Image of Shuttle Atlantis against Sun (non-NASA origin)

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/15/check-this-out-amazing-photo-of-the-sun/

The exceptionally gifted astrophotographer Thierry Legault captured this stunning tableau just minutes before the crew of Atlantis caught up with and captured Hubble for its very last servicing mission on May 13, 2009. This shot has never been accomplished before, and it?s magnificent. He used a 13 cm telescope, and camera that took a series of 16 images of 1/8000th of second each.

This photographer does NOT work for NASA.  This type of photo has never been accomplished before, meaning that the "projectors" could not have caused this phenomena (as there would be no reason for the projectors to be set up to show such an image, nor any reason to expect someone to attempt to capture it even if it was set up).

Responses?

I fail to see why this couldn't be faked.

I fail to see why this couldn't be faked.

I fail to see why you think that's relevant. It's evidence, and the evidence continues to come from every quarter, continues to be of a nature that you can independently verify it, continues to predict future events actually and usefully, and dominates by every measure the FE-supporting evidence.

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 02:39:48 PM

I fail to see why this couldn't be faked.

I fail to see why you think that's relevant. It's evidence, and the evidence continues to come from every quarter, continues to be of a nature that you can independently verify it, continues to predict future events actually and usefully, and dominates by every measure the FE-supporting evidence.

Falsified evidence is useless.

Quote from: MayTheBetterModelWin on May 15, 2009, 02:44:04 PM

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 02:39:48 PM

I fail to see why this couldn't be faked.

I fail to see why you think that's relevant. It's evidence, and the evidence continues to come from every quarter, continues to be of a nature that you can independently verify it, continues to predict future events actually and usefully, and dominates by every measure the FE-supporting evidence.

Falsified evidence is useless.

I agree. However, your statement is irrelevant here. You have no reason to believe that the evidence is falsified, other than your bias for FE. You can independently repeat the experiment, as well.

Why would this be faked?  This is the reason that FE is total bullshit.  Because you reject ALL evidence, REGARDLESS of source.

Are you positing that the photographer, who is named, is in on the conspiracy?

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 02:45:59 PM

Quote from: MayTheBetterModelWin on May 15, 2009, 02:44:04 PM

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 02:39:48 PM

I fail to see why this couldn't be faked.

I fail to see why you think that's relevant. It's evidence, and the evidence continues to come from every quarter, continues to be of a nature that you can independently verify it, continues to predict future events actually and usefully, and dominates by every measure the FE-supporting evidence.

Falsified evidence is useless.

I agree. However, your statement is irrelevant here. You have no reason to believe that the evidence is falsified, other than your bias for FE. You can independently repeat the experiment, as well.

I lack the equipment and training to do such a thing.

Why would this be faked?  This is the reason that FE is total bullshit.  Because you reject ALL evidence, REGARDLESS of source.

Are you positing that the photographer, who is named, is in on the conspiracy?

He may be.

Quote from: MayTheBetterModelWin on May 15, 2009, 02:57:50 PM

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 02:45:59 PM

Quote from: MayTheBetterModelWin on May 15, 2009, 02:44:04 PM

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 02:39:48 PM

I fail to see why this couldn't be faked.

I fail to see why you think that's relevant. It's evidence, and the evidence continues to come from every quarter, continues to be of a nature that you can independently verify it, continues to predict future events actually and usefully, and dominates by every measure the FE-supporting evidence.

Falsified evidence is useless.

I agree. However, your statement is irrelevant here. You have no reason to believe that the evidence is falsified, other than your bias for FE. You can independently repeat the experiment, as well.

I lack the equipment and training to do such a thing.
...

You can readily acquire both inexpensively. Google is your friend, unless you're afraid of the truth.

So let me get this straight... ANY photographic evidence, NO MATTER the source, will be rejected?

Hear that FEers?  Your fellow believer promotes the rejecting of ALL empirical evidence.  Is there any evidence we CAN trust?  Or only what my eyes can see RIGHT NOW?

Why don't you confront the photographer for all the world to see?  His name is right there.

Does any non-retarded FEer have any comment?  I don't have time to keep responding to a true waste of mind.

PLEASE NOTE: This means that pictures confirming the roundness or flatness of the Earth DO NOT CONSTITUTE VALID PROOF.

Straight from the FAQ.

Quote

PLEASE NOTE: This means that pictures confirming the roundness or flatness of the Earth DO NOT CONSTITUTE VALID PROOF.

Straight from the FAQ.

Its funny how NOONE except those ~50 people from the conspiracy have taken ANY pictures of the planets, sun, Earth seen from above etc. It's like EVERYONE is just like mindless zombies, isn't that right?

Q: "Why has no one taken a photo of the Earth that proves it is flat?"

A: Only those connected to the Conspiracy have access to heights from which the shape of the Earth can be discerned. 

I swear I can argue with you by just quoting the FAQ.

Quote

Q: "Why has no one taken a photo of the Earth that proves it is flat?"

A: Only those connected to the Conspiracy have access to heights from which the shape of the Earth can be discerned. 

I swear I can argue with you by just quoting the FAQ.

You would say you can't see the curviture of the Earth from a plane, or from an air-balloon? You can't see the other round planets from a powerful telescope?

No, you can't. I am not denying other planets being round.

Quote

PLEASE NOTE: This means that pictures confirming the roundness or flatness of the Earth DO NOT CONSTITUTE VALID PROOF.

Straight from the FAQ.

1) Just because it's in the FAQ doesn't mean it's true. Do have an open mind.
2) Are you now saying that the picture confirms the roundness of the Earth?
3) Did anyone in this thread say the picture constituted "valid proof"? No, we claim it's part of the mounting and overwhelming evidence that the Earth is round.

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 03:43:18 PM

Quote

PLEASE NOTE: This means that pictures confirming the roundness or flatness of the Earth DO NOT CONSTITUTE VALID PROOF.

Straight from the FAQ.

1) Just because it's in the FAQ doesn't mean it's true. Do have an open mind.
2) Are you now saying that the picture confirms the roundness of the Earth?
3) Did anyone in this thread say the picture constituted "valid proof"? No, we claim it's part of the mounting and overwhelming evidence that the Earth is round.

1)The FAQ is the standard we use on this forum.
2)I did not,nor did I ever, say this.
3)It is not "Valid evidence" either.

Quote

Q: "Why has no one taken a photo of the Earth that proves it is flat?"

A: Only those connected to the Conspiracy have access to heights from which the shape of the Earth can be discerned. 

I swear I can argue with you by just quoting the FAQ.

Why did you quote that? It's relevant to this thread. You're arguing that only the Conspiracy control pictures from space against the argument of a photo taken form Earth.

Quote from: MayTheBetterModelWin on May 15, 2009, 04:00:20 PM

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 03:43:18 PM

Quote

PLEASE NOTE: This means that pictures confirming the roundness or flatness of the Earth DO NOT CONSTITUTE VALID PROOF.

Straight from the FAQ.

1) Just because it's in the FAQ doesn't mean it's true. Do have an open mind.
2) Are you now saying that the picture confirms the roundness of the Earth?
3) Did anyone in this thread say the picture constituted "valid proof"? No, we claim it's part of the mounting and overwhelming evidence that the Earth is round.

1)The FAQ is the standard we use on this forum.
2)I did not,nor did I ever, say this.
3)It is not "Valid evidence" either.

1) No, it is not.
2) Then your argument is irrelevant
3) I challenge you to support your claim. There's nothing in your quote is states that since "evidence" is very different from "proof".

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 04:02:31 PM

Quote from: MayTheBetterModelWin on May 15, 2009, 04:00:20 PM

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 03:43:18 PM

Quote

PLEASE NOTE: This means that pictures confirming the roundness or flatness of the Earth DO NOT CONSTITUTE VALID PROOF.

Straight from the FAQ.

1) Just because it's in the FAQ doesn't mean it's true. Do have an open mind.
2) Are you now saying that the picture confirms the roundness of the Earth?
3) Did anyone in this thread say the picture constituted "valid proof"? No, we claim it's part of the mounting and overwhelming evidence that the Earth is round.

1)The FAQ is the standard we use on this forum.
2)I did not,nor did I ever, say this.
3)It is not "Valid evidence" either.

1) No, it is not.
2) Then your argument is irrelevant
3) I challenge you to support your claim. There's nothing in your quote is states that since "evidence" is very different from "proof".

1) Yes, it is. There is a reason why the phrase "read the FAQ" is so popular.
2) We are arguing over weather photos are valid proof.
3) The FAQ(the standard on this forum) states that photos are not valid proof because of the easy ability to be falsified.

...
1) Yes, it is. There is a reason why the phrase "read the FAQ" is so popular.
2) We are arguing over weather photos are valid proof.
3) The FAQ(the standard on this forum) states that photos are not valid proof because of the easy ability to be falsified.

1) No. Popularity does not imply accuracy. If that were true, RE would win easily.
2) If you will kindly re-read the FAQ, you will find that it does not impugn all pictures, just certain ones, and not the one in question in this thread.
3) Again, I urge you to realize that there's a difference between "proof" and "evidence".

The FAQ is the standard on this forum. You can ask any major member or mod on this site. The FAQ states that pictures are not valid evidence or proof.

How come the sun looks like an egg yolk?

How come the sun looks like an egg yolk?

Great question! On second thought, no it's a terrible question, you really can't think of an answer yourself?

Could you think of a better way to ask me to find an answer myself? (see this isn't a good way to discuss things with people)

1)The FAQ is the standard we use on this forum.

Ive have several FE'ers saying the FAQ is incorrect when they are challenged on certain aspects of it.

Quote

Q: "Why has no one taken a photo of the Earth that proves it is flat?"

A: Only those connected to the Conspiracy have access to heights from which the shape of the Earth can be discerned. 

What about students from universities who have done these experiments? (was posted recently on this site).

The conspiracy has figured out how to use photoshop - what else is new?

According to the FAQ which YOU quoted, only the photos which confirm the roundness of the earth by taking pictures from altitude are dismissible.  Fucking moron.  Learn to think.

These pictures were taken from the ground.  Ergo, the FAQ's solution DOES NOT APPLY.  learn to use your brain.  Or do you only mindlessly accept what other people tell you without thinking it through for yourself first?

How do you know that photo is real? That photo could have been photoshopped in mspaint

Motive?

How do you know that photo is real? That photo could have been photoshopped in mspaint

Because he posted the equipment that he used to take that photograph so that you reproduce it yourself.  It's called peer review.  Give it a try sometime.