It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by cloaked4u
reply to post by koder
Ok, it's the only orange planet out in the sky, go and look for yourself, It will be the biggest and brightest one in the sky and that is the one i am talking about.
Originally posted by Gerizo
I suggest you respect other people's opinions since I wasn't asking yours. This isn't up for debate since a "lens flare" can't have a half crescent shadow from the sun's reflection. This is one of many pictures that show basically the same group of planet like objects. Yes, there are many variables. Maybe you should spend less time telling people what they do or don't understand, oh great armchair expert of Ats.edit on 22-3-2012 by Gerizo because: too shorten post, change font
Originally posted by Gerizo
I saw this video with those objects on youtube a while back. It was also discussed here on ATS in another thread, but a few people, actually some of the same debunker people on this thread, insisted it was a lens flare. A lens flare that can have a half moon like crescent. Ridiculous! I am just wondering why it shows up blue in color and all of the alleged descriptions of Nibiru have it being red.
Originally posted by ColAngus
Originally posted by danray35e
The 2003 prediction was a white lie to get the powers that be to force their hand, and they did.
Wow. You guys are so damn good at revising history. I'm seriously impressed. Make a hard-date prediction, and when it doesn't come true, just say you were bluffing to get everyone else to tip their hand.
You guys? I just read the website. Im not affiliated with it.
Seriously, good stuff..
Originally posted by danray35e
She doesnt make etas, the time line will not be revealed.
Please don't say that. That's not playing fair. You CANNOT keep claiming this 5, 10, 15 years down the line. I refuse to accept that.edit on 22-3-2012 by ColAngus because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Arken
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by Human_Alien
Sorry but when watching the video you see a site called The Galactic Free Press how do these people come up with such cheesy names.
As for his Heavy mass object if it was really there and could cause problems on earth it would also effect other bodies in the solar system as well, what you guys will do to perpetuate your wild BS theories is really spectacular!!!
INFACT...
Saturn massive storm 2011
Jupiter loses Big Belt
Uranus Mysterios Storm
Neptune Huge Storm
Maybe I missing someone
Originally posted by cloaked4u
reply to post by Shugo
It may be one of our cast of characters, but it seems to be getting bigger by the years and like i said, i do not remember any orange planets orange anything in the sky at all in my younger years. I am no star buff. This is obvious, i do not claim to be. I only notice the out of ordinary.
Originally posted by Super7dsmom
Originally posted by Arken
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by Human_Alien
Sorry but when watching the video you see a site called The Galactic Free Press how do these people come up with such cheesy names.
As for his Heavy mass object if it was really there and could cause problems on earth it would also effect other bodies in the solar system as well, what you guys will do to perpetuate your wild BS theories is really spectacular!!!
INFACT...
Saturn massive storm 2011
Jupiter loses Big Belt
Uranus Mysterios Storm
Neptune Huge Storm
Maybe I missing someone
I'm new but I wanted to add to that list..cause I have been noticing those things too..didn't they say that pluto was warming..that far out how could that happen without something that Produces heat cause that?
Originally posted by Human_Alien
reply to post by caf1550
We evolved?
It's almost being proven we DIDN'T evolve. Rather we were put here. But that's for another thread at another time.
Besides, I didn't say nor was it said that if/when Nibiru swings by it wipes out every living thing.
You're putting your own inflections into this story. Not I!
Originally posted by Human_Alien
Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by KonquestAbySS
Why is there no solid evidence of this "heavy mass" thats approaching?
And if there is and i haven't heard about it.... please provide said missing evidence
It depends on who you're waiting for to show the evidence.
Think about it.
Will the government?
No.
We have looting when there are minor blackouts.
So, if the government won't show us the evidence that means by quick deduction and association, the media and NASA are out of the equations too.
You HAVE to turn to alternative news while we still can. This is not to say all that is spun out is accurate but at least you know what's happening and perhaps, why.
ATS is a great place to start!
Originally posted by eriktheawful
Originally posted by ajay59
Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by ajay59
You are completely ignoring the fact that it was impossible to move beyond the speed of light!
False. It is impossible to move beyond the speed of light in a vacuum.
Clearly you did not read the link I posted.
Furthermore your previous claim quoted below is false.
Why does an HMO have to be detected by our known scientific methods? I seen recently that E=MC2 is not quite right when scientists accelerated a particle beyond light speed! Our science, as we know it is not right!
What friggin difference does a vacuum make? BEYOND THE SPEED OF LIGHT!
Calm........down.
You obviously do not have a large background in physics, which is fine. Not everyone does, nor needs to.
Unfortunately, you don't want to read and learn about it either.
So I'll try to explain as best as I can:
Two cars are on a freeway traveling at 60 Mph. They are traveling towards each other. When they pass, they will do so at a APPARENT velocity of 120 Mph. Even though each is only going 60 Mph.
Do it another way: same to cars, except one is going 61 Mph. They are going in the same direction this time. When the one going 61 Mph passes the car only going 60 Mph, the people in the 60 Mph car will see that the other car is only moving past them at 1 Mph.
Sound travels at 765 Mph through the air, at sea level (1 Earth atmosphere). However, sound will travel much faster than that in water, because water is much more dense than air. We still say that the speed of sound is 765 Mph however.
Light travels at 186,000 Mps in a vacuum. However, there are times when it can APPEAR that light travels faster than this. For example a radio frequency moving inside a waveguide. The leading edge of that radio wave will LOOK as though it is moving faster than light. It's not however, it only appears that way to the observer.
The easiest way I can put it to you is this: Particles shot through a chamber with an atmosphere will APPEAR to go faster than the speed of light, because those particles are traveling though a medium that is denser than a vacuum. Just like sound in water.
Does that help? The speed of light is still, and always will be 186,000 Mps in a vacuum. Nothing can exceed that, because the amount of energy required to accelerate mater to that speed would be infinite. The object's mass would become infinite, and it's length would become infinite. Time aboard a space craft that achieves light speed would become infinite too. 1 second at actual light speed for them, would be all of time in the universe, and more.edit on 21-3-2012 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ajay59
All I can say is, Google speed of light breached confirmed for anyone out there who wants to know the truth. It does not matter if in a vacuum or not.