Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,888 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 100,424
Pageviews Today: 133,090Threads Today: 43Posts Today: 687
12:56 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
06/12/2010 12:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
It's not worth it- everyone here (including I suspect clunk herself) knows that she is nothing more than a bullshit artist.

I think that Clare is a real, sincere person who believes everything she says. This is from when I took the time to interact with her. She is extremely miopic, but truly THINKS she is viewing things more broadly than the rest of us. She does function as a 'shill', though, without really knowing it. She drags people through 'discussions' of things by focussing on meaningless minutia which distorts reality radically.
 Quoting: Menow 1000081


Hey, she exhausted *my* patience...

And that's saying something...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 908953
Canada
06/12/2010 02:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Hey! Anyone remember all the devastation wrought in the
early 1980s by the Jupiter Effect? Wasn't that something!

I DO!!!

those massive high tides washing ashore leaving massive devastation in their wake ....
Oh the humanity, the huge loss of life and property...

what were they again???

oh thats right...


`There was some influence by the planets, with high tide calculated at 0.04 millimeters higher than normal'
( [link to en.wikipedia.org]

;-)
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 763624

Oh yeah, those were the days! I also remember the "Harmonic Convergence" in August 1987, just months before the real end of the Mayan calendar. There were fruitcakes all over the ruins in Mexico soaking in the ascension vibes, dancing nude in the moonlight, preparing for the end that was coming in 2012. Too bad they didn't know back then or now that as they did that, real Mayas were preparing for the end of cycle ceremonies to be held in April 1988.

Some things never change.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 03:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
It's funny how she thinks an article citing a NASA microwave
engineer counts for shit in predicting the effects of "planet
alignments".
[link to citation.nstl.gov.cn]
[link to webcache.googleusercontent.com]

 Quoting: DrPostman


Who, Nancy?
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 03:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
RE: Sept. Clues having faked the photos or the screen shot of Colaios with 1 memorial mention last year, from 2003:


So many of you lose the forest for the trees: and THEN get the exactness wrong too.

For instance, there are those who suspect Sept. Clues of being the fakers; a short acquaintence with their work will show however the sincerity and cross-referencing they go to, whatever else.

But that idea of THEIR being the ones likely to fake, can only come to someone who can't identify the Colaios as possibly having a problem, and HOLD THAT IDEA long enough to check if maybe Sept. Clues is the one with the accurate screen shot, not the current memorial site.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 763624
Australia
06/12/2010 03:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Oh yeah, those were the days! I also remember the "Harmonic Convergence" in August 1987, just months before the real end of the Mayan calendar. There were fruitcakes all over the ruins in Mexico soaking in the ascension vibes, dancing nude in the moonlight, preparing for the end that was coming in 2012. Too bad they didn't know back then or now that as they did that, real Mayas were preparing for the end of cycle ceremonies to be held in April 1988.

Some things never change.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 908953

yeah I'd forgotten that- was a combo of the jovo's 144k(again- first time around in 1974) and the mayan end of the world as we know (knew) it cycle (first time around)
We had about a dozen wacko's all marching around in suits carrying signs (in 40 deg heat) all saying the end is nigh

something about sacred triangles or something...

from memory it was all the planets were in a triangle and so giant tidal waves would drown us all (again) as the earth was ripped apart (again)

it was a change from the giant tidal waves that had drowned us all four years earlier as the planet was ripped apart because the planets were in a straight line.....

(then we had the 2000 end of the world- from computers and because jc was coming back and all but 144k would be killed horribly (again)
then there was 2003 and we were all going to die horribly as giant tidal waves drowned us all (again) as the earth was ripped apart (again) as planet x dove through the solar system at several times the speed of light...
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
06/12/2010 03:54 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Chemtrail Poll . . . do you think chemtrails are real? See the Results NOW!

Thread: Chemtrail Poll . . . do you think chemtrails are real? See the Results NOW!

Quote
POLL: Chemtrail/Contrail Pool . . . do Chemtrails exist?
Yes 81.5% (53)
No 15.4% (10)
I need more information 3.1% (2)
No Opinion 0% (0)
Blank (View Results) (0)

Non-Blank Votes: 65



Chemtrail/Contrail Debate/Trial is scheduled for early July 2010.

I am the Advocate (George B.) my Opponent at this time will be (The Guy).

I do believe there are Chemtrails . . . my purpose is to present all the available evidence in July and compare the results of this Poll with an identical Poll after the debate/trail is completed.

The plan now is to have at least a three day debate . . . then the Poll.

Please respond to this Poll so we will have a basis for our conclusions regarding the debate.

My primary purpose is to gather on my time and effort all that the average person can realistically understand and go against an Opponent.

PUBLIC SERVICE: with a reasonably thorough presentation of the evidence, its rebuttal, counter arguments and the final vote by you via Poll.

WHY? So one can point to a point in time when there was a process and a result (if only temporary). I also think it can be rather entertaining as well. I am perfectly willing to be trashed but don't think I will go down easy. I really do believe there is something to the Chemtrail issue.

Last Edited by George B on 6/12/2010 at 2:27 PM

Please go to my Thread and Vote!!!!

Last Edited by George B on 06/12/2010 04:11 PM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 04:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I think that Clare is a real, sincere person who believes everything she says. This is from when I took the time to interact with her. She is extremely miopic, but truly THINKS she is viewing things more broadly than the rest of us. She does function as a 'shill', though, without really knowing it. She drags people through 'discussions' of things by focussing on meaningless minutia which distorts reality radically.
 Quoting: Menow 1000081

Yes, I am real.

Yes I am sincere. TY Menow for recognizing that.

hf

As to the rest: there is a difference between exactitude of analysis where possible, and losing the point of the analysis.

Many people here do think in a myopic manner: to suggest that the Colaios "have memorials" when the whole point is they DIDN'T ... and now DO ...

It is not mere unfamiliarity however which makes people here sugest a news article can trump fakery of a photo in importance, even if a person ultimaley turns up!

And it is not mere unfamiliarity with the site which makes the notion bloom for someone -- who then suggests that Sept. Clues must be the liers, when all their work shows they link to their sources and where the SOURCES CHANGE to cover their asses they cover that too.

A small familiarity with their work would show that the notion SC is faking is the opposite of the situation.

But even so, the clarity of the mass of evidence of fakery which takes a shrt while to see, would show you you were more likely dealing with an intelligence op than a Sept. Clues attack on victims.

So ... then, these "miopic" persons here would be thrown back on how to explain the Colaio non-memorials until now (new and back dated as they are now)?

So who is losing themself in "miopia"? So many here! I see the forest for the trees and can give relative weight to evidence and not produce inadequate articles to "prove there's no fakery" -- just because I want a victim to be real.

I can think of how a victim could be real AND there be fakes, and some reasons why.

Plus, I can recognize the basic fakery and DETAILS of it, if I NEED to. But that's not my purpose once that's done: it is thinking on the totality! So, yes, I have both capacities carefully developed and therefore am not likely to misuse them.

If you stay on the big you may miss a changing featrue of detail; if you stay on the detail you may refuse to switch everything around in order.

It is the latter paragraph which sums up the tendency here on this thread of some people.

I have a very good grasp of the big and small re. the fakery issues. You don't: a news article doesn't undo fakery even if the people were real. There's something going on and most are likely to be in fact blated numbers for WAR.


..........................

I am being exact when I can and ALSO working through the hypothetical possibilities and necessities which flow from the relative BREADTH of each feature's merits.

.................................

But ... to be exact and perhaps a bit unkind back for all the nastiness you've spewed at me over these pages ... it's "myopia" except in Italian and so on, so it's listed as "miopia" in one dictionary which redirects to myopia.


And the plural of "minutia" is "minutiae". (Fem. singular/fem. plural)


rockon
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 04:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
 Quoting: George B


Hi, George. They were at it last eve again and a dissenter (disbeliever) watched the same trail stay for 35 min's.

He was feeling hopeless at the evidence before his eyes. We all acknowledged a puff might last a minute or so, in a special atmosphere.

Plus there were many others at all heights and others not leaving trails. :)

It's raining without clouds again: just the bleary gray they created.

Some people suggest it's against high solar storms right now.

Prob. many reasons.

................................

By the way, I like your running triceratops. You changed your avatar!

:)

I still think they're cuter when not charging though. Lol.


Here's a cute one:

{>:-)
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 04:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Chemtrail Poll . . . do you think chemtrails are real? See the Results NOW!
Please go to my Thread and Vote!!!!
 Quoting: George B


George, it would be easier to find it if you posted p. 1 link, in case it gets "lost" in priority over time.

:)
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
06/12/2010 04:08 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I think that Clare is a real, sincere person who believes everything she says. This is from when I took the time to interact with her. She is extremely miopic, but truly THINKS she is viewing things more broadly than the rest of us. She does function as a 'shill', though, without really knowing it. She drags people through 'discussions' of things by focussing on meaningless minutia which distorts reality radically.

Yes, I am real.

Yes I am sincere. TY Menow for recognizing that.

hf


rockon
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Good afternoon Clare . . . welcome again to the Thread Wars. I wouldn't be too quick to accept their backhanded complements. They like house guests and fish will begin to smell in two days.
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
06/12/2010 04:13 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Chemtrail Poll . . . do you think chemtrails are real? See the Results NOW!
Please go to my Thread and Vote!!!!


George, it would be easier to find it if you posted p. 1 link, in case it gets "lost" in priority over time.

:)
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Thanks!
Thread: Chemtrail Poll . . . do you think chemtrails are real? See the Results NOW!

Last Edited by George B on 06/12/2010 04:13 PM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/12/2010 05:00 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I still get code only (some weird rectangle symbols mostly) at the .mil sites you linked to.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Good grief, you still don't know how to follow simple directions and save a file as a .fts file? You can't just open it in your browser, as I've said, you must save it as a .fts file... if you don't know how to do that then read your browser's help files or manual.
And I didn't see yet a link from you -- but maybe I missed it -- specifically on what NASA says they do to corrupted images.
 Quoting: clare

I don't need to provide any such link since I have already provided the uncorrupted raw images. I already explained how those images were corrupted, you utterly failed to comprehend the ramifications of that explanation though and wasted my time with a lengthy and totally irrelevant reply.
I would submit, however, they will not say they fill in with new information all areas which are missing and change previous and subsequent images to miss a star to cover for the error! Lol.
 Quoting: clare

How many times do I have say it? 5? 10? 20?! It's not new information, the corruption overwrites parts of the image with OLD information, from OLD pictures taken days before, NOT NEW INFORMATION! The problem occurs between the raw file and the processed jpg available online. The raw files do not contain or show any such problem.
I will at the same time hope you bother with any kind conciliatory message you would like to make back to me -- re. your words to me (manner) and to show me that you see:
 Quoting: clare

Conciliatory message? LOL, whatever. If you choose to believe that Nancy wasn't hiding anything by selectively cropping her images to not show the full extent of the corruption in the images, fine, you go be ignorant all you want, but you will get NO conciliatory response from me.
b) that I never suggested the images shouldn't be found and linked to.
 Quoting: clare

I never said you suggested that, I said you clearly wanted that by refusing to provide links to the images when they were repeatedly requested. You did go to the trouble of making long replies to those requests, but you would only reply with videos, not links to the images, wasting my time and hiding the originals. I will not give you the benefit of a doubt that you were just clueless on where and how to find those images.
c) that I somehow was "lying" in saying I couldn't access the images from SOHO. Whatever I did to pull them up pulled up not the right times.
 Quoting: clare

Oh right, like you don't even know how to type a date in a form correctly. You're not stupid clare, but you are a troll.
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 908953
Canada
06/12/2010 05:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Clare is a real expert on fakery, being one herself. First hand knowledge is a powerful thing.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 05:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I still get code only (some weird rectangle symbols mostly) at the .mil sites you linked to.

Good grief, you still don't know how to follow simple directions and save a file as a .fts file? You can't just open it in your browser, as I've said, you must save it as a .fts file... if you don't know how to do that then read your browser's help files or manual.

And I didn't see yet a link from you -- but maybe I missed it -- specifically on what NASA says they do to corrupted images.

I don't need to provide any such link since I have already provided the uncorrupted raw images. I already explained how those images were corrupted, you utterly failed to comprehend the ramifications of that explanation though and wasted my time with a lengthy and totally irrelevant reply.


I will at the same time hope you bother with any kind conciliatory message you would like to make back to me -- re. your words to me (manner) and to show me that you see:

Conciliatory message? LOL, whatever. If you choose to believe that Nancy wasn't hiding anything by selectively cropping her images to not show the full extent of the corruption in the images, fine, you go be ignorant all you want, but you will get NO conciliatory response from me.

b) that I never suggested the images shouldn't be found and linked to.

I never said you suggested that, I said you clearly wanted that by refusing to provide links to the images when they were repeatedly requested. You did go to the trouble of making long replies to those requests, but you would only reply with videos, not links to the images, wasting my time and hiding the originals. I will not give you the benefit of a doubt that you were just clueless on where and how to find those images.

c) that I somehow was "lying" in saying I couldn't access the images from SOHO. Whatever I did to pull them up pulled up not the right times.

Oh right, like you don't even know how to type a date in a form correctly. You're not stupid clare, but you are a troll.
 Quoting: Astronut


Astronut, most of this is drivel. What do you mean by troll here? Usually it means a shill or something like that, right? So what do you mean?


Not your issue, however, with the images.
I respect what you say there and hope that your upset at me about not seeing your post on "rewriting info" -- whichever one is the key one --


Okay, so when you say "original images" why was there reprocessing if it was okay to start with? Do you mean in converting the file from .fts to .jpg?

But still ...

If it rewrote the data in the area, why was Venus the demarcator -- both top and bottom and left and right? (Why did the information split at Venus?) And why did Venus and sky above and below show left-hand information at all? -- in fine proportion?

And why was the MIDDLE bright star below Venus missing in the previous and subsequent images?

Back to you again ...
I still didn't see your "lengthy reply" and am sorry about that. I asked you to re-post the date/time or page so I could find it easily. I have been replying to other posts as last few pages and then would run out of time and have to go. By the time I got back there was new stuff. Sorry! Seriously.



Regarding Nancy: she did NOT crop out the "compression errors". The issue is that it ISN'T compresion in her mind and my analysis of what compression would do -- to Venus, to stars and so on -- and how the edge information would be lost naturally is a comparative mutual exclusivity when applied over several images.

Your issue with .fts files (as when I clicked it was a link and I didn't know about that special format) might seem at first to be relevant but it's a straw man issue.

A person can know about mutual exclusive issues and so on and not know a particular file saving mechanism.

Did Michelangelo know Chinese printing? No, but he knew images.

:) I know both. Well, not as he did, quite. -- lol. Anyway, you get the point. It's a joke but it's a point.

And I do know Photoshop AND can think.

...........

I also know your test was unscientific, for the bridge. You MUST test the real proportional distances -- as you should know (/ do know?) -- and one can think it through as well.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 05:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Oh right, like you don't even know how to type a date in a form correctly. You're not stupid clare, but you are a troll.
 Quoting: Astronut


By the way, the problem wasn't the date.

The problem was whether I went to the right page or satellite name maybe:

I went to Lasco general option.

I tried C3 as well.

I didn't specify anything else.

It pulled up different image TIMEs for that date.

Here was my process:
archive: [link to sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov]
traditional archive choice: [link to sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov]
start the user interface: [link to seal.nascom.nasa.gov]

So, if I did something wrong here, please tell me.

But it still doesn't prove that I know nothing about images or that this image makes sense with the other ones ...

And yet, if the "original images" had no problems then why the reprocessing? Please explain (nicely) and tell me where your post is?

I AM interested, Astronut, in spite of your manner.
And I will have a look through the last 10 pages to see if it's there but I can't this next few hours, prob. --- so if you DO get this message please let me know what page is the one you would like me to notice.

Ty.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 06:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I don't need to provide any such link since I have already provided the uncorrupted raw images. I already explained how those images were corrupted, you utterly failed to comprehend the ramifications of that explanation though and wasted my time with a lengthy and totally irrelevant reply.
 Quoting: Astronut


By the way, Astronut -- I never saw your lengthy reply -- I was always playing catch-up with other items subsequent.

I cannot see the uncorrupted raw images so how do I do so?


I never said you suggested that, I said you clearly wanted that by refusing to provide links to the images when they were repeatedly requested. You did go to the trouble of making long replies to those requests, but you would only reply with videos, not links to the images, wasting my time and hiding the originals. I will not give you the benefit of a doubt that you were just clueless on where and how to find those images.
 Quoting: Astronut


As to not giving someone a benefit of a doubt: that is unscientific. You do not know whether I am telling the truth or not -- unless of course you actually see the MANNER of my replies. It seems you do not: many times if there is a brusqueness in my reply, you revert to thinking it's malice.

If you let that speak to you you will see overall my attempts to be forthright.

Now ...

I never "refused" to provide links. This is an ad hominem attack, for it's baseless. I was BUSY.

I wrote on what I thought at the time was important -- as you did, re. the bridge (lol) -- and if I made errors, I did. But I did not "refuse" (in the sense of a maliciousness) to give you images.

I didn't want you to hunt to tease you, just because I had little time and much to say elsewise, even if it was wrong. I had my priorities and the first thing you asked was the video.

Since the compression error -- if it was such -- was IN the video (and I thought you'd SEE that or KNOW that there was likely such a line, and I was suspecting a PHOTOSHOP line instead of a REAL compression error ...) I didn't think more than the video was necessary for you to see what was happening in a cursory way.

Finally, since you MIGHT BE ON LINE and want to look -- you might find the images before I could. I was presenting something anomalous. You want to debunk it, it's your job to look it up if there's something you need to find in order to do so, unless I'm around and know where it is easily and can find it for you. I didn't have that info at my fingertips. It wasn't MALICE.

But I did think the video was sufficient to see the error and compression and I was out of time ...

You should know better by now than to think I'm malicious! :-/
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 969583
United States
06/12/2010 06:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
So ... then, these "miopic" persons here would be thrown back on how to explain the Colaio non-memorials until now (new and back dated as they are now)?

 Quoting: mclarek 986233



You haven't produced any evidence of this.

Regardless, I've produced more than enough evidence BESIDES the memorial pages that the Colaio brothers exist.

You just can't accept any information that contradicts the theories you're shilling for.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 06:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Regarding Nancy: she did NOT crop out the "compression errors". The issue is that it ISN'T compresion in her mind and my analysis of what compression would do -- to Venus, to stars and so on -- and how the edge information would be lost naturally is a comparative mutual exclusivity when applied over several images.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233 to Astronut


I have said several times, btw, if you missed it, that the top edge colouration difference did show in the video (I thought) ... and on her site it's clear it's there, too.

So that's why I say Nancy wasn't hiding the compression if it was only compression.

But since it's not compression, she thinks, which does this, she doesn't mention the lines when Venus moves. To her that's insignificant.

To me it's a possibility it is pure compression but then why was Venus and sky filled in to the left, very well, and why were top and bottom of Venus sky was different (Venus the demarcator)?

Clare
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 908953
Canada
06/12/2010 06:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Why can I locate Venus anytime I like by using Mayan tables drawn up thousands of years ago? I'll tell you why. Because Venus is still where it should be, behaving as it always has, and the tables are accurate.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 06:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
So ... then, these "miopic" persons here would be thrown back on how to explain the Colaio non-memorials until now (new and back dated as they are now)?




You haven't produced any evidence of this.

Regardless, I've produced more than enough evidence BESIDES the memorial pages that the Colaio brothers exist.

You just can't accept any information that contradicts the theories you're shilling for.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 969583



The evidence is the screen shot (hard evidence) and the reputation of the researchers (which you impugn but it is not their conclusions which you can base that on; you have to base it on their track record of sleuthing -- and on that they are great).

What does the latter issue mean?:

Well, even if they're wrong in a given instance they have all along been careful to pull accurate info over the years to support their evidence (even if they come to false conclusions).

I have more than a passing experience with them and the sites they cite, and how their work has progressed to track different changes in media claims over the years. When stories go down (are scrubbed/changed), they do another video or page on how the change now appears.

In that sense they are excellent detectives and are not impugned by those who -- pro or con -- are very familiar with them and the claims of video fakery FOR THEMSELVES FAKING. Even their detractors know they do not do fakes.

So I trust their screen shot and description. It is hard evidence from these detective types at Sept. Clues.

And now there are "memorial mentions".

There is ALSO the context with the other fakes, like the Wanio pics. I am not saying she particularly can't have been real -- but her photos are fakes.

Contextual evidence IS ALSO hard evidence in the sense YOU need it ... in the sense that it is as strong as hard evidence if the latter is lacking. It is not technically the hard evidence, but we don't always have that.


But now to the former issue:

In this case, though, we do have hard evidence: the screen shot. I have described here how we can trust the makers of the page overall, so it is hard evidence.



Aside:

If you want more than Sept. Clues' work and screen shot ...

Do you think CNN would do a news article on its own fakery? No. You're going to find it IN THE WORK OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY LOOKING.

Sept. Clues is an excellent site for motives and method of collection of data over the years, whatever their conclusions.

One can tell by how thoroughly they track the video cuts from different years. (These have changed too: to cover up what used to be available but was more glaring evidence of fakery than some of what the official archives have up now.)
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/12/2010 06:22 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astronut, most of this is drivel. What do you mean by troll here? Usually it means a shill or something like that, right? So what do you mean?
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

See, there you go trolling again trying to get me to waste my time defining what the word "troll" means. Whatever.
Okay, so when you say "original images" why was there reprocessing if it was okay to start with? Do you mean in converting the file from .fts to .jpg?
 Quoting: clare

Linking to the jpg would have been original enough for me to clearly see was going on. Linking to the fits would have revealed that the most original form of the file was uncorrupted and undamaged. Converting to a jpg that can be displayed online is just one reason and way in which it is processed. As with all astrophotography, certain calibrations must be done in processing a raw image, be it from a spacecraft or a ground telescope. I'm not going to write an entire course in astrophotography here to explain the what and why of every possible calibration that can be done, but there are many things that need to be reprocessed. Some of the general areas that need to be addressed in each image include dynamic range compression (basically tonemapping), flat fields (if avaiable), permanent hot pixel subtraction (dark subtraction), bias frame subtraction, and so forth. These are the kinds of things that are done to each image automatically before it becomes a jpg you see online. The raw fits file does not have any adjustments, so it's uncorrupted by the process of reprocessing each image, but it's a double edged sword because it's not as easy to work with and by its nature it's uncalibrated.

But still ...

If it rewrote the data in the area, why was Venus the demarcator -- both top and bottom and left and right? (Why did the information split at Venus?)
 Quoting: clare

It isn't. You don't even know what you're looking at or how to look at it. If you play with the curves of the image you can see the corruption line runs past venus, it doesn't stop at venus (in fact, it runs the entire length of the visible image; you can see this by the disjunction it forms in the dark line caused by the occulting plate's holder bar), nor does it cut through venus, only through venus' bloom spike which spans a large part of the image anyway. From tip to tip, had the compression not truncated it, it would have spanned about 191 pixels. That's almost 20% of the image.
And why did Venus and sky above and below show left-hand information at all? -- in fine proportion?
 Quoting: clare

Because it was data from a previous day's image when the sky that far left of Venus WAS visible. How many times am I going to have to say this Clare? How many?

Just to be clear; I don't intend to shove your teeth down your throat, but you ARE this dense.
And why was the MIDDLE bright star below Venus missing in the previous and subsequent images?
 Quoting: clare

Same reason as above; Venus' position with respect to the stars changes day to day. The stars' positions all change in the previous and subsequent images for the same reason.
Regarding Nancy: she did NOT crop out the "compression errors".
 Quoting: clare

She cropped her images in such a way that I was unable to tell what was going on until I loaded the original full image. It's clear to me that she and you both did not want the full images to be seen. Of course neither one of you is going to admit this, but it's clear as day to me that her cropping of the images was way too tight and totally unnecessary. She could have simply animated the full three images, as others did on the ning, but she didn't go that route as she knew it gave away what was going on.
The issue is that it ISN'T compresion in her mind and my analysis of what compression would do -- to Venus, to stars and so on -- and how the edge information would be lost naturally is a comparative mutual exclusivity when applied over several images.
 Quoting: clare

I never said it was compression, it's not, it's corruption, and you clearly still don't understand the effect that old data overwriting parts of a new image has on the edge information, or more precisely, that it wouldn't be missing information even though it shows more to the left of venus than is seen in current images.
Your issue with .fts files (as when I clicked it was a link and I didn't know about that special format) might seem at first to be relevant but it's a straw man issue.

A person can know about mutual exclusive issues and so on and not know a particular file saving mechanism.
 Quoting: clare

Look, there is nothing mutually exclusive about the edge information in these images, you just don't get it. Your failure to save the fits files properly is preventing you from seeing what the uncorrupted image looks like, but it's your willful ignorance that is preventing you from "understanding" what should be seen or not seen to the left of venus in the corrupted image.
I also know your test was unscientific, for the bridge.
 Quoting: clare

I will not address this issue until you admit you were wrong. I can't believe you're still trolling me on this. You're the ONLY one here who still thinks you're right about that.

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 06/12/2010 06:25 PM
astrobanner2
Catseye
User ID: 999346
Dominican Republic
06/12/2010 06:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
When we make up words, we know the other people reading know they are made up - zetatards, for example. At least most readers with IQs above the Earth's AU range will know. But I believe Clare really thinks that as long as it can be spelled out, it is a word. Like assumptiveness. Yeah, I can assume what she thinks it means, but it's still not in the MW dictionary.

OMG Astronut, if you had read the past fifty pages, you would have seen that she doesn't answer about 90% of the questions posed to her. I hope you didn't waste too much time, though I imagine you probably were able to find all those references pretty quickly.

This all began as a simple "the moon does not rotate" argument and has since gradually bloomed into a "there's a conspiracy behind every fart" 'tard thesis.

Oh oh, I feel another quiz coming on . . .



wall


a) the hopelessness of Clare's lack of understanding
b) Astronut trying to reason with Clare (just recently, but it could apply to all of us)
c) what this thread makes me feel like doing



slaphim


a) this should be legal
b) what everyone wants to do to Clare
c) Nancy's secret handshake




anon

a) the anonymity of cyberspace
b) how Planet X was able to infiltrate the inner solar system without detection
c) 911 plane victim who opted out of witness protection


waaaht


a) what happens to your sense of reason when you watch The View
b) a normal person's first reaction upon hearing that earth has a dark twin hiding out on the other side of the sun
c) my face after skimming one of Clare's long, pointless posts, esp after she discovered red bold



beat_shot

a) bowling night at the 'tard convention (insert your own brand of 'tard here, ex. zetatard, claretard, 911missilepaintedtolooklikeplanetard)
b) how Nancy really channels
c) Planet X hitting an unbeliever


beat_plast


a) after bowling
b) Clare's ego when this is all over
c) what Hilary did to Bill after he did Monica


ops


a) Zeta graduate
b) the kind of face I'd have to have to suggest to someone's face that their loved one didn't really die in 911 like we've been told
c) BP manager who bypassed safety issues



adore


a) what people from Planet X look like
b) person with an air of ASSUMPTIVENESS that just won't quit
c) damned if I know, somebody ask the Zetas
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 06:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Why can I locate Venus anytime I like by using Mayan tables drawn up thousands of years ago? I'll tell you why. Because Venus is still where it should be, behaving as it always has, and the tables are accurate.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 908953

Duh.
Of course it is.

It was the IMAGE we were talking of, as manipulated in a deceptive way or not manipulated at all (just compression errors), or manipulated innocently by a re-write program.

And there are, I submit, some factors in the image and in it in context with the others, which suggest this image AS PRESENTED was fiddled with deceptively.

IF AND ONLY IF that is right ...
Perhaps now they've fixed it all on the .mil site and claim THOSE are originals?

I don't know. It's a possibility and I am not ruling it out. It can be innocent completely, but the issues I brought up do not fit simple rewriting or compression, because of what is consistent and where, and what is not.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 06:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
When we make up words, we know the other people reading know they are made up - zetatards, for example. At least most readers with IQs above the Earth's AU range will know. But I believe Clare really thinks that as long as it can be spelled out, it is a word. Like assumptiveness. Yeah, I can assume what she thinks it means, but it's still not in the MW dictionary.
 Quoting: Catseye 999346


banana2


Idiotic.

I can coin a word: Shakespeare did. It's called creativity.

And it's not because I don't know the language and just misspell or fall for an error which everyone now uses.

That would be "alot" for "a lot" and "alright" for "all right" -- something that crept in with some rockers who were sliding everything together and didn't know better either.
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/12/2010 06:28 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Oh oh, I feel another quiz coming on . . .
 Quoting: Catseye 999346

LMFAO! That's one of the funniest things I've read in a long time, thanks for that. That just made this all worth it.
astrobanner2
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 06:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
OMG Astronut, if you had read the past fifty pages, you would have seen that she doesn't answer about 90% of the questions posed to her. I hope you didn't waste too much time, though I imagine you probably were able to find all those references pretty quickly.

This all began as a simple "the moon does not rotate" argument and has since gradually bloomed into a "there's a conspiracy behind every fart" 'tard thesis.
 Quoting: Catseye 999346


bsflag

"OMG" Catseye, get your eyes checked out. What questions did I not answer that weren't baiting or unimportant -- very few.

I did miss some important ones on the Astronut / me SOHO problems. I have also shown I intend to answer them.

And "OMG", Catseye, you misrepresent the "moon does not rotate" issue STILL!

I never said it didn't rotate from the Sun's perspective. I said it didn't rotate RELATIVE TO THE EARTH. Anything else is a misrepresentation.

All the rest was semantic confusion for a time and the fact that Menow still at the end disavowed the differences in superposition and how that accounts for people saying the moon doesn't rotate.

So, Poll: who's an un-patient and biased reader?: Catseye? Yes, you.

peace

In this instance, anyway.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1001317
United Kingdom
06/12/2010 06:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
feedtroll
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 06:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Oh oh, I feel another quiz coming on . . .

LMFAO! That's one of the funniest things I've read in a long time, thanks for that. That just made this all worth it.
 Quoting: Astronut



Console yourself away, Astronut. You didn't even realize you have to do a PROPORTIONAL DISTANCE test if you're going to test the fakery.

And why.

..............

Or that the compression lines (if they are that) show in the video.

..............

Or that I don't "refuse to post" links in malice.



So.


Now, for the post I am waiting for: what was the problem with my pulling up the images on SOHO's site?

And where is your "lengthy post" with "all the rest" about the "rewriting" process. I am very interested to know.

Be back in a while.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/12/2010 06:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
feedtroll
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1001317

iamwith
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/12/2010 07:21 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Or that the compression lines (if they are that) show in the video.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

You're the only one here saying that they are that.
Now, for the post I am waiting for: what was the problem with my pulling up the images on SOHO's site?
 Quoting: clare

If you're having problems loading images from SOHO's site then it's your problem because it's working just fine for me.
And where is your "lengthy post" with "all the rest" about the "rewriting" process. I am very interested to know.
 Quoting: clare

WTF are you even talking about?
astrobanner2

News








We're dropping truth bombs like it's the end of days!