Alien craft/observatories spotted around the sun!

nyarlothothep

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8POHkMQg0Dw&feature=player_embedded#

In lieu with all the alien spacecraft sightings I would say 2012 is coming.

bmaxi

nyarlothothep wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8POHkMQg0Dw&feature=player_embedded#

In lieu with all the alien spacecraft sightings I would say 2012 is coming.

Very definitely, immediately after 2011.

Sleipnir

nyarlothothep wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8POHkMQg0Dw&feature=player_embedded#

In lieu with all the alien spacecraft sightings I would say 2012 is coming.

Yes, 2012 is certainly coming, as is 2013, 3014, 2015 etc. Just because something is as yet unexplained, doesn't mean it signifies the end of the world.

Also, "in lieu" means "instead of".

nyarlothothep

Sleipnir wrote: »

Yes, 2012 is certainly coming, as is 2013, 3014, 2015 etc. Just because something is as yet unexplained, doesn't mean it signifies the end of the world.

Also, "in lieu" means "instead of".

oh bugger, it always sound like accompanying to me, well what the hey, Ive just given a word a new meaning, like gay doesn't just mean happy anymore.

espinolman

I have seen photos of similar spacecraft near the sun on the internet years ago .

bonkey

This isn't a ufology forum

nyarlothothep

no but there is a coverup, this is a conspiracy. And its becoming apparent as we draw closer and closer towards 2012, because something big is going to happen.

PirateShampoo

Why is the light from the Sun reflecting off the wrong position of the spheres?

nyarlothothep

PirateShampoo wrote: »

Why is the light from the Sun reflecting off the wrong position of the spheres?

If they're that close to the sun they have to have radiation deflection shields.

PirateShampoo

nyarlothothep wrote: »

If they're that close to the sun they have to have radiation deflection shields.

That doesnt answer the question. There is both light and shadows on the sphere and there in the wrong place.

espinolman

Here is a direct link to NASA , stereo science centre ,where the images are :

http://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/browse/2010/01/21/behind/euvi/195/2048/

bonkey

nyarlothothep wrote: »

no but there is a coverup, this is a conspiracy. And its becoming apparent as we draw closer and closer towards 2012, because something big is going to happen.

The iamges are coming from NASA, according to that last post of espinolman's.

If there was coverup, don't you think that the government-owned, government-controlled organisation who would have to be in on it?

If NASA are in on this cover-up, why are they publishing these pictures where anyone can see them?

If they're not in on it, then why are tehy ignoring all of this stuff?

It would seem that there's a far simpler explanation, which is that there's no UFOs and no coverup.

PirateShampoo

Also them sphere's would rougly be the size of Mercury or Venus.

Which would lead me to belive that its one of them.

nyarlothothep

no they're aliens.

nyarlothothep

nyarlothothep wrote: »

no they're aliens.

You think it's an alien spacecraft, that doesn't mean it is one.

namloc1980

Here is a quick animation of the images referenced by the video in the OP. 21st Jan 2010.



There is no pattern to the anomolies pointed out by the OP as being spaceships. They flick on and off in various parts of the image as it progresses with the only thing moving in a proprer motion is the Sun as it rotates slowly. The most obvious reason for this is that they are image artefacts.

The next thing to do is to check out images from another source to see whether or not these are real anomolies or just image artefacts:

Here is an image from the SOHO mission from the 21st January taken at the same time as the above animation. The active region at lower left in this image is the same as the active region at lower centre in the STEREO animation above.



There is nothing like the 'spheres' and anomolies that the OP referenced in this SOHO image.

Conclusion: The anamolies don't appear to be real but look to be image artefacts of some kind.

squod

There's huge time differences in the images used to make that moving gif. Another picture you posted doesn't show anything. So what. I'm not supporting the aliens theory, however this is the weakest argument against it possible.

Sure it's completely possible the spheres are photographic anomolies. I'm not sure however how putting forward such a weak argument is meant to dispel peoples beliefs in the alien theory.

namloc1980

squod wrote: »

There's huge time differences in the images used to make that moving gif. Another picture you posted doesn't show anything. So what. I'm not supporting the aliens theory, however this is the weakest argument against it possible.

Sure it's completely possible the spheres are photographic anomolies. I'm not sure however how putting forward such a weak argument is meant to dispel peoples beliefs in the alien theory.

If you think 10 minutes between each image is a huge time difference then I don't know what to say other than :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Also the second picture doesn't show anything....don't you think that's kinda important in the whole context of the thread...:rolleyes:

Riamfada

namloc1980 wrote: »

If you think 10 minutes between each image is a huge time difference then I don't know what to say other than :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Also the second picture doesn't show anything....don't you think that's kinda important in the whole context of the thread...:rolleyes:

Im confused. I dont see anything.

squod

namloc1980 wrote: »

If you think 10 minutes between each image is a huge time difference then I don't know what to say other than :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Also the second picture doesn't show anything....don't you think that's kinda important in the whole context of the thread...:rolleyes:

Yes huge, how fast do these 'aliens' travel? Have you considered that?

I'll see your :rolleyes::rolleyes: and I'll raise you two :rolleyes::rolleyes:

namloc1980

squod wrote: »

Yes huge, how fast do these 'aliens' travel? Have you considered that?

I'll see your :rolleyes::rolleyes: and I'll raise you two :rolleyes::rolleyes:

If these aliens are travelling so fast how can they be captured in an image at all....have you considered that?

Anyway, if you're not interested in discussing the topic but would rather take shots at other posters that's your perogative....I for one am not interested in that.

squod

namloc1980 wrote: »

If these aliens are travelling so fast how can they be captured in an image at all....have you considered that?

Uh huh.

namloc1980 wrote: »

Anyway, if you're not interested in discussing the topic but would rather take shots at other posters that's your perogative....I for one am not interested in that.

Black pot!

constance tench

bonkey wrote: »

The iamges are coming from NASA, according to that last post of espinolman's.

If there was coverup, don't you think that the government-owned, government-controlled organisation who would have to be in on it?

If NASA are in on this cover-up, why are they publishing these pictures where anyone can see them?

If they're not in on it, then why are tehy ignoring all of this stuff?

It would seem that there's a far simpler explanation, which is that there's no UFOs and no coverup.

.. Unfortunately, we can no longer view these images (spheres intact) on the NASA site

espinolman

There is six anomolies on this photo :

http://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/browse/2010/01/23/ahead/euvi/195/2048/20100123_231530_n7euA_195.jpg

PirateShampoo

And the only explanation you will except is that they are UFOs? And will dismiss any other explanation put forward?

You do realize that if they where space craft they would roughly the same size as the earth and like i already said. if it really was a object and not a artifact then its reflecting the suns light and shadow on said object is wrong.

mysterious

PirateShampoo wrote: »

And the only explanation you will except is that they are UFOs? And will dismiss any other explanation put forward?

You do realize that if they where space craft they would roughly the same size as the earth and like i already said. if it really was a object and not a artifact then its reflecting the suns light and shadow on said object is wrong.

Why does everything in your view have to be everything but a UFO.

We don't live in a world anymore with the theoy that UFOs may exist. They do exist.

PirateShampoo

mysterious wrote: »

Why does everything in your view have to be everything but a UFO.

We don't live in a world anymore with the theoy that UFOs may exist. They do exist.

Don't be a Hypocrite, why does everything that you cant explain have to be a UFO?

So far i have seen 2 or 3 other possible explanations of what they could be, but your unwilling to ever consider them as it doesn't suit your agenda.

Are you suggesting that Earth size ships are sitting in the Sun's corona?

mysterious

PirateShampoo wrote: »

Don't be a Hypocrite, why does everything that you cant explain have to be a UFO?

So far i have seen 2 or 3 other possible explanations of what they could be, but your unwilling to ever consider them as it doesn't suit your agenda.

Are you suggesting that Earth size ships are sitting in the Sun's corona?

Please Don't call me a hypocrite and again avoiding the question i simply asked you.

All I asked was to answer an answer Pirateshampoo. I don't need to make myself any clearer.

PirateShampoo

You are being a hypocrite its not a personnel insult your just being one. Your questioning me on it being a anything but a UFO while refusing to look at suggestions it could be something else. That is a hypocrite.

Now heres a few reasons why I don't think its a UFO.

1. If it was a UFO then why is the Sun's reflection wrong on the Sphere? The Shadow is also in the wrong place. It needs to be turned 90 degrees to match.

2. The Spheres would be roughly the same size has the Planet Earth and are sitting just outside the Sun's Corona which is roughly 5,800 kelvins.

So which is the more likely explanation?

namloc1980

mysterious wrote: »

Please Don't call me a hypocrite and again avoiding the question i simply asked you.

All I asked was to answer an answer Pirateshampoo. I don't need to make myself any clearer.

There is no evidence at all to show these things are spacecraft and are more likely some sort of image artefact/aberration. Why don't these spaceships show up on SOHO images???

mink_man

it is a possibility though!

PirateShampoo

mink_man wrote: »

it is a possibility though!

Well theres always a possibility, Unicorns and Carebears hold a certain probability also.

All i have shown is the facts of what the picture is showing us, yet all the pro UFO side has offered us as "proof" is only there belief its a UFO.

mysterious

PirateShampoo wrote: »

You are being a hypocrite its not a personnel insult your just being one. Your questioning me on it being a anything but a UFO while refusing to look at suggestions it could be something else. That is a hypocrite.

Now heres a few reasons why I don't think its a UFO.

1. If it was a UFO then why is the Sun's reflection wrong on the Sphere? The Shadow is also in the wrong place. It needs to be turned 90 degrees to match.

2. The Spheres would be roughly the same size has the Planet Earth and are sitting just outside the Sun's Corona which is roughly 5,800 kelvins.

So which is the more likely explanation?

Right lets try again Pirate shampoo, I didn't ask for this above. I asked you a simple question. Couild you please answer it.

Why does every single UFO report on this forum has to be anything but a UFO. You make this case every single time.

Now All i want is an answer as to why.

Not this above.:rolleyes:

namloc1980

mysterious wrote: »

Right lets try again Pirate shampoo, I didn't ask for this above. I asked you a simple question. Couild you please answer it.

Why does every single UFO report on this forum has to be anything but a UFO. You make this case every single time.

Now All i want is an answer as to why.

Not this above.:rolleyes:

if these spaceships are real why dont they show up on SOHO images??

PirateShampoo

Because there all bad phone camera jobs with blurred lights. And silly dubbed audio doesn't help there case either.

And in your own words why should i believe something that someone else is showing me without seeing it in the flesh and with my own 2 eyes.


Now answer my question do you believe they are planet size space craft orbiting our sun in that picture? And if so can you explain the Light and Shadow in the wrong place.

Yitzhak Rabin

mysterious wrote: »

Right lets try again Pirate shampoo, I didn't ask for this above. I asked you a simple question. Couild you please answer it.

Why does every single UFO report on this forum has to be anything but a UFO. You make this case every single time.

Now All i want is an answer as to why.

Not this above.:rolleyes:

It doesn't have to be anything. Each case that I have ever seen presented, can usually be explained by some other phenomena, or it simply can't be explained.

Just because it can't be explained(in this case it can) doesn't mean its an alien ufo. The unexplained is just that, unexplained. Arbitrarily assigning what it is, is not helpful, all you are doing is deciding what it is without any evidence.

I would much rather say, I don't know what that is, than just take a guess and say "aliens". In this case, aliens is highly unlikely, given that the anomoly is the size of the earth and at a temperature which boils/melts/incinerates pretty much any substance we know of.

Brian

mysterious wrote: »

Right lets try again Pirate shampoo, I didn't ask for this above. I asked you a simple question. Couild you please answer it.

Why does every single UFO report on this forum has to be anything but a UFO. You make this case every single time.

Now All i want is an answer as to why.

Because PirateShampoo has a keen and skeptical mind, which tries to identify what an unidentified flying object is, whereas you are happy to say you don't know what it is. That isn't an argument. "So you think it's this, but I think I don't know what it is, so you must be wrong".

Pokes

Why are there areas covered with black on the soho images

http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime/eit_195/512/

: nevermind , i see the images are put together in mosaic form.

mysterious

Baza210 wrote: »

Because PirateShampoo has a keen and skeptical mind, which tries to identify what an unidentified flying object is, whereas you are happy to say you don't know what it is. That isn't an argument. "So you think it's this, but I think I don't know what it is, so you must be wrong".

Right then, whatever to that, but I will say this, don't assume what I'm thinking or feeling about this. I haven't shared my thoughts on that yet. until then maybe you might be able to talk about what I feel about this.

I asked a question, I still didn't get the answer from him. That's all I posed here was a question nothing else.

PirateShampoo

mysterious wrote: »

Right then, whatever to that, but I will say this, don't assume what I'm thinking or feeling about this. I haven't shared my thoughts on that yet. until then maybe you might be able to talk about what I feel about this.

I asked a question, I still didn't get the answer from him. That's all I posed here was a question nothing else.

Read much?

PirateShampoo wrote: »

Because there all bad phone camera jobs with blurred lights. And silly dubbed audio doesn't help there case either.

And in your own words why should i believe something that someone else is showing me without seeing it in the flesh and with my own 2 eyes.


Now answer my question do you believe they are planet size space craft orbiting our sun in that picture? And if so can you explain the Light and Shadow in the wrong place.

I can re type it again if needed.

bonkey

PirateShampoo wrote: »

You are being a hypocrite its not a personnel insult your just being one.

Stop making personal comments. The argument of "I believe its true about you" doesn't mitigate anything.

espinolman

PirateShampoo wrote: »

1. If it was a UFO then why is the Sun's reflection wrong on the Sphere?

Because the images are taken in the extreme ultra-violet .


http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A03uv8ec8V1Lbb8Ar_ZLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByazUxbmZ2BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMwRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAw--/SIG=13trrhk3o/EXP=1264534300/**http%3a//www.nasaimages.org/luna/servlet/detail/NSVS~3~3~12697~112697%3aSTEREO-s-Extreme-UltraViolet-Imager

http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A03uv8ZX8F1LEA4BuPFLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByNGxmazk4BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAw--/SIG=12mof2nse/EXP=1264533975/**http%3a//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_ultraviolet_Imaging_Telescope

PirateShampoo

espinolman wrote: »

Because the images are taken in the extreme ultra-violet .


http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A03uv8ec8V1Lbb8Ar_ZLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByazUxbmZ2BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMwRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAw--/SIG=13trrhk3o/EXP=1264534300/**http%3a//www.nasaimages.org/luna/servlet/detail/NSVS~3~3~12697~112697%3aSTEREO-s-Extreme-UltraViolet-Imager

http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A03uv8ZX8F1LEA4BuPFLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByNGxmazk4BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAw--/SIG=12mof2nse/EXP=1264533975/**http%3a//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_ultraviolet_Imaging_Telescope

That doesnt explain why the shadows are wrong way around.

squod

PirateShampoo wrote: »

That doesnt explain why the shadows are wrong way around.

Angle of incidence is a measure of deviation of something from "straight on", for example

Wiki explained it on the page, way over my head.

espinolman

PirateShampoo wrote: »

That doesnt explain why the shadows are wrong way around.

It says light produced by helium and ionized iron

The EIT instrument is sensitive to light of four different wavelengths: 17.1, 19.5, 28.4, and 30.4 nm, corresponding to light produced by highly ionized iron (XI)/(X), (XII), (XV), and helium (II),

quote from second link


http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A1f4cfqZFF5LdzYARCpLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByNGxmazk4BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAw--/SIG=122cqbduj/EXP=1264543257/**http%3a//antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap010929.html

PirateShampoo

espinolman wrote: »

It says light produced by helium and ionized iron
quote from second link


http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A1f4cfqZFF5LdzYARCpLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByNGxmazk4BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAw--/SIG=122cqbduj/EXP=1264543257/**http%3a//antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap010929.html

I think we might of got our wires crossed some where?

Im talking about the shadow on the spheres which people are calling UFOs, not the sun its self.

Gordon

espinolman wrote: »

There is six anomolies on this photo :

http://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/browse/2010/01/23/ahead/euvi/195/2048/20100123_231530_n7euA_195.jpg

Top left four disc-like blips have shinyness on underside making me think they are all some kind of glitch as they have uniform colour/light positions compared to the sun, hence it's not shine, but image blips. Right hand side two, seemingly close next to each other, could be small blips too. Bottom three blips seemingly in front of the sun have same colour/light positions as top left blips: black circle, greenish bottom section.

Just camera blips imo.

But real conspiracists would say that these blips are from NASA censoring out the real spacecraft images. Unless the claim is that the spacecrafts are aligned vertically/to each other, or something?

It sure would be amazing to find out if these things are actually blobs of sun gloop skiting around the sun though, that would rock. Sun gloop doesn't get to Earth ever does it?!

Brown Bomber

PirateShampoo wrote: »

Well theres always a possibility, Unicorns and Carebears hold a certain probability also.

All i have shown is the facts of what the picture is showing us, yet all the pro UFO side has offered us as "proof" is only there belief its a UFO.

Thats a sneaky comparison. Your comparing something unproveable to something completely made up in your head.

espinolman

PirateShampoo wrote: »

Im talking about the shadow on the spheres which people are calling UFOs, not the sun its self.

Is all it shows in the images is ultraviolet light emitted from helium and ionized iron at millions of degrees , so how could the images show shadows on the spheres ?

Are you aware that you are not looking at images in the visible light spectrum ?

RGDATA!

by UFO we are talking about "unidentified flying object", correct?
ie. UFO does not necessarily mean "alien craft/observatory"?

PirateShampoo

Gordon wrote: »

Top left four disc-like blips have shinyness on underside making me think they are all some kind of glitch as they have uniform colour/light positions compared to the sun, hence it's not shine, but image blips. Right hand side two, seemingly close next to each other, could be small blips too. Bottom three blips seemingly in front of the sun have same colour/light positions as top left blips: black circle, greenish bottom section.

Just camera blips imo.

But real conspiracists would say that these blips are from NASA censoring out the real spacecraft images. Unless the claim is that the spacecrafts are aligned vertically/to each other, or something?

It sure would be amazing to find out if these things are actually blobs of sun gloop skiting around the sun though, that would rock. Sun gloop doesn't get to Earth ever does it?!

And thanks for posting this, its exactly what i have been on about since page 1 which none of them will answer.