>There are Americans on Sup Forums right now who beleive NASA is not embezzling tax money because of 1992-tier CGI.
How do do save my country from mass hypnosis? Why do mutts beleive things that are obviously forged and ostensibly intended to be detected as forgery? Look at the fucking lunar shadow for fucks sake. Address the fact that this image wasn’t taken during an eclipse and that the shadow is unresponsive to the position of the sun
nasa.gov
Explain yourself, NASAcolytes.
Other urls found in this thread:
hubblesource.stsci.edu
nasa.gov
nasa.gov
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtube.com
en.m.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Reality sure is mind blowing aint it?
>EPIC’s “natural color” images of Earth are generated by combining three separate monochrome exposures taken by the camera in quick succession. EPIC takes a series of 10 images using different narrowband spectral filters -- from ultraviolet to near infrared -- to produce a variety of science products. The red, green and blue channel images are used in these color images.
It literally tells you that the images were composited, they were probably created in Photoshop like many other images from space.
To clarify, there is a solar hotspot dead center in the linked gif suggesting a solar-stationary satellite and the OP image shows a shadow from the moon on the wrong side. The shadow is consistent through the entire gif provided by NASA despite massing through the path of the sun.
Anyone who remembers the recent eclipse will recall the shadow of the moon is actuall MUCH smaller than the moon due the perceived effect of gravity on observed light, and obviously changes based on the SEM relationship.
Why is this shadow so large and unchanging? Can you really defend a single frame of this NASA-sourced gif as authentic?
>the images were fake, that means they are real.
Im hoping there was a communication error here.
Holy fuck you're dumb. There is no need for embezzling money when we have a black budget that gives Trillions of dollars to companies and projects that will never know about.
Almost every picture you've ever seen of something in space is fake. You can read about the process used here:
hubblesource.stsci.edu
They are generated based on real data, but they aren't what you'd actually see with your eyes.
>everyone ever is involved in the black budget
>the black budget isn’t explained by false ops
You might be the retard d one, friend.
Also having trouble finding an official explanation of how fast the EPIC satellite is traveling. Accepting NASA sources or documented math.
>everything you have ever seen from NASA is fake
>it’s okay the images are fake, these zeros and ones say so.
Neat.
>tfw can’t get NASA to give specific information
Used to it
>tfw math nerds won’t try to defend NASA immediately
New feels
How fast is the satellite allegedly taking these images moving relative to Earth?
For those who already know about NASA, why do they make it so obvious they are lying? Do they want people to realise or do they just not respect people?
Here is the picture I meant to post in OP, I grabbed a thumbnail by mistake.
Again, hotspot roughly 4 degrees off dead center, shadow pointing towards hotspot,
This in no tangential way involves rocket science, even base,ent dwellers know shadows don’t point towards the source of light.
Watch the video for a real laugh. The cloud formations remain the exact same through a 6-8 hr Earth rotation
>ostensibly intended to be detected as forgery
Please comment on this observation. I never intend3d for NASAcolytes to suddenly face overwhelming evidence.
Why is the “evidence” SO bad? Do you think they want us to know, or simply have no respect for the masses?
Any comments o. This frame from the NASA website?
Didn’t think. So.
Damnit.
>embezzling tax money
i'll put up with flat earthers but this is literally more retarded than anything flat earthers could say.
it's not like they DON'T build rockets.
it's not like they DON'T have massive complex and buildings.
it's not like they DON'T hire thousands of engineers at 100k a year each.
etc...
being a space agency is expensive.
with the expenses, the absolute MOST they could scrape off the top, assuming literally everything besides the physical objects they make is fake, is a measly 1 billion dollars. for some shadowy organization that is able to fake stuff to this degree, that would be like pennies.
DSCOVR resides in a looping halo orbit at the Earth-Sun L1 point. So it's always between the Earth and Sun, but the exact angle changes by several degrees throughout the year.
Mind you that image is not specific to DSCOVR, that's just a quickly googled example of a L1 Halo orbit.
Its going to be a while before normies can swallow the red pill.
Its Easier to lie to them and continue the fake 1000mph spinning ball traveling thousands more mph through fake space.
They cant handle the truth that it is fucking FLAT and we do Not Move!!!
I just laugh and shake my head if i see NASA t shirts or the weekly article nasa puts out about finding more fake planets that might sustain life millions light yrs away?!?! Fking hilarious!
you're kind of right and kind of wrong.
Hubble time is extremely expensive. nobody uses it to just take pretty pictures. people use it to do research, and look for specific distributions of certain gasses in nebulae.
basically, they have a number of filters they can select between to select for the kind of light emitted by certain things, such as hydrogen, helium, oxygen, infrared, ultraviolet, etc...
if you wanted, you could try and convince someone with telescope time to take three exposures with rgb filters and then combine the images to make true color photographs, but they probably wouldn't do it for you, you know, because they payed a lot of money to use it for a very specific purpose, and there is a long line to get in, and they only let you use it if you have a good reason do (i.e are going important research)
the images aren't fake, it's just that the ones you see are usually research data taken by an amateur or professional at nasa and artificially colored for pr purposes.
t. guy who does this
...
>They cant handle the truth
lol at this. flat earthers are so blind.
you swallow absolutely retard teir arguments that DEPEND on the fact that you have no clue at all what you're talking about. they flat out deny any evidence that directly proves them wrong, and at the end of the day they go "durr nobody else wants to accept that i'm right!"
what a joke.
>flat earth era are fine
>NASA hoaxers aren’t
Look, I’m fine with shills, I hope and dream I can be one some day.
The fact that you still have a job gives me great hope that all is not lost, my services are desperately needed.
>implying you are serious
...
>Oh man, it cost us SOOOO much to land on the moon, there is no budget to fake landing on the moon!
>Oh shit, we spent SOOO much money getting EPIC into orbit, we can’t afford to fake pictures of weather patterns, the primary reason for launching said satellite.
>Ugh, it is so hard to launder money when we keep doing exactly what we are allegedly supposed to do, why do we keep faking imagery after spending all the money it allegedly takes to get real Imagery?
Something is tragically depressing here. Either it is me taking you seriously, or you taking you seriously.
>the shadow of the moon is actuall MUCH smaller than the moon due the perceived effect of gravity on observed light
The size of the moon's shadow is almost entirely due to the distances involved and the difference in size between the moon and sun.
...
Ultra shitty pic related. All I want to know is
what i'm saying is that even if they faked literally everything, it still costs money at the end of the day.
the actual mission is not the expensive part.
cringe tier bait
I’m not necessarily opposed to flat earth, but for fucks sake, let’s take it one step at a time. There is no fucking way you got “wome” to flat earth before realizing NASA was a fucking disgusting sham. In fact, it was probably the outright audacity of NASA fakes that pushed you to such a position.
Shut the fuck up about flat earth if you actually beleive in it. Focus on about mainstream “space science” and if you are right people will realise it.
Fucking learn to strategize. Losing your room ain’t shit if their king falls.
Why does the Earth look so puny in pic related, but so large in the New one?
Pic source:
nasa.gov
relative to earth, the satellite is moving very slowly.
however, since the satellite is always between the earth and the sun, and the earth is moving at about 40 km/s, then the satellite should be moving slightly slower than that.
There's no shadow in that picture because it wasn't taken during an eclipse.
Nice try shill. You are a stupid fuck, nebula, and more big space words made up. Shareblue NASA your time is almost up and the gag is out and there will be public hangings from pissing out trillions on fake shit except Tang, and freeze dried ice cream, which i liked.
So stop with your fake big words made up talk. Your only fooling idiots still which its like flies on shit. Nasa is a compartmentalized shithole and astronauts are not heros unless they are former combat pilots and are paid and signed off non disclosure agreements ti continue the fraud.
Here is a laugh.
pic source:
nasa.gov
are you pulling a goof or something?
...
My dad works at Nintendo and he says you suck dicks for wii-avatar uniques.
See how unfounded claims work? Why don’t you try answering my top two qu3ationw this thread:
Easy: how fast is EPIC moving around earth?
medium: why doesn’t the moons shadow on earth change during the entire animation presented by NASA
Hard:why don’t the clouds change?
FML: explain this frame from the NASA gif Repeat after me: “I am totally retarded and beleive whatever NASA says, the obvious and objective fakery of their imagery means nothing.”
DSCOVR's relative velocity changes throughout it's orbit, but on average it's about 29.4km/s relative to the sun. The Earth being about 30km/s.
Presumably the moon is a little closer to Earth in the pictures where Earth looks bigger.
>your arguments are retarded and lack evidence
>what a joke
Not even a flat earthier, but there is a startling lack of evidence to support your theory in your “scathing” rebuttal.
Who is joke really on? I would think the UN logo may provide the truth?
Your time is up and you can start panic reving real soon!
Flat out deny. Smiley.jpg
Address the NASA submitted imagery rather than my inane ramblings, then.
>photoshops that would be called out in the 90s cost money too! How can they possibly profit from faking images when they only receive billions of dollars a year?
Seriously though, what the fuck is your argument?
I’d sell you a picture of a bridge, but if you want I can sel, you the bridge for the same price.
Take your pick.
IDK. that is a huge difference in size between the image in the OP and the one in If I were to look at these out of any context, I would have to conclude that they can't both be accurate representations of the same subject matter.
i don't "beleive what nasa says". hell, i don't even know what they say. i'm just telling you what i know.
>how fast is EPIC moving around earth?
want to try this one for yourself? no? ok. it's not. it's in a fucking LAGRANGE POINT. BY DEFINITION IT IS NOT MOVING "AROUND" THE EARTH. so the answer to your question is zero.
> why doesn’t the moons shadow on earth change during the entire animation presented by NASA
why would it? the moon is only moving a couple of degrees in it's orbit during the entire time it happens.
>why don’t the clouds change?
why would they? you realize the gif only takes place over the course of two hours. clouds don't change very much during that time from a birds eye view.
>explain this frame from the NASA gif
Defend this frame from the gif in OP Honestly, defend ANY frame from the gif in OP?
It's ya none of these pics are real all composite etc great. How come there is no video from spaceship cockpit going into orbit or coming back in. They have cameras on every fucking flight and no one has ever thought to film the most compelling part of the trip. How come theres not one 360 or even 180 degree pan ever filmed in space or on the moon. I'm not saying I agree with all the flat e stuff because they are all just guessing the best they can but can you justify why none of this shit exists. There's some shit they are not telling us one way or the other.
You think that's obviously a forgery? Look at the doctored images and recordings of Saturn taken by cassini
>explain this frame from the NASA gif
t. someone who has literally never done astrophotography in their entire life.
it's being cut off from the maximum field of view of the telescope, and cropping done in post. do you honestly think nasa, even if they were faking it, would be so retarded as to include a botched picture like that?
so,
A: it's fake and nasa is retarded and incompetent beyond belief
B: it's not fake and it's a natural product of the equipment.
youtube.com
>inb4 "anything that proves me wrong is fake"
Schlomo Spherestein really working overtime in this thread.
>"they look fake so they must be fake"
retard detected.
guess this picture, and the thousands of much better pictures taken by much better photographers than me are all fake.
Are you like 8 yrs old or have an undeveloped brain? Have you looked at any of the evidence over the last couple decades are are you just walking outside for the first time?
Heres a hint. Watch some space station videos a little closer and you may find the green screen and cables and cgi is rather highly funny. Oh i forgot the Hairspray!
>Address the NASA submitted imagery
What about it?
DSCOVR is a lot further from the moon and using a different focal length, etc. than than Apollo 8 was.
The truth about NASA? The truth about the Outer Dark? That takes a level of TS/SCI clearance that is nearly fiction, a Special Access Restriction that bears a price.
You will learn the truth. And you will pay. With your morality. With your sanity. And with your life.
/thread
>"they look fake but trust me they're real because daddy government's branch of the military told me so"
> Have you looked at any of the evidence over the last couple decades are are you just walking outside for the first time?
i am a flat earth veteran. it's astounding the level of retardation and obvious delusion flat earthers experience. i have seen literally every single argument. they're all retarded. and i'm not just saying that. there are clear, easy to understand reasons why everything flat earhers try to spout is wrong.
OP here. First, your image is NOT a NASA image, it is an amateur photoshop.
Second, the scale is actually reasonably accurate given the perspective between the two. Google “rob skiba debunks rob skiba” to see as good as an explanation as you will ever get. (Side note, rob skiba is wrong a lot, but his willingness to debunk himself is highly respectable. Check him out.)
NASA is fake as fuck, and guess what is the best strategy to defend fake imagery? Making actual fake, non-endorsed, fake imagery popular.
There are ZERO official NASA photos with the lunar horizon and earth visible simultaneously. You are in a world of deception, be careful what you beleive.
>ITT: OP teaches Sup Forums that people larping as flat earthers is a tactic to make the nationalist movement silly by association.
Screen cap it
"White supremacists do not believe the Earth is round!!" @Buzzfeed/Motherjones/CNN
Cap this shit, they've been at this nonsense for fucking weeks.
You can even go back to like 70 year old footage
It's a fact we've had flat earthers and that kind of people here to ruin Sup Forums's reputation.
Well that's a rocket coming down from pretty close distance not a shuttle going into or out of orbit. Never said rockets are not real. Also it's obviously not very high if it can reach earth in 30 seconds.
>framing the things you allow yourself to discuss based on the possible perception that a news organization will push
Just end yourself you PRcuck redditor.
>big words
Is the word "nebula" that hard to understand?
It's just a cloud of gas in space.
>astronauts are not heros unless they are former combat pilots
Combat pilots are not heroes, pulling a stick doesn't make you a hero.
War is always a matter of luck.
>Sup Forums's reputation
Go back.
Distance has a large effect on apparent size.
en.m.wikipedia.org
This
If the earth were flat you’d be able to see the sun from any point on the disc with a strong enough telescope. So tell me, why does the sun disappear into the horizon every single day from almost every point on earth?
bob is going on vacation.
using your donated money, he bought a plane ticket, an expensive rental car, that you helped him rent, and a five star hotel room that you helped him book. you see all kinds of photographs of his cool awesome vacation online, but your friend bill is skeptical.
"he totally just faked the photographs and is spending your money on something else right now", bill says
"yeah, but i purchased the plane ticket.", you rebutt.
"but did you see him get on the plane???", bill says, confidently.
"no, but i heard airplane noises when he called me after they reached cruising altitude."
"he just put his phone up to a fan. bill would do that. he's sneaky, cuz one time he ate all the pizza even though he said he was going to save me a slice".
.you pull up a security video of him boarding, and the plane taking off.
bill says "there's no way you can prove he actually landed. he and the pilot were in kahoots and he landed again and let him off' before going on their way"
this is how you sound.
at the end of the day, the vacation still cost real money. even if literally everything was faked by bill, real money is still gone.
even if literally every photo and video from nasa is fake, real money still goes into building the satellite, real money still goes into building the rocket, real money still goes into maintaining the entire thing.
>How do do save my country from mass hypnosis?
EMP. electricity is the number 1 conductor of brainwash
look how big this tree is!
it's so much bigger than the forest behind it!
What else are the arborists hiding from us?
Math or NASA SOURCE OR SHUT THE FUCK UP
The moon clearly covers the hotspot in the image, and by the fully illluminated hemisphere it is clear the satellite is located nearly parallel from the sun (roughly 4 degrees off, if you were wondering)
>the satilite isn’t moving
>earth and the moon are moving
Look, we can have an argument about the futility of relativity, or you can admit you are retarded.
Or both. No other options are available.
>why would the moons shadow Cary based on it’s position from the sun?
I’m alarmed I dare even respond to such bait, it even ignoring the image of the moon crossing the sun are you denying the reality of an eclipse?
>why would the clouds change! Only 6-10 hour passed!
Dude.
>the quote that defeated you
>tfw when you posted anyways
Priceless
I will have to ponder your image, but at first glance it seems to me that the image here from Apollo should correspond to the upper left hand corner of your image and the image in the OP should correspond to the square on the lower right of your image. It seems to me at first thought, that, based upon your sample image, the Earth should be filling the background in like the dart board is in frame one of your image.
>NASA is embezzling tax money
>NASA expenditure isn't even five percent that of welfare
Look at the link I provided for the image in The image is from the FUCKING NASA website.
Nigger I've been on this fucking website since /h/ was a fucking board
You take your backwards ass bullshit to fucking where it fucking belongs. Goddamn I've entertained this stupid bullshit for years and the only thing of fruition from all of your nonsense is a greater understanding of the mentally ill.
You didn't refute a fucking bit of what I said either you goddamn kike/kike puppet
That's exactly what you fucks are up to, you want to make us all look like fucking loonies.
Hey friend. New questions for you to ask retards:
>ISS sure is cool, right? Why didn’t people ostensibly with a terrific interest in space place any windows not observing earth?
Let them answer
>why didn’t they place any cameras facing away from Earth?
Let them answer.
>So the ISS has no windows or cameras facing space, only earth? Why is the space station more concerned with earth than space?
Let them be silent.
Why is the terminator line on the moon on the opposite side from the terminator line on the earth.
I will wait for you, user.
>Also it's obviously not very high if it can reach earth in 30 seconds.
Unless it's going very fast
Here is a screenshot of the FUCKING page. Here is the link, again.
first of all, you specifically asked me how fast EPIC is moving AROUND the earth. then, i proved that you were a retard and didn't understand anything about anything because by definition EPIC IS NOT EVEN GOING "AROUND" THE EARTH. you have literally no idea how orbits work, do you?
>I’m alarmed I dare even respond to such bait, it even ignoring the image of the moon crossing the sun are you denying the reality of an eclipse?
i don't even understand what you're trying to get at. again: THE MOON IS ONLY MOVING TWO DEGREES ALONG IT'S ORBIT. NO NOTICEABLE SHADOW CHANGE IS EXPECTED AT ALL.
>why would the clouds change! Only 6-10 hour passed!
>intentionally misquoting me
wow, you really do have nothing to stand on.
>You didn't refute a fucking bit of what I said either you goddamn kike/kike puppet
Your post was literally just "don't post about this because news agencies will make mean articles about us redditors". There's nothing to refute because there was no substance to begin with faggot.
w-why was bart doing that??
Just did it again, you're not making a very good case for yourself.
>be rocket.
>enter atmosphere reverse-aerodynamically.
>land with reverse thrusters less than two seconds later
Let’s have a physics lesson, Sup Forums. How fast was reentry and how much thrust was produced. Reminder unless the rocket accelerated toward earth by its own volition (why?) gravity is only 9.8 m/s.
Again I point out that this fakery is almost certainly produced to either
>mock your retardation
Or
>wake you up.
Are you failing the cosmic intelligence test? Look closer.
>Why is the terminator line on the moon on the opposite side from the terminator line on the earth.
hint: it's not the terminator line. want to know why? want to know why i'm completely sure that it's not the terminator line, and is instead just the moon being cut off from the edge of the optical image?
because a fucking terminator line is bumpy as fuck, and there are clear elongated crater shadows along it, retard.
>you're not making a very good case for yourself.
I better clean up my act before Buzzfeed writes an article about me.
>complete retard doesn't realize the video is just sped up
everybody point and laugh.
No, because the Apollo 8 image was taken with a handheld camera with a smaller focal length, aperture, etc. The moon is simply bigger in the Apollo 8 photo because it was much closer to the camera.
In the Apollo 8 photo the moon would be the floor and the toy would be the Earth, with the dartboard being empty background space. Taken with a short focal length similar to the 14mm example.
In the DSCOVR photo the toy would be the moon and the dartboard would be the Earth. Taken with a long focal length similar to the 135mm example.
See OP. This shit is so fucking fake I would have asked for a Theatre ticket refund in 2002 if tits weren’t thrown on the screen in under a minute.
Do you honestly think OP image is real (source NASA)
More importantly, do you see nothing wrong with this picture (source NASA)
Iplease, for fucks sake, take some time analyzing this image. It shouldn’t take long but for fucks sake 6 seconds of your time is worth unraveling the second biggest deception ever.
Thank you for the explanation. I will look at it again.
>I beleive that which makes me feel better
This is how you sound.
Side note, does t not trouble you at all that you have to make up hypotheticals to discredit your debate opponents?
Most people in your position would remain silent, I assume you are to young for this board. Mods?