Red Orb by Sun pic posted by major Malaysian Newspaper Oct 3rd

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

next time you want to claim lens flare at least get your due diligence done and run it thru halosim or something similar www.atoptics.co.uk...

That link has nothing to do with lens flare.

Now, what is this showing on the trees?

reply to post by DenyObfuscation

leaves? [ ps your picture has nothing to do either]

lol sundogs the increase in sightings being possibly indicative of changes in the atmosphere.
also possible reason for the excessive lens flare memeing here
don't want to do any due diligence either huh?

lol with inhale exhale [one wonders what] OP is expected to call the police chief, however "debunkers" need not adhere to such standards, guess he can't afford to make the call himself lol.

reply to post by Argyll


lol thanks for you and nghunter posting
now we all know chemtrails *cough* geo-engineering may be involved.

keep up the "good work"
and flag and star for op though i advise you to rid yourself of anything related to zettalk
also the annunaki's planet was destroyed in the days of abraham as i understand it any aproaches of nibiru would be in pieces IMO

It looks like a sundog to me also as mentioned a couple of times on this thread.













some are close to the OP's image.

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger


So how come only a select few saw this object and there aren't many pictures of it?

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by DenyObfuscation

 

leaves? [ ps your picture has nothing to do either]

lol sundogs

the increase in sightings being possibly indicative of changes in the atmosphere.

...a sundog in front of a tree? Really?

also possible reason for the excessive lens flare memeing here

Then what's the reason for the excessive sundog memeing here?

don't want to do any due diligence either huh?

I'd say providing a photo of the same kind of lens flare in front of some trees is pretty darn good due diligence that it's not a sundog, comet, fireball, planet, or any other real object or atmospheric phenomenon.

lol thanks for you and nghunter posting
now we all know chemtrails *cough* geo-engineering may be involved.

keep up the "good work"

Not sure what you're trying to imply there.

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

leaves?

Really, leaves? Is that your best? You think that's NOT lens flare in the pic?

[ ps your picture has nothing to do either]

Amazing! Ever hear of a complete sentence? Try it sometime. What were you trying to say?

don't want to do any due diligence either huh?

Due diligence? You link to a site dealing with halos and sundogs which have nothing to do with lens flare.

Humans cannot even see what butterflies and bees see in their visual frequency even if looking @ the same flowers???????????????? example

good luck and maybe a 3rd eye better visual will come along to assist the 3d human eyes.

reply to post by Ophiuchus 13


What's your point? You're on the side that claims what is seen in the photo was seen in the sky by "The witnesses".

Originally posted by nancyliedersdeaddog
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

 

So how come only a select few saw this object and there aren't many pictures of it?

HELLOOO!!!
if it's a sundog it wont be visible planetwide

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

 

leaves?

Really, leaves? Is that your best? You think that's NOT lens flare in the pic?

oh my bad, thought you were talking about the black kirby-krackle effect in front of the sun

[ ps your picture has nothing to do either]

Amazing! Ever hear of a complete sentence? Try it sometime. What were you trying to say?

perhaps if you didn't break a post down into widdle chunks you'd realize [based on the previous reply, of course ]
that i was stating that your black dots had nothing to do with lens flare doh! or perhaps if you took some advanced english courses or read more

btw, nice ad-hom you slipped in there,NOT!
shows how well you're denying ignorance, NOT!

don't want to do any due diligence either huh?

Due diligence? You link to a site dealing with halos and sundogs which have nothing to do with lens flare.

offered as an example of due diligence, site offers software for generating sundog effects as opposed to making fulminant doctrinal nonsense statements, after all, you could have an agenda, why should we believe things "because you say so" or accept things on your awthoritay.
HELLLOOOOO!!!!!

but hey keep, going to any lengths to keep the priorly addressed lens flare meme going, so any other explanations, as well as the previous top contender, sun-dogs and the implications of their apparent increase in their frequency, can be heavily buried under enormous piles of manure going.

toodle-pip!

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

Originally posted by nancyliedersdeaddog
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

 

So how come only a select few saw this object and there aren't many pictures of it?

HELLOOO!!!

if it's a sundog it wont be visible planetwide

HELLOOO!!! Have you seen this, Malaysian online newspaper with red orb by Sun image? It's called "THE TOPIC".

From that link,

In MUAR, residents were stunned to see what looked like a reddish object near the sun at about noon yesterday.
Muar marine police chief Asst Supt Nordin Osman said his personnel captured the image on their handphones.

Let's see some of those pics. Not the garbage lens flare pic in the article.

BTW, I'm pondering the likelihood of a sundog at noon near the equator. I don't think the odds are good.

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by DenyObfuscation

 

leaves? [ ps your picture has nothing to do either]

lol sundogs

the increase in sightings being possibly indicative of changes in the atmosphere.

1-...a sundog in front of a tree? Really?

also possible reason for the excessive lens flare memeing here

2-Then what's the reason for the excessive sundog memeing here?

don't want to do any due diligence either huh?

3-I'd say providing a photo of the same kind of lens flare in front of some trees is pretty darn good due diligence that it's not a sundog, comet, fireball, planet, or any other real object or atmospheric phenomenon.

lol thanks for you and nghunter posting
now we all know chemtrails *cough* geo-engineering may be involved.

keep up the "good work"

4-Not sure what you're trying to imply there.

1- no silly the black dots in front of the sun is what i'm refering to see reply to DenyObfuscation
2- no such thing, you just made it up, probably to trip me or other readers up, and confuse matters muddy the waters even more
3-see 1
4-oh yes you dooooo see 2

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

 

What's your point? You're on the side that claims what is seen in the photo was seen in the sky by "The witnesses".

Point is many cannot see what may be right next to them as we communicate now. Thats all DenyObfuscation, its all good

Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

 

What's your point? You're on the side that claims what is seen in the photo was seen in the sky by "The witnesses".

Point is many cannot see what may be right next to them as we communicate now. Thats all DenyObfuscation, its all good

lol

What senses do we lack that we cannot see and cannot hear another world all around us? (D39)

Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic. (D363)

We create order, but it is an artificial condition that only tentatively satisfies some supposed purpose in the universe around us. Any structure is fallible and must be exhaustively tested to expose potential weaknesses. No structure will, on its face, stand against all the possible forces of the universe.

Because the universe of our existence is necessarily anthropomorphic, there must be realms that are inaccessible to human awareness. These realms become accessible when we expand what it is to be human.

-Bene Gesserrit aphorisms

regarding a previous poster re bright lights being harmful,

FALSE: it's UV that damages the eyes.

Feynman proved that at Trinity, by refusing to wear goggles and using the windshield of a jeep to block the UV of the atomic bombs explosion [glass is opaque to UV]. though he was seeing deep purple for a while, he suffered no permanent harm to his eyes.

Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

 

What's your point? You're on the side that claims what is seen in the photo was seen in the sky by "The witnesses".

Point is many cannot see what may be right next to them as we communicate now. Thats all DenyObfuscation, its all good

I'm not trying to argue with you. I just don't see how comparing human vision to insect vision relates to what, according to the article, was actually seen and photographed. Not a jab, just don't see the connection.

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation

Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

 

What's your point? You're on the side that claims what is seen in the photo was seen in the sky by "The witnesses".

Point is many cannot see what may be right next to them as we communicate now. Thats all DenyObfuscation, its all good

I'm not trying to argue with you. I just don't see how comparing human vision to insect vision relates to what, according to the article, was actually seen and photographed. Not a jab, just don't see the connection.

It relates to the underlying interest the ANNUNAKI transport and how many challenge its existence due to many of EA*RTH not seeing it, thats all DenyObfuscation. So basically I am alerting to some things are not meant to be seen by all the time things that may be out of normal visual frequency..

Has anyone found a video of the supposed object? If this thing was real you would think one of the observers would of pulled a videophone out and got some footage.

reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

So basically I am alerting to some things are not meant to be seen by all the time things that may be out of normal visual frequency..

OK, I'll try again. How does that relate to the thread where we're discussing something alleged to be seen and photographed. Not how or why something might be invisible.

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

 

So basically I am alerting to some things are not meant to be seen by all the time things that may be out of normal visual frequency..

OK, I'll try again. How does that relate to the thread where we're discussing something alleged to be seen and photographed. Not how or why something might be invisible.

Witnesses seen it or were said to of others did not.