DON'T PANIC! Things Look FAKE in SPACE [Damage Control] of

[Sinful]

DON'T PANIC! Things Look FAKE in SPACE [Damage Control] of SpaceX Starman Roadster


https://youtu.be/0gniIVc504Q?t=35

Can't believe people think this is fake. Looks real to me.

[Mischief Maker]

It makes me sad, to tell the truth.

In NASA's heyday the exploration of space could be viewed as part of the public commons. If you were a taxpaying citizen, you in your own small part were helping to reach the heavens. But then the cold war ended, the shuttle program dribbled to a halt with no replacement funded, and now today space exploration has been co-opted into a gaudy marketing campaign; launching a luxury car into orbit with all the other space junk.

[Lord Satori]

This wasn't even NASA's doing...

[quash]

It makes me sad, to tell the truth.

In NASA's heyday the exploration of space could be viewed as part of the public commons. If you were a taxpaying citizen, you in your own small part were helping to reach the heavens. But then the cold war ended, the shuttle program dribbled to a halt with no replacement funded, and now today space exploration has been co-opted into a gaudy marketing campaign; launching a luxury car into orbit with all the other space junk.

If it makes you feel any better, taxpayers are responsible for this one too, seeing as Elon Musk receives an untold amount of money from the government for projects like this.

Also, it is a pretty impressive launch, considering it had to safely haul a few tons of cargo.

[BryanM]

the shuttle program dribbled to a halt with no replacement funded, and now today space exploration has been co-opted into a gaudy marketing campaign; launching a luxury car into orbit with all the other space junk.

The shuttle was a massive misappropriation of both money and lives. It'd have been better to have stuck with what we had, then cut off our hands and feet and pay more to get so much less. Space-X is, at the very least, actually moving forward and making actual progress. (This payload used in this Falcon Heavy test launch was meant to orbit Mars, which hasn't yet accumulated that much trash yet. But they missed, so it's gonna hang out around the asteroid belt until the solar system's gone.)

Musk is still an evil billionaire that feeds Tesla employees who try to unionize to pigs. But, as far as billionaires go, at least he tries to do something.

I mumble to myself, as the stock market falls off of a cliff and the billionaires make their plans to make us pay for it. Like always.

(Can you believe there are people out there who think Bill Gates is a "good" billionaire? I get negged to hell by redditors anytime I say a negative word about the man. Brutal monopolist, wants to get rid of the minimum wage, but sure he's totally different from Trump.... because he has hair.)

[Xyga]

I don't like that we talk about 'space exploration'.

There won't be any real space exploration as long as spaceships are powered by fucking chemical rockets. For 'conquering' only the Solar System efficiently (not just a container-sized cargo every few decades to some planet or moon) we need almost light-speed capable ships period.

Currently whatever crew makes it to Mars thanks to a big-ass rocket will be as useful as men leaving diapers and a flag on the Moon: yeah congratulations! ... now what?

Elon Musk's only accomplishment is to reuse 20th century tech slightly improved and more cost-effective, he's indeed just an entrepreneur, not a genius.
So yeah that's an ad for his businesses. Made me smile because I like live footage of the Earth from space and this way is funny, but that's all this show will ever be.

[PC Engine Fan X!]

I don't like that we talk about 'space exploration'.

There won't be any real space exploration as long as spaceships are powered by fucking chemical rockets. For 'conquering' only the Solar System efficiently (not just a container-sized cargo every few decades to some planet or moon) we need almost light-speed capable ships period.

It'd seem that we'd need some exotic technology to make such a light-speed ship possible or at the very least perhaps approaching 1/4th the speed of light = 46,500 mph (plus some kind of force-field shield to protect the ship from any on-coming projectiles and what not head on -- not to mention protecting the crew from deadly gamma ray radiation exposure). It wouldn't do any good if said crew arrives at it's final destination dead on arrival due to radiation exposure during the lengthy trip (leading to some heavy radiation shielding to be developed/designed for that very purpose alone).

Back to the OP's thread at hand.

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[BryanM]

In practical terms cutting the cost of a launch by roughly 70-80% makes things like low earth orbit satellite internet feasible, which is one of the initiatives they plan on pursuing.

In longer time spans, we're talking about colony ships like O'Neill cylinders. Non-earth planets aren't exactly... terribly hospitable.

Won't keep Musk from retiring on Mars. Which will last all of maybe a year until he realizes the internet sucks and he comes back. Like a rational person.

[Xyga]

Nah we definitely won't make it to space and spread into the galaxy colonizing planet after planet, we'll likely all die here ripping each other's throats for memes and the last bits of vital resources, way before acquiring the fitting science and tech.

[Jeneki]

Forget the car in space. Watching the booster rockets land themselves was the highlight for me, holy shit that was impressive.

[PC Engine Fan X!]

Nah we definitely won't make it to space and spread into the galaxy colonizing planet after planet, we'll likely all die here ripping each other's throats for memes and the last bits of vital resources, way before acquiring the fitting science and tech.

That's seems the more likely scenario for our future generations to come -- the world will be quite a different place by then.

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[Obscura]

The comments on that video are the funniest thing I have seen today. I thought YouTube comments were dumb, but damn, normal idiots have nothing on Flat Earthers.

[Sinful]

Not one person thinks it's fake. You all believe a car can survive the vacuum of space in pristine condition. There's even green screen glitches caught off the live stream. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elkh38u5gow

When asked what's the point of this, Elon Musk replied "There's no point, obviously, just for fun. And to get the public excited."

[EmperorIng]

We'll see how "pristine" it will be when it arrives inside the asteroid belt, its ultimate destination.

By the by, have you ever noticed how mountains and plateaus looks like the stumps of giant trees??

[Mischief Maker]

Not one person thinks it's fake. You all believe a car can survive the vacuum of space in pristine condition. There's even green screen glitches caught off the live stream. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elkh38u5gow

When asked what's the point of this, Elon Musk replied "There's no point, obviously, just for fun. And to get the public excited."

Watch the shadows on the tires when the Earth glitches.

[Sinful]

Not one person thinks it's fake. You all believe a car can survive the vacuum of space in pristine condition. There's even green screen glitches caught off the live stream. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elkh38u5gow

When asked what's the point of this, Elon Musk replied "There's no point, obviously, just for fun. And to get the public excited."

Watch the shadows on the tires when the Earth glitches.

The car might be legit, but it's got CGI overlay for lighting, shadows and reflections off it. Why the car looks fake despite maybe being the only real thing.

Also surprised no one yet commentated on the Earth having all water and clouds but no land mass.

[Mischief Maker]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6MOnehCOUw

I prefer the conspiracy theory that Elon Musk killed someone then set up this stunt so he could stuff the body in the spaceman suit and dispose of the evidence that way.

[Sinful]

Never knew stuffing a body in a space suit and sending it to a studio was effective evidence disposal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAwNxR9oI1A

Elon Musk should stick to what he's good at, robbing tax payers.

[Mischief Maker]

Never knew stuffing a body in a space suit and sending it to a studio was effective evidence disposal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAwNxR9oI1A

That's a still image of the car with the earth reflections photoshopped out superimposed on top of a photo of a green screen studio. Look at the outlines of the car, especially the left side where the Earth had to be painted out, between the "raw" footage and the final. "Oh shit, remember to photoshop out that nasty dent in the left side of the hood so that it lines up symmetrically with the right side. Geez, you think they'd have spotted that before we wheeled this thing into the studio."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWy1qmMoToM

[BryanM]

You all believe a car can survive the vacuum of space in pristine condition.

So the empty space inside my thermos bottle is like lava?????????

I see. The ancient eldritch energy is what keeps my soup toasty.

Interdasting.

I, also, don't believe satellites or the Hubble telescope exist.

[Sinful]

Never knew stuffing a body in a space suit and sending it to a studio was effective evidence disposal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAwNxR9oI1A

That's a still image of the car with the earth reflections photoshopped out superimposed on top of a photo of a green screen studio. Look at the outlines of the car, especially the left side where the Earth had to be painted out, between the "raw" footage and the final. "Oh shit, remember to photoshop out that nasty dent in the left side of the hood so that it lines up symmetrically with the right side. Geez, you think they'd have spotted that before we wheeled this thing into the studio."

Didn't say it wasn't. Just supposed to give you guys an idea of what was previously said.

You all believe a car can survive the vacuum of space in pristine condition.

So the empty space inside my thermos bottle is like lava?????????

I see. The ancient eldritch energy is what keeps my soup toasty.

Interdasting.

I, also, don't believe satellites or the Hubble telescope exist.

Ah yes, the Hubble telescope so powerful that it gives us crystal clear images of galaxies millions or billions light years away but can't turn around for one second to take a full picture of the earth.

[BryanM]

Uh..... why do you need a terrible picture of blue streaks exactly.

We'll see how "pristine" it will be when it arrives inside the asteroid belt, its ultimate destination.

It'll probably be fine for a very long time. Lots of empty space over there.

[Sinful]

Uh..... why do you need a terrible picture of blue streaks exactly.

Because to this day there hasn't been a real image of the Earth.



Need to make sure I'm not living on a painting, you know.

[Mischief Maker]

Is this entire thread an elaborate troll?

Because to this day there hasn't been a real image of the Earth.

Circa 1972, photographed by the Apollo 17 mission.

The newer blue marble photo he's talking about is composited from satellites whose orbits are too close to encompass the planet in a single shot. Apollo 17 was on its way to the moon, far outside normal satellite orbit range, so it had the necessary distance to encapsulate the entire globe. There's nothing about the Hubble's cameras that would fix the fact that the planet is too damn close.

[Ed Oscuro]

Conspiracy theorists have just two modes of operation:

1) moving the goalposts

2) not understanding the basics of whatever arena of science in the topic at hand

The most basic reason most images of the Earth are stitched together is the same reason fixed-focal length lenses (known as "primes" in the hobby) are used, in addition to variable-length "zoom" lenses (which are also often telephoto lenses). The ability to zoom in with a lens comes at the cost of complexity, weight, and ultimately image quality or certainty about the accuracy of the image. Hubble already required an early "repair" to fix an engineering mistake in its deisgn; I hate to think how expensive it would have been if we had to contend with all the other parts and bulk of a "zoom" lens, and it would certainly not have been a good use of taxpayer dollars to create a more complicated instrument with worse performance at rendering distant objects.

It's odd to fixate on the Hubble telescope because anybody with a passing interest in satellite imaging would be aware of the LANDSAT program, which has provided photographs of the Earth in various spectra since the early 1970s, in a specific lower-resolution format which provides continuity in time, as opposed to space. There, too, image quality is more valued than the ability to take an image of the Earth all at once. LANDSAT images must also be stitched together, just as you would Hubble images or imagery from reconnaissance aircraft going back to World War II and before.

There are some other practical reasons (and information) the Hubble telescope cannot be pointed directly at Earth found here. Nothing fishy or out of the ordinary.

There is also the curious fact of the commercial composite satellite images found on Google Earth matching up exactly with real known locations and GPS data. There probably is some open source software that could be used when accessing open source satellite imaging or GPS satellites that will not support any theories about mapping tricks being used to make the earth appear non-flat, and I question how the photography could be convincingly faked when it very obviously represents real images. This, on top of the huge number of impromptu experiments where people hang GoPro cameras and cell phones from balloons and send them up high enough to observe the curvature of the Earth and other expected phenomena, all the while creating a continuous record from the moment they are launched?

If you want evidence that the Earth is round, a picture taken all at once like the Apollo 17 photograph actually gives us less data than does the GoPro. It is a relatively low-resolution image of the Earth during a fixed period of time and with a limited dynamic range (I don't believe the stars are visible behind the Earth in the original), with a limited ability to create context on its own, compared with the video from a GoPro slung under a balloon which gives low resolution images and other information throughout a long duration. The Apollo planners realized this, of course, which is why they made ample provisions for transmitting all kinds of data back to Earth.

Of course there are also many other "Blue Marble" style pictures taken from other space missions. I don't know them in enough detail as it's not really been interesting to me, but I saw a few mentioned here.

[Xyga]

Right we missed a flat-earther in our collection of conspiracy nut job members.

I miss the times when ufo maniacs were the weirdest.

[Sinful]

Is this entire thread an elaborate troll?

Because to this day there hasn't been a real image of the Earth.

*snip*

Circa 1972, photographed by the Apollo 17 mission.

The newer blue marble photo he's talking about is composited from satellites whose orbits are too close to encompass the planet in a single shot. Apollo 17 was on its way to the moon, far outside normal satellite orbit range, so it had the necessary distance to encapsulate the entire globe. There's nothing about the Hubble's cameras that would fix the fact that the planet is too damn close.

Feel free to believe what you want, as that's just a painting of Earth to me. Do you also believe the ISS feed is not CGI either?



If you ever bother to check the ISS live feed, you often see the whole entire side of the planet covered in clouds. As if that's even possible. (And not that the live ISS feed is 24-7 either. Loops after 30-60 min)


But lets not derail, even Elon Musk thinks SpaceX Telsa footage looks fake when he said "You can tell it's real because it looks so fake, honestly." So is this the new standard for what's real, if it looks fake enough? We as humanity can spot fake mustache removal on Superman for a Hollywood movie and laugh, but when NASA/Elon Musk fake things with CGI it's fine and believable.

2) not understanding the basics of whatever arena of science in the topic at hand

This topic is about spotting CGI or not.

[Ed Oscuro]

Humans have how many millions of years of evolution invested in face detection?

How many years invested in Earth looks detection?

Also you haven't watched the weather channel recently, have you? Or even Groundhog Day? *blows clouds across to the East*

[Xyga]

Peter Cushing is alive and well.

[Sinful]

Humans have how many millions of years of evolution invested in face detection?

How many years invested in Earth looks detection?

Also you haven't watched the weather channel recently, have you? Or even Groundhog Day? *blows clouds across to the East*

Who's goal post moving now? Topic is spotting CGI or not. Try again.