NASA now believes comet Elenin to be a comet cluster

reply to post by Laokin


lol I really dont mean to jump into this but I think this best applies right now..

Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
-Mark Twain

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Laokin

 

The implication is that the spacecraft will be diverted from it's usual observations in order to observe the comet. It will not.

The implication is that it will be "turned" from the Sun. It will not.

No, that's what you wanted him to mean. That's not what he said.
He said... and I quote....

Do you get bored of this semantics crap you keep carrying on with??
Phage, your comment sure sounds like they are turning it to me..

In which case you said

Fine. Next time you're in a plane ask the pilot to roll 135º. Same as a 135º turn, right?
Rolled, turned, whats the difference

In which he promptly pointed out exactly how this is a case of semantics by showing you how you just made the same argument we are making at you... except you used an airplane.... and we are using a space satellite.

Actually pilots would "bank" to 135 degrees..

The point being... the word "Turn" does not mean to change direction along the X axis by rotating against the Z axis.

That is NOT what the word "Turn" means.

Just like that is not what "Roll" means.

That is an applied label for a Direction chosen by Nasa and "Labeled" as roll according to the YPR formula.

But I bet you still don't get it yet... do you?

The bright ones are always the thickest.

It's called SEMANTICS.

This is you -- Pilots Bank, they don't Turn, they Roll... they don't spin.... They ascend they don't climb, they descend they don't dive.....


Also, it's important to note that when a plane turns... it rolls. You must not fly planes. The rudder is only used at low speed/low altitude for MINOR course correction or for TAXIING against the Z axis.... Do you know what happens when 747 makes a "turn" at altitude at speed using just the rudder? You snap it off and your plane crashes.

But again, you think you know it all... you don't know anything -- you are my very own "Let me google that for you." That's all you are....

You are an astronaut, you are an engineer, you are a scientist, you are a physicist, you are a mathematician, you are a professor in history...

The reality is you know how to push the "Google" button... which is why things like this fly RIGHT over your head.... You are the "Layman" Phage.


P.S.
A 130º roll to the in a plane will turn you to the left. That's how they do it. They roll, and lower the left aileron and raise the right. This is how you perform a "bank" or a standard turn. So yeah, really... roll -- turn -- what's the difference...?

None, you just said it yourself.

Originally posted by Hillbilly123069
I hear a lot of people thinking that they are successfully debunking there is a dwarf star in our solar system. Yet not 1 person has explained away the timing of the major quakes in recent years when we are lined up with this orbiting body. I do not have any degrees in general relativity or astrophysics, but I do have a basic understanding. A comet cannot do this. I pray that I'm wrong. I'm certain I am not. The next 2 months will tell all.

A) I do not believe that the "recent" earthquakes and whatever other catastrophes are "unique" in any sense, in fact we have earthquakes, tsunamis before Elenin was even discovered.

AGAIN (there is obviously no single thread on ats where i dont need to say this: "WHAT LOGIC IS THAT SUPPOSED TO BE?"

Or are you saying that the recent earthquakes were in some odd, twisted way "special" making them totally different to countless earthquakes and other catastrophes in the past ? ABSURD

B) You say rightfully a comet "can not do this"....which already puts you into the top 2% above the average conspiracy forum visitor, above the 98% who seem to lack essential science understanding, common sense and logic.

However - i am amazed by your "back logic" to say that since a comet (obviously) cannot trigger earthquakes - so this must be some kind of evidence that its indeed not a comet - but a "dwarf star" or whatever other object which (allegedly) causes the earthquakes.

Who even came up with that idea anyway, i mean what non-scientific moron started the idea of a dwarf star causing earth quakes?

reply to post by Laokin

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Phage

 

If I rotate my steering wheel then I call it turning..
I'm getting into semantics with you again though I will point out that the majority of links to this issue clearly say they are TURNING the craft..

It is clear what the "majority of links" claim is being done.
The "majority of links" are wrong.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Laokin

 

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Phage

 

If I rotate my steering wheel then I call it turning..
I'm getting into semantics with you again though I will point out that the majority of links to this issue clearly say they are TURNING the craft..

It is clear what the "majority of links" claim is being done.
The "majority of links" are wrong.

No they aren't. They are 100% correct because the word TURN does not apply exclusively to a maneuver along the X axis against the Z axis. The word turn means to maneuver in a circular fashion upon ANY axis. Period.

Again... you are the only one wrong... and it's only a point of semantics. Yes it rolls... but a roll IS A TURN. A TURN IS A REVOLUTION.

Why are you being "thick?" You also already addressed that very same post... also, great job of bringing it up again from the back pages of this thread... (where you already addressed it.)

You seem to think a turn is "yaw." Cars don't "yaw" they turn, because they can only turn against the "yaw" axis. Therefore... we don't say "I yawed my car to the left." We don't use the word "Turn" to describe "yaw" in aviation because the vehicle can "turn" upon multiple axis'. Therefore... the word TURN is not used in Avionics. It isn't specific enough to describe the axis of the turn, so we use more descriptive words like "Bank" instead. "Bank" is the verb applied to "Yaw" in avionics. Again this is because cars CANNOT TURN on any other axis -- so the word "Turn" is sufficient in context.

I don't know any other more clear way to explain it than that.

There it is... What I have been saying for the last 3 pages... reduced into simple terms for a simple man.

To specify the "Yaw" axis is not a rotation of the Z axis. If you were to say that, you wouldn't be giving a specific enough description to know which way to rotate the Z axis. It can rotate on either axis the X axis or the Y axis. It cannot rotate upon itself.

More accurately... "Yaw" is a rotation along the X axis AGAINST the Z axis from the default perspective of "above." Now you can accurately calculate that maneuver in a 3dspace using 2 reference points.

Because cars can ONLY turn on the X axis AGAINST the Z axis... we call "Yaw" a turn. A car CANNOT turn against any other axis... so saying "Turn" in the context of an automobile equates to a rotation on the X axis AGAINST the Z axis.

If you refute this -- you are a clown and are a testament to how

The Yaw-Pitch-Roll (YPR) method of specifying orientation is one of the most difficult methods to understand.

It's simple in actuality... you just have to see it once. I fly planes and I work in 3DSpace all the time in CAD programs like 3D Studio Max, Cinema 4D, and Maya.

I AM an expert on YPR since I have to use it everyday in animation. Being as the system was invented for Airplanes... and I actually fly airplanes... I figured that was my best and most familiar way to explain the concept. However, in hindsight I feel like it's the latter.

reply to post by Laokin

NASA has two satetelites in orbit one is Stereo A the other is Stereo B. On the 2nd August Elenin will pass close to Stereo B (4.5 Million miles from Stereo B) NASA plans to turn SB (Stereo B) around to face Elenin rather than the Sun which it does now so that it can get the data of the make up etc of Elenin.

universallyaware.ning.com...

Hello ATS,

Just found this video on the STEREO-B footage of the latest test. STEREO-B done a 135 degree spin to take a peek at ELENIN. Check this video for more.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

In an interesting turn of events, NASA are turning their STEREO B (Behind) satellite to 135 degrees to look at the incoming "comet" Elenin. Remember that until now, NASA has not really publicly acknowledged Elenin's existence.

covertnews.blogspot.com...

NASA has already booked 2 weeks of valuable time with the STEREO spacecraft-B to turn it around and take pictures of comet elenin which everyone with Internet access will be able to see.

______beforeitsnews/story/884/679/Why_Has_NASA_Not_Taken_Hubble_Pictures_of_Comet_Elenin.html

You can moan about semantics all you like. The perception is that the spacecraft will be directed away from the Sun because there is something special about the comet. The perception is wrong.

reply to post by Hillbilly123069

...and there I go again wasting my time because of a misleading title....

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Laokin

 

NASA has two satetelites in orbit one is Stereo A the other is Stereo B. On the 2nd August Elenin will pass close to Stereo B (4.5 Million miles from Stereo B) NASA plans to turn SB (Stereo B) around to face Elenin rather than the Sun which it does now so that it can get the data of the make up etc of Elenin.

universallyaware.ning.com...

Hello ATS,

Just found this video on the STEREO-B footage of the latest test. STEREO-B done a 135 degree spin to take a peek at ELENIN. Check this video for more.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

In an interesting turn of events, NASA are turning their STEREO B (Behind) satellite to 135 degrees to look at the incoming "comet" Elenin. Remember that until now, NASA has not really publicly acknowledged Elenin's existence.

covertnews.blogspot.com...

NASA has already booked 2 weeks of valuable time with the STEREO spacecraft-B to turn it around and take pictures of comet elenin which everyone with Internet access will be able to see.

______beforeitsnews/story/884/679/Why_Has_NASA_Not_Taken_Hubble_Pictures_of_Comet_Elenin.html

You can moan about semantics all you like. The perception is that the spacecraft will be directed away from the Sun because there is something special about the comet. The perception is wrong.

Again, that was never my issue of contention. One more time... CLEARLY. My issue of contention and where you are factually wrong lies within your statement that the media outlets are in fact "Wrong" for using the word "turn" when they are in fact... 100% not wrong to do so. It is not a "Layman" term for a "Yaw" manuever. Turn describes the actions that are taking place upon the two axis' it is being "turned" upon.

You are so dense, that you keep implying that I am saying the issue of contention is the perception that the spacecraft will be directed away from the sun.

I merely mention that if you don't list the degree of rotation people are "supposed" to assume 360º rotation which would factually direct the satellite away from the sun. I merely pointed out that your argument favored HIS opinion because you failed to INCLUDE the degrees of rotation and the "Axis" in question. This was your fault... not mine, nor any other reader. It's a fault of the writer. You gave to little information based upon a context you failed to explain.

I pointed that out to you. I never said you were wrong... in my first post I ever said "It's not a big deal, Phage is right here as usual."

The only part you are WRONG in, is claiming a turn is exclusively paired with "Yaw" and you are telling people that the press/media links that used the wordage "turn" were in fact in "error" when they weren't.

Again... Turns are revolutions and rotations. Cars don't "Yaw" they "turn" because the turn is predetermined by the limitations of the car. I.E. They cannot turn on any other axis.

P.S.

I wouldn't have even mentioned it if you weren't flagrantly telling people the outlets were wrong. You were so into yourself being "the savior" of ATS that you made an error of "Semantics" and were adamantly suggesting your error was in fact -- not an error.

It's A.) Common knowledge you are wrong. B.) You carried on about how you were right, instigated a side argument with another poster. C.) Kept propagating this falsehood however benign it actually is.

So I explained to you the error you were making, and also pointed out how you didn't clearly explain it -- which out of context actually supported the claim that the sun will be out of the view finder. I never said I supported this claim, I just explained the position.

You're on a rampage of elitism right now... living high on your famous ATS horse. I had a lot of respect for you -- I now have zero... because you're acting like a "Powerposter rushing to his 25th" and less like that cool calm respectful guy who checks his facts before he speaks.

You just tied up 3 pages over semantics. To put it frank -- you're an intellectual bully who doesn't know how to admit he made a mistake.

Originally posted by Laokin
Again, that was never my issue of contention. One more time... CLEARLY. My issue of contention and where you are factually wrong lies within your statement that the media outlets are in fact "Wrong" for using the word "turn" when they are in fact... 100% not wrong to do so. It is not a "Layman" term for a "Yaw" manuever. Turn describes the actions that are taking place upon the two axis' it is being "turned" upon.

I've just spent a bit of time looking over this argument between you two, and although I can write arguments that both of you are wrong is some way or another, I'm going to side with Phage.

Its not the job of the media to always use technically correct terms (although often it would be nice if they did), its their job to convey meaning to the public. In this example, it is (despite your assertion above) 100 percent "wrong" for the media to use the term "turn" in this context.

NASA plans to turn SB (Stereo B) around to face Elenin rather than the Sun

Although yes, "turn" is not a "Layman" term for a "Yaw" manuever, in the context of talking about "turning" a spacecraft to look at comet Elenin, it gives 100 percent the wrong impression and meaning.

Thats my opinion, now you two can keep going at it...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Laokin

 

The implication is that the spacecraft will be diverted from it's usual observations in order to observe the comet. It will not.

The implication is that it will be "turned" from the Sun. It will not.

That was NOT my implication...

BTW, I guess you "roll" your tap on at home rather than the rest of us that "turn" it on..

Your semantics are boring and as I said earlier, even many legitimate sites uses the word "turn"..

Maybe you're just trolling to derail the thread with BS.

reply to post by Hillbilly123069


I have to say people seem to be getting commet elenin mixed up with nibiru, i went through a hug file the other night was from a post on nibiru and it basically states that elenin is trapped in Nibirus orbit, nibiru has a massive orbit, go to this link and reeead! what ever you think i think this guy is pretty spot on.
Thoughere info about nibiru

Originally posted by Phage

You do realize that the IRAS images were taken in 1983, right? At the time Elenin would have been found somewhere between Leo and Cancer.

edit on 7/30/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

You mean round-a-bout where CW Leonis is???

OK. Thanks, and I appreciate the detailed answer.

p.s. Roll, Yaw, Turn...is it really worth it? ##SNIP##

reply to post by Tahnya86

The link is not working!

reply to post by Tahnya86

I have to say people seem to be getting commet elenin mixed up with nibiru, i went through a hug file the other night was from a post on nibiru and it basically states that elenin is trapped in Nibirus orbit, nibiru has a massive orbit, go to this link and reeead! what ever you think i think this guy is pretty spot on.
Thoughere info about nibiru

This fifth grader's essay is thoroughly dissected here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

lol Phage and Laokin both need to observe their egos, their minds are completely hijacked by it
2nd

Originally posted by alfa1
It only took about 30 seconds with google to find a random amateur astronomer who took a recent photo.

Given the number of times that comet Elenin photos have been posted to ATS, its still surprising how many people think there are no photos of it.

Hi alfa1.

When I don't like something, anything, I try to avoid having to do it as much as possible.

My question to you out of curiosity is- Why are you still here posting on this thread?

Lets recap and read your first post on page 3 shall we -

If I was dictator of this site, the OP would be banned for a week.
This site is *supposed* to be about informing people of the truth of the world, not about making tabloid sensationalist lies.
And who are the 13 morons who flagged this garbage?

If thats what you really think why are you still following this thread (or visiting a conspiracy site for that matter). There are literally thousands of threads you could be reading but you return here to get involved in a thread you clearly feel offers nothing. I questioned your motives back on page 3 but you didn't respond however you seem to feel obligated to respond and counter anyone who believes Elenin is something more sinister than a standard comet. respond

Have an agenda do we?

Here's the latest numbers (July 31st). X1 is @ 141.9 ..million miles from Earth, and 97.9..million from the Sun...
Very close to Spitzer/StereoB Space Telescopes area of operations. Its only 3 days away from reaching Earth orbital plane(92 million miles=1au)...
Still no Color images...?
It would be great to get images,colors,data,etc...from Spitzer ...It's a great telescope..It would answer alot of questions and concerns...
www.spitzer.caltech.edu...

Look at this great image of comet taken by Spitzer.
photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Vetfather

Still no Color images...?

Most planetary imagers use charge coupled devices that simply collect light. In order to get a "color" image they use filters in the three primary colors and stack them together. Because the comet is moving relatively quickly compared to the background stars, this would create the impression that there were little orbs blinking in red, green and blue travelling parallel to the comet! If the comet grows large enough, someone might take a snap with color film or a conventional DSLR. Mostly comets are just ghostly white anyway.

reply to post by DJW001

Should not be that hard for the pros...
www.ewellobservatory.com...
Also, X1 had been observed 2203 (#obs), since last December...That is alot

MOST #obs used total data(Most number of observations) by Jpl,.professionals, amateurs?
===
Comets..(Inner Solar System)

#1...9P/Tempe 1................. 8,848
#2... 1P/Halley.................... 7,428 ---> Everybody knows about Halley
#3... 2007 N3(Lulin) ............ 3,847 ----> Two tails...anti-tail toward sun, and away...
#4... 1995 01(Hale-Bopp) .... 3,317 ---> alot of press coverages
#5... 17P(Holmes)................ 3,265 ---> Outbrust(2007), 3x bigger than Sun,etc..etc..
#6...Comet X1 (Elenin).......... 2,203---> Current, yet no real color images
#7...2P/Encke..................... 1,686
#8... 8P/Tuttle..................... 1,534
#8... 2002 V1...................... 1,504 ---> Giant that passed near Sun
#9... C/1996 B2(Hyakutake).. 957 --->came close by
#10..2007 W1(Boattini)....... 807 ---> No coverage, and attention..outbrust Apr/ May 2008...no tail
#11... 2006 P1(McNaught)....... 328 ---> alot of coverages
#12... 7P............................... 296 ---> Outbrust 2008
#13... C/1983 H1(Iras-Araki-Alcock)..... 255 --->Very close pass to Earth
#14... 73P............................. 162 ---> Broke apart in 2006 near Earth
====

Alot of observations for Comet 2010 X1...and counting

Still working on list...subject to changes..list not fully completed
=============================================
Not bad for a small, non-event, nothing to see here, no big deal,etc...lol...comet
btw...all of the above had color image/pic taken