NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars

  • 130 Replies
  • 19969 Views
*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #90 on: January 26, 2012, 10:46:38 AM »
Barrel Roll.

http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf

Let's have some fun.

Remember, this photo was taken with a Canon PowerShot SD870 IS. To confirm this, I saved the file and checked it myself:



Here's the test image for this camera model:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SD870IS/SD870ISVFAWB.HTM

I loaded the test image into a photo editing program to correct the barrel distortion:



It turns out this camera needs a setting of about -10 points to make the lines appear straight:



So let's apply the same correction to our photo:



View the full-size final result here: http://i.imgur.com/QVNE1.jpg

So how about it, Tom?  Are you still blind?
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41788
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #91 on: January 26, 2012, 11:08:08 AM »
Barrel Roll.

http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf

Seriously Tom?  You can't even get barrel distortion right?  ::)
« Last Edit: January 26, 2012, 02:55:43 PM by markjo »
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.

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11684
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #92 on: January 26, 2012, 02:23:56 PM »
You guys are having trouble comprehending what the article states. This quote is from the article, and I think this is Tom's point.

 Photographs purporting to show the curvature of the Earth are always suspect because virtually all camera lenses project an image that suffers from barrel distortion.
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #93 on: January 26, 2012, 03:01:35 PM »
The article is explaining how to measure curvature, and it says that this can be done through photographs if you take the relevant factors into account. It does not say the curvature doesn't exist.

Tom is attempting to cite this article as evidence for his claims. Evidently, he's the one who didn't read it. Or is he arguing with himself? Observe:

That video is alleged to have been taken at 39 thousand feet, the cruising altitude of an international flight. There is no curvature at that altitude. The camera must be looking through something.
Quote from: http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf
5. Summary and Conclusions
In view of the agreement between the visual observations, measurements of the photographs, and the theoretical curvatures, it seems well established that the curvature of the Earth is reasonably well understood and can be measured from photographs. The threshold elevation for detecting curvature would seem to be somewhat less than 35,000 ft but not as low as 14,000 ft. Photographically, curvature may be measurable as low as 20,000 ft.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41788
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #94 on: January 26, 2012, 03:02:15 PM »
You guys are having trouble comprehending what the article states. This quote is from the article, and I think this is Tom's point.

 Photographs purporting to show the curvature of the Earth are always suspect because virtually all camera lenses project an image that suffers from barrel distortion.

Don't forget the next sentence: "To accurately assess curvature from a photograph, the horizon must be placed precisely in the center of the image, i.e., on the optical axis."

The author then proceeds to show how the curvature can, indeed, be discerned from properly composed photographs of the earth's horizon.
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.

?

OrbisNonSufficit

  • 3124
  • I love Gasoline.
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #95 on: January 26, 2012, 08:25:48 PM »
In response to the OP, NASA's investment returns have been estimated (this is the highest figure) to be 14 to 1. 

Health and medicine
LEDs
Infrared ear thermometers
Ventricular assist device
Artificial limbs

Transportation
Aircraft anti-icing systems

Highway safety
Jarmaine Safety grooving
Improved radial tires
Chemical detection

Public safety
Video enhancing and analysis systems
Fire-resistant reinforcement
Firefighting equipment

Consumer, home, and recreation
Temper foam
Enriched baby food
Portable cordless vacuums
Freeze drying

Environmental and agricultural resources
Water Security Corporation's Discovery Water Filtration System
Water purification
Solar energy
Pollution remediation

Computer technology
Structural analysis software
Remotely controlled ovens

Industrial productivity
Powdered lubricants
Improved mine safety

Food safety

NASA either drove, funded or had a significant impact on all of the above, in addition to sending men to the the moon, contributing to the ISS, and exploring the solar system.  LOL at waste.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #96 on: January 27, 2012, 06:06:45 AM »
All of those were private companies researching independently from NASA. NASA happened to "use" them and its like "Woah! NASA did all this!"


All of that technology would exist regardless of NASA's existence.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #97 on: January 27, 2012, 06:30:18 AM »
All of those were private companies researching independently from NASA. NASA happened to "use" them and its like "Woah! NASA did all this!"


All of that technology would exist regardless of NASA's existence.

Did you forget what your thread was about? He's talking about where the money goes, not about what the people who directly comprise NASA do.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

?

OrbisNonSufficit

  • 3124
  • I love Gasoline.
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #98 on: January 27, 2012, 10:12:32 AM »
All of those were private companies researching independently from NASA. NASA happened to "use" them and its like "Woah! NASA did all this!"


All of that technology would exist regardless of NASA's existence.

Someone would have invented the telephone besides bell.  Someone would have incorporated Taylor-ism and interchangeable parts besides ford.  But we give them credit because they did it first.  NASA was either involved or Funded these projects, and either way it was not money wasted.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #99 on: January 29, 2012, 10:37:56 AM »
Hey Tom, get back here.

What causes the circle of darkness?

Not barrel distortion. I have corrected the photo for that (assuming it hasn't already been). The updated version is above and I have set it as my avatar so it won't be ignored.

What causes the circle of darkness, Dr. Bishop?
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

?

squevil

  • Official Member
  • 3184
  • Im Telling On You
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #100 on: January 29, 2012, 02:43:23 PM »
like he is going to answer that. he snorted his nose up at my thread without making any comment. in the past i made clear comments about how ENaG is not what people think it is and is only speculation based on SBR's thoughts. the only way to get a response on the upper fora is to troll it, or so it seems

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #101 on: February 09, 2012, 08:45:08 AM »
Hey Tom, get back here.

What causes the circle of darkness?

Not barrel distortion. I have corrected the photo for that (assuming it hasn't already been). The updated version is above and I have set it as my avatar so it won't be ignored.

What causes the circle of darkness, Dr. Bishop?


It's either a wide angle lens or barrel distortion.

People often post images claiming that they can see curvature at sea level, when it is really just an effect of the lens.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #102 on: February 09, 2012, 08:47:13 AM »
Hey Tom, get back here.

What causes the circle of darkness?

Not barrel distortion. I have corrected the photo for that (assuming it hasn't already been). The updated version is above and I have set it as my avatar so it won't be ignored.

What causes the circle of darkness, Dr. Bishop?


It's either a wide angle lens or barrel distortion.

People often post images claiming that they can see curvature at sea level, when it is really just an effect of the lens.

You have already been outed as knowing nothing at all about photography, Mr Bishop. Stop trying to make out you understand anything about it.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #103 on: February 09, 2012, 08:53:45 AM »
Hey Tom, get back here.

What causes the circle of darkness?

Not barrel distortion. I have corrected the photo for that (assuming it hasn't already been). The updated version is above and I have set it as my avatar so it won't be ignored.

What causes the circle of darkness, Dr. Bishop?


It's either a wide angle lens or barrel distortion.

People often post images claiming that they can see curvature at sea level, when it is really just an effect of the lens.

You have already been outed as knowing nothing at all about photography, Mr Bishop. Stop trying to make out you understand anything about it.

In those other images from that same balloon, the horizon looks relatively flat.

So is the earth's horizon both flat and curved at 100,000 feet?

No, the horizon's shape changes depending on where it is on the screen because the lens is distorted.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2012, 09:22:04 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #104 on: February 09, 2012, 09:27:45 AM »
It's either a wide angle lens or barrel distortion.

Cut it out, you filthy liar.

Click here.

Don't be scared, Tom. Click it. Read it.

We know the full specs of the camera. Distortion is negligible and has been reversed. You can even try it yourself for free. And guess what? It's still round. And it's not a circle of light.

You can't bullshit out of it anymore:

- It's not a spotlight.

- It's not lens-distorted.

- It's not from NASA.

You've used up all three lifelines, and " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">you can't walk away. Explain it, Tom.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

Aytron

  • 264
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #105 on: February 09, 2012, 09:29:11 AM »
Nasa's budget is less than 1% of US federal budget.

That doesn't make the fact they spend billions of dollars lying about the shape of the world any less disgusting. Since you seem to think so little of the value of money, I assume you have a few billion around to donate to the society?

I'd bitch about the billions they spend on pointless government agencies they have going, and the trillions we've spent on the war, before I bitched about the billions spent in the name of bettering humanity's understanding of how the universe works.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #106 on: February 10, 2012, 09:13:00 AM »
Barrel Roll.

http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf

Let's have some fun.

Remember, this photo was taken with a Canon PowerShot SD870 IS. To confirm this, I saved the file and checked it myself:



It doesn't say which lens is being used on that camera.

Look at the low altitude images from Sunset Soar II, for instance.

The camera they're using clearly has a warped lens:





« Last Edit: February 10, 2012, 09:34:53 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #107 on: February 10, 2012, 09:40:04 AM »
Oh, wow, circles of darkness, right (from page 3)?





No. Your "Soar" balloonist team is using a wide-angle or fish-eye lens on their equipment (Page 4):

« Last Edit: February 10, 2012, 09:48:09 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #108 on: February 10, 2012, 09:52:45 AM »
No. The Soar team is using a wide-angle or fish-eye lens on their equipment

Yes they are. For video. Pay attention:

http://www.mikedeep.com/Project-Soar/Overview/14004205_gKURw

Quote
PRIMARY CAMERA (VIDEO)
GOPRO HERO HD

Rugged fisheye HD video camera


SECONDARY CAMERA (PHOTO)
CANON SD800 IS

Small, light still camera
7.1MP, 4.6-17.3mm (28-105mm equiv.) lens

Come on, Tom. If those two pictures were captured by the same camera, the second one would look a lot more distorted.

But just for fun, let's confirm:



Yep. That one was from the still camera.

The other one, probably since the GOPRO HERO HD is a video camera, doesn't have detailed metadata for single frames; however, the filename is GOPRO002-XL: http://www.mikedeep.com/Project-Soar/Sunset-Soar-II/i-QrLgsrR/0/XL/GOPRO002-XL.jpg

Nice try Tom. ::)



In those other images from that same balloon, the horizon looks relatively flat.

So is the earth's horizon both flat and curved at 100,000 feet?

No, the horizon's shape changes depending on where it is on the screen because the lens is distorted.

Tell me, Mr. Bishop, how did you determine that both of those photos were taken at 100,000 feet? Let's go back to the video I had posted originally (which is from the same source as this flickr set):

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">From the video description:

Quote
The ascent rate was about 800ft/min

So let's look at the metadata again:



These two photos were taken 20 minutes apart, therefore the second photo was at an altitude of about 16,000 feet higher than the first photo.

So, no Tom, the earth's horizon is not both flat and curved at the same altitude, but it does look more curved 16,000 feet higher.

Oh, and by the way Tom, if the barrel distortion of this camera really were as radical as you claim, the horizon in the first photo should be curving upwards as it approaches the bottom of the frame. The fact that it looks straight would have proved that the actual horizon would have appeared convex. Aren't you glad I disproved that?
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #109 on: February 10, 2012, 09:57:48 AM »
No. The Soar team is using a wide-angle or fish-eye lens on their equipment

Yes they are. For video. Pay attention:

http://www.mikedeep.com/Project-Soar/Overview/14004205_gKURw


Nope. I've shown that the PHOTOS are clearly being warped with a fisheye or wideangle lens.

Didn't you see the PHOTOS which I posted which had been warped? This is proof that the PHOTOS are being warped, in contradiction to whatever they claim on the website about only video having a fisheye lens attachment.

Stop wasting my time. The PHOTOS are clearly being warped and the website is wrong. Goodbye.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2012, 10:05:43 AM by Tom Bishop »

?

OrbisNonSufficit

  • 3124
  • I love Gasoline.
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #110 on: February 10, 2012, 10:00:30 AM »
No. The Soar team is using a wide-angle or fish-eye lens on their equipment

Yes they are. For video. Pay attention:

http://www.mikedeep.com/Project-Soar/Overview/14004205_gKURw


Nope. I've shown that the PHOTOS are clearly being warped with a fisheye or wideangle lense.

Didn't you see the PHOTOS which I posted which had been warped? This is proof that the PHOTOS are being warped, in contradiction to whatever they claim on the website about only video having a fisheye lens attachment.

Because video cameras cannot take pictures, nor can stills be taken from videos. 

?

Thork

Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #111 on: February 10, 2012, 10:02:47 AM »
*Tom Bishop waves to the crowd, a small ripple of applause as he makes his way to the exit. What a seasoned professional.

?

OrbisNonSufficit

  • 3124
  • I love Gasoline.
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #112 on: February 10, 2012, 10:12:03 AM »
*Tom Bishop waves to the crowd, a small ripple of applause as he makes his way to the exit. What a seasoned professional.
lol.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #113 on: February 10, 2012, 10:26:17 AM »
No. The Soar team is using a wide-angle or fish-eye lens on their equipment

Yes they are. For video. Pay attention:

http://www.mikedeep.com/Project-Soar/Overview/14004205_gKURw


Nope. I've shown that the PHOTOS are clearly being warped with a fisheye or wideangle lens.

Didn't you see the PHOTOS which I posted which had been warped? This is proof that the PHOTOS are being warped, in contradiction to whatever they claim on the website about only video having a fisheye lens attachment.

Stop wasting my time. The PHOTOS are clearly being warped and the website is wrong. Goodbye.

Did you even look at the rest of my post? Those stills were taken by the video camera, the GoPro Hero HD, which has a fisheye lens. Almost all the other photos on the site were taken by the dedicated still camera, the Canon SD800 IS, which does not have a fisheye lens. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #114 on: February 10, 2012, 11:33:07 AM »
Tom Bishop waves to the crowd, who jeer loudly and unleash a storm of rotten vegetables. Tom slips comically on a squished tomato as the curtain falls. It rises moments later to reveal Archibald, looking serious, preparing to read an excerpt from "Bee Husbandry For Zetetics" while a nervous Master Lord Of Teh Admiralty Willmire and Pizza Planet mop the stage. However, the readings of Archibald are drowned out by Clocktower and Zarg heckling from the balcony, until the whole scene is plunged into darkness as Parsifal cuts the mains electricity supply.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #115 on: February 10, 2012, 01:52:08 PM »
*Thork, who had been famously quoted as saying "Tom does not run away from threads," was not available for comment.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12106
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #116 on: February 11, 2012, 04:57:06 PM »
I have to admit I don't know much about photopgraphy, but everything I've found concerning the Canon PowerShot SD800 IS indicates that it does have a wideangle lense, just as Tom claims. For example:


Canon's third new compact today is another image stabilized Ixus/ELPH, this time with a useful (and still fairly rare) 28-105mm wideangle zoom . . . Wide angle 28mm lens with Optical Image Stabilizer


Canon PowerShot SD800 IS 7.1MP Digital Elph Camera with 3.8x Wide Angle Image-Stabilized Optical Zoom


Of course I might be wrong, but it seems to me that this is entirely consistent with what Tom said:


No. Your "Soar" balloonist team is using a wide-angle or fish-eye lens on their equipment
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41788
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #117 on: February 11, 2012, 06:08:58 PM »
While a 28mm lens on a full frame 35mm camera is wide angle and can introduce a degree of barrel distortion, it is not considered a fish-eye lens.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisheye_lens
Quote
The focal lengths of fisheye lenses depend on the film format. For the popular 35 mm film format, typical focal lengths of fisheye lenses are between 8 mm and 10 mm for circular images, and 15–16 mm for full-frame images. For digital cameras using smaller electronic imagers such as 1/4" and 1/3" format CCD or CMOS sensors, the focal length of "miniature" fisheye lenses can be as short as 1 to 2mm.
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.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12106
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #118 on: February 11, 2012, 06:17:46 PM »
Yes, but Tom said


wide-angle or fish-eye lens


This camera has a wide angle lense.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41788
Re: NASA Wastes More Tax Dollars
« Reply #119 on: February 11, 2012, 06:30:34 PM »
Yes, but Tom said


wide-angle or fish-eye lens


This camera has a wide angle lense.

Yes, wide angle but not fish-eye, therefore it will not exhibit the same degree of distortion as a fish-eye.
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.