3081
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Thread Post Timestamps
« on: August 17, 2018, 11:14:27 PM »
Brilliant, thx
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I'm not sure exactly what you mean, and could be way off, but here's my interpretation:
2. When pictures are posted of distant skylines obscured by water, such as this one:
I really appreciate the perspective of this picture; it really looks like the earth is curved.
But there's a problem with this picture. Based on RE theory, the super-imposed tower that you see there would have to have been taken at a much closer distance than the overall picture since you would have to get closer to get over the curve (unless of course the earth is flat). The relative size of the tower taken at a close distance should be a different size than the very distant tower in the overall picture. How is it that they are aligned so perfectly in this picture? I'm not buying it. The super-imposed picture appears to have been modified to fit the size of the overall picture.
You would need to use a camera with a higher zoom and aspect ratio to see closer to the base of the tower in order to determine if you can, or cannot actually see its base.
That quote actually says "these are the factors that will affect the bullet," rather than "these are the factors that the sniper accounted for." One is a commentary by the author and the other is a depiction of process. Surely you can see that there is a difference.I knew you were going to go there. And yeah, I get your point. But the real point is, this is the process used by snipers which includes accounting for the Coriolis Effect. Meaning, the effect is something that trained snipers do take into account.
Photographs of the Ice Wall are extremely plentiful and common. It does nothing to help convince the RET brigade.Quite a strange, non-linear statement I'm not really following. Granted, it could just be me.
I also firmly disagree that photographs are empirical evidence. Empiricism relies on your own senses and ability to reproduce an experiment. And, as both sides of the debate have shown time and time again, it's only good evidence until it doesn't support their stance.
That's what an INS computer does. It makes the adjustment calculations.
One possible flat earth answer is atmospheric refraction. The atmosphere density changes base on where you are on earth which thus changes your perceived star location.As for a possible FE explanation, being that atmosphere density varies which could cause changing perceived star location wouldn't that make star location variable thereby rendering navigation by which inaccurate?
The weightless scenes in The Martian was achieved with a combination of wire support and CGI. CGI, as in cutting the actor out from the green-screen and making him or her float in the scene...
NASA was a consultant on the effects for that movie too.
You were very specific in stating YOU NEED THE THING to mimic in the first place....
Your backtracking and loose lipping the issue is very telling.
Given the timestamp you offered, the man is not at free movement at all from the point.
I more or less agree, with the exception of the guy with the gap in his tooth.From the FET wiki FAQ:
NASA only really needs a small zero-g room or container and they can just superimpose the water effects, floating pen effects, or human effects onto footage of the bigger sets.
Considering the many videos pointing out the harnesses, green screen effects, AR, and bubbles-in-space, they are likely using multiple methods.