Stars of the Hill Map

a reply to: tanka418

What data have I thrown out? Be specific.

Everything in "The Interrupted Journey" and all of Betty Hill's subsequent statements.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: tanka418

What data have I thrown out? Be specific.

Everything in "The Interrupted Journey" and all of Betty Hill's subsequent statements.

He's very biased in what he decided fits meaning as long as it fits what he believes. He's willing to except it's trade routes as she stated. However her statement of being stars and planets I'd just inconvenient so of course rejects it. Not to mention since then it's been shown that hypnotism is not a good way to recall incidents because being human we will add information as it became available meaning the story changes. Remember back then they believed it was a curate recall of an incident. However he wants it both ways saying well she's right here but wrong here.

originally posted by: DJW001
If I can show you how easy it is to project that "template" on to a star field, will you admit that your interpretation holds no merit?

What can One say to a person that chooses to ignore all logic and common sense...Son...willful ignorance is not becoming, and yall just like to display that fact to the world.

Tell ya what...I'll look at your projection of the template onto stars, but, don't hole your breath on being successful. Probability is not on your side.

And, just for your information; it is not "my" template, it is Betty's...

One can only wonder what happened to you as a child that made you so afraid of new things, afraid of data that evidences such things as ET. However, it is something that you own, not the rest of the world. so, if you could, please try to not project your failings on me...

And, if you could possibly manage it...try to critique my work in a rational, scientific, logical manner in the future...it will make you look better to the world.

originally posted by: tanka418
...afraid of data that evidences such things as ET.

If you have such data, then you better go collect your Nobel, as it would be the single greatest discovery in mankind's history.

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: tanka418

What data have I thrown out? Be specific.

Everything in "The Interrupted Journey" and all of Betty Hill's subsequent statements.

He's very biased in what he decided fits meaning as long as it fits what he believes. He's willing to except it's trade routes as she stated. However her statement of being stars and planets I'd just inconvenient so of course rejects it. Not to mention since then it's been shown that hypnotism is not a good way to recall incidents because being human we will add information as it became available meaning the story changes. Remember back then they believed it was a curate recall of an incident. However he wants it both ways saying well she's right here but wrong here.

Another who needs to actually pay attention...

I rejected Bettys "stars and planets", as I said, because it isn't reasonable for ET to include both stars and planets in the same view. I already explained that, you are choosing to ignore logic and common sense...and that is on you...not me.

What you and DJW are refusing to do is separate the data from the story. You are all "hung-up" on Betty's story and the hypnosis that you can't see the realities here. You fail to understand a fundamental property here; that the story does not, and can not affect the probabilities of the 25 star match.

Of course is sort of "special" that yall think that you can demand that it is random when the probabilities are so astronomically against you.

So...you go after every thing you can find in this hypothesis, except for the actual data, and fail utterly to make any point so ever, and when yall fail, as you ultimately have, you try to blame it all on my lack of science and understanding...

Anyway, I would prefer for you to either become civil, or leave; so that this can return to a discussion that leads to discovery and truth...

A Reminder......

Discuss the topic and not each other....You are responsible for your own posts.

Go After the Ball, Not the Player!


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

originally posted by: tanka418
I rejected Bettys "stars and planets", as I said, because it isn't reasonable for ET to include both stars and planets in the same view.

Here we go again with the wild presumptions. Presuming to know anything of an alien species is a prime example of just how far from scientific and unbiased your 'research' is. Presuming to know what an alien species would find "reasonable" is laughable.

I already explained that,...

What qualifications do you possess to make you the ultimate authority on anything?

...you are choosing to ignore logic and common sense...

How about we stop drawing conclusions based on your skewed perception of what constitutes 'logic' and 'common sense', and instead try using the scientific method.

What you and DJW are refusing to do is separate the data from the story.

Only a fool would separate the two. The "data" is part of the story; Without the story, there is no data. Every respectable scholar or researcher knows that data without context is meaningless.

You are all "hung-up" on Betty's story and the hypnosis that you can't see the realities here.

Nobody cares about your preconceived notions of reality.

You fail to understand a fundamental property here; that the story does not, and can not affect the probabilities of the 25 star match.

What match would that be?

Of course is sort of "special" that yall think that you can demand that it is random when the probabilities are so astronomically against you.

I haven't seen anyone demand anything, but regardless, given everything presented thus far, there's nothing to indicate anything other than randomness.

So...you go after every thing you can find in this hypothesis, except for the actual data, and fail utterly to make any point so ever, and when yall fail, as you ultimately have, you try to blame it all on my lack of science and understanding...

With good reason, given the huge lack of apparent knowledge of proper scientific procedure.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistanceHere we go again with the wild presumptions. Presuming to know anything of an alien species is a prime example of just how far from scientific and unbiased your 'research' is. Presuming to know what an alien species would find "reasonable" is laughable.

Have you ever heard of Hermes Trismegistus, and his "Emerald Tablet"? If not you might want to learn something new...Anyway, it is good ole Hermes that originally said something to the effect of "As above, so below..." Again yo may want to listen to the voice of wisdom...

There are many thing we can know about Extraterrestrials (I prefer to avoid the improper word; "aliens"), from simply observing nature around you. For instance, my Wolf is as different from me as any "Gray" would be, yet, he does many thing just like I do. He has need, wants, desires that are not unlike the same things in me...or you.

Am I equally as wrong thinking that I have some small understanding of him? You see, I'm not "presuming" anything about ET, I actually "know" what some of his psychology is about, I know what some of his behaviors are, I know what some of his motivations are. You do as well, except you have convinced yourself that you can't...so you presume that no body can...you are wrong, and a serious self-reflection will show you that.

What qualifications do you possess to make you the ultimate authority on anything?

Actually I was hoping to avoid that, since there is no way for you to verify anything;
However...MSEE. MSCS, BPh, BMa and 40+ years of experience developing scientific, analytical, business intelligence, and other data acquisition, management, and analytical software and systems. Today I'm considered a senior architect. How about you?

How about we stop drawing conclusions based on your skewed perception of what constitutes 'logic' and 'common sense', and instead try using the scientific method.

Yes Please, let us use science!!!

Only a fool would separate the two. The "data" is part of the story; Without the story, there is no data.

And here is a core issue. You appear to be rather confused on the dependencies at play here. You seem to think that the data is dependent on the story; it isn't, and, the story isn't dependent on the data. However...while the story can not affect the data, the data can and will affect the story.

I should also point out that the data does not derive its context from the story...it is fully capable of standing alone...

What match would that be?

How quickly you have forgotten...or have you, it might seem that you are simply ignoring reality and trying to pretend that there is no match....like DJW001 does...However, just to remind you...the 25 star match this Hypothesis started with...you know the one I've been detailing in this thread and my paper.

I haven't seen anyone demand anything,

No??!!!??
That's a bit disingenuous...How about the insistence by DJW001 that this is just a random event? How about your own words that try to say the same?

Your refusal to accept the probabilities involved...just how do you explain these events being "random" even though the probability is so small that you have not and will not encounter anything of that magnitude again in your life?

So...you go after every thing you can find in this hypothesis, except for the actual data, and fail utterly to make any point so ever, and when yall fail, as you ultimately have, you try to blame it all on my lack of science and understanding...

With good reason, given the huge lack of apparent knowledge of proper scientific procedure.

You are truly funny...I'm the only one who has made any serious attempt to bring science into this, and as I said...you try to blame for all the errors here...you need to take a serious look at the whole thing...maybe find some who is a little more expert than you to help ya out.

Now then; if you'd like to discuss this like a rational person, I'd really like that...After all that is the reason for the thread; to discuss and hopefully make some real sense out of it.

By the way; IF you can't do that in a reasonable manner, You are un-invited from my thread.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: tanka418

What data have I thrown out? Be specific.

Everything in "The Interrupted Journey" and all of Betty Hill's subsequent statements.

As I have repeatedly tried to stress; The "Story", per se' is not considered a part of this analysis.

The data is not dependent on the story, so the story is, for the most part, irrelevant.

originally posted by: tanka418
Have you ever heard of Hermes Trismegistus, and his "Emerald Tablet"?

Good lord...That's a work of fiction. Written (and plagiarized in large part) in the 1930s. You're not helping your case at all.

As I have repeatedly tried to stress; The "Story", per se' is not considered a part of this analysis.

And as myself and others have repeatedly tried to stress, without the "story", there is nothing else. This is one (of many) reason why your analysis is meaningless. Data without context is worthless.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: tanka418
Have you ever heard of Hermes Trismegistus, and his "Emerald Tablet"?

Good lord...That's a work of fiction. Written (and plagiarized in large part) in the 1930s. You're not helping your case at all.

As I have repeatedly tried to stress; The "Story", per se' is not considered a part of this analysis.

And as myself and others have repeatedly tried to stress, without the "story", there is nothing else. This is one (of many) reason why your analysis is meaningless. Data without context is worthless.

Sigh...you know absolutely nothing of Hermes...

And, as I said; the map data does not derive its context from the story...it stands alone...

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: tanka418
Have you ever heard of Hermes Trismegistus, and his "Emerald Tablet"?

Good lord...That's a work of fiction. Written (and plagiarized in large part) in the 1930s. You're not helping your case at all.

As I have repeatedly tried to stress; The "Story", per se' is not considered a part of this analysis.

And as myself and others have repeatedly tried to stress, without the "story", there is nothing else. This is one (of many) reason why your analysis is meaningless. Data without context is worthless.

Sigh...you know absolutely nothing of Hermes...

And, as I said; the map data does not derive its context from the story...it stands alone...

I know what you said, and I also know that you're wrong, as several people have pointed out. Obviously you're not going to admit that you might be (and are) wrong, so I guess I'm going to go back to just watching this train wreck of a thread. Enjoy living in your fantasy!

a reply to: tanka418

OK sorry you don't get to choose who responds because you don't like what they say. Now let me give you some background. I have a PHD In both chemistry and physics and have a doctorate in Microbiology and Molecular Genetics. So let's just say I understand the scientific process. So let's see if I can't enlighten you on how it works.

First rule you can never alter the data it must be evaluated as a whole and you can't use what you determine to be logic to alter said data. In other words like on physics logic tells us one thing the data gives us quite a different story. If scientists did what you do making assumptions about what's logical and what's not most of what we have learned in physics and the breakthroughs we made would be impossible.

Rule two all data received must be evaluated and checked this can be done in two ways. You can either evaluate the source checking for inconsistencies and blatant errors or you can perform the experiment changing variables and being able to predict the results reliably.in your case second option is out so we are stuck evaluating the source of the data.

Third rule you can't pick and choose what data to use in other words I can't say we'll it's close enough here so it looks like a match. Either it matches or it doesn't problem with what you are doing is we can never confirm a match because the data your starting with is missing important information. For example distances the less data you have the easier it is to falsify the data to an outcome you choose.

And now the fourth rule never ever ever make assumptions.you have to work very hard in science to make sure the researcher themselves is not influencing the data. In this case I think most people reading this thread has figured out your doing exactly that.

So what this amounts to is your playing with dots on paper that you assume to mave found a match for but you have no way to prove it to be true. And to make matters worse you have literally falsified your results with something called confirmation bias. Now if your bored and you like doing this have fun but sadly it proves nothing it doesn't show anything about aliens. By the way we have already discovered alien lifeforms I did a thesis on it. So you can't rant and rave everyone's being unfair but as far as I can see they are just pointing out the obvious.

Just a quick note on why the map does not contain planets, per se'

If you were a truly space faring society and you were going to convey an overview of your trading and exploration territories you would be rather compelled to use stars as contrasted to planets. The reason is that within each star system there would probably be one, maybe two planets capable of supporting life, Human like life, without a heavy investment in technology and life support.

You might use an image not unlike this to convey an overview...


And you're trying to tell me this isn't substantially similar to Betty Hill's original?



This image contains all of the important data to construct instructional content, aid in mission planning, and execute queries against a database.

And that boys and girls is the logic involved. It is a matter of communicating data to the user for interaction, and not some "alien" concept. Really rather mundane...

IF my opponents will allow me some small amount of time; I'll demonstrate this concept to you ...using the image above.

a reply to: tanka418
*sigh*
Once again, you're basing your conclusion on what you think would be the 'logical' behavior of an extraterrestrial species, and nothing more. You're making up results before even looking at the data. This is like conversing with a brick wall.

You seem to be passionate about your research, but as long as you keep using flawed methodologies and adding bias into your results (and refusing to acknowledge or admit such, and fix it), your work will all be meaningless. Do it the correct way, and who knows, you may make a great discovery some day.

a reply to: tanka418

Problem is there is no practical purpose for this map. It is completely useless for any sort of trade related information as well. If an alien needed a map such as this there would be two you would have to cross refrence one based off the galactic plane the other based on known points of refrence which means distances to objects this would be more if a data set saying this star to this star is this distance. Not something a pull down chart would have like betty saw. Obviously this would be done by computers in most cases and plotting a course would be plotting thr destination and allowing the computer to to calculate motion direction and speed of the object to determine it's new location to coincide with your arrival. Remember an alien space ship can't arrive to where something is now or where it was. It must time it's arrival to where it will be in the future.

By the way we have already discovered alien lifeforms I did a thesis on it.

I would very much like to read this thesis you did, what with your credentials and all. Where can I find it?

It's a bacteria called GFAJ-1 I haven't put that one online but maybe I should then my students can see it as well. I'll have to drag it back out and let you know when I upload it to Vanderbilt server.

originally posted by: dragonridr
It's a bacteria called GFAJ-1 I haven't put that one online but maybe I should then my students can see it as well. I'll have to drag it back out and let you know when I upload it to Vanderbilt server.

Totally off-topic, but I would be interested in reading that as well. I'm (slightly) familiar with some of the research on GFAJ-1, and as I recall there was a good bit of criticism for some of the original findings. That was a few years ago though.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: tanka418
*sigh*
Once again, you're basing your conclusion on what you think would be the 'logical' behavior of an extraterrestrial species, and nothing more. You're making up results before even looking at the data.

No...actually, I'm basing what I think based on very solid computer science.
Perhaps you did not read what I said...try again!