Is Venus Brighter Than Normal?

Can someone please explain to me what a moran is? I keep seeing it on GLP, and I thought people were misspelling moron for awhile, but I think I am missing something here.?.

Maybe I'm a moran but hell, I don't even know what that is!





A moron's spelling of the word moron which means idiot.


Explain that as well:

It's the stupid "GLP" way of saying it.


OK, I think I get it. To many people spelling it moran instead of moron, so now it's a big joke for everyone to spell it moran. I think.

A moron's spelling of the word moron which means idiot.


Explain that as well:




Wow, I think I see meds in this guys future!

It does care because the only instruments humans have mostly is our EYES. We don't have the privilege of devices. If you didn't care about what the human eye saw then why the poll. Also, there is more to light than just contrast from light to dark. You know light is frequencies, wave lengths and vibrations. Machines are not set up well to receive those. So if many humans are telling you something is up, I would tend to lean toward the human eye on this one! Sorry, just can't always depend on the MACHINE~~~

Last Edited by ****SUPERFLY**** on 09/17/2012 08:42 PM

No doubt...

I get messages from those who do from time to time. I don't care if you've seen it or not. It's not about you.

Excuse me, but you do not dictate when I do what. My research involves abnormal hours, and believe me, many hours are consumed by it. Debunking this bullshit does not take that long, and I take my time in developing threads like this one so that what little time it takes does not intrude. This one has been under construction for a couple of weeks now.

So your false assumption lead you to a false conclusion. What else is new.

I don't know how many times I have to say "good" before you'll get it, but I'll say it again. Good.

Excuse me, I never said I was "THE" go to source. You're now engaging in a strawman fallacy, you're just full of logical fallacies tonight. There are many here who are every bit as knowledgeable on the subject as myself. TBar, Hydra, Reality420, Hap, just to name a few in no particular order.

I never said my PhD was in either of those fields. In any case, you're once again engaging in a no true scotsman fallacy.

Yes, belittle my fun little experiment here all you want. I don't give a damn. It's not just about "rehashing the same crap over and over." For me, half the fun is in resurrecting old data. In fact, in the course of preparing this thread I came upon another interesting lead on a piece of old astronomical data I intend to hunt down. As you suggested though, my time is not unlimited, so that's going to have to wait a few weeks.

Neither. You clearly don't understand why I enjoy debunking, that's fine, but don't pretend like you can narrow down my motivations to a false dilemma.

I didn't say you did, in fact I said "good" in response to your denial.

No. I'm amused at how incredibly wrong you are, but as regards my personal data, many have tried to figure out my real life identity on here. If you can't understand why I would be concerned that you might want to be the next, then that's just one more thing you simply don't understand about me.

I'm already published, and I'm currently running an experiment for my next publication. I've also spoken at international scientific conferences and I will be speaking again at one this fall.

I do.

False dilemma. I can, and do, do both.

Again with the attempt to shut me up. I will not comply.

I will not. And yes, some do.

Not everyone. Some. That's fine, those who wish to remain idiots are free to do so. And those people are usually the most vocal about it as well.

Some do have the willingness to learn. But I'd do it even if they didn't, simply because I enjoy the process of debunking.

Yeah, I should just you and others slander me without responding. That always works out well for one's reputation.

Well you're failing miserably. Your entire argument is based on one logical fallacy after another. And best of all, I know for a fact that you're wrong, so I'll just keep provoking you to "call me out" and watch you keep failing.

We do have the privilege of many devices. The poll was to find out if people seriously thought it was truly abnormally bright. That requires more than simply thinking it's too bright based on what you see, it requires a dreadful lack of understanding about the availability of instruments that can definitively determine that and how amateurs can and do use those instruments to make such measurements. If you had that understanding, it should lead you to be skeptical of your initial impression (if you think it's too bright) and cause you to seek further information to find out if amateur astronomers are noticing anything like that out of the ordinary.

Actually the machine is very well set up to receive those, and can do so at very controlled and specific wavelengths in order to standardize the measurement, and is far more accurate than the human eye. Sorry, but the machine is superior.

Checkout the New Camera. I hope they put them up on the Web like the Hi-Res Mars Images here; [link to hirise.lpl.arizona.edu]

Thread: Most Powerful Sky-Mapping Machine Ever Built To Probe Universe’s Biggest Mysteries

i think probably

but the answer will end up being no

just like what is that on soho, the moon is out of place, so is the sun, the zeta were right, and watch the skies.



all true mark my words

@Astro... Our jimmies? Hmm...Seems like an admission to being a govclown to me.

Well, thank you kindly for debunking elenin / the "brown dwarf" a while back with your gravity perturbation model.

Now you're just going off the rails. I'm not mad. I do have my doctorate. And I have cut it in the real world.

Looking at the post... nope, nothing wrong with it. I debunk because I enjoy debunking. You don't get it. You never did, you probably never will. I say that not because I'm mad, I say that because it's the truth.

Again, I'm not uncomfortable, I'm enjoying watching you dance.

I come here because I enjoy debunking astronomical nonsense, particularly when it leads me to research old, relatively obscure data. It's a hobby.

No, lots of things seem hilarious to me that I don't bother to debunk. I debunk that which ties into my interests and leads me down interesting paths of research.

I'm not conducting research on people.

I'm not debunking simply for the sake of those who took part in the poll, in fact I would have done exactly what I did regardless of the poll's outcome or how many or how few participated. Had there been zero interest I probably wouldn't have bothered to pin this thread since it wouldn't have gotten any response. Clearly it has though, and it has been highly entertaining to watch. Your responses are one of the main highlights.

My motivation for debunking the Venus magnitude issue initially came out of an interest in researching old photometric data on Venus and seeing how that could be (and is) applied to modern observations. In doing so I've come across even more historical astronomical data that I will further pursue in the future. It's not just about debunking it and getting kicks out of the reactions of people on here, though as I said that is entertaining in and of itself, it's about the journey I take in the process.
I wouldn't have bothered to dig up all the original source material had it not been for the process of doing this debunking.

Actually I've treated you with more respect than you deserve, far more than you've shown me.

LMFAO! Oh really? That's news to me. Keep thinking that, you're dead wrong once again. I do very real research outside of GLP, or else I wouldn't be invited to speak at major, international scientific conferences.

Nope. For someone who claims not to want to know me personally, you sure pretend to know me personally.

Have you seen any UFOs in your years of stargazing? If your interested I would like you to know that I am in the friend catagory of (friend or foe?).

astromut is full on shill fellers....this thread makes it VERY obvious...or he is just the most pathetic bag of shit in the western world....pick ur poison bottomline is this asshat gets off on denying what is obvious...the planet,along with the rest of the solar system, is undergoing serious changes...we can all see WITH OUR OWN DAMN EYES venus is brighter...yet this gearbox finds it neccessary to pull out his bag of statistics nobody understands or gives a rats ass about...people like this peon make my skin crawl....go SHILL somewhere else knob. we have had more than enuff of ur attention whoring bullshit....what a ridiculous thread

Well then. Lets hear your theory on Venus not being normal. Please give a nice scientific answer.

And what changes are going on? Please elaborate. Don't say more volcanoes are erupting and an increase of earthquakes please. Let us hear your example.

Leave Astromut alone!

I'm going to say my last word here because this is the EXACT problem Scientist types like yourself have on a continual basis. You leave no room what so ever for Quantum Physics and that my friend is why Scientists falter. Machines are NOT in the Quantum world....period...end of discussion. So go ahead..put all your stock in the machine the human mind designed. Who created the values on your device? How do we know the values aren't human constructs of their eye and mind? LOL Nothing is geared to see the physical world WE live in better than the human eye. Human eyes see more than you think but because of the conditioning of the human mind, there are limits. So the question is or the answer is, if humans say they believe Venus is getting brighter. Who is to argue? In reality, there are no facts, only interpretations of data. I just happen to disagree with your interpretation and agree with others and frankly, THERE IN NOT ONE SCIENCE STUDY THAT CAN ACTUALLY PROVE DIFFERENTLY. It's like the numerous Gods we have in the world, you know only one can be right and the rest are wrong.....but which one is wrong and who is to say.

Check it out; [link to apod.nasa.gov]
May 18, 1999
A Laguna Triangle
Credit & Copyright: Wally Pacholka

Explanation: High above Laguna Beach last month hung bright celestial orbs. Visible after the California sunset were, from left to right, the Moon, Saturn, and Venus. Tonight and for the next few days, Venus and the Moon will again be visible together. Nearby stars will include Pollux, Castor, and Procyon. Venus now sets hours after the Sun and is so bright it might be mistaken for an airplane or UFO. Binoculars should enable the viewing of craters on the Moon, and phases for Venus.

Dang, Venus is almost as bright as the Moon in that shot...

Not going to happen. I have my doctorate and I'm proud of it. I don't care what you think.

Again, I've treated you with far more respect than you deserve.

You're attacking me personally.

Aha, the truth comes out. This is all about trying to derail my threads. Thanks for admitting it, you are now banned from my threads and your posts will be deleted. Have a nice life.

This thread isn't about Nibiru. You're obsessed with Nibiru for someone who claims not to believe in it.

Hasty generalization fallacy. Again, your whole argument is one fallacy after another. You don't seem to care though, after all, your objective was to derail my threads. I don't tolerate those whose stated objective is to derail my threads.

Photometry proves it is not. To those of us who are trained observers and have been watching Venus for many years, there's nothing unusual about the brightness of Venus, but photometry proves this conclusively. You can do it yourself and see for yourself that it's normal using the methods I described.

I see, real astronomy is too complicated for you, so you'd rather make false claims.

The values are calibrated to stellar magnitude by comparing Venus to a known star like Sirius.

CCD photometry is far more accurate and precise than the human eye. I again refer you to the article "Photometric Precision and Accuracy" in the book "Astronomical Photometry: Past, Present, and Future."

Wrong. There are real facts and my data illuminates those facts.

Then explain how my interpretation is wrong and explain how it is that the photometry shows Venus' brightness to be normal.

Now they'll just claim Venus was too bright even back then.

I gnomeinate nurse astro for a Nobel Piss Prize. [link to www.google.com]

If it wasn't for nurse astro a mind would be free to wonder. All hail him.

Yeah, how dare I shed light on this little thing called reality.

In all your years of stargazing you have never seen a UFO. I believe that. But they don't want to be seen. :) Are there ways of cloaking in space? oh off topic...... I don't know anything about Venus.

Even if only using your eyes, Venus is still no brighter than usual.
The key to being able to trust the eyes in this matter, is experience.

People who don't have the neccesary experience will see Venus big and bright, and will be surprised by it, because they don't usually see 'stars' that bright.

I do have the neccesary experience - I've been a keen amateur observer all my life, and can usually estimate magnitudes to within a coupla tenths accuracy.
Admittedly, nowhere near the accuracy of photometry, but good enough that I could tell that the last time I saw Venus (a coupla days ago), it was about magnitue -4.0 (to within about 0.2 accuracy)
And noticeably (to me anyway), a little dimmer than it was a few weeks ago.

For the record... Based on 35+ years experience, and a good eye for estimating magnitude....
On the original poll I voted that Venus' brightness was perfectly within 'normal' parameters.

I'll answer this too...
I can honestly say that I've never seen anything that I thought was an alien craft (I assume that's what you mean by 'UFO')
I've seen lots of things over the years that a less experienced observer might think was a 'UFO' - satellites and meteors on a nightly basis, several per night of each.
Satellite flares are very commonly mistaken for UFOs, and these last few years, A LOT of Chinese lanterns, they've been VERY popular in UK lately.

The most puzzling thing I ever saw while 'stargazing' happened one night while I was viewing a shadow transit of a Jovian moon.....
As I watched, what looked like two 'interference lines' passed upwards across the disk of Jupiter.
It looked a bit like when a videotape starts to wear-out, and you get those horizontal lines moving up or down the screen.
Very surreal at the time, and quite baffling.
I could hear a plane in the distance, but thought nothing of it at first, then when I looked up from the 'scope, the plane was to the right of Jupiter, headed away from it - then I realised what I'd seen....
It was wingtip vortices... The plane must have passed just below my field of view, and the prevailing wind shifted the vortices towards me, and upwards across my field of view.
I mentioned it on a very large and popular astronomy hobbyist forum, and only one of the other guys who answered, had ever seen the same thing.

Last Edited by Karlos on 09/18/2012 02:06 PM

That's cool. My brother saw one or two UFOs while in the Navy He said it'they pinged radar.

Sorry I missed this question before. I've never seen anything "alien" or "ET" in nature up there, but I have seen things I didn't expect that others might mistake for an "alien." One was a weather balloon; to the naked eye it looked like a very bright star, almost like ISS, but it was moving way too slow to be an ordinary low earth orbit satellite and since there was still plenty of daylight, it was clear that it wasn't a plane or helicopter. When I trained my telescope on it, I could clearly see that it was a weather balloon. The balloon itself was brightly reflecting the setting sun and the payload was swinging away on a tether beneath it. It was a wild thing to see. No idea who launched it or from where, but it was clearly a weather balloon.