The mind-blowing game-changer you can't unsee.

Originally posted by raymundoko
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

He really compared it to a campfire????? So I was right he has absolutely no working knowledge about solar mechanics. And I already showed a couple pages ago that the dark spouts are defects in the lenses as well as the rings. That's why I ignored him. People who have no experience with solar mechanics and imaging, yet adamantly stick to this theory obviously have an agenda or an unwavering present conceived notion. I also find it strange that the OP has dissapeared and this new guy is violently saying the same stuff the OP did.

If Ray is accusing me of being the OP, well I'm not. LOL!!!

The OP probably took a break because his thread has devolved into people pretending not to understand NASA pics and GIFS of those NASA pics.

The fire analogy DOES WORK because solar flares are fire, much like a campfire.

Fire, flames, & CME's do dance around wildly all the time. Have you guys ever seen a campfire or a candle.

The flares in the NASA pics are not reference points because they are flames dancing around the sun wildly and quickly.

The dark spots are the stable reference points. Flares can NOT be reference points EVER.

THESE ARE FREE NASA PICS SO PLEASE MAKE YOUR OWN GIF AND PROVE YOUR POINTS OF THE DARK SPOTS BEING BEING CAMERA PROBLEMS INSTEAD OF EXTERNAL REFERENCE POINTS.

SAME FOR THE FLARES. USE THE NASA PICS AND PROVE / DISPROVE IT. MAKE A GIF OF THE SUN STABILIZED, AND SEE IF THE FLARES DANCE AROUND LIKE FIRE DOES, AND LIKE THE FLARES DO IN THE OP'S PICS & GIFS.

reply to post by WhiteHat


Because these members you speak of are equally misinformed as the op.
They for some reason chose to simply believe the op about what is the corona and what is not.
And that is fundamental for the entire topic.
Because if what the op thought was the corona is NOT the corona, then game over.
Because that changes the entire approach and this thread would probably never even been created if he was not wrong about the corona thing.

reply to post by peacefulpete


You are embarrassing yourself and are making a mockery of the whole thread.
.

You know, every time I see debunkers hording and claiming something is "super debunked" I get the distinct feeling something is wrong. Something is actually going on near the Sun. And as always I am more than inspired to look even further - especially because the horde tries to discourage further investigation by their standard reply repetoire:

thread closed
debunked on page 2
OP fraudulent

Rinse repeat.

Well yes as far as I can tell the subject is closed: there are unidentified objects near the Sun. A new thread needs to be opened to start an in depth speculation/investigation as to what they are.

The horde has not even bothered commenting on the videos I posted about the STS-75 mission objects, the energy vortexes and the clear formations. But I guess for real member it is clear as day why that is.

"We are the Debunkers - You will be Discouraged - Resistance is Futile"

Hardly. The harder you try to debunk using illogical arguments the more interested I get.

Maybe I feel a nice website coming up with as foundation the information presented by the OP. I'm already downloading a nice archive of pictures. The Donut Articles.

Some say I'm whipping a dead horse; but I started this entire line of questioning in order to get the full story behind the original single image gleaned months ago from a dubious site.
One thing I do want to say is that I am no fraud. I am not looking for stars or flags, either. If it turns out that I am mistaken, so be it. I have only one account here at ATS. I do not perpetrate hoaxes even though this thread is now permanantly linked through Google to words like hoax and intellihub and Nibiru. That bothers me. All the work presented is mine.

I started out looking at an old story, asking questions, going through images, seeing a rotation, capturing a flare, making a .gif, and then started puzzling things out. I originally thought that there was an object actually going around the sun. As it turns out, that was definitely wrong. Maybe that's what NASA wanted me to think, maybe not. This IS a conspiracy site, after all. Anyhow, after a lot of work and a lot of time I decided to put my theory to the acid test, and here we are.

I feel I have come to the end of my contribution and my sacrifice. I'm not sure there is much more I can add to this discussion. I have a life to get back to and am disappointed that the results were not conclusive. This is a topic I expected little from and was hoping for a quick general concensus. It surprised me and over-whelmed me and is now starting to get so complex that the time required to make any small advances are simply not worth it.

Some have said that I took off and created a new account. I did not. I was checking and re-checking my data. There are problems and questions remain, but I feel that this thread has exceeded the original aim. I do not trust any government that is leading us down a path of global socialism. I do not take anything they say for granted. Their agencies are corrupt and unaccountable and the military is completely out of control, imho.

I understand the view that some of the objects can be seen as dust or damage. I do not deny that there can be dust, artifacts, or damage to the lens. I have trouble with the dust example because I have seen evidence that the dots move over time and track across the lens with regularity. Having said that, there is so much data to go through, I feel I will not be able to document this because I can't make a 400 Mb .gif. I have used the word proof in this thread but admit here that proof requires 100% reliability, and due to the limitations before me, this cannot be assured. I would still call it proof but with a caveat, that the proof goes as far as the data, but I realize that the data has its limitations, as do I.

As far as the rotation arguement goes, I have made stabilized .gifs in which the corona both spins and doesn't. I have tracked spots which both move gradually and jump without a noticeable effect on the images. With most images being at least five minutes apart, there can be no resolution to this problem unless more images are released (if they exist at all.) I can't help but feel that I am limited by the technology of these satellites (surprisingly.)

I came to the conclusion that there could be damage to the lens in the form of chips in either the lens, the housing or the coatings. If the coatings were applied in layers, it would explain the concentric circles, but it would raise other questions.
-Why are all the chips so perfect? It is like every strike came from directly in front. There are no scratches or oblique impacts. As I do not know the properties of the glass, it becomes difficult to answer this question; but one would expect the damage to be random, not identical.
-Why is all the damage on Stereo B? Stereo A is ahead of the Earth in orbit around the sun, B is behind. Now, if you were riding a motorcycle, would you get more bugs in your mouth if you were riding in front of or behind a semi-truck? Isn't that how Saturn's rings are formed? After six years in space, one would expect to see some damage on Stereo A considering there is so much on Stereo B.
-If the chips have been there since the very first images, they must have been launched that way (or unlucky in the extreme.)
-If these are truly chips in the lens, wouldn't they be blurry. Etch a hole in your cameras lens and set the depth of field to infinity. You will see a blur or a smudge, not perfect concentric circles. Is the depth of field on these instruments really that perfect? You'd think they would take better care when making the lenses for such fine machines. Lens distortions are another story. I've seen how telescope lenses are made and the precision involved is astounding. Yet these distortions have been there since launch. Lens distortions should not change, but these are inconsistent so they are either not distortions or the lens is melting. If they are distortions, there is software to cancel that out.
-There is a reflection in the main object which seems to travel back towards the sun during wave. There are two explanations.

reply to post by MoonMine


Generally i would agree with what you say but this has in fact been debunked.
The corona is not what the op thinks is the corona.

The dark spots he used as reference for his gif are artifacts. Proven artifacts.
He used them as points because he thought they were part of the corona.
Which has been proven it is not.

Ipso facto debunked.

The plasma wave is either passing over a dome shape (an object,) or under a bowl shape (a chip in the lens.) The only way to prove the point one way or another is to find evidence of opacity (an image showing a streak on either side of the object but hidden as it passes under.) I have no such image.
-If we assume these objects to be nothing more than artifacts, there are examples of small dots under lens distortions in chips on the lens. But the distortions are not affected by the chips in the lens. They also appear to change frequently. The refraction of light through them is not affected as it should be. If the dots really are dust, they are either inside the lens or they are moving in strange ways considering they are in what basically amounts to a bowl.
-There are gaps in the data which sometimes amount to weeks. Sometime after the appearance of the main object, there are no pictures for three weeks (if I remember correctly) and then the object is gone, only to re-appear later. Did the focus on the instrument change? Did the field of view change? It doesn't look like it, but who knows? Those who do know are not contributing directly to this discussion.
-I cannot ignore the possibility that a chip was deliberately placed in the lens. Put one huge defect which grabs all the attention (as is well demonstrated in this thread) in order to alibi the rest at a later date. I wouldn't put that past an agency bent on keeping secrets. This could also be done in order to 'give us enough rope' so to speak and to weed out the trouble-makers. I wouldn't put that past a government bent on keeping control, either.
-Let us not forget that more evidence was presented through this thread by others which was not addressed. The video of an object at the top of a flare which suddenly whizzes out of view as well as the video by the photographer who changed the colors of an anomaly next to the sun come to mind.

The big problems I'm facing are gaps in the data, an over-whelming amount of data, software limitations, inconsistencies (some of the objects react like chips in the lens in some instances, and like physical objects in others,) variables, vagueries, 2-D images, and low-resolutions compared to some other NASA images I've seen. There is contradicting evidence which cannot be improved upon since the images from Hv are too few at times. There was no way I could have known this when I first posted. Also there is no way for me to put together a very long .gif as my software has its limitations. So I am left with many unanswered questions.

And hostility. This one, especially, is taking its toll.

Hostility is the one thing I didn't expect, well, at least not in this measure. The level of hostility towards curiousity was tremendous. Especially where it concerns NASA. I feel they waste an awful lot of money and hide an awful lot of data for a publicly funded operation. There is no reason that the two satellites are not tweaked differently which only adds to the confusion. The images from both platforms certainly look very different. And these are just the images from satellite we are allowed to see, and are low-res at best. That hostility is voiced at all increases the suspicion of a cover-up.

The weaponization of space also bothers me greatly. We need to be more vigilant about what is going on over our heads and behind our backs. The Air Force has been the driving force behind NASA since its inception. They have gone from a claim of controling space to a claim of owning it. If they claim to own space, they must have ways of defending space. This would go against international treaties and threaten us all. If the main object was built into the lens to hide other objects, and those objects are terrestrial, what are they? Why are they there and why are the people who paid for them not being told?

Even if it turns out that I have been wrong in my assertions (as some have said since page 1,) we must continue to keep an eye on the sky in order to control the governments of the world who are trying to control us. So I offer my kudos to the person who found this image and brought it to our attention in the first place. Even if they were wrong, they were alert, were looking, and sounded the bugle call. They were defending themselves and the rest of us. I'd rather hear about something potentially dangerous than not hear about something lethal. He is now villified as I soon will be.

I do not claim proof of ET life. I will remain skeptical on the subject until I meet one. I do not claim that all of these anomalies are objects. I don't even know whether these objects are terrestrial. Some of them could be damage, but some remain with too little evidence either way.
Being one who does not like to speculate to begin with, I feel I have done my fair share and will desist from the debate leaving it to people better than I.

It is only when we stop asking questions out of fear that we become truly enslaved.

And there are a lot of scared people, these days. So seek love, not peace. Through love, peace will come; but peace without love can be an end to very violent means, indeed.

I wish you all the very best in your efforts to understand that which you seek.
HiramA

Originally posted by WhiteHat
I'm back. I think I have got at the bottom of this.
I hate to be a party pooper, and I was very excited about discovering something new, but I have to be faithful to the truth, even if I don't always like it.

I think it is debris.
I just found this pic at the Stereo site:

along with this explanation:

These small debris particles are brightly illuminated by the Sun, and are easily seen by the coronagraphs if they wander into the field of view. They are tremendously out-of-focus, and often appear as "donut" shapes in the COR1 and COR2 telescopes because of the central occulter in these telescopes. The bigger the piece of debris appears, the closer it is to the telescope. Because the COR1 and COR2 images are generally built up from a series of images, the same piece of debris will often show up multiple times.

Link

I couldn't help noticing the same donut shape, the same transparency.
Then I went to helioviewer to find this specific pic, and is not there. You can check it out for yourselves.
This is telling me that they usually don't post pics compromised with so many debris; on the other side the objects discussed here are persistent and stayed there for a very long time so they have to put them there, otherwise would have been years without a pic.

This also explains why they were visible on both satellites. Debris.
There is still the issue of those smaller objects, not shaped like a donut, but I doubt it is some earth-shaking discovery.

I would love to hear some arguments to invalidate this debris theory, but for now I can't see a more logical option. Please prove me wrong

Now I really go to jump off the window

Have fun!

Interesting. That would explain the rotation enigma. There is only one problem with your theory: the debris remains stationary for longer periods of time. If the debris was floating in space (as debris does because it will have gotten an initial velocity caused by the collision, explosion or whatever else created the debris) the debris would remain in motion only to be acted upon by the gravity of the planetary bodies. Debris would not remain stationary for longer periods of time.

It is also worthwhile to note that the windshield fingers argument goes out the window with this picture - unless one thinks someone flew to the spacecraft and cleaned the window with some alcohol and paper towels.

Originally posted by alienDNA
reply to post by peacefulpete

 

You are embarrassing yourself and are making a mockery of the whole thread.
.

edit on 23-8-2013 by alienDNA because: No I'm not going to bother with you, since you are clearly just trolling and having a laugh

No, you and the other dissenters are doing exactly what you just accused me of.

Embarrassing myself because I can understand the NASA pics? The guys pretending they can't understand NASA's Hv pics are the ones embarrassing themselves. That willful misunderstanding is the mockery of the thread, along with these pointless insulting posts, as quoted above.

Trolling and having a laugh. Funny I thought that was what the dissenters have been doing for 3 dozen pages.

You guys can't understand a barrel roll. You disbelieve NASA pics and GIFs made of NASA pics. You could prove it by using the pics yourselves to make your own GIF but you don't bother.

Sounds like trolling to me.

3 dozen pages of dissenters swearing that they can't understand NASA's pics, or that OP faked them.
And after 3 dozen pages none of the dissenters will use the NASA pics themselves to prove their own point.

And then they call me a troll LOL!!!

I'm actually just someone who is interested in the topic and sick of reading phony misunderstandings by phony dissenters. aka trolls.

Originally posted by alienDNA
reply to post by MoonMine

 

Generally i would agree with what you say but this has in fact been debunked.
The corona is not what the op thinks is the corona.

The dark spots he used as reference for his gif are artifacts. Proven artifacts.
He used them as points because he thought they were part of the corona.
Which has been proven it is not.

Ipso facto debunked.

So you are claiming the entire "mantle" (the area directly outside the black disc) is all artifacts too? Please elaborate and explain in detail what that area just outside the black disc (or mantle) is.

And I mean the ENTIRE area.

reply to post by MoonMine


Yes that is what I claim.
It has been discussed already several pages back and is proven already. Please at least read the thread before you act confused by something already confirmed

reply to post by peacefulpete


Ok you just utterly convinced to me that you are a troll.
What you are saying is so crazy it's impossible to take you seriously.

Originally posted by HiramA
-I cannot ignore the possibility that a chip was deliberately placed in the lens. Put one huge defect which grabs all the attention (as is well demonstrated in this thread) in order to alibi the rest at a later date. I wouldn't put that past an agency bent on keeping secrets. This could also be done in order to 'give us enough rope' so to speak and to weed out the trouble-makers. I wouldn't put that past a government bent on keeping control, either.

Now THAT's the spirit.

Bravo!!!

reply to post by MoonMine


None of the theories presented so far cover all the holes. That's why I'm still waiting for people with ideas and some backup. I do believe that together we can figure it out, but as the OP just stated there is to much hostility and fear toward curiosity. The world is flat, and that's the end of it.

OP, don't give up, this is ATS, a forum where everyone can be anything, but smart people will know how to take the valuable bits without all the garbage surounding it.

Originally posted by alienDNA
reply to post by MoonMine

 

Yes that is what I claim.
It has been discussed already several pages back and is proven already. Please at least read the thread before you act confused by something already confirmed

See? There you go again. You attack and

a) accuse me of being confused
b) accuse me of not having read the entire thread

I can assure you that you are wrong on both counts and that your tone of voice is a violation of the T&C. The entire mantle has NOT been explained. There has only been an "explanation" of the dark dots on the South side. If there is en explanation for the entire mantle where is it?

reply to post by WhiteHat


What are you doing?
Why are you making it about that crap?
The corona is not what op thought and that's the end of it.
Why does it have to be bigger than that?
Why do we have to be ignorant the world is flat types because the op clearly was wrong and we are pointing it out?
Why are you trying to make it something it's not?

Seems you trying to make something out of nothing....


I'm not a dissident just because I can see the obvious about the corona and that the op was wrong.
And that fundamentally destroys the whole theory.

reply to post by MoonMine


Whoa dude take it easy on the accusations.
Yes it has been explained clearly!! It is not my fault you seemed to have missed that part of the thread so go easy with the accusations man!

Originally posted by alienDNA
reply to post by WhiteHat

 

What are you doing?
Why are you making it about that crap?
The corona is not what op thought and that's the end of it.
Why does it have to be bigger than that?
Why do we have to be ignorant the world is flat types because the op clearly was wrong and we are pointing it out?
Why are you trying to make it something it's not?

Seems you trying to make something out of nothing....


I'm not a dissident just because I can see the obvious about the corona and that the op was wrong.
And that fundamentally destroys the whole theory.

I would need more than "you said so" to believe that; why don't you try to prove your point somehow?
I mean really, all that "mantle" is artifacts? Really? And you want me to believe that and go away?

Originally posted by alienDNA
reply to post by peacefulpete

 

Ok you just utterly convinced to me that you are a troll.
What you are saying is so crazy it's impossible to take you seriously.

Anyone who is convinced I'm a troll is simply failing at reading comprehension.

Your post is nothing but a vague, meaningless insult at a stranger you don't know.

If dissenters had some validity to their claims then they would not be resorting to insulting strangers on the internet lol.

Also please tell me why no dissenters will use the NASA pics and prove their points regarding barrel rolls and reference points.

Use the pics and prove your points.

Or please tell me: Why WON'T any of the dissenters do this???

You guys could EASILY prove your points with NASA pics, that you've spent 3 dozen pages arguing about.