Where Are All The ELENIN Conspiracy Theorists Now?

reply to post by hotbread


It happened in a different reality...we live in a multiverse....

reply to post by hotbread


It happened in a different reality...we live in a multiverse....

reply to post by mockrock

Now answer this, can you think of one logical reason why Google sky et al would block out a chunk of the sky? and move that blocked area as though it were disguising a moving object.

Google Sky is not real time and their pictures don't get updated. For instance their infrared pictures come from the 1983 IRAS mission. So I fail to see how they could be covering up something moving when the pictures are all years old.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


The 1983 claim is a complete farce - you seriously expect people to believe they used images nearly 30 years old ?


api.ning.com...*afnEJ7w551DGWQ78pqxv1IbPPHLxC/Eleninlocation17june2007inf rared.jpg


""That is SUPPOSEDLY (there's that word again) an object known as C W Leonis, allegedly a carbon star or red dwarf. Interestingly, in the Google Sky pics, it is in almost the exact location where Elenin was in June of 2007. The question is, when were the images for the infrared version of Google Sky taken? I have been unable to pin that down exactly...seems that the "regular" images for GS were taken in 2007, but the IR images are supposedly (again...) from IRAS, which was operational for 10 months in 1983. In 1983, Elenin was not, by astronomical standards, very far from this object, but in 2007 it appears to be right in front of it. Here's the one that shows Elenin location in November 1983 (the white square with the coordinates to the right of the large, scary object): ""

earthchanges.ning.com...

reply to post by mockrock


So if I can offer proof of an object that shouldn't appear on google sky infrared in 1983 you will accept that the 1983 claim is a lie?

reply to post by mockrock


Please start posting useful links that actually work. Try them out before posting and that should help.

As far as Elenin being detected in 2007 - not possible. The comet was far too dim at that distance to be detected. At the time of discovery it was magnitude 19.5. Three years earlier it would have been too dim. It is a small object.

reply to post by mockrock


Actually no it isn't. You can look through the actual images from IRAS and see that what is on Google Sky matches up exactly with the image from the IRAS data. Why can't people just accept that CW Leonis is a carbon star 390-490 LY away that has been known about since the 60s?

reply to post by Xcalibur254


Apologies on the link good sirs, not my full-time job.

reply to post by mockrock


Again simple question. Can you think of one reason google sky would block out an area of the sky.. You like the number bullet points so here we go.

1) They are hiding something.
2) They want to create fear, propagate a conspiracy for unknown reasons.. Possible distraction.

This is what puzzles me.. Blacking out a square in the sky is quite lazy, with CGI technology why not manipulate the image and make it more subtle. I cannot resolve this, can anyone help explore this? Could it be slight of hand.. Look over here distract everyone's focus.. when the real threat is elsewhere. Or maybe an organisation the size of Google was not under control, so they had to do a quick messy job on it.

Any ideas on this Stereo?

Can I put forward my case to be allowed in the bunker? That third nipple will be a valuable genetic mutation..

reply to post by mockrock

Why would Google "block" out an area of sky? Good question. It probably has something to do with the way they stitch the original images together. Like you say, a little bit of effort would clear the issue up. But what difference does it make when the source images the Google uses are readily available.

You seem to be interested in this image (from IRAS, from 1983). As you can see the image is kind of "noisy".

reply to post by mockrock

Again simple question. Can you think of one reason google sky would block out an area of the sky.. You like the number bullet points so here we go.

1) They are hiding something.
2) They want to create fear, propagate a conspiracy for unknown reasons.. Possible distraction.

This is what puzzles me.. Blacking out a square in the sky is quite lazy, with CGI technology why not manipulate the image and make it more subtle. I cannot resolve this, can anyone help explore this? Could it be slight of hand.. Look over here distract everyone's focus.. when the real threat is elsewhere. Or maybe an organisation the size of Google was not under control, so they had to do a quick messy job on it.

There is no black out on Google. There are stitching errors that result in blacked out areas. The blacked out areas can be viewed in the original data sets used by Google.

Anyone that thinks that a conspiracy is involved is being a bit odd.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by mockrock

 

Again simple question. Can you think of one reason google sky would block out an area of the sky.. You like the number bullet points so here we go.

1) They are hiding something.
2) They want to create fear, propagate a conspiracy for unknown reasons.. Possible distraction.

This is what puzzles me.. Blacking out a square in the sky is quite lazy, with CGI technology why not manipulate the image and make it more subtle. I cannot resolve this, can anyone help explore this? Could it be slight of hand.. Look over here distract everyone's focus.. when the real threat is elsewhere. Or maybe an organisation the size of Google was not under control, so they had to do a quick messy job on it.

There is no black out on Google. There are stitching errors that result in blacked out areas. The blacked out areas can be viewed in the original data sets used by Google.

Anyone that thinks that a conspiracy is involved is being a bit odd.

edit on 6-10-2011 by stereologist because: (no reason given)

That is a really 'odd' thing to say.. It is surely healthy to question a missing area? If that is being 'odd' I take that as a complement.. In the context of what we are discussing a perfectly rational question to ask.

reply to post by mockrock


The reason for the so-called blacked out areas is due to a stitching issue. The images are old. Some are IRAS. Some images are Sloan. Not sure if there are other sources.

To suggest that there is intentional hiding is odd. To suggest that there is a conspiracy is odd.

reply to post by stereologist


Compare my one foray into oddness with stereo's 7000+ posts on something he believes is a ridiculous hoax.. why would an intelligent person waste time on such a folly?

Now that is a little odd...

reply to post by mockrock



Evidence Nemesis/Nibiru is not a hoax but a serious theory that explains many cyclical extinctions.

Richard A. Muller has never been comfortable with conventional scientific wisdom. In the 1980s, when his mentor Luis Alvarez came up with the then outrageous idea that a giant comet or asteroid impact wiped out the dinosaurs, the University of California, Berkeley, physicist went him one better, suggesting that the meteorite had been hurled our way by a dim companion star to the sun, which Muller dubbed Nemesis. In the 1990s he posited that ice ages are triggered by space debris encountered because of cyclical changes in the location of Earth’s orbit.

www.scientificamerican.com...

Don't panic about the following text: this collision is in a approx a million years. But it does back up the theory Nemesis/Nibiru hypothesis. The reason we know about Gliese 710 is that it is an orange Dwarf so much brighter than the cooler brown dwarfs which are far harder to detect..

"New calculations show that the orange dwarf, called Gliese 710, will crash through the Oort Cloud that surrounds the Sun. The disruption to this shell of many billions of icy fragments would launch a shower of comets into the inner solar system, threatening the planets with devastating impacts."

Evidence of close brown dwarfs..

"A dim object less than 10 light years from Earth appears to be the closest brown dwarf yet found. The "star" is so cold that any residents on an orbiting planet would see a dark sun in their starry "daytime" sky.

The discovery suggests that brown dwarfs are common and that the objects could exist even closer to Earth."

Text www.scientificamerican.com...

blogs.scientificamerican.com...

And since it has already been successfully argued that if one had been discovered closer which poses significant risk they wouldn't tell us.. There is no way to rule out that there isn't one approaching.

But we can search for the effects this brown dwarf has.. Statistical evidence does exist for this and the argument that the orbit would be too unstable is false as it such orbits have been found.

"Sedna moves in a highly unusual elliptical orbit, Cruttenden has determined that Sedna moves in resonance with previously published orbital data for a hypothetical companion star."

Please read the whole article.
www.sciencedaily.com...

reply to post by mockrock

Don't panic about the following text: this collision is in a approx a million years. But it does back up the theory Nemesis/Nibiru hypothesis. The reason we know about Gliese 710 is that it is an orange Dwarf so much brighter than the cooler brown dwarfs which are far harder to detect..

"New calculations show that the orange dwarf, called Gliese 710, will crash through the Oort Cloud that surrounds the Sun. The disruption to this shell of many billions of icy fragments would launch a shower of comets into the inner solar system, threatening the planets with devastating impacts."

Why would anyone panic about something you just made up? That statement is not to be found in any of the sources you linked to.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by mockrock

 

The reason for the so-called blacked out areas is due to a stitching issue. The images are old. Some are IRAS. Some images are Sloan. Not sure if there are other sources.

To suggest that there is intentional hiding is odd. To suggest that there is a conspiracy is odd.

If it was a stitching issue, it would not be a regular shape. Why didn't thy resolve this?

And since we have already determined from your logic that NASA and the government wouldn't tell us if we were at risk.. Then one your previous answers on this subject is void.

"If Nibiru were out there it could not be hidden from the amateur astronomers. Didn't an amateur find comet Elenin? Didn't an amateur video an object striking Jupiter? There are many amateurs all over the world and they have more eyes than NASA or any other group you choose to disparage or not trust. " Stereologist

We just established that NASA's WISE and very few other telescopes would be able to detect and confirm this object.. So what do we have to look for.. Perhaps an indicator, some hint..

Blacked out area(s) in Google Sky.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by mockrock

 

Don't panic about the following text: this collision is in a approx a million years. But it does back up the theory Nemesis/Nibiru hypothesis. The reason we know about Gliese 710 is that it is an orange Dwarf so much brighter than the cooler brown dwarfs which are far harder to detect..

"New calculations show that the orange dwarf, called Gliese 710, will crash through the Oort Cloud that surrounds the Sun. The disruption to this shell of many billions of icy fragments would launch a shower of comets into the inner solar system, threatening the planets with devastating impacts."

Why would anyone panic about something you just made up? That statement is not to be found in any of the sources you linked to.

Here you go sir www.scientificamerican.com...
apologies.

reply to post by mockrock


Thank you. An 86% chance of disturbing the Oort Cloud in 1.5 million years is not something worth worrying about. More to the point, it has nothing to do with the late, lamented Comet Elenin. Neither does Sedna's orbital eccentricity. Neither does Muller's Nemesis Hypothesis. Comet Elenin was exactly what it appeared to be, a small, dim long term comet that had no effect on anything but the imagination of a few fearmongers.

reply to post by DJW001


The point was to show that the Nibiru/Nemsis theory is just that a theory which should not be derided as a hoax..

Furthermore that if our sun was part of a binary system that the only people who could verify that would be the people with specialist equipment. eg NASA

We have already argued that if it posed a risk we would not be told.. So we have established that it is not a hoax, but a theory.

So if we don't have access to this equipment.

We can look for the following.

1) Efforts to suppress the information. Disinformation, Blacking out areas of Google sky. Press conference on NEO to attempt to close the subject.

2) Economic collapse. New financial crisis when the recovery was well underway. Move to safe stocks, stock market 'finished'.

3) World leaders on recess for danger period.

4) Meteorites falling from the sky. Possible death in Argentina.

5) Desensitizing. UARS satellite followed by ROSSAT on the 9th November.

6) Emergency test transmission 9th November. Linked to rush for digital switch over.

7) Asteroid YU55 close pass 8th/9th November.

8) Amateur astronomers are reporting anomalies in ELEnin's orbit.

9) Increase in Solar flare activity.

10) Increased volcanic activity. Take a look at this list.. notice a pattern www.volcano.si.edu...

11) Increase in Earthquake activity (Hard to prove as increased detection methods may alter results, so better to focus on volcanic activity.)