**(Deep Impact) First Close-up Photos of Comet Hartley 2 Reveal a Space Peanut (Video)

reply to post by nataylor


That's not true and stop telling lies.

I got banned immediately.

And the last part of the post is irrelevant because I was banned immediately.

If you look up my posts you'll see I never made another post on that board and they banned me.

They were reacting like a bunch of scared chickens, slamming the BAN button as soon as they saw an argument they couldn't win.

Frankly I'm surprised they didn't delete the post to hide the facts from others.

Oh, by the way, one of their members was kind enough to post this picture of Enceladus for me.



Clearly those are luminous jet sources JUST LIKE ON HARTLEY.

They are glowing IN THE DARK SHADOWS of the moon. - They MUST be luminous sources to be visible.

MUST.

Same discharge as the comet for the exact same reasons.

As I stated in the BAUT thread, the spectra readings of those jets turned up water ions, NOT water. This is CONSISTENT with what we observe in aurora discharges. H2O ion spectra.

Originally posted by Khaaaaaan!!
I guess this shows how much imagination I can have (so easy on the ridicule) but I see a figurine in the front of that rock........... Real nice blend of light and shadows there

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/51be358fcdd0.jpg[/atsimg]


................here it comes

It's not a figurine. That is the pilot! I would have thought that was obvious

Okay here is one for you to ponder. Imagine now what if all the comets we see were some form of ships or observation vehicles for other species in the universe.I know they aren't ,but how cool would it be if it were true. Hey what better way to observe things without being noticed. You look like a large ball of debris and noone bothers you except for a flyby from some observation vehicle that only takes pictures as it goes by. Just something to think about. Also great thread you got here OP very interesting indeed.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by nataylor

 

That's not true and stop telling lies.

I got banned immediately.

And the last part of the post is irrelevant because I was banned immediately.

If you look up my posts you'll see I never made another post on that board and they banned me.

They were reacting like a bunch of scared chickens, slamming the BAN button as soon as they saw an argument they couldn't win.

Frankly I'm surprised they didn't delete the post to hide the facts from others.

edit on 6-11-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)

You got banned for being a sock puppet, meaning you had previously registered and posted on their forums. Are you saying you never posted at Bad Astronomy before, and just happened to register and post for the first time a couple days ago? Given your confrontational attitude, I'd be shocked if you hadn't been there before to tell them how wrong they are.

At any rate, you broke the rules. Don't complain when you get called on it.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Oh, by the way, one of their members was kind enough to post this picture of Enceladus for me.



Clearly those are luminous jet sources JUST LIKE ON HARTLEY.

They are glowing IN THE DARK SHADOWS of the moon. - They MUST be luminous sources to be visible.

MUST.

Somehow these "luminous" jets are only visible in the sunlight or right at the terminus where they only need a little altitude to get into the sunlight. They're never visible in completely shadowed areas where they wouldn't reach sunlight even with a very high altitude.

Quite the coincidence there.

Originally posted by RMFX1

Originally posted by Khaaaaaan!!
I guess this shows how much imagination I can have (so easy on the ridicule) but I see a figurine in the front of that rock........... Real nice blend of light and shadows there

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/51be358fcdd0.jpg[/atsimg]


................here it comes

It's not a figurine. That is the pilot! I would have thought that was obvious

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7061b83d05e6.jpg[/atsimg]

looks like jabba the hutt to me

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/915caf8c4a6b.jpg[/atsimg]

but really nice pictures

Originally posted by nataylor
You got banned for being a sock puppet, meaning you had previously registered and posted on their forums. Are you saying you never posted at Bad Astronomy before, and just happened to register and post for the first time a couple days ago? Given your confrontational attitude, I'd be shocked if you hadn't been there before to tell them how wrong they are.

At any rate, you broke the rules. Don't complain when you get called on it.

No, I got banned because they like to make up excuses for reasons not to debate people.

You can search my posts and look at my post history.

Just like in wiki, they use sock puppets as an excuse to avoid debate.

As the man said, anyone who challenges the mainstream is subject to sanctions.

"mnemeth, you are getting very close to advocating a non-mainstream opinion. Q&A is for asking questions and receiving mainstream answers to them. You can ask follow-up questions, but you can not challenge the mainstream answer in Q&A."

I have literally thousands of posts on ATS, if I am able to debate here without getting banned, it is clear that I would not have engaged in any behavior on BAUT that was different from what I do here.

The proof is in my history.

FURTHER - I noticed you are attacking me personally rather than my claims/

You should worry more about the information I am posting than my history on BAUT, which was short and sweet.

Originally posted by nataylor
Somehow these "luminous" jets are only visible in the sunlight or right at the terminus where they only need a little altitude to get into the sunlight. They're never visible in completely shadowed areas where they wouldn't reach sunlight even with a very high altitude.

Quite the coincidence there.

You can see where the point sources are emanating from.

To believe your claims is to believe that the horizon of the moon rises upwards across the face of the moon as soon as the shadow boundary starts.

That would be ridiculous.

You are like one of the 9/11 thermite deniers telling me that I'm not really seeing what I'm seeing.

That I'm just too dumb to comprehend the basic curvature of the moon and where shadows start.

The images are blatantly clear.

Those sources are luminous.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

No, I got banned because they like to make up excuses for reasons not to debate people.

You got banned for a specific reason, you had previously registered there and posted under a different name.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Just like in wiki, they use sock puppets as an excuse to avoid debate.

They have a whole section where you are free to post your alternative ideas. There all all kinds of threads there, including one on Hartley 2.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
As the man said, anyone who challenges the mainstream is subject to sanctions.

"mnemeth, you are getting very close to advocating a non-mainstream opinion. Q&A is for asking questions and receiving mainstream answers to them. You can ask follow-up questions, but you can not challenge the mainstream answer in Q&A."

Again, you leave out the part where they tell you they have a specific area for discussing non-mainstream ideas. Sounds like you're the one with the agenda.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
I have literally thousands of posts on ATS, if I am able to debate here without getting banned, it is clear that I would not have engaged in any behavior on BAUT that was different from what I do here.

They're supposed to track you down on other boards and see what your history is? At any rate, your behavior WAS different, because you were breaking the ruls by posting your non-mainstream ideas in a section where they are not allowed rather than in the section they specifically have for people to post such things.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
FURTHER - I noticed you are attacking me personally rather than my claims/

I'm attacking your claims on why you were banned. If you start smoking in the non-smoking area of a restaurant, don't complain when you get kicked out. Just move to the smoking section.

I noticed you never actually answered the question as to whether you had previously registered and posted under a different name there.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

You can see where the point sources are emanating from.

To believe your claims is to believe that the horizon of the moon rises upwards across the face of the moon as soon as the shadow boundary starts.

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying there.

It seems clear to me that the jets that are in the full sun are much brighter and more concentrated because the material is being illuminated as soon are it exits the surface. The jets past the terminus, where the surface is dark, are much less bright and more diffuse, because they're not reflecting light until they are high enough above the surface to be hit by sun light, and by that time, the material has spread out and is more diffuse.

And you won't be able to find any of these "luminous" jets anywhere around, say, the equator at midnight. That's because they come from reflecting sun light. If they were truly generating their own light, they should be plainly visible more than just a few kilometers from the terminus. Yet they're not, which must mean they aren't generating their own light.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
The images are blatantly clear.

On that we can agree.

reply to post by nataylor


I got banned because they don't want to debate me.

You can't quote anything I said that was remotely ban worthy, thus you're claims are utterly ridiculous.

Further, I have two eyes and a brain, thus I am capable of seeing that the sources are indeed glowing.

You can ramble on about them hiding from me and how its my fault, but anyone who can read will just see you as a desperate defender of the faith. They banned me without warning. I posted NOTHING after they told me to take it to the alternative forum.

Brightness enhanced - nothing else.

Tell me those plasma discharges are being illuminated by sunlight.

You'll only be discrediting yourself if you do.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/483714022209.png[/atsimg]

Here is how a normal fog of particulates reacts to sunlight when obstructed by terrain. It gets blacked out in shadows.

Those jets MUST be luminous sources of light to show up in that image, otherwise there would be a dark band of shadow covering the source points of the jets up.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/81cfffb12505.jpg[/atsimg]

Some day a probe with color cameras that can see the true color of those jets will take images of them. Then there will be no doubt as to the true nature of those so-called jets of water.

Society will eventually know who was telling the truth this whole time.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Here is how a normal fog of particulates reacts to sunlight when obstructed by terrain. It gets blacked out in shadows.

That picture has nothing to do with what we're looking at. You're showing clouds where the shadow is being cast on top of them, not through them.

With the jets on Enceladus, the source is in the shadow. You're only seeing the plume as it hits the sun. That's why the plume originating in the sun (red arrow) appears brighter and more concentrated than the plume originating in the in shade (green arrow). You're only seeing the plume in the shade from about the height of where the blue is pointing to the plume in the sun.



A side-on view of what's happening, with the sun coming directly from the left:



The plume in the shade is going to appear less bright and less concentrated because you're seeing it only after it's well above the surface.

Here's how it would look if the sun was coming from directly overhead, where both plumes would be in the sun:

reply to post by nataylor


Its obvious that is not what is happening due to the intensity and focus of the point sources.

Again, trying to convince me that I'm not seeing what I'm seeing will not work.

As your own make-shift model shows, the jets should be diffuse at that altitude of the shadow cut off.

They are not.

My image with the enhanced brightness shows clearly they are POINT sources, not cut off clouds.

reply to post by nataylor


I know you work in this field.

The only person in this exchange you are hurting is yourself.

Eventually the truth will be exposed.

You know good and well the discharges on the comet and on Enceladus are LUMINOUS discharges.

Face up to it.

Decades from now when the truth is finally made known, you will be remembered as being on the right side while 99% of the establishment was wrong.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Again, trying to convince me that I'm not seeing what I'm seeing will not work.

Yeah, I know. Same goes for me, too. But I'm not doing this to convince you of anything. I'm more interested in those who would read this thread.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
As your own make-shift model shows, the jets should be diffuse at that altitude of the shadow cut off.

They are not.

My image with the enhanced brightness shows clearly they are POINT sources, not cut off clouds.

edit on 6-11-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)

They ARE diffuse to my eye. The brightness at the point of the red arrow is 100%. The brightness at the point of the green arrow is 60%. Clearly it is less bright, because it is diffuse.



Can you find any of these jets that aren't within a few kilometers of the terminus? They should be all over the place if you're correct, right? They should be covering the night side of the moon. Yet they don't. They only find them in the sun or in locations along the terminus where the plume protrudes into the sun.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by nataylor

 

I know you work in this field.

The only person in this exchange you are hurting is yourself.

Eventually the truth will be exposed.

You know good and well the discharges on the comet and on Enceladus are LUMINOUS discharges.

Face up to it.

Decades from now when the truth is finally made known, you will be remembered as being on the right side while 99% of the establishment was wrong.

See, it's stuff like that that makes your explanations come off as kind of crazy. This isn't some religious persecution of you. It just doesn't sound right when you tell people what they know.

And no, I don't work in this field. Though I'm flattered that you think so!

reply to post by nataylor


keep digging your hole.