Deep Impact Foul Play

zenonmars · Aug 1, 2005

Thanks, tel. Good work. "it's open registration, but the form asks for an "affiliation," That leaves ME out!........lol.........I don't think they'll accept the Enterprise Mission as suitable press credentials! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

zenonmars · Aug 1, 2005

Here is an interesting tidbit (even though I connot confirm this information). This is "heresay", technically, but I trust the TEM poster who relayed this: Violet posts: "Thunderstruck, over at anomalies posted this ... have finally received a reply from the deep impact team, they are going to sit on the data until feb 2006!! The science team will be presenting their results at scientific meetings in August and September of this year. The schedule for release of all raw and calibrated data from all Deep Impact instruments is February, 2006. It will be submitted to the Planetary Data System in archival format, which includes documentation of the data. It is then available to the scientific community and the public through the Planetary Data System." Elizabeth Warner warnerem@astro.umd.edu <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · Aug 1, 2005

Based on the conference info and the e-mails I've seen from Ms. Warner (mostly in the RCH blog, I might add), my take is that abstracts of the findings will be available immediately after the conference and the release of all "raw and uncalibrated" data will apparently take place in Feb. 2006. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

telfrow · Aug 1, 2005

While I don't agree with his theory, TVF does a very nice (and level headed) job of answering questions about the release of the data and the "conspiracy" in this two page thread on his BB.... With guess who? GRR8... and not one link to the Captain's Blog. Imagine that. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> http://www.metaresearch.org/msgboard/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=698 <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Aug 1, 2005

ZenOnMars - tel, How do you know what 'part(s)' of my post Richard was refering to? Intuition? If I recall correctly, neither you nor Maxtheknife directly denied being part of a RCH/TEM "campaign" on SDC. In fact, I believe both you and Max were rather evasive about directly answering the question and, to my knowledge, it has not been answered any of the inumerable times it has been directly put to you and/or Max. If you can direct me to a post in which you answered the question and I would be happy to see it. ZenOnMars - TOS is TOS.........not apples and oranges. Now I did more than you asked, and I think you must address some bigger issues. What cs_specialist said seems true. This harangue seems to have passed the point of voicing your displeasure. It seems to sidetrack the issues of the Deep Impact discussion. That is not the case. The true purpose of this forum is to discuss "Phenomenon" in an atmosphere conducive to civil conversation and mutual exchange. That's why we have TOS. However, when it becomes apparent that the possibility exists that a member(s) has an underlying agenda to prosleytize or otherwise present ideas with no real intention of discussing them or accepting rebutals, a true discussion can not take place. It's impossible to really "discuss" something with someone who refuses to acknowledge llogical and factual rebuttals to their idea because they have an unrevealed agenda. The reason you have not had anyone who is interested in much else except divining the truth behind the "campaign" allegations is because noone is going to waste time discussing something with someone that they believe is insincere. In that instance, the primary desire is to first discover the poster's sincerity and motivation before undertaking the possible futile effort to engage in discussions with them. ZenOnMars - You five <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

zenonmars · Aug 1, 2005

lost: "If you honestly wish to be a respected member of SDC then you will take steps to repair your reputation. So far, you appear fairly unconcerned about your reputation and only appear concerned with promoting RCH/TEM. In the face of all of this, what do you honestly believe SDC members should think of you? For the record, and the minds of others who may read this, I have no personal animosity towards you. However, I can be greatly concerned about your apparent actions on SDC and the motivations that may exist behind them. I can also undertake posts and actions that I deem necessary to do what I can to discourage such behavior. In this regard, I do what I feel I must to defend a board that I respect and have grown fond of. I would expect you would do no less on your own favorite boards." Thank-you, friend Lost, for responding to my rant on behalf of tel. I am sure he would agree with your assessments, and would agree with me that your ideas are noble and honorable. My "reputation" around here, thankfully, as a far-sighted and free thinker, remains intact. As soon as that changes, I would truely vacate this board, and let you fellas do the arduous work of restating the obvious, and re-phrasing the already-accepted. I sure am glad you referenced that incredible day (July 20, 1969) as it assures me you are old enough to remember the "Age" before video games, before the internet, before 300 channel TVs and DVD movies. Remember what really thrilled us as kids? I mean, other than bad scifi and black and white monster movies? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> ... D-I-N-O-S-A-U-R-S ! ! ! And while Apollo 11 landed on the moon, we were being taught all about those "giant terrible lizards". Giant carnivorous lizards who ruled the Earth for 600 million years! Cold-blooded lizards. Boy have times chan <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · Aug 2, 2005

Thank-you, friend Lost, for responding to my rant on behalf of tel. I am sure he would agree with your assessments, and would agree with me that your ideas are noble and honorable. Well, first of all, he didn't respond "on my behalf." I responded to the portions of your post I wanted to and ignored the rest. I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, your rant was caused, in large part, by the content of Steve33's posts....and you just needed to vent. That said, however, I agree completely with ALP's post. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Aug 2, 2005

ZenOnMars - Remember what really thrilled us as kids? I mean, other than bad scifi and black and white monster movies? ... D-I-N-O-S-A-U-R-S ! ! ! To my right, thru a door, I can see the some of the shelves in my "library." Lining one of them is a collection of brass dinosaurs. Yup, brass. My uncle gave them to me when I was a kid. The bronto even has the old head on it. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> ZenOnMars - My "reputation" around here, thankfully, as a far-sighted and free thinker, remains intact. There is nothing wrong with being far-sighted or a free-thinker. However, far-sightedness and free-thinking do not sufficiently qualify as scientific evidence or fact. It may be entertaining to imagine the possibilities if the Moon was made of cheese. However, that doesn't mean that it truly is made of cheese nor will any amount of free-thinking make it so. ZenOnMars - And while Apollo 11 landed on the moon, we were being taught all about those "giant terrible lizards". Giant carnivorous lizards who ruled the Earth for 600 million years! Cold-blooded lizards. Boy have times changed. Just go to the current text books. Now we have NEW ideas about these beasts, right? They weren't cold blooded at all, we now think, right? All because someone LOOKED at those giant fossils and used his common sense! No way those things needed such giant hearts, if they only drew their warmth from the sunlight! And imagine the furor in those hallowed halls of academe when that idea was raised! It is only because people have learned more concerning nature through meticulous attention to established scientific principles that they are able to make new observations and state new ideas which have considerable evidence which supports their merit. An electrical engineer sitting at lunch with his friends and commenting on <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Aug 2, 2005

ZenOnMars - Thank-you, friend Lost, for responding to my rant on behalf of tel. I am sure he would agree with your assessments, and would agree with me that your ideas are noble and honorable. As telfrow indicated, I did not respond on his behalf. I posted in response to your post. Telfrow has demonstrated that he is very capable and willing to respond to posts as he sees fit and has no need for others to respond for him. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

maxtheknife · Aug 2, 2005

Packet.... Chill out, man. We came to talk. That's all. You even invited us in, remember? "This thread is started as a courtesy...."? We're all in this together. Let's stick together.

zenonmars · Aug 5, 2005

telfrow: "Based on the conference info and the e-mails I've seen from Ms. Warner (mostly in the RCH blog, I might add), my take is that abstracts of the findings will be available immediately after the conference...... While I don't agree with his theory, TVF does a very nice (and level headed) job of answering questions about the release of the data...... http://www.metaresearch.org/msgboard/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=698 Now, tel, you really gotta stop advertising for these guys, cause they are just snake oil salesmen, and truely drab and terrible and awful. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> ------------------------------------------------ btw, from your link above, GRR8: "What are your thoughts concerning no full spectrum data releases by Nasa/Jpl. And what are your thoughts about why Nasa/Jpl remains absolutely silent, while the Earthbound teams are at least coming out with some statements on what they have to work with thus far?" And TVF's response to such questions: "There are strong incentives from the commercial weekly science journals (Science, Nature) to have no press releases prior to publication there. Prior publicity will usually disqualify a paper from consideration. This is especially true if there is something unexpected about the results. Everyone on the team will want to be very cautious and examine every possibility before signing onto a paper with unexpected results. Fortunately, there were many non-team participating observatories, and some of those results are starting to come out. The big surprise related to the spectrum is that there was no output increase for water or other volatiles following the probe's impact. -|Tom|- So it seems (Listening, Steve?) that................... MONEY is the great motivator here. Money and ego tie <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · Aug 5, 2005

Now, tel, you really gotta stop advertising for these guys, cause they are just snake oil salesmen, and truely drab and terrible and awful. Credit where credit is due, Zen. TVF does do a nice job explaining what's involved in the release of the data. I don't agree with his theories or his interpretations, but he did a good job explaining the process... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

telfrow · Aug 5, 2005

And BTW, Zen...TVF's answer was in reference to GRR8's question about "spin": "You dont suppose that theres some possible spin going on with how the data is to be presented to the public do you? The first sentence of TVF's reply stated: There is always spin. But there are many competing interests on the science team, and that will help keep the others honest. Makes a difference. <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

votefornimitz · Aug 6, 2005

So, what have i missed? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> In the event of a full scale nuclear war or NEO impact event, there are two categories of underground shelters available to the public, distinguished by depth underground: bunkers and graves... </div>

telfrow · Aug 7, 2005

You'll have to do some reading, VFN. I don't know if we can condense it into a few words... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

yevaud · Aug 7, 2005

The Universe reversed it's movement, and is now heading for the "Big Crunch." Aliens landed on the White House lawn, and said that the secret of life was "47" (no, not "42," as all of you have been profoundly misinformed). The Earth narrowly missed getting creamed by an asteroid the size of California, but we destroyed it with several hundred nukes. Everyone who responded to that ad during the last several days was granted effective immortality. The rest of you will soon be George Burns...and look like him too. Meanwhile, the rest of us will look/feel 18 again. Other than that, pretty dull week or so. You? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

telfrow · Aug 7, 2005

<img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

dmjspace · Aug 7, 2005

telfrow said: Credit where credit is due, Zen. TVF does do a nice job explaining what's involved in the release of the data. I don't agree with his theories or his interpretations, but he did a good job explaining the process... I'm always curious when I run into a blanket statement such as this. You don't agree with ANY of Van Flandern's theories or interpretations? What about his interpretation of the data release issues? Personally, I can't think of a single scientist--or even snake oil salesman--whose theories and interpretations I disagree with 100% of the time. Shades of grey are the name of the game in science. But since you've gone out on a limb with TVF, perhaps you'd like to share why you don't agree with his theory on Tempel 1. After all, the EPH has easily out-predicted the "dirty snowball" model at every turn.

telfrow · Aug 8, 2005

I've made it very clear I believed he did a good job explaining the procedure concerning the release of the data. It seems to be clear, concise and fair. I cited TVF’s explanation for Zen because 1) GRR8 initiated the conversation on TVF’s BB; 2) TVF and RCH can be considered, in some regards, to be “allies”; and 3) Zen is a supporter of RCH. I thought seeing an explanation of the data release structure from someone he agreed with might carry more weight. Why don't I agree with TVF? Because his predictions concerning Tempel 1 hinge on the EPH, and I have seen no examples in nature that indicate this is, indeed, possible. The problem(s) with the theory (i.e., the energy required for a planet to “explode,” the fact the vast majority of the planet “vaporized,” etc. ) have been covered in your thread in SSA. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

earth_bound_misfit · Aug 8, 2005

I need a code breaker to fiqure out this thread! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> ----------------------------------------------------------------- Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?Go here to see how: SDC Eye saver </div>

telfrow · Aug 8, 2005

I don't think it would help. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

dmjspace · Aug 9, 2005

telfrow said: Why don't I agree with TVF? Because his predictions concerning Tempel 1 hinge on the EPH, and I have seen no examples in nature that indicate this is, indeed, possible. The problem(s) with the theory (i.e., the energy required for a planet to “explode,” the fact the vast majority of the planet “vaporized,” etc. ) have been covered in your thread in SSA. I don't mean to be picking on you. I'm just surprised whenever I see someone disregarding successful predictions on the premise that the underlying theory is "impossible." Surely there are theories that many accept that do not have a basis in observation. The "dirty snowball" comet model, for example. The "big bang," the Oort cloud, the "primordial soup" theory of life origins, and many more. None of these concepts has ever been observed, and there is no clear support for a plausible mechanism. Yet, many scientists view these as nearly indisputable facts. I only write to caution against ignoring a theory's success merely because it sounds unlikely. If most scientists tooks this approach, we would almost never make new discoveries. I can't think of anything more detrimental to the fundamental goal of science...to discover and explain.

Deep Impact Foul Play

zenonmars

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

telfrow

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

votefornimitz

Guest

telfrow

Guest

yevaud

Guest

telfrow

Guest

dmjspace

Guest

telfrow

Guest

earth_bound_misfit

Guest

telfrow

Guest

dmjspace

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page