It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I find it interesting that those who don't believe that science and technology can take us to the moon or capture pictures rely on it in their daily lives without question and believe it can create more real pictures than actual pictures
originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
Your argument is specious
originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: Ove38
And is that the moons surface or is it something that was added to give the visual feel to the pic ? eta ...so where is the flag ?
originally posted by: butcherguy
Two different moonrise photos:
Both were taken from Earth.
Is this proof that we have two different moons....
or the moon grows and shrinks?
originally posted by: Ove38
The Earth is much larger than the moon, therefore images of the Earth from the Moon should appear much larger than the Moon does from Earth.. It's really that simple.
originally posted by: imd12c4funn
originally posted by: ngchunter
a reply to: imd12c4funn
What you believe is irrelevant. Yes, NASA took real pictures of earth. No, Bob Ross' paintings have no equivalency with photos from LRO, regardless of the stitching and image processing. Every astrophoto you have ever seen has been processed to one extent or another, but that does not mean it's as fake as a Bob Ross painting. They even show the video on the LRO website of the raw wide angle camera images as it scans the surface of the earth and moon. It's quite real, just processed together to represent one moment of time from that scan.
It's fundamentally no different than stacking an image of a comet moving through space. If stacked on the stars and on the comet and composited it represents just one moment in time from the original imaging session, but it comes from a range of images covering a span of time where the comet was actually moving relative to the stars. If you simply added the photos together without any other processing the comet would be a blur, just as earth would be a blur if you stabilized on the moon's surface and didn't do any other processing to create the image.
Prove that NASA took real pictures of Earth. You can't and never will be able to, but that is irrelevant.
What is relevant is that you rely on the word of a 3rd party unknown to you and proclaim it as gospel truth.
I rely on the admission of the use of special processing and supposed composites to create a representation of a real picture.
I rely on the fact that the NASA can create a representation but cannot take a snapshot of Earth that can actually be analyzed to prove the image is reality.