Alleged NASA -Affiliated Astronomer Deciphers 'Intelligence' Signal From Nearby Stars

Originally posted by LadySambuca

Also I appreciate you proving the authenticity of the photo I supplied. If you are honest about it, which I believe you will be, that should be prove what you need and then your chase for a woman can start !!

I will be honest about it, even if it throws egg in my face, but I have grave doubts that will be the case. Without doubt the face in the photo is that of Judy. All data points so far also match with James.

A stickler problem is that all the internal data has been stripped, and that is generally an indicator of subterfuge, since the data in question relates only to the image itself, and verification of it, not the subjects IN the image. There is no personally identifiable information in such data, only timestamps, camera settings (or scan settings) and software used to process it. When that is stripped away, it usually means that something is being hidden from analysis. When THAT is the case, questions arise, which demand answers to move forward.

War sehr gut mit dir aller zu plaudern, aber jetzt geh ich schlafen! Also gute nacht, over and out and Chuss!

Nice chatting with you as well. Sleep tight. We'll continue tomorrow.

[edit on 2010/8/21 by nenothtu]

reply to post by Drunkenparrot


G'day Drunkenparrot.

Yup - it's a tangled web we weave ... etc etc

But I guess any attention, even bad attention, is a fix for one who craves it. Quite sad.

reply to post by LadySambuca


look on my gallery, on there you will find pictures of james van greunen and judith helena van greunens passports, they have matching signatures, then look at the pictures of james van greunen with janice falcus, then look at the birth certificate of one of janice and james children with james van greunens signature on also matching the passports, then look at the name change certificate of janice falcus to janice fugea, they all prove that james van greunen and janice falcus were married and had children,

then read this: Re: Watergate Hall and Skateboarding in Chase Parkby judy_fältskog (Member 10232989) on 23-Oct-2008Hi Janice! Hope you are the Janice that I used to know cause I am looking for Janice Falcus who used to be married to James. The Janice I know also has two girls called (removed) . If you are that person, please contact me urgently in Germay under the number (removed). I hope to hear from you soon! Judy.
from this link:www.knowhere.co.uk...

now try to explain this?. if judy faltskog was never james van greunen and is from sweden then how in the hell does she know janice falcus,(fugea) and why try and re establish contact??.

also look at the traceable proveable documents from the german courts proving that judy was once james and explain ?.

DO NOT AVOID THIS LIKE YOU DID EVERYTHING ELSE, EXPLAIN THIS FACTUAL PROVABLE TRACEABLE EVIDENCE

thanks

rich

[edit on 21-8-2010 by RICH-ENGLAND]

hi all, an email from our helpful anonymous lady:

Hi Rich, Well what can one say, have followed the thread all night, just off for a whiskey or should it be a sambucca LOL, It has been soo amusing, as for the picture , wheres this blond ravishing barely dressed women with the blond blond Farrah Fawcett hair do , that can captivate every thing in its path  mmm SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPEC SAVERS !! That is meant to be a 30ish year old women, 16 years ago  1993/1994 ish (Hard life I would say )(Along with a lot of personal knowledge ) Gosh how busy was James/Judy  Doctorate, sex change , mother of many , man magnate , dating a chap from the DHSS (Living in wallsend), and working for NASSA to name just a bit .Rich I totally refute that our LADY SAMBUCCA is the only one that has seen Judy , I and my sister have seen both Judy and James.Rich post as isRegards

PS  I would have ran off if that was my husband !! Favours EH

thanks

rich

This just in:

Steroid Scandal in Local High School Girls Basketball Team

Philadelphia, PA

A scandal has broken out alleging the use of steroids to enhance the performance of athletes in a local high school. The Girl's Basketball Team has been sidelined pending further investigation into the allegations. If proven true, it has been speculated that all team members involved will be used to replace non-performing members of the Boy's Football team early this fall. As the attached photo confirms, the steroid use has had some unfortunate side effects on the girls.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/155a200f41d3.jpg[/atsimg]

Film at 11.

=================================================

In all honesty, this picture is only used as an illustration of how easily this sort of Photo-shoppery can be accomplished, especially if one deletes all the documentary information in the file. These alterations to the original photo were accomplished in around 15 minutes by two people total, myself and Nettie's Hermit, almost exactly directly opposite one another on the world.

That 15 minutes includes travel time for sending the files.

Had we used ANOTHER 15 minutes worth of care, the end product would have been even MORE convincing as to matching.

Considering the admission that the metadata was deliberately removed from the original photo, and the fact that it was saved and resaved more than necessary, especially considering that it was alleged to have been scanned only today, minutes before posting, AND the fact that clear signs of air brushing and blurring were present in it, especially in the area of the voicebox and upper cleavage, I have to consider it a photoshop job unless and until I can obtain higher resolution scans of the original, with the metadata intact, and substantially fewer jpeg artifacts.

That's pretty much the only thing that will change my mind.

On the positive side, I gave Dr Judy a boob job, augmentation that increased bust size to an actual, as opposed to claimed, DD cup. That's gratis, no charge.

Disclaimer: The above photo is a parody. It's in no way real, nor is it claimed to be an actual representation of any person or persons, living or dead. No homeless persons were harmed (nor were any given actual breast augmentation) in the production of this photograph.

reply to post by nenothtu




You make a lovely couple, nenothtu.

And I'm jealous of your ... attributes. Can I borrow that enhancement software?

Great post Rich,

and kindly thank the lady for offering her insight. What a day on the Chile telescope adventure. Judy has had so many births that I gave up on hospital birth certificates and turned to the Guiness Book of World Records for my source of information.

OMG, I just saw that picture and choked. When I get my breath back, I'm suing>

[edit on 21-8-2010 by dcmb1490]

reply to post by Netties Hermit


I'm thinking of making a blinking GIF out of the two pictures... before and after... I probably shouldn't post it here, though, as the 'augmentations' make it look like they're going to pop the screen right out of your monitor when they jump out...

On the other hand, it serves pretty well to show just how much the photo changes and can BE changed, while still maintaining an appearance of reality.

A terrible, horrid, frighteningly maddening appearance of normality...

reply to post by LadySambuca


Judy, what's up man? It really isn't in anyone's interest how you exercise with a shampoo bottle or whatever else it is that you do in that respect.
What does High Lord Wayne think of your actions here? Probably be a good idea for you to go ahead and assume the punishment position to receive the H/L's forgiveness.
So seriously, what's been happening with you man? We've been concerned for you considering the reports of New World Order forces trying to silence you and your work. Are you still on the run? I don't see how you do it, you are more man and woman than I Sir.
Were you the first shall we say, convert, to Waynism?
Man, I'm a little suspect on how long you and High Acolyte Wayne have been good buds. Were you two pals when you were younger?

[edit on 22-8-2010 by Marrr]

Originally posted by Marrr
Man, I'm a little suspect on how long you and High Acolyte Wayne have been good buds. Were you two pals when you were younger? Also, did you ever date Wayne? I'm not accusing you of being gay, just looking for a little direction here as I am confused.

I've been confused for the past three months.
Really.
Still can't work it out.

nenothtu and Marrr,

You guys got me laughing so hard that I lost my place in the Guiness Book of World records and it was just getting interesting reading about litters.

Not surprisingly, Never received an e-mail from Nitromaria regarding Dr. Judy.

Not holding my breath

can anyone make out those books behind Judy's shoulder in that pic for dating purposes?


[edit on 21-8-2010 by dcmb1490]

Agreed nenothu. Interesting point of view from the new member a page or so back.
Postponed OP here and will redo later.

[edit on 21-8-2010 by Marrr]

Just to clarify:

I have no PROOF that the original photo was altered, but there is EVIDENCE that it was tampered with. I'm still open to being convinced that I'm wrong, by the means I stated above: A higher quality, higher resolution copy of the original scan, with the metadata intact, for analysis.

If I'm shown to be wrong in my opinion, I hereby publicly state that I will admit it right here in this thread, right in front of God and everybody.

LadySambuca, in her capacity as an IT tech, should be well aware that intact metadata will in no way convey personally identifiable information, it only gives insight into the intactness and revision history of the original file, not the subjects of the photo or the sender of it. Therefore, the excuse that it was to "protect privacy" does not hold water.

Removal of the metadata DOES, however, conceal any evidence of possible tampering that it may have contained. It could be that the 'blurring' and 'airbrushing' indicators are in error. The metadata would likely reveal that.

So then, the case isn't closed, and my mind is still open to the possibility that I am wrong in my assessment. Prove me wrong, ladySambuca, and I'll freely admit it. Until then, I stand by my opinion.

By the way, at the claimed resolution of 72 DPI, the original photo would be 6.3x8.6 inches, a rather odd size (that's 16.0x21.7 cm for metric users). Even though the size is odd, at that size, it could deliver spectacular detail at, say a 250 DPI scan. One has to wonder WHY it was deliberately degraded quality-wise.

What would there be in the image itself to conceal?

BTW, MY 'revision' of it , as a parody, is expressly admitted to have been tampered with. I doubt that Judy really has a beard.

Any more.

[edit on 2010/8/21 by nenothtu]

Originally posted by dcmb1490

can anyone make out those books behind Judy's shoulder in that pic for dating purposes?

Nope. I sharpened and enlarged and negativized and everything else I could think of, but due to the poor quality of what was delivered, the titles can't be made out. It's like trying to read a newspaper through an ice cube, while it's melting.

You can't get more info out of a picture than it contained to begin with, and due to the lo-res scan and subsequent manipulations and re-saves, there just isn't that much there to pull out of it.

reply to post by nenothtu


Thanks for trying. Its hard for me to believe the age she gives this picture. It has a newer look and feel to it than the age she gave. Was hoping there was some tell-tell visual item item there somewhere that could be dated. guess not.

Originally posted by dcmb1490
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Thanks for trying. Its hard for me to believe the age she gives this picture. It has a newer look and feel to it than the age she gave. Was hoping there was some tell-tell visual item item there somewhere that could be dated. guess not.

look closely at the wrinkles around Judy's eyes, and compare their state to, say, the allegedly more recent "NASA hat" photo. If this picture was taken at least 16 years ago, one would think Judy must be pushing near to 60 by now, rather than her reported age of 40-ish.

Edit to add: There appears to be blurring present at the corners of her eyes, so crows feet are hard to determine. Concentrate on the wrinkles UNDER her eyes. Those COULD be some of those horrendous jpeg artifacts I mentioned, but we'll never know unless we get a higher quality scan. Meanwhile, they APPEAR to match up pretty well with the NASA Hat picture.

[edit on 2010/8/22 by nenothtu]

I had a hard time locating Judy's adam's apple. Also, the ever prominant bottom lip full of skoal is missing in that picture too. Judy always had a chew in, always.

reply to post by Marrr


The adam's apple appears to have been blurred, and a line along the right side of it (our right, not hers) at the 'edge' of her neck appears air brushed. Do a 2x enlargement, and examine that area. You'll see a vertical line of a dark tan color there without much color variation and with relatively sharp edges that looks airbrushed (that is to our left of the necklace shadow). Also, there are fewer jpeg artifacts there and in the area which appears to have been blurred.

I think the thinner lips may just be an optical illusion, since her head is at a higher incident angle than in most of the other photos, and the lighting is somewhat different.

[edit on 2010/8/22 by nenothtu]

I didn't want to but I went and took a closer look at that pic and your right, she has either aged or that is her mother and her eyebrows looked painted on. I just figured it was all them childbirths had finally taken their toll. At least all of those poor babies have full bottles with rubber nipples and won't go hungry.

The blog radio picture she even looked older than this one.

But she won't listen to reason and give up those UV scopes and I'm afraid she may wither away to nothing and leave those poor children alone in the shoe.

Oh well, so much for trying.

Can you blokes cool it with the close examination of crows feet and wrinkles.
Us girls are paranoid of our looks enough without you guys scrutinizing every line, hey Judy


LadySambuca - when/if you come back on, would you mind telling me how you came across this website and thread - seeing as it was such a long time ago that you and your husband parted ways. And have you read most of the thread and evidence?