frame

Proving the stars are close

Opening Argument

edited November 7 in Earth Science
joecavalrymelefnamemcnameHankMissDMeanor
 
«13

Status: Open Debate


Arguments

  • The stars are not close for multiple reasons. The universe and galaxy are very large, stars are located throughout it. This can span distances of light years.
    ErfisflatSilverishGoldNova
    DebateIslander and a DebateIsland.com lover. 
  • edited October 13
    The stars are not close for multiple reasons. The universe and galaxy are very large, stars are located throughout it. This can span distances of light years.
    Thats a pretty piss poor reason. Not gonna lie. If the stars were really tens, even hundreds of light years away, it would be impossible to simply zoom in, and they wouldn't look like water
     

  • loading...


  • JoePineapplesJoePineapples 128 Pts
    edited October 13
    Are you Sirius? (that's an astronomy joke)
    Neither of those links shows a close up view of stars, it's merely a zoomed-in view using a feeble terrestrial video camera. 

    Of course, attempting such a thing results in the visual distortion displayed in those links.
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • @JoePineapples Sirius-ly tho, if they were 10's or 100's of lights years away, why could you zoom in and why would they look like water? Like, you see Sun? Now I have to get out of this Altair ego.


    Erfisflat
     
  • Are you Sirius? (that's an astronomy joke)
    Neither of those links shows a close up view of stars, it's merely a zoomed-in view using a feeble terrestrial video camera. 

    Of course, attempting such a thing results in the visual distortion displayed in those links.
    I like this one, look at it, and tell me this is due to some distortion. Waiting on your reply in the earth is flat debate.

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Are you Sirius? (that's an astronomy joke)
    Neither of those links shows a close up view of stars, it's merely a zoomed-in view using a feeble terrestrial video camera. 

    Of course, attempting such a thing results in the visual distortion displayed in those links.
    http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/microsite/astrophotography/getstarted/camera/index.html


    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • @JoePineapples Sirius-ly tho, if they were 10's or 100's of lights years away, why could you zoom in and why would they look like water? Like, you see Sun? Now I have to get out of this Altair ego.


    The answer is in the question, it looks like blobby water because of the attempt to zoom in on something light years away, using only a weak terrestrial camera.
    That's why so many millions (£/$) are spent on astronomy optics such as the recently completed HiPERCAM. The quality of the photos from it are astounding but aren't available for public viewing yet.
    Erfisflat
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • JoePineapplesJoePineapples 128 Pts
    edited October 23
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • @JoePineapples Sirius-ly tho, if they were 10's or 100's of lights years away, why could you zoom in and why would they look like water? Like, you see Sun? Now I have to get out of this Altair ego.


    The answer is in the question, it looks like blobby water because of the attempt to zoom in on something light years away, using only a weak terrestrial camera.
    That's why so many millions (£/$) are spent on astronomy optics such as the recently completed HiPERCAM. The quality of the photos from it are astounding but aren't available for public viewing yet.
    They're still getting the final touches done in Photoshop. You are so very gullible. And you think you lack any belief...
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Erfisflat said:They're still getting the final touches done in Photoshop. You are so very gullible. And you think you lack any belief...
    No I've seen the photos, they just haven't been made public yet.
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • @JoePineapples
     
    We last saw you here.
    Erfisflat said:
    Are you Sirius? (that's an astronomy joke)
    Neither of those links shows a close up view of stars, it's merely a zoomed-in view using a feeble terrestrial video camera. 

    Of course, attempting such a thing results in the visual distortion displayed in those links.
    I like this one, look at it, and tell me this is due to some distortion. Waiting on your reply in the earth is flat debate.


    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Erfisflat said:
    @JoePineapples
     
    We last saw you here.
    Erfisflat said:
    Are you Sirius? (that's an astronomy joke)
    Neither of those links shows a close up view of stars, it's merely a zoomed-in view using a feeble terrestrial video camera. 

    Of course, attempting such a thing results in the visual distortion displayed in those links.
    I like this one, look at it, and tell me this is due to some distortion. Waiting on your reply in the earth is flat debate.


    No problem. It's due to some distortion.
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • Erfisflat said:
    @JoePineapples
     
    We last saw you here.
    Erfisflat said:
    Are you Sirius? (that's an astronomy joke)
    Neither of those links shows a close up view of stars, it's merely a zoomed-in view using a feeble terrestrial video camera. 

    Of course, attempting such a thing results in the visual distortion displayed in those links.
    I like this one, look at it, and tell me this is due to some distortion. Waiting on your reply in the earth is flat debate.


    No problem. It's due to some distortion.
    How very scientifically accurate of you. I don't see it as a plausible excuse though.
    Ghosty
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • JoePineapplesJoePineapples 128 Pts
    edited October 24
    Erfisflat said:
    How very scientifically accurate of you. I don't see it as a plausible excuse though.
    You're willing to accept that atmospheric/ambient moisture distorts the view of our own Sun to a great extent, yet you have a hard time accepting that other stars billions of miles away will look distorted through a cheap camera?

    On top of the atmospheric effects there's chromatic aberration, scintillation, space debris, the fact that when you zoom in on something even a couple of miles away you're going to lose a lot of detail/visual quality, and all manner of other factors to take into consideration.


    feaGhosty
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • edited October 24
    @JoePineapples If the stars were really far away then I don't think you could just zoom into them, it'd be alot harder than that, and could you explain how a bright ball of gas billions of miles turns into water?

    PS:


    fea
     
  • Erfisflat said:
    How very scientifically accurate of you. I don't see it as a plausible excuse though.
    You're willing to accept that atmospheric/ambient moisture distorts the view of our own Sun to a great extent, yet you have a hard time accepting that other stars billions of miles away will look distorted through a cheap camera?

    On top of the atmospheric effects there's chromatic aberration, scintillation, space debris, the fact that when you zoom in on something even a couple of miles away you're going to lose a lot of detail/visual quality, and all manner of other factors to take into consideration.


    To be fair, it isn't a cheap camera, it's probably the best camera available for astrophotography touting arguably the best zooming capabilities for this type of camera.
    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/hands-review/nikon-p900-new-king-superzooms
    fea
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • And the difference being that the distortion from atmosphere is noted when it is close to the ground. 99% of the earth's atmospheres moisture is just 30 miles from the surface, so looking at stars overhead will not produce the exact same results because you are looking through less of it.
    fea
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Erfisflat said:
    To be fair, it isn't a cheap camera, it's probably the best camera available for astrophotography touting arguably the best zooming capabilities for this type of camera.
    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/hands-review/nikon-p900-new-king-superzooms
    The simple fact that you class a £400 camera as "not a cheap camera" and "the best camera available for astrophotography" shows that you don't know the first thing about astronomy optics. Over the last few months I've been involved in the production of a £75million+ astronomy camera/telescope. If you'd have told me about the Nikkon sooner I could have saved all the universities/space agencies/research centres and observatories around the world billions of pounds/dollars!
    DrCerealfeaGhosty
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • @JoePineapples If the stars were really far away then I don't think you could just zoom into them, it'd be alot harder than that, and could you explain how a bright ball of gas billions of miles turns into water?

    PS:


    Why would I try to explain something that I haven't claimed is true? You're the one that's made the assertion, why are you asking me?
    As for the photo comparison, yeah that's generally how it works - NASA (and anyone else who has multi million dollar telescopes) will have a better view with their equipment. Everyone else with their £20 - £1000 telescopes just get what they pay for.
    fea
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • Erfisflat said:
    To be fair, it isn't a cheap camera, it's probably the best camera available for astrophotography touting arguably the best zooming capabilities for this type of camera.
    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/hands-review/nikon-p900-new-king-superzooms
    The simple fact that you class a £400 camera as "not a cheap camera" and "the best camera available for astrophotography" shows that you don't know the first thing about astronomy optics. Over the last few months I've been involved in the production of a £75million+ astronomy camera/telescope. If you'd have told me about the Nikkon sooner I could have saved all the universities/space agencies/research centres and observatories around the world billions of pounds/dollars!
    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal
    fea
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Erfisflat said:
    @JoePineapples
     
    We last saw you here.
    Erfisflat said:
    Are you Sirius? (that's an astronomy joke)
    Neither of those links shows a close up view of stars, it's merely a zoomed-in view using a feeble terrestrial video camera. 

    Of course, attempting such a thing results in the visual distortion displayed in those links.
    I like this one, look at it, and tell me this is due to some distortion. Waiting on your reply in the earth is flat debate.


    No problem. It's due to some distortion.
    @JoePineapples You implied the reason stars look like that is because of distortion 
    fea
     
  • Erfisflat said:
    Erfisflat said:
    To be fair, it isn't a cheap camera, it's probably the best camera available for astrophotography touting arguably the best zooming capabilities for this type of camera.
    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/hands-review/nikon-p900-new-king-superzooms
    The simple fact that you class a £400 camera as "not a cheap camera" and "the best camera available for astrophotography" shows that you don't know the first thing about astronomy optics. Over the last few months I've been involved in the production of a £75million+ astronomy camera/telescope. If you'd have told me about the Nikkon sooner I could have saved all the universities/space agencies/research centres and observatories around the world billions of pounds/dollars!
    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal

    I point out the huge and blindingly obvious difference between a cheap astronomy camera and a high-level one, and you try to play the anecdotal fallacy card?
    How old are you exactly? I don't mean to offend but your posting style and the way you respond to arguments is characteristic of someone who is extremely young and uninformed.
    Are you saying that you think telescopes/cameras that cost more than a few grand don't exist?
    feaGhosty
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.

  • loading...


  • SilverishGoldNova said:
    @JoePineapples You implied the reason stars look like that is because of distortion 
    Yes I did. Why do you think the top level telescopes are so expensive?
    feaGhosty
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • edited October 25
    SilverishGoldNova said:
    @JoePineapples You implied the reason stars look like that is because of distortion 
    Yes I did. Why do you think the top level telescopes are so expensive?
    We already have NASA admitting to faking images of the Earth, do you think we should trust them on Mars? 
    feaGhosty
     
  • JoePineapplesJoePineapples 128 Pts
    edited October 26
    We already have NASA admitting to faking images of the Earth, do you think we should trust them on Mars? 
    You don't have to trust them, Google search for your nearest public observatory and book in with them to look for yourself.
    On the subject of NASA;

    -Which photos have they admitted to faking? I keep seeing this claim popping up
    -Going back to the mars photos/telescope comparison, I believe the one on the right might be a composite photo taken from the mars orbiter

    Erfisflatfea
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Website!

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2017 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch