The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth General => Topic started by: trincot on October 14, 2012, 04:11:38 AM
-
Hello,
Will any of you watch this jump? I am not sure what will be broadcast, but it could be interesting for further discussion:
http://www.redbullstratos.com/live/ (http://www.redbullstratos.com/live/)
Supported by a team of experts Felix Baumgartner plans to ascend to 120,000 feet in a stratospheric balloon and make a freefall jump rushing toward earth at supersonic speeds before parachuting to the ground.
It seems the live broadcast is due in about 2 hours.
Greetings,
Trincot
-
Broadcasting live now:
# (http://#)!
-
im watchinnnn, I like the fishlens
-
bored by it now
-
Looks pretty.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/233/roundearth.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/233/roundearth.jpg/)
-
Indeed, a round disk. Also, just as I'm listening the guy is saying that you only see this because of the wide lense and it doesn't look like that if you're actually in the capsule.
-
Is it possible to take an image into Photoshop and compensate for the distortion of the lens?
-
Indeed, a round disk. Also, just as I'm listening the guy is saying that you only see this because of the wide lense and it doesn't look like that if you're actually in the capsule.
Actually, he said that at this height that you can begin to see the curvature of the earth, however it's not at pronounced as it's showing on the broadcast which is due to the wide angle lens.
-
The view out of the capsule when the door was open looked pretty darn flat.
-
The view out of the capsule when the door was open looked pretty darn flat.
The view out the door did look flat.
And the other angles looked very round.
-
There are several other threads in which the fish-eye lenses on those cameras distorted the horizon even at ground level during previous testing. Feel free to use the search function and find them. The only view without a wide-angle lens shows a flat horizon at the apex of the flight.
-
I've previously seen an argument on here that the earth appears rounded because that is the edge of the light from the sun, and that the earth actually continues on past that curve. So even if a photo from a non-wide angle lens were posted showing the curve of the horizon, the follow up reply would then say that isn't the edge of the earth, correct?
-
Some slight curvature may be expected from extremely high altitude, correct.
The choice in lens was made to give the impression of a jump from space. Even the background graphic was a rapidly spinning globe. I doubt it was anything nefarious, more for "Wow!" factor and publicity. The idea that the fish-eye views constitute proof that the world is a globe, however, is laughable.
-
I'm not sure if I was clear in my previous post.
Here's what I was getting at:
If a video from a regular lens showed a curved horizon, you guys have another rebuttal waiting to explain that. The whole fisheye argument is irrelevant. If someone went through the trouble of providing a video where fisheye wasn't involved, you wouldn't accept that as proof. You have some other reply for why the horizon looks curved.
Is this correct?
Edit: Changed "photo" to say "video".
-
Some slight curvature may be expected from extremely high altitude, correct.
-
Why would there be some curvature?
-
Why would there be some curvature?
Bendy Light
-
So you guys could make a thread that explains why a photo or video could never prove whether or not the earth is flat and cut down on a lot of pointless conversations about what kind of lens was used. "Bendy light" is the answer.
-
"Bendy light" is garbage. If there is curvature from altitude, it is due to the day-night terminator or the edge of the disc.
-
The view out of the capsule when the door was open looked pretty darn flat.
This really isn't the gotcha moment you would like to think it is, ya know. Draw a curved line to symbolize the curvature that we see of the earth from space. Now, think about the fact that what you saw from the door of that capsule was only a teeny tiny portion of that line. Finally, take your hands and cover most of your curved line so that only a small part of it, representative of the small portion you could see through the capsule door. Does it look curved? No, it looks flat, because it is only a tiny segment, so of course it looked "pretty darn flat", but that doesn't mean it was.
-
More details (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/science-technology/baumgartner-suit-absolutely-full-of-urine-2012101444834?fb_action_ids=10151113979364541&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%2210151113979364541%22%3A449745418409858%7D&action_type_map=%7B%2210151113979364541%22%3A%22og.likes%22%7D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D) about Baumgarter have emerged.
-
this guy just keeps getting cooler!
-
http://www.redbull.com/cs/Satellite/en_INT/Video/Exclusive--What-Felix-Saw-Red-Bull-Stratos-Live-021243270932859 (http://www.redbull.com/cs/Satellite/en_INT/Video/Exclusive--What-Felix-Saw-Red-Bull-Stratos-Live-021243270932859)
So is this footage of the edge of the disk?
A total hoax?
-
http://www.redbull.com/cs/Satellite/en_INT/Video/Exclusive--What-Felix-Saw-Red-Bull-Stratos-Live-021243270932859 (http://www.redbull.com/cs/Satellite/en_INT/Video/Exclusive--What-Felix-Saw-Red-Bull-Stratos-Live-021243270932859)
So is this footage of the edge of the disk?
A total hoax?
Not at all. It's exactly what one would expect to see when viewing video from high above the flat Earth taken with a camera that causes severe distortion.
-
Is Felix in on the conspiracy? Did he see a flat horizon that he has to shut up about?
-
Is Felix in on the conspiracy? Did he see a flat horizon that he has to shut up about?
Actually Felix didn't see much of anything, as his visor misted up. ::)
As he ascended, there were fears the mission would once again be cancelled after he reported that the heating device in his visor was not working properly, causing it to mist up.
He said that he considered aborting the mission twice. Once while in the capsule when his visor began to fog up because of the coldness of his breath; the second at the beginning of the fall when he went into an uncontrollable spin.
-
the second at the beginning of the fall when he went into an uncontrollable spin.
Wasn't it already too late to abort when he was already falling?
-
the second at the beginning of the fall when he went into an uncontrollable spin.
Wasn't it already too late to abort when he was already falling?
I think he meant he considered pulling the drogue chute to stop the spin. Yes, this would not have stopped him from still achieving the height record, but it may have stopped him from achieving the speed record and most of the others.
-
Is Felix in on the conspiracy? Did he see a flat horizon that he has to shut up about?
What one's eyes see is not necessary the scientific truth. Illusions, mirages, refraction in atmosphere with different density...
-
Yes, even I agree that the footage is severely distorted by the visor.See how it actually changes as he looks at it?
-
In official photos it's pretty rounded, as well as camera crane:
(http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/7525/article211570412310c2b0.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/819/article211570412310c2b0.jpg/)
Here is the same picture and it is pretty flat:
(http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/5026/felixjump.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/194/felixjump.jpg/)
You can even see some ice-wall far far behind (joke:)
If you drag & drop one of these picture to Google Images page, you'll find the sources.
-
In official photos it's pretty rounded, as well as camera crane
...
Here is the same picture and it is pretty flat
...
If you drag & drop one of these picture to Google Images page, you'll find the sources.
Nice work. This is the kind of stuff worth copying and retaining because it clearly shows falsification.
A similar example is the official 1966 NASA photograph of Gemini 10's alleged space walk by astronaut Michael Collins which was proven to be a reworked photograph of Collins in an airplane fuselage two years earlier circa 1964. The original photo was actually published in Collins' 1974 book 'Carrying the Fire.' Ralph Rene, an ardent exposer of the moon landing hoaxes, was the first to notice this particular discrepancy.
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/nasa-photo-fakery (http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/nasa-photo-fakery)
http://ralphrene.com/books.html (http://ralphrene.com/books.html)
An abundant and well organized collection of pairs of photographs (fake photographs side-by-side their originals) like these can form a significant chapter in a book about the shape of the earth.
I will begin such a collection. An obvious category within this collection will be well publicized or officially endorsed photographs of the edge of the earth as round which are accompanied by originals exposing the rounded ones to be fake. Another category will be astronaut photos such as the Collins photos which tend to expose photos of floating in space as a complete farce. Yet another category will be the more obvious Apollo moon photo discrepancies.
-
A similar example is the official 1966 NASA photograph of Gemini 10's alleged space walk by astronaut Michael Collins which was proven to be a reworked photograph of Collins in an airplane fuselage two years earlier circa 1964. The original photo was actually published in Collins' 1974 book 'Carrying the Fire.' Ralph Rene, an ardent exposer of the moon landing hoaxes, was the first to notice this particular discrepancy.
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/nasa-photo-fakery (http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/nasa-photo-fakery)
http://ralphrene.com/books.html (http://ralphrene.com/books.html)
Can anyone provide any evidence that the "fake spacewalk" photo was ever presented by NASA as an official photo?
No? I didn't think so: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread566601/pg370 (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread566601/pg370)
-
In official photos it's pretty rounded, as well as camera crane
...
Here is the same picture and it is pretty flat
...
If you drag & drop one of these picture to Google Images page, you'll find the sources.
Nice work. This is the kind of stuff worth copying and retaining because it clearly shows falsification.
A similar example is the official 1966 NASA photograph of Gemini 10's alleged space walk by astronaut Michael Collins which was proven to be a reworked photograph of Collins in an airplane fuselage two years earlier circa 1964. The original photo was actually published in Collins' 1974 book 'Carrying the Fire.' Ralph Rene, an ardent exposer of the moon landing hoaxes, was the first to notice this particular discrepancy.
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/nasa-photo-fakery (http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/nasa-photo-fakery)
http://ralphrene.com/books.html (http://ralphrene.com/books.html)
An abundant and well organized collection of pairs of photographs (fake photographs side-by-side their originals) like these can form a significant chapter in a book about the shape of the earth.
I will begin such a collection. An obvious category within this collection will be well publicized or officially endorsed photographs of the edge of the earth as round which are accompanied by originals exposing the rounded ones to be fake. Another category will be astronaut photos such as the Collins photos which tend to expose photos of floating in space as a complete farce. Yet another category will be the more obvious Apollo moon photo discrepancies.
That roundness has to do with the camera lens, if you watch the video, the earth also becomes concave at some point
By the way, both photos and the video are obviously fake, you cant see any star(!)
-
That roundness has to do with the camera lens, if you watch the video, the earth also becomes concave at some point
By the way, both photos and the video are obviously fake, you cant see any star(!)
It's not completely dark, the sky is dark blue. Usually when there is a sun visible, usually you don't see any stars.
Also they could use some additional lighting, to have a better video quality.
-
That roundness has to do with the camera lens, if you watch the video, the earth also becomes concave at some point
By the way, both photos and the video are obviously fake, you cant see any star(!)
It's not completely dark, the sky is dark blue. Usually when there is a sun visible, usually you don't see any stars.
Also they could use some additional lighting, to have a better video quality.
I was being sarcastic, a sky with no stars was one of the argument people used to discredit moon landing videos.
-
Can anyone provide any evidence that the "fake spacewalk" photo was ever presented by NASA as an official photo?
Rene said NASA mailed it to him after he asked for it. The photo is also in Collins' 1974 autobiography.
By the way, both photos and the video are obviously fake, you cant see any star(!)
I was being sarcastic, a sky with no stars was one of the argument people used to discredit moon landing videos.
Hmm. Interesting observation none the less.
-
Can anyone provide any evidence that the "fake spacewalk" photo was ever presented by NASA as an official photo?
Rene said NASA mailed it to him after he asked for it.
Which photo? The space walk photo or the simulator photo?
The photo is also in Collins' 1974 autobiography.
Yes, I know. I provided a link explaining how it got there. However, I don't recall his autobiography being an official NASA document.