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
