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

ANy comments about what any object "would" or "should" behave like or how the solar radiance interacts with any object are only conjecture and a species of what I will call "mind saving" (think of face-saving, but rather than pride what you are trying to retain is a world view).

It is obvious to me that vehicular space travel MUST be inter-dimensional and not 3D rocketry or other "really, really fast" travel that we would consider "normal". As interdimensional vehicles any "normal" physics (like getting torched by being near the sun) are N/A.

The plain fact is that any true space travel is beyond our comprehension right now, and so any commentary that even an intelligent person could make is pure unadulterated guesswork (as is my own here).

Would a giant mothership be able to stand next to the sun without creating any systemic gravitational anomalies? Why not? Would it withstand the radiance of the star? Why not?

I have seen images of solar discharges that appeared to wrap around "objects" in SOHO images that were within the coronal area. I mean, you could clearly see that the material/energy was interacting with the body in the pictures.

BTW - to reverse myself here a bit - rather than the solar discharge going "in front of" the apparent object(s), it could simply be flying off into space and the objects could in fact be artifacts. No way to know.

But to dismiss evidence as something or another (whatever you want to call it - swamp gas, birds) because it doesn't "make sense" to someone (meaning it is not in accordance with their pedestrian world view) is illogical.

Could it be a mothership? Why not?

ATS should have a bigass banner on the front page saying - "To assume we are alone in all the universe is a type of mental illness. It is patently ridiculous and anyone claiming otherwise is automatically disqualified from commentary here."

The Earth just aint flat any more, Copernicus.

The mind blowing game changer that you cant see.

The Earth just aint flat any more, Copernicus.

The earth we stand on is, otherwise how will we ever stand together if its not flat.

If its not flat we will never stand together and fall as individuals.

Well the points here ,very well exposed,just let me with two questions.........1-Why Nasa spends millions of dollars sending defectuose and rudymentary equipment to the space,when suposed to be the opposite,send the top of the line equip. and discard the useless.This also applies to the rover in Mars that cant get a decent picture inCOLOR of the planet. 2-If the OP is certain in his finds....why we havent seen the effects of this anomalous presence,since they have been there for a while?....

reply to post by HiramA

for what it's worth, I have observed what looked like a planet but how could it be so close to the sun? I do not have a camera for my telescope, and could only observe it for some considerable time, basically I got tired looking at it, it didn't move or anything, but was definately there, as I looked at the sun bottom left with a little distance between sun and whatever this was. obviously because of the sun it looked just like a black ball. and not small as in minute, it was very large I imagine if comparing to the sun. but very easy to see it. I did not report it to anyone, or anything like that as I see it as just something we dont understand yet... but it was something... good post and thanks for sharing

The satellite more than likely has a protective layer in the front of the camera that's being bombarded by micro impacts.

Im so confused right now going over the thread

So if the sun is moving, and the camera, and that object isnt, doesnt that prove tht the object isnt apart of the camera? Like a speck of dust..whatever.

To me that seems that the object is next to the sun, just not moving.

reply to post by rocha123


It probs worked fine when it was launched, space aint clean.

Also NASA has a shockingly low budget for its mission of exploring space.

I certainly applaud another search for truth and know there are unknowns and known unknowns tooling around our little solar system... but... really?

It's cool when someone takes that plunge and goes out there and tries... but they gotta expect a certain amount of wetness.

Some cursory knowledge of astronomy, or any subject one opines on, is good, but a little knowledge, sometimes, can be a bad thing in that the unknown information just beyond the reach of one's knowledge base can open all the windows and let the light pour in...

Belabored metaphor off now.

Dings in the lens or the lens cover... more likely than mega huge dimensional constructs or interplanetary sunflowers. Someday though... someday.

Very interesting thread OP. I have read a few pages and read all the arguments. Honestly to me it looks like what a rock chip on a windshield would look. Regardless though I loved reading your post and it was very well done.

reply to post by HiramA


Don't pretend you didn't imply it. Look at your "conclusions" (actually, it's sloppy inductive reasoning):

Based on this new information, some points became painfully obvious.

1- The objects have been there as long as the satellites which took their pictures have been in orbit and are still
there now.
2- Nasa has been covering something up (no big surprise here.)
3- The objects are measureable, and their position can be easily determined.
4- They are not alone; and it would appear that neither are we. There are several objects that appear simultaneously which have also been there since the first satellite images were taken by the telescopes in question.

That bolded phrasing refers to intelligent ET life. There's no way you didn't know this, since it's a cliché.

Each one of your points is baseless. Each one of your points has either been refuted or is too silly to consider with the "evidence" you've given.

3. They're not external objects. Their position is necessarily fixed.
1. They only appear as long because because they're image artifacts.
4. From (3) and (1) this conclusion has been invalidated.
2. From (3), (1) and (4) this conclusion has been invalidated.

It's not a proper syllogism, but I did the best I could, considering your logic was all over the place.

If you meant to let others "express their thoughts", than you'd also calmly engage criticism of your so-called "mind-blowing game changer". Look, we agree: It doesn't take much skill to rotate an image in Photoshop and animate into a .GIF. If there were a real cover-up, I would sure hope that NASA--an elite scientific institution that attracts the top talent--wouldn't be spending its dwindling tax-payer dollars on a ruse that an armchair physicist could see through. What, did they hope that no one would be curious enough to access a public webpage where such "mind-blowing" evidence could be easily found? Be serious.

reply to post by HiramA


interesting post.. good research..

i myself noticed odd things in the soho clips for years now..

watch the bottom right.. the flare seems to go around an stationary sphere..



anyone can find these at the soho site.. but if one gets a lot of hits..

its gone..

Originally posted by Tylerdurden1
Im so confused right now going over the thread

So if the sun is moving, and the camera, and that object isnt, doesnt that prove tht the object isnt apart of the camera? Like a speck of dust..whatever.

To me that seems that the object is next to the sun, just not moving.

It is confusing, mainly because the OP has been outright refusing to believe anyone's genuine explanations. The sun is stationary, but eh camera and "artifact" move, which proves that the "anomaly" is related to the camera/lens. The gif someone else created showing the spinning keyboard is exactly the same idea.

Hope that cleared it up for you, dude

I didn't read the whole post but just the pictures alone it looks like a spec of dust on the sensor, I see it all the time on my DSLR and if the sensor isn't self cleaning, they can remove it via software algorithms, must have slipped by the junior image cleanup intern this summer!

In which case hes trollin i.e. trying to keep the thread running as long as possible with as much fighting/chaos as possible t-hehe

Originally posted by Thundersmurf

Originally posted by Tylerdurden1
Im so confused right now going over the thread

So if the sun is moving, and the camera, and that object isnt, doesnt that prove tht the object isnt apart of the camera? Like a speck of dust..whatever.

To me that seems that the object is next to the sun, just not moving.

It is confusing, mainly because the OP has been outright refusing to believe anyone's genuine explanations. The sun is stationary, but eh camera and "artifact" move, which proves that the "anomaly" is related to the camera/lens. The gif someone else created showing the spinning keyboard is exactly the same idea.

Hope that cleared it up for you, dude

Wow, the same camera artifact in picture after picture, in the same place. Just like a spot on the lens, in the same place, shape, etc, etc...

Bing! Bing! Bing! I think we have a winner. A camera artifact, vs. missing math for an object being there. Where's the data analysis of what would permit such an object to be there, that would refute our current understanding of planetary orbits? Absent, of course. Nice pics and idea, but nothing solid that would be inexplicable by a camera anomaly.

Oh okay. Got it. That gif was spinning the camera and not the sun? right? Ok so that means the chip is on th camera and moved with the lense and not the sun.

I wish there was an aircraft there though, that would be awesome!

Now is there any way to get other angles? If not then yah this would be hard to prove that its a stationary object, and not something on the lense.

Originally posted by Tylerdurden1
I wish there was an aircraft there though, that would be awesome!

Many people wish there were extraterrestrials coming to save us from ourselves or destroy what's seen as a sinful orb. They see all sort of things because of it. I'm sorry, but it's up to us to save this planet.

reply to post by HiramA


Clearly UFOs, just fueling up I suppose.

reply to post by gentledissident


The majority think that Jesus is going to come back to save them not aliens.

This may be one of the cooler threads on ATS I've seen in years. Very good job OP. I see your logic, and think you are onto something. No, I'm not an astronomer or a physicist, however I haven't seen any debunking in this thread you haven't been able to handle. And graciously too. Notice how everyone trying to "Debunk" you immediately switches to attacking and calling you "too stupid to understand"? Interesting.