Sun UFO : NASA Caught Doctoring Near Sun UFO Image - Red Handed!

[irishspirit]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_basraNod1Ms/TUOzm1xjQMI/AAAAAAAAB8Q/gyR6E2RNuTc/s400/sohoufosun.jpg (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_basraNod1Ms/TUOzm1xjQMI/AAAAAAAAB8Q/gyR6E2RNuTc/s1600/sohoufosun.jpg)On January 22nd, 2011 Youtube user "BeePeeOilDisaster' had posted the down below video and in his testimonial he said " Go to the NASA STEREO website, input 20110122 and 20110122 using Behind EUVI 195 then after it loads scroll to the time frame 10:46:10 and there is the original... You can save it to your PC and adjust the Zoom, Brightness and Contrast to bring out the detail of the image

I made this video to show what can be missed just by glancing at these pictures from the STEREO website. With the proper knowledge and techniques so much detail can be brought out by adjusting the zoom, brightness and contrast. I am just amazed at this picture"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvG0xKSaHOo&feature=player_embedded#

http://www.ufo-blogger.com/2011/01/soho-ufo-nasa-caught-doctoring-soho-ufo.html

[Tangri]

Go to the NASA STEREO website, input 20110122 and 20110122 using Behind EUVI 195 then after it loads scroll to the time frame 10:46:10 and there is the original..

Only 10:45:30 exist

[mrmalco]

Thanks very much irishspirit. I find it a bit spooky that thing.

[TWINNICK]

Yes one of many I suspect, I find it a little on the un nerving side as well.

It must be huge !

Who or what is in it I wonder.

..Nick..

[zebowho]

I hate to do this but feel like I have to since all these posts about "UFO's around the sun" just do not seem to consider the basic's of the actual telescope instruments. All it takes is a little research to find out a couple of "illuminating" things (pun intended) :).

1- These green images are the ionization of Iron at a specific wavelength 195nm.
2- The telescopes themselves have aluminum filters at the opening as well as at the focal plane.
3- The filters reject light!

Here's a quote from the equipments description: "The EUVI uses thin metal film filters at both the entrance aperture and near the focal plane to suppress undesired UV, visible, and IR radiation...."

Those are just a few things to consider. Think of it this way, can you tell what a person looks like from just looking at their shadow? These images are only showing a small slice (very small) of the optical spectrum. The rest is more assumption than anything else. Here's another way of putting it, remember the vid Bill put up where Carl Sagan describes 4D? Now remember the part where he describes how a 2D square see's a 3D apple? This is similar, its only a slice of the spectrum.

Now I'm not saying there isn't anything out there but just jumping to "UFO's" is sort of putting the cart before the horse if even, as in this case, marginal research isn't done. Where are those objects? Near the Sun (which would make them simply huge) or near the telescope (which would make them pretty small).

Logical deduction says there's something going on but do we have all the information to determine (correctly) what exactly that is? I think not, at least at this point.

I'm not trying to derail a thread but thought I should share what I've learned.

-z

[GeosAlien]

I hate to do this but feel like I have to since all these posts about "UFO's around the sun" just do not seem to consider the basic's of the actual telescope instruments. All it takes is a little research to find out a couple of "illuminating" things (pun intended) :).

1- These green images are the ionization of Iron at a specific wavelength 195nm.
2- The telescopes themselves have aluminum filters at the opening as well as at the focal plane.
3- The filters reject light!

Here's a quote from the equipments description: "The EUVI uses thin metal film filters at both the entrance aperture and near the focal plane to suppress undesired UV, visible, and IR radiation...."

Those are just a few things to consider. Think of it this way, can you tell what a person looks like from just looking at their shadow? These images are only showing a small slice (very small) of the optical spectrum. The rest is more assumption than anything else. Here's another way of putting it, remember the vid Bill put up where Carl Sagan describes 4D? Now remember the part where he describes how a 2D square see's a 3D apple? This is similar, its only a slice of the spectrum.

Now I'm not saying there isn't anything out there but just jumping to "UFO's" is sort of putting the cart before the horse if even, as in this case, marginal research isn't done. Where are those objects? Near the Sun (which would make them simply huge) or near the telescope (which would make them pretty small).

Logical deduction says there's something going on but do we have all the information to determine (correctly) what exactly that is? I think not, at least at this point.

I'm not trying to derail a thread but thought I should share what I've learned.

-z

Okay zebowho thank you for your observations. Your comments are fair.
However, remains the question why NASA removes that object in later publications?
Because it is "lens flare" or other imprefectnesses, from their equipment, or something we shouldn't be aware off.....??
:confused:

[modwiz]

Yes one of many I suspect, I find it a little on the un nerving side as well.

It must be huge !

Who or what is in it I wonder.

..Nick..

Nick,
Google James C Horak and you will be taken to a blog site.

Scroll down just a bit on the right and look for the videos with EMV on them. He explains them in some detail.

He claims to have been in one and is a representative of them. As crazy as this sounds he is actually really funny, down to earth and educated. In some of his videos he even has a potty mouth.

He says the beings in these vehicles are keeping the Sun balanced and from roasting us during coronal ejections. He claims they have been there for thousands or millions (I forget which, he doesn't) of years to allow us to develop without having our lifestream brought to a halt by the Sun.

Modwiz

[zebowho]

Okay zebowho thank you for your observations. Your comments are fair.
However, remains the question why NASA removes that object in later publications?
Because it is "lens flare" or other imprefectnesses, from their equipment, or something we shouldn't be aware off.....??
:confused:

One thing I do know is with the EUVI images (I've downloaded several months worth to notice) is that there are two versions. The first 'low res" or more of a "raw" version that is initially streamed from the telescopes. The second version is refined and higher quality (according to the SSC team) which has been, I believe resampled. There is a period where the first version is up and then totally replaced by the high resolution version.

The reason I'm saying that is there does seem to be some pixelation and/or artifacts (image artifacts) in those images. Some seem exaggerated in the raw versions and either altered (because pixelation is smoothed out) or non existent in the high res version.

Here's the problem as I see it, (this is just my opinion based on what I've learned and I could be wrong), since we cannot see the the visual spectrum (same light source as our eyes) we have no way of telling just from these images if those pixels are either large objects or small (dust) or even CCD artifacts because of particles hitting the CCD cells in obtuse ways. I will also add here that I've looked at other NASA images from some of the other missions and have clearly shown that they do doctor images. The problem is I haven't been able to find the same evidence with the EUVI material.

So bottom line, I do know about pixelation and how that relates to low res (or raw) images and how that can be cleaned up by having more information in the image to produce a higher resolution image. What I can't prove or disprove is the doctoring. Basically as I said, we just don't have enough to go on for all the assumptions. I do think something is up but haven't been able to figure it out. If you notice SSC has asked for public involvement as well so I think some of what we're talking about here (image artifacts), they can't even explain.

It is very interesting though!

-z

[grunt225]

Most Americans are blind....... They rather watch Dancing with the Stars rather than question their government.

[GeosAlien]

Thank you for your kind explanation of your views. It could make sense.
On the other hand, such eventual pixelation having such a shape (as we see in the pictures) is weird, isn't it?

[GeosAlien]

Most Americans are blind....... They rather watch Dancing with the Stars rather than question their government.
Isn't your reaction "OFF TOPIC"??
Else, this is not only an American weakness !!

[zebowho]

Thank you for your kind explanation of your views. It could make sense.
On the other hand, such eventual pixelation having such a shape (as we see in the pictures) is weird, isn't it?

You're welcome! :) and you're absolutely right, just one persons views! lol

Yes, yes, the shapes are indeed weird. Even given the small slice of the optical spectrum that is captured. I've also seen most of these pixelated shapes on terrestial images but some are only found in these EUVI data.