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.

 

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

page: 21
175
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 



big eyes at that!

i was thinking the same thing, basically, maybe the signals are just ads!

lol, commercials.


i don't know what to think after reading all this.




posted on May, 4 2010 @ 04:55 AM
link   
Hoagland's now weighed in on the FB page asking some questions

such as
"Question:

How can a RADIO astronomical observatory receive and process a "UV signal" ...?

The two are TOTALLY different, in terms of the wavelength region of the EM spectrum where they're found. Thus, a "radio telescope" certainly couldn't receive/detect such a "ultra-high-frequency LIGHT signal" (which is what "ultraviolet LIGHT" is ...)."

He also had more to say, similar to what people here are saying.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 04:59 AM
link   
well according to Wayne none of this is benefitting him....from his FB page today , his reply to someone called Lars:



-Wayne Herschel- @Lars... what book sales???... my book has been forcibly deleted and removed from all stores in the USA... the distributor shut down in the USA after listing it as a rare unavailable book (my third distributor to shut down) I couldnt give a s...t about what people think and I only want the truth behind this claim as any of the others here want as well. Right now it has done more harm to this research than good.
_____________________

Also an apparant email from her to Wayne explaining :

-Wayne Herschel- Judy then wrote... From Far Infra Red to Deep ultra Violet Radiation gives of Radio Emissions. Even light from a candle will produce radio emissions on a sensitive receiver.
Here is a example on this :

www.youtube.com...
... See More
www.youtube.com...

We modified it to be sensitive to Radiation Emissions on the far scale of the EM spectrum and used it to test results on a radio telescope. Cant say more...
about an hour ago

____________________________________



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by Tom_Proctor
I think the better question is, why would an intelligent species not use radio waves, and instead visible or sub-visible light, which is what humans see, but not at those distances.

come to think of it
in all the images I've seen
of aliens, I have never seen ears.
So why would they use radiowaves
if they themselves cannot hear ??
Just a thought


but they do have eyes

[edit on 4-5-2010 by boondock-saint]


Humans can't hear radio waves


That's why we have radios to convert the radio waves into frequencies our ears can hear



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:02 AM
link   
well hoax or not

we do have some clues as to where
and how to look for ET now.
Well at least another variant
in the UV Spectrum.

And at least some more research in that vein
might be appropriate.

And this time:
leave the RADIO telescopes at home



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by GerhardSA

Originally posted by GerhardSA
ok..here is the official reply from the Hartebees observatory here in SA
I quote:


Hi Gerhard,

As you figured, radio telescopes cannot detect "deep ultraviolet", and
certainly those here are not observing any of the stars mentioned.

But it is in the nature of conspiracy theories that any denial is taken as
proof of the conspiracy, so this was why I asked what response you
expected.


So it is a catch-22 situation for anyone you ask to confirm what you emailed.

Enjoy your day.

Mike Gaylard


So...there you have it. Game = OVER, well.... certainly from a perspective of South African Observatories being involved

[edit on 4-5-2010 by GerhardSA]


maybe you guys missed this. but the SA guys say.."No....It is all BS"



Well there is a discrepancy somewhere as what that guy in SA implies counters what the official low down is about NASA capabilities as mentioned in MarrsAttax's post a few before your own..........? It's all rather confusing now. Someone suggested Wayne is just relaying info in a way that is missing finer points and leading people to misunderstand and Wayne on his site said something about her being Swedish and implying there may be the odd less-than-perfect translation /explanation.....



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Tom_Proctor
 

yea go ahead and laugh it up
I made a funny

but u get my drift



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by GerhardSA
 


Oh, I am blinded by your billance or attempts at disinfo that you need to repost it TWICE on the same page.

You mean this little guy that focus mainly on microwave bands,

HartRAO, Hartebees Observatory, South Africa

or this souped up baby that can focus on better wavelengths that you have not reach or ignored or do not even know it ezist?

SALT, South Africa Large Telescope, Sutherland



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by GerhardSA
 




Prior to making a public announcement that evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence has been detected, the discoverer should promptly inform all other observers or research organizations that are parties to this declaration, so that those other parties may seek to confirm the discovery by independent observations at other sites and so that a network can be established to enable continuous monitoring of the signal or phenomenon. Parties to this declaration should not make any public announcement of this information until it is determined whether this information is or is not credible evidence of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence. The discoverer should inform his/her or its relevant national authorities.
.

Source: www.setileague.org...

Protocols would mean any announcement would go through the proper channels, and not be a response to an email from an ATS member


(Of course this also means that Dr Faltskog has broken these protocols if what she is saying is true which would speak against her being a scientist of professional integrity but wouldn't necessarily provide falsification of the claim.)

Note as well all he says is



As you figured, radio telescopes cannot detect "deep ultraviolet", and
certainly those here are not observing any of the stars mentioned.
.

If the signals were UV then of course his observatory wouldn't bother observing those stars. What would be the point? That doesn't negate the possibility that the signals exist and and have been picked up by alternative instruments (see my post above).

Then again it doesn't mean they have either.

GAME = NOT OVER JUST YET


[edit on 4/5/2010 by MarrsAttax]



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:10 AM
link   
Richard Hoagland's post on Wayne's page in full :

Richard C. Hoagland Wayne,

I'm not quite sure why you felt the need to take a "crack" at me in your response below; I was asked several questions regarding this report yesterday afternoon, and I responded -- since astronomy is certainly one of my areas of expertise, as a former NASA consultant in that specific discipline.

My questions about your friend's report are very simple.... See More

According to you (since we CAN'T currently access any of your friend's data on HER FB site), the signal is now being tracked by multiple RADIO astronomy observatories around the world. But--

It's also a "UV signal ... on a frequency we never thought to look at before" (paraphrasing).

Question:

How can a RADIO astronomical observatory receive and process a "UV signal" ...?

The two are TOTALLY different, in terms of the wavelength region of the EM spectrum where they're found. Thus, a "radio telescope" certainly couldn't receive/detect such a "ultra-high-frequency LIGHT signal" (which is what "ultraviolet LIGHT" is ...).

Further, let's consider that you simply got it wrong; that, there is NO "UV signal" ... but only a message in the radio band; why aren't there HUNDREDS of properly-equipped radio amateur astronomers listening to the same signal(s) right now ... and letting everybody KNOW, world-wide, via the Net?

You published the list of stars (apparently) emitting these signals ....

Who would NOT want to be the "first amateur astronomer in HSTORY" to confirm a bona-fide SETI signal!!??

Or, let's take the reverse:

Let's assume you got the "radio signals" part wrong, and the signals are ONLY UV (laser?) transmissions ....

Again, UV (below a certain wavelength) CANNOT be detected from the ground; that's why Hubble, FUSE, and other space telescopes are flown ... to detect wavelengths in the UV that CANNOT penetrate the atmosphere.

Again, I'm surprised by your gratuitous "swipe" at me; I THOUGHT we were all interested in the truth here ....

I'm simply pointing out some basic (and very disturbing) facts regarding your "friend's" story ... it DOESN'T add up. Neither does her "method of disclosure" (for someone "worried that the entire effort might be kept secret" -- again, paraphrasing).

Sadly, I have the awful feeling that YOU have been targeted for a major "disinfo operation." Perhaps to undermine the credibility of YOUR research ....

Oh ... and there ARE "ancient ET ruins on the Moon."

24 minutes ago



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by cosmicpixie
well according to Wayne none of this is benefitting him....from his FB page today , his reply to someone called Lars:



-Wayne Herschel- @Lars... what book sales???... my book has been forcibly deleted and removed from all stores in the USA... the distributor shut down in the USA after listing it as a rare unavailable book (my third distributor to shut down) I couldnt give a s...t about what people think and I only want the truth behind this claim as any of the others here want as well. Right now it has done more harm to this research than good.
_____________________

Also an apparant email from her to Wayne explaining :

-Wayne Herschel- Judy then wrote... From Far Infra Red to Deep ultra Violet Radiation gives of Radio Emissions. Even light from a candle will produce radio emissions on a sensitive receiver.
Here is a example on this :

www.youtube.com...
... See More
www.youtube.com...

We modified it to be sensitive to Radiation Emissions on the far scale of the EM spectrum and used it to test results on a radio telescope. Cant say more...
about an hour ago

____________________________________


This proves nothing. He is moving everything furiously which makes the radio waves on the photo sensor. If he had done an off/on test with something stationary, that would be more convincing. It's like a theramin



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
reply to post by GerhardSA
 


Oh, I am blinded by your billance or attempts at disinfo that you need to repost it TWICE on the same page.

You mean this little guy that focus mainly on microwave bands,

HartRAO, Hartebees Observatory, South Africa

or this souped up baby that can focus on better wavelengths that you have not reach or ignored or do not even know it ezist?

SALT, South Africa Large Telescope, Sutherland


Disinfo....
Me...you really think GerhardSA = Disinformant?

i was simply stating that the SA Obeservatory claimed to be involved in this is actually not Involved!
Disinfo....please.... far from it mate!


Ps....
Hartebees = Radio Telescope, which they claim are being used to pick up the signal = untrue.
SATL =Optical = not part of the arguement and not used for this "event".
I have checked with them as well.
Dont insult buddy....
I never mentioned SALT because it was not of relevance to the discussion being Radio Signals and deriving Deep UV signals from them, as is stated on the FB page of WH and on this THREAD!

[edit on 4-5-2010 by GerhardSA]



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by GerhardSA
 


Since you edit your post..I 'll have to edit this post.

Which is more important- the RADIO TELESCOPE or the UV info?
Guess I've wasted my efforts on your silly drama.

[edit on 4-5-2010 by SeekerofTruth101]



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by cosmicpixie
But--

It's also a "UV signal ... on a frequency we never thought to look at before" (paraphrasing).

Question:

How can a RADIO astronomical observatory receive and process a "UV signal" ...?

The two are TOTALLY different, in terms of the wavelength region of the EM spectrum where they're found. Thus, a "radio telescope" certainly couldn't receive/detect such a "ultra-high-frequency LIGHT signal" (which is what "ultraviolet LIGHT" is ...).
....


Richard Hoagland 1 - 0 Wayne


This is clearly a hoax, i think the whole 'transmitting signals' into space would be a redundant thing to do for an alien race. Firstly, because of religion we take a strange standpoint on the unknown and the universe.
secondly an alien race without religion would just want to advance technologically in order to acheive the ability to find other 'aliens'

Us humans have A LOT to learn



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:23 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


My point exactly...no hard feelings.
I hate disinfo... And certainly do not want to be labled as such a agent on this website either.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
reply to post by GerhardSA
 


Since you edit your post..I 'll have to edit mine

[edit on 4-5-2010 by SeekerofTruth101]

we gonna keep missing the point now...
just read the email and see it for what its worth..i dont want fights here... i wanna get down to the bottom of this as everyone else on here does



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:27 AM
link   
someone on FB posted this link and said : as i got it, UV light emits RADIO signals as well, so it can be tracked with radio telescope....

He also posted this link and another one here for clarification about UV and radio signals. I don't understand any of it myself but maybe someone here will

[edit on 4/5/10 by cosmicpixie]



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:28 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


Check U2U



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by GerhardSA
 


Fair enough. But your investigation posted here is on Hartrao and not Salt, it proves nothing. Therefore you can't prove a conclusion that it is a hoax just because Hartrao do not search in the UV spectrum unlike Salt.

Furthermore there are protoccols involved as one intelligent poster explain, and it aint gonna be in the form of some email to a john doe.

IF Dr. Judy can share with us the UV info and emission signature, then it may lead to a clearer picture of what's going on, rather than fight over semantics.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 05:39 AM
link   
more from Richard Hoagland on Wayne's FB page:

Answering your earlier question:

There is "ultraviolet" ... and then there's ULTRAVIOLET!... See More

It's all in how you "define" the precise spectral region that your observing ....

From (we now know -- because Wayne just confirmed that he copied them AS IS from Judy's FB page) HER OWN DATA ... she says that it's the EXTREME UV portion of the spectrum that they're seeing the signal(s).

That automatically eliminates ANY ability to confirm this with ANY optical (or radio) obervatory ... FROM THE GROUND.

But, from orbit?

Easy.

And only NASA, ESA and (maybe the Japanese and the Russians) possess ANY satellites IN ORBIT capable of seeing signals in THAT far-UV region of the spectrum ....

So, how can she say that this UV signal is "eing confirmed around the world" .. when no telescope on Earth can possibly SEE it ...?!

And, again, as for the "radio" part ....

That frequency (which she does NOT seem to list, curiously ...) COULD be received by ANY radio telescope in the world. and, there are now a LOT of them which are in private individuals' hands ....

So, where are THOSE confirmations .. since this story went viral yesterday morning (New Mexico time ....)?

No, this "smells" ... Big Time now ... including, her melodramatic "last e-mail."

Which is -- technically -- horse pucky ....


There are SO many things wrong with her latest "explanation" re this fundamental frequency problem ... like, the absurd example of the ("blackbody") candle, compared to "single EM frequencies" (huh?!) ... that this has gone from "amusing" to "absurd."

I'm sad to say, Wayne, that you've been "had."



new topics

top topics



 
175
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join