facebook google plus goodreads

The Black Sky


Read the bold if you just want the highlights, and keep in mind that this is a work in progress.

For those who have read Silent Subversion I, this article should give you some hints about the contents of the second book, but should not come as a spoiler. For some, the contents of this article will cause confusion, anxiety or both. This article will address the following question. Are stars visible from the upper atmosphere? No conclusions are made yet, but some interesting information has been discovered.

There is a big challenge of writing a fictional story intended to take place in the real world. The author’s understanding of the world can be wrong and can change after they write the story. It’s one thing to create stories set in the real world as Anxiety Publishing claims, and actually writing a story which could actually take place in the real world. This is what happened to me. I wrote book 1 and 2 of the Silent Subversion saga from my understanding of the world, but then my understanding changed. This happens to everyone, hopefully every day, but in this instance, my new views all of the sudden conflicted with some of the content in Silent Subversion 2. I cannot be honest with myself and my audience without aligning the story to my most current world view. Of course, this will put a minor delay in the publication of the second book.

Here is what shook my world, so to speak. In my never-ending search for what NASA is hiding, I came upon a set of videos that disrupted my reality. At first, the new information caused me to feel anxiety as it conflicted with my current set of beliefs. In my life, I’ve grown accustomed to these experiences of anxiety. I do not fear anxiety, but have learned to embrace it. It’s like what happened to me when I discovered my religion to be a hoax. At first, the world transformed into a scary place of the unknown, but after a while, it became more beautiful and mysterious and the thought of returning to my old set of beliefs frightened me more than the new unknown ever did.

These videos that caused so much disturbance were all the high altitude weather balloons videos where the clouds are far below and the atmosphere is thin. I’ve watched so many of them, some of much better quality than others. I love watching the balloon take off from the ground and ascending into the sky. As it travels through the blue, I get impatient for the blue to disappear and to see the black of the new sky above. The view brings an eerie sensation, a feeling of being all alone in an empty universe.


Figure 1) Snapshot of a 4 hour video by RotaFlight on youtube.com/watch?v=9dfVtaZbuIQ&t=9718s


Where are the stars?

Figure 1 above is a typical image from one of the videos taken in HD quality. In the video you can see the sun, the Earth and the blackness of the sky without the slightest hint of any stars. When I first encountered these videos, I temporarily accepted the standard explanation for the lack of stars. The exposure must not be set correctly. The aperture must not be large enough. The brightness of the sun and Earth must be totally saturated the sensors. For a while, I accepted those explanations, but with a healthy dose of skepticism. Most people though, easily swallow the typical excuses without any question because they come from authority figures.

A closer analysis of the sky with photographic imaging software revealed absolute blackness. For my own analysis, I chose to take a snapshot without the sun to show more of the black sky where the evidence of stars would most likely be found. On my computer I used GIMP software edge detection and found no evidence of stars, see figure 2. In the images, if stars were present, they should be shown as areas of slightly less black than other areas and would be surrounded by contour lines. Above the dense part of the atmosphere it is totally reasonable to assume the brightness of the stars to be much greater than below. They should be detectable! In the image, the contour lines simply show a gradient from the bright Earth to the black sky with no circled areas. This means that the bright stars failed to show less black than the areas without stars, a highly unlikely scenario when the stars are supposed to be much brighter. This is evidence that the stars are not shining in wavelengths sensitive to standard cameras, wavelengths in the visible spectrum.


Figure 2) Snapshot of a 4 hour video by RotaFlight with edge detection


Does the evidence described above mean that the stars are only an illusion? Are the stars just some sort of distortion of the upper atmosphere? Before I present the remaining results of my personal investigation, I’d like to share an analogy that initially occurred to me. What if we lived in a situation as presented in the Matrix movie and the programmers failed to create appropriate views from high in the atmosphere? I don’t believe this is the case, but it is fun to theorize and also impossible to prove false.

The picture in figure 3 below shows a scene from one of my favorite movies, Coraline. In the movie, an evil witch traps children in a small world of her making. In this particular scene, the main character Coraline is trying to run away from her evil captor. When she reaches the boundary of the imaginary land, her reality becomes pixelated. The witch who made the world to trap children, did not take the time to create an infinite world. In the high altitude videos, the sky is black and only the moon and sun are visible. Perhaps if there were programmers, they didn’t want to take the time to generate the stars all over again without the atmospheric interference.

Figure 3) A scene from the movie Coraline

Are the photo analysis and arguments above sufficient to convince me or others that stars are invisible in space? For me, it’s almost enough considering all the other reasons I have to doubt NASA’s claims. In this instance, however, I also need to determine if the faint signatures of stars from pictures below the atmosphere can be detected using the same analysis. If the same edge detection analysis on videos from below the atmosphere can be used to detect the faint signature of stars, that should be sufficient evidence that they should be visible above the atmosphere.

The logic makes sense. Stars should be possibly twice as bright above the atmosphere than below, maybe more. This alone would make photographic evidence of stars more abundant at high altitude. All it takes is one picture, just one real picture taken at the Earth’s surface.


Figure 4) Snapshot of amateur moon video on youtube.com/watch?v=8n0qd44KEb4


The image in figure 4 is one such image from a video of the moon taken below our dense atmosphere. The video appears to be raw footage and not manipulated. I specifically restricted my search to videos by amateurs and not space organizations. Places like NASA rarely if ever provide raw imagery. Everything they provide has been edited and is usually composite creations. Nowadays, everyone has the ability to take video in HD which should be good enough for this analysis. Figure 4 is a snapshot of the raw video and figure 5 is the same photo but with edge detection. As can be seen, there are many circular contour lines indicating areas with different brightness. These are most likely stars.


Figure 5) Snapshot, with edge detection, of amateur moon video on youtube.com/watch?v=8n0qd44KEb4

Another observation came when I was looking at the sky at dusk, when the blue had almost disappeared and turned to black and the brightest stars began to show. I took a picture at that time, just as an example, see below in Figure 6. At that moment, I realized another important clue. If my eyes and simple camera could simultaneously capture the blue with the stars, then without the blue, they would be able to capture the stars even better against the black. This alone should be proof enough. In the high altitude videos, if their camera can capture the blue just before it turns black, they should also be able to capture the stars. Therefore, the stars do not show in the visible spectrum like they do under the atmosphere.


Figure 6)  Snapshot taken by an 8megapixel smartphone camera. My shaking hands turned it into a swirl.


After several months of investigation and searching for videos of stars at high altitude, I came across a single believable video. Figure 7 shows the screenshot, along with its source so that if it’s ever removed from Youtube, the evidence will still remain in this article. The posters of this video claimed to use filters to see stars in upper atmosphere. Later in the video, a person gives some information about the photographic details. For the star shots, they gave the following short description. They call their camera setup, EVIL which stands for (electronic viewfinder with interchangeable lens) with a backlit sensor and self-recording system included and sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens with filters. The text in the snapshot suggests that English is not their native language.

Figure 7)  Can stars be seen in space, part1 on youtube.com/watch?v=Lq18zyxY6z4

Figure 8) Deseret News article by Howard W. Blakeslee published Feb 17, 1949 about Horace Winfield

As a side note, the video is posted by a Youtube channel named Rendra Az. If there were other videos I could find of high altitude views of the stars, I would have used them instead. Here’s my critical analysis of the video. First, they don’t show much footage of the stars. Since the whole purpose of the video was to show video of stars, it didn’t make sense for only a small percentage of the video to show their results and then spend most of the time with discussion. I tried to find a longer video of theirs with more footage, but could not. In the video title they interject the term Flat Earth which is always a red flag to me. I personally believe the flat earth movement to be a psychological operation (psyop) by some intelligence agency. Since this article is not about controlled opposition, I will not discuss that concept further here.

Finally, I came across an interesting article published by the Deseret News, in Salt Lake City, about stars being invisible in space. The first part of the article is shown in Figure 8. As a personal side note, the Deseret News is from Salt Lake City where I happened to spend the majority of my childhood. The author, Howard W. Blakeslee wrote about the theory of physicist Dr. Horace Winfield Webster. It is interesting to note that his theory came before anyone supposedly went into orbit.


There are several implications to these observations. On a personal level, I have to modify parts of my second Silent Subversion novel before publication. On a more global scale, our imagination of space might need to be slightly modified. This would impact the producers, participants, and fans of every science fiction movie about space. Needless to say, all mainstream scientists who have their reputation built on the present understanding will fight any contradictory information.

Observations like this usually lead to more questions. If the Sun is like all the other stars, why is it visible in the upper atmosphere when all the other stars are not? Perhaps since we are so much closer to the sun, the radiation is strong enough that even the thin higher atmosphere can transform much of it into the visible spectrum. From what we know about blackbody radiation, however, an apparently hot object like the sun should emit some visible light. So, is the Sun different than the stars or does visible light not travel as far? It is also known that there is a significant electrical field which ends at the ionosphere. Could the different electrical condition above the atmosphere interfere with star light propagation? These questions are beyond the scope of this article. Speculation can be fun and productive, but sticking with observation is often the safest course of action.

The observations in this article might help those of us who have noticed:

  • Why the astronauts aboard the international space station, ISS, never point their cameras into space during their day or night. They only take video of the Earth.
  • Why no pictures from the Hubble Telescope are taken in the visible spectrum. For example, they are taken in x-ray or UV or some radio frequency and then assigned visible light.
  • Why no camera aboard any rocket ever points to the sky while travelling into orbit. They all point to the Earth.
  • Why no astronaut ever points his camera into space to show the stars while on an EVA, or why no stars are ever shown (until only recently).
  • Why Neil Armstrong claims not to have seen any stars other than the sun while on the moon or on his way to the moon.

Sometimes NASA astronauts admit that no stars are visible in space and other times they claim the stars are visible. I think they do this to cover their bases, one way or the other, but they must know the truth. Maybe they’ll go public one day, and make some excuse for lying about so many things. What other information are they keeping from us?

Notes: The following video shows a camera view of the sky and an altimeter reading on the whole trip. The sky begins to turn black before 70000 ft or 21 km. youtube.com/watch?v=hceMXAQWWN8. Another video shows the view from a U2 spy plane at 70,000 ft., youtube.com/watch?v=q48Swb2ATww. Although the pilot doesn’t point the camera up, the horizon is dark blue, and seems to turn blacker as the angle upward increases.

Disclaimer: I make no claim to some of the images shown as they are freely available on the web for the public to use. No attempt has been made to contact the owners of the videos which were used in my analysis.

7 responses to “The Black Sky”

  1. Michelle says:

    Excellent!!! Found you on Crrow777 radio, so glad I followed the link you left. Can’t wait to read more of your writings.

    • hyrum jones says:

      Thanks for the acknowledgment Michelle! The whole idea of the stars being invisible to the human eye, unaided, is truly amazing. I’m still in shock by all the implications.

  2. Gary Nicholls says:

    The star visibility question is the most important of all, but NASA will not perform the experiments required to meet the conditions of empirical science, obviously something is amiss.
    I think I have the answer, but it relies on statements and transcripts from the Apollo astronauts and past Shuttle and ISS astronauts, which I see Crow777 radio thinks are all fake or non-existent.
    Trying to figure out who is disinfo these days is another problem.
    Your Bioinfo link to Horace Winfield Webster is not for the correct person. The history of the one mentioned in the newspaperis even more interesting, he disappeared from all academic and scientific records and was last heard of disembarking at the port of Victoria BC in the late 1960s.
    His visibility assessment was correct I believe, and based on the correct model, but this knowledge can never be made known, it would destroy all astronomy and astrophysics, and confirm that indeed we are all just the property and playthings of our invisible rulers.

    • Hyrum says:

      Thanks Gary for the comments and note about the error. I have corrected the link in the article. I agree with you. This observation changes the story we’ve been told.

  3. Tom_12 says:

    I came here thanks to Cassiopia website comment.

    I have never been as far as outer space so I have no clue as to whether the stars are visible or not. The atmospheric filter hypothesis sounds reasonable.

    While listening to some music on YT I came across this video. Have a look and if you can comment on it.



  4. hyrum jones says:

    Hi Tom_12. Thanks for your comment and the video link. I could probably listen/watch that while going to sleep and I would have sweet dreams!

    I’ve watched similar videos before. But given NASA’s history of fraud, I don’t trust anything they produce. I put my trust in amateur videos and photos, but even some of them are faux-amateur, so one must be careful.

    There’s a lot of good content in the cluesforum topic about the ISS.

  5. Tom_12 says:

    Hi Hyrum
    I agree completely as to not trusting NASA.

    The forum you reference is one where I once frequented to observe the discussion about the Magical Mars lander and its magical elevator. For me that one strange mission on par with the Moon Lander that couldn’t be flow in Earth training facilities.


Leave a Reply to Hyrum Cancel reply
