It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Glargod
reply to post by Droogie
Can YOU identify it? No? then it is unidentified
Can YOU see it in the air? Yes? then it is flying
Can YOU see an object appear? Yes? then It must be an object
Therefor it must be a U de F de O and who are you do condemn people for calling it whatever they want and getting excited at that.
the first time you take your kid fishing and he catches a trout are you going to rain on his parade and tell him it no big deal?
Seriously. I think you're in denial and in your obscurium you must be so lonely that you want to dredge in a couple buddies.
Originally posted by Afterthought
The evidence Phage presented is a dark object or shadow, while the Op is a flash of light. Two different things.
Originally posted by misscurious
Personally I do not see the same thing in the image you posted as the one in the op.
Originally posted by Glargod
It may if you compare two similar items; however, you are identifying the darkness in your "evidence" and comparing it to the manifestation of a luminous spacial phenomenon in the OPs linked video.
Pray tell since when is "White" debunked by "Black" or is "Up" not "Up" because "Down" exists?
In the linked video, there does seem to be a fading light effect around Mercuty, but the luminescent object appears as the flare energy transects its position. The farce of what you called evidence did not even have a solar flare AND its time stamp of the still images is asynchronous and makes the sequence irrelevant.
I will amusingly assume that you did not even bother to watch the video fully!!!
Originally posted by darknull
Phage im kind of new to this kind of stuff but i would like you to clear this up for my because ill get annoyed if it floats around in my head to long. Anyways i understand how your post and ops are using different devices but i dont get how what you showed debunks at all.
Originally posted by Manhater
Funny, no one, not even The almighty god "Phage", has explained the appearance, when clearly, it was in view.
Lets just hypothesize that there is actually a very large object of unknown origin in the vicinity of the planet Mercury, and what we are seeing on the video is as a result of energetic particles streaming from the Sun and causing a reaction from the unknown object. The reaction could be as a result of intense EM effects, or as from particles striking it directly, whatever the case may be, how does showing other images containing a very similar effect disprove the unknown object hypothesis?
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Alien Abduct
The "flare" occurs at a mid-latitude of Mercury, not near a magnetic pole.
edit on 12/5/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)
In these HI-1 images, a daily median is used as the best near-real-time method to get the best CME enhancement. This results in the "hole" from Mercury, which has a larger dimension in the horizontal than the vertical due to the relatively quick motion of Mercury in the field of view over one day. The "brightening" near Mercury occurs in these images because there is less background removed where the hole is. You will note in the next image the bright area is gone because a different daily background is being used.