It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: clevargenuis
i know its getting a little hot in here for nasa defendants but why trash the thread? its only gonna prove my point lmao
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: clevargenuis
i know its getting a little hot in here for nasa defendants but why trash the thread? its only gonna prove my point lmao
You're new here.
Certain forums have different parameters. It so happens that you have posted in a science forum. In this forum it is acceptable to ask for evidence for claims.
There are other forums which are not as...picky. So, if you don't like being asked for evidence, one of those forums would be more appropriate.
Your thread would not be trashed, it would be properly situated.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: visitedbythem
Indeed. But that is not relevant to the question.
have iss astronats on space walks ever taken a picture in which earth is FULLY seen?????
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: WarriorMH
Me? It's Phage, not page.
But other than that (and that I don't quite get your meaning), this thread isn't about me, is it?
originally posted by: clevargenuis
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: clevargenuis
Why does NASA rely on compositing and photoshoppery?
Why do you say NASA relies on compositing and photoshoppery?
You know that there are many forms of data which NASA utilizes, many of which have nothing to do with visual imagery.
as far as earth images are concerned nasa relies on photoshop/CGI.
you wouldnt trust a news agency that habitually shows you fake photoshopped images, so why do you trust NASA?
originally posted by: ImaFungi
Adding the fish eye idea to;
2002 composite image 443 miles above
2015 single image 930,000 miles above
Could that have something to do with it too?
originally posted by: clevargenuis
originally posted by: choos
originally posted by: clevargenuis
maps are a different story. I'm just asking for an actual photo of earth. they can give us hi res photos of friggin pluto but dont have the tech to give us an actual photo of earth roflmao
no its the same thing..
maps are meant to be real, so that we can read them to know where we are!!
photo of the earth and a map are two very different things.
Try harder. Why does NASA rely on compositing and photoshoppery?
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: clevargenuis
originally posted by: choos
originally posted by: clevargenuis
maps are a different story. I'm just asking for an actual photo of earth. they can give us hi res photos of friggin pluto but dont have the tech to give us an actual photo of earth roflmao
no its the same thing..
maps are meant to be real, so that we can read them to know where we are!!
photo of the earth and a map are two very different things.
Try harder. Why does NASA rely on compositing and photoshoppery?
Because the ISS is only 400 miles up. From 400 miles away, the Earth fills pretty much the entire sky looking in that direction. To fit it all means we have to either stitch a panorama or use a fisheye lens (or both).
AHA so nasa never made it high enough to photograph earth?!
also how come NASA dont have footage from their rocket showing the journey from earth to space??
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: clevargenuis
AHA so nasa never made it high enough to photograph earth?!
The Moon is quite a bit "higher" than the ISS.