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: 16
48
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Got it. These are the coordinates of the first few seconds of the vid just before he pans over to the "object" - they're nowhere near where he claims he's pointing:
11:27:18.263, +61:07:13.576
www.flickr.com...
Got you, hoaxer.

*It's clear what the "object" is now in this case - it's the star Dubhe in the big dipper, aka Ursa Major. No amateur astronomer with an LX200 would ever mistake Dubhe for "planet X" - you're a con artist, through and through.

[edit on 9-4-2010 by ngchunter]




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

Originally posted by Phage
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.

Your gut instinct was right Phage. He switched coordinates on us, probably figuring that going several hours of right ascension away would keep us from being able to use Penny's brute force method, and figuring that only giving me a few seconds of clear video wouldn't be enough for me to get a lock. He was almost right on that last part, but I got it before he pans over to the object. I also came up with a workaround of stacking a few video frames after he pans it in the split second before he's done panning out as many reference stars as possible - results on that last frame which DOES contain the "object" are forthcoming.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:41 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.


habfan, do you have any idea how difficult it is to identify a small patch of sky, when the poster has previously given false coordinates, and we don't even know the orientation or magnification of the area being captured?

OK, then I'll show you... Let's just assume for a moment that the coordinates he gave are real. HERE is that piece of sky:
image82.webshots.com...
- you'll notice I've highlighted a small, nondescript star so that in the top left corner, the program is showing you that the coordinates are very close, ie RA/Dec 6h42m/41d35m. I've also zoomed in to a rough equivalent magnification of some of the OP's other images. Note that you can do this in ANY planetarium program or even using a printed star atlas, so don't believe me, do it yourself.

Now, here's your job. You need to look at a freeze frame from the OP's video. Then you have to rotate it, and also zoom it larger or smaller, and move it around over that area until you find an exact match.

OK? back to you! Let us know when you're done.

Yes, there are some automated methods to do this, but they need clear data, which that video hasn't really offered. And it is easy if the poster does the right thing - like in the first video, he showed Orion and then gave us enough panning info to let us nail the location (which is in DIRECT CONFLICT with the coordinates he gave).


Stop Press!!

To ngchunter - nice work!! That's TWICE that jcattera aka LX200GPS_3 has attempted to pull a hoax.

By the way, I'm going to do a quick crosscheck on your results - I'll come back shortly, maybe with a little animation of the scene, overlaid on a starmap...

And if anyone wants the details on how to go about this for themselves, just ask.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 

Nice job.


[edit on 4/9/2010 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by CHRLZ
 



I don't have a clue what any of the stuff you posted means, i don't even know how to use Google sky or the other programs mentioned but, if you are going to challenge someone then you should go ahead and disprove the theory or information they have with what you have to work with. That is all I was saying, i did not want to help prove or disprove but since they were challenging they should come with proof and they did now ,so they figured out how to do it without him giving more info which further proves the you tube vids are not real.

Good job overall guys.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:19 PM
link   
This is hilarious; I just got back the results for the frame containing the "object" - the astrometry software flat-out labeled it as Dubhe! LOL! We already figured out what it was, but this is just the delicious cherry on top of it all:
www.flickr.com...
As you can plainly see, the astrometry software solved it and added that label automatically and unbiasedly. You're busted jcattera.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Great Job and thank you.

So was not Mars but still a hoax

And to you LX200GPS_3, Shame on you.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheDon
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Great Job and thank you.

So was not Mars but still a hoax

And to you LX200GPS_3, Shame on you.


Thanks! Just in case there's any confusion for anyone just joining; it was Mars the first few times he posted videos, but he switched it to Dubhe in this latest video. Part of the reason is no doubt because he had to throw us off his trail, and because he had to make it seem like the "moon" was continuing to orbit the object rather than just getting farther away. Thus, he chose another bright star that had a similarly close second dimmer star in a new orientation. Dubhe suited that purpose quite well.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by habfan1968
I don't have a clue what any of the stuff you posted means, i don't even know how to use Google sky or the other programs mentioned but, if you are going to challenge someone then you should go ahead and disprove the theory or information they have with what you have to work with. That is all I was saying, i did not want to help prove or disprove but since they were challenging they should come with proof and they did now ,so they figured out how to do it without him giving more info which further proves the you tube vids are not real.
Good job overall guys.


I apologise, habfan, I read your post as if it was 'goading'. The point is, that it is VERY difficult to identify any point of the sky from just a few stars. The tool that NGCHUNTER has identified is quite simply remarkable, and it means that hoaxers will have to work a heck of a lot harder in future.

Anyway, although Phage beat me to the punch, I didn't want to waste the GIF I created, so here it be:

A screenshot from Stellarium, the video grab rotated and sized to fit (stars colored in yellow & satellites in red for clarity), and a combination overlay. I didn't align them with *absolute* precision, but you can easily see it is a match.

Note that this can all be verified in any planetarium program, or any star atlas, online, printed, whatever.

So in simple terms, jcattera (or LX200GPS_3) LIED.
The coordinates are NOWHERE near that scene - the ones NGCHUNTER gave are correct and they are easily verified.. If anyone needs any help with a particular program, or what to look for in a star atlas at your local library.. just ask.


Added, just for completion... the coordinates for Dubhe, in Ursa Major are:
RA: 11h 3min 43.7sec, DEC: +61° 45' 3''

The coordinates jcattera gave were:
RA: 6h 41min 55.77sec, DEC: +41° 35' 19.45''
which lands you far off in Auriga - about 40 degrees of sky away.


[edit on 10-4-2010 by CHRLZ]



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 12:42 AM
link   
Nice to see someone took the time to check the nearby stars... But like I said last page I was not going to bother with it as the location he gave was almost below the horizon at his location and time he claimed to be filming. Much easier way to start to confirm or deny it was even possible, for me. Less than 1 degree above the horizon was not very probable for me. Sure its possible but things become harder to see that close to the horizon. Especially like .6 degrees above it.. at least he could of said it was higher in the sky than that, then maybe I would of wasted some time to check.


Maybe next time he gives the location it will be below the horizon and not even remotely possible to view where he lives. And I guess someone will match it anyway just to add icing to the cake. But I think I proved him wrong before anyone wasted their time and matched stars. Guess no one listens to me, whatever, its all good



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by SecretUsername
Nice to see someone took the time to check the nearby stars... But like I said last page I was not going to bother with it as the location he gave was almost below the horizon at his location and time he claimed to be filming.
...
Guess no one listens to me, whatever, its all good

Now don't be like that- *I* listened to your posts, and they were good. But there was nothing really to add or debate..

Anyway, it's pretty much over now, but I'd love to see LX200GPS_3 come on back, and explain just how he got so much stuff wrong. Or perhaps "WHY" is the real question...

Anyway, it's all good, like you said - it's now quite clear who the 'disinfo' agent is.



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by CHRLZ
 


Haha sorry I've had quite a bit too much drink tonight.. I don't mean to be like that, its just hard to joke around over the internet. In all seriousness I wouldn't trust me either, I like the fact so many users here try and find answers themselves, it's exactly what I would do. There is some really bright and talented people here on ATS and that's why I've kept coming back all these years. I've been a lurker for many years before I actually joined, actually posted quite a bit before I joined, I miss posting anonymously



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by LX200GPS_3
FOLKS!! THIS... IS...NOT... MARS !!!

Sorry, it's really easy to modify a black still clip with Photoshop. This is the oldest trick in the book.

Someone easily took a snap shot still of my footage and lowered the brightness to almost black. Then they blackened out a few stars and circled the object in question and labeled it Mars. They then brightened a few stars here and there and added some to make it look a little different. Then said it came from Stellarium. Oldest trick in the book! Sorry, i'm not buying it. NICE TRY!


Wow, you lost it man. You made a mistake. Now I get to debunk you and give you a view of reality.

Here is a video of exactly what I did:


...no tricks.

Final image:


To me, it's quite clear you are one of two things, maybe both;

Completely wrong.

Completely lost.

You must be an extreme conspiracy theorist....


-edit to add note-

I had to hide the horizon to view Mars in the video above. So his location must be incorrect, or something else.

[edit on 10-4-2010 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 07:50 AM
link   
One more thing.. Apart from the obvious shameful behavior of jcattera / LX200GPS_3 in deliberately falsifying data and misrepresenting images in this way, there is another very sad fact.

That telescope (a Meade LX200, one presumes - possibly an 8" or 10", I'm guessing..) is also very nicely set up - good, very stable, sharp images (although the grainy camcorder approach is a bit lame).

To get such quality from a scope is reasonably difficult, as any astronomers here will attest.

So here we have some really good equipment being used to misinform, to deceive, to hoax. It's tragic. And it also means that anything this hoaxer posts is highly suspect - if he is prepared to go to such lengths to deceive, then how could you trust anything he provides? If he has CGI software as well, then *everything* he posts could be faked - he clearly has the motivation to do so.

So the damage this person does to the genuine observers and genuine investigators/researchers/hobbyists is HUGE, and the waste of such equipment is an added tragedy.

But at least he has helped to show one thing - that people shouldn't ever take claimants at face value, even if they sound sincere and have expensive equipment. You really do need to look carefully at every claim, for there are too many 'jcattera's out there...



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by CHRLZ
So here we have some really good equipment being used to misinform, to deceive, to hoax. It's tragic. And it also means that anything this hoaxer posts is highly suspect - if he is prepared to go to such lengths to deceive, then how could you trust anything he provides?

I was thinking the same thing myself. The LX200 is a very powerful tool, and like all tools it can be used for good or evil. I know that sounds cheesy, but it's true. You can see in this very case what happens when someone uses it to deceive. There are a number of people out there with very strong beliefs and even fears of "Planet X" or "Nibiru." My concern is that some of them may be capable of being "set off" in a Heaven's Gate like fashion if they were truly lead to believe that this object were approaching and about to destroy us, especially as we near 2012. All it took to set heaven's gate off was one amateur jumping to an incorrect conclusion about what he thought he saw in his telescope; that one image set off a chain of events that lead to their suicide. You could make the case they would have found an excuse to kill themselves without his help, but nonetheless it taints amateur astronomy when someone with a powerful telescope like this abuses its power. Also, the more powerful the telescope, the easier it is to create a hoax which is difficult to disprove. Like you said, if he had combined this telescope's power with CGI, it would have been darn near impossible to refute without at least an equally powerful telescope.

[edit on 10-4-2010 by ngchunter]



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 08:46 AM
link   


and hopefully all their bunkers will be under water and they won't be able to get out and the people that were smart enough to get to higher ground will be left over to start a better society, one can hope right
reply to post by graaly
 


What a loveable person you are.

What is it people are trying to gain with B.S ? Is it that 15 minutes of fame
thing? That in this case turns into a 1 minute stoning. I don't get it. All the
trouble they go to, they must believe their own crap. Can't see that
either.


Thanks to Phage and a few others the truth is served up like a hot bowl
of chicken noodle. Great work.


[edit on 10-4-2010 by randyvs]



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by CHRLZ
 


I'm not sure he even has a lx200, if you go to his you tube page he has a picture of a long telescope. The LX200-ACF 8" is a very short stubby scope. But he could just be using a different pic who knows/cares?

But what he used to filmed these videos is a 5x zoom infrared camera. A Yukon digital night vision ranger (5x42), much cheaper piece of equipment. He said the "LX200" was only for checking the coordinates.



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by SecretUsername
 

Not exactly an infrared camera.

It's a night vision scope. It responds to visible light as well as infrared and amplifies both. It is equipped with an IR illuminator which of course is useless in this application.



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by SecretUsername
reply to post by CHRLZ
 


I'm not sure he even has a lx200, if you go to his you tube page he has a picture of a long telescope. The LX200-ACF 8" is a very short stubby scope. But he could just be using a different pic who knows/cares?

But what he used to filmed these videos is a 5x zoom infrared camera. A Yukon digital night vision ranger (5x42), much cheaper piece of equipment. He said the "LX200" was only for checking the coordinates.


It's true that his reputation for honesty is pretty much shredded, so who would know... There's this profile:
www.youjotube.com...
(yes, it's youjotube..)
I'm not motivated enough to do the sums, but the angle of view of some of the imagery suggests a much higher magnification than 5x - is that what the Yukon thing does? Plus it looks more like what i would expect to get by videoing via the eyepiece/tube on a well-mounted scope.

Could easily be wrong, and frankly, can't be bothered wasting much more time on this hoaxer..

By the way, a quick google shows this person has been spamming his hoax far and wide. If anyone is bored, you might like to go and visit some of the forums he poisons, and refer them to this thread.



posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by CHRLZ
So here we have some really good equipment being used to misinform, to deceive, to hoax. It's tragic. And it also means that anything this hoaxer posts is highly suspect - if he is prepared to go to such lengths to deceive, then how could you trust anything he provides?

I was thinking the same thing myself. The LX200 is a very powerful tool, and like all tools it can be used for good or evil.

I was under the impression that he didn't own this scope but borrowed it until I read a post from him claiming it was his. After the work you guys did I don't think we should consider anything he has claimed to be true. I doubt he actually owns a telescope of any kind.

Just to be clear, that telescope is a very nice piece of equipment and would not allow even a beginner to mistake coordinates like that. This HOAX was intentional for the purpose of attracting attention. You guys did a great job and this is what makes ATS fun for me.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join