Chemtrails...

Summary:

Does the Swedish government lack the funds needed?=)

Chemtrails...

RickardM 24 Jun 2010 04:41

Have seen these claims on Youtube for quite some time now, and I must say that this really symbolizes the stupidity of Lieders et als followers. The claim being made is that ALL governments use these chemtrails in order to cover up Nibiru/PX. These chemtrails manifest them selfs as something as deceiving as… …clouds. They constantly seem to neglect the fact that Nibiru could only be captured when there are clo… er, chemtrails i mean, in the sky. No one has ever taken the time to think about why Nibiru never is seen on a clear day.

Here are two videos that supposedly shows Nibiru:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kywpxGXbqg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/user/beyosoco#p/a/u/0/lGnJ1dJ7XeU

I would say that these are obvious image distortions, or is it something else in the first picture? The moon or something like that? Looks very much like image distortions in both videos, and i meant to ask the author why we doesn't have chemtrails in Sweden. But, somehow he only lets through comments that support his claims=)

I've gotten a little curious about this picture though: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsjuIpeTBk0&feature=related. What is that? A planet shot through a telescope or just plain fake?

---

Facts are stubborn things.
- Ronald Reagan

Re: Chemtrails...

TheGreatJuju 24 Jun 2010 05:35

But, somehow he only lets through comments that support his claims

Naturally, censorship and head-in-sand antics are the best arguments most conspiracy theorists have.

I've gotten a little curious about this picture though: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsjuIpeTBk0&feature=related. What is that? A planet shot through a telescope or just plain fake?

It looks like a very poor video of the Sun, yet another cellphone-grade offering with an operator who can't even hold his/her device steady. I really don't have the foggiest idea where that person gets "Nibiru" from that clip.

As a social experiment, I'm tempted to take a photograph of one of my truck's headlights, edit out everything but the light in Photoshop, shrink it down and paste it onto a background of stars. Then I'll post it to YouTube as photographic evidence of Nibiru. However, that seems like a lot of unnecessary effort, when it would be much easier to just aim my phone at the sky, record the brightest thing I see, and post it under the title "Nibiru / Planet X COMING SOON!!! NASA CONFIRMS!!!!"

Actually, no, I won't do any of that, because it disturbs me to think about how many people would believe it.

---

"They tell you, but do you believe it? If so, why?"

http://www.undeadrufus.com

Re: Chemtrails...

RickardM 24 Jun 2010 05:56

Actually, no, I won't do any of that, because it disturbs me to think about how many people would believe it.

That's the sad thing about this. I used to be a part of the gullible masses, and are so on occassions, but even I start to see through this crap. But even so, I still think it would be a good idea to adress these Youtube videos on this site (in a proper article). Since many learn about 2012 from youtube videos about Nibiru, and not the other way around, it would be nice to see these videos thouroghly debunked. I would gladly participate in the necessary work on this article, even though my area of expertise is far from astronomy and digital images=)

Just out of curiousity, do you think that the object in the first video was an digital artifact or could it have been a planet (Venus or something)?

---

Facts are stubborn things.
- Ronald Reagan

Re: Chemtrails...

RickardM 24 Jun 2010 06:00

And what do you make of the object around 3:12 in the second video? That actually look like a real planet, or perhaps the moon?

---

Facts are stubborn things.
- Ronald Reagan

Re: Chemtrails...

Kevin (guest) 24 Jun 2010 06:27

The guy in the second video really really believes in whatever he saw…. I think he really needs to be educated in the field of science.

Re: Chemtrails...

RickardM 24 Jun 2010 06:34

Yeah, and he seems to be really hooked on conspiracy theories too. Who would have figured?=)

---

Facts are stubborn things.
- Ronald Reagan

Re: Chemtrails...

TheGreatJuju 24 Jun 2010 16:21

The video titled "Rogue planet near the sun!" looks completely fake to me. I would ask the person who posted it to simply show me the gravity. Any object near enough to resolve a disc with the naked eye from Earth is close enough to be severely perturbing the inner solar system.

The second video — I assume you're referring to the one titled "The calm before ?" — 3:12 is kind of a transition point, so I'm not sure which image you're talking about. The image described as "Two suns plus an unknown planet" (which just made me laugh) features either a window reflection, editing or both. No "planet" resolves naked-eye like that from Earth, though Venus goes through phases when viewed in a telescope. Show me the gravity.

The image after that, the black blobs (which I assume are are supposed to be clouds), I really can't make heads or tails of any of it. Why these people feel the need to make some of their "evidence" almost indiscernible is telling in its own right. Again, it could be a window reflection or just outright fake. Show me the gravity.

Unsurprisingly, this latest batch of images and claims are repeats of the same old peek-a-boo planet myth.

I'm not a photographic analysis expert, but when people make claims about photos whose objects should entail very perceptible effects on reality, it's simple enough to ask where those effects are and to seek explanations for their absence.

---

"They tell you, but do you believe it? If so, why?"

http://www.undeadrufus.com

beyosoco (guest) 04 Jan 2011 19:45

Gravity means jack shit my friend or haven't you studied the electric universe yet? Time to catch up or shut up maybe? All images on the beyosoco channel are genuine images, suggest you visit photobucket and enter "Sunset Nibiru" download the images marked "original image", interrogate the data and you will find they are original images. They are not camera or lens anomalies just original images of something seen with naked eye by two people and photographed by two people on different cameras.
Make of these images what you will as indeed I have done. You will doubtless choose to dwell in the house of dogma that is current main stream physics and astronomy (without regard for electricity). This is a bit like having your head planted firmly up your arse, all you will ever see is black holes, dark matter and other such shit.

Moo (guest) 04 Jan 2011 23:19

… Right. Because you're firmly believing in one theory and telling other people for believing in the 'mainstream theory' makes them sheep. Isn't that sort of hypocritical logic? You're doing the exact same thing, really.

"Oh you're all stupid for not believing in what I believe hurdurdur!" Nice logic, the same logic that got a ton of people murdered during the Crusades. Just saying.

You know, if you're going to spout off your belief in Nibiru and blah blah blah? You miiiiight want to support yourself with the proper links to your source material, and not force other people to do your homework for you.

Really, quit using the "Electric Universe Theory" as an example of "Going against the mainstream makes us right!". You really shouldn't drag down something legitimate with your own nonsense.

bikenbeer2000 05 Jan 2011 02:06

I've had a look at your images and I see some nice sunsets with light refracting through lenticular clouds and some internal lens reflections of the Sun. Original images of things which you seem unable to identify.

something seen with naked eye by two people and photographed by two people on different cameras.

I have to laugh at this. Two people? How many people are there in the world? A bright object visible in broad daylight near the Sun and it's seen by two people out of 6.9 billion?

I never cease to be amazed by the sheer ludicrousness of these claims.

TheGreatJuju 05 Jan 2011 07:03

Gravity means jack shit my friend…

O rly?

Amusingly, the old "gravity is just a theory" joke seems to apply more to electric universe proponents than to young-earth creationists.

Also, I am not your friend.

…or haven't you studied the electric universe yet?

Yes, I have, and I concluded long ago that it does not account for observations as does the standard model, even granting the standard model's shortcomings.

Time to catch up or shut up maybe?

I'm not behind, and I'm disinclined to be silent upon hostile request.

All images on the beyosoco channel are genuine images, suggest you visit photobucket and enter "Sunset Nibiru" download the images marked "original image", interrogate the data and you will find they are original images.

Whether they're "original images" doesn't change the fact that they do not depict the imaginary planet Nibiru, for reasons we have elucidated many times on this website.

They are not camera or lens anomalies just original images of something seen with naked eye by two people and photographed by two people on different cameras.

Only two, eh? Fascinating. So … where did it go?

You will doubtless choose to dwell in the house of dogma that is current main stream physics and astronomy (without regard for electricity).

No, I dwell in the house of testability and evidence.

This is a bit like having your head planted firmly up your arse, all you will ever see is black holes, dark matter and other such shit.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

Oh, there's oven. Cobbler is done….

---

"They tell you, but do you believe it? If so, why?"

http://www.undeadrufus.com

obaeyens 05 Jan 2011 18:13

Gravity means jack shit my friend or haven't you studied the electric universe yet?

Oooohhhhhh your into EU?

I bet that you even don't understand your own EU theory.
So tell me what is the charge of The Sun, what is the charge of The Earth and what is the Charge of the Moon? Now tell me how does the Moon gets its charge and how does the Earth gets it's charge? Do I hear invisible currents? Now then explain what happens when there is a solar eclipse, and why does people not float away from the Earth when the Moon is between the Sun and Earth preventing the current ever to reach Earth?

obaeyens 05 Jan 2011 18:19

Gravity means jack shit my friend or haven't you studied the electric universe yet? Time to catch up or shut up maybe?

Oh yes, the earth does not stay at the same distance from the Sun, it is an ellipse. So explain me in your electric universe why people does not become heavier during the moments of the closest approach and lighter at the furthest distance? Magic?

Re: Chemtrails...

Astrogeek 24 Jun 2010 06:17

Have at it:

http://www.2012hoax.org/youtube

It's not linked to anything yet, and won't be until you whip it into shape. links to helpful examples would be appreciated.

---

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

Re: Chemtrails...

RickardM 24 Jun 2010 06:33

Thanks Astro=) I've searched for examples that shows how these videos can be done, but haven't been able to find anything of use. I think I saw something at baut.com, but can't seem to find the thread now. You don't happen to have come across something like this (debunking-vise that is)?

Did you look at the video (the 2nd) at 3:12? If so, what did you make of the planet to the right? Was it the moon or could it have been a parhelion?

---

Facts are stubborn things.
- Ronald Reagan

Re: Chemtrails...

Astrogeek 24 Jun 2010 07:07

You mean this one?

I think it was an internal reflection in the camera.

---

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

Re: Chemtrails...

RickardM 24 Jun 2010 07:24

No, sorry I looked at the wrong time. I meant around 2:57, the planet to the right (seems a little faded).
And also, what do you make of these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nhlJJFFpo8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zYAabj3KTk (around 0:52)

The first one must be some kind of distortion in the camera, or something like that? Looks alot like parhelion on the last one, or at least something caused by the clouds? I'm sure that there is no unknown planet at least, because it isn't visible here=)

---

Facts are stubborn things.
- Ronald Reagan

Re: Chemtrails...

bikenbeer2000 24 Jun 2010 20:31

Both of these are pretty idiotic. The first one is some sort of internal reflection in the camera. Why don't these idiots ever wonder why these mysterious objects vanish when they look with their naked eye?
The second one is obviously photoshopped. Look at all the cloud - and suddenly we see something with perfectly sharp edges. Dear, oh dear. Pathetic.

Re: Chemtrails...

UndeadxNurse 24 Jun 2010 20:40

The creator(s) of these videos should slit their wrists and go jump off a bridge for creating something so painfully moronic.

The first one is obviously a flare in the camera itself, if you actually pay attention, instead of saying "OMG!!! No way!!!", you will notice that the "second Sun" moves when the camera moves while the primary Sun stays stationary.

The second is just a bunch of photoshopped images, I've actually seen better photoshops that look more convincing in other areas of the internet.

As Bikenbeer said… Pathetic.

---

Wie Sie säen, so sollst du ernten.

Re: Chemtrails...

RickardM 02 Jul 2010 00:35

Bikenbeer and UndeadNurseX, thank you for taking the time to look through all these stupid videos. As you say, if people (and myself in particular) just take a moment and look things through, without just accepting whatever assertion is being made in the video these videos would get far less followers.

And as far as I'm concerned, the Danish prick in one of the video would to the world a huge service by following UndeadNurseX's advice. That kind of fearmongering should be punishable.

I am however a little curious about the planet shown in this videohttp://www.youtube.com/user/beyosoco (at 2:57). As TheGreatJuju says, it's probably an window reflection or editing, but I would like to find out how that could be done? I'm not at all familiar with Photoshop and programs like that, but is it hard to "fake" a planet like that one, or could anyone do that?

I actually found it funny that the guy in that video described the two suns as the spectacular thing, not the giant planet. That says something about their grasp on reality=)

As you guys have pointed out so many times before, the gravitational effects of something this big would be out of this world, it should be spotted much more frequently than just the occassional second sun and most importantly, amateur astronomers and NASA would have seen this comming a long long time ago. Disregard Youtube videos of lense reflections, Jupiter on Lasco C3, IRAS sightings from 1984 and CHANDRA observations in 1992, then what are we left with? Undisputable proof of this planets existence? NO, what we are left with is conspiracy theories fetched directly from the X-files. Self-contradiction seems to be the only criteria you need to fullfill in order to qualify as a "true believer"=)

So, to sum things up. I think it's rather clear, that there are no foreign objects in the sky, but… I still find some of the videos strange, in the sense that I don't understand how they are made, that is. If there is anyone that got tips on credible sites debunking this it would be really appreciated.

---

Facts are stubborn things.
- Ronald Reagan

Re: Chemtrails...

bikenbeer2000 02 Jul 2010 01:52

I am however a little curious about the planet shown in this videohttp://www.youtube.com/user/beyosoco (at 2:57).

It looks like a lens flare to me. Apart from the fact that you can never see planets that close to the Sun with the naked eye, the object must be at least the same size as the Sun and to be more than half illuminated, it must be farther from us than the Sun.
The people who post this nonsense haven't a clue what they're talking about.

Re: Chemtrails...

TheGreatJuju 02 Jul 2010 02:01

is it hard to "fake" a planet like that one, or could anyone do that?

No, it's quite easy. Yes, just about anybody can do it. Here are some examples.

Sunrise - Original Version:
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a97/insanebluejay/sunrise.jpg

Sunrise - Nibiru Version:
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a97/insanebluejay/sunrise_fake.jpg

The above edit literally took about thirty seconds. It took me longer to Google the photo and download it than it did to manufacture a Nibiru.

Here's another example showing how one can use layers to place objects behind clouds:

Sunset - Original Version:
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a97/insanebluejay/sunset.jpg

Sunset - Nibiru Version:
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a97/insanebluejay/sunset_fake.jpg

Though not completely convincing, this edit took about three minutes. "Nibiru" is actually Venus, taken from this image:

Bear in mind that I am not a graphic artist by an stretch of the imagination.

Now imagine what a determined hoaxer with hours to devote to this sort of material might come up with, using even the simplest of tools. Using a 3D program like Vue or Terragen, with a willingness to carry a hoax to any lengths, the potential results are near limitless.

---

"They tell you, but do you believe it? If so, why?"

http://www.undeadrufus.com

Re: Chemtrails...

RickardM 02 Jul 2010 08:52

Thank you, that was exactlly what I was looking for. It actually looks quite a bit like a few of the videos out there, so it was nice to see how they are done=)

---

Facts are stubborn things.
- Ronald Reagan

Re: Chemtrails...

3WMElliott 24 Jun 2010 16:22

I've done a similar thing myself but with the Moon, found out to be a reflection through the window. Open the window, no reflection, no mysterious second sun/planet/spaceship whatever. That's all I needed to test, opening a double-glazed window to see if the second object still appears.

People just don't test things out. Or even think them through. Blocking something with a chemtrail is like dangling a piece of string in front of one of your eyes - your other eye can see past it. Replace eyeballs with people at opposite ends of a field, island, country, hemisphere, whatever, one view will be 'blocked', the other most certainly wont.

Re: Chemtrails...

Astrogeek 24 Jun 2010 06:43

Based on the claimed date and time, that would have been the moon, 2 days past full (full moon was 31 Dec 2009).

---

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind