ("Twinkling") as the light passes through the atmosphere of the Earth. As the air moves in and out, the starlight is refracted, often different colors in different directions. Because of this "chromatic abberation," stars can appear to change colors when they are twinkling strongly.

curious.astro.cornell.edu...

However, this only happens to 4 stars, and many times the other three can't be seen, so it can't just be because of atmospheric conditions, there must be something to these stars that also make them look that way meanwhile other stars all look in just one color.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Ok. I got it. Just for my own piece of mind...you don't think it's a geosync satellite because "of the reasons" you stated earlier. What exactly are those again?

PS is it dark there yet? Is it out yet?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
BTW, as to you seen it move, it is more probably an optical illusion. If you look at an object for too long, you will see objects close by move, but it is only an optical illusion, they are not really moving differently from other stellar objects.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
I believe I have witnessed the same star Solipsism is referring to and I also understand some peoples skepticism, but if you witnessed the manner in which the "anomaly" moved in the sky you would realise that no planet/satellite etc. would be capable of maneuvering in such a fashion. I was stood on my balcony at 1am on monday morning and to me all the stars looked particularly bright but one really stood out and had me transfixed. It was so bright it seemed to have rays emanating from it and whilst I stood there staring( I was having a cigarette) it suddenly dropped diagonally very rapidly and stopped abruptly twice in immediate succession. I couldnt believe my eyes and so I watched it for around thirty minutes to see if it did it again. During this time it continued to move ,although it seemed to be coming closer then receding. I witnessed this from Sale in Greater Manchester and in my efforts to rationalise my experience I attributed it the police helicopter ( a not uncommon sight in this area unfortunately!) But the "anomaly" was far too high up to be a helicopter and the light it produced couldn't have been a searchlight( do they actually use them anymore? Surely not with thermal imaging in common usage) I mentioned this to my sister in law who suggested it could have been a satellite but I then returned to the way it maneuvered. I am still uncertain of what I saw but feel sure it wasn't a planet/star/satellite and so in the words of Sir Arthur Conan Doyles great protagonist Sherlock Holmes "......when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cole DeSteele
Ok. I got it. Just for my own piece of mind...you don't think it's a geosync satellite because "of the reasons" you stated earlier. What exactly are those again?

PS is it dark there yet? Is it out yet?


You mean "for your own peace of mind". ;P

Geosync satellites do not twinkle, and do not change colors.

It is most probalby Sirius that he is seeing, and the movement is just an optical illusion from looking at one object for too long.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
The normal claim for stars changing colors is:


This is because of scintillation ("Twinkling") as the light passes through the atmosphere of the Earth. As the air moves in and out, the starlight is refracted, often different colors in different directions. Because of this "chromatic abberation," stars can appear to change colors when they are twinkling strongly.

curious.astro.cornell.edu...

However, this only happens to 4 stars, and many times the other three can't be seen, so it can't just be because of atmospheric conditions, there must be something to these stars that also make them look that way meanwhile other stars all look in just one color.


Wait. What? Are you saying that only 4 stars twinkle? and that only one of those is usually visible?

What source do you cite for this fact? Thanks in advance.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Cole DeSteele
 


No, "CHANGE COLORS" is what I said....

I know all stars twinkle, some more than others...



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by Cole DeSteele
Ok. I got it. Just for my own piece of mind...you don't think it's a geosync satellite because "of the reasons" you stated earlier. What exactly are those again?

PS is it dark there yet? Is it out yet?


You mean "for your own peace of mind". ;P

Geosync satellites do not twinkle, and do not change colors.

It is most probalby Sirius that he is seeing, and the movement is just an optical illusion from looking at one object for too long.


No. I mean piece. I'm an Iron Maiden fan.

ETA: what exactly is the diff between twinkle and change colors?
edit on 17-11-2010 by Cole DeSteele because: clarifying my question



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Sirius is supposed to be the brightest star in the sky, and it has been worshipped by many ancient civilizations.

All evidence tells me it is more probably Sirius, however, I have been able to see it at times when it shouldn't be seen. It is supposed to set after the Sun and rises before the Sun, but I have seen it well into the evening hours.

Also Sirius is supposed to be the only star that shines in different colors, but what about the other three which are smaller but also change colors?
edit on 17-11-2010 by ElectricUniverse because: error


As stated before it's NOT Sirius. Sirius is extremely easy to locate and yes it does shine brightly and change colour thanks to the stars orbiting each other. However I can say with absolute certainty that is not Sirius.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by solipsism
 



Where in the night sky do you see it?

To this day I still look at the stars and I haven't seen anything new.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
BTW, as to you seen it move, it is more probably an optical illusion. If you look at an object for too long, you will see objects close by move, but it is only an optical illusion, they are not really moving differently from other stellar objects.


Thanks for the advice, I am fully aware of this however and can tell the difference between what could perhaps be conceived as movement and precise motions that have direction.

I don't really think that you are in the position to tell me what I'm seeing and what I'm not seeing to be perfectly honest.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by solipsism
 



Where in the night sky do you see it?

To this day I still look at the stars and I haven't seen anything new.


Perhaps if you read through the thread and seen what I'd said previously, instead of attempting to pass off your explanations as my own experiences, we wouldn't have to keep going over old ground.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by solipsism

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
BTW, as to you seen it move, it is more probably an optical illusion. If you look at an object for too long, you will see objects close by move, but it is only an optical illusion, they are not really moving differently from other stellar objects.


Thanks for the advice, I am fully aware of this however and can tell the difference between what could perhaps be conceived as movement and precise motions that have direction.

I don't really think that you are in the position to tell me what I'm seeing and what I'm not seeing to be perfectly honest.


Obviously noone here is in a position to tell you much of anything without you not liking their tone, etc. If you opened this thread to make an announcement...you have succeeded. For a moment there I thought you were looking for answers or quite possibly the truth. Your posts betray an altogether different agenda.

Good luck.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by Cole DeSteele
Ok. I got it. Just for my own piece of mind...you don't think it's a geosync satellite because "of the reasons" you stated earlier. What exactly are those again?

PS is it dark there yet? Is it out yet?


You mean "for your own peace of mind". ;P

Geosync satellites do not twinkle, and do not change colors.

It is most probalby Sirius that he is seeing, and the movement is just an optical illusion from looking at one object for too long.


For the final time it's not Sirius, it's like speaking to a brick wall. I can only feel insulted by your continued insistence on me mistaking this for Sirius and also insulted by the fact that you never felt the need to actually read anything I'd said and instead express your own skewed opinions onto me.

As I have stated previously this object and sirius are clearly visible in the night sky at the same time. If you know how to locate the constellation of orion yourself, then pan roughly 90 degrees to your left, not orion's left and that's roughly where I seen it. I can easily use sirius as a marker to find it. That's why I know it's not Sirius....that and the fact it doesn't behave like the other stars or planets



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Shaky Cam - Check
In and out of focus - Check
Non-descript light with no reference point - check
Assertion of Alien or mystical origins - check
Proof - none

I really and truly want to believe. I just wish someone would write a how to guide for people.
First thing is the out of focus, shaky images. If you don't have a tripod, find something to brace the camera on. Anything steady will do, just rest it on something stationary instead of holding it in your hands.

My big pet peeve is when people just focus on something in the sky with no reference points. Which direction are you facing? Show a pan up from the horizon at least. Focus in on some known celestial references. That way people will at least have a chance to understand the true nature of your discovery.

Don't assume it is anything.




The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

edit on 17-11-2010 by Smack because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   
I think we need to take a break from this thread, frustration is starting to get the better of both sides. Lets just sit back a while and see what others can bring to the table, it would be a shame for the thread to be killed over misunderstandings and repeated questions. Besides all that i want to find out what this is, wether that happens tonight or in the next week isnt important.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cole DeSteele

Originally posted by solipsism

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
BTW, as to you seen it move, it is more probably an optical illusion. If you look at an object for too long, you will see objects close by move, but it is only an optical illusion, they are not really moving differently from other stellar objects.


Thanks for the advice, I am fully aware of this however and can tell the difference between what could perhaps be conceived as movement and precise motions that have direction.

I don't really think that you are in the position to tell me what I'm seeing and what I'm not seeing to be perfectly honest.


Obviously noone here is in a position to tell you much of anything without you not liking their tone, etc. If you opened this thread to make an announcement...you have succeeded. For a moment there I thought you were looking for answers or quite possibly the truth. Your posts betray an altogether different agenda.

Good luck.


I take it you were the guy who was insulting my friend on youtube last night?? As you seem to have really taken offence at me not accepting your satellite theory.

Regarding this poster, he has continually and completely ignored what I've said and kept going back to Sirius as the solution inferring that I'm some sort of idiot who doesn't know where sirius is. I have repeatedly stated that it's not Sirius, given directions to locate it using Sirius as a marker and it's still not good enough. Because he thinks i'm seeing Sirius and it's famous scintillation, i'm mistaking this for something that's not a star and is moving through the sky...because i obviously don't know what I'm looking at and don't have the mental fortitude to work simple stuff like locating sirius out for myself.

Should I then just accept the fact this guy is insulting me by his refusal to accept my testimony? Should I just say ok it's Sirius to appease him?? Should I accept it's ok for him to cast judgement on me without acutally reading anything I've said?

Quite frankly it's myself that's been getting the sharp end of people's comments and it seems like they don't like it when you reply in the same fashion. And I include yourself in that analysis.

Yes I am looking for answers, but no I'm not looking to be insulted or have people patronise me by telling me I'm seeing something that it patently isn't.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by solipsism
 


I suggest you accept his theory on the condition he provides irrefutable evidence to support his contention.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damacles
reply to post by solipsism
 


I suggest you accept his theory on the condition he provides irrefutable evidence to support his contention.


Well I know it can't be provided so that would be unfair



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join