Broadening my Horizons lol...(3I/ATLAS)

 

First of all,

Here is what 

people need to know, 

understand and remember:

Wednesday, July 9, 2025

Joel 2:30-32 pt2 (Not for the faint of heart BTW)

NASA confirms that mysterious object

 shooting through the solar system 

is an 'interstellar visitor' 

— and it has a new name

Live Science 07/02/25

"NASA scientists have confirmed that a mysterious object shooting toward us through the solar system is an "interstellar object" — only the third of its kind ever seen."

"On Wednesday (July 2), NASA released a statement confirming that A11pl3Z is indeed an interstellar object and will not remain in the solar system for long. The researchers also shared the object's new official name, 3I/ATLAS,  

and revealed that 

it is most likely a comet,

upending previous assumptions 

that it was an asteroid."

(NASA Comet 3I/ATLAS)

"Researchers initially suspected that 3I/ATLAS was an asteroid, like 'Oumuamua. However, the object has displayed "tentative signs of cometary activity" like 2I/Borisov — including being surrounded by a bright cloud of gas and ice, known as a coma, and having what looks like a tail — according to the IAU's Minor Planet Center. However, more observations are needed to confirm this."

(No observation to date 

has 

"confirmed this"

(In fact

It just keeps getting weirder

This Visiting Interstellar Comet 

Just Keeps Getting Weirder

Gizmodo 08/27/25)

As well as the 

"Researchers initially suspected 

that 3I/ATLAS was an asteroid"

have never been identified,

nor the methods used 

by which they made that determination 

nor the location

of where that determination was reached.

So?

Before it was confirmed to be an interstellar visitor

it was thought to be an asteroid,

but then within 24 hours of being confirmed 

NASA says it

"it is most likely a comet"

and to date

no Data has confirmed

it to be a comet.

Comets have a tail, 

(or tails)

of gas and dust 

that flow behind them:

3I/ATLAS

has a "fuzz"

IN FRONT 

of it 

and

it's going 130,000+ mph.

"The lower left corner of Panel (a) 

shows the sky-projected direction 

from 3I/ATLAS to the Sun (S) 

and its velocity (v) vector."

The First Webb Telescope Observations of 3I/ATLAS

"We've never seen such a thing. 

A comet doesn't have 

glow in front of it."

Avi Loeb on CNN This Morning

Thursday 08/07/25 per Raw Story

With all that said?

Lets see what my buddy 

Ethan Seigel has to say

SPHEREx and JWST reveal what comet 3I/ATLAS is

… and isn’t

Big Think Ethan Siegel 08/26/25

"It’s the largest, fastest-moving interstellar object yet detected, displaying features like a large, bright coma but no tail and a nucleus that’s difficult to resolve. Fortunately, the infrared-optimized SPHEREx space telescope has just acquired observations of this object, revealing how comet-like it is. 

For all other interpretations, 

the evidence is absent."

(What is absent here

is the data that says 

this object is not a comet.

Pushing an agenda much?

And not according to the head of the 

Harvard University Astronomy department

it's not absent:

"We've never seen such a thing. 

A comet doesn't have 

glow in front of it.")

"Above, you can see the Hubble image of 3I/ATLAS, which was taken on July 21, 2025: when the comet was still 365 million kilometers away from Earth, or 2.4 times as far away as the Earth-Sun distance. You can clearly see that there’s a bright nucleus that isn’t completely resolved (i.e., you can’t tell where the coma begins and the nucleus ends) embedded within a larger, diffuse coma, or halo-like puffy cloud that surrounds the nucleus. 

You can see strong evidence for this coma, 

but no evidence for either 

a dust tail or an ion tail, 

which are normally features common to comets found in our own Solar System."

(Bias alert:

See where Ethan mentioned the :

"halo-like puffy cloud 

that surrounds the nucleus"

was pointing toward the sun?

Yeah me neither.

He did it twice.

Here is the caption in the article

to the above picture:

"...revealing an enormous extent 

to the coma, or halo, surrounding it."

That's two chances 

to have stated 

that the 

"glow"

was pointing to the sun

and neither time

was that fact mentioned.

Its not what is being said that matters

Its what should be said, 

but is being 

intentionally left out

that does.)

"...we have a large, bright coma that’s responsible for most of the light coming from 3I/ATLAS"

(Again no mention of it's "glow"

pointing forward.)

"there’s no obvious jet or tail structures 

coming from 3I/ATLAS"

(But previously 

they tried to sell us

the lie that it did have a tail?

Why?

Thats not having something comets have:

A tail.

And having something comets don't:

"A glow" 

in front of it.

Ethan? Buddy?

So much for:

"For all other interpretations, 

the evidence is absent.")

"there is no detection of features that would be associated with sublimating water-ice; there is a non-detection of H2O in the coma of this object. Similarly, where a carbon monoxide signature could/should be, there’s also nothing."

(So again,

why were we being sold:

3I/ATLAS Is Very Actively Releasing Water

universetoday.com 08/12/25

Two weeks ago?)

"This is consistent with an interpretation where 99% or more of the measured continuum flux, at least from SPHEREx, is arising from coma dust, and where that coma dust is consistent with being made of CO2 ices that appear in relatively large fragments."

(See where he explained 

"the glow"

in front of the object?

Yeah me neither.

Thats four chances 

to have brought it up

and all four times

that fact was simply omitted.

That rules out it's omission 

as having been simply an accident

"We've never seen such a thing. 

A comet doesn't have 

glow in front of it.")

"Meanwhile, for 3I/ATLAS, which is still approaching perihelion (getting closer to the Sun), we find no carbon monoxide and no signs of water-ice, but it’s very rich in CO2, which it’s presently offgassing."

(See here is what 

they are going to do,

they are going to say:

"it’s presently offgassing."

and then sell us the:

"see, it is a comet" line of BS

that they have from the start.

What they are going to leave out is:

Comets don't "offgass"

toward the sun

but away from it.

Its pretty simple really.)

"The reason it’s important to look at these images is because Comet 103P/Hartley 2 was observed to have precisely the same properties that 3I/ATLAS displays. 

Hartley 2 showed:

lots of carbon dioxide, 

no carbon monoxide 

and water 

only when it was sufficiently close to the Sun, 

(3I/ATLAS is to that point now.)

and was fragmenting 

and spitting out 

large chunks of itself:

pristine material that showed it originated 

from our own Kuiper belt."

(So the thing 

(Comet 103P/Hartley 2) 

with

"precisely the same properties 

that 3I/ATLAS displays"

showed lots of carbon dioxide, 

no carbon monoxide 

and water 

only when it was 

sufficiently close to the Sun, 

and was 

"fragmenting and spitting out 

large chunks of itself."

)

"3I/ATLAS, like 103P/Hartley 2, 

looks like an in-between object. 

It’s most likely:

an ice-rich object,

formed as part of an alien star system,

that was ejected 

and hurled into interstellar space,

where it traveled for at least 

hundreds of millions of years, 

and maybe even 

many billions of years,

having been eroded so that 

all of its “light” ices 

have been boiled away already,

but where both water-ice 

and carbon dioxide-ice remain,

where the CO2 ices 

are sublimating now 

and breaking off in big chunks 

(rather than little motes),

but which 

won’t begin offgassing water 

until it either gets hotter 

or makes an even 

closer approach to our Sun."

"Despite unfounded speculations 

that 3I/ATLAS could be an alien artifact, 

(Life requires an intelligence behind it.

Every life, everywhere we have ever seen it,

everywhere, every time.

If it processed oxygen to live

it had a genetic code.

Every plant, animal, fungi

and human, ever.

Life on this planet wasnt an accident

as 3.2 billion character codes

CAN NOT

happen randomly

and are in fact

THE VERY OPPOSITE 

of random processes.

So life here wasnt an accident,

and all of the laws of the universe being

the same everywhere?

What would have been

 the intelligence

behind

"Aliens"

to produce an "artifact"?

ITS FUCKING 

PREPOSTEROUS.)

"the data instead shows that it is alien-like 

in the sense that it originated from 

an alien star system in the Milky Way, 

but naturally: 

the same way Kuiper belt objects 

exist in our own Solar System."

(Ethan?

The head of 

The University of Harvard 

Astronomy Department 

disagrees:

No, There’s No Clear Evidence for Water Around 3I/ATLAS

"This closely resembles the reddening 

observed in typical D-type asteroids, 

(Reference here and here) 

implying that this part of the spectrum 

could originate from the solid surface of 3I/ATLAS.

In that case, the brightness of 3I/ATLAS implies a diameter of 20 kilometers. As I showed in my first paper on 3I/ATLAS, this size is untenable because the reservoir of rocky material in interstellar space can deliver at best a 20-kilometer rock once per 10,000 years. In contrast, 3I/ATLAS was discovered after surveying the sky for less than a decade.

Sorry Brother

gotta go with Avi on this one.)

"Moreover, 3I/ATLAS isn’t just comet-like, 

it’s a special type of comet-like, 

akin to the evolved comets 

(like Hartley 2) 

that we find in our own Solar System: 

the old, semi-fragmenting 

short period comets."

(I said very early on:

"If its as old 

as they are saying it is?

Why do they think 

it still has water ice in it?"

Meaning, in all those millions 

or billions of years?

After obtaining gravity assist 

from other stars and nebulas 

for eons to reach the speed it has?

Why hasn't it finished before now?

"sublimating" it's water-ice?

They cant make 

this object make sense

and that's by design

which implys a designer

and if aliens cant exist?

See the delima here?

There is only one form of intelligence 

that could have designed this 

and it aint lil green men that cant exist.)

"Moreover, 3I/ATLAS isn’t just comet-like, 

it’s a special type of comet-like, 

akin to the evolved comets (like Hartley 2) 

that we find in our own Solar System: 

the old, semi-fragmenting 

short period comets."

)

"As they orbit the Sun, comets and asteroids typically break up over time, with debris between the chunks along the path of the orbit getting stretched out to create debris streams. These streams cause meteor showers when the Earth passes through that debris stream. This image taken by Spitzer along a comet’s path shows small fragments outgassing, but also shows the main debris stream that gives rise to the meteor showers that occur in our Solar System. Note that comets, and comet-like objects, evaporate the most quickly when they’re at their hottest, and when they approach a star at the smallest separation distances."

(Thats pretty much 

what were looking at having happen.

Right there.

Only bigger 

and more of em 

than you could ever imagine.

So what happens when a bunch of 

hot ass on the outside, still frozen on the inside

mountainous chunks of frozen Co2 hit the oceans

in large quantities becomes my question.

I just read the "AI overview" lol.

Bout what I thought.

It aint good.

As in really, really, not good:

"a rapid, localized event with severe, far-reaching consequences. The immediate, explosive impact would be followed by a cascade of effects on the marine environment, ultimately contributing to a global-scale crisis of ocean acidification"

"the immense volume of CO₂ dissolving into the seawater would drastically and rapidly alter the ocean's chemistry, triggering a catastrophic episode of ocean acidification"

"Harm to calcifying organisms"

"The resulting disruptions would cause a ripple effect throughout the entire marine food web. The decline of key species, such as shellfish and plankton, would affect the larger fish and mammals that prey on them."

Acidification: The CO₂ from the impact would acidify the oceans.

Warming: The initial energy release, followed by the CO₂ acting as a greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, would contribute to a warming ocean.

Deoxygenation: Warmer water holds less dissolved oxygen, creating "dead zones" where marine life cannot survive. 

This combination of stressors could cause immense damage to global food security, coastal economies that depend on fisheries and tourism, and the overall balance of life in the oceans. )

"To be sure, though, 

while Hartley 2 will likely be gone completely 

in the next ~1000 years or so, 

the one close pass of 3I/ATLAS 

through our Solar System 

won’t significantly change its composition. 

(I disagree)

"After passing by our Sun,"

(If it does.)

"it will exit the Solar System,"

(Maybe, but I doubt it.)

"likely encountering 

many other stars 

over at least 

hundreds of millions 

of years further."

(Ethan?

Who is paying you to write such 

flowery, best case scenario garbage as:

"likely encountering 

many other stars 

over at least 

hundreds of millions 

of years further."

Looks to me like 

"the data"

shows its a possibility

at least, that

this thing is already spent.

I have read Ethan Siegel for sometime now, that above is not how he used to write, normally he would say something along the lines of:

"More than likely 3I/ATLAS 

will continue on out of our solar system

blah blah blah...etc."

Not:

"After passing by our Sun, 

it will 

exit the Solar System, 

likely 

encountering many other stars 

over 

at least 

hundreds of millions of years 

further."

Who added that Ethan?

Cause it doesn't 

even sound like you are writing it.

In fact?

It almost sounds like a code

for exactly

WHAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!

Avi Loeb has said the best time for 

"The mothership"

(Asteroid)

to release

"Mini-probes"

(Fragments)

would be when it is obscured from us 

by being on the opposite side of the sun.

I told honey then:

"Sounds to me like 

Avi is speaking in code 

and he expects this thing 

to fragment then."

And here is why I disagree

with Ethan about:

"the one close pass of 3I/ATLAS through our Solar System 

won’t significantly change its composition."

There is a body of evidence

that is being intentionally ignored

that says we have seen this before:

New Supercomputer Simulation 

Explains How Mars Got Its Moons

By Brian Koberlein - 

November 22, 2024  

"Observations of Deimos and Phobos show that they resemble small asteroids. This is consistent with the idea that the Martian moons were asteroids captured by Mars in its early history. The problem with this idea is that Mars is a small planet with less gravitational pull than Earth or Venus, which have no captured moons. It would be difficult for Mars to capture even one small asteroid, much less two. And captured moons would tend to have more elliptical orbits, not the circular ones of Deimos and Phobos."

"An alternative model argues that the Martian moons are the result of an early collision similar to that of Earth and Theia. In this model, an asteroid or comet with about 3% of the mass of Mars impacted the planet. It would not be large enough to have fragmented Mars, but it would have created a large debris ring out of which the two moons could have formed. This would explain the more circular orbits, but the difficulty is that debris rings would tend to form close to the planet. While Phobos, the larger Martian moon, orbits close to Mars, Deimos does not. (23,500 km)

"This new model proposes an interesting middle way. Rather than an impact or direct capture, the authors propose a near miss by a large asteroid. If an asteroid passed close enough to Mars, the tidal forces of the planet would rip the asteroid apart to create a string of fragments."

("D-type asteroids have a very low albedo ("a measure of the percentage of sunlight that a surface reflects away" our guy is bright, Opps.) and a featureless reddish spectrum. It has been suggested that they have a composition of organic-rich silicates, carbon and anhydrous silicates, possibly with water ice in their interiors.[2] D-type asteroids are found in the outer asteroid belt and beyond; examples are 152 Atala, (65 KM +/-8 KM) 944 Hidalgo (52 KM) and most Jupiter trojans. It has been suggested that the Tagish Lake meteorite was a fragment from a D-type asteroid, 

and that the Martian moon Phobos 

is closely related."

Also reference:

 Chuck Missler The Book of Genesis - Session 5 of 24 -

From the 34:36 mark on as he talks about Mars.

"35:35 and what's interesting about this model 

is that it would account for catastrophic events 

on a number of 35:42 occasions

 in fact seven of them in history apparently"

Dr. Missler doesn't explicitly say that this book is where he got that information, but later he mentions that we are "deeply indebted" to its author Immanuel Velikovsky.

I downloaded the PDF version for free.

I Haven't started on it yet, been busy with some other things like the book on The Dead sea Scrolls etc, and my PDF reader quit working go figure etc.)

(So this will be #8.) 

"38:50 well it's a two centuries after the telescope history here no one knew that 38:55 Mars had any moons at all why because they're only a the moon's only about eight miles across and they're almost black they have a reflectivity and 39:02 Albedo of less than three percent"

"23:32 okay but when you look at Mars  here's something that most people don't realize 23:38 Mars has 93% of its craters on just one hemisphere 23:45 and that in fact and only seven percent and the other it creates the impression that most of 23:53 those craters happened within a half an hour ..."

Later on he says 80%.

I don't know which # is more accurate but even if its "just"

80%?  on one hemisphere?

Its fair to infer they all happened within a 

relatively short timeframe.

i.e., an asteroid fragmentation.

So thats:

the moons themselves resemble asteroids

There is a computer model that says

 they could be the result of fragmentation of an asteroid

that makes more sense than the other two theories

(That still nobody in any article about 3I/ATLAS

has referenced along with perturbations

being excluded from the conversation as well)

and a large part of its craters 

all being on one hemisphere 

suggesting they may have 

all happened at once.

Also consider where this thing came from.

Stability of the Solar System

"External influences

"Objects coming from outside the Solar System 

can also affect it."

Think the "Societal High Priest of our Time"

Members of the cult of scientism

don't know what I am telling you?

I guarantee you they do.

Look at your world.

Satans is pissed.

He is going to take as many 

down with him as he can.

Dont be fooled.)

"Our imaginations may be limitless, but the very enterprise of science demands that we constrain them to be consistent with both 

the full suite of data 

that we collect about the Universe

and the fewest number of unnecessary, 

extraneous assumptions

in order to explain what we observe. 

3I/ATLAS is definitely comet-like, 

but potentially a slightly different comet, 

with possibly different 

water-to-carbon dioxide ratios, 

than the comets of Kuiper belt origin 

we’re more familiar with."

Ethan?

You left out:

"We've never seen such a thing. 

A comet doesn't have 

glow in front of it."

(Four times it could have been mentioned

and all four times it wasnt.)

and you did so intentionally

just to try and make 

your point:

"3I/ATLAS is definitely comet-like, 

but potentially a slightly different comet,

So how is that 

consistent with 

the full suite of data 

that we collect?

Which Avi just obliterates

with one sentence:

"We've never seen such a thing. 

A comet doesn't have 

glow in front of it."

3I/ATLAS does

"have a glow

in front of it."

This is their new angle.

This is how they are still going to try 

and call it a comet.

They are going to intentionally leave out

it has a glow in front of it.

James Webb telescope images reveal there's something strange with interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS

livescience.com 19 hours ago

And doesn't have a tail behind it.

Think that article mentions 

the "glow" in front of it?

Or the lack of a tail?

Comets dont have the former

and do have the later.

This object has the former 

but not the later

and yet every science rag imaginable

is going to still call it a comet.

This is a great example 

of how the the elitist, 

exclusive cult 

of scientism works:

IF WE DONT LIKE 

THE EVIDENCE WE SEE

(The glow in front, 

the lack of a tail behind

in this particular instance)

WE JUST GO ON

WILLFULLY IGNORING IT.

IT"S JUST NOT SCIENCE!

Some people 

somewhere, somehow

(we will never know)

 had it right 

in the beginning

before it was confirmed 

by NASA

"upending previous assumptions 

that it was an asteroid."

AND STUPID FUCKING PEOPLE

ARE WORRIED ABOUT

RESTAURANT SIGNS

??????????

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

We don't live in your world.

Hebrews 11:13

These all died in faith, 

not having received the promises, 

but having seen them afar off, 

and were persuaded of them,

 and embraced them, 

and confessed 

that they were strangers

 and pilgrims on the earth.

14 For they that say such things 

declare plainly 

that they seek a country.

15 And truly, 

if they had been mindful of that country 

from whence they came out, 

they might have had 

opportunity to have returned.

16 But now they desire a better country, 

that is, an heavenly: 

wherefore God is not ashamed 

to be called their God: 

for he hath prepared for them a city.

Haggai 2:6

For thus saith the Lord of hosts; 

Yet once, 

it is a little while, 

and I will shake the heavens, 

and the earth, 

(The biggest, brightest, 

fastest object, 

humanity has ever witnessed

is going to be passing through 

the inner solar system

in a lil over a month.)

and the sea, 

and the dry land;

He is getting ready to:

Isaiah 13:13

Therefore I will shake the heavens, 

and the earth shall remove 

out of her place, 

(Ready to go back to 

a 360 day a year calendar anybody?)

in the wrath of the Lord of hosts,

 and in the day of his fierce anger.

(This is but a taste of his wrath.

The full measure comes 

in the second half

of the Tribulation

"The Great Tribulation"

that last of Daniels 70/7's.

Up to that point 

we just get doses of it

 here and there of it.

Gods anger is always righteous.

It is always provoked.

It is always done out of love.

And it al

ways teaches a lesson.

Tell ya what

If nobody else wants to give a sermon 

on God's righteous anger?

Cause you are scared 

what your congregation might think about it?

Holler at me and I'll come do it for you.

No kidding.

He is trying 

to get your attention.

He is to the:

"Taking off the kid gloves"

part of the programming.)

Revelation 8:8-9

And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood;

9 And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed.

Revelation 18:21

And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.

Revelation 18:17-19

For in one hour so great riches is come to nought. 

And every shipmaster, 

and all the company in ships, and sailors, 

and as many as trade by sea, 

stood afar off,

Reference Neoliberalism

"Neoliberalism is often associated with a set of economic liberalization policies, including privatization, deregulation, depoliticisation, consumer choice, labor market flexibilization, economic globalization, free trade, monetarism, austerity, and reductions in government spending. These policies are designed to increase the role of the private sector in the economy and society."

18 And cried when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, What city is like unto this great city!

(Babylon, the Satanic World System.)

19 And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas, alas that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! for in one hour is she made desolate.

Revelation 21:1

21 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

And:

"there was no more sea."

finally makes sense to me now.

People wasting their time

thinking bout a Restaurant sign...

And cant, dont, and just 

WILLINGLY wont see

its to keep your 

eyes and ears from hearing 

and seeing what really matters.

People please:

As it was 

in the days of Noah indeed...