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 29th January 2020, 07:39 PM   #201
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,390
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Sunset Timelapse from the International Space Station is one of many observations of sunrise and sunset from the ISS...
But, you see, Solon claims that looking through that much ionosphere allows the “conversion” process (the exact mechanism of which he can’t say, but has appealed to a bunch of sciencey-sounding words) to occur.

There will be enough in your line of sight as long as you don’t get too far an angular distance from the limb of the Earth (which he can’t specify, mind you, but he knows it when he sees it - somehow it always includes every picture taken from the ISS, even the ones he claimed didn’t exist (e.g., Mars)).

Ya gotta have enough ionosphere. Except when, for reasons known (perhaps) only to him, Solon brings up balloons and jets in the stratosphere. Or observers on mountains in the troposphere. Or ice crystals or dust grains. Or the top couple of inches of lunar regolith.

Speaking of the Moon, apparently its ultratenuous atmosphere is just enough to allow you to see it from lunar orbit, because it’s enough to do the magic conversion despite massing about 10 or 20 tons total. Except it’s also enough to see from 50,000 miles away when an observation from that distance is provided. Because, hey presto, Solon did a calculation that just happened to give that distance. No word yet on the subsequent example provided to him from 100,000 miles away; he must’ve missed the numerous requests for an answer.

(Of course, you can’t do a calculation without knowing the rate of visible light falloff, which Solon has said is known. Hey, Solon, what is that rate anyway?)

In fact, it turns out the barely-there-air of the Moon lets you see it, as well as distant stars, from 50,000 miles away, but the much greater amount of the ionosphere above the ISS won’t even let you see the Sun. Funny how that works. I wonder if I’ve ever asked Solon about that?

The good news is that this means the ISS crew gets a nice dark extra night centered every 90 minutes around orbital noon, as the Sun nears zenith. Oddly enough, though, EVA and rendezvous pictures always show everything brightly lit up, as if the Sun just goes right on shining through that diminished thickness of ionosphere. I can’t imagine why, but I feel I’ve asked Solon about it before. Maybe it’s my questions that turn invisible.

Last edited by sts60; 29th January 2020 at 07:48 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 29th January 2020, 08:22 PM   #202
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Originally Posted by sts60 View Post
But, you see, Solon claims that looking through that much ionosphere allows the “conversion” process (the exact mechanism of which he can’t say, but has appealed to a bunch of sciencey-sounding words) to occur. ...
His ignorance of course includes what the ionosphere is! It extends to about 1000 kilometers and these videos include the Sun being visible many thousands of kilometers from the Earth. His delusions predict that the Sun will be invisible and kill the ISS astronauts wit gamma radiation. Then the Sun will gradually become visible as it passes through more and more of the ionosphere.

Any gibberish or word salad does not change this actually minor evidence that debunks his delusion. The killer evidence are the images of the Sun, Moon and stars from space. Even his ionosphere/exosphere delusion fails because there are some space space telescopes not in Earth orbit. I have mentioned Gaia and its over a billion detected stars which is at the L2 point about 1.5 million kilometers away.
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 29th January 2020, 08:34 PM   #203
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,390
My friend, we were trying to help Solon understand all this stuff years ago over in CQ. You’re preachin’ to the choir. :-)

ETA: actually, I think the “gamma Sun” is new, at least from Solon.

Last edited by sts60; 29th January 2020 at 08:35 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 29th January 2020, 11:45 PM   #204
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 25,234
I still don't quite see ow Solon thinks his argument is forwarded by a document explaining why the Apollo space craft needed window shades.
__________________
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 online now   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 30th January 2020, 03:07 AM   #205
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,065
Quote:
How many astronauts, highly trained observers with the very best of eyesight, saying it is totally black out there do you need to hear before you would consider they may be correct?
Which is a total lie. As has been pointed out to you for years. How many times do you need to read the quotes from these highly trained observers that they can see the stars and Sun from space, before it occurs to you that you are an eejit? Just askin'.
__________________
“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 30th January 2020, 03:18 AM   #206
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,065
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
The density of the atmosphere is important to the conversion of shorter wavelengths of solar radiation to the longer ones.
Complete and utter drivel. How the hell would the atmosphere react to a bombardment of gamma radiation, hmmm? Ever opened a science book (rhetorical)? Do you know what was causing the recently visited comet, 67P, to be visible to the spacecraft in visible light? Gamma rays, was it? Stop being stupid, and go troll somewhere else.
__________________
“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 30th January 2020, 04:31 AM   #207
cjameshuff
Critical Thinker
 
cjameshuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 280
Originally Posted by sts60 View Post
My friend, we were trying to help Solon understand all this stuff years ago over in CQ. You’re preachin’ to the choir. :-)

ETA: actually, I think the “gamma Sun” is new, at least from Solon.
He was never clear about where he was going with it, but he did claim what we saw of Mars was reflected solar x-rays converted to visible light in Earth's atmosphere.
cjameshuff 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 30th January 2020, 04:42 AM   #208
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,065
Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
He was never clear about where he was going with it, but he did claim what we saw of Mars was reflected solar x-rays converted to visible light in Earth's atmosphere.
Lol. X-rays, huh? I wonder if he means the same sort of x-rays that are produced in solar flares, and can disrupt the ionosphere? Strange how our radio communications aren't permanently screwed due to this non-existent constant bombardment of x-rays! I'm afraid that Solon is just another of these EU types who do not understand enough science to realise what idiots they continually make of themselves due to the aforementioned ignorance. It'd be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.
__________________
“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 30th January 2020, 06:16 AM   #209
cjameshuff
Critical Thinker
 
cjameshuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 280
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Lol. X-rays, huh? I wonder if he means the same sort of x-rays that are produced in solar flares, and can disrupt the ionosphere? Strange how our radio communications aren't permanently screwed due to this non-existent constant bombardment of x-rays! I'm afraid that Solon is just another of these EU types who do not understand enough science to realise what idiots they continually make of themselves due to the aforementioned ignorance. It'd be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.
Here we are (the infamous Conjunctions thread again): https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthr...93#post1990693

Originally Posted by Solon
My explanation is that Mars is visible because we are seeing planewaves from the ionosphere of Mars, created
by Solar x-rays, being shifted to visible in our ionosphere. What happens to the x-rays and EUV
blocked by out atmoshere? They just disappear? This is the point source array of x-rays from Mars ionosphere,
creating the plane waves. They are down shifted in our ionosphere, I believe. There is more to it, but that's
a generalisation.
cjameshuff 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 30th January 2020, 07:34 AM   #210
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by wollery View Post
I always find it extremely telling which posts someone responds to, and which ones they ignore.

It speaks so eloquently of how aware they are of the shortcomings of their arguments than anything they actually say.
Thank you!

I have also noticed that foolish liars often reveal the truth about themselves by what they refuse to say as well as what they do say.
__________________
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 30th January 2020, 07:38 AM   #211
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,065
Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
Here we are (the infamous Conjunctions thread again): https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthr...93#post1990693
Ye Gods! My eyes are bleeding reading that!
Seems that our friend has zero understanding of the effect of x-rays on the atmosphere. I wonder why he thinks the ionosphere is mostly neutral, despite an x-ray bombardment that would ionise the upper atmosphere completely, in his world? And why the ionosphere basically collapses on the night side of the planet, due to the lack of x-rays? Despite the fact that we can see the Moon in reflected sunlight both in the daytime and at night?
One wonders how ignorant of how much science one needs to be to even entertain such nutty beliefs?
__________________
“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 30th January 2020, 07:43 AM   #212
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,308
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
<snip>

Originally Posted by Solon
If the people who perform the observations don't comment on them there would be no science at all would there?
This requires that we first make sure we are on the same page re "science" and "scientific"; I'll get to that later. So for now I'll simply acknowledge your question.
(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?
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 30th January 2020, 07:48 AM   #213
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 30,270
There's too much crap in this thread to wade through, but it seems to me that Solon is asserting two rather obvious pieces of utter nonsense:

(1) "Transverse EM waves" and "plane waves" are completely different things, rather than the latter being a subset of the former; and,

(2) X-rays and visible light are completely different things, rather than both being a subset of EM radiation.

Have I calibrated my stupidity detector correctly, or is s/he not at least implying both of these things?

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers 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 30th January 2020, 08:20 AM   #214
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,390
That’s the nut of it. He piles on a lot of other random stuff, and keeps asserting things like “no image of X from Y” which are instantly disproven, and saying ridiculous things like the Shuttle windows had “gratings”. He also refuses to answer to the numerous self-contradictions and certain other observations which are inevitable consequences of his premise.

And then he calls it “science”, although he is afraid to do the one thing absolutely essential to science: consider he might be wrong, instead of there really being a decades-long, world-girdling conspiracy of scientists and engineers and astronauts to cover up some key bit of physics for no reason whatsoever.
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 30th January 2020, 12:05 PM   #215
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,207
Solon,

What's your explanation for how these telescopes work?

How Infrared Telescopes Like Spitzer Help Astronomers See the Invisible
Quote:
Infrared light opens up new vistas to astronomers, revealing previously invisible features of planets and galaxies.
__________________
Look what I found! There's this whole web site full of skeptics that spun off from the James Randy Education Foundation!
halleyscomet 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 30th January 2020, 12:33 PM   #216
Solon
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 33
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
I still don't quite see ow Solon thinks his argument is forwarded by a document explaining why the Apollo space craft needed window shades.
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. 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.
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. 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.
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.
lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/browse/AS15/98/13399.jpg

So no photos of the Sun were attempted from cislunar space and the low light experiment photos showed nothing.

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.
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.
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 30th January 2020, 12:40 PM   #217
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,207
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
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.
Solon,

What's your explanation for how these telescopes work?

How Infrared Telescopes Like Spitzer Help Astronomers See the Invisible
Quote:
Infrared light opens up new vistas to astronomers, revealing previously invisible features of planets and galaxies.
__________________
Look what I found! There's this whole web site full of skeptics that spun off from the James Randy Education Foundation!
halleyscomet 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 30th January 2020, 12:41 PM   #218
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,834
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. 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.
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. 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.
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.
lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/browse/AS15/98/13399.jpg

So no photos of the Sun were attempted from cislunar space and the low light experiment photos showed nothing.

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.
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.
Solon:

You are a liar.

The Apollo astronauts did report that they could see stars when they were on the Moon.

Also, since they were taking pictures of the Moon, the camera exposure was adjusted in order to take good photos of the Moon. And since the lunar surface is so very bright during the lunar day, that meant that the far dimmer sources of light, such as stars, could not be seen in the photographs.
__________________
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 30th January 2020, 12:48 PM   #219
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,791
https://www.space.com/first-to-the-m...o-8-movie.html
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 30th January 2020, 12:50 PM   #220
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,207
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Quote:
They moved into the darkest part of the moon's shadow, which is called the umbra. It was a darkness that is hard to imagine here on Earth. "There was no earthshine, and there was no sunshine, so consequently, when we looked out the window, all the stars came out," Jim Lovell, Apollo 8 command module pilot, said in the film.

At that moment, crewmember Bill Anders added, the trio could see stars everywhere. There were so many stars that even the familiar constellations were washed out (and the astronauts knew these constellations well, since they used star sightings to help calibrate their spacecraft's navigation system).

"And yet, as I looked over my shoulders," Anders said, "I saw suddenly [that] the stars disappeared. A black hole, and that was the moon. And I must say, at that stage of the game, the hair came up on the back of my neck a little."
Right, like Solon will stop using the claim just because people provide proof the claim is false.

Pffft.
__________________
Look what I found! There's this whole web site full of skeptics that spun off from the James Randy Education Foundation!

Last edited by halleyscomet; 30th January 2020 at 12:51 PM.
halleyscomet 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 30th January 2020, 01:05 PM   #221
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Thumbs down Ignorant fantasies and delusions about Apollo missions

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.....
31 January 2020 Solon: Obsessive fantasies and delusions about Apollo missions.
Apollo 11 was not the only Apollo mission. The Apollo missions are not the only missions to space. To show that your idea of the Sun and stars only emitting gamma rays is an ignorant delusion all we need is 1 image of the Sun or a star in visible light. We have millions of image of the Sun and stars from space in visible light .

Of course the Apollo astronauts would have been to told not look directly at the Sun because that is lots more dangerous than it is on Earth. The window shades were periodically used to give shade for sleeping, etc.!

An irrelevant and probable "no photos of the Sun from cislunar space" lie. Just because a person with an obvious delusion that the Sun and stars only emit gamma rays does not look for then or cannot find then, does not mean that they do not exist. The astronauts in the Command Module did not just sleep for several days! As cited Jim Lovell, Apollo 8 command module pilot looked out the windows and saw stars. He probably saw sunrise and sunset over the Moon as he went thru its shadow. He definitely did not report that the Sun vanished!

We are not here to support your blatant delusions. If you have looked at databases of Apollo photos and not found any, then you need to cite them so we can check. Otherwise it is just an ignorant fantasy or probable lie.

31 January 2020 Solon: Repeats his deleted "using the same instruments and methods as we use from Earth " demand.
We cannot use exactly the same instruments because outer space is not the Earth's surface. Terrestrial instruments will not work or maybe simply explode in space . So we use instruments designed to work in space which gather the same data as terrestrial instruments. Space telescopes use space-hardened CCDs (CCDs are used in terrestrial cameras) and filters. The Sun's heat is measured in space but not using the instruments he ignorantly demands.

31 January 2020 Solon: A stupid understanding "difference between photography and spectroscopy" insult.
There is basically no difference in the context of your delusions.
Visible light detected in a camera or spectrograph is still visible light that has been detected! Anyone with minimal science education (thus the insult) knows that a camera and spectrograph are nearly the same instrument, A camera may have more focusing elements to focus the visible light. A spectrograph will spread visible light into a spectrum. What is really insulting is that there are people here with science degrees who definitely know about scientific instruments.

Last edited by Reality Check; 30th January 2020 at 02:06 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 30th January 2020, 01:14 PM   #222
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
You all think I am stupid...
I don't. I think you're playing a game, because you like the attention. Am I wrong? Are you stupid?
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 30th January 2020, 01:20 PM   #223
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,065
Quote:
There were so many stars that even the familiar constellations were washed out (and the astronauts knew these constellations well, since they used star sightings to help calibrate their spacecraft's navigation system.
^From Halley's post.
Yep, they were navigating using stars that they couldn't see! Some trick is that. Solon has been caught in this lie before on phys.org and, for all I know, CQ. Repeating the same lie is not going to make it come true.
__________________
“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 30th January 2020, 01:31 PM   #224
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Solon:

You are a liar.

The Apollo astronauts did report that they could see stars when they were on the Moon.
Solon's delusions include that magic happens over the Moon's surface to turn his imaginary gamma rays into visible light. Usually stated in the context of images of the Sun from the Moon but also a delusion about starlight. So that will be his response about the fact that stars are visible from the Moon.

The lie is that stars and the Sun were not seen from the command module orbiting the Moon when stars definitely were seen when module was in shadow. The Sun would be seen when the module was in sunlight but it is unlikely that such a well-known thing would be commented on.
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 30th January 2020, 01:32 PM   #225
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,065
And, as many people will already know, each apollo mission was equipped with a sextant. Just in case comms broke down, or were jammed by the dastardly commies.

http://www.astronomy.com/news/2018/0...apollo-sextant
__________________
“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 30th January 2020, 01:35 PM   #226
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,065
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Solon's delusions include that magic happens over the Moon's surface to turn his imaginary gamma rays into visible light.
So, how long have the Voyagers been exposed to this constant stream of gamma/ x-ray? What about Rosetta? Can't imagine that sort of thing would be good for the delicate instrument electronics!

EDIT:

Oh, and I believe Rosetta's star tracker used visible light. It's why they had to get the hell away from the comet, due to it being confused by the amount of dust flying around when things heated up. Of course, that dust is reflecting visible light in ........ visible wavelengths. Otherwise the cameras wouldn't have seen it! So, what was turning that light from.......whatever, into visible light around a comet?
__________________
“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

Last edited by jonesdave116; 30th January 2020 at 01:48 PM.
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 30th January 2020, 01:50 PM   #227
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
So, how long have the Voyagers been exposed to this constant stream of gamma/ x-ray? What about Rosetta? Can't imagine that sort of thing would be good for the delicate instrument electronics!
That is a debunking of his delusions that has not been emphasized enough.
Replacing the measured spectrum of the Sun with only gamma rays has consequences from those gamma rays.

Why do spacecraft designed to cope with normal radiation still work when bombarded with gamma radiation sometimes for decades?
ETA: How do spacecraft navigate when they use star trackers detecting the positions of stars in visible light? He may argue that magic happens around comets and even asteroids but what about New Horizons and other spacecraft navigating between planets?
How do solar panels on the ISS and other spacecraft work when the Sun only emits gamma rays?
What about the spacecraft testing light sails (LightSail 2 Spacecraft Successfully Demonstrates Flight by Light) when gamma rays should pass straight thru the sails?
Why are astronauts that have done EVA still alive?
Why are the ISS astronauts (3 months in a gamma ray rich environment) not poisoned by gamma radiation?
Why do gamma observatories in space not see a gamma ray only emitting Sun with the required intensity?
Why does the Earth have an atmosphere after over 4 billion years of ionizing gamma radiation?

Last edited by Reality Check; 30th January 2020 at 01:58 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 30th January 2020, 01:53 PM   #228
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,610
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. 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.
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. 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.
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.
lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/browse/AS15/98/13399.jpg

So no photos of the Sun were attempted from cislunar space and the low light experiment photos showed nothing.

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.
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.
Still waiting for a reply to post 162.
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 30th January 2020, 02:31 PM   #229
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,742
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
I have also noticed that foolish liars often reveal the truth about themselves by what they refuse to say as well as what they do say.
You are quite right. Solon prefers to talk about what the astronauts talked about, because he believes this is the only solid argument he has. All the other counter arguments are ignored, probably because he knows that he can't win in these areas.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh 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 30th January 2020, 03:07 PM   #230
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,390
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
You are quite right. Solon prefers to talk about what the astronauts talked about, because he believes this is the only solid argument he has. All the other counter arguments are ignored, probably because he knows that he can't win in these areas.
Of course, he keeps ignoring the examples of astronauts reporting seeing the Moon, Sun, and stars from cislunar space - including from past the 50,000 mile limit he “calculated”.
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 30th January 2020, 03:13 PM   #231
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,390
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
...You all think I am stupid..
I don’t think you’re stupid. You’re just an intellectual coward, afraid to address the numerous refutations of and glaring self-contradictions within your claims. You’re frightened to admit you were wrong, too scared to learn anything.

For example, you’ve said the rate of falloff of light waves in a vacuum is “known”. What is it? I predict you will not give a number, because you’re afraid to have your bluff called.
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 30th January 2020, 03:20 PM   #232
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 15,907
I'd like to also keep this question in the fore:

Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
What does it matter what you see? Is there some aspect of scientific conduct that's dependent upon your approval somehow? Are you offering research grants, editing a journal, allocating budgets, supervising a department, teaching a course, advising a government?

If Solon wants to play the game of "Try to convince me!" "Nope, I'm not convinced, you lose!" then it's fair to ask why anyone should bother playing. Absent any possibility of physical interactions, not being persuaded of something one takes pride in not accepting is literally the easiest thing in the world.
__________________
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 30th January 2020, 03:23 PM   #233
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 45,703
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
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 haven't insulted you at all. But I've asked you basic questions to try to understand your ideas better, and haven't gotten any response. I've also described to you the origins of the theory you cited, and how a lack of understanding of fusion led to this theory. Are you familiar with hydrogen fusion? Do you understand the standard model for how it powers the sun? Do you think the standard model of stellar fusion is wrong, and if so what do you think is the right model? I'm curious to know what you think about these aspects, because they're all relevant to your ideas.
__________________
"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 30th January 2020, 04:50 PM   #234
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
All that is on offer is insults, which the operators of this very cosmoquest-like forum seem to encourage.
That is wrong, Solon. We have offered you the real world which you have ignored.
For example, I presented you with this empirical evidence: 23 January 2020 Solon: Empirical evidence making a 9 year old claim of no observed light from the Sun outside of Earth's atmosphere a fantasy.
You have had 9 years to do basic research. Years of not knowing or denying that solar observatories in space have taken millions of images of the Sun in visible light turns a fantasy into delusion.
I gave you the physical fact that the Gaia spacecraft has detected over a billion stars in visible light. Denying that turns fantasy into delusion.
Astronauts in space have seen the Sun and stars and taken photos. Denying that turns fantasy into delusion.
Gamma radiation is bad for astronauts, spacecraft and even the Earth's atmosphere. Ignoring that turns fantasy into delusion.
9 years of a fantasy of gamma rays interacting with air or lunar dust or whatever and turning into sunlight from a body made of mostly H and He with no supporting science or evidence is a delusion.

The end result is that you are posting a many year old fairy story in the "Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology" section of the forum. That will be mentioned !
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 30th January 2020, 04:51 PM   #235
cjameshuff
Critical Thinker
 
cjameshuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 280
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
There's too much crap in this thread to wade through, but it seems to me that Solon is asserting two rather obvious pieces of utter nonsense:

(1) "Transverse EM waves" and "plane waves" are completely different things, rather than the latter being a subset of the former; and,

(2) X-rays and visible light are completely different things, rather than both being a subset of EM radiation.

Have I calibrated my stupidity detector correctly, or is s/he not at least implying both of these things?

Dave
1 is even worse: all EM waves are transverse, and any kind of wave can be planar...it's purely a matter of the shape of the wavefront.

His babble about point sources might be a clue as to how he got some of his more bizarre ideas about plane waves: radiation from a distant point source approximates a plane wave. Of course, this isn't because plane waves travel further. Starlight approximates plane waves because you're only ever looking at a tiny fraction of a very large spherical wavefront.

Of course, this has been explained to him before, and ignored.
cjameshuff 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 30th January 2020, 07:04 PM   #236
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 25,234
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Solon:

You are a liar.

The Apollo astronauts did report that they could see stars when they were on the Moon.

Also, since they were taking pictures of the Moon, the camera exposure was adjusted in order to take good photos of the Moon. And since the lunar surface is so very bright during the lunar day, that meant that the far dimmer sources of light, such as stars, could not be seen in the photographs.
And while we're at it, I wonder if Solon read the same report I did, or whether it changed between his citing it and my seeing it, because it pretty clearly states that the shades were put there in part, not to prevent looking at the sun, but to prevent the sunlight, which is not diffused by atmosphere, from causing difficult lighting conditions inside the spacecraft, as well as to prevent heating. Didn't Solon include heat among the things that aren't supposed to travel through space? I am guessing that when the windows were not facing the sun, the shades could be opened, and if no stars could be seen from them, I am willing to guess that this would have been very big, important news indeed. Really, isn't this getting to be a rather odd conspiracy theory, if in fact no stars could be seen from space, and no space travelers mentioned it?
__________________
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 online now   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 30th January 2020, 07:16 PM   #237
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 65,590
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
And while we're at it, I wonder if Solon read the same report I did, or whether it changed between his citing it and my seeing it, because it pretty clearly states that the shades were put there in part, not to prevent looking at the sun, but to prevent the sunlight, which is not diffused by atmosphere, from causing difficult lighting conditions inside the spacecraft, as well as to prevent heating. Didn't Solon include heat among the things that aren't supposed to travel through space? I am guessing that when the windows were not facing the sun, the shades could be opened, and if no stars could be seen from them, I am willing to guess that this would have been very big, important news indeed. Really, isn't this getting to be a rather odd conspiracy theory, if in fact no stars could be seen from space, and no space travelers mentioned it?
By the time you're arguing that light cannot travel through a vacuum, you're basically in a place where you have to deny pretty much everything that is known in order to support your argument.

Which leads me to ask - who created this vast fictional universe that we all live in and why?
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot 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 30th January 2020, 07:46 PM   #238
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
...How do solar panels on the ISS and other spacecraft work when the Sun only emits gamma rays??
Spacecraft that have used solar power
Quote:
To date, solar power, other than for propulsion, has been practical for spacecraft operating no farther from the Sun than the orbit of Jupiter. For example, Juno, Magellan, Mars Global Surveyor, and Mars Observer used solar power as does the Earth-orbiting, Hubble Space Telescope. The Rosetta space probe, launched 2 March 2004, used its 64 square metres (690 sq ft) of solar panels[7] as far as the orbit of Jupiter (5.25 AU); previously the furthest use was the Stardust spacecraft at 2 AU. Solar power for propulsion was also used on the European lunar mission SMART-1 with a Hall effect thruster.[citation needed]

The Juno mission, launched in 2011, is the first mission to Jupiter (arrived at Jupiter on July 4, 2016) to use solar panels instead of the traditional RTGs that are used by previous outer Solar System missions, making it the furthest spacecraft to use solar panels to date.[8][9] It has 72 square metres (780 sq ft) of panels.[10]

Another spacecraft of interest is Dawn which went into orbit around 4 Vesta in 2011. It used ion thrusters to get to Ceres.[citation needed]

The potential for solar powered spacecraft beyond Jupiter has been studied.[11]

The International Space Station also uses solar arrays to power everything on the station. The 262,400 solar cells cover around 27,000 square feet (2,500 m2) of space. There are four sets of solar arrays that power the station and the fourth set of arrays were installed in March 2009. 240 kilowatts of electricity can be generated from these solar arrays. That comes to 120 kilowatts average system power, including 50% ISS time in Earth's shadow.[12]
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 30th January 2020, 08:28 PM   #239
ferd burfle
Graduate Poster
 
ferd burfle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Just short of Zeta II Reticuli
Posts: 1,470
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. 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..

Nonsense highlighted. The Apollo command module guidance system required periodic corrections due to drift and on occasion in case of gyro-lock. This was accomplished by taking fixes on stars using optical sextants. Your claims are weak indeed when I, a layman on these topics, can easily spot the flaws.

Quote:
The CM optical unit had a precision sextant (SXT) fixed to the IMU frame that could measure angles between stars and Earth or Moon landmarks or the horizon. It had two lines of sight, 28X magnification and a 1.8º field of view. The optical unit also included a low-magnification wide field of view (60º) scanning telescope (SCT) for star sightings. The optical unit could be used to determine CM position and orientation in space.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_PGNCS

Based on your responses and non-responses elsewhere, I am under no illusion this will have any positive effect on your thinking.
__________________
"You do not know anyone as stupid as Donald Trump. You just don’t.”-Fran Lebowitz

Last edited by ferd burfle; 30th January 2020 at 08:31 PM.
ferd burfle 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 30th January 2020, 10:21 PM   #240
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,390
All of this has been repeatedly pointed out to Solon before. That astronauts in cislunar space had to deal with sunlight in their windows, including on the outbound leg sunlight bouncing off the docked LM. That they used the sextant on all the lunar missions (examples given immediately after he claimed it was never used). That they reported seeing the Moon and stars during translunar cruise. All of this would be impossible according to Solon, and thus all these numerous examples immediately refute his claim.

I see he’s cycled back to simply ignoring them and making up stories about the crew “not being allowed” to look out their windows. Solon, why are you so desperately afraid of being wrong? It’s not like anyone would think less of you for admitting your errors.

It’s also been repeatedly pointed out to him that spacecraft being powered by solar panels also refutes his claim: according to him, there would be no light to the panels, and thus no power. But there is.

It’s also been pointed out to him repeatedly the enormity of the absolutely airtight, world-girdling, decades-long conspiracy that would be required to keep Solon’s “physics” a secret. And all for no point whatsoever. We’d still look at the stars and planets, still go into space. And there would be fame and Nobels for those revealing this phenomenon. Yet Solon deliberately ignores this glaring deficit in his fantasy, afraid to extrapolate his claims to their inescapable conclusions.

Solon, why are you so afraid to simply say: “Huh, I wasn’t aware of those examples; I didn’t realize the contradictions that would arise; I didn’t realize how impossible keeping all this a secret would be. I was wrong, but at least I learned some things, so that’s good.” You act as if learning was bad; as if there’d be some terrible personal consequence, rather than a few people on an Internet forum saying, “Hey, good for you!”

What’s the point of clinging to this self-contradictory muddle so tightly you have to run away from data; run away from the results of your own claims? How does willful ignorance serve you?
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
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 12:07 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.