OBTAINING PLANETARY TRUTH

Commentary #040

September 20, 2009

 

Years ago a scientist came up with a software program developed for planetary exploration satellite digital imaging that appeared to do a decent job of penetrating obscuring media revealing a good deal of what ever was below it. He referred to the obscuring media as clouds, dust, etc. but I suspected then and now that his program was actually dealing with digital obfuscation applications like the ever prevalent smudge applications in the data imaging.

As you might logically suspect, such a technology advancement would be quickly viewed as a threat to any secrecy. So you would anticipate hearing nothing more about such a development. Sure enough that is exactly what happened, that is as far as I know. However, this development brought up an issue for me. For example, what if I had such software and what could I do with it? The answer may seem obvious but it isn’t really. For example, if my efforts started producing more fabulous discoveries back then via this then new procedure, who would believe the evidence it revealed?

Some of you in the here and now have a measure of confidence in this work. However that mostly comes from years of exposure as you and others test this work deriving from the ability to verify the evidence right in the official science data. That is the difference and convincing factor from day one that often sets this evidence record apart from others and that factor would likely not be present in that scientist's software development. I’ve learned long ago that the largest issue over what is or isn't out there isn’t the evidence itself quite so much as it is buried deep in human psychology. Those who present evidence ignore human psychology and perception at their peril.

This is what my evidence research and reporting tries never to loose sight of. The evidence presented, whether it consists of anomalies or obfuscation of those anomalies, must be verifiable both for short run and long run credibility. Ultimately, the lower the verifiability factor, then the lower will be its impact in human perception because the confidence/trust factor is handicapped.

In all of the evidence that I present for consideration, I try to keep my graphics work enhancements in it very simple and confined to just simple clarity work never altering evidence. The greater the simplicity, the easier it is for those following behind me to verify the evidence in the official science data at the links I provide and that equates to the more long term success. So I resist presenting evidence that requires more sophisticated and complex manipulations.

In fact, if I were to get into more sophisticated image processes, the less confidence even I would have in the results. In the digital world, yes evidence can be better revealed by such processes but so can it be falsely altered and/or created as well. In my work I know where crossing over that line is at and I keep my graphics work well short of it. Why? Because one day I know that all of this evidence record will require replication and defending at official levels under very skeptical to outright hostile conditions. So I keep the evidence not only simple but easily defendable.

Many understand and appreciate this and over time have increasing confidence in the visual evidence's credibility even if they may not buy into my verbal opinions of any particular evidence. The science and academic professional communities understand this as well as evidenced by the fact that they very rarely attack the evidence openly involving me and prefer to stay at a distance doing so as a mostly social thing in forums where they believe that they are comfortably under my radar.

No matter, that is their right. However, the truth is that attacks expressed directly to me via my email are very rare constituting considerably less than 1% of my total email volume and I get a lot of email. Considering the controversial nature of the evidence and the diverse strong reactions it can be expected to generate, I regard that as significant.

Now in the website Guest Book comes a person identifying himself as Harry. Harry indicates that he has discovered a process that defeats the obfuscation tactics and at the very least reveals more than what has so far been the norm in the official satellite imaging. Like others in the Guest Book, I hope that this is for real because what ever will reveal more truth is always a good thing and welcome. On the other hand, it must be noted that Harry did not approach me first on this. He did invite me in the Guest Book to email him and I have done so but have so far received no response nor has the many positive encouragements he received from so many in the Guest Book developed into anything either.

So Harry may not be real? He may even represent just another profiling strategy by the secrecy types in the Guest Book. However, like that scientist and his software, his presence and the bait he dangles in front of us brings up another issue to consider. That is the value difference between the pursuit of planetary truth via revealing it through graphic software manipulation of the existing publicly released data such as Harry suggests or going after the release of the unobfuscated data and yes there is a difference.

The Planetary Truth Project basic assumption is that there exists somewhere in secret the real unobfuscated visual and instrument science data never publicly revealed. This conclusion is arrived at via the logical extrapolation from the presence of massive amounts of obfuscation tampering work in data that has been released for public consumption. There is no way that the original clean data, since it is such a ongoing valuable resource, would be messed up in this way. That logically means that clean copies of the real original data are corrupted by the obfuscation processes and then released posing as the real science data while the real originals and other copies exist somewhere in secret occupying many terabytes of digital space.

Now a question might be raised as to whether the real unobfuscated science data, since it would obviously be dangerous to those involved in secrecy, could have been destroyed? My response is of course not. It is far FAR too valuable to them for that. The primary purpose of hijacking such data into secrecy isn't to hide it from you and I but to keep it for someone's exclusive use as an ongoing technological resource. Second, it is their insurance in case things get out of hand and go south on them with populations as it can be held as a hostage for their safety. Historically keeping this knowledge away from you and I in the public is merely a byproduct of those primary purposes allowing them to operate unimpeded without population inconvenient interference.

What resource you ask? Well imagine yourself as a primitive caveman type who's technology high point is a hand welded spear where you have to get in dangerously close to targets to make it work for you. However, you've got a little more brain power than your clan fellows and one day you're out on hunt alone and covertly witness another clan effectively using bow and arrows (higher technology) more effectively against prey and at a safer distance. You're close enough to witness details like the bent stick, the gut string joining at the stick's two ends under tension, and the slender arrow shaft flight. What you witnessed is insight which translates to knowledge. It is now possible, if you have enough motivation and drive, to reverse engineer that bow and arrow concept into something useful to you and your clan out of natural materials with time, a little trial and error, and patience.

Now move forward to our time and here's another example. You're a thinker and you witness a UFO hovering low right over where you are standing. You're shocked that it is there hovering and making no sound but, because this is your own personal direct experience rather than something one hears about, you just can't deny it and you're not just about emotion. Being a thinker like that caveman, you also note that there are two large counter rotating parts one within the other on the underside of this craft. That's useful knowledge! In this day and time it may not take you long to suspect that you were looking at some sort of counter acting electromagnetism technology enabling this craft's flight and to maintain its hover status over you.

The difference between you and that caveman is simplicity. The caveman can go back and, regardless of what his peers may think at the moment, experiment on his own until he gets that bow and arrow right. When he does and demonstrates its effectiveness and usefulness to his peers in their survival environment, the rest of his clan will eventually dovetail in behind it. On the other hand, in this more modern time, you probably can't tell any of your peers because they will automatically think you've either lost your mind and/or were out there smoking some really weird stuff. If you tell the authorities and it gets out from there to the secrecy types, you may just find yourself waking up on some lab table with people all in white attire around you using all kinds of unpleasant invasive things on you trying to get all the information you saw downloaded in detail from your head.

Insight is knowledge and knowledge has the potential for power and advantage to someone, that is if it can be exclusive, especially here on Earth. Images taken of advanced technology offer insight into that technology and the potential for reverse engineering that technology for use initially here on Earth.

Think about the possibility of those little rovers on Mars roaming around taking fixed permanent close high detail images of someone else's used discards, debris, and junk laying around while feeding you and I desolate scenes of rock and sand geology. Think about what could be accomplished technology wise with that as well as profiling an entire people associated with that junk and their behavior. Isn't that what detectives and criminals do here on Earth when they go through your garbage on the sly? They aren't doing it because they love your garbage. They're doing it to accomplish gain and advantage.

The original unobfuscated science data held somewhere in secrecy is the certain answer to cure our population ignorance as to what may really be in our larger environment whereas complex graphics procedures, even if productive and welcome, may or may not supply sufficient truth that will be trusted. More truth via sophisticated graphical techniques may be more informative and welcome but it represents only another step toward the full truth in the clean unobfuscated official science data. That is the goal and the target of the Planetary Truth Project movement.

That clean unobfuscated imaging is a tremendous ongoing technological resource to those who can possess it exclusively. Further, it is the secrecy agenda's insurance against any population's too strong retaliation reaction against them. Either reason alone is enough to guarantee that data's preservation and together they make it entirely certain. After all those that practice secrecy so emphatically aren't morons, just types corrupted by power and self. Oh yes truth is there all right but rational behavior on our part must prevail and giving into anger seeking retaliation must be curtailed to realistic compromise levels in the obtaining of it.

It is not hard to suspect that others are watching to see if we Earth populations can emerge from our mostly mental isolation into this new age (for us) throwing off our imposed yoke of ignorance but without strong indulgence in the mental mud of emotional violence and revenge. We have to be more than just emotions if we want to earn the respect of others who have likely advanced beyond this limited and more primitive type of behavior or at least see themselves as having done so.

This all has to start somewhere just as any journey starts with a single step. This evolving anomalous evidence record and the Planetary Truth Project is that initial step for population welfare whereas elitists consumed with self, gain, advantage, and power will always predictable choose their own self interests just like the addicts they are.