I don't see the problem.
Looks normal to me.
What you will see depends on many factors.
The camera-lens, settings, etc.
The distance from the earth from which the picture was taken.
The angle from which the picture was taken.
And possibly many other factors.
So....the Blue Marble picture is not a fake?Correct.
I don't see the problem.
Looks normal to me.
What you will see depends on many factors.
The camera-lens, settings, etc.
The distance from the earth from which the picture was taken.
The angle from which the picture was taken.
And possibly many other factors.
You are an idiot incapable of reading a post.
He's saying the surface area doesn't add up.I don't see the problem.
Looks normal to me.
What you will see depends on many factors.
The camera-lens, settings, etc.
The distance from the earth from which the picture was taken.
The angle from which the picture was taken.
And possibly many other factors.
You are an idiot incapable of reading a post.
No. I am not an idiot. And I am just an amateur photographer. But I do know a few things about photography.
So.......What's the problem with the picture ? What's impossible with it ?
I don't see the problem.
Looks normal to me.
What you will see depends on many factors.
The camera-lens, settings, etc.
The distance from the earth from which the picture was taken.
The angle from which the picture was taken.
And possibly many other factors.
You are an idiot incapable of reading a post.
He's saying the surface area doesn't add up.
He's saying the surface area doesn't add up.I don't see the problem.
Looks normal to me.
What you will see depends on many factors.
The camera-lens, settings, etc.
The distance from the earth from which the picture was taken.
The angle from which the picture was taken.
And possibly many other factors.
You are an idiot incapable of reading a post.
No. I am not an idiot. And I am just an amateur photographer. But I do know a few things about photography.
So.......What's the problem with the picture ? What's impossible with it ?
I don't see the problem.Not that I like to differ with someone of your experience, but Mike is certainly right about Antarctica.
Looks normal to me.
What you will see depends on many factors.
The camera-lens, settings, etc.
The distance from the earth from which the picture was taken.
The angle from which the picture was taken.
And possibly many other factors.
I think you’re overestimating what you’re not seeing. The following is based on the link below. I lined up the globe to match your picture.
I also think you are seeing more than half of Antarctica.
Mike
The Blue Marble
History
The photograph was taken about 5 hours and 6 minutes after launch of the Apollo 17 mission,[7] and about 1 hour 54 minutes after the spacecraft left its parking orbit around the Earth, to begin its trajectory to the Moon. The time of Apollo 17's launch, 12:33 a.m. EST, meant that Africa was in daylight during the early hours of the spacecraft's flight. With the December solstice approaching, Antarctica was also illuminated.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/Apollo17WorldReversed.jpg)
The photograph was originally taken upside down to what was widely distributed. The image was flipped to fit expectations of north-up orientation[
Look at the post you're defending. Blatant ignorance of every word of the OP. I will respond to trolls as they deserve.I don't see the problem.
Looks normal to me.
What you will see depends on many factors.
The camera-lens, settings, etc.
The distance from the earth from which the picture was taken.
The angle from which the picture was taken.
And possibly many other factors.
You are an idiot incapable of reading a post.
Interesting... Weren't you the one who started that thread about trolls where you were crying like a little bitch about people supposedly trolling when they disagree with you, calling other users names and not actually adding to the discussion? How does the above post of yours fit into that picture exactly? Are you actually fine with that kind of behavior as long as you are the one doing it?
This thread was perfectly clean until your worthless degrading post. So how about a nice little ban for our precious jrowe, mods? Just a suggestion :)
As kikael said, "This thread was perfectly clean until your worthless degrading post" with your:Look at the post you're defending. Blatant ignorance of every word of the OP. I will respond to trolls as they deserve.You are an idiot incapable of reading a post.
Interesting... Weren't you the one who started that thread about trolls where you were crying like a little bitch about people supposedly trolling when they disagree with you, calling other users names and not actually adding to the discussion? How does the above post of yours fit into that picture exactly? Are you actually fine with that kind of behavior as long as you are the one doing it?
This thread was perfectly clean until your worthless degrading post. So how about a nice little ban for our precious jrowe, mods? Just a suggestion :)
Why, are you scared?
You are an idiot incapable of reading a post.Sure Denspressure was being sarcastic in,
This is impossible!
As kikael said, "This thread was perfectly clean until your worthless degrading post" with your:You are an idiot incapable of reading a post.Sure Denspressure was being sarcastic in,This is impossible!
But how does this provoke a response like, "Blatant ignorance of every word of the OP"?
I don't see the problem.
Looks normal to me.
What you will see depends on many factors.
The camera-lens, settings, etc.
The distance from the earth from which the picture was taken.
The angle from which the picture was taken.
And possibly many other factors.
Please explain just what in Googleotomy's provokes an outburst like this from you?
You are an idiot too then, as you are incapable of noticing that I quoted a very specific post.I don't see the problem.
Looks normal to me.
What you will see depends on many factors.
The camera-lens, settings, etc.
The distance from the earth from which the picture was taken.
The angle from which the picture was taken.
And possibly many other factors.
Doesn't see the problem huh? Also doesn't even acknowledge ANY of what the OP said. I'd call that being an idiot, as you are now being if you are acting as though that's all clean and innocent.
I made one post calling out a troll. You're going to blame me for that?
You are an idiot incapable of reading a post.I see nothing that's not "clean and innocent" in that.
To compare, we may look at just one aspect of the RE model: gravity.But your claim, in
The model states that this is due to mass bending space, and this bending causing an attractive force. Both of these statements are unjustified: relying solely on supposing what the model predicts, over any alternatives. This is what an assumption is, and so we are left with two assumptions in the RE model.
How far up was camera when the photo was taken?
(https://i.imgur.com/qEC4G.png)
The Blue Marble
Photograph created in 1972
The Blue Marble is an image of the planet Earth made on December 7, 1972, by the crew of the Apollo 17 spacecraft at a distance of about 29,000 kilometers from the surface. It is one of the most reproduced images in human history. Wikipedia
Created: 7 December 1972
Please explain just what in Googleotomy's provokes an outburst like this from you?So it's an outburst now? It was one fucking line calling him out for blatantly ignoring every word of the OP.
I know you will accuse me of derailing the topic, but you've already done that, so who cares?Yes, I will call you out for that. No I did not derail the topic, i called someone out for ignoring it, you're just throwing a temper tantrum that anyone dared question a trolling roundie. If you actually care about DET, start a thread. But you won't, because you're not trying to ask a question, you're trying to distract and waste time, it's all you do. It's all you've done here.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Googleotomy's post. It doesn't ignore "every word of the OP". It's on top and he's trying to explain that there are a number of factors that can explain the perceived discrepancies, which to be honest, aren't expressed well enough to really warrant any replies at all. He should be grateful Google took the time to give him any information.QuotePlease explain just what in Googleotomy's provokes an outburst like this from you?So it's an outburst now? It was one fucking line calling him out for blatantly ignoring every word of the OP.
What is it about calling out such a blatantly trolling post that provokes an outburst like this from you?
I don't see the problem.
Looks normal to me.
What you will see depends on many factors.
The camera-lens, settings, etc.
The distance from the earth from which the picture was taken.
The angle from which the picture was taken.
And possibly many other factors.
You are an idiot incapable of reading a post.
So, the BLUE MARBLE!
Taken from a distance of 22 thousand kilometers or so through the porthole of the Apollo 17 CSM!
An incomplete portion of a totally sunlit half of the Earth, completely surrounded by "outer space!"
Compared to live color footage of Apollo 11 found in the following video (from 32:00-onward):
Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole...
Take a 3D Tour Inside the Apollo 11 Command Module(https://hips.hearstapps.com/pop.h-cdn.co/assets/16/29/1469215749-apollo11.gif?crop=1xw:1.0xh;center,top&resize=768:*)Yesterday, we celebrated the 47th anniversary of the Apollo 11 mission, the historic initiative that landed astronauts on the moon. The only part of the Apollo 11 spacecraft to make it back to earth was the command module "Columbia," where astronauts Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Buzz Aldrin lived throughout the eight day mission.
Since its landing on July 24th, 1969, the Columbia has been kept sealed in plexiglass at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, DC. That is, until recently, when the software company Autodesk was allowed a rare opportunity to use their high-tech 3D scanning equipment to create a simulation of the spacecraft that anyone on the internet can explore.
See interior and exterior in, Take a 3D Tour Inside the Apollo 11 Command Module (https://3d.si.edu/apollo11cm/)
Quote from: Popular Mechanics, Take a 3D Tour Inside the Apollo 11 Command Module (https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a22006/3d-tour-apollo-11/)
"A Funny Thing..." Moon Conspiracy debunked pt 1 of 2, GreaterSapien | A Funny Thing..." Moon Conspiracy debunked pt 2 of 2, GreaterSapien |
So, the BLUE MARBLE!There is no cardboard cutout. Sibrel lied to you. He lied about it being classified footage. He lied about it being a circular window (it was trapezoidal shaped). And then he cut out part of the footage that proves him wrong.
Taken from a distance of 22 thousand kilometers or so through the porthole of the Apollo 17 CSM!
An incomplete portion of a totally sunlit half of the Earth, completely surrounded by "outer space!"
Compared to live color footage of Apollo 11 found in the following video (from 32:00-onward):
Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole...
Why would anyone wants to check out the arguments of enthousiastic amatures when it comes to Apollo footage and the blue marble 'through a window ' ?So, the BLUE MARBLE!There is no cardboard cutout. Sibrel lied to you. He lied about it being classified footage. He lied about it being a circular window (it was trapezoidal shaped). And then he cut out part of the footage that proves him wrong.
Taken from a distance of 22 thousand kilometers or so through the porthole of the Apollo 17 CSM!
An incomplete portion of a totally sunlit half of the Earth, completely surrounded by "outer space!"
Compared to live color footage of Apollo 11 found in the following video (from 32:00-onward):
Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole...
The globe seen shows current for the time weather patterns and rotation.
described here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny7.html
and continued here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny8.html
but I bet you won't look at the video or read the links
I am sorry...So, the BLUE MARBLE!
Taken from a distance of 22 thousand kilometers or so through the porthole of the Apollo 17 CSM!
An incomplete portion of a totally sunlit half of the Earth, completely surrounded by "outer space!"
Compared to live color footage of Apollo 11 found in the following video (from 32:00-onward):
Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole...
Who says that "the entire Earth fills the porthole"? Bart Sibrel? If he claimed that the sky was blue, I'd immediately race outside and double check!
So, I'd advise you to double-check all that he claims, such as, "once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole".QuoteTake a 3D Tour Inside the Apollo 11 Command Module(https://hips.hearstapps.com/pop.h-cdn.co/assets/16/29/1469215749-apollo11.gif?crop=1xw:1.0xh;center,top&resize=768:*)Yesterday, we celebrated the 47th anniversary of the Apollo 11 mission, the historic initiative that landed astronauts on the moon. The only part of the Apollo 11 spacecraft to make it back to earth was the command module "Columbia," where astronauts Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Buzz Aldrin lived throughout the eight day mission.
Since its landing on July 24th, 1969, the Columbia has been kept sealed in plexiglass at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, DC. That is, until recently, when the software company Autodesk was allowed a rare opportunity to use their high-tech 3D scanning equipment to create a simulation of the spacecraft that anyone on the internet can explore.
See interior and exterior in, Take a 3D Tour Inside the Apollo 11 Command Module (https://3d.si.edu/apollo11cm/)
Quote from: Popular Mechanics, Take a 3D Tour Inside the Apollo 11 Command Module (https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a22006/3d-tour-apollo-11/)
So, Mr Total Lacking, are you still going to claim that "once the cardboard cutout is removed from the ( ;D squarish ;D) porthole how the entire ( ;D squarish ;D) Earth fills the porthole"?
Tou might (not) be interested in these:
"A Funny Thing..." Moon Conspiracy debunked pt 1 of 2, GreaterSapien
A Funny Thing..." Moon Conspiracy debunked pt 2 of 2, GreaterSapien
Now what was your problem with "Blue marble (AS17-148-22727)" again?
Sibrel did not release the footage or control the footage from Apollo 11 footage 32:00 - on...NASA did.So, the BLUE MARBLE!There is no cardboard cutout. Sibrel lied to you. He lied about it being classified footage. He lied about it being a circular window (it was trapezoidal shaped). And then he cut out part of the footage that proves him wrong.
Taken from a distance of 22 thousand kilometers or so through the porthole of the Apollo 17 CSM!
An incomplete portion of a totally sunlit half of the Earth, completely surrounded by "outer space!"
Compared to live color footage of Apollo 11 found in the following video (from 32:00-onward):
Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole...
The globe seen shows current for the time weather patterns and rotation.
described here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny7.html
and continued here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny8.html
but I bet you won't look at the video or read the links
Sure, "Sibrel had nothing to do with the footage depicted from 32:00 forward", but he had everything to do with the deceptive with the commentary.I am sorry...So, the BLUE MARBLE!
Taken from a distance of 22 thousand kilometers or so through the porthole of the Apollo 17 CSM!
An incomplete portion of a totally sunlit half of the Earth, completely surrounded by "outer space!"
Compared to live color footage of Apollo 11 found in the following video (from 32:00-onward):
Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole...
Who says that "the entire Earth fills the porthole"? Bart Sibrel? If he claimed that the sky was blue, I'd immediately race outside and double check!
So, I'd advise you to double-check all that he claims, such as, "once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole".QuoteTake a 3D Tour Inside the Apollo 11 Command Module
<< Moved down to answer >>
Yesterday, we celebrated the 47th anniversary of the Apollo 11 mission, the historic initiative that landed astronauts on the moon. The only part of the Apollo 11 spacecraft to make it back to earth was the command module "Columbia," where astronauts Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Buzz Aldrin lived throughout the eight day mission.
Since its landing on July 24th, 1969, the Columbia has been kept sealed in plexiglass at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, DC. That is, until recently, when the software company Autodesk was allowed a rare opportunity to use their high-tech 3D scanning equipment to create a simulation of the spacecraft that anyone on the internet can explore.
See interior and exterior in, Take a 3D Tour Inside the Apollo 11 Command Module (https://3d.si.edu/apollo11cm/)
Quote from: Popular Mechanics, Take a 3D Tour Inside the Apollo 11 Command Module (https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a22006/3d-tour-apollo-11/)
So, Mr Total Lacking, are you still going to claim that "once the cardboard cutout is removed from the ( ;D squarish ;D) porthole how the entire ( ;D squarish ;D) Earth fills the porthole"?
Tou might (not) be interested in these:
"A Funny Thing..." Moon Conspiracy debunked pt 1 of 2, GreaterSapien
A Funny Thing..." Moon Conspiracy debunked pt 2 of 2, GreaterSapien
Now what was your problem with "Blue marble (AS17-148-22727)" again?
Was there something in either of these videos that actually debunks the video I posted?
Sibrel had nothing to do with the footage depicted from 32:00 forward. Came straight from NASA.
Why would anyone wants to check out the arguments of enthousiastic amatures when it comes to Apollo footage and the blue marble 'through a window ' ?So, the BLUE MARBLE!There is no cardboard cutout. Sibrel lied to you. He lied about it being classified footage. He lied about it being a circular window (it was trapezoidal shaped). And then he cut out part of the footage that proves him wrong.
Taken from a distance of 22 thousand kilometers or so through the porthole of the Apollo 17 CSM!
An incomplete portion of a totally sunlit half of the Earth, completely surrounded by "outer space!"
Compared to live color footage of Apollo 11 found in the following video (from 32:00-onward):
Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole...
The globe seen shows current for the time weather patterns and rotation.
described here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny7.html
and continued here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny8.html
but I bet you won't look at the video or read the links
While the realworld award winning experts like David Percy and his fantastic aulis site, Massimo Mazzucco and Marcus Allen (also a former professional photographer contrary to the amatures at clavius ) put their award winning names at risk !!!!
So who is your award winning photographer who claimed the Apollo footage is 100% genuine ?
Why are there only enthousiastic amatures like Jay Windley & co defending the footage ?
Ready to give me some real names in defence of the Apollo footage ?
And 'lightguy' will not cut it ! ;D
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_loUDS4c3Cs/maxresdefault.jpg)
Sure, "Sibrel had nothing to do with the footage depicted from 32:00 forward", but he had everything to do with the deceptive with the commentary.No he didn't.
And you so kindly spelled out the heart of the issue, with "Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole..."Horse hockey.
I'll move the image of the Apollo 11 Command Module so can see how deceitful those words were.(https://hips.hearstapps.com/pop.h-cdn.co/assets/16/29/1469215749-apollo11.gif?crop=1xw:1.0xh;center,top&resize=768:*)Yes, the images of earth were circular, but the windows of the Apollo 11 Command Module are almost square!
So, if "the entire Earth fills the porthole" the ;D ::) ;D earth must be square ;D ::) ;D! There are many other discrepancies, but look at the videos.
So, those videos are not necessary for that bit, but just to show how deceptive Bart Sibrel really is.Sibrel is not my hero.
Like to comment on your hero, Bart Sibrel?
Our dutchy loves his redicule and his enthousiastic amatures!Why would anyone wants to check out the arguments of enthousiastic amatures when it comes to Apollo footage and the blue marble 'through a window ' ?So, the BLUE MARBLE!There is no cardboard cutout. Sibrel lied to you. He lied about it being classified footage. He lied about it being a circular window (it was trapezoidal shaped). And then he cut out part of the footage that proves him wrong.
Taken from a distance of 22 thousand kilometers or so through the porthole of the Apollo 17 CSM!
An incomplete portion of a totally sunlit half of the Earth, completely surrounded by "outer space!"
Compared to live color footage of Apollo 11 found in the following video (from 32:00-onward):
Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole...
The globe seen shows current for the time weather patterns and rotation.
described here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny7.html
and continued here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny8.html
but I bet you won't look at the video or read the links
While the realworld award winning experts like David Percy and his fantastic aulis site, Massimo Mazzucco and Marcus Allen (also a former professional photographer contrary to the amatures at clavius ) put their award winning names at risk !!!!
So who is your award winning photographer who claimed the Apollo footage is 100% genuine ?
Why are there only enthousiastic amatures like Jay Windley & co defending the footage ?
Ready to give me some real names in defence of the Apollo footage ?
And 'lightguy' will not cut it ! ;D(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_loUDS4c3Cs/maxresdefault.jpg)
Well, would you look at that, appealing to authority only when is convenient for your argument, and not only that, but the authority of someone that has nothing to do with Earth's shape...You need to up you game dutchy, because this is too lame, even for you
Debunking Lunar Landing Conspiracies with Maxwell and VXGI, NVIDIA | Nvidia Debunks Conspiracy Theories About Moon Landing |
Because they might actually be open minded and want to learn that Sibrel did nothing but lie and his suggestions on how the footage was done don't work. Everyone knows that doesn't include you so you can go back to sleep.Why would anyone wants to check out the arguments of enthousiastic amatures when it comes to Apollo footage and the blue marble 'through a window ' ?So, the BLUE MARBLE!There is no cardboard cutout. Sibrel lied to you. He lied about it being classified footage. He lied about it being a circular window (it was trapezoidal shaped). And then he cut out part of the footage that proves him wrong.
Taken from a distance of 22 thousand kilometers or so through the porthole of the Apollo 17 CSM!
An incomplete portion of a totally sunlit half of the Earth, completely surrounded by "outer space!"
Compared to live color footage of Apollo 11 found in the following video (from 32:00-onward):
Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole...
The globe seen shows current for the time weather patterns and rotation.
described here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny7.html
and continued here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny8.html
but I bet you won't look at the video or read the links
While the realworld award winning experts like David Percy and his fantastic aulis site, Massimo Mazzucco and Marcus Allen (also a former professional photographer contrary to the amatures at clavius ) put their award winning names at risk !!!!You think they are experts? That says a lot.
So who is your award winning photographer who claimed the Apollo footage is 100% genuine ?Strawman much? Please show where I claimed anyone said it is all 100% genuine.
Why are there only enthousiastic amatures like Jay Windley & co defending the footage ?Sure. Let me get right on that. I'll do a whole bunch of work for you to promptly ignore. Maybe, if you can show you won't just immediately dismiss everything I might be tempted to bother. But based on your track record, I doubt it. In case you didn't notice, I wasn't responding to you in the first place.
Ready to give me some real names in defence of the Apollo footage ?
And 'lightguy' will not cut it ! ;D
NASA released all of it. Most of it was broadcast live at the time. Sibrel lied about it being classified.Sibrel did not release the footage or control the footage from Apollo 11 footage 32:00 - on...NASA did.So, the BLUE MARBLE!There is no cardboard cutout. Sibrel lied to you. He lied about it being classified footage. He lied about it being a circular window (it was trapezoidal shaped). And then he cut out part of the footage that proves him wrong.
Taken from a distance of 22 thousand kilometers or so through the porthole of the Apollo 17 CSM!
An incomplete portion of a totally sunlit half of the Earth, completely surrounded by "outer space!"
Compared to live color footage of Apollo 11 found in the following video (from 32:00-onward):
Please note once the cardboard cutout is removed from the porthole how the entire Earth fills the porthole...
The globe seen shows current for the time weather patterns and rotation.
described here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny7.html
and continued here
http://clavius.org/bibfunny8.html
but I bet you won't look at the video or read the links
What does Collins remove from the window? Aldrin's ass? His ass? Your ass?
NASA released all of it. Most of it was broadcast live at the time. Sibrel lied about it being classified.frenat, quit behaving like a disingenuous asshat.
Sibrel cut out the part of the footage that shows them moving back from the window. Nothing was in the window. A cardboard cutout would not provide the effect claimed. Sibrel lied to you and you bought it.
Nope. Current weather was shown matching the whole globe. Not possible from LEO.
The entire Earth cannot even be seen from LEO, which is exactly where the images in question were taken.
It fills the entire WINDOW, regardless of shape.It does not. It moves around in the window. The claim that an astronaut's arm gets in front of it is when you see the edge of the window.
Collins placed some kind of insert into the porthole to give the illusion the Earth was circular. When he remove the cutout, the Earth filled the entire porthole and no discernible shape could be ascertained.Nope. Nothing placed in the window. Again, the image moves around in the window when the camera is moved. When the camera is moved back (part that was cut out deceptively by Sibrel) and the iris was opened and the inside lights brought up, there is a glare on the window.
the lights are down. There is nothing in the window. A cutout would NOT allow a viewing of full globe weather from LEO. It would not stop the quick rotation that should be seen in LEO.NASA released all of it. Most of it was broadcast live at the time. Sibrel lied about it being classified.frenat, quit behaving like a disingenuous asshat.
Sibrel cut out the part of the footage that shows them moving back from the window. Nothing was in the window. A cardboard cutout would not provide the effect claimed. Sibrel lied to you and you bought it.
It is right there in the video.
The entire module is blacked out.
Collins clearly removes something from the window.
A cutout of any material would provide the effect exactly as stated in the video.
Every single word of your reply is not true.Nope. Current weather was shown matching the whole globe. Not possible from LEO.
The entire Earth cannot even be seen from LEO, which is exactly where the images in question were taken.It fills the entire WINDOW, regardless of shape.It does not. It moves around in the window. The claim that an astronaut's arm gets in front of it is when you see the edge of the window.Collins placed some kind of insert into the porthole to give the illusion the Earth was circular. When he remove the cutout, the Earth filled the entire porthole and no discernible shape could be ascertained.Nope. Nothing placed in the window. Again, the image moves around in the window when the camera is moved. When the camera is moved back (part that was cut out deceptively by Sibrel) and the iris was opened and the inside lights brought up, there is a glare on the window.
Nope. It does show current weather at the time for the whole globe, not just a portion which would be seen if a cutout was used. It does move around in the window as the camera is moved. and there is a glare on the window when the lights are brought up. I have not lied.Every single word of your reply is not true.Nope. Current weather was shown matching the whole globe. Not possible from LEO.
The entire Earth cannot even be seen from LEO, which is exactly where the images in question were taken.It fills the entire WINDOW, regardless of shape.It does not. It moves around in the window. The claim that an astronaut's arm gets in front of it is when you see the edge of the window.Collins placed some kind of insert into the porthole to give the illusion the Earth was circular. When he remove the cutout, the Earth filled the entire porthole and no discernible shape could be ascertained.Nope. Nothing placed in the window. Again, the image moves around in the window when the camera is moved. When the camera is moved back (part that was cut out deceptively by Sibrel) and the iris was opened and the inside lights brought up, there is a glare on the window.
In addition, the portion in question was never released for broadcast.
As far as "broadcast live," is concerned, the feed was never released to broadcast stations. If a network wanted to transmit visual coverage, they needed to be in place at Houston, with a camera, pointed at a large monitor.
Incorrect! the networks did not have to point their camera at a large monitor, they received a clean feed.Every single word of your reply is not true.Nope. Current weather was shown matching the whole globe. Not possible from LEO.
The entire Earth cannot even be seen from LEO, which is exactly where the images in question were taken.It fills the entire WINDOW, regardless of shape.It does not. It moves around in the window. The claim that an astronaut's arm gets in front of it is when you see the edge of the window.Collins placed some kind of insert into the porthole to give the illusion the Earth was circular. When he remove the cutout, the Earth filled the entire porthole and no discernible shape could be ascertained.Nope. Nothing placed in the window. Again, the image moves around in the window when the camera is moved. When the camera is moved back (part that was cut out deceptively by Sibrel) and the iris was opened and the inside lights brought up, there is a glare on the window.
In addition, the portion in question was never released for broadcast.
As far as "broadcast live," is concerned, the feed was never released to broadcast stations. If a network wanted to transmit visual coverage, they needed to be in place at Houston, with a camera, pointed at a large monitor.
Nope. It does show current weather at the time for the whole globe, not just a portion which would be seen if a cutout was used. It does move around in the window as the camera is moved. and there is a glare on the window when the lights are brought up. I have not lied.frenat, the entire "globe" was not even shown in the video.
Your source can claim whatever it wants.Incorrect! the networks did not have to point their camera at a large monitor, they received a clean feed.Every single word of your reply is not true.Nope. Current weather was shown matching the whole globe. Not possible from LEO.
The entire Earth cannot even be seen from LEO, which is exactly where the images in question were taken.It fills the entire WINDOW, regardless of shape.It does not. It moves around in the window. The claim that an astronaut's arm gets in front of it is when you see the edge of the window.Collins placed some kind of insert into the porthole to give the illusion the Earth was circular. When he remove the cutout, the Earth filled the entire porthole and no discernible shape could be ascertained.Nope. Nothing placed in the window. Again, the image moves around in the window when the camera is moved. When the camera is moved back (part that was cut out deceptively by Sibrel) and the iris was opened and the inside lights brought up, there is a glare on the window.
In addition, the portion in question was never released for broadcast.
As far as "broadcast live," is concerned, the feed was never released to broadcast stations. If a network wanted to transmit visual coverage, they needed to be in place at Houston, with a camera, pointed at a large monitor.
Source: https://www.honeysucklecreek.net/Apollo_11/index.html At the bottom of page, section: "Busting myths about the Apollo 11 TV"
Can you list your source?Your source can claim whatever it wants.Incorrect! the networks did not have to point their camera at a large monitor, they received a clean feed.Every single word of your reply is not true.Nope. Current weather was shown matching the whole globe. Not possible from LEO.
The entire Earth cannot even be seen from LEO, which is exactly where the images in question were taken.It fills the entire WINDOW, regardless of shape.It does not. It moves around in the window. The claim that an astronaut's arm gets in front of it is when you see the edge of the window.Collins placed some kind of insert into the porthole to give the illusion the Earth was circular. When he remove the cutout, the Earth filled the entire porthole and no discernible shape could be ascertained.Nope. Nothing placed in the window. Again, the image moves around in the window when the camera is moved. When the camera is moved back (part that was cut out deceptively by Sibrel) and the iris was opened and the inside lights brought up, there is a glare on the window.
In addition, the portion in question was never released for broadcast.
As far as "broadcast live," is concerned, the feed was never released to broadcast stations. If a network wanted to transmit visual coverage, they needed to be in place at Houston, with a camera, pointed at a large monitor.
Source: https://www.honeysucklecreek.net/Apollo_11/index.html At the bottom of page, section: "Busting myths about the Apollo 11 TV"
I can claim anything I want.
Dueling sources.
Choose.
I provided the video so far.Can you list your source?Your source can claim whatever it wants.Incorrect! the networks did not have to point their camera at a large monitor, they received a clean feed.Every single word of your reply is not true.Nope. Current weather was shown matching the whole globe. Not possible from LEO.
The entire Earth cannot even be seen from LEO, which is exactly where the images in question were taken.It fills the entire WINDOW, regardless of shape.It does not. It moves around in the window. The claim that an astronaut's arm gets in front of it is when you see the edge of the window.Collins placed some kind of insert into the porthole to give the illusion the Earth was circular. When he remove the cutout, the Earth filled the entire porthole and no discernible shape could be ascertained.Nope. Nothing placed in the window. Again, the image moves around in the window when the camera is moved. When the camera is moved back (part that was cut out deceptively by Sibrel) and the iris was opened and the inside lights brought up, there is a glare on the window.
In addition, the portion in question was never released for broadcast.
As far as "broadcast live," is concerned, the feed was never released to broadcast stations. If a network wanted to transmit visual coverage, they needed to be in place at Houston, with a camera, pointed at a large monitor.
Source: https://www.honeysucklecreek.net/Apollo_11/index.html At the bottom of page, section: "Busting myths about the Apollo 11 TV"
I can claim anything I want.
Dueling sources.
Choose.
semantics. the weather shown on 3/4 of the globe matched the then current weather. Wouldn't have happened if viewing a smaller area in LEONope. It does show current weather at the time for the whole globe, not just a portion which would be seen if a cutout was used. It does move around in the window as the camera is moved. and there is a glare on the window when the lights are brought up. I have not lied.frenat, the entire "globe" was not even shown in the video.
The Earth was depicted as being 3/4 phase in the video.
Only after the cutout was removed from the window does the Earth fill the entire window.There was no cutout. The part where it is claimed a cutout is being removed is just somebody moving in front of the camera after the camera has been moved back (the part Sibrel doesn't like to show you). the window is not filled until it shines with glare (due to a coating on the window IIRC) after the lights are brought up. At the time they claim something is removed, nothing about the image changed.
Oh...so now it is "semantics..."semantics. the weather shown on 3/4 of the globe matched the then current weather. Wouldn't have happened if viewing a smaller area in LEONope. It does show current weather at the time for the whole globe, not just a portion which would be seen if a cutout was used. It does move around in the window as the camera is moved. and there is a glare on the window when the lights are brought up. I have not lied.frenat, the entire "globe" was not even shown in the video.
The Earth was depicted as being 3/4 phase in the video.
There was no cutout. The part where it is claimed a cutout is being removed is just somebody moving in front of the camera after the camera has been moved back (the part Sibrel doesn't like to show you). the window is not filled until it shines with glare (due to a coating on the window IIRC) after the lights are brought up. At the time they claim something is removed, nothing about the image changed.You can keep typing this all you want.
As they weren't in LEO there is no issue. Had it been LEO then what little was seen would not match anything and would move past very quickly. That is why some hoaxies later made the claim of a transparency being used. That doesn't work as it was live, the image moves around in the window and there is some rotation seen (though far less than if in LEO)Oh...so now it is "semantics..."semantics. the weather shown on 3/4 of the globe matched the then current weather. Wouldn't have happened if viewing a smaller area in LEONope. It does show current weather at the time for the whole globe, not just a portion which would be seen if a cutout was used. It does move around in the window as the camera is moved. and there is a glare on the window when the lights are brought up. I have not lied.frenat, the entire "globe" was not even shown in the video.
The Earth was depicted as being 3/4 phase in the video.
A person is not capable of seeing 3/4 globe from LEO and there is no way for you to personally identify every weather pattern visible in the video.
Not a lie. Nothing is removed from the window. Sibrel TELLS you there is and you believe it without question. The fact remains that the image moves around in the window as the camera moves and current weather is shown.There was no cutout. The part where it is claimed a cutout is being removed is just somebody moving in front of the camera after the camera has been moved back (the part Sibrel doesn't like to show you). the window is not filled until it shines with glare (due to a coating on the window IIRC) after the lights are brought up. At the time they claim something is removed, nothing about the image changed.You can keep typing this all you want.
It does not change the fact Collins is shown in the video removing something from the window at which point the Earth ceases to be depicted at 3/4 and fills the entire window.
Only possible from LEO.
Stop behaving like a total jack ass and quit typing blatant lies.
As they weren't in LEO there is no issue. Had it been LEO then what little was seen would not match anything and would move past very quickly. That is why some hoaxies later made the claim of a transparency being used. That doesn't work as it was live, the image moves around in the window and there is some rotation seen (though far less than if in LEO)People can simply watch the footage on this video from 32:00 minutes forward and come to their own conclusion. They will readily see the insert removed from the window. They will readily hear Armstrong state the camera is placed against the window. They will readily see an arm get in between the camera and the window.
32:00 forward to about 40:00.
Not a lie. Nothing is removed from the window. Sibrel TELLS you there is and you believe it without question. The fact remains that the image moves around in the window as the camera moves and current weather is shown.
They will see those if they watch and listen to the voiceover telling them what to see. If they watch it without they will not see an insert as there is none and the image moves around in the window. They'll see the edge of the window briefly get in the way. On the footage provided by Sibrel they won't see when the camera is clearly moved back from the window because Sibrel doesn't want you to see that so he deceptively cut it out.As they weren't in LEO there is no issue. Had it been LEO then what little was seen would not match anything and would move past very quickly. That is why some hoaxies later made the claim of a transparency being used. That doesn't work as it was live, the image moves around in the window and there is some rotation seen (though far less than if in LEO)People can simply watch the footage on this video from 32:00 minutes forward and come to their own conclusion. They will readily see the insert removed from the window. They will readily hear Armstrong state the camera is placed against the window. They will readily see an arm get in between the camera and the window.
They will readily see you a clearly lying.Still not lying.
Still not lying. But thank you for proving you didn't watch either of the videos posted.32:00 forward to about 40:00.
Not a lie. Nothing is removed from the window. Sibrel TELLS you there is and you believe it without question. The fact remains that the image moves around in the window as the camera moves and current weather is shown.
Anyone can clearly see you are lying.
the lights are down. There is nothing in the window. A cutout would NOT allow a viewing of full globe weather from LEO. It would not stop the quick rotation that should be seen in LEO.LMMFAO!
LEO has an orbit time of about 90 minutes. Anything in the window would move past quickly.the lights are down. There is nothing in the window. A cutout would NOT allow a viewing of full globe weather from LEO. It would not stop the quick rotation that should be seen in LEO.LMMFAO!
"Quick rotation..."
What quick rotation?
A quick rotation of what?
WTF are you talking about?