Why would anyone want to take pictures of the Earth from a geostationary orbit? It's a long way away, and you only get to look at a single spot. Placing cameras in LEO is better in every possible way.
Bentley Harris
You dont think that anyone involved in funding the launch of these sats wouldnt be intersted in getting a picture of the earth from pic related vantage point???
How much is a shitty camera? 100 bucks?
jesus christ
Jonathan Gonzalez
You know, satellites do not exist for the purpose of convincing flat earthers. Sane people usually already got it.
Well you can't just use a "shitty camera". It needs to work in fucking space. It's also not like you can just strap it to the satellites and that's it. It demands some engineering to power it, to process the pictures it makes and then send those pictures back to earth. If your satellite is supposed to something else entirely, then that's not something someone will do in his free time, because why not.
>You dont think that anyone involved in funding the launch of these sats wouldnt be intersted in getting a picture of the earth from pic related vantage point??? Given it's a terrible vantage point, I'm not really surprised it hasn't publicly happened. Geostationary orbit is far away enough that your pictures would look like ass, but not far enough to actually be interesting.
>How much is a shitty camera? 100 bucks? Much more than that buy the time you've put it on a satellite, and more again by the time you've sent it to geostationary orbit. The price of a camera on a store shelf isn't really the important thing here.
>jesus christ Why are you upset about this? You're acting like it's unthinkable that people wouldn't do this, but you've not really given any reasons why they would WANT to.
Ha e you never held a DSLR? Top of the line ones are 1-2kg easily. Now add all the extra stuff needed to rig it, process pics etc and we're at 2-3kg, or $10-15k
Blake Bell
>picture of a rendered planet Please, that's like saying Michelangelo's pictures of babies with wings are concrete facts that cupid exists. Give me some evidence.
John James
Because the earth is flat
Alexander Bell
>from orbit Because space doesn't exist you fucking retard.
Ayden Young
So what do you think the pictures from the moon are? Does that mean you believe the moon landing was a hoax?
Also, does a cool weather balloon experiment like this get close to what you were looking for?
It costs more to program a picture taking machine than it does for a camera it's self
Aiden Jones
I'm guessing you'll only accept pictures from obamaisareptilian.com
Wyatt Martinez
im a comsat operator and no no one strapped a camera on one because there's no point. comsats use sunsensors\earthsensors\startrackers for navigation\maneuvering. adding a camera also adds needless complexity to the satelite's internal communication and off the shelf comsat equipment\computers cant really handle storing\transmitting images .
also comsat industry is extremely conservative as these things cost a shitton of money to build and launch and last like 15-20 years you dont wanna fuck around with the equipment you put on it, its not uncommon for them to have really old computers because those models are tested and are reliable .
Gavin Gonzalez
>You dont think that anyone involved in funding the launch of these sats wouldnt be intersted in getting a picture of the earth from pic related vantage point??? no spy\scientific imaging sats are in LEO so they can get a better image and cover a good chunk of the earth in an orbit . putting an imaging\spy payload on a GEO sat is objectively worse and more expensive then putting it on a LEO sat.
Ryder Ross
its less about weight and more about having to fuck around with lots of systems to integrate it into the satellite's communication system. if you're gonna be constantly transmitting images you need new MUX\digitizers and shit to handle the bandwidth which is much higher then your usual telemetry and you need to take up some of ur antenna's bandwidth which is potential money lost.
basically no one pays enough money for GEO pictures\video so no one does it.
Nolan Long
Well what the fuck were you expecting Geo does make sense for weather satellites, because they can get a continuous uninterrupted view of a place. NASA's GOES does this.
Anthony Long
Here you go. An image from the Deep Space Climate Observatory. You ask for 35,000km, I deliver 1,000,000 miles. You're welcome. Thread closed.
Parker Clark
maps.google.com
Juan Ortiz
>Well what the fuck were you expecting It's almost like he was trolling or something
Liam Price
fake image
Christian Reed
Could one of you flat earthers, please, please just say what evidence you would accept?
Ethan Lewis
Baseless claim.
Luke Peterson
don't forget above top secret, flat earth society and good ol' /x/
Wyatt Cook
Not Geosynchronous, but DSCOVR is far enough to get the entire planet in each photo (captures about 10-20 per day).
Strap them to the side of the next Falcon9 stage that will land again.
If it works and the survive, then they get learnt and we all win.
If it blows up with them on it, lets face it, we still win
Ryder Gomez
where are the stars?
Evan Reyes
>wahh if the photos aren't like I saw space in star wars then it's fake
Mason Jones
Due to the way cameras work, you can either see definition in the Earth or in the stars, but not both. If you setup the camera to show definition in the stars, the Earth will look like an amorphous white blob, bleeding into the blackness of space. If you setup the camera to show definition in the Earth, you see no stars. It has to do with the difference in light intensity between the Earth (high intensity) and the stars (low intensity). A camera can only be setup to show definition in a narrow range of light intensities.
your argument is to link to a rendered black and white image of a quadrant of the "globe"?
Sebastian Martin
>rendered It's a map overlay of a photo, dumbass.
Thomas Rogers
If you don't believe pics taken of Earth from the moon, why would you believe pics taken from geostationary orbit?
Caleb Kelly
If you could see the stars you'd be asking why the earth looks like a large white disk. Would you rather see the stars or the earth?
And if you want to ask why we don't have more advanced camera taking the photos keep in mind the HDR cameras then to take many pictures in rapid succession at different exposure values and then combines all the best parts of each photo to give you a pretty picture. And I know you aren't suggesting you'll accept when a camera has that functionality built in but not when NASA does it manually in other composition shots so just hurry up and fuck off
Lucas Parker
But we do, op... NASA have amazing APIs for developers, one of them is called EPIC. It provides picture from satellites (not geosynchronous though) that are more than 1,000,000 km from earth. >pic related Official website: epic.gsfc.nasa.gov/ API website: api.nasa.gov/api.html#EPIC
Tyler Morgan
but WHY would this be faked? for what purpose? To what end?
Leo Cruz
what are you talking about?
Carter Morgan
the intimation, not so much here, but on some parts of the internet that everything from space is fakery.
It just beggars belief to me. It's a grand, extensive deception with no purpose and that's increasingly ludicrous given modern technology.
Brody Martin
as a non native english speaker this answer is a pain in the ass to read > but WHY would this be faked? for what purpose? To what end? I assume flat earthers think that rich countries want people to think they (the countries) are the best, so they do fake missions to show they 'fake' superiority blabla..... (hope i make sense) I also assume they are fucking dumb
Joseph Richardson
>I also assume they are fucking dumb Its this, and a profound need to distrust anything official and a moth-like attraction to anything other than the mainstream(sheeple) explanation. I remember reading an article about people who constantly see conspiracy's around them, and there was something about their need to feel special, and that knowing "the truth" somehow fed their ego and self-image
Nicholas Turner
Exactly, it's like hipsters, but at another level
Nathaniel Sullivan
What's that yellow highlight in the middle of the picture?
Benjamin Gutierrez
Yeah, but hipsters are of no treat to anyone. The worst is that they wont make you the double mocha that you just ordered. Conspiracy nutters on the other hand, can get themself put in places like the incoming Trump advisory staff. And that actually worries me
Jacob Butler
No idea. I looked at some of the other images on that site, didn't see any similar artifacting on those.
Hudson Bell
There's also Japan's Himawari 8 satellite.
Logan Mitchell
wow top quality here, is this a fuji camera? kek. Nicely done japan
Joshua Gonzalez
>Bible. >Minister. Literally, "flock" (of sheep) Cucked and accepting it.
Jayden Allen
>kek What do you mean "kek"? Are you some kind of space photography expert?