earth from outer space

hello dear people,i have a quest i wish to share
it all begun a year ago...  was just about to draw a picture of earth when i stopped for a few moments to search the internet for a genuine picture of earth from outer space.being already in 2013 i expected for something really beautiful,a full screen HD picture with some stars or a piece of space around,but to my still continuous wondering i have found NONE,not then not even today.it seemed strange at first and as a joke i started to challenge people i knew and meet to find any kind of image-IMPORTANT:real image or real video of earth from outer space,meaning the whole planet as it's self in the vast space floating;i have even set a prize for the one who will succeed:moderate for the beginning,but with time grew in to fulfill any wish the triumphant,could expect from a normal human being and,could fit in my possibilities to accomplish.
the quest is still on,the prize likewise,even with all the people that are trying to convince me with certain images and false proof or composite pictures(aka google earth).please note that even if not a trained artist one could easily see the not real thing.but on the second,rest assure if the real deal is a bit photoshoped to enhance some of the colours(real) of the planet or to accentuate the light of space/stars(real not collage),i have a trained eye for such.and second please:if someone finds one of the renowned "the blue marble" pictures-any year ,first consult a mathematician/geometrycian or someone who have the list knowledge how to calculate the surface of the continents overlaid on the size of the sphere of the picture-the land masses wont fit in any of them sorry..
and as a ++ the whole solar system(besides the moon and sun) lacks real pictures of such caliber :outer but still kind of a closeup,if you like as a planetary portrait of each.they are either from the 60's-70's or whatever(nice paintings) or computer generated.hmm curious,with all this new technology still no freaking real pictures...
oh...if i am in the wrong forum please direct me to a more appropriate one,thank you!

As Galileo receded from its second flyby of Earth on December 16 and 17, 1992, it captured this sequence of Earth rotating as the Moon zipped by on its orbit. There are 56 frames in total, each separated by 15 minutes, spanning about 14 hours.

thank you flat orange for the time spend to find this
it is beautiful as an example,almost close as the kind i wish for
but....
is this what you call real?
the first one is just a series of the same "blue marble" in a somewhat apparent turning motion,and look at the reflection of the sun..it is so small compared with what it will be if the proportions between size of the sun and earth + the distance and the so called spherical shape that we all learned about are genuine.(if you have a friend that works on 3D computer programs ask him to make a close similar model of this proportions and textures and you will see how light behaves considering all the details)
and the one with the moon.please explain with no calculation necessary if you chose,considering the distances that the moon transverse in the example and the one of between the moon and earth have(which is great-384,400 km).how is it possible for the moon to have almost the same size,wouldn't be right to drastically change it?(at least around the 12 o'clock-the middle- of the motion pictures)+ if it was for real,the moon since the beginning should have been way much smaller,it is on the opposite side of the earth in report to Galileo's

Are there any pictures of a guarded ice wall surrounding the 'flat earth'?
Have there ever been any expeditions to the edge of the earth?
no, then there is no evidence that the earth has an edge.

Could someone please direct me to the flat earth society's statement of faith?
IE, The dogma that every flat earth person believes, and has apparently been convinced of the evidence for?

the earth is round, it looks that way the further you get from it.
Take a soccer ball and place it on your eye, tell me, can you say that it is round?
Now take something a lot bigger, say an exercise ball.
put your face up close, can you see it is round?
no, only when you start to bring your face further away from it.

Now take something larger, say the EARTH.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

and then again  keep in mind : i don't believe anything that is yet nothing,i take no sides,it's just a thread i like to question on,especially that there are no concrete evidence,neither "flat" nor "round" neither ice walled around....for example,your video and plank face clear demonstration (sorry but you could sound naive to believe so vehement without experience ,especially that i can bet you have never got far enough from your globular earth to have a more real impression) are irrelevant especially with all those fish eyed lens going on this days.I mean look at this ,it" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">,it reaches just 2 km lower than your guy,doesn't the horizon look flatter(should you question this clip,yes you should,as i will question all evidence that any one can bring)

and then again  keep in mind : i don't believe anything that is yet nothing,i take no sides,it's just a thread i like to question on,especially that there are no concrete evidence,neither "flat" nor "round" neither ice walled around....for example,your video and plank face clear demonstration (sorry but you could sound naive to believe so vehement without experience ,especially that i can bet you have never got far enough from your globular earth to have a more real impression) are irrelevant especially with all those fish eyed lens going on this days.I mean look at this ,it" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">,it reaches just 2 km lower than your guy,doesn't the horizon look flatter(should you question this clip,yes you should,as i will question all evidence that any one can bring)

The amateur rocket did not come close even close the ISS altitude.  The rocket went 121,000 feet. That is 22 miles. The ISS is travelling at 250 miles. Big difference.

..as i will question all evidence that any one can bring

I believe i have found your problem. You can't sit on the fence forever,
Either the Earth is flat, or it is Round.

I have yet to see one shred of evidence in support of the flat earth model.
All I ever get around here is 'look out your window'.

No explanation of UA, No evidence of the Ice Wall, No photographs of the edge of the Earth, not even any poorly photoshopped ones. No explanation for satellites, no explanation for 6 month long days on the poles, no explanation for the seasons, no explanation for why other planets in our solar system are round and have moons orbiting them.
No explanation for why you can't see sky scrapers from other countries with a telescope, but you can see the moon? and other planets? And the ISS? When you are on top of the Burj Khalifa, You can not see the Eifel tower, You can not see the Pyrimids,
You can not see the empire state building. You can point a laser , and it will not be seen.

There is no explanation of this in FET. The closest I ever got to an explanation was that light was being bent by gravity and distorting our view. But then again, the FEer I was debating could not explain why Only the light from the sun was being 'bent' and not man made light sources, including radio signals.

The "Ice Wall" is simply what you call Antarctica. 

Quote from: djuptsjomaour on March 25, 2014, 04:12:32 AM

..as i will question all evidence that any one can bring

I believe i have found your problem. You can't sit on the fence forever,
Either the Earth is flat, or it is Round.

I have yet to see one shred of evidence in support of the flat earth model.
All I ever get around here is 'look out your window'.

No explanation of UA, No evidence of the Ice Wall, No photographs of the edge of the Earth, not even any poorly photoshopped ones. No explanation for satellites, no explanation for 6 month long days on the poles, no explanation for the seasons, no explanation for why other planets in our solar system are round and have moons orbiting them.
No explanation for why you can't see sky scrapers from other countries with a telescope, but you can see the moon? and other planets? And the ISS? When you are on top of the Burj Khalifa, You can not see the Eifel tower, You can not see the Pyrimids,
You can not see the empire state building. You can point a laser , and it will not be seen.

There is no explanation of this in FET. The closest I ever got to an explanation was that light was being bent by gravity and distorting our view. But then again, the FEer I was debating could not explain why Only the light from the sun was being 'bent' and not man made light sources, including radio signals.

That is just some of it. They can't find the location of the south pole, they can't explain why the north star can't be seen in the south hemisphere, They can measure accurate distances with their map, they can't explain lunar eclipse.

The "Ice Wall" is simply what you call Antarctica.

How convenient for you. ANY evidence that the 'antartican' Ice Wall, extends around the entire perimeter of the flat earth?

Nope. So why do you believe in the ice wall in the first place? Have YOU been to Antarctica?

Sure there is evidence.  Just look at the UN logo.

Sure there is evidence.  Just look at the UN logo.

That is not evidence my friend.
Here is evidence of what you look like in real life:

http://oi62.tinypic.com/35c2bdt.jpg

Evidence? I'm sure you will agree it is absolutely useless as evidence.
On a more serious note, are you telling me you base your entire worldview based on a logo?
Does the UN give an explanation for using a 2d logo?
Perhaps they should have used something 3d, pity we don't have holographic displays.

Notice that, despite all of the other continents being represented, Antarctica is not.  Suspicious?

Also, the Earth on their logo looks a lot like the FE map.  Coincidence? 

Quote from: djuptsjomaour on March 25, 2014, 04:12:32 AM

..as i will question all evidence that any one can bring

I believe i have found your problem. You can't sit on the fence forever,
Either the Earth is flat, or it is Round.

but yes i can,i have no other options,for now there is only the "fence"
for me it is amazing that in the year 2014 there is still no real photographed evidence of earth being globed.and that raises questions like: what is NASA and other organisations like it and all that are implicated up to?
                                   what is the tomorrow of mankind if all of today is flod?
thank you again for the struggle

Quote from: 3.14159265359 on March 25, 2014, 04:32:04 AM

Quote from: djuptsjomaour on March 25, 2014, 04:12:32 AM

..as i will question all evidence that any one can bring

I believe i have found your problem. You can't sit on the fence forever,
Either the Earth is flat, or it is Round.

but yes i can,i have no other options,for now there is only the "fence"
for me it is amazing that in the year 2014 there is still no real photographed evidence of earth being globed.and that raises questions like: what is NASA and other organisations like it and all that are implicated up to?
                                   what is the tomorrow of mankind if all of today is flod?
thank you again for the struggle

What kind of photographed evidence would you accept to be valid?

Notice that, despite all of the other continents being represented, Antarctica is not.  Suspicious?

Also, the Earth on their logo looks a lot like the FE map.  Coincidence?

No it's not suspicious at all. what is suspicious is that the FE map closely resembles the UN logo.
But i think you are trying to smuggle in a conspiracy theory as evidence, correct?

What kind of photographed evidence would you accept to be valid?
[/quote]
the kind that is real?i have already explained the details,for example the ISS is to low for the frame i wish for.

Notice that, despite all of the other continents being represented, Antarctica is not.  Suspicious?

Also, the Earth on their logo looks a lot like the FE map.  Coincidence?

As a refutation to your 'evidence' that the earth is flat, Could you kindly remind us all what the United Nations is?
And which Nation is associated with Antarctica?
Is Antarctica considered a Country?
Nope.

What kind of photographed evidence would you accept to be valid?

the kind that is real?i have already explained the details,for example the ISS is to low for the frame i wish for.
[/quote]What about this sack of crap taken from a supposed Apollo 17.



http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=55418

What kind of photographed evidence would you accept to be valid?

the kind that is real?i have already explained the details,for example the ISS is to low for the frame i wish for.
[/quote]

I think you would reject any picture.
Here's a solution, get a weather balloon, and a camera, and take your own photo's.
you can't dispute that can you?

Quote from: djuptsjomaour on March 25, 2014, 05:27:54 AM

What kind of photographed evidence would you accept to be valid?

the kind that is real?i have already explained the details,for example the ISS is to low for the frame i wish for.

I think you would reject any picture.
Here's a solution, get a weather balloon, and a camera, and take your own photo's.
you can't dispute that can you?
[/quote]You've already been told iit's not high enough. He/she wants one from space that he/she can analyse to confirm it's legitimacy.

err no, a weather balloon can get sufficiently high, for a reasonably low price.
check this out:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2048244/Home-200-weather-balloon-captures-Thames-118-000-feet-up.html

What about this sack of crap taken from a supposed Apollo 17.



http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=55418
[/quote]
nope...that is one of the "blue marbles" i was referring in my first post:
",rest assure if the real deal is a bit photoshoped to enhance some of the colours(real) of the planet or to accentuate the light of space/stars(real not collage),i have a trained eye for such.and second please:if someone finds one of the renowned "the blue marble" pictures-any year ,first consult a mathematician/geometrycian or someone who have the list knowledge how to calculate the surface of the continents overlaid on the size of the sphere of the picture-the land masses wont fit in any of them sorry.."
thank you 

What kind of photographed evidence would you accept to be valid?

the kind that is real?i have already explained the details,for example the ISS is to low for the frame i wish for.
[/quote]
That is a fair answer. Define me real and who is going to take tour picture.

Nobody will ever give you a picture of Earth from space, because nobody can get into space to do so. The fact that you've never seen a genuine picture of Earth from space should tell you all you need to know.

Nobody will ever give you a picture of Earth from space, because nobody can get into space to do so. The fact that you've never seen a genuine picture of Earth from space should tell you all you need to know.

I am not asking you my question. He wants it to be "'real" but did not define it.

Nobody will ever give you a picture of Earth from space, because nobody can get into space to do so. The fact that you've never seen a genuine picture of Earth from space should tell you all you need to know.

What is your view on the use of satellites to receive data from aircraft every hour to send back to eg. Rolls Royce?

Sure there is evidence.  Just look at the UN logo.

The purpose of the projection of this map is to provide a neutral center point so that no particular country can be considered or thought of as being more important that any other. Antarctica doesn't need to be shown because it is not and never will be in the UN.

Nobody will ever give you a picture of Earth from space, because nobody can get into space to do so. The fact that you've never seen a genuine picture of Earth from space should tell you all you need to know.

Except that there are millions of genuine pictures and videos of space everywhere. You simply reject them because you refuse to admit that you are wrong. But you are. You're wrong.