261–270 of 419 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My guess is the answer is: We didn’t really launch Artemis. This is all CG.
> This is all CG. Reminds me of the classic - It is true that Spielberg filmed the moon landings, but he was such a perfectionist that he wanted to shoot on location.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Flat Earth is a distraction or a way to ridicule any counter-narrative to anything scientific. When a cosmologist says that a planet nobody can see exists and is made of x% helium and is y light years away etc etc with absolute certainty despite nobody being able to go there and witness any of it (look how wrong they were about Pluto’s appearance), then you can always just say “what are you a Flat Earther” and easily…
> a planet nobody can see exists and is made of x% helium and is y light years away etc etc Yeah, because this is high-school curriculum. https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/edu/resources/lesson-plan/using-lig... > with absolute certainty It is taught that the scientific method provides evidence, not certainty, in middle school science curriculum.
FWIW, this fact isn't taught properly or normies are somehow unable to process it.
There's this popular dismissal of tech people, saying that "they think in 0s and 1s, but world is shades of gray", but in reality, it's almost everyone else that thinks in 0s and 1s - STEM people and people in/into similar fields (like medicine) are usually forced to understand nuance due to nature of their interests/occupation, but everyone else seems to operate in purely binary mode, and what's worse, whether something is true and false isn't even correlated much with objective reality, and mostly with one's personal feelings about how things should be.
(Now, to be an equal opportunity cynic, in my experience, the concept of categories and taxonomies being arbitrary - invented and assigned by people, and judged by their usefulness, as opposed to being inherent facts of nature that are discovered - seems to be hard for even STEM people to process, for some reason, at least based on my observations and the number of conversations I had about this with all kinds of people.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The photograph appears to show nightime on Earth with just a sliver of daytime. Beyond cities in Iberia and along the coast of Africa, most of what we can see would be reflected light from the Moon? We are just past full moon on April 1.
1/4 exposure time so 250 ms of light. the light is coming from all the light sources in the universe, plus the moon, plus the sun's rays refracting through the atmosphere which happens even at night. The natural blue light is coming from the oxygen in the atmosphere but it's so overwhelming in that spot that it turns the light pure white. The red/orangish is coming from particulates and the green/red from aurora. My…
That's highly incorrect. I have many lightsources that aren't contributing to any photons in that picture. For example my refrigerator light.
How are people still flat-earthers after stuff like this
If you are interested in taking similar images, there are several satellites transmitting ‘full disk’ images like this, instead of a camera you need a dish or yagi a sdr and lna. Example satellites are Himawari 8, GOES 18, Fengyun 2H.
I remember there's some tools to use the images as desktop backgrounds: https://github.com/boramalper/himawaripy
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or maybe press the timer and let it float...
or sticky-tape it to the window. d5 has an actual shutter yeah? not mirrorless? I think the shutter moving will spin the camera.
No it didn't. That would be catastrophic and likely fatal. They are going to the Moon, which is also in Earth orbit.
truly stunning picture