Two Suns Rising - the documentary

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by lordpiney

 

That's an awesome description of these events. It is interesting that you have been able to view 2 of these types of events. When I saw the first mock sun fade away it certainly caught me off guard. An you have seen 2, one solar and one lunar.



thank you. to be honest, i had pretty much forgotten about both events until i read this post. I remember, for a year or so after i saw the double sunrise, i mentioned it to different people. out of maybe 25 people, 5 told me they had witnessed the same phenomena at some point in their lives. if i recall correctly, they were mostly older people who had been commercial fishermen most of their lives, and all of them witnessed it over the ocean. i believe that the phenomena is atmospheric in origin, unless there was a dimensional window open back in 1984 and earlier.

reply to post by Aestheteka

Local Interstellar Cloud exists and is an electromagnetic bundle

If there were a large EM field then it would be detected. It has not been detected. There are many satellites capable of detection and none have detecting this thing you claim exists.

You are denying climate changes on planets

That is not true.

I've already stated that I wasn't alone when I saw the two suns

You saw something not seen by others. It was clearly something not visible to others besides someone next to you or satellites. It was a local phenomenon.

reply to post by lordpiney


Interesting that you have met so many others that have seen the effect you described. I had read about it before. It seems to me that there was a description from Siberia that I read way back.

Although mentioned in the literature I have found out very little about the event and am guessing it is a fairly rare occurrence. Then again I saw a circumzenith arc only to learn it is not rare.

reply to post by Skorpiogurl


I guess you could surmise that the interference pattern or the transmission bandwidth only allowed green light through. Maybe the high energy storm occasionally associated with tornadoes is then due to this "leaking through" of the other planet? Is that the general idea or some variation of it?

reply to post by stereologist

If there were a large EM field then it would be detected. It has not been detected. There are many satellites capable of detection and none have detecting this thing you claim exists.

This is dealt with in the sequel with specific measurements
Your other comments are similarly dealt with - the sensible ones, at least.
Having travelled quite widely (approxinately 50 countries to date on 5 continents), I have experienced various atmospheric phenomenon and am quite capable of identifying each for what it is (although I'm awful when it comes to clouds - I prefer my rheumatism to tell me the general type). The two suns were not included in that list and it is not a question of belief - either mine or yours, as you have zero scientifc fact to back up your argument for what you think I saw as you were not present and science does not work on hearsay but solely on observable, quantifiable phenomena.
i have already told you how and when to repeat the 'experiment' should you so wish, which would be in true scientific and skeptical spirit, but instead you just deny blankly.
We are of a very different ilk, you and I. I am fascinated by the unknown and the secret. So much so that I physically go to locations purported to be of interest, for various reasons, and once there I attempt to uncover the truth for myself. Unlike you, I start out neutral and am pleased if I prove or disprove something as I have no biased agenda and instead look for the truth.
As you will se in the sequel (I'm noit sure in which forum to place it yet), many of the hard 'facts' that you've been spouting as though an expert on the subject (and from looking through your other threads you appear to promote yourself as an expert on every aspect of 2012 as the ultimate naysayer) will be shown to be un-facts and in ontradiction to the very establishment you pretend to be supporting. This puts you in a very odd position indeed. You clearly DON'T know the facts yet you adamantly state your spiel as though it is from NASA's fountain of knowledge.
Again, this leads my mind to darker places and persons. Disinformation and misinformation and misdirection appear to be more your goal than scientifically debunking my claims. History and science make strange bedfellows but on this occasion they're very snug together, as you shall see....

reply to post by Aestheteka


Interesting video. I like the way you have collected the information and compiled the order, content, music, selected the message... Congratulations!

I am looking forward to seeing the next one.

Good job.
Regards,
Ptolomeo

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Skorpiogurl

 

I guess you could surmise that the interference pattern or the transmission bandwidth only allowed green light through. Maybe the high energy storm occasionally associated with tornadoes is then due to this "leaking through" of the other planet? Is that the general idea or some variation of it?

Eh, that could be one way to look at it.... maybe the energy from a coming storm allows for a few minutes of leak-through. Another way could be the idea that, there is no storm, but just by observing the sun we affect the behavior of that matter. Thus, we can never be fully certain of the nature of the object or its attributes, like velocity and location. i.e., dissapearing act. I want to see a double sun-rise therefore the act of looking at the sun will create the illusion. Because when you really think about it... everything is an illusion. What you see is different than what I see. Another way could be the idea that the universe is literally duplicated, splitting into one universe for each possible outcome from a measurement. But is the act of "looking" at something the same as measuring something? I don't think so. Yet another way to look at it is the idea that we're just creating what we see as we go along, you know, the whole "I am a co-creator with my creator" thing... and yet another idea to consider is that maybe we're all just dreaming... there are a lot of variations to this story. What works for one doesn't work for another.

What will work for me right now is a cup of coffee... it's way too early to get into this
Keep challenging

reply to post by stereologist


The sequel is now up - www.abovetopsecret.com...

your turn....

Originally posted by Aestheteka
reply to post by stereologist

 

The sequel is now up - www.abovetopsecret.com...

your turn....

So Sensationalism Part 2.

Disturbance in the magnetic field = Dead Cows, come on?

"It's a proven fact that electromagnetic fields cause anxiety and anger in people". Show me the proof ??

We are NOT in a solar minimum.

Comet Elenin was not hit by anything from Jupiter. Plasma based planetary missile defence. What .. OK ....

So now YU55, another Elenin.

The two satellites that crashed were not shrouded in secrecy at all.

"I start out neutral and am pleased if I prove or disprove something as I have no biased agenda and instead look for the truth. As you will see in the sequel (I'm not sure in which forum to place it yet), many of the hard 'facts'"

So these are what you call Hard Facts??? Yes, right, case dismmised. NEXT!

Originally posted by Aestheteka
reply to post by stereologist

 

The sequel is now up....

I already gave you 16 minutes before. After reading Asgard's post, I don't think I will be giving you an additional 9 minutes. Especially since you have not taken what I posted to heart. In case you have forgotten.

If your going to post something as proof, please provide the proof and not your interpretation of headlines. It's like telling someone your going to serve them meat and potatoes but only giving them the gravy (no meat, no potatoes).

-saige-

reply to post by The Asgard


I'm not even going to bother finding links to answer your pointless questions.
You really do talk nonsense. There's no such thing as electromagnetic anxiety? No connection between cows and the magnetic field?
Bye bye...

Originally posted by Aestheteka
reply to post by The Asgard

 

I'm not even going to bother finding links to answer your pointless questions.
You really do talk nonsense. There's no such thing as electromagnetic anxiety? No connection between cows and the magnetic field?
Bye bye...

I talk nonsense, that is so funny. You have just created two videos worth of nonsense!

Originally posted by Aestheteka
reply to post by The Asgard

 

I'm not even going to bother finding links to answer your pointless questions.
You really do talk nonsense. There's no such thing as electromagnetic anxiety? No connection between cows and the magnetic field?
Bye bye...

This is the problem I have with your videos and so called hard facts. For example.

You state in your second video that the sun is at solar minimum, correct?

You then weave a story around this. If you put the true state of the suns cycle into the equation, actually the sun is acting normally. If you actually dug a little deeper you would find the sun is actually pretty quiet this cycle. If you put the actually facts into the video it kind of cancels your statement out does it not?

So is my question pointless and am I talking nonsense?

Who s correct?

reply to post by The Asgard


NASA’s Sunspot Prediction Roller Coaster

Solar cycles 21-24

Current HF Propagation Charts

Look at the steadily increasing solar flux. November skyrockets....

Originally posted by Aestheteka
reply to post by The Asgard

 

NASA’s Sunspot Prediction Roller Coaster

Solar cycles 21-24

Current HF Propagation Charts

Look at the steadily increasing solar flux. November skyrockets....

As I said you state in the video we are at solar minimum and we are not. Solar max will be around 2013 and activity is expected to be below normal due to a slow start, a very slow start.

When you look at the real hard facts there isn't much to shout about but then that's not what your videos are about.

Your videos are - take things out of context, lie and then sensationalise them. Some people worry about these things and your videos are a deliberate attempt to play on people's fears which is wrong.

Deleted in order to remain civil.

reply to post by The Asgard


You've lost your footing.
We are supposed to be in Solar Minimum but we're not. That was NASA's prediction. The susnpot cycle was supposed to have stopped but isntead has increased.
The items identified in the videos are not random piecves of news inteneded to snesationalize anything - there is clearly a connection between all and I presented a hypothesis as to what that might be. I also state that there are other theories.
Unlike some, I do not look at the world and think 'gosh, what a completely random collection of unfortunate circumstanmces which are particularly unusual but totally ubnrelated". When I see a correlation, I pursue its denominator.
In your wisdom, then , tell me whether:

a) you believe the events this year (some of which i have identified but to save time and space I omitted the VAST majority of) are completely unrealted
b) you have your own idea what is behind them. If so, please present YOUR theory and provide evidence.

my aim is not to ram anything down anyone's throat. If someone were to PROVE to me what the answer to all these riddles was then I would be very glad as I am not the brightest spark in the universe. Being told that they are all unconnected, however, is naive if not deliberate misinformation.
The fact that Rothschild bought Weather Central at the beginning of this year and since then we in Europe haven't heard one iota of the floods in the US or other weather problems globally should have set off some alarm bells in your mind?

reply to post by Aestheteka


Videos?

The problem is that the videos are apparently telling you lies that you fell for. That's ok. You can learn that there are not 2 suns. I have been out there star gazing and checking out the Sun.

I am not going to watch the sequel since I have experienced enough rubbish for a while. If you think there is a particular important point in the video then post it.

reply to post by Aestheteka


You won't provide links?

Actually the truth you can't. Your bluff was called and you folded.

reply to post by stereologist


Troll la leee troll la la
Watch the second video and you'll see many of your inane questions are answered.
If you don't watch it then be quiet and forever hold your piece.
You asked me to support my argument but refuse to look at the evidence I provide.
You'd make a good Inquisitor.
You could bore your victims to death.