Earth to be Proven Round Soon

I didn't take the picture in my backyard. Anymore than NASA takes theirs of objects in space (or I suspect you took yours in your backyard). I showed how easy it is to modify a picture of a lousy to scale model and make it look like it was a picture of something actually in space. It was good enough quality for you to accept it was from NASA. It fit the preconceptions you have of a photo of an object in space. It wasn't. It was a lousy model. I just played with it for under five minutes and made it look damn near NASA-like. What could NASA do with pictures on their budget?!

I didn't take the picture in my backyard. Anymore than NASA takes theirs of objects in space (or I suspect you took yours in your backyard). I showed how easy it is to modify a picture of a lousy to scale model and make it look like it was a picture of something actually in space. It was good enough quality for you to accept it was from NASA. It fit the preconceptions you have of a photo of an object in space. It wasn't. It was a lousy model. I just played with it for under five minutes and made it look damn near NASA-like. What could NASA do with pictures on their budget?!

I'll grant you that it's much easier to make it look like it was taken on the ground, but to make it look like it was taken in space?  Nope, not easy, sorry.  Try the reverse and you'll find it quite difficult.  Many movies with millions of dollars for special effects have tried and all have failed to make it look perfect.  I initially assumed it was a ground picture and had to go back to correct myself and ask if you were saying it was taken in space because I noticed the angle was a little odd for a ground based picture.  It wasn't long before I realized you were lying, though to be fair I didn't know what the truth was.  Obviously you've had plenty of experience in lying.  That said, if I were to show you the station in person you'd have absolutely no recourse.

The only reason you suspected it was not a picture from NASA is because I retracted my claim that it was. It proves how the public takes "evidence" for granted when it is provided by the conspiracy.

The only reason you suspected it was not a picture from NASA is because I retracted my claim that it was. It proves how the public takes "evidence" for granted when it is provided by the conspiracy.

No, it proves that all amateur astronomers must be in on the conspiracy and apparently we use digital manipulation and scale models to support NASA and the "conspiracy".  I think this has inspired me to step up my participation in sidewalk astronomy events, maybe even start organizing some new ones. 

 It proves you and NASA could easily make pictures of "objects in orbit". Have fun with your sidewalk astronomy. Everyone needs a hobby.

Has anyone noticed the side supposedly on the side of rational science is the side that seems consistently to resort to personal attacks, hyperbole and irrationality when confronted with a conflicting point of view?  I'm not advocating one side or the other, I've been lurking this forum for a long time but just now signed up for an account.  It definitely seems like the FE side of things has a better sense of humor.  Kudos to ski for a well-done ruse and a 2 minute minor penalty to messierhunter for poor form. 

And the only way to actually end the FE and RE debate once and for all, is to image earth from space, it's convenient how it's always an impossibility no matter what

Ski, you won't win the arguement. Your statements are invalid and you have no proof to back you up. Not only is the Earth round, you have no proof to back you up. Just saying "they are faked" doesn't make them faked.

Ski, you won't win the arguement. Your statements are invalid and you have no proof to back you up. Not only is the Earth round, you have no proof to back you up. Just saying "they are faked" doesn't make them faked.

I'm not the one claiming my picture proves the shape of the earth. I simply showed how easy it is to manipulate an image to depict a "space picture". That NASA can do the same thing and pass it as "proof" is a given conclusion. If they are going to make bizarre claims like "This is from space" they should back it up. You round earthers are a strange lot.

Actually, I think he did a great job showing that a photograph that _he_admits_to_faking_ was able to fool a so-called "sidewalk astronomer".  Seems like he has a case for sewing seeds of doubt.  

Quote from: ROUND000 on June 26, 2008, 03:09:14 PM

Ski, you won't win the arguement. Your statements are invalid and you have no proof to back you up. Not only is the Earth round, you have no proof to back you up. Just saying "they are faked" doesn't make them faked.

I'm not the one claiming my picture proves the shape of the earth. I simply showed how easy it is to manipulate an image to depict a "space picture". That NASA can do the same thing and pass it as "proof" is a given conclusion. If they are going to make bizarre claims like "This is from space" they should back it up. You round earthers are a strange lot.

Because it's easier to fake a picture of the ISS in orbit that means that all pictures of ISS in orbit are fake?  Is that what you are trying to say?  Is it so hard to believe that someone may actually be able to take a true and accurate (albeit, somewhat fuzzy) picture of a rather large object in a relatively low earth orbit?

We will never get into space. It is impossible.If you need proof, just look down at the ground. It is flat. Therefore, the world is flat.

Because it's easier to fake a picture of the ISS in orbit that means that all pictures of ISS in orbit are fake?  Is that what you are trying to say?  Is it so hard to believe that someone may actually be able to take a true and accurate (albeit, somewhat fuzzy) picture of a rather large object in a relatively low earth orbit?

It certainly increases my skepticism when people are claiming the pictures are "proof" of the impossible, yes.

We will never get into space. It is impossible.If you need proof, just look down at the ground. It is flat. Therefore, the world is flat.

Actually it is most certainly not flat, it is bumpy. Bumpy and round. Spaceflight is possible. We wouldn't fake images of planets we've never been to. And of course you have no proof either. FAIL.

Quote from: markjo on June 26, 2008, 04:04:53 PM

Because it's easier to fake a picture of the ISS in orbit that means that all pictures of ISS in orbit are fake?  Is that what you are trying to say?  Is it so hard to believe that someone may actually be able to take a true and accurate (albeit, somewhat fuzzy) picture of a rather large object in a relatively low earth orbit?

It certainly increases my skepticism when people are claiming the pictures are "proof" of the impossible, yes.

And yet you refuse to even try to replicate the observation yourself.  Go ahead, dare to try the impossible.  If you limit yourself to only what is possible, then life gets boring after a while.

I do not have a telescope of sufficient power even if I so desired.

Do you know anyone rich?

Rich people do not call themselves "rich".


Unless their name happens to be Richard and they enjoy the nickname.

Rich people do not call themselves "rich".


Unless their name happens to be Richard and they enjoy the nickname.

I think Bill Gates would call himself rich. I think.

But I technically know someone with a few million dollars, does that count?

If you need proof, just look down at the ground. It is flat. Therefore, the world is flat.

When I look at the ground, I see my carpet. Therefore, the world is covered by my carpet.

OWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!11

I think Bill Gates would call himself rich. I think.

But I technically know someone with a few million dollars, does that count?

I would be surprised to hear Bill Gates say something like "I'm rich". Perhaps, it's possible. He is Nouveau riche after all, but I doubt it.

Quote from: the_flutist on June 26, 2008, 04:07:32 PM

If you need proof, just look down at the ground. It is flat. Therefore, the world is flat.

When I look at the ground, I see my carpet. Therefore, the world is covered by my carpet.

I realize you're trying to make a point, but it would be better made if you could avoid hyperbole.  If you look down and see carpet, you're either inside some object, or you have laid carpet down upon the ground.  Trying to demonstrate faulty logic with similarly faulty logic is fail. 

Quote from: ROUND000 on June 26, 2008, 04:22:52 PM

I think Bill Gates would call himself rich. I think.

But I technically know someone with a few million dollars, does that count?

I would be surprised to hear Bill Gates say something like "I'm rich". Perhaps, it's possible. He is Nouveau riche after all, but I doubt it.

If I was Bill, I'd call myself rich. Screw what others think of me.

OWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!11

This one pretty well proves my point about RE'ers seeming to be incapable of coherent, adult discussion.  I suspect that eventually this thread will degenerate into posts containing captioned cat pictures and pornographic imagery of men elaborately manipulating themselves.  

You sir, fail at posting. You're just jealous your precious theory is being owned.

Quote from: ROUND000 on June 26, 2008, 04:28:23 PM

OWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!11

This one pretty well proves my point about RE'ers seeming to be incapable of coherent, adult discussion.  I suspect that eventually this thread will degenerate into posts containing captioned cat pictures and pornographic imagery of men elaborately manipulating themselves.  

Yeah umm, im not sure what forums you usually are on but that typically doesnt happen in this one. Sorry to disappoint you.

But Messier and ROUND000, you guys need to stop taking the bait. They know theyre wrong and they know that Messiers pic isnt doctored but they always can get a response out of you by claiming it is.

Kudos to Ski though on his pic.....

Quote from: uglykidjoe on June 26, 2008, 04:31:54 PM

Quote from: ROUND000 on June 26, 2008, 04:28:23 PM

OWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!11

This one pretty well proves my point about RE'ers seeming to be incapable of coherent, adult discussion.  I suspect that eventually this thread will degenerate into posts containing captioned cat pictures and pornographic imagery of men elaborately manipulating themselves.  

Yeah umm, im not sure what forums you usually are on but that typically doesnt happen in this one. Sorry to disappoint you.

But Messier and ROUND000, you guys need to stop taking the bait. They know theyre wrong and they know that Messiers pic isnt doctored but they always can get a response out of you by claiming it is.

Kudos to Ski though on his pic.....

But I enjoy pwning the FE theory. 

You sir, fail at posting. You're just jealous your precious theory is being owned.

How do I fail at posting in your world?  Is it because I didn't retort with some childish meme or there some un-written rule of posting that I haven't followed?  By all means enlighten me.

Incidentally, I never declared myself on either side of the fence regarding the FE/RE discussion.  I don't have any stake on either side.  Please apologize for jumping to such ludicrous conclusions and making false accusations.  

Kudos to Ski though on his pic.....

A pity I was born a bit too late to make billions on my scam.