Hubble Telescope and the Olbers' paradox: where is the space dust?

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,170
Likes
4,138
#1
What do you do when there is something contradicting your theory to the point of invalidating it? I don't know about you, but our science declares it a "PARADOX". A very simple solution to a very complicated problem. Now, everything in this story is official, and that makes it just that more ridiculous. That's my personal opinion only, but feel free to voice yours.

Dark Night Sky Paradox

Olber's_Paradox.gif

In a nutshell ~ Olbers' paradox. The night sky is supposed to be lit up like a flood light due to the amount of stars up there. This is clearly not the case. And the reason we do not see this overwhelming sky size spot light shining down our own backyard is... cosmic dust blocking the view.

olbersparadox.jpg

Schematic of the distribution of stars in an infinite universe and Olber's Paradox
Credit: Penn State Astronomy & Astrophysics​

Hubble Space Telescope

hubble_space_telescope.jpeg

Hubble orbits the Earth at an altitude of about 353 miles (569 kilometers). It takes about 97 minutes to complete one orbit around the Earth. Hubble passes into the shadow of the Earth for 28 to 36 minutes in each orbit.

Here are some of the pictures allegedly made by this awesome piece of equipment. More HUBBLE pictures at this NASA link.
  • Hubble’s Lonely Firework Display - Roughly 50 million light-years away the little galaxy NGC 1559 has hosted a variety of spectacular exploding stars called supernovae.

Hubble’s Lonely Firework Display.jpg

Hubble Spots a Green Cosmic Arc.jpg
My question: Where is this interstellar cosmic dust? How come this Hubble thing allegedly orbiting our planet at 353 mile altitude can take a photo of galaxies located 7.5 billion light years away? NASA taught it to see through the dust?

7.5 billion light years away... how many miles is it? Let's see.

1 light year = 5.88 trillion miles.
7,500,000,000 light years x 5,800,000,000,000 = no clue what this is called but my calculator demonstrated this 4.35^22 miles. I think in a more conventional way the distance looks like this - 43,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 miles.

This is your paradox, ladies and gentlemen: The night sky is supposed to be lit up like a gigantic floodlight. Obviously it is not because we have this interstellar cosmic dust blocking our view. Yet the Hubble telescope orbiting 353 miles above Earth is able to penetrate at least 4.35^22 miles of dust saturated space and snap a photo of some Galaxies far far away.

What's funny, we are so dull, we believe this non-sense. What's even funnier, Hubble is unable to take a picture of Earth. Why? Here is why:
  • The surface of the Earth is whizzing by as Hubble orbits, and the pointing system, designed to track the distant stars, cannot track an object on the Earth. The shortest exposure time on any of the Hubble instruments is 0.1 seconds, and in this time Hubble moves about 700 meters, or almost half a mile. So a picture Hubble took of Earth would be all streaks.
Hubble orbit speed: 5 miles per second at 353 miles above Earth
ISS orbit speed: 4.76 miles per second at 205-270 miles above Earth

$2.5 billion Hubble telescope weighing, 24,500 pounds and measured at 43.5 feet does not have a camera to take a picture of Earth located only 353 miles away. Yet, it brings us joy with the images of the galaxies located 43,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 miles away. It is also capable of penetrating 4.35^22 miles of space dust. That same dust preventing the stellar light from reaching our planet Earth.

Are we being duped?
 

in cahoots

Active member
Messages
78
Likes
210
#2
Would you suggest then that it isn't cosmic dust, but rather an atmospheric particulate that is obscuring our vision?
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,170
Likes
4,138
#3
From a certain point in my life, when i see something similar to "do not believe your eyes, here is a formula instead", I start digging. I don't think there is any Hubble out there, just like there is no interstellar dust. The more you look into it, all the topics covered so far become intricately intertwined. It sure does sound ridiculous, but the space program is a decoy, with the only purpose of supporting and maintaining the false concept.
 

in cahoots

Active member
Messages
78
Likes
210
#4
I must say, with regards to the entwinement of conspiracies (and can we stop calling them that? I've heard elsewhere the term "truther" which has its own baggage but seems closer to the...... um.... truth.....), that after a certain degree of initiation into this information, it begins to make it difficult to even broach topics with other people because of how Swiss-cheesed the status-quo truth has become. I have been speaking with a high school history teacher (Canadian mind you) in a group chat recently. It's fascinating and tragic, how he obviously has a curiosity for the material, but is now intrinsically predisposed against new information challenging the institution he has become embedded in. Another fellow in the same chat facetiously asked me, "Okay, if you're so smart, then *what is knowledge*?"

Anyway this is all to say... I think the work you're doing here is excellent. It is much easier for I daresay "normies" to understand how unstable their understanding of reality is, when you subtract out all the ad hominems and accusations that typifies most truther material. I was able to show, for instance, the image of the "Jedi knights" to many people and left them with jaws silently dropped. It is better to raise questions than presume answers - great work, KD.
 

Magnus

Member
Messages
45
Likes
81
#6
There is no such thing as outer space.
You can never prove it exists, you can never go there, you can never see it or experience it with your own sense and mind.

Instead, you must trust the modern day high priests of science, and take them at their word. No different than blindly following a slick televangelist or a medicine man from the past. Its a religion to believe in outer space
 

in cahoots

Active member
Messages
78
Likes
210
#7
There is no such thing as outer space.
You can never prove it exists, you can never go there, you can never see it or experience it with your own sense and mind.

Instead, you must trust the modern day high priests of science, and take them at their word. No different than blindly following a slick televangelist or a medicine man from the past. Its a religion to believe in outer space
I think a popular rebuttal here would be, "Well, how many people are in on it?"

This is a huge sticking point for many people. Among us lower "normies," most tend to assume that all human beings are essentially, morally decent. However from fiction up through to the news and certainly personal experience, people treat each other like shit, and they seem to do so more readily as they gain influence over others. As the distance between "You" and "They" becomes wider, they tend to become smaller.

This is just to say that, of the few who've ascended to positions where they can verify the effectiveness and products of these technologies, it's very unlikely they hold the same basic "do unto others and stand up for truth" moral framework we were all implanted with. I actually find this is similar with much moral "goodness" in the Western world - all the tenets just cripple you. Turn the other cheek. Pass no judgment. Bow your bloody head and take your beating. These are bonkers philosophies that we all find ourselves deeply implanted with from an early age. It's very easy for assholes to take advantage of those who fell for the ruse that if you bend and bow as low as possible, everyone else will do the same for you.
 

Magnus

Member
Messages
45
Likes
81
#8
I think a popular rebuttal here would be, "Well, how many people are in on it?"

This is a huge sticking point for many people. Among us lower "normies," most tend to assume that all human beings are essentially, morally decent. However from fiction up through to the news and certainly personal experience, people treat each other like shit, and they seem to do so more readily as they gain influence over others. As the distance between "You" and "They" becomes wider, they tend to become smaller.

This is just to say that, of the few who've ascended to positions where they can verify the effectiveness and products of these technologies, it's very unlikely they hold the same basic "do unto others and stand up for truth" moral framework we were all implanted with. I actually find this is similar with much moral "goodness" in the Western world - all the tenets just cripple you. Turn the other cheek. Pass no judgment. Bow your bloody head and take your beating. These are bonkers philosophies that we all find ourselves deeply implanted with from an early age. It's very easy for assholes to take advantage of those who fell for the ruse that if you bend and bow as low as possible, everyone else will do the same for you.
Well said, thanks for the terrific, thought-provoking response.

And, I agree!

What would be your approach to such a response?

Thoughts that come to mind:

*Compartmentalization...Need to Know Basis... Top Secrets Clearances.... not every player has a complete picture of the puzzle, they just work on their one, highly specific, and highly specialized section of the puzzle, with agencies and departments assigned "areas" of the puzzle, and individual agents are assigned one single puzzle piece. In this way, millions can be involved in science and modern astronomy, but will only have access to a very small part of the overall picture and overall truth. Macro/Micro.... Big Picture.... only a few oligarch families, or even fewer: individuals .... or even the Prince of the Powers of the Air is at the top of the pyramid.
*True Science: I encourage others to observe and ponder. If we are on a rotating, revolving planet in space, how is it possible to focus our eyes and a camera lens on the daytime or nighttime moon, and take a crystal clear photo? Should this be possible if the object we are standing on is in motion?

Or might we deduce, from our direct and first-hand observations, that we are standing on a fixed plane of existence, with the moon traversing the sky above us, an celestial body which does indeed move; but at a rate imperceivable to our eyes, allowing us to photograph it in crystal clear focus...

Some photographs of the moon I have taken
IMG_2095.JPG IMG_2098.JPG
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,170
Likes
4,138
#9
I think at this point you don't need to have too many people "in on it". This could probably be one of the major misconceptions of the entire issue. One of the things I keep on saying is that we need to look at all the bizarre things as it was a totality of circumstances pertaining to the same event.

Were there people who knew the true setup of our world? Sure there were. Here is where burning at the stakes comes in. As well as the total annihilation of the aristocrats during the French revolution, and such. Russian nobility was wiped out in its entirety prior to 1917-1920.

Then we have this "Civil War" in the 1860's. The known reason for it was slavery. What do we witness now, 150 years later? The destruction of the monuments of the civil war as they pertain to the confederacy. Historic characters are being taken out of the history books because they are supposedly a reminder of slavery. What reminders are they trying to take out? are those of slavery, or of something else, totally different? At the same time the individuals advocating for the removal of the monuments are hardly "in on it". They simply have a wrong concept of the world.

And this is exactly the answer. Give people a wrong concept of the world, and those people will do the job which under normal circumstances would need a lot of "in on it" individuals.

Now let's look at the out of nowhere "Industrial Revolution". Iron clad ships coming out of nowhere during the same Civil War. Add all those buildings built with a copper chisel and a horse carriage. Are those people believing in such a nonsense "in on it"? Of course not, but due to them having the wrong concept, they definitely do what you would need a whole lot of "in on its".

The Space Program does not need to have a lot of people knowing the real setup. There was like a total of what, 553 people who supposedly went to space? Weren't all of them Freemasons? Only a few need to know what's happening. The others only have a piece of this giant LEGO world.
 

in cahoots

Active member
Messages
78
Likes
210
#10
*True Science: I encourage others to observe and ponder. If we are on a rotating, revolving planet in space, how is it possible to focus our eyes and a camera lens on the daytime or nighttime moon, and take a crystal clear photo? Should this be possible if the object we are standing on is in motion?

Or might we deduce, from our direct and first-hand observations, that we are standing on a fixed plane of existence, with the moon traversing the sky above us, an celestial body which does indeed move; but at a rate imperceivable to our eyes, allowing us to photograph it in crystal clear focus...

Some photographs of the moon I have taken
Good to see you again, Magnus, I hope all is well with you.

I think "nobody has the full picture" is a great rebuttal. And the few that do have no reason whatsoever to shatter the beneficial illusion for everyone else. Let's just maintain business as usual, shall we...?

As to your statement about True Science, I think this was something we lost from the Renaissance, when so many great discoveries were not at all the achievements of a bored, leisure-time bourgeoisie (though many were), but rather of the whole population of commoners who had new access to literacy, information, and tools of production. SCIENCE is an INDUSTRY, and same with any other industry, whoever controls the MEANS of that industry gets to dictate what it produces.

What I like so much about what you're saying, is that you zero in on what the ACTUAL means of Science is -- human perception. Nothing more than human perception, which everyone has. We all control the means of producing Science. Yet we are told that human memory is garbage and easily corrupted, that the air is thick with illusions, that everything we see is upside-down, that we're distracted, we're biased, we don't have electron microscopes, we don't have telescopes or infrared scanners or any of the expensive, massive, and heavily-guarded machinery we are told is NECESSARY to arrive at Truth. So here we are again, peasants in the nave, begging blindly for salvation from the only mofo in town who knows how to read The One Book! We have the dang Internet in our hands - an open-source, instantaneous, global psychic nexus - and we're still shuffling around like vassals! What a head game!

I really admire amateur astronomy such as in the photos you have taken. By observing things for ourselves, the power and means of Science returns home to where it belongs, in the mind of each individual human being. Good on you Mag.
 

Onijunbei

Member
Messages
30
Likes
76
#13
Most of the psyience involving space is crap... Hell most of the psyience involving earth is crap. There is definitely satellite imagery of the earth and multiple websites containing real time footage of earth from orbit. "Space Dust" is just yet another imagined fairy tale of psyience and light traveling is a fairy tale too, that's why all the distances are off. The electric fields of the planets and galaxies are going to suck dust in. Stars and galaxies exploding is pseudo crap. The night sky is lit up like a Christmas tree if you are away from the cities and smog...
 

The Kraken

Active member
Messages
79
Likes
230
#14
I think at this point you don't need to have too many people "in on it". This could probably be one of the major misconceptions of the entire issue. One of the things I keep on saying is that we need to look at all the bizarre things as it was a totality of circumstances pertaining to the same event.

Were there people who knew the true setup of our world? Sure there were. Here is where burning at the stakes comes in. As well as the total annihilation of the aristocrats during the French revolution, and such. Russian nobility was wiped out in its entirety prior to 1917-1920.

Then we have this "Civil War" in the 1860's. The known reason for it was slavery. What do we witness now, 150 years later? The destruction of the monuments of the civil war as they pertain to the confederacy. Historic characters are being taken out of the history books because they are supposedly a reminder of slavery. What reminders are they trying to take out? are those of slavery, or of something else, totally different? At the same time the individuals advocating for the removal of the monuments are hardly "in on it". They simply have a wrong concept of the world.

And this is exactly the answer. Give people a wrong concept of the world, and those people will do the job which under normal circumstances would need a lot of "in on it" individuals.

Now let's look at the out of nowhere "Industrial Revolution". Iron clad ships coming out of nowhere during the same Civil War. Add all those buildings built with a copper chisel and a horse carriage. Are those people believing in such a nonsense "in on it"? Of course not, but due to them having the wrong concept, they definitely do what you would need a whole lot of "in on its".

The Space Program does not need to have a lot of people knowing the real setup. There was like a total of what, 553 people who supposedly went to space? Weren't all of them Freemasons? Only a few need to know what's happening. The others only have a piece of this giant LEGO world.

I have spent alot of time trying to work out the how

  • Who Big Bad Evil Guys.
  • What Rewrote history
  • Where Progressively everywhere
  • When Over the last 300 years
  • Why To take control/Keep control
  • How Magic

Using the only evidence i have access too . My personal experience with current historical rewriting. Social control used artfully. My country of New Zealand has had its History rewritten as i watched. The "native Maori" as i was taught in school arrived here in 1280 or so. They then murdered and ate the actual natives the Maoriori. Now know as the Moriori .

During the early 20th century it was commonly, but erroneously, believed that the Moriori were pre-Māori settlers of New Zealand, linguistically and genetically different from the Māori, and possibly Melanesian. This story, incorporated into Percy Smith's "Great Fleet" hypothesis, was widely believed during the early 20th century. However, the hypothesis was not always accepted.[4]
Political Correct thinking has now rewritten history to the currently accepted ""Na bro it didn't happen"". People i went to school with have now forgotten/removed/dismissed previous fact with zero new evidence because its just the way it is now. Physical history books are gone. In just the space of 20 years History is now completely different.

Using this experience as a guide or measure i just plug in what i am told happened in regards to a particular event/place/person and giggle to my self at the bullshit.

They didnt need to kill every man woman and child. They simply removed those that held the knowledge and replaced them. A recent study into memory showed people who take photos of a thing have trouble remembering it. This is due to a trait in humans to share knowledge in a group.

The British Psychological Society

This work aimed to replicate and extend a study by Linda Henkel that showed that taking photos of paintings in a museum could lead to poorer recall of those paintings. To make sense of this, Henkel drew on the body of research on transactive memory, which shows that longtime partners or friends distribute memory demands between them, creating a “shared” system where one will remember certain things so the other doesn’t need to. Henkel thought that in a similar fashion we may be treating the camera as a memory partner and offloading the effort onto it. Soares and Storm tested this explanation by separating photo taking from photo having.
We as a group simply trust that the guy whose job it is knows what hes doing and isnt lying about it. The trusted educators only need to be trained based on a lie some one told them who in turn was lied too. Its beautiful in its simplicity. Once started its self correcting and resistant to change.
The people who went to space tell us space is real. Lets ask the people who went to space if it was real. Yip they say its real. lets check that against the people who went to spaces opinion. There we have it. Space is real. Look at the rockets and shitty photos from earth but no photos from space but no real reason why........................

Normies are like 98.75% of the population People who ask questions are like 2% of that 1.25% .So its just us 30 dudes out of a world population of 7 billion (if it is even that)
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,170
Likes
4,138
#15
We as a group simply trust that the guy whose job it is knows what hes doing and isnt lying about it. The trusted educators only need to be trained based on a lie some one told them who in turn was lied too. Its beautiful in its simplicity. Once started its self correcting and resistant to change.
The people who went to space tell us space is real. Lets ask the people who went to space if it was real. Yip they say its real. lets check that against the people who went to spaces opinion. There we have it. Space is real. Look at the rockets and shitty photos from earth but no photos from space but no real reason why........................
I think it also pertains to our history sources. We have hundreds, and thousands of books on ancient history. Yet they all come down to one or two initial sources, which upon a closer look are not event true sources. It's sad how this society builds its understanding of the world based on so many made up things.
 

PostCancel

New member
Messages
1
Likes
4
#16
Look into ‘Vantablack’. Basically it’s a graphene nanotube cluster of varrying depths but since they are so small and close together they don’t allow light to releflect from its surface. Shadows don’t show even in the brightest rooms when applied to objects with protruding elements, even light emitting diodes or laser pointers don’t have an effect when positioned directly onto surfaces painted with this stuff. This is the best explanation, physically, that I found which could possibly describe the ‘how’ aspect of naturally formed lighting sources not manufactured within our atmosphere, as the material requires a vacuum chamber to be made.
But then again, if the planet is just a man made incubator of sorts, it proves the possibility of having a light source extremely close to the surface of earth. If space, i.e. the backdrop, were to be painted entirely in this material then the reflection from the water and frozen over portions of the planet would reflect back into space any color they wanted with a thin film organic compound, it would dither respectively based on the individual viewer.
 
Last edited:

Dirigible

Active member
Messages
138
Likes
210
#17
I have spent alot of time trying to work out the how

  • Who Big Bad Evil Guys.
  • What Rewrote history
  • Where Progressively everywhere
  • When Over the last 300 years
  • Why To take control/Keep control
  • How Magic

Using the only evidence i have access too . My personal experience with current historical rewriting. Social control used artfully. My country of New Zealand has had its History rewritten as i watched. The "native Maori" as i was taught in school arrived here in 1280 or so. They then murdered and ate the actual natives the Maoriori. Now know as the Moriori .



Political Correct thinking has now rewritten history to the currently accepted ""Na bro it didn't happen"". People i went to school with have now forgotten/removed/dismissed previous fact with zero new evidence because its just the way it is now. Physical history books are gone. In just the space of 20 years History is now completely different.

Using this experience as a guide or measure i just plug in what i am told happened in regards to a particular event/place/person and giggle to my self at the bullshit.

They didnt need to kill every man woman and child. They simply removed those that held the knowledge and replaced them. A recent study into memory showed people who take photos of a thing have trouble remembering it. This is due to a trait in humans to share knowledge in a group.

The British Psychological Society



We as a group simply trust that the guy whose job it is knows what hes doing and isnt lying about it. The trusted educators only need to be trained based on a lie some one told them who in turn was lied too. Its beautiful in its simplicity. Once started its self correcting and resistant to change.
The people who went to space tell us space is real. Lets ask the people who went to space if it was real. Yip they say its real. lets check that against the people who went to spaces opinion. There we have it. Space is real. Look at the rockets and shitty photos from earth but no photos from space but no real reason why........................

Normies are like 98.75% of the population People who ask questions are like 2% of that 1.25% .So its just us 30 dudes out of a world population of 7 billion (if it is even that)
Mandela Effect due to this?
 

The Kraken

Active member
Messages
79
Likes
230
#19
Mandela Effect due to this?
Yes and no.
Yes.There is currently a real time editing of our digital history. With the emphasis on cloud storage and digital converstions this has been made easyer for the bad guys.

No.What i call personal canon. Movies or tv shows or songs are remembered in the way we personally find most pleasing. The catch being lots of people like the same stuff so opinions match up but the movie dont.
 
Top