OK, lets do a line-by-line on this one.
Clearly, four recent NASA astronauts -- plus a bevy of Apollo boys -- claim outright that you cannot SEE stars from the vacuum of low earth orbit (or cislunar space re Apollo, same thing), which is clearly a LIE. Let's start with that and leave the faked imagery for later.
Your video states (regarding the Jerry Lodriguss APOD image) "This is a NASA composite". As previously said, it's not a NASA composite.
Can you please acknowledge your error?The sentence continues "..depicting what the heavens would look like from Earth if we had no atmosphere". Please re-read the narrative in the image footer. It states "If you could turn off the atmosphere's ability to scatter overwhelming sunlight, today's daytime sky
might look something like this" (emphasis mine). In reality, the Sun's corona is only visible to the human eye during a total eclipse. In addition, the disc is taken through a hydrogen-alpha filter and the features shown are invisible to the human eye.
Please acknowledge your misinterpretation of the image notes. From this alone it's clear that you are labouring under a massive misapprehension. What are your views on this please?
You then go on to say "The same view that an astronaut would have on a spacewalk".
Do you still think this, in light of your errors above?You then go on to accuse Leroy Chiao of lying because the Sun washes out the starlight when on the Sunside of the orbit.
Can you please explain this? I'm also interested in hearing your explanation of how you think that the human eye can see stars (typically at something like magnitude 3-6) when the Sun (magnitude -26) is in the same field of view. Your "evidence" that he is lying is the "NASA image".
Do you accept that a far more likely explanation is that you have based your supposition on erroneous thinking and that you haven't the foggiest idea of what you are talking about? You then go on to make another accusation of lying based on "the darkest black you could imagine". You assume that "the darkest black" means "no stars".
Clearly you have never heard of Olber's Paradox, have you? You repeat the same error when quote-mining the next astronaut.
You then to mention something called the "black sky lie". What colour do you think it would be?
That'll do for the moment. I couldn't watch much more of your rubbish video without my intestine jumping up and throttling my brain to escape the stupidity.
The question has nothing to do with the usual BS that stars do not register on film.
Who ever said that? how exactly do you think that pictures of stars are taken if they don't register on film??
We are only talking about what these NASA people say they can SEE in space.
No you are not. You are talking about your erroneous interpretation of those words and your, frankly laughable, attempts to twist them to fit your warped world-view.
By the laws of physics and simple common sense, these people are lying. I ask, Why?
I'd love to hear you going through your understanding of the laws of physics....
Allancw is baaaack.
Clearly.
So,
any chance of an acknowledgement of any of this, or will you do what you did the last time and refuse to accept that your interpretation was incorrect?
