Check out the new one to hit the internet.

http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0609/2mass.php

Sorry if this has been posted. I couldn't find it with the search engine

Whatcha think??

What do you guys think of the 2Mass project over at the Caltech website?

http://www.ipac.caltech.edu/2mass/

What's it about? In your words.

That way, in the future, if the link breaks, as links often do, this topic will stand on its own.

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

Ehhh lemme see, I see a website for the 2 micron sky survey.
In what way is this connected to Planet X?


Yojimbo, please be specific in your claim, tell us what you think you see on the 2MASS website and how it relates to Planet X. If you do not do this the thread will be closed. This is not the place for posting "Look what I found!!" There needs to be more beef.

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

there's more typos on that page than there would have been had it been written by me..
and that's pretty bad..
but beyond that, they sure do seem fond of using the "keep zooming in on a jpeg until something weird shows up" method of astronomical study..

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

Um sorry, tusenfem.

My first post link actually showed the beef, the second link is the organization that found the beef.

Sorry for the confusion. I'm a novice amateur at best. Found this info on the web and wanted to ask for your input.

The first link shows all the pictures.

I left a comment on the first site that I doubt will be shown, but basically...pixelation creates artifacts. You can't use zoom to uncover info.

I also questioned why out of all the blurry dots, he picked that particular one. I didn't see anything remarkable about it.

Yojimbo, what makes you think the UFO Digest's analysis is correct? In your own words, please.

I like the UFO Digest author's suggestion that we, based on a blurry image combined with the author's suggestions that it looks like something metallic, should decide for ourselves.

__________________
- quote by "Zenas" on the Pravda.ru forum

I think that someone has zoomed in onto a display of a compressed file, and ended up pulling out an artifact based on a few pixels. I see nothing at all to suggest that this is anything more than just a digital effect blown up large, and then presented, with no justification, as new "science".

I am reasonably interested in finding out why anyone thinks it worth making a web page for this sort of rubbish, instead of doing something productive with their lives, and so, for me, the science is sociology or psychology here, not astronomy.

On that point, what are your thoughts? Do you think that it is a result of a diagnosable condition, or is it just someone who thinks that they can do science but is far too lazy to actually go through the normal route of getting an education in the subject?

I'd speculate that it is the latter, and is a manifestation of the Dunning-Kruger effect, whereby someone with no idea at all how science is done has convinced themselves that they know better than the actual real experts in the field.

But please, tell me, what do you think?

I think Planet X is everywhere!

4.2ly away and due in 2012 too!

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Hm, don't we all have ideas, hypotheses that we seek to validate? I'm sure whoever found that artefact and is making grandiose claims really wants to find Nibiru out there and is glad for a sign. But unlike with an ideal scientist, Nibiru is a matter of faith first for this person, with evidence being sought after and then celebrated as a kind of proof, never mind whether it's verifiable.

Wouldn't this be like someone finding a possible missing link or some ancient Biblical relic? Both are examples of finding something that would validate a belief. That's all this is, I'm sure. One thing I wonder about is how that rather thin red tail appears at all when every other object is wider? It doesn't seem like anything that thin exists at that level of magnification..

Edit: By the way, has anyone anywhere ever actually produced this supposed ancient Sumerian text describing Nibiru? Everything online is second-hand.

__________________
- quote by "Zenas" on the Pravda.ru forum