Somethings NOT right with that that Object that struck the Sun. Has to be BS?

reply to post by ckitch


On the other hand. I have not replaced a single light bulb in my house for over seven months. Then all of a sudden, last week I had two bulbs go out. Should I be concerned, is something going on?

I don't fully understand the specifics behind it, but the recent one was different to others I have seen. But by no means do I claim to have seen them all. Just that they usually curl round and into the sun, yet this one shoots into it like a missile. I don't beleive it's something we fired from Earth though, that's a pretty ludicrous claim. I think we would have noticed something like that be launched I'm sure it probably was just a comet, coming in from some immense angle.

To add fuel to the fire though, I was very surprised to read in my little towns monthly newsletter about the need to improve the Emergency strategy, to locate 'safe' places for any eventuality. Never seen them concerned about that kind of thing before. And the way they word it kind of gives the impression of something large scale impending. I know it's a little off topic, but keep an eye out on your local newsletters - see if your local councils/governing bodies are introducing or updating their emergency strategies.

doesn't take too long for space news to turn into the end of the world conspiracies.
when in doubt, listen to phage unless he is they.

Is it too much to ask for people to post a link in the Original Post so people know what the hell you're talking about?? I'm not psychic like every other person on page one seems to be. Or were they all standing behind or beside you, looking over your shoulder as you watched the video? Wad there some big ATS party I didn't know about? I mean I could understand why I wasn't invited as I have a low tolerance to stupidity and flat-out ignorance and that can be a big downer to the average jackass out there, but surely I wasn't the ONLY one who didn't get invited/show up, so, for the sake of everyone else, including lurkers and new members who jist joined today who couldn't possibly have made it to this hypothetical extravaganza, couldn't you explain even a little bit more about what you're talking... Er, ATTEMPTING to talk about, other than "that one video of the thing that went into the sun"? I'm not gonna go through the other pages of the thread hoping not to get smacked in the face with more presumptuous ignorance, I already risked sticking my neck out of the gutter for ONE PAGE and I GOT SH# SHOVELED IN MY FACE.

Based on the vast amount of ignorance exhibited so far, I am stuck with two choices. I can either believe that your ignorance was a one time thing and there may be something to this, or I can believe your judgement has remained at the same ignorant level throughout your entire investigation and thought process, and that you are making a mountain out of a molehill. One thing I will point out, is that depending on the angle, if sunlight was hitting the object and reflecting mass amounts of light into the camera, the procesors can become overloaded and cause a white blur to appear, making it (the object) appear to be larger than it actually is. Hope that helps, I'm out.

reply to post by king Pop!p


Great questions.

Peace to all

reply to post by ZackMorris


Go to Google. Type in "Soho Lasco". Click the first link. Click "Soho movie theatre" on the left. Select "LASCO C2". Insert start date 20111001 and end date 20111002. Click "Search". Buddabing.

reply to post by Phage


So you're saying the "comet" and the CME were exaggerated, which would have to be the case if the reflective light emanating from the object made it appear larger.

Originally posted by Heartisblack
That was no comet, try humungous asteroid.

Where did it get its propulsion from if it was an asteroid?


What is this?? ---------------->

reply to post by Garkiniss

No. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that a point source of light appears larger than it is. That it excites more pixels than it should.

Look at this image: The object above the Sun is Mercury. Mercury has about 1/285th the diameter of the Sun. At the time the image was taken Mercury was almost directly opposite the Sun from Earth, at a distance of 1.405 AU. So its actual apparent diameter would have been something like 1/376th that of the Sun.

The white circle in the coronograph represents the diameter of the Sun (864,000 miles). The white circle is 80 pixels across so the actual size of Mercury would be less (much less) than one pixel. But what do we see? We see that because of its brightness, Mercury is 7 pixels across (not counting the more extreme oversaturation effects). It appears about 33 times larger than it should be.

There is no way to judge the size of the comet by the images from the coronographs but since it was not seen by anyone until it entered the field of view of the coronographs (which are very sensitive), it cannot have been very large.

Reason that NASA didn't say anything about it is probably because they don't want to admit that they missed an object of such a large size.

They're currently only scanning about 1% of the sky for "near Earth objects", so not really surprised that they missed this.

Originally posted by Skewed
reply to post by ckitch

 

On the other hand. I have not replaced a single light bulb in my house for over seven months. Then all of a sudden, last week I had two bulbs go out. Should I be concerned, is something going on?

Yes, you bought all your light bulbs about seven months ago. Now they're burning out.

reply to post by Phage


How dare thee try to make you look like a fool. In turn thy makes themsevles a fool.

Bravo...job well done on the explanation once again. People need to understand you are not a prophet for christ sakes.

reply to post by king Pop!p


Nasa doesn't know anything at all either!!

Frami

Originally posted by frami12
reply to post by king Pop!p

 

Nasa doesn't know anything at all either!!

Frami

Oh they know...they just make it seem as if they don't know. Or they really don't know & are a lot dumber than one would think....which when you look at it can't be the case...can it?

www.realistnews.net...
lasco-www.nrl.navy.mil...

You gotta feel sorry for Phage, for every comment he makes he then has to post another ten just to defend himself! 99.9% of the time he is right, so its always going to be a loosing battle.

What if this celestial object skipped off the surface of our White Star and on its way out exploded?

reply to post by Human_Alien



That 'Little mercury' is in only one frame, videoman would know that.

reply to post by king Pop!p

That thing had to be 1000x bigger then the Earth, if not, more.

You're confusing Nucleus size with Coma. The Coma is like a very thin atmosphere of diffuse dust and gas. The Nucleus is the solid portion of the comet which is a small fraction of the size of the object you are seeing that is reflecting light, or the coma. A coma can be 100k times larger, or more, than the nucleus.

Also, how could it have been a comet, if comets are ice celestial bodies? Shouldn't it have melted way before getting to the sun?

First of all comets are far more complicated then simply balls of frozen water. Evidence has been showing that comets are made up of a multitude of elements which include solid rocky material.

Secondly think about melting for a minute. Material that melts does not disappear, it becomes liquid. The mass of an object approaching the Sun is still there regardless of whether it melts or not.

( Somethings NOT right with that that Object that struck the Sun. Has to be BS? )

Well it's not, I've been warning people but! guess what? Most things I say and show is being poorly debunk by the ATS Wrecking Crew, why is this? I'll keep it to my self.

www.abovetopsecret.com...