It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by yorkshirelad
How many times do we have to have photographs where the camera is pointing towards the sun and "nibiru" appears before people read what photographers have known for years.................
Come on I would really love to know. Let me guess Niburu has been approaching the earth for the past 100 years and all those photographers who said it was lens flare were actually government agents covering up the approach of Nibiru.
Sheesh. HOW MANY TIMES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FYI : Years ago I read about the nonsense surrounding "orbs". So I decided that I knew exactly when orbs would appear. I waited for a damp evening (obvious condition number 1), in the dark (more pronounced condition 2), took my digital camera (with lens close to flash - obvious condition3) and pressed the shutter. Guess what a gadzillion orbs. My god the spirits knew what I was doing..............
Oh no , hang on, I knew what I was doing having done photography from way back in the days of film, estimating shutter speeds, apertures etc. Chemicals to develop colour film and prints in near darkness.
I'm beginning to think that digital equipment makes people stupid.
Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
reply to post by Artlicious
Nice catch OP.
I don't know if it's Nibiru or Planet X, but it is definitely not a lens flare, and those that say it is obviously do not know much about photography. I'm open to other explanations that don't involve the word "lens" and/or "flare".
It is clearly obvious the clouds across the Sun in your pic do not match up with the one layer of clould over your orb, the size and angle are off.
It is just like this YouTube video I posted a while back, when the Sun goes behind a cloud and the orb remained completely unobscured and it was still called a lens flare.
Then the Sun came out from behind the clouds - AND THE ORB WENT BEHIND THE CLOUDS AT THE SAME TIME. Lens flares do not go behind clouds, especially when the main light source is completely unobscured.
Think about it - if Planet X/Nibiru exists and the governements of the world would not be able to help the citizenry - would it be covered up? Of course.
Start at 14 seconds in:
Good luck to all and peace.
Originally posted by smurfy
So it is probably not lens flare in your example, while the obvious lens flare is more mobile off to center left.
Originally posted by ProperlyErrant
reply to post by Artlicious
100% lens flare.
I have images of the same thing during the May 21, 2012 eclipse, and the image looks just like that, but with a big 'ol black hole in the middle of it (the Moon blocking the Sun).
In this video there is an obvious lens flare and a small orb that is obviously not a lens flare.
Umm are you sure, this one appears to be behind the clouds, should it not be shown in front of the clouds if it where a lens flare ?
Originally posted by Artlicious
Originally posted by Phage
Another thread on the same topic? No. Not Nibiru.
It is lens flare (more accurately, an internal reflection). Since the Sun has clouds across it, so does its reflection.
I did think about that.
But as you can see the Sun in my photo is criss-crossed with many contrails and the green orb is only intersected by one in the middle which overlaps more than just the green orb.