Walter in China is pathetic...he gets classical images of lens flares and claims they are planet X - even claims that shooting through a screen door will eliminate lens flares....just pathetic. Of course Nancy claims they are planet X.

http://www.zetatalk.com/teams/rogue/nanc1217.htm
http://www.zetatalk.com/teams/rogue/nanc1224.htm
http://www.zetatalk.com/teams/rogue/nanc1223.htm

Tom

__________________
I feel a hot wind on my shoulder
And the touch of a world that is older

I saw that pic of hers through the screen. Can't people tell that that is lens flare? It is so obvious. If I was a follower of hers I think I would be insulted that she would think I was so stupid as to not see that pic for what it is.

__________________
What happens if a big asteroid hits the Earth? Judging from realistic simulations involving a sledge hammer and a common laboratory (insert least favorite test animal, person), we can assume it will be pretty bad.
{changed as per Frogesque's request :D}

Actually, the claim is that it will eliminate the argument for lens flare. The assertion is that the picture shows the "object" to be behind the screen; therefore, in the sky. It, of course, is still a lens flare. You can see the discoloration on the mesh pretty clearly.

In the second picture, she claims the "object" can be photographed separately from the Sun, proving it's not a lens flare. However, she offers no proof aside from pictures that are obviously cropped.

Ok, so how do we know walter really is in China...?

Maybe it's one of Nancy's own "personas"...

__________________
-Jack Higgins
"Scientists discover huge nuclear fusion reaction in progress only 93 million miles from earth - visible to naked eye even during the day!"
My Celestia Add-ons site.

I've often wondered about Walter...is he purposely feeding Nancy false info just to help her dig herself into a ditch--oh excuse me, "trench"--or is he a believer?
Since most of the pictures he sends her are obviously pictures of nothing, I've been leaning towards the "Walter is pulling Nancy's leg" theory.

__________________
"I'm a genius! A genius can't help it!!" -- Little Washu

If that's the case, then Walter is a braver (or more desperate, by orders of magnitude) man than I am... [-(

To paraphrase Mike Doonesbury, concerning "...the light at the end of the tunnel...": "Why do you insist on calling it a tunnel every time you've dug yourself into a hole?"

__________________
"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.

Uhhh...shooting through anything is kinda dangerous right? I once shot
a 12 gauge through a watermelon and it sorta made a mess.

I didn't even know lens flares were in season! But don't shoot through
the screen door because it might make big holes and let the bugs in. #-o

__________________
Genius has its limits....stupidiity is infinite.

http://www.freewebs.com/doombase

The so-and-so from such-and-such a place photos at least seem to be consistent. Consider all those weird Incoming! photos from Italy with the pink sky and the sensor burnout. Not that they're proof they really come via China and Italy and wherever (good lord, now I sound like I belong on GLP with the conspiracies).

__________________
Help! Marxist literary critics are following me!

Ah, but she doesn't realize that you can get a lens flare or internal reflection without the bright light source being within the image frame. All that's required is that the light is shining on the lens but still be out of the field of view. That's one the reasons for having a dew shield installed on a telescope, especially when observing near the moon, or in the proximity of artificial lighting. The same is true for cameras and lens hoods/shades and sunlight.