When you see it

Precisely!

A composite or an artists rendering is what is presented by NASA in I'd guess 99.9% of the images that people believe are photos.
I am not saying NASA has presented them in a disingenuous fashion. Simply that, the average Joe see's the latest image on a magazine while in line at the grocery store. He gets a little patriotic boost I mean, just look at that "We" just took a picture of a Brown dwarf Star 200 Million Lightyears away! That is amazing that We can even do that!

Technically we haven't used a photograph to image space for a very long time. I mean actual reflected light to a lens , to a filmstrip, being recovered and the developed in a dark room with chemical immersion. We use composite layers of data captured by a sensor interpreted by a computer program. That data is then converted into a transmit able form of energy that is again captured and reconverted into information that can be displayed as an image on a screen.

Just in defense this is not me saying that this method of capturing an "image" cannot present an accurate depiction of an area of space time in a given moment. This is just me saying that neither of the op images are photos. And, no amount of perspective can account for the size difference of America presented. Period.

Now could a misinterpretation of data be the culprit? Possibly. A misplaced decimal point is easily overlooked.

Now, the reason for releasing them both as claimed accurate representations of The Earth in photo form? How did this even get released?!

reply to: chr0naut

a reply to: Jonjonj

test that theory on the globe in my OP

a reply to: conz1992

True that, this time it seems the data was transcribed into a wonderful propaganda piece. I suppose, there are no standards regarding photographs of the earth

originally posted by: SKurtle
Let us not forget m.youtube.com... a reply to: chr0naut

You should also know that all astronauts are quite aware of the cancer risk from leaving our safe cocooning atmosphere. Despite that, they have decided to risk it, for the rewards that being an astronaut offers.

Acknowledgement of the dangers does not imply that Van-Allen belt radiation is immediately fatal. It isn't. Some people have genetic resistance and for others, it is just the "luck of the draw" that confers cancer or not. The risk factors for radiation carcinogenesis are calculable and are held as low as possible in practice.

Here's a Wikipedia article on Spaceflight Radiation Carcinogenesis.

t.co... B.O.O has shared the same photo on his twitter xD check it out