AREA 51 (the thread)

[Crux]

Wow. I just found a reference that even proves my point exactly. It also shows why you shouldn't cite wikipedia when discussing something you don't understand:

How Mentholated is Wrong.

Lol. The wikipedia article I created is gone already. They work fast over there

[Guardianx11x]

Originally Posted by mentholated

The reason I mentioned the "pulsating 100s of times between each frame" is because upon close examination of the videos, on those little orbs you can see a swirling vortex moving out towards the exterior of the shell of the orb from the center black/non luminal dot and even when viewed at very slow frame rates (1-4 frames a second) that vortex appears to change quite dramatically given the fact that if it was recorded at around 60fps.

I don't know how to fake that, but maybe you do.

Don't worry sweetie, I can teach you. It is simple.

Now here is what a camera data polling looks like. You have periods where the shutter is open and it captures data. It then closes, no data is captured.



So say you have a slow pulse. It looks something like this (this one is actually quite fast compared to the frame rate):



Now the key point is that inside each frame the camera can only store a SINGLE FINITE DATA POINT. For all intents and purposes lets say that it averages. So if you were to average what is inside the frame and connect those with straight lines...you'd get the camera/video approximation of what is going on.

Now lets look at a faster signal. This is a common test signal known as a chirp:



You see how the faster it pulsates the average signal begins to look more constant...well actually to get a clearer idea of the effect I'll speed it up:



Do you see it now? Notice how even the visual effect seems to indicate the possible mapping of various wave combinations to those data points. I don't have the time to show you what happens when the data is averaged and fit an infinate number of curves to the polled points. But basically that is how you can generate data that will look like something that is pulsating faster than the frame rate of the camera. Now you know...feel free to make your own irrefutable evidence of a UFO now.

[mentholated]

Originally Posted by Guardianx11x

Don't worry sweetie, I can teach you. It is simple.

Now here is what a camera data polling looks like. You have periods where the shutter is open and it captures data. It then closes, no data is captured.



So say you have a slow pulse. It looks something like this (this one is actually quite fast compared to the frame rate):



Now the key point is that inside each frame the camera can only store a SINGLE FINITE DATA POINT. For all intents and purposes lets say that it averages. So if you were to average what is inside the frame and connect those with straight lines...you'd get the camera/video approximation of what is going on.

Now lets look at a faster signal. This is a common test signal known as a chirp:



You see how the faster it pulsates the average signal begins to look more constant...well actually to get a clearer idea of the effect I'll speed it up:



Do you see it now? Notice how even the visual effect seems to indicate the possible mapping of various wave combinations to those data points. I don't have the time to show you what happens when the data is averaged and fit an infinate number of curves to the polled points. But basically that is how you can generate data that will look like something that is pulsating faster than the frame rate of the camera. Now you know...feel free to make your own irrefutable evidence of a UFO now.

Thank you, I will. ;]

But theres still an unanswered question. Why would nasa create fake little dots that you can't see unless you're an AV nerd and allow it to be broadcasted nationwide? These things were found originally by some cable technician in canada who managed to intercept downlinks being sent from either a relay satellite or directly from the shuttle itself. After he found them, lots of people with their own recordings made directly from the broadcasted footage analyzed it and found the exact same "phenomenon."

[Guardianx11x]

I never said they were fake, they just arent pulsating like you claimed they were. This means they are probably artifacts. This in turn means that they are nothing special. Welcome to reality.

This obviously started with people who read wikipedia and make conjectures based on their wiki-understanding. Which is incomplete to say the least.

[mentholated]

Originally Posted by Guardianx11x

I never said they were fake, they just arent pulsating like you claimed they were. This means they are probably artifacts. This in turn means that they are nothing special. Welcome to reality.

This obviously started with people who read wikipedia and make conjectures based on their wiki-understanding. Which is incomplete to say the least.

That doesn't explain the "first phenomenon" found on the tape.

(but I'm not going to even bring those into this conversation because even I think they might be just tiny little bits of ice shooting past the camera that reflect certain frequencies of light)

[Kerostasis]

What was the "first phenomenon" again?

[mentholated]

The first phenomenon.


this is better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZN0XnDJKdWo

and this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7IzXHsym7k

[section-8]

This thread is just...wow. Mentholated, you sound like you are literally using that wonderful crtl+c function for the majority of...whatever it is you are trying to say. Which I'm still not quite about, either. You say we are dumbasses for not realizing that everything on earth can be run by the magnetosphere...which..is...I just dunno. I don't understand what your POINT is. Yes there is stuff out there we cant explain. Yes the government is hiding stuff from us. I guess I don't have the science background you do...because most of you you say makes no sense at all.

To move onto 'Dreamland' or area 51 I guess. Its a wonderful no-fly zone which I've had the pleasure of doing exercises around. Do I believe they have technology we've never seen? Of course. Is it possible that they've manifested this crazy technology into some kind of super-gravity defying glowing ball that 'appears' in pictures all over the world. Maybe. Dunno why, tho. But in my experience the military classifies things for a reason. And it declassifies them as well.

As for that abovetopsecret site... they have a lot of crazies on there. Everyone and their mother has seen a giant floating black triangle. Mole-men. Secret people. New world order. Come ON. Use a credible source. www.fas.org is an excellent source for classified and newly declassified subjects.


As far as aliens? Well...show me one, and I'll believe.

[mentholated]

Originally Posted by section-8

This thread is just...wow. Mentholated, you sound like you are literally using that wonderful crtl+c function for the majority of...whatever it is you are trying to say. Which I'm still not quite about, either. You say we are dumbasses for not realizing that everything on earth can be run by the magnetosphere...which..is...I just dunno. I don't understand what your POINT is. Yes there is stuff out there we cant explain. Yes the government is hiding stuff from us. I guess I don't have the science background you do...because most of you you say makes no sense at all.

To move onto 'Dreamland' or area 51 I guess. Its a wonderful no-fly zone which I've had the pleasure of doing exercises around. Do I believe they have technology we've never seen? Of course. Is it possible that they've manifested this crazy technology into some kind of super-gravity defying glowing ball that 'appears' in pictures all over the world. Maybe. Dunno why, tho. But in my experience the military classifies things for a reason. And it declassifies them as well.

As for that abovetopsecret site... they have a lot of crazies on there. Everyone and their mother has seen a giant floating black triangle. Mole-men. Secret people. New world order. Come ON. Use a credible source. www.fas.org is an excellent source for classified and newly declassified subjects.


As far as aliens? Well...show me one, and I'll believe.

Oh I agree about abovetopsecret, I cringed when I decided to link to there because of the ridicule I knew would come.

I don't think any of us really wants to see what they look like, that would take all of the mystery (and probably dinner) out of us. I'm all about finding things that A) look like they might be classified (ARV) or alien technology or b) look like they're organic space dwelling organisms.

I don't have a point. This thread certainly doesn't have a point either.

[Crux]

Originally Posted by section-8

I guess I don't have the science background you do...because most of you you say makes no sense at all.

I have a Bachelor of Science majoring in Physics, and a Masters degree from Georgia Tech in Materials Science and Engineering. Nothing he is saying makes much sense to me either. Don't confuse his clumsy use of scientific terms with a science background. Most of what he is spouting is stuff gleaned from websites. The rest appears to be his own made-up ideas [/quote]

[TheSkudDestroyer]

Originally Posted by sc1ence

I tell my college intro students to check wiki first for any paper. It is a very credible source of factual info that is free and easy to use. Take it with a grain of salt of course, but I am more than happy to trust it as a resource for most things. Like any information source, you should look around for back up opinions.

To use it as a main source in a college paper would be a bad move, but not terrible. To use it as a main source in high school seems ok to me. to use it to steer your thoughts and learn new info is great. I have read huge amounts of wikipedia pages and contributed to a few as well. I have read peer reviewed journals with more flaws than wikipedia.

I think citing wikipedia in an Internet argument makes perfect sense. It is unrealistic to have a cogent discussion with citations of scholarly journals etc here in the TG sandbox.

Even in academic mail lists I see wikipedia referenced for a quick read on a topic. This is coming from leaders in the field of cognition and perception.

A first. And so close by! Only a couple miles away from me I suppose.

I've talked with many teachers and professors about it. It's the devil to them. While the point you make about it being an easy and factual site is correct, I just can't trust 3/4ths of the information I read on there. Unless it is a very established topic (ex. Gravity; Usually moderated by teachers and professors so I do trust it) most topics on Wiki are not as strictly moderated.

EDIT: I know it's over stressed, but the 9/11 Conspiracy episode of South Park really hits the nail on the head. Conspiracies could easily be put out by the government itself. Conspiracies are either very far fetched, or very plausible. Either way, they can be orchestrated by whoever originally made them to be blown wayyy out of proportion. It gives the creator power. It can make a following. They can write 25 books and make some money off of it. There are still people who spend hours every day looking for information about the JFK assassination. I honestly have no idea why. Would it be nice to know everything that happened? Yes. Does it really matter? No, not in my opinion. What if he was shot by the CIA? I think the nation would turn a blind eye to such a revelation within 6 to 12 months. If it happened today; If the news that JFK was shot by the CIA came out TODAY; I think the American public would have an outrage, get the information it wants...And forget about it as soon as the superbowl happened. Or Jamie Lynn Spears' baby was born.

Double Edit: I don't care if the CIA shot JFK ...

[sc1ence]

Originally Posted by Guardianx11x

Do you see it now? Notice how even the visual effect seems to indicate the possible mapping of various wave combinations to those data points. I don't have the time to show you what happens when the data is averaged and fit an infinate number of curves to the polled points.

great post. You get patterns like that whenever using a discrete/digital recording device to record an analog event.

to skud: wikipedia can get a little screwy with current events or political topics. Pretty much anything that is controversial can be biased. I would be extra cautious using it exclusively for topics like this.

a quick informal poll of some faculty suggests most look at it like I do. If used properly it can be a great educational tool.

I often have a random wikipedia page up in the 10 minutes before class to stir some good pre class discussion.

Back to the original topic. I find it ludicrous to suggest that nasa faked this vid. it is a camera artifact. if it looked like that to the human eye you would hear people freaking out. no one, NO ONE sees that with the naked eye and does not say WTF!

[MasterEditorInChief]

Originally Posted by mentholated

I don't have a point. This thread certainly doesn't have a point either.

Great, then let's get on with our lives.

[CingularDuality]

Originally Posted by section-8

As far as aliens? Well...show me one, and I'll believe.

Originally Posted by mentholated

I don't think any of us really wants to see what they look like, that would take all of the mystery (and probably dinner) out of us.

I've got your mystery right here:

[mentholated]

Originally Posted by TheSkudDestroyer

A first. And so close by! Only a couple miles away from me I suppose.

I've talked with many teachers and professors about it. It's the devil to them. While the point you make about it being an easy and factual site is correct, I just can't trust 3/4ths of the information I read on there. Unless it is a very established topic (ex. Gravity; Usually moderated by teachers and professors so I do trust it) most topics on Wiki are not as strictly moderated.

EDIT: I know it's over stressed, but the 9/11 Conspiracy episode of South Park really hits the nail on the head. Conspiracies could easily be put out by the government itself. Conspiracies are either very far fetched, or very plausible. Either way, they can be orchestrated by whoever originally made them to be blown wayyy out of proportion. It gives the creator power. It can make a following. They can write 25 books and make some money off of it. There are still people who spend hours every day looking for information about the JFK assassination. I honestly have no idea why. Would it be nice to know everything that happened? Yes. Does it really matter? No, not in my opinion. What if he was shot by the CIA? I think the nation would turn a blind eye to such a revelation within 6 to 12 months. If it happened today; If the news that JFK was shot by the CIA came out TODAY; I think the American public would have an outrage, get the information it wants...And forget about it as soon as the superbowl happened. Or Jamie Lynn Spears' baby was born.

Double Edit: I don't care if the CIA shot JFK ...

I'm really glad you said this because it is so true. A lot of ufo junkies don't realize that the things they call UFOs may in fact just be another form of disinformation meant to distract (or possibly discredit) people from actual classified technology. It makes sense that if we were to perceive aliens as hostile, in the event that they were to actually make direct contact on a large scale, we would assume they were here to kill us, or enslave us and use our resources for their benefit.