What is NASA Hiding?

[Peregrinus]

Strange.

I saw a video about a possible planet Niburu location (a theory I do not subscribe to). In this video they had pictures which were taken from Google Earth. Apparently these pictures became public and a (small) area of the (very far) sky was subsequently blacked out where these pictures were taken from.

The pictures showed something that, to me, did not look at all like a planet, but did look like something else I looked at in 2010. What that was were NASA STEREO images of the sun whereby there were larger than Earth sized craft orbiting the sun. These images* showed objects which appeared to be shiny and spherical, with several smaller spheres attached to the main sphere. According to humanly understood physics, there is nothing known that could withstand the heat of the sun at the distance these objects are from the sun. I have attached one of these images for your perusal. There are many many more.

  20100123_001530_n7euB_195.jpg (Size: 264.84 KB / Downloads: 35)

Now, on to the area in space blacked out. The location is 5h 53m 27s, -6 10' 58"

One can find it by running Google Earth, changing the view to sky, and searching this location, or run the .kmz file I have attached in a zip (must have Google Earth installed).

Thoughts?


*One can find the NASA images on the NASA STEREO website if viewing the date 2010-01-23. It also happened that these objects were there in December 2010, but I am unsure of the exact date, so I can't say exactly when to look for December.

[unity100]

probably maybe one of the 'sky bases' that Ra talked about in the ufo business ?

[Peregrinus]

Whatever it is, it is huge. Here is an attached pic for those that do not have G-Earth installed.


  Missing.jpg (Size: 359.27 KB / Downloads: 55)

[turtledude23]

Once several years ago I watched a video about a Nazi base in the antarctic, it was supposedly footage from a soviet ship. The video then said to look at a certain part of Antarctica on Google Maps and when you start zooming in to a certain part all of a sudden you see a square image of different terrain overlaid on part of the map, it seemed like a poor attempt to cover something up, and what would you need to cover up in Antarctica? I now forget where on the map this was supposed to be but in any case I do think Google hides some parts of their maps if political pressure is applied on them, other than that I think they're a very good company.

[zenmaster]

Because there is a tile missing from the sky survey we conclude that Google is hiding something? Please.

[Peregrinus]

Please what?

There is no tile missing. There is a blacked out part from a specific tile that wasn't blacked out until a giant object was spotted in it, an object that clearly is not natural.

[Namaste]

Very interesting indeed. I wonder if this object can be seen with powerful binoculars. I have a set of star gazers next to me.

Here is the area of space Peregrinus mentioned via Google Sky (works in web browser)

[Ankh]

Can it be that this spot is just not been filmed yet and is black because it was not yet photographed by google? I also don't understand why google would do something like that? I understand if it was NASA or some government, but google doesn't have the interest in covering up UFO: s and similiar stuff?

Also - if there is something unnatural in the sky shouldn't some amateur astronomers have spoted it?

[zenmaster]

Can it be that this spot is just not been filmed yet and is black because it was not yet photographed by google? I also don't understand why google would do something like that? I understand if it was NASA or some government, but google doesn't have the interest in covering up UFO: s and similiar stuff?

Also - if there is something unnatural in the sky shouldn't some amateur astronomers have spoted it?

To a lot of people the actual situation does not matter at all. More interesting is what the imagination makes out of the possibilities raised by framing the situation in a certain manner. These projects are fueled by prejudices wanting something to be a certain way and the 'blame' or projection actually makes the ego feel better in the short term.

People will see what they want to see and will try to raise the same suspicion in others, if it serves their interests. Sort of like what the Orion group does by creating opportunity for fear and doubt - and letting others fill in the blanks.

[Peregrinus]

Very interesting indeed. I wonder if this object can be seen with powerful binoculars. I have a set of star gazers next to me.

I am unsure.

Can it be that this spot is just not been filmed yet and is black because it was not yet photographed by google? I also don't understand why google would do something like that? I understand if it was NASA or some government, but google doesn't have the interest in covering up UFO: s and similiar stuff?

Also - if there is something unnatural in the sky shouldn't some amateur astronomers have spotted it?

Google sky is NASA images. This spot/area was originally included and has been removed because the object found there was unlike any other known object in space (other than like those objects around the sun). Again, I am not an amateur or professional astronomer, so I cannot say if this object is viewable at the distance it is at. This may be a Hubble or other long range orbit based telescope image.

Image Credit Courtesy DSS Consortium, SDSS, NASA/ESA

To a lot of people the actual situation does not matter at all. More interesting is what the imagination makes out of the possibilities raised by framing the situation in a certain manner. These projects are fueled by prejudices wanting something to be a certain way and the 'blame' or projection actually makes the ego feel better in the short term.

People will see what they want to see and will try to raise the same suspicion in others, if it serves their interests. Sort of like what the Orion group does by creating opportunity for fear and doubt - and letting others fill in the blanks.

There is no fear or ego in my post. I am simply asking a question.

Questioning is something that is done by those that choose to look through a lens that is normally not looked through, and that is exactly what we do on this forum. Fear of questioning by ridiculing those that question, and subsequent fear of nonconformity... is the desire of sts and Orion group.

[zenmaster]

Sure, it's difficult to justify propagating conspiracy theories without getting sidetracked with one's identification with an ethical mission. But that's in keeping with the illusion of 3rd density. We choose what we want to see and condemn the innocent in the process.

How many conspiracy theorists contribute to actual progress in the areas which they think information suppression occurs? They typically do nothing themselves to advance real scientific or investigative knowledge the areas they demand be 'revealed' - such as free energy inventions or E.T. contact, for example. Ultimately, how can there be real merit or virtue when the completely unnecessary charge of disservice can be false? After all, suspicion like that breeds mistrust which necessarily promotes a distorted view of society offered to everyone. Opportunistic framing of perceived 'lacunae', for the purpose of social change, is the consequentialist's agenda.

[Peregrinus]

I worked as a chemical engineer for eighteen years in a specific area of expertise, the oil industry. Because of that work, I chose to work for an environmental agency working against further development of the Canadian tar sands. In the case of the Canadian tar sands, I see government/industry manipulation/disinformation/misinformation/complacency/complicity on an almost daily basis, despite peer reviewed science and doctors speaking out and people directly affected speaking out. Because I have seen both sides of this coin, I know how government/industry works to suppress what is not in their best interests, and I highly doubt this is a special case.

We know UFO tech has been suppressed. We know free energy tech has been suppressed. There is too much scientific proof that 911 was engineered and not some haphazard event done by a handful of men with box cutters and poor to non-existent flying skills.

Wikileaks has given us ample understanding that government/industry lies and deceive for their own purposes, using whatever (all) means they can to obtain the goal they desire. Suppression of information and truth can be ignored, but simply ignoring the sts illusion within the 3D illusion fulfills orange/yellow ray work, whether in control or being controlled. As we know from Ra/Q'uo, the majority of people are blocked/partially blocked in the yellow/orange rays because they do not even participate in the betterment of humankind. To teach/learn is a desirous act, one I continue to choose to do, and I will not simply sit back and do nothing based upon the guise that my thoughts align with conspiracy.

[zenmaster]

If all 'good' intentions were magically virtuous, then indeed society would benefit. I can only question the degree of congruency a decision maker - a 'sub-sub-logos' - must have with themselves when the tactic is an unnecessary appeal to suspicion and doubt. After all, more prudent options are usually available.

[Peregrinus]

I simply offer the seeds of thought. It is up to the individual to choose what they believe.

[Monica]

How many conspiracy theorists contribute to actual progress in the areas which they think information suppression occurs?

Well I can think of 2, right off the top of my head. That is, 2 controversial topics commonly referred to as 'conspiracy theories.'

http://ae911truth.org/ (911 'conspiracy theory' reputable research site - one of many actually!)

http://pesn.com/ (reputable site for researchers of alternative energy devices, many of which have been suppressed)

They typically do nothing themselves to advance real scientific or investigative knowledge the areas they demand be 'revealed' - such as free energy inventions or E.T. contact, for example.

That's a bit of a blanket statement. Let's not toss out the legitimate researchers just because there are some nuts in there (in any given 'conspiracy theory').

I have witnessed suppression by our mainstream media, firsthand. I saw the proof. It was irrefutable. Suppression by the media exists. It's also rampant in the medical industry. Follow the money trail. Ask, "Who benefits?"

Ultimately, how can there be real merit or virtue when the completely unnecessary charge of disservice can be false? After all, suspicion like that breeds mistrust which necessarily promotes a distorted view of society offered to everyone. Opportunistic framing of perceived 'lacunae', for the purpose of social change, is the consequentialist's agenda.

I totally didn't understand that statement. Can you translate, please?

---

I can only question the degree of congruency a decision maker - a 'sub-sub-logos' - must have with themselves when the tactic is an unnecessary appeal to suspicion and doubt.

If suspicion came first and was baseless, and the person goes looking for something, anything, to back up the suspicion, then yeah, that's not cool.

But in many cases, suspicion arose as a result of observing something 'not right' ie. evidence. As in the case of 911. Contrary to popular myth, 911 researchers noticed glaring flaws in the 'official' story, and irrefutable physics impossibilities. THEN came the suspicion, for good reason! The evidence could not be denied.

It can work both ways. Sometimes people are so skeptical, that they ignore the obvious evidence just because it is a volatile topic. But not all volatile conspiracy theories are bogus. Some are real and the activists working to expose the lies are courageous.

After all, more prudent options are usually available.

Sometimes, yes. I don't know if I'd agree that they are usually available.

I don't want to turn this into a discussion about 911, but since Peregrinus mentioned it, I will use it again, since it is such an obvious example. In this case, the 'official' story is so much more fantastical than the truth, that it's really mind-blowing that the public believed it. This is a good example of how sometimes, the 'official' story is the one that is preposterous, not the 'conspiracy' theory.

[zenmaster]

How many conspiracy theorists contribute to actual progress in the areas which they think information suppression occurs?

Well I can think of 2, right off the top of my head. That is, 2 controversial topics commonly referred to as 'conspiracy theories.'

http://ae911truth.org/ (911 'conspiracy theory' reputable research site - one of many actually!)

http://pesn.com/ (reputable site for researchers of alternative energy devices, many of which have been suppressed)

Was a rhetorical question based on the proportion of those claiming cover-up and those that had done their own research to back up their finger pointing. The answer, is of course, a million to one.

I'm not sure 'reputable' is an appropriate word for pesn.com. If you've been following it for a while, that site pretty much covers everything, regardless of actual veracity of claims. They are bound to find a successful invention at some point.

They typically do nothing themselves to advance real scientific or investigative knowledge the areas they demand be 'revealed' - such as free energy inventions or E.T. contact, for example.

That's a bit of a blanket statement. Let's not toss out the legitimate researchers just because there are some nuts in there (in any given 'conspiracy theory').

It is intended to characterize the vast majority of distorted and wishful-thinking info on the subject that we read on the internet. Of course there is a small amount of researchers, who deserve credit for their efforts.

I have witnessed suppression by our mainstream media, firsthand. I saw the proof. It was irrefutable. Suppression by the media exists. It's also rampant in the medical industry. Follow the money trail. Ask, "Who benefits?"

Not worth it.

Ultimately, how can there be real merit or virtue when the completely unnecessary charge of disservice can be false? After all, suspicion like that breeds mistrust which necessarily promotes a distorted view of society offered to everyone. Opportunistic framing of perceived 'lacunae', for the purpose of social change, is the consequentialist's agenda.

I totally didn't understand that statement. Can you translate, please?

---

Sure. Guy on internet accuses organization of lying, merely because it serves to reinforce his suspicion and bias. Not because it is true. Sort of akin to the mindless, lynch-mob mentality.

I can only question the degree of congruency a decision maker - a 'sub-sub-logos' - must have with themselves when the tactic is an unnecessary appeal to suspicion and doubt.

If suspicion came first and was baseless, and the person goes looking for something, anything, to back up the suspicion, then yeah, that's not cool.

But in many cases, suspicion arose as a result of observing something 'not right' ie. evidence. As in the case of 911. Contrary to popular myth, 911 researchers noticed glaring flaws in the 'official' story, and irrefutable physics impossibilities. THEN came the suspicion, for good reason! The evidence could not be denied.

It can work both ways. Sometimes people are so skeptical, that they ignore the obvious evidence just because it is a volatile topic. But not all volatile conspiracy theories are bogus. Some are real and the activists working to expose the lies are courageous.

Sure, the actual researchers can be considered courageous. 99.999% of the lazy followers that merely have an axe to grind, no.

After all, more prudent options are usually available.

Sometimes, yes. I don't know if I'd agree that they are usually available.

I don't want to turn this into a discussion about 911, but since Peregrinus mentioned it, I will use it again, since it is such an obvious example. In this case, the 'official' story is so much more fantastical than the truth, that it's really mind-blowing that the public believed it. This is a good example of how sometimes, the 'official' story is the one that is preposterous, not the 'conspiracy' theory.

IMHO, there are problems with the official story, and some engineers have done a good job revealing them. However, we still see what we want to see. There was a suspiciously biased Q'uo channeling on the subject some years past.

[Monica]

Sure. Guy on internet accuses organization of lying, merely because it serves to reinforce his suspicion and bias. Not because it is true. Sort of akin to the mindless, lynch-mob mentality.

How about this: Physics professor accuses organization of lying, because the story presented is physically impossible. Professor does research and discovers physical evidence, then discovers other professors with similar findings.

IMHO, there are problems with the official story, and some engineers have done a good job revealing them. However, we still see what we want to see. There was a suspiciously biased Q'uo channeling on the subject some years past.

Which Q'uo channeling are you referring to?

[zenmaster]

Sure. Guy on internet accuses organization of lying, merely because it serves to reinforce his suspicion and bias. Not because it is true. Sort of akin to the mindless, lynch-mob mentality.

How about this: Physics professor accuses organization of lying, because the story presented is physically impossible. Professor does research and discovers physical evidence, then discovers other professors with similar findings.

I do not disagree that the 9/11 professors are a rare exception - after all we have plenty of physical evidence to examine in that case. I'm talking about the vast majority of individually-framed accusations for all 'conspiracy' theories combined. Perhaps read what I wrote again. I wasn't saying there are no legitimate theories, which presumably is what you're hand-waving about. I was saying most aren't, and by a long shot. And in my opinion, these are not only illegitimate, but without virtue and immoral.

IMHO, there are problems with the official story, and some engineers have done a good job revealing them. However, we still see what we want to see. There was a suspiciously biased Q'uo channeling on the subject some years past.

Which Q'uo channeling are you referring to?

Don't have the session date, although it was one in which Q'uo commented about the government's involvement in 9/11. Have tried to search, but don't have unique keywords. This is one session that I did not 'resonate' with. For me it underscored more of the human element involved in the 'contact'. I don't reject the other words of wisdom in the other sessions because of that. I think Carla is well informed and experienced on her own, and more than qualified to give 'spiritual advice'. There is additional credence in the necessary purity of intention or ego-maturity required for any transpersonal communication.

That purity of intention inherently can shed new light on problems, even if it's distorted with personal bias. However, more distortion also requires more reader discernment to extract any 'pearls'.

[Peregrinus]

In an social environment where "experts"/scientists weren't muzzled and controlled by governments controlled by... then I suppose we would hear truth from them. As it is, what I hear you saying, Zen, is somewhat along the lines of "if you aren't a scientist or engineer having directly done the investigative work yourself, sit down and shut up".

That won't work anymore. People are awakening, and control systems like that which you appear to desire to propagate are failing. People distrust governments, doctors, corporations, money, etc etc, and for good reason. They therefore look to many sources, finding one's own truth which will be, in the end, the universal truth.

[Monica]

I do not disagree that the 9/11 professors are a rare exception - after all we have plenty of physical evidence to examine in that case. I'm talking about the vast majority of individually-framed accusations for all 'conspiracy' theories combined. Perhaps read what I wrote again. I wasn't saying there are no legitimate theories, which presumably is what you're hand-waving about. I was saying most aren't, and by a long shot. And in my opinion, these are not only illegitimate, but without virtue and immoral.

Thank you for the clarification. I'm glad to hear you weren't lumping the serious 911 researchers in with the others.

Being that many of these 'hot topics' lack any authoritative (otherwise known as 'legitimate') investigative processes, in addition to the fact that most of these theories seem radical to the average person, even pushing the buttons of those who are otherwise open-minded, I don't really think it's possible to fully assess them, without delving into each one individually and assessing it on its own merits. Thus, I don't even think it's possible to know if indeed 'most' fall into a legitimate or, as you say, 'immoral' category.

911 is a good example. It's got the most tangible evidence and therefore a no-brainer to anyone who has granted the subject even cursory review, and yet most mainstream people still think anyone even questioning the official story is 'wacko,' unpatriotic, and even 'immoral.'

I prefer to take a neutral stance on any theory that I have not personally investigated enough to form an opinion.

it was one in which Q'uo commented about the government's involvement in 9/11.

? I wasn't aware the Q'uo ever made any such comment. I would be very interested in this, if you happen to find the session!

For me it underscored more of the human element involved in the 'contact'. I don't reject the other words of wisdom in the other sessions because of that.

There are a few sessions like that for me too.

I think Carla is well informed and experienced on her own, and more than qualified to give 'spiritual advice'. There is additional credence in the necessary purity of intention or ego-maturity required for any transpersonal communication.

That purity of intention inherently can shed new light on problems, even if it's distorted with personal bias. However, more distortion also requires more reader discernment to extract any 'pearls'.

Agreed.

---

That won't work anymore. People are awakening, and control systems like that which you appear to desire to propagate are failing. People distrust governments, doctors, corporations, money, etc etc, and for good reason. They therefore look to many sources, finding one's own truth which will be, in the end, the universal truth.

Well said.

[unity100]

as far as i know, there is no plane crash that happened on land, and an entire passenger aircraft went poof without leaving any noticeable traces.

pentagon was such an incident. there was no huge tailfin, no elevators, no wing fragments, not even passenger seats, remains, nothing. and, no passenger aircraft nose has the audacity to be able to pierce through 4-6 separate layers of hardened concrete. (one wall on each ring) pentagon to boot.

only missiles can do that.

[zenmaster]

In an social environment where "experts"/scientists weren't muzzled and controlled by governments controlled by... then I suppose we would hear truth from them. As it is, what I hear you saying, Zen, is somewhat along the lines of "if you aren't a scientist or engineer having directly done the investigative work yourself, sit down and shut up".

No, I guess you 'heard' wrong.

[Monica]

as far as i know, there is no plane crash that happened on land, and an entire passenger aircraft went poof without leaving any noticeable traces.

pentagon was such an incident. there was no huge tailfin, no elevators, no wing fragments, not even passenger seats, remains, nothing. and, no passenger aircraft nose has the audacity to be able to pierce through 4-6 separate layers of hardened concrete. (one wall on each ring) pentagon to boot.

only missiles can do that.

Yes. Those are just a few of the many obvious pieces of evidence. The tangible evidence is overwhelming.

[Peregrinus]

Anyone know what this is? It can be seen for almost the entire day in orbit around the sun.


  169833_1533334700282_1442240895_31171814_5614888_o.jpg (Size: 52.79 KB / Downloads: 29)


  170881_1533334980289_1442240895_31171816_7531463_o.jpg (Size: 70.67 KB / Downloads: 26)

Interestingly enough and typically of NASA, this specific picture and the one before and after were removed when people began to question this picture.

The date was 2011 Jan 8.

[zenmaster]

Anyone know what this is? It can be seen for almost the entire day in orbit around the sun.

It's another extremely common imaging artifact of the camera's CCD. Cosmic rays impact the sensors, impart their electrical charge, and create such streaks. Please look it up - it's one of the reasons satellites and space ships have radiation shielding. The original photo was not taken offline (of course).

http://stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov/browse/2011/...uB_195.jpg

In fact, anyone bothering to look will find all of the stereo behind EUVI 195 images for that day here: http://stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov/browse/2011/.../195/2048/

And, of course, the artifact was not there the entire day.

[Peregrinus]

It's another extremely common imaging artifact of the camera's CCD. Cosmic rays impact the sensors, impart their electrical charge, and create such streaks. Please look it up - it's one of the reasons satellites and space ships have radiation shielding.

I'm surprised you didn't call it a weather balloon or swamp gas. This item would be there every day if it were as you suggest.

The original photo was not taken offline (of course).

I downloaded the rest of the day. That one and the one before and after were gone. I have a witness to that.

And, of course, the artifact was not there the entire day.

I've got at least 20 other pics from the same day showing the same artifact at multiple times and angles in orbit. It has specific characteristics that can be easily seen to be the same, which would not happen if this were random streaks.

Another blip... for your debunking. Enjoy.


  20000204_1300_eit171_1024 - Copy.jpg (Size: 181.99 KB / Downloads: 23)


  20000204_1300_eit171_1024 - 2.jpg (Size: 168.17 KB / Downloads: 20)

[Peregrinus]

Another object censored.

it appears NASA did the same thing again, post something, realize what they posted, removed object, re-posted.



Here's a video.

Here's the original article.

[Joe6]

If thats same coordinates what this news tells:
http://www.examiner.com/ufo-in-canada/3-...g-to-earth

I dont think that UFO's are that interested phenomenon in general. Todays unhealthy food diet and busy oriented ego centered goal hunting societes have altered peoples mind (wear down) so drastically that they really dont have power to think outside of the box, I love that figurative description what I once read that "People are living in a box, eating from a box, traveling in a box to a work in a box and watching box at night." Everyone can easily replace the fitting word for the word box. There is Youtube and Google full of information about the subject but people are more interested about watching tv-series and much more fictional movies.

Personally I have always resonated very positively to anything about ufo's. Remembering even as a child to many times asking that they would take me to a little trip. Maybe to a watching my old home planet or something but havent visited me yet, atleast that I know (36yrs old now).

[Namaste]

Video on the subject (shows original image which has been blacked out):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nuvu9mUsOuw

[Ankh]

Video on the subject (shows original image which has been blacked out):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nuvu9mUsOuw

But what was it that has been blocked out? Looked like a red star, is it something controversial or did I miss something?