Space, the final frontier of discrepancies

I am no scientist, nor do I claim to have any bit a smarts in me wee-pea-brain. But, I can’t help but look at the following images and ask myself if NASA seems to have some continuity issues here. Observationally speaking, the images below don’t really match up.

space1.png

I just can’t help but notice the dissimilarities here. Look at how much closer those rings seem to have gotten while also becoming more in tune with how they would act if gravitational attraction on a cosmic scale were an actual factor. What I mean by that is this… the photo on the left seems to suggest that the rings are somehow offset from the sphere, and as a result somehow defy the way that gravity is supposed to act in the vacuum of space.

Come to think of it, I have looked at Saturn a few times in my life through a telescope. And not once have I ever observed its rings in a geometrical formation around the sphere such as the 2016 NASA photo seems to suggest. No, instead I have always observed it to be much like what we see in the image on the left (offset; defying the centrifugal momentum gravity would place on the rings). Why is it that this inconsistency exists? Why is it that what NASA shows us regarding this celestial body does not match what we can actually observe on our own when looking through a telescope? Apparently, the more expensive your telescope, the more it effects where the rings are positioned in relation to Saturn as a sphere.

Seems logical…

But it doesn’t stop there. If you go back and look at any of the images from 1960 and compare them to today’s NASA images, there are a lot of things that don’t seem to line up. Don’t get me wrong, I understand that the “quality” of a photo changes the way that the image will appear. I understand how focus works. I’ve used a camera. That will however… not change the shape or features of the image to the degree that we see here.

space2.png

Apparently, when you increase the resolution of an image the shape of that image and its features also change. I didn’t know that was how it worked. How ignorant of me. Speaking of shapes… the science people of today seem to suggest that the earth isn’t actually round at all. None of the planets are, apparently. Nope… they are oblate. And according to good ol’ Neil, the earth is pear shaped, because that makes sense.

If that is true, then why are all of the NASA images of any planet showing us something perfectly round? As you can see in the photo on the left of Jupiter, it doesn’t appear to be a perfect circle (which goes along with what scientists tell us about the shape of the earth and other heavenly bodies today). Why then are all of the photos of every planet including the earth perfectly spherical in shape today? They are either round or they aren’t. They can’t be both. Someone needs to get with Neil and Bill to clear all of that up.

Anyway, I feel like this rant has run its course. I just don’t feel that the drastic differences we see in the above images should exist over such a short amount of time. Something has got to give. Either the images from the 60’s were forged… or the images from today are forged. And since I can look through a telescope on my own and see roughly the same thing that was shown in the 60’s, I am inclined to agree with them. On the other hand, I can drop today’s NASA images into Photoshop and by changing the opacity to show where most NASA “photos” have been cropped, edited, or cloned in some way (making them no longer a photo, but a composite – which is a fancy way of saying, drawing). With that, I am more inclined to believe that the images provided to use today are the ones that are fake.

Having said that, here you go… rant actually over. Space is fake.

Someone explain these inconsistencies, please.

And if your attempt of an explanation is simply Googling one phrase, clicking the first video you find, and sending it to me… nice try, but no thanks. If you actually started looking closer at this stuff, you would be asking these types of questions, too.

But who are we kidding… right? I am ignorant.

The Great American Eclipse of 2017

On Monday, August 21st we have the Great American Eclipse happening. It is a pretty exciting thing indeed to have such an event taking place across the entire continent of North America. With that in mind, I have been thinking on it quite a bit… and honestly, I have one major question.

c-1920

But, before I ask my question we need to clarify how it all works. Bear with me for a moment while I try to elaborate on what we need to know to grasp how these bodies orbit or spin in relation to one another. Hopefully this is written in a way that it isn’t too hard to follow.

So… here we go.

To make one complete rotation in 24 hours, a point near the equator of the earth must move at close to 1,000 miles per hour (1,600 km/hr). The speed gets less as you move north, but it’s still a good clip throughout the United States. With that being the case, for simplicity sake, we will say that the earth spins at 1,000 miles per hour while making one full revolution within a 24 hour period. Within the course of one full rotation, the earth spins a total of 24,000 miles in 24 hours (seems simple enough).

The Moon orbits the earth at a speed of 2,288 miles per hour (3,683 kilometers per hour). During this time it travels a distance of 1,423,000 miles (2,290,000 kilometers) for one full revolution. The sidereal month is the time it takes to the moon to make one complete orbit around Earth. This is about 27.32 days. The synodic month is the time it takes the Moon to reach the same visual phase. This varies notably throughout the year, but averages around 29.53 days.

This would mean that one full revolution for the moon takes close to 27 or 30 full 24 hour periods. This would then further imply that the earth would in essence spin on its axis a total of 27 to 30 times while the moon itself completes one single revolution. In other words the moon during one full 24 hour period would have traveled only a total of 54,912 miles. This is roughly 1,368,088 miles shy of completing one full revolution.

To better grasp what I am getting at, the following video is a great animated visualization of these two bodies and their respective speeds of motion (the earth spinning on its axis and the moon orbiting the earth). This video makes it seem a lot less complicated than I just did, for sure.

In this video you will notice that both bodies are moving from West to East. The earth spins on its axis in an eastward direction. The moon orbits the earth in an eastward direction as well. With that in mind, both of these objects move from west to east in their respective speeds. This is something we can all agree upon I hope. The earth is going one speed. The moon is going another speed. They both travel in the same direction.

Seems simple enough…

There is however a major error that occurs when you consider the two speeds and the fact that the earth is generating a full revolution at more than 27 times that of the moon’s speed. As a result, although the Moon is moving to the east relative to the earth, the much faster westward motion of the sky is carrying it to the west, so despite its eastward motion relative to the center of the Earth, it rises in the east and sets in the west, just like any other celestial body.

To better grasp what I am rambling about, go back and watch that video again. You will notice that although the earth and moon are both traveling eastward, the earth’s greater speed is causing the moon to appear to travel east to west rather than west to east in relevance to the observer from ground level on the earth.

The point here is simply this; although the moon travels from the west in an eastward direction, the earth spins so fast that it causes the observer from ground level to see the moon traveling backwards from east to west instead. With this in mind, go back and watch the animation one last time to see what I am talking about.

Now, assuming that I haven’t lost you… here is the question.

Despite the fact that both the earth and the moon are traveling from west to east, the relative motion of both bodies causes the moon to appear to be traveling backwards from east to west. If this is the case (which it is) please… someone explain to me how in the world is the Great American Eclipse on the 21st is apparently occurring from West to East?

1

This absolutely defies the Copernican Principle.

Again, if the moon due to relativity appears to the observer to be traveling from east to west, how in the world is this eclipse happening from west to east? Someone, please explain to me how this doesn’t totally disprove the Copernican Principle of Heliocentric Cosmological Evolution?

This eclipse is only going to last like 4 hours across the United States. But before we look at the math behind this… let’s let Neil Degrasse Tyson explain real quick how math surpasses our senses. Don’t trust what you can see, touch, or feel… No, instead, trust the math.

With that in mind, let’s look at some math real quick. In order for the moon to defy our senses, no longer appearing to travel from east to west despite the fact that it supposedly isn’t, it would inevitably need to somehow speed up and begin traveling in an eastward direction faster than that of the earth’s spin.

And since it will only take 4 hours for the moon to cross North America on the 21st, this would then mean that the moon is somehow no longer traveling (according to math) 1,423,000 miles in the course of 720 hours. No, instead… on the 21st it will magically have sped up from 2,288 miles per hour to a whopping 69,644 miles per hour so as to defy the east to west observational conundrum.

Hhhmmmmm… I don’t know why, but this bible verse seems to come to mind.

And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; – Luke 21:25

Who are we kidding though, I am clearly just ignorant.

To the average observer here on earth the moon travels from east to west. But, on the 21st it will be doing its own thing. Don’t worry about it. Just let the math do the talking. Like Neil Degrasse Tyson said, we can’t trust what we see anyway. The science guys will explain this one away. Keep on letting them do your thinking for you.

What does NASA have to say? 

Wrong!!!

Whatever… rant over.
Space is fake.

Apparently you can ask these people anything!!!

1433279332345828014

As some of you already know, I have a lot of questions about science, cosmology, and what we are told about the physical properties of physics and nature. With that in mind I was totally blown off guard when my wife showed me the number bellow. You better believe I instantly dialed the number and ran through a series of questions.

Screenshot-(109)

Sadly, they were unable to answer any of my questions. With that said, here were the questions that I asked.

1.) How is it possible for the Polaris Star to be stationary in the night sky while the earth travels through space in five directions at once? The earth spins on its axis, goes around the sun, the sun around the Milky Way, the Milky Way through space, while the earth also apparently pivots its axis making the north pole change locations every 27,000 years (despite this last one having never been observed).

2.) Since the earth is spinning at more than 1,000 MPH at the equator… how is it that sound at the equator is possible? The speed of sound is a little more than 700 MPH. And with that in mind the sound wave would never catch up to the earth at the equator, causing it to be a dead zone of silence.

3.) If the earth is spinning at the equator at more than 1,000 MPH wouldn’t the basic laws of physics as a result of the angular momentum cause the wind to only travel in one direction?

4.) The ISS (International Space Station: NASA) is flying over our heads at more than 7,000 MPH. That speed equates to nearly 50 MPS. With that in mind, it is traveling at nearly 3 times faster than the speed of sound. How can they hold a conversation?

5.) We are told by NASA that the ISS and most satellites exist in or beyond the exosphere. We are also told by NASA that these manmade objects have an exterior made of aluminum. Here is why I have a problem with that… the exosphere is more than 3,000 degrees. The melting point of aluminum is only 1,200 degrees. Since the exosphere is twice what these objects can withstand, how are they up there?

Basically what this comes down to is that I am going to save this number… because, let’s face it. I have tons of questions and no real answers. And I shamefully admit it… I got way too much out of it. I enjoyed hearing the person on the other line scratching their head… because, with questions like these… I seem to do a lot of that these days.

What about the Great red Dragon?

Now, when it comes to the signs of the times most people who are doing any actual observation have heard about the September 23rd sign of Revelation 12.

And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.Revelation 12:1-2

rev_12_1

Don’t get me wrong, I am just as excited about this sign as the next Christian. But, I can’t help but ask the question; what about the second sign of that same chapter? I have seen a few people touch on this topic. One answer is a so called 9th planet otherwise known as Planet X that has supposedly been a long time coming. Personally, I don’t buy that one because I find the entire Copernican Principle of Heliocentric cosmological evolution to be downright absurd.

There have been a few other suggested opinions on what it could be, but each one seems to be more outlandish than the last.

I have found that the simplest answer is generally the logical one. But, before I get into it, what does the bible say about this second sign in Revelation 12?

And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days. And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.Revelation 12:3-8

rev_12_2.png

So, this sign seems to have a lot going on. I will give you that. But I just wanted to point out two things. One, the dragon was before the woman ready to devour the baby. And two, the fact that Michael and a battle are mentioned with the sign.

The first part give us placement. If you are trying to devour a baby being born, the best place to find yourself would be at the feet of the woman. At least I think so. Second, the devil has many names in the bible, one of which is serpent of old.

With those two things in mind, I can’t help but notice the fact that there appears to be a man wrestling with a serpent at the feet of Virgo.

With that said, I think this answers the question. The second sign isn’t some strange nebula that looks like a dragon. It isn’t some theoretical 9th planet that has no proof of existence. It is what has been in front of us the entire time. At the feet of Virgo in September a war is raging in Heaven. And a perfect depiction of that fact is with the man we find below Virgo wrestling with the Serpent who just so happened to be positioned in a perfect place to eat the baby had Michael not been there to mess things up.

As for the heads and crowns of this dragon/serpent, I wonder how many stars are actually associated with the constellations above its head? I bet we would find that some numbers once again match up.