PDA

View Full Version : Nibiru in Orion? (phase2_gsc2 image)



Dmitriy
2009-May-22, 02:38 PM
hello
first of all sorry, i have no idea where to post it and ask about, and sorry for new thread

the second, i do not believe into anything in Internet, I'm sure aliens is text removed etc
but i make a little research when find that 'google sky' remove image for that area: -6.01931, -91.5903 (in they coordinates this is Orion)

ok, this is the picture
http://archive.stsci.edu/cgi-bin/dss_search?v=phase2_gsc1&r=05+35+17.30&d=-05+23+28.0&e=J2000&h=60&w=60&f=gif&c=none&fov=NONE&v3=
(gets from here: http://archive.stsci.edu/cgi-bin/dss_form?target=Orion&resolver=SIMBAD)

im sure all of you seen Orion before
so as i can guess this is a planet? and have 3 satellites? I'm unfamiliar with astronomy that's why i ask what is this?

Swift
2009-May-22, 03:00 PM
Hi Dmitriy, welcome to BAUT. If you are wondering, because you are a new member, and the post had links, it was awaiting moderator approval (to prevent spammers).

This particular forum is mostly for advocating conspiracy theories (CTs), but it sounds like you are mostly just asking about this. I'll leave your post here for now, so you can get some answers. But if you start advocating some conspiracy, you'll be asked to defend the idea (might be a good idea to read over the rules).

Lastly, please watch the bad language, we try to keep this forum child-friendly.

Thanks,

Dmitriy
2009-May-22, 03:00 PM
maybe image too big, here another one

http://archive.stsci.edu/cgi-bin/dss_search?v=phase2_gsc1&r=05+35+17.30&d=-05+23+28.0&e=J2000&h=15&w=15&f=gif&c=none&fov=NONE&v3=
vs
http://archive.stsci.edu/cgi-bin/dss_search?v=phase2_gsc2&r=05+35+17.30&d=-05+23+28.0&e=J2000&h=15&w=15&f=gif&c=none&fov=NONE&v3=

Night G
2009-May-22, 03:41 PM
Hello Dmitriy

Ask yourself a question. Would a planet that large be discovered now only as it passes in front of the Orion Nebula or would it have been discovered decades or centuries before now?

captain swoop
2009-May-22, 03:51 PM
Also could it be hidden just by removing a picture of it from 'google sky' ?

Dmitriy
2009-May-22, 03:54 PM
Hello Dmitriy

Ask yourself a question. Would a planet that large be discovered now only as it passes in front of the Orion Nebula or would it have been discovered decades or centuries before now?

probably you right
suspicion that google sky hide that area

but guys what if that planet moving fast from outer space and can be seen only now? did you read about Nibiru, people say it's have very very long orbit so i'm a little bit confused

Gandalf223
2009-May-22, 05:12 PM
maybe image too big, here another one

http://archive.stsci.edu/cgi-bin/dss_search?v=phase2_gsc1&r=05+35+17.30&d=-05+23+28.0&e=J2000&h=15&w=15&f=gif&c=none&fov=NONE&v3=
vs
http://archive.stsci.edu/cgi-bin/dss_search?v=phase2_gsc2&r=05+35+17.30&d=-05+23+28.0&e=J2000&h=15&w=15&f=gif&c=none&fov=NONE&v3=

An anomaly in the imaging process. Perhaps a bit of flotsam on the film or sensor created the effect, or simply and electrical glitch that created the effect in a digital system.

Let's reduce this to a question of science: Unless experimental data -- or photographic data -- can be independently
reproduced by other researchers, then it must be assumed to be anomalous data and must therefore be discarded.

NEOWatcher
2009-May-22, 05:48 PM
Why is there always an assumption with any mass of information, that missing components are "removed" as opposed to never obtained, or invalid to begin with?

Has anybody ever gotten a roll of film developed and only get 23 pictures on a roll of 24 because the exposure was bad on one?

Ok; I guess I'm asking people who actually remember film. :doh:

rommel543
2009-May-22, 06:21 PM
Why is there always an assumption with any mass of information, that missing components are "removed" as opposed to never obtained, or invalid to begin with?

Has anybody ever gotten a roll of film developed and only get 23 pictures on a roll of 24 because the exposure was bad on one?

Ok; I guess I'm asking people who actually remember film. :doh:

Inversely, what about when you get 25 in a roll of 24. Maybe it's like the missing sock theory and someone looses a frame and it ends up on someone else's film. Hmmmmm :whistle:

stutefish
2009-May-22, 07:04 PM
but guys what if that planet moving fast from outer space and can be seen only now? did you read about Nibiru, people say it's have very very long orbit so i'm a little bit confused
If it's moving so fast that it appears suddenly close by, before we have a chance to notice its approach, then it's moving too fast to stay in orbit around the sun. It's just passing through. We've never seen it before, and we'll never see it again.

So that kind of fast-moving Nibiru can't have even a very very long orbit.

On the other hand, if it's moving slow enough to stay in orbit, and it's big enough to have any effect on us (other than by direct impact), then it's going to be noticeable from a pretty long way out. That kind of orbiting Nibiru won't suddenly appear.

Also, remember, Google doesn't own the sky.

You could get a telescope yourself, and look at that region of the sky with your own eyes.

In fact, thousands of people look at the sky every night, and report on all kinds of exciting things: planets, moons, asteroids, sunspots, solar flares, comets, stars, galaxies, quasars... do you think all of them besides you are part of some conspiracy to hide Nibiru from us? Do you think that if you bought a telescope, the salesman would make you promise to never reveal the truth about Nibiru?

Like the song says, nobody can take the sky from you. If Nibiru is up there, we'd be able to see it.

01101001
2009-May-22, 07:35 PM
Here's a link to the Google Sky image in question: Google Sky scary black coverup rectangle (or unimaged space -- you be the judge) (http://www.google.com/sky/#latitude=-6.01931&longitude=-91.590301&zoom=10&Spitzer=0.00&ChandraXO=0.00&Galex=0.00&IRAS=0.00&WMAP=0.00&Cassini=0.00&slide=1&mI=-1&oI=-1)

See earlier topics:

Odd things floating on google sky (http://www.bautforum.com/space-astronomy-questions-answers/82312-odd-things-floating-google-sky.html)
Google Sky Weirdness (http://www.bautforum.com/conspiracy-theories/76983-google-sky-weirdness.html)
Google Sky is in on the Planet X Conspiracy (http://www.bautforum.com/conspiracy-theories/76065-google-sky-planet-x-conspiracy.html)

Dmitriy
2009-May-22, 08:00 PM
many thanks for replies, now it's completely clear that this is another optical mistake
once again sorry for boring post, i was scared, all this talks... nibiru... fooling

robross
2009-May-22, 08:17 PM
Why is there always an assumption with any mass of information, that missing components are "removed" as opposed to never obtained, or invalid to begin with?

Has anybody ever gotten a roll of film developed and only get 23 pictures on a roll of 24 because the exposure was bad on one?

Ok; I guess I'm asking people who actually remember film. :doh:

This is one aspect of CTs that has always made me a little crazy. Most CT theories posit something like:

"Some government group has knowledge of something important and is keeping it secret because they don't want to panic anyone."

Yet,

1. ALL the CT know about it. So I guess the government sucks at keeping secrets.
2. Even though they suck at keeping secrets, they have an iron-clad, unflinching grip on all the evidence they supposedly have. So of course no one can show this evidence, but they knew a guy once in a lab 20 years ago that says he saw it.

I don't think you can have it both ways. Either the government lives up to its CSI/James Bond/Mission Impossible movie image, or they're bumbling idiots leaking top secret information like neutrons from a hot Uranium-235 stove.

Rob