Comet 67P: images from the Rosetta probe show a shining object on the surface and other anomalies

a reply to: qmantoo

Psst..

The Rosetta mission has got nothing to do with NASA

a reply to: qmantoo

Not NASA. Sorry.

Try ESA:

Rosetta is a robotic space probe built and launched by the European Space Agency to perform a detailed study of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko.

Rosetta

The camera:

OSIRIS (Optical, Spectroscopic, and Infrared Remote Imaging System). The camera system has a narrow-angle lens (700 mm) and a wide-angle lens (140 mm), with a 2048×2048 pixel CCD chip. The instrument was constructed in Germany.

It was built by a consortium led by the German Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research.

Again: not NASA.

a reply to: Arken

Bah. Literally ANYTHING that shows up in NASA or ESA images that looks artificial is explained away as "dust", "ice", or "cosmic rays". I would take their explanations with a grain of salt. They desperately need us to think the universe is a vast sterile desert and will never admit to evidence otherwise.

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: Arken

Bah. Literally ANYTHING that shows up in NASA or ESA images that looks artificial is explained away as "dust", "ice", or "cosmic rays". I would take their explanations with a grain of salt. They desperately need us to think the universe is a vast sterile desert and will never admit to evidence otherwise.

Why?

Considering the amount of funding they would get and the prestige if they did find things out there, why do you think they want the exact opposite?

Public opinion is important. Public get's bored, funding goes away.

So.....what is your reasoning?

Alien mother ship clear as day. Beat the humans there because of monitoring launches from Earth. The reason the ship is so small is that the ET race is composed of very, very small creatures compared to humans.

a reply to: Urantia1111

Wow, clearly you haven't even bothered to learn about Rosetta's mission before bagging it and ESA out, because if you had you would know that one of it's main missions is to find organic compounds and elements, you know, the building blocks for life itself.

originally posted by: qmantoo
Some folks can only jump in to respond with reasoned and orthodox explanations.

We don't just jump in, we usually do some research, examine images, think of possible explanations, etc. We're not like the UFO believers that take one look at some image and conclude that it's aliens.

Why should this one shiny object be an artifact when there are numerous other images where there are no artifacts.

Imaging in space is capricious like that; some images can come out relatively clean, others will suffer from cosmic ray strikes, software glitches, or a plethora of other technical reasons.

If it was smaller, it would be a couple of lost pixels on the detector no doubt.

In the original NAVCAM imaget, he white "object" is just 5 pixels at the widest, but more like 3 pixels. The fact that it appears as almost purely white also hints that it's not a real object on the comet's surface (or just above it).

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: Arken

Bah. Literally ANYTHING that shows up in NASA or ESA images that looks artificial is explained away as "dust", "ice", or "cosmic rays". I would take their explanations with a grain of salt. They desperately need us to think the universe is a vast sterile desert and will never admit to evidence otherwise.

Shouldn't you also take with a grain of salt when ANYTHING that looks artificial is explained away as UFOs, aliens, alien structures, etc? Some (usually people who want to sell their books and DVDs) desperately need us to think that aliens are everywhere around us, and that the governments know about them but want to keep us in the dark.

By the way, how can a small collection of white pixels look artificial?

originally posted by: Arken
a reply to: violet

Or it could be man made space debris.

Our space debris?
No. That comet is really too far, and space is really... an huge...place.

It is a mirror... you know...the kind 'they' put on the moon to measure its distance

originally posted by: wildespace
The fact that it appears as almost purely white also hints that it's not a real object on the comet's surface (or just above it).

any chance of a fuller explanation for that?

thanks

Even the ESA researchers do not know what exactly that shining anomaly is.
They argue for ice particles condensed but...

In previous NAVCAM and OSIRIS images, we’ve already seen jets of gas laced with dust streaming away from the comet, and the instruments COSIMA and GIADA have started detecting dust, so it would be no surprise if these objects were also found to originate from the comet. In any case, it is a phenomenon that will clearly be studied in great detail at 67P/C-G over the coming weeks and months.

blogs.esa.int...

a reply to: zatara

i've seen that suggested in a couple of places - do you have a source that suggests they are using one, and better yet - where it was placed - i've looked but couldn't find anything

thanks

a reply to: AlphaHawk

one of it's main missions is to find organic compounds and elements, you know, the building blocks for life itself.

Yes, but not the life itself.

a reply to: Arken

Do you really think an advanced alien race would need antennas? Give me a break. Everyone on this planet who speaks about extraterrestrials cannot think outside their own box. There tech would be so superior to ours that you wouldn't recognize it, or possible even see it. The tech required to travel the distances of space or time would put them well beyond any of our wildest imaginations.

Give it up with the random photographs of crap on rocks. The first photo is the only one worth posting as it is legitimately something that I can see as unexplainable. It has more of a chance of being an antenna than your antenna photo.

a reply to: Stuship

I have noticed most people think of ETs in human light. That I would think is a real shortcoming in investigating.

originally posted by: VoidHawk
The "antenna" is interesting.
Where do comets come from or go to?
Solution: Fire a radio device at the comet so that it goes with it.
Could it be an alien radio device???

Comets come from the Oort cloud.

It is quite obvious that this image is a jumping sheep

No Seriously, it's very interesting, and I think we are just not familiar with seeing enough ufo's just yet, we just are not accepting they do exist and are coming and going at will. we just need to accept that and then when we see one of them loafing around when we pass by, it won't be so jaw dropping, that image could be anything, perhaps its an alien marker, as in letting others know that this is their rock. or maybe they have it marked for mining. depending on its mineral content. etc etc, we need to be more open minded. others are in this universe and that includes all places local to us. thanks for the interesting post. I'm giving you a flag,

In science we default to nature when discussing anomalies. Just a tip. Everyone would like to find aliens of course but it is far more likely that any anomaly we see on missions such as this one are due to a natural occurrence on such an object rather than "ZOMG! Aliens!"

There is a no good reason to believe in the artificiality of the object in the OP.

Comets by their nature fracture, pieces come off, ionize, etc.

It's why they have lovely tails when they come into the inner solar system.

So seeing some transient object on a comet is not weird. It's natural.

One should remember the reason missions like these exist, to learn more about objects in our solar system, its inevitable that we find mysteries but they are natural ones.

To me, those framing every anomaly come across in planetary exploration as possibly due to aliens do themselves a disservice because rather than learning more about the object the anomaly is on they focus on a possibility that is one of the least likely.

So people studying SOHO images for "UFOS' learn nothing about solar physics, people looking for aliens on Mars learn little to nothing about Martian geology, and those looking for anomalies on this comet are not really learning much about comets or their origin and role in making our Earth a habitable planet.

It's a shame because that stuff is real and very interesting in its own right.

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: Stuship

I have noticed most people think of ETs in human light. That I would think is a real shortcoming in investigating.

Agreed for some of the boulder looking objects could be something else riding along.

a reply to: Arken
for the interesting share. At least we don't got to look into this image and describe the undescribed as just rocks since they haven't been described yet.

NAMASTE*******