Brilliant-block-shaped-16-story-tall-black-objects-oberserved-on-comet-hartley-2.

After about 3.2 billion miles (5.1 billion kilometers) of deep space travel, several discoveries awaited the EPOXI mission's project and science teams. On Nov. 4, 2010, the mission spacecraft flew past a weird little comet called Hartley 2. A strane mission discovery is that on the knobby ends of Hartley 2, particularly the smaller end, the surface terrain is dotted with block-like, shiny objects, some as big as one block long and 16 stories tall. These objects appear to be two to three times more reflective than the surface average.

"From all the imaging we took during approach, we knew the comet was a little skittish even before flyby," said EPOXI Project Manager Tim Larson of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. "It was moving around the sky like a knuckleball and gave my navigators fits, and these new results show this little comet is downright hyperactive."

Source: www.dailygalaxy.com...

Historically, comets are not supposed to change their motions much as they are fairly inert objects. However, historically, that fact that they don't behave as expected is treated in two ways, either as errors in earlier reported positions (which is entirely possible as the comet is more distant) and as "non-gravitational parameters." This latter classification serves to cover strongly verified early positions that were later altered to new parameters. In this instance, much emphasis is given to pockets of exploding gases within the comet that burst forth with rocket-like gas releases that alter the mass of the body. Such a theory is asking a lot of nicely coordinated conventional physics, but nonetheless, that has been and continues to be the existing explanation--because they cannot offer another,, suitable to their taste, explanation.

Back when Comet Halley was the first comet to be examined by probes sent to comets, one report I found on- line in those early days of the internet and could never track down was that there was a box-like "building" structure reported upon its surface.

The more scientists study and obtain data from comets, the less they know and the more devestating damage done to their prior theories.

Mod Note: IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS - Please Review This Link.

Sorry, I've been unable to post the image found in the article here.

Here is the full link as what is provided above does not seem to be correct.

www.dailygalaxy.com...

reply to post by Aliensun


Cool thread. Here is the pic you wanted from the link source.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c5e2da2a8270.jpg[/atsimg]

Where exactly are these "objects"?

Great, another claim with no evidence to back it up.

Add another to the list of unconfirmed ET proof that people will champion for years to come without any actual evidence.

Originally posted by Mr Mask
reply to post by Aliensun

 

Cool thread. Here is the pic you wanted from the link source.

*snip*

I don't think that's the image, that seems to be related to a different article.

reply to post by Lionhearte


What 'evidence' would you like?

Digital media can be manipulated.
Peoples word can be discredited.

Seriously?

Originally posted by LightAssassin
reply to post by Lionhearte

 

What 'evidence' would you like?

Digital media can be manipulated.
Peoples word can be discredited.

Seriously?

How about something that can be observed, tested, and judged?

How about 'anything' over 'nothing'?

C'mon now.

yes-i-am-a-bit-confused-about-what-this-thread-is-about.

i-can't-see-a-16-story-building-from-14-million-miles-away.

pics-or-it-didn't-happen.

The "deep impact" probe was launched in 2005, flew by earth in 2007, and has traveled billions of miles to send back pix of comets that it sent projectiles into, holy cow that is impressive. Here is an odd quote from wiki:

The name of the mission is shared with the 1998 Deep Impact film, in which a comet strikes the Earth. This is coincidental, however, as the scientists behind the mission and the creators of the film devised the name independently of each other at around the same time.[10]

Great minds think alike??

Historically, comets are not supposed to change their motions much as they are fairly inert objects. However, historically, that fact that they don't behave as expected is treated in two ways, either as errors in earlier reported positions (which is entirely possible as the comet is more distant) and as "non-gravitational parameters." This latter classification serves to cover strongly verified early positions that were later altered to new parameters.

What are you implying here? Historically measurements have become more precise. Who said comets are inert? Are you trying to imply the outgassing changes the orbits of comets? (with that non-gravitational reference).

In this instance, much emphasis is given to pockets of exploding gases within the comet that burst forth with rocket-like gas releases that alter the mass of the body.

Ah, yes you are. Just how powerful do you think outgassing is to a relatively massive structure to simple 'thawing'?

Such a theory is asking a lot of nicely coordinated conventional physics, but nonetheless, that has been and continues to be the existing explanation--because they cannot offer another,, suitable to their taste, explanation.

What do you mean by 'suitable to their taste'? I believe the math of mass per gravitational attraction explains things quite nicely, and it's not a theory, it's relatively simple math.

BTW, where is this big black block, and how did you determine its size, (we don't see)?

Here's the image

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fc811f3fe553.jpeg[/atsimg]

reply to post by Illustronic


It should be obvious that the print in blue is from the official source and is their words, not mine. So if they say "blocks sixteen stories high," I would guess they have pretty well defined what they can see with their images and analysis programs that are far more keen then our eyes.

As to the "building" on Comet Halley that I reported from an old on-line site, it was more or less an astronome'rs discussion site and that is why I recall the comment from a female poster I was shocked.

We have had popular movies and scientific discussions about moving wayward asteroids and comets with space tugs and shoves from exploding nuclear bombs. The scientific argument has been that we could not exert enough force on these relatively large bodies to make much of a difference in their motions, Yet here we have an expert saying they have had difficulties tracking the thing because of the natural release of gases. Do you see the gigantic leap that must be made to keep them classified as natural objects?. I have researched many old books on comets from the late 1800s, and it is not unusual for it to be stated that the body failed to follow its predicted orbit.

There are many puzzles yet unanswered about comets that can be explained by visualizing them as being intelligently controlled. The problem is that most humans cannot get their minds around such a premise without insisting on human-based oblectioins of why a ancient space-faring race would operate in such a fashion. Yet for such a race to use a natural body, an asteroid, as an abode makes perfect sense in any of our long-term thinking of arking, habitats, etc.

As I've said before on other comet threads, I assume that the comas are created as a form of radiation insulation around the solid body, an atmosphere in effect, as it approaches the Sun. I also assume that the ion tails observed on the long-period comets are a more specific means of directing the comet to its optimum and desired path as it approaches near the Sun. This is done to get the comet to precisely return along the path it came into the system.

Comets are the UFO of deep space and are no different than UFOs. Of course, if you believe the government's position on UFOs, then you would never look at comets with clear eyes. In point of fact, comets cannot be hidden as can fleeting UFO visits. They must be explained. The problem is, that explaining in conventional terms gets more difficult everytime they gain new data from comets. It just doesn't fit.

The comets have "non gravitational forces" because proximity to the sun causes vaporization of ice and off-gassing, like a large, distributed and unpredictable thruster. I don't see anything "weird" about the comets being unpredictable in their orbits, especially when planning a rendezvous where precision is required, and slight moves have to be made well in advance, and are delayed by speed-of-light communication.

Could we see these objects on the comet with a modest telescope if so ...would a reflector or refractor under $1000 do the job?
I am wishing to buy a Telescope for such things posted on ATS...thanks OP, will the "Go to scopes" have the comet in their data bases?

Yet here we have an expert saying they have had difficulties tracking the thing because of the natural release of gases.

Presumably, 103P/Hartley is tumbling chaotically, which means that the rocket like thruster effects caused by the sublimation of surface ices (known as non-gravitational forces) will be firing in different directions during each subsequent rotation of the comet. That causes problems with respect to super accurate tracking of the position and velocity of the comet (required when you are trying to navigate a spacecraft during an extremely close approach). Non-gravitational forces are a relatively common component of a comet's orbital motion when it is near the Sun, and they can affect the orbit to a greater or lesser extent (depending on the amount of surface activity, the composition of the surface ices, and the mass of the comet itself).

"Yet for such a race to use a natural body, an asteroid, as an abode makes perfect sense in any of our long-term thinking of arking, habitats, etc."

With all due respect... It makes perfect sense?

I think that you may have lost everyone there. If there are "aliens" with the arrival of any of these comets, I'm hoping that enough people will have realised by now that they will have been manufactured on THIS planet.

Originally posted by Pilot
The "deep impact" probe was launched in 2005, flew by earth in 2007, and has traveled billions of miles to send back pix of comets that it sent projectiles into, holy cow that is impressive. Here is an odd quote from wiki:

The name of the mission is shared with the 1998 Deep Impact film, in which a comet strikes the Earth. This is coincidental, however, as the scientists behind the mission and the creators of the film devised the name independently of each other at around the same time.[10]

Great minds think alike??

It is not that big a coincidence. Deep Impact is a term used to describe an impact so dangerous it penetrates the crust, allowing magma from the core to flow to the surface. Such impacts have global effects qnd are the ones we should be worrying about. Thus the name of the movie and the name of the mission.