According to Nancy
This is bad, even for her.
Vulcan Administrator
According to Nancy
This is bad, even for her.
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.
Established Member
Looks like the Zetas laying a cosmic egg!!Originally Posted by ToSeek
Established Member
Really bad considering the fact that the sun had set.
Canary Islands +1 from UTC (until October 26th).
From the four images posted:
19:34 UTC - 8:34 PM local time
23:21 UTC - 12:21 AM
23:35 UTC - 12:35 AM
23:39 UTC - 12:39 AM
The sun set in the Canary Islands at 7:25 PM local time on the 23rd.
Obviously, the woman cannot tell time.
That white blob is an aberation of some sort with the webcam that is POINTING STRAIGHT UP and it's only on between sunset and sunrise.
Tom
Established Member
That's meant to be the sun?
Established Member
Yep, the sun at night. I'm waiting to see how long the images remain on her site before she realizes she was really off on her interpretation.That's meant to be the sun?
Tom
Established Member
Doing a little searching I found http://concam.net which seems to be a legit site. And here's one example
http://www.chipman.org/starhoax/concam.jpg which pretty clearly shows that it's a fisheye view of the night sky with Orion towards the SW. I suspect the pictures sited by our favorite fanatic is a case of overexposure.
Established Member
Since many OTHER false images remain, I'm guessing these will stay until she "retires" from ZT.
Established Member
She started to realize that her interpretation was really off, but then the Zetas told her that she was right in the first place! #-oSince many OTHER false images remain, I'm guessing these will stay until she "retires" from ZT.
Established Member
Hey, I'm headed to the junkyard to see if they got any old Moon wheel covers or hubcaps out there...betcha we could take them there panoramic sky views too! Where's my Covington book? It's in there som'ers...
Established Member
She would probably insist that since the massive crustal shift, pole shift, and 3-4 upshift that was supposed to have taken place in the last 4 months, has caused us to believe that midnight is actually midday, and that we are too unperceptive to have noticed it. With all of these shift changes, coupled with the upcoming Paradigm Shift of Nov 8-9, I hope I notice my own shift change, otherwise I will be stuck at work for an eternity
Established Member
Photoshops a handy program eh?
Well of course it is a legitimate site. If you folks are interested in astronomy you should know that the concam site allows you to see the night sky from a network of observatories all around the world and in both northern and southern hemispheres. Its way cool (especially the ConCam RH site http://concam.net.rh/ )
I have posted some ConCam stuff at http://astrho.astro.ufl.edu/concamrhanim.html and
http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~oliver/Way...CamLessons.htm
These are works in progress. Several of us have an NSF grant to develop lessons using the concam images.
Yes ... moisture is somehow getting into the ConCam CI optics ... we haven't figured out a solution yet. They were dried out but the water has come back again.
Incidently, its not a webcam. Its an SBIG ST-10 with fisheye optics. When its working well it sees done to about 8th magnitude.
Established Member
Nice instrument. I was wondering why the setup costs are so high. That's certainly a good part of it.
Member
What are the labels on the photos? Well, I know what they are but are the simply to show the relative positions of planet x... (heh heh) and Camelarpardis, Cepheus, Perseus, etc."
Established Member
They shoulda just got a webcam. They are much cheaper, and everyone in the know uses them. They can also resolve objects all the way down to nothing!
Established Member
I'd love to have an SBIG ST-10 - 3.2 megapixel CCD (verus a 0.3 megapixel webcam). Electro-Mechanical shutter, etc. Superior in all ways to a webcam.
Tom
Well some of the the ConCams (such as the CI & MK ConCam) have software that does photometry on each image to monitor/search for variable stars etc. The files are at the link I gave before (oh heck ... here is a link for the MK ConCam http://concam.net/mk/mk031028.html ). That requires at least 12 bits at the A/D stage. I guess I am not really up on webcams ... which one should I look at for 12 to 14 bits?They shoulda just got a webcam. They are much cheaper, and everyone in the know uses them. They can also resolve objects all the way down to nothing!
In addition, the effective aperature with the fisheye lens is very small so even an ST-8E or ST-10 requires a 120 second exposure to get down fainter than naked eye. Again, which webcams can go that long with low dark current accumulation.
Established Member
You guys are frightening me. It looks like you think I meant that.
However, if you contact Nancy, I am sure she knows all about the correct webcam models. 8)
Sorry ... In retrospect, I now see the joke. I have paid so little attention to Lieder's webcam images that I missed the reference altogether.You guys are frightening me. It looks like you think I meant that.
However, if you contact Nancy, I am sure she knows all about the correct webcam models. 8)
Established Member
The webcam of choice for amateur astronomers is the Philips Toucam model 740K which, of course, is not readily available in the United States. It is, however, available in Europe (where I snagged one the last time I was in France).I guess I am not really up on webcams ... which one should I look at for 12 to 14 bits?
There are a few dealers who carry it in the United States for less than $100. You really need one with low light capability and a CCD sensor. CMOS is just not as sensitive.
Tom
Yes, I know about the ToUcam and Vesta and related webcams and the mods needed for long exposures. None of them have A/Ds capable of 12 bits. The mentions of webcams have however reminded me to look again at this approach for a low cost allsky camera. I am developing a portable system to be loaned to schools and so this thread has been useful.
For my DayCams (see a very early version at http://astrho.astro.ufl.edu/DayCam_ani.html ) I prefer CMOS since the sun just causes a "blob" instead of a column bleed.
IMO FODS #831
Vulcan Administrator
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.
Member
I have an incredible imagination, but no matter how hard i try, i just can't see planet X in any of the supposed images of it. Am i missing something?
=|
Order of Kilopi
It's not that you're missing something, it's that you have something they don't - sanity. :wink:
Member
I beg to differ!It's not that you're missing something, it's that you have something they don't - sanity. :wink:
muwahahaha
Vulcan Administrator
You just don't have the right attitude. You've got to keep in mind that any blob of light that you can't explain in the first two seconds is conclusively demonstrated to be Planet X. If you still have problems, then forget everything you know about optics and astronomy and try again.
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.
Member
hmm...You just don't have the right attitude. You've got to keep in mind that any blob of light that you can't explain in the first two seconds is conclusively demonstrated to be Planet X. If you still have problems, then forget everything you know about optics and astronomy and try again.
:laces his astronomy books, telescope and binoculars in the closet::
Ah, now i see it...
WE'RE ALL DOOMED!!!!!!!!!!
Established Member
One point that seems to be lost on the woo-woo's is that most web cams were designed to post pictures of "nekkid" folks on the net. they were not designed for Astronomical Research.
Member
*clicks fingers*You just don't have the right attitude. You've got to keep in mind that any blob of light that you can't explain in the first two seconds is conclusively demonstrated to be Planet X. If you still have problems, then forget everything you know about optics and astronomy and try again.
That's it! I was looking at an overexposed blob, and wondering what it was supposed to be. Does Planet X emit light rays?
Posting Permissions
