The Space Thread - Launches, Events, Live Streams, Governments, Corporations, drama in Spaaaaaaaaaaaace

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
imbecile said:
- Donald J. Trump, addressing the crew just now. I fucking can't.
Click to expand...
If you talk in the right (wrong?) corners of space nerddom you eventually get around to people being totally fucking flipshit assmad that the only president's signature on the moon is Nixon's. They must be fervently hoping right now the next landing doesn't happen in 28.
 
Point and Laugh said:
Everyone wave
View attachment 8817689
Edit for search: Orion, Moon, & Earth in one shot minutes before signal loss
Click to expand...
Very nice ☺️

* IDK who was screen recording that but iMessage ruined the vibe 😢

Mikoyan said:
If you talk in the right (wrong?) corners of space nerddom you eventually get around to people being totally fucking flipshit assmad that the only president's signature on the moon is Nixon's. They must be fervently hoping right now the next landing doesn't happen in 28.
Click to expand...
I'll do you one better.... It happened Jan 19th 2029 😎😅

Or July 4th 2028 (now that would cause so much ASSRAGE it would be dangerous to live in NoVA, SF, LA, Portland, Seattle or Chicago)
 
I had a thought.. How badass would it be if Trump out of the blue gives these guys a legit old school ticker tape parade in NYC.

Is that even possible anymore or would some leftist org try to stage shooting them in the streets to get at MAGA?
 
mlanguishi said:
I had a thought.. How badass would it be if Trump out of the blue gives these guys a legit old school ticker tape parade in NYC.

Is that even possible anymore or would some leftist org try to stage shooting them in the streets to get at MAGA?
Click to expand...

wow that would be SO COOL
 
I can't fathom how any human being with a functioning brain can take one look at this shitty pajeet CGI and think it's actually real.

images (8).jpeg

I swear I feel like I'm living in the Twilight Zone and surrounded by NPCs. Fucking terrifying.
 
Fat Camp Intern said:
I can't fathom how any human being with a functioning brain can take one look at this shitty pajeet CGI and think it's actually real.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, we're once again getting to "I don't know how cameras work and I'm going to make that everyone else's problem" hours.
 
teriyakiburns said:
Ah yes, we're once again getting to "I don't know how cameras work and I'm going to make that everyone else's problem" hours.
Click to expand...
Nigga open your jew eyes. It's fucking CGI. What is your IQ- 27? Amazing how the stupidest fucks react with "dumb"

Did you believe this one too?

150806103555-moon-passes-earth-0806.jpg

Lmfao. Funny how they forgot the stars in that one huh. You fucks are unbelievably stupid and naive.
 
Fat Camp Intern said:
Nigga open your jew eyes. It's fucking CGI. What is your IQ- 27? Amazing how the stupidest fucks react with "dumb"

Did you believe this one too?

View attachment 8819947

Lmfao. Funny how they forgot the stars in that one huh. You fucks are unbelievably stupid and naive.
Click to expand...
Like I said, you've no idea how cameras work.

The Artemis shot is from the night side of the planet, so it requires a long exposure to reveal the earth's surface. That long exposure also gives enough time to resolve the stars, which are very faint. The other image is from the day side (and from a satellite positioned at the L1 lagrange point using a very narrow angle lens, whence the perspective), meaning it only requires a short exposure, which doesn't leave enough time for the stars to resolve.
 
teriyakiburns said:
Like I said, you've no idea how cameras work.

The Artemis shot is from the night side of the planet, so it requires a long exposure to reveal the earth's surface. That long exposure also gives enough time to resolve the stars, which are very faint. The other image is from the day side (and from a satellite positioned at the L1 lagrange point using a very narrow angle lens, whence the perspective), meaning it only requires a short exposure, which doesn't leave enough time for the stars to resolve.
Click to expand...
Nah this shit is fake as fuck.
you really believe them when they say that the stars are dim? lmao.
you'd think they'd take a fucking photo of the milky way.
or that they'd take an extremely powerful camera worth millions for some good photo's but nope.
and the reason why they don't ever take photo's of the stars is because all it takes is one star autist to identify that the billions of stars are in the incorrect position and their lies are exposed.
they cant fake the billions of stars positions correctly so they just filter them out.

every photo NASA (jewish word for deceit) has ever released has been "edited".
honestly it's the lack of common sense shit anybody would do or gear they'd take with them if they were told they were going into space to take photo's.
but NASA never seems to do it, funny that.
 
Tyrannosaurus rex said:
NASA (jewish word for deceit)
Click to expand...
if i was part of the secret jew group that set up NASA to control the goyim or whatever retarded shit you're claiming, i know i would leave breadcrumbs behind like some poorly written marvel villain that would expose my evil plan
Tyrannosaurus rex said:
or that they'd take an extremely powerful camera worth millions for some good photo's but nope.
Click to expand...
what would an "extremely powerful camera worth millions" provide that the D5 and Z9 can't?
Tyrannosaurus rex said:
you really believe them when they say that the stars are dim? lmao.
Click to expand...
do you even understand how lighting works and how it's tied to taking pictures?
 
Massive Retard said:
if i was part of the secret jew group that set up NASA to control the goyim or whatever retarded shit you're claiming, i know i would leave breadcrumbs behind like some poorly written marvel villain that would expose my evil plan

what would an "extremely powerful camera worth millions" provide that the D5 and Z9 can't?

do you even understand how lighting works and how it's tied to taking pictures?
Click to expand...
so youll spend billions on getting to the moon but wont spend millions on a custom camera for space to take really good pictures?
you won't take a fuck ton of pictures of those so called dim stars that i can see from earth at night?
you'll NEVER take a photo of the milkyway from the shuttle?
a hobbyist in his backyard with a shitty telescope can get a better view.
screeching out at the top of your lungs about camera settings isn't a winning argument.
fucking have a camera company develop a camera with the perfect settings then nigger and then they'd get some advertising when its used or something.
shitty sloptubers purchase and use camera's worth HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR SLOW MO VIDEOS.
HOW ABOUT YOU PUT A SLOW MO CAMERA IN 8K NEXT TO THE LAUNCH SITE OR DEPLOY ONE JUST AFTER IT EXITS ATMOSPHERE,
after all surely the camera would be fine since there's no gravity or air to provide it with resistance during thrust causing damage.

it's not like i am arguing it cant be done or that the earth is flat or that space is fake i am merely stating that nasa has a long history of deception and lies, it is a government organization.
anybody with half a brain would do half the shit ive stated and probably more but somehow nasa NEVER does.

Edit:
i retract some of my statement (nasa is still kike deception fuck you) some of the images and video's are actually not bad quality, wtf are those retards doing splashing dogshit videos and images everywhere?
its still only 720p though lmao.
 
Last edited:
Tyrannosaurus rex said:
you won't take a fuck ton of pictures of those so called dim stars that i can see from earth at night?
Click to expand...
This is what I mean when I say you people don't understand how cameras work. You see the stars at night because your eyes are adapted to the darkness, by dilating your pupils to let in more light in general, which allows your retina to detect dimmer light at the expense of being over-sensitive to brighter light. Stand in a brightly lit area and you won't be able to see them as easily, if at all.

In a camera, the equivalent is achieved by keeping the shutter open for longer. Do this in bright light and you may be able to see the stars, but everything else will be blinding white and will probably wash out the rest of the view.

And they do, incidentally, have cameras on the ISS that can show the stars.


You can see the blooming effect washing out the video at the very start, as the terminator disappears behind the horizon, and then again at the end as the station moves back into sunlight. TO be able to resolve detail on the station in daylight, the camera would have to be adjusted to have a much shorter exposure time, which would prevent the stars from being resolved.

Here's some more from an older video.

 
Tyrannosaurus rex said:
you won't take a fuck ton of pictures of those so called dim stars that i can see from earth at night?
Click to expand...
why the fuck would they take pictures of stars when the objective is the moon? the ISS already captures exactly what you want, taking those pictures from artemis II would achieve nothing and would offer us 0 new perspective. an analogy in case i wasn't clear enough:
>be in the middle of a big plain
>look at mountain in the distance
>take 10 steps towards it
>wtf it looks exactly the same
Tyrannosaurus rex said:
shitty sloptubers purchase and use camera's worth HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR SLOW MO VIDEOS.
HOW ABOUT YOU PUT A SLOW MO CAMERA IN 8K NEXT TO THE LAUNCH SITE OR DEPLOY ONE JUST AFTER IT EXITS ATMOSPHERE,
after all surely the camera would be fine since there's no gravity or air to provide it with resistance during thrust causing damage.
Click to expand...
what exactly do you want to capture in super slow motion? the entire fucking mission? how do you store all of that footage? do you think they can just stream it back to the earth?
Tyrannosaurus rex said:
a hobbyist in his backyard with a shitty telescope can get a better view.
screeching out at the top of your lungs about camera settings isn't a winning argument.
fucking have a camera company develop a camera with the perfect settings then nigger and then they'd get some advertising when its used or something.
Click to expand...

i don't think you know what you even want. for the moon shots, they're already as high-quality as they can be with our current tech level. SOTA objectives for this kind of job (terrestrial photographic objectives) can capture stuff at ~300-400 miles distance while still maintaining "image quality". the closest they got to the moon was 10+ times that distance, at around 4000 miles.
edit: even if they take full 8k ultra hd dolby max footage, they can't really get it back on earth without it taking a fuck ton of time (bandwith limitations + they already use a lot of the bandwith for actually useful shit like telemetry, comms, the livestream etc). i imagine we'll get higher-res stuff when they get back home.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom