More NASA Oopsie-daisies!

Originally posted by twhitehead
I am not the one who spent post after post denying he could see any rotation at all, then admitted it, then denied it, and is now admitting it again.

[b]In the elephant video--- if you're considering this rotation--- the entire field rotates: elephant, street, buildings, world.
Why?
Because the frame of reference, i.e., the camera, moves. ...[text shortened]... when the latest batch of drugs wears off so we can continue discussing the moon and perspective.[/b]

You may have not suggested anything, but the only way you can possibly construe a rotation of the elephant is by the camera moving with it, causing the entire scene to rotate--- which you know full well looks nothing at all like the moon.
The moon rotates in its scene, while the entire scene is "rotating" with the elephant.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Do share your work.

Your honor, if it pleases the court, please have one of the gals in the back office type my notes for me--- double-space lines, Syrian Handwriting Italic size 14 font, three copies, please, staples in top 2" of left hand corner, please.

Do your own work!

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
You may have not suggested anything, but the only way you can possibly construe a rotation of the elephant is by the camera moving with it, causing the entire scene to rotate--- which you know full well looks nothing at all like the moon.

I demonstrated that perspective matters. Are we agreed on that or not?
Moving object plus panning camera can result in rotation. That is, I believe an agreed fact is it not? Or have you changed your mind again and gone blind?

Once we have agreed on that (no backsies) we will move on to the exact rotation expected for a given circumstance.

The moon rotates in its scene,
Evidence please. I see no such rotation given that there is no 'scene' to be seen.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
You may have not suggested anything, but the only way you can possibly construe a rotation of the elephant is by the camera moving with it, causing the entire scene to rotate--- which you know full well looks nothing at all like the moon.
The moon rotates [b]in its scene, while the entire scene is "rotating" with the elephant.[/b]

About that moon, the probe taking that photo is moving. Do you deny that? Do you understand what T is talking about? Moving camera CREATING apparent motion. What part of that do you not understand?

Originally posted by sonhouse
About that moon, the probe taking that photo is moving. Do you deny that? Do you understand what T is talking about? Moving camera CREATING apparent motion. What part of that do you not understand?

Actually, the timelapse we are discussing (in which Freaky saw rotation) was taken from the ground as the moon moved overhead. The problem is, the shot was zoomed in on the moon, so we actually don't have any real evidence that the person capturing the images didn't rotate his camera. There are no stars at all visible in the time-lapse. It is obviously a fact that he moved it across an arc to follow the moon. Now how you follow an arc with a camera is highly dependant on how it is mounted, whether he used a tripod or took the photos by hand etc.

But lets suppose you take images of the moon such that the frame in the camera is always horizontal to the horizon. When the moon rises, any visible features on the moon that are at the point nearest the horizon will not be nearest the horizon when it sets, therefore it will appear to rotate. Exactly what rotation we expect in this instance depends on your location on the earth and the time of year, phase of the moon etc. What Freaky doesn't get (or pretends not to get) is that the rotation is as much a function of where the camera is as it is of what the moon is doing.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Your honor, if it pleases the court, please have one of the gals in the back office type my notes for me--- double-space lines, Syrian Handwriting Italic size 14 font, three copies, please, staples in top 2" of left hand corner, please.

Do your own work!

"Your own work" in that instance referred to your instruction to me to make a time lapse of the link you provided as support for the ol' rotating elephant.

"Your own work" in this instance is directed at your claim to have overlaid the images of the backside of the moon to discern its rotation from that view, too.

So, either way, it's kinda, you know: your work.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I demonstrated that perspective matters. Are we agreed on that or not?
Moving object plus panning camera can result in rotation. That is, I believe an agreed fact is it not? Or have you changed your mind again and gone blind?

Once we have agreed on that (no backsies) we will move on to the exact rotation expected for a given circumstance.

[b]The mo ...[text shortened]... scene,
Evidence please. I see no such rotation given that there is no 'scene' to be seen.[/b]

I demonstrated that perspective matters.
That was never in question.

Are we agreed on that or not?
Your contention was that you could show an elephant doing what the moon was doing, i.e., rotating clockwise and then counter-clockwise, which is exactly what the 5-Hour time lapse is showing.
What you gave instead, was an entire scene "rotating" on account of a camera being moved.
On that we are totally in agreement.

Moving object plus panning camera can result in rotation.
Don't steal my thunder: I came up with that bit of insight.

Evidence please. I see no such rotation given that there is no 'scene' to be seen.
I would direct you again to the video as evidence.
Evidence you apparently agreed with at some level, since you tried to show how an elephant could appear to do the same thing... so you must of seen, I don't know... something, right?

The 'scene' is fairly simple: you have the moon and you have the sky.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually, the timelapse we are discussing (in which Freaky saw rotation) was taken from the ground as the moon moved overhead. The problem is, the shot was zoomed in on the moon, so we actually don't have any real evidence that the person capturing the images didn't rotate his camera. There are no stars at all visible in the time-lapse. It is obviously a ...[text shortened]... at the rotation is as much a function of where the camera is as it is of what the moon is doing.

Ah, so he's doctoring his images to bolster his complaints about... clearly doctored images.

Yep: that makes literally zero sense.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
"Your own work" in that instance referred to your instruction to me to make a time lapse of the link you provided as support for the ol' rotating elephant.

"Your own work" in this instance is directed at your claim to have overlaid the images of the backside of the moon to discern its rotation from that view, too.

So, either way, it's kinda, you know: your work.

My English comprehension is considerably better than yours as we have already seen in this thread.
If you want to find out if the moons rotation is measurable in the NASA images, do it for yourself. If you can't see an elephant rotating, you won't see >3 degrees of rotation of the moon, so I don't hold out much hope. My claim to be able to discern it was made to sonhouse not you and I feel no obligation whatsoever to substantiate it to you.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
That was never in question.

Then you should have had the honesty to admit it at the start of the thread instead of playing dumb all this time.

Your contention was that you could show an elephant doing what the moon was doing, i.e., rotating clockwise and then counter-clockwise, which is exactly what the 5-Hour time lapse is showing.
Was it? Methinks you are imaging things. Do you see unicorns too?

Don't steal my thunder: I came up with that bit of insight.
Ha ha ha ha. You mean it finally twigged after I explained it to your multiple times of umpteen pages of you denying being able to see it at all. Boy are you one difficult student.

I would direct you again to the video as evidence.
I have looked at the video multiple times. What you claim is there, is not there.
So:
You couldn't see an elephant not 3 yards from your face.
You imagine you see the whole sky in a video showing just the moon.
Still not seeing unicorns?

The 'scene' is fairly simple: you have the moon and you have the sky.
You can see the sky? What color is it? Pink perhaps? With yellow polka dots? Is it rotating? In what direction does it rotate?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Then you should have had the honesty to admit it at the start of the thread instead of playing dumb all this time.

[b]Your contention was that you could show an elephant doing what the moon was doing, i.e., rotating clockwise and then counter-clockwise, which is exactly what the 5-Hour time lapse is showing.
Was it? Methinks you are imaging things ...[text shortened]... r is it? Pink perhaps? With yellow polka dots? Is it rotating? In what direction does it rotate?[/b]

Was there a question in there?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Was there a question in there?

Have you seen this '?' symbol before?

Cat got your tongue?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually, the timelapse we are discussing (in which Freaky saw rotation) was taken from the ground as the moon moved overhead. The problem is, the shot was zoomed in on the moon, so we actually don't have any real evidence that the person capturing the images didn't rotate his camera. There are no stars at all visible in the time-lapse. It is obviously a ...[text shortened]... at the rotation is as much a function of where the camera is as it is of what the moon is doing.

Are we talking about the same time lapse? I was talking about the one taken in space a million miles from Earth showing the moon crossing Earth. Is that the one in question? If not, do you have a link to the one you are talking about?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Are we talking about the same time lapse? I was talking about the one taken in space a million miles from Earth showing the moon crossing Earth. Is that the one in question? If not, do you have a link to the one you are talking about?

Watch the video in the OP. There are two time-lapses featured and compared. One is taken from a satellite, one is taken from the ground. We were talking about the one taken from the ground. In the one from the ground, the moon appears to wobble quite considerably as well as rotate to some degree.
We are discussing one possible cause for that apparent rotation - assuming the YouTube creator did not deliberately fake it but made a best effort attempt to make a time-lapse of the moon.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Have you seen this '?' symbol before?

Cat got your tongue?

It would be more helpful if you could speak more clearly.