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.

 

Unusual Object Appears on STEREO-B Satellite Image

page: 3
29
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by angrymartian
 


In the 90's I was waiting under a large gas station carport for a friend to return to work. The sun was somewhere between 12:30pm and 2pm, Fall. The carport was just blocking the sun and I was wearing a pair of dark sunglasses. As I looked up, I thought I saw dust or some other particle reflecting the sun go by. The objects looked like small balls of light because, I believe, they were reflecting the sun. Curious, I kept looking and started seeing more of these objects. There were so many I was amazed. I could tell they were very high in the sky, but I had no idea if they were in the atmosphere or not. Then they started making maneuvers that were not natural. Some may U-turn style turns while others may sharp 90 degree turns. The speed (as I perceived it to be) was too fast for human travel. It appeared the objects might be doing a type of drill, there were many. I do not think I could have seen the objects if they were in the same area as this OP stated his were, they had to be much closer, but this reminds me of that event. Would be nice if others tried the same 'experiment" and saw the same as I did almost 20 years ago, and better if you could get it on film.




posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by angrymartian
 


10:1 it's an artifact. If it were a real body it would be affected by gravity and not remain stationary. If it were real it would have been impacted into the sun long ago.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmberLeaf
Optical anomaly/artifact.

Are people really that stupid they think an object the size of Jupiter next to the sun would be missed by the 6 billion pairs of eyes on the ground??

What you see is an artifact, LASCO is old, it was built in the 1980s.
The circles you see in some of the images, yes circles, not UFOs!! they are caused by the electronics box. There has never been a firmware update, since it was judged as too sensitive changing the flight-software.

Other things observed and labelled as UFO's are simple telemetry dropouts, disturbance in the data transfer...these are the white and black spots that appear sometimes.

If only you guys spent the time educating yourselves on the subject, instead of looking for things you dont understand, maybe the UFO scene wouldnt be such a joke!!



Right on. Its so obvious this is an artifact.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by angrymartian
 


It's defocused light reflected from a particle on the field lens that moved very slightly on the 17th. There are actually many such bits of debris on the field lens (here's what a raw unprocessed image looks like after just doing a dynamic background subtraction to eliminate some of the solar glare: img5.imageshack.us... ) and always have been, but normally the median combined frame they subtract to calibrate the images eliminates them. If one moves or a new one lands on the field lens between the calibration frame and the current image, then you see it in the image until the calibration frame consists entirely of images from after it moved/arrived. In this case, it moved just enough relative to the calibration frame to make the calibration frame incorrectly subtract it, changing its appearance to this: imageshack.us...
Here's my video with a full analysis of the artifact:



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter
reply to post by angrymartian
 


It's defocused light reflected from a particle on the field lens that moved very slightly on the 17th. There are actually many such bits of debris on the field lens (here's what a raw unprocessed image looks like after just doing a dynamic background subtraction to eliminate some of the solar glare: img5.imageshack.us... ) and always have been, but normally the median combined frame they subtract to calibrate the images eliminates them. If one moves or a new one lands on the field lens between the calibration frame and the current image, then you see it in the image until the calibration frame consists entirely of images from after it moved/arrived. In this case, it moved just enough relative to the calibration frame to make the calibration frame incorrectly subtract it, changing its appearance to this: imageshack.us...
Here's my video with a full analysis of the artifact:




Good. You cleared it up. Everyone know this is just an artifact now?



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Maybe Humanity is on the verge of discovering that planets are not formed from an accretion disk.

A Star sucks up ALL the elements needed for a protoplanet or a dozen of them come to that.

What if...a critical mass occurs, leads to a tipping point and..congratulations Sol!..you've just given birth to a new planet or four.

Perhaps this is actually how planets are born. Might explain the weird things going on with the Sun, no Solar max..was expected 2008, then 2011, then 2012 now expected Autumn 2013...maybe the energy was being...conserved for a special event.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by abeverage
 




...artificial object the size of a planet in orbit around the sun would have moved in the time that it "appeared" into view.


reply to post by LastStarfighter
 




If it were a real body it would be affected by gravity and not remain stationary. If it were real it would have been impacted into the sun long ago.


There is really no information to speculate about it beyond that it may be probably an artifact but it is a strange one since it is present during some time has some interaction with the rest of the composition for example the flashes due to high energy particles and as the video points out (and misses some) the shape is replicated in many places at different scales, even as an artifact in the image it is a curious one...

As for the orbit and gravity speculations you make they stop making sense if we were talking about artificial objects...



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Panic2k11
 


It's a piece of dust which moved a tiny bit. It's heavily defocused so it takes on the shape of the optics and is then further distorted by the subtraction of the misaligned calibration frame. That's why it's stationary after it's done appearing; it's no longer moving on the lens. It's reflecting light from the sun and the corona, so naturally it may not appear quite the same depending on the conditions of the light from the corona.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Most probably but it is not only one dust particle since there are several replications of the effect on the image.

Now we know that extra special care it taken to avoid dust particles going into those observers, so even as particles on a lens the objects are unusual in their number.

Align that with the attempt to link it to objects in the tether incident (I can't see the relation but it may be a similar phenomena) the objects or particles may not be at all stationary in the lens...



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by LastStarfighter
 

Not really.
This way you can even make the Moon disappear.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Panic2k11
 


I am mostly just glad that the unit is not damaged but is just having some dust problems. If damaged it is expensive to replace it and with our current money crunch might not happen for years.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Panic2k11
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Most probably but it is not only one dust particle since there are several replications of the effect on the image.

Now we know that extra special care it taken to avoid dust particles going into those observers, so even as particles on a lens the objects are unusual in their number.

Align that with the attempt to link it to objects in the tether incident (I can't see the relation but it may be a similar phenomena) the objects or particles may not be at all stationary in the lens...

No, it really is only one dust particle, the final appearance is simply an effect of the misaligned subtraction. They do avoid dust as much as possible, however:


"In addition to this diffuse scattering component
are small bright ring-shaped features at various locations on the image. The brightest of these
on COR1-B reaches 1.4×10−6B/B, but only over a small area. These artifacts have been
determined to be caused by features on or near the front surface of the field lens, probably
created during the processing of the lens to attach the occulter stem."
"On 30 January 2009, the COR1-B background increased suddenly, most likely due to the
deposition of a ∼100 μm particle on the objective lens. This is treated by the software as
being equivalent to a repoint. Section 6 describes this event in more detail."

nldr.library.ucar.edu...

Figure 1 shows the same dust particles in the raw images prior to subtraction.

Ironically, the tether incident UFOs are related; they're also heavily defocused small bits near the camera, showing the shape of the optics.



The same effect could be seen in those cameras at other times as well, such as in this shot of the Mir space station and as they focused on it, the ring notch UFOs disappear and you realize they're just point like lights on the station.


edit on 4-7-2013 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-7-2013 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-7-2013 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by pinobot
Looks interesting.



suspicious0bservers on youtube says they're 'coronal cavities'. I'm not sure why an outward stream of particles would combine with the coronal field to create nearly spherical cavities, but he's been watching the sun for a lot longer than I have, and he also supports the electric universe model (which I also do).

If he were reading this I think that's what he would say.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by IDenyEverything
 


I've done that on a couple of occasions. Didn't record it because it was obviously dust I was seeing. I could make the 'objects' disappear from my sight simply by inching over into the shade a little more. Try it some time... it's fun! The giveaway is that it's really hard for you to see them with both eyes. A camera is not equipped that way (normally).



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
What if i was to tell you that the engineers sometimes like to mess with your heads to hide some things that are real.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


The best explanation I've seen so far (the video example you gave also makes it more understandable).

I had always found the teether video very interesting and you broke the spell somewhat, have to see the images again as I remember there are some differences in regards with interaction with other things in the image and the number and dynamics is vastly superior, also the focus change and camera movement would probably make or break the seemingly connected effect since the effect you describe is very dependent of camera and background (light sources)...



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Panic2k11
reply to post by abeverage
 




...artificial object the size of a planet in orbit around the sun would have moved in the time that it "appeared" into view.


reply to post by LastStarfighter
 




If it were a real body it would be affected by gravity and not remain stationary. If it were real it would have been impacted into the sun long ago.


There is really no information to speculate about it beyond that it may be probably an artifact but it is a strange one since it is present during some time has some interaction with the rest of the composition for example the flashes due to high energy particles and as the video points out (and misses some) the shape is replicated in many places at different scales, even as an artifact in the image it is a curious one...

As for the orbit and gravity speculations you make they stop making sense if we were talking about artificial objects...



Go back to high school physics for the gravity part. I don't know what to tell you. I guess you're saying they are artifically powered craft. More power to you.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 




I really dont get why some people find it hard to believe your responses.



posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lady_Tuatha
reply to post by ngchunter
 




I really dont get why some people find it hard to believe your responses.



If you can supply a rationale for why its not an artifact it would be good



posted on Jul, 11 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by seamus
 

Definitely not dust.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join