can anyone explain this vid on ISON?WTF

It seems to me I read once its tail wuold not be oriented to the direction usualy expected for comets... Does someone have read/heard about this?

Right...but never explained how or why that would happen. Obviously if we "lose gravity" it would be cataclysmic...but c'mon man that's the type of speculation that discredits all the other *good* information he just put in his other two videos.

he explained this would happen if the 'wings' turned out to be objects orbiting / following ison

Right...saying "we will lose gravity if those wings are orbiting the comet" is not an explanation at all. It is just a prediction based upon exactly what scientific principle?! Let's assume they are small moons orbiting around a planet...how would that gravitational pull effect ours at all? I just don't understand the mechanism he is promoting..???

He is saying that Comet ISON could have 2 moons and is,possibly, what is creating the wings due to long exposure. If you take a pic of a stationary car it comes out in the pic steady but if right when you snap the pic another car passes by you can still see your car but also a streak of light the passing car will leave.

ISON codename = Eyes On Nibiru

He said, "judeo-christian" and that's a "no-no" as well as "We are blessed in this country with the Constitution and freedoms and so on BS" and that's an end to it.

Yep. Absolutely.

Might need to make a thread similarly titled to: "ISON is not a Comet," but instead called: "The Sun is not a 'star' (it's a pulsar)."
Though I'm obviously not saying that ISON isn't a comet, I'm dropping something far more "dangerous." I could link to so many papers and evidence of conspiracy that you'll go blind trying to take it all in... Isn't that what this site is for?



The "Bilderberg-approved" model of reality must stand at all "costs." (pun intended.)

:disks-10:

They will run to their shit "textbooks" (which are full of lies and false models...especially post-1945...) and cry to their "superiors," Never getting A Straight Answer.
Because the answers are no longer there, nor allowed.
The deception has been foisted over the scientific establishment so well.

When your head is up so far your damn ass, how will you ever know anything but shit?

Hydrogen-fusion is a fucking joke.

Again, this fellow... Fred Hoyle, in a meeting with Arthur Eddington in 1940:

:fred-hoyle:
(Coined the term "The Big Bang", i.e., we are all now fucked.)

“We both believed that the Sun was made mostly of iron, two parts iron to one part hydrogen, more or less...”
“The high-iron solution continued to reign supreme (at any rate in the astronomical circles to which I was privy) until after the Second World War...”

Now I am Become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds...

[link to www.youtube.com]

The Cradle of Nuclides:
:cradle-nuclides:

The Sun is mostly Iron (Fe-56).
Stars make and discard Hydrogen.
Neutron Repulsion is key.
The Sun is a pulsar.

:sunspot:

Here's something that maybe even the stupidest, that is to say, most deceived, astrotards might understand.
(This method of delivery might be more along their level.)

Nellie the Neutron:

[link to www.youtube.com]

:joklappa:

Neutron Repulsion [PDF]:
[link to redshift.vif.com]

And the kicker?

Climategate: 30 years in the making...
:climategate:
[link to jonova.s3.amazonaws.com]

Of course, who could forget this one?

Eisenhower's Warning:
@ 9:00m: "...public policy could itself be the captive of a scientific, technological, elite..."

[link to www.youtube.com]


Edit: "The" Big Bang

Bump

EXCELLENT!

See the SLIGHTLY curved tracks?

That's REAL Hubble parallax.

See the giant V-shapes?

No?

THAT'S BECAUSE THERE ARE NONE!

Astro, Hydro, & Geo, are LIARS.

Yes, there clearly are and there clearly should be in this instance.

As I said a million times before, the exact parallax at any given time depends on Hubble's position, ISON's position, and so forth. That shot above is missing the point at which it makes the "hairpin turn" but that does not prove the "hairpin turn" is unusual. Quite the contrary, see the video above. For example:
[link to www.nasa.gov]
[link to www.nasa.gov]
The trail of the asteroid there looks like that, but notice the gaps. That's where the hairpin turn occurs.

Wow, you really have no shame - those links track a STAR in LOOP CRESENTS that are A YEAR AND A HALF APART!

And note I said loop crecent, not a peaked crest, and also note that there is no longitudinal aspect changing.

The Hubble photos of ISON were taken across a few hours, and show a complete aspect change of 120 degrees INSIDE the coma around a centerpoint.

The "hairpin turn" is not only unusual, it's UNPRECEDENTED. And it either shows and structural triangle, or a rotating LINEAR feature snapped while changing its aspect across the field of view.

You're scum, Astro, and so are your dog-sniffing helpers. You're beyond a liar, you actually teach people to misapply science, and insult them when they find the flaws in YOUR lies.

This is planet or space ship or a combination of the two. There is a huge sphere with wings. This thing what ever it was actually stopped for days and then started up again this time its picking up speed. Not scared though oddly.

God you're dense. They're far apart because that example is due to parallax from earth's orbit rather than Hubble's but the situation is directly analogous.

Holy hell you're dense. It's a peak, whether it actually goes retrograde at the peak or not is simply a matter of whether or not the parallax vector is large enough in the direction of the object's path of travel to completely offset that travel and then some. In the case of Ison the answer was not quite. If you had a shred of intellectual honesty, which you don't, you would admit the similarity of this example and the fact that the asteroid example completely omits that part.


You are an intellectually dishonest piece of shit who pretends that this case is proven by the lack of hairpin turns in other examples of parallax while deliberately ignoring them from examples where they do exist and ignoring the most important fact of all; it was supposed to look like this given Hubble's orbit and ISON's orbit. I don't care if it was the first time Hubble specifically imaged a hairpin turn in an object from parallax or not, that is completely secondary to the issue of whether or not the event was normal and expected given the time and the orbits.

Astro nobody can disagree with you and this way of acting is not of a real doctor mate, sorry.

Your theory of Parallax is BS and before you asked for my proof, since yesterday a lot of people has already gave you a pile of proof for your bogus theory with Parallax.

I saw a graphic on another forum that I think helped it make sense to most people quite well. I made my own version with Celestia:
[link to img593.imageshack.us]
That is what Hubble looked like from the perspective of ISON that morning. Ignore the one labeled "Hubble" - it's the stock Hubble that comes with Celestia and the orbit is all wrong. HST is the real orbit of Hubble that day. Notice the path traced out by HST - it's the same path that ISON appeared to take from the perspective of Hubble. Now it should hopefully make more sense. Earth is moving along in its orbit and so is ISON, causing the apparent motion of earth from left to right in the image. Hubble is moving as well, causing the "angular shape" to the path - parallax.

Make sense now?

Oh no! We could be wiped out!

Those wings of plasma, or gas on that comet are maneuvering jets I think that object is being controlled or guided on it's trajectory.
Could is be the ship that was mentioned to arrive in September to take those earth humans who want to live on another 3rd. dimensional earth like planet one without insane self-serving warmongers elite controlling it.

Its got nothing to do with parallax! It is the motion of ISON taken by hubble per 400secs.

Yes, it has a lot to do with parallax.

Yeah, just like Elenin. Extinction Level Event Nibiru Is Near.

Right dude, right?

I, for one, sure hope your right.

Namaste.

Last Edited by El Quisqueyano on 08/20/2013 11:59 PM

WOW, I wonder like many other why the HST is the ONLY element/thing/object which makes such a move whereas ALL THE OTHERS orbit/travel/move in "harmony"..... quite convienent for just THAT SINGLE OBJECT to behave like that, ain't it?

the formation has not 3, but 5 objects....
[link to n03i.img-up.net]



:5soi:



:battleshipmeteor:

It's one object, the nucleus, in five stacked images. The individual images:
[link to imageshack.us]
[link to imageshack.us]
[link to imageshack.us]
[link to imageshack.us]
[link to imageshack.us]

That's pretty...A dirty snowball is...just a dirty snowball...lol

Stacking made a pretty pic!