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.

 

Is this planet x? (no, it's Mars)

page: 15
48
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 06:43 AM
link   
Haha the title of this just made me laugh out loud... Is this planet x?( NO ITS MARS!!!) I haven't been on ATS for a while so thanks for making this visit enjoyable haha!




posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 07:45 AM
link   
With regards to the video creator,

As with any science or even criminal forensic investigation, you always eliminate and disprove everything in front of you until you are left with just the facts. Once you have the facts then you go on to PROVE what it is you're trying to find out.

If you can't be humble and listen to people who have put evidence right in front of you, not because they want to upset you or offend you, but to find out the truth then you should leave and come back when you have got your feet back on the ground.

To all these people who are quick to label others disinfo agents for their own point of view or harsh interigations, keep in mind that maybe they want the truth as much as you do. It's just maybe they are the wiser ones from past experience of wild claims and don't want to be led on a wild goose chase. You have to eliminate what can't be proven in order to realise what can!

At the end of the day, we all would love such an event to take place less the destruction, but some of us look at the facts and eliminate what we can until we can see what's laid out in front.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by LX200GPS_3
What I am claiming in these 3 videos is this is 100% NOT Mars and what in the heck is the orbiting object??

How do you explain the fact that astrometry of your videos shows that you were aiming right towards the coordinates for mars then?
www.flickr.com...
Had to clone out the "bright spot" you detected since the software does not account for the presence of planets in an image, nor would it account for a true detection of a mysterious object, causing it to reject such images - by cloning that out though, even leaving the supposed "moon," we find that your camera was aiming right towards mars.
Coordinates of the center point of the video (from march 18):
08:14:20.168, +23:40:51.817
Coordinates for mars on march 18:
08 13 47.84 +23 20 41.8
Your field of view was about 4.8 x 3.8 degrees in size. Each pixel accounted for more than an arcminute in angular separation. Translation? Mars was in this video, near the center of the frame, which indeed is where the "bright star thing" originally appeared. Anyone can repeat this test and submit it to the astrometry group on flickr for automatic analysis. You'll get the same result.

[edit on 8-4-2010 by ngchunter]



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by serbsta
 


No it is the member I have a problem with, sorry. You'd understand that if my explanation of why hadn't been removed...

Thanks



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by NibiruWarrior
reply to post by serbsta
 


No it is the member I have a problem with, sorry. You'd understand that if my explanation of why hadn't been removed...

Thanks

That is what's called an ad hominem attack. I think you'll find that this is against the T & C, hence the removal of the post. Not sure why you're disappointed by that.

If you want to debate the topic, you are able to do so. But calling someone disinfo because they came to a different conclusion than you is not denying ignorance.

I am not trying to put you down, as I'm sure you want the same thing I do. The truth. So I'm just encouraging you to put personal opinions aside, and look at the evidence. That way, any actual disinfo can be called out, without relying on personal feelings and emotion.

[edit on 8/4/10 by Curious and Concerned]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Well I will post it since nobody else has, as far as I have seen.

The YouTuber is waiting for his dis-info friends at ATS to debunk this fyi.

As I have stated before I don't know much regarding astronomy.



So feedback appricated.

Thank you.

EDIT: My GUT tells me it is still Mars from just looking at the video and what has happened in the past. Though that is just IMO and is based on no research regarding this new video.

[edit on 9/4/2010 by TheDon]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by TheDon
 


I put a new image in the astrometry hopper from his latest attempt to fool people. We'll see what coordinates it spits out, hopefully in a few minutes.

*I'm finding it quite difficult to get the astrometry software to accept his images. He's made it quite hard to find a clear frame in a moment of good seeing what with all the stupid notes all over the image. I'm wondering if he saw how I analyzed it before and is now putting more notes up to try and keep me from analyzing his images.

[edit on 9-4-2010 by ngchunter]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheDon
Well I will post it since nobody else has, as far as I have seen.
...
EDIT: My GUT tells me it is still Mars from just looking at the video and what has happened in the past. Though that is just IMO and is based on no research regarding this new video.


It's important that *all* the options are considered, especially given jcattera's proven use of false coordinates.

The coordinates given for that video (6h42m, 41d35m), roughly align with a small, dim star (HP31928) in Auriga. That's about half way between Capella and Pollux, and NOT very close to Mars.. I'll see what ngchunter comes back with, before taking it any further.

Now, can satellites be seen travelling in twos or threes? Yes.
www.satobs.org...
www.csr.utexas.edu...
Given that some of these formations will be for military use, details of other systems may be hard to find. But those are easy - it seems NOTABLE that jcattera/LX200GPS_3 *again* doesn't seem to be aware of much, when it comes to astronomy... There are even observation tables available to track some of these formations, eg:
www.satobs.org...

And it should be noted using CGI to insert such objects is VERY easy..

Again, a simple challenge to jcattera/LX200GPS_3, why doesn't he identify at least a few of the stars in the videos? The only reasons I can think of why he would not do that, are:
- he hasn't a clue.
- he wishes to make it difficult to identify the region of sky



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by CHRLZ
 

Birds show up nicely.






[edit on 4/9/2010 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
This thread is still going? IT'S MARS!!
geez

Even I, with my one astronomy class of 20 years ago and just a little poking around on the right astronomy software, could see IT'S MARS!!


P.S. On a completely different note, they've remade "A Nightmare on Elm Street". It comes out April 30th. I hope they didn't ruin it...



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Well just to humor him I set my time to Detroit time and opened up Stellarium once again and set my location to Detroit.. dunno where he is but it should be close enough. Went to 1:15am this morning and got this picture . As you can see the horizon is completely flat.. I put the landscape as "Mars" could of did the ocean but that seemed more fitting. I found a object as close as I could to the coordinates he gave and set a marker on that. That is VERY low on the horizon.. but the video does not look like it was shooting across a field. Looks like he was pointing up more.. something would show up that low to the horizon, a tree, a bush.. something. I'm not going to bother matching stars this time, he has no idea where he is looking. Less than 1 degree above the horizon.. please


And he takes only a 25 second video, I was hoping for more. Zooming out so we could see the stars better, showing us Mars compared to this object, better reference points etc.. but he just films 25 seconds of the same stuff.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Hey buddy, I left a clear frame just for you between 13-16 seconds. I'll even widen it more for you so you can attempt to map it.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by LX200GPS_3
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Hey buddy, I left a clear frame just for you between 13-16 seconds. I'll even widen it more for you so you can attempt to map it.

How about you upload the whole video without obscuring it with text notes? That would be a real help, if you wanted an actual identification of the coordinates. 3 seconds isn't much time to try and catch a moment of good seeing and transparency AND not get too many compression artifacts in the image. On your previous videos I was able to either work around fewer text blocks or have longer periods of time unobstructed.

[edit on 9-4-2010 by ngchunter]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 09:47 PM
link   
ngchunter,

you are trying to disprove him, use your smarts and do it with what is available up to now. He has provided you co-ordinates and video, with 3-4 seconds of clear video. You can do it. Phage can help too.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by habfan1968
ngchunter,

you are trying to disprove him, use your smarts and do it with what is available up to now. He has provided you co-ordinates and video, with 3-4 seconds of clear video. You can do it. Phage can help too.

I'm working on it. It'd be easier if I had the actual video untouched, but it's right at the ragged edge of what is possible to do in an automated unbiased 100% objective way. That's how I did it last time, but even then it was sketchy as to whether it would work or not.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by habfan1968
 

We already know the coordinates he provides are not to be trusted.
We don't know if this video is of the same object as the others.
I don't have the same means at my disposal that ngchunter has.


[edit on 4/9/2010 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Well as long as you are being objective and fair. Phage has some kind of software I think because he posted an overlay very early in the thread maybe he can help you a bit.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by habfan1968
 

We already know the coordinates he provides are not to be trusted.
I don't have the same means at my disposal that ngchunter has.


oops sorry my post above, I thought you had some other program available sorry.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by LX200GPS_3
Hey buddy, I left a clear frame just for you between 13-16 seconds. I'll even widen it more for you so you can attempt to map it.


Yes, you do that, and make sure the view goes back far enough to provide a recognisable asterism or two. Then we'll get back to it...

But in the meantime, jcattera, you have avoided every challenge so far, will you accept this one?

I challenge you to debate with me a *full technical description* of your initial video, pointing out exactly what stars are shown.

During that, I will show readers exactly how they can VERIFY it is Mars using a number of methods.

I will then point out where the 'coordinates' you gave actually *are*, again with full instructions on how readers can verify it for themselves.

Note that those methods will include not only *any* planetarium software on the planet, but also old books and charts, and of course, the use of their eyes.


So, how about it, jcattera aka LX200GPS_3? I promise to keep the debate strictly on topic, with no ad hominems or insults from my side.

Again, I can think of only ONE possible reason why you would refuse.

By the way, even if jcattera aka LX200GPS_3 refuses to participate, I'm happy to go through the entire process for any interested reader...



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by habfan1968
 

It was possible for PennyQ to locate the object (Mars) in the first video because he (the youtube guy) was kind enough to provide context by panning to it from Orion's belt. Knowing that, I was able to match the background stars in Stellarium and proven to be Mars.

We don't know if this is the same object. I don't think it is. Ngchunter can submit the background star pattern to a program which will locate it. He needs a clean image to do so.


[edit on 4/9/2010 by Phage]



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join