BREAKING: Scientist claims comet ISON has companions!

You are 100 % correct.
And it is not when some comet realy big and potentially dangerous come in to our inner solar system because it is (they are in fact) already here. Wait and see.

You are 100 % correct.
And it is not when some comet realy big and potentially dangerous come in to our inner solar system because it is (they are in fact) already here. Wait and see.

Yes they were, including the hubble images we were discussing last week the inconvenient parts of which you ignored.

Wrong. Strict upper limits on its size can be, and were, established by the images that were taken. As the hubble images showed, it was tiny and if there was a companion, it was separated by no more than about .1 arcseconds.

I don't care what you think it is, but it is NOT potentially dangerous. You're fear mongering and playing on people's ignorance.

I forgot to add, just take no notice of Astro, he gets paid to post, so he will go on and on and on and on ..., don´t waste your time answering.

I forgot to add, just take no notice of Astro, he gets paid to post, so he will go on and on and on and on ..., don´t waste your time answering.

I know that, but I'm soooo boring these days...

That poor Hubble images only shows the comet in its complete structure with coma and tails, you cannot see or determine directly it's nucleous size *unless* by selecting a comet model and deducing it.

It's not a 'poor' image and you can not directly resolve the nucleus because IT'S TOO SMALL! That's precisely why a hard upper limit can be set on its size. It's incredible how little you understand.

Oh boy!Elenin thing all over again!!!

This will be one hell of a year!

Do you have a life Astrothingy ? troling each post endlessly ? LOL

As usual another thread bites the dust. Some egomaniac comes online (Astrosmut) and they declare themselves "King of the ... whatever". With the impressions of Obssessive Compulsive Disorder, answering every post, every one ... hmmm ... yes, she's bored ... or nuts ... or sane ... or all three. When you answer every single post the board loses the main topic. Now THAT is boring.

How big is it?

Something in constellation virgo
Gives huge red light
Has huge tail
Heading via same trajectory as comet Panstarrs and comet Ison
Chould this be a companion or pan - starrs core object

This thing gives more light and is further than comet Ison
By the way i never saw such a comet ass pannstarr
Huge magnitude, huge mass, huge tail

That images of telescopes, whow come there is not one professional image of comet pannstar and comet Ison

Howcome they are deleting images from public

Destroyer looked like a comet
When it approached in history
They saw wormwood like structure
With huge tail
Something will happen in 2013-2014

When Destroyer passed first plant that grew was wormwood

Maybe that is why they call it wormwood
Red kathinka, red tycho, red iron planet x, red dragon etc etc

What a dipshit. He's full of shit. ISON does not have any "companions." I'll tell what happened, he saw this image floating around on conspiracy forums like this one claiming it shows "companions" near comet ISON and he latched onto it:
Thread: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is being followed
These sorts of images often show asteroids as well as hot pixels, but those asteroids are nowhere near the comet, and the hot pixels are not even real objects at all. I'm betting he didn't even notice the asteroid at the top of the above image:
[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]

Hot pixels don't even form point-spread functions, which is why that dipshit McCanney exclaimed that it "hadn't formed a coma." The lack of a point-spread function means it's not a real object, it's just noise in the imager. Asteroids and other real objects in space such as 2002 TY164 do, however, making them easy to distinguish. Obviously McCanney did not realize that.

Its amazing, you don't even have to read one word to realize something is a crackpot site. Just look at the color scheme...

Wow . what a thread !

Just some comments for what its worth:

First of all I do not know Mccanney nor do I like his website. it does look like a such a commercial thing .

Glauco is certainly a believer in mccanney and goes at all length defending him or his theory . Of course he does not have much scientific hard fact as support as it is mostly based on his beleif on the man. right or wrong Time will tell.

then we had the PHD s intervention . Voltaic who thinks that the fact that he calculated his IQ from some questionnaire or other material means makes him infaillible. As if an IQ test was worth anything . Sadly he disappeared after he banked his PHD on the fact that comets could not have objects orbiting around them . This statement was proved wrong ( by his own master Dr Astro as well ) .

Dr Astro is intriguing. The guys knows his facts and is often correnc when he debunks bsters ! However he seems to ignore the fact that our scientists understand only a minute part of the universe's misteries . So his 'facts' are only correct for the part that we understand . He simply disregards evrything else as impossible or inexsistent . if that was true then the world would still be 'flat' today .
Also just like Voltaic, or even more so , he is so arrogant and full of himself that he thinks he has to constantly resort to insults . And yes for this I will agree with Glauco , he shows his weaknesses.
The debate would have been so much more interesting if he could have been less arrogant and say that his intervention is based upon scientific beliefs or observations as they are today !

Peace

The debate would have been so much more inetersting if he could have been less arrogant and say that his intervention is based upon scientific beliefs or observations as they are today !