Then you should know that you see the sun because it's only two planets away, much much closer than the closest star.
Stars also aren't going to be as visible because of the brightness of the Sun relative to the stars behind it. Like the light in an interrogation room, or a police flashlight in your face. Everything behind it losses visibility.
Off-Topic: I know for a fact you don't believe none of the shyt you say, you just hate people who seemingly have "blind faith" in science, without the why's to back up their beliefs. This is in contrast to religion, which you believe is the only thing worthy of blind faith.
So why cant you see stars in space when youre on the opposite side of the earth from the sun? As in, youre in the earths shadow. You should definitely be able to see stars in that scenario because it should be no different then seeing stars at night on earth
You can still see other things behind the light in an interrogation room, everything else just looks dimmer, not invisible
I don't have the time or energy, nor do i care enough about anyone on here to lie about my stance on this reality. Im a flat earther and i dont believe "outer space" exists
Also feel free to point out any of my posts that blindly defend any religion
Sorry but this is yet another post where youre not saying anything at all
You got years and years and years of evidence of "astronauts" giving conflicting reports on whether they personally saw stars in space, yet you keep trying to narrow the convo down to cameras
On the other hand you are in your normal personal attack "element".
You asked a question about a photo. A photo taken by a camera.
So starting there is NOT "narrowing the convo down", it's actually the logical place to begin and is keeping the conversation focus constant.
You meanwhile are broadening the conversation to include "tales of astronauts" (which is your right) while claiming that I am doing the opposite (i.e. narrowing the convo) and that that me "narrowing the convo" means I am "out of my depth". E-grow if you want to speak about "what astronauts saw" then introduce it like a normal person. No need for the unpleasantries.
Meanwhile the actual science gets buried under the ill-judged and misplaced focus on the person rather than the facts.
And that you think qualifies as what?
The conversation started with cameras+stars and proceeding from that point is logical.
You keep conflating what people "see" with pictures taken with a camera when any physicist should know that they are NOT the same thing.
When this is pointed out to you, rather than conceding the point or addressing it directly you auto-shift to something else and attack the person.
-
Your method of what you consider "argumentation" means that a conversation that should have been resolved or at least where some progress should have been made years ago on here always degrades into jumbled non-sequitur posturing and posing that NEVER goes anywhere.
It's @thekingsmen style logic. You both hit something that you don't want to face so ... "random long jump" to another point it is, without having enough awareness to acknowledge (even to yourself) what you just did.
The bottom line is that we don't have to consider personal-testimony when discussing why stars may not appear in space photos. That is how science works. That is how we can predict the content of pictures that rover will take on Mars even though there is no one there.
-
Like we have already been over with ..
1. Stephen Hawking - hawking Radiation.
and
2. GPS - would not work on a flat earth where the flatness remained a secret. Adjustments would have to made on each and every device.
etc
When presented with these you had no answer. Instead you just do your random jump and KIM - which is your right BTW.
I don't have the time or energy, nor do i care enough about anyone on here to lie about my stance on this reality. Im a flat earther and i dont believe "outer space" exists
That's all well and good, I'm not trying to convince you or convert you. It just appears to me you're very self aware when it comes to this subject. You're using your education background to troll the common folk. I'm not one of the common folk though.
I find it difficult to identify you as anything but a troll when it comes to this subject, because you ducked every question I asked you in the other thread. This is a fact: The Sun and Moon are a circular shape. The human eye can see them to verify this. Although we can't see the Earth in the same fashion we see the Sun and Moon without technology, it doesn't take technology to correctly theorize that the Earth has a similar shape.
Also you claim the stars not being visible as evidence that outer space doesn't exist, yet you clearly (and also acknowledged) see the Sun, and that whomever had taken that photo was physically closer to it. So all that darkness around the Sun, that you acknowledged is there, would be "Outer Space".
Also feel free to point out any of my posts that blindly defend any religion
Your religious beliefs are at the core of you being a flat earther, but I digress. We don't have to open a religious can of worms here, that would only make for a more convoluted conversation.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Then you should know that you see the sun because it's only two planets away, much much closer than the closest star.
