Re: Planet X: Changing the PAST?

I M Openminded wrote in message <[email protected]>
> Nancy Lieder wrote in message <[email protected]>
> > I note no response as to my (and Steve Havas) points made a week ago.
> > Just Tholen talking AROUND the issue, not addressing it (so what else is
> > new) and the usual adolescent snickering.  So I'll repeat:
> >
> > Steve mentioned in private e-mail to me several questionable matters re
> > the NEAT image (and remember that Tholen, on "vacation" for several days
> > after the Jan 19th image at Haute-Provence was announced, and works in
> > Hawaii where the NEAT program is stationed).
> >
> > 1. why does the NEAT image who the Jan 19th spot as being
> >    LARGER and BRIGHTER than the faint star above while
> >    also not showing up on any DSS image?
> >
> > 2. why is the NEAT image (Dec 16, 01) that IMO had posted
> >    on his site STILL UNAVAILABLE for viewing at the
> >    NASA site?
>
> I have posted many responses to item 1 to you, to Havas, to josX.  You
> simply ignore them.
> 1a) Different photographic and CCD systems have different
>     sensitivities to stars of different color.  You have acknowleged this
>     in your requirement that attempts to observe your planet be made with
>     a red filter.  The result is that the brightnesses of some stars on
>     one image may be different on another taken with different equipment.
> 1b) Many (if not most) faint red stars are variable in brightness,
>     sometimes highly variable.
>
> The bottom line here is that the spots you pointed to with your red
> circles all have turned out to be either empty or to have stars that I
> have shown were imaged there years and even decades in the past.
>
> 2) I have gone back to the NEAT archives several times since Havas
>    made his cliam that the images were unavailable and each time I find
>    them there.
>
> Go to http://skys.gsfc.nasa.gov/skymorph/obs.html
>   enter Position [ 04 27 24 , 12 12 30 ]
>   and hit Submit Query
>   and scan down the resulting list to
>   20011216040155a 04 27 56.10 +12 16 25.7 2001-12-16 04:03:10 150Y
>   20011216055443a 04 27 55.94 +12 16 43.0 2001-12-16 05:55:58 150Y
>   20011216072630a 04 27 50.25 +12 16 42.1 2001-12-16 07:27:45 150Y
>   check them off, scroll to the bottom, set 600 pixels as the desired
>   area.
> The click Request Images.  You will get a FITS format image from NEAT.
> I just did this and it works as of 5 minutes before this post as it
> has since my original post.

Wow, so NEAT finally got those FITS files working, good for them! Only took
them hmm... a month or so after it was pointed out that it looked like there
was something fishy going on with these images? So, somehow these files were
previously operational for you to be able to post an image on your site,
then are down due to serious errors for whatever reasons for a month or so
and now are back up...

You say the differences of the spot on the NEAT images at the location where
the Jan 19 spot appears is due to imaging variables of different CCD systems
etc.. However, I believe the differences of these images and the areas in
discussion are great enough and inconsistent enough that it is due to a
process entirely more mischievous and purposefully misleading. And why
wouldn't they? If this planet is real it only makes sense for them to doctor
images to try keep the general public in the grey area for as long as
possible.

As a side note of interest, I noticed that when doing various stretches on
this image -20011216040155a - that the area in question initially shows up
as a perfect cross! Coincidence or what hehe!