Electric Comet ISON - Revealed

reply to post by Tallone

Specifically I am talking about all cameras placed to view comet ISON as it entered perihelion, undertook perhelion, and departed from perihelion.

Maybe I need to be even more specific with my question.

Can you name the craft you were referring to when you said

No images at all from the cameras set up to capture ISON in perihelion by satellites positioned at the closest proximity.

That part about satellites positioned at the closest proximity raises some questions.

Something to consider about the NASA bashing, the ESA didn't see it either.

reply to post by DenyObfuscation


That is very very true. That underlines my point. These large well established space agencies with immense resources to draw upon, able to aim a space vehicle with pinpoint accuracy on a target on other space bodies can't apparently set up not even one camera to take an image of arguably the most closely watched comet ever! That is simply unbelievable.

It is not a case of "NASA bashing" at all. It is not an unprovoked assault. It is entirely provoked.

reply to post by Tallone

That is very very true. That underlines my point. These large well established space agencies with immense resources to draw upon, able to aim a space vehicle with pinpoint accuracy on a target on other space bodies can't apparently set up not even one camera to take an image of arguably the most closely watched comet ever! That is simply unbelievable.

The fact that you think this is even in the running to be one of the most closely watched comets is an indication of how little you know about comets.

It is not a case of "NASA bashing" at all. It is not an unprovoked assault. It is entirely provoked.

Really? What provoked you?

reply to post by Tallone

a bit like the belief that traffic lights just turn off and on regardless of the feedback from sensors attached to them

In my area, they do. The very few with sensors, also have signs letting you know they are there.

It is time to deliver or get off the field and return yourself to the bleachers.

I was putting together a post as you requested, and in my searching, I eventually found that even Wikipedia won't allow an entry about EU. It really doesn't help your case when the website that allows entries about just about everything, up to and including the Flying Spaghetti Monster, won't allow an entry on their site.

So.. have fun with your thread.

poet1b
Here is the link from page 13 where I previously proved you wrong, responding to your claims, for which you still don't have a response.

Your claim, which I am addressing, and here I quote you:

the flares about 24 hours before ISON dived into the sun were class M flares?

the sun shooting off several large flares

How often do these M class eruptions take place

How often do these M class eruptions take place in bursts of 3?

...is the point you keep going back to of "three M class flares".
And nowhere in that link you provided is there any evidence of that whatsoever.
Because they never happened.
Not even one.


The second link you provide, on the topic of flares, is not data but an article from a journalist:

A giant cloud of solar material, called a coronal mass ejection or CME, is also seen in the images bursting off the bottom of the sun and heading out into space.

A time is not given but the image is from a time about the start of the 27th, UTC, so the flare would be either at the very start of that day or the end of the 26th.
Going back through the records, this one matches best...

530 2304 2308 2311 G15 5 XRA 1-8A B7.1 2.0E-04

It is a B class flare.
One.
Not strong, not an M class, and certainly not three of them.
Just a small B class flare.
Might have *looked* pretty in the pictures, and might have fooled a watcher who didnt know what they were looking at, but on any other day it wouldn't have been worthy of any mention at all.

Even the journalist had the sense to describe it as "giant" (which it is), rather than "strong" (which it is not).

I've given you the link to flare records before.
Pick any random day. Any day at all, and you'll almost certainly see a B (or even C) class flare.
Its a normal random LOW value happening.

poet1b
Nothing in you link backs up your claims. Number of sunspots in the summer of 2013, about 65, that is about on average about one every day and a half. That makes it look like the number of flares seen as ISON approached to be a very high number.

"That makes it look like..."?
I never mentioned sunspot numbers, so its not clear why you brought the topic up, or how on earth you think there might be a "look like" link to the flares.
I dont care what you think something "looks like" or not.
Instead, I'm giving you the raw data on flares.

poet1b
All the flares took place before the time of the first row of data on the table you provided, which means that your table has nothing to do with what happened.

Au contraire.
Maybe you didnt scroll down to the bottom of the table like I asked.

poet1b
In addition your link on solar radio flux does not indicate number or size of solar flares,

I never claimed it did.
I was specifically answering the specific question you asked, which also did not ask about flares.
To remind you, you asked:

You could explain how you define normal activity of the sun. Provide some links that describe normal activity of the sun.

To which your own wikipedia reference says in the very next sentence:

It is an excellent indicator of overall solar activity levels ...

You asked about "solar activity", I provided data for "solar activity".

poet1b
It has been suggested that 10.7 cm solar flux could interfere with point-to-point terrestrial communications.

Nobody claimed ISON would interfere with terrestrial communications.

Agreed.
Nobody claimed that.
Neither you, nor me, so I dont know why you bothered to bring the topic up now.
I suggest you stick to the topics that were ARE discussing.

More data.
Here are the numbers of C, M and X class flares for each day of November.

2013 11 01 = 6 1 0
2013 11 02 = 8 1 0
2013 11 03 = 3 1 0
2013 11 04 = 8 0 0
2013 11 05 = 9 2 1
2013 11 06 = 12 2 0
2013 11 07 = 11 2 0
2013 11 08 = 3 1 1
2013 11 09 = 14 0 0
2013 11 10 = 8 0 1
2013 11 11 = 7 1 0
2013 11 12 = 12 0 0
2013 11 13 = 12 1 0
2013 11 14 = 16 0 0
2013 11 15 = 7 1 0
2013 11 16 = 13 2 0
2013 11 17 = 10 1 0
2013 11 18 = 13 0 0
2013 11 19 = 6 0 1
2013 11 20 = 7 0 0
2013 11 21 = 3 1 0
2013 11 22 = 5 0 0
2013 11 23 = 10 2 0
2013 11 24 = 10 0 0
2013 11 25 = 4 0 0
2013 11 26 = 1 0 0
2013 11 27 = 2 0 0
2013 11 28 = 4 0 0
2013 11 29 = 1 0 0
2013 11 30 = 1 0 0
2013 12 01 = 2 0 0

There is nothing to indicate "activity" was raised as the comet was closest to the Sun.

Indeed, it had been 10 days since the previous X class flare. The longest gap for a month and a half.

It had been 5 days since the previous M class flare. Also the longest gap for a month and a half.

Any way you count it, the last few days of November were a very quiet time for the sun.

link to source

reply to post by alfa1


Glad to see you putting in a reasonable effort, at last.

I'm probably too busy to put in a reasonable response until next weekend.

Consider the possibility that the class of the flare does not matter.

In the meantime, I suggest you keep digging.

Could I ask any better?

reply to post by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Tallone

 

Whaaaaaaaat? Do you mind linking to where Tallone makes that point?

I believe he's referring to "Point 3" listed from the vid.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I didn't bother editing the quote from the poster of the video. In his defence though I would say he is arguing from the POV of the EC model that considers comets along with asteroids and meteors to be essentially the same. I think his main observation is entirely justified and he was the first I saw to make the association between the 'explanation' offered by NASA and what it implies - that comet ISON was not a ball of ice and rock.

That is probably the kind of acute left of field observation a non-astronomer could only make, or at least way before any advocate of the DST model would twig to it.

Here's a bit from the NASA explanation to show you what I (and Daniel also) are talking about.

This means we have a couple of things to check as we try to understand the lack of any visible trail in the SDO images. Did Comet ISON have a strange composition? By strange it would have to have very little oxygen. Many molecules that are found in comets have oxygen atoms in them. Water, carbon dioxide, and most rocks have oxygen in them. Comet ISON appeared normal as it moved through the solar system. It may have been running out of ice as it moved into perihelion, but the dust particles should also have sublimated and contributed oxygen to the corona as they flew past.

sdoisgo.blogspot.com.au...

Is NASA suggesting that ISON was metallic in nature? No. But that is a reasonable assumption to make considering they have just ditched the DST model in their postulate above!!! If you consider the implications of what they are suggesting here.

BTW nothing to do with my reply but on the subject the possible composition. I have suggested above in several posts that I think there is the possibility comet ISON had a large amount of metal in its composition - in keeping with the EC model, and this possibility is supported by the survival of the comet through perihelion to the point of fragmentation. What I want to say is this. If those fragments are metal, that is not good. Because the one other observation I made consistently through this thread and my first ISON thread on the subject of the NASA and MSM cover-up of the ISON anomalies that are well and truly evident and the subject of comment by astronomers - is that ISON is MUCH bigger than we were led to believe. I say IS because those fragments are still out there.

Very big metallic comet fragments spreading through space is not good for Earth. You will be aware by now how the fragments of ISON are spreading out, and that the trajectories of Earth and of those fragments are due to intersect. In fact from the rate and scale of dispersion already observable the Earth will almost definitely be travelling through the debris field. People should / need to be aware of this.

poet1b
In the meantime, I suggest you keep digging.

Keep digging?

I've already provided in answer to your request for information on (and I quote you) "normal activity of the sun"
* a chart of recent 10.7cm solar flux values.
* a table of values of recent solar flux activity.
(including all of observed, adjusted and URSI Series D values.)
* another table of recent solar radio flux at
245 Mhz
410 Mhz
610 Mhz
1415 Mhz
2695 Mhz
2800 Mhz
4995 Mhz
8800 Mhz
15400 Mhz
* from the observatories located at
Learmonth,
San Vito,
Sag Hill,
Penticton, and
Palehua.
* Two different charts showing GOES X-ray Flux
(at both 1-8 Angstrom (0.1-0.8 nm) and 0.5-4.0 Angstrom (0.05-0.4 nm) passbands.)
* A list of solar flare counts for the month of November.
(for C, M and X flares)
* Lists of daily solar events, so you could check activity for yourself if you wish to double check or count B class flares.

And NONE of it indicates anything except a quiet sun at perihelion of comet ISON.

----

In contrast, you have provided:
* A story of (and here I quote you) "the flares about 24 hours before ISON dived into the sun were class M flares", of which there is no evidence of such flares having ever taken place.
* A story of (and here I quote you) "these M class eruptions take place in bursts of 3", of which there is no evidence of such flares having ever taken place.
* A video and media story of a single C class flare, to back up a false claim of 4 large flares come out of the Sun as ISON approached. ... of which there is no evidence of such flares having ever taken place.

----

And now further, I now see a backdown in that:
* The direction of a flare doesnt matter anymore. Comet directed or not.
* The class of a flare doesnt matter to you anymore. Anything goes now.

Its all a far cry from a week ago when (and I never tire of quoting Electric Universer's words back at them):

"Worldwide Power Disruptions", "X flares", "its going to increase radiation on earth", earthquakes, "the resulting photon flare up will engulf the Earth", "the photon flash will be so great that it will instantly turn everything on the Earth’s surface into light", CME's, pole shifts, "earth changes", "elevated electron levels", "can cause fault slippage", "an extinction level event", "another Carrington event", "economic collapse", changes in "vibrations", blackouts, increase in crime, looting and pillaging, emitting X rays, causing the sun to go dim, affects on our magnetic field, energized changes on Earth, "super storms", "radio disruption", "dangerous", TPTB censorship and coverups, TPTB false flags, influencing weather, people will behave differently, "a major major super huge thing", "this is exactly like armageddon", and "...there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it except panic."

alfa1
Its all a far cry from a week ago when (and I never tire of quoting Electric Universer's words back at them):

"Worldwide Power Disruptions", "X flares", "its going to increase radiation on earth", earthquakes, "the resulting photon flare up will engulf the Earth", "the photon flash will be so great that it will instantly turn everything on the Earth’s surface into light", CME's, pole shifts, "earth changes", "elevated electron levels", "can cause fault slippage", "an extinction level event", "another Carrington event", "economic collapse", changes in "vibrations", blackouts, increase in crime, looting and pillaging, emitting X rays, causing the sun to go dim, affects on our magnetic field, energized changes on Earth, "super storms", "radio disruption", "dangerous", TPTB censorship and coverups, TPTB false flags, influencing weather, people will behave differently, "a major major super huge thing", "this is exactly like armageddon", and "...there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it except panic."

Damn, it seems down under in Australia we missed all that. I hope you are coping ok with all that doom and gloom!

reply to post by poet1b

I am sorry, but it seems you do not understand basic physics.

I have forgotten more physics than you will ever know, sailor man.

The suns eruptions do not have to be directed directly at the comet.

So you're not talking about an arc discharge. Could you tell us, then, exactly what sort of interaction you are speaking of?

The static electricity response was simply an example.

Fine. What was it an example of? The kind of interaction you think may have occurred? So what sort of interaction is it?

reply to post by Tallone


Other points may be worth arguing later, maybe not.

This is what concerns me the most

You will be aware by now how the fragments of ISON are spreading out, and that the trajectories of Earth and of those fragments are due to intersect. In fact from the rate and scale of dispersion already observable the Earth will almost definitely be travelling through the debris field. People should / need to be aware of this.

*Emphasis mine*

What is your source for these claims? Especially the bold text.

reply to post by Tallone

Is NASA suggesting that ISON was metallic in nature? No. But that is a reasonable assumption to make considering they have just ditched the DST model in their postulate above!!! If you consider the implications of what they are suggesting here.

Where do they "ditch the DST model?" Speculating that a comet does not contain as much oxygen as other comets is not the same thing as abandoning the model. In fact, they continue their speculation to explain the observations as follows:

Perhaps the corona was not as dense as we assumed. The reactions that cause oxygen ions need fast electrons. Each step in the ion chain takes a little time. If the density of the fast electrons is smaller each step takes a little longer. At the same time the oxygen ions are moving away from the orbit of the comet. As the new oxygen ions get further away from the comet their density goes down and they become more difficult to see. This will require us to go look more carefully at those places in the frames where the comet material has been the longest. Maybe a faint signal can be detected.

Your own source.

reply to post by Tallone

Very big metallic comet fragments spreading through space is not good for Earth. You will be aware by now how the fragments of ISON are spreading out, and that the trajectories of Earth and of those fragments are due to intersect. In fact from the rate and scale of dispersion already observable the Earth will almost definitely be travelling through the debris field. People should / need to be aware of this.

I know I said I was done with this thread but, the above quote sucked me right back in.

Do you have a non-youtube source for the above?

reply to post by daryllyn


The size of ISON, in my opinion, is totally insufficient to produce any serious threat to large areas of earth. Im sure it is possible for a few fragments to go boom in atmo similar to the recent Russian meteors but I don't see how it could physically produce any city killers etc, worrying about that kind of thing is a waste of time or a grab for youtube views. Even from an EU perspective, those materials would have had sufficient time to balance their charges making large reactions in the atmosphere similar to the comet over Russia unlikely.


The worst thing you can do is talk about doom related predictions and bring in stuff from BPearthwatch and other sites that are not only purely speculative, with known track records of failure, but are deliberately sensational in their claims.
You guys have taken this thread to quite a few pages since I went on vacation, seems like the arguments have not advanced all that much though.

well u see here is the problem,,,,,

Melting Points of Various Metals

Metal Fahrenheit (f) Celsius (c)
Aluminum 1218 659
Brass 1700 927
Bronze 1675 913
Cast Iron 2200 1204
Copper 1981 1083
Gold 1945 1063
Lead 327 163
Magnesium 1204 651
Nickel 2646 1452
Silver 1761 951
Steel 2500 1371
Tungsten 6150 3399
WroughtIron 2700 1482
Zinc 787 419

now ,,what is the temp of the sun,,,that close too the sun????

anyone see a factual problem yet?

so once again,, just what is that Core made of?????

reply to post by BobAthome


What exactly are you trying to say? Just because I throw a snowball over the top of a 3000 degree furnace doesn't mean it will instantly melt.

The fact that a comet is made up of ices as outlined on this first few pages of the thread is undeniable, it is a fact. That does not preclude that it contains other metals or materials. That does not prevlude the fact that most of the visible parts of a comet are NOT particles of dust reflecting sunlight. That's absurd a simple spectra graph can show you how flawed that idea is.

The standard explanation of a comet taught in physical science in any 6th or 8th grade science class is not an accurate representation of the standard model of comets as spouted by NASA, it is that standard explanation as spouted by the Discovery Channel.

NASA is not ready to plunge into new territory as a group. Several of its researchers are however, unless we would all like to go on pretending that none of this ever happened:

One need only review the extraordinary spectacle provided by Comet Holmes 17P to see how deep the crisis in cometology reaches. In October of 2007, Holmes suddenly and unexpectedly brightened by a factor of a million. In less then 24 hours, it grew from a small 17th magnitude comet to a magnitude of 2.5, so large it was easily visible to the naked eye on Earth. Holmes' coma continued expanding until by mid-November of '07 it had become the largest object in the solar system, vastly larger than the Sun. The coma's diameter had grown from 28 thousand kilometers to 7 million km.

At the time of Holmes' extraordinary display, the comet was actually moving away from the Sun, and therefore cooling. Among the common sense questions posed by the enigma: how does such a gravitationally minuscule body hold in place a uniform, spherical coma 7 million kilometers in diameter? If Holmes' flare-up was the result of a collapse or explosion (as some scientists speculated) why was the ejected material not asymmetrical (as one would anticipate from an explosion)? Why did the claimed explosion not produce a variety of fragmentary sizes instead of the extremely fine dust that was actually observed? What explosive event could have caused the comet to luminate for MONTHS, rather than the SECONDS typical of an explosion's luminescence? Why did the comet's gaseous, dusty, spherical cloud persist for months, rather than dispersing quickly away from the comet?

Alfa1 im going to parse some of what you had to say about the actual science here, and see if I can get you a real response, from the thunderbolts directly. Nasa has already stated that the coma from comets is "magnetic" in nature, it wont be long until the idea of dusty ice balls reflecting light is gone in the mind of researchers. Im sure it will linger long in text books around the world.....

reply to post by vind21


"Just because I throw a snowball over the top of a 3000 degree furnace doesn't mean it will instantly melt. "

gee u know u could have said,, 3,000,000 degrees,, and that,, would have been at least,, lets see,,

about 10 million degress less 3000 deg. = ???

3 million less 10 mill much easier.

but yes u may be correct,, now how fast did u through it?

vind21
reply to post by daryllyn

 

The size of ISON, in my opinion, is totally insufficient to produce any serious threat to large areas of earth. Im sure it is possible for a few fragments to go boom in atmo similar to the recent Russian meteors but I don't see how it could physically produce any city killers etc, worrying about that kind of thing is a waste of time or a grab for youtube views. Even from an EU perspective, those materials would have had sufficient time to balance their charges making large reactions in the atmosphere similar to the comet over Russia unlikely.

The worst thing you can do is talk about doom related predictions and bring in stuff from BPearthwatch and other sites that are not only purely speculative, with known track records of failure, but are deliberately sensational in their claims.

You guys have taken this thread to quite a few pages since I went on vacation, seems like the arguments have not advanced all that much though.

edit on 2-12-2013 by vind21 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-12-2013 by vind21 because: (no reason given)

Exactly.

That is precisely why I asked for a source because I have a feeling that what I quoted came from either BPEarthwatch, or one of the similar fear mongering, armchair "experts" on Youtube.

I guess I'd better not hold my breath waiting.