3 UFO found on NASA beacon files

reply to post by Gorman91


didnt i just say that?

Edit: we're talking within the realms of this thread right?

reply to post by Romekje


When first captured and saved by NASA, because it was unknown, it was classified as such. Something in space that is unknown is a ufo.

The phrase "for those not ignorant of the facts" should come with a 100 dollar bill so I can at least be paid to pretend to take the poster seriously.

Facts are what people believe. That NASA or any other space agency or government is going to post any real picture or video of alien activity at this time is generally not what people are going to believe.

Originally posted by circuitsports
That NASA or any other space agency or government is going to post any real picture or video of alien activity at this time is generally not what people are going to believe.

Are you suggesting that NASA is infallible? People make mistakes all the time. I find it hard to believe they wouldn't. I don't know why people always have to jump from UFO to alien. I guess it's the result of years of programming. It's a UFO, plain and simple.

Facts are in fact, NOT what people believe. Facts are facts, and nothing more or less.

Originally posted by Qemyst
*****Fits Viewer Bug Report?*****

I'm not sure if anyone else is aware of this or not, but....

I just downloaded the 2 images you did, from the exact site you did, and opened them in fits viewer. Before I mention any findings, I will mention an odd bug with Fits viewer I noticed. I opened the behind image first. The dark Y shape on the sun is there, and the 3 objects are there. At this point, I wanted to check the AHEAD image. So, in Fits viewer, I clicked "open file" in the top right, selected the AHEAD image, and the program claimed it had opened the AHEAD image. The Ahead image's filename was present in the bar at the top of fits viewer (where you wiggle your mouse pointer around in the vid, to point out the filenames ARE showing), and so on. At this point I went "hm. That's odd. the AHEAD image looks -EXACTLY- like the BEHIND image I had opened in this program prior...only, its flipped upside down..." so, again, without closing fits viewer, I tried to open the BEHIND image again. When it opened, it was the original BEHIND image I was looking at.

So, I then CLOSED the fits viewer between opening each file. Only then would it allow them to open the TRUE file and display the TRUE picture. I noticed you did not close fits viewer between the opening of each file in the video.

My findings show that in the REAL ahead picture, only one of the objects was visible. It did, however, have the same 'spider-like' shape as the objects in the BEHIND.

Can someone confirm this bug with fits viewer?

edit on 11-8-2011 by Qemyst because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-8-2011 by Qemyst because: (no reason given)

Everybody should read this post ! He has just explained why the two images are identical. I have tried myself, and if you open the files via the FITS viewer, it duplicates the first fts file opened, but keeps the original name and data.
If you just double clic on each fts file to open, you get the 2 seperate and different fts images.

Qesmyst I fail to see any object on AHEAD ? Maybe you could give your black and white settings ?

Originally posted by WeSbO

Qesmyst I fail to see any object on AHEAD ? Maybe you could give your black and white settings ?

Certainly!
I set the Black level to 700 and the white level to 900. Zoom in and the object is on the right side of the sun.

Cheers.

reply to post by RUSSO


Aw you beat me to it....this site cracks me up...

reply to post by Qemyst


Thanks found it.

2nd line

You do realise these EARTH SIZED UFO's have been spotted hundreds of times before, but never had anyone been able to get hold of any Sterio A - B most likely they got abit sloppy this time

If you do indeed have Sterio A - B identical triplets then

WOW

Kinda "undebunkable" id say

S&F

reply to post by Qemyst

The "spider-like" shape is a typical result of the compression algorithm which is used. Here are some random examples, including the image from STEREO B which is being discussed.




Depending on the surrounding values, a single pixel can acquire various "addons".

In ICER, the context of a bit in a pixel is determined by the bits already encoded in the pixel and in its eight nearest neighbors from the same segment of the subband. Thus, from the more-significant bit planes, bits from all nine of these pixels help to determine the context; from the current bit plane, bits from only four of these pixels are used (they are determined by the raster-scan encoding order within bit-plane segments). See Fig. 8.

ipnpr.jpl.nasa.gov...
In the examples above it can be seen how the bright pixels "bleed" outward, the levels of the surrounding pixels being a sort of average of the actual affected ones. Then, when "enhancements" are applied to the jpeg version (another compression scheme) of the original compressed data, imaginations run wild.

The level of compression by ICER can be lossy or lossless. The beacon mode images (512x512) are very lossy. The science data (2048 x 2048) (received through the DSN) is much less so but similar (though much less "dramatic") artifacts can be found with the cosmic ray strikes.

reply to post by MainLineThis


Its pretty obvious by now man...youre attacking the person and not thier argument.

Come on...

Very thought provoking topic by the way

At the risk of being flamed, is it possible that the 'artifact' is in fact a satellite? It would obviously be in the foreground, and therefore appear to be much larger in comparison to the sun's size. The long protusions (I spose you could call them) could be unfurled solar arrays?

Was thinking too that if there was any hint of tampering with images, a satellite could explain it... if said satellite served some military purpose and it's location and configuration had to remain secret.

Just an idea anyway.

Phage,

Shouldn't we then see more of these "spider" artifacts in other examples from A and B? If you can show previous examples that mimic what the OP is showing (from the same telescopes), then I'll be inclined to believe you.

I must say I have been a long time reader of ATS, and post far and few between (please ignore my join date...I was a lurker for many years before deciding to sign up).

At the very greatest, in terms of believing in UFOs, I am...skeptical but curious. I have seen a lot of work put into the threads made here and I can say, when I walk away from the computer, a lot of things I've read here linger in my mind, giving me things to think and dream about.

What disturbs me, is that a vast majority of posters here, have this blind faith in the member "Phage". As benign as most of his posts are, a lot of weight is carried on the word of this person...and this is something that concerns me, with no real credentials given by this member. I am satiated with the "UFO spotted - REQUESTING PHAGE" or..."not sure what that is there....let's let Phage figure it out!" posts and/or threads.

What has persuaded so many ATS viewers to show such credence to Phage? I have seen many of his posts, and take it as his personal opinion, just like every other post made here (unless evidence is given otherwise).

This person appears to have the nature of believing in distorted scientific explanations with overemphasized words strung together...linking a lot of external content without his own, experienced explanations.

Please, help me understand.

Originally posted by Enlightenme1111
Phage,

Shouldn't we then see more of these "spider" artifacts in other examples from A and B? If you can show previous examples that mimic what the OP is showing (from the same telescopes), then I'll be inclined to believe you.

Shouldn't giant-sized UFOs be visiable to the naked eye? If you can snap a photo of an alien through the window of one of these, i'd be more inclined to believe you too. All i see is a splodge.

If the diameter of the sun is 870,000 miles, how big would these freaking ships be? I'm thinking it would take many planets completely turned into starship parts to make this go and yet there are three of them! Dream on I say, I'm goin with Phage on that alone.

reply to post by minkmouse


With the size of the universe (billions, or even trillions of light years across), wouldn't you think by now, anything is possible? On the scale of things, Earth, our Sun and everything inside of our solar system, is microbial in scale.

Free...your...mind.

Originally posted by minkmouse
If the diameter of the sun is 870,000 miles, how big would these freaking ships be? I'm thinking it would take many planets completely turned into starship parts to make this go and yet there are three of them! Dream on I say, I'm goin with Phage on that alone.

Who said anything about it being a starship, or an alien spacecraft? Your assumptions fall in line perfectly with your assumptions that Phage is correct.

Originally posted by Still Naive?
reply to post by minkmouse

 

With the size of the universe (billions, or even trillions of light years across), wouldn't you think by now, anything is possible? On the scale of things, Earth, our Sun and everything inside of our solar system, is microbial in scale.

Free...your...mind.

Can't argue with that "we're just a sesame seed on a bun in another universe argument" now can I?
Get a grip!