Astronomer Locates Active UFO Stargate in Big Dipper!

Alcor and Mizar are 81.1 and 78 light years, or ~476 trillion and ~!459 trillion miles from the Earth, respectively. Now this astronomer really could see spaceship-size objects at that distance, given two assumptions:

(1) it was a clear night with little atmospheric or light pollution; and
(2) his backyard telescope had an aperture of about a million miles.

And, of course, all this recent activity that he's seeing actually took place just about the time of bathtub gin, the Charleston, raccoon coats, and flappers; and three or four years before the great Wall Street Crash of 1929.

Colleagues, we need to deny ignorance here!

I was looking at that very system recently, with a reasonably powerful meade telescope. Saw nothing (except stars, obviously).

I'm sure you can repeat this for hundreds of thousands of astronomers worldwide.

well i do think this is a load of shhhhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiiiitttttttt , think about tape of alien craft in space with a camera on a telescope , if it where true he'd have invest in desent equip as the pictures would be in time magazine and he'd be famous

For those that are not familiar with a telescope, you need to realize some things...
1. Most telescopes under $1,000 have bad optics that would remove about half the light you would see with your naked eye, makes it hard to see dim objects...
2. You also have to track your object (we are moving and it is also)
constant adjustments are needed to keep your view of the object.
3. then consider FOCUS, which is kinda touchy... you can zoom and focus right past many objects that are closer than what you are looking for.

If he is an amatuer astronomer, i can understand him not wanting to spend an extra $5,000 just to prove what he enjoys regularly...
that is what it would cost for the telescopes that could POSSIBLY improve his view enough to: first, capture enough light to be able to use a camera...and then get the buggers to sit still long enough to take a good focused pic. (other wise you end up with a nice piece of red string all over the photo).

I assume that these objects are truly appearing somewhere close to earth, or the whole thing is a lot of HOOEY. But i have also seen some pretty unusual things in our orbit, so it's possible, it's possible...

This thread sounds like a job for jack oniell.

Stargat is on TV in UK BBC1 tonight.

Satellites can be seen with uninstrumented eye provided there is no light pollution in the area. I've seen those many times.

Could this be just sightings of satellites? They travel with different speeds... And I can imagine the optics could cause those to look reddish?

Any thoughts?

Originally posted by LazarusTheLongIf he is an amatuer astronomer, i can understand him not wanting to spend an extra $5,000 just to prove what he enjoys regularly...

let's see, for 30 or so years I've been watching alien activity and now there is clearly something interesting happening at the off ramp of the intergalactic highway (something interesting? isn't all of the activity interesting? why else do you watch it for 30 years?). I can plunk down $5,000, get some real, hard proof, hit the news circuits and sell exclusive photos for boatloads of cash. OR.....

I can post about my findings on a website, have no prooof and let someone with the proper equipment snag the brass ring.


yeah, I wouldn't plunk down any money that would earmark me as the guy who proved, once and for all, that there is life beyond our planet.


by the way, I have been tinkering in my home chemistry kit and I've been curing the local pets of all types of cancers and my drug seems to work on aids too. I don't have proof but I'll tell you guys what to do and you can see for yourselves.

Crakeur the reason most people dont go to the news and try to make millions is because most people wouldnt belive him. Theyd call him a crack pot and he would loose all of his cretability. thats why most people stay quiet. atleast thats why I stay quiet. and besides why spend 5,000 trying to prove to the ignorant world something you already belive.

To debunk the debunkers:

The location of the object(s) of interest is what was being refered to in
the original post. There is no easy way to determine the distance of any
object you're viewing with a telescope. It could be 5 miles or 5 light years,
unless you know the size of the object(s) then you haven't a clue as to
their distance.

Photography through a telescope is not easy to do (yes, I have done it).
It sounds like from the original post that the camera was mounted on the
telescope (very common) and not looking through the telescope. When
you're in this configuration your magnification depends on your camera lens
being employed, NOT the telescope magnification. So the statement that
the objects would be difficult to photograph makes perfect sence. Even
if the camera is looking through the telescope, a long exposure and pefectly
aligned tracking is required. Again, this is very difficult to do with a back
yard telescope.

I'm not saying I believe there is a star gate in Ursa Major, but it amazes me
how many people claim this is BS without any knowledge of the subject or
investigation into the matter.

Well, OK , lets think about this a little bit.

Lets say that this "Portal" is really some kind of trans-dimensional gateway that is within our solar system.

It may be some kind of wormhole, something that is fixed in space and just for the sake of argument moves relative to the stars. This would explain why he always sees the ships in the same position relative to his reference stars. It wouldn't have to be in proximity to the reference star, just between here and there.

For him to see "Motherships" and other ships with a portable telescope, they would have to be very close to earth. Based on my observations with portable telescopes, such as my old Meade LX-50 which is an 8" reflector, it would have to be much closer than the orbit of Mars, which you can see as a small disk through a nice 8" telescope. So unless these motherships are as large as the planet mars at that distance, they would have to be much closer to the Earth, closer than the Moon (our moon). Since the portal would have to be so close to the Earth, it isn't all that reasonable that it would always maintain its position relative to the reference star since it would have to be within the Earth-Moon orbit. Based on this I think that this is probably BS.

I was looking in the area that he said with my friends new $2000 telescope and we saw stuff. Now the stuff we saw looked like little red ants running around or bees for that matter. My friend could not believe his own eyes, he thought I was smoking crack when I told him about the UFO's in this area. Hmmmm................

[edit on 9/23/2004 by dizznod]

Originally posted by TruthCanHurt

Photography through a telescope is not easy to do (yes, I have done it).

Never done it myself unfortunately, and I know that night photography can be difficult, but its not immpossible.
It sounds like from the original post that the camera was mounted on the
telescope (very common) and not looking through the telescope. When
you're in this configuration your magnification depends on your camera lens
being employed, NOT the telescope magnification. So the statement that
the objects would be difficult to photograph makes perfect sence.

Yes, that does make sense. Sounds like the telescope is just being used as a tripod really. However, this sort of photography is not immpossible. I urge anyone that is seeing these things to attemp photographing with their camera mounted on the eyepeice of the telescope.

Even
if the camera is looking through the telescope, a long exposure and pefectly
aligned tracking is required. Again, this is very difficult to do with a back
yard telescope.

but it amazes me how many people claim this is BS without any knowledge of the subject or investigation into the matter.

Even if an amateur couldn't get any photoevidence, the professionals certainly could, so why haven't they been able to. It sounds like a lot of people are having success finding these things, there has to be some way to get more evidence for it.





[edit on 23-9-2004 by Nygdan]

t long range telescope any thought what that could coast and what that would be. I want to see this aliens ships for real and let you know wha's really going on. Never in my life seen any aliens or UFO's before.

Before people start dismissing this saying (its 80 ly away, how can he see it?)...try using your nogging...

He sated that he sees them in the CONSTELLATION or Ursa Major. A constellation is a human construct of an area of sky that appears like that just from our point of view. The stars actually in the constealltion are in reality very far apart from each other (some are even galaxies in some cases) and are not arranged in reality like they are in a constellation.

Also, I could say "The sun passes through the constellation of pisces....", does that mean the sun has left our own solar system and gone for a quick months holiday across the galaxy? i think not, it just looks as if it is passing through the constellation from our own perspective.....like wise with this "stargate"......


PS: someone get some pics, i am still dubious about this, just thought I would put some muppet smart arses right with the above.....

Originally posted by Jazzerman
Maybe he is not necessarily talking about seeing ships cross "at" the Ursa Major region, but that it only appears so in the sky to him. This would mean that the ships are actually fairly close to Earth because they appear to jump around in that area whose stars are light years away from each other. I would guess the guy probably means he see's them close to Earth from his vantage point, which makes them look as if they are "between the stars".

I wish I could go and observe this sometime and see if there is any basis to this, but being in the city, the lights are usually to bright to see much.


On another note....I really miss living in the country

Like jazzerman said it does not mean its in the Big Dipper it just mean it APPEARS to be near the Dipper.

[edit on 9/24/2004 by dizznod]

[cough]bull][cough]

people who watch the same spot night after night who claim to see mother ships and doormen ufos usually have some pics to back it up ??

Regardless,

1. No other astronomers see this?
2. Satellites the likely culprit?
3. If he could prove it photographically, he'd spend a little money to do so.

Originally posted by neonine
Crakeur the reason most people dont go to the news and try to make millions is because most people wouldnt belive him. Theyd call him a crack pot and he would loose all of his cretability. thats why most people stay quiet. atleast thats why I stay quiet. and besides why spend 5,000 trying to prove to the ignorant world something you already belive.

except he apparently did go to the media with his story.

If I was abducted, taken to planet whatever and forced to be a sexual love to ugly 2 boobed aliens, I'd go to the media but I'd go to big time media and I'd make sure I had some kind of proof to back it up. If all I had was my word, I'd probably keep quiet with the mainstream media.

A bunch of hooey. He should give his data to NASA for verification before anyone takes him seriously. Mother ships controlling a portal...sheesh.

I think that someone needs 2 take a pic i mean ....... i agree with some of you guys someone else would have seen this!