Re: More one NASA management

From: JohnTromaville (johntromaville@aol.com)
Date: 02/09/03 

From: johntromaville@aol.com (JohnTromaville)
Date: 09 Feb 2003 13:36:41 GMT

Hmmmm this is like banging head against a wall -- but I'll try once again.

> As I reported on NBC news they quoted the picture NASA released was
>of far lower quality than what there reporters had seen. It very likely
>they are playing the classification game and so release a much lower
>quality picture.

yeah lets believe what the newsagencies say because of course they are gonna be
given acess to CLASSIFIED pictures... if you know anything of the National
Recce Office (NRO) you'll know they keep their pictures quality tight to there
chest. Very few of their best pictures have ever been released - one was
released by accident when it was passed to NASA can be seen here :
satobs.org/telescope.html . there is nothing to suggest that they would have
deliberately released a lower than best quality picture - since this was
released well before the current STS-107 mission

> Actually you haven't kept up with theroy. It like arguing with a
>old telephone engineer who belived theory limited tele phone lines
>to a 1600 baud rate. People develop new and better ways its called
>progress.
>
 
No thats a really bad analogy a better analogy is that you have to sample a
signal >2 times its higher frequency component to prevent aliasing... Now if
you can work out a better way to sample so that Nyquist was wrong then you will
be a very rich and famous man.

The fact is that the atmosphere causes distortions - that is why the Hubble was
put in space and can see far better than its bigger earth bound rivals. Now
different frequencies are affected differently by the atmosphere granted but in
the UV - Optic - IR bands there is distortion.

Please stop using pseudo-science like the earth was proven round so therefore
anythign I say that challenges the present view must be correct. Now
challenging the theories is fine and that is how progress is made. But totally
poo pooing stuff just because it goes against your views rather than looking
for the merit will never bring progress.

Progress can be seen on this thread very easily : when you said that pictures
of high definition had been taken - after I said that definition of the quality
required was limited due to the small time spent within the view of telescopes
and because of atmospherics, didn't I apologise? I then looked and found out
about what you were saying and found that you were mistaken similar picture
from the same site had nowhere near the definition required (in line with my
previous experiance). So i did give your viewpoint a fair hearing. Now when you
areshown to be mistaken you simply make wild accusations like everything is a
cover-up and those who are trying to bring some order to events (the FAQ
STS-107) are in league with NASA to create a cover up - perhaps even in league
with devil and the french as well??

many people will agree with you that anyone found to be responsible should be
made to account for their actions but the fact you seem incapable of admitting
you were wrong on minor points makes your other points that may or may not be
correct seem wrong by association.

Thank you
Trom

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
    ... I'm not attacking the quality of your ... All I'm saying is that given the same conditions, a dslr is capable of ... You've shown from your own experience as a p&s camera enhusiast. ... at some samples of pictures from the Sony A900 with one of the Carl ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Canon EOS 20D - Is this review fair?
    ... > underexposure, particularly with wideangle lenses." ... fairly easy and renders sharper pictures. ... > quality, but they also mean that users will have to put a bit more ... It might cost more but you'll ...
    (alt.photography)
  • Re: Different broadcast methods & perceived picture quality.
    ... Yes, well look at DAB, look at the now very poor dynamics on BBC FM, look at ... not be checked or even cared about in the quality sense unless its really ... see the quality of most HD pictures. ... channels has been lacklustre. ...
    (uk.tech.digital-tv)
  • Re: new jewelry making method
    ... have a low tolerance for folks asking less than 'smart' questions. ... The two pictures I was able to see are not of sufficient detail to offer any sort of opinion on the quality or the style of work being solicited for opinion. ...
    (rec.crafts.beads)
  • About Quality (minini-essay) [BTPC Extension - PyramidWorkshop]
    ... Or you use a computer generated algorithm that is hopefully ... somewhat near what a human would describe as quality and use this one. ... most sure have changed (more saturated pictures look better, ... subjectivity, or leads to changes in it. ...
    (comp.compression)