gonzo Posted July 21, 2019 Share Posted July 21, 2019 (edited) How come you can’t see any stars on the pictures? Edited July 21, 2019 by gonzo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Supporter MickyD Posted July 21, 2019 Site Supporter Share Posted July 21, 2019 5 minutes ago, gonzo said: How come you can’t see any stars on the pictures? They answered this on the tellybox the other day. Apparently, the shutter speed was set to take in the light levels as found in direct sunlight on the moon. This would mean the shutter had opened and closed before light from the pin-pricks of light across the Milky Way had got in through the lens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_white Posted July 21, 2019 Share Posted July 21, 2019 The moon was way too bright to pick up stars in the background. And for me - that would be an argument FOR the moon landing, not against it. Otherwise you'd have to imagine NASA's top secret production agency (probably directed by Kubrick of course) saying 'Holy shit lads. You'll never believe what we've forgotten to put on the black background. Fucking stars. Nobody is going to believe this shit now'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underpants Posted July 21, 2019 Author Share Posted July 21, 2019 (edited) We know what they want us to know. Simple as that. Every angle covered. Every question has an answer. It's like when we get shown some multicoloured picture of a galaxy millions of light years away, or a picture of the edge of the universe (which they have). They could show us any collection of coloured dots and say its something. Edited July 21, 2019 by Underpants Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_white Posted July 21, 2019 Share Posted July 21, 2019 19 minutes ago, Underpants said: We know what they want us to know. Simple as that. Every angle covered. Every question has an answer. It's like when we get shown some multicoloured picture of a galaxy millions of light years away, or a picture of the edge of the universe (which they have). They could show us any collection of coloured dots and say its something. I don't even know where to begin with this. Are you genuinely not on a wind up here? For starters 'they' don't have a picture of the 'edge of the universe' - 'they' have the extreme deep field picture - the singularly most awe inspiring image I've ever seen. That's a picture of a tiny patch of sky looking as deep into the universe we can ever observe - 13.8 billion years worth. However - even the stuff in that picture is now about 50 billion light years away because of continued expansion since the big bang And in any case that's just the observable bit - and it's also assuming we're at the centre (which we're not). Best estimates put the actual size of the universe at about 7 trillion light years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Casino Posted July 21, 2019 Moderators Share Posted July 21, 2019 He thinks red dwarf is a documentary Ignore him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Carlos Posted July 21, 2019 Moderators Share Posted July 21, 2019 How come we have crystal clear pictures of galaxies billions of light years away but every CCTV shot of some robbing scrote is blurred to fuck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_white Posted July 21, 2019 Share Posted July 21, 2019 Just now, Carlos said: How come we have crystal clear pictures of galaxies billions of light years away but every CCTV shot of some robbing scrote is blurred to fuck? Probably because the scrote robbing the bank doesn't stay still for 3 months to get the same exposure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Youri McAnespie Posted July 21, 2019 Share Posted July 21, 2019 I reckon' anyone who claims to 'get' and/or is mindblown by this space malarkey are of the same cloth as; people who laugh at Shakespeare, people who do Parkruns and people who pretend to have make-believe ailments like hayfever or lactose intolerance... Attenrion seeking twats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underpants Posted July 21, 2019 Author Share Posted July 21, 2019 (edited) 28 minutes ago, kent_white said: I don't even know where to begin with this. Are you genuinely not on a wind up here? For starters 'they' don't have a picture of the 'edge of the universe' - 'they' have the extreme deep field picture - the singularly most awe inspiring image I've ever seen. That's a picture of a tiny patch of sky looking as deep into the universe we can ever observe - 13.8 billion years worth. However - even the stuff in that picture is now about 50 billion light years away because of continued expansion since the big bang And in any case that's just the observable bit - and it's also assuming we're at the centre (which we're not). Best estimates put the actual size of the universe at about 7 trillion light years. Like I said. Put a collection of dots together, and with no way of disproving it, folk will believe anything. It's an observation of mine which carries some truth. I'm not asking you to believe it. Unlike that fucking brilliant picture you like that some bloke said was something. We've had pictures of fairy's, the Lock Ness monster and Yetis. Eminent folk at the time have put their names to them pictures being genuine. Believe what you want. Not everything is how it's presented. Edited July 21, 2019 by Underpants Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Youri McAnespie Posted July 21, 2019 Share Posted July 21, 2019 (edited) I believe in Yetis and their North American cousins, sasquatches... There's actual film of a bigfoot. Men on the moon? Piss off. As for so-called hard man Buzz, he obviously only takes on geeks who can't fight. Edited July 21, 2019 by Youri McAnespie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_white Posted July 21, 2019 Share Posted July 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, Underpants said: Like I said. Put a collection of dots together, and with no way of disproving it, folk will believe anything. It's an observation of mine which carries some truth. I'm not asking you to believe it. Unlike that fucking brilliant picture you like that some bloke said was something. We've had pictures of fairy's, the Lock Ness monster and Yetis. Eminent folk at the time have put their names to them pictures being genuine. Believe what you want. Not everything is how it's presented. So you're choosing not to believe NASA and the data from the Hubble telescope because a hillbilly once took a picture of what he claims was Bigfoot? What motive do you think NASA have for putting a collection of dots together that appears to resemble a collection of galaxies and making it public? And you could disprove it. Either by getting Hubble to point at another random patch of sky for the same length of time and seeing whether you got a similar result - or by doing the same experiment with the James Webb when it launches. It's a joint collaboration between NASA, the ESA and the CSA - so we can rely on the latter two to tell us whether NASA was just bullshitting all along. Unless - they're in on it too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underpants Posted July 22, 2019 Author Share Posted July 22, 2019 6 hours ago, kent_white said: So you're choosing not to believe NASA and the data from the Hubble telescope because a hillbilly once took a picture of what he claims was Bigfoot? What motive do you think NASA have for putting a collection of dots together that appears to resemble a collection of galaxies and making it public? And you could disprove it. Either by getting Hubble to point at another random patch of sky for the same length of time and seeing whether you got a similar result - or by doing the same experiment with the James Webb when it launches. It's a joint collaboration between NASA, the ESA and the CSA - so we can rely on the latter two to tell us whether NASA was just bullshitting all along. Unless - they're in on it too? I'm choosing to believe what I want. As are you. A couple of questions - Where did I say I believe in Big Foot (I actually said the Yeti which is in another part of the world all together)? And where did I say I don't believe the edgs of the universe picture? I'll wait... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Supporter MickyD Posted July 22, 2019 Site Supporter Share Posted July 22, 2019 8 hours ago, kent_white said: Probably because the scrote robbing the bank doesn't stay still for 3 months to get the same exposure. But didn't you earlier say: 8 hours ago, kent_white said: I don't even know where to begin with this. Are you genuinely not on a wind up here? For starters 'they' don't have a picture of the 'edge of the universe' - 'they' have the extreme deep field picture - the singularly most awe inspiring image I've ever seen. That's a picture of a tiny patch of sky looking as deep into the universe we can ever observe - 13.8 billion years worth. However - even the stuff in that picture is now about 50 billion light years away because of continued expansion since the big bang And in any case that's just the observable bit - and it's also assuming we're at the centre (which we're not). Best estimates put the actual size of the universe at about 7 trillion light years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_white Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Underpants said: I'm choosing to believe what I want. As are you. A couple of questions - Where did I say I believe in Big Foot (I actually said the Yeti which is in another part of the world all together)? And where did I say I don't believe the edgs of the universe picture? I'll wait... I didn't say you believed in bigfoot. It sounded like the point you were trying to make was that we shouldn't believe evidence from the Hubble telescope because some people have faked pictures of various cryptozoologic creatures over the years. Which would be utter bollocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_white Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 16 minutes ago, MickyD said: But didn't you earlier say: Yes - but that picture is taken at a distance of 13 billion light years. Even with an exposure time as long as it was - and the continued expansion during the time of the exposure - it would have made relatively little difference due incomprehensibly long distance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Zico Posted July 22, 2019 Moderators Share Posted July 22, 2019 On 21/07/2019 at 00:56, Underpants said: We've got telescopes that can take pictures of stars and galaxies that are zillions of light years away. Some of them stars don't even exist anymore. But I've yet to see one picture of a flag, moon buggy or any of the so called left overs up on the moon. Well, apart from a London double decker bus. not yet, but soon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bolty58 Posted July 22, 2019 Members Share Posted July 22, 2019 Let's put it down to personal opinion then. I reckon 90% plus of the worlds population believe the moon landing actually happened. Doesn't mean it did but it's good enough for me - especially when you look who is lined up in the other 10% minus. Flat earthers, tinfoil hatters and turd wranglers from the Macedonian border. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deane koontz Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Some of Stanley Kubrick's more subpar work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Zico Posted July 22, 2019 Moderators Share Posted July 22, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, bolty58 said: Let's put it down to personal opinion then. I reckon 90% plus of the worlds population believe the moon landing actually happened. Doesn't mean it did but it's good enough for me - especially when you look who is lined up in the other 10% minus. Flat earthers, tinfoil hatters and turd wranglers from the Macedonian border. which category is Undies in? edit: is the last one a Rabotnicki reference? Edited July 22, 2019 by ZicoKelly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not in Crawley Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Whilst painting the kids room yesterday listened to a great podcast - 13 minutes to the moon by the BBC, really interesting and very in-depth. certainly would give it a listen if you are interested in the Apollo missions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Youri McAnespie Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Questions; Why did Kubrick spend most of his life in Britain? Fear. Why did OJ Simpson get away with murder? Inside knowledge. Why does Buzz 'Killer' Aldred go around smacking (softarses) who disagree with him? Guilt. Why did Neil Armstrong die unexpectedly in that plane crash? He was about to go public. And finally, does this look fake? Unlike the 'moon' footage, with numbered prop rocks pilfered from 'Lost in Space'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_white Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 3 hours ago, bolty58 said: Let's put it down to personal opinion then. No chance. That's why we have the sciences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underpants Posted July 22, 2019 Author Share Posted July 22, 2019 4 hours ago, kent_white said: I didn't say you believed in bigfoot. It sounded like the point you were trying to make was that we shouldn't believe evidence from the Hubble telescope because some people have faked pictures of various cryptozoologic creatures over the years. Which would be utter bollocks. I'm saying I'm a sceptic in a lot of things. Unlike some I don't blindly accept what NASA or any other "respected" authority say on a given subject. In my original post a posed a question and argued that point later. Your argument is that respected person/organisation say X so it must be true. I'm saying not necessarily. Moon landings, Yeti, Nessy, spaghetti harvest famine etc.. it doesn't matter. It should all get treated with suspicion. And rightly so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Supporter Cheese Posted July 22, 2019 Site Supporter Share Posted July 22, 2019 26 minutes ago, Underpants said: I'm saying I'm a sceptic in a lot of things. Unlike some I don't blindly accept what NASA or any other "respected" authority say on a given subject. In my original post a posed a question and argued that point later. Your argument is that respected person/organisation say X so it must be true. I'm saying not necessarily. Moon landings, Yeti, Nessy, spaghetti harvest famine etc.. it doesn't matter. It should all get treated with suspicion. And rightly so. Are you equally sceptical about DNA, or the roundness of planet Earth? After all, you can't personally verify that these things are true... Or do you choose what to be sceptical about based on the last YouTube video you watched? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.