Sunrise Images

  • 58 Replies
  • 9506 Views
*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #30 on: September 29, 2008, 06:42:16 PM »
Quote
The Sun was not brought back through magnification because the image seen is the Sun shining through distant clouds.

Don't you mean shining through the distant atmosphere?

I meant the clouds. If it were shining directly through the atmosphere, it might have been brought back. As it was, the light was being absorbed and re-emitted by molecules within the clouds, rather than travelling directly. So it is the clouds that are visible, not the Sun, and that is why it does not appear to be brought back.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #31 on: September 29, 2008, 06:44:36 PM »
Osama, why are you defending the perspective theory? It was you who postulated bendy light, remember?
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #32 on: September 29, 2008, 06:50:09 PM »
Osama, why are you defending the perspective theory? It was you who postulated bendy light, remember?

Both hypotheses have their merits.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #33 on: September 29, 2008, 07:41:30 PM »
Osama, why are you defending the perspective theory? It was you who postulated bendy light, remember?

Both hypotheses are complete nonsense.

Fixed that for you.  BTW, do those clouds that you talking about happen to be ocean colored?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #34 on: September 29, 2008, 07:43:48 PM »
Fixed that for you.  BTW, do those clouds that you talking about happen to be ocean colored?

No. But there are clouds clearly visible above the Sun, so there is no reason to believe that there aren't more clouds closer to the horizon that aren't directly visible due to their enormous contrast with the brightness of the Sun's rays.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #35 on: September 29, 2008, 07:48:33 PM »
Fixed that for you.  BTW, do those clouds that you talking about happen to be ocean colored?

No. But there are clouds clearly visible above the Sun, so there is no reason to believe that there aren't more clouds closer to the horizon that aren't directly visible due to their enormous contrast with the brightness of the Sun's rays.

I don't see any reason to believe that there are more clouds closer to the horizon either.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #36 on: September 29, 2008, 07:50:03 PM »
I don't see any reason to believe that there are more clouds closer to the horizon either.

You can't rule it out, though. So this evidence counts for nothing.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #37 on: September 29, 2008, 07:52:42 PM »
I don't see any reason to believe that there are more clouds closer to the horizon either.

You can't rule it out, though.

You might not rule it out, but I would.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #38 on: September 29, 2008, 07:54:45 PM »
You might not rule it out, but I would.

Go on, then. Prove there aren't any clouds closer to the horizon than those which are visible.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #39 on: September 30, 2008, 02:14:04 AM »
You might not rule it out, but I would.

Go on, then. Prove there aren't any clouds closer to the horizon than those which are visible.

I would "prove", but I will give compelling evidence: 

  • Most often, clouds completely obscuring the sun's light, thereby "scattering" it in all directions so that it is not possible to observe the sun's outline (for example on a "cloudy day").  This is especially true distant clouds because the sun's light is more horizontal, therefore travelling through more cloud.  This makes the proposed hypothesis extremely unlikely.

  • The idea that the sun is "projecting" itself onto the back on the clouds would only be possible if the sun's rays were travelling in one direction (like a torch).   This is clearly not the case as another observer, hundreds of miles away, can witness the same sunset at approximately the same time.

I other words, the sun would have to be shining out like a spotlight onto just one area of the clouds, which is clearly nonsense (i.e. I contracts observations of the sun during the day).
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #40 on: September 30, 2008, 02:16:24 AM »
You might not rule it out, but I would.

Go on, then. Prove there aren't any clouds closer to the horizon than those which are visible.

I will not "prove", but I will give compelling evidence: 

  • Most often, clouds completely obscuring the sun's light, thereby "scattering" it in all directions so that it is not possible to observe the sun's outline (for example on a "cloudy day").  This is especially true for distant clouds because the sun's light is more horizontal, therefore travelling through more cloud.  This makes the proposed hypothesis extremely unlikely.

  • The idea that the sun is "projecting" itself onto the back on the clouds would only be possible if the sun's rays were travelling in one direction (like a torch).   This is clearly not the case as another observer, hundreds of miles away, can witness the same sunset at approximately the same time (give or take 1/2 an hour) in approximately the same part of the sky.

I other words, the sun would have to be shining out like a spotlight onto just one area of the clouds, which is clearly nonsense (i.e. It contradicts observations of the sun during the day).

« Last Edit: September 30, 2008, 02:36:05 AM by Moon squirter »
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #41 on: September 30, 2008, 02:45:08 AM »
Most often, clouds completely obscuring the sun's light, thereby "scattering" it in all directions so that it is not possible to observe the sun's outline (for example on a "cloudy day").  This is especially true distant clouds because the sun's light is more horizontal, therefore travelling through more cloud.  This makes the proposed hypothesis extremely unlikely.

The clouds would need to be very thin. Otherwise, you are correct, they would obscure the Sun.

The idea that the sun is "projecting" itself onto the back on the clouds would only be possible if the sun's rays were travelling in one direction (like a torch).   This is clearly not the case as another observer, hundreds of miles away, can witness the same sunset at approximately the same time.

If you're going to make that claim, the least you can do is provide evidence for it.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #42 on: September 30, 2008, 03:28:06 AM »
Can we have an enlarge digital file?  e.g. a crop of the "actual pixels" of the sun in the first photo

Those are the original files taken off of the camera.

Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #43 on: September 30, 2008, 03:30:20 AM »
Go on, then. Prove there aren't any clouds closer to the horizon than those which are visible.

As the original observer, there weren't any clouds other than the ones in the picture.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #44 on: September 30, 2008, 03:30:36 AM »
Most often, clouds completely obscuring the sun's light, thereby "scattering" it in all directions so that it is not possible to observe the sun's outline (for example on a "cloudy day").  This is especially true distant clouds because the sun's light is more horizontal, therefore travelling through more cloud.  This makes the proposed hypothesis extremely unlikely.

The clouds would need to be very thin. Otherwise, you are correct, they would obscure the Sun.

The idea that the sun is "projecting" itself onto the back on the clouds would only be possible if the sun's rays were travelling in one direction (like a torch).   This is clearly not the case as another observer, hundreds of miles away, can witness the same sunset at approximately the same time.

If you're going to make that claim, the least you can do is provide evidence for it.

OK, lets forget the observers and just think about it.  Does the sun behave like a torch?  -People north America see the same sun at 9:00 EST as do people in Europe at 15:00 GMT  (i.e. at the same point in time).

So it cannot possibly be a narrow "spotlight".
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #45 on: September 30, 2008, 03:39:04 AM »
As the original observer, there weren't any clouds other than the ones in the picture.

Well, now I'm convinced. ::)

OK, lets forget the observers and just think about it.  Does the sun behave like a torch?  -People north America see the same sun at 9:00 EST as do people in Europe at 15:00 GMT  (i.e. at the same point in time).

So it cannot possibly be a narrow "spotlight".

It is a narrow spotlight, if an 80 degree field of light may be considered "narrow". The light then bends outwards. I don't see what you're trying to prove.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #46 on: September 30, 2008, 04:22:58 AM »
It is a narrow spotlight, if an 80 degree field of light may be considered "narrow". The light then bends outwards. I don't see what you're trying to prove.

I think you've explained it perfectly yourself.  80 degrees is definitely not "narrow".   Therefore the sun is extremely unlikely to be able to project a "small" image of itself (from 3000 miles away) onto the back of a cloud.
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #47 on: September 30, 2008, 04:25:37 AM »
I think you've explained it perfectly yourself.  80 degrees is definitely not "narrow".   Therefore the sun is extremely unlikely to be able to project a "small" image of itself (from 3000 miles away) onto the back of a cloud.

Unless the water molecules in the cloud were arranged in such a way that they re-emitted the light at a very well-defined angle relative to that which it was absorbed.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #48 on: September 30, 2008, 04:27:15 AM »
Well, now I'm convinced. ::)

Glad I could help.

Quote
It is a narrow spotlight, if an 80 degree field of light may be considered "narrow". The light then bends outwards. I don't see what you're trying to prove.

I think what he is trying to ask how the same spotlight that they are seeing in Britain at 1145 is the same spotlight that I am seeing low on the horizon at 0645.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #49 on: September 30, 2008, 04:29:36 AM »
I think what he is trying to ask how the same spotlight that they are seeing in Britain at 1145 is the same spotlight that I am seeing low on the horizon at 0645.

The light then bends outwards.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #50 on: September 30, 2008, 04:40:09 AM »
Unless the water molecules in the cloud were arranged in such a way that they re-emitted the light at a very well-defined angle relative to that which it was absorbed.

Crystalline clouds that re-emit the light at the angle that can be observed by anyone that is looking?  This specific angle would make it difficult for anyone not in the same location that I am in to observe the sunrise, but people hundreds of miles north and south of here observe sunrise.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #51 on: September 30, 2008, 04:42:01 AM »
Unless the water molecules in the cloud were arranged in such a way that they re-emitted the light at a very well-defined angle relative to that which it was absorbed.

Crystalline clouds that re-emit the light at the angle that can be observed by anyone that is looking?  This specific angle would make it difficult for anyone not in the same location that I am in to observe the sunrise, but people hundreds of miles north and south of here observe sunrise.

Please reread the bolded portion of my post.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #52 on: September 30, 2008, 05:22:45 AM »
I think you've explained it perfectly yourself.  80 degrees is definitely not "narrow".   Therefore the sun is extremely unlikely to be able to project a "small" image of itself (from 3000 miles away) onto the back of a cloud.

Unless the water molecules in the cloud were arranged in such a way that they re-emitted the light at a very well-defined angle relative to that which it was absorbed.

Are you saying that you think the picture shows a Sun Dog effect?

I must remember that:  Every time I see a sunset where the sun is not restored by a telescope, it's a Sun Dog; The real Sun is hidden behind "perspective".  Quite a lot to swallow there!

BTW I'm not convinced you actually believe any of this, Osama/Robosteve.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2008, 06:00:01 AM by Moon squirter »
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #53 on: September 30, 2008, 06:16:05 AM »
Unless the water molecules in the cloud were arranged in such a way that they re-emitted the light at a very well-defined angle relative to that which it was absorbed.

Crystalline clouds that re-emit the light at the angle that can be observed by anyone that is looking?  This specific angle would make it difficult for anyone not in the same location that I am in to observe the sunrise, but people hundreds of miles north and south of here observe sunrise.

Please reread the bolded portion of my post.

I reread it and I still think it is wrong.  That would only work for an observer in a single position, not observers separated by hundreds of miles.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #54 on: September 30, 2008, 07:32:25 AM »
You might not rule it out, but I would.

Go on, then. Prove there aren't any clouds closer to the horizon than those which are visible.

You want me to prove that there are invisible clouds in that picture?  ???

You FE'ers are so funny.   :-*
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

Ian loner

Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #55 on: September 30, 2008, 12:05:41 PM »
have you seen the humper bridge, one of the towers is higher that the other one this is due to the worlds curve shier wich means is is globe like


*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #56 on: September 30, 2008, 03:37:31 PM »
Have you seen the Humber bridge? One of the towers is higher that the other one, and I believe that this is it adhering to the Earth's curvature, thus proving, in my opinion, at least, that the Earth is a globe.

Translated into English, and how do you know this?
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #57 on: September 30, 2008, 03:45:01 PM »
Have you seen the Humber bridge? One of the towers is higher that the other one, and I believe that this is it adhering to the Earth's curvature, thus proving, in my opinion, at least, that the Earth is a globe.

Translated into English, and how do you know this?

The height of the towers being different wouldn't prove anything.  The tops of the towers being further apart than the bottoms, however, could be used as evidence to suggest the roundness of the earth.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

Nick Copurnicus

Re: Sunrise Images
« Reply #58 on: October 03, 2008, 08:03:07 AM »
In looking at the photos, why would the clouds be facing that way if the earth is flat?