"Where are the stars?" Apollo Mission - No stars visible from mood - proof of geocentric model?

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

I'm not interested about people proclaiming data form other satellite or "probes" in the solar system.

What is the point of asking the question if you've already banned evidence from the replies?

Because posting stuff about probes or whatever has nothing to do with being on the moon, they hadn't even been invented by then and there is a lot of reasons, that would lead away from the point of discussion. I don't want to run around researching space probes that are a red herring.

Asking questions that have been answered for decades isn’t digging for truth. Using an argument from incredulity as the basis of your question isn’t digging for truth. Trying to limit the framework of what answers people are “allowed” to give you isn’t digging for truth.

Just because you don’t understand the answer doesn’t make the answer invalid.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Short answer: exposure time.

Longer answer: The sun and objects that reflect the sun's light (Earth, Moon, car windshield, etc) are very, very bright. Pictures taken with the sun's light present requires very low exposure time (less than 1 second).

Stars light is faint. Very, very faint. To capture the light of stars, requires long exposure times. Here's an image I took that is a stack of frames, each frame being an exposure of 15 seconds or longer:



If you're standing on the surface of the Moon, while it's day time on it, and you take a picture of your fellow astronaut, the exposure time for the picture is going to be very short, something like 1/120 of a second or less. That's no where near enough time to capture the light from the stars.
If, on the other hand you do expose the frame long enough to show the stars....you still won't see them....because the entire frame will look blinding white from the over exposure of the sun light reflecting off the Moon's surface (and your astronaut friend).

In orbit, it will be the same thing: if you take a image while your camera is pointed either at the Moon or Earth, the sun light reflected from them is very, very bright, and the exposure time of the image will be very short, and not enough time to see the faint stars. Again: if you were to try and make the exposure time long enough to see the stars, you won't, because the reflected sun light will again wash out your image to where it's all white.

Even if you were to make the universe geocentric: it still would not change this fact.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

there is no star issue.

Case solved, resolved and archived.

The only issue around stars and the light seen or unseen..is a press interview by the first moon Apollo crew...when they could not remember if they had seen any or not.

That for me was strange.

You can only see star light by being in a shadow of a celestial body. The Sun overwhelms all other light sources we could possibly see with our eyes.

Anyway..there really is no star issue. The end.

The sunlit Earth and sunlit Moon are very bright. In order to take a picture of the Moon or Earth, a camera needs to be set at fast shutter settings/short exposure times, or else the picture will be overexposed and have no detail.

Those settings are similar to daylight settings, which does not provide a long enough exposure time for stars to show.

Here's an experiment you can do to prove this for yourself. If you have a camera that can have the exposure set, set that exposure to what you would set it for daytime pictures. Then take a picture of the night sky -- even a very starry night sky. You will see that your picture resulted in no visible stars.

Heck, even if you take a picture at night with the "night" settings of most consumer cameras or mobile phone cameras, you will most like y see no stars in the image -- even if they were visible to your eyes.




By the way, Michael Collins, the member of Apollo 11 who did not walk on the Moon be stayed in the CM orbiting the Moon, wrote In his autobiography about being able to see stars as the command module passed behind to the night side of the Moon (after his eyes adjusted to the darkness, rather than being adjusted to the brightness of the Moon):

"I feel this powerfully -- not as fear or loneliness -- but as awareness, anticipation, satisfaction, confidence, almost exultation.

I like the feeling. Outside my window I can see stars -- and that is all. Where I know the moon to be, there is simply a black void, the moon's presence is defined solely by the absence of stars."

What's this all about? Sesame Streets www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: TamtammyMacx
What's this all about? Sesame Streets www.youtube.com...

Its about puppets doing acts to entertain and educate young children.

Can you be more specific?

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

I like the feeling. Outside my window I can see stars -- and that is all. Where I know the moon to be, there is simply a black void, the moon's presence is defined solely by the absence of stars."

I find this one...almost poetic.

originally posted by: TamtammyMacx
What's this all about? Sesame Streets www.youtube.com...

As I said in my post above yours, Michael Collins (the third member of Apollo 11) said he could see stars when he was on the night side of the Moon and his eyes were adjusted to the darkness.

That's consistent with what Armstrong said in the video you posted when he mentioned in a press conference that no stars could be seen in the brightness that was the Moon because their eyes would be adjusted to brightness and not darkness.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

The heliocentric system was proposed before Jesus walked the Earth-that is all.

The moon is in space you guys, how can it have day time and night time?

It's not on earth...

sheesh you manipluaotors of the REAL troof...

a reply to: InhaleExhale

There's the part where Buzz Aldrin says " The stars all around are even brighter than they are here"

originally posted by: TamtammyMacx
a reply to: InhaleExhale

There's the part where Buzz Aldrin says " The stars all around are even brighter than they are here"

They are when the person is in darkness, as Aldrin's crewmate Michael Collins said in the book excerpt I quoted. But as Armstrong told the reporter, when they were on the surface of the Moon, the Moon was too bright for their eyes to properly adjust to see stars.

originally posted by: TamtammyMacx
a reply to: InhaleExhale

There's the part where Buzz Aldrin says " The stars all around are even brighter than they are here"

see Soylents post above.

Stars are brighter in the country side here on earth than they are in the city.


This is due to light pollution at night. the less light from sources such as street lights and what not will make viewing stars much better, hence why in the country side or anywhere away from city lights you see many more stars compared to viewing from a city where you will only see the really brighter stars.

The same goes for anywhere really, when trying to view small points of light, if there is a really big light it will make seeing the smaller lights harder compared to when the big light isn't on to outshine the smaller ones.

I don’t know.
I’ll believe that the earth is a globe when Phage shows up and tells us it is.
Otherwise, has any of us personally been to space?
Has any of us personally used photoshop or cgi programs before?

What I’m supposed to believe master mason Neil degrass Tyson? Or the freakin science guy?

Aww what a calm day. No ripples on the water. Butterflies easily flapping around in the still air as we rotate 1,000 mph at the equator and travel many thousands of miles per hour through space...

originally posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein

Otherwise, has any of us personally been to space?

No.

Has any of us personally used photoshop or cgi programs before?

Yes. quite a bit, with scripting too.

What I’m supposed to believe master mason Neil degrass Tyson? Or the freakin science guy?

That's a personal choice up to you, however there are a few things you could do yourself.

Aww what a calm day. No ripples on the water. Butterflies easily flapping around in the still air as we rotate 1,000 mph at the equator and travel many thousands of miles per hour through space...

Yep, just like when you're traveling in a car down a smooth road at 60 or 70 mph....because everything in the car is also traveling at the same speed.

Or just like in a jet aircraft.

It's called physics.

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein


Don't rely completely on what other people say. Investigate it for yourself, like the ancient Greeks Pythagoras and Eratosthenes did back in the "BC" days when they asserted and devised that the Earth was a sphere.

They used critical thought and observation to figure outthat the Earth was a sphere. They didn't go into space and see for themselves.

It's usually a good practice to NOT simply take what someone says at face value without at least giving it some critical thought on your own.

I'm not interested about people proclaiming data form other satellite or "probes" in the solar system.

Actually it's not rocket science, the stars simply weren't bright enough to be picked up by the exposure and small aperture of the camera. It's the technology of the time. Also lots of photographers use these tricks in order to create visual effects. Literally nothing to see here, move along.

Claims that Apollo astronauts did not see stars are utterly false.

Astronauts saw stars and photographed them. They navigated using them and used film and equipment specifically to image them. They went to the moon using navigation built around the idea of a spherical Earth revolving around a sun and a moon revolving round Earth.

Here's a list of quotes from astronauts describing what they saw:

onebigmonkey.com...

and here is one of my old favourites, Venus, Saturn and Mars taken against a backdrop of identifiable stars by Apollo 16 in cislunar space.

If the question is did they really land on the moon? why don't ask the Russians, they're the one's that would have cried 'Foul' if NASA cheated...