heh yea, that's a little too anemic with all the satellites supposedly over 20,000 miles away. That would be by far a good enough distance to show more pictures of the "convex globe".
On a side note the winer (Learn of the Jesuit Order) in the video has a little problem with me, he thinks i'm a shill and calls me Lord Steven Yeast. Not sure why he says that. Seems to think I have a yeast infection on my face. lol.
poor guy makes a bunch of wrong assessments, even though NASA does spew a bunch of bullshit.
This is supposedly from a weather satellite at 40,000km
It could be real (after being edited) because there isn't any spin and the Earth is admittedly forced convex by the camera
from the description, "The Sun is not visible due to mechanisms used to protect the camera CCD from direct exposure to sunlight. A circular mask on the CCD ensures that only the Earth is visible. This mask can be seen as pixelation on Earth's horizon. The mask also excludes stars from view, although they would not be bright enough to be visible to this camera."
Or it could just be fake... depends on my mood
Either fake or real, still possible inside the earth. especially if the geosat is levitating due to the ocathedron equilibrium points.
If these images were real shouldn't we see some movement of the clouds? And also I saw shadows of the satellite in some of the frames. Would there be a shadow from space?
yes, exactly. especially the sped up time lapsed one, where the motions are sped up. They say it takes 90 minutes to make one revolution, so at that rate we'd see at least a good 30 minutes of cloud movement during any one clip. lol.
My old phone shoots HD 1080p 30fps video. One would think with the billions of dollars NASA gets we should have hundreds of hours of video of the earth from space, not fake images combined to create a "animation". NASA is such a joke.
...I would say that this particular globe in the latest ISS video isn't even real!
Especially seeing it pass right in front of the camera at 1:23. Focus of it compared to her further back doesn't add up, just doesn't look a real physical object real to me. I do think these videos are very slick with the merging of CGI floating objects and interaction with the actors though, but that's all it is.. VFX.
I photographed the ISS the other night with my telescope, so I know there is an object up there passing overhead very fast (I like to see things as much as I can with my own eyes). But my conviction is all the footage of people shown is being faked with many many tricks stitched together.
Either there is a drone object up there with no one inside, or a completely different crew, they don't want the public seeing and knowing what they are doing is.
This thing IS hard to capture in a telescope, manually tracking it with a pointer with my eye through that and trying to operate a camera at the right moments. There are better captures and much worse captures by amateurs.. so for a first try I'm happy with it.
Here's some snaps I do of my preferred subject though...
Do you believe there are Apollo landing sites there?!
When taking photos or video I don't use the eye pieces, as I attach my camera on the back of it with an adapter. Standard with just no extra lens I would guess similar to the standard 25mm eye piece of 60X. I also use barlow lenses, which I have 2x and 3x of those on top. With eye pieces (which I have a full set too) - says the magnifications go up very high - 354x who knows?? ...I'm a bit of a beginner really. The smallest eye pieces are harder to see something in their tiny lens spot with your eye up against them. There is "eye piece projection" for pictures, but I haven't sussed out how to do get usable results that way yet. The more zoom used though, the harder it is to get a quality image with lesser light/higher ISO, increasing atmospheric distortion etc.
I'm kind of semi interested in buying a purpose astronomy CCD camera that you can feed into a laptop in real time. Apparently you can get some much better quality images that way, by stacking images together in software. But I don't want to get carried away with equipment...it can get a VERY expensive hobby by looks of it! And I'm not that into it, especially as I live around built up areas with light polution.
The ISS is supposed to be very big - diagrams of it next to 747's for comparison. - which is funny as all the living segments fit nicely inside size of such planes - zero g fakery scenes ;)
Regular satellites are tiny by comparison and we're told to be much much further away. There is a satellite tracking ap (the freebie for just ISS) which I might get and see if I can register any view of any so called satellites if they go near me in a clear night sky.
The black part of the image in down/righy corner could never be the the edge of a convex earth image because the showned curvature do not cannot match the size of Greece (even more difidult without a part of Crete in sight.
And it cannot be, also, the horizon...
In the upper video of this balloon (up - right)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPCvohXds1c&index=61&list=PLWRzUSpfFKZ8lPBisdoQ2SVjWW7iIDV5i at high altitude (just till 28,5km high), still when sky is still blue just above clouds, or when it turns to black sky, you can stop the video when the sun goes behind the rope and completly desappears with no light shining on the sides of the tiny rope...
last times the sun goes completly eciipsed behind the rope before the balloon burst are, for example:
Yes I catch your drift...but this video is real and also not easy to explain
I used to use Terragen way back in 2002/2003. It was pretty realistic for landscapes back then.. I made an intro video for my company and also used a scene for a background in one of my banners for my Bible software (long time back).
Of course you can fake this stuff.. I can see the movement in one video posted above yours where they are taking a still photo and doing some sort of slide and rotation morph with it at the same time to make it appear like you are looking down on Earth. To my eyes looks clearly faked.. In the same video has the fake moon setting scene, which also looks clearly faked.
Was thinking about doing a video on the Karman line.. And also on planetary orbits..
you have any interesting history behind NASA's cover up with the Karman line?
With my latest video about the influence of TV, cell phones, etc, I noticed that many of the scientists imported from Nazi Germany via Operation Paperclip were either rocket scientists or behavioral/psychiatrist types who were doing experiments with drugs/mind control/etc on people (those in concentration camps).. Many talk like all the mind control type scientists went to the various places of learning and the rocket scientists to NASA..
However, I am thinking many of these mind control types also went to NASA.. With all the fakery and forcing a certain model of Heliocentricism..
What are you thinking on this? you have any articles or interesting info on these topics?