Two months ago we predicted NASA would blind TESS during 3I/ATLAS’s opposition window. NASA just confirmed it. We verified the raw data independently. Here’s the full timeline.

Analysis of Interstellar Object 3I/ATLAS: A Timeline of Independent Findings and Official Confirmations

Over the past two months, extensive forensic analysis has shed light on the data and operational protocols surrounding the interstellar object 3I/ATLAS, which is currently en route for a close approach to Jupiter’s Hill Sphere on March 16. Our independent investigation has revealed a compelling alignment with subsequent official disclosures from NASA, confirming initial hypotheses and raising important questions about data handling and classification practices.

Background and Initial Observations

Since December 18, our team has been closely monitoring and analyzing data related to 3I/ATLAS. This object marks only the third confirmed interstellar visitor passing through our solar system, making detailed study vital for understanding its nature and origin.

In our early assessments, we identified 18 anomalies in the available data that appeared inconsistent with natural celestial phenomena. We postulated that agencies might employ background subtraction techniques—standard procedures designed to obscure or neutralize anomalous signals—during observation and data processing, especially during critical approach windows.

Significant Milestones

• December 18: Published a threat assessment highlighting anomalies that did not conform to typical natural objects. Predicted that institutional data would be processed through background smoothing to mitigate visibility of potential anomalies.

• January 6: Documented a response from the CIA, indicating a classification of the object as a matter of national security, effectively restricting access to detailed information.

• January 30: Observed and reported a blackout period in data collected by the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), coinciding with 3I/ATLAS’s opposition approach. Based on contextual clues, we characterized this as a containment or mitigation protocol—an operational measure likely aimed at controlling sensitive data.

• February 3: Identified a brightness “opposition surge”—a sharp increase in observed luminosity—suggesting solid or metallic surfaces rather than the expected cometary dust. We hypothesized that this brightness anomaly might be linked to the observed data blackout.

• February 12: NASA publicly confirmed the blackout dates, explicitly citing “iterative background subtraction” as the method applied during data processing. This explicit acknowledgment aligns precisely with our earlier prediction, affirming the accuracy of our independent analysis.

• February 14: Noted subsequent undocumented changes to NASA’s fireball database and observed gatekeeping behaviors within scientific publications, which appeared to suppress or obscure anomalous findings related to