NASA time lapse from Space - obviously fake

Quote from: Nolhekh on April 08, 2012, 02:48:51 PM

Quote from: Graff on April 08, 2012, 12:48:05 PM

So... Somehow, because this video was so heavily edited, that is supposed to prove that space travel is impossible?
I just don't see the connection...

The OP's claim was that the video was faked, and not that space travel is impossible.

Right, but even then: Let's assume the video was fake. How does that prove spacetravel is impossible?

It doesn't. It disproves the claim that spacetravel is performed.

Quote from: Graff on April 08, 2012, 02:52:06 PM

Quote from: Nolhekh on April 08, 2012, 02:48:51 PM

Quote from: Graff on April 08, 2012, 12:48:05 PM

So... Somehow, because this video was so heavily edited, that is supposed to prove that space travel is impossible?
I just don't see the connection...

The OP's claim was that the video was faked, and not that space travel is impossible.

Right, but even then: Let's assume the video was fake. How does that prove spacetravel is impossible?

It doesn't. It disproves the claim that spacetravel is performed.

It's not fake, but even if it was, it would only disprove that spaceflight in this particular case was not performed, not that it can't be.

Quote from: EduardoVS-BR on April 07, 2012, 07:56:21 PM

Quote from: jroa on April 07, 2012, 07:39:17 PM

If it was not modified, it would be a very long, slow, and boring film of the Earth. 

Well, if you want to see "very nice" footages of the earth, full of lights and effects, just watch Star Wars.

Star Wars doesn't take place anywhere near Earth.  Anyway, I'm not sure what effects you think are being used in this video.  There are lights from cities, lights from arorae, lights from lightning and light from the moon.  Everything I'd expect from the real thing is in this video, so I can't conclude that it's fake.

Oh yeah. I forgot that Star Wars takes place in a "galaxy far, far away"... What a shame! (ironic). But anyway, Star Wars has many scenes of planets populated by huge cities, full of lights, in an explosion of colors and effects. Considering that this video is real, I don't think it is the best way to see a real shooting of Earth from space. This is so edited, it looks more last generation video game/film scene than a real shooting.
And I still saying: if you like both space and electro-magnetism, go watch Star Wars or playing video games on this theme.

For the last time, yes, there was a lot of editing done to this film.  NASA does not even deny that.  Will the raw footage shut you up?

Quote from: Nolhekh on April 08, 2012, 06:45:52 AM

Quote from: EduardoVS-BR on April 07, 2012, 07:56:21 PM

Quote from: jroa on April 07, 2012, 07:39:17 PM

If it was not modified, it would be a very long, slow, and boring film of the Earth. 

Well, if you want to see "very nice" footages of the earth, full of lights and effects, just watch Star Wars.

Star Wars doesn't take place anywhere near Earth.  Anyway, I'm not sure what effects you think are being used in this video.  There are lights from cities, lights from arorae, lights from lightning and light from the moon.  Everything I'd expect from the real thing is in this video, so I can't conclude that it's fake.

Oh yeah. I forgot that Star Wars takes place in a "galaxy far, far away"... What a shame! (ironic). But anyway, Star Wars has many scenes of planets populated by huge cities, full of lights, in an explosion of colors and effects. Considering that this video is real, I don't think it is the best way to see a real shooting of Earth from space. This is so edited, it looks more last generation video game/film scene than a real shooting.
And I still saying: if you like both space and electro-magnetism, go watch Star Wars or playing video games on this theme.

So, you're not actually claiming its fake, just that it could have been done better?  Maybe the real thing isn't as bright and colourful as Star Wars, so special cameras and editing are needed to get something nice.  I don't know why you're telling me to watch Star Wars.  Sometimes I just prefer to see the real thing once in a while.

So now the videos can capture the stars in space?  Someone should let the Apollo guys know.  They didn't quite manage to capture the stars in their videos supposedly taken much further away from the earth.  So either theirs were faked or this was faked.  Of course, we all know....they are all faked. 

So now the videos can capture the stars in space?  Someone should let the Apollo guys know.  They didn't quite manage to capture the stars in their videos supposedly taken much further away from the earth.  So either theirs were faked or this was faked.  Of course, we all know....they are all faked.

Such dribble... Yes, exposure does effect what shows up in a photograph or a video. No, you can't make the outlandish generalization that the 'stars' must show up in either all or none of them. We call this fallacy the excluded middle fallacy. Please be more logical in the future.

So now the videos can capture the stars in space?  Someone should let the Apollo guys know.  They didn't quite manage to capture the stars in their videos supposedly taken much further away from the earth.  So either theirs were faked or this was faked.  Of course, we all know....they are all faked.

What a joke...  why don't you do some research on what exposure is and stop spreading lies.

Video is ridiculously fake.

TOO much curvature and things look computer generated.

Compare with this picture:

Video is ridiculously fake.

TOO much curvature and things look computer generated.

Compare with this picture:
<img>

How did you determine that there was too much curvature? Are you just guess or did you finally do some math?

What things were computer generated and just how did you determine that they were?

You aren't just making things up again, are you?

Quote from: iWitness on April 13, 2012, 06:18:48 AM

Video is ridiculously fake.

TOO much curvature and things look computer generated.

Compare with this picture:
<img>

How did you determine that there was too much curvature? Are you just guess or did you finally do some math?

What things were computer generated and just how did you determine that they were?

You aren't just making things up again, are you?

Well if the ISS is a couple hundred miles up and it curves that much then why isn't the picture I posted curved at all?

Quote from: ClockTower on April 13, 2012, 06:51:38 AM

Quote from: iWitness on April 13, 2012, 06:18:48 AM

Video is ridiculously fake.

TOO much curvature and things look computer generated.

Compare with this picture:
<img>

How did you determine that there was too much curvature? Are you just guess or did you finally do some math?

What things were computer generated and just how did you determine that they were?

You aren't just making things up again, are you?

Well if the ISS is a couple hundred miles up and it curves that much then why isn't the picture I posted curved at all?

So you are just making things up and not doing the math. Got it.

Quote from: iWitness on April 13, 2012, 08:04:17 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on April 13, 2012, 06:51:38 AM

Quote from: iWitness on April 13, 2012, 06:18:48 AM

Video is ridiculously fake.

TOO much curvature and things look computer generated.

Compare with this picture:
<img>

How did you determine that there was too much curvature? Are you just guess or did you finally do some math?

What things were computer generated and just how did you determine that they were?

You aren't just making things up again, are you?

Well if the ISS is a couple hundred miles up and it curves that much then why isn't the picture I posted curved at all?

So you are just making things up and not doing the math. Got it.

If I handed you a pickle and said it was blue would you need to do the math to prove it wasn't?

Quote from: ClockTower on April 13, 2012, 11:44:08 AM

Quote from: iWitness on April 13, 2012, 08:04:17 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on April 13, 2012, 06:51:38 AM

Quote from: iWitness on April 13, 2012, 06:18:48 AM

Video is ridiculously fake.

TOO much curvature and things look computer generated.

Compare with this picture:
<img>

How did you determine that there was too much curvature? Are you just guess or did you finally do some math?

What things were computer generated and just how did you determine that they were?

You aren't just making things up again, are you?

Well if the ISS is a couple hundred miles up and it curves that much then why isn't the picture I posted curved at all?

So you are just making things up and not doing the math. Got it.

If I handed you a pickle and said it was blue would you need to do the math to prove it wasn't?

Irrelevant. Also, yes, by comparing the wavelengths of its reflection of a white light with the standards of 'blue'.

Funny that Iwitness thinks that that is a picture from the same altitude as the ISS.   Is the internet really this difficult?

Funny that Iwitness thinks that that is a picture from the same altitude as the ISS.   Is the internet really this difficult?

HAHAHAHAAH that is so rich...

Last I checked, MiG-29s were still suborbital craft.

Well if the ISS is a couple hundred miles up and it curves that much then why isn't the picture I posted curved at all?

Different Fields of view will result in different magnitudes of curvature.  If I take a picture of a ball and zoom in on its edge (zooming in reduces the field of view), the curvature becomes less pronounced.  And of course the two pictures could have been taken from different altitudes.

Quote from: ClockTower on April 07, 2012, 11:32:44 AM

Quote from: EduardoVS-BR on April 06, 2012, 08:38:10 PM

If you believe that this NASA video is really taken from a spaceship, I'm sorry but you're a dumb.
Do you really believe that?

Yes, I really do believe that the NASA video was really taken from a spaceship (using a rather loose definition of the word). Oh, and you might want to learn English grammar before before insulting others as "a dumb".

Also, you might want to try making an argument to support your claim that your evidence is useful.

How is that spaceship not falling out of the sky without some massive engines? How does it move around when it is so obviously non-aerodynamic? I'm more apt to believe in Inception before this clearly CGI video.

Oh. My. God.

I don't want to answer. I just don't.   *facepalm*

Video is ridiculously fake.

TOO much curvature and things look computer generated.

Compare with this picture:

Yeah. When it's that damn close to the planet (Especially compared to the ISS altitude) it's not going to show much of it's curve. You guys are somethin else.

1.  Obviously, the footage has been heavily edited to make it look cooler.  That does not make it fake.  The video is meant to impress people, not prove to FEers that the Earth is a globe.

2.  It is very, very easy to understand how something could rotate around a sphere without perpetual propulsion.  It's called an orbit.  This illustration should clarify things:

I don't get what about this diagram is so difficult to believe.  Here is another:


3.  Orbital decay is most definitely a thing.

Do you believe that this NASA video was really taken from a spaceship?
Do you really believe that?

This video is so fake, I can't believe anyone would think it is actual footage.

Quote from: EduardoVS-BR on April 06, 2012, 08:38:10 PM

Do you believe that this NASA video was really taken from a spaceship?
Do you really believe that?

This video is so fake, I can't believe anyone would think it is actual footage.

If it's so fake, it should be so easy to prove.

And what about this feed?
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/live-iss-stream#

Quote from: EduardoVS-BR on April 06, 2012, 08:38:10 PM

Do you believe that this NASA video was really taken from a spaceship?
Do you really believe that?

This video is so fake, I can't believe anyone would think it is actual footage.

I see nothing in the video that conflicts with round earth theory.  What is it about this video that would be considered fake?  I see maintained altitude, appropriate reflections in space station hull, appropriate reflections of the moon on the ground and on bodies of water,  nothing about the lighting seems wrong.  What do you see in the video that makes it so obvious to you that it's fake?  In the context of round earth theory, what did the video get wrong?

So this thread has gone for 3 pages and nobody bothered to do any actual research, in favor of wild speculation. Typical.

The video obviously wasn't made by a camcorder; it's a rather heavily post-processed timelapse of individual photos, so calling it computer-animated or CGI would be accurate.  But the source photos themselves are genuine.

As I pointed out in the recent thread about a similar video, the original, high resolution, unedited photos (every single one of them, whether included in videos or not) along with extensive background information on each one, can be downloaded directly from the source: http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/.

Feel free to try to find any inconsistencies in the actual photos and come back when you have any concerns that aren't addressed in the articles on the site.