Stars Can't Be Seen from Outer Space

originally posted by: sadang


a reply to: xGerhardSAx
- I appreciate you attention to details, but if a CCD don't detect light (in my opinion!) what make you believe a photoconductive surface used in vidicon tubes from Voyager do that?
- also did you took into consideration the magnetosphere and magnetotail of various celestial bodies until now?

What utter nonsense.
I'm sure you meant " Did you TAKE into consideration", but will let that one slide, because you'd probably have some pseudo-explanation as to why it should read TOOK in stead of TAKE as well.

Back to my point I was making. NOW you move your story from atmosphere to magnetosphere and its tail, as well as "stars can only be seen from certain points in deep space"?

[snipped]

This conversation is has degenerated to the point where it is so ridiculous and absurd it borders on clinically insane!

For the record, it would appear certain members of late on this thread are lacking in a rudimentary understanding of basic physics and/or biased by some outside influence / ideology to the point of outright denial of irrefutable FACT. This is not about failing to understand, but rather absolute refusal to WANT to understand! This, and conscious / willful reframing of the discussion, manipulation of definitions...and grade-school Dodgeball.

Out west we have a saying about leading a horse to some water. At some point one just has to say "screw it...you're on your own!" This would be one of those moments.

I'm OUT!

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Out west we have a saying about leading a horse to some water. At some point one just has to say "screw it...you're on your own!" This would be one of those moments.

I'm OUT!

Likewise.
I'm done trying to make a blind man see.
I'm out as well

originally posted by: ConnectDots
It will take you 2 minutes and 13 seconds to listen to whistleblower Eric Dollard tell you succinctly what's wrong with official science regarding the sun . . .

Dollard’s expertise about the sun comes from his work experience.

He had an association with RCA/Radio Corporation of America.

I’ve heard Dollard say that RCA started “radio astrology,” because one has to know what the sun’s doing in regard to what frequencies to use, and to know what the sun’s doing, the planets will tell you.

Here is a video regarding Dollard’s “RCA Book,” one of many publications by Dollard:

Published on Sep 20, 2013
. . . Listen to this interview about a highly suppressed book detailing the science behind a longitudinal electrostatic communication method that works by principles that are completely contrary to the popular science that explains transverse electromagnetic radio waves.

www.youtube.com...

Obviously, this material is alternative science. It is alternative because historically it has been suppressed.

If all you are going to do is ridicule and make sarcastic remarks, you're going to be saying nothing of any consequence, because ridicule and sarcasm are logical fallacies . . .

Likewise, I'm done trying to teach monkeys how to eat peanuts.

When civilisation grinds to a halt, they won't be needing astrologers or people to interpret entrails.

Have fun wallowing in your own ignorance.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
I consider Thomas Joseph Brown to be an expert in alternative science, which is the only science, in my opinion, that is worth the time of day at this point in history, unless the subject matter is not controversial.

People should not be put off by the word “spiritual” in Brown's About page on his website:

I am Thomas Joseph Brown, an independent researcher into Spiritual Science and Metaphysics as well as Light & Colour, Free Energy, Lost Sciences, Electro-Therapeutics and more.

thomasbrown.org...

Researchers who delve into spirituality have a big picture view, and that’s what we want. We don’t want people who can’t see the forest for the trees, which is what we have at present in mainstream science.

Spirituality is used by alternative science researchers to provide part of the picture. It simply supplements research into experimentation and practical, real-life experience.

Brown’s personal research and experience in the 1987 time frame dealing with NASA taught him that we can’t get a straight answer out of NASA.

This is why we need tenacious, dedicated researchers to help bring the truth to light.

originally posted by: ConnectDots

originally posted by: ConnectDots
I consider Thomas Joseph Brown to be an expert in alternative science, which is the only science, in my opinion, that is worth the time of day at this point in history, unless the subject matter is not controversial.

People should not be put off by the word “spiritual” in Brown's About page on his website:

I am Thomas Joseph Brown, an independent researcher into Spiritual Science and Metaphysics as well as Light & Colour, Free Energy, Lost Sciences, Electro-Therapeutics and more.

thomasbrown.org...

Researchers who delve into spirituality have a big picture view, and that’s what we want. We don’t want people who can’t see the forest for the trees, which is what we have at present in mainstream science.

Spirituality is used by alternative science researchers to provide part of the picture. It simply supplements research into experimentation and practical, real-life experience.

Brown’s personal research and experience in the 1987 time frame dealing with NASA taught him that we can’t get a straight answer out of NASA.

This is why we need tenacious, dedicated researchers to help bring the truth to light.

Good lord...you guys are so incredibly ungrateful for everything the"narrow minded" scientists have give you. Quite ridiculous and disgusting.

You hate mainstream science so much? STOP BENEFITTING FROM IT. Until you so, you are all grade A hypocrites .

a reply to: 3danimator2014

Truth seeking has nothing to do with gratitude.

It has to do with following leads and information wherever they take you, no matter how difficult.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Truth seeking has nothing to do with gratitude.

It has to do with following leads and information wherever they take you, no matter how difficult.

More twaddle. And you missed my point entirely. Bravo

a reply to: 3danimator2014

No, I didn't.

You're trying to claim authority in mainstream science due to what you see as proof.

And you accused me of ingratitude and hypocrisy, which is entirely off-topic and a bogus argument.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: 3danimator2014

No, I didn't.

You're trying claim authority in mainstream science due to what you see as proof.

And you accused me of ingratitude and hypocrisy, which is entirely off-topic and a bogus argument.

This is pointless and stupid. I'm done. Enjoy the fruits of REAL scientists research. Hypocrite.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: 3danimator2014

No, I didn't.

You're trying to claim authority in mainstream science due to what you see as proof.

And you accused me of ingratitude and hypocrisy, which is entirely off-topic and a bogus argument.

Why not forget the posturing about mainstream science and just concentrate on the facts of GaryN's claim. We could make philosophical arguments back and forth about state of science and/or the role science plays in our current understanding of nature, but that is pointless.

The real question is WHY would the part of the EM spectrum between the wavelengths of about 380 nm and about 750 nm be visible here on Earth but be invisible in space. There has been no clear answer to this question.

Sadang says that part of the spectrum is not "visible light", but he hasn't explained why it's not visible light.

...but ya know...science don't know everything! and science isn't perfect! So that's a darned good enough reason for me for saying that EM waves in what science calls "visible light" doesn't interact with the light receptors in my eyes, nor does in interact with the light-sensitive photoelectric sensors in a camera, nor does it react with the light-sensitive emulsion on print film.

Hey, guess what???? I've got an idea!!!

I'm gonna' start a new thread, it's called.....

"Steers can't be seen from Outer Space!!"

I'm pretty sure I can make a convincing argument that despite spectral analysis, atmosphere or not, "glows" and whatever, that "steers" can't be seen from space!

Do you all think that page will get to 65 pages????

Steers, from space, that's the premise!

originally posted by: Box of Rain
The real question is WHY would the part of the EM spectrum between the wavelengths of about 380 nm and about 750 nm be visible here on Earth but be invisible in space. There has been no clear answer to this question.

I'm going to assume you are stating the issue correctly (as previously demonstrated, I'm not as scientific as you are).

The reason is that apparently what we call visible light is not in existence without matter to interact with. That is, the radiation from the sun interacts with the Earth's atmosphere to create that portion of the EM spectrum.

Now we come to the fact that this phenomenon is one that the powers that be do not want known, because it points to a whole world of information that is secret: the secret space program.

NASA is an entity that is only for public consumption.

The real space program is secret.

That's why we can't have a civil discussion here on this thread.

originally posted by: Bedlam

Any thoughts?

Yes. I think your eye, like any camera, has only so much dynamic range, and that's all you get.

Like most cameras, your eye has several mechanisms for moving the center of your dynamic range. One is the iris. When it's very bright outside, say, when you're standing on gray Lunar soil in Lunar day, everything is so bright your iris closes, to adjust the center of your dynamic range toward the bright end.

When this happens, you will no longer be able to see the stars, because they're off the bottom of your range. It's like trying to hear a pin drop. On a hard surface in a quiet room, you can. During a Mastodon concert, not so much, even though the pin makes the same amount of noise. Because your ears adjust the same way your eyes do.

eta: BTW, you DO know they navigate in space by the stars, right? Using something like a sextant? linky!

Massive props for the Mastodon analogy lol. The Moon does not truely have a night in the same sense as the Earth does. Because the same side always faces earth due to its speed of rotation and distance from us it only experiences a form of twilight but still receives a fair amount of light from the sun. Remember also that the suit helmet visors were also highly filtered during eva's hense why in all the photos you are not able to see the faces of the suit occupants. There are many factors involved in the cause of the phenomenom.

originally posted by: ConnectDots

NASA is an entity that is only for public consumption.

The real space program is secret.

An introduction to the secret space program can be found in the thread The Need to Watch the Citizen Hearing on Disclosure Videos.

a reply to: ConnectDots

And what about all the other space agencies around the world that aren't NASA?

Forgot about those, didn't you?

a reply to: TerryDon79

As far as I know, governments worldwide are controlled by the shadow government, another name for the powers that be.

Within the shadow government there are factions, however, so things are not cut-and-dried.

Also, I believe that within governments are certain individuals who will not necessarily always be afraid to speak the truth.

a reply to: ConnectDots

Way to not answer my question.

0/10 for effort.

a reply to: ConnectDots

So, why can't stars been seen from space?

You've been provided with evidence of stars being seen AND being photographed from space.

I await your answer.