It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did the Space Shuttle dock at the Secret Space Station tonight?

page: 13
39
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton

How about a little more on that now eh?
Woomera is somewhere I have an interest in


No problem Chorlton.. but you will have to wait a bit... We are in negotiation right now on rights to reprint some documents and rights to present the data. I promise as soon as we get that squared away we will present it

Now as an addition to the Smart 1 impact...

perhaps it will help to see the dust cloud in motion... to get a better idea of the dispersal...





This mosaic was built with infrared images taken by the Canada -France- Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) 3 September 2006, and shows the flash and the dust cloud that followed the SMART-1 impact. The 15 exposures that make up the mosaic start with the one taken at the time of the flash. Courtesy of ESA/CFHT. (Click on image for hires version) ID number: SEM3353VRRE


www.esa.int...

You will notice that the ESA says DUST CLOUD





posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
So its a big joke to you that with all the threads I posted that image in I had simply forgotten I did not post it in this one...

Its funny because you made a big deal out of it, like we were all avoiding some big smoking gun piece of data or something.


Originally posted by zorgon
I suppose you never make a simple slip huh?

Sure and I expect to take lumps for it when I do too.


Originally posted by zorgon
It is the Impact of Smart 1, the ESA spacecraft. It raised a plume of dust that dissipated in that peculiar pattern. Each frame is a minute apart and the area shown is approximately 3 km x 2km

Ok, so it was an impact then, whether it was man made or not. This is exactly what I said it looked like.
I still don’t get the big conspiracy about it. Is one of the ejecta pieces shaped like a piece of mining equipment or something?


Originally posted by zorgon
you can't beat the data, resort to name calling. Perhaps if you were not snooping in directories where you don't belong, you would not be visiting those boys...

I don’t see why you care what I call the owner of that website, and have yet to see any data. Simply some blurry pictures.

If you would have posted a link to more then just the pictures I would not have been trying to find the page it came from to read what I was supposed to be seeing. I hardly call chopping the last word off of a URL and going to its parent page snooping.

Either way its still infantile to be forwarding wrong url requests to the FBI home page, and I am sure they would not be happy about it.


Originally posted by zorgon
and calling me a Moron and insulting those that share my views and my research show we must be getting to you.

Oh, now I get why your all up in arms about the website remark…
Besides there have been plenty of insults that have come the way of those of us who can see this thread for what it is.

Ill get to the harder answers later on, when I have some time to devote to it.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by defcon5




I posted a link to your photographic evidence for the astronomy guys over at “Dr. Phil Plaits Bad Astronomy Website” .



I would respectfully call that traiterous and disrespectful consorting with the enemy.
But I would not be surprised at this kind of conduct by you Defcon5. After all, is this not your modus operandi?

I would humbly submit that ATS has a far more informed membership. We don't feel its our job going from forum to forum educating the less informed masses. If they feel like they want to know the "Secrets of the Universe" they are more than welcome to join up.

Please don't consider yourself an appointed or self-appointed emissary from the John Lear thread "Did The Space Shuttle Dock At The Secret Space Station Tonight" because you are not.

Thanks for the post.






I have liked almost everything you have ever said up to this point.

Exactly who do you think you are again?

John, get off your high horse. You have a nack for conspiracy. Don't ruin it by resorting to the same sort of mind control the government uses.

You do not hold the "Secrets of the Universe", and neither does ATS. ATS is good, I agree; however, you have no idea what other people know.

I have a feeling you need people to come to ATS so you can get clicks on your banners. You could always become a Wal-Mart greeter. Freddy Blood, a former trainer of the drummer from Def Leppard, he's a Wal-Mart greeter here in Saratoga Springs, NY. I think it suits you.

Oh, and don't forget to keep looking up.


EDIT: to close off bold tag.

[edit on 9/5/2007 by TarzanBeta]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Originally posted by TarzanBeta



John, get off your high horse. You have a nack for conspiracy. Don't ruin it by resorting to the same sort of mind control the government uses.


OK, getting off. My paragraph went from tongue in cheek to nasty.

Thanks for the heads up Tarzan Beta.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 10:27 AM
link   
John, that was awesome

(psst, who is tarzan beta, btw? threatening you with a walmart job? you work for tarzan?
in what capacity?)


[edit on 5-9-2007 by undo]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Originally posted by defcon5




I still don’t get the big conspiracy about it. Is one of the ejecta pieces shaped like a piece of mining equipment or something?



Ever see a bucket wheel excavator defcon5!!!!!





posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 12:31 PM
link   
with the technology that we have (well, with the technology that extra-terrestrial / UFO related conspiracy theories say we have), wouldn't it be useful to use like a, um i don't know, cloaking device or something


any super-secret space station shouldn't be visible from earth


plus nasa should be smart enough to cover up the extra time, right???

why was there a detailed description of the times available to the public






posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Originally posted by jra



Could you provide the interview that you read where he stated it was a space station and that it was black?


I could but I think it would be a waste of time. With all due respect.



Not quite. If you simply looked up for yourself what all went on instead of imagining and fantasizing, you'd know why it took as long as it did. Operating the shuttle isn't like commercial aviation at all. There is all sorts of preperation to go through, and yes, resting. Believe it or not, but performing EVA's and working up in space can a high stress job and it can be exausting.

It's not as simple as just undocking from the ISS and landing right away.



JRA. With all due respect you should know that your arguments and explanations are getting weaker and weaker. There are many people reading this thread that are very interested in whether or not there might be one or more secret space stations. Many of those would instantly see through your "high stress". "exhausting" and "naps" right after undocking comments. I know I do.



Cargo planes don't take off vertically, nor do they go shooting up out of the atmosphere in a matter of minutes. The cargo needs to be very secure, more than what you'd do in a cargo plane. And just because you see some extra space in the bay doesn't mean they can pack it all in with extra stuff.


Why not? Did you think that vertical acceleration is different from horizontal acceleration? I am pretty sure that you are referring to the rate and not the fact that it is vertical. Am I correct?


That makes no sense, how would it be harder to hide using the progress to deliver supplies to the supposed SSS than the Shuttle?


Take a stab at it JRA. You tell me why it would be harder to hide Progress. I don't mind pointing you in the right direction JRA but I am not going to spoon feed you.


Also, why does the SSS get all the supplies and the ISS none according to you?


So now we are debating the division of the supplies, not whether or not they are being delivered to the secret space station? Is this correct?


Again, show me the interview where he says it's a black space station. I'm not saying you're wrong. I just haven't ever seen him say that.


If the issue of whether or not Gary said he saw a black space station becomes critical in our debate, I will find the interview. But until you are just about ready to concede that there might be a secret space station in the same orbit as ISS, and is used for cargo being shuttled from the moon, and is secretly being supplied by our Space Shuttle by using the 3 days after launch before docking with the ISS and 2 days after undocking before landing, I am going to respectfully decline doing your search for you.


Secondly, black is the worst colour to make a space station. Black absorbs light and thus heat. There's a reason why, most space ships/stations/space suits are either reflective or white.


Depends on what you use for camouflage? Check with Joe Resnik. (2nd request.) He is the expert. Have you read any of his patents and do you know the technology of what he developed. Actually, do you even know who the heck Joe Resnik is?

Thanks for the post JRA. As I mentioned before, many people are looking carefully at this thread to see if there might in fact be another and secret space station. They are intrigued by the circumstantial evidence and are further intrigued by whether or not NASA can account for the missing 3 days before docking and 2 days after docking, which the Space Shuttle uses to travel, dock, and deliver and pickup cargo from the secret space stations which you are attributing to checklists, exhaustion and naps.

If you can't come up with any better excuses for the unaccounted 3 days before, the unaccounted 2 days after docking and undocking, the quarter ton of fresh fruit, John Lenards photos and Gary McKinnons testimony plus the hundreds and hundreds of alleged 'spy satellite' launches with no spy satellite, plus the numerous photos of mining operations on the moon I would respectfully suggest that the scales are going to gently tip in the direction of what I am alleging: one or more secret space stations in orbit with ISS, shuttle cargo operations from lunar orbit to low earth orbit and lunar mining operations that have been operations for many years.

Have a nice day.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Originally posted by they see ALL




with the technology that we have (well, with the technology that extra-terrestrial / UFO related conspiracy theories say we have), wouldn't it be useful to use like a, um i don't know, cloaking device or something


any super-secret space station shouldn't be visible from earth


plus nasa should be smart enough to cover up the extra time, right???

why was there a detailed description of the times available to the public



Thanks for the post they see ALL.

I can't tell whether these are questions or comments.

If these are questions but cloaked in sarcasm I would respectfully suggest that you rephrase them.

If these are just plain old questions, they are not clear to me. I would respectfully request that you rephrase them.

If they are just plain comments and don't require an answer:

Thanks for your post they see All. It is truly appeciated.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Thanks for the post they see ALL.


no problem...


I can't tell whether these are questions or comments.


it's quite simple, really...

the question mark means that it's a question



If these are questions but cloaked in sarcasm I would respectfully suggest that you rephrase them.


nope, there is no sarcasm here...

i really want to know what you think about these questions...


If these are just plain old questions, they are not clear to me. I would respectfully request that you rephrase them.


i'll make it easy for you:

the following are regular, plain, old questions:

1.) with the technology that various extra-terrestrial / UFO related conspiracy theories say we have, wouldn't it be useful to use a "cloaking device" or something?

2.) obviously any super-secret space station shouldn't be visible from earth, right?

3.) plus, nasa should be smart enough to cover up the extra time (the 52 hours you mention in your opening post)?

4.) why was there a detailed description of the times available to the public?

if you have any other questions that will help you answer my questions more fluently, just ask...




[edit on 5-9-2007 by they see ALL]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 02:24 PM
link   


He is the expert. Have you read any of his patents and do you know the technology of what he developed. Actually, do you even know who the heck Joe Resnik is?


www.zoominfo.com... rsonDetail.aspx?PersonID=88572534&QueryID=99f4b2c4-d5c9-4a41-bd90-a937e8975d34

I heard he's the big wig who owns the rights to the moon's minerals.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Originally posted by they see ALL





1.) with the technology that various extra-terrestrial / UFO related conspiracy theories say we have, wouldn't it be useful to use a "cloaking device" or something?


Yes.



2.) obviously any super-secret space station shouldn't be visible from earth, right?


Secret space stations are difficult to conceal because they are so large and because of the sun shining on them. Guy Cramer, Tim O'Neill and Joe Resnik develope camouflage for the U.S. Government and some of their developments could be used to help hide the secret space station. Whether they are used in that capacity or not I do not know.

As careful as they are to hide the secret space stations, if you know where and when to look they are visible.

Some were designed and built to present the lowest profile looking at it from earth but there is just so much you can do.


3.) plus, nasa should be smart enough to cover up the extra time (the 52 hours you mention in your opening post)?


You would think so but apparently not. They may use the old JRA suggestions, "checklists" "that sort of thing" "naps" but none are going to account fully for the 3 days before and 2 days after.

What they should have done was fill those unaccounted for hours with inflight experiments, maybe something that the public could see. But they can't draw attention to exactly where they are because they are docked at the secret space station. They probably just decided not to do or say anything hoping nobody would notice that there was 3 days unaccounted for going up and 2 days unaccounted for going down. ("We spent 48 hours on checklists before we pressed 'Engage" on the autopilot!
)They have some very complex timing problems arriving and departing the secret space stations. The departure times have to accurately match the original orbit times beginninng when they originally left the ISS.

But NASA should be good at that because in the original Apollo moon orbiting and landings in order for the moons gravity to be one sixth that of earth the orbits had to last 2 hours when in fact the gravity is at least 64% percent that of earths and the actual orbiting time for the moon was one hour. They had to match 2 way communicaton times to when it was theoretically possible to when it was technically possible just in case anybody was keeping track.


4.) why was there a detailed description of the times available to the public?


Why wouldn't there be?


if you have any other questions that will help you answer my questions more fluently, just ask...


OK. Let me see if I have this straight: If I have any questions that will help me answer your questions more fluently, just ask?"

How about "Is English your first language?"

Thanks for the post.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Why wouldn't there be?


i don't know...

if there is a conspiracy (if they're trying to hide a space station), then why would they disclose a huge case of missing time (or, in this case, too much time)???


OK. Let me see if I have this straight: If I have any questions that will help me answer your questions more fluently, just ask?"


it's kind of a tung twister, eh???

i thought it was clear enough...


How about "Is English your first language?"


ouch, no need to poke fun...

i am just trying to sink my teeth into this fantastic story / claim...




jra

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Why not? Did you think that vertical acceleration is different from horizontal acceleration? I am pretty sure that you are referring to the rate and not the fact that it is vertical. Am I correct?


Yes I am referring to the rate that the Shuttle accellerates compared to a cargo plane. Also I'm sure being in the vertical position and later in 0 gravity means the cargo needs to be very secure in the hold.


Take a stab at it JRA. You tell me why it would be harder to hide Progress. I don't mind pointing you in the right direction JRA but I am not going to spoon feed you.


I'm not asking you to "spoon feed" me. You made the claim, it's only fair if you explain why. I can't tell you why it would be harder, because I don't believe it would be harder to hide than the Shuttle. Understand?


So now we are debating the division of the supplies, not whether or not they are being delivered to the secret space station? Is this correct?


Well you brought it up and you seem to know so much about it. I was curious.


If the issue of whether or not Gary said he saw a black space station becomes critical in our debate, I will find the interview.


It is important if you're going to try to use it to help your case for the exsistance of a SSS.


But until you are just about ready to concede that there might be a secret space station in the same orbit as ISS, and is used for cargo being shuttled from the moon, and is secretly being supplied by our Space Shuttle by using the 3 days after launch before docking with the ISS and 2 days after undocking before landing, I am going to respectfully decline doing your search for you.


So I have to admit that there could be a SSS before you'd try to back up what you claim? Give me a break John.


Actually, do you even know who the heck Joe Resnik is?


No I do not know who he is, and a search didn't turn up much of anything either.


...many people are looking carefully at this thread to see if there might in fact be another and secret space station. They are intrigued by the circumstantial evidence...


And you provided this "circumstantial evidence" where? All i've seen in speculation, at best.


and are further intrigued by whether or not NASA can account for the missing 3 days before docking and 2 days after docking, which the Space Shuttle uses to travel, dock, and deliver and pickup cargo from the secret space stations...


They can and they have, but you chose to dismiss it without a good explination.


which you are attributing to checklists, exhaustion and naps.


On August 19th the shuttle undocked and instead of doing a station fly-around, which is normally done, was cancelled to give the crew some extra down time after a busy two weeks. An inspection of the tiles on the Nose and leading edges of the wings was also done.

On August 20th, a number of pre-landing check-out tests were done, these don't take that long, but they are always done the day before landing. I assume this is to give some buffer time in case any problems may arrise durring these tests, so that they have time to fix them and that they don't have to delay there scheduled landing. They also configured the Spacehab for entry, a couple of them worked with the Shuttle landing simulator and some last minute equipment stowage was done.

Also several of them took the time to talk to some Canadian students. Probably a standard Q&A session.

On August 21st, the bay doors are closed, the Shuttle software is configured to landing mode and re-erntry suits are put on by the crew. The astronauts then begin to drink lots of fluids, generally referred to as "fluid loading". This is to help them re-adjust to gravity and to prevent hypotension. Then, before the deorbit burn, the 'go' is given for the weather conditions. And then about 2.5 hours later the crew is given the 'go' to begin there deorbit burn.

That's about it in a nutshell.


If you can't come up with any better excuses for the unaccounted 3 days before, the unaccounted 2 days after docking and undocking


We can and we have. Can you provide anything that's more than just speculation and fantasy?


the quarter ton of fresh fruit


Astronauts are people too, and they need to eat. From what I've read, an Astronaut consumes about 30kg a day. The three astronauts on the ISS will consume about 2.8 metric tons of food and water in a month. That fruit won't last long at all.


John Lenards photos


You mean those blurry/fuzzy images which don't really prove anything?


and Gary McKinnons testimony


Which so far has nothing to do with this topic of SSS.


plus the hundreds and hundreds of alleged 'spy satellite' launches with no spy satellite


And your evidence to support this claim is where?


plus the numerous photos of mining operations on the moon


Which I consider to be extremely questionable to put it mildly.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
I still don’t get the big conspiracy about it. Is one of the ejecta pieces shaped like a piece of mining equipment or something?


It is clouds of dust... blowing in the breeze



and have yet to see any data. Simply some blurry pictures.


Well then you just show me that you never really looked at the site as it is full of the best resolution images of the moon available and tons of documents from official sources... but it is convenient for you to "only see fuzzy images"



If you would have posted a link to more then just the pictures I would not have been trying to find the page it came from to read what I was supposed to be seeing.


I always do I simply thought the post was in this thread



I hardly call chopping the last word off of a URL and going to its parent page snooping.


I do and so does the government... they track people who do that on government websites. I have seen it in many "terms of Use" documents... they call it "data mining" And it seems they plan to clamp down on "putting the pieces of the puzzle together"


Joint Staff set out to discover just how easy it is to collect data not only on military personnel, but the military in general. They used personal computers at home, used no privileged information -- not even a DoD phone book -- and did not use any on-line services that perform investigative searches for a fee.

In less than five minutes on the Net Ashley, starting with only the general's name, was able to extract his complete address, unlisted phone number, and using a map search engine, build a map and driving directions to his house.

Using the same techniques and Internet search engines, they visited various military and military-related web sites to see how much and the types of data they could gather. What they discovered was too much about too much, and seemingly too little concern about the free flow of information versus what the public needs to know.

www.defenselink.mil...

. Unauthorized Disclosure of Classified Information to the Public (DoD Directive 5210.50) - policy and responsibilities for reporting and investigating known or suspected incidents of unauthorized public disclosure of classified information and reporting corrective and disciplinary action taken.

. Website OPSEC Discrepancies (SecDef MSG R 141553Z JAN 03) - THE FACT THAT FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (FOUO) AND OTHER SENSITIVE UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION (E.G., CONOPS, OPLANS, SOP) CONTINUES TO BE FOUND ON PUBLIC WEB SITES INDICATES THAT TOO OFTEN DATA POSTED ARE INSUFFICIENTLY REVIEWED FOR SENSITIVITY AND/OR INADEQUATELY PROTECTED. ... THIS CONTINUING TREND MUST BE REVERSED.


I will find a few and post them... but while I searched I came across this... but seems they are going to try to shut down the info flow




Either way its still infantile to be forwarding wrong url requests to the FBI home page, and I am sure they would not be happy about it.


Actually they got a laugh out of it
And it is only to their front page public site... maybe I should use the NSA? They have a really cool website...



Besides there have been plenty of insults that have come the way of those of us who can see this thread for what it is.


Not from me... and just what is this thread? A search for answers where we present our case as best as possible with whats available short of breaking the law in seeking files we shouldn't have... in a CIVIL manner



Ill get to the harder answers later on, when I have some time to devote to it.


No rush on my account I have work to do posting more evidence



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
You do not hold the "Secrets of the Universe", and neither does ATS. ATS is good, I agree; however, you have no idea what other people know.


I believe you missed the point here...

Those that feel the need to post our work on Bad Astronomy and other sites do so not in the context of sharing, but they pick examples and misrepresent what OUR interpretation is... this has happened to me several times...

So now I have to follow up on that and state my side of the story... and quite frankly I do not have the time for that. If someone wishes to post some of our work, it is reasonable to expect that our opinion is made clear and posting a selected piece out of all the puzzle we have been working on just sends the wrong signal.

Jim kirk did one on Clementine and simply forgot to add the references, which ensued in a name calling attack...

Posting something out of context to bolster your (generic) point of view is not much different than slander... and it is childish.. It DOES show me though how desperate some skeptics are and THAT makes me smile


But as I said I don't have the time to pursue it... I have more than enough to try to catch up with here at ATS



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by they see ALL
with the technology that we have (well, with the technology that extra-terrestrial / UFO related conspiracy theories say we have), wouldn't it be useful to use like a, um i don't know, cloaking device or something


Seems they have... but sorry I am just putting that together as I write this... and as I just posted the Department of Defense policy on "piecing to gather the bigger picture" I am going to tread softly on this one... but trust me, I have found something just like that... and I promise I will put that info in here as soon as I am sure it won't violate and national security issues.



any super-secret space station shouldn't be visible from earth


Have you seen it yet?




plus nasa should be smart enough to cover up the extra time, right???


Wrong... how many times do I have to say this NASA is not the only ones in Space... they are a front to keep the public occupied and they DO have different data for different levels...

If all these people saying NASA is with holding stuuf were wrong, NASA could take them to court... They don't, because they can't, because they do... get it?

:shk:



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra
I've read interviews about how he got into these computers, he's nothing more than a "script kiddie".Plus any sensitive/classified information is kept on a completely seperate network, not on computers that are connected to the internet.


I would suggest you read the whole article that I posted above about this issue from the Department of Defense... it seems people have been getting careless leaving sensitive stuff on easy to access via internet areas. Seems Defcon makes a habit of seeking these hidden directories too... I wonder if Gary's cell has 2 beds?


But the Joint Chiefs of Staff did studies showing how easy it is to get secret info.

Please read it. As to the Jail issue... it is a very real threat that hangs over all those seeking answers the only way we can... the internet.

And just a footnote... for those like Defcon that consider our website worthless, you would be surprised at the government contacts we have established dialog with... a lot of it that we CAN reveal (and will) as soon as its assembled)


So fire away... but we know where we stand... as a friend of mine from the DoD said recently... "you only have the tip of the cat's tail.."

That one line will stick with me for a long time...

[edit on 6-9-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Seems they have... but sorry I am just putting that together as I write this... and as I just posted the Department of Defense policy on "piecing to gather the bigger picture" I am going to tread softly on this one... but trust me, I have found something just like that... and I promise I will put that info in here as soon as I am sure it won't violate and national security issues.


sounds like a good read...



Have you seen it yet?


have you???


Wrong... how many times do I have to say this NASA is not the only ones in Space...


i don't know...

this is the first time i am hearing (or, in this case, seeing) this from you...


they are a front to keep the public occupied and they DO have different data for different levels...


okay...


If all these people saying NASA is with holding stuuf were wrong, NASA could take them to court... They don't, because they can't, because they do... get it?


yupp...

yet, still, why didn't nasa just say (on their website or something) that it took the normal amount of time to do whatever it is they were doing???





posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra
And you provided this "circumstantial evidence" where? All i've seen in speculation, at best.


In this thread we posted contractor documents and patents... that is actually better than circumstantial, it goes to intent at least...

As to Gary remember some time ago I asked you to find those high res Lunar orbiter images and the NASA tiff files?

And you linked me to one directory where I found those high res tiff files, the one that showed the black and white moon and the blue Earth that was pulled before we down loaded the rest?

Well I remember the directory... it was at Johnson Space Center and I also have a letter on file from someone who wrote to me from that same location and made a query about my website... in effect letting me know where he was by his email address JSC.NASA

Now here is a clip I had saved from Gary McKinno as it was relevant...


GM: One of these people was a Nasa photographic expert, and she said that in building eight of Johnson Space Centre they regularly airbrushed out images of UFOs from the high-resolution satellite imaging. What she said was there was there: there were folders called "filtered" and "unfiltered", "processed" and "raw", something like that.


I have the rest of that somewhere British TV interview I think on google

And ArMaP can verify about the disappearing images as they were pulled while he was downloading one.. (hi res tiff 90 megabytes)






new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join