When I was young at a neighborhood block party a neighbor had a telescope set up pointed directly at the planet Saturn. It was one of the most powerful and impactful images I have seen in my lifetime. The spectrum of color on the rings was incredible. Have you ever seen a planet with your own eyes through a telescope?
Yes, it is pretty cool. Good telescopes with computer assistance are available for under $500.
Telescopes are an illuminati trick. The reptilians from the dimension of Hades dont want you to know.
I've come to the conclusion that with things like this - there is absolutely something unique about the experience of having your eye absorb the actual photons that reflected off of something, and all associated phenomena.Quote:
Originally Posted by TaylorWolf
Back in 07, Saturn was at its max tilt - it has a ~27 year periodicity - fuckin a, the blackness of space in between the rings and the planet!!! Such vivid colors.
Same with Jupiter, bands of color and the great red spot (which is one of the biggest easiest ways to tell that jupiter is a planet and is rotating ;) )
Or Mars, the mariner valley and ice caps. (Similarly, the rotation can be observed.) (Venus you can just see clouds, its featureless and really bright, mostly not even worth bothering dragging the scope out to look at.)
The moon, it was always fun to zoom up on the edge and watch the shadow creep across the terrain.
Gets tedious on a manual telescope, I'll tell ya that!
Or, that time I was in Juneau AK and rode the mt roberts tram up 1800 feet, and looked north at the mountains of southeast alaska...pictures dont do that justice, either.
As Phil Anselmo said - to see, to bleed, cannot be taught!
Man I consider myself a pretty intelligent and well-read guy... it's really rare that I hear a new idea/concept that I find profound but hats off to you sir, you just blew my fucking mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coonehh
I always wondered what it was that makes observing natural phenomena like Niagara Falls or the Grand Canyon (for example) in person is so much more powerful and overwhelming than looking at even the very best photographs. I never considered that my eyes absorbing light particles that are bouncing off of said phenomena could have something to do with this.
The concept that light bursting outward from the sun was BOUNCING OFF OF THE PLANET SATURN (and its crazy rings) and traveling back 700million miles directly into my eyes through the telescope... wow. Just wow.
You know those telescopes use software to get your telescope to point to the planets your talking about...
so there is a high possibility that the software is just showing you A DRAWING of it just like the other pictures from space.
It's kind of a different topic, but it's also related to our little discussion here. Language is very fascinating, after all it is one of the main tools that has led us humans to our current intellectual state. It allows us to communicate our thoughts and ideas to each other, and this continuous exchange has helped us reaching the vast complexity we are familiar with nowadays. It is language that not only has led to the discovery and development of complex disciplines like philosophy, and later on the natural sciences, it is language that has actually made them possible. As great and as beautiful language is however, ancient philosophers have already discovered major problems with it: it has a lot of holes. Someone who has studied logics and rhetorics understands the weaknesses of language and how easily it can be manipulated for various goals and purposes. As an extension of that however it's important to understand what this connection between language and thinking means. The possibility to manipulate language also allows, as a consequence, to manipulate how you think about the world and everything. Why am I mentioning this? Well, my next point is very important: because of these "holes" that language has, it is possible to deny EVERYTHING. Pick any topic, it doesn't matter, someone states facts, ideally provides evidence, and yet language, and as an extension of that thinking, allows us to deny it. Add some more creative, some less creative excuses into the mix and it's getting very, very interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuT
Anyway, even though this is possible, keep in mind, denial does not equal disproof. Here is a very interesting book on this topic.
On-topic: I have and it's just amazing. The universe and its components can be very beautiful.
The Earth is Flat. Surrender to this. Your half-guard will thank you later.
My guard game overall has been lit since I've submitted to Flat Earth.
So I got a telescope for my kid, it will fall out of Krampus' sack tonight when St. Nicholas and Krampus come for visit. It comes with a download on Astronomy Basics and how to Calibrate and aim it at targets with Celestial Navigation. It is an interesting read.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/celestron-s...nomybasics.pdf
I read it. Your post.Quote:
Originally Posted by maxmarkov
... and good luck with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by NameLikeNoOther
As Alfred Korzybski has beautifully said: "The map is not the territory."
Flatearthers in particular seem to forget or ignore the fact that our natural perception is very limited. That's why we need microscopes to see down to the cellular level and beyond or telescopes for space. Or why we need instruments to detect infrasound, ultrasound, etc. Our bodies are meant to function as good as possible on the macro-level, because that's where we could get attacked by bears, where we can see whether it's safe or not to make a certain step in the mountains, etc.
Just because we can't see air with our naked eyes doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's "invisible" to our eyes, but when you f.ex. wave your hands rapidly you can feel it. It is "invisible" and yet it is everywhere around us.
Btw., if the Earth is supposed to be flat, how come when the sun "goes down" in the US, it rises in Australia? Also, isn't the sun supposed to move in a straight line from the US to Australia in a flat-earth-model? Wouldn't have planes recorded such a phenomenon by now? The sun actually going down proves the fact that Australia is geographically "below" the US and not simply to the right as a map would suggest. Once more, the map is not the territory. In case someone wants to make the argument that "the sun just seems to go below, because of elevation", here's the obvious counter-argument: get to the place with the highest amount of elevation in your country and look from there, you won't see the sun, because it is actually on the other side of the globe. Night in the US, daylight in Australia? Crazy magic...
Another important fact to consider: if the sun would move in a straight line, due to the hight amount of light it emits we would never have nights anywhere, because the sun would still be visible everywhere to some degree, but from different distances. In doubt you could still climb the highest point of elevation in your country (usually a mountain) and you would have to see the sun in the distance. No mountains are wide enough to completely block the light from reaching other places on the planet... don't be ridiculous! Clouds aren't able to do that on the cloudiest days, hell... even the moon can't do it during solar eclipses. Case closed, next topic!
The mountains aren't high enough for you? Get into a helicopter or on a plane and enjoy "the disappearance of the sun"! :)
Is there footage of the most high powered telescopes getting shots of the moon up close and personal? Like shots of the American flag?
http://www.lroc.asu.edu/featured_sites/
Real or Fake?
I meant super close, like a close up of the flagQuote:
Originally Posted by NameLikeNoOther
I didn't necessarily want this to be a flat earth debate... If anything I wanted to keep the focus on the observable planets (which I and others here have seen with our own eyes) I now have to ask though, if the earth is flat (not a planet) then does that mean there are no such things as planets? The Saturn I (we) saw doesn't exist? However if planets ARE real ...why wouldn't we be on one of them?
I guess Simulation Theory is a big deal these days so who the fuck knows what all of this is anyway. I just know I saw a glorious PLANET with my own eye through that telescope when I was a kid! Also Gallileo observed Saturn's rings and major moons around year 1600 with a very simple/crude telescope!
Also KRAMPUS
Yeah man...Quote:
Originally Posted by TaylorWolf
https://www.instagram.com/p/Bcme-fQA...ar_perspective
https://www.instagram.com/p/BWRKEpcF...ken-by=flat_af
What did yo'll see the top once or the middle ones?
:confused: we need an emoticons of Buz doing the finger sign .
Is this trolling? You didn't answer ONE of my questions. You are a perfect example of why I didn't really want to start a debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuT
Okay lets take planet Venus this time. You don't even need a telescope to see it, its bright AF in the night sky (even in LA) yet point the simplest telescope at it at you can see it looks exactly like it does in pictures. You could even track it yourself following along with books like the one NameLikeNoOther linked.
This has nothing to do with NASA faking the moon landing footage... we are talking about planet Saturn, Venus etc. and my questions still stand from my last post.
Awesome meteor show last night! Lots of objects were visible arching across the skyline.
I am working on getting my camera mounted to the telescope to get photos of planets and other objects but I need to get some lens filters and a shutter release trigger to get good quality photos. I want to try and get some photos of the space station when it passes at night.
Mate , you are asking philosophical questions , and you are asking them at the birth stages... look in to it and ask a proper question. And you say you are looking for to start a debate... debate on what?Quote:
Originally Posted by TaylorWolf
I said most of high end telescopes come with a digital disk to find stars , meaning they can be easily altered with software , meaning you cannot use em in an argument about shape of the plane you are looking from.
And take in to account that what you are seeing in the sky as a planet , you could be looking through a round peephole
and actually seeing a plane ... See how easy it is to throw a wrench in an argument?
Okay, I can tell you that the computer assistance for the telescope I bought only moves the mount on the tripod to apparently compensate for the rotation of the earth. My telescope is essentially a 500mm telephoto lens with a computer assisted tripod mount. It also becomes very clear after about 5 minutes of trying to use a telescope that in order to actually spot planets or objects and follow them you need to use the Heliocentric model. There is no digital connection between the scope mechanism and the computerized mount mechanism.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuT
OkQuote:
Originally Posted by NameLikeNoOther
https://www.edx.org/course/introduct...asux-ast111x-6
This is a pretty cool course from ASU. Definitely from the Heliocentric perspective versus the Geocentric perspective.
Helps understand a bit of what your brain is perceiving through your eyes when you look through the eyepiece of a scope.
If i wanted to learn to speculate , i did do it following open ended solutions like flat Earth.Quote:
Originally Posted by NameLikeNoOther
Some think the earth may be flat, I think it's round, but regardless of what you believe, or if you are on the fence; this video is one of the most awesome videos I've seen in a decade. It's all four thruster-rockets with mounted cams, from start to disconnect, one after the other, different angles. Turn the sound up, it's creepy
The Sr-71 just took a backseat for me, that shuttle is way cooler! :3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLl7oqdm_B8