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.

 

Plus degrees in December (Polar night ends TWO DAYS early? )

page: 10
92
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by willie9696
Doesn't anyone else find it a little fishy that within 24 hrs of the early rising of the sun(by 2 days), that we now have different astrological signs? Something is amiss I would say. Yes I heard years ago that the astrological signs were out by a month or so, so why disclosure now? Sounds like they're trying to keep people from either freaking out or asking questions. But the MSM has picked this up so I'm guessing TPTB want everyone to know about it so it can't be good.


You're right. They're making this a very smooth brain-numbing transition alright. They added this sign and people are just accepting it without consideration or implication. Probably because the whole 'astrology' field is not fully embrace either.
But...if they added an additional letter to the alphabet (or another judge on American Idol) then I think we'd see some reaction.

But hey, there's little to do anyway. Just enjoy life (as much as this world bites) the best and as often as you can.

The Earth IS changing and we ain't see nothing yet.




posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
You're right. They're making this a very smooth brain-numbing transition alright. They added this sign and people are just accepting it without consideration or implication.

I considered it, it's just more proof to me how astronomers have accurately accounted for precession while astrologers have not. Because of the extreme resolution of the measurements I make, even precession over just an 11 year time span becomes quite significant. The only thing I find unusual is that the story just happened to come out less than a week after I measured our axis of rotation and calculated for the very same effect.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by willie9696
Doesn't anyone else find it a little fishy that within 24 hrs of the early rising of the sun(by 2 days), that we now have different astrological signs?

No. Astrologers don't account for precession, astronomers do. If you account for precession you find that the earth's axis of rotation is exactly where it should be.
Actually the earth's axis of rotation isn't what I was referring to. What strikes me as odd is the timing of the astrological "disclosure". Although we know and have known for years the signs are off(I remember hearing about this over 20 years ago), the question I have is doesn't it seem a little suspect that this information has gone mainstream just within a day or so of the early rising of the sun. It would be interesting to know if we could tell if the earth was moving faster through it's orbital plane. Maybe the early rising of the sun could be explained if we are actually moving faster and we are in fact a cpl days ahead of what the calendar says. Just a theory , but I think this may have started on the winter solstice of 2010. The bible does speak of a shortening of days in the end times. What if its not the 24 day that gets shorter but the year in fact gets shorter?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by willie9696
Actually the earth's axis of rotation isn't what I was referring to. What strikes me as odd is the timing of the astrological "disclosure". Although we know and have known for years the signs are off(I remember hearing about this over 20 years ago), the question I have is doesn't it seem a little suspect that this information has gone mainstream just within a day or so of the early rising of the sun.

I don't find it any more or any less suspect than me happening to generate data on the rotational axis showing it to be where it should be just days before the report of the early rising of the sun. A funny coincidence, but really it could have just as easily have happened shortly before or after the inuit stories hit the media (which caused me to start generating ideas on how to directly test the claim that the earth is tilting) or when the story about excess light in northern canada hit the media.

It would be interesting to know if we could tell if the earth was moving faster through it's orbital plane.

If that were the case we'd easily be able to tell by the fact that the other planets and asteroids in our solar system wouldn't be where they're supposed to be in the night sky.
edit on 14-1-2011 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by willie9696
Actually the earth's axis of rotation isn't what I was referring to. What strikes me as odd is the timing of the astrological "disclosure". Although we know and have known for years the signs are off(I remember hearing about this over 20 years ago), the question I have is doesn't it seem a little suspect that this information has gone mainstream just within a day or so of the early rising of the sun.

I don't find it any more or any less suspect than me happening to generate data on the rotational axis showing it to be where it should be just days before the report of the early rising of the sun. A funny coincidence, but really it could have just as easily have happened shortly before or after the inuit stories hit the media (which caused me to start generating ideas on how to directly test the claim that the earth is tilting) or when the story about excess light in northern canada hit the media.

It would be interesting to know if we could tell if the earth was moving faster through it's orbital plane.

If that were the case we'd easily be able to tell by the fact that the other planets and asteroids in our solar system wouldn't be where they're supposed to be in the night sky.
edit on 14-1-2011 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)
Well that may not be the case right now seeing as this is probably just the beginning of the process, and I don't think much would be out of wack yet, or at least noticeable. We will have to keep our eyes on the sky and see what happens. Interesting times indeed.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by willie9696
Well that may not be the case right now seeing as this is probably just the beginning of the process, and I don't think much would be out of wack yet, or at least noticeable. We will have to keep our eyes on the sky and see what happens. Interesting times indeed.

Please explain how the sun could be out of position by two day's worth of motion along the ecliptic because we're too far along in our orbit by that much, but yet we wouldn't be able to tell based on our motion relative to the other planets or asteroids? For instance, Jupiter's coordinates for midnight UTC yesterday were 23h 55m 14.99s -01d 50' 55.7". 48 hours later its coordinates should be 23h 56m 26.61s -01d 42' 44.4". That's more than 8 arcminutes of a difference, which is easily noticeable telescopically and is mostly due to our motion in orbit since Jupiter orbits the sun at a much slower velocity than we do.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by willie9696
Well that may not be the case right now seeing as this is probably just the beginning of the process, and I don't think much would be out of wack yet, or at least noticeable. We will have to keep our eyes on the sky and see what happens. Interesting times indeed.

Please explain how the sun could be out of position by two day's worth of motion along the ecliptic because we're too far along in our orbit by that much, but yet we wouldn't be able to tell based on our motion relative to the other planets or asteroids? For instance, Jupiter's coordinates for midnight UTC yesterday were 23h 55m 14.99s -01d 50' 55.7". 48 hours later its coordinates should be 23h 56m 26.61s -01d 42' 44.4". That's more than 8 arcminutes of a difference, which is easily noticeable telescopically and is mostly due to our motion in orbit since Jupiter orbits the sun at a much slower velocity than we do.
You're right of course if the other haven't increased their velocity as well. Not saying they have but other planets seem to be experiencing things that we are here on earth. Would it possible for everything to be accelerating and we wouldn't notice if everything else did the same? I would assume that earth is not affected by itself, the other planets would be affected as well. Just a theory, but something ain't right.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Would you like to check it right now ?
Just in case if anything maybe changed within this one week ?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by willie9696
You're right of course if the other haven't increased their velocity as well. Not saying they have but other planets seem to be experiencing things that we are here on earth. Would it possible for everything to be accelerating and we wouldn't notice if everything else did the same?

Then everything would assume a set of coordinates 48 hours too advanced. In other words, Jupiter's position relative to the background stars would still be 48 hours ahead of where it should be. We'd see it from where we're supposed to be at that 48 hour time point, but that just shouldn't have happened yet. If everything in our solar system moved along in its orbit by that same amount of time, everything would seem to be off by that same amount; star occultations would happen 2 days before they're supposed to and everyone would miss every occultation until the problem was discovered, etc.
edit on 14-1-2011 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by sechmet
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Would you like to check it right now ?
Just in case if anything maybe changed within this one week ?

Well I can't check it "right now" but I can check it again next time I get the chance. Maybe this weekend, if I have the time.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by sechmet
We have some "shift" in the Earth's rotation angle, thats the probably reason.
Isn't it impressive?


*snip*

Therefore the star should have been 294.2 arcseconds from the north celestial pole.

My camera and telescope combination produce an angular resolution of 1.88 arcseconds per pixel when the images are scaled down to 1024 resolution:
flickr.com...
I measured USNO-A2 1725-00691811 to be 156.9 pixels from the NCP in the image I took that night:
i319.photobucket.com...
The original image is here:
i319.photobucket.com...
That corresponds to a distance of 294.972 arcseconds from the NCP, less than an arcsecond from the expected value and well within the resolution of the image itself (in other words, no change in our tilt was detected). An arcsecond, by the way, is 1/3,600th of a degree.
edit on 14-1-2011 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)


Here's a thought I haven't seen in the thread yet...

What if the equatorial bulge of the planet has enlarged? If you think of it that way, the planet would "squish" down a little, removing a bit of the arc of the horizon at the higher latitudes. The glacial rebound theory makes sense in this case, but I don't have the trigonometric knowledge to figure it out.

Another poster mentioned that it would take approximately 570' of elevation change to see the sun over the horizon 2 days earlier based on the degree of tilt for that region. So maybe it isn't a 570' change in elevation, but an overall lowering of the horizon due to the squashing effect of the equator bulging out further?

Also, according to your math above, there is a degree of change, even though it is small...

294.2 was your expected value. You arrived at 294.972. That is a difference of .772, which is pretty close to a full arcsecond, so a little less than 1/3600th of a degree.... that's still a difference, is it not?

This is not my field of expertise, but I do know math and that is not an exact match if you are trying to line up stars and planets. When talking about distances of great lengths, a millimeter difference here on earth is equal to light years out in the vast reaches of space.

My question is this - is your equipment not sensitive enough to get to that degree of precision? OR is there actually a measurable difference that is not accounted for in precession? The fact that they announced on the news out of nowhere, and the mass media RARELY talks about astrology, but yet they made sure that every news outlet in the world was aware of the astrology "oops", even though this doesn't effect sidereal astrology at all, seems very very strange to me along with all of the other events happening around the world.

The only plausible answer left would be a greater bulge at the equator that is happening at a much greater rate, either from glacial rebound, more water, something.... the causes of that are beyond my understanding of geology, but I'm sure there are astronomical possibilities for this as well.

Star for chiming in and shedding a bit of scientific validation to the claims... it helps to have someone who can speak to astronomy.


~Namaste



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Great thread H.A.!


Posted this on another thread related to the rise of the sun 2 days early in Greenland:

I don't know if I buy into either the global warming or cooling scenarios, but I'll tell you what, SOMETHING weird appears to be happening to our planet in recent times, no matter HOW one cuts it.

Could this be related to climate change? Or perhaps the magnetic pole flip?

It appears as if things are becoming displaced, even by my own observations.

I come from a warm desert climate, and this entire last year has been very strange-It is almost like the SEASONS have been 'off-placed'. The summer temperatures did not set in till MUCH later than normal, and extended into a time where things usually have cooled down for us in this region.

I wonder, have other ATSers noticed things changing dramatically in their region as well?

The earthquake activity and floods also appear to be escalating. The planet appears to be going through some wild changes and shifts in these times.

Now WHAT is the cause is something that nobody can seem to agree on...



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by SonOfTheLawOfOne
 


I've often pondered whether this 'global warming' isn't coming from deep within.

Here's an interesting (if not terrifying) video of someone claiming land is rising up in Michigan with heat emanating from within.




posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Nice to see you here and thanks for merging



Here in southeast Florida it's been extremely chilly. It's dipped down into the 20's and stays for a long time. Having a fluke is one thing but when it starts to become the norm well........

The weather is very erratic and extreme. I think we can all attest to that. Now, does that have anything to do with Greenland having their Polar Nights ending 2 days sooner? I think it probably does!



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   
What the heck is going on??????



Scientists picked up on the never-before-seen phenomenon by peering at thunderstorms with NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope. The antimatter particles were likely created by what scientists call a terrestrial gamma-ray flash (TGF), a brief burst of gamma rays produced inside thunderstorms and known to be associated with lightning, researchers said.
www.msnbc.msn.com...



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by SonOfTheLawOfOne
294.2 was your expected value. You arrived at 294.972. That is a difference of .772, which is pretty close to a full arcsecond, so a little less than 1/3600th of a degree.... that's still a difference, is it not?

Excellent question. The answer is that it's not a real difference. The reason is that the image's own resolution is limited to 1.88 arcseconds a pixel, so a .772 "difference" means that the pixel representing the detected location of the NCP is in perfect agreement with the pixel that it should have been within the image. Anything below 1.88 arcseconds is below the resolution of the image and no statement can be made about it (indeed the chandler wobble would be detected, but it's a sub-arcsecond effect and beyond the capability of this equipment). No matter how high resolution the image is, you could always run the numbers to some fraction of an arcsecond below the resolution of the image and find a perceived "difference" between predicted and detected. The point here was to rule out any "unreported" wobbles beyond the known Chandler wobble that would account for strange sightings and reports of this nature.


My question is this - is your equipment not sensitive enough to get to that degree of precision?

Amateur equipment generally can't break the arcsecond mark for resolution over an exposure that long without some kind of adaptive optics (which usually makes it not-amateur in nature). The atmospheric seeing (aka turbulence) simply won't allow it. You can get better resolution, but only with very short exposures to "beat the seeing" which defeats the point of the photo.
edit on 14-1-2011 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by AeonStorm

Just to put this into some perspective Alaska's longest night lasts 67 days. If there is a change of two days then that is a change of (2/67=0.0299) .0299% .

If this happened on the equator where the night lasts about 12 hours then that would equate to a change of (0.0299x12hr) 0.358hr's or 21 minutes. So the sun would rise 21 minutes early (on the equator). (I believe all the math and numbers are right. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.)

hrmm. The lowering of the horizon could account for that. but it does seem to be a massive change.

SnF
edit on 13-1-2011 by AeonStorm because: Addidtional Info

edit on 13-1-2011 by AeonStorm because: ^^


Did someone correct this and i just didnt notice? I just see the "please correct me if im wrong" and the fact it got two stars. I also saw it referenced by link further into the thread.

You "forgot to carry the one" as it were. If the longest night were 100 days, and it moved 2 days earlier, that would be a two percent shift. An equal variance within a smaller pool will not equal a smaller percentage


The correct number is 2.9851%

I have no real opinion on the thread otherwise
Other than, if its a sign of things to come, many more things will happen. If its not, then everything was just "coincidence." meh, we will undoubtedly find out


Beyond all of it, i say love is the imperative notion here. Whether it is the "end of days" or a turbulent period, having love for one another, and yourself, is the best "first responder" course of action. Then we can go from there.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   
North Magnetic Pole Moving Due to Core Flux

The core is too deep for scientists to directly detect its magnetic field. But researchers can infer the field's movements by tracking how Earth's magnetic field has been changing at the surface and in space.

Now, newly analyzed data suggest that there's a region of rapidly changing magnetism on the core's surface, possibly being created by a mysterious "plume" of magnetism arising from deeper in the core.
news.nationalgeographic.com...



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Awesome reply, thank you for the well-written explanations!

I've learned quite a bit today thanks to you....

~Namaste



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   
If you go to the SOHO telescope website and look at pictures of the sun you will notice an application on the side called "Movie Maker".

You type in the beginning date and end date, and they play daily pictures of the sun rapidly as a slide show so that it appears as a movie.

You can watch the sun spin around with all it's solar activity. My daughter pointed out "daddy the sun got FATTER".

Sure enough I replay it and the sun "squatted down" and became wider. What would cause this? The sun is spinning faster. The black hole in the center of our galaxy yanked our solar system with it's gravity.

The Earth of course would be effected as well. Shorter year. Why did Comet Holmes explode and become the largest thing in our Solar System in 2007? That's when things got INTERESTING.

Extreme Gravity being exerted on our solar system. You are watching it unfold. Don't believe me? Go to the SOHO website and use their "movie maker" and watch the sun "git fatter". Time has changed.
edit on 14-1-2011 by Pervius because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
92
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join