Almost Everything You Think You Know Is A Lie

[Orias]

If you keep making false claims about "assumptions" we are not going to get anywhere. You need to lean the difference between assumption and deduction.

You're not deducing, you're being reductive. And presumptive. Please address my points or I will have to disengage from you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well that's what you'd think. But they aren't there in the video. I can go outside right now and see Mars and take a video of it and see it. Apparently on the moon you see the stars better but on video and from the ISS there are no stars .

Guess what, that means it is dark out, the Sun is blocked by the Earth. It was always "daytime" when the astronauts were on the Moon.

 

[Orias]

LOL!! Sorry, you can't see the stars. The stars are shining in the daytime on Earth too. Why can't you see them? Both film and video cannot show stars during the daytime. That is in the daytime on the Moon. The brightness of the Sun, much of which is reflected from the Lunar surface, will make any stars impossible to see. They are not bright enough.

Have you ever debated this before? Anyone that has worked with film knows why one can't see stars.

Quit trying to make excuses and look for the evidence that tells us that this was a true lunar shot.

No, you can still see the stars. There isn't an atmosphere to obscure the light. Day and night on the moon isn't the same. But it sounds like you're saying the footage was taken from Earth where there is night and day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You're not deducing, you're being reductive. And presumptive. Please address my points or I will have to disengage from you.

I have, you ran away from that.

And no, I am working based upon both experience and your posts here. You have yet to show that I was wrong in any way at all. I would actually enjoy it if you could demonstrate that I was wrong in my assessment of you.

 

[Orias]

Guess what, that means it is dark out, the Sun is blocked by the Earth. It was always "daytime" when the astronauts were on the Moon.

They could still see the stars with their eyes. Just not the cameras huh? It's the same with the ISS is it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, you can still see the stars. There isn't an atmosphere to obscure the light. Day and night on the moon isn't the same. But it sounds like you're saying the footage was taken from Earth where there is night and day.

It pretty much is. The brightness of the light reflecting off of the Moon will totally over power any stars.

When it comes to photography the camera's exposure and f-stop must be adjusted to the average brightness. At those exposures the stars are too dim to see.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They could still see the stars with their eyes. Just not the cameras huh? It's the same with the ISS is it?

No, the stars were very hard to see with their eyes. They had to shield their eyes from the light reflecting off the Moon. The could not see both the Moon and the stars at the same time.

 

[Orias]

Right it's the brightest objects in the sky except too dim to see. I wonder since it was always day time on the moon how the astronauts were able to endure space radiation?

 

[Subduction Zone]

By the way, this is an example of you running away. It also indicates that you either have not debated this before or you were not honest or rational in earlier debates because why you can't see the stars and the Moon is extremely well known.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Right it's the brightest objects in the sky except too dim to see. I wonder since it was always day time on the moon how the astronauts were able to endure space radiation?

What are you talking about?

The Moon has a "day" that lasts roughly 14 Earth days. They did not want to be bumbling around in the dark so they always landed on the day side. If they could have stayed their long enough it would have been "night" there.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Here is the video one more time. Watch it and I will answer any questions:

 

[Orias]

No, the stars were very hard to see with their eyes. They had to shield their eyes from the light reflecting off the Moon. The could not see both the Moon and the stars at the same time.

So you're claiming they could see the stars, just not the horizon and the stars at the same time? Couldn't they just as easily pointed the camera away then? Or at least been able to capture some external light source given the proper angle?

 

[Orias]

Also in every video the light is behind them? Like a studio.

How are they enduring space radiation and emf from the sun since there is no atmosphere and they are outside of the van Allen radiation belts?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you're claiming they could see the stars, just not the horizon and the stars at the same time? Couldn't they just as easily pointed the camera away then? Or at least been able to capture some external light source given the proper angle?

They would have to reset the exposures, but if they shot straight up and avoided the Sun they could see stars. Any bit of the Moon in the shot would almost certainly have made that part too bright to see any stars.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Also in every video the light is behind them? Like a studio.

How are they enduring space radiation and emf from the sun since there is no atmosphere and they are outside of the van Allen radiation belts?

No more running away. The video first and an understanding of it and then we can discuss other matters. Don't worry, your questions can be answered.

 

[Orias]

By the way, this is an example of you running away. It also indicates that you either have not debated this before or you were not honest or rational in earlier debates because why you can't see the stars and the Moon is extremely well known.

More assumptions. I've been a member of this forum for a long time and have more experience than you do. I was doing this in highschool for fun. I'm not going to make any assumption about you're experience or age because frankly I don't care, it's irrelevant, I can tell more about you than you of me, based on you only chosing to claim you have my character pinned without looking at any of my other content. That's a total cop out, and a farce.

 

[Orias]

No more running away. The video first and an understanding of it and then we can discuss other matters. Don't worry, your questions can be answered.

If you would just answer them instead of being an irreverent melon that'd be great.

 

[Subduction Zone]

More assumptions. I've been a member of this forum for a long time and have more experience than you do. I was doing this in highschool for fun. I'm not going to make any assumption about you're experience or age because frankly I don't care, it's irrelevant, I can tell more about you than you of me, based on you only chosing to claim you have my character pinned without looking at any of my other content. That's a total cop out, and a farce.

Wrong again, observations, not presumptions. And you may be a member of this forum longer than I have been, but that hardly means you have more experience. Do you think that this is the only forum in existence on the internet?

And I have not made any assumptions, your use of the words "assumptions" and "presumptuous" ironically demonstrate that you have made assumptions. Even after being corrected you make the same errors.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you would just answer them instead of being an irreverent melon that'd be great.

Nope, I have seen this behavior before. You won't deal with the evidence that shows you are wrong so you keep making detours.

You were the one that demanded a video and now you are running away from it. That is highly hypocritical behavior.

 

[Orias]

Wrong again, observations, not presumptions. And you may be a member of this forum longer than I have been, but that hardly means you have more experience. Do you think that this is the only forum in existence on the internet?

And I have not made any assumptions, your use of the words "assumptions" and "presumptuous" ironically demonstrate that you have made assumptions. Even after being corrected you make the same errors.

They aren't observations. You haven't observed anything, you're judging everything off limited and minimal dialogue. You're presumptive nature is making an arse wagon out of both of us. You engaged in minor semantics and are trying to separate words that are interchangeable .

Like you are making a lot of assumptions. That's because you're very presumptuous meaning you think it's ok to keep making assumptions about me and judge my character with extremely limited interaction. In this instance they are interchangeable it's proof in the pudding because you're keeping with the facade instead of imploring and responding earnestly .