Zeeman crater hides an alien factory and more ...

We ought to cut off NASA's funds until they start reporting the 'Truth' ,About Everything. We pay these people to lie to us?!?! I know we do this when we buy a newspaper or Esquire ,TIME & Newsweek mags.,but that a our choice!

reply to post by PlentyoTool


Actually the more people are repeating the words of others and always come up with the same data, the more I am convinced that I am on the right track.

Thx for the heads up.

Greetz,

Sander

P.S. No one mentions anything about the ship nor the new found anomalies in the Grail video ... makes you wonder.

reply to post by 1967sander

P.S. No one mentions anything about the ship nor the new found anomalies in the Grail video ... makes you wonder.

Don't you mean no one agrees with you about the ship?
What "anomalies" in the GRAIL video? (He asked apprehensively, preparing to see overzoomed images from a youtube video).

Originally posted by 1967sander

Actually the more people are repeating the words of others and always come up with the same data, the more I am convinced that I am on the right track.

So a single source is more believable than multiple sources?...
...Or is it that you are more apt to only believe the source that already fits into your preconceived notions.

If the whole world was so closed-minded as to believe only their preconceived notions, and chose to ignore other possibilities, then we would never have any learning.

reply to post by 1967sander

Actually the more people are repeating the words of others and always come up with the same data, the more I am convinced that I am on the right track.

Yet you continue to refuse to explain exactly what that track is. For example, in your video you do not explain how you "enhance" the Orbiter images. Some programs interpolate data. Say that on a scale from 0 to 1, with zero being black and 1 being white, an image has an overall brightness of 0.5. This means that if the algorithm detects a pixel with a value of 1, it will interpolate a pixel with the value of 0 to maintain the overall average of 0.5. This would explain why your bright "pipes" would suddenly acquire a perfectly parallel black "shadow." But since you haven't explained your process, there's no way to tell for certain... and you seem suspiciously happy to keep it that way.

reply to post by 1967sander


I have seen all your videos Sander, and have never not been impressed!

I only started posting on here yesterday, but I dont think I will continue, and I dont think I will be missed.

This place has probably 10 trolls to every open minded poster. Above top secret lol my a"*e! paid trolls.com more like. There is no one here who wants to discuss anything, they want to flame and that's it.

Just keep doing what your doing, and forget this place my friend.

You can get paid to troll here?

Originally posted by draknoir2
You can get paid to troll here?

i want in!. ill warn you though, quality trolling comes with a heafty fee.



And as for the OP. i dont see an alien factory. i do however see a space mcdonalds on the edge of that crater. i sure am in the mood for a space burger.

reply to post by PlentyoTool


We want to discuss the software he uses and what filtering he does, he chooses not to discuss that so we have nothing to discuss. If science never revealed their methods peer review would be impossible and then you can say the science is subjective. But science reveals their methods so proper analysis can be undertaken by other parties to see if the results are genuine, or flaws in data entry, or data analysis exist, or to see if others get repeatable results.

I do know one thing, jpeg images are flattened, there are no layers. History of manipulation cannot be traced from a flattened jpeg. The very fact the image is a jpeg means it has been manipulated. Analysis of such is poppycock. Two, no, less than one minute into his video is the very kind of artifacts jpeg image processing creates, so anything after that time was a waste of time to listen to. (He doesn't even have Adobe Photoshop).

The processing is subjective creation through imagination, nothing more.

It makes perfect sense. Maybe thats how aliens get here or some type atleast, would make it easier than from a far off planet or other dimension as has been speculated. Its OBVIOUS not only in this video but other nasa pics, that they have been tampered with. Then there is the guy Gary Mckinnon that hacked into Nasas system and got busted, he said there was an airbrushing department and pics of craft. good vid

On his Facebook page he says he also does analysis of NASA FILM.

common man, NASA gave him FILM to analyze?

No, they didn't, he is analyzing compression internet uploads of some other (probably inferior PC based video compression), or Flash ladened compression (what Youtube uses), or at best even Quicktime H264 compression but I seriously doubt it. He is playing with a toy that fascinates him and won't listen to people in the field to snap him out of it and do something constructive like looking for a job if he's so qualified!

Film, HA!, that's when I decided not to read any more of his bull crap.

I agree with Phage,
this is nothing more than a stretched crater,
using transform in Photoshop,
most likely to make a component part of the picture fit the whole..

A good example of making a whole lot of hooey out of nothing.

Move along.

Having been humiliated on this thread, Sander will start a new one to drive traffic to his YouTube account. *yawn*

Original Thread Located Here

Closing Duplicate

Thank you

Semper