Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,726 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,775,891
Pageviews Today: 2,821,279Threads Today: 881Posts Today: 18,509
10:49 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

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

 
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/27/2010 11:41 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astronut might be able to answer
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 763977

It's not a bad question at all. Here's my answer in short form; worlwide telescope and google sky both suck. They're free, they're widely known and publicized, and neither one is anywhere near adequate for this kind of research. Always, always, always look to the primary source of the material. Here are the palomar sky survey images for those coordinates:
[link to archive.stsci.edu]

[link to archive.stsci.edu]

[link to archive.stsci.edu]

There's clearly nothing of significance there in the sky survey images. Note though how much more detail you can see in the original images than in google's and microsoft's watered-down mosaics. It's the same story with every sky survey image of those coordinates you can find, with the notable exception of hydrogen-alpha narrowband images; those show a huge bubble of nebulosity in that area, but it covers the entire region around Orion, not just that one splotch. There's nothing in any sky survey that corresponds to that splotch, yet the images for worldwide telescope were made directly from those sky surveys. Neither google nor microsoft did their own survey, they just took the images from previously-completed surveys and stitched them all together into a giant mosaic. It's a processing error on microsoft's side, which is also why it's unique to microsoft's software. Google and microsoft have their own proprietary ways of handling the data, and neither one are perfect. You must go to the original sky surveys to see what comes up. stsci is one, here's another good link for canvasing a lot of sky surveys at once:
[link to skyview.gsfc.nasa.gov]

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 06/27/2010 11:48 PM
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
06/28/2010 12:36 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Good answer, Nut. Thanks for always sharing your info!
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
06/28/2010 10:08 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astronut might be able to answer

It's not a bad question at all. Here's my answer in short form; worlwide telescope and google sky both suck. They're free, they're widely known and publicized, and neither one is anywhere near adequate for this kind of research. Always, always, always look to the primary source of the material. Here are the palomar sky survey images for those coordinates:
[link to archive.stsci.edu]

[link to archive.stsci.edu]

[link to archive.stsci.edu]

There's clearly nothing of significance there in the sky survey images. Note though how much more detail you can see in the original images than in google's and microsoft's watered-down mosaics. It's the same story with every sky survey image of those coordinates you can find, with the notable exception of hydrogen-alpha narrowband images; those show a huge bubble of nebulosity in that area, but it covers the entire region around Orion, not just that one splotch. There's nothing in any sky survey that corresponds to that splotch, yet the images for worldwide telescope were made directly from those sky surveys. Neither google nor microsoft did their own survey, they just took the images from previously-completed surveys and stitched them all together into a giant mosaic. It's a processing error on microsoft's side, which is also why it's unique to microsoft's software. Google and microsoft have their own proprietary ways of handling the data, and neither one are perfect. You must go to the original sky surveys to see what comes up. stsci is one, here's another good link for canvasing a lot of sky surveys at once:
[link to skyview.gsfc.nasa.gov]
 Quoting: Astronut

Thank you greatly for a rational, thoughtful response!
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
HarryHeiney

User ID: 22334
United States
06/28/2010 12:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Dude, I've been over there for a while and can't stand that shit no more. There is some kind of fight going on inside the moderators and a letter is going out to I guess new people becuase it says that all the mods quit or some shit and now Cheryl is not a mod no more. Decided it would be more fun to quit being anonymous coward over here.

Thanks for the Ning updates. I just won't go over there...


It's a veritable Deepwater Horizon of idiocy and a very good source of material for zetasquawk.com

There is a meteorologist who never heard of supercooling and thinks that water can only freeze at 32 degrees F. Then there's Cheryl who is the resident D&G poster.

It's positively amazing that there could be a gathering of 1,400+ idiots like that.

Oh, then there are the idiots who can't identify Mercury on STEREO or SOHO.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1015458

Bite my Harry Heiney
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
06/28/2010 12:18 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astronut might be able to answer

It's not a bad question at all. Here's my answer in short form; worlwide telescope and google sky both suck. They're free, they're widely known and publicized, and neither one is anywhere near adequate for this kind of research. Always, always, always look to the primary source of the material. Here are the palomar sky survey images for those coordinates:
[link to archive.stsci.edu]

[link to archive.stsci.edu]

[link to archive.stsci.edu]

There's clearly nothing of significance there in the sky survey images. Note though how much more detail you can see in the original images than in google's and microsoft's watered-down mosaics. It's the same story with every sky survey image of those coordinates you can find, with the notable exception of hydrogen-alpha narrowband images; those show a huge bubble of nebulosity in that area, but it covers the entire region around Orion, not just that one splotch. There's nothing in any sky survey that corresponds to that splotch, yet the images for worldwide telescope were made directly from those sky surveys. Neither google nor microsoft did their own survey, they just took the images from previously-completed surveys and stitched them all together into a giant mosaic. It's a processing error on microsoft's side, which is also why it's unique to microsoft's software. Google and microsoft have their own proprietary ways of handling the data, and neither one are perfect. You must go to the original sky surveys to see what comes up. stsci is one, here's another good link for canvasing a lot of sky surveys at once:
[link to skyview.gsfc.nasa.gov]

Thank you greatly for a rational, thoughtful response!
 Quoting: George B

Since the sky surveys are taken at different dates . . . I assume; is it at all possible that one source could have captured a moving object and the other/s not? If so . . . how likely would it be that such an event could occur without other astronomy sources being aware?
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
06/28/2010 12:23 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
The links I posted give you access to the same surveys used by google and microsoft.

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 06/28/2010 12:30 PM
astrobanner2
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
06/28/2010 12:40 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
The links I posted give you access to the same surveys used by google and microsoft.
 Quoting: Astronut

I get it . . . Thanks!
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
HarryHeiney

User ID: 22334
United States
06/28/2010 01:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Dude, I've been over there for a while and can't stand that shit no more. There is some kind of fight going on inside the moderators and a letter is going out to I guess new people becuase it says that all the mods quit or some shit and now Cheryl is not a mod no more. Decided it would be more fun to quit being anonymous coward over here.

How long did your post last? As far as the dissent it was
predicted. We saw how the blog Nancy set up went, and knew
that the same thing would happen to the Ningcompoops. Looks
like the Facebook page Cheryl set up is gone too.
 Quoting: DrPostman


I never posted there. Just watched the fun happen. There are some batshit people there, man. hiding
Bite my Harry Heiney
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/28/2010 01:26 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
The links I posted give you access to the same surveys used by google and microsoft.

I get it . . . Thanks!
 Quoting: George B

No problem. Assuming the pictures from wwt were with the "digitized sky survey" layer turned on, the particular sky survey you were looking at was indeed the same as the one on the STSCI links. The other sky surveys available in WWT are available in the last link.
astrobanner2
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
06/28/2010 02:40 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
The links I posted give you access to the same surveys used by google and microsoft.

I get it . . . Thanks!

No problem. Assuming the pictures from wwt were with the "digitized sky survey" layer turned on, the particular sky survey you were looking at was indeed the same as the one on the STSCI links. The other sky surveys available in WWT are available in the last link.
 Quoting: Astronut


Thanks again . . .

Astronut,
I have a technical question for you . . . if I may?

If you know the Right Ascension (Longitude) and the Declination (Latitude) of an object over, let us say 10 days in which it moves from one coordinate to another coordinate.

RA 6h 42m 8.44s, Dec 41 40' 18.94" . . . First Day
RA 6h 41m 55.77s, Dec 41 35' 19.45" . . . Ten Days later

Could you tell if the object was traveling away, toward or parallel to Earth's Orbit? If you can, in the example above which way is it moving?
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: 634208
United States
06/28/2010 02:56 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
RA 6h 42m 8.44s, Dec 41 40' 18.94" . . . First Day
RA 6h 41m 55.77s, Dec 41 35' 19.45" . . . Ten Days later

Could you tell if the object was traveling away, toward or parallel to Earth's Orbit? If you can, in the example above which way is it moving?
 Quoting: George B

Not enough information. You need more observations (over the course of about three nights of observing, preferrably separated by a week or two) and you need to know the observer's exact location. Here's some software which can solve for the orbit using that information in what is known as the Gauss' method for orbit determination. From there you can plug the orbit into a variety of programs to visualize the orbit and its relationship to earth.
[link to www.projectpluto.com]

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 06/28/2010 02:58 PM
astrobanner2
Menow
User ID: 1003573
United States
06/28/2010 02:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astronut might be able to answer

It's not a bad question at all. Here's my answer in short form; worlwide telescope and google sky both suck.

 Quoting: Astronut

The PXers always depend on the poorest observation methods so they can think they find PX within their LARGE margins of error. That has been a constant from the beggining. It's how Nancy has always operated, too.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1018818
United Kingdom
06/28/2010 03:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
That is just what I said above . . . I am aware that repeated verifiable observance is required to confirm any anomaly.
 Quoting: George B


But you consistently IMPLY that such anomalies are evidence of Planet X. Even if they are genuine anomalies (rather than image defects/artefacts etc.) they are certainly not evidence of Nancy's Planet X, because Nancy's Planet X is completely impossible and ridiculous.

Every claimed physical property of Nancy's Planet X is not compatible with what we know about the Universe, which means it is a figment of Nancy's stupid mind and does not exist in the real world.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1018818
United Kingdom
06/28/2010 03:48 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Thank you greatly for a rational, thoughtful response!
 Quoting: George B


It's a pity you can't develop a rational, thoughtful mind.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1018818
United Kingdom
06/28/2010 03:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astronut might be able to answer

It's not a bad question at all. Here's my answer in short form; worlwide telescope and google sky both suck.


The PXers always depend on the poorest observation methods so they can think they find PX within their LARGE margins of error. That has been a constant from the beggining. It's how Nancy has always operated, too.
 Quoting: Menow 1003573


Precisely! This is why the 'best' images of Planet X tend to come from web cams!
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 634208
United States
06/28/2010 04:14 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astronut might be able to answer

It's not a bad question at all. Here's my answer in short form; worlwide telescope and google sky both suck.


The PXers always depend on the poorest observation methods so they can think they find PX within their LARGE margins of error. That has been a constant from the beggining. It's how Nancy has always operated, too.


Precisely! This is why the 'best' images of Planet X tend to come from web cams!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1018818

Sorry, can't help myself, I have to nitpick; good images of planets are quite possible with webcams:
jupiter200
Yeah, I know, this kind of quality is never what you see when it comes to "planet X" or "nibiru" images :P . It's all about how you use the tools at your disposal, and with nibirutards they're always being used inappropriately, which is precisely why they find problems and errors.
astrobanner2
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
06/28/2010 04:26 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
RA 6h 42m 8.44s, Dec 41 40' 18.94" . . . First Day
RA 6h 41m 55.77s, Dec 41 35' 19.45" . . . Ten Days later

Could you tell if the object was traveling away, toward or parallel to Earth's Orbit? If you can, in the example above which way is it moving?

Not enough information. You need more observations (over the course of about three nights of observing, preferrably separated by a week or two) and you need to know the observer's exact location. Here's some software which can solve for the orbit using that information in what is known as the Gauss' method for orbit determination. From there you can plug the orbit into a variety of programs to visualize the orbit and its relationship to earth.
[link to www.projectpluto.com]
 Quoting: Astronut

Thanks!
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
06/28/2010 04:38 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
That is just what I said above . . . I am aware that repeated verifiable observance is required to confirm any anomaly.


But you consistently IMPLY that such anomalies are evidence of Planet X. Even if they are genuine anomalies (rather than image defects/artefacts etc.) they are certainly not evidence of Nancy's Planet X, because Nancy's Planet X is completely impossible and ridiculous.

Every claimed physical property of Nancy's Planet X is not compatible with what we know about the Universe, which means it is a figment of Nancy's stupid mind and does not exist in the real world.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1018818

Number 1. I never implied any such thing. My original statement was quote: "Talking about Nancy and Planet-X. I found these three clips that I would like your take on . . ." You took the liberty to interpret what my motives are or what I think . . . you are wrong.
Number 2. I have never stated that Nancy was anything but nuts.
Number 3. I present issues and so called evidence to clarify what the common man may or may not fully understand.

Last Edited by George B on 06/28/2010 11:58 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
Catseye

User ID: 1016953
Dominican Republic
06/28/2010 04:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astronut might be able to answer

It's not a bad question at all. Here's my answer in short form; worlwide telescope and google sky both suck.


The PXers always depend on the poorest observation methods so they can think they find PX within their LARGE margins of error. That has been a constant from the beggining. It's how Nancy has always operated, too.


Precisely! This is why the 'best' images of Planet X tend to come from web cams!

Sorry, can't help myself, I have to nitpick; good images of planets are quite possible with webcams:
jupiter200
Yeah, I know, this kind of quality is never what you see when it comes to "planet X" or "nibiru" images :P . It's all about how you use the tools at your disposal, and with nibirutards they're always being used inappropriately, which is precisely why they find problems and errors.
 Quoting: Astronut




WOW!!! Awesome photo! You took that, right? Do you happen to know which moons those are? I just love Jupiter and Saturn, I can stare at them for hours, even someone else's pics. Thanks for sharing.


applause2
Forgive your enemies, it messes with their heads.
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 634208
United States
06/28/2010 05:26 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
WOW!!! Awesome photo! You took that, right? Do you happen to know which moons those are? I just love Jupiter and Saturn, I can stare at them for hours, even someone else's pics. Thanks for sharing.
 Quoting: Catseye

Thanks! Yeah, that's my best photo of Jupiter so far. The moon on the far left is Io and to its right is Europa.
astrobanner2
Catseye

User ID: 1016953
Dominican Republic
06/28/2010 10:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
WOW!!! Awesome photo! You took that, right? Do you happen to know which moons those are? I just love Jupiter and Saturn, I can stare at them for hours, even someone else's pics. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks! Yeah, that's my best photo of Jupiter so far. The moon on the far left is Io and to its right is Europa.
 Quoting: Astronut



Io and Europa . . . just knowing it's those two makes it doubly cool! I guess you won't mind, I've saved the pic.



thumbs
Forgive your enemies, it messes with their heads.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
06/29/2010 12:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astronut might be able to answer

It's not a bad question at all. Here's my answer in short form; worlwide telescope and google sky both suck.


The PXers always depend on the poorest observation methods so they can think they find PX within their LARGE margins of error. That has been a constant from the beggining. It's how Nancy has always operated, too.


Precisely! This is why the 'best' images of Planet X tend to come from web cams!

Sorry, can't help myself, I have to nitpick; good images of planets are quite possible with webcams:
:jupiter200:
Yeah, I know, this kind of quality is never what you see when it comes to "planet X" or "nibiru" images :P . It's all about how you use the tools at your disposal, and with nibirutards they're always being used inappropriately, which is precisely why they find problems and errors.
 Quoting: Astronut



How did you get that with a webcam?!?!?!? Amazing!
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/29/2010 08:53 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
How did you get that with a webcam?!?!?!? Amazing!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

Lots of practice with frame stacking and careful focus. The poor little webcam doesn't even have a lens of its own, it just plugs into the telescope and uses that as the lens.
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 218281
United States
06/29/2010 10:25 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astronut might be able to answer

It's not a bad question at all. Here's my answer in short form; worlwide telescope and google sky both suck.


The PXers always depend on the poorest observation methods so they can think they find PX within their LARGE margins of error. That has been a constant from the beggining. It's how Nancy has always operated, too.


Precisely! This is why the 'best' images of Planet X tend to come from web cams!

Sorry, can't help myself, I have to nitpick; good images of planets are quite possible with webcams:
:jupiter200:
Yeah, I know, this kind of quality is never what you see when it comes to "planet X" or "nibiru" images :P . It's all about how you use the tools at your disposal, and with nibirutards they're always being used inappropriately, which is precisely why they find problems and errors.



How did you get that with a webcam?!?!?!? Amazing!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444



Actually, webcams are the preferred method of shooting planets. Planets are bright, so sensitivity isn't an issue. The problem with planets is that they are SMALL (small angular diameter, even in scopes) so you have to apply magnification by using barlow lenses, which amplifies atmospheric distortions. By shooting thousands of frames of video and using software to pick out the ones with best definition (each frame differs from atmospheric motions) and aligning and stacking those, you can get quite good images of the planets. Here are some references:

[link to www.astro.shoregalaxy.com]

[link to cs.astronomy.com]

[link to www.willbell.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1019736
United States
06/29/2010 12:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I never posted there. Just watched the fun happen. There are some batshit people there, man. hiding

Yep. Folks like that need the protection of a tightly
controlled web board. Unfortunately that also ends up
leading to infighting and destroys it in the end.
 Quoting: DrPostman


The second blog post concerning moderators is gone off the ning.

[link to www.zetasquawk.com]

I quoted both with links on the above.
Setheory
User ID: 869850
United States
06/29/2010 12:20 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I never posted there. Just watched the fun happen. There are some batshit people there, man. hiding

Yep. Folks like that need the protection of a tightly
controlled web board. Unfortunately that also ends up
leading to infighting and destroys it in the end.


The second blog post concerning moderators is gone off the ning.

[link to www.zetasquawk.com]

I quoted both with links on the above.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1019736



Isn’t it funny how they “claim” the government is doing all of this “covering up” concerning information that they do not want the public to see? After all of that tripe, they are actually caught doing that exact same thing in a tangible and verifiable way. Just too funny!
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
06/29/2010 04:19 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Thank you greatly for a rational, thoughtful response!


It's a pity you can't develop a rational, thoughtful mind.

Come on dude, George is trying to learn, unlike the Zidiots
we used to have on GLP.
 Quoting: DrPostman

Thanks, I appreciate your comment . . .
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
Setheory
User ID: 869850
United States
06/29/2010 04:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Thank you greatly for a rational, thoughtful response!


It's a pity you can't develop a rational, thoughtful mind.

Come on dude, George is trying to learn, unlike the Zidiots
we used to have on GLP.
 Quoting: DrPostman


<laughing>

"used to have"? Surely this must be a typo DrPostman.
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
06/29/2010 04:58 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
RA 6h 42m 8.44s, Dec 41 40' 18.94" . . . First Day
RA 6h 41m 55.77s, Dec 41 35' 19.45" . . . Ten Days later

Could you tell if the object was traveling away, toward or parallel to Earth's Orbit? If you can, in the example above which way is it moving?

Not enough information. You need more observations (over the course of about three nights of observing, preferrably separated by a week or two) and you need to know the observer's exact location. Here's some software which can solve for the orbit using that information in what is known as the Gauss' method for orbit determination. From there you can plug the orbit into a variety of programs to visualize the orbit and its relationship to earth.
[link to www.projectpluto.com]
 Quoting: Astronut

C - Mars 2
Aim point RA: 6h 41m 55s Dec: +41°35'19" Fri 2010 Apr 9 19:23 UTC

[link to www.fourmilab.ch]

Astornut,

I would like your opinion regarding the coordinates we discussed yesterday. An individual claims that they used an IR capable camera and recorded an object at the coordinates RA: 6h 42m 8.44s, Dec: 41 40' 18.94" on 20 March 2010 from a location in southern Michigan. He later recorded an identical or similar object at 6h 41m 55.77s, 41 35'; 41 35' 19.45" on 9 April 2010. After consulting 'Your Sky' at [link to www.fourmilab.ch] (see graph above) it seems this object is found fairly close to the orbit of Mars. With your knowledge of camera capable telescopes which have the ability to record coordinates . . . is it possible:
1. The object may well be Mars because of the close proximity . . .
2. Some other star the individual is confusing the object with . . .
3. Individual has no clue of what he is doing . . .
4. He has possibly found something unique . . . .

Thanks for your time!

Source Material: IR Image’s location from YOUTUBE:
6h 42m 8.44s, 41 40’ 18.94” on 032010 [link to www.youtube.com]
6h 41m 55.77s, 41 35’ 19.45” 040910 At 1:15 AM EST
[link to www.youtube.com]

Last Edited by George B on 06/29/2010 05:13 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: 634208
United States
06/29/2010 05:11 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Astornut,

I would like your opinion regarding the coordinates we discussed yesterday. An individual claims that they used an IR capable camera and recorded an object at the coordinates RA: 6h 42m 8.44s, Dec: 41 40' 18.94" on 20 March 2010 from a location in southern Michigan. He later recorded an identical or similar object at 6h 41m 55.77s, 41 35'; 41 35' 19.45" on 9 April 2010.
 Quoting: George B

I knew those coordinates looked oddly familiar. Yes, I'm familiar with Jcattera's lies... err, claims. When his video first came to light on GLP I immediately checked those coordinates and the surrounding area with my own IR camera and telescope. I later uploaded that rather uneventful video to youtube:
[link to www.youtube.com]
I also took a frame from his first video and performed astrometry on it and found that he was flat-out lying about the coordinates he was looking at. I had to photoshop out his "anomaly" since the astrometry software doesn't account for planets in an image and if they look star-like it rejects the image. Even if his anomaly were real it would have rejected it since that point of light would not fit when pattern matching to the background starfield:
[link to www.flickr.com]
The coordiantes for the image indicate that it WAS Mars in his field of view and that it was a huge distance from where he claimed to be pointing. He was lying about the real coordinates both to conceal the fact that he was seeing mars and I believe he deliberately chose coordinates corresponding to a blank spot on google sky so that layman researchers would think there was "something more to it." A video much later on claimed to show that his anomaly had moved even farther, but astrometry of that video proved he was still lying about the coordinates and was now pointing at the star Dubhe:
[link to www.flickr.com]
Of course he censors all negative comments of his videos and rejected my attempt to post my footage of his coordinates as a video response.

The whole ordeal was played out in this thread:
Thread: Did this guy just discover Planet X?
I started broadcasting a live view of his coordinates starting on page 12.

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 06/29/2010 05:20 PM
astrobanner2

News