Disappearing stars

There is a strange phenomenon which is the fact that stars disappear at high altitude. You’ve probably seen those amateur videos on You Tube of somebody sending a toy space shuttle or a tent into the stratosphere attached to a weather balloon. You know, ones like these:
 

3 Toy Robot in Space! - HD balloon flight to 95,000ft
Link
4 Natty Light First Beer In Space HD
Link
5 How to film the Earth from space
Link
6 High Altitude Weather Balloon Launch - Bobblehead in Space Raises Aware
Link
7 Obama to Space!
Link
8 Helium Balloon amazing space photos
Link
9 Balloon 100,000ft in space
Link
10 Balloon with camera goes to space. amazing
Link
12 Germany - Lego Space Shuttle Soars To Edge of Space
Germany
13 High Altitude Balloon JHAB2 Lost in Space
California
14 Costa Rica
Costa Rica
15 Space Camping - First tent in Space
Scotland
16 Balloon to the edge of space South Australia
South Australia
17 Cambodia Space Launch - 2010
Cambodia

There should be incredible images of stars high up in the atmosphere, free from clouds; but there isn’t one single star visible in any of these videos.

I know what you are thinking. This idiot doesn’t realize that camcorders can’t pick up stars even in the best low-light conditions, let alone contrasting with the bright sky below.

Absolutely. It is very difficult to see stars with a camcorder, but there are ways to tinker with some of them to see stars at night. The Panasonic HDC-TM90K and Samsing SDC-435 are two such examples.

Still, the people sending up their balloons during the day were probably not interested in changing the camera settings just to see stars. Their camera might not be capable or they may not have read its instruction manual on how to do it. Fair enough.

Having said that, there is not one example on You Tube where one single star is visible at all at any time. Not once.

So to capture images of those magnificent stars we will need to find film taken by someone with a really expensive top-end professional video camera (television camera) or ones used for filming movies perhaps. Television cameras use CCD sensors instead of the cheaper CMOS ones that camcorders use. CCDs are more sensitive, but it seems that size really is the most important factor when it comes to low-light sensitivity. The bigger the sensor, the more light they let in.

Even something like the Blackmagic Cinema Camera may be enough, or not.

Let’s up the ante and go higher in technology. What is the best money can buy? And when I mean the best, I mean custom-made cameras such as the 1100 series from Spectral Instruments. I’m sure there are other companies making top spec cameras for specific industrial applications, such as this company which makes cameras with Electron Multiplying CCD sensors which can capture stars on their own as can be seen in this video.

professional video camera capturing stars at night
EMCCD sensor capturing a few stars at night

What organization could drop some serious change on such equipment?

How about NASA.

Their multi-billion dollar annual budget should allow them to order something decent from Spectral Instruments; you know, a custom-made camera with a sensor the size of a planet (no pun intended).

OK, I know NASA doesn’t exactly have the best reputation at the moment, all thanks to the great analysis on the interwebs. Whether it is a plethora of bubbles floating up into “space”, or the obvious artist renditions without them being kind enough to tell us!

However, evidence from official sources like NASA can be deemed legit if they can be verified. And I mean verified by us. Can us mere mortals repeat what they did and get the same results?

If the NASA footage is the same or very similar to the amateur stuff then there has been little chance of NASA tomfoolery.

And by amateur, I mean the footage must be:
1. Repeatable. Unlike the so-called amateur footage of 9-11, which was a one-off event in history that we can’t repeat ourselves since the event has past forever.
2. Accessible. Sending a camera up to 30 to 44km is something which anyone can do for under $100. This guy’s launch cost $325. Most people can afford that.
3. Variedly sourced. The amateurs must come from all walks of life and not all be connected to one family (think Sandy Hook hoax) or all work for the big media companies (think 9-11) or be involved with any one organization.
4. Numerous. There must be more than a handful of videos or photographs. Obviously, the more there are, the better.

The weather balloon technology ticks all these boxes, with no. 4 being the weakest (I have found 22 videos so far), but the above criteria could be copied by a determined hoaxer (e.g. NASA employee). So, with these criteria in mind is there any verifiable NASA footage out there?

Yes there is.

I found these two videos:

New Views of Endeavour's Launch from Booster CamerasEndeavour Launch NASA On Board SPACE SHUTTLE Launch HQNASA On Board SPACE SHUTTLE Launch

(The white thing in both of the images is one of the shuttle’s booster rockets after being ejected.)

Looking at either of the videos you can tell by the sheer overwhelming brightness of the earth that the camera was set to be very sensitive to light.

 
But still no stars!
 
Where are they?

There are only two possible explanations, either:
1. NASA have defrauded congress by claiming $200,000 expenses for a booster rocket camera that was really a $150 flip camcorder attached with Blu-Tack. I doubt this, but plenty of NASA cynics wouldn’t.
2. Even the best specifically purpose-built professional cameras with their huge ultra-sensitive sensors can’t capture stars because of too much light pollution and all that. Do you believe that?

Unfortunately we don’t know what kind of camera NASA have used in these videos, at least I haven’t been able to find out after a quick search.

Either way, we haven’t got stars. Let’s give NASA the benefit of the doubt (millions wouldn’t) and say they haven’t got the technology to capture stars on film from the stratosphere during the day (and we never see any booster rocket camera shots from a night time launch either. Funny that.)

 
What other sources are there to try and capture those elusive stars?

Maybe an amateur weather balloon enthusiast has used a digital slr instead of a camcorder, one which can pick up stars in a ground level nighttime environment. Even better if they sent up the balloon at night for the best possible light conditions.

Guess what?

There is such a You Tube video. It shows a lot of still shots in quick succession taken just before dawn at around 5:30am. The two cameras used were the Canon PowerShot A540 and the Canon PowerShot A590 IS.

Now, we will see stars, even if it is just one or two, at least they will be much brighter than those taken on the ground as there is a super thin atmosphere at this height.

Can’t wait! I’m so excited.

dslr weather balloon
dslr images at 30km

What the…? No stars at all in any image. What is going on here? OK, don’t panic. Everything’s alright. The same man has a website with high resolution pictures. Surely I’ll see the stars now…

Afraid not.

There must still be a logical explanation. Maybe these cameras can’t capture stars even from ground level. Let’s check Flickr groups for both the Canon PowerShot A540 and the Canon PowerShot A590 IS.

Here are four night sky images, including environmental light pollution, from the Canon PowerShot A540:

Canon A540 star photo1starry night 1 Canon A540 star photo2starry night 2 – no tripod 3 sec exposure
Canon A540 star photo3starry night 3 Canon A540 star photo4starry night 4

And from the Canon PowerShot A590 IS:

Canon PowerShot A590 IS star photostarry night 5 Canon PowerShot A590 IS star photo2starry night 6
Canon PowerShot A590 IS star photo3starry night 7 Canon PowerShot A590 IS star photo4starry night 8

Only one or two stars can be seen in five of the above images, but three of them show several stars, albeit nothing like the time lapse images of more expensive dslrs. Images such as these from this video.

timelapse 1 timelapse 2
timelapse 3 timelapse 4

I should still be able to see a couple of stars in a few of the high altitude night sky images surely, but nothing, nada, zilch.

Maybe the camera wasn’t set at the right settings to capture stars, even though it would seem the author would have had that intention since he sent the balloon up at night. Stars are best captured by using a tripod and at least 15 seconds shutter speed (for a full sky of them to appear), so maybe atmospheric conditions caused the camera to twirl around allowing no clear images to be shot. I would still expect a few photos to contain some kind of star light with this length of exposure especially during periods of relative calm up there, but obviously not.

Oh well, I will have to admit defeat that I will never be able to see glorious looking stars at high altitude on either photo or video no matter who takes them, NASA or mere mortal.

 
Wait a minute…

If neither a state of the art video camera, nor a dslr can do it, what about the naked eye? Maybe someone can tell me what an incredible dazzling array of stars they saw high up there in the stratosphere.

So who has been over 30km high in a balloon?

Felix Baumgartner, the world record breaking sky diver of the Red Bull variety of course.

Here’s good ol’ Felix looking like something out of 2001 Space Odyssey.

felix no black visor

But has he told us about the majestic heavens?

Yes he has.

Finally, someone has seen stars up there to fire up our imaginations of a stellar sky full of hope and ambition.

So what does he say? Let’s forward the video to 01:32 and listen.

Skydiver Jumps From Edge of Space
Felix marveling at the starry sky

“You can see that the sky is totally black.”

 

Come again? What did he say?

You’ve got to be kidding me. There are no clouds, virtually no air pressure up there, hardly any air molecules at all to block the beautiful light of the multitude of stars that should all but encompass him in one majestic Milky-Way throng of delight. He should have a view of the stars like at the Mojave desert times 10.

Ah, but his eyes have been so overwhelmed by the sun’s dazzling light that the light of the stars have been pushed out, despite his dark protective visor on his helmet. Never mind eh.
+++
+++
All the above observable evidence have their excuses, however likely or unlikely, as to why not a single star has ever been shown in any verifiable footage in the stratosphere; but it certainly raises eyebrows.

Even in most of the unverifiable images of space attributed to NASA we never get to see any stars, and the ones that do, we can’t determine if they had been added by Photoshop or not… except, thanks to Sandy Mulder, we can. To make our eyebrows raise even more, like to the back of our heads, is NASA being caught in the act at copy and pasting a starry night in one of their shots of the International Space Station. These are three light “errors” being copied and pasted.

copy and paste stars
Oops!

This entire image is a proven fabrication thanks to an inconvenient truth called the thermosphere; but it goes to show that NASA have no qualms faking stars (and entire images) when it suits them.

Update 1: During my 2 weeks on holiday in Sharm-el-Sheikh, Egypt, I only once saw a thin slight wisp of a cloud for a short time one morning, otherwise there was never a cloud in the sky during the oven-like temperatures from 44 to 55 °C. On 19th and 20th June 2013 I was flying back from 21:00 through to 3:00 the next morning. There were no clouds at take-off on the 19th and soon after the lights inside the aircraft were dimmed. I continually looked out the window when we were at cruising altitude and I could not make out a single star (with or without cupping my hands for a while)… odd, since the area is famous for organizing star-gazing trips with the Bedouin people in the desert.

If there are any pilots reading this, or if a reader wishes to ask pilots in the cockpit, have they ever seen stars above the clouds at night from their cockpit? After all, the only lights in the place are from the glowing instruments; there should be no glare. If yes, we know stars are further up than flying altitude; if not, then stars must be low altitude phenomena.

+++
So, what are we to make of all this? Are there really stars up there in the heavens? (Or anything else but the Sun, for that matter.) Are stars just an atmospheric phenomena?

Update 2: No. It seems that whatever the stars represent, must exist much higher but become invisible at higher altitudes for reasons unknown to the author.

Why is this?

The problem are four irreconcilable facts which point to stars being very near the center of the Earth (either side vertically) right above the poles.

The facts
1. It is 99.99% certain that it is the stars that move in the sky above us and not the Earth.
2. It is also 99.99% certain that we live inside the Earth (Concave Earth Theory).
3. The north star Polaris can be seen by everyone in the northern hemisphere from those living in the arctic to those just above the equator (and slightly below it).
4. The stars are seen to move in an anti-clockwise direction by those living everywhere in the northern hemisphere.

Conclusion
If everyone in the northern hemisphere can see the north star, this star must be above the north pole somewhere whether just above it in the atmosphere, right through to the center of the Earth (or “space”), or anywhere in between. The fact that everyone in the northern hemisphere can see these stars move in an anti-clockwise direction around Polaris must mean that these stars are extremely near the very center of the Earth.

concave earth simple

For the stars to be seen to move in an anti-clockwise direction everywhere in the northern hemisphere, the star fields must be at or very near the center of the Earth.

The size of this “star field” will be demonstrated in a future article, but it seems it is extremely small.

+++
Wait, stars are invisible at high altitude? What about the Hubble Telescope? You know that piece of unverifiable evidence of stars being visible from space. The Hubble Telescope is a complete fraud as my post on the thermosphere will demonstrate. Just be prepared for cognitive dissonance.

Bookmark the permalink.

94 Responses to Disappearing stars

  1. Daniel says:

    I’m going to eastern Europe during vacation, there I have some friends that are always up for fun. I’m going to use this opportunity to launch a helium balloon with a camera that is going to record live, so we do not have to create a recovery mechanism +from the time on the video we can calculate the approximate height and determine when stars disappear from the video. It’s also highly appropriate since this is going to be summer, not winter — and you pointed out this happens during summer. So we’ll see, I’ll report back if everything goes well, hopefully with a video!

    View Comment
  2. msasterisk says:

    Hey, did you know about an experiment done in the 19th century that proves the aether? Two scientists built an apparatus that would measure the exact optical properties of light, figuring that a clear deviation from the mainstream laws of optics would prove the aether’s existence and thus the invalidity of heliocentrism. Sure enough, they got the expected deviation. They did it again… And again… And again… Every time, getting the same results! I love this site, keep it up! (No link, I don’t know how to…)

    Now, if you believed all that, you are blindly believing a higher authority and your credibility has jumped off a cliff. If you were still skeptical by the end, good. Be skeptical of ALL sources, not just the ones you disagree with. Like, say, laughing off Newton, but worshipping that 19th century plumb bob experiment thing, is the wrong thing to do.

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      I didn’t worship that 19th century plumb-bob experiment. I think the tamarack mines experiment was inconclusive with too many variables.

      I don’t laugh off Newton, TPB are laughing at you by not telling you what Newton really thought. In his letters he wrote that he thought gravity was a push by “spirit”. Funny how they don’t take that “thought experiment” and put it on a 20th/21st century pedestal. I like one late 19th century experiment on the shape of the earth which holds infinitely more weight than a supposed 17th century thought experiment.

      Cosmology isn’t science. It is marketing. They are selling you their interpretation and version of reality. They want you insignificant, godless and susceptible to all their future lying promotions to shape the world in their image. They want you to be afraid of asteroids, terrorists, nukes, aliens etc.

      If you can’t see that, then don’t bother trolling here whilst frothing at the mouth like a rabid dog.

      View Comment
  3. Donald Sarty says:

    Night time Balloon Launch
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z3V8jpJwq8&feature=youtu.be

    Balloon-Borne mission over Spain to study the Quadrantids from the stratosphere 20016. Night from the 3 to 4 of january 2016.

    Cooperation between Proyecto Daedalus and the Grupo de Observación de Bólidos y Meteoros de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid (BYMUCM) part of the SPanish Meteor Network (SPMN)

    View Comment
    • Donald Sarty says:

      It only went up to 71,850 feet, another 50,000 feet higher and it could like the ISS was taking the footage

      View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      They have used a sensitive enough camera at last. Disappearing stars from a plane window seems to be seasonal. Around the summer solstice is when they disappear at high altitude, but around December is when they are still very visible from a plane. At least what we have so far learnt from the handful of eye witnesses who have commented on this blog (including myself).

      I wanted to compare the difference between the highest (20km) and lowest altitude (2K?) to see if the stars got smaller but it is very hard to tell because the balloon is moving around so much at low altitude it is elongating the stars. Oh well. Good find Don.

      View Comment
      • JMAC1978 says:

        that’s an awesome video.. stars, stars and more stars. and that was shot at only 13 miles up??? so stars are still around 3000miles away and the sun like 2000???? that’s a lot of depth to try and visualize..

        View Comment
  4. Joel Harris says:

    The exposures are too short for stars. Period.
    If they had it on ISO 1600 and longer exposures they would get them, but the sun and the earth would be way over exposed.
    You know that they did get stars from the moon too.

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Possibly sure, but there are too many testimonies now of people either not seeing stars from an aircraft at night or seeing a lot less of them depending on the time of year. June is the time not to see stars from an aircraft.

      Also, as I have mentioned in the comments below, the only satellites that can see stars in “space” are the ones with super-sensitive radiometers and high amplitude boosters. Why is that?

      Neither space nor stars are what we are being told they are.

      View Comment
  5. matt says:

    The stars disappear when you get to a certain altitude. I have noticed this several times on night flights

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Yeah. You’re not the only one. On my forum I mentioned a quote from a flat earth forum from a previous air stewardess who often never saw the stars at night on a plane. I can’t speculate on a reason yet. Maybe one day.

      View Comment
  6. PROBE NASA says:

    https://youtu.be/aisdh5sdrgk Of course since I made this video Scott Kelly has posted photos of stars/the atmosphere and the Northern Lights. Looks very CGI, but nonetheless there is that!

    View Comment
  7. David says:

    I recently flew from Brisbane to Bangkok and I definitely saw stars but very few and not bright, nothing like from the ground…

    View Comment
  8. MR says:

    I was traveling on plane to UK by night. The lights inside the plane were dimmed. During flight I saw complete black sky with no stars.
    Maybe my eyes are not sensitive to see stars, LOL.

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      A few more people are also voicing this observation now on various comments on YT etc. I think the energy source of stars is at the center of the cavity, but the starlight is created in the atmosphere. That is my best guess at the moment. Who knows?

      View Comment
    • Calmarius says:

      Your night vision is worse when you are on an airplane which have reduced cabin pressure.

      View Comment
      • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

        Ah, so less air (pressure), less visible light then? So the higher the altitude, the weaker the starlight. It is looking like starlight needs the atmosphere to be more easily detected. Why I wonder?

        View Comment
        • wise one says:

          Please try to find someone who can prove if light is visible in a vacuum (where there is very little pressure). A night vision camera is necessary, along with a vacuum chamber that is not glass or anything transparent.

          View Comment
          • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

            That is what I had thought. But I guess starlight must travel through a vacuum as it travels through space to hit the atmosphere to go on to hit our eyes. Unless space isn’t really a vacuum but has a small presence of noble gas such as argon? Sounds wild, but not really – http://www.universetoday.com/107154/argon-the-first-noble-gas-discovered-in-space/

            In this instance, the researchers were somewhat astounded when they found some very unusual data which required time to fully understand.

            They are always astounded lol. How is a modern sulfur lamp made? With argon gas apparantly.

            The reason for the lack of blue light is unknown to me at this time, but may be because the Sun uses carbon electrodes in a vacuum as opposed to an electrode-less sulfur lamp using microwaves to ignite the sulfur which is surrounded by argon gas.

            http://www.wildheretic.com/is-the-sun-a-light-bulb/

            Is there a connection? Possibly.

            View Comment
  9. Calmarius says:

    They should send an image amplifier type night vision camera up on a balloon at night, that’s aimed diagonally up during the flight, so it sees the sky and there is no interference from the bright ground. That’s the only chance for a digital video camera to see the stars.

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      That would be one possibility. Two people on YT claimed to have seen stars below them while on an airplane. At the moment I am wondering if starlight is a water vapour effect from an energy source in the center of the cavity. One person has seen stars from a plane during December. Is this because the energy source is a little greater and effects the little water vapour higher up more (noctilucent clouds in the mesosphere maybe) so they can be seen? I honestly don’t know at this point. The question I am asking myself is – is the energy source of stars light, or something else that creates light in water vapour? I don’t know. They claim that ultrasenstive radiometers on satellites can pick up starlight (if true, that rules out a non-light energy source I guess, as there is no water vapour above the glass… or is there?)

      So far, I would expect more sensitive instruments to “see” stars at higher altitude than less sensitive ones (time of night and day of year being equal of course). Not an easy subject, but is ripe for night time balloon experimentation – one “camera” looking below and one above perhaps.

      View Comment
  10. Tomek says:

    maybe it’s a little brighten the problem

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=336&dat=19490217&id=aKZTAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7IcDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5385,3455260

    Horace Winfield Webster, he’s my hero 🙂

    View Comment
  11. sollan says:

    Here’s a few thoughts for ya WH.

    The Sun….
    I think is a reflection/concentration off a reflective surface on the opposite side of the concave earth from a much less bright and less hot heat source in the center. Ever burnt an ant with a magnifying glass? what would the sun look like to that ant before it fried, this is what i’m imagining the sun to be a “concentration” of light and heat. The concave mirror could rotate around the earth on a daily cycle and would be as big as one side of the earth. This mirror could even be on the back side of LSC’s glass sky. As the mirror rotates less of the surface is available to reflect the light and its angle changes. thus the sun gets less intense in the after noon and lower in the western sky. What happens when the sun goes down is this mirror has passed between you and the central light source and thus night ensues as the light source in the center of the earth is blocked.

    The Stars……
    Well they are just permanent holes in the mirror that lets a little source light through. when we move higher in altitude the light comeing from these holes probably lose focus.

    The Ether……..
    (i saved the best for last). Nicola Tesla stated: “If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.” The Ether is made from numbers. Marko Rodin and Randy Powell (google them) have deciphered numbers and come up with something call “vortex mathematics”. It is nothing like the maths taught in schools. It basically deciphers how all stuff (matter) interacts with each other, and the numbers (from 1 to 9) describe these relationships. look it up.

    View Comment
  12. SPACE says:

    Notice how photography works, it captures from ghost/dark world some light/image. I talking about oldskool photos. Then need to be processed for eye to see. Digital captures some light on microchip. And is ready at once. That’s why photo cameras can see what naked human eye can’t.

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      That’s interesting. So the old film cameras are better or more sensitive? Is that right?

      View Comment
      • SPACE says:

        I would say old film cameras are less confusing. Did you noticed how they promoted color TV, cinema. I would say color film is more complicated.

        View Comment
        • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

          I’ve noticed that “proper” tv and film cameras don’t seem to show any horizon curve at all. There is a helicopter scene at the end of “Diamonds are Forever” attacking an oil rig and the horizon is dead straight. The helicopter looks to be at least 1000 feet up, maybe even as high as 2000 feet.

          View Comment
      • Craig says:

        I believe we live in an electric universe. Our bodies are electricly
        activated and to see the stars you have to be grounded to earth. You don’t have to touch the earth, just be close enough to complete the circuit. Once you get high enough you are no longer
        close enough to complete the circuit.
        I do not believe that the sun is nuclear, like I said it’s electric..

        View Comment
  13. Felix says:

    Felix also said “You can see the curvature of the Earth”… oh, wait. Shit. Concave Earth bullshit debunked. 🙁 Oh, well, that subtracts credibility from nutty theories around here, doesn’t it?
    Or maybe Felix was lying… But only lying about the curvature of the earth, and saying the truth about the blackness of the sky.
    🙁
    Oh, well, oh well…

    View Comment
  14. SPACE says:

    Also, did you noticed, that people don’t see Moon & Sun in the dreams?

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Dreams are a difficult one. I don’t think I have ever seen the moon in dreams, and probably not the Sun either.

      Here are very rare things (>1%) in my dreams that I can remember:
      1. children (I can only remember one dream with children in it)
      2. animals
      3. violence

      Here are rare things (>5%)
      4. People of other races (the only races that I have been involved in my dreams are whites, blacks, yellows). I am white.
      5. food
      6. kitchens
      7. a workplace or wanting to find work
      8. bedrooms
      9. trees

      What about yourself?

      View Comment
      • SPACE says:

        I will say for the first time. I kept kinda private. About my dreams when I was a kid to >12 age. When I was kid about 10 y.o. one evening friends were talking about their dreams. Very various, colorful dreams. My eyes were like this 0_0, because the only dream I had as a kid, was some evil creature trying to catch me. In some kinda sci-fi environment. 2-3 times almost got me. I had this dream about 5000 times. I thought, that other people also have this dream.
        About Sun & Moon. I myself never seen them, and I noticed reading other people dreams, they do not mention Sun and Moon. There’s kinda astralic shining.
        So, I assume, in other dimension there’s no Sun and Moon. Reminds first Genesis verses: and there was light. Notice, that Sun appears only on 4th day.

        View Comment
        • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

          Yes, genesis is very interesting, and so is the Hopi creation myth as well. To my mind the second page (or is it chapter in biblical speak?) of genesis doesn’t sound like it connects with the first page all too well. I wonder if they came from different sources.

          View Comment
          • SPACE says:

            In talmud there’s interesting place: Alexander Macedonian asks rabbis of Judea: what is further, Heaven from Earth or East from West. Rabbis answer: East from West.

            View Comment
          • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

            That is indeed interesting. After the concave earth/space articles I’m going to look into some of the religious books and others in more depth.

            View Comment
    • Vitja says:

      I have seen the Sun and the moon in my dreams. Also “stars”. In my dreams I have seen daytime and nighttime. But I have never traveled up enough in my dreams to see the earth from higher perspective, though..

      View Comment
      • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

        I once had a very vivid dream where the surroundings looked exactly like the world at the end of the movie Contact where Foster meets her “father”.

        View Comment
    • Jadia says:

      I see the moon plenty in my dreams, just saying….

      View Comment
  15. Saros says:

    I am not sure if you have heard, but Alan Eustace, a senior Google vice president set a new record in the highest skydive jump thus beating Felix Baumgartner. Here is the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E93Rsf-XcCc
    It would be interesting to ask him if he saw any stars.

    View Comment
  16. Mo says:

    Hi,

    I just stumbled upon the Youtube ad campaigns. Appearently you don`t have to pay unless someone watches more than 30 seconds of your video, and doesn`t just click it away like most people do. Hence the probability is pretty high that those who click on to your site then really are interested in what you have to say. Ignorants will just close the ad after 5 secs. You could reach thousands of people like this per month, and the concave earth theory could spread like wildfire, with broader implications for world consciousness. Have you thought about this? By now only a very limited group of people gets potentially reached, and by ads, you could terminate the target group which has the highest potential in overstanding it and spreading it around further etc. Anyway, just an idea, greetz!

    View Comment
  17. aryadeva says:

    hi wildheretic,

    what do you think about this observation. there seem to be stars at 34.000 feet:

    http://pbase.com/flying_dutchman/pacific_eruption

    ps: can’t wait for your next article!

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Sure.

      At the moment my take on it is that there is no one height that is set in stone where you can’t see stars. I think there are variable factors at play such as weather, season, time, location etc. Sometimes pilots see stars, sometimes not, according to one poster. Even Karol has found one video of a few stars visible at high altitude from a balloon during the day. It is more of a general guideline I think. I’m not 100% sure, but I seem to remember a few clear cloudless nights where I couldn’t see any stars from the ground (no light pollution where I am). Very unlikely, but again it is a general rule I think.

      WH

      Working hard on the next article. Just started gravity in a concave earth and it is a wild one as I have had to look at matter.

      View Comment
    • M says:

      hi wildheretic,
      i ve taken a pic in the morning with the sun coming up.. i took a picture..with many horizontal even length lines in the sky.

      unexplainable.. perhaps the glass wall?

      Rgds,

      View Comment
  18. Douglas Adams says:

    Here is a link to a news article with a satellite taking a 360 view as it reaches space. As it turns away from earth and stares into space with no other light sources interfering with its lens, you’ll notice there are still no stars…

    http://www.universetoday.com/113859/awesome-video-of-a-satellite-in-orbit/

    View Comment
  19. scud says:

    Of course, I might add that this might be just another fake video…bold enough to describe the ascension of Venus but not the majestic and far more complicated background of stars…and my! What a beautiful convexed world we circumvent!!! (thanks, wide angle lens).

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Probably not fake, just a simple wide angle lens is my guess. Yeah, it is funny how the camera can pick up Venus, but not stars. Is it due to the sensitivity of the camera that because Venus is brighter, it picks it up? I wonder what the pilots saw? Probably the same, especially as the Russian pilots claim sometimes not to see stars either. It looks like we are looking at an aether density… sorry… a magnetic density phenomenon (for those that don’t like the aether word lol). My feeling is that this is a big clue as to how light travels and what it is. I’m not looking into this though at the moment.

      View Comment
      • panos says:

        Some civilizations call venus the morning star,the star that created everything else.

        View Comment
      • Stuart Harry Taylor says:

        Hi WH. Spoke to my brother who is a pilot and flew Hercules Transporters for a number of years with the RAF. He says you can see stars clearly at high altitude and pilots used to use astral navigation for many years until modern and more accurate forms of navigation were implemented ie gps etc

        View Comment
        • Stuart Harry Taylor says:

          Hi WH. Did a bit more digging around regarding astral navigation and found this ( web link at footer)

          “Most spacecraft steer by the stars. Or, to make sure they are still on course and pointed in the right direction, they may periodically check the position of the stars. So, what is a star camera——often referred to as a star tracker——and how does it work? A star camera or star tracker is a “celestial reference” device that recognizes star patterns, such as constellations.

          Star patterns, and even single stars, are very helpful for navigation. In ancient times, sailors navigated by the North Star——it was their reference point. By looking at it they could tell if they were on course. This is similar to checking the position of our sun, which rises in the east and sets in the west, and being able to tell in which direction we are heading. The sun gives us point of reference——a starting point that we refer to and compare our position to as we travel.

          To recognize star patterns, Compass uses an active pixel sensor (APS) in a wide-field-of-view (WFOV) miniaturized star camera. APS is a new type of compact imaging device with an array of photosensors. APS uses a fraction of the power used by standard charged coupled devices, enabling a major reduction in the power, size, weight, and cost of imaging and spectroscopy instruments. This makes APS very attractive for use on small, low power spacecraft and instruments.

          The Compass WFOV star camera will observe a wider slice of sky, taking pictures of the star patterns in its view. And like a star tracker, the star camera will locate the positions of stars and report them to the spacecraft. The captured images will then be compared to a celestial map that resides in the spacecraft computer memory.

          The Compass star camera’s sensor will track both bright and dim objects in its field of view. It will also prevent extremely bright objects, such as the moon or Earth, from spilling over into the pixels of captured objects.

          Compass star camera sends data to the gyroscopes, which can hold stable for just a short time, every few seconds. This helps to keep the gyroscopes accurate. Together, the star camera and gyroscopes keep the spacecraft stable and oriented in the right direction in space.” But didn’t Armstrong say they saw no stars…. Here’s the link to the above http://web.archive.org/web/20110721054014/http://nmp.nasa.gov/st6/TECHNOLOGY/star_camera.html

          View Comment
          • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

            “Most spacecraft steer by the stars. Or, to make sure they are still on course and pointed in the right direction, they may periodically check the position of the stars.”

            Well, it does seem they are telling great big porkie pies with regard to spacecraft being able to see the stars lol. And IMO, I think they are telling lots of porkies regarding all their weird and wonderful flying machines.

            View Comment
        • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

          That’s what the Russian guy’s commercial pilot friends said to him until I asked him if they could always see the stars. So after a while he came back and said only sometimes. I didn’t see stars in a dimly-lit cabin over Egypt mid-June 2013 at cruising altitude 30 min into the flight. I cupped my hands for about 1 to 2 min in case my eyes had to adjust. I couldn’t see anything at all. Another German poster noticed the same thing when he was on a flight. I recommend you test it yourself when you next fly at night (even if it is in a few years’ time). Note the time and date and see if you a get a positive or negative.

          Now, ask your brother if he can always see stars at night with the naked eye when flying at high altitude. The next time he flies ask him to make the same observation and note the altitude and date. Ideally, we may be able to pinpoint the altitude and time of year when stars are most and least visible or invisible.

          WH

          View Comment
      • Wise One says:

        The white dot in that video was another satellite (they say).

        View Comment
  20. scud says:

    Wotcha WH

    Little ditty in the UK’s ‘Daily Telegraph’ today…

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelvideo/10983606/Tokyo-to-San-Francisco-in-83-seconds.html

    Hmm, so night arrives at about 40 seconds in and no stars / planets whatsoever are visible. Then 10 seconds later, when the Sun pops up, Venus becomes apparent…how very odd.

    Hope you are well my friend. In the process of moving house at the mo’ which has rendered all thinking brain totally kaputen…

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Thanks for that Scud. I’ll take a look after I type this post.

      I know how it is. I renovated a house at the end of last year. It takes up all your time and attention.

      I’m on full throttle now though and oh boy, I’ve got magnetism in the bag for sure haha! Gravity coming up. I had planned on just doing the path of the sun, but as soon as I got to bending light the shit hit the fan and everything is now connected. I found real engineering evidence, that isn’t just Keppler’s theolite experiment, of bending light in micro cavities that fits concave earth perfectly.

      I’ll reveal all when the time comes. The path of the sun is so big it will be split into three parts. Hopefully at the end of summer comes the first part.

      View Comment
    • Andy says:

      Interesting how at the start the terminal building appears convex, even most of the way down. Get out a ruler and check for yourself!

      View Comment
  21. panos says:

    My cousin uses D7100 Nikon to shoot photos of the stars.

    Man this looks amazing…

    http://www.karalisyiannis.com/Night_photography.html

    Also check the lenses one can use for astrophotography.

    http://karalisyiannis.com/Recommended_lenses.html

    So one can use this camera,together with weather ballon and a gps to prove once and for all if stars disappear when one goes higher in altitude.

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Yes. Be careful though with expensive equipment in case you lose the balloon or break the camera on the descent.

      Make sure the camera can take stars when moving and jiggling about and doesn’t require a tripod etc. I guess you’ll only know by trying it.

      View Comment
  22. Icecoldsun says:

    It’s so hilarious to browse the net for all those “genuine” photos of planets, stars etc. Especially this one has gotten my attention:
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Saturn%2C_Earth_size_comparison.jpg/691px-Saturn%2C_Earth_size_comparison.jpg
    Oh my god, you can even imagine how they created those pretty rings! 😉
    BTW: No stars in all the Saturn pictures as well. How come I was (kept) so stupid all my life??

    View Comment
  23. Nick says:

    So do you think the fisheye lens is standard on cameras that go to space? Or do you think all video of the Earth in Space goes through a filter somehow to alter the inverted earth to a globe? The guy jumping from space mentioned “the curve of the Earth” Is he in on the lies?
    I am pretty shaken from reading your entire site. I prefer yours to that egomaniac guy Lord Steven Christ lol. hes deletes you for even mentioning his ego! He thinks he is some elite guy for figuring this stuff out. Pride comes before a fall I say.
    Anyhow thanks so much for this site. I am passing it around and will be discussing it at out A-Z Group- our local Truther discussion group. 🙂 Keep up the great work. I will have more questions later…..

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Sure, ask away. I haven’t finished yet lol and hope to post more articles, but they are more difficult to fathom and slow to process. There are only so many evenings in the week (non-tired ones to boot).

      I’ll have a go at answering any questions, but I’m nearly as new to this as you are lol.

      On fish-eye lenses. I think they often use “normal” lenses on any real footage (which is about as far up as when the shuttle ejects its SRBs). Is that 40km? I had the info somewhere. When a camera pans up with the horizon dipping below, it looks convex and the reverse when looking down. You’ll notice this on the balloon videos also.

      View Comment
  24. karol says:

    You can’t see the stars on amateur weather balloon flights because..it’s the day not night.

    View Comment
  25. Phil says:

    Let me get this straight. You believe the earth is hollow, and we live inside it?

    I’d heard of such people, but always thought it was a joke. Please tell me it’s a joke.

    View Comment
  26. Saros says:

    I just want to bring something interesting to your attention. The NASA’s ‘Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy’ (SOFIA) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_Observatory_for_Infrared_Astronomy)

    “..The primary science objectives of SOFIA are to study the composition of planetary atmospheres and surfaces; to investigate the structure, evolution and composition of comets; to determine the physics and chemistry of the interstellar medium; and to explore the formation of stars and other stellar objects.”

    So, if we think about it critically, why would NASA need a telescope observatory at an altitude of 12 km, if we already have satellites, Hubble, ISS, space shuttle etc. This whole project is very suspicious as it kind of suggests that you cannot observe anything from an altitude higher than 12-14 km or that all the satellites that we have deployed in space don’t exist or cannot be used for observation of space.

    View Comment
  27. sumstuff52 says:

    Found quite a few more balloon videos which show NO stars or moon, this is quite the adventure, made a playlist, the longer duration videos are at the end of the playlist, enjoy

    The Disappearing Stars and Moon In Space
    http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLWRzUSpfFKZ8lPBisdoQ2SVjWW7iIDV5i

    63 videos
    26 hours

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Wow. Great work Sam. Seriously.

      I’ll re-post your link to the homepage as unfortunately I can’t amalgamate the homepage with the disappearing stars page on wordpress (unless you know how and can tell me).

      View Comment
  28. Cail says:

    WH, I’ve already shared your website with 4 colleagues.

    4 for 4 stunned reactions and they have only covered 2-3 of the topics.

    One other guy laughed and mocked the notion that the moon could be fake. He wasn’t laughing after I showed him the moon anomalies and then I pointed at all the chemtrailing going outside our windows.

    The usual response with the tail between the legs: “Wait, what does this mean?!”

    Thank you WH for your work. And thank sumstuff52 for directing me here.

    cail

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      “Wait, what does this mean?!”

      His guess is as good as mine. I’m open to ideas. I’m all out of them regarding the moon.

      Trying to put together the next article at the moment with a lot of my crappyily-made illustrator diagrams lol.

      Thanks for sharing the info with others.

      View Comment
  29. Carole Thomas says:

    Hi Wild Heretic,
    I love your site and I am eager to find out more about the theory of the concave earth. I am a frequent ( ok – obsessive) listener to the fakeologist podcast and Ab has said that he would like to get you on. Please do an interview with him- it would be great to hear you in person:-)

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Hi Carole,

      Because of the way WordPress seems to be put together, the only way I could get the first article “disappearing stars” on to the homepage was to create both a page AND a post. You’ve posted your comment on the post (left column link) rather than the homepage.

      Oh and yes I will do an interview with fakeologist for sure. I just need to do one more article. I am so busy at the moment renovating my new house during the day and organizing tradesmen in the evening. Any spare moment I am researching the next article which I have nearly finished looking into.

      View Comment