Dwarf Star

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 07:19PM

beyosoco wrote: »

You ask has anyone else seen it, the answer is yes, I and my family have seen it, and you have seen it too, if you have taken the time to look at the photographs.

I did look at your photos but I don't see a second star or anything of the kind!

It was a beautiful day here today down south with nice blue clear skies and just one star shining! Maybe the NWO forgot to send up their 'chem-trailing' planes today??

This dwarf star theory is off the wall for a multitude of reasons not least because every amateur solar astronomer in the world appears to have missed it!

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 07:22PM

The Bored One wrote: »

I looked at the photo's and I'm not sure its two suns you're looking at. Its possible to get a simliar effect looking street-lights where the light effect is split.
Have you considered it could also potentially be a Sun Dog?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_dog

Those can have some rather spectacular appearences in the sky, as can be seen in the photos on the wiki page.

I have considered sun dog, but this is imaged 9 times by two people, two cameras, different locations some 100 foot apart and it moves from south to north across the face of the sun and some distance to the north at that, all within 15 minutes. A close up of the image where it is to the north of the sun reveals red flares around sections of it. Having photographed it many times since and discovered that we had photographed it many times prior to this ( my wife kept telling me there was something wrong with the sun, all summer) I am confident that we have a planet of some description that should not be there. I have never seen a dwarf star close up, but according to ancients too numerous to mention we are due a visit from our binary twin star, its seven planets and ten moons. Could this be some other planet, yes it could, could it be a camera anomaly, diffusion, sun dog, dust, flare or anything else more acceptable, no, I'm afraid I know it cannot.:(

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 07:27PM

beyosoco wrote: »

Could this be some other planet, yes it could, could it be a camera anomaly, diffusion, sun dog, dust, flare or anything else more acceptable, no, I'm afraid I know it cannot.:(

Wow. Skeptics are always being berated and laughed at on this forum for being close-minded. You can only see one explanation for what is in your image. You close your mind to everything else?

Again I ask, how has every amateur astronomer failed to see this planet/star thing when you seem to have captured it with a camera??

RoboClam · 04-03-2010 07:31PM

beyosoco wrote: »

I have considered sun dog, but this is imaged 9 times by two people, two cameras, different locations some 100 foot apart and it moves from south to north across the face of the sun and some distance to the north at that, all within 15 minutes. A close up of the image where it is to the north of the sun reveals red flares around sections of it. Having photographed it many times since and discovered that we had photographed it many times prior to this ( my wife kept telling me there was something wrong with the sun, all summer) I am confident that we have a planet of some description that should not be there. I have never seen a dwarf star close up, but according to ancients too numerous to mention we are due a visit from our binary twin star, its seven planets and ten moons. Could this be some other planet, yes it could, could it be a camera anomaly, diffusion, sun dog, dust, flare or anything else more acceptable, no, I'm afraid I know it cannot.:(

Can your camera see something that my eyes cannot? I'm told quite often to do my own research on these forums. In this case, I do my own research every single day.

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 07:37PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

Wow. Skeptics are always being berated and laughed at on this forum for being close-minded. You can only see one explanation for what is in your image. You close your mind to everything else?

Again I ask, how has every amateur astronomer failed to see this planet/star thing when you seem to have captured it with a camera??

Why not ask an astronomer that question?

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 07:48PM

beyosoco wrote: »

Why not ask an astronomer that question?

I have. They've never heard of it. None of the amateur astronomy sites have ever heard of it. There are thousands of amateur solar astronomers around the world who watch the Sun and it's environment on a daily basis with much more sensitive instruments than your camera....don't you think at least one of them would have seen this thing???

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 07:52PM

RoboClam wrote: »

Can your camera see something that my eyes cannot? I'm told quite often to do my own research on these forums. In this case, I do my own research every single day.

My wife photographed this object this summer with a 5mpx Pentax Optio S5i, I photographed it with a Lumix Lx2. We then purchased a Canon G9 and a Panasonic G1 with the 200mm lens for the express purpose of photographing this object. These cameras as you can clearly see can see something that is in the sky close to the sun that should not be there. Whatever your eyes can see I do not know, I cannot help you there.
Doing daily research (if that means photography) on this I find a waste, best wait till there is very heavy chemtrailing of the sun (when you can see loads of trails leading into your view of the sun) and then put the shutter on continuous, f22, minus 2 stops exposure comp and rattle off 600 or so images around the perimeter of the sun, waiting for cloud breaks and chemcloud thinning. Then snuggle up next to your imac with a cup of bovril and really take your time enlarging and skimming every one of them. If you have waited as suggested for heavy heavy chemtrailing, bingo, you will have images of another planet or few close to the sun.....promise;)

fontanalis · 04-03-2010 07:56PM

beyosoco wrote: »

My wife photographed this object this summer with a 5mpx Pentax Optio S5i, I photographed it with a Lumix Lx2. We then purchased a Canon G9 and a Panasonic G1 with the 200mm lens for the express purpose of photographing this object. These cameras as you can clearly see can see something that is in the sky close to the sun that should not be there. Whatever your eyes can see I do not know, I cannot help you there.
Doing daily research (if that means photography) on this I find a waste, best wait till there is very heavy chemtrailing of the sun (when you can see loads of trails leading into your view of the sun) and then put the shutter on continuous, f22, minus 2 stops exposure comp and rattle off 600 or so images around the perimeter of the sun, waiting for cloud breaks and chemcloud thinning. Then snuggle up next to your imac with a cup of bovril and really take your time enlarging and skimming every one of them. If you have waited as suggested for heavy heavy chemtrailing, bingo, you will have images of another planet or few close to the sun.....promise;)

It seems your belief in this imaginary planet is based on your belief in chem trails.

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 07:56PM

beyosoco wrote: »

My wife photographed this object this summer with a 5mpx Pentax Optio S5i, I photographed it with a Lumix Lx2. We then purchased a Canon G9 and a Panasonic G1 with the 200mm lens for the express purpose of photographing this object. These cameras as you can clearly see can see something that is in the sky close to the sun that should not be there. Whatever your eyes can see I do not know, I cannot help you there.
Doing daily research (if that means photography) on this I find a waste, best wait till there is very heavy chemtrailing of the sun (when you can see loads of trails leading into your view of the sun) and then put the shutter on continuous, f22, minus 2 stops exposure comp and rattle off 600 or so images around the perimeter of the sun, waiting for cloud breaks and chemcloud thinning. Then snuggle up next to your imac with a cup of bovril and really take your time enlarging and skimming every one of them. If you have waited as suggested for heavy heavy chemtrailing, bingo, you will have images of another planet or few close to the sun.....promise;)

So these planets/stars only appear on certain days when there is alleged 'chemtrailing'? So on a day like today when it was a lovely clear day, these planets suddenly become shy and run away and hide?? The link you provided in the OP only has 4 images, yet you claim to have taken many images with various cameras...any chance you can provide these?

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 07:57PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

I have. They've never heard of it. None of the amateur astronomy sites have ever heard of it. There are thousands of amateur solar astronomers around the world who watch the Sun and it's environment on a daily basis with much more sensitive instruments than your camera....don't you think at least one of them would have seen this thing???

I'm shocked, wouldn't you think that those watching the sun all day with telescopes would have seen this before now? :rolleyes: Me thinks the scopes come out at night and it ain't out at night it's playing on the other side of the earth where the light is and where they are trying to hide it with chemtrails.:)

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 08:00PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

So these planets/stars only appear on certain days? What do they do the rest of the time?? The link you provided in the OP only has 4 images, yet you claim to have taken many images with various cameras...any chance you can provide these?

If you cannot examine the images I have posted and see what is, what chance of you doing anything but the same with any other image I post....no chance, you will have to get your camera out, and in fairness to everyone posting that is the only way anyone will ever totally internalize the reality of this situation.

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 08:01PM

beyosoco wrote: »

I'm shocked, wouldn't you think that those watching the sun all day with telescopes would have seen this before now? :rolleyes: Me thinks the scopes come out at night and it ain't out at night it's playing on the other side of the earth where the light is and where they are trying to hide it with chemtrails.:)

Please tell me you realise that there are such things as solar telescopes?? Or do you think telescopes are only for night time!!:pac::rolleyes: There are thousands of astronomers who only observe the sun....I'm pretty sure one of the would have seen this thing by now.

fontanalis · 04-03-2010 08:01PM

beyosoco wrote: »

I'm shocked, wouldn't you think that those watching the sun all day with telescopes would have seen this before now? :rolleyes: Me thinks the scopes come out at night and it ain't out at night it's playing on the other side of the earth where the light is and where they are trying to hide it with chemtrails.:)

So there are only scopes on one side of the planet? Sorry but this is the most befuddling thread I've ever seen.

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 08:01PM

beyosoco wrote: »

If you cannot examine the images I have posted and see what is, what chance of you doing anything but the same with any other image I post....no chance, you will have to get your camera out, and in fairness to everyone posting that is the only way anyone will ever totally internalize the reality of this situation.

So you won't post anymore of your 'evidence'??? Says it all really! :rolleyes:

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 08:03PM

fontanalis wrote: »

It seems your belief in this imaginary planet is based on your belief in chem trails.

Why would I have to believe in something I have photographed so many times?

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 08:07PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

Please tell me you realise that there are such things as solar telescopes?? Or do you think telescopes are only for night time!!:pac::rolleyes: There are thousands of astronomers who only observe the sun....I'm pretty sure one of the would have seen this thing by now.

So am I and I'm really sure you can find him, I just photograph it, how about you?

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 08:09PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

So you won't post anymore of your 'evidence'??? Says it all really! :rolleyes:

Yes that says it all:rolleyes:

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 08:10PM

beyosoco wrote: »

Yes that says it all:rolleyes:

It sure does!

RoboClam · 04-03-2010 08:16PM

The time, fuel, money and manpower needed to "chemtrail" the sky to obscure this star all over the world makes me wonder why they'd even bother hiding it.

It's been said already, but what about before the invention of the plane? Why was this star not seen then? What possible orbit could it have?

espinolman · 04-03-2010 08:26PM

RoboClam wrote: »

What possible orbit could it have?

Like a comet and your not goin to see it until it comes up into the ecliptic and then everyone is gonna know about it .

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 08:30PM

espinolman wrote: »

Like a comet and your not goin to see it until it comes up into the ecliptic and then everyone is gonna know about it .

That's not true. Bodies that are off the ecliptic can be seen just as easily as objects that are on the ecliptic place.

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 08:36PM

So let's assume this thing is an image of a planet etc. and not a lens flare or something more likely

First of all if it is a planetary body it is either very close to earth and quite small or else it's far away and absolutely enormous. Secondly it appears to have a decent amount of separation from the Sun, maybe 4 or 5 degrees. This should make it easily visible to the naked eye....which of course it's not.

Thirdly why doesn't it appear in your other images of the same scene?????

My guess is either it's a lens flare or something like that or that it was added into the image. All the evidence suggests this is not a real planet or star or whatever.

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 08:39PM

RoboClam wrote: »

The time, fuel, money and manpower needed to "chemtrail" the sky to obscure this star all over the world makes me wonder why they'd even bother hiding it.

It's been said already, but what about before the invention of the plane? Why was this star not seen then? What possible orbit could it have?

Dunno, I just take photographs of it

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 08:43PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

So let's assume this thing is an image of a planet etc. and not a lens flare or something more likely

First of all if it is a planetary body it is either very close to earth and quite small or else it's far away and absolutely enormous. Secondly it appears to have a decent amount of separation from the Sun, maybe 4 or 5 degrees. This should make it easily visible to the naked eye....which of course it's not.

Thirdly why doesn't it appear in your other images of the same scene?????

My guess is either it's a lens flare or something like that or that it was added into the image. All the evidence suggests this is not a real planet or star or whatever.

Look at the second image, it's above the sun, just above it, right there in front of you. Alright you might need a decent screen, but it's there and isn't that why I added the other two images with a little decrease in brightness and increase in contrast. Thanks for re posting the images, it's helps remind everyone what this thread is about, your a star:)

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 08:46PM

beyosoco wrote: »

Look at the second image, it's above the sun, just above it, right there in front of you. Alright you might need a decent screen, but it's there and isn't that why I added the other two images with a little decrease in brightness and increase in contrast. Thanks for re posting the images, it's helps remind everyone what this thread is about, your a star:)

Are you honestly trying to tell us that this thing moved a huge distance in a very short amount of time???????? :pac::pac:

If that was the case it only makes the case for this thing being easily visible even stronger. If it can move that fast it should be visible all the time moving??? :pac::pac:

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 09:14PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

Are you honestly trying to tell us that this thing moved a huge distance in a very short amount of time???????? :pac::pac:

If that was the case it only makes the case for this thing being easily visible even stronger. If it can move that fast it should be visible all the time moving??? :pac::pac:

At last you're getting the picture, it is easily visible, just follow the steps I outlined in 248 and you too can start posting you tube vids of Nibiru along with the hundreds of others who are taking similar photographs.:)

beyosoco · 04-03-2010 09:19PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

So let's assume this thing is an image of a planet etc. and not a lens flare or something more likely

First of all if it is a planetary body it is either very close to earth and quite small or else it's far away and absolutely enormous. Secondly it appears to have a decent amount of separation from the Sun, maybe 4 or 5 degrees. This should make it easily visible to the naked eye....which of course it's not.

Thirdly why doesn't it appear in your other images of the same scene?????

My guess is either it's a lens flare or something like that or that it was added into the image. All the evidence suggests this is not a real planet or star or whatever.

And one other little snippet of information for you, the lower image, where you can see the tree, where the planet is directly above the sun, well , if you look at the tree in the other image you will see that I stepped about six feet to my right to take that one and the time data on the image tells me that the top image was taken 62 seconds after the first (lower image). That thing is moving pretty fast, might be the reason for the red flares coming from it don't you think.

Kepti · 04-03-2010 09:32PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

My guess is either it's a lens flare or something like that or that it was added into the image. All the evidence suggests this is not a real planet or star or whatever.

I had a look at the image in Photoshop and in fairness to beyosoco it doesn't show any signs of being doctored. I'm no Photoshop pro, but he'd have to be pretty good to not leave any signs that he tampered with the image. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Emkay · 04-03-2010 09:40PM

The Bored One wrote: »

Do you know anyone who has photographed this whose tried viewing it by any means other than Mark 1 Eyeball or a camera though?
Given how it appears in the photographs it could very easily just be diffusion.

Known to me personally? No, but the following information is in the public domain.

Robert S Harrington viewed planet X from New Zealand in the early 90's. Harrington was Supervising Astronomer for the US Naval Observatory. He informed NASA what he had found, but died suddenly, apparently of a previously undiagnosed cancer, before he could return home and publicise his discovery that Planet X was indeed inbound into our solar system! He had been looking for Planet X for some dozen years.

It is relevant to the subject of Planet X that NASA falsely stated in their obituary that Harrington had late in his career become "skeptical" about Planet X. Harrington's colleague in the search for Planet X, retracted any statements he himself had previously made, and was henceforward silent on the subject.

Harrington was interviewed in conversation with Sitchin in 1990. They were in total agreement as to where Planet X would be found, and had each, without any collaboration with the other, drawn its elliptical orbit. Sitchin, of course, knew a great deal about the tenth planet, or Planet X, through his scholarly work deciphering the ancient Sumerian tablets.

Before Harrington actually found the precise location of Planet X, a report was published in the Washington Post on Fri Dec 30 1983, that "A heavenly body, possibly as large as the giant planet Jupiter and possibly so close to Earth that it could be part of this solar system, has been found in the direction of the constellation Orion by an orbiting telescope aboard the US Infrared Astronomical Satellite. "

So Planet X was viewed by IRAS a decade or more before its precise location was confirmed by Harrington, who, conveniently for NASA, then died.

namloc1980 · 04-03-2010 09:44PM

beyosoco wrote: »

And one other little snippet of information for you, the lower image, where you can see the tree, where the planet is directly above the sun, well , if you look at the tree in the other image you will see that I stepped about six feet to my right to take that one and the time data on the image tells me that the top image was taken 62 seconds after the first (lower image). That thing is moving pretty fast, might be the reason for the red flares coming from it don't you think.

Red flares???? Your interpretation of those images as a planet/star or something is so full of conjecture and false logic. Your interpretation neglects the rest of the people on the planet who have eyes and can see these things, if they existed. It totally ignores the fact that no amateur astronomer has reported seeing such a thing. And let's face it if it were as big as you suggest the entire planet should be able to see it. Conclusion. Camera anomaly

Dwarf Star

Comments