Proof that C/2010 X1 is not a Comet as US Govt/NASA states, but is something extremley larger in mas, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 59 times

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 12:56 AM by chr0naut

Originally posted by youwouldknow
Elenin has intrigued me for a while now. I havnt seen any good pictures of it coming in yet. I however did see a pretty good amateur astronomer showing something else in elenins position. He was using an infared technique I belive. Any backyard astronomers here? The video was on youtube, cant find a link right now as im on a mobilebrowser. Comet or not, exciting stuff this fall.

The YouTube footage from the "amateur astronomer" has been deleted off YouTube by the original poster (astrolpatroit).

This is probably because it was revealed that he was pointing his telescope in the wrong direction and had merely photographed a normal star.

His small Meade telescope and a red filter does not equal professional equipment (its resolution abilities were slightly greater than normal binoculars).

To adequately capture a dim infra-red object (as he was claiming) requires an auto-tracking telescope of at least 8 inches (diameter not length), a supercooled CCD image sensor and a long exposure time. Please read up about infra-red astronomy on Wikipedia

Please also search on previous threads for "astrolpatroit" and deny ignorance.

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:04 AM by my3911

reply to post by chr0naut

Thanks for the info.. .but I have question for you. How do you explain the continuous and obvious blockage from Google sky of this "comet"? Why would they block the coordinates of "comet" ELENIN? The obvious answer is; there is something they don't want us to see.

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:07 AM by weedwhacker

reply to post by my3911

You aren't paying attention to logic and reason, and science. You are being fed a load of crap, by the people mentioned in the video, on Russian TV (guess, you didn't watch?)

The Comet Elenin is not approaching from below the plane of the ecliptic, such that is only visible from the South Pole....it is only a few degrees below the plane:

ssd.jpl.nasa.gov...

At present, is still outside the orbit of Mars, and is farther from Earth than Earth is from Sun.....

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:07 AM by saintk

Not sure if there is much truth to it but a number of other web sites are stating the the comet will miss us it's the 8 mile long tail that will shower us as we pass through it... from what i have been able to understand is that this thing will pass in front of the earth and our flow will push us through it's tail... if thats true it's right along the lines of some nasa guy first sayn that there would be a massive shower starting oct 5 or so 2011 ....

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:10 AM by my3911

reply to post by saintk

I hope you are right. But do you actually believe that NASA/Government is telling us the truth that this is only a comet? It is totally feasible that they would hide the truth in order to avoid early mass panic.

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:17 AM by my3911

reply to post by weedwhacker

You are correct.. it will enter the ecliptic at 33 degrees from below the ecliptic on 9/11/2011. Check the JPL NASA orbital diagram link I provided. I don't see how your recent statement would discredit my original post. It will enter our ecliptic plane and it will be noticeable at that point. I don't understand why you think your last statement is debatable? Please elaborate.

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:23 AM by my3911

reply to post by weedwhacker

I have noticed you are very consistent and even more very active in attempting to discredit theories that are not necessarily conspiracy, but fact. If you are an average American that is not associated with the Government... please provide proof. You have always been there to discredit my so called theories. And until you can provide proof that you are not Psyops... well it's pretty obvious. No offense, but again... very obvious.

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:28 AM by weedwhacker

reply to post by my3911

Wrong!:

....it will enter the ecliptic at 33 degrees from below...

I linked the JPL site, too. Sure you know how to interpret the diagram?

It is a tiny bit....maybe, 2 or 3 degrees. Read the parameters, in the data boxes. OR, just look at the darn diagram!! It's obviously NOT at "33 degrees" below!

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:31 AM by weedwhacker

reply to post by my3911

LOL!!!

That is rich.

No.....when I see obvious nonsense, I call it.

This thread (like all the many, man others that are similar) is rubbish. But, you are in *good* company, with the many similar threads.

Too bad, the *sources* usually can be traced back to the same Internet rumors, that all of you have fallen for.....

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:41 AM by my3911

reply to post by weedwhacker

No discredit or offense to you sir.But, it seems you are always out to bash anyone and everyone that makes any statement on this forum. I have never seen you actually agree or support anyone that challenges the US Government. I can sit here and type up factual data that would prove your recent statements wrong, but I really don't want to waste my time. I will be back on-line tomorrow.... and again, I hope you can prove me wrong. It would make me feel much better that this is not inevitable and life as we know it will go on. I am actually asking you to provide me hard data that I am wrong. But so far, you haven't. I mean no offense to you and this is why I have posted this thread. So please.... give me actual data and proof that I am wrong. I do not want this to happen. Thank you for your challenge and your time. Peace.

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:45 AM by alfa1

Originally posted by my3911
It will enter our ecliptic plane and it will be noticeable at that point.

Complete fail.
Whether or not an object is on the ecliptic has nothing to do with whether it is visible.
With a telescope, it is visible now. A good set of binoculars will have it by August.
Stars, galaxies, comets, the moon, all and more are regularly seen at great angular distances from the ecliptic. If you'd really done astronomical research for a whole year then you'd know this.

Get away from youtube videos, and go outside at night.

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:49 AM by my3911

reply to post by alfa1

I really wish I could, but I live in downtown Houston... way too much light pollution. Your statement does not entirely discredit my original post. I was only elaborating a previous reply that someone made about it approaching from below our ecliptic. This has nothing to do with the validity of my thread. But thanks you for your input.

edit on 30-5-2011 by my3911 because: Grammar Correction

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 01:55 AM by alfa1

Originally posted by weedwhacker
It is a tiny bit....maybe, 2 or 3 degrees. Read the parameters, in the data boxes. OR, just look at the darn diagram!! It's obviously NOT at "33 degrees" below!

We can be very specific on this.
The inclination of the orbit is 1.839465381680949 degrees.

But clearly not 33 degrees. Like you, I'm baffled as to where his brain got this number from.
Even its declination will be less than 6 degrees at this time (September 11th).

Edit - actually I think I've worked it out.
He's talking about the location at which it goes from being below the ecliptic, to above the ecliptic.
Its what, if he was a real astronomer, would call the "ascending node".
323.23396 degrees.
which is 36.76604 degrees backward from the location internationally agreed as 'zero'.
But its a meaningless number in the context of this conversation.

edit on 30-5-2011 by alfa1 because: more content

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 02:07 AM by my3911

reply to post by alfa1

Ok... I admit the 33 degree approach was hear-say, so thank you for correcting me. This is why I posted this thread. I know there are individuals such as yourself that know more about this than I do. I am only searching for the truth as many of us are. I love my country, but I do not trust our government. This is why I have to resort to alternative sources such as this website.... but again, we do have to sift through the BS, so thank you for clearing that bit of BS for me!

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 02:09 AM by metaldave

Originally posted by my3911
reply to post by weedwhacker

No discredit or offense to you sir.But, it seems you are always out to bash anyone and everyone that makes any statement on this forum. I have never seen you actually agree or support anyone that challenges the US Government. I can sit here and type up factual data that would prove your recent statements wrong, but I really don't want to waste my time. I will be back on-line tomorrow.... and again, I hope you can prove me wrong. It would make me feel much better that this is not inevitable and life as we know it will go on. I am actually asking you to provide me hard data that I am wrong. But so far, you haven't. I mean no offense to you and this is why I have posted this thread. So please.... give me actual data and proof that I am wrong. I do not want this to happen. Thank you for your challenge and your time. Peace.

"No.....when I see obvious nonsense, I call it."
Classic & perfect response...

Dude, your beat!!
Take it like a man & move on bro...

Peace
MD

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 02:11 AM by my3911

Perfectly reasonable... I guess I'm just a sucker, huh? Well, thanks for being there to beat me down and keep me in check. The world needs more people like you. Right?

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 02:20 AM by my3911

reply to post by metaldave

You really struck a minor chord with me on my "manhood"sh!t.... I'm almost 40 years old, been happily married for 10 years, well traveled and have a 20 year old daughter. I've been in several bands and am currently a music producer. So please don't tell me to take it like a man... frankly, that pisses me off... but it really doesn't affect me... you're just another nameless and absent person on the mind numbing, social draining, internet.

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 02:29 AM by lestweforget

Heres a little experiment that may or may not prove anything but it would be interesting and i certainly have an opinion of what i believe would happen.
If any Nibiru skeptic would like to participate, oh and Whacker dont even bother, simply ring your local newspaper and alert them to the fact that through your large infra-red telescope you have detected a large dull mass that proves what NASA is reporting in relation to Elenin is false.
Then wait and see how long it takes before you get a knock at the door by some well dressed strangers.
I doubt whether any will try this and i wouldnt recommend it either to be totally honest but it would be interesting especially if filmed and then posted here.

Hang in there My3911 you are closer to the truth than most!

edit on 30-5-2011 by lestweforget because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 02:40 AM by alfa1

Originally posted by my3911
I know there are individuals such as yourself that know more about this than I do.

Since you asked,

yeah, I've been an amateur astronomer ever since I was a little kid.
Dont have many pics on this particular computer, but here's one of comet Hyakutake...

Not taken through a telescope, but with a camera mounted on top of one (because I needed the drive to follow it through the exposure).
But here is one of the globular cluster Omega Centauri, taken through my rather modest 8 inch Meade 2080...

I'd take one of comet Elenin myself, except for the fact that my stuff is currently 400 km away, and the comet itself isnt (apart from the conspiracy theories) actually very bright or interesting as an astronomical object. And there's many other pics on the net of it by other amateurs anyway.

reply posted on 30-5-2011 @ 03:08 AM by The Baby Seal Club

reply to post by my3911

Dude, I disagree with Weedy on more things than agree; but on this one he is right. Elenin is an uninteresting comet.
And please do us a favor. Quit giving out that tired old number of "Google sky has it blacked out" stuff. Instead, go somewhere where you can actually look at the night sky. You'll notice that the night sky is not really fuzzy like on your computer screen.

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >> ^^TOP^^