unsubscribe bye

From: Ralf Vandebergh (ralf.vandebergh@home.nl)
Date: Fri May 27 2011 - 21:50:29 UTC

  • Next message: amstuart: "Unsubscribe"

    This is the last time I respond on Mr Legaults attempts to discredit my hard 
    imaging work.
    On my website, were I will link to for the last time, everyone can see for 
    his own that
    the claims are well supported by frame sequences which clearly show that the
    detail is real. No further discussion possible
    Due to the unreasonable factors playing here on the list against me, I will 
    from this list as it is clearly not appreciated to post my work here.
    thanks to the people who did respect and appreciated the work over the past 
    but everyone will understand that this can't work for normal people.
    Best regards,
    Ralf Vandebergh
    -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- 
    From: Thierry Legault
    Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 10:36 PM
    To: SeeSat-L@satobs.org
    Subject: Re: And I thought if Nanosail D was obseved flashing, means it's 
    Ted, I fully agree with you about the importance of the rule.
    Instead of making a long e-mail, I have made a page describing a deep
    technical analysis of recent Nanosail images from Mr Vandebergh. As
    you suspect, shape and colors are artifacts. I think that the new
    rule is especially interesting in this "textbook case". I even think
    that now a few raw images extracted from the video are not
    sufficient, the full avi file would be very interesting to assess.
    The analysis: http://legault.perso.sfr.fr/nanosail_vandebergh_analysis.html
    >From: Ted Molczan
    >Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 2:52 PM
    >To: seesat-l@satobs.org
    >Subject: RE: And I thought if Nanosail D was obseved flashing,means it's
    >Ralf Vandebergh wrote:
    > > Just wanted to link to my website to show an image to support this
    > > discussion, but even that is rejected.
    > > So It's even not possible to support a discussion by showing an image.
    >When you comply with the rules, your images will be allowed:
    >In the rejected report, you claimed to have resolved the "the shape and
    >attitude of the Sail and perhaps a sign of
    >tumbling". Given the size and altitude of the object, the aperture of your
    >optics, and method of tracking, there is room
    >for doubt. The rules are intended to facilitate evaluation of your results.
    >Ted Molczan
    >Seesat-l mailing list
    Thierry Legault
    Seesat-l mailing list
    Seesat-l mailing list

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 27 2011 - 23:09:31 UTC