It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Alleged NASA -Affiliated Astronomer Deciphers 'Intelligence' Signal From Nearby Stars

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

log in


posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:53 PM

Originally posted by judyc
Wayne last posted 6 hours ago and now I can't post on his wall.

and when was it the last time that you could do that?

you can't post on his wall.... true.... but you can comment on his links or status...

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:58 PM
There's no patience here for the full story. The 'skeptics' decide immediately if they believe a topic or not just from reading the title, and begin trashing it right out of the gate. Treating every slight incongruancy in the first few details as damning evidence of a hoax, and declare the case closed before it's even fully open. That's not really objective reasoning, in my opinion. I'm sure they'd like to think they 'just know' what's a hoax or not at first glance, but that's obviously a delusion.

As it stands right now, it's possible the whole radio and UV debunking effort is simply just the result of a person saying something they didn't mean, or didn't clarify enough for us. These people actually do have advanced degrees in this stuff, so i find it hard to believe they'd meticulously prepare a hoax with an error that your average internet jockey can pick up on.

If we never hear anything about this again, that will certainly stand out as unusual to me, because it goes against any belief that this is a test of reactions or publicity stunt, and warrant more attention.

[edit on 3-5-2010 by Risen]

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 11:00 PM
My background is in military electronic warfare as a technician. 2-20 ghz range of operation. We used common words among ourselves to describe an event. I , in keeping an open mind, give the subject of radio telescope's capture of uv as one of these "working terminology" type of comments.

It would be nice for this event to be true and disclosure to finally happen.

I guess its nice to be the first to claim hoax and be found true at the end of the day,but I agree that it is too easy to browbeat a poster than to look for possible communication erors. Like my poor typing.

be true

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 11:02 PM
Actually any publicity is good publicity. So if this was a hoax, who cares about credibility, it brings him publicity=$$ in the bank.

He's the secondary source anyways. He can't be held accountable, only Judy can (who ever Judy is -->and I think there's evidence to suggest she's real).

As much as I thought this was real, you have to look at how the information was released. Yes it was from an inside source but you don't reveal the most important imformation of all-time over facebook, unless you're in danger and need to get it out quick. But her messages don't sound like she's in danger.

Also, as a holder of 2 PHDs, she must understand the consequences of breaching contract and releasing confidential information. She wouldn't do this for anybody, especially a guy who isn't necessarily an anstronomer.

Still, lets hold out hope, keep our fingers crosses, see what happens tomorrow with Wayne, and then we can make a fair judgement.

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 11:04 PM
1. While it is true that most UV from space would have been absorbed by the atmosphere, currently we do know that our atmosphere had been taking regular beatings from the sun's solar winds.

Could some of these UV managed to penetrate through and picked up by earth based RADIO TELESCOPES during such times?

2. The Aldeberan star system is of interesting note. It was believed that the occultist Germans through the Thule Society had managed to make contact with beings from the star system in the 30/40s and accounted heavily for satanic Hitler's remarkable inhuman tech achievements.

How the seers of the Thule society managed to gain contact was through the spirit medium, of which we are only making infant steps to prove it in neuroscience on the EMF radiated out of our human body.

(While this is not related to the topic, i would like to point out that even teeth had been known to act as radio receivers, but most certainly cannot be of the capability of radio telescopes to receive UV for sure! the point of this paragraph is to prove how much of unknowns that we have even yet to know of. )

3. The recent furore created by Stephen Hawkins, a member of the establisment stating that Aliens could be evil, could not have come at a more coincidental time.

I am not endorsing the OP claims, but only to open up minds so that more explorations and search be done, rather to say it is not true, case closed. For those who claim it is a waste of time, no one is being forced to participate in this search and the ignore button ( sometimes known as the high ego button) is always there.

[edit on 3-5-2010 by SeekerofTruth101]

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 11:16 PM
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

Exactly you, hit it on the head. who the hell really knows whats true and whats not these days?

Until then, everything is just hearsay on the internet!

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 11:27 PM

"But, who really knows if Julia works for NASA.. can't find a lot of information on her?"

That's probably because her name is actually Judy

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 11:29 PM
I'm glad ATS has tough skeptics. Very glad.

In my younger years on-line searching for the things that ultimately lead me here, such skepticism was rare. I wasted ridiculous numbers of hours reading only the perpetual "pro-x" positions and with unlimited suspension of disbelief. I remember the heaven's gate thing and many others all too well. Even when I first came here I believed 90% (easily) more conspiracies than I do now. I've grown a good bit thanks to skepticism.

ATS is a great place if you are generally neutral on everything, like I am. It's rewarding to skeptics in that they can help save us from delusions and lies that just about all of us want to believe and want to happen. A karma sponge for the hard working skeptics as, by now, I'd say at least 1 human life has been saved by them and maybe lifetimes of TIME spent believing the unbelievable. Very lucrative market for authors, dvd peddlers etc and for a good reason. We easily buy into anything.

We need harsh, shrewd skeptics with a sniper's accuracy for times like these. Otherwise, we will wander off on embarrassing journeys spreading the word to our networks & families.

We have to hear and consider every new piece of information as it comes out. I will share everything I come across from all camps and I hope everyone does the same. I want to believe, but I want justice if it's a hoax and I rather not share this with my networks in fear of making "a tool of myself" for someone peddling books and services.

Let's build the case for it here and keep the pro/con equilibrium stable and fair but most of all CLEAN as this could be real, for a change. Someday it likely will be.

[edit on 3-5-2010 by Atlantican]

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 11:32 PM
reply to post by Bedlam

that is one fo the greatest debunk posts i've ever read here

star for you man.

Im glad we have members as educated as you in these parts, because honestly, until i read your post, i was thinking


posted on May, 3 2010 @ 11:46 PM
Wayne's past post as of 9:42 5/03/10

-Wayne Herschel- I am more concerned for her circumstances since her FB account is missing ... her other accounts are missing and her email is unanswered.

Judy has been an expert on some material that only an expert could portray. She is also very open about the importance of letting the truth out before it is stopped or censored.

Her friends are now very concerned and so am I....
See More

Consider this ... if all radio telescopes around the world are set up as claims are made from a source radio telescope wanting verification, they will all be tuning into a target star. And if a 'never heard before' sound or data pattern is incoming, imagine how difficult it would be to cover up in the astronomer scholar network.

This could be the case and Judy being Judy told friends who are interested in this crazy 'new' signal ... which I will be investigating with astronomers in the morning. Need to sleep now... its 2 am.
4 hours ago

Originally posted by Wookiep
Well, I sent a link to this board to wayne seems he's getting virus attacks.

Wayne Herschel- May 3 at 3:03pm Report

both Judy and my pages and internet are experiencing interference and virus attacks... this is typical. Please could you copy and paste all comments from my facebook for now and the updates there before the page disappears. they are targeting my 3 G5 stars any minute now... holding my breath!

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:06 AM

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle

Good bit of a partial debunk there Bedlam, but, the UV range specified below is just outside of the visible band of 450nm to about 700nm.

At the time of that post, her statement was "deep ultraviolet" which doesn't reach the ground. She didn't hum in the band she was talking about until later in the thread, when she contradicted her first statement by citing UV-C to the edge of visible violet, which I state in about the third post of mine afterwards.

Plants actually use 3 light frequencies, one UV (455nm), one visible red (665nm) and one IR (710nm) to push photons through the photon "pump" process and skin cancers seem to be caused by exposure to 280nm UV.

Bees smell fear, and the human head weighs about 8 pounds.

You are right though in that a radio telescope will not pick up UV, you need a special optical scope. But, UV would be the most viable transfer means that is close to visible light, if say one were pumping resolvable optical data over vast distances.

However, the fact is that she lied. She did not receive UV with a radio telescope, and her techno-spew was revealed for what it was. But why pick UV? Why not any wavelength in the area? An alien wouldn't likely evolve with the same light receptors we use - even insects see different bands than we do, and they evolved here. So stating that UV was close to visible light carries the caveat - if you're a human. Which doesn't make a lot of sense as a pro or con.

And if this is really happening and someone out there has an 8" to 16" f5.6 or better optical scope, they should be able to hook up a spectraly adjusted optical sensor array, that has say 212nm, 280nm and 400nm receivers and resolve the binary data, if the frequencies are real and data is actually there.

However, her other statements also claim that whatever magic instrument she's using is also capable of analyzing the signal bandwidth, a remarkable, perhaps superhuman achievement for an optical receiver running in real time with such a small signal input. Almost as if she were confusing it with, say, a radio telescope. And she says that many other RT sites are receiving it too. And what do you think the chances are of ANY rt site having a UV capable optical telescope setup with such a receiver? None, perhaps? And remember, she was saying that they were receiving it as we read her posts. During the day. Sorry, it's a nice attempt at a save, but it's all too obvious that she tried to baffle us with bs and failed.

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:07 AM
reply to post by bobs_uruncle

UV in the range of 2800 to 4500 angstroms reaches earth through the atmosphere all the time, without too much trouble. Yes there is some attenuation, but nothing like visible light and infrared.

Ultraviolet is heavily attenuated when passing through the atmosphere. At 450nm it is cut by 35%, at 400nm by 50%. At 280nm and higher none is reaching the surface.

The atmosphere is most transparent to visible light (probably why it is "visible", our eyes evolved to use it) and generally more transparent to infrared than ultraviolet. 700nm radiation is reduced by 28% and 800nm by only 13%.

This is the reason there are no ground based ultraviolet telescopes.

Even without the claim of using a radio telescope, the claim is nonsense.

All @ 212.55 nanometers

212.55nm does not penetrate the atmosphere.

[edit on 5/4/2010 by Phage]

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:10 AM

Originally posted by mcrom901

you guys should stop OSETI from wasting any further funds....

If someone from OSETI shows up saying that they're receiving HF band radio signals with the telescope, I'll call them out on it too.

The issue is not "can you communicate with light", but "can you receive UV with a radio telescope", and that answer is, alas, no. Sorry, I know maybe it's not what you'd like to be true. You're as likely to pick up an AM radio station with a microscope.

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:13 AM

Originally posted by Atlantican
The Ultraviolet vs Radio debate is based on if she meant UV and not IR.
In the heat of a hurried situation a simple detail might be overlooked.

A radio telescope can't receive IR either. Either way, still a fail. And she gave freakin' wavelengths, it's not so much a UV vs IR, when you state that it's between 212 and 400 nm. That's unequivocally UV. Hard to pass that off as a typo.

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:16 AM
Wait just a cotton pickin minute here...

Just had a look at Wayne's profile pic on his FB page, and have to say that anyone who looks like these two comedians shouldn't be taken too seriously...

edit to add- no offense to anyone who currently sports a blond "butt-cut" hairdo

[edit on 4-5-2010 by PhotonEffect]

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:19 AM

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
1. While it is true that most UV from space would have been absorbed by the atmosphere, currently we do know that our atmosphere had been taking regular beatings from the sun's solar winds.

Could some of these UV managed to penetrate through and picked up by earth based RADIO TELESCOPES during such times?

No. Radio telescopes don't receive UV. At all. They're not equipped for it, the design is very very very different.

(While this is not related to the topic, i would like to point out that even teeth had been known to act as radio receivers, but most certainly cannot be of the capability of radio telescopes to receive UV for sure! the point of this paragraph is to prove how much of unknowns that we have even yet to know of. )

I've often heard this, but never seen an authentic documentation of it. Except some Lucille Ball story which she changed several times. None the less, what didn't happen is that suddenly some radio astronomer decided to press THIS button instead of THAT button, and suddenly the thing became a specialized optical instrument.

I am not endorsing the OP claims, but only to open up minds so that more explorations and search be done, rather to say it is not true, case closed.

If someone told you they were looking at the surface of the Moon using a portable AM radio, you'd tend not to believe them, eh? Deny ignorance, even when you'd really like the thing to be true.


Woohoo! After these credits clear, our honeypot system ought to be about #3 under the NASA Ames users! Hey, remember how Judy's presence on the NASA Ames SETI at home team was supposed to indicate she worked there? Well, now I WORK THERE TOO! Mwa ha ha! Tom O'Bedlam, newest member!

[edit on 4-5-2010 by Bedlam]

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:20 AM

Originally posted by True-seer
reply to post by the.lights

Hahahahahahaha i find this amusing that this signal whatever it is appears 2 days before disclosure is supposed to happen.

Coincidence maybe who the hell knows.

Oh man, this "disclosure to happen" is a fallacy. Disclosure is kinda like the "End of Days" on a daily basis... it always gets postpone to two days from today.

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:22 AM
reply to post by PhotonEffect


At least the one from the first picture is a professional what he does and does it honestly

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:26 AM
Well, I figured it all out its : Project Serpo Release #34 - "Operation TANGO-SIERRA".


Nother scotch please..

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:28 AM
reply to post by Phage

Phage I always love your posts because you make it so simple and yet complex with your charts! How awesome!

Check this chart out:

I know! Complete nonsense, right?

Seriously, Phage, you need to stop using paint to create a chart for every single thread

How do you know this is nonsense? No one has any idea yet if this is a valid claim, and because the information is being interpreted through a 3rd party, and then relayed again after that as well, we have no way to know what got lost in translation.

[edit on 4/5/2010 by highlyoriginal]

new topics

top topics

<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in