ISON Object (Comet?) To Fly By (Impact?) Mars next Fall! NASA News.

Originally posted by NeoParadigm
reply to post by zedy63

 

thats the only explanation that could be thought up to explain what were seeing doesn't mean its true we will soon see the truth lol

If you use information that is provided to us by NASA itself, namely the Hubble imagery of ISON, to come up with a supposed mystery, you also have to accept that, based on what we know about Hubble, its orbit, ISON's position, and the imaging method that was used, the display in the imagery is EXACTLY what one would expect to see under those conditions.

If you still don't believe it you are saying that there is something wrong with at least one those aspects. Tell me, which one(s)?

You can even view the seperate exposures that prove how the image was built up out of multiple exposures.

There really is no doubt here.

Btw, I don't trust NASA either, but if things add up, they add up.

i agree with what u say but why in the pic are the stars not affected i just don't believe anything until i see it myself especially from NASA.

reply to post by zedy63


The stars are much farther away than ISON is, so you would have to move much much farther to affect their position. You could go to the moon, and the stars would barely move if they moved at all.

reply to post by tallcool1

I wasn't trying to imply that you were losing the argument.

I know you weren't.

Lets forget about it. Your comments are appreciated and noted.

reply to post by zedy63


Yes because the stars are much much further away than ISON, therefore the change in angle is minimal and unnoticable, whereas the angle change in relation to ISON is relatively big.

i still think tho that nasa should have published the darkened images showing the lines and curve.. and explain that it is an optical illusion caused by changing perspectives and placing multiple perspectives into one stacked image.. why did they publish such a high exposure image when the underlying truth is that what we were looking at wasnt one ball of light representing the comet. the image was misleading.. and is causing all the conspiracy around ison.

there are still discrepancies. things we can use to pick the accepted explanation apart. but it could be due to lack of details. but hey, thanks-giving is just around the corner. get yer telescopes ready. lol

i believe there's also another comet called Encke lurking somewhere around. havent gotten to check that out really yet. but the name sure reminds me of Enki the Sumerian God.

so we have Encke and ISON.. cool!

Originally posted by filledcup
i still think tho that nasa should have published the darkened images showing the lines and curve.. and explain that it is an optical illusion caused by changing perspectives and placing multiple perspectives into one stacked image.. why did they publish such a high exposure image when the underlying truth is that what we were looking at wasnt one ball of light representing the comet. the image was misleading.. and is causing all the conspiracy around ison.

there are still discrepancies. things we can use to pick the accepted explanation apart. but it could be due to lack of details. but hey, thanks-giving is just around the corner. get yer telescopes ready. lol

i believe there's also another comet called Encke lurking somewhere around. havent gotten to check that out really yet. but the name sure reminds me of Enki the Sumerian God.

so we have Encke and ISON.. cool!

edit on 21-8-2013 by filledcup because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-8-2013 by filledcup because: (no reason given)

While I agree they should have gone a bit more into depth over the image, ask yourself:

"Would it do any good?"

Too many people here are quick to scorn NASA and claim they are lying and covering up things. So while I'm pretty sure they don't really pay attention to conspiracy sites, even if they had put that information out, and it was quoted and posted here.........it wouldn't change a lot of people's minds that have decided that they hate NASA, etc.

reply to post by filledcup

i still think tho that nasa should have published the darkened images showing the lines and curve.. and explain that it is an optical illusion caused by changing perspectives and placing multiple perspectives into one stacked image.. why did they publish such a high exposure image when the underlying truth is that what we were looking at wasnt one ball of light representing the comet. the image was misleading.. and is causing all the conspiracy around ison.

I don't know how the response would've been to that. Something like, "OMG, NASA is actively covering this up!"

I think NASA doesn't really care about what conspiracy theorists think when they put out images with "anomolies" that are easily explained by going to the ISON website for instance, and in part, just by using reason.

They are probably laughing hard.

reply to post by eriktheawful


yeah i understand why they may not want to 'touch' the pictures and leave them as they are. perhaps even if they had published it like that.. a whole conspiracy would form from the high exposure big bright ball of light version.. haha

we want to meet aliens so bad we scrutinize every bit of dust in search of them. looking for signs.
im learning things.. things that are changing my perspective of nasa. they do take alot of blame for alot of stuff that alot of ppl dont fully understand. but im not sure it's all totally unwarranted. im going to go ahead and doubt that nasa doesnt know anything about some stuff that they have kept a tight lid on, that alot of ppl would like to know about.

Originally posted by NeoParadigm
reply to post by filledcup

 

i still think tho that nasa should have published the darkened images showing the lines and curve.. and explain that it is an optical illusion caused by changing perspectives and placing multiple perspectives into one stacked image.. why did they publish such a high exposure image when the underlying truth is that what we were looking at wasnt one ball of light representing the comet. the image was misleading.. and is causing all the conspiracy around ison.

I don't know how the response would've been to that. Something like, "OMG, NASA is actively covering this up!"

I think NASA doesn't really care about what conspiracy theorists think when they put out images with "anomolies" that are easily explained by going to the ISON website for instance, and in part, just by using reason.

They are probably laughing hard.

i dont think any educated person would laugh at someone asking questions and trying to learn.

those who just cast judgements without asking questions, dont make any point, and all round just troll in disbelief however.. yeah.. they can be laughed at.

reply to post by filledcup


I was just answering your question about why they presented it like this.

They don't care about conspiracy theories and they feel like they have explained it sufficiently for those who want to hear it.

I'm sure that some of them might find it amusing when there is a big fuss over nothing.

Originally posted by NeoParadigm
reply to post by filledcup

 

I was just answering your question about why they presented it like this.

They don't care about conspiracy theories and they feel like they have explained it sufficiently for those who want to hear it.

I'm sure that some of them might find it amusing when there is a big fuss over nothing.

id say you need to be initiated in some way into the concepts, observations and methods of analysing data first, to visualize it properly.

Thank's Dear Arken!

Question: Can we expect to see the same photo issues about the Siding Spring dude from Hubble?

SNC

Originally posted by MysterX

Originally posted by NeoParadigm
reply to post by Arken

 

Don't mistake my confidence for arrogance, Luke.

People that are still perpetuating the myth that comet ISON actually looks like that triangle are delusional and incapable of discerning fact from fantasy, and posess no ability to recognise the clear explanation for this "phenomenon" and the evidence that supports it.

I think "headless chicken" is an accurate description at this point.

You can't even recognise you're doing it, even when it's pointed out to you.

Calling people who don't agree with your point of view "delusional" and "incapable of discerning fact from fantasy" and "posess no ability to recognise.." is actually pretty arrogant thinking.

People can be wrong, and often are...but it in no way means delusion or lack of discernment is playing a part in the slightest.

Have you considered that you may be wrong?

I was just going to post something along those lines.......Hell of a way to make friends huh????
See, when someone has an idea, they KNOW their right, even though they could be wrong. There are plenty of people on here who are capable of discerning fact from reality, and do have the ability to recognize, what ever it is they would like to recognize, and are they delusional??? Maybe.....Is it up to "someone" to be a tool and act like a 2 year old throwing a fit when someone disagrees??? Yeah that's ok to......but it is no way to make friends here.

This is a conspiracy site. This is a place to entertain some really off the wall stuff.

Phage, Where are you, someone needs a reality check.

reply to post by thepolish1

This is a conspiracy site. This is a place to entertain some really off the wall stuff. Phage, Where are you, someone needs a reality check.

That is true, and you might see me entertaining some wild stuff when there is a reason for it. There just needs to be a bit more objectivity.

The point is that the OP of this thread is spreading false information, at a point in time where one can reasonably expect him to have reviewed the proof.

I don't know why you bring Phage into your rant but I know what his thoughts on this ISON deal would be, the same as mine. I don't get why you would use Phage to give me a reality check.

reply to post by NeoParadigm


Dude, I give up, I guess what I said previously did not make you think one bit.

It's one thing to try and persuade people to see your point of view, it is quite another to cram it down everyones throat.

Welcome to ATS.

I'll be seeing you around........

reply to post by thepolish1


We are not talking about viewpoints, but facts.

But I do apologize for any insulting comments. Sorry. I already said I was a jerk, jeez.

Thank you. See you around too.

Originally posted by filledcup
i still think tho that nasa should have published the darkened images showing the lines and curve.. and explain that it is an optical illusion caused by changing perspectives and placing multiple perspectives into one stacked image..

They did.

hubblesite.org...
plus.google.com...

reply to post by wildespace


yeah but that explanation is still quite vague. it assumes a background of observing celestial objects. but the most important thing is knowing the position of the earth in relation to the comet.

for example the april 30th image on ur plus.google link is showing the comet heading upward toward the sun, with an arrow showing it's direction of travel and a large tail trailing behind it.

but according to nataylor and others, the june comet is travelling downward, even tho the tail seems to be pointing in almost the same direction.

now i originally thought that the june images showed the comet moving upward like the april photo.

so it's confusing in that regard. but now id say the difference up/down is in relation to the position of the comet and earth in april.. whereas 2 months later in june we have a different position and viewing angle as the earth is moving to head-off the comet.

would u agree with that? or is the june comet also travelling upward as the april shot shows?

Originally posted by filledcup
reply to post by wildespace

 

yeah but that explanation is still quite vague. it assumes a background of observing celestial objects.

Not it isn't, and no it doesn't.

These exposures were made while the telescope tracked the stars. Because of the motion of the comet and the motion of HST in its orbit around the Earth, the comet trailed slightly relative to the stars during and between these exposures. This is not the way comets are usually observed. Normally we would track on the comet to keep it stationary in the camera during the exposure. However, in this case we wanted to produce an image of the comet against a background clearly showing stars and galaxies.

It's not required to know exactly how everything moved, only that things were in motion, so either one or the other thing had to be kept in the focus, as it were. You can't have both. The comet was moving, and NASA wanted to focus on the stars and galaxies rather than on the comet. So the comet was stretched in the images. It doesn't require special knowledge, just the basic understanding of motion and parallax will do.

I remember the first image of Elenin, where the comet was tracked and the stars were drawn into lines. People were getting agitated about these lines, saying that Elenin has got "companions", but Leonid himself explained that the telescope was tracking the comet as it moves with respect to the background stars, so a stack of images would draw stars into lines. Exactly the opposite happened here: the telescope tracked the stars, and the comet's bright nucleus was drawn into lines.

reply to post by wildespace


well i didnt know this happened with elenin. this is my first time investigating a comet. i usually dont really care that much for comets.. dont even go outside to see them when theyre passing. but this one intrigued me.. so i had to know more. including the position of the elements in space when the photo was taken. i wanted to see how everything was done and understand how the image was made from the ground up.

"Because of the motion of the comet and the motion of HST in its orbit around the Earth" doesnt really provide a clear picture for someone who knows little to nothing about imaging celestial object paths. if it did, there wouldnt be a thread with everyone investigating it for 30+ pages, even though the entire quote is plastered in the OP.