ET's replied to SETI

Please don't...

The concept of "atomic weight" is inarguably a human construction, and it defies logic to think that it would be readily understood by a different species.

Quote:
Development of the Concept of Atomic Weight

J. L. Proust formulated (1797) what is now known as the law of definite proportions, which states that the proportions by weight of the elements forming any given compound are definite and invariable. John Dalton proposed (c.1810) an atomic theory in which all atoms of an element have exactly the same weight. He made many measurements of the combining weights of the elements in various compounds. By postulating that simple compounds always contain one atom of each element present, he assigned relative atomic weights to many elements, assigning a weight of 1 to hydrogen as the basis of his scale. He thought that water had the formula HO, and since he found by experiment that 8 weights of oxygen combine with 1 weight of hydrogen, he assigned an atomic weight of 8 to oxygen. Dalton also formulated the law of multiple proportions, which states that when two elements combine in more than one proportion by weight to form two or more distinct compounds, their weight proportions in those compounds are related to one another in simple ratios. Dalton's work sparked an interest in determining atomic weights, even though some of his results—such as that for oxygen—were soon shown to be incorrect.

While Dalton was working on weight relationships in compounds, J. L. Gay-Lussac was experimenting with the chemical reactions of gases, and he found that, when under the same conditions of temperature and pressure, gases react in simple whole-number ratios by volume. Avogadro proposed (1811) a theory of gases that holds that equal volumes of two gases at the same temperature and pressure contain the same number of particles, and that these basic particles are not always single atoms. This theory was rejected by Dalton and many other chemists.

P. L. Dulong and A. T. Petit discovered (1819) a specific-heat method for determining the approximate atomic weight of elements. Among the first chemists to work out a systematic group of atomic weights (c.1830) was J. J. Berzelius, who was influenced in his choice of formulas for compounds by the method of Dulong and Petit. He attributed the formula H2O to water and determined an atomic weight of 16 for oxygen. J. S. Stas later refined many of Berzelius's weights. Stanislao Cannizzaro applied Avogadro's theories to reconcile atomic weights used by organic and inorganic chemists.

The availability of fairly accurate atomic weights and the search for some relationship between atomic weight and chemical properties led to J. A. R. Newlands's table of atomic numbers (1865), in which he noted that if the elements were arranged in order of increasing atomic weight the eighth element, starting from a given one, is a kind of repetition of the first. He called this the law of octaves. Such investigations led to the statement of the periodic law, which was discovered independently (1869) by D. I. Mendeleev in Russia and J. L. Meyer in Germany. T. W. Richards did important work on atomic weights (after 1883) and revised some of Stas's values.

I think crop circles are absolutely nothing to do with extra terrestrials
They are however, to do with A1 size sheets of graph paper on which a design is drawn and then all necessary dimensions are lifted off and "scaled up."
The artists walk down the tractor tracks to keep their artwork neat and leave little evidence that they were there. They use various lengths of string from reference points for distance (from scaled drawings). Wooden poles on rope to flatten corn. Oh and night vision aids come in handy as do sandwiches and a flask of tea
It is not big and it is not clever and it costs farmers lots of money
PEACE,
RK

I honestly don't understand why people don't have night vision cameras stationed at all those crop circle hotspots in England. It's a very small investment to catch something that could possibly be huge.

Well here's an image that can make everyone chuckle.






Courtesy of Dementeddenizens.com

Originally posted by DaMod
Well then you should know that the atomic number is based on atomic weight. How many neutrons and protons are contained within. If they have an understand of atomic structure that would be apparent.

You are thinking of atomic mass. Atomic weight and atomic mass, though often confused, are two separate measurements.

Originally posted by DaMod
How hard do you think it would be to make both of them over night especially one in binary that infers alien DNA and then a nice detailed face next to it. I bet 10000000000 you cant! How else are they going to communicate? You think they speak English or use the same broadcasting tech we do? Drawing things on the ground are basically all they have left. If they are from outside our solar system they would get the message in binary see the dish think well that's about right and do it there.

[edit on 10-3-2009 by DaMod]

Are you serious? You really think that Drawing things on the Ground are basically all they have left? REALLY? Come on now.

While it looks good I'd have to say this is a hoax.

This is where a slight puzzle becomes visible. By performing the steps described above, the literal translation of the original pulses is on the left of figure 3. However, the image printed in a couple of my books is that shown on the right of figure 3. This is an exact left-right mirror image of my decoding. I suspect that this is possibly an error which went un-noticed when the book went to print - although I have checked two books which both depict the same pattern as shown on the right of figure 3.

The pattern which occurred in the Chilbolton crop field, is the same image as shown in the books (ie. the one on the right of fig.3 and the mirror image of the original decoding). This could imply that IF someone hoaxed the formation, they copied the incorrect pattern printed in a book. Alternatively, I may have converted the original pulses by mapping left to right when converting into a 23x73 grid, instead of going from right to left - which personally doesn't seem correct to my interpretation of the original binary sequence.

Here is the full article and below is the link for the image in question.



This was how far I got before I realised what the author was doing here...

The image on the left is how it should appear and the image on the right is a mirror-image, perhaps an editing/printing error, and how it has appeared in a number of books.

The author states very clearly in his article:

The pattern which occurred in the Chilbolton crop field, is the same image as shown in the books (ie. the one on the right of fig.3 and the mirror image of the original decoding). This could imply that IF someone hoaxed the formation, they copied the incorrect pattern printed in a book

I checked out the Aricebo message on wikipedia and the image on the left is indeed the correct translation/deciphering of the message. This is also confirmed by other websites.

The authors alternative explanation for the image mix up was that he deciphered the binary image the wrong way which even in his own opinion wouldn't be right. I'm sure a quick check online for an image would've aleviated any concerns and saved him time writing the rest of the article happy in the knowledge that hoaxers didn't waste his time, make him look silly....that kind of thing.

If anyone can explain this discrepancy, I would love to hear your comments. However, for the purposes of the rest of this article I shall refer to the pattern physically laid in the crop field.

In my opinion I just did. Or rather the author did that himself but is too caught up in what he wants to believe rather than review the evidence in front of him or digging deeper.

And one more thing I have to say to prove this isn't a crop circle and officially debunk it...... that isn't a circle if you can't tell the difference between a circle and a rectangle... hee hee

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by DaMod
Well then you should know that the atomic number is based on atomic weight. How many neutrons and protons are contained within. If they have an understand of atomic structure that would be apparent.

You are thinking of atomic mass. Atomic weight and atomic mass, though often confused, are two separate measurements.

Thanks SaviorComplex that's what i meant.

As far as drawing things on the ground, why not? We did it to communicate to the sky before we could even fly...

As far as them knowing what television is maybe they do but maybe it's not what they think we use it for, and maybe they cant understand the language of our type of signal. You people can argue that they don't understand anything about the way we apply science yet you are quick to say that they could hijack a TV signal that is encoded in an unfamiliar way.... So far, as far as accounts go the only way they communicate is through thought which is a universal language.

I honestly don't understand why people don't have night vision cameras stationed at all those crop circle hotspots in England. It's a very small investment to catch something that could possibly be huge.

Well here's an image that can make everyone chuckle

small investment?

3rd gen night vision scopes start at around $5000, and that's just the monocular ones...let alone cameras... (I priced them for Paintball, hehe...and they are outta my league....) - If you've never looked through one...man, it's incredible....literally turns night into day...those night vision guys owned the night game, hehe...

Some 1st gen cameras would be much cheaper, but you'll need the clarity of 3rd gen to PROVE anything....(anything that isn't pranksters, that is...)

[edit on 10-3-2009 by Gazrok]

Itchy if that's as far as you got then you didn't get to the part where the circle information changed to fit an alien race.

I'd like to reiterate my point that there is no reason for us to expect that an alien race would be able to communicate with us using human conventions like the atomic table (based on earthly elements), or English language terminology regarding DNA. This is an obvious hoax.

I would like to know why if the agroglyph represents a grey-type alien these creatures would feel the need to "reply" to the Arecibo message when they've been here for decades abducting people.

Originally posted by DaMod
Itchy if that's as far as you got then you didn't get to the part where the circle information changed to fit an alien race.

No that's as far as got before I started questioning the article. I read the whole thing, twice, and checked out a few other sites. If you even check the binary code from the original source and do your own drawing you'll see the original image is the on the left. So, the one on the right was the one the hoaxers copied from - the incorrect image - and made their own adjustments incorporating the changes the author spent time working out.

Whereas if he just checked the original data he'd notice this was the work of hoaxers. Smart aliens would alter the original and not one from a book....

There is no information changed to fit an alien race... the only thing here that's changed is the information to fit a story. Information put there by hoaxers....

I still can't take you serious when your adamant it's a circle when clearly its not...

reply to post by stephan76

The "Real" Crop Circles are made using Tesla Technology from HAARP.

What the the hell is that all about ? please explain

Originally posted by DaMod
Itchy if that's as far as you got then you didn't get to the part where the circle information changed to fit an alien race.

And there is nothing there that a human could not replicate.

[edit on 10-3-2009 by SaviorComplex]

Crop Circles are man made. There's nothing UFO about it. Also there's been people you claimed to have made crop circles so that puts it to rest really.

I'd like to go back to my original proposal and use man-made crop circles as a way of replying to an implied message from ET. Instead of assuming ET will respond to our 50 years of radio transmission (the SETI position), why not assume (indeed many seem to believe) that some crop circles ARE alien and meant to be replied to. After all, if ET draws his DNA and face in the crops, it seems clear to me that we are expected to reply. Wouldn't it make good sense to use the same medium as ET used for his original message? And it's a lot cheaper than SETI's method. After all the chances of SETI receiving ET's transmission are arguably as remote as the chance he's already communicating to us via crop circles. And what if ET decides some of these man-made circles aren't genuine at all?? Think about it.

WG3

Originally posted by stephan76
Project Blue Beam. Doesn't it ring a bell?

SETI will officially report some day: "We have contact!", and it will be a lie.

The "Real" Crop Circles are made using Tesla Technology from HAARP.

Believe it or not.

Wow! It's absolutely amazing that Blue Beam and HAARP have been at work even since the 1600's.

reply to post by SaviorComplex

Hi,
Crop Circles have very common and distinct architectures which show what is a real circle and what is man made. In real crop circles, the stalks are heated so that they bend without damaging the plant, they are also intertwined in a specific pattern, layed down in a specific pattern and always show a distinct energy flow.

Man-made crop circles are always imperfect, do not show the heating of stalks, do not get intertwined when layed down and do not have the energetic flow of real crop circles.

Given the complexity of most crop circles it would be impossible to create such large, perfect "pictures" overnight no matter how many people work on it. Plus people will leave evidence of having been there making a circle/pictograph. Real Crop Circles do not have footprints from people when they are discovered, the rest of the crop is always untouched.

Now think about making a massive crop circle like this particular one in Binary Code, overnight, without leaving tracks and without someone seeing the lighting rigs necessary to do so. If it was man made it would have imperfections, at the least there would be holes all around the outer edge where small stakes had been used to mark off the segments, etc. None of this was found, there were no footprints in the soil, the remaining crop was undamaged, etc. Fake that.

The serious researchers are often camped out overlooking the fields during the circle season, and so it comes as a surprise to them to find a mssive crop circle/pictograph in a field close by when there had been no traffic, no large numbers of people being seen in the field overnight, etc.

Yes, these really are still an unexplained occurence around the world, despite the pathetic attempts of some groups to create man made circles.. which are always proven to be fakes.

Look at the crop circles, you will notice they are far to imperfect to be created by anything but a human being. the sides are misshapen the ends are misshapen. same with the face imprint. please do you really think ET's would come to this planet and make crappy shaped crop circles? no they would be perfect in all aspects. and they would not make first contact on crops.

Who knows the real reason they hoaxed this. Donations to observatory? media attention? gift shop wasn't selling so well? all of the above? Just "because"? For fun? perhaps someone has a better non ET idea.

aether way you look at it tho its a really cool MANMADE art style.

Yeah I'm crazy I'm the guy that doesn't believe that aliens from far off planets are contacting us threw misshapen/glamor media crop circles. yeah I'm totally nuts and my mind is in a box along with white Jesus.

Well - this guy is sort of convincing me thinks - candian defence minister - UFO speech.

www.youtube.com...