Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 2 votes

Where are YOU on this map ?


  • Please log in to reply
86 replies to this topic

#31    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 12,649 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 05 August 2013 - 12:24 AM

Steve,

It is honorable that you come here to try and defend your article, but I wish you would do a little more in that respect. Frankly, and by all means of respect, but you are basing your article on assumptions based on assumptions that can not be defended and has to rely on pure belief. case in point:


View PostSteve3951, on 04 August 2013 - 07:49 PM, said:

I wonder if I showed most of the readers here a map of a few dozen stars, could anyone reproduce it, from memory, after a supposedly traumatic event like an alien abduction, and do so with enough accuracy that it would be recognizable? And where would it be recognizable from? Earth? Or the supposed alien's home world? And at what orientation (i.e. which way is "up" or perhaps north), it could be quite different to you and to "them"? You could draw several dots on a page and a computer might match them up with stars in the night sky, but if your drawing was off by just a fraction it could easily match them with completely different stars. There is also the magnitude, color, etcetera of the stars to consider. To me this map seems rather worthless on the face of it.

Here you are making two huge assumptions, assumptions that cannot be validated in any way, shape or form:

1. That Barney and Betty Hill were actually abducted
2. If they were abducted, that the star map is a correct representation of what Betty saw.

Frankly, I believe in neither and I have not seen any compelling arguments to persuade me that I am wrong.But since Chrlzs has already put out some good arguments, I will focus on the star map. But as you state:

Quote

Re:

I wonder if I showed most of the readers here a map of a few dozen stars, could anyone reproduce it, from memory, after a supposedly traumatic event like an alien abduction, and do so with enough accuracy that it would be recognizable?

By all means of respect, but this makes no sense whatsoever. It merely illustrates that you actually don't really know what you are talking about. She drew a number of stars and you immediately jump onto that it was a correct representation. A correct representation of what exactly, I would ask.

1. What are the "error bars" in her representation, i.e. how accurately was her representation?
2. Where was that map seen from? I.e., seen from Earth (as Majorie Fish assumed), seen from somewhere else?
3. What was the rotation of said map and what was missing from it?

Frankly, assuming something like that is authentic is, at best, incredibly naive. But lets look more, here is a look from Earth towards the sky. Please do elaborate on how you cannot fit anything you like and draw any star map you could possibly dream up and make it fit somewhere in the night sky, especially when you have all the freedom you want in scaling and error ranges. One example of the night sky:

Posted Image

To suggest otherwise is simply ridiculous. Any possible star map you could possibly dream up we would be able to find a match for given the same freedom we have with Betty's map (no distance, error or brightness numbers). To suggest otherwise is simply deceptive.

Quote

The star map that Betty Hill drew was drawn in several years later in 1964 as a post hypnotic suggestion from Dr. Simon, and there is information that hypnosis does help to recall information. So your question should be whether or not hypnosis can improve ones memory. This article written by John Ryder says Ph. D. says yes.


Does Hypnosis Improve Memory?

Attention, memory, and focus.
Published on September 28, 2009 by John Ryder, Ph.D. in Hypnosis: The Power of Trance



Over the years many clients have come to me asking for hypnosis to find lost jewelry, valuable papers, or items that were simply misplaced. Most of the time I have been successful in helping these people retrieve their items. The same applies to actual memories that may have been forgotten. The research literature is full of studies that document the power of hypnosis to enhance memory. Most studies are laboratory based experiments that usually show a significant increase in the recall of hypnotized subjects as compared to normal controls. Articles about psychology are full of stories of people who recover lost things or recall memories that presumably were lost.

And the influence of hypnotic suggestion is very well known and one of the reasons why this is not used.

<snip>

Quote

This is a simple graphic of Betty Hill's star map and the proper indentification of the stars involved. See the iink to see the stars is provided on my web site.

You really need to educate yourself---Recommend that you re-read the article

See my web site: www.hillwilsonstarmap.net

No chance. If you want to defend your article, you do it here, but frankly, you don't really stand a chance as it is very obvious that you don't really have the background to do so. You creamed yourself in the above post and I can only see it getting worse if you really try, but do go for it if you want.

That said, to echo Chrlzs, please do learn how to quote - it does make it easier to discern what is actually what in your posts.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#32    ChrLzs

ChrLzs

    Just a contributor..

  • Member
  • 5,327 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gold Coast (Qld, Australia)

  • I only floccinaucinihilipilificate
    when it IS worthless...

Posted 05 August 2013 - 09:44 AM

I'm speechless at that reply from Steve - pretty much everything was completely ignored.  I'm not going to put any more effort into such unsupported drivel - if anyone actually supports any of it and wishes to debate it properly (as Steve clearly won't), feel free to do so.

On that point of the alleged 'match' of the star map - here is that supposed 'match', with the lines removed so you can see how ridiculous it is:
Posted Image

As Bade said, she had all of the sky she could play with, and *that* is the 'match'.  Save me.  May I quote:

Quote

..if we set out to find a pattern correlation between two nearly random data sets by selecting at will certain elements from each and ignoring others, we will always be successful

Neither you or I or Steve or Betty or the fantasy aliens are ANYWHERE on any of those 'maps'.. because they aren't maps, they are random, meaningless doodles.

Edited by Chrlzs, 05 August 2013 - 10:30 AM.

There are answers out there, and they won't be found by people sitting around looking serious and saying 'Isn't life mysterious?' - Tim Minchin ('Storm')
My garden is already magical and beyond beautiful - I do not need to invent fairies... - me
The truth ONLY hurts when it slaps you in the face after you haven't done proper homework and made silly claims... - me

#33    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 12,649 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 05 August 2013 - 04:30 PM

View PostChrlzs, on 05 August 2013 - 09:44 AM, said:

I'm speechless at that reply from Steve - pretty much everything was completely ignored.  I'm not going to put any more effort into such unsupported drivel - if anyone actually supports any of it and wishes to debate it properly (as Steve clearly won't), feel free to do so.

On that point of the alleged 'match' of the star map - here is that supposed 'match', with the lines removed so you can see how ridiculous it is:
Posted Image

As Bade said, she had all of the sky she could play with, and *that* is the 'match'.  Save me.  May I quote:


Neither you or I or Steve or Betty or the fantasy aliens are ANYWHERE on any of those 'maps'.. because they aren't maps, they are random, meaningless doodles.

Yeah, well, Chrlzs, I think we shove the Barney and Betty Hill tale back where it belongs. I would have expected more from a columnist to be quite honest. But then again, columnists around here aren't exactly always stellar...

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#34    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 12,649 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 08 August 2013 - 03:27 AM

Since its been another 3 days and the columnist have ignored every pertinent point raised so far, I think it is safe to assume that he does not have the means to defend in any sensible way the claims made. Not surprising, I daresay.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#35    Steve3951

Steve3951

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2013

Posted 09 August 2013 - 05:26 PM

Chris:


Your comments said--- it's *not* my Psychic Spy persona.  I'm just ChrLzs..  Now, as far as my comments being 'rubbish'.. the only one I can see criticising your non-appearance is this:



That comment was posted after waiting 3 full days and nights after the publication of your article



You’re just an anonymous voice in the wilderness who says: “well I waited 72 hours.” This article has appeared around the world for over a year, and I was never notified that I had any obligation to jump through your hoops. Ok –it’s great that you’re Chris-but who is Chris from downunder?  With all the rain down there in Queensland, AU-- your comments are a little soggy. I haven’t really made any determination that your voice carries any weight since it seems that you’re just some impatient kid with a lot of time on his hands.

I'll get back to you on some of your other issues like F. Lee Bailey -who was a Polygraph Expert--If you check he used it on several occasions


#36    Steve3951

Steve3951

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2013

Posted 09 August 2013 - 05:58 PM

Chris do you or Badeskov know what SIMBAD is?

The information that you keep b****ing about is on my website

The real triangle is below the Big Dipper, and as a courtesy to the readers of the Unexplained Mysteries we are providing the link to see the triangle that I found. When you look at the triangle-you'll understand the magnitude of the shock that I felt when I first gazed upon the real triangle in Betty Hill’s star map. This was the first step and the acid test was to locate a star directly to the right of the triangle as Betty Hill drew, that might have a habitable planet. Please note that in Fish’s ZR interpretation it doesn’t. Equally puzzling is the disappearance of the large mysterious star in the middle of the Betty Hill’s star map. I identify this star as 52 Ursa Major.



The link in the article wasn’t activated-but anyone can use the Epoch 2000 coordinates on a virtual telescope as the well known My Sky virtual telescope that uses Hubble images. The star map was plotted out to Norton’s Star Atlas.  



Triangle :Aim point RA: 12h 26m 32s Dec: +35°14'59"



This is the real triangle in Betty Hill’s star map



61 Ursa Major

http://www.astrostudio.org/xhip.php?hip=56997

Now Chris is 61 Ursa Major to the right of the triangle?

52 Psi UMa


http://www.astrostudio.org/xhip.php?hip=54539
And is 52 Psi Uma above and to the right of 61 Uma?
FYI: you can pull out any current star map and validate their  position


#37    Steve3951

Steve3951

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2013

Posted 09 August 2013 - 06:13 PM


Chris and Badeskov  

The last thing you two can call yourselves is the voice of authority--so please show everyone your credentials to prove that your superior to Walt Webb, Stanton Friedman, Kathleen Marden, J. Allen Hynek  Huffer, Jeffrey Kretsch, Terence Dickinson or a host of others.


Chapter 3 (page 33) of Fuller’s book the starts off on October 19, 1961, a month after the abduction of Betty and Barney Hill. Walter Webb (Astronomer) and lecturer on the staff of the Hayden Planetarium in Boston opened his mail to read a letter from Richard Hall, who was then the secretary and now Assistant Director of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomenon in Washington. As a Scientific Advisor to NICAP, Walter Webb occasionally investigated the more serious and puzzling UFO reports in the New England area, drafting detailed document for Washington when the merits of the case warranted it. Hall’s letter included a copy of a letter that Betty Hill had written to Major Keyhoe and suggested to Webb that it might be worthwhile to drive the eighty miles north of Boston to their residence in Portsmouth to investigate the case. Webb, who had joined the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory in Cambridge, Massachusetts, shortly after his graduation from college in 1956, had been interested in Unidentified Flying Objects since 1951, when as a counselor at a boys’ camp in Michigan, he had made a sighting while training campers in the use of a telescope. So now we have an astronomer who has personally seen a UFO.
Page 34: Webb’s first reaction to Richard Hall’s letter was reluctance. It was plain that this case involved a report of the movement of beings on the craft, and Webb was skeptical of this type of sighting. He drove up to Portsmouth on October 21, 1961, with his skeptical attitude unchanged. In his mind were thoughts of the sensational nature of the claim, the possibility that the Hills might be seeking publicity, perpetrating a hoax, or suffering from a mental aberration.

On the other hand he felt that Betty’s letter was extremely literate, an honest and straightforward account of a frightening experience which had happened to two people. He would reserve judgment until after his interview, which, he resolved, would be thorough and painstaking with special attention to finding flaws in the story. As an interviewer with a scientific background, he was certain he could create a slip-up if the Hill’s story was spurious, and he would not hesitate to crack the story if he could. He arrived at the Hill’s house at about noon.

Page 35: The interview began shortly after noon, and continued with little interruption until eight that evening. I was so amazed, impressed by both the Hills and their account,” Walter Webb said, “that we skipped lunch and went through the afternoon and early evening. During that time, I cross-examined them together, separately, together, re-questioned them again and again. I tried to make them slip up somewhere, and I couldn’t; I simply couldn’t. Theirs was an iron-clad story. They seemed to me to be sincere, honest couple driving home from vacation, late at night on a lonely road, when suddenly something unknown and un-definable descended on them. Something entirely foreign or alien to their existence.”

Page 36: He (Webb) concluded his lengthy report: “It is the opinion of this investigator, that after questioning these people for over six hours and studying their reactions and personalities during that time, that they were telling the truth occurred exactly as reported except for some minor uncertainties and technicalities that must be tolerated in any such observation where human judgment is involved (that is, exact time and length of visibility, apparent sizes of object and occupants, distance and height of object, etc.)  Although their occupations do not especially qualify the witnesses as trained scientific observers, I was impressed by their intelligence, apparent honesty, and obvious desire to get at the facts and to underplay the more sensational aspects of the sighting.  Mr. Hill had been a complete UFO skeptic before the sighting.

Walter Webb a credentialed Astronomer and Scientific Advisor to NICAP drove up with a skeptical attitude and returned home that night as a believer.  J. Allen Hynek is another example: Hynek's opinions changed in later years, so much that he became, to many, the scientifically respectable voice of Ufology. He would lament that the Robertson Panel had "made the subject of UFOs scientifically unrespectable, and for nearly 20 years not enough attention was paid to the subject to acquire the kind of data needed even to decide the nature of the UFO phenomenon." For good measure Hynek:  "Ridicule is not part of the scientific method and people should not be taught that it is."



#38    Steve3951

Steve3951

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2013

Posted 09 August 2013 - 06:40 PM

The book that I have written is over your head technically so please stop your ridiculous  patronization. The information provided in the web site is more than adequate

More about 20 Leo Minor:

20 Leo Minor is a spectral type G3Va

Age: 6.5 Billion

Metallicity: Superior to Sol our Sun

On NASA top 100 Terrestrial Planet Finder

It’s on the Ball list (NASA Contract)

FYI: It's also on Maggie Turnbill's 30 star short list*

*screened from a list of 5000 stars

On a very exclusive research program of Astrophysicist Margaret Turnbill called the Sun Life List
Screened so tight it her study of these select group of stars would satisfy the harshest critic to host a habitable planet. Read comments on 20 leo Minor

#1: 20 Leo Minor
http://www.astrostud...p.php?hip=49081
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#3-11 Leo Minor
http://www.astrostud...p.php?hip=47080


Recommend that you search for Fischer and Valenti's theory on the correlation of planetary formation-which is in my book


#39    Steve3951

Steve3951

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2013

Posted 09 August 2013 - 08:48 PM

Here's More Chris in Defense

Right Ascension and Declination is the equilevent of Latitude and Longitude as seen on the Celestial Sphere with our position at 0,00,000-anythjing below is minus-as Zeta Reticuli at -62 degrees. As observed--both 61 Ursa Major and 11 Leo Minor-fall beteen the upper and lower declination as shown on the star map. 20 Leo is also to the right as observed and all of them are spectral type G stars. All of the 12 stars (6 trade-6 exploration stars in the Hill-Wilson star map are F-G. The triangle formation is a asterism and clearly visible in any reference book you might want to use to dispute. The RA and declination coordinates are exact-if you don't beleieve my-look it up.

FYI: The triangle is directly below the Big Dipper-so its left placement is correct

Please by all means plot out all of the stars of the Hill-Wilson star map-and please feel free to use Vizier or the N Star data base as well.


Horizontal Alignment of key features (Validation Test)

Identity    Declination (from high to low)

Top of triangle: 6 CVn     Dec: +39° 01' 07.0

Position  #3: 11:LMi:     Dec: +35° 48' 36.5"

Position #10: 61 UMa:    Dec:+34° 12' 5.888

Triangle bottom left:     Dec: +33° 14' 51.3


Triangle bottom right: Dec: +33° 3' 41.5


Home world: 20 Leo Minor:    Dec: +31° 55' 25

Once again-when I find the time-which will most likely be on the weekend time permitting --I'll be back

  Both of you can plot out the above star coordinates to prove that the triangle is real.

The bottom left star of the triangle  HR4783 is higher declination wise than the right  of HR4668 -just like Betty Hill.

And the triangle was located by usage of Norton's Star Atlas -19th Edition edited by Ian Ridpath. ( Map- 9) and the use of My Sky -which is based upon the Hubble Telescope.

The Angle from 20 Leo Minor to us is correct.  

Chris and Badeskov as a suggestion plot out the angle and location of 20 Leo Minor to 36 Ursa Major on your copy of Norton's Star Atlas-known world wide as a premier reference guide for Amateur and professional astronomers worldwide and even in Australia.

The figure #2 star map of Hill and the OSU students is discussed in my book and Fish's theory has the position to Sol/Earth off in the wrong direction.

Bades---> BS.
Yeah, well, Chrlzs, I think we shove the Barney and Betty Hill tale back where it belongs. I would have expected more from a columnist to be quite honest. But then again, columnists around here aren't exactly always stellar...

Since you both know exactly what I'm talking about
  

The M/H ratio for is the overall metallicity abundance ratio for 20 Leo Minor at +0.10 and TEFF is 5753K (Soubiran +2008)

Is that stellar enough?

Position #11 is 44 i Boo (3  G star trinary) and #12 is 8 Bootis a super rich star

Position #7 and #9 are both on Turnbill's Sun Life List. Position #8 10 Cvn is a G spectral type star. The Eta-Earth Survey discovered a planet around this star 2 years ago. The actual exploration pattern of these three stars match their real coordinates as observed from Earth.



  
  


#40    Steve3951

Steve3951

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2013

Posted 09 August 2013 - 09:06 PM

Bade: Your wish for hard Stellar has been granted: Excerpt



Position #1: 20 LMi A (SETI #4126)

Constellation: Leo Minor

Hemisphere: Northern

Star name: GJ 376A

HIP: 49081

Arity: Binary*

HR 3951

HD 86728

BD: +32 1964

High Proper Motion Star: Yes

Proper motion arcsec/yr: -0.430 (Lepine+ 2005)

RA: 10h 01m 01.0066s (Takeda+ 2007)

Dec: +31° 55' 25.22" (Takeda+ 2007)

Turnbill short List #60

Sun Life List #980

Ball List #195

TPF Top 100 stars: Rank #54

R (Mas):0.354581

Total Proper Motion: 0.684 "/yr 230.5

Trigonometric Parallax: 67.10 (Bobylev+2006)

Radial velocity 55.8 km/s (Bobylev+2006)

Oribital period years: 0.43 (Ball list)

Semi-maj Axis A AU: 0.56    (Ball list)

Angular Separation: 37.34   (Ball list)

Home world: 20 LMi (e) fourth planet in this system.

Old Stellar Population Star: Yes

Age: 6500 million years (6.9 Gyr) (Bryden+2006)

Habitable Zone: 1.17 AU (Center AU 1.465) NSTED

Hzin(mas):  61.32636 (M. Turnbill)

Hzout(mas): 122.2156

Total HZ zone: 61 million

Predicted Habitable Zone:

Center: 1.465 AU    Milli arc seconds: 98.353

Inner radius: 0.979      Milli arc seconds: 65.698

Outer radius: 1.951      Milli arc seconds: 131.08

Planets recently discovered: 1

Earth Mass: 1.08 (Howard+2010) confirmed 12/16/2011

Number of observations: 28

Previous Known Planets: 0-Now 4 inner rocky terrestrial (Projected)

Orbital period: 1.17 years (427.05 days per yr.)

Orbital period of Sol: 365 days

Predicted Dynamical effects

Radial velocity wobble m/s: Earth like: 0.037000

Astrometric wobble micro arc/seconds:  0.295400

Higher Orbital period in days: +62

Tilt(d): Tipped more severe than Earth’s axis

Tilt(e): Tipped more severe than Earth’s axis

20 LMi (d): Distance from sun: estimated: 89-91 AU (82.77-84.6 million)

20 LMi (e): Distance from sun: estimated: 1.17 AU (108.8 million)

Orbital period: 427 days

Sidereal rotation period (hrs) (d) 23 hrs 12m 7s (estimated)

Sidereal rotation period (hrs) (e) 24.46 hrs 30s (estimated)

Earth Sidereal rotation period (hrs) 23 hrs 56m 4.1s

Surface Gravity (d): .90-1.05 (estimated)

Surface Gravity (e): .95-1.10 (estimated)

Theoretical Diameter (d): 90-105% of Earth

Theoretical Diameter (e): 11,468-19,113km (.90-1.5e Earths diameter)

Period of Revolution around sun: 330-380 days

Separation of (d) from (e): 28 Million miles

Temperature range: 200-310 K

Metallicity: 141-219% of Sol

Moons (d): unknown: 1-3?

Moons (e): unknown: 1-3?

Celestial X,Y,Z in light yrs: -35.8, 20.5, 25.7

Galactic X,Y,Z in light yrs: -27.9, -7.73, 39.0

Galactic Longitude: 195.0139°

Galactic Latitude:   52.8547°

Spectral type: G3Va

HIP: Field (H76) G1V

Spectral type: G1V** (Soubiran+ 2008)

Fe/H: +0.20 (Soubiran+2008), 0.27 (Takada+2007)

M/H: +0.10 (Overall metal abundance to Sol) (Gray+, 2003)

Atmospheric Oxygen: 28% (Estimated)

VMag: 4.511 (Soubiran+2008)

Teff: 5753K (Soubiran+ 2008)

LogL Stellar luminosity: 0.15 (Takeda+ 2005)

B-V: 0.644 (Soubiran+, 2008) (Same as our Sun Bade)

Comparison to Sol’s B-V: @ 0.65

Mass: 1.13 x sun (Takeda+2005)

Radius: 1.21 (NSTED)

Luminosity: 1.359 NSTED 7/09

Thin disk membership probability:  0.1

Thick disk membership probability: 0.9

Halo disk membership probability:  0.0

Distance: 48.54 ly from Sol (14.89 pc) (Grether+2006)

Distance to 61 UMa: 22.4973 ly

Status: Super civilization in the solar neighborhood

Lines to Position #16 (Sol) shows heavy banded “trade” type traffic lines

Visibility: 1H 28M 51S AZ: 41D 56M 58S

Sets: 18H 33 M 11 S AZ: 318 D 03M 02S

Civilization: Type 1

Known exo-planets: 0




#41    Saru

Saru

    Site Webmaster

  • 20,840 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male

  • "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious." - Albert Einstein

Posted 10 August 2013 - 10:40 AM

Just a general note here to all concerned - can we tone down the hostilities please, it's unnecessary.

We accept and publish column articles from a wide range of different authors, researchers and enthusiasts - while it's good to hear their comments in response to feedback never do we expect them to have to "defend" their writing on the forums after the piece has been posted up. Members are welcome to post their thoughts and opinions on what's been written but calling out the author simply because they haven't turned up immediately to answer questions is highly unreasonable.

Let's keep the feedback civil and courteous, disagree with what's been written by all means but please do so without the hostilities.

Thank you.


#42    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 12,649 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 10 August 2013 - 11:06 AM

View PostSteve3951, on 09 August 2013 - 05:58 PM, said:

Chris do you or Badeskov know what SIMBAD is?

I can't pretend to speak for Chrlz (you seem to have a hard time catching his nick), but of course I know what SIMBAD is; as well as a number of other resources. However, that is completely irrelevant to the points raised with respect to the Barney and Betty Hill abduction.

It is admirably that you will spend time here on our comments to your column, but instead factually debating them you build up a number of strawmen to mask that you obviously have no means of defending the underlying premise, which is what is really being questioned here.Those points you completely skip.

Quote

The information that you keep b****ing about is on my website

No, it absolutely is not, but feel free to post it here.

Quote

The real triangle is below the Big Dipper, and as a courtesy to the readers of the Unexplained Mysteries we are providing the link to see the triangle that I found. When you look at the triangle-...

<snipped irrelevancies>

Nobody is questioning your abilities to look at the stars in the sky and find a match to some random doodles on a piece of paper, but that is not the point of contention raised. The point of contention raised is the accuracy of said doodle in the first place and this you have meticulously avoided to discuss in any shape, form or fashion in your column, your website and in the present discussion. But let me try and make it very basic as it is the foundation on which you build your whole argument:
  • What is the accuracy with which Betty drew the star map (how large tolerances do you have in matching something)?
  • What is the scale of the star map?
  • From where should this star map be seen to make the current 2D projection (a little arrogant to assume Earth, I would say)?

Before you can answer the above you cannot even begin to match it to anything in any meaningful way and that is the crux of the matter in this discussion.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#43    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 12,649 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 10 August 2013 - 11:10 AM

View PostSteve3951, on 09 August 2013 - 09:06 PM, said:

Bade: Your wish for hard Stellar has been granted: Excerpt

<snipped irrelevancies>

No, I did not ask for such; such simple data I can easily find myself should it be necessary. I was questioning the underlying premise as described above and nowhere did I ask for any hard data on stars as you are simply not in a position where you can even begin to contemplate such.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#44    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 12,649 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 10 August 2013 - 11:16 AM

View PostSteve3951, on 09 August 2013 - 06:40 PM, said:

The book that I have written is over your head technically so please stop your ridiculous  patronization.

Your attempt at propping yourself up to a level of technical understanding that you do clearly not master is not helping. Researchers with that level of understanding recognizes the necessity of truly understanding the foundation of one's argument before anything is built upon it - something that is sorely missing here.

Quote

The information provided in the web site is more than adequate

As stated above, no it isn't.
<snip>

Quote

Recommend that you search for Fischer and Valenti's theory on the correlation of planetary formation-which is in my book

Already very familiar with it and your hypothesis is clearly suffering from the same flaws as theirs (i.e., matching what can only be described as random doodles on a piece of paper to a night sky that has innumerable matches if one makes some assumptions that cannot be defended in any way).

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#45    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 12,649 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 10 August 2013 - 11:23 AM

View PostSteve3951, on 09 August 2013 - 06:13 PM, said:

Chris and Badeskov  

The last thing you two can call yourselves is the voice of authority--so please show everyone your credentials to prove that your superior to Walt Webb, Stanton Friedman, Kathleen Marden, J. Allen Hynek  Huffer, Jeffrey Kretsch, Terence Dickinson or a host of others.


<snip>

Yet another irrelevant strawman. Nobody is claiming to be a voice of authority, Chrlzs and I are simply pointing out the fatal flaws in your premise and if you had been on safe ground in that respect, you would immediately have corrected us and shown us why your premise is sound. The fact that you need to build these strawmen to avoid that is very telling, but not very surprising.

And, with the above, you have to be joking right? Friedman, for instance? My level of education is higher than his, I have worked as a scientist in my field of expertise significantly longer than he did. The fellow has a masters degree and calls himself a scientist. Well, first of all, scientists publish in peer reviewed journals, which Mr. Friedman never did. Secondly, the title of scientist is not a life long title just because you worked as one at some point; you are a scientist when you work as one.

And it is utterly irrelevant - all that matters is what I present here and how I can substantiate it. Not my degree or anything else in that respect.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users