#111
|
|||
|
|||
|
#112
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 03:02:58 +0000 (UTC), Sander Vesik
wrote: In sci.space.policy Ami Silberman wrote: "*" wrote in message Okay smart ass, why are the MOC photos coded during transmission from Mars Because to digitally store or transmit images they need to be encoded in This is also true of analog transmission of images (or other sensor data) - youhave to covert it into a way that can be transmitted over radio waves. some sort of format. To transmit them, furthermore, there needs to be further encoding to be able to detect and correct errors during transmission. Conceptually, its no different than fax transmission in the 60s. Except I think faxes weren't digital yet in the 60's. Translation: no one has access to the raw Mars MOC photographic data except Malin. |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
* wrote: On 17 Mar 2004 09:32:27 -0500, jeff findley wrote: * writes: On 16 Mar 2004 18:07:07 -0800, (George William Herbert) wrote: The data format has been published. Looking it up would require some actual research in a library looking at journals, however, which may be beyond your limited capabilities. You'd probably have to write some software to do it, though there's an outside chance that Malin would give it to you. You keep making this out to be harder than it is. Translation: no one has the programs to retrieve the raw Mars photographs but Malin. And you clearly lack the skills to write a simple program to transform data from one format to another. This is one of the *easiest* types of programs to write. I've written dozens of such programs over the last 15 years or so. About half for "fun" and about half for work. You don't even need a "modern" programming language to write this sort of code. C would be my choice, but just about any other language that has reasonably complete libraries for file I/O would suffice. You don't even need a UI for such programs. Just run it from the command line since the only input is the file to process. I'm not saying that you personally need to write the code, but anyone with a B.S. in Computer Science (or the equivalent experience) would be able to write such a program in short order (not just Malin). No they can't. They're coded. Are you trying to say they are encrypted? If so, please use unambiguous terminology, so we can better understand your delusions. |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
"George William Herbert" wrote in message ... In article , * wrote: On 16 Mar 2004 16:16:38 -0800, (George William Herbert) wrote: The US government (or, everyone) owns the images and data, both raw and processed, throughout. Liar. During Malin's 'proprietary period' Malin has *exclusive ownership* of the MOC photographs, and during that time Malin and his staff doctor the photographs. 1) NASA keeps their original downlink data. 2) If you keep posting 4 copies of everything you send, Earthlink will turn your account off within a day or two. -george william herbert If you do a 'whois' lookup on her IP, it comes back as Qwest. _______________________________________________ OrgName: Qwest Communications OrgID: QWDL Address: 950 17th Street Address: Suite 1900 City: Denver StateProv: CO PostalCode: 80202 Country: US NetRange: 65.128.0.0 - 65.159.255.255 CIDR: 65.128.0.0/11 NetName: NET-QWEST-3BLKS NetHandle: NET-65-128-0-0-1 Parent: NET-65-0-0-0-0 NetType: Direct Allocation NameServer: DCA-ANS-01.INET.QWEST.NET NameServer: SVL-ANS-01.INET.QWEST.NET Comment: ADDRESSES WITHIN THIS BLOCK ARE NON-PORTABLE RegDate: 2000-08-23 Updated: 2002-12-17 TechHandle: QN-ARIN TechName: NOC TechPhone: +1-703-363-3001 TechEmail: OrgAbuseHandle: QIA2-ARIN OrgAbuseName: Qwest IP Abuse OrgAbusePhone: +1-877-886-6515 OrgAbuseEmail: OrgNOCHandle: QIN-ARIN OrgNOCName: Qwest IP NOC OrgNOCPhone: +1-877-886-6515 OrgNOCEmail: OrgTechHandle: QIA-ARIN OrgTechName: Qwest IP Admin OrgTechPhone: +1-877-886-6515 OrgTechEmail: |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
* wrote in message . ..
On 17 Mar 2004 16:27:50 -0800, (Al Jackson) wrote: * wrote in message Nice Troll!!! Not a troll, the information comes from NASA. Ah so! you ARE!, indeed, working for Halliburton! Still, a nice troll. |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Sander Vesik writes: In sci.space.policy * wrote: On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:58:07 -0600, Herb Schaltegger wrote: In article , * wrote: On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 16:44:49 -0500, Patty Brooks wrote: snip Is Hoagland a fraud? Yes he is. He's being paid by Lockheed to be a diversion and to make NASA/Lockheed secret discoveries on Mars look ridiculous. Is your name Maxson? You seem to share their patriarch's Lockheed fetish. To all amused lurkers, I suggest a quick google search on "Formosa's Law" . . . I suggest you bone up on Lockheed and their holdings and involvement with NASA, the NSA, the phone company, the welfare system, and all the components ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ would the be the AT&T phone company, the Sprint phone company, the Worldcom phone company or some other 'the' phone company? No, that would be TPC, The Phone Company. Famous for their development of the Cerebral Communicator in the 1960s. The naturial enemy, along with the FBR, of the CIB. Everyone hates The Phone Company. Even Beduins hate The Phone Company. Perhaps Agent Kropotkin can fill yo in. He's a stockholder. -- Sidney Shaeffer, M.D., Ph.D, imdb.com "Who could have every phone in the country tapped?" |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
"*" wrote in message ... | | Hey when you want to know something, go to the source. | | In this case, it's NASA. You missed the point. You're selectively accepting or rejecting evidence from NASA based on whether or not it appears to support what you already believe. You can't try to bolster your point by talking about "NASA insiders" and implying how authoritative they must be, while at the same time ridiculing others for believing "NASA lies". If something is authoritative because it comes from NASA, then it must be authoritative even when it disagrees with you. You can't have it both ways and still expect people to listen to you. -- | The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
why
don't any other independent scientists outside of NASA/Lockheed have it WIll someone please get across to this conspiracy nut there is no such company as Lockheed, and has not been for some years now? Lockheed Martin is quite a different entity. Matt Bille ) OPINIONS IN ALL POSTS ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE AUTHOR |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" writes:
Well, just remember, Stargate SG1 maps to reality about as accurately as Wormhole X-treme maps to Stargate SG1. Exactly! Remember, you've got Christian Bocher who plays the actor Raymond Gunne who portrays the character Dr. Levant who is based on the character Dr. Jackson who is played Michael Shanks, which is based on the character potrayed by James Spader in the movie which in turn is based on the Real Dr. McCoy of the real Stargate program. Or something like that. You've got it. The pitcher with the pestle broke. The Chalice from the Palice has the pellet with the poison. The Flagon with the Dragon has the brew that is true. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hoagland a fraud? | * | Policy | 129 | March 30th 04 06:20 AM |
Electric Gravity&Instantaneous Light | ralph sansbury | Astronomy Misc | 8 | August 31st 03 02:53 AM |