Since we are talking non-parallel shadows in the thread about the German debunking site, I thought I'd post my own shot of a fence. The posts are vertical, and the image was taken about two hours before sunset. The sun was low, though still high enough to be out of the frame at the top.

<a name="20020729.5:00"> page 20020729.5:00 aka More As T ro "N"
On 2002-07-29 13:46, The Bad Astronomer wrote: To: 5:00 P.M. PST
Since we are talking non-parallel shadows in the thread about the German debunking site, I thought I'd post my own shot of a fence. The posts are vertical, and the image was taken about two hours before sunset. The sun was low, though still high enough to be out of the frame at the top.


ok in order to chang this to astroL ..
i'll edit it and see if I can include a
"DOWNLOADABLE" link below ? somewhere ?
http://www.badastronomy.com/pix/fenceposts1.jpg
fenceposts1.jpg

Ok? probably not?/? anyway i did do the
DOWNLOAD? who knows I can recheck it Later
------------------------------------------
My contention still will be :
ON the Moon? there should be visiable ?
in close up photography
shadows caused directly from Earthshine
AS : Earthshine on the Moon: should be quite
"Bright" and eaisly seen.. in photographs.
Yes: yes I know that the Sun Shine blocks out
Earth shine where the sunshine exists.. So the Eartshine
shadows "MUST" occure ONLY within SunShine Shadows [there are many] So There, there
should be secondary shadows Due to Earth shine & i've never seen even 1

Earthshine isn't bright enough to contend with sunlight in photography. Yes, it's bright, but not bright enough to matter.

Thats a pretty good photo BA, but don't expect that to convince David Percy.

Here's one of his arguments from his Fortean Times article



Now compare with the panoramic shot, photo 2, supposedly taken on the Moon, you can work out where the sources of light are! ... Not very far away! These shadows are not parallel.

Nor should they be, as anybody who understand perspective knows why.

__________________
~AstroMike

<a name="20020731.5:53"> page 20020731.5:53 aka How Far?
On 2002-07-31 00:09, AstroMike wrote: To: Mike AS Tro M
1: Ok: My anti Your TV cover age has been [X]'ed in
2: What can I say: NO I dont believe TV.
3: And i even hav my doubts about these
4: Computer covered events (in the Universe){ities}
5: well so? My point today are these:
6: I recently purcahsed 3 FSR radio's
7: they say on the package Range = 2 miles
8: My test results are Two Blocks [ ] [ ]
9: So Sure i express dissatisfaction
http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/vi...=1&start=50&53
http://www.cr.nps.gov/aad/kennewick/powell_rose.htm

<a name="20020731.6:0"> page 20020731.6:0 aka Not Far ?
On 2002-07-31 10:07, HUb' wrote: To: Math Hour HUb'
1: So with several Fricative sounding F words
2: and yes some silly S words also
3: Why oh frisky Y can I not buy
4: an FSR with a 55 mile Range?
5: I mean whos trying to out Silly wHo
6: three post from this one
7: Why does the Go_Mint % of E/M spec
8: have to be So blaitantly coRupt
9: at Mega Whats to silly milli
10 I ask Who this ?
11 {see next post} 6:09 A.M. math hour has past.
http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/vi...=1&start=50&53
http://www.cr.nps.gov/aad/kennewick/powell_rose.htm
13

<a name="20020731.6:11"> page 20020731.6:11 aka this far!
On 2002-07-29 13:46, The Bad Astronomer wrote: TO: 6:12 A.M.
Since we are talking non-parallel shadows
6:13 A.M. NO!
what i do will be hit th fourth key in on the "AS"
row several times in sequence
FFFFF
ther now i've done my time and can await
WHOm ever posts next: and of course the post after that 1