More NASA Oopsie-daisies!

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
[youtube]1Uvt83YWWWY[/youtube]

Hello, me
Gotta handReveal Hidden Content it to you: I always loved that fish!
It was so hard to see him go...

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[youtube]9WlOfDorEho[/youtube]

More YouTube nut oopsie daisies. The funny thing is, you keep telling people that they are too trusting of authority, yet you believe anything someone says on YouTube.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[youtube]9WlOfDorEho[/youtube]

So the only point made is that they author confuses timing of pictures with time lapse?

Can you believe what foold post on youtube?

I can't.

Originally posted by twhitehead
You YouTube nut oopsie daisies. The funny thing is, you keep telling people that they are too trusting of authority, yet you believe anything someone says on YouTube.

I haven't told anyone they are too trusting of authority as much as I have encouraged people to test everything possible for themselves.
If I am held hostage by the last conversation I heard on YouTube, you would see marked vacillation in my opinions--- which you don't.
That being said, I don't consider it necessary to run a disclaimer on every link to any source stating a release from liability for every opinion or presentation made in the entirety of the information contained.
No one else puts forth such caveats, so why adopt an unnecessary policy?

If there is something with which you disagree in the linked video, or were you simply pursuing paths of insult?

Originally posted by Ponderable
So the only point made is that they author confuses timing of pictures with time lapse?

Can you believe what foold post on youtube?

I can't.

I realize it might be a bit taxing to expect anyone to sit through 4:51 of a video in order to get the gist of what is being presented, so allow me to provide the Clif Notes™ for you.

He fully understands the time lapse nature of NASA's video, which is indicated by his use of large font advisement emblazoned across the top: "5 Hour Time Lapse."
In showing the time lapse sped up, he hasn't edited out any rotation of the 21 second video NASA postedReveal Hidden Content.
In comparing his own recording (available and accessible for anyone with a view of the night sky to execute themselves) to theirs, it is quickly apparent that a real life time lapse is going to see an obvious rotation which cycles forward and then back as noted in the face of the moon.
In theirs, the moon flatly glides across the screen with zero rotation over five hours... unless you're contending that they just happened to catch the moon on a bad night.
Not only is there an obvious lack of the back-and-forth rotation, the moon they CGI'ed through the picture makes ZERO motion other than passing through the picture.

He points out the transparency of the moon: something I am confident NO ONE has ever seen.
EVER.

He also points out the lack of any so-called synchronous rotation of the moon which is one of the excuses proffered for why we always see the same side of the moon.

Other than those, he has no point.

With which of those points are you contending?

Or, are you upset he didn't make a point out of the fact that in five hours, there was nearly ZERO cloud movement across the earth?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
That being said, I don't consider it necessary to run a disclaimer on every link to any source stating a release from liability for every opinion or presentation made in the entirety of the information contained.

Your thread title suggests however that you endorse the contents of the video.

If there is something with which you disagree in the linked video, or were you simply pursuing paths of insult?
Its complete bunk. The video creator doesn't understand the simple concept of perspective. He actually thinks the moon is constantly wiggling around.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Your thread title suggests however that you endorse the contents of the video.

[b]If there is something with which you disagree in the linked video, or were you simply pursuing paths of insult?
Its complete bunk. The video creator doesn't understand the simple concept of perspective. He actually thinks the moon is constantly wiggling around.[/b]

Ah, so you're at a loss.
Noted.

It appears it escaped your notice that:
He posted his own time lapse which clearly shows the transition of the moon; and
He posted NASA's time lapse which shows a cartoonish moon with NO rotation at all.

Otherwise, posting a link to anything external literally never implies complete agreement.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Ah, so you're at a loss.

Ah, so you have difficulty reading posts that contradict your world view.
Noted.

It appears it escaped your notice that:
He posted his own time lapse which clearly shows the transition of the moon; and
He posted NASA's time lapse which shows a cartoonish moon with NO rotation at all.
It appears it escaped your notice that I responded directly to those exact points in my post.

Otherwise, posting a link to anything external literally never implies complete agreement.
But posting a link to a YouTube and titling it 'More NASA Oopsie-daisies!' strongly implies you believe that the content of the YouTube demonstrates a NASA Oppsie-daisy.
If that is not what you intended, say so now before you make more of a fool of yourself than you already have.

If you wish to proceed with the conversation please state clearly:
1. What in the video you do actually agree with.
2. What in my response post you didn't understand.

Thousands of years ago, clever and ingenuous people were able to show, using a few simple instruments, that the Earth is round.

Thousands years later, Freaky gets easily tricked by the ramblings of methheads making amateuristic YouTube videos.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Ah, so you have difficulty reading posts that contradict your world view.
Noted.

[b]It appears it escaped your notice that:
He posted his own time lapse which clearly shows the transition of the moon; and
He posted NASA's time lapse which shows a cartoonish moon with NO rotation at all.
It appears it escaped your notice that I responded directl ...[text shortened]... hat in the video you do actually agree with.
2. What in my response post you didn't understand.[/b]

If you wish to proceed with the conversation please state clearly:
1. What in the video you do actually agree with.
2. What in my response post you didn't understand.
Boy, are you in luck!
Just a few posts above this post, I put the notes together regarding the salient point.

Now, other than generalities, what are your specific complaints about hid presentation?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Thousands of years ago, clever and ingenuous people were able to show, using a few simple instruments, that the Earth is round.

Thousands years later, Freaky gets easily tricked by the ramblings of methheads making amateuristic YouTube videos.

Perhaps you would care to do something against character and level a specific complaint?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Boy, are you in luck!
Just a few posts above this post, I put the notes together regarding the salient point.

So can I take it that you a) agree with what he says about and b) do not have a reasonable explanation for any of these:
1. The apparent rotation of the moon in his timelapse vs the absence of any rotation in NASA's timelapse.
2. The moon is transparent in the NASA video.
3. The moon does not appear to be rotating on its axis in the NASA video.

Now, other than generalities, what are your specific complaints about hid presentation?
Please think about these carefully:
1. If you have a camera a few cm above the ground and it films an elephant walking in a straight line past the camera, will the elephant appear to rotate? In which direction will it rotate?
1b) if the elephant is filmed from 5km away, will it appear to rotate?
2. I actually don't see any transparency in the original. But given that it is a gif image, it would not be surprising if it appeared transparent if you changed the colour settings - an effect you would not see if you used the original images. Gif compression relies on recording differences between frames. If you change the colors, then previous frames may appear in a given frame.
3. Please calculate how many degrees the moon should have rotated over the course of the timelapse (given a 27.3 day rotation period). Then please provide the approximate time in the video where he shows it not doing so.

heh hilarious how people still try to explain this dumbass (or troll) that the earth isn't flat.