Video of second object near the Sun, very clear.

page: 3
25
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 

Then you better tell that to all the worlds astronomers, professional and amateur.

Because none of them ( the millions of them) are not seeing your Planet X.

Nor is the Earth or any other planet in our solar system feeling any gravitational affects that would be attendant with any Planet X that large.
edit on 5/16/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)


Really? Was Robert Harrington, who believed in Planet X due to his scientific inquiry of it, just a bum off the street or a US Naval astronomer?

nibiruplanetx.org...

And we are supposed to follow the lead of astronomers who couldn't even figure out up to 20 years ago that comets and meteors might be dangerous to the earth and didn't change their minds until they saw Shoemaker-Levy impact Jupiter?

And we are supposed to rely in a government that took 40 years to figure out smoking was dangerous to your health?

People, when it comes down to it, you are on your own for many things, so you should do the research and make up your own minds and resist the programming of paid debunkers that would otherwise cause you to dismiss and ignore info that could be crucial to the survival of yourself and those you love.

Here are thousands of pictures, you think they all are faked or lense flares?

www.zetatalk.com...




posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 


Some are likly faked.

Most are most probably misidentified.

If the suns up wherever you are, why not just go out and stare at the sun for a while?


Surely you will see your Planet X since you claim it is there, right?


Oh, rubbed my eyes then saw some spots.

Planet X is in my head now!
edit on 5/16/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE

Originally posted by dawnprince
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 


Your statement is rubbish .
Nobody is capturing anything , other than mirrored images .
When somebody spots it with the naked eye , then you may be taken seriously , but we both know that will never happen



The Hubble has taken millions of images, none seen with the naked eye, are they all rubbish? If there were a planet heading towards us that could cause huge devastation, do you think governments would be falling all over themselves to warn us?



May 15, 2012 from MSN (and they don't put out suggestive news bits for the sake of wasting bandwidth or ink)
It's short but interesting:



Secret rogue planet may be hiding behind Neptune




Does Earth have a new friend? An astrophysicist says it's likely that an as-yet undiscovered planet exists on the dark fringes of our solar system, messing with the orbits of celestial bodies in the Kuiper Belt, just beyond Neptune. Rodney Gomes says the new planet could be anywhere from half to four times the size of Earth and is likely a rogue planet that floated over from another solar system. Other space scientists say Gomes' findings may be a lot of hot air and aren't sure his calculations support his theory. Buzzkills. We already lost Pluto. Stop playing with our hearts. Give us the new guy.

now.msn.com...



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Thanks Human Alien. You know what they say, half-truths are almost as bad as lies or zero truths. They are just as confusing and just as unhelpful - that is what this is, a half-truth.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 


Some are likly faked.

Most are most probably misidentified.

If the suns up wherever you are, why not just go out and stare at the sun for a while?


Surely you will see your Planet X since you claim it is there, right?


Oh, rubbed my eyes then saw some spots.

Planet X is in my head now!
edit on 5/16/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)


Very predictable. When confronted with logic fall back on other tactics.



I respect a reasoned argument, but when one resorts to mocking, belittling, insulting - basically anything derogatory, it is a) the mark of an insecure individual; or b) an effective tactic used by paid posters using HB Gary protocols otherwise known as sock puppets, shills, trolls - or the new one you find in actual job descriptions "knowledge management specialists".




posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 


Where's the logic?

Where did you hide it, because I missed it.

You name a handful of people who subscribe to your theory and discount the millions if not billions who study the solar system as a hobby and/or professionally.

That's your logic?

Seriously is it?

eta: lol
I disagree, so of course I must be "a paid shill" or "disinformation agent", or "troll"?

That is just as predictable a response as you say mine is.
edit on 5/16/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Thanks Human Alien. You know what they say, half-truths are almost as bad as lies or zero truths. They are just as confusing and just as unhelpful - that is what this is, a half-truth.


I think it really comes down to our level of spiritual awakening and/or our hard-wiring. Because to me, I know there are other celestial bodies that belong to our solar system including but not limited to a dwarf binary star. Now whether this knowledge is implanted deep within my DNA or...it's something I am just aware of, I don't know.

Taking Pluto out was a very calculating move. This was their chance to make us become semi-used to saying 8 planets.
So when the next one shows up, it won't have that dubious and nefarious title of 'Planet X' because technically it'll be an innocent and welcoming replacement called Planet IX

I don't know when this will become evident but I am pretty certain it'll be within my lifetime and I'm 53 already. So....let everyone think what they want. That's not our concern or problem to solve. We're here to share what we think/feel or know. And those who resonate with it.....will have their own epiphany.
To the others?....it doesn't effect the outcome one bit.




posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   
The "object" actually does move with the camera movement but not much. Lens flare. Something like this:
edit on 5/16/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Another example can be found here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 5/16/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 


Where's the logic?

Where did you hide it, because I missed it.

You name a handful of people who subscribe to your theory and discount the millions if not billions who study the solar system as a hobby and/or professionally.

That's your logic?

Seriously is it?

eta: lol
I disagree, so of course I must be "a paid shill" or "disinformation agent", or "troll"?

That is just as predictable a response as you say mine is.
edit on 5/16/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)


Here is my logic, see if you can grasp it and come up with a coherent argument that actually addresses the point I'm making and refrain from coming up with distractions that are the hallmarks of "knowledge management specialists":

Lens flares, artifacts, optical illusions etc move with the camera, and do not hide behind clouds. Hence, this object is not one of those. It is neither the moon, Jupiter, Venus or any other "recognized" planetary body. Why can't it be Planet X? Is that too much for you to handle? Maybe you had better lay off ATS and stick to Huffington Post, it may be more your speed.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
The "object" actually does move with the camera movement but not much. Lens flare.


I don't know if we're watching the same video buddy, because in this one there is an obvious lens flare that acts like a lens flare and another spherical object beside the Sun that does not move, yet hides behind the clouds, as a lens flare could not.

www.youtube.com...

Watch it for yourselves people and make up your own minds!



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 

I'm your buddy now? How nice.
Yes buddy, I watched the video. The "object" behaves in exactly the same why the lens flare does in the video I posted. Except in the video I posted the camera operator demonstrates that it is lens flare.
edit on 5/16/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Here's another
edit on 5/16/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
The "object" actually does move with the camera movement but not much. Lens flare. Something like this:
edit on 5/16/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)





Very cool presentation!!! I wonder if the OP in the video would try that if it's as simple as it looks.

Seeing I might have your attention, what determines what side of the solid object a lens flare will show up?



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 




Why can't it be Planet X? Is that too much for you to handle? Maybe you had better lay off ATS and stick to Huffington Post, it may be more your speed.

Too much for me?


Why can't it be lens flare or lens anomalies?

Because you say so I imagine.

Gee thanks for telling me to lay off ATS, that is very kind of you.

It would also get me out of your hair too, huh?

Planet X takes more unfounded faith in something hugely improbable for me.

gosh maybe I should just leave
ATS since I can't seem to unquestioningly accept something there is absolutely no evidence for in your video.
edit on 5/16/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


can it hide behind the passing cloud? In your video...the spot is clearly not hidden by the finger in front...because it's the lens...not the same case here.
edit on 16-5-2012 by MarioOnTheFly because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I'm not disputing whether planet X is real or not. What I am disputing is the video the OP posted is perhaps planet X or another planet...which it is not. Watch the video at the 1 minute mark. Just as Phage posted above the lens flare/illusion disappears when the light (from the sun) is covered and not directed back into the camera.

At the 1:05 mark you can see in the center of the cloud the same object as the sun starts to break through the clouds omitting sunlight back to the camera. Around the 1:20 mark you can clearly see the "2nd object" in FRONT of the clouds and not behind it. How is that possible? Anyways, I stand with my opinion that THIS video is no other than lens flare/illusion.
edit on 16-5-2012 by HawkeyeNation because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by HawkeyeNation
 


I admit there are elements that makes this look like an illusion. I'm puzzled about it going behind the cloud. If it's a lens thing...it could not go behind. Unless it's a mirror image of the sun going behind the cloud....but how they can than be out of sync? If the sun is covered by the cloud...the mirror image should have faded away also, but it remained bright much the same luminosity even when sun was behind the cloud....until itself was covered by the cloud.

Even if this is an illusion...it's pretty interesting effect.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly
 


Unless it's a mirror image of the sun going behind the cloud....but how they can than be out of sync?


It is a reflection of the Sun. They are not "out of sync".

Notice that the reflection gets dimmer when the cloud passes over the Sun. The reflection does not disappear behind the cloud, it blends into the very bright cloud (backlit by the Sun).

When the cloud moves past the Sun it, and the reflection, become brighter. The reflection now becomes visible against the cloud (which is no longer backlit).

The brightness of the reflection follows the brightness of the Sun.

The reflection (not technically lens flare) is caused by the protective cover over the lens. The light of the Sun bounces from the lens to the cover and back into the camera. A similar effect can be seen with a double paned _

edit on 5/16/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Phage.


The reflection caused by the protective cover over the lens. The light of the Sun bounces from the lens to the cover and back into the camera. A similar effect can be seen with a double paned _


Yes Phage . We used to see the exact same thing through the double glazing in the school windows at sunset . Even though we were only maybe 8 or 9 years old , not one of us were stupid enough to think that there were 2 suns .



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Time and time again these outrageous claims, by the very small minority , of there being two suns have been debunked .
I think it's time that threads of this nature are either dis-allowed completely or highly scrutinised by the MOD'S before being allowed onto the forum boards.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
Really? Was Robert Harrington, who believed in Planet X due to his scientific inquiry of it, just a bum off the street or a US Naval astronomer?


Your problem is with mixing up Planet X with Nibiru


Once upon a time Pluto was Planet X before it was discovered.

The Planet X that Robert Harrington was talking about was a new planet in the Kuiper Belt that was early called Xena with moon Gabriel but was then renamed to Eris with moon Dysnomia

Here is the orbit... (some sites use this as Nibiru's orbit)



Eris is bigger than Pluto and there are many others out there already discovered

It was Z Sitchin that distorted Roberts work on Planet X but even Sitchin says that Nibiru won't be here for a LONG time...


“Nibiru settled into a clockwise orbit (equal to 3,600 orbits of Earth around the Sun). Nibiru stabilized into a clockwise orbit, equal to 3,600 orbits of Earth around the Sun until 10, 900 B.C.E., when Nibiru arrived earlier, due to increasing drift from Solaris of Uranus. Uranus' gravity sped Nibiru's orbit. As a result of this
close encounter between Nibiru and Uranus, one of Nibiru's moons, Miranda, was captured by and became a moon of Uranus as Nibiru and Uranus pulled at each other. From 10,000B.C.E. on, Nibiru's revolution sped to 3.450 Earth years; which makes Nibiru's next return 2900A.D. rather than 2012 as predicated on the earlier 3600- year orbit”

Sitchin, Z., 2007, The End of Days, pages 315 - 317


2900 AD not 2012
In Sitchin's own words... that is 892 years away...

Now you could try to make a case for that brown dwarf NASA is talking about that they named NEMISIS


But your video is not showing any real object
If there was a second sun that close, you would feel the heat Temperatures would soar...
edit on 16-5-2012 by zorgon because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
25
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join