ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 9th February 2020, 01:47 PM   #361
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,641
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
I use the Apollo image atlas:
lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?14

Those images look green to me.
Wow. You intentionally sought the lowest res crappiest quality images you could find.

For those interested here is a side by side of what Solon is using and the real deal.

__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 02:06 PM   #362
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,641
Even more amusing is that Solon's source states outright the exact process used to generate the images right here...

https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/processing/

Ending with the disclaimer...
Quote:
Because of all this processing, these catalog images should not be used for research purposes. They should only be used to select and identify images for use in a research project. Higher resolution products should be obtained for use in any scientific investigation(s).
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 02:10 PM   #363
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,641
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
sts60
336




The NAC of MDIS has a band limited IR filter so no photos from that device show anything your eyes would see. The WAC is a spectral device that is detecting emission or absorption lines from the surface materials subject to ionising solar radiation, it is not photographing reflected visible light.

Until someone can explain the green looking lunar far side images from Apollo 8 then I must assume that nobody on this site has the least idea of what is really going on. If you think they went to the Moon on Apollo 8 just to take snaps to send to the folks back home then you are clueless. The composition of the films they used were determined by the Naval Research boys and they gathered much more information from those images than is commonly understood.
I have explained it to you. Now what?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 02:16 PM   #364
Solon
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 33
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Wow. You intentionally sought the lowest res crappiest quality images you could find.

For those interested here is a side by side of what Solon is using and the real deal.

https://i.imgur.com/t6Al890.jpg
How do you know which is the real deal?

What I was told is that the images taken with the SO-368 showed the green on the far side because there was no blue light, and this is what happens when the near IR is the only light source.
It can also be found that all the images taken of the far side during the Orbiter 5 mission were through a Wratten 25A filter, tri-band IR.
This is why the lunar far side images from the Beresheet camera were so dark and oddly coloured. Sure, any photo or image can be played with to make them look like what ever you want, but unless I see anything that suggests otherwise then I will believe the lunar fully illuminated far side is much darker than it should be if the solar constant model is used. Lets have an exposure meter on both the near and far side and compare readings. Oh, but that means an actual experiment, can't have that can we?

Last edited by Solon; 9th February 2020 at 02:17 PM.
Solon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 02:39 PM   #365
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Thumbs down A deluded lie about the LRO and insult

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
The LRO has no conventional camera, you really have no idea how they produce these images do you?
10 February 2019 Solon: A deluded lie about the LRO and insult to detail from his actual debunked delusion.

It is utterly stupid to demand that any conventional camera be in space because they cannot be launched, would explode or just not work. Astronomers launch space-hardened cameras using the same principles as conventional cameras: a lens focuses light on an array of charge-coupled devices just as in a digital camera.

It is deluded to quote the fact that the LRO does take images in visible light to show that you did lie as below:.
7 January 2020 Solon: Continues with irrelevant nonsense about the Moon ignoring the real world of images of the Sun and stars in visible light debunking his "they only emit gamma rays" delusion. incudes
A "Up until the Israel Beresheet mission [in 2019]there had been very few photos, all of them in the near infrared" lie about the lunar far side

10 February 2019 Solon: Idiocy about a "greenish" image from Apollo 8 to detail from his actual debunked delusion.
Solon is the one with the debunked delusion. Solon has to show that he is not abysmally ignorant about astronomy, e.g. the "greenish" tint of that image of the Moon and Earth in visible light.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 02:47 PM   #366
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Exclamation Yet another "no visible light images" lie emphasizing his debunked delusions

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
There are also no visible light photos of any part of Mercury if anyone would take the time to actually study what the Mercury Messenger instruments actual detected. ...
10 February 2019 Solon: Yet another "no visible light images" lie (of Mercury) emphasizing his debunked delusions!

Ignorance of textbook astronomy, the existence of Wikipedia and even Google shows that his "stars only emit gammas rays" is based on a abysmal level of ignorance and an inability to do basic study.
Mariner 10: "The imaging system, the Television Photography Experiment, consisted of two 15 cm (5.9″) Cassegrain telescopes feeding vidicon tubes.[30]".
MESSENGER: "Included two CCD cameras, a narrow-angle camera (NAC) and a wide-angle camera (WAC) mounted to a pivoting platform".
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 02:49 PM   #367
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,641
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
How do you know which is the real deal?

What I was told is that the images taken with the SO-368 showed the green on the far side because there was no blue light, and this is what happens when the near IR is the only light source.
Then you were told wrong.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
It can also be found that all the images taken of the far side during the Orbiter 5 mission were through a Wratten 25A filter, tri-band IR.
Nope. I showed you your own source side by side with the real deal. I showed you that your own source states that it is not to be used for research at all in any circumstance. How is it that you did not know that?

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
This is why the lunar far side images from the Beresheet camera were so dark and oddly coloured. Sure, any photo or image can be played with to make them look like what ever you want, but unless I see anything that suggests otherwise then I will believe the lunar fully illuminated far side is much darker than it should be if the solar constant model is used.
Farside has sunrise and sunset just like nearside.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Lets have an exposure meter on both the near and far side and compare readings. Oh, but that means an actual experiment, can't have that can we?
No, it means that you have no clue how an exposure meter works, what it is for, nor why it is unnecessary. Nor even why it was once a good idea.

No, there is no escape for you. Your source states in plain...
Quote:
Because of all this processing, these catalog images should not be used for research purposes. They should only be used to select and identify images for use in a research project. Higher resolution products should be obtained for use in any scientific investigation(s).
And you want to dodge that fact.

Well, I obtained a high resolution product and put it side by side with your mere catalog image. I provided you with the statement FROM YOUR OWN SOURCE which explains exactly why your source should not be used for research of any sort, merely as an index to identify images of interest. For which task it is well suited.

Despite all of that, here you are claiming that your crappy images MUST be accurate even though your source states outright that they are not.

How do you explain that?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 02:53 PM   #368
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Exclamation Another deluded crank existing does not support his debunked delusions

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
And I am not the one who said the Sun only emits gamma radiation, if you remember it was Horace Winfield Webster....
10 February 2019 Solon: Another deluded crank existing does not support his massively debunked delusions!

29 January 2020 Solon: This may be the 1949 delusion of Horace Winfield Webster as described on a rather insane web page (unfortunately his complete fantasy is not readily available).
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 03:08 PM   #369
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 45,703
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
What I was told is that the images taken with the SO-368 showed the green on the far side because there was no blue light, and this is what happens when the near IR is the only light source.
No, this is not correct. Follow my earlier link about Aerochrome film, and you'll see that infrared light shows up as red, NOT as green, on Aerochrome film. Furthermore, the green is not saturated, so the other layers are still picking up other light. Lastly, when using Aerochrome film, filters were usually used to block blue light because all three layers are sensitive to blue light. If you take an Aerochrome picture with a blue light source and no filter, it will expose all three layers and show up as grey/white, producing a washed-out image. By filtering blue light out, you separate the sensitivity of each layer. If is likely that your source confused filtering out blue light (the typical operating conditions for Aerochrome use) with an absence of blue light.

But we know the far side of the moon had blue light. The Ektrachrome images make that pretty clear. This map shows where the images were taken from:
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/m...p07/150dpi.jpg
As you can see, the color Ektachrome 35 mm images were taken about 20 degrees South, 170 degrees west. That's the far side of the moon, and pictures from the far side of the moon using Ektachrome show up as grey/white. That means the Ektachrome camera was picking up red, green AND blue light.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 03:10 PM   #370
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 25,234
Solon, did you scroll down and notice that there are also blue and green images taken with the same film on the same occasion? I believe if you open enough pages (I've lost track a little here), you will find reference to the fact that in many instances where the object was not a simple photographic record, such as the pictures taken of he landing event, but instead for other information, color filters were used.

Don't forget too that it seems at least some of the pictures taken on the moon were done not under direct sunlight but in earthshine.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 03:11 PM   #371
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Thumbs down Deluded gibberish about the Mercury missions instruments

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
The NAC of MDIS has a band limited IR filter so no photos from that device show anything your eyes would see. The WAC is a spectral device ....gibberish snipped...
10 February 2020 Solon: Deluded gibberish about the Mercury missions instruments.

The NAC on MESSENGER was near-infrared (700-800nm). The WAC shared electronics and CCD with the NAC adding 12 filters including a clear filter covering a spectral range of 395–1,040 nm. Mariner 10 also makes his "no visible images" into a lie.

Mariner 10: "The imaging system, the Television Photography Experiment, consisted of two 15 cm (5.9″) Cassegrain telescopes feeding vidicon tubes.[30]".
MESSENGER: "Included two CCD cameras, a narrow-angle camera (NAC) and a wide-angle camera (WAC) mounted to a pivoting platform".
The Mercury Dual Imaging System on the MESSENGER Spacecraft (PDF)
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 03:15 PM   #372
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,610
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
How do you know which is the real deal?

What I was told is that the images taken with the SO-368 showed the green on the far side because there was no blue light, and this is what happens when the near IR is the only light source.
It can also be found that all the images taken of the far side during the Orbiter 5 mission were through a Wratten 25A filter, tri-band IR.
This is why the lunar far side images from the Beresheet camera were so dark and oddly coloured. Sure, any photo or image can be played with to make them look like what ever you want, but unless I see anything that suggests otherwise then I will believe the lunar fully illuminated far side is much darker than it should be if the solar constant model is used. Lets have an exposure meter on both the near and far side and compare readings. Oh, but that means an actual experiment, can't have that can we?
China's successful landing on the dark side of the Moon. Note it's not green. As a matter of fact all the astronauts that walked or orbited the Moon describe it as uniformally grey in color.
https://youtu.be/JWlxoU5DpLk

Wikipedia. The far side of the Moon is the hemisphere of the Moon that always faces away from Earth. The far side's terrain is rugged with a multitude of impact craters and relatively few flat lunar maria compared to the near side. It has one of the largest craters in the Solar System, the South Pole–Aitken basin. Both sides of the Moon experience two weeks of sunlight followed by two weeks of night; even so, the far side is sometimes called the dark side of the Moon, where; "dark" is used to mean unseen rather than lacking sunlight.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_side_of_the_Moon

P.S. still waiting for a reply to my post 162.

Last edited by Steve001; 9th February 2020 at 03:30 PM.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 03:26 PM   #373
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Thumbs down Believed in obvious garbage from an unnamed source and more lies

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
What I was told ...
10 February 2020 Solon: Believed in obvious garbage from an unnamed source and more lies (Orbiter 5 filter)
The far side of the Moon was in shadow for some orbits and thus not illuminated by direct sunlight. No blue light. No green light. No red light. etc. Thus there is no garbage of just "no blue light". What the SO-368 photos show are the response of the film to the emitted mostly infrared light. A grain of film gets hit by an infrared photon. Obviously for the grain be visible it has to turn into some other visible color than the background !
Likewise when the far side was not in shadow the response of the film has to be taken in account. A grain of film gets hit by an close-to-green photon. Maybe the grain turns green.

There were 5 Orbiter missions.
Instruments included a Canopus star tracker (visible images of stars !)
Quote:
The photographic system was provided by Eastman Kodak and it was derived from a system, provided by the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), designed for the U-2 and SR-71 reconnaissance planes.[3]
No evidence that any Orbiter used a "Wratten 25A filter, tri-band IR".

Last edited by Reality Check; 9th February 2020 at 05:10 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 03:31 PM   #374
Blue Mountain
Resident Skeptical Hobbit
 
Blue Mountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Waging war on woo-woo in Winnipeg
Posts: 5,780
Yoo-hoo, Solon! Did you miss this one?

Originally Posted by Blue Mountain View Post
(leading part snipped)

So, Solon, can you show me the news stories where American and Russian space agencies were shocked to discover their first attempts to take pictures from space came up blank? Can you provide links to the papers describing the the reasons for the failure and then the conversion process? And then the news stories from about five years later when the first images from the new space photograph technology were released?
__________________
The social illusion reigns to-day upon all the heaped-up ruins of the past, and to it belongs the future. The masses have never thirsted after truth. They turn aside from evidence that is not to their taste, preferring to deify error, if error seduce them. Gustav Le Bon, The Crowd, 1895 (from the French)
Canadian or living in Canada? PM me if you want an entry on the list of Canadians on the forum.
Blue Mountain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 03:34 PM   #375
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,390
Solon, why won’t you answer my questions? Why are you so scared?

1. You said that ~50,000 miles away was the limit for seeing the moon from cislunar space. But you were given examples from much further away. Why haven’t you acknowledged them?

2. You said the rate of falloff for visible light in a vacuum was “known“. What is that rate?

3. According to you, you can’t see the sun near zenith from the ISS. This contradicts your claim that you can see the sun from the surface of the moon, as there is much less ionosphere above the moon then is above the space station. What does this contradiction say about your idea?

4. According to your claims, the ISS would be plunged into darkness near every orbital noon. Yet this is observed not to happen. Please explain why this is so, even though your claims predict the opposite.

5. Please explain, in your own words, exactly how the airtight, world-girdling conspiracy required to cover up this idea of yours has been maintained over the past six decades.

6. Why are geosynchronous and interplanetary spacecraft designed with solar panels, while according to you this would not work?

7. Why have you not yet grasped that plane waves are merely a representation of transverse waves from a distant source, not a distinct physical phenomenon? This has been explained to you dozens of times.

Last edited by sts60; 9th February 2020 at 03:39 PM.
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 04:22 PM   #376
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,641
Originally Posted by Steve001 View Post
Both sides of the Moon experience two weeks of sunlight followed by two weeks of night; even so, the far side is sometimes called the dark side of the Moon, where; "dark" is used to mean unseen rather than lacking sunlight.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_side_of_the_Moon

P.S. still waiting for a reply to my post 162.
Wait, wait, wait. Surely Solon does not think that the farside is never exposed to full noon sunlight? Tell me that is not true? Please?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 04:32 PM   #377
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 45,703
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Wait, wait, wait. Surely Solon does not think that the farside is never exposed to full noon sunlight? Tell me that is not true? Please?
If I understand it correctly, he seems to think that before encountering an atmosphere, sunlight consists of gamma rays, not visible light. But it's hard to tell, since he's very vague about what he believes is actually going on.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 04:42 PM   #378
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,641
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
If I understand it correctly, he seems to think that before encountering an atmosphere, sunlight consists of gamma rays, not visible light. But it's hard to tell, since he's very vague about what he believes is actually going on.
I don't think you understand correctly. I am almost certain nobody can understand correctly. I am almost certain Solon does not understand his own claims.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 04:51 PM   #379
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,641
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
How do you know which is the real deal?
I don't have to. All I need know is that you are dishonestly using images disavowed as remotely accurate from the get go.

It matters not a whit what source I may or may not use.

You are using a source that states it should not be used in any way because it is flawed. Yet you continue to use it.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 08:52 PM   #380
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,390
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
...But it's hard to tell, since he's very vague about what he believes is actually going on.
This is in part a deliberate strategy on Solon’s part to avoid getting pinned down and actually defend a specific assertion. He keeps throwing out new terms he Googled up, and cycling through numerous irrelevant assertions - like arguing about the exact appearance of something in a region that he’s already asserted has undergone his “conversion” process. It’s meant to keep people busy rebutting side-claims that have nothing to do with his main idea.

The other reason he’s vague about what he believes is going on is that he genuinely has no idea what he’s talking about, so X-ray fluorescence, “downshifting”, and pair production are all equally good sciency-sounding terms for him to throw out. He might as well throw in continental drift and photosynthesis.

The one thing he won’t do is address the gaping contradictions in his fantasy. Well, nor how the decades-long, airtight, world-girdling conspiracy to cover it up is supposed to work. Or, come to think of it, numerous examples that directly rebut his claims. Oh, and the absolutely broken notions of physics at the core of his claims - at least the parts that aren’t pure gibberish.

OK, that’s more than one thing he won’t do. We’ll add that he refuses to say why he is so abjectly terrified of learning something that he has to lie so often.
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 09:15 PM   #381
Paulhoff
You can't expect perfection.
 
Paulhoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 12,512
Just another Flat Earther.
__________________
For our money "IN WHICH GOD DO YOU TRUST"
Much worse than the Question not asked, is the Answer not Given
Don't accept an answer that can't be questioned - God is Surperfluous
A society fails when ignorance outweighs knowledge
Science doesn’t know everything, but religion doesn’t know anything
Life is so horrent and also so beautiful, but without it there is nothing
Paulhoff is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 09:30 PM   #382
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 15,907
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
How do you know which is the real deal?

What I was told is that the images taken with the SO-368 showed the green on the far side because there was no blue light, and this is what happens when the near IR is the only light source.
It can also be found that all the images taken of the far side during the Orbiter 5 mission were through a Wratten 25A filter, tri-band IR.
This is why the lunar far side images from the Beresheet camera were so dark and oddly coloured. Sure, any photo or image can be played with to make them look like what ever you want, but unless I see anything that suggests otherwise then I will believe the lunar fully illuminated far side is much darker than it should be if the solar constant model is used. Lets have an exposure meter on both the near and far side and compare readings. Oh, but that means an actual experiment, can't have that can we?

It's not that this thread is actually breaking any laws, it's just that the optics are very bad.
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 03:26 AM   #383
wollery
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
 
wollery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,893
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
How do you know which is the real deal?

What I was told is that the images taken with the SO-368 showed the green on the far side because there was no blue light, and this is what happens when the near IR is the only light source.
Who told you this?
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad

"Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin
wollery is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 03:40 AM   #384
erwinl
Master Poster
 
erwinl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,477
Originally Posted by wollery View Post
Who told you this?
Looked too much at pictures of the thermal images you get with the fire control of some tanks, I guess.
__________________
Bow before your king
Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"
erwinl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 04:18 AM   #385
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,995
Originally Posted by wollery View Post
Who told you this?
Oh, be reasonable. Surely it would be much easier for someone to just pop back to the moon and see if the back of it is green than it would be for Solon to try to remember who it was who made whatever comment he thinks he once saw about SO-368 film.

I mean, in all the Apollo transcripts, did anyone actually ask the astronauts flat out "by the way, is the far side of the moon green instead of the uniform grey everyone expects it to be?" because without that prompting I just don't see how we can be sure that they didn't just omit to mention it.
Jack by the hedge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 06:08 AM   #386
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
How do you know which is the real deal?

What I was told is that the images taken with the SO-368 showed the green on the far side because there was no blue light, and this is what happens when the near IR is the only light source.
It can also be found that all the images taken of the far side during the Orbiter 5 mission were through a Wratten 25A filter, tri-band IR.
This is why the lunar far side images from the Beresheet camera were so dark and oddly coloured. Sure, any photo or image can be played with to make them look like what ever you want, but unless I see anything that suggests otherwise then I will believe the lunar fully illuminated far side is much darker than it should be if the solar constant model is used. Lets have an exposure meter on both the near and far side and compare readings. Oh, but that means an actual experiment, can't have that can we?
Solon:

You are a liar.
__________________
On 22 JUL 2016, Candidate Donald Trump in his acceptance speech: "There can be no prosperity without law and order."
On 05 FEB 2019, President Donald Trump said in his Sate of the Union Address: "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation."
On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 08:59 AM   #387
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,390
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Originally Posted by Solon
...What I was told is that the images taken with the SO-368 showed the green on the far side because there was no blue light, and this is what happens when the near IR is the only light source.
Solon:

You are a liar.
He’s also very, very bad at keeping his stories straight. According to his own words, the Moon’s practically nonexistent atmosphere is sufficient to perform the magic conversion to visible light, which is how the Apollo astronauts were able to see it. Now he’s contradicting himself, again, by saying there was only infrared light.

As I said, part of this is because he keeps trying to obfuscate his claims to avoid getting pinned down. And part of it is simply that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

Last edited by sts60; 10th February 2020 at 09:00 AM.
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 09:43 AM   #388
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,995
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
… Oh, but that means an actual experiment, can't have that can we?
Which would be easier for you Solon; to conduct whichever experiments on Ektachrome film you require, or to fly to the moon with exposure meters?

It's sad that so many sinister global conspiracies like this one are allowed to continue for decade after decade because the insightful people who see what's really going on and could blow the whole thing wide open won't do anything beyond having a bit of a moan about it on the internet.
Jack by the hedge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 11:09 AM   #389
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by sts60 View Post
He’s also very, very bad at keeping his stories straight. According to his own words, the Moon’s practically nonexistent atmosphere is sufficient to perform the magic conversion to visible light, which is how the Apollo astronauts were able to see it. Now he’s contradicting himself, again, by saying there was only infrared light.

As I said, part of this is because he keeps trying to obfuscate his claims to avoid getting pinned down. And part of it is simply that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
This whole concept is just stupid and weird.

After all, if his concept is valid, then I suppose that when astronomers study objects millions, or even billions, of light years away, that somehow all of those light photons that are produced by these objects disappear when the hit the vacuum of space and then suddenly reassemble when they hit the atmosphere of planet Earth.

And to make things even stranger, a concept like this would be quite easy to test, but 'Solon' has continually failed to show even one experiment that shows his concept has actually been demonstrated.
__________________
On 22 JUL 2016, Candidate Donald Trump in his acceptance speech: "There can be no prosperity without law and order."
On 05 FEB 2019, President Donald Trump said in his Sate of the Union Address: "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation."
On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 11:38 AM   #390
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,065
Satellites, even in close Earth orbit, can be badly affected by large flare/ CME events. To put it technically, the shortwave radiation, such as x-rays, buggers up their workings.
Now imagine a spacecraft such as Rosetta. Over a decade in space. Supposedly getting bombarded constantly by even shorter wave radiation - gamma, for instance. Still worked. Including its cameras. Until the day it was 'crashed' onto the comet. There are other such missions. How long has New Horizons been out there? Why are these missions not failing due to all this shortwave radiation? Hell, why can't they even detect it in the quantities implied by Solon's nonsense?
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 11:40 AM   #391
Solon
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 33
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No, this is not correct. Follow my earlier link about Aerochrome film, and you'll see that infrared light shows up as red, NOT as green, on Aerochrome film. Furthermore, the green is not saturated, so the other layers are still picking up other light. Lastly, when using Aerochrome film, filters were usually used to block blue light because all three layers are sensitive to blue light. If you take an Aerochrome picture with a blue light source and no filter, it will expose all three layers and show up as grey/white, producing a washed-out image. By filtering blue light out, you separate the sensitivity of each layer. If is likely that your source confused filtering out blue light (the typical operating conditions for Aerochrome use) with an absence of blue light.

But we know the far side of the moon had blue light. The Ektrachrome images make that pretty clear. This map shows where the images were taken from:
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/m...p07/150dpi.jpg
As you can see, the color Ektachrome 35 mm images were taken about 20 degrees South, 170 degrees west. That's the far side of the moon, and pictures from the far side of the moon using Ektachrome show up as grey/white. That means the Ektachrome camera was picking up red, green AND blue light.
Thanks for that reply Ziggurat, I'll certainly look a little deeper into your explanation. I believe the SO-368 had the Wratten 2A coating so they didn't have to use a lens filter, but the exact details of the films they used is sparse. I'm pretty sure I have a bookmark somewhere that explained the green hued images, will have to see if I can dig it up.

This page talks about the colours of the Moon, but it was my (up to now) belief that the films were structured so that much more information was available spectrally to those who knew the exact nature of the chemistry, and that the images were not the way they were due to bad film or sloppy processing/copying etc. I really think these guys knew their stuff and were not just trying to take pretty pictures.
hq.nasa.gov/alsj/apollocolor.html

What I would really like to see but don't think we ever will is some photos taken with one of the Nikon D series cameras that they use on the ISS to photograph the Earth (and not the IR enhanced ones), as with the EXIF files we could deduce much more about actual light levels. Very complicated subject when we take into account the human colour perception and sensitivity, but all in all I think there is still much experimentation to be performed to nail down the full details.

bruto
Quote:
Solon, did you scroll down and notice that there are also blue and green images taken with the same film on the same occasion?
Yes, and I read that the photographer had put the wrong film magazine in the camera and that those filters were meant to have been used on, I think, the 2485 film.

Quote:
Don't forget too that it seems at least some of the pictures taken on the moon were done not under direct sunlight but in earthshine.
As if things weren't complicated enough already!

And to those who mock the gamma light stuff, you have to consider that the gamma ray emissions from the lunar surface might have something to do with just how bright the Moon can be sometimes. Obviously the gamma does not get to the surface, it is attenuated by the atmosphere. This idea that harmful radiation is blocked by the atmosphere is silly, all that energy has to go somewhere and not just disappear, it is transformed through multiple stages.
Solon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 11:56 AM   #392
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 45,703
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
This page talks about the colours of the Moon, but it was my (up to now) belief that the films were structured so that much more information was available spectrally to those who knew the exact nature of the chemistry, and that the images were not the way they were due to bad film or sloppy processing/copying etc. I really think these guys knew their stuff and were not just trying to take pretty pictures.
hq.nasa.gov/alsj/apollocolor.html
I'm sure that's true. Aerochrome seems to have been developed for aerial reconnaissance (hence the name). And the blue and red images of the moon suggest to me that they tried imaging the moon with different filters to separate out some of that spectral information.

But that's also precisely why I think that if there was something really strange about the spectrum from the moon (such as a lack of blue light), they would have picked up on it. That isn't the sort of discovery scientists would want to hide. That's exactly the sort of thing scientists live for: a radical and unexpected discovery.

Quote:
And to those who mock the gamma light stuff, you have to consider that the gamma ray emissions from the lunar surface might have something to do with just how bright the Moon can be sometimes. Obviously the gamma does not get to the surface, it is attenuated by the atmosphere. This idea that harmful radiation is blocked by the atmosphere is silly, all that energy has to go somewhere and not just disappear, it is transformed through multiple stages.
Yes, the energy can't just disappear. But that's precisely the problem: if gamma rays are being converted to lower energy photons, we should be able to see that. But we don't see anything like what we should see if any significant fraction of the flux from the sun was gamma rays.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 12:02 PM   #393
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,791
Has solon ever addressed the mechanism that causes the Sun to appear as a 1/2 degree ball in the sky and how the light that reaches Earth's surface maintains the collimation appropriate to an object 90+ million miles away?
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 01:01 PM   #394
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,390
Solon, why won’t you answer my questions? Why are you so scared of being wrong - of learning something?

1. You said that ~50,000 miles away was the limit for seeing the moon from cislunar space. But you were given examples from much further away. Why haven’t you acknowledged them?

2. You said the rate of falloff for visible light in a vacuum was “known“. What is that rate?

3. According to you, you can’t see the sun near zenith from the ISS. This contradicts your claim that you can see the sun from the surface of the moon, as there is much less ionosphere above the moon then is above the space station. What does this contradiction say about your idea?

4. According to your claims, the ISS would be plunged into darkness near every orbital noon. Yet this is observed not to happen. Please explain why this is so, even though your claims predict the opposite.

5. Please explain, in your own words, exactly how the airtight, world-girdling conspiracy required to cover up this idea of yours has been maintained over the past six decades.

6. Why are geosynchronous and interplanetary spacecraft designed with solar panels, while according to you this would not work?

7. Why have you not yet grasped that plane waves are merely a representation of transverse waves from a distant source, not a distinct physical phenomenon? This has been explained to you dozens of times.
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 01:25 PM   #395
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Thumbs down Usual delusions and lies about cameras and images that are not his debunked delusion

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
....
11 February 2020 Solon: Usual delusions and lies about cameras and images that are not his debunked delusion.

7 February 2020 Solon: Continues with irrelevant nonsense about the Moon ignoring the real world of images of the Sun and stars in visible light debunking his "they only emit gamma rays" delusion.

A deluded lie that there are only "IR enhanced" photos taken by the many Nikon D series cameras in the ISS when a 5 second Google shows there are photos with no sign of his "IR enhanced" delusion.

More "I heard"/"I was told"/"I read" fantasies.

Stupidity that gamma rays are part of why the Moon is bright. Gamma rays are not visible. Gamma rays need special equipment to be detected not ordinary cameras. Moonlight is reflected sunlight.

Some "harmful radiation is blocked by the atmosphere is silly" stupidity. That is what has to happen in his debunked "stars only emit gamma rays" delusion. The atmosphere has to block the gamma rays by the high energy photons hitting atmospheric molecules and atoms and blowing them apart. The result over 4 billion years is that we have no atmosphere !

In the real world we exist and we measure a solar spectrum that was emitted by the Sun (mostly H and He), not the atmosphere.

Last edited by Reality Check; 10th February 2020 at 01:26 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 01:56 PM   #396
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 25,234
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I'm sure that's true. Aerochrome seems to have been developed for aerial reconnaissance (hence the name). And the blue and red images of the moon suggest to me that they tried imaging the moon with different filters to separate out some of that spectral information.

But that's also precisely why I think that if there was something really strange about the spectrum from the moon (such as a lack of blue light), they would have picked up on it. That isn't the sort of discovery scientists would want to hide. That's exactly the sort of thing scientists live for: a radical and unexpected discovery.



Yes, the energy can't just disappear. But that's precisely the problem: if gamma rays are being converted to lower energy photons, we should be able to see that. But we don't see anything like what we should see if any significant fraction of the flux from the sun was gamma rays.
Although I have misplaced the reference (lots out there) I think it's mentioned in more than one place that photos of the lunar surface were purposely done with R,G, and B color filters. It should hardly need to be said, but apparently it does, that when you apply a color filter to light, what is left is still light.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 03:37 PM   #397
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,308
Bump ...

Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
(My hilite)

In the OP, Solon says:

"I am searching for empirical scientific evidence that [...]"

In post #158, Solon agreed that "empirical" means "capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment" (the third choice for the definition per the online Merriam-Webster dictionary).

In this post I'll suggest some meanings for "scientific" and "science", also from the online Merriam-Webster dictionary.

Scientific:
1. of, relating to, or exhibiting the methods or principles of science
2. conducted in the manner of science or according to results of investigation by science : practicing or using thorough or systematic methods


Science:
1. the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
2a. a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study
2b. something (such as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge
3a. knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method
3b. such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena
4. a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws


Solon: when you use the terms "scientific" and "science", which of the above meanings do you intend?
Still waiting for a response, Solon.

This is central to your claim, per your OP; how can we have a rational, reasonable discussion if you do not define your key terms?
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 04:09 PM   #398
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,308
To recap: Solon's OP is all about "empirical scientific evidence that the Sun emits any heat (thermal infrared) or visible light when observed from outside of Earths atmosphere or outside of any other planet or moons atmosphere." (my hilite)

I've started going through Solon's posts, from #158 onward (a definition of "empirical" is given in that post), to apply that definition to the content of those posts (still waiting for clarification on "scientific"); in particular I am ignoring post #55).

The only posts by Solon that I'm considering are those which contain material which could be construed as containing, or refering to, "empirical scientific evidence". Per the definition agreed to by Solon in post #158. I've already addressed one such, in #200 (a response to #189).

This, post #216, is the first such.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
The Apollo 11 astronauts were instructed not to look at the Sun, and the window shades were to prevent them doing that and also to not allowing excess heat to enter the craft.
Hearsay.

Where is the empirical evidence?

Quote:
Of course, the astronauts never even snuck a peek at the Sun during the many days in cislunar space, which means of course they could also never have seen the stars either.
Opinion or speculation.

Where is the empirical evidence?

Quote:
Now for anyone who takes the time to actually read the transcripts you find these red neck space cowboys were actually darn right rude and crude, so to believe they did not even attempt to take a look is rather hard to believe.
Opinion or speculation.

Where is the empirical evidence?

Quote:
When they did the low light photography experiments thay would have to have removed one window shade to fasten the camera to the window bracket, and having been kept dark adapted the whole time, surely if the stars were visible they would have mentioned it? They were there to observe.
Hearsay.

Where is the empirical evidence?

Quote:
So they took no photos of the Sun from cislunar space. They took some from Earth orbit, and some from lunar orbit, the ones from lunar orbit being taken with the very high speed 2485 film and no solar filter. They never took any solar filters, what a shame.
Opinion, speculation, hearsay.

Where is the empirical evidence?

Quote:
lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/browse/AS15/98/13399.jpg
This might be empirical evidence ...

... except that there's no metadata!

Can you supply that metadata, Solon? Without it, this cannot be empirical evidence.

Quote:
So no photos of the Sun were attempted from cislunar space and the low light experiment photos showed nothing.
Opinion, speculation, hearsay.

Where is the empirical evidence?

Quote:
So regarding my original question regarding proof using the same instruments and methods as we use from Earth to measure the Suns heat and light, there is none.
For the record, here is the key part of your OP:

I am searching for empirical scientific evidence that the Sun emits any heat (thermal infrared) or visible light when observed from outside of Earths atmosphere or outside of any other planet or moons atmosphere.

Quote:
You all think I am stupid and I think you are all (well, mostly anyway) completely 'in the dark' when it comes to understanding absolutely anything about the instruments involved or even the difference between photography and spectroscopy. All that is on offer is insults, which the operators of this very cosmoquest-like forum seem to encourage.

I'm quite content to wait until the next visitors to the Moon, armed with the latest cameras, video cameras, and other high tech gear (and some solar filters of course) give us some 4K video and of course, if they are there during the night, some magnificent photos of the stars. Can't wait.
Perhaps.

But there's no empirical evidence presented in this post.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 04:20 PM   #399
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,308
Quoting only the parts relevant to my investigation (empirical evidence). This is post #252.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
<snip>

To the issue of star visibility, the Apollo astronauts only ever saw stars when looking through the sextant
Hearsay.

Where's the empirical evidence?

Quote:
, and if any of you would take the time to research how it worked you would find that it incorporated a star tracker and also used a high voltage photon multiplier. The view from the star tracker was merged with the optical path to the eyepiece, and the star tracker was detecting the Lyman Alpha line of hydrogen.
Opinion, speculation.

Where's the empirical evidence?

Quote:
from A17:

“CC Question 12 for each of you: What do you hope to tell your grandchildren as your most memorable moment of your trip to the Moon?”

“Well, I'll start with that one, Hank. I had two impressions. The-the first is the dazzling beauty of Descartes -the surface. It was just one of the most awe-inspiring sights I've ever seen. And, secondly, on the EVA, when you look away from the Earth -or the Moon - it's Just the utter blackness of space. It really is black out there.”

The first professional British astronaut [Tim Peake] said the most unexpected thing was "the blackness of space".
"We always talk about seeing the view of planet Earth and how beautiful it is and you come to expect that.
"But what people don't mention that much is when you look in the opposite direction and you see how dark space is.
"It is just the blackest black and that was a real surprise to me."
This might be empirical evidence ...

... except that there's no provinence (so no one is able to check it). Care to supply that, Solon?

Quote:
I got lots more quotes, none mention dark adaptation or dark visors.
Opinion.

Where's the empirical evidence?
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 05:22 PM   #400
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,641
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Thanks for that reply Ziggurat, I'll certainly look a little deeper into your explanation. I believe the SO-368 had the Wratten 2A coating so they didn't have to use a lens filter, but the exact details of the films they used is sparse. I'm pretty sure I have a bookmark somewhere that explained the green hued images, will have to see if I can dig it up.

This page talks about the colours of the Moon, but it was my (up to now) belief that the films were structured so that much more information was available spectrally to those who knew the exact nature of the chemistry, and that the images were not the way they were due to bad film or sloppy processing/copying etc. I really think these guys knew their stuff and were not just trying to take pretty pictures.
hq.nasa.gov/alsj/apollocolor.html

What I would really like to see but don't think we ever will is some photos taken with one of the Nikon D series cameras that they use on the ISS to photograph the Earth (and not the IR enhanced ones), as with the EXIF files we could deduce much more about actual light levels. Very complicated subject when we take into account the human colour perception and sensitivity, but all in all I think there is still much experimentation to be performed to nail down the full details.

bruto


Yes, and I read that the photographer had put the wrong film magazine in the camera and that those filters were meant to have been used on, I think, the 2485 film.



As if things weren't complicated enough already!

And to those who mock the gamma light stuff, you have to consider that the gamma ray emissions from the lunar surface might have something to do with just how bright the Moon can be sometimes. Obviously the gamma does not get to the surface, it is attenuated by the atmosphere. This idea that harmful radiation is blocked by the atmosphere is silly, all that energy has to go somewhere and not just disappear, it is transformed through multiple stages.
Welcome back to your weakly post. Please explain why it might be that your source explicitly states that it's images are merely an index of images and absolutely must not be used for any other purpose? We both know the answer, but I will allow you an opportunity to salvage whatever dignity you have left before I torpedo your nonsense without mercy.

Last chance. Pony up with at least a shred of honesty.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:35 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.