Re: Re: trump
By: Gamgee to HusTler on Wed Jan 06 2021 08:16 am

Please note that I in no way agree with the idiotic belief that the
Earth is flat. It isn't. It's a sphere.

I myself think it is an egg-oid shaped weird thing that comes close to being a sphere, if you have imagination enough.

https://navarinoinvestment.blogspot.com/2016/02/3d-model-of-earth-without-water -in.html

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Arelor wrote to Gamgee <=-

Please note that I in no way agree with the idiotic belief that the
Earth is flat. It isn't. It's a sphere.

I myself think it is an egg-oid shaped weird thing that comes
close to being a sphere, if you have imagination enough.

Yes, OK it's not a perfect sphere, but for the sake of conversation, especially in the context here (vs flat/disk), it is.



... Forbidden fruit is responsible for many a bad jam.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Arelor wrote to Gamgee <=-

Please note that I in no way agree with the idiotic belief that the
Earth is flat. It isn't. It's a sphere.

I myself think it is an egg-oid shaped weird thing that comes
close to being a sphere, if you have imagination enough.

Yes, OK it's not a perfect sphere, but for the sake of conversation, especially in the context here (vs flat/disk), it is.

... Forbidden fruit is responsible for many a bad jam.

... it is only through awareness that dimensions can be perceived. For those whose perception is restricted to 'what the eye beholds' live in a bi dimensional existence, thereby, all observations are 'flat'. Only through astute observation and pondering can concepts of 3 dimensions become possible ... then, add: movement; mass; energy; time; positional relativity in a never ending billiard ball changing vector; INTENT; etc, to be conceivable for the observer that as this snowball of Quantum Entanglement rolls down the hill of temporal diffusion to a singularity where even, this, is moot :-P




~Ephram

---
þ Synchronet þ The Realm of Dispair telnet ephram.synchro.net 2323 ssh 2222 web 82

Re: Re: trump
By: Tracker1 to MRO on Sun Jan 03 2021 03:24 am

On 12/31/2020 9:02 PM, MRO wrote:

i have never seen a full picture of the earth that is not an
artist rendering. nasa even admitted this as much. you can go
look at all the renderings through the years.

There are live 24/7 satellite feeds that are not artist renderings.

--
Michael J. Ryan
tracker1 +o Roughneck BBS

---
­ Synchronet ­ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

Hey, photography is an artform too.

---
þ Synchronet þ Havens BBS havens.synchro.net

deepthaw wrote to Dr. What <=-

I defer to experts because I feel I'm well enough educated to a) understand when their credentials are qualified and b) understand when
a topic is beyond my understanding and that it's best to defer to
experts identified by a.

I find that I can no longer defer to the "experts" because too many are political shills. ex: Fauci

I've also seen over many years that just because a "leader" says someone's
an "expert" doesn't mean that the person is really an "expert". I've met
too many "experts" in companies who were out, standing in their fields.

The problem with lack of critical thinking is partially this battle in education between wanting to (waste time) creating well rounded
citizens, versus it being a vocational thing that just prepares them
for a career without wasting time on "soft skills."

A "well rounded" person will always have critical thinking skills. So that's not the reason. But a person with critical thinking skills will sniff
out the BS being fed to him pretty quickly and question authority. That's
what they want to stop.

I think the focus on testing is a massive part and despite being a
liberal who supports the department of ed., local schools need more discretion to assess their own performance. We've gone too far towards "teaching the test" because it's all that matters come performance evaluation time.

I remember those days. But the "teaching to the test" was only part of the plan. That just made many of the better teachers leave to be replaced with more indoctrinators.

Once the teachers were "teaching to the test" (because those test scores
were how they were getting rated), then they just started to change the
test.

It's all part of ruining the education system and turning people in to
sheep.


... Did you expect mere proof to sway my opinion?
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Tracker1 on Tue Jan 05 2021 12:06 am

it just seems strange to me that nasa does these odd things and nobody questions them. they think these artist renderings are fact. people are brainwashed into believing everything nasa says and does.

While I agree that NASA are keeping us in the dark about a number of things, I don't think the Earth not being spherical is one of them.

---
þ Synchronet þ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to MRO on Fri Jan 08 2021 12:23 pm

While I agree that NASA are keeping us in the dark about a number of things, I don't think the Earth not being spherical is one of them.

dont you think it's odd that there is no REAL photo of the earth from nasa? they are all artist renderings.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

dont you think it's odd that there is no REAL photo of the earth from nasa? the
are all artist renderings.

To be correct, some are renderings, some are photos that have been
"enhanced."


* SLMR 2.1a * "My eyeballs nearly popped out!"

---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: trump
By: Dumas Walker to MRO on Sat Jan 09 2021 02:12 pm

dont you think it's odd that there is no REAL photo of the earth from
nasa?

the

are all artist renderings.

To be correct, some are renderings, some are photos that have been "enhanced."

or more correct:

nobody fucking knows
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to MRO on Fri Jan 08 2021 12:23 pm

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Tracker1 on Tue Jan 05 2021 12:06 am

it just seems strange to me that nasa does these odd things and nobody
questions them. they think these artist renderings are fact. people
are brainwashed into believing everything nasa says and does.

While I agree that NASA are keeping us in the dark about a number of things, I don't think the Earth not being spherical is one of them.

i'm just saying we dont know. and it's very strange that there are no actual earth photographs of the entire earth.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

MRO wrote to Andeddu <=-

it just seems strange to me that nasa does these odd things and nobody
questions them. they think these artist renderings are fact. people
are brainwashed into believing everything nasa says and does.

While I agree that NASA are keeping us in the dark about a number of things, I don't think the Earth not being spherical is one of them.

i'm just saying we dont know. and it's very strange that there
are no actual earth photographs of the entire earth.

How can you possibly be this ignorant?

There are tens of thousands (maybe more?) of them, publicly
accessible. Pull your head out of your ass, doofus.


... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

On 2021-01-15 6:07 a.m., MRO wrote:

i'm just saying we dont know. and it's very strange that there are no actual earth photographs of the entire earth.

From Apollo 11 a long time ago : https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/21080291173/in/album-72157658666156148/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/21710271221/in/album-72157658666156148/

If you don't see a full spherical earth from the space station it's that
it's not orbiting from high enough, just a few hundred miles.

Things is that it's allays possible to say "it's a miniature model shoot
in a Hollywood studio" etc.

But everyday life, sunrise, sunset, tides, weather pattern etc. are more
easy to explain when you consider that earth is a sphere. Usually the
simplest explanation to a phenomenon tend to be the right one.

It has been demonstrated the earth is round thousands of years ago, just
need sticks, sun at noon and take measurement from different locations.

I believe that most flatearther don't really believe that the earth is
flat. It's just a way to rebel and oppose to what they see at authority
and piss people off :-)

---
­ Synchronet ­ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Re: Re: trump
By: Ennev to MRO on Fri Jan 15 2021 10:51 am

It has been demonstrated the earth is round thousands of years ago, just need sticks, sun at noon and take measurement from different locations.

I believe that most flatearther don't really believe that the earth is flat. It's just a way to rebel and oppose to what they see at authority and piss people off :-)

i'm just saying why is it that all we have for a total picture of the earth is blue marble that they always photoshop.

and they have compilations from various sources that they piece together and then they draw on THAT too!!
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

i'm just saying why is it that all we have for a total picture of the earth is blue marble that they always Photoshop.

Like I said. For myself I've seen this picture since a was a young child, so pre-photoshop. Even the best mainframe computer of the days couldn't have simulated something like this.

I see a 120 film negative scan with how a raw scan should look.

If you referring to picture taken in low orbit, they won't have the full earth on it because the earth is 7916 miles wide and that for example the space station is only flying at 260 miles above it.

A geostationary satellite is higher (22236 miles) gives that opportunity. This link : https://cdn.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/GOES16/ABI/FD/02/678x678.jpg
gives a live picture from GOES-16 satellite.

---
þ Synchronet þ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

i'm just saying we dont know. and it's very strange that there are no actual ea
th photographs of the entire earth.

If it was flat, wouldn't it be easier to get a picture of the entire Earth?


* SLMR 2.1a * A momentary lapse of reason that binds a life to a life..

---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

On 2021-01-15 6:05 p.m., Dumas Walker wrote:

If it was flat, wouldn't it be easier to get a picture of the entire Earth?

That's right :-D

---
­ Synchronet ­ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Re: Re: trump
By: Dumas Walker to MRO on Fri Jan 15 2021 06:05 pm

i'm just saying we dont know. and it's very strange that there are no
actual

ea

th photographs of the entire earth.

If it was flat, wouldn't it be easier to get a picture of the entire Earth?

not really
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: Ennev to Dumas Walker on Fri Jan 15 2021 10:34 pm

If it was flat, wouldn't it be easier to get a picture of the entire
Earth?

That's right :-D

Okay, I have to say it... If the Earth was flat, cats would've knocked everything over the side by now.

In all honesty, to think that the Earth isn't a fat in the center sphere is akin to thinking centrifical force doesn't move you to the outside at high speeds.

Dream Master

---
þ Synchronet þ Caught in a Dream - Coming Soon!

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Andeddu on Fri Jan 08 2021 05:46 pm

dont you think it's odd that there is no REAL photo of the earth from nasa? they are all artist renderings.

It's odd, but like the other posters have said, the pictures ARE a true and accurate representation of the Earth. They're legit pictures that have been modified in terms of contrast, brightness, exposure and vibrancy, etc... to make them more amenable to normies. I'd like to see the unedited photographs though.

Besides, if the Earth is flat, I am sure someone would have visited the edge of the world and returned to tell the tale.

---
þ Synchronet þ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

In all honesty, to think that the Earth isn't a fat in the center sphere is akin to thinking centrifical force doesn't move you to the outside at high speeds.

Granted it’s not a perfect sphere.

---
þ Synchronet þ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to MRO on Sat Jan 16 2021 12:31 pm

It's odd, but like the other posters have said, the pictures ARE a true and accurate representation of the Earth. They're legit pictures that have

that's an opinion.

and accurate representation of the Earth. They're legit pictures that have been modified in terms of contrast, brightness, exposure and vibrancy, etc... to make them more amenable to normies. I'd like to see the unedited photographs though.

they have gone out past the earth. they can do one shot of the earth instead of an artist rendering. instead it's always artist renderings with added clouds and the color changed. looks fake as fuck.

everytime nasa does a story it is fake ass picturs.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Andeddu on Sat Jan 16 2021 02:21 pm

they have gone out past the earth. they can do one shot of the earth instead of an artist rendering. instead it's always artist renderings with added clouds and the color changed. looks fake as fuck.

everytime nasa does a story it is fake ass picturs.

I believe every picture ever released of a planetary body is based on an artist's rendition... the true photograph would be to dark to make anything out. All the pictures of nebulas and galaxies are fake but that's neither here nor there, the Earth is still spherical!

---
þ Synchronet þ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to MRO on Sun Jan 17 2021 05:37 pm

everytime nasa does a story it is fake ass picturs.

I believe every picture ever released of a planetary body is based on an artist's rendition... the true photograph would be to dark to make

i dont give a shit. i dont want fake ass pictures.

anything out. All the pictures of nebulas and galaxies are fake but that's
neither here nor there, the Earth is still spherical!

i'm talking about the earth not having a real photo after all these decades. ---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Andeddu wrote to MRO <=-

they have gone out past the earth. they can do one shot of the earth instead of an artist rendering. instead it's always artist renderings with added clouds and the color changed. looks fake as fuck.

everytime nasa does a story it is fake ass picturs.

I believe every picture ever released of a planetary body is
based on an artist's rendition... the true photograph would be to
dark to make anything out. All the pictures of nebulas and
galaxies are fake but that's neither here nor there, the Earth is
still spherical!

Wow, there's two of them that should have stayed in school.



... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Andeddu wrote to MRO <=-

@MSGID: <600475D2.4557.dove-debate@amstrad.simulant.uk>
@REPLY: <60034AB6.1164.dove-deb@bbses.info>
Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Andeddu on Sat
Jan 16 2021 02:21 pm

they have gone out past the earth. they can do one shot of the earth instead of an artist rendering. instead it's always artist renderings with added clouds and the color changed. looks fake as fuck.

everytime nasa does a story it is fake ass picturs.

I believe every picture ever released of a planetary body is based on
an artist's rendition... the true photograph would be to dark to make anything out. All the pictures of nebulas and galaxies are fake but
that's neither here nor there, the Earth is still spherical!

You can just increase the exposure time to get a lighter picture. But yes, almost all the pictures you see are enhanced to appeal to the public. Jupiter is made far more colourful than what it really looks like. For accurate ones, look at the ones taken by backyard astronomers.


... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to MRO on Sun Jan 17 2021 05:37 pm

I believe every picture ever released of a planetary body is based on an artist's rendition... the true photograph would be to dark to make anything out.

I'd think they could take a long exposure so there would be enough light in the photo - though with a moving telescope, or a camera on the earth which is moving, there might be issues doing that. But with today's camera technology, I'd imagine they could take the raw data from the camera sensor and increase the exposure level on it to get a brighter photo - though I wonder if even that would be enough.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Andeddu on Sun Jan 17 2021 03:48 pm

i'm talking about the earth not having a real photo after all these decades.

The truth is that there have been very few pictures taken of the Earth in its entirety as most satellites that take pictures do so at low Earth orbit which is too close to capture the entire planet. Modern pictures are composites of snapshots stitched together to appear like a single shot.

---
þ Synchronet þ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: trump
By: Boraxman to Andeddu on Mon Jan 18 2021 01:57 am

You can just increase the exposure time to get a lighter picture. But yes, almost all the pictures you see are enhanced to appeal to the public. Jupiter is made far more colourful than what it really looks like. For accurate ones, look at the ones taken by backyard astronomers.

Satellites such as Juno have returned with some very good pictures of Jupiter. Those have been enhanced as well for the public's delectation however I reckon they are a true representation of the visual appearance of the planet made more colourful, as you've mentioned.

MRO was talking about the Earth being flat and citing the unavailability of unedieted pictures as evidence. I don't think he's being serious either way, but the pictures we have available are authentic; they've just been lightly enhanced for public consumpton.

---
þ Synchronet þ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: trump
By: Nightfox to Andeddu on Sun Jan 17 2021 10:18 pm

I'd think they could take a long exposure so there would be enough light in the photo - though with a moving telescope, or a camera on the earth which is moving, there might be issues doing that. But with today's camera technology, I'd imagine they could take the raw data from the camera sensor and increase the exposure level on it to get a brighter photo - though I wonder if even that would be enough.

Nightfox

I'd like to think that with today's camera technology, we could take a sufficiently clean picture of the Earth from the Moon. Software built into the camera could increase the exposure after the shot has been taken anyway, but I don't think that would clear MRO's high bar.

---
þ Synchronet þ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to Nightfox on Mon Jan 18 2021 04:58 pm

I'd like to think that with today's camera technology, we could take a sufficiently clean picture of the Earth from the Moon. Software built into the camera could increase the exposure after the shot has been taken anyway, but I don't think that would clear MRO's high bar.

I tend to agree.
And MRO would proably still think it would look fake. Or maybe because the camera adjusted the exposure and/or other settings, it's still an "edited" photo and thus not a real photo of the earth..

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to MRO on Mon Jan 18 2021 04:27 pm

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Andeddu on Sun Jan 17 2021 03:48 pm

i'm talking about the earth not having a real photo after all these
decades.

The truth is that there have been very few pictures taken of the Earth in its entirety as most satellites that take pictures do so at low Earth orbit which is too close to capture the entire planet. Modern pictures are composites of snapshots stitched together to appear like a single shot.

so we never launched anything into space that could look back and take a photo?

and why are these modern composit pictures always edited to add clouds and other dumb shit?
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to Boraxman on Mon Jan 18 2021 04:48 pm

MRO was talking about the Earth being flat and citing the unavailability of unedieted pictures as evidence. I don't think he's being serious either way, but the pictures we have available are authentic; they've just been lightly enhanced for public consumpton.

you guys keep harping on the flat earth shit.

i just want real photos of the earth, please. we dont have that.
and it's been a long time.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to Nightfox on Mon Jan 18 2021 04:58 pm

I'd like to think that with today's camera technology, we could take a sufficiently clean picture of the Earth from the Moon. Software built into the camera could increase the exposure after the shot has been taken anyway, but I don't think that would clear MRO's high bar.

i just dont want a fake ass picture, which i guess they cant come up with. that's my only requirement.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: Nightfox to Andeddu on Mon Jan 18 2021 09:41 pm

And MRO would proably still think it would look fake. Or maybe because the camera adjusted the exposure and/or other settings, it's still an "edited" photo and thus not a real photo of the earth..

if it's a fake photo i'm going to say it's a fake photo.

i'm not picky but i'm not an idiot. i dont accept bullshit.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Andeddu on Tue Jan 19 2021 01:41 am

so we never launched anything into space that could look back and take a photo?

and why are these modern composit pictures always edited to add clouds and other dumb shit?

According to one article, only one photograph of the entire Earth was taken prior to around 2014. It's the famous grainy half-Earth picture that you've no doubt seen.

High definition cameras on low orbit satellites can capture clouds, you know. If they've added additional clouds and other details it's not something I've ever been made aware of.

Either way, if you're satisfied or not, it doesn't really matter. Those are the pictures we have of the Earth and we have to make do with them. There are now several pictures of the planet caught in a single frame so I think that puts to bed any credence in the flat Earth theory.

Next up, the Hollow Moon hypothesis...

---
þ Synchronet þ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Nightfox on Tue Jan 19 2021 01:45 am

And MRO would proably still think it would look fake. Or maybe because the camera adjusted the exposure and/or other settings, it's still an "edited" photo and thus not a real photo of the earth..

if it's a fake photo i'm going to say it's a fake photo.

i'm not picky but i'm not an idiot. i dont accept bullshit.

It doesn't matter if they've increased the contrast or enhanced the colours, it's still an accurate representation. If you take a picture of yourself and edit the lighting, you're not going to suddenly see Brad Pitt, it'll still be your face... and a true and accurate represetation at that.

---
þ Synchronet þ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to MRO on Tue Jan 19 2021 05:27 pm

High definition cameras on low orbit satellites can capture clouds, you know. If they've added additional clouds and other details it's not something I've ever been made aware of.

yeah, they say they do it. it's obvious that they do it.

Either way, if you're satisfied or not, it doesn't really matter. Those are the pictures we have of the Earth and we have to make do with them.

like i said. it's just weird that we dont have an entire photo of the planet earth. everything is fancy artist drawings. makes me wonder whats the reason.

you making up excuses for them doesnt explain it.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to MRO on Tue Jan 19 2021 05:32 pm

if it's a fake photo i'm going to say it's a fake photo.

i'm not picky but i'm not an idiot. i dont accept bullshit.

It doesn't matter if they've increased the contrast or enhanced the colours, it's still an accurate representation. If you take a picture of yourself and edit the lighting, you're not going to suddenly see Brad

motherfucker.

I.DO.NOT.WANT.A.FAKE.PHOTO.

i'm not talking about contrast being changed.

faaaaaaaaaake
photoooooooo


all the time.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Andeddu on Tue Jan 19 2021 05:52 pm

motherfucker.

I.DO.NOT.WANT.A.FAKE.PHOTO.

i'm not talking about contrast being changed.

faaaaaaaaaake
photoooooooo

all the time.

We've established that there are authentic photographs, one has been around since the late sixties and we've had several more since then. You are talking about the Earth being captured in a single shot... that has been done. Although 99% of shots that are out there on the internet are heavily edited and enhanced, but you cannot deny that genuine shots do exist; to do so is to exhibit wilful ignorance.

---
þ Synchronet þ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to MRO on Wed Jan 20 2021 05:24 pm

We've established that there are authentic photographs, one has been around since the late sixties and we've had several more since then. You are talking about the Earth being captured in a single shot... that has

no that hasnt been established.

been done. Although 99% of shots that are out there on the internet are heavily edited and enhanced, but you cannot deny that genuine shots do exist; to do so is to exhibit wilful ignorance.

there is no untouched, real photo of the earth that shows it in its entirety. and that is what i keep saying is very strange.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Next up, the Hollow Moon hypothesis...

Have you ever read H.G. Wells "The First Men in the Moon"?


* SLMR 2.1a * Is it OK to yell "MOVIE" in a crowded Fire Station??

---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

We've established that there are authentic photographs, one has been around since the late sixties and we've had several more since then. You are talking about the Earth being captured in a single shot... that has been done. Although 99% of shots that are out there on the internet are heavily edited and enhanced, but you cannot deny that genuine shots do exist; to do so is to exhibit wilful ignorance.

I'll repost the one from the other day :

https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/21710271221/in/album-7215765 8666156148/

unedited

nice thing with NASA, it's that it's a public institution, all the stuff is public.

in 2015 they dumped 8400 on flickr : https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapoll oarchive/albums/with/72157659052908231

the one from the "magazine" are interesting because they are raw, unedited.

they are flawed, sometime badly framed or exposed. Really look like 120 format film in a square format hasselblad camera.

I like theses : http://q.ennev.com/z ( url shortener, will lead the the proper magazine on flickr )

---
þ Synchronet þ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Hello Mro!

** On Tuesday 19.01.21 - 17:52, MRO wrote to Andeddu:

I.DO.NOT.WANT.A.FAKE.PHOTO.

i'm not talking about contrast being changed.

faaaaaaaaaake
photoooooooo
all the time.

How far would a human have to be from the surface of the earth
inorder for the planet to fit within the scope of one's field of
view. From the moon, the earth can be covered with your thumb.

This guy attemps to explore that topic (and other things as he
digresses with realted things):

https://youtu.be/mxhxL1LzKww


--- OpenXP 5.0.48
* Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

On 2021-01-21 9:45 a.m., Ogg wrote:

This guy attemps to explore that topic (and other things as he
digresses with realted things):

https://youtu.be/mxhxL1LzKww

Thanks, I've really enjoyed this video

---
­ Synchronet ­ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

MRO wrote to Andeddu <=-

@MSGID: <6008D967.1219.dove-deb@bbses.info>
@REPLY: <60086735.4613.dove-debate@amstrad.simulant.uk>
Re: Re: trump
By: Andeddu to MRO on Wed Jan 20 2021 05:24 pm

We've established that there are authentic photographs, one has been around since the late sixties and we've had several more since then. You are talking about the Earth being captured in a single shot... that has

no that hasnt been established.

been done. Although 99% of shots that are out there on the internet are heavily edited and enhanced, but you cannot deny that genuine shots do exist; to do so is to exhibit wilful ignorance.

there is no untouched, real photo of the earth that shows it in its entirety. and that is what i keep saying is very strange.

I'm not really following this thread. You can't take a photo of the whole earth because its round. AT best, if you are far away enough, you'll get one half. But if you are closer to the Earth, you'll only see a small portion, only to the horizon. Being in "space" only makes the horizon further away than it would be if you were on the ground, or up high in the atmosphere.

You have to go VERY far, in order to see the globe, and humans haven't travelled that far since the moon landings.

... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Re: trump
By: Boraxman to MRO on Thu Jan 21 2021 08:47 pm

one half. But if you are closer to the Earth, you'll only see a small portion, only to the horizon. Being in "space" only makes the horizon further away than it would be if you were on the ground, or up high in the atmosphere.

You have to go VERY far, in order to see the globe, and humans haven't travelled that far since the moon landings.

so can't one of our probes that we launch out do a look back and send us the photo?
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

On 2021-01-21 10:31 p.m., MRO wrote:

Re: Re: trump

so can't one of our probes that we launch out do a look back and send us the photo?

They do, but they are of little scientific interest.

But you would say they are fake anyway :-D

there where a flyby that a remember for a gravity assist that the
Galileo probe did back in 92

https://appel.nasa.gov/2011/05/13/galileos-rocky-road-to-jupiter/

p.s. I don't mind checking because I haven't look at that stuff in a
while. The purpose here is not to convince you.

---
­ Synchronet ­ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Re: Re: trump

so can't one of our probes that we launch out do a look back and send us the photo?

Of course not, They do not.

https://youtu.be/rFDjAfwmWKM (The Mercury-bound MESSENGER spacecraft captured several stunning images of Earth during a gravity assist swingby of its home planet on Aug. 2, 2005)

---
þ Synchronet þ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Re: Re: trump
By: Dumas Walker to ANDEDDU on Wed Jan 20 2021 04:32 pm

Next up, the Hollow Moon hypothesis...

Have you ever read H.G. Wells "The First Men in the Moon"?

* SLMR 2.1a * Is it OK to yell "MOVIE" in a crowded Fire Station??

No, I've not read the book though I am aware it's the first instance in which a Hollow Moon is mentioned in literature.

---
þ Synchronet þ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: trump
By: Ennev to MRO on Fri Jan 22 2021 09:33 am

On 2021-01-21 10:31 p.m., MRO wrote:

Re: Re: trump

so can't one of our probes that we launch out do a look back and send
us the photo?

They do, but they are of little scientific interest.

But you would say they are fake anyway :-D

there where a flyby that a remember for a gravity assist that the
Galileo probe did back in 92

https://appel.nasa.gov/2011/05/13/galileos-rocky-road-to-jupiter/

that looks enhanced and it's not a full image of the earth.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: Ennev to MRO on Fri Jan 22 2021 10:59 am

Re: Re: trump

so can't one of our probes that we launch out do a look back and send
us the photo?

Of course not, They do not.

https://youtu.be/rFDjAfwmWKM (The Mercury-bound MESSENGER spacecraft

so the last image you sent as proof was half the earth and look enhanced. same thing here?
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Ennev on Fri Jan 22 2021 10:14 pm

https://appel.nasa.gov/2011/05/13/galileos-rocky-road-to-jupiter/

that looks enhanced and it's not a full image of the earth.

The sun's light is shining only from one direction, so only half the planet can be seen there.. That shot would probably have to be enhanced in order to make the other half visible.

Some level of "enhancement" often helps with photos anyway, and it doesn't mean the photo is fake. If you talk to professional photographers, I bet they'll tell you after a photo shoot, they'll take the raw photos from their camera and edit them with their PC to touch up the light levels, etc.. It's to make things look their best, not to make fake photos.

Do you expect just a quick point-and-shoot style photo of the earth that will come out looking good?

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

that looks enhanced and it's not a full image of the earth.

If the Earth is round you cannot get the whole thing at once, no matter how
far out in space you are.


* SLMR 2.1a * A nudist wedding makes the best man easy to identify.

---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: trump
By: Dumas Walker to MRO on Sat Jan 23 2021 09:45 am

that looks enhanced and it's not a full image of the earth.

If the Earth is round you cannot get the whole thing at once, no matter how far out in space you are.

yeah i understand the sun has to light it up. how about if they put the sun to their back and go straight backwards from the earth? wouldnt they get a whole quarter shape and size pic of the earth?
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

MRO wrote to Boraxman <=-

@MSGID: <600A472E.1237.dove-deb@bbses.info>
@REPLY: <6009E8B2.19928.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
Re: Re: trump
By: Boraxman to MRO on Thu Jan 21 2021 08:47 pm

one half. But if you are closer to the Earth, you'll only see a small portion, only to the horizon. Being in "space" only makes the horizon further away than it would be if you were on the ground, or up high in the atmosphere.

You have to go VERY far, in order to see the globe, and humans haven't travelled that far since the moon landings.

so can't one of our probes that we launch out do a look back and send
us the photo? ---

I suppose they could go to the trouble of orentating the probe mid flight to take a photo, then reorentate it, but why?

What is it you want proven?


... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Dumas Walker wrote to MRO <=-

@MSGID: <600C39B4.21887.dove-deb@capitolcityonline.net>
@REPLY: <600BA2B3.1249.dove-deb@bbses.info>

that looks enhanced and it's not a full image of the earth.

If the Earth is round you cannot get the whole thing at once, no matter how far out in space you are.

Is there argument over whether the Earth is round or not? Is that what this is about?


... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Re: trump
By: Boraxman to MRO on Sun Jan 24 2021 12:15 pm

so can't one of our probes that we launch out do a look back and
send us the photo? ---

I suppose they could go to the trouble of orentating the probe mid flight to take a photo, then reorentate it, but why?

What is it you want proven?

i want to know why we do not have a photo of the earth that isnt some artist rendered bullshit.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Boraxman on Sat Jan 23 2021 11:08 pm

Re: Re: trump
By: Boraxman to MRO on Sun Jan 24 2021 12:15 pm

so can't one of our probes that we launch out do a look back and
send us the photo? ---

I suppose they could go to the trouble of orentating the probe mid flig to take a photo, then reorentate it, but why?

What is it you want proven?

i want to know why we do not have a photo of the earth that isnt some artist rendered bullshit.

I think in part NASA want the public interested in space, so as to make public funding of them more palatable. One thing they do, is enhance the images that come back to make the colours more vibrant, and bring out detail, to make things look more interesting. The nebulas you see for example, aren't quite that colourful.

Space is actual blander than depicted, and I think they figure people don't want to see that. Also, without enhancement, you don't see as much detail, and again, I suppose they figure people want to see the details, the clouds, the contrast, etc, to gather information, than "as it is".


However, most pictures you will see are enhanced to some degree. Professional photographers will usually tweak the RAW image just a bit. It's not a "rendered" photo, just an adjustment of how the camera saw it.


Lastly, what a camera sees is also dependent on exposure, lighting, lenses, etc, so adjusting it doesn't make it 'fake'. After all, what you see in the dark looks different depending on whether you've been in the dark a while, or just walked in from a bright room.

---
þ Synchronet þ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Re: trump
By: MRO to Boraxman on Sat Jan 23 2021 23:08:29

i want to know why we do not have a photo of the earth that isnt some artist rendered bullshit.

Why not enjoy a peek over at eol.jsc.nasa.gov/ESRS/HDEV?
You'll be able to see live footage from a camera mounted on the ISS, pointed at Earth.

Correlate that with weather/geo records and the current ISS position and you can pretty easily verify the earth is round with direct footage.

I mean there is just a mountain of live footage.

---
þ Synchronet þ Auntie Bodies BBS - auntibodiesbbs.themuldoons.co.uk

If the Earth is round you cannot get the whole thing at once, no matter how far out in space you are.

Is there argument over whether the Earth is round or not? Is that what this is about?

I don't think so, just pointing it out.


* SLMR 2.1a * A momentary lapse of reason that binds a life to a life..

---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

On 2021-01-22 11:14 p.m., MRO wrote:

that looks enhanced and it's not a full image of the earth.

I guess it's all about semantic.

What is your definition of "full image of the earth" ?

---
­ Synchronet ­ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -