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.

 

May 29 2012 - Most recent Nibiru/Planet X pictures - Very Clear!

page: 13
17
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2012 @ 05:42 PM
link   
They spent trillions of our Life Tax on underground bases because they are a bunch of cowards. They all suffer from delusions of grandeur because they seem to think that they are above us (maybe they are, I don't know). If I had the self discipline to watch myself get shot I would strap them all to light posts and burn them alive.




posted on May, 31 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by Amadeo

Regarding what behooves me, I think it behooves you to know the difference between fact and fantasy. You really do need to work on that.



Let me ask ya something o' enlightened one.......does intelligent alien life exist?


Absolutely. That's something I don't doubt for a single minute. But that still has nothing to do with the fictional planet you think is hiding behind the sun and only pops out when someone points a crappy camera phone at it.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 04:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 



I'll explain that to you explain why all these earthquakes are being dropped from earthquake reporting sites:

Read the USGS reporting rules. It explains things quite clearly.


The USGS picks up a 2.5 magnitude earthquake in Micronesia but can't pick up multiple 5+ magnitude earthquakes in Canada that happen in one day in one of the most seismically stable regions of the whole planet, the Canadian Sheild?

Anytime you see an earthquake location appear on any earthquake reporting site map, it means at least three seismograph stations have picked up the same seismic wave, they need a minimum of three stations to triangulate the position. Following? Hence error bias from any one station reporting a "false" earthquake is eliminated. Of course they can be adjusted a few decimal points up or down.

Also, the USGS rules don't explain why these earthquakes are dropped from other legitimate earthquake reporting sites that also need three stations to record the same seismic wave in order to put a point on the map.

Great evidence of the coverup of Planet X - I knew no one would be able to refute it. Go back to your controllers and try hard to come up with something.

For any that would like to see my original earthquake post:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 31-5-2012 by PlanetXisHERE because: addendum

edit on 31-5-2012 by PlanetXisHERE because: epiphany

What are you gonna do when Nibiru never shows up?



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by TheProphetMark
 


Hey mate, just so you know... I stopped reading when you called everyone who sees this differently to you disinformation agents.

Your words carry no weight with that sort of attitude.


edit on 29/5/12 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)


Chadwickus...
I think I remember you being called a disinfo agent in times past...

I see how it feels now... I thought you were one, until I started arguing with you once I had an account.

Gah....

Why is this not obvious to everyone. These exact pictures are NOTHING...

I believe in planet X. I'm a believer! haha... The pictures in this thread are laughable.

Dang I sound like such an agent now... I wonder how I will sound in a couple more years on this site??



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 06:42 AM
link   
So, according to the crop depiction, what we see in the photo isn't the sun at all, as the sun is in the centre of the solar system.

Where abouts was the sun when this photo was taken?



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 06:44 AM
link   
reply to post by NuclearPaul
 


Have a look at the shadows on the wings/clouds and make your own assumption, at a guess i would say 10-11 o'clock in respect of the photo



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 06:46 AM
link   
Even if this were other celestial objects appearing from behind the sun, they would also be seen for thousands of miles from that location at least.

Being only able to see it from Melbourne just wouldn't be possible.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
Even if this were other celestial objects appearing from behind the sun, they would also be seen for thousands of miles from that location at least.

Being only able to see it from Melbourne just wouldn't be possible.


Of course it wouldn't be possible in fact it's impossible, but the OP stated elsewhere it's just invisible and that the government is acting to cover it up from all of us.. More film at 11...



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 


My apologies if you've already been called on this and responded, in which case I missed it.



It apparently emits/reflects most of it's light in the IR spectrum, so hard to see unless captured by special equipment and filters; the best time to see it are sunrise and sunset as the sun's glare is reduced, and most of what we see in this pics are acutally light reflected from it's swirling moons.


The pic presented in the OP is not IR photography. So how is nibiru photographed using standard photography?

edit on 1-6-2012 by DenyObfuscation because: rephrase



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by gwydionblack
People would much rather see the lens flare in their minds


If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck then.....


Originally posted by gwydionblack
than accept the possibility of anything else.


Or, it's just a plain ole duck.


Originally posted by gwydionblack
Could it be a hoax?


No, a hoax intimates an intention to perpetuate a fraud. THIS is no hoax, it's an actual photograph taken (likely with no intent at all other than the original photographer wanting a nice picture of the cloud deck).


Originally posted by gwydionblack
Could it be real?


Again, of course it is real. It is just NOT some rogue planet (never MIND with its own orbiting moons

It has been suggested, by the OP, in other threads that "PlanetX" is a dwarf star or a brown dwarf.
Let's examine that for a moment....most specifically with respect to the aforementioned OP's image.

Any Dwarf Star or Brown Dwarf that could so easily be photographed and APPEAR to be that large, would be catastrophic to us RIGHT NOW, not in some distant future, it would be right now. That Dwarf Star would be (like I said given its ability to be so easily photographed and its size) on the order of 40 to 60 sextillion tons. Roughly 10 times the mass of Earth, and significantly more than THAT of the moon.

It would already be drawing the Earth, the Moon, (likely) Mars, Mercury, and Venus into it's gravity and distorting all of our orbits. We would not be able to escape it's gravity (with it being as close as the photo suggests).

So, in my estimation is it possible it's even close to being real? Heck no.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 


Boo boo, NASA has no cards picturing Nibiru, close to its vest or otherwise. You just cant hide a planet and especially one that is supposed to be here in just over 6 months? Come on it took four years to get from here to Saturn!



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by TheProphetMark
 


I see no evidence to suggest that these are anything more then artwork even if they are potentially alien in nature. Where is your evidence that this is a warning?



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by CoolStoryMan
 


I will celebrate - and continue to do what I'm doing now - live my life like each day is the last.

Of course I'll be set for camping gear for life, and have a few months worth of food - of which I'll give some to the homeless or some shelter.

If nothing happens by Jan 1st and the worldwide tectonic/meteorlogical activity is not increasing and has scaled back - I will consider the danger to have passed.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


Planet X itself is best seen at sunrise/sunset with IR filters, the chemical composition of it's moons is different and the same doesn't apply to them.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 



Planet X itself is best seen at sunrise/sunset with IR filters, the chemical composition of it's moons is different and the same doesn't apply to them.


Your source for this information?



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 

I don't know if you're a Misinformation Redistribution Specialist by intent or just don't know what you're talking about. For now I'll pursue the clueless angle.

You say that


Planet X itself is best seen at sunrise/sunset with IR filters

because


It apparently emits/reflects most of it's light in the IR spectrum, so hard to see unless captured by special equipment and filters


This is not IR photography


Can you answer this question directly please, why is it showing up in a full color photo?

Read this. Is WIKI in on the coverup?

I also would like a source for


Planet X itself is best seen at sunrise/sunset with IR filters, the chemical composition of it's moons is different and the same doesn't apply to them.

And of course you realize that you're saying its moons should be visible to the naked eye?



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


Umm, I don't know what you're getting all worked up about. These are some of Planet X's moons, part of the Planet X complex.

My thread title may have been slightly inappropriate, I should have said "Planet X COMPLEX pictures".

If you didn't know, I think it's kind of obvious, the large orb is the Sun, and the two smaller orbs are two moons of Planet X.

There is no picture here of Planet X, as I mentioned in case you weren't paying attention, it will only show up with special IR filters.

I never said Planet X's moons could be seen with the naked eye, but they should be able to be seen with telescopes or any optical devices that can zoom.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 




My thread title may have been slightly inappropriate, I should have said "Planet X COMPLEX pictures".

A little too late for that now isn't it? When did you "realize" this?



If you didn't know, I think it's kind of obvious, the large orb is the Sun, and the two smaller orbs are two moons of Planet X.

No it's not obvious. I'm not the only one who does not believe that to be the Sun.



There is no picture here of Planet X, as I mentioned in case you weren't paying attention

And in what post did you mention this?



it will only show up with special IR filters.

Slapping an old floppy disk over your camera is not a "special IR filter". Modern digital cameras have IR blocking filters. If you don't remove it you need to adjust the exposure.



I never said Planet X's moons could be seen with the naked eye, but they should be able to be seen with telescopes or any optical devices that can zoom.

If the moons are this large in the pic why would you need a telescope or zoom?


Kick around any theory you like but do it honestly and without contradiction.

ETA: Again, do you have a source for this misinformation?


Planet X itself is best seen at sunrise/sunset with IR filters, the chemical composition of it's moons is different and the same doesn't apply to them.


edit on 5-6-2012 by DenyObfuscation because: ETA



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join