How Far the Moon/Here, Kitty-kitty

Originally posted by sonhouse
Earth seen from the moon covers just about 2 degrees, 1 part in 188 of a circle using the distance to the moon as radius. It took me about 20 seconds to figure that one out.

Of course you can't accept that answer which is also on you not me.

360 degrees in a circle means you can slice the circle in to pie shaped wedges 360 equal slices apart, and if ...[text shortened]... year old can see it but I can't send images here so you will have to do with those pesky words.

Yes, the angular diameter of the Earth from the Moon averages to 2 degrees (actually a bit less, like 1.915 degrees, given that the AD of the Earth from the moon at apogee is 1.81 degrees and at perigee, 2.02 degrees). The AD of the Moon from Earth is a well-documented 31 arcminutes, or 0.517 degrees, giving a ratio between the two of 26.997%.

Originally posted by Suzianne
WTF are you on about? Do you think science is done from a cartoon? Really?

Step away from the keyboard ... one step more ... now, think before you are going to make a reply to this ... uhm ... being. Do not get sucked in. You have time to avoid ending up in a myriad of nonsensical, outrageous and always completely insane ramblings of a mad man.

If you thought I was an idiot ... brace yourself, because this "thing" is the epiphany of idiocy.

RUN!!! RUN!!! Run, while you can.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
We already have the numbers, numbnuts.
Give the earth a 12,742 km diameter.
Call the moon 3,474 km diameter.
So the moon is roughly 27% of the earth's diameter.
That's not exactly what we see in the animation, though, is it?
Because the moon is closer to the camera, we would expect to see it appear as greater than 27% of the earth's diameter, but inst ...[text shortened]... ssuming he'd seen some of the shots NASA has produced over the years for comparison, of course).

Why guess about angular diameters when you can work out the math?

Take the diameters of the two, and the distances involved (the distance you want to view the two from, and the distance between the two)) and fit them into the equations. Unlike people, math doesn't lie.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Why guess about angular diameters when you can work out the math?

Take the diameters of the two, and the distances involved (the distance you want to view the two from, and the distance between the two)) and fit them into the equations. Unlike people, math doesn't lie.

Oh dear.

Originally posted by Kegge
Step away from the keyboard ... one step more ... now, think before you are going to make a reply to this ... uhm ... being. Do not get sucked in. You have time to avoid ending up in a myriad of nonsensical, outrageous and always completely insane ramblings of a mad man.

If you thought I was an idiot ... brace yourself, because this "thing" is the epiphany of idiocy.

RUN!!! RUN!!! Run, while you can.

Hehe, yeah, well, I have some time to kill this week. 😛

Originally posted by Suzianne
Hehe, yeah, well, I have some time to kill this week. 😛

Freak is RJ Hind's brother it seems. Same insane arguments based on words, words, and more words without the ability to work things out for himself. I showed him how to figure the apparent size of Earth seen from the moon, but his real reason for asking those questions is he wants us to be proven wrong, apparently not by him anyway, but wrong about the size of Luna, the distance and so forth. He has this halfasss idea Earth is flat but he doesn't have enough education to work things out so he relies on scoffery.

And name calling.

And more scoffery.

That is my made up word BTW🙂

I also brought up a point I don't think anyone else has, the fact Earth's magnetic field is just as strong at the north pole than the south.

The problem for flatasssers is the magnetic field would have to go to the edge of the flat planet and therefore be a lot less dense field lines than in the north pole but he doesn't have enough on the ball to even reply to that critique much less refute it.

Do you see what I mean about Earth's magnetic field? It pops up in the north, pops back in in the south pole area (of course not exactly since magnetic north and south wanders around some) just like the fields on a bar magnet, they got out at some point and go back in on the opposite end. If Earth was really flat, magnet sciences would have figured that one out long ago.

Also I told him the bit about seeing over the horizon is due to atmospherics, hot layers covered by upper cooler ones, they call them mirages, of course known for millennia.
My point about that is this: if it were due to a flat Earth it would be 24/7 and not intermittent like we actually see happen.

I told him you NEVER see over the horizon on the moon because there is no atmosphere which is responsible for 100% of over the horizon vision on Earth and I said you could even see it with a telescope because the moon wobbles a little bit and you can see sunrises and sunsets on the moon if you have a good scope.

The moon faces us tidally locked and all that but not totally, there is a slight wobble that allows us to see things just a bit beyond the original horizon if the lock was perfect.

So we can see with telescopes there would be no seeing over any horizon on the moon.

Then I talked about Coriolis effect and he answers so it happens with bullets but not AIRPLANES?

Of course it happens with airplanes but that is modulated by the fact the atmosphere is mainly going the same speed as the Earth so you don't get permanent 1000 mph winds but the effect is still there but nothing gets through his head just like RJ.

So the bottom line is, for Freak to believe in the flat Earth he is FORCED to diss almost every science from geology to relativity.

Oh yeah, another deal: NASA lies about EVERYTHING. Moon landing, fake. ISS, fake.

GPS not fake but no satellites used, it's all from ground stations.

I pointed out GPS works quite well on a boat in the middle of the Pacific ocean a thousand miles from anything, no land in sight no towers but for some totally mysterious reason, GPS still works there. Amazing eh. No satellites involved with GPS, that's all a lie but yet it works fine in the middle of the Pacific ocean.

No response from Freak about that.

You can see the pattern, he ignores any evidence you provide, just like Hinds.

They might be the same person. What do you think? Probably not, Hinds would never allow his engine to run at 1300 like Freak shows here.

Another tactic of his: Why isn't there 24/7 video of the astronauts? All I see is a few seconds here and there and always cut short with reboots and such. THEREFORE the whole thing is fake, just graphics done in a back room full of graphics gurus.

Can you even imagine the depth of paranoia of such a person.

For instance, apparently NASA, ESA, the Russians, the Chinese, the Brazilians, the Canadians, all in on the vast international conspiracy to keep the truth from the common folk since we couldn't handle the truth and NASA knows it so every image is altered or just made up in a studio.

Mars rovers, fake, Rosetta (comet landing, ESA) fake, Dawn around Pluto, all fake.

He even had the gall to bring up the 19th century objection to rockets: They can't work because there is nothing to push against.

Definite sign of desperation, delusions, paranoia, he has it all.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Hehe, yeah, well, I have some time to kill this week. 😛

Don't ever say I didn't warn you. Look at Sonhouse ... he is DOOMED!!!

Originally posted by Kegge
Don't ever say I didn't warn you. Look at Sonhouse ... he is DOOMED!!!

I am just explaining my thoughts to Suz, I stopped posting directly to the freak.

Originally posted by sonhouse
I am just explaining my thoughts to Suz, I stopped posting directly to the freak.

I hope you do. With every reply to the Aberration, you will lose 2% sanity points.

Originally posted by Kegge
I hope you do. With every reply to the Aberration, you will lose 2% sanity points.

And don't forget the 1.4 IQ points down the drain🙂 I did enough of that back in the 60's.....

Originally posted by Suzianne
WTF are you on about? Do you think science is done from a cartoon? Really?

Had you opened the link you'd know WTF cartoon I am "on about."
NASA "captured a unique view of the moon as it moved in front of the sunlit side of Earth last month."
Below the gif, the narrative continues:
"This animation features actual satellite images of the far side of the moon, illuminated by the sun, as it crosses between the DSCOVR spacecraft's Earth Polychromatic Imaging Camera (EPIC) and telescope, and the Earth - one million miles away."

Listening with half an ear and using less of the brain will vary the results.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Why guess about angular diameters when you can work out the math?

Take the diameters of the two, and the distances involved (the distance you want to view the two from, and the distance between the two)) and fit them into the equations. Unlike people, math doesn't lie.

If the math doesn't lie, what does that say about the linked website?
Does that represent a moon with a diameter which is 27% of the earth's?
Do the proportions align themselves with reality?
If the Cat on the Moon looked up, would he see mostly earth?
Or would he see, as sonhouse asserts, an earth which consumes two degrees of the sky?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
If the math doesn't lie, what does that say about the linked website?
Does that represent a moon with a diameter which is 27% of the earth's?
Do the proportions align themselves with reality?
If the Cat on the Moon looked up, would he see mostly earth?
Or would he see, as sonhouse asserts, an earth which consumes two degrees of the sky?

Hey you blithering idiot, didn't you read my post about that? I took the still and measured the width of Earth which came out to about 78 mm and the width of the moon which came out to about 27 mm and the ratio showed the moon to be, even with that extremely rough measurement, to be about 35 % of the width of the moon, only about 7% off from your own numbers.

How many times do I have to post this before it trickles down into your so-called consciousness?

You could just as easily done the same thing but that would never have occurred to you now would it have?

Reading it again I see it was another craft that took the same kind of image and IT was 31 million miles from Earth ATT.

I wonder, did you actually read the words of that article? They had to combine images because they were taken ten seconds apart in time and had to account for colors so there was a lot of digital work to make the image look as close as possible to what we would have seen from the same vantage point of 1 million miles away. We would have seen something a LOT smaller and I urge you to use the same method I did to come up with the 2 degree figure for what Earth looks like as seen from the moon.

It really is easy, just arithmetic, not even algebra, just knowing radius times two is diameter and that times Pi is the circumference which becomes a great circle you can use to figure out how much of that circle would be taken up by a planet or moon.

Try it, you might get a headache using this vicious arithmetic but it will be worth it, and you can always drink another beer afterwards.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Hey you blithering idiot, didn't you read my post about that? I took the still and measured the width of Earth which came out to about 78 mm and the width of the moon which came out to about 27 mm and the ratio showed the moon to be, even with that extremely rough measurement, to be about 35 % of the width of the moon, only about 7% off from your own number ...[text shortened]... is vicious arithmetic but it will be worth it, and you can always drink another beer afterwards.

So, if I'm reading you right, that animation is perfectly aligned with reality.
You simply cannot see how someone on the dark, earth-facing side of the moon would see anything more than...
two degrees of its sky covered by the earth?
There's no helping you, then.