The Problem with Greer

reply to post by torsion


Here it is.

Marco Island Photo Analysis

What are the important factors in determining whether or not the hotel lights are in the background of this photo (i.e. a camera picking them up in the distance even though they are not very visible to the eye.)?

1. The direction the camera is facing
a. The stars on the date, time, and location (or as close as possible) as seen in the photo
b. Physical features of the landscape, with the location provided as a back-up comparison

2. The horizontal width of the field of view of the camera (i.e. the angle of sight going out into the world from the point of the camera’s lens).

Using the information regarding direction (SW) and Field of View (FOV), we can determine what was and was not able to be in the photo.

So, here we go!

Point #1a – The stars on the date, time (which was given as an approximation), and location as seen in the photo.

I’ve used SkyView set to Naples, FL, which is slightly North of Marco Island but directly on the water. I took two screenshots of the constellations and merged them above the “orb” photo, with clear indications of major features and stars in my discussion. The SkyView screen shot shows the direction for this date and time. I’ve also included one of the screen shots showing it is indeed, Naples FL.

Notes: Sirius is the large bright star in the photo – you can clearly see the majority of Canus Major in the photo and the star chart. Pyxis is a small constellation in between the Southwest and South directions. T-0005 is the star on the far left of the photo as indicated. Alnilam, as indicated, is the farthest star on the right hand side of the photo. It is the middle star of Orion’s belt. As the time is an approximation, I’m not worried about how high up in the sky Orion is compared to the star chart. It is possible it was taken between 11:30 PM and midnight.

The stars clearly show the direction the photo was taken in to be due SW.




Point #1b– confirming the direction the camera is facing using physical features in the photo as seen in the indicated location. This is a rough way to see if we are indeed in the correct location, and direction. Below is a screenshot showing the physical location indicated for the photo as seen on google earth and compared to the photo itself. The compass on google earth shows due Southwest and the physical features are a very good match for what is seen in the photo.

[img][/[/img]

Point #2 – Field of Vision
What is the camera’s field of vision? In other words, how wide is the shot? The SkyView app comes to the rescue again. The right-most star in Orion’s belt is at -100° on the compass. T-0005, the left-most star, plus adding two degrees to get to the edge of the photo, is -168° on the compass. (See star chart comparison above)

So the camera’s Field of View (FOV) for the horizon (from left to right) is a wedge with an angle of 68° from the center point of the camera’s lens. This means that from the center line of the photo, there are 34° by the compass in the camera’s vision to the left and 34° to the right, equaling a total FOV of 68°. At the very center of the photo we find Adhara of Canus Major, which is right at the SW mark, located at -134°. The edge of the “orbs” are at -144°. (See star chart comparison above.)


Conclusion... next post

reply to post by torsion


CONCLUSION – Answering the question of the hotel lights.

1. The direction the camera is facing is due SW (see photo picture - my previous post)
2. The FOV is 68°, which means 34° from the center of the photo to either side, as there are 68° between -100° and -168° (see picture - my previous post).
3. Taking the direction of due SW and plotting out 34° from the center (which would be the left edge of the photo) we can then go back to the google earth map and see whether or not the hotels could be in the background of the photo (see picture below, a screenshot of the plotted view using the above information - yep, it's Old School ;-).


[img][/[/img]


The hotels are not able to be in the photo at all. The only possible “backdrop” for this photo is beach and ocean. This eliminates the possibility that the camera picked up any hotel lights in the distance and distorted them.

Other, less researched thoughts...A multiple exposure explanation is not workable – no signs of ghosting or other artifacts that would indicate a multiple exposure. Photoshop on the fly? If the photo was seen on the camera first, as it currently is, and then uploaded to a computer viewer in front of witnesses, it makes this explanation an extremely tricky and unlikely slight of hand. Could be different.

If this is a hoax, it is a complex one that could not be proved by the data we have.

So, what are the “orbs”? I have NO idea! I hope this helps...

peace,
AB

greer looks and talks like a buffoon.
why do people still pamper him

reply to post by torsion



I watched your video in the other thread.



Words fail me. Like watching a bunch of little kids play make believe.

reply to post by torsion

SEE the ET craft appear in the trees! SEE the group actually BOARD the INVISIBLE saucer!!!

Sorry, but how do you SEE ETs and SEE people board an invisible saucer if the ETS and saucer can't be seen OR filmed in the normal spectrum???

One word: FAIL

I don't see how anybody could possibly, in good faith, defend Greer. It is a FACT that Greer has LIED about some pretty substantial things. It is a FACT that Greer has time and again promised progress and delivered nothing.

I find it very sad that people like Greer not only exist, but are supported by so many. I have no strong feelings about the UFO phenomenon. I think it's highly likely that ETs exist somewhere. I think it's very possible they have visited earth either in the past or in the present. But I've had no personal experiences, and have not seen any evidence that would conclusively prove ET have visited Earth.

But I want the truth the come out either way. I fully support good, solid research into UFOs and ETs. Which is why I find Greer so unfortunate. He makes a mockery of the whole field. He seeks fame, fortune, and control, instead of the truth.

Any person that legitimately seeks to expose the truth about ET/UFOs to the world wouldn't charge truth seekers thousands of dollars to hang out with them during a camping trip. He is simply taking advantage of the lost of and the gullible. You can travel your own path and seek the truth without giving money to Greer. He would have you think otherwise.

He attempts to gain control of the entire field of ET/UFO and bring it under his influence. He tries to make it seem as if the only legitimate UFO research comes from him or through him. He has said many times how when "disclosure" happens that HE will be at the forefront of it. He acts as if he is somehow the representative of the human race. Who elected him to this position?

How is he qualified to teach or guide anybody? Because he plays with lasers in a field? Look around ATS, THOUSANDS of people have had incredible experiences without ANY help or involvement from Greer. So what significance does Greer have, at all?

The answer is, none. IF there really are things going on, abductions, communications, etc with ETs, then nobody needs Greer for it. People evidently have no problem interacting with ETs without Greer's help.

Everything I've seen from these for-profit outings that Greer Has reeks of fantasy and manipulation. Even the people who paid for this experience look lost and disappointed. In that one video, the Asian woman talks about seeing an orb. The other guy says "well there is a spaceship right over there" and the Asian woman responds "Oh....... is there?"

She doesn't see it. She knows it isn't there. These poor people want to believe so badly that they allow themselves to be manipulated.

The poster in this thread who talked about their experience with an invisible alien walking on water, then orbs and helicopters. WHAT does this have to do with ET/UFOs AT ALL? Nothing. How do you know it wasn't ghosts or something? Your saying that invisible aliens were walking around on water, then passed through you? Then you go on to say you have experience with the CIA and Military? Highly doubtful. Seems like more delusion. Even if you are being honest, you did HEAR something in the water, that's all that happened, you heard something in the water. You have no way of knowing if it was an invisible alien or anything else. You are just guessing. But if it WAS, what does Greer have to do with this at all? Why did you have to pay money for this experience? Do these aliens use Greer as their agent to arrange paid demonstrations?

Anyway, like I said earlier, I think the possibility of ETs on Earth should be taken seriously. But people like Greer ruin any and all credibility to the subject. That is very possibly his purpose, to destroy the credibility of the whole topic. It's just sad that people buy (literally) into this farce.

reply to post by AboveBoard

Lot of effort, AboveBoard, a lot of focused effort.

Originally posted by AboveBoard
reply to post by torsion

 

CONCLUSION – Answering the question of the hotel lights.

1. The direction the camera is facing is due SW (see photo picture - my previous post)
2. The FOV is 68°, which means 34° from the center of the photo to either side, as there are 68° between -100° and -168° (see picture - my previous post).
3. Taking the direction of due SW and plotting out 34° from the center (which would be the left edge of the photo) we can then go back to the google earth map and see whether or not the hotels could be in the background of the photo (see picture below, a screenshot of the plotted view using the above information - yep, it's Old School ;-).


[img]

[/[/img]


The hotels are not able to be in the photo at all. The only possible “backdrop” for this photo is beach and ocean. This eliminates the possibility that the camera picked up any hotel lights in the distance and distorted them.

Other, less researched thoughts...A multiple exposure explanation is not workable – no signs of ghosting or other artifacts that would indicate a multiple exposure. Photoshop on the fly? If the photo was seen on the camera first, as it currently is, and then uploaded to a computer viewer in front of witnesses, it makes this explanation an extremely tricky and unlikely slight of hand. Could be different.

If this is a hoax, it is a complex one that could not be proved by the data we have.

So, what are the “orbs”? I have NO idea! I hope this helps...

peace,
AB

edit on 16-8-2012 by AboveBoard because: I lost an 'I' ;-)

I'm a little confused here, and I'm not trying to be argumentative.

You say SouthWest, and even demonstrate so with the star chart, yet, your arrows on the map in the quote above point UP and to the LEFT, which is NorthWest. SouthWest on any map, I thought, was Down and to the Left?

Did you rotate the map for illustrative purposes?

so, i was always under the impression that orbs were spirits. not aliens. spirits of dead earth stuff, or demons/ angels. how in the hell can this guy get away with this nonsense again? how's about just to prove a point greer telepathically tells the aliens to manifest in our physical dimension, just for a few seconds, and we will all see he's not really a con artist sca...... couldn't even make it through the entire post without getting nauseous. excuse me for a moment...

reply to post by wondermost

Orbs? Who knows? The dozens on dozens I have seen are comprised of - what I could only guess - several known and unknown substances. Plasma-like qualities are the most frequently encountered. Solid and semi-transparent. Tennis ball to many meters radius.

reply to post by QuantumQuackers


yes, i have some photos with orbs in them from a stay at a said to be haunted hotel. interesting photos. never thought they were aliens, though. from time to time i see orbs in the sky above my residence. not an every night thing, and they definitely arent solid space craft. i guess it could be interdimentional, but i have no clue what they are. usually doesnt stick around for more than five to ten seconds and then gone as quick as they appear. im pretty sure my previous post was done so very poorly, and for that i apologize. i'm still trying to wrap my head around why people pay that much money to go out to a field with some dude and see things i see for free on occasion. i am guilty of greer bashing, and again i apologize. poor taste.

Originally posted by AboveBoard

If this is a hoax, it is a complex one that could not be proved by the data we have.

So, what are the “orbs”? I have NO idea! I hope this helps...

peace,
AB

Good work, Above.

However, if your calculations are correct then it is simply a composite photo (double-exposure or photoshop) as suggested from the start which CSETI did on the laptop in the half hour interim before showing it to the punters.

If you look at the crazy video above of Greer entering the invisible flying saucer you will learn that the spaceships cannot be filmed. So we're back to the orbs being the hotel lights!!

In my experience Invisible flying saucers are real. But they are very exclusive who they let in. Greer would never get pass the bouncer on the front door. Greer entering the invisible flying saucer is then obvioulsy fake.

Originally posted by draknoir2
reply to post by torsion

 

I watched your video in the other thread.

So did many others!

A very poor mod decision to close that thread.

So much for denying ignorance!

Originally posted by torsion

Originally posted by draknoir2
reply to post by torsion

 

I watched your video in the other thread.

So did many others!

A very poor mod decision to close that thread.

So much for denying ignorance!

Feel free to discuss it HERE on this existing thread. One thread is enough. We do not need a new thread for every person's individual personal thoughts.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

Feel free to discuss it HERE on this existing thread. One thread is enough

The reason I started a new thread was because I felt the video was important enough to reach a fresh ATS audience - which is exactly what it did, prior to its closure. Nor was it a duplication of this thread, it was duplication of a single post. The only new posters this thread was attracting were those intent on derailing it (most of whom are now banned).

We do not need a new thread for every person's individual personal thoughts.

But isn't that the very reason any thread is started?

cheers

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
Feel free to discuss it HERE on this existing thread. One thread is enough. We do not need a new thread for every person's individual personal thoughts.

I thought torsion's post was topically different enough by focusing on one video and one aspect. It should be widely seen, as this great thread winds down.

You're the boss. However, you didn't link this thread when you closed the others down, GEL. If we are gonna deny ignorance--and only have one thread to do it in--then it should be linked in your closing post imo.

Don't MODS usually do that?

Originally posted by HomerinNC

Sorry, but how do you SEE ETs and SEE people board an invisible saucer if the ETS and saucer can't be seen OR filmed in the normal spectrum???

Only Steven Macon Greer can answer that. And the answer he gives (which won't actually be an answer) will cost you $2500

- plus the need to swallow a few large gulps of Kool Aid!

- and require purchasing all his book and dvds

- and you'll need to agree never to tell the answer to anyone else

- and then hand over some more cash

reply to post by Druscilla


Hey Dru!
Yes, it is rotated. Look at the little compass in the left hand corner - the view shows the coastline looking from the group's location directly SW, as the camera was facing. The ocean is to the west of the coast.

Thanks for looking at it! And I appreciate the question.

peace,
AB

reply to post by torsion


Thanks, torsion! I do disagree with a simple multiple exposure, however. The reason being there are no ghosting overlays in the photo - no additional stars, no "shadow beach" over the people, etc.

I'm not saying it is a "real" orb picture, as stated in my conclusion, only that if it's a fake, it is a complex one. If it was seen on camera first by witnesses (other than CSETI staff or the photographer) before being put on the computer screen, then...heck if I know how that could be done!

My point is, this one is not easy to determine. We would really need the original photo data to determine if it was messed with or not. As we don't have that, it can't be definitively called one way or the other. I know you want to throw this into the hoax bin and I understand that based on your opinions about Dr. Greer. I will put it in the "undetermined" bin myself, not in defense of him, but because that fits my facts on this photo better.

peace,
AB