Zeeman Crater - NASA editing at it's finest?

Originally posted by Illustronic Or maybe it's just the simple verbiage that a test in the scientific world is really applied demonstration, kind of a linguistic misunderstanding.

Well I said over 900 "applied demonstration"? or boys playing with toys to make a big bang?

I know I'm not very good at explaining the scientific process, because I'm not a scientist,

That's okay Einstein explained it

'"Science is a wonderful thing if one does not have to earn one's living at it."" Albert Einstein

Photoshop has really been with us for quite sometime/quote]

NASA doesn't need photoshop... they have algorithms that can do it for them. But I really don't have time to dig all that up again today. I think its in the old Clementine thread somewhere... from Sandia Labs

reply to post by zorgon

'"Science is a wonderful thing if one does not have to earn one's living at it."" Albert Einstein

Awesome, if one 'really' got the message.
Till then, the monetary system (fiat one tobooT?) will have to do.

Surprised I've never heard that one.

I believe you would be more e/affective in the documentary film business.
You have a keen interest in certain matters as well as the desire, ability and attention to 'detail' that is necessary for one to understand the topic at hand. It would be a like a breathe of fresh aire to many.
If yourself and proto came together, well, I'd watch it.
U?

So phage as always is banging the official response drum, never does he seem to come up with his own opinion, absolute genius with google i must say,

Can someone explain if this is a stretching anomaly why its been messed up more than once in the same spot?

Originally posted by BRITWARRIOR
So phage as always is banging the official response drum, never does he seem to come up with his own opinion, absolute genius with google i must say,

Can someone explain if this is a stretching anomaly why its been messed up more than once in the same spot?

I imagine, like many professional debunkers, he takes his information from websites like this, almost in a copy & paste sort of fashion:
Skeptic Wiki

I can never really gather mentally why some people would be SO obsessed with not thinking out of the box at all regarding anything remotely unknown or unexpected to our species.

If skeptics had their day, we still would be on a flat earth, in a solar system where the sun and planets orbit Earth.

I can get being skeptical on certain issues--and we do have some loony toons around here. But Phage literally spends hours upon hours scouring the boards to debunk ANYTHING he/she runs into. What's the point of being on a discussion board if your mind is already made up? And how could you ALWAYS accept the official explanation?

I would have loved to see some of these skeptics when they first ran with the "Flying Saucer" headline before the government pulled it back during Roswell. It would have been like brain overload for people like Phage--the government telling me their are aliens? SINGULARITY!

Originally posted by zcflint05

Originally posted by BRITWARRIOR

If skeptics had their day, we still would be on a flat earth, in a solar system where the sun and planets orbit Earth.

Actually that is a very general statement. I could say that skeptics were necessary to disprove the believers claims of unfounded things such as God.

. Without skeptics, we still would believe in a flat earth.

edit on 14-11-2010 by Somehumanbeing because: (no reason given)

reply to post by Somehumanbeing


In a sense, skeptics and true believers balance each other out.

But I generally think it's bad for one to be a skeptic on EVERYTHING remotely unknown. And in many ways, those individuals in the dark ages who made claims that God didn't exist are more in line with individuals that believe in UFOs today than the skeptics of extraterrestrial activity. UFO believers are subjected to serial debunkers (as we've seen here), derision, being the "joke story" on the media (remember the military personnel with the nuclear UFO story?), and massive cover ups throughout the government to ridicule people who have had legitimate experiences into silence.

Just as people who didn't believe in God in the dark ages (and in some countries, even today) were branded as "heretics", they were deemed crazy, and persecuted and derided for their beliefs. Just something to think about.

reply to post by zcflint05


I agree that the contributions from the 'skeptics' is very important if we were all just nodding our heads in agreement this site could get pretty dull don't you think? For me the skeptics drive the debate and if they successfully argue that something which looked potentially earth shattering is nothing at all then great - energies and intelligence can be better placed elsewhere. It can be frustrating that people look to certain individuals for "the answer" and then move on without further consideration in most cases I like to make up my own mind across a number of sources if it warrants - the biggy thread on the plane v missile thread is a good example of this for me as well as this one of course.

Anyhoo I appreciate the efforts by Zorgon for this thread and hope to learn more as it develops (hopefully)

Cheers!

bB

reply to post by badBERTHA


I don't have a problem with occasionaly skeptics, what I do have an issue with is debunking EVERYTHING that you come across, and not having a remotely open mind. The mentioned behavior actually has a chilling effect for discourse on this site; namely because someone like Phage comes into a thread, throws down a few quotes, acts like he's 100% sure he's right, and most of the newbies will just give up or give in. What Phage is basically asking us to do (since he's been debunking since the start) is to NOT question authority or suggest that any idea that is out of the box is automatically wrong--on face.

There is a wide gulf between open minded individuals who come down on the official explanation, but are open minded enough to not adhere to debunking EVERYTHING, and individuals like Phage who come onto ATS and roam from thread to thread debunking. I mean, at the point where you debunk everything, why are you on ATS? Phage does not believe in ANYTHING that draws typical members to this site; 9/11 truth, UFOs, Lunar/Mars anomalies, et al. Phage seems to have only one objective: debunk, and never give the benefit of the doubt.

edit: thank you for the rational and calm response. I fully believe that dialouges like this will make the site better in every sense

Originally posted by zorgon
From Clementine color data set

AutOmatIc asked about "true colour" images, that's why I didn't talked about those.

Originally posted by zcflint05
reply to post by Phage

 

I'm sorry if this seems unreasonable, but why exactly do you visit this website?

Let's be honest, for the most part, ATS is for people who believe in rather hard to believe things. I haven't seen you yet post ONCE that someone may be correct about ANY issue. It seems to me that you're just in this as some kind of roving professional debunker.

And on another note, throwing up a picture and saying that somehow the OP (or whomever posted the photo) stretched it and not providing any other supporting evidence (the photos you have are from a distance, of course closer inspection is needed) that you are correct.

Your photo also doesn't account for the fact that NASA now smudges out the supposed "nothing" that is in this crater. How exactly do you plan to account for that?

Phage is another reason to visit UFO and scientific threads. Then everyone presenting claims has to work harder. Result, higher overall quality.

Originally posted by Illustronic
I always just love when people say NASA is fooling us while using NASA images to support their claims. Is that kettle black, or am I on pot?

What you have to realize is that there is no benefit to NASA for lying about what they can detect celestially. And I would like just one explanation on how beings from (whatever) light years away from us are visiting us today or anytime in our Earth's history. In fact it takes a third generation star to support any kind of life as we know, that means that a star must be formed, explode in a few billion years, create another star in a couple of billion years later, explode and form the 3rd generation star as our Sun probably at least 13 billion years in the making.

If there is a star nearby that is a million years older than our sun that supports life that became intelligent within 4 billion years they might have a technological advantage on us.

But you still have to explain how they can move matter faster than light speed to ever get here. Sorry, reality is quite boring an Occam's razor is quite sharp, in an uninspiring sort of way for dreamers that is.

There should be no explanation against ingenuity and or preparadness. If we can think that somebody is visiting us, then probably someone can. The feeling and notion is there because it serves some purpose for our survival in the future as a species. there is no problem in someone thinking about things that for the time might seem impossible. The problem is in someone that is NOT thinking. In this Cosmic environment appart from being in a race against ourselves, we are or we think we are in a race against everyone else that exists out there. Since we evolved and gazed the Cosmos, it was only natural we would start assuming things and getting prepared for them.

Originally posted by Sanjaya
"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality."
--- Nikola Tesla

....

Originally posted by zorgon
'"Science is a wonderful thing if one does not have to earn one's living at it."" Albert Einstein

How true. For instance, no scientist would get any money if he proposed a 500 year space exploration plan (this is what humanity really needs to go forward) and these people need money to stay alive like everyone else, they are limited in their perspectives and efforts by what ever the establishment accepts and scientists cannot control the PTB despite their best efforts sometimes so they become a part of it.

Originally posted by ocker

Originally posted by SaganTool
To me the Clementine Photo and the Chinese tabloid photo are EXACTLY the same. Shadows, the smudge, its all the same. Are not these two photos supposed to be from different craft?

The Chinese article claims that their government has photos of the blocked out object in the NASA image.

They passed over the same area and took images they have not released yet.

hope this helps

Ocker

Yes, thank you, it help!
Much Appreciated!

I just can't wait to see these Chinese pics. I am sure people will debunk them too but it could be the signalling of a new era if the Asian countries start bringing us new data from outside our atmosphere to review and debate!!

NASA just edited another picture.

I check on their SOHO Telescope webpage occasionally and caught this:

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

The dark shaded area on the left matches this:

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

You can see the tail of a comet on the lower left side of the sun in both frames as well as that little streak at 10 o'clock.


They edited the 07:12 frame with the left half of the 09:36 frame. Why are they editing photo's??


here is 06:36 to 09:48:



sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...


why do they even bother putting the photo's online if they are doctored????

reply to post by Pervius


I suggest you ask them.

Most of my emails to NASA were answered.

reply to post by Pervius

Once again, if it were intentional editing it sure is a lousy job of it.
It is not editing, it is a software issue. I noticed and inquired about it a while ago.

Dear ***,

Simple answer: crapy software!

The software uses a circular buffer, and instead of nulling old images just overwrites them with new images once they become available. If there is a data gap, the old images remain in the buffer instead of being deleted. If the next DSN pass includes data from the onboard tape recorder (which can be several weeks old), the software sometimes gets confused and associates the header with a wrong image file.

I should emphasize that this affects only the quicklook data (quick and dirty near real-time data that are created on the fly for our web pages). The final level 0 science quality data in the SOHO science archive are correct.

Greetings,

Bernhard

--
==================================================================
Dr. Bernhard Fleck
SOHO Project Scientist, European Space Agency

reply to post by Pervius

You can see the tail of a comet on the lower left side of the sun in both frames as well as that little streak at 10 o'clock.

??

I am not sure, but I have not heard how the SOHO can image a comet??

Would you check on the manner in which SOHO captures images, and whether or not a comet will appear in the spectrum and methods used?? I could look it up, when I have time. But, you made the claim, I would like to hear your explanation first, would be faster.

Originally posted by ArMaP
AutOmatIc asked about "true colour" images, that's why I didn't talked about those.

Well your definition of 'true colour" is too picky. I remember all those long battles of color in the Mars rover threads. Yet even you managed to produce images that were close to what we would expect to see if we were there

But when I can see images taken on certain days that shows a blue glowing crater in Earth based telescopes, and I see that same crater in Clementine and Galileo also blue glowing, and I see reports from astronomers dating back to 1554 in NASA's own records that tell me that crater is blue glowing, and I read a report from the Apollo 11 crew that is looking down on that crater and it is blue glowing....

Then I say that NASA turning the moon grayscale to perpetuate a colorless moon myth is BOGUS. Whether or not it is precisely 'true colour" to meet your standards of the term is irrelevant. At least with color you can see differences that are interesting... details that are lost in the grayscale. Which is why they did it in color in the first place

For example... this is the magnetic anomaly on Farside at Mare Marginis... almost opposite Reiner Gamma. With grayscale you would not see the fantastic features of this area. You would deprive people of such views because your a stickler on 'true colour"? Besides USGS said these are what we would see 'slightly enhanced by UV light' which is after all what UV/VIS (Ultra violet/Visible) is all about



HEY!! I think I will revive that Aristarchus thread I have some new photos taken by a French astronomer that caught the crater glowing Besides I am sick to death of those contrail/missile threads. Seems the whole world all the way to the Pentagon cannot make up their minds what they are seeing.

Originally posted by Perseus Apex
reply to post by Sanjaya

 

"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality."

Truth nailed in a paragraph.
That's unusual.



Well, 'We have this hope" was once muttered along the, you know.....
Could One explain this video to themself? It doesn't 'appear' to make any sense or does it? Something about that video brings tears of.....laughter to my eyes and then I wonder, what was so funny? I don't know, could be the hair, costume, the shuffle.


"We have this hope".
I believe it was etched in stone, somewhere.
Any ideas?

Not many, but anyway how do you feel about this one?

Peace

Originally posted by weedwhacker
I am not sure, but I have not heard how the SOHO can image a comet??

Probably like this... Comet NEAT (C/2002 V1)




But Nassim Harramein says that is Nibiru But then... he also says you have a black hole in your head. And he wonders why he was kicked out of physics?