5h 53m 27s-6 10' 56 For some reason this image was removed.. find out why here > http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread511592/pg1

Hi, mike, and welcome to Google Sky.

Ah, not quite. The image wasn't removed, it just was never included with the rest of the data that went into the Google Sky imagery. There is quite a difference between data being removed and data being overlooked.

Contrary to the claim in the video you posted to the effect that "this is the only piece of sky missing from all of Google Earth", there are several areas of missing data in the Google Sky imagery. I've attached my collection of maybe 100 or so of them, as well as lots of other kinds of data problems, below.

Most people don't know how difficult it is to gather full-sky imagery in the tiny pieces that telescopes produces, digitize the images into useable data, "stitch" all these pieces together, then present them over the Internet without lots of little errors creeping into the data.

And the idea that the South Pole Telescope was constructed to observe Nibiru is laughable. If you understand anything about the sky at all, you'll know that the entire Southern Sky is visible from anywhere south of the equator. There are dozens of professional quality telescopes at La Silla, Chile, in Australia, South Africa, and other places which can see the entire Southern Sky, just like you can see the North Star (Polaris) from anywhere North of the equator. You don't have to go to the North Pole to see Polaris, and you certainly don't have to build a telescope at the South Pole, to see all of the Southern sky.

Nibiru isn't "hiding" or "being hidden" in some special place that can only be seen from a certain location in the Southern Sky. That's what is funny about this whole thing...there are hundreds of professional quality telescopes and thousands, perhaps millions of amateur quality telescopes. Anybody with a pair of binoculars can go out and look at any part of the sky, and with observers in both hemispheres, there's no part of the sky which isn't visible.

Lastly, that particular piece of missing data from the Google Sky imagery, and all the other missing pieces, are not missing from other wavelegths in the Google Sky imagery, and are not missing from a variety of other sources of astronomical imagery. Google Sky isn't the only place to find a picture of the night sky. Check around, educate yourself, see what you can find for yourself, and don't believe everything you see on the Internet.

Good luck, and have fun.

that is a double star system (think Tatooine)

i was looking at cool/strange looking stars, and i zoomed in at Pollux, and when i zoomed in, i saw something that looks somewhat like a satellite, and i just found that very strange.

Pollux is the 17th brightest star in the sky, according to THIS Wiki page. All bright stars create glares, internal reflections and aberrations of the kind that you found around Pollux. These aberrations are worse, or at least more colorful and have more internal reflections, in the SDSS Google Sky data than in the DSS data. (Look at the bottom of your Google Sky browser, it'll tell you which set of data you're looking at.)

Browse around some of the other bright stars on the Wiki list above, and see the various oddities that come about when professional telescopes and sensitive digital image gathering equipment is pointed at overwhelmingly bright sources.

Here's Beta Ursa Majoris:




Good luck, and have fun!

I found something weird, too. You have to get fare away to see the sign. Can it be some light? And look at the planet who is nearbye on the left.Maybe somebody doesn't want us to see anything?

RA6h39m13.34s,DEC-13:30'03.83

I hope somebody has an answer?

Hi, Nelly, and welcome to Google Sky.

You've found an internal reflection from Sirius, less than 5 degrees away to the SW. The glare from very bright stars frequently does funny things to sensitive professional astronomical hardware. This is what the business end of a reflecting telescope looks like, see if it doesn't look something like the reflection that you found: