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.

 

PA NJ NY CONN RI Philadelphia Daytime Bolide Fireball 12:45 EST 14FEB2011

page: 2
19
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by apacheman
I mean, is the 60 per hour the historic average?


You should know - after all you are an expert in the field aren't you? You keep saying (in your other thread) that your interpretation of the AMS fireball data is right, where as the researchers who gathered the data are wrong.

So basically, in "30 years keeping an eye on the subject" (your words not mine), you have not once observed the Geminid meteor shower, and yet when it comes to statistical analysis of the data, all of a sudden you know better than all the researchers that have access to the very same data, and the AMS (who collected the data)?

To be clear, I have no problem with you starting this thread, but when you start saying we are probably experiencing an increase in the amount of fireballs hitting our atmosphere, without any real scientific basis, you're just needlessly scaremongering.




posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


Not scaremongering, merely reporting what is readily available in the published databases.

I freely admit to gaps in my knowledge, but take exception to your tone. I haven't insulted you, and would appreciate it if you'd not offer such to me.

If you have something valid to contribute, please do so, with references. So far, you've offered nought but opinion.

In the meantime, the actual number of reports is increasing, and the size of the reported fireball are also increasing.

Whether that is significant or not is open to debate: I haven't a sufficient grasp of atmospherics to say for sure one way or the other. However, it still seems like the number is going up, and is something I will continue to watch and report on, with occasional analysis and/or speculation as I deem appropriate, whether you approve or not.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   
This is bs!!!! I live in Philly! Why do I have to work all day? And why did this happen while I was working??? ARRRRRRR!!!



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:57 AM
link   
on this website thats what they say about this event:
hisz.rsoe.hu...

A daytime fireball seen today from Philadelphia, New York City, New Jersey and other parts of the east coast turned heads and made waves. Over 20 AMS reports were filed within an hour of the fall and almost all of them put the space rock somewhere in the Atlantic. The image below represents the plotting of the witness reports received by the AMS website in the first hour of this fall. 20+ reports in 1 hour for a daytime fireball, means this was a significant meteor event. The red person icon means the witness saw the meteor traveling left to right. The green icon means the person saw the meteor traveling right to left. The green line is the direction the witness first saw the fireball. The yellow line is where they last saw it. The red line is my ‘quick guess’ at the path of this fireball based on early reports.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:14 AM
link   
It's being speculated and actually written about in ancient texts..... that this 'new' (yet still unconfirmed giant planet of ours) will enter our inner solar system, bringing along a wake of comets, asteroids, moons and other celestial bodies/debris.

This planet is HUGE.
And yes, this is Nibiru or whatever planet de-jour they wish to call it so to keep us confused and them, unaccountable for having to rewrite history!


Life as we knew it, is underway.
Nothing bad I hope. Just life-changing and this time, the Elite can't do anything about it!! Well, except, deny it which, they are.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   
American Meteor Society claims they received 186 reports and that's just from those who had the presence of mind to report it. I am sure, to every one report, there were 10 others who didn't report it. It's just not something people typically think about.

I would hope a video will pop up any day unless of course it was so fast, no one had time to react.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Damn! i live in stamford CT! i fell asleep yesterday around 11 am: ( didnt wake up till 1 30 am.. just missed it: (



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   
191 reports and counting...



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by apacheman
 


i missed it, but two people I was with saw it. Outside philadelphia. They pretty much said same thing... Wheres the sound. Where did it hit? CT saw it too? Holy .... "it was big, bright yellow, blueish tail, smoking,, looked like it went straight down." thats what they told me.. Waited for impact.. Never happend..
edit on 15-2-2011 by Myendica because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


In the 13 tablet of enki, the sumerian outcast blast through a barrier of debris to find the earth. Nibiru according to that ill stay just outside the asteroid belt...but it will dislodge some in our general direction....but it all up to chance if we get hit.

So do not think that nibiru is gonna pull up beside us and say hello....according to the tablets this idea comes from, Nibiru cycles outside our inner system. And it was an exile who blasted a hole through the ateroid belt when he was running from nibiru....he was surprised to find the earth and then sent a message back to nibiru asking forgiveness if he told them how to get to the earth and thus harvest its gold etc...

13 tablets of enki...the main source of stitchens story....nibiru is like this new planet they just acknowledged, it stay just outside the inner rings....but with it complications in weather and more comets etc...its like we are in a big game of marbles...


edit on 01/22/2011 by Drala because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Wow! A fantastic collection of coinciding reports. I would imagine this object would have to have been fairly large (football field maybe?) to have been spotted from such a wide area in broad daylight. If you read the testimonials it certainly seems like this was an unusual and mystifying experience.

As much as we would all love to see a video crimsonninja , I doubt one (a real one, at least) will surface, considering it was said to have been observed for no more than 2-3 seconds . My camera relflexes are pretty decent, but I'd love to see the person who can whip out, turn on and focus on a quickly moving object in the sky and manage a decent capture in 3 seconds. Looks like we are going to have to rely on personal accounts.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


Not scaremongering, merely reporting what is readily available in the published databases.



The point I'm trying to make is that with at least a threefold increase in meteor impacts on the earth's atmosphere

Source: post by apacheman


So don't be surprised when a bigger-than-average space rock visits your neighborhood.

Source: post by apacheman



indicating that the reported fireball count is lower than the actual number of fireballs (scary thought)

Source:post by apacheman

This is something anybody who did a little research into the subject should know already. Why should it be scary?


Anyone care to bet whether we get a Tunguska-like event sometime this year?

Source: post by apacheman



Not to mention the increased probability of at least one of them being large enough to hit the ground or airburst Tunguska style.

Source: post by apacheman


Geez...the slope's gone nearly vertical.

I think I'll have a cognac and try not to think about it getting steeper.

Source: post by apacheman

Proof that you seem to have scared yourself


If the current numbers don't represent the peak predicted for 2012, then I'm not sure I want to know how many that could be per day...it could get downright scary.

Source: post by apacheman

That's just from one thread. If that's not scaremongering, I don't know what is. Please show me where any of the above quotes you made appear "in the data".



Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


I freely admit to gaps in my knowledge


Well it's a start I suppose, but "gaping caverns" might be a better term - this is a big and sometimes quite complex subject, and I have come across many who claim to know something about the subject, but fall into elementary traps, and that includes NASA scientists and professors of astronomy.

Take one example, which on the surface of it seems quite straightforward and common sense:

Most people assume that meteors start to "burn up" when they hit the atmosphere, which seems like a reasonable statement on the face of it, but it is actually 100% wrong.

There is not enough oxygen in the atmosphere at the altitude at which meteors become visible in the atmosphere (about 100 km) to sustain combustion. The process whereby a meteoroid sheds material is known as "ablation".




Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 

but take exception to your tone.


I'm sure your tone would also be verging on irate if:

You had been coming on here for years, trying to "clear the water" and demystify a subject that most people know little about, apart from the many misconceptions associated with it, trying to act like they are the last word on the subject and they know better than the people who actually do this for a living or make it their life's passion/devote their life to the study of this subject (I'm not talking about myself here, but about people with a truly deep knowledge of this subject - I consider myself to be "intermediate", and I still have lots to learn). It starts to get tiring after a while, and feels somewhat like banging my head against a brick wall, especially when people ignore all evidence posted that seems to them to be in conflict with their own ideas or beliefs.

If you're going to come in here and say that "the data shows this and that", which implies to most people here that the data has been looked at in a scientific way, at least look at all sides of the subject and accept the valid opinions of those who have more experience with the subject than yourself. That would be more scientific (valid) than the pseudo-scientific conclusion that you have come to since you have not taken into account factors that affect/skew the data.


Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 

I haven't insulted you.


Perhaps not, but you continue to insult my intelligence.



Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


If you have something valid to contribute, please do so, with references. So far, you've offered nought but opinion.


I have offered plenty to back-up my argument, and not just my own opinion, but references from the very people who collected the very same data that you are using to promote your opinion:

One more time.

The next logical question is what is causing the apparent increase in fireballs seen this month? The key word here is apparent. It could very well be that there is no increase at all, but rather a marked increase in the number of reported fireballs. Mr. Hankey has worked with the AMS in providing an easy way to report fireball sightings and the general public has responded with a record number of reports so far in January. If you look through the last five years that the AMS has available, you will see an increase in every year. The increase is certainly not as dramatic as January 10 vs. January 11, but that again can be attributed to the recent change in format. I am also confident that no matter the number of NEO's in January 2012, there were still be more fireball reports in January 12 vs. January 11.

Interesting subject and I appreciate the contributions of Dirk, Mike, Wayne, and Carl!

Source: Bob Lunsford on METEOROBS

Bob Lunsford is the Operations Manager/Journal Editor of the AMS.

I've bolded the important bits.

The first time I posted it you tried to twist the words around to match your own idea


Originally posted by apacheman


The next logical question is what is causing the apparent increase in fireballs seen this month? The key word here is apparent. It could very well be that there is no increase at all, but rather a marked increase in the number of reported fireballs.


Key word in your quote is the COULD that I've bolded. No where is it stated as fact that the increase is a reporting artifact, only that it COULD be.


Source: post by apacheman

What:Bob Lunsford actually said was significantly stronger than "could", if you care to read his post again.

He even says it himself: "the key word here is apparent" in relation to the recent "increase" in fireballs.

How much clearer does it have to be? How much more proof do you want? Would you like me to conjure up a white paper based on data which researchers know is not suitable for statistical analysis because of the method of collection? Who would be better qualified to answer this question than Bob Lunsford, who is effectively the guy that runs the AMS? Do you even read my posts?


Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 

In the meantime, the actual number of reports is increasing, and the size of the reported fireball are also increasing.



There you go again.

I say again, there is no data to support an increase in the rate of fireballs, any more than is "normal".

Where is the data which supports your statement that "the size of the reported fireball are also increasing"?

Also, to what are you comparing this "increase" with? You only have 6 years of data. How do you know what the rate was before 6 years ago, and that it was not actually much more than it is now compared to 10, or perhaps 20, or even 50 years ago? How do you know we were not in a "lull" or trough of activity when the data collection started, and that we are not just now back to "normal" activity levels?



Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


However, it still seems like the number is going up,.


The key word here is "seems".



Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 

and is something I will continue to watch and report on, with occasional analysis and/or speculation as I deem appropriate, whether you approve or not.


By all means - I welcome honest and transparent reporting of these events, but please, if you are going to comment and give us your own interpretation of that data, make it clear that it is your own interpretation of the data.

edit on 15-2-2011 by C.H.U.D. because: clarification/typo



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by StripedBandit
I would imagine this object would have to have been fairly large (football field maybe?) to have been spotted from such a wide area in broad daylight.


Not quite that large, although it certainly was not your average sized Earth "colliding" meteoroid!

There was a similar event a few years back which I linked to in my post above this one (Edit: My mistake - it was in the other thread). It was found that the object was probably around the size of a "pickup truck".

Natural meteors slam into our atmosphere at a very high speed relative to the Earth. Anywhere between about 10-73 km/s. That gives them a lot of energy, much of which is converted into light, and even relatively small objects can pack a real punch. An object just a few meters across can release as much energy as a small atomic bomb, in a very short space of time.


Originally posted by StripedBandit
If you read the testimonials it certainly seems like this was an unusual and mystifying experience.


There's no doubt about that. Anyone who has seen a spectacular meteor will tell you that. I've seen more than my fair share of meteors, and although many were "nothing to write home about", every so often once comes along and all you can say is "wow!". It's not unusual that some meteors can seem to be almost within touching distance, but this is just illusion. The sheer brightness of a decent sized meteor has a lot to do with this.
edit on 15-2-2011 by C.H.U.D. because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by crimsonninja
so much going on in our skies so many inbound objects
just look at everything this year has given us so far it is
hard to pull away from the computer because i feel like
the next big story is just a minute away does anyone else
feel like this? like something massive terrible is coming ?
edit on 14-2-2011 by crimsonninja because: (no reason given)


Me too!!! Can't stop checking in on my ATS family....
like you said, the next big story is always a minute away

Interesting times indeed



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   
Is this being discussed on CNN or FOX?

And if it is, I hope they are not discussing it in a "Everything's fine, it's actually quite funny" kind of way that they do with these kinds of incidents...
edit on 15-2-2011 by ButterCookie because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
It's being speculated and actually written about in ancient texts..... that this 'new' (yet still unconfirmed giant planet of ours) will enter our inner solar system, bringing along a wake of comets, asteroids, moons and other celestial bodies/debris.

This planet is HUGE.
And yes, this is Nibiru or whatever planet de-jour they wish to call it so to keep us confused and them, unaccountable for having to rewrite history!


Life as we knew it, is underway.
Nothing bad I hope. Just life-changing and this time, the Elite can't do anything about it!! Well, except, deny it which, they are.


Well said!!!!

Wow, this does seem to match up with the Nibiru characteristics.....

I just knew it

2012, here we come



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


First of all...I am not scared of anything. Describing something as scary is not the same as being scared.

I could pick apart your post, but I'll confine myself to pointing out that ablation is the process by which material is heated and burned off by atmospheric friction, which is semantically equal to "burning up"; changing the words, doesn't change the process or effect. Most of what you have said falls along the same lines.

Granted, the increase in numbers could possibly be a statistical artifact, but it is up to you to provide the proof that this is so. An unsupported statement from a data collector is not necessarily proof. Show us how the data collection process changed last year and how this accounts for the jump in incidents reported, while the average number of reporters per event has not increased proportianately, but rather remained pretty stable. In the meantime incident reports are still rising.

I appreciate your frustration at butting up against rather dumb ideas, I feel the same way: I ask you for proof of your assertions, yet the best you can do is quibble over the meaning of ablation, and generalized assumptions about the increase in viewers.

As far as the size increase goes...have you not read any of the viewer comments? Repeatedly you see the refrain "I've been watching all my life...experienced observer..Biggest ever, most spectacular I've ever seen, etc, etc". You seem to discount all these, athough I'm not sure why.

Considering the recent huge daytime fireball reported by an astonishing 185 people, followed by an apparent impact in Great Britain a few hours later, I'd say my thesis holds more validity than yours.

Bringing data to people's attention is not scaremongering, but there seems to be a class of ATS members who seem to view any attempt to look at data that is uncomfortable as scaremongering. The reality is we can easily survive a fair number of small hits, small being under, say 75 meters or so. Really bad if you're directly under, but inconsequential on a global scale (at least immediately, hard to say ultimately).

At this point we neither of us have anything remotely resembling absolute proof of our seperate theories. I am saying there appears to be an increase in frequency and size, and the reported data seem to be supporting that.

You say the increase is a reporting artifact, but have offered nothing beyond speculation to support it. If you can provide proof, then please do so. But I do ask it be more relevant than your diversionary argument about ablation vs burning up.

It is possible to have different interpretations of datasets without it devolving into personal attacks.



posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Some details from NASA:


Early Monday afternoon, a bright object flashed across the sky before vanishing with a flash, according to scores of eyewitnesses from Virginia to Massachusetts.

The likeliest explanation is that a large meteor - a space rock hurtling through the atmosphere - passed eastward over the North Jersey-New York City area.

It might have been 5 feet in diameter with a weight of more 5 metric tons, judging from reports that it blazed as bright as a full moon, said NASA scientist Bill Cooke of the Marshall Space Flight Center.

He based his estimate on "a reasonable speed" of 33,500 m.p.h. Good thing it didn't hit anything.

"My crude estimate of the energy of this fireball is about 100 tons of TNT, which means it was capable of producing a crater 125 feet in diameter and about 15 feet deep, assuming an impact into sandstone," Cooke said.

The Earth's atmosphere, is strafed by such rocks about once a month, usually over the oceans, and a similar event may have happened near Jackson, Miss., on Jan. 11, he said.

Apparently, this intruder was much larger than the typical debris in shooting stars or meteor showers. At night, even a grain of sand can cause a bright streak across the sky.

Cooke said a better estimate would be available in a few days, after data is collected from "infrasound stations to try to determine the meteor's energy from the sound waves emitted as it flew through the atmosphere."


www.sott.net... ytime-fireball-roughly-a-5-ton-meteor-NASA-estimates




top topics



 
19
<< 1   >>

log in

join