Yea, no, that's not the shadow of the ISS. I haven't done the math, but the sun/s angular radius is 1/2 of a degree. A platform the size of a football field 220 miles away will have an angular size much less than 1/2 of a degree. The sun would shine around the ISS and no shadow would be cast onto the Earth's surface. At least that's what I think. I could be wrong.
@@mcgyverinstituteofninjatech My opinion remains unchanged. That's just a giant shadow, miles across. I've never seen a shadow like that on other images from the ISS.
@@pdxdragon7479 I can respect that. I found a 3rd view of the shadow and am uploading the video now. Check back in 20 minutes if you want. Have a good day!
Remember, a shadow can never be smaller than the object casting the shadow if there is only one light source....you can confirm this at home with any light.
lol that isn't a shadow its a smudge or something on the camera. Look at the landmasses that would make the shadow the size of a state when in reality it's angular size would be so small the human eye couldn't detect it without the aid of optics.
You seriously thought this was a shadow huh? It's a smudge on the lens. If it was a shadow, which it is mos definitely not, it would shift position as the ISS moved across the sky and changed position with the Sun.
@@mcgyverinstituteofninjatech LOL moisture on a camera, in space... Good one. The ISS is about the size of a football field. To cast a discernible shadow on the Earth it would have to be about 30 times larger than it is. As for the artifact on the lens, I don't know what it is, could be smudge, ie. something that was transferred onto the lens, could be pixelation caused by a defect, but I am 100% certain it is not the ISS shadow being cast on the Earth. Try to let go of that pride and just admit you did not think this through.
@@buddychrist296 have you ever thought that the ISS might be 30 times closer than you think? Do you believe you can see the stated 3% of the earth as NASA says. They say you can see 2000 miles from left to right, yet you can only see 500 miles from Florida to New Orleans....maybe it's not what you think
@@mcgyverinstituteofninjatech LOL you're joking now right? You seriously believe that it would be possible for the ISS to travel at 4.76 miles per second, at an altitude of 40,000 ft, without ever landing or refueling? I am pretty sure people would notice the ISS rocketing past them from time to time. Also, I refer you back to my original comment. The shadow would not remain static on the screen. It would change position and shape depending on the ISS's position relative to the Earth and the Sun. I understand questioning things, but I have given you the answer and explained everything in detail. At this point you should just say thank you and move on with your life. Unfortunately, in all likelihood, you will be choosing the path of obstinate fool. I hope not.
@@buddychrist296 I'm not sure why you are so concerned with what I believe, and I'm not sure how you know so much about a space station that you've never seen or touched in real life. You are simply regurgitating stats from NASA without any real proof. Your belief in NASA is the same a religious blind Faith. No proof, but you are sure it's true. I might be wrong about the shadows, but I need to hear an alternative explanation that is logical first.
@@mcgyverinstituteofninjatech lol that isn't a shadow. Look at the landmasses for crying out loud. That shadow would be the size of a very large island or a small state. That isn't how shadows work. The shadow would be smaller than the ISS not larger even if it was closer to the ground say 40,000 ft the shadow would be smaller. It looks like either something on the sensor that is showing up with a specific color on screen or dead pixels from an old sensor.
Yea, no, that's not the shadow of the ISS.
I haven't done the math, but the sun/s angular radius is 1/2 of a degree.
A platform the size of a football field 220 miles away will have an angular size much less than 1/2 of a degree.
The sun would shine around the ISS and no shadow would be cast onto the Earth's surface.
At least that's what I think. I could be wrong.
Are you sure? What do you think it is? Does this other video show a shadow or is it just dust on the lens? th-cam.com/video/4QqYzzKnx7Y/w-d-xo.html
@@mcgyverinstituteofninjatech My opinion remains unchanged.
That's just a giant shadow, miles across.
I've never seen a shadow like that on other images from the ISS.
Watch part 2. There is a shadow in that one too.
@@pdxdragon7479 I can respect that. I found a 3rd view of the shadow and am uploading the video now. Check back in 20 minutes if you want. Have a good day!
Remember, a shadow can never be smaller than the object casting the shadow if there is only one light source....you can confirm this at home with any light.
Funny how it doesn’t move as it should with the orbit constantly changing the angle to the sun… oh may be it’s just a spot on the lens.
lol that isn't a shadow its a smudge or something on the camera. Look at the landmasses that would make the shadow the size of a state when in reality it's angular size would be so small the human eye couldn't detect it without the aid of optics.
You seriously thought this was a shadow huh? It's a smudge on the lens. If it was a shadow, which it is mos definitely not, it would shift position as the ISS moved across the sky and changed position with the Sun.
There are 3 videos with 3 different views of the shadow.....it's not a smudge. You think nasa didn't plan for moisture or dust on the cameras?
@@mcgyverinstituteofninjatech LOL moisture on a camera, in space... Good one.
The ISS is about the size of a football field. To cast a discernible shadow on the Earth it would have to be about 30 times larger than it is. As for the artifact on the lens, I don't know what it is, could be smudge, ie. something that was transferred onto the lens, could be pixelation caused by a defect, but I am 100% certain it is not the ISS shadow being cast on the Earth.
Try to let go of that pride and just admit you did not think this through.
@@buddychrist296 have you ever thought that the ISS might be 30 times closer than you think? Do you believe you can see the stated 3% of the earth as NASA says. They say you can see 2000 miles from left to right, yet you can only see 500 miles from Florida to New Orleans....maybe it's not what you think
@@mcgyverinstituteofninjatech LOL you're joking now right? You seriously believe that it would be possible for the ISS to travel at 4.76 miles per second, at an altitude of 40,000 ft, without ever landing or refueling? I am pretty sure people would notice the ISS rocketing past them from time to time. Also, I refer you back to my original comment. The shadow would not remain static on the screen. It would change position and shape depending on the ISS's position relative to the Earth and the Sun. I understand questioning things, but I have given you the answer and explained everything in detail. At this point you should just say thank you and move on with your life. Unfortunately, in all likelihood, you will be choosing the path of obstinate fool. I hope not.
@@buddychrist296 I'm not sure why you are so concerned with what I believe, and I'm not sure how you know so much about a space station that you've never seen or touched in real life. You are simply regurgitating stats from NASA without any real proof. Your belief in NASA is the same a religious blind Faith. No proof, but you are sure it's true. I might be wrong about the shadows, but I need to hear an alternative explanation that is logical first.
I think you are making a type 1 error.
Is this a shadow? I found another view....th-cam.com/video/4QqYzzKnx7Y/w-d-xo.html
When I see a non-moving spot on my monitor it's usually cat snot.
@@mcgyverinstituteofninjatech lol that isn't a shadow. Look at the landmasses for crying out loud. That shadow would be the size of a very large island or a small state. That isn't how shadows work. The shadow would be smaller than the ISS not larger even if it was closer to the ground say 40,000 ft the shadow would be smaller. It looks like either something on the sensor that is showing up with a specific color on screen or dead pixels from an old sensor.