Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister


<a href="mailto:&#111;&#108;&#108;&#105;&#98;&#114;&#97;&#110;&#100;&#64;&#103;&#109;&#120;&#46;&#100;&#101;?subject=Re: Crediblity .. you have none">Biruni</a> wrote:
>
> I don´t know, what to say. You stubbornly denying the danger
> of the so called "enhancement" of images, which is obvious
> for anyone else and reject sharply the proposal to link the
> images only from the official sites, which would give more
> credibility to your claims. It is sad to see, you still don´t
> see, that your assertion about calling those clear impact
> craters "vents", is by all means absurd and nonsense. But
> beside this, I appreciated your postings on this MB. They
> have some interesting insight and I learned something new,
> but you should also know your shortcomings about them and
> rethink some clearly faults of your claims about
> themUnfortunately you seem to be one of those guys, who
> think, every thing they say is absolutly correct and there is
> nothing wrong of what they say
>
> regards

1) -- There is no "danger" from enhanced images, nor will the sky "fall", Chicken little. Ehanced imagery is not altered.. .it is what the term implies, enhanced for presentation purposes and to direct attention to specific, real valid image detail. I provide links in all cases to the source imagery at MSSS/JPL/USGS for those who quesiton any detail and wish to validate that imager. Persenting the whole entire image from the site on the size of 4 to 7 Megabites is unrealistic for web presentations and merely saying "here" does not constitute image analysis nor a presentation.

2) --- If you wish to challenge these "vents" are impact craters than employ a graphics porgram and create a presentation with rationale for such an argument. I have detailed an in depth argument along with powerful and compelling imagery showing a direct link between tube and "vent" feature.

I have no need to change my argument nor presentation and *NONE* (most certainly yourself) has yet to present any argument AT ALL, none whatsoever, against these features being "VENTS" and for their being typical "impact craters" -- which every salient image detail *screams* they are not.

I've done my work and presented the evidence and I've yet to hear ANYONE reject these as "vents" with a rationaly. You hae no rational and only assert ugly personal attacks and employ demeaning adjectives to myself and my claims. I DO NOW sugggest you are unqualified to analyze the imagery and know NOT what an impact crater is to begin to even argue in favor of these being such.. nor have you addressed ONCE any salient detail.. .any image.. NOR put forward any counter argument. Your argument is *NULL* and your sole approach is a personal attack...

I submit, given these facts, that You, Biruni, are part of the ugliness here at GHMB and you personally are causal in this board's closing.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Merc was wrong - Tripp was right :) 173 Mercury Rapids 14-Apr-02 21:47
Theroretically water cannot exist on Mars 101 Star Traveler 14-Apr-02 22:08
Re: Theroretically water cannot exist on Mars 116 Mercury Rapids 14-Apr-02 22:26
Re: Theroretically water cannot exist on Mars 122 Star Traveler 14-Apr-02 22:40
Thanks, Merc! &amp; Here's S'mor Water On Mars 112 Tripp 14-Apr-02 22:49
More Mars Water Found Amidst Dunes 124 Tripp 14-Apr-02 23:06
Mars Seep Stain Distribution 125 Tripp 15-Apr-02 02:01
Re: Thanks, Merc! &amp; Here's S'mor Water On Mars 65 Mercury Rapids 15-Apr-02 11:02
Re: Thanks, Merc! &amp; Here's S'mor Water On Mars 113 kaos 15-Apr-02 11:46
Re: Thanks, Merc! &amp; Here's S'mor Water On Mars 121 Biruni 15-Apr-02 17:33
Credibility 102 Star Traveler 15-Apr-02 20:11
Re: Credibility 113 Biruni 16-Apr-02 14:12
Re: Credibility 97 Tripp 16-Apr-02 18:15
Re: Credibility 200 Biruni 17-Apr-02 11:31
Re: Credibility 109 Tripp 18-Apr-02 03:16
Re: Credibility 129 Biruni 18-Apr-02 16:28
Crediblity .. you have none 98 Tripp 18-Apr-02 17:50
Re: Crediblity .. you have none 93 Biruni 19-Apr-02 16:05
Re: Crediblity .. you have none 112 Tripp 19-Apr-02 21:25
Re: Crediblity .. you have none 108 Biruni 20-Apr-02 14:20
Re: Crediblity .. you have none 105 Tripp 21-Apr-02 06:13
Re: Crediblity .. you have none 107 Biruni 21-Apr-02 12:41


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.