The Moon Supports the BiPolar Model. (56K Warning)

I'd say that's like a slightly larger Moon then normal, definitely not the Super moon I'm talking about.

I'd say that's like a slightly larger Moon then normal, definitely not the Super moon I'm talking about.

The size of the Moon at apogee is 28.5 arc minutes  and at perigee it is 32 arc minutes. That's a difference of 12%.  That is the actual difference in size between the Moon and Supermoon.

Edit: corrected degrees to arc minutes.

Quote from: Sculelos on January 17, 2014, 12:24:01 PM

I'd say that's like a slightly larger Moon then normal, definitely not the Super moon I'm talking about.

The size of the Moon at apogee is 28.5 degrees  and at perigee it is 32 degrees. That's a difference of 12%.  That is the actual difference in size between the Moon and Supermoon.

I've measured the Moon as little as 5 Degrees at Apogee and as large as about 32 degrees judging by the Supermoon. That's about a 2.5 Times Distance (250% Variation) or about going from 100K to 250K distance.

Quote from: dephelis on January 17, 2014, 12:49:24 PM

Quote from: Sculelos on January 17, 2014, 12:24:01 PM

I'd say that's like a slightly larger Moon then normal, definitely not the Super moon I'm talking about.

The size of the Moon at apogee is 28.5 degrees  and at perigee it is 32 degrees. That's a difference of 12%.  That is the actual difference in size between the Moon and Supermoon.

I've measured the Moon as little as 5 Degrees at Apogee and as large as about 32 degrees judging by the Supermoon. That's about a 2.5 Times Distance (250% Variation) or about going from 100K to 250K distance.

5 degrees? Either delusion or outright lie, either way that is utter rubbish.

Quote from: Sculelos on January 17, 2014, 01:23:09 PM

Quote from: dephelis on January 17, 2014, 12:49:24 PM

Quote from: Sculelos on January 17, 2014, 12:24:01 PM

I'd say that's like a slightly larger Moon then normal, definitely not the Super moon I'm talking about.

The size of the Moon at apogee is 28.5 degrees  and at perigee it is 32 degrees. That's a difference of 12%.  That is the actual difference in size between the Moon and Supermoon.

I've measured the Moon as little as 5 Degrees at Apogee and as large as about 32 degrees judging by the Supermoon. That's about a 2.5 Times Distance (250% Variation) or about going from 100K to 250K distance.

5 degrees? Either delusion or outright lie, either way that is utter rubbish.

Sounds like it but when you see it and measure it in the Sky yourself you tend to believe that the Moon is just on a highly eccentric flight path around Earth and must vary considerably (at least 250%)

Quote from: dephelis on January 17, 2014, 01:33:05 PM

Quote from: Sculelos on January 17, 2014, 01:23:09 PM

Quote from: dephelis on January 17, 2014, 12:49:24 PM

Quote from: Sculelos on January 17, 2014, 12:24:01 PM

I'd say that's like a slightly larger Moon then normal, definitely not the Super moon I'm talking about.

The size of the Moon at apogee is 28.5 degrees  and at perigee it is 32 degrees. That's a difference of 12%.  That is the actual difference in size between the Moon and Supermoon.

I've measured the Moon as little as 5 Degrees at Apogee and as large as about 32 degrees judging by the Supermoon. That's about a 2.5 Times Distance (250% Variation) or about going from 100K to 250K distance.

5 degrees? Either delusion or outright lie, either way that is utter rubbish.

Sounds like it but when you see it and measure it in the Sky yourself you tend to believe that the Moon is just on a highly eccentric flight path around Earth and must vary considerably (at least 250%)

No it doesn't. I've actually been measuring it for the best part of 20 years and the diameter has never exceeded 32'.

I never measure in Inches though. Always in degrees.

I never measure in Inches though. Always in degrees.

Do you really mr 190 IQ? What is a smaller unit of degrees? Inches? Would you happen to know what the " stands for when discussing an angular measurement? Because it is more precise than inches which is already more precise than degrees.

Quote from: Sculelos on January 17, 2014, 02:33:35 PM

I never measure in Inches though. Always in degrees.

Do you really mr 190 IQ? What is a smaller unit of degrees? Inches? Would you happen to know what the " stands for when discussing an angular measurement? Because it is more precise than inches which is already more precise than degrees.

I need this 32 hour workday to end as my brain is scrambled. First I use degrees instead of minutes, then I use seconds (") instead of minutes ('). Need sleep!

Hopefully my posts are all now fixed.

Quote from: rottingroom on January 17, 2014, 02:46:54 PM

Quote from: Sculelos on January 17, 2014, 02:33:35 PM

I never measure in Inches though. Always in degrees.

Do you really mr 190 IQ? What is a smaller unit of degrees? Inches? Would you happen to know what the " stands for when discussing an angular measurement? Because it is more precise than inches which is already more precise than degrees.

I need this 32 hour workday to end as my brain is scrambled. First I use degrees instead of minutes, then I use seconds (") instead of minutes ('). Need sleep!

Hopefully my posts are all now fixed.

Arc Minutes certainly makes more sense. It's possible that Earths Atmosphere is acting like a concave or convex surface and distorting true distances and sizes. I'm not sure. Optically the Moon varies up to 250% that I am certain. However if the Atmosphere is magnifying or reducing the Size of the Moon it means the Optical measurement is not accurate. I still need more research done into this topic before I can come to any real conclusions.

Quote from: dephelis on January 17, 2014, 04:24:41 PM

Quote from: rottingroom on January 17, 2014, 02:46:54 PM

Quote from: Sculelos on January 17, 2014, 02:33:35 PM

I never measure in Inches though. Always in degrees.

Do you really mr 190 IQ? What is a smaller unit of degrees? Inches? Would you happen to know what the " stands for when discussing an angular measurement? Because it is more precise than inches which is already more precise than degrees.

I need this 32 hour workday to end as my brain is scrambled. First I use degrees instead of minutes, then I use seconds (") instead of minutes ('). Need sleep!

Hopefully my posts are all now fixed.

Arc Minutes certainly makes more sense. It's possible that Earths Atmosphere is acting like a concave or convex surface and distorting true distances and sizes. I'm not sure. Optically the Moon varies up to 250% that I am certain.

As demonstrated in the image posted earlier, and numerous others taken by amateur astronomers the world over, there isn't a 250% variance in the apparent size of the Moon.

However if the Atmosphere is magnifying or reducing the Size of the Moon it means the Optical measurement is not accurate. I still need more research done into this topic before I can come to any real conclusions.

Regardless of whether it is being altered, it should remain consistent so that relative sizes can be compare accurately.

My mathematics would indicate otherwise but it might also be related to luminosity making the apparent size of the Moon appear bigger as it's always a bright golden or reddish color when it's huge looking.

On a somewhat related note I also looked at the Cosmic Milky Way and compared it to my Earth and Moon model and it's eerie  similar.





Edit: I also looked at the coloration from a time-lapse and the results found were interesting.

You forgot to mirror some of those pictures Sculelos.  How are we supposed to know what's going on now?

You forgot to mirror some of those pictures Sculelos.  How are we supposed to know what's going on now?

They are still Mirrored but not in the way you are expecting. 

Could you maybe add some swirl effects to clear things up a bit more?

Could you maybe add some swirl effects to clear things up a bit more?

This is what happens when you get too swirled Man. You start to think the swirled realty is real.

My mathematics would indicate otherwise but it might also be related to luminosity making the apparent size of the Moon appear bigger as it's always a bright golden or reddish color when it's huge looking.

On a somewhat related note I also looked at the Cosmic Milky Way and compared it to my Earth and Moon model and it's eerie  similar.

Then I would suggest you post your full calculations so we can point out where you have gone wrong.

Also the image of the Milky Way was our best guess until recent experiments which seem to indicate that it has four major arms rather than two

Edit: fixed the quote.

Could you maybe add some swirl effects to clear things up a bit more?

Or bunch of intersecting lines everywhere indicating the prismatic paths of electromagnetic polarizing duplex-dimensional psionic protoss anti-radiation.

Should all fall into place then.

What is the point of these overlays? How does any of this support anything other than the fact you can overlay a bunch of things in the solar system and make it look like nothing?

What is the point of these overlays? How does any of this support anything other than the fact you can overlay a bunch of things in the solar system and make it look like nothing?

They support my hypothesis that Sculelos is on acid.

Quote from: ausGeoff on January 17, 2014, 04:08:28 AM

Quote from: AnonConda on January 17, 2014, 02:51:40 AM

The photo is possible by high zoom from an elevated stand point, and is consistent with the round earth model.

In actuality, the moon appears about 1.5% smaller when it's closer to the horizon than when it's high in the sky—because it's farther away by nearly one earth radius.  Atmospheric refraction also makes the image of the moon slightly smaller in the vertical direction.

The width of the supposed reflection at the horizon is the giveaway with this pic.  It's far too wide.

It's called Supermoon and the Moon is only 2/5ths it's normal distance meaning the Moon is 2.5 Times as big as average meaning the Moon goes from About 5-6 Degrees wide in the Sky to about 32 degrees wide in the Sky.

The Moon is always as Wide as it is Tall. Therefore the Usual distance to the moon is 237,000 miles but on that night the Moon was only 94,800 Miles from Earth.

You can't be serious. The distance from the earth to the moon varies between 225,622 and 252,088 miles.

Quote from: Sculelos on January 17, 2014, 10:47:54 AM

Quote from: ausGeoff on January 17, 2014, 04:08:28 AM

Quote from: AnonConda on January 17, 2014, 02:51:40 AM

The photo is possible by high zoom from an elevated stand point, and is consistent with the round earth model.

In actuality, the moon appears about 1.5% smaller when it's closer to the horizon than when it's high in the sky—because it's farther away by nearly one earth radius.  Atmospheric refraction also makes the image of the moon slightly smaller in the vertical direction.

The width of the supposed reflection at the horizon is the giveaway with this pic.  It's far too wide.

It's called Supermoon and the Moon is only 2/5ths it's normal distance meaning the Moon is 2.5 Times as big as average meaning the Moon goes from About 5-6 Degrees wide in the Sky to about 32 degrees wide in the Sky.

The Moon is always as Wide as it is Tall. Therefore the Usual distance to the moon is 237,000 miles but on that night the Moon was only 94,800 Miles from Earth.

You can't be serious. The distance from the earth to the moon varies between 225,622 and 252,088 miles.

I need to retest the Moon when I see it that close again. The last time I measured it at 32 degrees was sometime in 2012. Most nights it's about 5 degrees or so.

It's called Supermoon and the Moon is only 2/5ths it's normal distance meaning the Moon is 2.5 Times as big as average meaning the Moon goes from About 5-6 Degrees wide in the Sky to about 32 degrees wide in the Sky.

Sorry, but this is totally erroneous.  The moon's size never alters by more than 1.5% regardless of its orbit or its distance to earth.  The moon subtends an angle of approximately 0.54° (32 arc-minutes) which never varies noticeably.  To imagine that it goes from 5º to 32º is hysterically funny to anybody with a knowledge of astronomy.

Therefore the Usual distance to the moon is 237,000 miles but on that night the Moon was only 94,800 Miles from Earth.

Once again an absurd claim!  The moon is always around 240,000 miles from the earth.

I can't believe that people still maintaining these fanciful ideas of "supermoons" in the 21st century.  Aren't they teaching our kids astronomy in high schools any more?

I'd say that's like a slightly larger Moon then normal, definitely not the Super moon I'm talking about.

Again..... you do understand that this moon image is a fake don't you?   Or..... don't tell me you thought it was a real photo? 

There is NO such thing as a "supermoon".  You really need to get over this.
 
 

Again..... you do understand that this moon image is a fake don't you?   Or..... don't tell me you thought it was a real photo? 

There is NO such thing as a "supermoon".  You really need to get over this.

News 24 thinks it is a real picture of the moon.

http://www.news24.com/Multimedia/World/Supermoon-around-the-world-20130624

Have a look at image 3. 

News 24 thinks it is a real picture of the moon.

I'm intrigued.  You totally refute any/all pictures of our planet taken from outer space (showing a spherical earth) as being bogus, or manipulated with software.

How is it then that you accept these images as being unquestioningly accurate, and with no software manipulation having been applied?

Why the double standard?

Quote from: jroa on January 20, 2014, 04:29:06 AM

News 24 thinks it is a real picture of the moon.

I'm intrigued.  You totally refute any/all pictures of our planet taken from outer space (showing a spherical earth) as being bogus, or manipulated with software.

How is it then that you accept these images as being unquestioningly accurate, and with no software manipulation having been applied?

Why the double standard?

I did not claim that the picture is "unquestioningly accurate".  I was simply stating a fact; a media outlet believed that supermoons do exist and that the picture was accurate, otherwise they would not have reported it to be accurate, nor would they have claimed it was a supermoon. 

[...] a media outlet believed that supermoons do exist and that the picture was accurate, otherwise they would not have reported it to be accurate, nor would they have claimed it was a supermoon.

Fair enough.  I assumed that you agreed with News24 that they were "real"images (as you apparently posted them in support of your personal acceptance of the supermoon theory).

And I think we all know the distortions of fact that emanate from news desks LOL.

How did you measure 32deg?

Sorry, but this is totally erroneous.  The moon's size never alters by more than 1.5% regardless of its orbit or its distance to earth.  I can't believe that people still maintaining these fanciful ideas of "supermoons" in the 21st century.  Aren't they teaching our kids astronomy in high schools any more?

Once again an absurd claim!  The moon is always around 240,000 miles from the earth

There is NO such thing as a "supermoon".  You really need to get over this.

I really don't know where you come up with some of what you say. There is a "supermoon" and while the term originated with astrology, not astronomy, it does exist.



While the supermoon is nowhere near as large as Sculelos is suggesting the "supermoon" of June 2013 was "up to 14% larger and 30% brighter than a typical Full Moon...This is a result of the Moon reaching its perigree - the closest that it gets to the Earth during the course of its orbit. During perigree on 23 June the Moon will be "only" about 221,824 miles away, as compared to the 252,581 miles away that it is at its furthest distance from the Earth (apogee). "

http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/moon/newsdisplay.cfm?Subsite_News_ID=44049&SiteID=6&iSiteID=1