Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Another Gigantic Mothership UFO Photographed Near Sun By NASA

page: 18
116
<< 15  16  17    19 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Soulece
 

No, it's okay to ask, I happen to have my source.

reply to post by CiAlice
 

My source is bit new age, but the text is not, it's independent.www.luisprada.com...
edit on 27-7-2012 by swan001 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Folks, please relax, that is not a Mothership, UFO etc, it's simply Cameron the UK PM, everyone knows in the UK that clown is on another planet from the rest of us, that nice bright light thing is lit up like that when the USA wont let him Nuke China, and his flying machine is called HMS Prat Ship.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by mattdel
 


I know the OP had mentioned a beam of light from the so-called mothership, but kind of like the solar panel charging idea, I'm thinking it was energy being complied from the Sun not a beam onto the Sun. IMPO.

And I definitely see an interesting photo. This doesn't look like a glitch to me, the other two photos posted DO look like glitches because they are occuring on or near the Sun so that it could be a bright patch causing beams of light. But the OP's pic looks like this could be 100s of miles away from the Sun....like maybe just close enough to gather some of the Suns energy.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by LiveThruLove
 


or just maybe it was just a random cosmic particle striking the sensor at an angle, going through the CCD array for a couple of pixels before exiting it. The faint lines underneath the bright pixels is just the way the CCD bleeds through when you read it it. That is specific to CCD devices, on other types of sensors you won't get that effect.

you should really google the way a CCD sensor works, AND the way you read data from it, AND how an overload on a single pixel effects pixels below it AND then relooking at the picture, and see if that doesn't make more sense than a Jupiter-sized (or larger) spacecraft.

P.S. the way the CCD reacts to a bright overload isn't the whole story either, if you do that and still see some weird things, you need to look at the construction of the telescope, and the rest of the optical path(s) too....
edit on 27/7/2012 by Hellhound604 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Why is it that when there's a weird space anomaly people immediately think it's a UFO? It could just be one of those magnetic portal rift openings NASA has talked about or something else, and there should really be a different acronym for this. First of all UFO stands for Unidentified Flying Object. Unidentified-check. Flying-Nope. the definition of flying is "floating, fluttering, waving, hanging, or moving freely in the air". In essence there is no air or atmosphere in space... Get my point.

link: science.nasa.gov...
link: dictionary.reference.com...



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by swan001

]reply to post by Soulece
 

No, it's okay to ask, I happen to have my source.

reply to post by CiAlice
 

My source is bit new age, but the text is not, it's independent.www.luisprada.com...
edit on 27-7-2012 by swan001 because: (no reason given)

The problem we have is the veracity of your source. I don't know what your thoughts are on this but "Brother Veritas" opinion on spaceship-reptilians isn't what I can hang a hat on.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by CiAlice
 

His name is brother Brother Truth.
Come on. What's wrong with that? It must be true!



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by CiAlice
 

His name is brother Brother Truth.
Come on. What's wrong with that? It must be true!

The idea that enormous, or even small, rarely visible creatures inhabit the skies is a fanciful one. Such "critters" (Constable's term) would certainly assist the explanation of a number of observed phenomena {weak support}. I'm not very confident in this proposal, as I generally believe that most theories that depend upon several unrelated but similarly suspect disciplines for support, are bogus.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 10:41 PM
link   
the best one is the transformer one... There really is no explanation for that shape near the sun. Look it up. I have high end photographic equipment and get probably 90% of the artifacts they get when I make a movie or even a photo when it is attached to my 5,000$ telescope. The other 10% are unknown and I won't say it's not an artifact or something real.

But the new one some guy posted I looked up at the SOHO site and got the image and I have never seen anything like that in my 39 years of photography.

It defies logic that an image be it digital or analog from the old days could produce an object that precise. He will get ridiculed because he named his video and image TRANSFORMER NEAR THE SUN.

That makes this even more thought provoking because someone trying to fake something wouldn't be that retarded I think.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   
UFO or Data anomaly ( and even if it actually was a UFO they would still tell us that it is some sort of glitch) it looks freaking cool. I am going to use that on my next album cover.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by DeathShield
 


Album name "Glitch"



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 04:17 AM
link   
reply to post by CiAlice
 


As I said, this is just the name of the website. The text is independent.
Here, here is another publisher:

globalactionday.org...

As you see, the text is the same. The publisher is not the author of a text.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by CiAlice
 


As I said, this is just the name of the website. The text is independent.
Here, here is another publisher:

globalactionday.org...

As you see, the text is the same. The publisher is not the author of a text.



However further reading of additional articles which will be uploaded to this website in coming days will verify much of what is said in this transcript to be true. Verification from direct accounts and experiences by contactees, ex military personnel and other sources, many of them governmental.


We'll see but, unlike you, my bet is that what I consider to be "verification" and what the website proprietor considers to be "verification" are meters off. I am certain of that.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by CiAlice
 


Of course. Just remember the publishers of the text are not the author. The author experienced it and wrote it, then all papers published the text just like newspapers would do.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   
looks to me like its there and its real, doesnt look like a glitch to me. who knows what it is but i swear i read something some boffins wrote about how star energy would be the pinnacle of energy to be able to harness for deep space travel. There are loads of ufos that have been seen near the sun, all different wierd shapes, could be loads of different civilizations, could be something else we have no understanding of yet. cool tho, will try to find link to the story about space travel.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 09:24 AM
link   
One of the members contacted a scientist at NASA and asked about this anomaly and what seems to be, missing footage. Here's his reply:



Dear Mr *****

Images at SDO.gsfc.nasa.gov are spaced 15 minutes apart, precisely the interval you describe. Helioviewer provides access to 36 sec data as JPEG2000 files. Full science data is available through the JSOC. Note that science data usually has the proton hits, such as the feature you are viewing, removed.

As I discuss on the SDO blog on April 6, 2011
(sdoisgo.blogspot.com...) the event you are seeing is a proton hit. This quadrant of the CCD is drained up and to the right, so the trail points vertically down.

Proton hits happen all the time in SDO images, but most are not energetic enough to cause saturation of the pixels or go straight thru the CCD (rather than skip along the surface) and do not leave the linear trail seen in this example.

The JPEG2000 images are created before the particle hits are removed so the signature is removed in the science data archive but is still visible in these images.

Sincerely,
Dean Pesnell



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeathShield
UFO or Data anomaly ( and even if it actually was a UFO they would still tell us that it is some sort of glitch) it looks freaking cool. I am going to use that on my next album cover.




...........................and that's the conundrum we find ourselves in.

Do we put our fate in others( despite their credentials) or are we truly on our own to figure things out?
I often opt for the latter.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



And no, I don't know how NASA or Helio instruments work. So what?

Good point HA. That's why I believe your opinions in this matter are every bit as relevant as a plumber's opinion about auto repair.




Now that was funny and ironic because my plumber friend owns an auto shop!

It's been officially called a Proton hit by NASA (see above post)

Sounds plausible and that's where I remain.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Solid ground there. I can't argue with that!



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Chalk another one up to good ol' Phage huh? He called it a long time ago. I guess in this instance you believe NASA though?






top topics



 
116
<< 15  16  17    19 >>

log in

join