Tuesday, 18 November 2014
REAL ALIENS (Part 1)...OR Maybe Not...
I think that this video demonstrates exactly what I was writing about last week in my post about Sasquatch, UFOs and ghost hunters. Society in general and in the main people who really do have rice pudding for brains and will seriously -seriously- accept these really bad computer-effect aliens because they have been fed movies, TV shows, documentaries sci fi books and comics for so many decades that they cannot accept no one has recorded a real live alien in a street somewhere.
Seriously, if they believe all they read -I take it they DO read?- then Budd Hopkins, John Mack and David M Jacobs and even C. D. B. Bryan have actuallt explained WHY people are not catching aliens on video or phonecams.
And, yes, I DO still watch all this stuff and study new photographs because one day there just might be a genuine piece of footage or photo. Budd and David both told me that if that ever happened it could be explosive -if people didn't dismiss it as another You Tube fake!
So I suffer the eye-strain!
Seriously, if they believe all they read -I take it they DO read?- then Budd Hopkins, John Mack and David M Jacobs and even C. D. B. Bryan have actuallt explained WHY people are not catching aliens on video or phonecams.
And, yes, I DO still watch all this stuff and study new photographs because one day there just might be a genuine piece of footage or photo. Budd and David both told me that if that ever happened it could be explosive -if people didn't dismiss it as another You Tube fake!
So I suffer the eye-strain!
A Closer Look - Bigfoot recorded in IMAX "Great North" documentary
pack -possibly from the film crew ensuring that the animals filmed DO
flock across the more "picturesque" river than in the direction the
others are going.
I'm sorry but is this a joke? 6 minutes in we get a closer look at the "blob" and we see it is a man with a back-pack.
This is
nothing new -guy dressed to meld into the background (in black clothing
and head covering so he is not immediately standing out like a sore thumb
in the "natural scenery".
It
is quite common and all that had to be done was ask the company filming
-IF they admitted it because if they did suddenly you do NOT have a
"natural scene". Man pure and simple right down to body size.
flock across the more "picturesque" river than in the direction the
others are going.
I'm sorry but is this a joke? 6 minutes in we get a closer look at the "blob" and we see it is a man with a back-pack.
This is
nothing new -guy dressed to meld into the background (in black clothing
and head covering so he is not immediately standing out like a sore thumb
in the "natural scenery".
It
is quite common and all that had to be done was ask the company filming
-IF they admitted it because if they did suddenly you do NOT have a
"natural scene". Man pure and simple right down to body size.
Creature in the Giant Sequoias (Bigfoot)
ThinkerThunker explains why he thinks this is a genuine Sasquatch. I don't. I got pretty sea-sick with his back-forth frames but I did notice the left arm is hanging a lot. This seriously does look like a bad Sasquatch costume.
That said, I've not been face-to-face with a number of sasquatch for comparison. I say hoax.
That said, I've not been face-to-face with a number of sasquatch for comparison. I say hoax.
No Kidding: Astronomers Find Evidence Of Two Undiscovered Planets In Our Solar System
Photo credit:
Lexicon via wikimedia commons. The most distant of these outer
solar system objects share a trait that hints at an unknown planet.
This article by Stephen Luntz over at IFL Science http://www.iflscience.com/space/signs-planet-x-and-maybe-y is interesting -it must be 38 years ago that I first wrote about "Planet X", "Vulcan" and the belief in other planets further out in our solar system.
This article by Stephen Luntz over at IFL Science http://www.iflscience.com/space/signs-planet-x-and-maybe-y is interesting -it must be 38 years ago that I first wrote about "Planet X", "Vulcan" and the belief in other planets further out in our solar system.
I'm still unsure on the maths involved here but the concept is still interesting (hmmm....maybe those "Greys" do come from closer to home?).
The possibility of a planet lurking in the outer reaches of the
solar system has gained new ground, based on the orbits of recently
discovered objects. There is a new twist to the latest evidence,
however, with suggestions of not one but two large planets at
mind-bending distances from the Sun.
The quest for a "Planet X" beyond Neptune has been going on for more than a century. Recently, two dwarf planets Senda and 2102 VP113 have been identified with orbits extending to distances hundreds of times further from the Sun than our own.
Distant as these orbits are, they are too close to be part of the Oort Cloud, a collection of comets that mostly orbit at distances beyond 5000 AU.*
Instead it is thought that these objects formed closer to the sun. The gravitational influence of a large planet is one explanation of how their orbits changed. The theory has its own problems – if we can’t explain how objects like these came to be orbiting at such distances, then it’s equally unclear how a theoretical planet came to be there.
Scott Sheppard, of the Carnegie Institution for Science, and the Gemini Observatory's Chad Trujillo noted a clustering in the orbits of the solar system’s most distant known entities, many of which they had discovered. Ten Kuiper Belt Objects, and minor planets Sedna and 2012 VP113, all have orbits that cross the plane of the solar system at angles that range from shallow to steep.
Yet all of these distant objects reach their closest point to the sun just when they are near the plane the planets circle in. The scientists considered this unlikely to be a coincidence, and speculate it might be a sign of a planet influencing all of their orbits.
E. Otwell. The two most distant minor planets have very different orbits, but converge when closest to the sun.
In Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters brothers Carlos and Raul de la Fuente Marcos of Complutense University of Madrid have taken this a step further. “The analysis of several possible scenarios strongly suggest that at least two trans-Plutonian planets must exist,” they conclude.
Even more recently, Lorenzo Iorio of the Italian Ministry of Education, Universities and Research has argued in the same journal that if planet X exists, it must be much further out than Trujillo and Sheppard proposed. How far it would need to be depends on its mass, but an unknown object twice as heavy as the Earth could not be less than 500 AU from the Sun, Iorio maintains.
Other astronomers are more cautious. David Jewitt of the University of California, Los Angeles told Science News, "The outer solar system can be full of all sorts of unseen and interesting things,” Jewitt says, “but the argument ... for a massive perturber is a bit puzzling.” Jewitt notes that if the Kuiper Belt Objects in the Trujillo/Sheppard study have a planet keeping them in line, it may well be Neptune. Sedna and 2012 VP113 are too far out for this to be true for them as well, but it is far easier to explain two orbits as coincidences than twelve.
While the question may only be finally settled by the discovery of a large planet lurking in space, a number of teams have redoubled their efforts to find modest sized objects whose orbits might help us lend credence to, or reject, the theories proposed so far.
Below a CalTech.Edu image http://web.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/sedna/
Artist's conception of the cold distant Sedna. The sun is a tiny point of light 8 billion miles away from the red planetoid. A hypothesized tiny moon appears nearby.
Planet.org has an interesting article relating to 2012 VP113
http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2014/03261345-a-second-sedna-what-does-it-mean.html
Fun times ahead!
Astronomical Unit (AU) It is now defined as exactly 149597870700 metres (about 150 million km, or 93 million miles)
The quest for a "Planet X" beyond Neptune has been going on for more than a century. Recently, two dwarf planets Senda and 2102 VP113 have been identified with orbits extending to distances hundreds of times further from the Sun than our own.
Distant as these orbits are, they are too close to be part of the Oort Cloud, a collection of comets that mostly orbit at distances beyond 5000 AU.*
Instead it is thought that these objects formed closer to the sun. The gravitational influence of a large planet is one explanation of how their orbits changed. The theory has its own problems – if we can’t explain how objects like these came to be orbiting at such distances, then it’s equally unclear how a theoretical planet came to be there.
Scott Sheppard, of the Carnegie Institution for Science, and the Gemini Observatory's Chad Trujillo noted a clustering in the orbits of the solar system’s most distant known entities, many of which they had discovered. Ten Kuiper Belt Objects, and minor planets Sedna and 2012 VP113, all have orbits that cross the plane of the solar system at angles that range from shallow to steep.
Yet all of these distant objects reach their closest point to the sun just when they are near the plane the planets circle in. The scientists considered this unlikely to be a coincidence, and speculate it might be a sign of a planet influencing all of their orbits.
E. Otwell. The two most distant minor planets have very different orbits, but converge when closest to the sun.
In Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters brothers Carlos and Raul de la Fuente Marcos of Complutense University of Madrid have taken this a step further. “The analysis of several possible scenarios strongly suggest that at least two trans-Plutonian planets must exist,” they conclude.
Even more recently, Lorenzo Iorio of the Italian Ministry of Education, Universities and Research has argued in the same journal that if planet X exists, it must be much further out than Trujillo and Sheppard proposed. How far it would need to be depends on its mass, but an unknown object twice as heavy as the Earth could not be less than 500 AU from the Sun, Iorio maintains.
Other astronomers are more cautious. David Jewitt of the University of California, Los Angeles told Science News, "The outer solar system can be full of all sorts of unseen and interesting things,” Jewitt says, “but the argument ... for a massive perturber is a bit puzzling.” Jewitt notes that if the Kuiper Belt Objects in the Trujillo/Sheppard study have a planet keeping them in line, it may well be Neptune. Sedna and 2012 VP113 are too far out for this to be true for them as well, but it is far easier to explain two orbits as coincidences than twelve.
While the question may only be finally settled by the discovery of a large planet lurking in space, a number of teams have redoubled their efforts to find modest sized objects whose orbits might help us lend credence to, or reject, the theories proposed so far.
Below a CalTech.Edu image http://web.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/sedna/
Artist's conception of the cold distant Sedna. The sun is a tiny point of light 8 billion miles away from the red planetoid. A hypothesized tiny moon appears nearby.
Planet.org has an interesting article relating to 2012 VP113
http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2014/03261345-a-second-sedna-what-does-it-mean.html
Fun times ahead!
Astronomical Unit (AU) It is now defined as exactly 149597870700 metres (about 150 million km, or 93 million miles)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)