Part two
by Matt Ridgway & gary d. goodwin

Updated 7 December 1999

I would highly recommend that you re-read part one of this report, before going on!

This image was picked up by our research team from the YOHKOH satellite site back in February of 1999. The object that is obvious in the near center of the image has been seen numerous times since that date, on various different images, from different satelllites. (note what appears to be a stream of energy emanating from the top of the object out of view to the north-up).

We would also like to remind you of this image, that has been persistent on SOHO's EIT images (the dates are in the upper left hand corner of each image and are all 1999).

The explainations for these two images have always been; "it's a sunspot", "It's pixilation", or "It's a burn in on the screen". Of course in the lwoer image, it's sometimes there and sometimes not.

This additional incredible image from Matt Ridgway seems to support the existence of these objects. Here's what he said:

"I've found some highly-suggestive pics regarding that solar object I pointed out several months ago. Now, as you might remember, I sent a quick note to the guys at SOHO and they sent a quick one back saying the object was a flaw in the viewing lense, which is the obvious conclusion. Now, the only trouble with that explaination is that the object doesn't show up on ALL the SOHO picks, but only on the few that utilise particular radiation bands, like the x-ray series and so on. BUT, a week or so ago I happened upon THIS pic, (below) which I believe clearly shows the object, this time from a vantage point that is almost straight on, and you can tell that the 'object(s)' here are clearly pointing toward the viewer, have a differential 'brightening' between the two, and are obviously something 'in the frame' and not 'on the frame'... Could it be possible that this object has been artificially placed in orbit around the sun to act as a sort of lightning rod for these CME's, to attract and bleed them off in order to minimize the risk during the solar maximum? What sort of 'object' could withstand such abuse? I have no idea."

Note the arc that travels between the two objects or between the two extensions of one object!

The following picture, provided to us by another reader, appears remarkably similar to the objects in the image above. The horizontal line through the object, is a line of reference put there by the SOHO team for measurement purposes. This suggests that the folks from NASA are very aware of these objects just as we are!

This final comment from M-Core Member, Ray Ward, seems to pull together our beliefs concerning what we are seeing here:

"I am in awe of these eit composite images that I we have been following. This is truly the best shot yet of some- thing electrical going on, and not exactly a natural thing either. The arc shows so clearly what we have seen elsewhere, that this thing is a mechanical device meant to collect, store(possibly), and redirect the energy it receives to somewhere else. The best candidate I know of at this time is that object we always see on the ecliptic that seems to be in our orbit but on the far side of the sun. I cannot imagine what must be going on. Its obvious that the need for extra energy is there. Or is it necessary for our own well-being? As you know, the thing is impervious to the flares of the sun and one can only surmise that this thing is not natural since it exhibits the characteristics of an intelligently controlled machine. The size of the tubes and the fact that they are transparent suggest that some form of bending of the energy transmission takes place. The relative sizes of the tubes in relation to one another suggest that this is a broadband frequency gathering device that collects the energy in the xray region, the microwave region, and then some in order to redirect the "beaming" of the energy at a right angle to some object around the corner of the sun and that lies behind it.

This object, judging by the oscillations in its position appears to be in virtually the same orbit as our planet and may be an object that lies at one of the 5 lagrangian points recently discussed in the NASA press release, that is on the opposite side of our orbit around the sun. Also, the interior of the body in the Feb,1999 image is deep enough to contain a large enough right angle bend to act as a good conduit for this energy to go through in the helix pattern that is so charac- teristic for such energy that rides the outer skin of such tubes.

Its too bad that they have to go and erase the magnetic field lines that seem to go from the tower to the body that is clearly shown many times in the C3 images and the C2 images. What a pity.

The thing that most interests me at this time is the nature of this body on the far side of the sun. I would wonder as to its true nature, that is whether is a true planet or what else. Since it did not seem to be there before Hale- Bopp, my vote goes to its being a large artificial object that came in with the comet. Whether its a machine or perhaps even inhabited is open to just guesswork at this time. The same goes for this tower thing we have been seeing for some time. I suppose it could be inhabited since it seems to be immune to anything the sun can throw at it, but it would not be necessary either for its obvious this thing has excellent control of its position and direction of travel and can move quickly when it has to. It velocity capability has to be at least 1 million miles an hour to be able to play this game of catch the flare energy. The neat thing about this machine is that it is obviously utilizing the same energy for propulsion as it is using for its control while at the same time redirecting the energy that it "catches". I suspect that this thing has a rather simple feedback system that simply allows it to move with the push of the redirected energy beam while at the same time perhaps deriving control by a simple opposition to the spin direction of the flare energy being expelled. If this is the case, then complex circuitry involving vulnerable computers is not necessary. Sort of like a fuzzy logic in a way. With such large charges involved and the distances much closer than what we might envision, it is perhaps not necessary to worry about tight tolerances since the electrical charges involved would react on their own without any interference whatsoever. So, if this thing were out of tolerance by 10%in position it might not matter since the charges would override something of much greater magnitude of error or distance, angles in this case. So the error of 10% in this case would be insignificant as the forces are so much greater and could override perhaps 100% error at the distances we see involved with this thing. The thrust mechanism would simply utilize the thrust of the redirecting of the energy to the other body, that is,using the simple push of the energy being expelled to the other side of the sun. That would allow it to remain in position upon capture by the flare and there you have one side being attracted to the sun via the flare and the counter force simply the explusion of the magnetic lines of force to the other body. This concept reminds me of the interstellar ram jet concept that I saw a couple of decades or more ago. You have an engine with no moving parts that simply plows its way through the gases of space by combustion in the rear of the engine. In the case of this tower, it uses a similar concept, but needs no combustion since the field strengths involved pull the flare energy through the tubes. I suppose on further thought the machine may not be inhabited out of a more aethetic type of reason rather than a technological one. Since the body on the other side of the sun is at our distance, it would much more likely be inhabited since the requirements for life support would be easily met.

I guess I am digressing a lot as I write this but it seems necessary to point out that it is much easier to deal with plasma in space than on earth where oxidation can take place. With the absence of air or oxygen, and in the presence of only charged particles due only to the high heat needed to cause these gases to become plasma, things can be dealt with in a more forgiving fashion and without the tolerances needed here on earth. Already using the electromagnetic fields that the sun has and utilizing the property of helical type discharges it is much easier to capture large amounts of plasma than just going into space and trying to collect it. This machine already has it collected for it due to the above properties. So, instead of looking outward at the stars, we need to look inward, toward the sun, for our propulsion. It would be much more easily accomplished there than in the far reaches of space.

Something else comes to mind in this collection of plasma. I am sure you have heard of the recent development of transparent aluminum. I maybe am showing a lot of ignorance but it seems to me that something made of this transparent aluminum would much more easily absorb the energy in these flares since some of the filters used are the same. This type of tower would facilitate the collection of that particular frequency of energy since it would more easily penetrate this type of structure and be allowed to travel down the tube by the general flow already generated by this type of machine. It just might simply be a fine tuning for efficiency of collection in addition to the general principles that are utilized for this thing. In addition, the angle of the tower is roughly 30 degrees in angle at the top, looking at the side of the tower. This is in the range of angles that we normally see in crystalline structures, so this angle is obvious. Add to that the circular aspect of the tower and this, again,adds another aspect to the design of the tower for more ease in collection of energy in the flare. It is a crude way of collection of energy into a 90 degree bend and the more gentle bend is in the interior of the machine for less loss of transmission of the energy thus obtained. It may also be that once the process of collection commences, that the process becomes more efficient due to the inherent initial 90 degree bend into the tube by the bending of the entire stream of particles into the tower. Once the flux tube from the sun is bent properly into the tower, the rest of the flare will follow the same path since it is one of least resistance.

I know this is a lot of speculation, but, when one can figure all of these details into the tower design, and have a plausible explanation for them, then that entire concept looks that much more plausible. I don't know if this is some form of Occam's razor or not. It just seems that a bunch of simple things observed separately and matched to a particular shape make that thing much more plausible, far beyond chance that such a thing could exist as we are envisioning it. It just seems to have a ring of truth to it. Well, I hope this is fuel for thought, ha,ha.

Anyone care to comment?

gary d. goodwin

All material is copyrighted by THE MILLENNIUM GROUP and may not be used without their express permission.