Comments on: Walson’s World

By: natly

natly — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 01:04:51 +0000

maybe he is affraid of cia

By: Remembering Forgetomori ’2008 | forgetomori

Remembering Forgetomori ’2008 | forgetomori — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 22:46:56 +0000

[...] Our pick: a debunking on Lenard Walson’s “mystery space machines”. [...]

By: Mori

Mori — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:48:16 +0000

"futsnfup", regarding the relationship between "Walson" and Abby Parker, the items I mentioned weren't my "investigation", I was just reproducing the lame explanations that Walson's supporters gave about it. It's "Walson" himself that should have cleared things himself on this matter. He didn't.

Fact is, he showed images that were originally publicized by one "Abby Parker" as being his. There's no clear explanation for what this means. And this is just one more of the important things that Walson ignores or plainly refuses to explain.

You do have a point on the fact that a reproduction of an image doesn't prove that the original image was produced in the same way. It does prove that it's possible, though, and in this case, that it's apparently trivial.

You did ignore the crux of the matter of this "crap-lousy investigation". Which is the fact that amateur astronomers are able to capture the ISS in much greater detail than Walson, and yet are not able to see anything that he claims to see, by an undisclosed method, which was proved, can be reproduced by a simple hoax.

None of this is "absolute" proof that Walson is a hoax, that's granted. But not only can we say that it would be foolish to believe his claims as they are presented at the moment, but that even serious consideration of them leads to more and more doubts.

By: futsnfup

futsnfup — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:26:44 +0000

I am in no way defending the claims of John Walson but, man, what a crap-lousy ‘ordinary investigation.’
You state, “Less trivial is the fact that “Walson” seems to have been presenting videos from other people as if they were shot by him.” You then go on to investigate (and I use that term lightly) this ‘less trivial’ matter by stating that maybe Walson is the same person as Abby Parker, or maybe they are married. Or maybe none of the above. That clears that matter up!
Additionally, because someone can produce images with a similar appearance by a different method does not mean the original images were hoaxed. I could produce images similar in appearance to many Hubble images in my living room. Coupled with the fact that no one else can verify the Hubble images with another imaging system, this obviously leads to the conclusion that Hubble’s images are fake. That’s some awfully weak logic.
Doesn’t look like much of an investigation to me…

In reply to Rusty:”If the objects WERE in geostationary orbits, he wouldn’t have to keep moving his telescope to keep them in frame!”
Essentially true if the objects were geostationary, but not if the objects are geosynchronous. These are two distinctly different categories of orbit. Geosynchronous satellites do not remain in a stationary positiion relative to the earth, they produce a figure eight-like ground track.

By: Damn Data

Damn Data — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:20:04 +0000

VALIS glimpsed?…

Rense has a long article on the discoveries of John Lenard Walson who has developed a way of boosting the picture quality on ordinary telescopes and he has found some odd things in Earth orbit.

He also claims to have recorded them:

The first …