Comments on: Earthrise, Earthset

By: bob hope

bob hope — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 19:30:42 +0000

What are you guys smoking? This photo looks nothing like apollo 11′s. The lower half of the earth is visable, the surface is not all clouds, and the shadows on the edges of the moon make an uneven horizon. This definitvely disproves the moon landing. I’m sure other facts could be pointed out, but if its not completely obvious already. How come we can fly 7 missions to the moon in 4 years but can’t afford one more for another 45years? If moon travel is possible, Why are they wasting there time with the I.S.S.. A fixed biosphere makes more sense than a wanabe space station only 200 miles up. Woopdi doo!

By: average guy

average guy — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 17:45:12 +0000

average guy Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation. …lol

By: average guy

average guy — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 17:44:35 +0000

Aurora Borealis From Space

Astronaut Donald Pettit created this video out of dozens of still photographs he took from the International Space Station. Kinda makes the eight months of training and many millions of dollars it takes to get up there as a private citizen seem worth it.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/sarahmorgan/aurora-borealis-from-space-d8?w=1

hmm.. is that stars i see from a private picture from space… couldn’t be.

By: Joseph Starbuck

Joseph Starbuck — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 02:22:15 +0000

I found the answer – the image I was looking at is of an “EARTH-SETTING” not “EARTH-RISING”, which means we are looking at the orbiter as it swings back under the moon and heads away from the earth. Well, I’m glad the pictures now look correct!

By: Joseph Starbuck

Joseph Starbuck — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:35:06 +0000

In case you had trouble following what I wrote, here’s a very simple way to see it: first, go to the following link: http://homepages.maxnet.co.nz/creation/moon.html
There you will find a picture that shows the four main phases of the moon from the perspective of the Southern Hemisphere. According to any moon-phase chart, on the 14th of Nov. 2007, the moon was just passing a New Moon, and was on its way to a first quarter. At that position, when viewing the moon, the light is on the left, and when viewing the earth from the moon, the light is on the right (so the earth’s shadow is on the left). When looking at the rising-earth photo, it is 100% clear that Australia is inverted, so we are definitely looking at the earth from a South-pole orientation. And it is 100% clear that the growing shadow on the earth is ON THE RIGHT, not the left where it should be.

By: Joseph Starbuck

Joseph Starbuck — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 13:53:52 +0000

Slight correction – the crescent shadow on the moon would be observed from the perspective of the SELENE, on the “dark” side of the moon.

By: Joseph Starbuck

Joseph Starbuck — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 13:50:29 +0000

Try this on for size…on November 14th, 2007, the moon was just starting a waxing crescent, which in the Northern Hemisphere creates a crescent shadow on the right side of the observed moon. This means that the corresponding crescent shadow on the earth would be on the right side of the earth as viewed from the moon – which is exactly what we see in the photo. The only problem is, that is how it is viewed from the NORTHERN hemisphere, and if you look carefully, you will see Australia appearing upside-down on the picture of the earth, indicating that we are looking at the South pole, which means that the moon phases are inverted – the crescent shadow should appear on the LEFT SIDE of the earth – not the right. This should be proof that the picture is not real – apparently the guy who checked the moon chart for that date was not aware of the inverted moon issue! Anyone care to verify my reasoning in this?

By: The Bad Astronomer

The Bad Astronomer — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 15:51:00 +0000

lara king, the size of the Earth in the picture depends on the lens used to take the picture. Your eyes would see the Earth as small, bu a telescope would make it look big.

It’s hardly “inexplicable”; in fact it’s incredibly obvious to anyone with any experience in photography. Just because you don’t understand something doesn’t mean there isn’t an explanation.

In the future, I suggest you keep your mind open enough to ask a question instead of declare something being impossible.

By: lara king

lara king — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 07:47:39 +0000

Why is the earth so very much smaller than on the photos from the US moon missions? Surely this is a huge error? Why is there not a great deal of comment concerning this astonishing anomaly? Is there some explanation that can be seen as at least vaguely reasonable? Have we shrunk the planet? Did the US missions inflate the planet? Did the Japanese camera shrink us? Surely the Earth must look bigger from the moon than the moon looks from Earth? If not, why not? In these pictures, earth rise is smaller than moon rise. Inexplicable!

By: john M

john M — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 05:21:17 +0000

The second one is definetly real, the earth appears much larger than the moon does from hear on earth, it should be about 13 times larger. But I think that the first one is suspicious it is too small, it doesn’t match the second one. Could someone answer this.

By: Hank Roberts

Hank Roberts — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 00:38:15 +0000

Oh, duh, nevermind. That’s what “Earthbounce” did.

My neck hurts.

By: Hank Roberts

Hank Roberts — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 00:37:20 +0000

These should rearrange into lovely stereo pairs.
Anyone done that already?

By: Tony Rein

Tony Rein — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:52:36 +0000

Jere Y posted a question asking about seeing satellites of the Moon with a telescope from the Earth. I just read a fascinating book called “The Haunted Observatory.” One chapter deals with the whole question of how to search for Moon satellites from the surface of the Earth. While it dealt with professional astronomers searching for natural satellites, it was interesting. The short answer is no, you can’t see it, probably not even with big telescopes. Too bad!

By: Wired

Wired — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:11:23 +0000

If the Moon is so dark then why are the photos of a-nauts so bright and so many shadow castings….to many hemi’s on the ceiling…eh?

By: Marko Pyhajarvi

Marko Pyhajarvi — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 08:13:46 +0000

Yeah, those are fabulous pictures! One funny thing is that in one of those pictures the north pole is in the bottom and Australia up in the left corner

By: Karnbeln

Karnbeln — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:24:16 +0000

It does not have the resolution to see the landers. However, some other probe going up in the coming years will apparently be able to.

Sorry for being so vague, I don’t know much about it myself.

By: Graham

Graham — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 00:56:17 +0000

*Sniff* It’s so small!

By: Lance

Lance — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:57:01 +0000

Can anyone answer Martin Moran’s question about the orbiter photographing the Apollo landing sites?

I realize that the poor souls that refute the moon landings will probably just say that the new pictures are fake, but it would be cool to see what are basically historical sites that have not been viewed in over three decades.

By: The Centipede

The Centipede — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:18:04 +0000

I doubt it. If I recall correctly it’s rather small, not particularly reflective, and its orbit may not be conducive to scope viewing (as it’d be going a good clip around what’s already usually the brightest thing in the night sky, even if it is only 20% full)

By: Jere Y.

Jere Y. — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:46:03 +0000

Does anybody know if we can see this satellite orbit the moon through a backyard telescope?

By: The Centipede

The Centipede — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:41:03 +0000

[Romulan Senator]IT’S A FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE![/DS9 Reference]

It doesn’t show SHADO’s facility. No habitats, no landing base, and no Interceptor launch platforms. SHADO is clearly part of the real Moon Hoax conspiracy: we’ve been fighting organ-stealing aliens since at least 1980. 1980! 1980!

By: Skepterist

Skepterist — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:52:48 +0000

Adam said, “They keep advertising HD video, but all I can find is small flash video. If it isnâ€™t at least 720p, itâ€™s not HD.”

The videos are reduced in size for the web. The specs for the sensors are listed right at the bottom of the article. You can read more about the camera (and all the other scientific equipment) here:
http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/en/equipment/hdtv_e.htm

1920Ã—1080 is HD.

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:38:48 +0000

These photos are obviously a hoax! If you look closely in the lower left corner you can clearly see a small Japanese man in a rubber godzilla suit

By: Darth Curt

Darth Curt — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:25:09 +0000

Anyone check to see if the relative size of the earth is the same size as the earth in the pics the Astronauts took? Of course they would be, because the Japanese are in on the conspiracy (as mentioned above). I suppose the Earth’s size as viewed from the moon would be a few simple calculations and easy to fake. (Don’t go crazy… they landed… THEY LANDED!!! )

That gif of the earth bouncing almost makes the moon look CG…

By: American Voyager

American Voyager — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:08:17 +0000

The first picture looks like the Space 1999 opening sequence when you see the Moon heading away from the Earth. Seriously……..spectacular photo! Wish I could see it in person.