What about pictures from space?

+++
Satellites don’t take photos like we do. They actually take horizontal strips of the Earth across a certain width which they compile together to form one long strip very roughly along the north/south axis. More strips are gathered over a few days and collated into one image of the Earth. These images are heavily tweaked to correct for alignment, oblique viewing (i.e. looking at the Earth close to the horizon), brightness, altitude, and other methods in Photoshop to produce an appealing Earth composite image (such as copy and pasting clouds).

modis world
These are the north/south axis strips from the Modis satellite collated together and arranged onto a flat map.

By collating and heavily rectifying strips, it is impossible to say what shape the Earth is. Any shape could be presented, and is.

funny globes
(Click to animate). Wacky Blue Marble Earth has North America artificially curved around to make it look like a globe.

I could only find three images of the “globe” Earth which were said to have been taken with one shot, i.e. no composites: 1. The 1972 Apollo 17 missions. 2. The 1990 Galileo satellite images, and 3. The 2015 DISCOVR missions. There are some serious common sense issues with the moon landings and their images; and NOAA’s DISCOVR images are identical in shape and curve to GOES-13, which is a proven composite image. Both images don’t see above or below 75/80° latitude north and south and miss a large chunk of the Pacific ocean when capturing the “Earth’s rotation“. Even if these images of Earth are from one shot (they are not), you couldn’t tell the difference between an image of a concave Earth through a wide angle lens (3 minutes into the video) and one of a convex Earth a million miles away with a telescope.

convex earth1
The Earth looks like a convex ball…
concave earth
…until we see that really it was a model of a concave Earth.
satellite earth
(Click to animate). You can’t tell the difference between a convex ball and a concave bowl.
Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to What about pictures from space?

  1. BlueMoon says:

    I tried to watch the video that you got the “wacky earth” from; it’s 100% garbage, and put me in a pretty bad mood. The only piece of evidence to be found is that one “wacky earth” picture, and it’s obviously taken from a lower altitude (826 km according to Wikipedia. It checks out. And there are other image editing tools besides Photoshop, you know.
    If you compare the original Blue Marble with one from DSCOVR, you’ll find that the former has noticeably more evident perspective, due to being taken from much closer. This is consistent with a convex earth but not a concave one.

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      Yes, that was the excuse given in one of the YT comments, but it doesn’t really hold water. Why? Because they deliberately leave the rest of the picture black to give the impression they are taking a “picture” of the globe. If it is a low altitude picture then the entire earth should be in the picture. If it is true what you say (it isn’t as the earth is concave), then they have shrunk the picture vastly to give a globe impression which in itself is fraudulent.

      The same applies to the apollo 17 “image”. Did they shrink that down too and put it on a black background? We are dealing with magicians (marketing clowns) here, not scientists and engineers.

      View Comment