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.

 

Allegation: "Nancy is nuts" Is that true?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   
"Solar anomalies" encompasses the topic of solar flares, near-sol objects, collisions of objects with the sun, fluctuations in the magnetosphere of our planet due to solar activity, increases in temperature of our planet due to increased solar radiation.

However, the real question in many peoples' minds are: "Why does the sun look so different? Why is the sky now green, orange, pink and yellow? whereas in the past it was blue?

As in this photo my son sent me this week:

www.abidemiracles.com...

Photo one perhaps implies a great deal of extra dust in the atmosphere. Okay, but it's not exactly a news item, is it?

And then I caught this one this morning in midwest Canada:
www.abidemiracles.com...

Photo two makes no sense at all--There are too many diverse light sources here--unless you have seen the sun photos at Zetatalk. And then it makes sense. Maybe, the interpretation doesn't make sense; the but PHENOMENON makes sense visually.

And now, in contrast to -- last January's NYCity sunset --
www.abidemiracles.com...
--look at the size of this sun today -- What happened? Clear day, both times.


Photo three shows a dramatically larger Sun than many of us remember. And just look at THESE lens flares--triangles within a triangle. ???

I'll put up another photo-correlation tomorrow [different locations, same timeframe, the sun with an "arm" extending off of it], so I don't overwhelm the system; but clearly, the sun is no longer just a form we can call "simple single sphere." There's a lot of "stuff" hanging off of it, and it's larger and hotter, sensed by the skin. It hurts.

Maybe among all the people who come here, we can come up with some hypotheses, what these images mean.

I'm only intending here, to bring up a topic, not start an argument, okay?




[edit on 7-11-2004 by Emily_Cragg]

[edit on 7-11-2004 by Emily_Cragg]

[edit on 8-11-2004 by John bull 1]




posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Sun light reflects off of different gases in the air thus creating different 'colors' in the sky.

Emily, I commend you for your efforts. You really do bring a lot of debate to ATS, which is good.

But I see a theme to your post, what are you trying to prove?



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 02:57 PM
link   
I'm intending to prove that people who only watch television don't get to know things that are truly interesting.

Not having a TV has changed the way I see the world. My sights are not limited by primetime news.

That's my whole point.




posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Emily_Cragg
I'm intending to prove that people who only watch television don't get to know things that are truly interesting.
Not having a TV has changed the way I see the world. My sights are not limited by primetime news.
That's my whole point.


Ever since I've been out in the UK, I havent even seen a TV.

You know, I'm looking at this pic and I just cant see it. Whatever it is...I dont know.

But seriously Emily, What is it that you want us to prove? That there is a planet behind the sun? I dont know...



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:02 PM
link   
YES! im in week 7 of no tv

and ive noticed alot of changes for the better in my life


truly too much tv makes you loose touch with the real world

the only thing that seems strange is the overall brightness of that sun.
1. its looking verry cloudy in the pic and that sun is mighty bright

2. that sun is just way to bright eperoid


[edit on 7-11-2004 by Mizar]



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Okay, first off you need to scale that image down by a lot. If you can't do it, see about getting a mod to help you out. Thanks.

Now, to answer your questions: As you said, there is a lot of dust in the atmosphere right now. Mt St Helens just erupted, another erupted prior to that somewhere else in the Pacific Ring of Fire, and just within the past two weeks another erupted in one of the Nordic countries. This leads to a lot of dust and ash in the atmosphere. This dust then refracts the light, or bends it, and absorbs different wavelengths of light. Whatever wavelengths are not absorbed or refracted come through, and seem more apparant.

And as for calling the Sun a "single simple sphere," I've never heard that phrase before. Yes, the Sun is single. Yes, the Sun is mainly spherical. But not in any way is the Sun simple.



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mizar
YES! im in week 7 of no tv


I'm going on Week 6 and it's killing me. I just need to see a good football game and some decent NBA.



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:06 PM
link   
its not that bad i did go see a movie the other day its just my life has been very bussy and the raido is a more usefull tool



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Thread's on the Sun, not TV or the lack thereof. Keep it on topic, folks.



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Here's something that could help you understand what I was talking about with the wavelengths of light. Read these:

www.sciencemadesimple.com...

www.sky-watch.com...

cimss.ssec.wisc.edu...



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:24 PM
link   
i thhink it the same problem that you had in this thread

www.abovetopsecret.com...


i think they are timed exposures of mabye even 2 seconds it wouldnt take long for the sun to get thoes difraction spikes or get that big



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:26 PM
link   
I see nothing wrong with that picture, its just because the sun is so bright its the camera that creates that effect, think its because the light hitting it is reflecting and making it look larger than normal.

You can also see this on websites like spaceweather where they put a disk in front of the lens to block most of the light when looking at the sun when there are CME's exploding from the sun.

Also the Next Gen telescopes have mirrors to deflect light so they can see more clearly.



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:28 PM
link   
They may not even be timed exposures, but just bad cameras. The NYC one looks like it's from a webcam.

As for the second one having "too many diverse light sources" is nothing abnormal. It's just the sunlight reflecting around in the clouds, not to mention that each hole is probably at a different angle to the Sun.

By the way, thanks for scaling down the image.



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Oh, so you guys are accepting all these ~Phenomena~ as "normal" and natural to photography, eh?

Interesting conclusion.

I would agree except that, in rare cases when I am able to look up in the direction of the sun in the sky--it just doesn't look right. There are too many spheres illuminated in the clouds now. In my sixty years, I've never seen anything like this before.

Any of you notice this?



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Emily_Cragg
Oh, so you guys are accepting all these ~Phenomena~ as "normal" and natural to photography, eh?

Interesting conclusion.

I would agree except that, in rare cases when I am able to look up in the direction of the sun in the sky--it just doesn't look right. There are too many spheres illuminated in the clouds now. In my sixty years, I've never seen anything like this before.


Yeah, I am saying that this is natural and normal. And when looking at the Sun through clouds you'll either see nothing (because the clouds are dense) or you'll see where the Sun generally is (because the clouds are less dense.)

When the clouds blocking the Sun are cirrus, you'll probably see the latter. When there are cumulous clouds blocking the Sun, you'll see the former. When it is the cumulous clouds there may be holes in the cloud cover, giving the idea that the Sun's light is coming from different places.

Also, looking directly at the Sun for too long without any form of protection can make it appear to have bright dots around it. It's the same with any bright light. I suggest not doing it, since you can severely damage your eyes.

Oh, and what is your idea for what is causing this? You've never brought one forth.



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Optical systems in cheap cameras can produce lots of little "extras"

You get spherical abberations, especially when the main object in not centered.

Some of the effects are listed here:

opticals


I've also seen, a cameras own internal structure show up in photos that have unusual shaped apertures..a lot of cameras have triangle, or diamond shaped apertures..Usually they are not noticable..BUT,
If there is a lot of light. the aperture squeezes down, to a small setting..
Then, objects that are usually pinpoints of light, will show up as the aperture shape..

As far as watching TV..If you stop all the sudden, My theory is that your brain SEARCHES for things are interesting, until it gives up, then EVERYTHING is interesting, for a while..Later on, you become more discerning..



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Guess you and I aren't seeing the same things, eh?

Oh well. I see what I see; and what I see has changed from decades ago when I was looking with the same curiosity I have now.

I guess "seeing" is like "preferences." It's subjective.




posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Emily_Cragg
Guess you and I aren't seeing the same things, eh?
.....


A lot brighter these days in AUS



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 07:26 PM
link   


I flipped the colours and added some simple guidelines, judging from someone taking a picture behind glass this is perfectly normal.



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 07:41 PM
link   
Nerdling,

I didn't even factor that in. True..a piece of glass adds to the optical fun!
All those webcams, the outdoor ones especially, housed in some sort of protective box, with glass or plexiglass windows..
Plexiglass woulkd be worse, it tends to discolor, gets a hazy film after a while. Scratches easily.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join