ISS

Is this real?

Other urls found in this thread:

pbs.org/wgbh/nova/earth/earth-from-space.html
ustream.tv/channel/live-iss-stream
spotthestation.nasa.gov/sightings/
youtube.com/watch?v=qzMQza8xZCc
youtube.com/watch?v=CFrP6QfbC2g
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Flat Earth is a meme but this is totally CGI, you'd have to be retarded to think otherwise.

No, the earth is not currently on fire.

What about this, is it also CGI?

>screenshot of a Stanley Kubrick movie

kek

pbs.org/wgbh/nova/earth/earth-from-space.html
yes

That sucks. Which one here is non-CGI?

Technically speaking, any digital photo is CGI.

But those are definitely not shooped if that's what that n-bomb meant by CGI

This one is not shopped?

It is difficult to say, the bottom row looks like recreations for video games. They might all be real photos. The second from the left in middle row is the same as which I said was fake because it comes from a PBS documentary that uses mostly CGI to display what the earth looks like from different aspects but it might be a real photo, I think I was wrong.

This photo is from National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration satellite GOES-16. Looks quite similar. Nearly all satellite photos are taken with advanced light spectrum beyond visible light (infrared, ultra-violet, etc). They usually have filters applied to be recognizable. (which also blocks out the light of distant stars)

This is the same picture picture as SS049e0004489 (09/16/2016) --- Expedition 49 crew members capture a nighttime view of the Strait of Gibraltar with a Russian Soyuz spacecraft (left) and Progress spacecraft (right) in the foreground.

who cares its a nice photo

You flat earthers are so fucking stupid. What the fuck would be the motive in covering up he flat earth and lying about it being round?

mind control

Well, looks like it's fake.

It's really hard to find a real photo of earth...

Everything NASA-based is rendered and CG, Ivan.

> Image depicts city the size of a continent
>"Is this real?"

All are cgi because Nasa has yet to take a full picture of earth because they don't have satellite at that distance so all those at either 3d renders or stocked together images or both.

Do you understand how massive the planet is relative to us?

Of course not and thats the problem

Someone post the webm of spacewalks with airbubbles and fraud Chris Hadfield with straps. Astronaut = acting. NASA have lied to many times to take them serious.

im not saying this is shooped, but it easily could be, it looks like they blurred some of the edges while others are signifigantly sharper, which is often what you will have trouble fixing when doing actual shit in photoshops

Its not like im a pro or anything but ive made quite a few shoops including airbrushing people and full buildings out of images just for interrests sake, along with the occational dick shoops

>No, the earth is not currently on fire.
that's only because cia didnt meet dr pavel yet

Or Stiched together

long exposure

is there a single person on earth who draws red circles on images who isnt a subhuman mongoloid

great point, that really made me think

Most "photos" of earth are composites stitched together from pictures taken from low earth orbit

There are still plenty of real photos, but most satellites are not far enough away to capture the entire earth in one shot

You can buy a telescope and see the ISS for yourself.

Exactly

1. there's nothing beneficial about the ISS so there's no benefit to faking it.

2. you can see it in a telescope at night if you're in the right part of the world.

3. 200 miles up doesn't give you the best view of the world, that's why it's so close. This isn't KSP.

those digits activated my nuts

one might think that is a little wierd as going to the moon was "easy" some 50-whatever years ago

i guess its not always ideal for satellites to be too far away from earth but some of them should be, i think

ISS is in low orbit and gradually falls giving them that fake space effect of floating.

damn that's a cloudy earth.

>There are still plenty of real photos, but most satellites are not far enough away to capture the entire earth in one shot

Yes they are. Geosynchronous orbit is 30,000km out. That's where most satellites are because then their coverage of a specific part of the planet is continuous since they're orbiting at the same speed the earth is rotating when they're orbiting at that specific distance.

...

Nothing about going to the moon was easy. Who the shit told you that?

The ISS?
Yes, I even have seen it passing above
You can find out when you can watch it on NASAs website

To stop exploration.
No more new nations untouched by elites.

I'm glad I found the thread for shitposting.

tfw no idea what any of those inland cities are

Anyone got video of the female astronaut whose hair is so obviously hairsprayed up it's laughable?

It's not floating around freely, it's like Marge Simpson hair

Its easy when you can justify the millions of tax dollars it will cost to the taxpayers.

Also why would you have a satellite at geocentric orbit (35,000 km from surface)? What purpose would it serve?

Have a theory that I have not seen here or anywhere else.

I believe the Earth is flat but has round edges, like a pizza. This explains the misconception that the Earth is a sphere.

those aren't the same photos faggot

You are definitely on to something

fixed it

you tell me

Taking pictures of the earth is sort of a purpose, but im sure theres other shit to be done out there

>retarded Sup Forums has never watched a livestream of satellite video orbiting just above the atmosphere of our planet
Fucking kys all of you

Thank you for correcting the record

>Also why would you have a satellite at geocentric orbit (35,000 km from surface)? What purpose would it serve?

At that distance the orbital velocity for a circular orbit matches the rotational velocity of the surface of the earth. Putting a satellite there will give you coverage 24 hours a day over one specific spot on the earth.

When i was a kid, satellite tv was provided by satellites in lower orbits, and we had to wait for them to come up over the horizon to watch that channel. We also had to manually aim the motorized dish.

But who gives a shit about earth pictures.

everyone in this thread i guess, since its literally a thread about earth pictures

Poster companies, people who pretend to love science. a handful of scientists as well, but they don't matter.

ustream.tv/channel/live-iss-stream

Just see for yourself.

SAdly only clouds now.

spotthestation.nasa.gov/sightings/

You can literally take a photo of it from the ground with the right equipment and timing

digits confirm
this user is on to something.

>ISS is in low orbit and gradually falls giving them that fake space effect of floating.
>low orbit
>fake space effect

What did he mean by this?

must've been exciting stuff.

i remember when we in finland got our first color tv, it was so exciting. 80's

Our grandma insisted that she wants to watch the black&white, because it has clearer picture!

She was afraid of the colored pictures, too real!

Usually it's
>american education
but come on now, you can't tell that it's a bunch of cities connected by major highways/interstates? If that was all one large city, there wouldn't be large clusters like that.

Everything in orbit is gradually falling you fucking idiot

>pbs.org/wgbh/nova/earth/earth-from-space.html
That is clear proof that the images aren't real.

The chances of purple and yellow circles, red, blue and green boxes occurring naturally are next to impossible.

I think he was trying to tell us how orbit works by constantly falling towards the ground but moving fast enough around so it doesn't crash to the ground

...

No it sucked the shows i wanted to watch were always on satellites that either skirted the horizon or set just as it was coming on.

Only the stuff in low earth orbit is due to atmospheric friction. There's fuck-all air at geosync and they'll be there forever.

Cosmic rays play hell on sensitive photoreceptors.

Yes. Orbit can be defined as falling and missing.

The constant falling and missing creates the same effect you feel when an elevator begins to descend, except constantly. This is called Freefall or Microgravity and is a completely different phenomena from no gravity.

Soviet propaganda.

youtube.com/watch?v=qzMQza8xZCc
Obviously fake, the earth is flat

If the earth is flat why can you fly around it in a circle??

Yes, even with a phone camera I was able to get a decent shot

>Cosmic rays play hell on sensitive photoreceptors.
yes but the cosmos is behind the camera.

Because you can't make a right angle turn. The plane would fall out of the sky.

Modern cameras seem to be doing pretty well judging by the livestream from iss also so..

Red pill. The moon landings were fake. The ISS is filmed in a Hollywood basement. Nasa is ran by the military industrial complex. Gravity is still just a theory. The optic nerve in your eye flips and rotates images you see meaning up is down and left is right. KEK knows the truth but the Jews have lied to you.

Absolutely, same cloud patterns repeating.

By flying in a straight line you eventually go full circle around the world. As in Russia to America, America to euro, euro to Russia. In a big circle around the world without ever overlapping your path.
The earth is round

the same thing that makes the notion of a flat earth make you to butthurt

Looks like the work of the notorious Hackerman.

Project paperclip imported the worst of the worst war criminals from WW2 to start Nasa and work on v2 rocket technology. They also worked in mind control projects such as MKULTRA.

What?
here is one NOAA's DSCOVR satellite
youtube.com/watch?v=CFrP6QfbC2g

No it's all around it. Cosmic rays can go through most thin metals too and it's too expensive to shield it completely.

The Earth is oblate spheroid.

Americans landed on the Moon and returned.

God is real and creating multiple universes for fun. Wants every person to see His art and creations.

When a person dies, they may choose who they want to become in their next life, and the soul goes to another universe.

NASA is a real buddy for providing all the high quality images for us to built 3d models and animations. Why these are regularly promoted as real photos and videos remains a mystery to me.

>Of course not and thats the problem
What makes you think he doesn't understand how sensationally, relatively big the earth is? Acting impressed and asking a question like the answer is obvious ("""impressively very big""") isn't an argument. If all you can do is regurgitate sensationalism and propaganda, get off this board.
>inb4 you assume I'm a flat earther because you have no argument

You could send flat earthers to space in a rocket and let them spacewalk on the ISS themselves and they'd flat out deny that the earth is spherical, they'd say that a video feed is being planted in their helmet, that the helmet is actually VR goggles.

You could get a flat earther to take off his helmet in space and he'd gurgle out with his dying, choking freezeburning breath that nanoparticles are being injected into his eyeballs to give the appearance of a fish eye lens

Yeh ok I was exaggerating but those cities are still fucking huge when you compare them to the horizon curvature.

How can you have a reference frame for that when you've never been that high?

Is google earth a lie then

Because I've seen scientific cartographies of the globe in high school, and know that cities aren't that big?

Of course, but you'll be making an imperceptible turn, a giant circle. This is because of gravity, with the earth being heaviest in the centre of its disc.

I love how its called a "space station" when its just in the upper atmosphere (supposedly) just 5% farther away from the earth's center as sea level.

So let me get this straight. Its hard as fuck to get 400km up to the ISS, but the US sent a guy to the moon in the 60s, about 50 years ago, which is 400 THOUSAND km away?

Those shuttles had massive fuel tanks and two booster rockets just to go 400km up, but the small ass apollo rocket went a thousand times further. Suuure.. LMAO Its like they don't even try to cover it up that well because the initial brain washing of children is so much more effective.

These comic rays you talk of, would they be causing the circles and squares to appear in that photo?

This, this is how denial works, I realized it when a friend was so controlling of her girldfriends and still believed she cheated.
Every time you search for monters you think "they are still there where I havent looked" there is never enough proof

That's difficult to tell when you don't know the specific lens they use to make the photo. Is it wide-angle? Is it telescopic? That makes a difference.

...holy fuck i'm trying to use logic to someone who thinks the earth is flat. That's it. I'm going outside.

I never get, can you see this in naked eye or need special camera ,long exposure and etc?

Funding was bigger back in the 60s then now.

Definitely long exposure.

I think it's like seeing stars in the night sky, if you're in a dark area you see some, but with long exposure photographs, you really see them clearly. But not too long, because then you'd see the movement in the stars. Anything over a few seconds would show up as lines instead of dots.

Opening up your aperture also helps a lot. Cameras can catch more light than the human eye can.

the earth would still appear to be flat, we'd just be able to see the disk in all it's majesty, AND we'd get the the daily continental migration across its surface.

You could give every round earther on earth an app that tells you you're exact roll pitch and yaw and they STILL wouldn't bother to set it on a table, come back an hour and see that it hasn't rotated at all.

I dont care what you flat ir round shill believe.

Lets sau its real. My question is could i actually see all the bright lights at night like that from the ISS or iš that part just faked for effect ?