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.

 

So NASA says THIS is a "1 millimeter dirt" in the lens of SOHO spacecraft, BUT...

page: 3
28
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


Really! you went through all that to debunk this... those numbers are not the correct font...




posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Mandrakerealmz
 





Yeah pretty much in real time. For the dirt theory to hold up it should have been delayed.


Why should it be delayed? Do you think you can "see the flare" BEFORE the light reaches the cam?



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Not exactly... I understand that as your opinion but for the simple look at the last gif presented on the thread (if no special tweak was added to the image), I and it seems other on the thread are not in agreement with that position.

In any case we seem to agree that your first reply was erroneous (or at least not precise), and that fact made the simple one line reply you made have no meaning...



The light from the Sun hits the sensor and the fiber upon it at the same time.


...and I still am unable to see the point you were attempting to make...

PS: NASA is not an authoritative entity, they have their own agenda and in fact are well known to even make huge unplanned mistakes. If in fact something like the above was indeed 100% in accordance with those proposing an alien object, NASA would be obligated by policy to hide and deny it...



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mandrakerealmz
reply to post by nineix
 
Well excuse me for not believing NASA or the US Government.... They don't have the best record :/


You don't HAVE to believe the US Gov or NASA. run around in circles flapping your hands all you want.

Ignoring all the other evidence, presented here, several times, in numerous threads, told over and over by independent sources, reputable members with backgrounds, experiences, training, and education such that an informed and unanimous consensus is in total agreement, is just ignorant.

I recommend reviewing the motto of this website.

Denying ignorance does not equal clinging to a personal bias as basis for 'evidence'.

If it comes from NASA or The US Govt. it MUST be false? Really? Would anyone like to chrip in and say from what position making that kind of argument qualifies as?

edit on 24-3-2012 by nineix because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Panic2k11
 


...and I still am unable to see the point you were attempting to make...

If you read the post I was replying to you might understand. There is no reason for there to be any appreciable lightspeed delay.


If in fact something like the above was indeed 100% in accordance with those proposing an alien object, NASA would be obligated by policy to hide and deny it...


And you know this...how?

In any case, if something like the above were a real object it would be have been seen by amateur astronomers all over the planet. NASA would a very difficult time hiding or denying it.

edit on 3/24/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by nineix
 
I was merely questioning NASA's statement like others. No need to get Mean

edit on 24-3-2012 by Mandrakerealmz because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Mandrakerealmz
 


Questioning the veracity of any source, official or otherwise is more than fine and healthy, but, to blindly expect and/or accept any bias, whether in favor or against anyone or anything without verification, or independent followup to ratify or dispute such, is not an approach of reason, but, of bias.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Nice Info digging there chadwickus, nice to be able to see the anom has been there fe a few years, however now I fear it may become an orbital mining vessel


The way I see it, it's like a rain drop on your windshield, it too lights up when light hits it. So even if it is a solid fibre, I would expect it to thin out in opacity on the edges, so it would appear semi see through, and when the light hits the fibre it distorts the light causing it to appear.... Like an intergalactic orbital mining vessel, all your plasmas belongs to us!



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 

You rotated the entire image. You "rotated" the Sun and the spacecraft.

This is what a spacecraft rotation looks like.
Note that the bright areas of corona do not rotate. Note that the planet does not rotate. Note that the fiber and that "bump" on the coronagraph disc do rotate...in unison.


edit on 3/24/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)


So you're saying that the camera apparatus of the spacecraft has its own axis, so that the spacecraft rotates but not the sensor, right??

Though in this very same website, NASA "explains" another anomaly, the famous black dot in the Sun's north pole, ALSO as a "dirt in the sensor", but this video of SECCHI shows a moment when STEREO tilts to the right and the black dot follows the Sun to the left. I assume if it was another dirt in the lens, it should follow the tilt of the spacecraft, shouldn't???





I guess this invalidates your example!


edit on 3/24/2012 by 1AnunnakiBastard because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I have reread the original post and indeed the user makes a valid point. Soho is at L1 Lagrangian point, ~1,500,000 km nearer the Sun than Earth itself. If the images could have a good enough time resolution it would be possible resolve the issue.

In regards to NASA it is well know that NASA is primarily a tool for geopolitics, this allied with known reports generated to and from the USA government clearly indicates that any "alien" discovery would constitute a subject for national security and not for immediate public scrutiny. This sadly is only logical in the world we live in, as a further example we can look back on how the simple report regarding the possibility of past life on Mars was handled, or even later to the debacle of the Project Blue Book or to the incredible news conference by the military regarding the UFOs over Washington DC...

In any case claiming that if something like the above were real object it would be have been seen by amateur astronomers is extremely simplistic, since only NASA and other governments may have that capability. For instance it would be interesting to be able have the same access to data from the Japanese Hinode (or other similar probes in similar vantage points).

edit on 24-3-2012 by Panic2k11 because: For clarity...


----
(Indeed the probe is STEREO (my mistake, heliocentric orbit ) the comparison would indeed outside of the possible) but then claiming amateur astronomers are capable of gathering the same level of resolution becomes even more improbable.)



edit on 24-3-2012 by Panic2k11 because: Not SOHO but STEREO location



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 

One more time...
The image is rotated to keep the north pole of the Sun "up".



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mandrakerealmz
If its a spec of dirt why is it illuminated at the time that it would take for light to hit said object? If it was light bouncing from inside the camera/sensor then it would be delayed by seconds.

It is not.....


Wow, if you have this little understanding about how light works then what are you doing engaging in a technical debate about it? How do you possibly rationalize that light from the flare is going to reach the image sensor any sooner or later than it will reach an object that is sitting on the image sensor?



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by nineix
 
Ooh yes I accept that. I'm very bias against NASA and most government agency's. However right now on this planet. I view that as cautious and necessary. Question everything.

Plus im trying to find Biospheres

edit on 24-3-2012 by Mandrakerealmz because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Panic2k11
 


I have reread the original post and indeed the user makes a valid point. Soho is at L1 Lagrangian point, ~1,500,000 km nearer the Sun than Earth itself.

We are not talking about SOHO.

You think coronagraph images are out of reach of amateurs?
www.cloudynights.com...



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   
I find it lacking adequate explanation that a $1.2 billion satellite has a 1 millimeter fiber inside it. Just does not make sense.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Mandrakerealmz
 


Well there's two of us questioning you about basically the same thing. Do you have a response?



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by emberscott
 

You find it easier to believe that there is an object near the sun which "follows" the satellite as it rotates around the Sun and follows the rotation of the satellite around its axis?



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by nineix
 


Thats an understatement. The sheer capacity to deny reality and ignore the evidence here is stunning. I'm loosing hope for humanity based solely on this thread alone.

I have no idea how an object that moves with the camera and has been there since the cameras inauguration can be rationalized as anything other than an artifact of the optical system. It doesn't even look like a spaceship!



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 

One more time...
The image is rotated to keep the north pole of the Sun "up".



The image is rotated while processed by NASA??? Not by the spacecraft?? Sorry if I'm annoying you about this detail, because I'm no rocket scientist, but how does it explain the tilt of the other GIF I've shown you?? If you say the images are rotated to keep the north pole up and if NASA says that the black dot ALSO is a dirt in the sensor, how come it doesn't follow the tilt of the camera??



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join