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.

 

Life Spotted on Venus - Russian Scientist

page: 7
102
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Is every Russian astronomer called Leonid?




posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcherI am to assume by your reply then, that you have written to the Russian agencies and obtained confirmation, that this picture, was indeed taken by Venus-13?


Yes I have written...

No I have not yet received a reply...

When I do, you won't be the first to know


Вы должны выяснить для себя

Carry on
edit on 20-1-2012 by zorgon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


The original article was published in Space Research Institute or Astronomicheskii Vestnik. They want $52 per issue and you can get if from Amazon


www.amazon.com...

You can also buy individual articles, but this one is not available yet:

www.springerlink.com...

Not sure it's worth it...
edit on 20-1-2012 by Nicolas Flamel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   





A planet has 3 things:

1. solids (rocks, sand, etc)
2. fluids (liquid, air)
3. life (sometimes)

This does not look like the first two, so must be number 3.

The same could be said about a LOT of planetary photos.

Now, and I apologize for using caps, but this is an obvious smoking gun...

WHY IN THE HELL DO SPACE AGENCY CAMERAS SUCK MORE THAN TOY CAMERAS MADE FOR CHILDREN!!??



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon


looking at this thread I see very few people actually doing any research.


If you were a true researcher, then you would know about valid, corrobarated sources and that one has to explore all avenues, no matter if they conflict with one's personal views. Something I rarely (if ever) see you doing. In fact, when I've questioned you in the past regarding sources, you convieniently ignore the line of questioning.


I am just as eager as you to find out if there is life out there, even if it microbial. So even though I "won't be the first to know", I hope that in the interests of science you'll let us all know your findings.


It feels like i'm debating with my 3 year old son, when conversing with you sometimes. Grow up.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by avatar01
 
okay, but where is that pic from?

Isn't that the one with no provenance?



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Just wondering though, why does the ground seem to be different in those pics? Like a different texture and all?



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rafe_
'I have a house, i stepped into the garden,i saw no humans....i am alone'
That basically is your reasoning.


Wrong. My reasoning is:

"I have a house. I stepped into the garden. In the garden there was a kind of weird blue glowing crystal I had never seen before, and I have no idea how it got there. Should I assume that all, many, or any other gardens have this blue glowing crystal just because mine does?"
edit on 20-1-2012 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Originally posted by Rafe_
'I have a house, i stepped into the garden,i saw no humans....i am alone'
That basically is your reasoning.


Wrong. My reasoning is:

"I have a house. I stepped into the garden. In the garden there was a kind of weird blue glowing crystal I had never seen before, and I have no idea how it got there. Should I assume that all, many, or any other gardens have this blue glowing crystal just because mine does?"
edit on 20-1-2012 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)




What do the odds tell you?







edit on 20-1-2012 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by avatar01

..

WHY IN THE HELL DO SPACE AGENCY CAMERAS SUCK MORE THAN TOY CAMERAS MADE FOR CHILDREN!!??


Ever try emailing an image to Venus from Earth before? and for that matter in 1982? But honestly, the cameras are probably pretty nice, it's just when you send the image back its usually trans coded in letters and text that then has to be re translated into an image. There is only so much information that comes back from venus to earth, and for that matter, how much gets lost in space.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by AmatuerSkyWatcher

My material is always sourced unless it is an opinion. My point is that it is easy to trace the source of images and data with only a few minutes of search

Enjoy your bliss



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
reply to post by DJW001
 


To be fair, they look nothing like what we see in those pictures. I still think what we are looking at is still something from the probe though.

I am still at a loss of why this seemingly educated man would say different though. Just weird.
edit on 20-1-2012 by AmatuerSkyWatcher because: (no reason given)


Clearly if he said this he was NOT referring to the object in this picture....which is clearly part of the machine.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Ok, please review the UFO's in ancient art thread, then find my questions please.

I know how to find the source (origin) of a picture. I am talking about primary sources, or a source from the 'horses mouth' if you like? Some (possibly random) picture, on some obscure website should not be considered a primary source.

If that picture was issued by the astronomer or the space agency, then it would be considered primary. However, as far as we know, it is not, so cannot be considered evidence in this research. Get it?


en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 20-1-2012 by AmatuerSkyWatcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel
It's definitely part of the probe. And Murphy's law came into play as well:


The Venera 14 craft had the misfortune of ejecting the camera lens cap directly under the surface compressibility tester arm, and returned information for the compressibility of the lens cap rather than the surface.


en.wikipedia.org...

The probes only survived a couple of hours, still quite a feat considering on Venus it's hot enough to melt lead, crush you with 93 times Earth's air pressure or 1,300 lbs per square inch and rains sulfuric acid.


They must have materials by now that can withstand the heat considering what they have been doing with the particle accelerator.
They have also built lasers that create heat hotter then the sun also and it takes more energy to create the beam than the beam itself so what materials are they using and why can't they or have they sent probes we are not told about!



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Basic rule of whether life exists on a Planet. If the temp. is hot enough to melt just about every Element that could make a life form...probably no life. Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


Yeah I Would think so too, but in that picture there is nothing else that I (or anyone else yet) has seen, that he could of possibly meant.

We don't even know if this is the exact picture he is referring to. All we have is some half arsed newspaper article, and a few pics from the Venus probe mentioned.

Who's to say there aren't other pictures we haven't seen? I'm keeping an open mind. Hopefully they'll be some developments!



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
Basic rule of whether life exists on a Planet. If the temp. is hot enough to melt just about every Element that could make a life form...probably no life. Split Infinity


Venus isn't that hot.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by PennKen2009
reply to post by DJW001
 


Just wondering though, why does the ground seem to be different in those pics? Like a different texture and all?


More than one probe landed and Venera 13 and 14 had two cameras. Here some more pics with perspective correction:





Soviet Venus Images



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   


This is the clearest view of this object, in a different position and being that close to the camera i do say its part of the craft.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:26 PM
link   
I worked with some Russians academics for a while. Great people. One of the last I hosted was adamant that I be taught how to drink Vodka the Russian way.

It goes like this.

Lift glass, some toast is optional, throw vodka back in a single gulp and then, here is the key:
* LOUDLY, bang now empty glass on table, and, finally,
* Release contented guttural sigh. "Aghhh!"

I mention this important custom so those who are looking at the images for a disk, a dark flap and a scorpion will realize the tools being used by Russian researches which are necessary to see the disk, the black flap, and the scorpion.

I may experiment with bourbon later tonight to see if similar results might be replicated.



new topics

top topics



 
102
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join