OK guys, listen up. Just been trawling the GodLike Forum (quite an amusing place) and stumbled across these supposed Planet X sighting pictures.

http://www.darkinsight.com/helios2003/

They're all hosted here. Personally I smell a forgery, something bound to occur sooner or later. Any thoughs?

Oh, this is particularly interesting:

http://www.darkinsight.com/helios200...re-cropped.jpg

Check above the white line. Now, I don't buy into this stuff, but this could be enough to tip some people towards Nancy's way of thinking.

Much fuzz about a lint. Reminds me of the Moonhoaxer's C-rock.
http://www.clavius.org/rover1.html

Harald

Oh, hold on a sec. This is 'obviously' a professional astronomer! Check out his setup!

http://www.darkinsight.com/helios2003/Setup3.jpg

:roll:

Oh sh..! Never argue before having checked all the available information. I admit, I'm biased on the subject of Planet X. I'm soo narrow-minded...



Harald

Might just be me but aren't planets round? That looks too whispy to be round. Looks like a far away nebula.

Hey don't knock the setup, he prorobly spent a good beer break making it! (how would you take pictures throught binoculars? )

Funny you should ask that. I was just conducting some experiments yesterday on that very question. I took my new digital camera and placed it up to one of the lenses of my 7x50's to see what would come out.

Unfortunately, it wasn't much. I was able to get a few fairly clear photos of my front door from the other end of my apartment, but I couldn't get a full field of view most of the time. The pictures were mostly half dark blobs.

Maybe with the right kind of fixture for the camera and a steady mount you could get some decent photos, but it looks like a real pain overall. :-D

__________________
...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. --Sir Bedevere

check the zeta site, there are pics from the lawnchair astronomer!!!

http://www.zetatalk.com/teams/rogue/nancy16.htm

also, some discussion that tries to explain problems with images because
X is moving so much during the exposers that it won't all fit in the picture.

http://www.zetatalk.com/teams/rogue/pierre12.htm
http://www.zetatalk.com/teams/rogue/naji34.htm

it just gets better and better!!

Ahaha, Nancy obviously never read the rest of that thread:

And also:

Nancy has showed she is desperate enough to go with anything these days.

Oh, and here's a 'sighting' from the UK. Just one thing? Where's PX? http://www.geocities.com/net_tez/

Source: OH!!! PLANET X VISIBLE IN URUGUAY - Thread at Godlike Productions

Greenhalgh: I think I know what the person who took that picture is trying to pass off as Planet X. Look right above the center of the photograph, you should be able to make out a VERY faint circle that looks sorta kinda reddish if you want it to.

I'm not even gonna bother clicking on the link to the Godlike Discussions board to look at the thread. Ever since the whole deal with Comet NEAT, that they thought was gonna kill us all (which it didn't, obviously), I've just been sickened by that board. Even though some of their claims, such as all the leaders of each country in the world really being evolved reptillian creatures that are hiding in human skin (I'm serious, they are convinced this is true) are hilarious, I'm just getting tired of all their "The world's gonna end! The government's hiding it! " crap.

When they say stuff like "You're doing an incredible job with these daytime pictures. It's only a matter of time before the government HAS to admit Nibiru is coming! ", they're really saying, "Thanks for taking some pictures of the sky. I've forgotten what it looks like after all this time sitting in front of my computer, fearing something that isn't there and theorizing about how the government's covering it up, even though it's not."

I entirely agree. They are a weird lot over there, many of them obsessed with end of the world scenarios. It shows the kind of people Nancy is using as 'reliable sources'. Even the guy who took the pictures that are now on ZetaTalk has debunked them!!! How low can ya get?

Did anybody over there say anything about NEAT not, technically speaking, killing us all?

No doubt they will pay the same rigorous intellectual care to the failure of that prediction as will the "zeta" crowd to Planet X's no-show. Except that the latter will have to come up with a suitable excuse for the annoying failure of the Earth to roll over and play dead come mid-May.

The only interesting aspects are which excuse will be selected, and how many will continue to follow Ms. Lieder. I won't try science on them, I would only remind them Caveat Emptor, or, in the words of Orioles manager Mike Hargrove,

"That's an example of the old expression... what is that expression... Once, shame on me; twice, shame on you? Or once shame on you... Oh, whatever it is. You know the one: Try not to be a dumbbell too often."

Indeed, words to live by.

I'm not even sure what they said over at the Godlike Productions board after Comet NEAT didn't kill us all. Did they forget about it completely? I'm assuming they did.

That reminds me, I never did get to see Comet NEAT where I live. I didn't know about it until a few days before it reached perihellion, though.

taz -- beginner that I are, I'm only vaguely familiar with lens artifacts. Educate me - what we got? Lens flare? Cheap developing? Sundog? Mars attacking? What?

And no, I don't believe for the smallest micro-instant of time that it's really PX...if it were, Geraldo and Peter Arnett would be fighting over the last airliner seat to Wisconsin to get an exclusive interview with The Head Twinkie...

__________________
"If a tree is cut down in the rainforest, and is used to make paper to print a book, and the book is really bad, and there's nobody that will read it, do you still hear a sucking sound?"
Charlie in Dayton, A.AsC.

OK dudes, here's another potential 'sighting'. I must stipulate that the photographer has NOT claimed it to be PX, but he is apparently keeping an open mind

Here's the link to his gallery:

http://community.webshots.com/user/gffcc

I took a look and managed to find the blotch pointed to. Using MS PhotoDraw, I did an Auto Brightness / Contrast to enhance the photo and it came out with as a large, bright dot, with the surrounding stars tiny blue dots. Not sure what it means, but I don't think this tiny diffuse patch counts as naked eye? I would post my enhanced pic, but I don't want to have any trouble with copyright laws: the photographer said he didn't want the pictures posted anywhere as of yet.

I'm not signing up for the Webshots thing, so I can't post to that user's guestbooks.

There is an album that is titled "A Cloud does not sit there for 6 hours!!". I would point out that the type of cloud pictured, a lenticular cloud, CAN. And they DO. They are formed by air being foreced over an obstacle, usually parcel of cold, dense air over the top of a mountain - but it can be a parcel of colder, denser air by itself. The air is forced up over the obstacle and cools. The vapor in the air then condenses onto particles and forms a cloud. As the air descends down the other side of the obstacle, it compresses and warms, and the water droplets sublimate off the particles back into vapor.

So you have a stationary looking cloud that hangs for hours. Lenticular clouds have been mis-"identified" as UFOs.

CJSF

__________________
Two years ago moved from my town
I was looking up past the city lights
But the city lights got in my way

See the constellation ride across the sky
No cigar, no lady on his arm
Just a guy made of dots and lines

-from "See The Constellation"
by They Might Be Giants

What do you expect from a twinkie? If his dog sat watching him for 15 minutes it'd be branded a Government agent. :roll: About the 'Alderbaran (Taurus) & Orion' pictures: could the diffuse red cloud in his photos be a distant nebula?

A six-sided "light" in a photo is from lens flare; it is manifested thus by the aperture iris in an SLR camera. Actually, all light coming through a lens in an SLR is a six-sided image; However, we are only concerned (usually!) with the rectangular result on the film.

New Image at ZetaTalk, apparently viewed from 6000ft in Hawaii. Here's the link:

http://www.zetatalk.com/teams/rogue/nancy18.htm

Doesn't look too red to me. Any ideas as to what it is?

It could be practically anything. Without seeing the entire frame, un-edited and un-enhanced there is absolutely no way to say what it is without something else of reference within the frame. Exposure information -besides "4 seconds"- like f/stop and iso would help.

In my opinion, if this really was a picture of the night sky, exposed properly for 4 seconds from the top of a volcano in Hawaii, many other stars should be visible somewhere within the frame. Since they are not, I'm simply going to assume that this is an extremely poor exposure of nothing important equalling up to digital artifacts of no meaning whatsoever.

__________________
~Brad - Astropaparazzo
http://signaturedigitalimages.com

My guess is that it's probably Aldebaran. It's the brightest star in that region and it's reddish in color. He says he found "moons" around it under magnification, which I guess would be some of the Hyades around it.

But tell me how the time stamp is supposed to give us a sense of scale?

__________________
...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. --Sir Bedevere

Is it just me, or is the supposed Planet X in the first picture in the first link look like a red square? Also, I don't see how the reddish blob/cloud could be a planet, unless the planet exploded upon exiting hyperspace.

Methinks they are getting desperate. 40 days until Doomsday. It'll be interesting to watch as it all implodes upon itself.

I wouldnt even go so far as to guess it's Aldebaran. There's no way to see, based on what the photographer has shown, that the object depicted is even in the sky. For all we know it's a horribly exposed pictured of his porch light. Without some frame of reference, it's a photo of nothing. The same goes for the smear and the pink blob on the other photos (probably a moth and a compression artifact, respectively) which we can see show what could be star fields but still dont show enough to gain reference as to the coordinates imaged.

__________________
~Brad - Astropaparazzo
http://signaturedigitalimages.com

LOL!!! What's up with that picture of the chair? I looks like it has eyes. Freaky

True, but I'm trying to give him the credit of at least pointing to the right general region of the sky. There's no reason yet to assume he isn't being honest about his attempt. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that it's a case of mistaken identity and not a deliberate forgery until shown otherwise.

__________________
...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. --Sir Bedevere

RE: "A cloud does not sit there for six hours".

Uhhmm...I haven't looked at the image in question, but I'd like to point out one small potential problem all the same. I have heard it rumored during the course of my life that the earth actually does this rotational thing on it's axis, hence the reason the stars at night appear to 'move' across the sky, and hence the reason the sun appears to 'move' across the sky during the daytime. I realize that if one is a follower of DemonSpeak, I mean, ZetaBabble, one has to throw everything the God-given gift of science has proven and demonstrated for the last several hundred years out the window and all, but I'd imagine that at least the rotation of the earth isn't disputed by DemonSpeak, is it? In other words, if the image -and observations- made by this dude were PX, it wouldn't have sat in the same position in the sky anyway because the earth is rotating. Is this remotely logical or have I been sniffing too much glue while listening to The Ramones as of late? Whatever he imaged is probably not outside of the earth's atmosphere, assuming that there actually was anything there to image in the first place and we're not dealing with some photographic anomoly (as has already been pointed out)...or more fun with Photoshop, which is a valid question to ask in this day and age.

__________________
Who is the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows?

Ummmm... It could be in like a really, really 'high' geosynchronous "orbit" What the hey! At its purported distance (10 AUs) it'd be cruising at a mere ~ .36c --- not that excess of absolute velocity (was such indicated) would pose a problem in LIEder land ;-)

Toutatis The Duck God has spoken QUAAACK!!! ;-)

That lot (i.e. the Zetakooks) are a *RIOT* ;-) --I'm gonna miss 'em :,(

Best regards
Sarandon :)

__________________
My formula for success is never to talk about a successful formula, because it's bound to go wrong!

In other words, I hit the nail right on the head unless PX has decided to take up a geosynchronous orbit around our humble globe. I suspect the likelihood of that occuring is slim to none, with a definite lean towards the none side. Seems unlikely that a planetary body said to be roughly Neptune-sized would curl up in an orbit around our planet just so that Nancy & Co. at DemonSpeak could jump up and down and yell "Look! We were right!" :

Personally I'm not going to miss the lot of them and somehow I suspect that they won't allow us to forget altogether. I'm sure part of the excuse will be to leave a passage for them to sneak back into their self-created limelight and continue to milk this thing for a few more bucks over the next several years. I mean, there's the Mayan calender doomsday in 2012. That's approximately another nine and a half years to milk this thing. Hopefully the legions of the gullible will have diminished considerably by that time. Hopefully...but I won't be holding my breath about that.

__________________
Who is the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows?

I'm afraid you are right.....zetatalk maybe wont live, but something else will come along.....remember the immortal words of P.T. Barnum... 'Theres a sucker born every minute'....

New photo I've dug up. This one seems to be a case of mistaken identity:

http://www.darkinsight.com/a/00020.html

The person says that it is Aldebaran near the top of the pic... I don't think so. I'm no expert so what does everyone else think?