Re: Jan 25th Havas Images

Jim Scotti wrote in message <b141mi$37v$1@oasis.ccit.arizona.edu>
> Steve Havas wrote on Mon, 27 Jan 2003 19:03:49 GMT:
>
> :SH I would argue that in previous images, notably the Dec 13th, 14th,
> :SH 27th and 28th, that it has registered much brighter than magnitude
> :SH 18 or 19, perhaps  near magnitude 16 or so. If this object exists,
>
> Why would your object be getting fainter if it is approaching the
> sun (and at a speed of 6,000,000 MPH according to your earlier
> calculations)?  It should be at least a magitude brighter than it
> was a month ago at that speed.

I believe the areas identified on the images as "px white & red" have been consistently growing
larger and brighter, although not drastically over the last few months as they still show up as a
relatively few pixels. I previously mentioned that the numerous dozens of moons may show up or not
depending on how they are lined up behind the planet and I think on some of the previous images that
they have been lined up in such a way as to be more obvious on the images.

> :SH then the moon swirls could be one of the wild cards as they could
> :SH be lumped up together or more spread out and hence may reflect
> :SH light or not to varying degrees. Also, if this planet is primarily
> :SH emmitting red light which is bending over the hour or two the
> :SH images are taken and is actually registering on a different spot
> :SH on each image, that is  going to be a further complication to
> :SH getting a solid fix on a magnitude number and any sort of
> :SH conventional orbital solution.
>
> Give me a distance to the object, how big it is, what it's phase
> angle is, and how much light it scatters back into space, and I can
> tell you how bright it will appear in the sky - the orbit solution
> has nothing to do with it (other than helping to supply the distance
> to the object).  Nancy's claims for its appearance are nonsequitur.
> ZetaGobbledeegook [tm].

I recall in one of your previous posts with Nancy that you assumed Px 
should be close to Saturn's distance stating that it would be an obvious 
naked eye visible object. I have no idea how to predict the magnitude 
of objects in space but I do know Px should not be as bright as Saturn 
right now.

> :SH If this planet is able to make it
> :SH here in a scant four months, then we can safely conclude that it
> :SH has solved all of these dynamical problems.
>
> Big if!  The laws of physics tells us that it will not happen.
> Nancy's very description of her fictitious Planet X does not
> fit within the known laws of physics, but of course, she won't
> listen to us and claims that a "higher source" (i.e. the Zetans)
> know better and ridicule all human knowledge.  Nancy has
> described her fictitious planet X so well, that she has shoehorned
> it into a very tight corner.  That corner cannot contain the
> object she describes.  You can say things like you have above,
> but you have to throw out all of human knowledge to find her
> Planet X at the end of the day.  I can very comfortably say that
> she is wrong (in every fundamental way) and that there is
> absolutely nothing to her (er, I mean the Zetas) claims.

I do not think it's necessary to throw out all of human knowledge 
to find Px. If anything, this would add to human understanding. The 
telescope the images have been taken with was built using many years 
of accumulated knowledge, as are all of our cities, modern inventions 
etc.. However, that does not mean that there does not exists phenomena's 
which can contradict human knowledge and understanding. We should not 
close our eyes to something just because it doesn't fit with what we've
seen before.

> Of course, she claims that I am part of the big coverup and am
> lying to the public in debunking her claims, but rest assured
> that in May when Planet X has not made its appearance and the
> poles site quietly where they are, unshifted, that you will
> have to conclude that her whole story is a fantasy, and that
> maybe, just maybe, modern science does have at least a decent
> start at understanding the way the Universe works.

We can also rest assured that if Px does come by in May you will be 
unaccountable for except by from your conscious as the destruction on 
Earth is described to be great.

> Jim.
>
> Jim Scotti
> Lunar & Planetary Laboratory
> University of Arizona
> Tucson, AZ 85721 USA                 http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/