They get these massively gorgeous pictures from the Cassini probe itself, but this Huygens bit seems like it was sent with a re-purposed viewmaster for the camera. I realize it's probably like a 1995 design. Still, I think, the best processing of the data I have seen yet? Huge vertical exageration on this one I think.

You're welcome I reckon I could probably find a promote for the Huygens probe one some time over the next few days too... that should be enough to do it.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Newton, Ptolemy, Galileo, Huygens, science, creation, universe, bible, heaven, atheist' to 'Newton, Ptolemy, Galileo, Huygens, Laplace, creation, universe, bible, heaven, atheist' - edited by messenger

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Newton, Ptolemy, Galileo, science, creation, universe, bible, heaven, atheist' to 'Newton, Ptolemy, Galileo, Huygens, science, creation, universe, bible, heaven, atheist' - edited by messenger

[redacted]

i think you've clearly missed the point of the various holy books. theyre not science books. theyre not history books. its no different than taking any philosophical or theological book, ancient or modern, and calling bullshit on account of it not mentioning some far off nebula as if that means anything as it pertains to philosophy and/or theology

"why not mention something like, 'god created the stars, including the sun'? then people would be like oh, all those points of light are just different versions of our sun" why not? because what the hell does that have to do with the philosophical nature of the scriptures?

again, you want it to be a science book but its not and why should it be?
>> ^Mcboinkens:

>> ^shimfish:
Err...except for all the times the bible mentions stars, which, of course, we used to actually see at night.
Were you expecting a postscript along the lines of "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is."
>> ^Mcboinkens:
This is one of my biggest conflicts with religion. Not one mention of anything outside of the sun and the moon.


Errrrrr.......you clearly missed the point of my post. No mention of anything humans didn't already know about. If I created a full-fledged universe, I'd definitely hint at the fact that there were other things outside of the Earth, Moon, and points of light that are blatantly obvious. Also, it seems to differentiate between the Sun and stars. Why not mention something like, "God created the stars, including the Sun"? Then people would be like oh, all those points of light are just different versions of our Sun. "In 1600 A.D., Giordano Bruno was burnt at the stake for heresy, for asserting that the Sun is a star, among other things. It wasn't until the mid-1800s, after the work of Galileo, Kepler, Huygens, Newton, and finally, Friedrich Bessel, that it[meaning the sun was a strar] could be proven. The distance to other stars was calculated, and it was found that stars were about as bright as the Sun, when you account for the difference in distance. Also, chemical composition and surface temperature could be determined, and this added further evidence."
It mentions Pleiades and Orion, both of which received there name prior to when the book of Job was written, so no credit there. Besides, those are just constellations.
Why would you not expect any sort of indication that space was bigger than we though? Why leave us in the dark? Why not reveal that the Earth is a globe and not a flatland, like it implies when it mentions the four corners?
"The Third Day
The first appearance of dry ground. The further cooling of the surface set in motion a process of natural contraction, uplifting and motion of the crust (the process continues today, called "plate tectonics"). The earth changed from a smooth one-level molten "cue ball" to a planet with an irregular surface with ocean basins and continental landmasses. With dry ground available, the first plants were made to grow in great abundance. (Genesis 1:9-13)
The Fourth Day
With the sky now clear, the sun, moon and stars were dependably visible. They were to "serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years." The sun marked the day (sunset to sunset), the moon the month (new moon to new moon), and the stars the seasons (constellations are seen in particular seasons e.g. "Orion" is visible in winter in the northern hemisphere, which is summer in the southern hemisphere). (Genesis 1:14-19)"
A mention of dirt, but not gas? It just bugs me that the only things mentioned were the things that were already known about.

[redacted]

Only NASA could have a video like this and hardly anyone has actually seen it. They would be horrible on the sift.>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

promote mind blowing footage

Huygens Probe videos: http://www.videosift.com/video/A-view-from-Huygens-Cassini-Huygens-probe-landing and http://www.videosift.com/video/Huygens-Probe-Landing-on-Titan

>> ^jwray:
Why don't they just show us the ACTUAL FOOTAGE from NASA instead of this lame fake edited overlay? gay


I take it from watching the video that there is no such thing as "actual footage" in the way you seem to be implying. The probe is spinning and gyrating so wildly any video feed, if it were plausible to even send a video feed, would be completely useless. The probe was snapping small slices of pictures and keeping track of its orientation, and out of that data the final "landscape" was constructed as you see there.

Also, *promote

>> ^Peroxide:
I can't believe that I'm the only one who noticed the footprints at the end, Far left picture!
Is that the moon landing????


(Two years later)

Yes, it's a shot of the moon landing alongside the final images to demonstrate scale and distance of the picture.

>> ^jwray:
Why don't they just show us the ACTUAL FOOTAGE from NASA instead of this lame fake edited overlay? gay


Aliens, man. Aliens.

>> ^Memorare:
The excitement of exploration that briefly drove the science and technology of the early 60's has gone into hibernation. The only place you feel it these days is in the new star trek movie.


That is only because you don't know where to look. Projects such as Cassini/Huygens and the Mars Rovers are orders of magnitude more advanced than the moon landings. Just because the media find reality shows more worthy of attention nowadays doesn't mean the science and innovation has stopped.

I suspect that the soundtrack of this is what makes it so endearing. I think that there is information encoded in the sounds that causes your brain to subconsciously relax itself.
The audio actually reminds me of the Huygens Landing vid from NASA, but I don't think they are the same.

... listening to that vid again, yes- clearly very very different.

The constant wine you hear is the connection strength (Bottom right corner line). so when it dies its over. Mainly because of the atmosphere that's why not to mention its Saturn's moon not the moon. The connection died after about what 44 seconds. Even the best of the 4g wireless cant do that. It was launched on October 15, 1997 and got in orbit of Saturn's moon Titan on July 1, 2004 and the probe was dropped January 14, 2005 and lasted on the surface a total of 44 seconds before connection loss. They drop probes like this before they land rovers if ever. It takes 2 years to get to Mars by the way and yes the ultra high res camera's they have on that have sent back a ton of great pic's and some small video. And there was no colour change mentioned by NASA for this video.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassini-Huygens
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_%28moon%29