What Is NASA Hiding?

reply to post by boo1981


Please review the post above yours, you will see the conclusion I have come too.

ALS

reply to post by TheLieWeLive


I would suggest downloading and trying the 'JHelioViewer' program. It allows you to view the images at different intervals. You can see what really happens inside the missing 12 hours.

Linky for those interested in JHelioViewer

reply to post by SatoriTheory


Thanks, what a great little program.

ALS

Originally posted by ALOSTSOUL
Can't be, the date and times don't match:

The comet hit the sun on the 11th, these images were taken today (14th).

ALS

I do not think it was a comet, but this comment still bothers me, so I choose to reply to it.

There was only 1, but now it is gone?
There can't be another?

reply to post by john1287


If we can invent something that will contain 60 million degrees, a civilization advanced enough to travel here should be able to cruise relatively close to the sun. Not saying that was a UFO, just sayin'

books.google.com... huOPm9TTvRiNz2I2lUrtVEvY&hl=en&ei=K5jOTdT9K8LcgQfdrPnHDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBUQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q&f=false

reply to post by ALOSTSOUL


Thank you, i did see that after i had posted my reply.

-second

reply to post by BrokenCircles

There was only 1, but now it is gone?
There can't be another?

I'm not certain as to what your getting at, but if by "there can't be another?" you mean another comet, if there was another one then I didn't hear about it. Also it would still beg the question as to way they would bother to black out a comet.

Also, what bugged you about my post, everything I stated was factual.

ALS

Originally posted by ALOSTSOUL
I'm not certain as to what your getting at, but if by "there can't be another?" you mean another comet, if there was another one then I didn't hear about it.

I thought it was self-explanatory.

You stated it as an absolute. You said that it can't be a comet, because a comet hit the sun 3 days ago. There is a lot of space in space, and many objects also. The fact that a comet hit the sun 3 days ago, does not mean that there cannot be another. I did not realize that you hear about every object that travels through space.

reply to post by BrokenCircles

You stated it as an absolute. You said that it can't be a comet, because a comet hit the sun 3 days ago.

I stated this as I have an prior knowledge of another comet hitting the Sun, if there was one then we would have seen it on other SOHO images, which alas we didn't.

There is a lot of space in space, and many objects also. The fact that a comet hit the sun 3 days ago, does not mean that there cannot be another. I did not realize that you hear about every object that travels through space.

Instead of just nit picking with nonsensical slander, why don't you go off do a bit of research and if you do find that a comet hit the Sun on the 14/05/11, I will be happy to be re-educatced on the matter.

This program would be a good place to start..


ALS

Originally posted by john1287
reply to post by ALOSTSOUL

 

I find it hard to beleave that we or anything out there has the brains to make anything to get that close to the sun without burning up
me i think its a flaw in the pitcher thats all

That is a very naive statement, solely based on your current knowledge base.
Maybe naive is to gentle a word.....

That being said......can Anyone give a Believable explanation as to why the Vatican 'Owns' or is heavily invested in most of the solar telescopes on earth ???
I kid you not....

And, is not the Queen of England and her family part of a 'Sun Cult' ?
Are we all missing something really important, right in front of our eyes ???

Originally posted by ALOSTSOUL
everything I stated was factual.

Not exactly.

Originally posted by ALOSTSOUL
we all know that NASA like to airbrush and cover strange anomalies in their pictures.

No, we don't all know that, so that's not factual. I see a lot of people claim that, and a lot of the evidence used to support those claims looks ridiculous.

I can't say the claim that a black square was put there by NASA to hide something would be any less ridiculous. For one thing, if you wanted to hide something, would you use a technique that would stand out like that? Or try to use something more subtle that would blend in, like airbrushing?

Glitches happen. I just made a thread about a glitch on ATS and it doesn't mean they are trying to hide something.

reply to post by Arbitrageur

everything I stated was factual.

This was to do with this post:

Can't be, the date and times don't match:

www.spaceweather.com...

The comet hit the sun on the 11th, these images were taken today (14th).

ALS

So what isn't factual about that statement?

No, we don't all know that, so that's not factual. I see a lot of people claim that, and a lot of the

As I said the "everything I stated was factual." post was to do with something else. The statement above is my own (and others I talk with) personal view.

evidence used to support those claims looks ridiculous

How so? you only have to look at the many airbrushed pictures that have been released by NASA throughout the years. Now I'm not saying these are Alien stuctures (or whatever else) but you can't deny the fact that NASA have been hiding things in many of their photos.

Having said that, it is not my place to "make" you believe my point-of-view. I suggest you research the subject and come to your own conclusion.

Images

I can't say the claim that a black square was put there by NASA to hide something would be any less ridiculous. For one thing, if you wanted to hide something, would you use a technique that would stand out like that? Or try to use something more subtle that would blend in, like airbrushing?

If you go through the thread you see that I come to the conclusion that the "black square" is indeed a glitch.

ALS

I watch the SOHO movies on a quite regular basis and have had it favorited for years now but, I find in cases such as this if you go back and source the L2 and L3 with many of the other formats you can debunk your self just by pairing times and seeing if your anomaly shows up in other functions. If not as the conclusion you have come to, its just a glitch. But must say during the reviewing of the images there has been many times ive had to reverse and step through shots cause theres always something moving up there.

And on the topic of the sun and church and state... when it comes down to it Sun has been god for sometime now doesn't surprise me if the vatican still woreships him just as well now and likes to keep tabs LoL

First, from the SOHO site, "SOHO is a project of international cooperation between ESA and NASA".

Second, the site has a FAQ section and a Not so FAQ section right here;

SOHO not so FAQ

If that doesn't get you an answer, one can try Google or Dogpile; try this;

[url=http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/1998/ast21apr98_1/Solar flare today zaps spacecraft camera with protons[/url]

Might be the cause of the digital data being lost.

Much more mysterious than spacecraft digital picture glitches are the ones on Google Maps, like this large strip in Alaska and Canada, hey, those Canadians are in on it too!




The black rectangle I put over my bookmarks is not a mystery. There are many black boxes on Google maps, one in England raise suspicion. And what about those black boxes in commercial aircraft?!?

Trust me guys, NASA ain't hiding anything from us. There was another case before where some ATS poster believed that NASA was hiding an "unidentified object" in one of their photos of Saturn. He had upped the contrast to reveal this "unidentified object". The fail part about it was that the shape was quite visible without the aid of any contrast editing.

If NASA would try to hide something from us in one of their images, we'd NEVER know that they were in the first place, as they'd do a hell of a better job than just "obscuring" a shape by "shadowing it out", or replacing it with a retarded black square.

reply to post by boo1981


A black square is obvious but they can easily say it's a glitch and be believed rather than getting caught photoshopping it out. You don't need any real photo editing talent to put in a black square over an object. One click and this could be finished rather than figuring out how the clone tool works.

Originally posted by 1000TonBlocks

Originally posted by john1287
reply to post by ALOSTSOUL

 

I find it hard to beleave that we or anything out there has the brains to make anything to get that close to the sun without burning up
me i think its a flaw in the pitcher thats all

That is a very naive statement, solely based on your current knowledge base.
Maybe naive is to gentle a word.....

That being said......can Anyone give a Believable explanation as to why the Vatican 'Owns' or is heavily invested in most of the solar telescopes on earth ???
I kid you not....

And, is not the Queen of England and her family part of a 'Sun Cult' ?
Are we all missing something really important, right in front of our eyes ???

edit on 14-5-2011 by 1000TonBlocks because: sp

I have my own solar telescope ... could you please point the Vatican to me, I could do with a bit of extra money

reply to post by 1000TonBlocks

......can Anyone give a Believable explanation as to why the Vatican 'Owns' or is heavily invested in most of the solar telescopes on earth ??? I kid you not.... And, is not the Queen of England and her family part of a 'Sun Cult' ? Are we all missing something really important, right in front of our eyes ???

A believable explanation? No I can't, but I can give one that people don't want to believe.

The Sun gives us life and it can also take it away. Who else does that sound like?

How about: Jesus is the light of the world or maybe he is the Sun of God.

NASA is only government funded, it's not like they own NASA. Why would NASA want to hide anything in the first place.

Heck, why would the government want to hide anything space related.