Comet ISON A UFO?

Hi guys, I just chanced upon this video which seemed pretty interesting. ATS has a couple of threads on this but they don't seem to bring out a very intriguing aspect of the comet.

C/2012 S1, also known as Comet ISON, is a sungrazing comet discovered on 21 September 2012 by Vitali Nevski of Belarus and Artyom Novichonok of Russia. The discovery was made using the 0.4-meter (16 in) reflector of the International Scientific Optical Network near Kislovodsk, Russia and the automated asteroid-discovery program CoLiTec.

Now what they aren't commenting on is why is it so different from other comets? Here's a video that will throw some light on this. Could it be an alien spacecraft? That I guess would be a leap of faith to think it is so. But what do you think? Are the PTBs trying to hide something?



In the image below, the right one is less exposed and the details can be seen.



Now that doesn't look like a comet by any stretch of imagination! But hey, what do I know?

i think
its a Totally Invented "comet"

..only 'visible' to those who ' believe its pre-invented trajectory'

Elenin was the testcase, last year,
to see hów Stupid the people really are

...this 'comet '
"coincidentally" coincides with the time of the Lords birth - first half of Sepetember -
then "coincidentally" passes Regulus - the Sceptre rule star -
then "bringing it to earth"

...and millions of souls "wait the so called comet"
...but in fact are waiting Lucifers rule

its a Massive Occult Ritual
...thats what i think.

regards,

reply to post by OrionHunterX


I think it's a real comet. I think the amateurs doing the analysis don't know anything about astronomy or comets or photo processing.

As anyone who's ever tweaked a family photo knows, there's a certain amount of tweaking that you can do to sharpen and enhance a picture. Take it beyond that, and what you get is NOT a true picture of that group of people but rather some weird thing that doesn't represent reality at all.

It's a comet. A spacecraft has no need to come in on an elliptical orbit that's in the plane of the solar system. It'd be more efficient (less rubble) to come in perpendicular to the plane of orbit.

reply to post by Indellkoffer

Hmmm...Ok, but check this one out too....the images from Hubble.

reply to post by OrionHunterX


According to NASA, this is because of a strobe pattern effect while the camera took snapshots and the comet was moving around.

Though, might I add, the Hubble pattern doesn't match the pattern in your OP... Anomaly? Different pic in time?

reply to post by OrionHunterX


I don't trust youtube experts so take what he says with a large pinch of salt , here's a video of it from NASA's Deep Impact craft .

Toothpick Comet

Science--with a capital "S" would have you and themselves believe that comets are all the same: Natural objects that exist by the billions out at the end of the solar system some of which are "dislodged" and fall inward to where we see them.

The impossibility of that theory is easy to see if you view the motions of a comet in perspective. What we are typically shown, is the end view, the near circular motion of the comet as it approaches, rounds and retreats from the Sun. We are familiar with orbits from what we already know about the motions of planets, satellites and more vividly of how we rocketed men and equipment around our Moon and had them return.
With the Moon shots extreme precision was required at several junctures during the process. Briefly, these were at liftoff, orbital insertion, escape from earth parking orbit toward the Moon, course corrections during that phase, and at the Moon. Of course, the process is reversed to make the return to Earth. Never could a rocket with no control mechanism be sent to the Moon, orbit it with such great precision and precisely return to earth entirely upon its own. There are too many in elements of astrophysics involved to even dream of such an event happening.

The motion of a long-period comet coming into the inner solar system from the supposed outer reaches is not a true orbit because it defies natural astrophysics in reality, but on paper, in theory, it can be made to exist if multiple manipulations are allowed along the way.
The first step in straightening out this mess about the movements of comets is to not become overly preoccupied with the various names and classifications which come from outside the real events displayed.
The sage of Comet Kohoutek (1973VII) is an excellent case in point. Kohoutek was originally thought to move in an "elongated ellipse" that carried it out 3,600AU from the Sun. This is not a long orbit as long-period comets go. In fact, it is quite unusually short and virtually non-existent among the balance of its long-period members.

The orbit's width was only about 44AU.(The distance between its incoming path and its retreating path.) Working that figure with the supposed length of 3,600AU yields an 81-to-1 ratio of length to width. If drawn out, the orbit's shape would resemble a toothpick's profile, and thus it illustrates the absurdity to which a conic ellipse “orbit” can theoretically be drawn and still be applied to the real world.

However, after the plots of Kohoutek's orbit had been collected and studied, it was announced that the comet did not have an elongated ellipse motion as was originally believed. Instead, the comet was said to display a slightly hyperbolic orbit with an eccentricity of 1.0000078. (It is a bit amusing to be asked to accept that the movements of the comet finally have been so thoroughly wrung out that it now has revealed an orbit known down to seven decimal point places!)

The dictates of the new information about the comet being hyperbolic demands that the far end of the toothpick orbit be extended out indefinitely! The 81-to-1 ratio is totally useless for a truer view of the comet’s coming and going path. We can discard the already impossible toothpick analogy for a more correct view that the body is moving along parallel lines, a virtual railroad track set of motions extending out to infinity or better yet, to their home star.
We must recognize that the official views about cometary orbits slip from the absurd to the pathetic. --But their math works. They slip it to us on fine white papers and we need not concern ourselves very seriously about what comets really represent.
By the way, most of those sun-grazer comets that defy physics so vividly come from the area of the star Sirius.

(Part of the preceding has come from an original work of mine completed decades ago. At that time, the public, Science, government nor publishers were ready to hear about cometships coming from distant stars.)

Sorry, but ISON is a comet and will be a comet till it dies, but in the meantime a little explanation as to why it looks like it does...



BTW this has been discussed in the other two threads about ISON.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

These kinds of rumors are dangerous.

That's what happened with Hale Bop....

People thinking it was a UFO and then one cult going way to far and killing themselves all off in an attempt to go with the comet/ship someplace else. I hope this kind of talk/rumor doesn't create the same kind of situation.

yes it resonates at opposite frequency than us. big enough for everyone

Originally posted by Lone12



...and millions of souls "wait the so called comet"
...but in fact are waiting Lucifers rule

I hope so, YahWeh's rule didn't work out too well, in fact most (or all) of the time he/she/it is a no show.

Hoping the 'bringer of light' can illuminate things for us just a bit.
Couldn't possibly be any worse than that guy who stole the show in the OT.

Anyway, this comet sure looks interesting, but of course it won't be a spaceship, spaceships don't tend to give us warning that advanced. They come undetected.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


Perhaps if you were to study some of the hard comet data as I have over the decades, and read some of the NASA material about using natural bodies as vehicles both in the solar system and as star ships, perhaps you would not be so fast to reject any unconventional concept. After all, where has over a half century of denying UFO gotten Science and government?

Oh, wait! They gained time--from 1947--until the present to properly prepare us for the undeniable fact of today that other life is out there. About everybody now believes it a strong possibility because Science has lead us patiently down that necessary path. That was not an accident, but a natural response to the phenomena (that supposedly) remains a mystery .I've got news for you: Science lies just as easily as government when it has a "good" reason. Both are interwoven tightly in their conspiracies and if you read the recent news on their connected conspiracies, you cannot deny the fact. Let me put it this way: Science that is handfed by government is not your friend--but I digress (somewhat).

reply to post by Aliensun

Perhaps if you were to study some of the hard comet data as I have over the decades, and read some of the NASA material about using natural bodies as vehicles both in the solar system and as star ships, perhaps you would not be so fast to reject any unconventional concept. After all, where has over a half century of denying UFO gotten Science and government?

And with all your studies have you found one case that a comet was anything other than a comet?

And did NASA find any case that can show a comet wasn't just a comet?

reply to post by Aliensun

Oh, wait! They gained time--from 1947--until the present to properly prepare us for the undeniable fact of today that other life is out there.

Nobody said there wasn't life out there, but what they do say is ISON is a comet nothing more, and nothing less, and it isn't a UFO.