Twilight, chemtrails, infrared and the return of Planet X

page: 6
7
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by Phage
 



The Pleiades is not directly overhead at 38º N. It is about 68º above the horizon at its highest at this time of year.


reply to post by eriktheawful
 



The Pleiades (aka The Seven Sisters), can and do appear to be almost directly over head at night during this time of year....YES even at 38 deg N.




Do you all want to work this out amongst yourselves before strutting it on the boulevard or will you be needing arbitration?


You did this before with your neck and the moon last time.

As I said: "They can appear to be almost directly over head"




posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by eriktheawful
 

I was set up wrong. Pleiades is peaking at 76º now.



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by eriktheawful
 

I was set up wrong. Pleiades is peaking at 76º now.


I was going by memory. Fall and Winter are my favorite times to star watch. But I just checked my program, and yah, it's sitting at about 76 deg.

Lux, I know I've discussed this with you before. If you use a program like Stellarium, it can lay a polar grid against the sky for you. Look at it, and see that 90 deg is literally a point. The next circle is 80 deg, then 70, etc.

When objects start to get up near or past 70 deg, they can look like they are over head with our eyes outside. It's because we don't have any reference normally (like the horizon) within our field of view. So I can understand why you think it's directly over head.

Shoot. At 76 deg, it's only 14 deg from being right over head, so I'm sure to many it would look that way.

BTW - please understand I'm not debating you to make fun of you. As far as your meta stuff, or feelings you are having, I respect that (don't have them myself, but then I'm me, not you). And I'm sure you are just as frustrated in trying to make us believe that the LOS on that camera is not the same, as we are trying to show you that it is.
I just hate seeing people get worked up over things that I don't think they should be so worked up or worried over.....

and now for some strange reason I've got this sudden urge to sing Sponge Bob's "Best Day Ever" song........and at 46, that would be quite silly.

I'm off to see if I can't see the ISS through the clouds from Sandy (they stretch all the way down here, amazing).



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by eriktheawful
 

Right on Schedule.


edit on 10/29/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by luxordelphi
 

What's the problem? 68º is quite close to overhead but it is not directly overhead.
But I forget, you have a problem with spatial relationships.


So 68 degrees is the same as 90 degrees? 76 degrees is the same as 90 degrees? I have a new signature for you: Everything is the same as everything else.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


So 68 degrees is the same as 90 degrees? 76 degrees is the same as 90 degrees?

I didn't say that.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Your in a lot of planet x threads and then i noticed your location
PLANET 10 ,What are you hiding



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 06:25 AM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 



So 68 degrees is the same as 90 degrees? 76 degrees is the same as 90 degrees? I have a new signature for you: Everything is the same as everything else.


That's why I asked you what instrument you used to measure the elevation. Without precise measurements, you are making a subjective observation. Subjectively, anything can be anything else.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by luxordelphi
 

What's the problem? 68º is quite close to overhead but it is not directly overhead.
But I forget, you have a problem with spatial relationships.


So 68 degrees is the same as 90 degrees? 76 degrees is the same as 90 degrees? I have a new signature for you: Everything is the same as everything else.


To our eyes, with out a frame of reference, it can be.

Here is a picture of the night sky at your latitude:



The red dot is 90 deg. The first circle out is 80 deg, and next circle out is 70 deg. The green circle is the Pleiades. This picture is also with a polar coordinate grid in place, and I have the FOV set to 130 degrees.

Humans normally have a FOV of 100 deg, so when you look directly over head, most of the horizon is going to either not be very visible, or in your extreme edge of your vision, making reference very hard. We also of course are not walking around with a polar coordinate grid overlay to see. So let us take a look again, with the FOV set to 100 deg and the grid removed:



As you can see, judging exactly what degree in declination the Pleiades are becomes much harder.

If you insist that they are at 90 degrees, it would be quite simple for you to prove this if it's true:

Get a camera with a fisheye lens with a FOV of 180 deg, mount it on a tripod with it the camera set to 90 deg so that it's LOS is directly up and pointed at 90 deg.
Open the shutter for at least 15 seconds. Then upload the raw picture to here and show us.

That would be much better than you just saying that this is what you are seeing. Not because we think you are lying or anything like that, but because humans are not very good data recorders.

Have 10 people watch the same event, and you'll get 10 different stories as to what they saw.

ETA: by the way, you could do this too for the sunrise and sunsets that you say are "ping ponging" all over the place.
Get a couple of cheap web cams and set them up. Have one directly facing East and one Directly facing West. Alignment of them is crucial however, so you have to make sure you are making them line directly up with East and West.
Note the camera's FOV angle. Now you know how many degrees your pictures are. Document each sunrise and sunset. The pictures should show you how many degrees the sun is from East and West (to the north of them).

There are plenty of books and online sites that can show you how many degrees north of East and West the sun should be on any given date for your exact latitude and Longitude, along with sunrise and sunset times. Keep a journal and log with these pictures.

If the sun is off from where it is suppose to be, you'll have your proof, as long as you can show that you have set everything up correctly.
edit on 30-10-2012 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 



I was set up wrong. Pleiades is peaking at 76º now.

reply to post by eriktheawful
 



I was going by memory. Fall and Winter are my favorite times to star watch. But I just checked my program, and yah, it's sitting at about 76 deg.

reply to post by DJW001
 



That's why I asked you what instrument you used to measure the elevation. Without precise measurements, you are making a subjective observation. Subjectively, anything can be anything else.


Short recap: (lol) Directly overhead means the highest point in the heavens for an earth based observer or 90 degrees. 76 degrees means 14 degreees off the directly overhead position. 68 degrees means 22 degrees off the directly overhead position. According to some sites, 22 degrees is an arm's length.

Why is this significant: The Pleiades, the moon, the sun and zodiac stars all travel within a certain area - the ecliptic - from our earth point of view. At mid-latitudes, like 38 degrees N, they should never appear directly overhead.

Continued recap: (lol) (You three have taken astronomy to the realms of the ridiculous.) 68 degrees is not 90 degrees. 76 degrees is not 90 degrees. Neither 68 degrees nor 76 degrees are directly overhead. They are not even close to being directly overhead. They would never be perceived as being directly overhead. They never will be considered 'close' to directly overhead.

Conclusion: Adhering to Phage's new motto: 'Everything is the same as everything else', is lulzy, yes, but please...this was not intended to be an interdimensional or separate reality type of thread.

Definition of "altitude"

The angle of a celestial object measured upwards from the observer's horizon. Thus, an object on the horizon has an altitude of 0° and one directly overhead has an altitude of 90°.


Zenith

The zenith is the point on the celestial sphere directly overhead the observer. It has an altitude of +90o in the horizontal coordinate system.


Why is the moon never directly overhead?

The moon is always over there its never directly overhead.


If you've never seen the Moon directly overhead, it's almost certain you've never seen the Sun directly overhead, either. The Moon orbits at an angle that varies between 18 and 28 degrees relative to the equator. If you lived at 28 degrees latitude or lower (southern Florida or further South), the Moon could be located directly overhead. Or, if you lived in the Southern hemisphere above 28 degrees South latitude, you'd occasionally see the Moon directly overhead (Brazil, Peru, etc).


To sum: lol.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Why is this significant: The Pleiades, the moon, the sun and zodiac stars all travel within a certain area - the ecliptic - from our earth point of view. At mid-latitudes, like 38 degrees N, they should never appear directly overhead.
That's right. And they don't.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Although you claim to be replying to me, you still haven't answered my question: What instrument did you use? If you did not use an instrument, your observation is meaningless. You cannot observe an object at the zenith while standing upright. Unless you are a mutant, your neck is incapable of bending at a ninety degree angle. That is why objects above (around) sixty degrees elevation appear to be "overhead."



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Why is this significant: The Pleiades, the moon, the sun and zodiac stars all travel within a certain area - the ecliptic - from our earth point of view. At mid-latitudes, like 38 degrees N, they should never appear directly overhead.
That's right. And they don't.


Because of the return of Planet X, these objects are intermittantly appearing directly overhead from mid-latitudes. This is one proof of the return. Last night, for me, the moon was within 2-3 degrees of directly overhead. The Pleiades was too obscured (chemtrails) to see.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 



Last night, for me, the moon was within 2-3 degrees of directly overhead.


Determined to within three degrees by what sort of instrument?



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Why is this significant: The Pleiades, the moon, the sun and zodiac stars all travel within a certain area - the ecliptic - from our earth point of view. At mid-latitudes, like 38 degrees N, they should never appear directly overhead.
That's right. And they don't.


Because of the return of Planet X, these objects are intermittantly appearing directly overhead from mid-latitudes. This is one proof of the return. Last night, for me, the moon was within 2-3 degrees of directly overhead. The Pleiades was too obscured (chemtrails) to see.


Get a big credit card, buy me a huge TV and a nice Italian leather couch, and ship it all over. I want to spend the last days of the world in comfort. The world is going to end, you wont need to pay it off, right?

When are we expecting to see this imaginary planet, sir? I want to know how long I have to get Faith Hill to accept my proposal.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Although you claim to be replying to me, you still haven't answered my question: What instrument did you use? If you did not use an instrument, your observation is meaningless. You cannot observe an object at the zenith while standing upright. Unless you are a mutant, your neck is incapable of bending at a ninety degree angle. That is why objects above (around) sixty degrees elevation appear to be "overhead."


I guess you've never heard of lawn chairs. They can be extended and flattened so that they are perpendicular to the zenith (90 degrees or, more commonly - directly overhead.) (I was out waiting for the libration event lol.) I'm asking myself, at this moment, what's wrong with this picture? And I'm answering myself saying that I think I've stumbled into a circus.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 



I guess you've never heard of lawn chairs. They can be extended and flattened so that they are perpendicular to the zenith (90 degrees or, more commonly - directly overhead.) (I was out waiting for the libration event lol.) I'm asking myself, at this moment, what's wrong with this picture? And I'm answering myself saying that I think I've stumbled into a circus.


So, you measured the altitude of a celestial body to within three degrees by using... a lawn chair. Why do navigators waste so much money on sextants, I wonder?



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 





So, you measured the altitude of a celestial body to within three degrees by using... a lawn chair. Why do navigators waste so much money on sextants, I wonder?


I'll need confirmation from the "Rocket Surgeon Sextant Champ" on this one.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by flyswatter
 



When are we expecting to see this imaginary planet, sir? I want to know how long I have to get Faith Hill to accept my proposal.


Well...imo, you all, stuck to the monitor, aren't going to see it. You're not able to recognize anything in the heavens that internet constructs don't tell you about. How easy, really, to fool an entire internet-centric population.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Sweetie, when are we gonna see it?

It's causing all this calamity in the heavens; surely someone can produce a legitimate jpeg of the damned thing, no?

Lawn chair...lol.





top topics
 
7
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join