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

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: JadeStar

Of course not. It's simple logic

Perhaps. But it is still only a speculation, logical or otherwise. Which is my point.

Its not speculation to say there are more carpet fibers in your house than people.

Perhaps you do not know the definitions of speculation, observation and logical assumption.

If you want to believe that the many thousands of people who dedicate their lives to learn about what's out there (many of which are grad students or undergrads like myself) who work with NASA, the ESA and other science organizations all are in on "the Cosmic Watergate" ask yourself what incentive some grad student or undergrad would have in joining in. The evidence that they aren't is the fact that most of us are still paying off student loans well after we graduate. Wouldn't Big Brother do that for us, you know, as a thank you for keeping the lid on ET? LOL

Sara Seager, who you might have seen in one of the videos above is a single mother who when receiving a "genius grant" said it will help her take care of her kid.

The MacArthur grantees can do whatever they wish with the $625,000, which will be paid out over five years. Seager said the cash will help her make ends meet.

"All of the money will go towards childcare, household help and quality of life on the home front," Seager said in a video. "And by doing that, as a single mother, this will actually enable me to still do my job and excel at my job."

- Space.com - Planet Hunter Sara Seager Wins $625,000 'Genius Grant'

Guess she is in on the cover up too right?

See its easy to accuse people and organizations you know little to nothing about personally. It's quite another when you have met them and know what they are like and what their situation's are.

This is why I mentioned that I have met some of the people in the videos I posted. Not to "be cool" but it was stuff that happened in the course of my studies, field work or attending lectures, conferences, etc.
Like I said, I'm fine having a conversation with people with at least a basic understanding of science but this will be my last response to you because you seem more intent on arguing on a very juvenile level ("trying to be cool"? seriously? just because I gave some context to where I was coming from having you know, worked in the field as a student, please.)

What I hear from you more seems to be anger/envy/resentment directed towards "academics" for reasons best known to you. So I'm done with you.

If anyone wants to talk space exploration and about the possibilities of what might be out there I have plenty of time but low level personal attacks I have no time for.

IMO, the "bright spot" is floating because the shadow isn't connected to it. Note that every shadow on the scene connects to the bump that originates from.

The shadow bends over a small bump on the terrain, making it plausible that it comes from a floating object, that is there has the shadow is (no pixel blink or reflection...).

Note that object shines, appears to be perfectly circle or spherical, with no irregular form, in opposition to the other terrain formations.

people see what they want to see...

originally posted by: AlphaHawk
a reply to: VoidHawk

If we can see it, we know where it's coming from and going to, no need to put a transmitter on it to tell us that

I wrote..

Could it be an alien radio device???

While most comets come from local space, I'd bet money that some have come from far away unknown space and got trapped in orbit around our sun.
Also, simply using a comets speed and direction to calculate where its come from would only work well on those with a local origin, for example, suppose the comet in question is only part of a larger comet that suffered a collision somewhere out in deep space, if that were the case many parts could have been sent in many random directions, therefore, guessing where such a comet had originated would be very difficult.

As for my comment about whether it could be an alien radio device, its unlikely, but why not?

We are so desperate to see what we WANT to see that we grasp at every opportunity no matter how thin the premise.

Rest assured one day we will see..... just not in this case imho

originally posted by: JadeStar

I realize part of accepting conspiracy theory is ignoring evidence to the contrary but science is the opposite. You MUST accept evidence to the contrary or your point/research/etc is useless/worthless/unsubstantiated.

Richard Hoover ex-NASA, (retired) looked at other evidence when examining meteorites. Others disagreed with him, some were downright rude in the language, you could say arrogant, at least I would. Don't go down the same path.
BTW, ideas about Conspiracy mostly come about anomalies in an event which might make such an event not quite what is the given, and usually it ends up not. Funny thing though, it's the sceptics, who usually accuse the CT's of trying to rewrite history, they were doing that when the 9/11 commission became less evidential, they did that when there was controversy over the first NIST report on WTC7, which ended up being redone, never mind what was ignored by NIST in the Twin towers report. I have no doubt that NASA is in the business of uncovering 'the truth', is there anything in the textbook about sharing it et al?
And, 'must accepting anything to the contrary' that's kind of text booky isn't it? sometimes doing something by the book will not get the answer you are looking for, especially if there is an anomalous event thats not in the book of 'evidence'
Thing is Tigertatzen and others have a point.

"Conspiracy theories tend to fall apart when you realize that there is no motive which serves any of these people to "hide or obfuscate "the truth". " Answer to that? see above on 9/11, or talk to the 'painter' in camera.

First of all, I want to applaud Jade for stellar and intelligent replies in this thread. One of the best posters on ATS, hands down.

originally posted by: Fylgje
a reply to: JadeStar
I thought that NASA lived by the Brookings report, no?

1. What evidence is there that NASA lives by the Brookings report? Simply claiming that it does doesn't make it true.
2. Why is so much importance placed on a speculative report from the 60s? Views might have changed since then.
3. NASA isn't the only space agency in the world. Alien life might be found by ESA, India, China, or Russia. What's to stop them from anouncing it to the world and claiming a huge stake in national prestige and scientific and technological superiority?

~~~

originally posted by: Justoneman
You appear to give credit to what is really a mythical honesty in academia in a world where powerful people worship money for their God. Reality is money corrupts a lot of people. Power corrupts a lot of people and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Those in power have a very vested interest in you and i not noticing things they do so they get to keep their power. How much do you think a powerful man would do to give his power up? You see, you are misunderstanding what makes this world tick and it is dangerous to all for so many to be ostriches.

What kind of power do astronomers and astrobiologists have? What would they lose if they anounced discovery of alien life?

You make no sense.

~~~

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: JadeStar
Which "wild accusations about cover ups of ET life" are you referring to? Has anyone made any of those here? Actually, I haven't seen one other person besides yourself even mention aliens.

But you posted this in this very thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...

~~~

originally posted by: voyger2
IMO, the "bright spot" is floating because the shadow isn't connected to it. Note that every shadow on the scene connects to the bump that originates from.

The shadow bends over a small bump on the terrain, making it plausible that it comes from a floating object, that is there has the shadow is (no pixel blink or reflection...).

The shadow is from a boulder, which is visible in previous Rosetta images:

(Seen here just above the centre of the image)

Small "satellite" boulders around it explain the shadow's weird shape.

Note that object shines, appears to be perfectly circle or spherical, with no irregular form, in opposition to the other terrain formations.

The white object is not spherical, if you look at the original image enlarged using pixel resize. Other methods of resizing smooth the pixels over, creating shapes that aren't there.

Here it is again, pixel-resized:

originally posted by: VoidHawk

As for my comment about whether it could be an alien radio device, its unlikely, but why not?

What better than a Cocky Romet to 'surf the interverse' just park the spaceship up and dig a few 'oles, put up an aerial or two and have a few pints 'till you get where you are going to. You could even have a whole train of rocks going orbitally somewhere after a bit of rock farming...say to the Moon or Mars, and back again and, except for the space to rock shuttle, feet on the ground all the time!

a reply to: JadeStar
Once again, you are the only one going on about conspiracy and ET. And still, you have not answered my questions, whilst completely ignoring the point. .. which is that NONE of us knows anything for sure here. It is ALL speculation at this point. Period.

Unless you have physically travelled the entire Universe and seen everything there is to see, you are guessing. Like everyone else. And all the name dropping and airs of (wildly imagined ) superiority, all the rudeness, mockery and disdain in the world will not make you any more accurate. The people who make the greatest mistakes are the ones who believe they know it all.

a reply to: wildespace

Yes, and I meant it. But that has nothing to do with possible antennae on an asteroid. I was simply stating that it is possible for people to adopt beliefs about life other than the human variety without being sold a book or DVD.

As far as the asteroid goes, if there is an antenna up there, it's because we put it up there.

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: VoidHawk

As for my comment about whether it could be an alien radio device, its unlikely, but why not?

What better than a Cocky Romet to 'surf the interverse'

just park the spaceship up and dig a few 'oles, put up an aerial or two and have a few pints 'till you get where you are going too. You could even have a whole train of rocks going orbitally somewhere after a bit of rock farming...say to the Moon or Mars, and back again and, except for the space to rock shuttle, feet on the ground all the time!

Hi smurfy

Are you into reading sci fi ?
Some of the best scifi I've read (by that I mean scifi based on believable science) has massive space rocks hollowed out with humans living inside them. Most are owned by the very rich, and are copies of alien arks.
Similar to this.

My avatar name (voidhawk) comes from a scifi book. Its a type of sentient space ship used by aliens. Something like this.

If you dont mind losing yourself in some very good scifi for months on end then check out Peter F Hamilton (Knights Dawn Trilogy), once you get your head into them its hard to escape
Or even Alistair Reynolds (Chasm city - Revelation space etc..)

a reply to: Arken

I did a large blowup using the original high res download, and it definitely looks artificial to me.

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: JadeStar

Of course not. It's simple logic

Perhaps. But it is still only a speculation, logical or otherwise. Which is my point.

Yes, and perhaps it is a path that must be explored properly like a Tyrranasaur dig needs instead of poo poo ing each event as total nonsense. Logic says it simply cant all be explained by ignoring what your eyes and hard data do reveal just to see the those who to take the current paradigm on a continued spin.

a reply to: VoidHawk

Exactly! Why not? Anything is possible.

a reply to: tigertatzen

Do you hold yourself to the same high scrutiny that you are placing on others?

You demand evidence from JadeStar about her comments about ice, dust and cosmic rays in the universe, yet seem happy for us to accept your opinion that aliens are all around us and that the likes of NASA and the government are keeping the public in the dark about it.

Where's YOUR evidence?

a reply to: Justoneman

Personally, it saddens me to see people being so nasty to others and openly mocking them for their beliefs or theories as has been done on this thread. It turns into a pissing contest instead of a friendly discussion and I abhor bullies. We all have things to bring to the table, regardless of what our beliefs happen to be, and the snarkiness is not necessary.

The simple truth is that we don't know anything for certain and the possibilities are endless. Imagine how much further we might have advanced as a species by now if we accepted the existence of alternate possibilities and worked together instead of against each other? I agree with you completely; proper and thorough exploration is needed. Brainstorming instead of bickering. Thinking outside and inside the box at the same time. Learning.

If I were to spin any kind of conspiracy theory into this it would most likely be one in which TPTB (whomever the hell they are) purposefully puts things like these photos out there to stir up the animosity and get people all distracted so that they can better carry out their plans for us behind the scene without too many people asking too many hard questions. You know what I mean?

a reply to: AlphaHawk

I've already stated this more than once, but I'll do it again in hopes that maybe this time it will stick.

I do believe that extraterrestrials are among us. And I do believe that our governments are keeping information regarding their existence from us. There are many reasons why I believe that. But just because I believe it, does that make it a proven fact? No, it doesn't.

Jade was openly mocking someone for not basing their opinion off of "facts", and made a rude comment about how she/he had provided links to evidence that supported her /his statement. I asked her/him to please provide evidence that anything she/he said was a proven FACT. And of course it wasn't and she/he didn't. She/he can believe what she/he wants, but attempting to belittle someone for believing differently whilst trying to purport his/her own beliefs as "fact" was completely uncalled-for. It's ok for people to not share the same beliefs. There's just no need to be so nasty about it. Anything is possible in the Universe. And until we know the facts, none of us know who is right and who is wrong. That was my whole point.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Hmmmmmm....it almost looks like a satellite dish. Dum dum da DUMMMMMMM... the plot thickens. ..

a reply to: JadeStar

Perhaps you missed the part where I said I didn't need to buy a book or a DVD to form my beliefs regarding extraterrestrial life. I've never even seen a UFO lecture...I wasn't even aware there was such a thing. I don't even own a television and haven't for at least ten years.

I never once mentioned NASA, nor said anything about these photos being part of any cover-up by NASA or anyone else. I cannot fathom why you continue to behave as if I did. In fact, I was under the impression that NASA has nothing to do whatsoever with Rosetta, so why did NASA even come into the conversation in the first place?

The only reason I even noticed your existence was because of the arrogant and rude manner in which you were addressing another member and I felt that behavior was ghastly, particularly since you were throwing around words like "facts" and such, when you yourself were not being factual.

The whole conspiracy angle and nonsense about NASA was something you dreamed up in your head and blew completely out of proportion. None of that had any bearing on the point I was trying to make. I saw you being a McNasty and I decided to give you a piece of my mind, because it seemed like you really needed it. Nothing more.

a reply to: tigertatzen

The whole conspiracy angle and nonsense about NASA was something you dreamed up in your head and blew completely out of proportion.

Nope, it came from Urantia111