Comments on: Can Astronauts See Stars In Space?

By: Steve Carras

Steve Carras — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 06:27:44 +0000

Agreed as well with Brian..!

By: Gary Dahlke

Gary Dahlke — Tue, 15 Jan 2019 23:52:50 +0000

Right with you Brian Koberlein. On orbit, on the night side of the orbit, the number of stars visible will exceed the best Earth-based viewing by at least a factor of 10. Astronaut Jim Reilly has also attested to that fact. Regarding the lunar surface imagery, all of the Apollo missions were flown so the astronauts would be conducting the EVAs during the 354 hour, 22 minute period of daylight of each lunar “day”. In fact, the sun had to be at a minimum angle when viewed from the surface for these missions. There was so much reflected light on the surface that the camera apertures had to be stopped way down. This prevented the faint light of the stars from showing up on any of the pictures. Now, for a truly amazing experience, travel to the FAR side of the moon and wait for lunar night. No sunshine, no earthshine, just stars. And for those who haven’t figured it out yet, the far side of the moon and the dark side of the moon are not ALWAYS the same.

By: Brian Koberlein

Brian Koberlein — Sun, 13 Jan 2019 21:49:56 +0000

There is a difference between "I didn't see any stars while on the Moon (or in space)" and "You can't see any stars on the Moon (or in space)" The first is perfectly valid for an individual experience. The second is proven false. The latter also goes against everything we know about stars, the nature of light, and the nature of human perception.

By: ERICK HYMAN

ERICK HYMAN — Sun, 13 Jan 2019 14:07:53 +0000

I am NOT a flat earther, but I did find a direct contradiction between what the Apollo 11 astronauts said about not seeing stars while on the moon and what Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson states in the following interview at time marker 32:35: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KncbeLE9HS0 titled “Amazing Interview With Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson” The astronauts state that they didn’t see stars from the moon and Dr. Tyson explains why that can’t be true. If you could please shed some star light on this, I would appreciate it. Thanks.

By: Brian Koberlein

Brian Koberlein — Sun, 04 Nov 2018 15:03:19 +0000

The difference is really small. Seen in space (About 100km up) vs sea level is a difference of about 10 parts in a trillion. Measurable, but in no way noticeable to the human eye.

By: Savvy

Savvy — Sun, 04 Nov 2018 10:03:19 +0000

hey tell me what amount of blue shift is measured when you take a sunlight spectrum in space as opposed to at sea level?

By: jake treadwell

jake treadwell — Thu, 11 Oct 2018 09:53:31 +0000

Clearly, you can see stars from space. That’s indisputable. When Neil Armstrong said on BBC that the sky was deep black in cislunar space, he was saying something that is untrue. Can we at least agree on this point?

By: jake treadwell

jake treadwell — Thu, 11 Oct 2018 09:46:35 +0000

You keep repeating that “it is claimed” that Armstrong said he couldn’t see stars in space. It doesn’t have to be “claimed.” It is a fact. There is video of him SAYING DIRECTLY that it is “deep black” in “cislunar space, the space between the earth and the moon.” And it wasn’t “the crew” discussing this point. It was Armstrong, by himself, in a one on one interview with Sir Patrick Moore on BBC in 1970. For someone who presumes to have such respect for science, you play awfully fast and loose with the facts when it suits your argument. A reasonable reaction from an impartial reader is to question your motives.

By: Simon Bright

Simon Bright — Thu, 11 Oct 2018 09:32:15 +0000

“The sky is a deep black when viewed from the moon, as it is when viewed from cislunar space, the space between the earth and the moon.” ~ Neil Armstrong, BBC interview, 1970 https://youtu.be/PtdcdxvNI1o

By: Brian Koberlein

Brian Koberlein — Mon, 17 Sep 2018 03:12:58 +0000

Completely expected, but I did give you a chance.

By: onehit

onehit — Mon, 17 Sep 2018 02:23:14 +0000

This was expected, of course. Time will tell, but you will accept and not recognize the next time something is added like 94% unknown substance, or any arbitrary inflation, etc… Just read the book by Penrose that I recommended.

By: Brian Koberlein

Brian Koberlein — Sun, 16 Sep 2018 23:00:08 +0000

Since you continue to respond in paragraphs and gish gallops, onehit, I’m going to be as clear as I can. None of your comments are going to make it through the queue until we address your initial assertions. With each new response you continue to add more assertions and demand more responses, which is not an honest form of discussion.

To your original comment: “Nobody really believes the earth is flat, and nobody really believes the universe is only 13.7 billion years old”

You did not intend it as an exaggeration or parody. You even listed evidence you think disproves the big bang immediately following your statement. You equated the big bang model with the flat earth model. More paragraphs on new topics won’t change that fact.

So you have a choice. You can either say, “yeah, comparing the big bang to the flat earth isn’t accurate or fair, and I retract that statement.” or you can say “I think the comparison is fair. They are both nonsense contradicted by evidence.” You can use your own words, but you don’t need four paragraphs to do it. Either you think it’s a fair and honest claim, or you don’t.