Amazing huge UFO next to Mercury decloaked by Sun Flare, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 107 times

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 06:30 PM by Glargod

reply to post by Phage

Finding somehing similar dont automatic debunk the alternative possibilities.

In this case it pretty much does.

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!!!

Sometimes we have to debunk the debunker!

Phage, I dub thee " Phagus de Reptilis Mannus "

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 06:32 PM 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. First your artifact is coming from the opposite side of the flare from mercury while ops is in front of mercury. Secondly your image the radiation or heat blasts white and the artifact goes dark but there is no read of white at all while ops is in orange and after the flare theres a short radiation burst or what not in the artifact zone. As i said im new to this and am not saying your wrong i just want to learn.

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 06:33 PM by Manhater

Funny, no one, not even The almighty god "Phage", has explained the appearance, when clearly, it was in view. It only showed, after the solar flare hitting, which seemed to be a solid object. Whether, Russia, or the USA, no will ever know. Explain that simple solid object. If it's swap gas, I might believe you. Least it's something.

edit on 3-12-2011 by Manhater because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 06:34 PM by darknull

O and i forgot in your image im not sure but two of the frames seem to be from the same point of orbit while the last from the way the stars change seems at a different point still dont understand still not an expert lol

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 06:46 PM by aussiemisfit

reply to post by Vandalour

Nice find..
Im off to research this a bit more myself..

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 06:52 PM by Vandalour

Originally posted by aussiemisfit
reply to post by Vandalour

Nice find..
Im off to research this a bit more myself..

thanks, glad you like it.
Do tell if you find anything

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 07:01 PM by Human_Alien

Okay, I'm not saying this might not be something but how do people like this Tuber (and your Dutchscense etc) go from a guess to a conclusion?

So according to him, this thing that I circled in blue, is something artificial?.......and cloaked?..... and only happens to show up when the CME hits it? Really?

Okay then.

So I say, the object (pointed out in blue) is not only an artificial UFO but I declare it hails from Andromeda and is roughly 20 times the size of Jupiter.

Two can make stuff up and present it as factual too!

Again, I'm not saying this is nothing but I hate it when people profess to know something in which there is no way of knowing. If he said "I think" or "I believe" or "To me it looks like....."
But he didn't.
He went straight to "It's a cloaking UFO".

edit on 3-12-2011 by Human_Alien because: ETA "According'

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 07:10 PM by Vandalour

reply to post by Human_Alien

Okay you disagree with the "tuber" as you call him, but could you explain why it could not be a alien ship ?
Are you not seeing the same thing as I am ? does that look like a planet, moon, flare to you ? did you watch the video

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 07:17 PM by Trillium

Originally posted by Droogie
I doubt that any of you has got any idea of what we're looking at. That's why you shouldn't jump to any conclusions whatsoever, because there are people around here that are very knowledgable regarding YT videos such as this.

I've seen a number of them explained in prosaic terms, and I'm sure this is one of them. Stupid people such as us, who don't know the we're looking at, shouldn't jump the gun by being convinced this is a UFO as big as mercury. Because, although we realize we're idiots, we don't believe this is necessarily a UFO.

Sorry but stop talking for the rest off us
we can make our own mind up

Telling you some pl. kid

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 07:27 PM by Trillium

Originally posted by Phage
We've seen similar before.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

It is the result of a process called background subtraction.
stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Does anyone else get really tired of "Hey youtube. ______ here."

edit on 12/3/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Sorry not even close this time man you got to get new material

Your as bad as gortex and his blimp

Man prety bad when the debunker are running out of idea

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 07:31 PM by Human_Alien

Originally posted by Vandalour
reply to post by Human_Alien

Okay you disagree with the "tuber" as you call him, but could you explain why it could not be a alien ship ?
Are you not seeing the same thing as I am ? does that look like a planet, moon, flare to you ? did you watch the video

That's my point. Sure, it COULD be but this Tuber is saying emphatically that it IS! And that's the universal UFO no-no. You can't spin an opinion (especially when dealing with spirituality/paranormal/alien etc) into a fact.

It becomes much more appealing for consideration purposes if something enigmatic is presented as a theory. Not a friggin fact like this bozo did.
And because he took that arrogant stand, I've dismissed it all together. It's really a pity when this happens.

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 07:37 PM by Human_Alien

reply to post by Vandalour

I feel the moral to my story is: It's not what you say. It's how you say it.

Hoagland sticks his foot in his mouth every other month because he does exactly what this Tuber did and that's: jumped to a Human conclusion about an inanimate/anomalous object that's 93-million miles away.

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 07:37 PM by SavannahCat

reply to post by Trillium

If running out of ideas = explaining to you the truth of something then I guess you're right.

I've looked at what Phage has offered.. and what Chadwickus has posted.. to me it looks definitive. A lens artifact.

Something else to keep in mind... the one thing these solar observations are known for.. it lens artifacts... but let's ignore everything and go to cloaked ship of some type.

I'll side with logic.. in that it's obviously (to me at least) a lens artifact.

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 07:51 PM by Pauligirl

Originally posted by Vandalour

thanks, glad you like it.
Do tell if you find anything

There's a guy at the sungazers site that's really good about answering questions on this topic. I've emailed him a link to this thread. I'll post his answer when it comes in.

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 08:32 PM by Phage

Well I suppose it could be a coincidence that the "UFO" just happens to appear and remain at the edge of the background mask.

But as far as the CME goes, on December 1st, Mercury was between Earth and the Sun, actually to the left of the Sun. The CME passed between Stereo A and Mercury so if the "UFO" was near Mercury, the CME did not hit it. It must have decloaked for some other reason.

Or maybe it's an artifact related to a background mask. I have also requested an expert opinion.

edit on 12/3/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 08:39 PM by swoopaloop

Originally posted by Glargod
reply to post by Phage

Finding somehing similar dont automatic debunk the alternative possibilities.

In this case it pretty much does.

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!!!

Sometimes we have to debunk the debunker!

Phage, I dub thee " Phagus de Reptilis Mannus "

Aaaaaand that's a win.

Thank you Sir. Consider that Debunker to be Debunked lmao.

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 08:50 PM by Phage

Here's another example of the effect.

And another

edit on 12/3/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 09:21 PM by Phage

One more. Here the mask and flare appear on the side away from the Sun due to the relative movement of Mercury.

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 09:30 PM by daynight42

Had the UFO believers never seen so many sci-fi movies, their heads wouldn't be so full of ideas like "decloaking" and other BS terms that are completely (to their minds and ours) FICTIONAL.

"But but maybe it does!"

This is as much a waste of time as arguing about you-know-what..."Yes it does." "No it doesn't." "This tells me so." "That's garbage."

End the banter. It's a damn picture. It doesn't and will never amount to anything other than a picture, no matter what it looks like, even if it's 100MP, crystal clear, and you swear you saw one just like it last night.

If you don't get what I'm saying, I have a million bucks I want to sell you for $1,000. Here's a picture of it, to prove it's real: --insert image here-- There, see? It's real! I'm going to send it to you, too! Just send me $1,000 first...

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 10:23 PM by shushu

Originally posted by THEDUDE86
could be an answer to if there is a moon there?But something large was seen there before and startled the scientific community .........this could be huge
look at this
en.wikipedia.org...'s_moon

Mercury...

Main article: Mercury's magnetic field

Graph showing relative strength of Mercury's magnetic field (seen at wiki link)

During its second flyby of the planet on October 6, 2008, MESSENGER discovered that Mercury’s magnetic field can be extremely "leaky." The spacecraft encountered magnetic "tornadoes" – twisted bundles of magnetic fields connecting the planetary magnetic field to interplanetary space – that were up to 800 km wide or a third of the radius of the planet. These 'tornadoes' form when magnetic fields carried by the solar wind connect to Mercury's magnetic field. As the solar wind blows past Mercury's field, these joined magnetic fields are carried with it and twist up into vortex-like structures. These twisted magnetic flux tubes, technically known as flux transfer events, form open windows in the planet's magnetic shield through which the solar wind may enter and directly impact Mercury's surface.[72]

The process of linking interplanetary and planetary magnetic fields, called magnetic reconnection, is common throughout the cosmos. It occurs in Earth's magnetic field, where it generates magnetic tornadoes as well. The MESSENGER observations show the reconnection rate is ten times higher at Mercury. Mercury's proximity to the Sun only accounts for about a third of the reconnection rate observed by MESSENGER.[72]

edit on 3-12-2011 by shushu because: (no reason given)

I'm going to suggest that possibly Mercury's magnetosphere was interacting with the CME and produced one of those TORNADOES.

edit on 3-12-2011 by shushu because: (no reason given)