Original 'Solar Obliteration' episode found..

i have looked into some of the science of sprectrums that are produced across a brouad range that exists outside the limits of the human eyes

that said i looked for information on what our eyes and cameras could pick up
add radar as a real time picture of the frequency its operation and have cameras in ultra violet, infrared,
and night vision googles

then from a second location have a second set of the same camers radar ect

film before dawn with the cameras far enough away that 1 camera is in light and one dark (solar abliteration)

compair the effect between the overlayed data of light and dark accross multipule spectrums in the same time frame and if correct the difference of the presence of energy in sun light and out of light (abliteration) should show the energys presence shift in frquency slightly

i have a felling the energy wavelenghts are ever slightly affected by the direct sun light as these are the waves that get reflected of objects to make them visable to us as light and colour,are reflected not direct to the camera





xploder

I just found yet another group that is testing out the S.O. method.

Alien Secrets Investigors television series

Regardless, it proliferates.

reply to post by Johnbro


Great post, it is a very viable technique that everyone should try, If I had the equipment I would do so. Its amazing in the youtube video of what you see, just imagine if you did this with a HD or high performance camera. Wither it be extraterrestrials or man-operated vehicles its amazing to see this, and hopefully as time goes on we will understand more of what we are seeings. Never Give up, Never surrender!!!!!

Im looking at this from a "real person" standpoint.


Where is the one place in the daytime sky that NO ONE looks at?
The Sun! Hiding in plain sight is a technique used since the dawn of time. So this checks out and makes sense from a tactical standpoint. A+

Now just what the hellz are we seeing? Some of it is obviously dust, bugs and other things in the atmoshpere.

However, NOT ALL of the things captured on video fit this description. Lets be real and say that if only ONE SINGLE SOLITARY object ever captured on film using this method is a true UFO, then John Bro is a vindicated man.

Its flying, its an object....and we can't identify it.
His claim is valid as being in the realm of "possible" as far as I am concerned. A+

The man is not selling DVDs or conspiracy theories, only himself. A+

He tells YOU how to do it, challenges YOU to think for yourself and examine what you are seeing. A+

I say that he is a straight up guy. I think the haters need to leave him alone and go back to begging their moms for more cookies in the basement so they can fuel up for more arguing on the internet.
Haters will never accomplish anything in their useless lives but bashing a stranger on the internet!

Hey Johnbro did you make this?

Originally posted by bismarcksea
Where is the one place in the daytime sky that NO ONE looks at?
The Sun! Hiding in plain sight is a technique used since the dawn of time. So this checks out and makes sense from a tactical standpoint. A+

That only works on a relatively small area.

In the same way you see a bird over your head but someone 100 metres away sees the bird above your head and not over his/her head, this would only work if the objects hiding in front of the Sun are at a very high altitude.

But if they are they would not get any light reflect from their body back to us, the light would come mostly from behind it.

John Bro, you have obviously found the perfect audience here. Well done! You've found quite a few folk who honestly think this is exactly like flying aces attacking from the direction of the sun.

JB, I'd really like to hear you address the topic of ... parallax.

Let me repeat that 'small' issue... When an aircraft attacks from the sun, the technique ONLY works on a very small area, either a single aircraft or a small squadron.

ANYTHING A FEW HUNDRED METRES AWAY (let alone a few kilometres away) will clearly see the object some distance away from the Sun...

In the case of what you are doing, YOUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOUR, if they looked up, would see these objects several degrees away from the Sun (unless of course they are bugs and stuff very close to your camera - he might not see them unless he looks over the fence..). Someone fifty kilometres away would see them NOWHERE NEAR the Sun.

Feel free to explain why those points do not apply to this silly technique. (Actually it's not silly if all you want to do is see nearby dust, bugs and birds...)

Indeed, I'm VERY HAPPY to do the maths in some detail, and provide diagrams to explain what I mean. John Bro, you tell us - how far away do you estimate these things to be. Give us a range, by all means.

Now of course you don't have to, but if you refuse to partake in the proper investigation of what you are doing, then I will provide the numbers for you (and discuss their implications), and readers will have to ask themselves why you wouldn't want to discuss this in more depth.


So, John, you have two options here - either ignore this request (perhaps pretend you have me blocked?), or give some ACTUAL NUMBERS and watch what happens as this 'small' problem with your technique gets properly fleshed out..


Put simply, this whole idea only 'works' if you believe the entire universe revolves around you, and there are no other people looking up at other locations.

reply to post by CHRLZ


CHRLZ.....

Put simply, this whole idea only 'works' if you believe the entire universe revolves around you, and there are no other people looking up at other locations.

You amplify my previous commentary.

I simply cannot believe there is anybody who does not understand this whole "Solar Obliteration" thing is completely viewer-centric & as such, simply cannot work at all.

That is why I believe this whole topic is disingenuous in the extreme & designed to generate "media oxygen".

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by freelance_zenarchist


Freelance_zenarchist.....

Well, that all looks a little unusual.

Can you provide further info pertaining to that?

If you can, it might help us by gaining further insight into the type of thinking behind the "Solar Obliteration Technique".

Kind regards
Maybe...mnaybe not

Originally posted by Johnbro

I just found yet another group that is testing out the S.O. method.

Alien Secrets Investigors television series

"Just found"? As in you just now found out about them?

It seems you've known about your buddy Sean Crayton for quite some time, you even have a web page dedicated to him.

www.skymonsters.com...

Sean Crayton - 1997 to present
- Encino, California

Besides myself, possibly the longest practicing researcher of the 'Solar Obliteration' AKA
'John Bro Technique' method. Mr. Crayton took this information to heart and then on to such
a level that only other members in this gallery could appreciate. His 'Super bowl' sequences,
in 'real time' - of hovering saucers - stand in a class and category all their own. It is my
considered opinion that he will go down quite prominently in the history of this simple, yet
expanding research.

Originally posted by Johnbro

Regardless, it proliferates.

It's glaringly obvious that is your reason for being here and posting such rubbish.

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
You amplify my previous commentary.

Translation:
I stand in the shoes of giants...


I acknowledge the previous work of many others on this and other spa threads, like ignorant_ape, Armap (whose post I crossed neatly), OrionHunterX, etc..

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Hi Maybe...maybe not

that image was posted by one of my all time favorite posters vze2xjjk, here in the old moving Mars rock thread. I used to get massive giggles from vze2xjjk's graphics.
Johnbro if you are vze2xjjk I have really underestimated you!

reply to post by freelance_zenarchist


Freelance_zenarchist.....

"Just found"? As in you just now found out about them?
It seems you've known about your buddy Sean Crayton for quite some time, you even have a web page dedicated to him.

Well.....

That's no good at all & it futher reinforces my commentary regarding the disingenuous nature of this hoax & the manner in which this thread is designed to drive this awful "Solar Obliteration Technique" forward by producing "media oxygen".

I also note that I still have huge concerns about the danger inherent in this whole thing. I think it is completely reckless & irresponsible for anyone to promote a technique wherein there is such a strong chance of producing a serious eye injury, or at the very least cumulative eye damage over time.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist
...
"Just found"? As in you just now found out about them? It seems you've known about your buddy Sean Crayton for quite some time, you even have a web page dedicated to him.

www.skymonsters.com...

Sean Crayton - 1997 to present
- Encino, California
Besides myself, possibly the longest practicing researcher of the 'Solar Obliteration' AKA
'John Bro Technique' method. Mr. Crayton took this information to heart and then on to such
a level that only other members in this gallery could appreciate...

It's glaringly obvious that is your reason for being here and posting such rubbish.

WOAH!! That's reprehensible. First he spams his own sites, now he tries this on???

This sort of stuff does ENORMOUS damage to the cause of genuine ufo investigation.

Well spotted f-z.

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not

I simply cannot believe there is anybody who does not understand this whole "Solar Obliteration" thing is completely viewer-centric & as such, simply cannot work at all.

Hi

You may underestimate the "power of ignorance". (i'm sure you don't, but still i'm amazed like you)
While s.o. technique is a valid one to see things (bugs, dust, seeds, whatever floating in atmosphere) otherwise hardly visible, the b.s part is the arogance (or getting the best of the ignorance of people) to pretend those are alien ships hiding in the direction on the sun.
But why i'm still reading this topic? Perhaps i'm brainwashed to do it.

I have a very simple question for the debunker crowd....very simple....


Yes or No, can you identify every object seen using this method?

The answer is no and anything else is a lie. That makes them UFO's. The rest of your arguements and harassing the guy are for nothing.

Identify 100% of the objects filmed and then your going somewhere!

It was a dark and stormy night, when bismarcksea orated..

I have a very simple question for the debunker crowd....very simple....

Yes or No, can you identify every object seen using this method?

The answer is no and anything else is a lie. That makes them UFO's. The rest of your arguements and harassing the guy are for nothing.

Identify 100% of the objects filmed and then your going somewhere!

You go first.

I can provide lots of imagery of absolute garbage, using any of a huge number of stupid 'techniques', and then defy you to identify 100% of them.

And what would be achieved? Wouldn't it be a more useful application of the forum's time to debate whether the method makes any sense?

But if it makes you feel better to get annoyed at those who point out the very obvious (and very fatal) flaws in this 'observation method, I suggest you get out there and try it. Make sure you ignore every test we have suggested and don't bother trying to understand what the 'things' might be. That way you are guaranteed to generate lots more UFO's, and I'm sure you will produce results worthy of posting on John Bro's site.

Have fun.

in some of the solar obliteration videos it seems to me the objects are moving at different speeds, some in an almost intelligent manner? i agree that most of what is shown in these videos is probably due to regular phenomena, but can any of us say with one hundred percent certainty that every one of those object are naturally occurring?

reply to post by abysmal_sloth


Abysmal_sloth.....

but can any of us say with one hundred percent certainty that every one of those object are naturally occurring?

Yes.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by abysmal_sloth
can any of us say with one hundred percent certainty that every one of those object are naturally occurring?

And let's just add that it's a much lesser stretch than anyone saying, with even 0.1% certainty, that any of the objects are NOT naturally occurring..

Are you? Can you circle which one/s?