RE: Photos of EARTH

avatar

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

If the satellite is low then you need a wide angle or fisheye lens to see to the horizon, which will not be half the globe. As I said, any photo needs details of the altitude and lens to make sense of it. I'm not even a space scientist and I can see how it works. It's geometry.

Orbits

hive-122315
0
0
0.000
5 comments
avatar

Don't try my example experiment, that's fine. NASA wants to imply that they are showing the ball as it would be seen from space.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

If you have an alternative world model then it needs to account for tides, timezones, seasons, earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes, gravity, magnetic poles, weather patterns, planetary/lunar orbits, eclipses, radio transmission, long-haul navigation and much more

I'm waiting...

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Me too :) You want to change the subject and not attempt my experiment, that's fine.

Ok, so first off, gravity is still a theory (backed by their magical dark matter theory). What is gravity? Gravity is a neat little word which can be used to describe density, buoyancy and the electro-static force though. Those 3 things are provable.

There is 1 pole, not 2. South surrounds us, that has been proven time and again. Compasses don't lie.

Radio transmissions do not curve around a globe, but high-altitude line-of-sight balloon transceivers (google loon for example) and fiber optic lines can get signals around a globe quite easily.

Tides are difficult to prove since we are not allowed to privately explore antarctica or the north pole land (which is getting removed for some reason from many current maps and globes). Please don't say gravity again. Stick to what we can prove.

The huge battery-powered clock that we live on perfectly explains the seasons, star/planet orbits, long-haul navigation, timezones and more.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Your 'experiment' would not prove anything. If I had the lenses I could do shots to match those pics. You cannot just move a satellite higher. They each have a specific purpose and it's expensive to get them in place.

The theory of gravity has been very well tested and found to work in all cases.

Actually radio can get around the Earth to some extent by bouncing off the ionosphere. That was done before Loon or fibre optics.

Proving tides? They happen and can be seen on any coast. They are also well predicted based on the motion of the Moon. How else is all that water moving up and down?

The huge battery-powered clock that we live on perfectly explains the seasons, star/planet orbits, long-haul navigation, timezones and more.

Eh? Sorry, but you are just making stuff up. A lot of this stuff was known hundreds or even thousands of years ago, long before NASA. I'll talk to you about podcasts, but this discussion is pointless if you have set your mind against science.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Your 'experiment' would not prove anything.
Yes, it does. Use my 30% example.

The theory of gravity
Exactly. You cannot prove it. It is not a law or a fact, it is a theory.
I can prove buoyancy, density and the electro-static force though, which yields the same effects as gravity and you can too. Science.

radio can get around the Earth to some extent by bouncing off the ionosphere
Yes, the "ionosphere" is the physical barrier above our heads and yes I do believe that they can bounce low-frequency signals off of it.

tides ... based on the motion of the Moon
False. The moon is not something that you can land on. It does not have mass that causes a "grav-itational" pull that overpowers earth "gravity". If it could pull an ocean (but not a building?) off the earth, then only one side of the globe would have a high tide at a time, not two. Science.

huge battery-powered clock that we live on
Yep, I made that term up because that is how I perceive it based on provable science. :)

0
0
0.000
Reply