Himawari8 real-time imaging: https://himawari8.nict.go.jp/

If you've already dismissed every image ever as cgi there's hardly any new ones to change your mind.

How is that not what you were asking for?

What are you asking for, if not that?

It doesn't. You asked, they provided now it's time to admit defeat.

Please justify your refusal below.

What should a photo of space look like?

Which is what has already been presented.

Why don't you like what's already been presented? How should a photo differ in your opinion?

It should look just a little bit less fake than what you see here... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXRsNYKc-Xk

It does.

NEXT!

Well that fake piece of crap you posted and are peddling sure doesn't.

You think the back side of Moon looks like an indistinct and flat cow-pat in direct sunlight?

Or that the clouds don't move at all while the Earth turns? And you're looking at a lot of time for the Earth to turn as much as that phoney bit of business displays, roughly a whole day without disturbing a single cloud in the entire sky, eh?

It's and absolute fake and a piss-poor one at that.

The clouds do move. Look closely.

How should the moon look?

I'd expect some indication that these are spheres not flat discs. In ordinary daylight, when we can see the Moon in the sky even through the atmosphere it looks "white". Hit directly on the backside with no atmosphere out there to mute it, it should be a brilliant white and with plenty of visible detail.

And no the clouds don't move the Earth moves and the clouds move with it like they were painted on a ball that's being rotated.

The Moon was also out of whack and we should have seen some of the right hand side of it coming and some of the left hand side of going from the position that the camera is supposed to steadily viewing the scene.

no atmosphere out there to mute it, it should be a brilliant white and with plenty of visible detail.

The moon isn't white.

And no the clouds don't move

You were saying? https://imgur.com/a/A4tEpWX

Maybe it would have some stars in the background?

Not with that exposure level.

Most likely not.

Maybe this is an issue with your computer monitor.

It seriously looks fake as fuck, Musks car stunt looked more real lmao

Is that supposed to be real? It’s just a globe with yellow outlines around the continents

How do you expect the Earth to look?

You can turn off the superimposed outlines.

... What?

For real. Gimme a pic of the Earth without the statist's borders imposed all up over it.

I think what he is looking for is the MILLIONS of pictures there SHOULD be from the THOUSANDS of satellites flying around the earth 24/7. None of them have cameras? Not one live camera from a decent distance? ISS looks as high as those balloons kids and enthusiasts send with go pros.? There are lenses to counter infra red light if you'll counter that stars would block out the sun? So many questions.......and no pictures.

They don't all have cameras and there are hundreds of pictures.

Do you have a link where I can see them? And I'm sure not all would have cameras, but surely many do.

but surely many do.

Why would a company putting up a multi-million dollar satellite waste mass limits (money), fuel (money), space (money), R&D (money), or time (money) on a camera they don't want or need?

NASA's DISCOVR satellite: https://epic.gsfc.nasa.gov/

Russia's Elektro-L satellite: http://electro.ntsomz.ru/en/

Japan's Himawari8: https://himawari8.nict.go.jp/

India's INSAT-3DR infrared satellite images: https://www.mosdac.gov.in/data/weather.do?mode=diplay3DRImage

Apollo 11 images: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-36-5321HR.jpg and https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-36-5352HR.jpg part of this gallery:https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html#Mission

"Real time imaging".

Do you know what this implies?

Hint: it's not a camera sending pictures, but it does involves computers and calculations. it's CGIIIIII

Exactly. They use the words "imaging" and "image" to fool people so they don't realize they're not looking at photos at all but computer models made from data. It's never a photograph. It's always photoshopped, because as NASA itself says, it "has to be" (for some reason).

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/11971

The word 'animation' means it's several real photos played one after another. Like how stop motion animation is a series of real photos. (Because I just know people are going to get caught up on that word and be like 'AKHTCHUALLY ROCKRAN IT SEZ ANIMASHEN!')

op asked for no composite not to much to ask i don't think

Define composite.

Because your phone camera uses a Computer to Generate the Image

one click, one image, no post production raw. might not be spectacular but at least it would be real

So how is this not a real photo?

Lets test your knowledge of how this photo was taken.

that the photos look AWFUL

I would like the opportunity to decide for myself

Have you ever taken a RAW photo?

why don't tax payers deserve to look at the raw images they pay for?

So that's a no.

When you take a photo with your cellphone, or your average consumer camera set to AUTO and take a pic - Is that a RAW photo?

OP is fine in questioning but his lack of seeming to look for answers himself after being dealt a logical explanation, it seems OP is hell bent on imposing his ideas.

I guess what I'm asking is how far of an extent did you search? Did you actually go to NASA and ask someone? or did you stop after 5 pages of googling?

Well that's just a suggestion. I'm asking how far you searched, so we could add onto your work. If you already tell what you've done then we could save a lot of time and try to think of other solutions in getting the images you want.

It's not much to ask for:

[IMAGE HERE]
d/l: jpg | png | raw

Because RAW has so much more information than other image formats, and people who know what RAW is can make videos showing others how they go from RAW to the final image to show it's NOT FAKE.

But they don't do that.

how they go from RAW to the final image to show it's NOT FAKE.

That doesn't make any sense.

RAW can't be faked?

Well, at least is shows a part of the process of producing the final image.

But still, do you think it's too much to ask for the raw images? Don't forget that we pay for this shit, it's property of the people

Please don't only respond to 1 part of my comment as you did with the last one. This is a discussion, not a fight.

It shows your ignorance of how these photos are made.

it's property of the people

Lolno. You think the people have control over the rocket launches??

Sigh. Never mind. You're too thick to talk to. I made the decision a long time ago that I won't continue to interact with people just like you. Have a nice day :)

I pay taxes therefore I can tell NASA and whatnot what to do.

I bet you're the kind of person that would tell the police that they work for you.

I won't interact with negativity anymore :)
It's why I was miserable for years. I've risen above that. More and more people are doing so.

Something something wrong side of history.

I won't answer the hard questions! No more! I've risen above that, easy questions here on out! More and more people are avoiding the hard questions.

Something something i'm not smart enough for these questions.

Whatever man :) I don't need your words to show me what I already know. Xo

Don't forget that we pay for this shit, it's property of the people

That's not how taxes work, man. I wish it was, but it isn't.

Simple and great question brother.

unrealistic

“You can tell it’s real because it looks so fake.”

~Elon Musk

No, we can tell it’s fake because it looks so fake.

For anyone who can’t spot the pattern yet, by the way, here we have a user who appears faithfully in most threads which attack NASA in any way to defend this government agency and maintain that their every activity since 1958 has been legitimate including the fake moon landings and the fake ISS, the Mars rover, and of course the utter lack of photographs of earth from space.

You turned up right on time, I was getting bored with this thread.

Stick to the topic of RAW photography please.

I have a lack of understanding? LMAO you asked for pics of Earth, you got given pics of Earth.

You then said that these pics of Earth don't look right - How should they look? You don't even know!

Really though...

Oh gosh oh geez, why don’t people stop asking questions of NASA, they’re an honest paramilitary government agency that never has lied and totes went to the moon 50 years ago.

For someone that turned up RIGHT ON TIME you sure have a hard time sticking to the topic.

RIGHT

ON

TIME

YOU showed up right on time with BS answers which literally point to nothing, with obviously composite or fake ass looking pictures, on every threat that talks about FE, I'm not even a believer but you are obviously paid to counter the questioning or its destroying your own world view so much that you can't stop being against it. That makes me go more "hmmmm" than anything else in this threat

That is what made me start researching FE after a long time of dismissing it: the vitriolic and concerted opposition to it. They always overplay their hand.

I researched for the sake of being informed before, and I looked deep and there are MANY things which straight up make no sense. But the crazy ass opposition showed there is at least some truth.

One example is, the US suppousedly went to the moon in the fucking 60s!!! With pre-computer technology??? Now it's "so dangerous and hard" that they haven't been back in 60 years? That sounds like BS, like your lie would get caught if you tried lol. People would be able to see the lander and follow the rocket with earth based telescopes all over the world.

Yeah there would be real-time images from the moon, many photos of the landing sites, reality shows about going back to the moon, and commercial flights by now if anyone had ever set foot there.

One huge goal of the Apollo missions seems to have been showing earth as a ball from space since it was never done before then. Until the government agencies complicit in faking those missions admit their deceit, anything else they present should be viewed with extreme skepticism if not outright dismissed, including the shape and location of the earth.

Now it's "so dangerous and hard" that they haven't been back in 60 years?

No, we simply don't have the tech built for it, nor the desire to return.

While space X in a few years build everything nessesarily and is pumping rockets out like crazy? What's the billions NASA has gotten for the past couple of decades for then? It's a space agency that doesn't do space. All the space mining that could be done sounds like something we would want too instead of destroying the planet we live in.

I totally get your point, I'm just arguing both sides to make people converse more

No harm meant.

But there is a desire to return. I can link to NASA’s own website giving reasons to go back, or former astronaut Jim Lovell saying that the “next logical step” in space exploration is a return moon trip, or I could refer you to the multiple nations who claim to be planning for future lunar missions including China, Israel, India, and Russia.

Do they not have the desire to return? And while Americans took 6 trips to walk on the moon, did the Soviets lose their desire to go even once?

As for the tech, it’s just absurd to think that a technological feat cannot be replicated 50 years later, when it was accomplished with no fatalities during a time when the most powerful computer available was underpowered compared to the consumer electronics we use today.

Having a desire is not the same as having enough desire and reason to spend billions of dollars, especially when there are more important things to spend our R&D on.

NASA gets about $50 million per day. Anyone care to explain what benefit or productive purpose or R&D they are putting these billions of dollars toward?

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/fy_2018_budget_estimates.pdf

How is any of this relevant? The desire of individuals to return to the moon doesn't make it an agenda item. Having reasons to return doesn't make them more important than other initiatives. It also doesn't override the directive of the federal government which decides how much NASA gets to spend and on what.

No one is suggesting that we have lost the technology to go to the moon. It is that the time and resources required to do so safely and in the safest, most effective way are hugely time consuming, expensive, and for the most part don't align with the scientific benefits of returning a human being to the lunar surface.

It honestly shocks me that these simple explanations elude you.

I literally just said multiple nations are in the planning stages of lunar missions.

no one is suggesting that we have lost the technology to go to the moon.

Except NASA astronaut Jim Lovell who says exactly that.

Again, you're misunderstanding what it means to have "lost the technology." These spacecraft are not mass produced. There was no assembly line for creating lunar landers.

We know how getting to the moon works, and we possess the blueprints, schematics and all the ideas necessary to perform the task. What we don't have are the personnel, resources, bespoke tools or materials to perform the task today.

If you fund the project that all changes. Again--which idea here are you struggling to grasp?

My source points to nothing? Pretty sure it points to a pic of the earth.

Stop with the 'right on time' projection its cringy and see through

Joe walker is legit. You post non stop, 24/7 in space threads. It’s very very disingenuous of you to act like you don’t know his account. Joe walker, keep doing your thing.

Suspicious!

Gigs up hombre. I will not stop.

K

I think he meant RAW in not editing in post.

Who cares if it looks awful? The very people on this sub that complain how things look.

The very people on this sub that complain how things look.

The people complaining about these photos will never be satisfied.

All speculation but okay.

More like experience.

So speculating based on your experience gotcha

NASA has already addmitted they use composite pictures, several mashed together. This isn't arguable.

Yep.

And?

What don't you like about my photo?

In what way is it not a real photo?

In what way is it a composite?

Inthwway that there are thousands of satellites in space, SUPPOUSEDLY, IF only a few of them had at least 1 camera we would have the picture we want, but we don't. A picture from a "regular" camera would look like something we expect and see everyday instead of a early 2000 gif of earth that takes 3 minutes to load fully. There should be thousands of not millions of shots but alas we have none.

None? You just admitted two sources.

I want hundreds of pictures not the ones you're specifically pointing to, as there should be if everything about the topic is as mainstream days it is. Do you understand that point or still haven't trouble with it? I like the counter argument but not the way you do it.

I want photos

Here are photos

I want different ones

Here are different ones

I want more

Wat I just gave you photos

Yup sure

Thanks

You're still wrong, I'm not saying you're right LOL you're hilarious

Spoiler: All photos ever taken are composites

Look into it

Lol anyone have a Polaroid of earth?

Man, Polaroids use a COMPOSITION of chemicals to create the image.

It's not REAL enough for the people in this thread. Chemicals? Sounds like government.

They took a picture allegedly of earth during Apollo 15. From the moon, using a terrestrial Hasselblad camera with 70 mm Kodak film. Since you believe claim that this is a real photo of a real space ship really on the moon, what’s all this crap about why we don’t use a real camera in space? They took a picture of earth from moon during Apollo 15 I thought. So if you think that’s real, there already is a photo of earth.

Real camera? What is a real camera? - What's a Fake camera then?

A regular camera like someone would use on earth. You act like there’s some “scientifically smart” reason no one has taken a Polaroid from space yet that’s basically what was happening during the moon stagings, I mean missions.

Polaroid

LMAO WHAT

A POLAROID! Yeah that'd solve the conspiracy. Just take a polaroid!

Let’s send a car to space and play flutes in gorilla suits on the ISS, but let’s not take a photograph of earth. Makes sense.

There are photos and video of earth. This thread has already shown examples.

No, this thread contains one link to the Himawari images.

The totality of earth?

You're straight up being disruptive instead of contributing, why can't people from the ISS or take a polaroid? It's not as incredible as you think and obviously it would not solve the conspiracy but it would be something....u know a real picture not a composite done in a computer.

Why would they take a Polaroid when they have good digital cameras.

Different media.

Would it be better if they had a sketch too?

No as that's a subjective DRAWING not a picture.

LOL. You are more needed in these threads than you realize my brother. ;)

1) North America starts in the center and at the end it's all the way on the right side. So that's gotta be what...at least 6-8 hours? And NONE of the clouds change AT ALL in that time! 2) Look at the drop shadow coming from the moon. That exact shadow would not be possible if this were real and the moon was 238,900 miles away.

Try again.

The clouds do move. Just look closer.

The moon isn't casting any shadow on the earth.

This is what is referred to as cognitive dissonance.

No. Do what I say and you'll realise you're wrong.

This is what is referred to as having your eyes closed to reality.

Or a job.

Cloud movement: https://imgur.com/a/A4tEpWX

You may now delete your post out of embarrassment.

From /u/WhydoesNASAlie:

In real life if you’re working on a puzzle that others find silly, they will simply keep on moving. 9 times out of 10 this is true on Reddit as well. And then you come across certain topics like FE and PG that run counter to basic human interaction. This thread for instance, you’re interested in this puzzle, and we have accounts telling you how wrong and dumb you are. This isn’t a normal human reaction. It’s a planned counter to your puzzle, they want to fuck your puzzle up, and for what? I don’t go post in r/space. I hate politics so I don’t post in r/politics. It’s basic human interaction. So when you see the same accounts compelled to ridicule and fuck with the puzzle it’s time to pause and realize there is an active effort to gate keep the topic of space. Just make note of some of the push back you’re getting. The next thread you make you’ll see the same players and the same want to fuck up your puzzle. The fight is real, start swinging back.

There used to be a user fitzrock that came into the space threads to tell me how wrong and dumb I was. That account was deleted and reset. Could be something could be nothing. Looks as if other new accounts have picked up his slack

Yeah I think I remember that one. This thread features one of the more recognizable NASA fanboys and I can name a few others.

I have friends who posted like this IRL back when I was into social media. They asserted and propagated mainstream narratives all day long on their various platforms and accounts.

I don’t think they did it for money, or because it was their day job, but because they are prime examples of useful idiocy amidst a brainwashed populace. Getting a few “likes” really meant something to them.

I am assailed by a variety of paid and unpaid shills — one doesn’t have to be on a payroll to shill, as a verb.

When it’s on Facebook it’s one thing. On a conspiracy forum.... it’s like going to /r/atheism and talking about how cool Christianity is and expecting to get a dopamine rush off the upvotes you would get. Only there, or any other subreddit, you wouldn’t get upvotes for denouncing and dismissing in such a contrarian fashion.

Virtually every strong position you have is probably incorrect. At what point do you start to consider that so many people disagree with you not because they are brainwashed or government operatives but because you are just obviously wrong and poorly reasoned.

People like you pose the single biggest risk to intellectual thought on the planet.

The conspiracy sub covers topics both inside and outside the Overton Window, but the people who visit mostly stay well inside the boundary fence. Low-hanging normie upvote fruit is always ripe for the taking.

Fortunately there are still some people who post here who couldn’t care less about upvotes.

I don't know why anyone cares at all about upvotes, or would be deterred at all by downvotes. I'm not saying you're wrong, though, I just don't get it.

The vast majority of posting on this site is motivated by worthless karma points.

or would be deterred at all by downvotes.

Downvotes are more nefarious. The default site settings hide comments below a certain threshold. Users must actively choose to see comments below that threshold; I’m guessing the majority never even realise that setting exists.

Before I removed that setting to hide downvoted comments, I would always click to show the comment out of curiosity. Especially if it's a controversial topic, who could resist? I imagine I wasn't the only one, because whenever I've made truly unpopular comments, I would continue to get down-voted far past the -4 threshold to hide it, and it would keep getting downvoted past -20, -50 and beyond, proving to me that everyone just clicks to show the comment anyway (and then joins the pile-on by downvoting). It's a ridiculous setting. Why should I be shielded from a comment because other people didn't like it?

I understand that's the point of reddit, to elevate popularly voted comments and posts, and lower the unpopular ones, but especially in a short comment section, it doesn't even matter what order the comments are in. But, as you said, stupid pointless things matter to some people.

Oh shit, I have flag this guy a lot back then, he was on every space/FE topic and was responding to every comment. This was exactly the behavior of a « shill »

from China’s Chang’e-5 T1 lunar test flight

https://phys.org/news/2014-10-china-lunar-spacecraft-incredible-picture.html

Well, you didn't say "one that won't pixellate when I zoom in a lot."

It is rather strange that we don't have a photo that takes up the whole picture as they are flying away from earth. I will concede that.

Keep fighting the good fight.

Guys, don't waste your time presenting evidence to someone that doesn't want to see it.

You could've mentioned a lot more powerful photo editing programs than MS Paint, but since you did, it just proves my point.

Thanks, buddy.

lol you ain’t asking for me

Every time this is posted I hope for something to be posted that convinces me there is real non edited photo of earth, still no.

I think you already know this but it doesn't exit. The wet spinning ball in the make believe land of "outer space" is the most successful geopolitical state sponsored religion of all time.

... What?

how they go from RAW to the final image to show it's NOT FAKE.

That doesn't make any sense.

RAW can't be faked?

It doesn't. You asked, they provided now it's time to admit defeat.

Please justify your refusal below.

What should a photo of space look like?

Polaroid

LMAO WHAT

A POLAROID! Yeah that'd solve the conspiracy. Just take a polaroid!

Maybe this is an issue with your computer monitor.

It seriously looks fake as fuck, Musks car stunt looked more real lmao