Moon light - the word of God vs falsely so called science

[Kate30]

I do not believe it is very far 5,000 miles or under.
I know that with my camera when the moon is, lower on the horizon as compared to being right above my head. The difference can be noticed in photographing, i can zoom in much closer when the moon is above my head as opposed to the moon being closer to the horizon.

So with me being able to notice that difference in photographing, i would not think the moon is too far away.

Taylor I’ve often wondered that myself especially when looking apon a full moon the distance does not look so far. Perhaps one can fly to moon on one’s broom after all : ) What did the astronomers believe in the earlier centuries. Has the figure that we are told today of over 200,000 kilometres always been believed ?

 

[Speedwell]

Taylor I’ve often wondered that myself especially when looking apon a full moon the distance does not look so far. Perhaps one can fly to moon on one’s broom after all : ) What did the astronomers believe in the earlier centuries. Has the figure that we are told today of over 200,000 kilometres always been believed ?

The average distance to the Moon is about 250,000 miles. It was first calculated by the Greek astronomer Aristarchus in 270 BC to be 238,000 miles, a reasonably accurate number for the methods in use at that time.

 

[d taylor]

Taylor I’ve often wondered that myself especially when looking apon a full moon the distance does not look so far. Perhaps one can fly to moon on one’s broom after all : ) What did the astronomers believe in the earlier centuries. Has the figure that we are told today of over 200,000 kilometres always been believed ?

Kate not sure if you know of this book (link below) it gives a small look into, of basically how, the fantastic distances the science people use came about.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1407691384/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o09_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

[Kate30]

The average distance to the Moon is about 250,000 miles. It was first calculated by the Greek astronomer Aristarchus in 270 BC to be 238,000 miles, a reasonably accurate number for the methods in use at that time.

Thank you Speedwell. I shall keep that in mind. What about Aristotle, Plato and Pythagoras the father of geometry and mathematics did they do any calculations with this as well.

 

[Kate30]

Kate not sure if you know of this book (link below) it gives a small look into, of basically how, the fantastic distances the science people use came about.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1407691384/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o09_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Taylor thank you for the source. Looks like a very short book 116 pages long : but size does not always matter I guess especially if the quality of the information turns out to be true. I shall order the book.

 

[Kylie]

The star trek girl offering her scientific lie explanation, thank you but no thank i will stick with the truth of the Bible.

Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. God set them in the raqia (firmament,expanse,vault,sky,heaven) of the heavens to give light on the earth,

It's easy for anyone to say it's a lie, but you can't actually show it, can you?

 

[morse86]

Study your colors more and learn to see the difference between white & blue (white/moon on the left and blue/sky,heaven on the right behind the moon.
View attachment 259391

The hubble telie$cope is just SOFIA, it's just a stupid plane with a telescope on it:
Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy - Wikipedia

They have several that run 24/7 and fuel mid-flight.

The foolish pseudo scientists and technicians are receiving all the telemetry data from that plane and then think it's from the hubble.

 

[Kylie]

The hubble telie$cope is just SOFIA, it's just a stupid plane with a telescope on it:
Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy - Wikipedia

They have several that run 24/7 and fuel mid-flight.

The foolish pseudo scientists and technicians are receiving all the telemetry data from that plane and then think it's from the hubble.

Wait...

Are you saying that the existence of the Hubble Space Telescope is just a conspiracy theory?

 

[d taylor]

It's easy for anyone to say it's a lie, but you can't actually show it, can you?

It has already been shown Gerrard Hickson
But as for me i can see the moon is close and as i have zoomed in and have photos of the impressions emitting light.
Just hope that one of the camera companies never develops/manufactures a zoom camera with 200x.

 

[Nithavela]

It has already been shown Gerrard Hickson
But as for me i can see the moon is close and as i have zoomed in and have photos of the impressions emitting light.
Just hope that one of the camera companies never develops/manufactures a zoom camera with 200x.

Nikon P4000 Camera with 200X Optical Zoom Coming « NEW CAMERA

 

[Radagast]

The average distance to the Moon is about 250,000 miles. It was first calculated by the Greek astronomer Aristarchus in 270 BC to be 238,000 miles, a reasonably accurate number for the methods in use at that time.

Aristarchus used the timing of lunar eclipses. This is a do-it-yourselfer: Do-It-Yourself Guide to Measuring the Moon's Distance - Universe Today

You can also use parallax, in collaboration with a friend on the other side of the country.

You can also use the change in size of the moon from horizon to overhead, if you have a good camera: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1405/1405.4580.pdf

Scientists have also use radar and lidar. And astronauts flew over to visit, 50 years ago.

 

[Radagast]

The hubble telie$cope is just SOFIA, it's just a stupid plane with a telescope on it

This is just silly.

It has already been shown Gerrard Hickson
But as for me i can see the moon is close and as i have zoomed in and have photos of the impressions emitting light.

So is this.

 

[Radagast]

Note sure if real or satire.

In any case, I was illustrating the point. The Lighten blend mode basically tells photoshop to compare the pixels on the layer being adjusted, and if those pixels are lighter than the pixels on layers underneath, it will show the pixels on the top layer.

I'm not sure if "lighten blend" is the thing to use, but here is the moon with a blue layer in front and the moonlight shining through. I think that roughly mimics the effect of Raleigh scattering in the sky:

 

[Kylie]

It has already been shown Gerrard Hickson
But as for me i can see the moon is close and as i have zoomed in and have photos of the impressions emitting light.
Just hope that one of the camera companies never develops/manufactures a zoom camera with 200x.

The website APlaneTruth? Yeah, here's a tip. If a website has the word "Truth" in the name, you won't find any truth in its contents.

What qualifications do you have that qualify you to speak with authority on the things you claim to have seen?

And you speak of a 200x zoom? Well let's see...

The widest lens I could find is a 6mm ultra fisheye lens. https://www.thephoblographer.com/20...g-around-why-not-invest-it-in-a-fisheye-lens/

the longest lens I could find is a 5200mm monster from Canon. 9 Unbelievable Camera Lenses That Actually Exist

By my calculations, that's the equivalent of 866x zoom.

Wait - you DID know that the times zoom doesn't actually refer to the maximum magnification the camera can get, but is rather a measure of how much longer the lens is when fully zoomed in compared to when it is zoomed out, right? Because if you really were qualified to speak about what you've seen with your camera, you'd certainly know that!

For instance, if the widest a camera can zoom out is 17mm, and the furthest it can zoom is 55mm, that's a 3.2x zoom, and is quite a common range for the basic lenses you get with an entry-level SLR camera. If you have a lens that is 70mm to 200mm, that's a 2.8x zoom, very similar in terms of how much zoom, but because the focal lengths are different, they give very different looking photos.

But with you being so skilled in photography that you can tell that the "impressions" are emitting light (whatever that actually means), I'm sure you knew all this, and your obvious error in basic photographic theory was just a test to see if I knew what I was talking about. Isn't that right?

 

[Kylie]

I'm not sure if "lighten blend" is the thing to use, but here is the moon with a blue layer in front and the moonlight shining through. I think that roughly mimics the effect of Raleigh scattering in the sky:

View attachment 259498

I took this image of the moon: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/FullMoon2010.jpg

I opened it in Photoshop. I created a new solid colour adjustment layer and set that colour to a sky blue (specifically, 004a7e if you want to try it at home), then set the blend mode of that solid colour adjustment layer to Lighten. Then I resized it (because that moon picture was way huge). This is what I got.

You can see that everything takes on a blue tint. The closer to white the moon image was, the less blue it took, while darker areas had more blue. Areas that were completely black took the full tint of the blue.

 

[Radagast]

I took this image of the moon: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/FullMoon2010.jpg

I opened it in Photoshop. I created a new solid colour adjustment layer and set that colour to a sky blue (specifically, 004a7e if you want to try it at home), then set the blend mode of that solid colour adjustment layer to Lighten. Then I resized it (because that moon picture was way huge). This is what I got.

Better than my quick and dirty job.

 

[d taylor]

The website APlaneTruth? Yeah, here's a tip. If a website has the word "Truth" in the name, you won't find any truth in its contents.

What qualifications do you have that qualify you to speak with authority on the things you claim to have seen?

And you speak of a 200x zoom? Well let's see...

The widest lens I could find is a 6mm ultra fisheye lens. https://www.thephoblographer.com/20...g-around-why-not-invest-it-in-a-fisheye-lens/

the longest lens I could find is a 5200mm monster from Canon. 9 Unbelievable Camera Lenses That Actually Exist

By my calculations, that's the equivalent of 866x zoom.

Wait - you DID know that the times zoom doesn't actually refer to the maximum magnification the camera can get, but is rather a measure of how much longer the lens is when fully zoomed in compared to when it is zoomed out, right? Because if you really were qualified to speak about what you've seen with your camera, you'd certainly know that!

For instance, if the widest a camera can zoom out is 17mm, and the furthest it can zoom is 55mm, that's a 3.2x zoom, and is quite a common range for the basic lenses you get with an entry-level SLR camera. If you have a lens that is 70mm to 200mm, that's a 2.8x zoom, very similar in terms of how much zoom, but because the focal lengths are different, they give very different looking photos.

But with you being so skilled in photography that you can tell that the "impressions" are emitting light (whatever that actually means), I'm sure you knew all this, and your obvious error in basic photographic theory was just a test to see if I knew what I was talking about. Isn't that right?

Your first statement shows you know nothing about what your are talking about. I never mentioned any reference to a website called aplanetruth

 

[A_Thinker]

Science says the moon is 230,000+ miles out in space in the blackness of space, surrounded by dark space.

But when we see the moon during the day, the blue of the sky/heaven/raqia is always seen behind the blue. No matter how much a person zooms in on the moon the blue stays behind the moon.

The so called dark of space that the moon is supposed to be in, can never be shown to be seen around or behind the moon.

At night when there is dark seen around the moon, it is still just sky/heaven/raqia that is behind the moon.

The sky has just, lost the light of the sun to illuminate the sky, the sky does not all of a sudden become transparent and a person, can now look beyond the sky/heaven/raqia into outer space.

The sun, moon and stars are all located above the earth in the raqia, firmament, expanse, vault, dome.

Moon blue, behind the moon.

View attachment 259377

Closer zoom and blue still behind the moon

View attachment 259378
Still closer zoom in and sky/heaven (blue) still behind the moon.

View attachment 259379
Now a cloud the sky/heaven (blue) same as moon with the blue behind the cloud.

View attachment 259380

The moon the Bible states is a created light, created by God and has been placed in the raqia to give light on the earth along with the sun and stars.

When you look at space/sky during the day (when the sun is out) ... you see it as blue ... because of the sun's light is filtered through the atmosphere.

When you look at space/sky at night ... you see it as black ... because there is no sunlight to lighten the atmosphere.

The dark areas of the moon take on the same coloration of the surrounding atmosphere ... because all of that light must travel through the atmosphere ... which is affected by the light of the sun by day ... and not affected by the light of the sun by night.

How we see anything by day ... is affected by the light projected by the sun.

All photos/observances of the moon indicate that it is a solid objects ... with a curved surface ... which REFLECTS light to Earth.

There are no pictures which would indicate that you can see through any portion of the moon. Note that when the moon is a crescent, ... you can't see anything behind the dark area which makes up the rest of its sphere.

New Moon

 

[d taylor]

When you look at space/sky during the day (when the sun is out) ... you see it as blue ... because of the sun's light is filtered through the atmosphere.

When you look at space/sky at night ... you see it as black ... because there is no sunlight to lighten the atmosphere.

The dark areas of the moon take on the same coloration of the surrounding atmosphere ... because all of that light must travel through the atmosphere ... which is affected by the light of the sun by day ... and not affected by the light of the sun by night.

How we see anything by day ... is affected by the light projected by the sun.

All photos/observances of the moon indicate that it is a solid objects ... with a curved surface ... which REFLECTS light to Earth.

There are no pictures which would indicate that you can see through any portion of the moon. Note that when the moon is a crescent, ... you can't see anything behind the dark area which makes up the rest of its sphere.

New Moon

I am not saying the moon is transparent, of course it is not, because the moon blocks the sun in an eclipse.

The moon carries out its functions that God has created it to do 1. to be the lesser light (not a sun light reflector) 2.signs and seasons, and for days and years.

And according to the Bible will be used in the future times of trouble (tribulation)
“And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.”

God when giving the law to the Hebrews stated that a person should be charged on the account of two or more witness. One witness will not do.
“One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established.

It would be in line if God required that of the Hebrews that the Bible may follow that same practice.

But yet you and other christians who accept science over the Bible insist that the sun reflects the suns light.
But you or anyone else can not find any witness in the Bible that states that.

But yet there are two witness from the Bible that the moon is a created light and a few more that state the moon will not give its light.

Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also.

To Him who made great lights,
For His mercy endures forever—
The sun to rule by day,
For His mercy endures forever;
The moon and stars to rule by night,
For His mercy endures forever.

Two passages from the Bible stating the moon is a light and a few more state the moon will not give its light.

 

[d taylor]

The hubble telie$cope is just SOFIA, it's just a stupid plane with a telescope on it:
Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy - Wikipedia

They have several that run 24/7 and fuel mid-flight.

The foolish pseudo scientists and technicians are receiving all the telemetry data from that plane and then think it's from the hubble.

They know how to play the game for sure, but they take advantage of the fact. Most people are happy with someone announcing a great find or accomplishment and if it is through the news media, it is good enough for them, they will just simply believe or accept it. Or which is more than likely the majority, are just too busy living life two give it really a second thought.

Most scientist are just stooges, to be allowed in the group they just follow directions and do the task they are given. Non of this stuff they say is happening can not be modeled it is just basically numbers on paper.

But people have always been a fool for the person who makes the loudest and most confident statements, they usually do not require that they are accompanied with truth.