First Planet X / Nibiru Images Leaked by an Anonymous South Pole Telescope (SPT) Informant

Part 2 — Hoax Claim Rebuttal

Marshall Masters
YOWUSA.COM
02-March-2008

Table of Contents

• Part 1 — Intro and Findings
  
  
• Part 2 — Hoax Claim Rebuttal
  
  
• Part 3 — Human Intelligence
  
  
• Part 4 — Satellite Orbits
  
  
• Part 5 — Object Cluster

PUBLIC NOTICE: We are unable to contact the any of the informants and cannot cannot independently confirm this report. As compelling as these images are, any conclusions drawn from them must be viewed as speculative at this time.

On February 20, 2008, a 37-year old YouTube Director in Switzerland with the screen name of NibiruShock2012 posted images of Planet X that were allegedly taken by the South Pole Telescope (SPT) in Antarctica. Titled Nibiru/Planet X photos taken January 2008, it has been viewed over 39,000 times as of the publication date of this article.

Whenever a controversial, new Planet X / Nibiru observation video appears on the Internet, most viewers initially assume that a sophomoric, intellectual delinquent contrived it. That's natural, as that's how many of the Internet Planet X videos are produced, and we call them as we see them. For example, we were the first to declare the APOLLO 20 Important Datas About Nibiru Approaching a hoax video on our new blog on January 28, 2008.

Yes, hoax videos exist, but this does not justify shallow investigations and egotistical, shoot-from-the-hip, ad-hominem attacks. Yet, that is exactly what happened 6 days after NibiruShock2012 posted Nibiru/Planet X photos taken January 2008.

In a scathing attack against NibiruShock2012, another YouTube Director with the screen name of ProjectStorm released a debunking video response on February 26, 2008.

While ProjectStorm's response video was poorly executed, it offers two very valuable research findings:

• Hoax Fabrication Demonstration: ProjectStorm does a rather good job of showing how to create a hoax image of the brown dwarf (dark star) featured in NibiruShock2012's video using Adobe Photoshop.
  
  
• Proof of Authenticity: ProjectStorm was only interested in showing that he or she could create something similar. However, had ProjectStorm compared his / her work with that of NibiruShock2012, the conclusions would have been exactly the opposite. Instead of declaring NibiruShock2012's video a hoax, ProjectStorm would have had to authenticate it!

Here is what ProjectStorm should have done before declaring NibiruShock2012's video a hoax.

Step 1 — Create a Comparative Baseline

To ensure a fair analysis, let's create a baseline by obtaining similar, representative samples from both videos, after they have been compressed by the YouTube Flash video encoder.

While the two baseline images appear similar at first glance, differences appear immediately. ProjectStorm did not faithfully recreate the image. The NibiruShock2012 shows higher clarity and better tonal gradation.

Step 2 — Enhance for Detail

To enhance the original images for more clarity, we use an old, but effective image viewer called Compupic 6.22 (2003). We can easily do the same with more current software, such as Adobe Photoshop Elements, also. Below are the originals from above, which have been enhanced for increased clarity.

At this point, we see that ProjectStorm's image becomes mushy during enhancement. However, the enhanced image in NibiruShock2012's video shows greater detail and more subtle tonal gradations.

The manner in which NibiruShock2012's images respond to enhancement prompted Part 5 — Object Cluster author Benjamin Cropley to comment:

The large amount of detail in these screen captures of the YouTube video clearly indicates that they came from very high-quality originals. That is the kind of quality one would expect from the high-resolution CCD imaging systems in modern telescopes.

At this point, it should be clear that ProjectStorm conducted a faulty analysis and wrongly chastised NibiruShock2012 for presenting a hoax. If not, let's take it to the next step.

Step 3 — False Colors Simulation

NibiruShock2012's images reveal an amazing level of image depth, given that they've undergone Flash Video encoding by YouTube. This is important, because these original images are false color images, because the SPT is a submillimeter-range telescope.

False colors are used to illustrate what these objects look like in the visible light range.

We can roughly approximate the original observation images by converting the enhanced images shown above to 256 gray scale.

The dead giveaway here is the satellite passing in front of the brown dwarf (dark star).

In NibiruShock2012's image, the satellite is passing in front and to the right of the star with a natural effect. On the other hand, ProjectStorm's image resembles an amoeba more closely than anything else.

The point here is that ProjectStorm's images simply cannot stand up to close inspection, as those of NibiruShock2012 can.

Conclusion

ProjectStorm was not doing valid research or a public service, either, for that matter. ProjectStorm approached his or her analysis with a highly-charged agenda. He or she fully intended to discredit and humiliate NibiruShock2012 in any way possible. In the process, his or her own hubris not only proved to be his or her downfall; it also proved the exact opposite for NibiruShock2012's video. It proved that NibiruShock2012's video is not a Photoshop hoax.