What has NASA been doing while all Eyes were on ISON...

Comparing NASA & Amateur Photos of Comet ISON

The video above compares highly detailed amateur photos of Comet Ison to the blurry and edited "cotton ball" images presented to the public by NASA. By all logic, NASA should be able to produce images of equal or better quality, due to seemingly unlimited budget for highly advanced equipment and technology.

Herein lies the question:

Why is NASA so inept? Are they on vacation, embezzlers, slackers, pranksters, Keebler Elves ?

The owner of the video left the following comment on his YouTube page:

I am thinking that "Public Facing" space endeavors are a necessary evil for them. Perhaps they have more important black projects to tend to. I will be doing a NASA flash back video and will use the points you have made. I think its important to learn from the past before we can understand the present. Stay tuned,

Is, or shall I say, was Comet Ison a diversion and/or distraction for the masses. Why promote ISON as the "Comet of the Century" when NASA basically declared it a confused and wimpy, dirty snowball expected to disintegrate before perihelion. Something tells me there's much more to this than we know...


Is NASA preoccupied with something more important or way cooler taking place in the heavens at the moment?

There is allot of questions regarding ISON, and not just why NASA is not able to produce pictures off the same quality as & Amateur, or should i say release them.

Though I think your questions will fall on deaf ears here but we shall see.
Most off us rely on outher people (TPTB) to tell us what might be happening but are unable to challenge what we are told as we dont have the means to check it out for ourselves, so there lies a problem right from the start.

One thing is for sure, time will tell and I always try keep an open mind and examine any information put forward by anyone and then form my own conclusions.

Your video for easier viewing for thoughs who wish it.


The guy in the video shares what I and many others are thinking i believe.

reply to post by hurdygurdy


As far as photo's I know they could provide clear pictures of the moon and mars that show the smallest grain, but we who pay for it all are not allowed to see such things.

Clearly there is an agenda. Something the public is not a part of.

I get the guy's point alright, I watched the NASA site at the same time, and it was like watching paint dry. There was nothing-Zilch. Either they were pissed, or trying to take the piss out of us. Begs the question, what was the rest of NASA looking at?

reply to post by TheDon


Interesting that photos from INSIDE the earths atmosphere can be better or equal to those we are shown recorded from out in space.

Char-Lee
reply to post by hurdygurdy

 

As far as photo's I know they could provide clear pictures of the moon and mars that show the smallest grain, but we who pay for it all are not allowed to see such things.

I completely agree with that. They've sent up so many craft now with ever increasing abilities to scan the various planets in the minutest detail, and all WE are allowed to see is low resolution pics. Its 2013 and we ought by now have live public feeds of all those rovers that are running about, but all we get is tiny cleaned up snippets.

Makes you wonder with all that money up there why we dont have allot better quality photos.



As the saying goes "A picture is worth a thousand words"

Peace

NASA has always been inept IMO. I am one of those on the side of the fence that they faked the moon landing.

NASA will go bust as soon as private space exploration attempts to go to the moon(even unmanned exploration will quickly reveal radiation issues). Everything they release is below quality because they are a government bureaucracy that has no incentive to be anything but inept.

hurdygurdy
due to seemingly unlimited budget for highly advanced equipment and technology.

It's one of the funniest things I've read in a while. The Army gets the seemingly unlimited budget; NASA just get the bread crumbs off the table.

Those Hubble pictures of ISON were pretty good. At the time they were taken, amateur photos showed ISON as very small. Why the Hubble didn't take pictures when ISON flared up and produced a beautiful tail, I'm not sure, but it might be due to ISON getting too close to the Sun; Hubble is not allowed to be pointed to within a certain distance to the Sun in case it damages sensitive instruments.

Besides, NASA's main job is to do science, not to take pretty pictures for the public.

reply to post by TheDon


What do you expect mate, NASA decided to build a rover to wander around a crater on Mars costing $3.5 Billion...and apparently decided to equip the most expensive Matian rover in the history of Humanity with....2 megapixel CCDs.

Yep...2 meg imaging chips...on a $3.5 Billion mission.

And the reason for equipping the thing with such a pathetic, whimpy, little gnat of a CCD series given by one of the NASA imaging team?

Get this; Turns out 'they are used to working with the 2mp CCDs...that's it.

Oh yes...something is most definitely being concealed. On another planet that can only mean one or two things, and they both mean tptb don't want us to know.

It's an absolute bloody disgrace.

Char-Lee
reply to post by hurdygurdy

 

As far as photo's I know they could provide clear pictures of the moon and mars that show the smallest grain, but we who pay for it all are not allowed to see such things.

Clearly there is an agenda. Something the public is not a part of.

THEY do or are you looking only at conspiracy sites!!!

TheDon
Makes you wonder with all that money up there why we dont have allot better quality photos.

As the saying goes "A picture is worth a thousand words"

Peace

edit on 8/12/2013 by TheDon because: (no reason given)

Posts like is just prove how little some members understand when it comes to digital imaging!!!

VoidHawk

Char-Lee
reply to post by hurdygurdy

 

As far as photo's I know they could provide clear pictures of the moon and mars that show the smallest grain, but we who pay for it all are not allowed to see such things.

I completely agree with that. They've sent up so many craft now with ever increasing abilities to scan the various planets in the minutest detail, and all WE are allowed to see is low resolution pics. Its 2013 and we ought by now have live public feeds of all those rovers that are running about, but all we get is tiny cleaned up snippets.

PLEASE explain to members your understanding of low res pictures ?

That picture should tell everyone in the world they are lied to. In the US, funded by tax payers money, can't see how they're allowed to continue operations.

MysterX
reply to post by TheDon

 

What do you expect mate, NASA decided to build a rover to wander around a crater on Mars costing $3.5 Billion...and apparently decided to equip the most expensive Matian rover in the history of Humanity with....2 megapixel CCDs.

Yep...2 meg imaging chips...on a $3.5 Billion mission.

And the reason for equipping the thing with such a pathetic, whimpy, little gnat of a CCD series given by one of the NASA imaging team?

Get this; Turns out 'they are used to working with the 2mp CCDs...that's it.

Oh yes...something is most definitely being concealed. On another planet that can only mean one or two things, and they both mean tptb don't want us to know.

It's an absolute bloody disgrace.

edit on 8-12-2013 by MysterX because: (no reason given)

The ONLY absolute bloody disgrace is YOUR knowledge on the subject, the lander was designed LONG before its launch, they don't have broadband from Mars, also with LOW light levels PIXEL SIZE is more important than pixel amount, do some research!!!!

Unity_99
That picture should tell everyone in the world they are lied to. In the US, funded by tax payers money, can't see how they're allowed to continue operations.

WELL Unity_99 YOU of all people should be able to do better than NASA if your claims were true but you never seem to want to prove them do you!!!

wmd_2008
PLEASE explain to members your understanding of low res pictures ?

What, you think its a secret? or that I dont understand that pictures are made up of databytes that get converted into pixels?
When they send the image data back to earth its sent in layers, over time when they have all the image data they can assemble a hi res picture made up of many pixels. What we are shown looks much more like the its just the first scan.

If I'm wrong please correct me.

wmd_2008

MysterX
reply to post by TheDon

 

What do you expect mate, NASA decided to build a rover to wander around a crater on Mars costing $3.5 Billion...and apparently decided to equip the most expensive Matian rover in the history of Humanity with....2 megapixel CCDs.

Yep...2 meg imaging chips...on a $3.5 Billion mission.

And the reason for equipping the thing with such a pathetic, whimpy, little gnat of a CCD series given by one of the NASA imaging team?

Get this; Turns out 'they are used to working with the 2mp CCDs...that's it.

Oh yes...something is most definitely being concealed. On another planet that can only mean one or two things, and they both mean tptb don't want us to know.

It's an absolute bloody disgrace.

edit on 8-12-2013 by MysterX because: (no reason given)

The ONLY absolute bloody disgrace is YOUR knowledge on the subject, the lander was designed LONG before its launch, they don't have broadband from Mars, also with LOW light levels PIXEL SIZE is more important than pixel amount, do some research!!!!

the lander was designed LONG before its launch

Irrelevant when it concerns the camera's, in fact each year camera's get smaller yet more powerful so it would have been a minor adjustment to fit the latest tech.

they don't have broadband from Mars

Quite right, in fact I'd expect them to have a dedicated device running in the hundreds of ghz range, far faster than the average broadband.

with LOW light levels PIXEL SIZE is more important than pixel amount

One of the really great things about ccd's is that lack of light can be compensated for by voltage adjustment.

reply to post by wildespace

It's one of the funniest things I've read in a while. The Army gets the seemingly unlimited budget; NASA just get the bread crumbs off the table.

You mean the publicly known part of the budget I assume

VoidHawk

wmd_2008

MysterX
reply to post by TheDon

 

What do you expect mate, NASA decided to build a rover to wander around a crater on Mars costing $3.5 Billion...and apparently decided to equip the most expensive Matian rover in the history of Humanity with....2 megapixel CCDs.

Yep...2 meg imaging chips...on a $3.5 Billion mission.

And the reason for equipping the thing with such a pathetic, whimpy, little gnat of a CCD series given by one of the NASA imaging team?

Get this; Turns out 'they are used to working with the 2mp CCDs...that's it.

Oh yes...something is most definitely being concealed. On another planet that can only mean one or two things, and they both mean tptb don't want us to know.

It's an absolute bloody disgrace.

edit on 8-12-2013 by MysterX because: (no reason given)

The ONLY absolute bloody disgrace is YOUR knowledge on the subject, the lander was designed LONG before its launch, they don't have broadband from Mars, also with LOW light levels PIXEL SIZE is more important than pixel amount, do some research!!!!

the lander was designed LONG before its launch

Irrelevant when it concerns the camera's, in fact each year camera's get smaller yet more powerful so it would have been a minor adjustment to fit the latest tech.

they don't have broadband from Mars

Quite right, in fact I'd expect them to have a dedicated device running in the hundreds of ghz range, far faster than the average broadband.

with LOW light levels PIXEL SIZE is more important than pixel amount

One of the really great things about ccd's is that lack of light can be compensated for by voltage adjustment.

Camera design was due to bandwidth restrictions size etc these things take years of planning etc your comments show why you are not in that line of work, and as stated was well known by the team and reliable , all ccd have a base level increasing the voltage increases the NOISE what you don't want in pictures, PIXEL size is very important in low light also just as important are the optics attached.