On Sat, 28 May 2011 17:50:47 +0200, you ("Ralf Vandebergh" <ralf.vandebergh@home.nl>) wrote: >Recently Mr Legault presented over this list a page were >he ‘analysed’ my images to discredit them. With all due respect, just because someone takes a critical look at data as it's presented and comes to a different conclusion doesn't constitute an intention to "discredit". This is a normal process and shouldn't be taken personally. Granted we're all amateurs, but having procedures and results peer-reviewed by others is what makes them scientifically accurate and reliable. >My presentation of images and animations is not based on subjective conclusions of one person, Oh, there is more than one person involved in creating this? >but they show what is really captured, and an expert in astro-imaging or even someone less >then an expert is able to see what is a seeing artefact or not. This is clearly real: >http://freeimagehosting.nl/pics/4eb40c5a3f0f55f3f8f618bbf1938c61.gif The fact alone that every single frame in this animation sequence shows a completely different shape should be enough to realize that the overall resulution is by and large heavily affected by artifacts. It's purely coincidental that one frame shows a shape that somewhat resembles the shape of the object as it is already known beforehand, and still there's no telling if this one frame is "real" or if it's just artifacts adding up out of a chance encounter, while the actual orientation might be very much different in reality. It's a nice view and I'm sure a lot of work went into capturing it, but the lack of associated data unfortunately makes it impossible to tell anything else about it, or about the nature of its changing orientation over a period of time, etc. _______________________________________________ Seesat-l mailing list http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/listinfo/seesat-l
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 28 2011 - 16:26:45 UTC