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.

 

Full Earth view from ISS Cupola Impossible 100 percent Fake

page: 12
37
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: WaxingGibbons

No. With correct technique from ANY HEIGHT, assuming the ISS is LEVEL, it will ALWAYS be a ROUND composite. The fact is the angle only has to create an event horizon, for ALL YOU KNOW, the area in the picture is 4700 km~. The angled panes create relative horizons though and will make this composite round, because the Earth is Ultimately round, so as you go up, it REMAINS round composites.
edit on 25-3-2017 by MacK80 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: MacK80

The pic with lake Malawa, show about 1700km of surface, judging by the length of the lake. I just noticed that some pics from the cupola do in fact seem to show the entire Earth, this only makes things more fake.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: DJMSN

Could just ask the source: NASA.

Hey how come this picture appears to show a full earth but you guys say you can't see a full earth from the ISS?

But nah, this is more fun I guess.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:00 PM
link   
You are not wrong that you can't see the full earth from the ISS. Where you are wrong is that seeing round edges means you are looking at the whole earth. You are looking at one central photo and six photos of the edges of the viewable area in one composite, like a panorama, made using a fisheye lens. You are looking at the visible horizon at six angles from the distance of the ISS - not the hemisphere.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: MacK80



ATS filesize won't allow it, but here is the difference glass makes.
This is without Fish Eye, to show the distortion angle of the glass.

i.gyazo.com...
edit on 25-3-2017 by EartOccupant because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Umm... I just noticed this. How can the shot be 2 meters back if the overall height of the ENTIRE module is only 1.5 meters?

Overall height: 1.5-metre (4.9 ft)
Maximum diameter: 2.95-metre (9.68 ft)

Hmmm, I know, maybe because 2m is a BS number that WaxingGibbons pulled out of his rear end.

This is less than 2 meters:
www.nasa.gov...

Compare with the actual shot in question:
www.nasa.gov...

The camera is almost level with the edges of the Windows, which means it's a LOT closer than two meters.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

What kind of argument is that. Might aswell stop discussing things all together here. Why discuss 911, if we can simply ask the government what is up? Etc.

Why don't you contact NASA to get us the answer if it interests you?



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: DrWily

I didn't post any of those particular pics. Why don't you use the pics I posted and based my comments on?



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: eriktheawful
Again: I think you're just failing to understand how the view out the windows of the cupola works, and the use of different camera lenses.











That's correct, and notwithstanding that, normal views are by far the most common...Oh! and also real.

www.nasa.gov...

Example from the wiki site,



Use the direct link to the ATS file for more clarity, and full mag.
files.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 25-3-2017 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: WaxingGibbons
a reply to: DrWily

I didn't post any of those particular pics. Why don't you use the pics I posted and based my comments on?


And why are your 3rd party pics valid and my pics coming DIRECTLY FROM www.nasa.gov not valid? Hmm, I wonder where your source got them from...

You posted crappy, low resolution pics because they help your argument. I posted original, high resolution pics because they disprove your argument.
edit on 25-3-2017 by DrWily because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: samara11278

Throughout the thread, I presented two scenarios, one is that it shows the entire Earth which is impossible, the other is that it shows only a portion of Earth like a perfect sphere with space all around it, which is impossible too.

Looking at different pics from the cupola it appears that some show the entire Earth, and some show portions like a sphere with space around it. Both are impossible and getting both scenarios is impossible too.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: DrWily

Your pics don't disprove my argument that in the pics I posted the camera distance from the windows is 2 meter.

Your pics still show an impossible view, regardless of that.
edit on 25-3-2017 by WaxingGibbons because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Demonstration of a non-fake (but distorted) picture with fisheye lense showing the "globe" while only showing very small part of the total hemisphere. The NASA photo has the same effect, just less extreme:


edit on 25-3-2017 by redbore because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: WaxingGibbons
a reply to: DrWily

Your pics don't disprove my argument that in the pics I posted the camera distance from the windows is 2 meter.

Your pics still show an impossible view, regardless of that.


Your pics actually HELP my argument.

eol.jsc.nasa.gov...

It's obviously even closer than the pic I posted, which is WAY WAY less than 2 meters.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: WaxingGibbons
a reply to: samara11278

Throughout the thread, I presented two scenarios, one is that it shows the entire Earth which is impossible, the other is that it shows only a portion of Earth like a perfect sphere with space all around it, which is impossible too.

Looking at different pics from the cupola it appears that some show the entire Earth, and some show portions like a sphere with space around it. Both are impossible and getting both scenarios is impossible too.


You have to be trolling. There is just no way that you aren't. Haha.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

Seems like this is showing the full Earth.



Or least the curvature of the full hemisphere seems to match the curvature of the cupola more or less, or at least the part we see in this frame.

It is impossible for the Earth's curvature to match the 2m diamater cupola from 450 km.
edit on 25-3-2017 by WaxingGibbons because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: WaxingGibbons
a reply to: EartOccupant

Well, you are doing something wrong because it is not possible to view the entire Earth from 450 km, and again, we already established that it shows a portion of the Earth as a sphere with space all around it.


If its Impossible why does NASA say it is? Here Ill link you the official NASA picture. Its from 2013 mind you.

Earth view from ISS cupola.

If it was Fake NASA would not post it to be torn apart would they?



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: samara11278

Or are you trolling my thread? Let's stick to discussing the topic shall we.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

This is what NASA says, posting this for the 10th time,


Images of the earth may seem commonplace, but there are actually very few pictures of the entire planet. The problem, Simmon said, is all the NASA earth-observing satellites are in low-earth or geostationary orbit, meaning none of them are far enough away to see a full hemisphere. The most familiar pictures of the entire Earth are from the 1960s and 1970s Apollo missions to the moon.



posted on Mar, 25 2017 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: DrWily

And again, it is not relevant cause we can't see the entire Earth from 450 km.




top topics



 
37
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join