There is no outer space.

a reply to: Sheshbazzar

What does this have to do with “Ceres”

You have one year to prove this is something other than a comet.

Newly found Comet Leonard might become 2021’s brightest

earthsky.org...

Exciting news! A newly found comet might become 2021’s brightest comet. Astronomer Greg Leonard discovered the comet that now bears his name – C/2021 A1 (Leonard) – on January 3, 2021 at the Mount Lemmon Observatory in Arizona. Astronomers report that discovery images show a tail for the comet, suggesting we might see a nice tail as Comet Leonard draws closer to the Earth and sun. The comet is still far away, currently between the orbits of Jupiter and Mars, heading inward. It’ll reach perihelion, its closest approach to the sun, around January 3, 2022. And so we’ll have a whole year to watch this comet get brighter, and brighter

a reply to: Sheshbazzar

You are free to believe whatever you choose to, that is your right and really speaking even if you do or don't it has little baring on your day to day life, you don't have to understand about satellite communications or that the world is not a flat pizza like disc you just have to navigate through the day to day world of your own life and without harming those around you.

There is were patent untruth though gets many folk's upset because when belief becomes perceived truth the other truth the one that most others live within is then excluded, this can harm your children who will look up to you for education and make them a laughing stock in school etc.

If you do not care about other peoples opinion of you then good for you but it will still make you seem crazy in the minds of many of them when they observe your beliefs and they will then necessarily see your opinion and understanding as not compatible with there own, this will never be a problem unless discussion or work or some other activity leads you into having to use that consensus belief and then you refuse to do so.

The inner planets of our solar system today are of course Mercury the closest surviving orbiting object around our sun about the size of the earths core this planet is small metallic and battered, next is Venus the TRUE twin of earth or it once may have been a planet almost exactly the same size as the earth just very slightly smaller, two known continental highlands and a large planetary lowland that may once have served as an ocean basin are typical features of this planets surface, the surface though is like hell itself, temperatures that would make lead run molten, pressure that is comparable to being deep sea except there is no sea as that long ago boiled off into the planets upper atmosphere and most of the hydrogen in the water then bled off into space, it rains all the time but that rain NEVER reaches the ground, sulphuric acid but also some of the higher mountains have a thin metallic snow from a rare metal that is evaporated into the Venusian atmosphere and the days are about six month's long as are the night's but it is likely no cooler in the Venusian night than it is the day the atmosphere is such a perfect greenhouse heat trapper, Venus is also believed to have tectonic plates also the same as the earth but an earth gone to hell though it is possible that for a very sizable amount of it's existence Venus may have been a good candidate for life.

Next is the earth the most unlikely world or should we say TWO worlds because it is actually two planets the moon and the much larger earth that it orbits, an orbit that as you have pointed out is most peculiar and the moon is itself tidally locked so that one side of the planetoid always faced the larger planet and the other side is never seen from the earth.

Next is the battered world of Mars, Characterised by perhaps the largest volcano in the solar system and a huge scar that forms perhaps the largest canyon in the solar system, this world is much smaller than the earth with a surface area of less than half that of the earth though it has a day and night of almost identical length to that of the earth, it too may once have been a suitable candidate for life and given that it will be easier to fix mars than it ever would be Venus it may one day be a suitable candidate in the future for human terraforming of the planet.

Some believe that mars died or was murdered and there is a scientist whom has argued that isotopes in the atmosphere are undeniably indicative of an ancient nuclear explosion far larger than anything we could produce today, one that could and did kill a world though others argue it was due to something else the Asteroid belt or rather the theory that the Asteroid belt was once itself a planet and it was destroyed exploding and showering mars and the other worlds with it's fragments while a tiny portion remained between Mars and Jupiter forming the asteroids belt we know today, despite seeming wild there are even if this belief is dismissed many that believe that the asteroid belt WAS once a planet and that it is kind of a grave marker orbiting were a planet once did.

Next out beyond mars is that same Asteroid belt and beyond that the outer planets so the asteroid belt can be regarded as the terminus between the inner and outer planets, these outer planets are dominated by the next object Jupiter a planet that is so huge some once believe it to be a failed brown dwarf but in fact we know today that it's mass would have to be substantially greater before it became a brown dwarf.

The KNOWN satellites of Jupiter are small worlds in there own right, beyond Jupiter lies Saturn with it's famous rings and it's own orbiting worlds including Titan perhaps a distant prospect for human colonization in a very distant future but definitely not a habitable world, lakes of liquid methane and cold temperatures that would exclude life as we know it are a feature.

Beyond this is the unfortunately named Uranus and beyond that Neptune followed by Pluto and out beyond that a region known as the Cometary belt or the Oort Cloud, believed to be a remnant of the ancient accretion disc that orbited the sun when it was born in a nebulae along with other nearby star systems this is were most of our comets come from but there are believed to be at least three other possibly Pluto sized objects out there, as you can guess the further from the sun you get the less light an object receives so some of these distant objects may be undetectable except by there gravitational signature which of course also is attenuated by distance and there relatively small size.

The earth is a miracle, even if there are other earth like planets there is no guarantee that any life has formed upon them.

Our planet is unique it has a strong electromagnetic field that protects life from cosmic and solar radiation, a moon that help to regulate it's rotation and created tidal affects on our ocean all of which are probably key to life surviving here and also keep the planets chemistry in motion preventing it from being permanently locked up releasing it through active geological functions often driven or at least influenced by these tidal affects.

We may travel far some day if we ever have the grace to do so but we are unlikely to EVER find another earth, we may find planets in the goldilocks zone, planets we can convert and even possibly alien life but we won't find another earth.

So what I am saying is it's ok if you don't want to look up, you have to live day to day in this world, it's so far the only one we have anyway and does it really matter.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Thank you!

Concerning the Moon, Scientists say, as you mentioned, that tides are caused by it. Now a question: how is it that these Scientists now tell us that the Moon is flat faced (lemon shaped) on its Earth-oriented side? If the relatively small Moon causes earthquakes on a much larger Earth, attracting it, how is it I say that the visible face of the Moon is flat or Earth-fleeing? Shouldn't it be biased toward the heavy Earth?

originally posted by: Sheshbazzar
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

The North Star changes because of the Earth's precession, so tell us Astronomers, not because it itself moves.

The astronomers you don't believe? And the rest of the point I made? The ones you conveniently skipped over? You mentioned Ptolemy but obviously don't know about Halley's work on his observations rhat showed that constellations do change.

Rayleigh should also scatter reflected light in the Earth's atmosphere, and we shouldn't be seeing what NASA shows us, but rather a Neptune like, opaque blue ball.

It does scatter light. Not enough to prevent bright light from getting through, such as the moon or even Venus in daylight, or the reflected light from other objects several miles away. Same process in reverse with light going out. The amount of atmosphere involved is relatively thin, balloons have flown high enough to show darker skies above them compared with below. Any time you want to support your claims with stuff like facts would be great.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

The Bible tells that the sky is a "raqia", akin to a mirror, is impervium-solid, a sea of glass mingled with fire.

I haven't been in space, am a total and complete "Atheist" regarding man's "reports": unable to believe in them.

"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." (2 Thessalonians 2.11)

originally posted by: dug88
a reply to: projectvxn

Hey...at least this one's concise. Gotta give some credit.

Yep. No mind warping, eye crossing, brain melting wall-o-text!

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Sheshbazzar

You are free to believe whatever you choose to, that is your right and really speaking even if you do or don't it has little baring on your day to day life, you don't have to understand about satellite communications or that the world is not a flat pizza like disc you just have to navigate through the day to day world of your own life and without harming those around you.

There is were patent untruth though gets many folk's upset because when belief becomes perceived truth the other truth the one that most others live within is then excluded, this can harm your children who will look up to you for education and make them a laughing stock in school etc.

If you do not care about other peoples opinion of you then good for you but it will still make you seem crazy in the minds of many of them when they observe your beliefs and they will then necessarily see your opinion and understanding as not compatible with there own, this will never be a problem unless discussion or work or some other activity leads you into having to use that consensus belief and then you refuse to do so.

The inner planets of our solar system today are of course Mercury the closest surviving orbiting object around our sun about the size of the earths core this planet is small metallic and battered, next is Venus the TRUE twin of earth or it once may have been a planet almost exactly the same size as the earth just very slightly smaller, two known continental highlands and a large planetary lowland that may once have served as an ocean basin are typical features of this planets surface, the surface though is like hell itself, temperatures that would make lead run molten, pressure that is comparable to being deep sea except there is no sea as that long ago boiled off into the planets upper atmosphere and most of the hydrogen in the water then bled off into space, it rains all the time but that rain NEVER reaches the ground, sulphuric acid but also some of the higher mountains have a thin metallic snow from a rare metal that is evaporated into the Venusian atmosphere and the days are about six month's long as are the night's but it is likely no cooler in the Venusian night than it is the day the atmosphere is such a perfect greenhouse heat trapper, Venus is also believed to have tectonic plates also the same as the earth but an earth gone to hell though it is possible that for a very sizable amount of it's existence Venus may have been a good candidate for life.

Next is the earth the most unlikely world or should we say TWO worlds because it is actually two planets the moon and the much larger earth that it orbits, an orbit that as you have pointed out is most peculiar and the moon is itself tidally locked so that one side of the planetoid always faced the larger planet and the other side is never seen from the earth.

Next is the battered world of Mars, Characterised by perhaps the largest volcano in the solar system and a huge scar that forms perhaps the largest canyon in the solar system, this world is much smaller than the earth with a surface area of less than half that of the earth though it has a day and night of almost identical length to that of the earth, it too may once have been a suitable candidate for life and given that it will be easier to fix mars than it ever would be Venus it may one day be a suitable candidate in the future for human terraforming of the planet.

Some believe that mars died or was murdered and there is a scientist whom has argued that isotopes in the atmosphere are undeniably indicative of an ancient nuclear explosion far larger than anything we could produce today, one that could and did kill a world though others argue it was due to something else the Asteroid belt or rather the theory that the Asteroid belt was once itself a planet and it was destroyed exploding and showering mars and the other worlds with it's fragments while a tiny portion remained between Mars and Jupiter forming the asteroids belt we know today, despite seeming wild there are even if this belief is dismissed many that believe that the asteroid belt WAS once a planet and that it is kind of a grave marker orbiting were a planet once did.

Next out beyond mars is that same Asteroid belt and beyond that the outer planets so the asteroid belt can be regarded as the terminus between the inner and outer planets, these outer planets are dominated by the next object Jupiter a planet that is so huge some once believe it to be a failed brown dwarf but in fact we know today that it's mass would have to be substantially greater before it became a brown dwarf.

The KNOWN satellites of Jupiter are small worlds in there own right, beyond Jupiter lies Saturn with it's famous rings and it's own orbiting worlds including Titan perhaps a distant prospect for human colonization in a very distant future but definitely not a habitable world, lakes of liquid methane and cold temperatures that would exclude life as we know it are a feature.

Beyond this is the unfortunately named Uranus and beyond that Neptune followed by Pluto and out beyond that a region known as the Cometary belt or the Oort Cloud, believed to be a remnant of the ancient accretion disc that orbited the sun when it was born in a nebulae along with other nearby star systems this is were most of our comets come from but there are believed to be at least three other possibly Pluto sized objects out there, as you can guess the further from the sun you get the less light an object receives so some of these distant objects may be undetectable except by there gravitational signature which of course also is attenuated by distance and there relatively small size.

The earth is a miracle, even if there are other earth like planets there is no guarantee that any life has formed upon them.

Our planet is unique it has a strong electromagnetic field that protects life from cosmic and solar radiation, a moon that help to regulate it's rotation and created tidal affects on our ocean all of which are probably key to life surviving here and also keep the planets chemistry in motion preventing it from being permanently locked up releasing it through active geological functions often driven or at least influenced by these tidal affects.

We may travel far some day if we ever have the grace to do so but we are unlikely to EVER find another earth, we may find planets in the goldilocks zone, planets we can convert and even possibly alien life but we won't find another earth.

So what I am saying is it's ok if you don't want to look up, you have to live day to day in this world, it's so far the only one we have anyway and does it really matter.

And then lab tech screws my pooch!

a reply to: Sheshbazzar

You

The Bible tells that the sky is a "raqia", akin to a mirror, is impervium-solid, a sea of glass mingled with fire.

Really, what Bible verse, what word are you interpreting, and what is the context.

I believe in God, Christ, and the holy. Saved by Grace.

Where in the Bible does is say salvation is dependent on believing there is no outer space?

Do you eat pork, or food listed in the Bible as unclean?

But I am not going to box God in to only having the ability to make a fish bowl world. And I am not going to dictate to God what God created. Especially when I can use my telescope to see a galaxy outside the Milky Way, and you have no answer what I am looking at when I use my telescope to see the Andromeda Galaxy. Something you have no explanation for.

At least I actually look at the marvel of God’s creations, and reflect on its mysteries.

a reply to: neutronflux

Half-hearted.

If you were pointing that telescope on much smaller but much closer raqia images, you wouldn't be getting different vistas.

The Bible says the sky's solid. We're in the belly of a big fish, like Jonah.

"So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." (Revelation 3.16)

a reply to: Sheshbazzar

Asked you to put up, or shut up.

You

The Bible tells that the sky is a "raqia", akin to a mirror, is impervium-solid, a sea of glass mingled with fire.

Really, what Bible verse, what word are you interpreting, and what is the context.


The glory you box your god in


The Glory of God when you actually look up to witness God’s creation.


Which one is the lie?

a reply to: Sheshbazzar

What’s the items you have not answered to? Just from me?

You

The Bible tells that the sky is a "raqia", akin to a mirror, is impervium-solid, a sea of glass mingled with fire.

Really, what Bible verse, what word are you interpreting, and what is the context.


———-

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Sheshbazzar

What does this have to do with “Ceres”

You have one year to prove this is something other than a comet.

Newly found Comet Leonard might become 2021’s brightest

earthsky.org...

Exciting news! A newly found comet might become 2021’s brightest comet. Astronomer Greg Leonard discovered the comet that now bears his name – C/2021 A1 (Leonard) – on January 3, 2021 at the Mount Lemmon Observatory in Arizona. Astronomers report that discovery images show a tail for the comet, suggesting we might see a nice tail as Comet Leonard draws closer to the Earth and sun. The comet is still far away, currently between the orbits of Jupiter and Mars, heading inward. It’ll reach perihelion, its closest approach to the sun, around January 3, 2022. And so we’ll have a whole year to watch this comet get brighter, and brighter

————
originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Sheshbazzar
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

The North Star changes because of the Earth's precession, so tell us Astronomers, not because it itself moves.

Rayleigh should also scatter reflected light in the Earth's atmosphere, and we shouldn't be seeing what NASA shows us, but rather a Neptune like, opaque blue ball.

Or still doesn’t change the fact the Doppler or Red light shift does occur.

Redshift and blueshift describe how light shifts toward shorter or longer wavelengths as objects in space (such as stars or galaxies) move closer or farther away from us. The concept is key to charting the universe's expansion.

www.space.com...

Vs

Rayleigh scattering (/ˈreɪli/ RAY-lee), named after the nineteenth-century British physicist Lord Rayleigh (John William Strutt),[1] is the predominantly elastic scattering of light or other electromagnetic radiation by particles much smaller than the wavelength of the radiation. For light frequencies well below the resonance frequency of the scattering particle (normal dispersion regime), the amount of scattering is inversely proportional to the fourth power of the wavelength.

Funny. The sky looks blue, but direct observation of the sun is yellowish....


———-

Why is the direct light from the moon white?

————-
What are you babbling about?

Exactly where do comets come from. How do the travel about the solar system? Where do meteorites come from? How do they make it to earth.

Where does the background radiation of space come from?
———-

I have viewed the Andromeda Galaxy with my own telescope. If it was not a galaxy, what is it?

a reply to: Sheshbazzar

Bingo! It's all....just "space".

a reply to: neutronflux

Pretty pics = beautiful women = www.telegraph.co.uk... or www.psychologytoday.com...

The post ending with cube octasection in this thread shows that ostentation = pulverization = entropy = annihilation. (The more something brags the less there is to it, as you iterate octasecting a cube, the ratio "whole volume : total surface of the cubelets" decreases, becomes vanishingly small: volume stays constant, surface is doubled from one step to the next if you octasect each cube).

Hence Narcissus, "don't be wise in your own eyes", the blinding effect of God's face (to know Him, this only Himself can: one thus becomes God when uncovering "Noah's nakedness" or "knowing one's father's wife", except he is not, for God is already beyond and the would be God is but an idol*, an image, a pocket household godlet, fine dust.) and such.

Raqia = Nazi Impervium: biblehub.com... Nota bene, Elihu is not reprimanded by God.

There are other passages of course.

* Reflection Principle: if you think that you have, at last, found "the All", then you're wrong and what you took for the end is but a speckle on the face of the deep (a so called "model".)

a reply to: Sheshbazzar

You

Pretty pics = beautiful women = www.telegraph.co.uk... or www.psychologytoday.com...

You have run away from honest debate and questions

You

The post ending with cube octasection in this thread shows that ostentation = pulverization = entropy = annihilation.

Has to do with what? That you cannot handle people in this thread that star gaze, and you have no answer to what people actually witness. So you have to use personal attacks?

You

(The more something brags the less there is to it, as you iterate octasecting a cube, the ratio "whole volume : total surface of the cubelets" decreases, becomes vanishingly small: volume stays constant, surface is doubled from one step to the next if you octasect each cube).

Like you bragging you have this false truth while you call people with real life experience and observations liars with no foundation?

You

Hence Narcissus, "don't be wise in your own eyes", the blinding effect of God's face (to know Him, this only Himself can: one thus becomes God when uncovering "Noah's nakedness" or "knowing one's father's wife", except he is not, for God is already beyond and the would be God is but an idol*, an image, a pocket household godlet, fine dust.) and such.

What does that have to do with there being no foundation one must believe in your false notion there is no “outer space” for salvation or damnation. It’s not even in the top ten list.

Raqia = Nazi Impervium: biblehub.com... Nota bene, Elihu is not reprimanded by God.

What does that have to do with, I have viewed the Andromeda Galaxy with my own telescope. If it was not a galaxy, what is it?

You might have some credibility about the phenomena that people witness on there own. If you could address it in some intelligent fashion.

* Reflection Principle: if you think that you have, at last, found "the All", then you're wrong and what you took for the end is but a speckle on the face of the deep (a so called "model".)

What does that have to do with me looking up at the night sky, and pondering what I can see with the unaided eye, by binoculars, or telescope? Comets, planets, moons, binary stars, star clusters, nebula. Super novas that appear from time to time. Stars do move. Amateur and professional radio astronomy detect pulsars, radiation from stars, and the background radiation of the universe.

a reply to: Sheshbazzar

Remember. Your the one that puts limits on god.

While I look up on all of God’s creation, ponder what God has created, and marvel at a being where all things are possible. A infinite universe to compliment a creator of infinite imagination.

Which is the lie?

a reply to: neutronflux

You're merely TV-gazing a skydome, marvelling at images of images on Skynet's display device. The TV in question is very high resolution: what you believe are far away objects are but very small images displayed on a futuristic monitor, yes monitor, for you're being closely watched.

www.youtube.com...

P.S.: Do you get the esoteric meaning of the above song? Who is the singer? Read the lyrics. (spoiler: Satan.)
And this one: www.youtube.com..., do you see through it? Read the lyrics. (Spoiler, the skyscrapper is heaven/Babel tower, the man in white suit is Jesus, the one in leather jacket is the other "Jachin & Boaz" pillar, Satan. The desert is earth, the cube with its wide flat screen and the woman on a piedestal is, again, heaven.)

The accuracy of these two example songs is, yes, *spectacular.*

Hint.

"There is no spoon".

Hint.

"There is no spoon".

That some here do not see the connection between stars, dust, smoke, powder, illusion, ostentation, superficie, diffusion, virtualization, heaven, death, is disappointing.

Aren't there pixels on your appropriately named screen? Shiny dust, your beloved sky.

What is a burnt offering except a virtualization? One cuts in pieces the victim, to tiny bits, the fire devours the flesh reducing it to fine dust and smoke raises up to heaven, a cloud.

Eyes are two mouths, they analyze the seen, blinking they masticate to taste it, what you see is the eyeballs' taste, the forbidden fruits' hallucinatory effect. (Fruit of Wisdom, Fruit of Life: two eyeballs). Eyebrows are moustaches, obviously.

Entropy's chief preoccupation is to fill vacua in Communistic, horizontal, superficial fashion: "From each according to his ability; To each according to his needs". It breaks everything and diffuses it everywhere bringing about a vapid indistinct soup. That is what Globalization, migration, tourism are: we're a tasteless broth, credulous, stupid mongrels.

Need a woman? Get your local, virtual, narcotic pixel powder pr0nfix.

Poudre aux yeux.

The end is *around* 2033, thank God.

P.S.: "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." (1 John 2.16)
"And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand" (Matthew 7.26)

a reply to: Sheshbazzar

You

You're merely TV-gazing a skydome

With my own eyes? How does that work with radio astronomy?

As I witness meteorites falling to earth. And comets flying about the solar system. As I use satellites hundred miles above earth, and the broadcasting?

But there are other means to track man made objects in space....

How to cast a wider net for tracking space junk
There are only so many hours of the day you can use to track orbital debris. Some scientists think they’ve found more hours.

www.technologyreview.com...

Man has been in orbit around the earth. And in humans true fashion we have left our junk behind to prove it

You

The TV in question is very high resolution:


Impossibly big. Impossible to power with the current power grid. With no record of material and expenditures to make such a TV. With meteorites, comets, stars, super nova and other heavenly phenomena recorded long before such technology was available. With large physical evidence like meteorite impact sites in earth.

And what space is outer of this BS tv you claim exists? What would that be calked.

what you believe are far away objects are but very small images displayed on a futuristic monitor, yes monitor, for you're being closely watched.

Too bad there is physical evidence of items from outer space, and objects in outer space emitting radiation. Like pulsar stars.

You

P.S.: Do you get the esoteric meaning of the above song? Who is the singer? Read the lyrics.

Has nothing to do with songs.

Everything with how you can not debate intelligently about items on your list...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Sheshbazzar

What’s the items you have not answered to? Just from me?

You

The Bible tells that the sky is a "raqia", akin to a mirror, is impervium-solid, a sea of glass mingled with fire.

Really, what Bible verse, what word are you interpreting, and what is the context.


———-

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Sheshbazzar

What does this have to do with “Ceres”

You have one year to prove this is something other than a comet.

Newly found Comet Leonard might become 2021’s brightest

earthsky.org...

Exciting news! A newly found comet might become 2021’s brightest comet. Astronomer Greg Leonard discovered the comet that now bears his name – C/2021 A1 (Leonard) – on January 3, 2021 at the Mount Lemmon Observatory in Arizona. Astronomers report that discovery images show a tail for the comet, suggesting we might see a nice tail as Comet Leonard draws closer to the Earth and sun. The comet is still far away, currently between the orbits of Jupiter and Mars, heading inward. It’ll reach perihelion, its closest approach to the sun, around January 3, 2022. And so we’ll have a whole year to watch this comet get brighter, and brighter

————
originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Sheshbazzar
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

The North Star changes because of the Earth's precession, so tell us Astronomers, not because it itself moves.

Rayleigh should also scatter reflected light in the Earth's atmosphere, and we shouldn't be seeing what NASA shows us, but rather a Neptune like, opaque blue ball.

Or still doesn’t change the fact the Doppler or Red light shift does occur.

Redshift and blueshift describe how light shifts toward shorter or longer wavelengths as objects in space (such as stars or galaxies) move closer or farther away from us. The concept is key to charting the universe's expansion.

www.space.com...

Vs

Rayleigh scattering (/ˈreɪli/ RAY-lee), named after the nineteenth-century British physicist Lord Rayleigh (John William Strutt),[1] is the predominantly elastic scattering of light or other electromagnetic radiation by particles much smaller than the wavelength of the radiation. For light frequencies well below the resonance frequency of the scattering particle (normal dispersion regime), the amount of scattering is inversely proportional to the fourth power of the wavelength.

Funny. The sky looks blue, but direct observation of the sun is yellowish....


———-

Why is the direct light from the moon white?

————-
What are you babbling about?

Exactly where do comets come from. How do the travel about the solar system? Where do meteorites come from? How do they make it to earth.

Where does the background radiation of space come from?
———-

I have viewed the Andromeda Galaxy with my own telescope. If it was not a galaxy, what is it?

————-

What does that have to do with me looking up at the night sky, and pondering what I can see with the unaided eye, by binoculars, or telescope? Comets, planets, moons, binary stars, star clusters, nebula. Super novas that appear from time to time. Stars do move. Amateur and professional radio astronomy detect pulsars, radiation from stars, and the background radiation of the universe.