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 7th February 2020, 12:32 AM   #321
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 11,537
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Hold on, did Solon just assert that ultraviolet and infrared are not light? That the meaning of the word "light" is defined as "what our eyes see?" I have a sneaking suspicion that there's something wrong there.
To be fair, the use of the unmodified word light to mean "the part of the electromagnetic spectrum our eyes can detect" is not uncommon. The other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum are identified by modifiers, e.g. ultraviolet light, infrared light, and of course the term visible light is more properly used to specifically refer to that part of the spectrum. But if someone just says light I would assume they meant visible light, not the entire spectrum.

I'm more amused by Solon's assertion that no-one has any idea what light is, though it's clear that he certainly doesn't.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 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 7th February 2020, 01:11 AM   #322
erwinl
Master Poster
 
erwinl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,477
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Yes, yes. But that was with a Nikon D5. Which is not the consumer camera Solin specified.
So doesn’t count. Or something.

Very cool pictures by the way!
__________________
Bow before your king
Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"
erwinl 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 7th February 2020, 03:31 AM   #323
wollery
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
 
wollery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,894
Originally Posted by erwinl View Post
Yes, yes. But that was with a Nikon D5. Which is not the consumer camera Solin specified.
So doesn’t count. Or something.

Very cool pictures by the way!
It doesn't use film, it's digital, so it doesn't detect light the way the human eye would.
__________________
"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 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 7th February 2020, 04:25 AM   #324
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,744
Isn't Solon's claim that the Sun only sends out gamma rays, and that they are converted to other frequencies by the magic of atmospheres? One wonders how the practically nonexistent atmosphere on the Moon can do this trick so that photographs are possible at all.
__________________
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 7th February 2020, 04:51 AM   #325
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,653
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
You mean it never takes a good picture of Earth? It points at Earth quite frequently to calibrate.
I suppose if one had some odd interest in motion blur photography, one could use Hubble pointed at Earth. I have no idea how one could justify such a waste of Hubble's time, though.
__________________
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 7th February 2020, 05:04 AM   #326
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,210
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Hubble sees what your eyes could not for one thing, and it's not to to with wavelength, it's about coherency of light. Nobody knows what light actually is, the top experts admit it. We understand its behaviour in many ways, enough that we can do some pretty amazing things with it, but like gravity, magnetism and charge, we do not know what light really is.

The empirical method calls for independently verifiable experiments, but as a regular telescope and camera have not even been allowed into LEO let alone deep space then we can not independently verify that the stars are visible (at visible wavelengths) by any othe device than Hubble.

For the Atmospheric Light Transformer model to be tested it would also be required to know Hubbles orientation. Hubble is still in LEO, so if it is looking at an angle through the atmosphere then the line of sight to the target is still though thousands of miles of sparse but still present matter of some form or other.

So the best defense you can muster for your mythology about a gamma bomb Sun is to resort to the “god of the gaps” fallacy.

That’s both sad and anticlimactic.

The ONLY way you can defend your nonsense is to plead ignorance and extrapolate your own demonstrable and profound ignorance to the rest of the world. I want to congratulate you. You’ve cooked up a theory and a defense of it that’s more divorced from reality than Creationism and requires more ignorance of the last 80 years of scientific advances than flat Earthers.
__________________
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 7th February 2020, 05:33 AM   #327
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,614
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Solon replies thusly: you know Earth's atmosphere extends as far as the Moon and beyond. See https://newatlas.com/earth-atmospher...na-soho/58565/

Last edited by Steve001; 7th February 2020 at 05:40 AM.
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 7th February 2020, 07:38 AM   #328
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,803
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
I suppose if one had some odd interest in motion blur photography, one could use Hubble pointed at Earth. I have no idea how one could justify such a waste of Hubble's time, though.
I told you why. It's for calibration. The motion blur is a benefit in that case because it leads to an image that is of uniform (enough) brightness.
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 7th February 2020, 08:00 AM   #329
phunk
Illuminator
 
phunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,107
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
That's a gamma ray selfie
phunk 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 7th February 2020, 12:22 PM   #330
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,399
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Isn't Solon's claim that the Sun only sends out gamma rays, and that they are converted to other frequencies by the magic of atmospheres? One wonders how the practically nonexistent atmosphere on the Moon can do this trick so that photographs are possible at all.
Solon claims the almost nonexistent lunar atmosphere (with a total mass of 10-20 tons) is enough to perform his magic conversion, all the way into lunar orbit.

When confronted with an example of Apollo astronauts viewing the Moon from 50,000 miles away, Solon quickly “calculated“ that that was “about the limit“.

When then confronted with example of Apollo astronauts viewing the Moon from about 100,000 miles away, Solon ignored it. Over and over again. And has resorted to lying about the numerous sightings of the Sun, Moon, and stars from cislunar space.

Note, Solon’s “calculation“ must have used the rate of decay of visible light in a vacuum, a value he said was “known”. I keep asking him what that rate is. He has diligently ignored that question. For years.

Also note, Solon's claim about the lunar atmosphere contradicts his own claim that you cannot see the stars through the much thicker layer of ionosphere above the space station. This contradiction has been pointed out to him many times, but he has also repeatedly ignored that question.

Solon, why are you so afraid of learning anything that you keep lying and running away from the results of your own claims?

Why are you so abjectly terrified of learning anything that you resort to such dishonesty? Are you afraid people will laugh at you? Is it some sort of religious thing?

Last edited by sts60; 7th February 2020 at 12:24 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 7th February 2020, 12:45 PM   #331
Solon
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 35
Reality Check (304)

Quote:
The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter started to map the Moon in 2009 and till is taking images with the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera in white light with visible and infrared filters for the wide angle camera.
The LRO has no conventional camera, you really have no idea how they produce these images do you?

Apollo 8 orbited the Moon when the far side was about 2/3 lit, and took some real photos, this being one of the most famous. Can you explain why the lunar surface looks greenish?
lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/browse/AS08/14/2383.jpg
If you can't explain it, then you have not performed the necessary research

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. Mercury is so dark, despite being so close to this supposedly blindingly bright Sun, which then raises the question of how we can possibly see it so well from Earth. Right now is a good time to view Mercury.

And I am not the one who said the Sun only emits gamma radiation, if you remember it was Horace Winfield Webster. I said I though he was on the right track, but this is where experiments would be required. Gamma radiation would be attenuated on its way from the Sun, so an experiment would I believe show that the further you went towards the Sun from Earth, the shorter the wavelength of the prevalent light would become. We know we have more UV from the higher you go in the atmosphere, then more EUV, then more X-rays, as the attenuation of the originating light is lessened the closer you get to the Sun.
I really find it puzzling though that so many here seem to be totally against any form of experiments, perhaps because they are frightened that things may not be as their brainwashing by mainstream academia might lead them to believe.
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 7th February 2020, 01:14 PM   #332
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,839
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Reality Check (304)



The LRO has no conventional camera, you really have no idea how they produce these images do you?

Apollo 8 orbited the Moon when the far side was about 2/3 lit, and took some real photos, this being one of the most famous. Can you explain why the lunar surface looks greenish?
lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/browse/AS08/14/2383.jpg
If you can't explain it, then you have not performed the necessary research

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. Mercury is so dark, despite being so close to this supposedly blindingly bright Sun, which then raises the question of how we can possibly see it so well from Earth. Right now is a good time to view Mercury.

And I am not the one who said the Sun only emits gamma radiation, if you remember it was Horace Winfield Webster. I said I though he was on the right track, but this is where experiments would be required. Gamma radiation would be attenuated on its way from the Sun, so an experiment would I believe show that the further you went towards the Sun from Earth, the shorter the wavelength of the prevalent light would become. We know we have more UV from the higher you go in the atmosphere, then more EUV, then more X-rays, as the attenuation of the originating light is lessened the closer you get to the Sun.
I really find it puzzling though that so many here seem to be totally against any form of experiments, perhaps because they are frightened that things may not be as their brainwashing by mainstream academia might lead them to believe.
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 7th February 2020, 01:19 PM   #333
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,399
Solon, why are you so afraid of learning anything that you keep lying and running away from the results of your own claims?

Why are you so abjectly terrified of learning anything that you resort to such dishonesty? Are you afraid people will laugh at you? Is it some sort of religious thing?
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 7th February 2020, 01:25 PM   #334
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 45,710
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. I said I though he was on the right track, but this is where experiments would be required.
Horace came up with the idea to try to solve a problem caused by his ignorance of fusion. Now that we've solved this problem, what's the reasoning behind the idea that the surface of the sun generates significant amounts of gamma radiation?

In the standard model, the sun glows because it is a black body radiator. Are you familiar with the theory of black body radiation? It's quite interesting, and you should look into it if you're not familiar with it. In order to emit significant amounts of gamma radiation through blackbody radiation, the sun would have to be fantastically hotter than we think it is. There are a bunch of reasons to believe that it isn't possible for the sun to be that hot (for example, it would expand, it would also emit far more visible light than we see, etc.).

If the sun isn't emitting gamma radiation because of blackbody emissions, then some other mechanism must be producing that gamma radiation. But what are the candidates? Fusion shouldn't happen at the surface, there's not enough pressure, and if that much fusion could take place at the surface then far more would be happening at the core, and we'd have a supernova.

So what is it you think is producing this gamma radiation?

Quote:
Gamma radiation would be attenuated on its way from the Sun, so an experiment would I believe show that the further you went towards the Sun from Earth, the shorter the wavelength of the prevalent light would become. We know we have more UV from the higher you go in the atmosphere, then more EUV, then more X-rays, as the attenuation of the originating light is lessened the closer you get to the Sun.
The problem with this idea is that we have a pretty good understanding of how gamma radiation is attenuated by matter, because we can measure such attenuation in labs here on earth. And between the surface of the sun and earth, there isn't enough matter to significantly attenuate gamma rays.

Furthermore, when gamma rays do interact with matter, they scatter. This means not only can they lose energy (your model of downshifting wavelength), but they can also change direction as they bounce off. Your model doesn't account for this. If gamma rays were being redshifted between the sun and the earth, then we would see light originating from all that matter. The space between the sun and the earth would be glowing from all that scattering, similar to how the atmosphere glows blue from scattered visible light. But it doesn't.

Quote:
I really find it puzzling though that so many here seem to be totally against any form of experiments, perhaps because they are frightened that things may not be as their brainwashing by mainstream academia might lead them to believe.
Don't do this, Solon. If you want other people to take your arguments as good-faith arguments (and I know you do because you've already complained about that), you have to be willing to do the same for others. There is an incredible body of experiments which standard models of physics are built upon, more experiments than probably any one person knows. Other people are aware of experiments that you aren't aware of. That's inevitable, even if you've studied physics professionally, simply because there is so much of it out there. If other posters have come to a different conclusion about physics than you, you can't assume that it's because they are against any form of experiments. If you want other people to be open to the possibility that they are wrong, you have to be open to the possibility that you are wrong too.

I have done you the courtesy of not insulting you, and I expect you to return the favor as we discuss this topic.
__________________
"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 7th February 2020, 01:44 PM   #335
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,653
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
I told you why. It's for calibration. The motion blur is a benefit in that case because it leads to an image that is of uniform (enough) brightness.
<sigh>I know that. My point was that it is useless for Earth observation.
__________________
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 7th February 2020, 02:06 PM   #336
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,399
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
The LRO has no conventional camera, you really have no idea how they produce these images do you?
1. I do. You don’t. You see, I’ve actually worked on commercial imaging satellite systems that use push-broom imagers. There’s nothing novel in the technology. They take perfectly good visible-light images, using the same underlying CCD technology used in everything from copiers to smartphone cameras to commercial spacecraft. Everything about this everyday use highlights your ignorance; please don’t project it on the rest of us.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Apollo 8 orbited the Moon...
Lying through misdirection. According to you, the Moon’s barely-there atmosphere is sufficient to perform your magic conversion, so orbital images don’t enter into the discussion. In fact, you “calculated” (using a rate of visible light falloff you said was “known”) that it worked out to 50,000 miles.

2. Why don’t you answer the examples given to you of sightings from much further away? You know, from much farther away than you said the astronauts could see the Moon?
3. What is the rate of falloff? You said it was “known”. What is it?

Why are you so pants-wettingly terrified of answering these questions that you keep pretending they were never asked?

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.
4. I did. You’re wrong. Again. The Mercury Dual Imaging System images in visible and near infrared. It’s a couple of telescopes using megapixel CCD arrays - the same technology used in everyday consumer cameras.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Mercury is so dark, despite being so close to this supposedly blindingly bright Sun, which then raises the question of how we can possibly see it so well from Earth. Right now is a good time to view Mercury.
5. What an exceedingly foolish question. Mercury is visible because it’s lit up by the nearby Sun, which is measured to be extremely bright.

You posit a decades-long, world-girdling and absolutely airtight conspiracy to cover up some fantasy cartoon physics for... no reason whatsoever. You also assert that you have the understanding to overturn it all, although you still can’t understand even the most elementary physical concepts involved, and your claims routinely contradict each other, and you flee in terror from the numerous examples that rebut your claims (well, the ones that aren’t pure gibberish).

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. I said I though he was on the right track,...
He had no idea at all how the Sun produces its energy. We’ve known for decades. Please stop borrowing ignorance from other people; you’ve already got a goodly supply of your own.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
I really find it puzzling though that so many here seem to be totally against any form of experiments, ...
You’re lying, again, and projecting, again. Experiments from all over the solar system have been cited to you innumerable times. You ignore them, or reject them for reasons that make no sense (and you don’t understand why), even when they meet criteria you stated.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
...perhaps because they are frightened that things may not be as their brainwashing by mainstream academia might lead them to believe.
Projection duly noted. I’ve designed, operated, and analyzed spacecraft for a living. You have no idea what you are talking about, and keep making silly claims that are embarrassingly trivial to disprove. But when you get called on your mistakes and contradictions, you run away like the coward you are, pausing occasionally to release a cloud of pointless irrelevancies like a frightened squid.

Why are you so terrified of learning something? Do you think lying will convince anyone? Do you think you’re fooling anyone at all?

Last edited by sts60; 7th February 2020 at 03:53 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 7th February 2020, 02:18 PM   #337
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,399
Originally Posted by Ziggurat
... I have done you the courtesy of not insulting you [Solon], and I expect you to return the favor as we discuss this topic.
I extended the courtesy of taking him at his word for quite some time, years ago on CQ and at the start of this thread. But Solon has repeatedly demonstrated that he will not engage honestly, and has devolved into a sort of low-rate troll, cycling between outright lies and a predictable set of obfuscations, while refusing to address the numerous self-contradictions called out to him.

That sort of dishonesty in the service of intellectual cowardice cannot be countenanced, and one is not obliged to extend him the courtesy he has so willfully disearned.
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 7th February 2020, 03:08 PM   #338
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,626
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
More ignorance of the existence of Google from Solon!
Solar 3D printing of lunar regolith
I remember that from A Fall of Moondust.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate 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 7th February 2020, 03:40 PM   #339
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,088
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
I remember that from A Fall of Moondust.
Crikey! That's going back a bit! I read that when I was about 14. Those were the days. Arthur was my first intro to sci-fi via my Dad. The Sands of Mars was another favourite. Probably the best I read was the original Rendezvous with Rama, or maybe Childhood's End. Memories, memories......
__________________
“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 7th February 2020, 03:45 PM   #340
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,088
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Reality Check (304)



The LRO has no conventional camera, you really have no idea how they produce these images do you?

Apollo 8 orbited the Moon when the far side was about 2/3 lit, and took some real photos, this being one of the most famous. Can you explain why the lunar surface looks greenish?
lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/browse/AS08/14/2383.jpg
If you can't explain it, then you have not performed the necessary research

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. Mercury is so dark, despite being so close to this supposedly blindingly bright Sun, which then raises the question of how we can possibly see it so well from Earth. Right now is a good time to view Mercury.

And I am not the one who said the Sun only emits gamma radiation, if you remember it was Horace Winfield Webster. I said I though he was on the right track, but this is where experiments would be required. Gamma radiation would be attenuated on its way from the Sun, so an experiment would I believe show that the further you went towards the Sun from Earth, the shorter the wavelength of the prevalent light would become. We know we have more UV from the higher you go in the atmosphere, then more EUV, then more X-rays, as the attenuation of the originating light is lessened the closer you get to the Sun.
I really find it puzzling though that so many here seem to be totally against any form of experiments, perhaps because they are frightened that things may not be as their brainwashing by mainstream academia might lead them to believe.
Wakey, wakey. There are a squillion images of comets taken in visible light from in-situ spacecraft. Had no choice. That's all a lot of those cameras could bloody do!
No offence, but this is idiocy squared. Might as well argue the age of the Earth with creationist loons, for all the good this is doing. As somebody might have said.
__________________
“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 7th February 2020, 04:04 PM   #341
cjameshuff
Critical Thinker
 
cjameshuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 280
Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
So the best defense you can muster for your mythology about a gamma bomb Sun is to resort to the “god of the gaps” fallacy.

That’s both sad and anticlimactic.

The ONLY way you can defend your nonsense is to plead ignorance and extrapolate your own demonstrable and profound ignorance to the rest of the world. I want to congratulate you. You’ve cooked up a theory and a defense of it that’s more divorced from reality than Creationism and requires more ignorance of the last 80 years of scientific advances than flat Earthers.
More like 160 years...Maxwell's equations were published at the start of the 1860s, Hertz experimentally verified them just a couple decades later, in the process learning how to directly generate and detect electromagnetic radiation with quite simple equipment.

I'm certainly not claiming that our understanding of light is perfect and complete, but it's actually one of the best understood physical phenomena by this point, and our understanding of it is part of the foundations of relativity and quantum mechanics, which themselves are incredibly successful at describing the universe. Solon's insistence that it's all one big mystery and therefore his semantically null gibberish is equally valid is just...pathetic. The real world's so much more interesting than his 19th century fantasy.
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 7th February 2020, 05:28 PM   #342
Blue Mountain
Resident Skeptical Hobbit
 
Blue Mountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Waging war on woo-woo in Winnipeg
Posts: 5,782
Question Where are the news stories, papers, and conversion formulas?

If Solon's idea is correct, then for both film and digital cameras to operate outside of the atmosphere the method whereby the atmosphere converts radiation from the sun into visible light would need to be duplicated in these devices. If they didn't then all they would capture would be blank images.

That means research. First would be the discovery that for reasons unknown ordinary cameras didn't work in space. I believe that would have made the news when it first happened. There would be flurry of scientific papers discussing the problem, proposing hypotheses as to why and outlining possible solutions.

Next the scientists would determine the exact parameters required to capture images when the atmosphere was unavailable to do the necessary work, and publish the processes and formulas in papers. Finally, the Americans and Russians would have to develop the required technology and test it—and it would make the news when the first successful picture from space was taken using the new system.

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 7th February 2020, 05:56 PM   #343
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,210
Originally Posted by Blue Mountain View Post
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?

That’s a major point I have yet to see our claimant address. In order for Solon’s claims to be true one of two things needs to happen.

1. There would have to be a massive international conspiracy among every spacefaring nation to conceal the nature of light. They would all incur extra expense researching and developing technology needed to counter this phenomenon for literally no discernible benefit to anyone involved in the conspiracy.

2. Literally every nation that has sent ships into space accidentally included technology that just happened to perfectly compensate for the phenomenon Solon is claiming exists.

The alternative is that Solon is wrong or deliberately lying.
__________________
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 7th February 2020, 07:16 PM   #344
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,399
Solon is wrong, and deliberately lying.

He’s wrong not only because (a) his “model” (the parts that aren’t complete gibberish, anyway) is irretrievably broken from the start with the idea that “plane waves” are a distinct physical phenomenon from transverse EM waves, but also because (b) he keeps throwing in random ideas he googled up but doesn’t understand, so his story keeps changing, and also because (c) his claims flatly contradict each other, let alone physics in general and decades of space operations.

He’s deliberately lying because he keeps pretending the refutations presented to him don’t exist; sometimes by direct lies, and sometimes by indirect lies (obfuscation) and lies from silence (flat refusal to acknowledge his interlocutors).

Being wrong isn’t a problem. Being dishonest is, and so is being such an intellectual coward that one resorts to this dishonesty rather than learn something.
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 7th February 2020, 08:38 PM   #345
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 25,257
Not to doubt STS60 and what ought already to be a conclusive kibosh on the silliness here, but I did come across another bit of information on the filming done by the Apollo astronauts.

They had to use specially prepared cameras for various reasons, such as resistance to heat, the expectation that lubricants would boil off, and controls to allow them to be operated with heavy gloves, with specially grounded grids to prevent sparking when the film was advanced. But, as suspected, although the film was specially made for the application and the magazines used, it used essentially conventional emulsions - Kodacolor for the color, and Panatomic X for the black and white. Various ASA ratings were used, including a very fast 1600, but most were either ASA 160 or 80. The recommended exposures for the 160 used in daytime were pretty close to "sunny 16" here on Earth. Shutter speed of 1/250, aperture from 5.6 to 11. I would suggest, in advance of Solon's likely assertion that they might have pushed the film, that since the cameras involved were capable of slower and more wide-open performance if required, and since one of the objects of the special order of film was to get the finest possible grain, it's more likely that if anything, the film was pulled.

Here's a pretty interesting link that includes links to further information.

https://www.reddit.com/r/photography...tions_for_the/

Interestingly, one of the links mentions that previous orbital flights around the moon, from which we got painstakingly detailed digital photographs, were actually made on film, with on-site automated development and scanning. True digital photography did not then exist.
__________________
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 7th February 2020, 09:23 PM   #346
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,399
Oh, I’m no photography expert. JayUtah is one of the informed people when it comes to Apollo photography, plus some other knowledgeable folks who have been around this forum but on whose names I’m blanking out.

I just spend some time thinking about what Solon says, and point out some of the contradictions and changes to his story as he avoids learning anything. Plus I tend to keep track of what he’s said vs. what’s been shown to him.
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 8th February 2020, 12:12 PM   #347
Solon
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 35
sts60
336

Quote:
4. I did. You’re wrong. Again. The Mercury Dual Imaging System images in visible and near infrared. It’s a couple of telescopes using megapixel CCD arrays - the same technology used in everyday consumer cameras.

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.
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 8th February 2020, 02:15 PM   #348
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,653
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.
Well, if you want to understand the Apollo 8 photography, you should start here...

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/c...9700005062.pdf

Once you understand that, we can talk.

But we know already that in the unlikely event that you attempt to read it, you certainly won't understand a word of 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 8th February 2020, 02:36 PM   #349
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 15,924
Isn't the green appearance just from the color of the cheese the Moon is made of?
__________________
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 8th February 2020, 02:41 PM   #350
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,839
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.
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 8th February 2020, 02:47 PM   #351
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,210
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
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.

Oh goody! There’s a larger conspiracy theory you claim to believe in! Tell us more. Tell us what the Apollo Astronauts were REALLY doing.
__________________
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 8th February 2020, 03:04 PM   #352
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,653
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
Isn't the green appearance just from the color of the cheese the Moon is made of?
Not at all, That would quite obviously be the space mold, which, if carefully carved off, results in usable cheese.

Any student knows the technique.
__________________
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 8th February 2020, 04:11 PM   #353
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,997
If the intended implication is that the camera captured non-visible light then it might be worth noting that lenses don't focus all wavelengths similarly. A lens made to focus visible light will be out of focus with near infrared for example. It may be opaque to some wavelengths. It won't focus x-rays at all. You can't just pretend a camera might have photographed something in invisible light when focussed in visible light. It doesn't work.
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 8th February 2020, 04:23 PM   #354
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,653
Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge View Post
If the intended implication is that the camera captured non-visible light then it might be worth noting that lenses don't focus all wavelengths similarly. A lens made to focus visible light will be out of focus with near infrared for example. It may be opaque to some wavelengths. It won't focus x-rays at all. You can't just pretend a camera might have photographed something in invisible light when focussed in visible light. It doesn't work.
And the effect is well understood in photography. And produces observable effects. In visible light, we have no need to wander into other wavelengths, although the effect becomes more extreme there.

But that is irrelevant. Solon is unaware of such effects. The best we can attempt is to inform him. To paraphrase, we can hand him information only. We cannot hand him an understanding.
__________________
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 8th February 2020, 08:46 PM   #355
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 25,257
https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/Apo...NSSDC70-09.pdf

Standard terrestrial emulsions on special bases. Standard terrestrial filters on standard terrestrial lenses.

They knew what they were doing.
__________________
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, 06:17 AM   #356
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,399
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 that is detecting emission or absorption lines from the surface materials subject to ionising solar radiation, it is not photographing reflected visible light.
Nope. You have no idea what you are talking about. But the “emission or absorption lines” was especially funny.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Until someone can explain the green looking lunar far side images...
Lying through diversion (and projection) again?

Solon, why are you so shiveringly panic-stricken at the prospect of answering my questions about the examples you said were impossible? About the rate of falloff you said was “known”? About the glaring self-contradictions in your claims?

Why do you have to lie to avoid them? Why are you so terrified of answering? Is this some kind of religious thing with you, that you’re afraid you’ll burst into flame if you have to actually stop trolling and confront the idea you might be wrong?
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, 10:04 AM   #357
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 25,257
Solon, how about a link to the "green looking" images of the far side of the moon. None of the ones I've seen are green. Of course an image can be post processed to any color. Where do yours come from, and what information do you have that the color, if any, is significant?
__________________
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, 12:30 PM   #358
Solon
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 35
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Solon, how about a link to the "green looking" images of the far side of the moon. None of the ones I've seen are green. Of course an image can be post processed to any color. Where do yours come from, and what information do you have that the color, if any, is significant?
I use the Apollo image atlas:
lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?14

Those images look green to me.
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, 01:07 PM   #359
Deadie
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 58
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Those images look green to me.
If your argument is that distance is important, why does the earth appear blue with white clouds in those pictures?
Deadie 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, 01:35 PM   #360
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 45,710
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.
Those photos were taken with SO-368 film, which according to this link is Kodak Aerochrome film. You can read up more about Aerochrome film here, but the important bit is that Aerochrome film doesn't produce accurate colors, nor is it intended to. Note also that some of the photos are pure blue or pure red, suggesting the use of color filters. We don't know if they used a filter on the greenish pictures, but again, the point is that pictures with Aerochrome are not intended to be color-accurate pictures.

Contrast those photos with photos taken with the Nikon 35 mm camera:
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/a.../magazine/?162
These photos used SO-168 film, or Kodak Ektachrome, meant for daylight photography and intended to produce accurate colors. And if you look at pictures taken of the astronauts, you can see the color accuracy is reasonably good:
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/a...AS17-162-24053
Now what does the moon look like with SO-168 film?
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/a...AS17-162-24106
That's not green.
__________________
"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
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 02:05 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.