Al Gore Still Does Not Understand What GoreSat Does
DSCOVR Shows Moon Crossing Face of Earth (Video) http://t.co/5VJ35PYXnJ #EARTH #NASA pic.twitter.com/zKCjKrZMEB
— EarthToday (@earthtoday) August 5, 2015
@algore if that was the "dark side" of the Moon then we would not see any features. But we do. #TakeAScienceClass
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) August 6, 2015
Keith’s note: Hey @AlGore according to NASA “These images were taken between 3:50 p.m. and 8:45 p.m. EDT on July 16.” Guess what: that means that we saw an almost-new Moon here on Earth – to use your term we were looking at the “dark side” of the Moon which happened to be the near side of the Moon at the point – you know, the side of the Moon that faces Earth. DSCOVR was looking at the lunar farside which was almost fully lit at that point. It is not “dark” in this photo. Its called Science, Al.
Keith’s update: As a reader notes NASA does not even know what “dark Side” means i.e. at least not consistently. The NASA press release for this image says “The series of test images shows the fully illuminated “dark side” of the moon that is never visible from Earth.
NASA itself is confused about this terminology: Common Moon Misconceptions, NASA: “Misconception: The same half of the Moon is in darkness all the time-i.e. that there is a dark side of the Moon. Reality: The Moon has no side that is constantly dark; the front and back are alternately lit as the Moon rotates. Far side is a more accurate term.”
There is a lot Al Gore does not understand……
“There is a lot Al Gore does not understand……”
What exactly does he not understand (and make sure you reference things in context and that can be corroborated)?
Recall the error you made here: https://disqus.com/home/dis…
Even spaceref called it the dark side of the Moon, Keith.
When? Link please.
Disqus will not allow link, but it’s the first article at the moment when going to spaceref. Second line says,
“The series of test images shows the fully illuminated “dark side” of the moon that is never visible from Earth.”
It is not an “article’ it is clearly identified as a NASA press release repeated verbatim. Yes, it too make the same mistake As a reader notes NASA does not even know what dark Side” means i.e. its press release on the NASA site says “The series of test images shows the fully illuminated “dark side” of the moon that is never visible from Earth”.
Fine, it’s a press release. In either case it is not like Al Gore came up with this reference on his own. If you’re going to be critical of anyone it should be NASA and their press release.
Duh. I did.
Yes you did, but in your update that came AFTER I posted the above response. I also meant the original post should have been about NASA’s bad press release using the term “darks side” of the moon vice an attack on Al Gores understanding of GoreSat because he used a term that even NASA used in its press release.
So guess what Al Gore and NASA were wrong.
Neither were wrong. They simply used a very common idiom that refers to the lunar far side.
It will always be the mysterious dark side of the moon to me, and I have always understood, since second grade that half the month it is bathed in sunlight.
I guess the concern is that children are not taught or are interested enough to pay attention enough in school to learn the simple basic mechanics of our solar system.
I recall some republicans congressmen attacking Al Gore
for his idea of looking at the earth. It may have been Newt?
Anyway
Thanks Mr. Gore 🙂
Hmmm I wonder what the world would be like to day had the court picked him as president?
My guess is it would have been a little better.
I am zeroing out this reply as too political in an exercise in self-restraint.
Well thats good Yale
Sorry I encouraged you.
We wouldn’t want to talk about the root causes of why our public system can’t get us to the moon and outer space. Better to stay on topic to just complain about the effects.
Nothing will ever change.
The other side of the moon will likely stay dark for many more decades if not centuries to come
I’ll just watch the debates on TV, Oh wait I can’t. I don’t have cable.
Good thing I have a smart phone. Fox news stream.
Nice to know Fox is in control.
“Nice to know Fox is in control.”
Scary thought that!
If the NASA writer didn’t get it, then why did he use quotes? I give him or her credit for a clever “nod” to this common misconception. However, I think Gore actually goofed.
Well, the words “dark side” were put in quotes. I
take that to mean that the person who wrote the
press release is implying that it really isn’t dark.
The mistake, of course, is not following through
and explaining the implication (ie, WHY “dark
side” was put in quotes). Not a particularly well
vetted release.
“dark side” should be expunged from use. Why say something that needs to be elaborately explained so as not to confuse an untrained audience?
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with “elaborately explaining” it if the intent is to clarify and correct a long-standing misconception. But the press release didn’t do that (or at least, didn’t clearly do it). So I agree, they shouldn’t have even used it.
I agree that there is a purpose in “elaborately explaining” in its proper place. Back in the early Paleozoic Era I taught science and that’s what I attempted with mixed success. But a news blip is not the place. It only confuses.
I noted the quotation marks and interpreted it as a clever insiders’ joke (wink wink). If you have to explain a joke, then it’s not funny.
Just a quick comment. I am not a twitter user and do not follow celebrities. Looks like your comments refers to something Al Gore said or twittered, but without proper references I have to say I am confused.
I can agree with you that Al Gore may not understand the science mission of GoreSat, especially the part about solar wind and space weather，which is understandable. However, the relative geometry between the moon, earth and DSCVER you described does not have a lot to do with what DSCVER does. You may want to change the title?
Irrespective of this discussion about the “dark side of the moon,” Al Gore well understands the science mission of DSCOVR, both the space weather and earth observation parts:
http://tinyurl.com/l3zpv3h
So the title is completely wrong.
(Hmm, just like referring to the “dark side of the moon” is wrong. I guess everybody mis-communicates at some point.)
Al Gore may not understand the science mission of GoreSat, especially the part about solar wind and space weather，which is understandable.
Really?
What makes you think Gore does not understand the science mission?
To quote Gore:
I said HE MAY NOT, I suppose you understand what “may” means here. As far I can tell from what you quoted, he sort of “understand” the argument scientists put forward for politicians to “understand”, in a utilitarian manner. There is far more than just being a warning system for any of NASA’s scientific missions, and I doubt Mr. Gore understand the subtlety. Anyway, I did not blame Mr. Gore, but rather giving him some slack on anything he said that might not be strictly scientific. On the other hand, by quoting what he wrote as proof that he understood science, you just showed your own weakness in basic scientific education.
I give up. 😯
You constantly engage in PlasticMan super-elastic argumentation and infinitely malleable “waterproof hypothesis”. It does you no credit and it is obvious to all.
It’s called logic, fyi.
There is far more than just being a warning system for any of NASA’s scientific missions, and I doubt Mr. Gore understand the subtlety
Actually you are wrong.
There are 3 instruments on DSCOVR. The sun-pointing instrument is not NASA, it is a NOAA/USAF detector array designed for the OPERATIONAL role to “maintain the Nation’s solar wind observations, which are critical to maintaining the accuracy and lead time of NOAA’s space weather alerts and forecasts.”
And, separately, the Earth-pointing NASA SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH instruments.
It is you, not Gore, that misses the subtlety.
What do the mission managers say:
What is DSCOVR?
The Deep Space Climate Observatory, or DSCOVR, is a spacecraft which will orbit between Earth and the sun, observing and providing advanced warning of particles and magnetic fields emitted by the sun (known as the solar wind) which can affect power grids, communications systems, and satellites close to Earth
haha…
If I’m reading this right, you can’t see the twitter feeds or their internal links?
I’m in the same boat on this Firefox install. But weirdly, I have another instance on my laptop, with exactly the same addons/etc, which does show the twitter feed.
“Dark” as in “unknown” or “unseen” or “mysterious”, which was pretty much the case until we could send spacecraft around it. I guess we can’t use “far side” now either, since we have DSCOVR sitting at L1 and that side is nearest to it 50% of the time. Perhaps Al Gore should have said “The Moon, with a subsolar point of approximately 180° longitude, and the light side of the Earth seen together in full light for the first time ever.” Since we’re getting picky, he should have capitalised “Moon” since it is used as a proper noun.
Facts are facts. Gore referred to a “dark side” of the Moon that is fully illuminated in this image – so he is not even paying attention to what he is looking at.
The fact that he was careless means he succumbed to the Twitter curse of firing something off before thinking it through, not that he’s not paying attention to what he’s looking at. Now, not thinking through his Twitter statement isn’t great, but at least give him credit for understanding what he sees.
I don’t know if Gore does understand.
A viable reading of his words is “See how dark the Dark Side is even under full solar illumination versus the brightness of a fully illuminated near side”
I really truly don’t know what is the correct interpretation of his words are. Gore is very intelligent and well versed in many subjects, including science and technology, but why would he automatically know astronomy?
“See how dark the Dark Side is even under full solar illumination.”
Well, it is strikingly dark, particularly since it is directly contrasted with the bright Earth. Even if you previously knew the albedo of the Moon when compared with the albedo of the Earth and so the image is exactly what you’d expect, the juxtaposition is dramatic.
My conjecture was that he assumed that the near side was lighter, hence the lack of quote marks in his comment. But it is purely conjecture. I hope he clarifies.
I don’t think that a lack of quotes indicates he thinks it’s literally dark. No clarification needed, just use common sense.
Common sense is something I am sworn to avoid.
Well, pretending to not understand a simple and commonly used phrase does you no credit.
That is an unworthy attack. I was being cute in order to defuse your apparent personal comments. In fact, I stand by my points and think they are correct and very much common sensible.
“I don’t know if Gore does understand … I really truly don’t know what is the correct interpretation of his words are.”
Common sense is knowing that the “dark side” of the Moon is synonymous with “far side” of the Moon. Again, pretending to not understand that does you no credit.
Besides, I know you’re smarter than that. I have a very low tolerance for deliberate stupidity.
Whatever…
If you re-read my comments you will see you interpret them wrongly. lets let it go.
So what did you think of the debates yesterday?
I didn’t bother to watch it, I knew it would be a circus with Trump involved, and everything I’ve heard about it so far indicates that was indeed the case. Though I’m told Jeb Bush came through it looking pretty good, along with Rubio and John Kasich.
I was hoping it would be like the Jerry Springer Show where they start throwing chairs and shoving. Maybe next time.
And the albedo of typical surface features on the moon (other than darker maria and brighter ejecta) is about the same as mountains (without snow or ice) not he earth…. regolith being regolith.
Yeah. The average albedo of the Moon is about .12, similar to the albedo of worn asphalt. The Earth’s average albedo is about .32, though it varies quite a bit depending on cloud cover.
The following chart is for Al, one of the great human beings.
Agreed. This is all just silly. Far be it for me to defend Al Gore on anything, but “Dark” in this context is a metaphor. No reasonably informed person thinks that there is a side of the moon that is always dark in the physical sense. To claim that anyone using the term “dark” to describe the tidally locked far-side of the moon actually thinks that side is physically dark all the time is condescending and un-informed in its own way. Hey! Science! Lighten up! The rest of the world uses metaphors to describe things! Get used to it!
“We,” as in the Soviet Union, you mean, with Luna 3. And then many NASA Lunar Orbiters. And five Apollo missions. And Clementine. And Chandrayaan-1. And now LRO. (Sure I missed some in there.) Not quite so dark, mysterious, or unknown any more.
Al was only using exactly the same terminology used in its release, so blame the Agency before you blame some geezer non-scientist.
From Wikipedia:
Though both sides of the Moon experience two weeks of sunlight followed by two weeks of night, the far side is also referred to as the dark side of the Moon,[1][2] originally in the sense of “unknown” rather than lack of light.
Facts are facts. In addition he referred to a “dark side” of the Moon that is fully illuminated – so he is not even paying attention to what he is looking at.
The image shows something counterintuitive. Despite our perception of the full Moon being extremely bright, this is only because it is normally seen in contrast to the darkness of the night sky. The Moon has an albedo only about one third that of the Earth, so compared to Earth, even the illuminated hemisphere is surprisingly dark.
I think Al Gore’s consistent support of science and technology is more significant than his occasional imprecise language. “Darkest Africa” was also fully illuminated.
He simply quotes NASA.
“A series of test images shows the fully illuminated “dark side” of the Moon that is not visible from Earth.”
http://earthobservatory.nas…
To under stand what he wanted to say is easy, to stand up and point at him and say nana is not called science.
It is slightly dark in the image. The gain was not the best for the Moon. It was set for Earth. Simple reasoning would be if the Sun was behind the viewer, the Moon and Earth would be lit. I have a video of the Moon going behind the Earth taken from a Dish sat.
Oh here we go again with the ‘dark’ discussion!
I also have to say that if you are going to post pieces about political foibles you have to expect that the conversation will discuss the politician, Keith. Just sayin’. Look at the comment by Granit below as an example. I don’t find it objectionable- but then again I thought the discussion re: ISS package was way lower than my own flinch point. Lots of back and forth, all friendly.
Just enjoy the music Micheal 🙂
Heh. Actually, this photo is an interesting illustration of the fact that *all* sides of the Moon are dark. Average albedo around 0.12, roughly the shade of a worn asphalt parking lot.
We tend to think of the Moon as a light place because we mainly see it illuminated by direct sunlight against a night sky. But the Earth is overall around three times as reflective, and this photo illustrates this point nicely. Albeit somewhat startlingly, as the Moon’s relative darkness is very counter-intuitive.
I think it is a shame that what could have been an enlightening moment, when we can see that the moon is actually a dusky dark object, shaking our preconceptions, instead turns into a massive public confusion because of the unnecessary usage (quotes or not) of the archaic term “Dark Side of the Moon”. 🙁
In a couple weeks, there may be an additional set of photos (and GIF) of the Moon passing behind the Earth. Perhaps a video of a whole orbit. The Moon will appear a similar brightness (I’ve read the near side albedo is ever so slightly greater?). For those who remain confused, it might make something click, to see what is actually going on.
But maybe not. As “people on the street” videos show, there are no limits to the public’s ignorance. I still think the number of people awed by this is still greater than the number who are confused, or worse, claim it is fake.
Wow maybe we will see a demonstration of what Galileo saw 500 years ago.
An inquisition?
My guess is, just about nobody involved is thinking about it that deeply anyway, so no real harm.
As for why the former VP put it that way, my guess is, far more likely too much Pink Floyd back in the day than any belief in a “Dark side of the Moon” as a genuine physical phenomenon.
Very much agree
@POTUS just called it the dark side as well. Good luck, Keith. I’m surprised Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson is not also mounting a new crusade about this semantic point.
Tyson, Nye, etc are all fellow wizards and they never point out each other’s errors.
This Just In: “darkest Africa” was actually bright green the whole time.
Someone tell Lucas that “Dark” Side is misleading. They’re Siths, not vampires.
The “dark side of the moon” is a figure of speech. I suppose everyone who uses the phrase “dark side of the moon” should make little quotation marks with their fingers when they do it so we don’t take them literally. I’m really feeling some Austin Powers levels of “quotation marks” ridiculousness here.
Couldn’t agree more. #Take a science class was incredibly blunt (and rather crass). Say what you want about Gore, but he’s one of the few for the most part that has consistently pushed science. One might also attack the NBC Nightly News team. The other night Lester Holt reported the same exact thing- using the same phrase. What, no nasty tweet for NBC’s Alan Boyle as well? Let’s start with NASA press releases and work from there.
So … ignore what astronomy books say, eh?
Nothing in his comment suggests he is.
Most of the American public believes the dark side of the moon IS dark so it’s more than a figure of speech to them. People who know otherwise should refrain from using that phrase.
Proof it is the dark side of the moon right here in the you tube listing
https://youtu.be/DLOth-BuCNY
Facts are facts lol
Um…who cares? This is much ado about nothing.
Must be a slow space news day.
Indeed. Look at how popular this post is in attracting comments.
True, though even if it weren’t total clickbait (which I believe it is), I’d consider the current story’s “popularity” to be based on 32 comments since 23 other comments (or 41%) are either yours or responses to yours.
So you just had to add an additional comment ….
This issue was also discussed here:
https://disqus.com/home/dis…
Huh? Everything is quoted.
I think he means Gore. Gore added to the universal confusion:
no quotes.
Keith, could you just link to the comments section the last time someone used the term? That would save us ALL a lot of time.
I don’t see any confusion at all. “Dark side” is synonymous with “far side”, and NASA uses it consistently in that regard.
It is still wrong.
So are most euphemisms.
Technically wrong – yes. However it is an understood expression still in use by many. If we must always be technically correct how do we reconcile the use of ‘full moon’, when what we are seeing is only half of the sphere lit by reflecting sunlight? A ‘half moon’ is really only a quarter of the sphere etc…
I’ve been working on explaining what an expression is to my kids when they look at me funny when they hear something like “beating a dead horse” – it is not meant literally but is able to get a point across and a concept understood.
Another transit image, this time by Deep Impact while 31 million miles away (see notes below):
http://spaceflightnow.com/w…
Notice the dimness of Luna.
Another very interesting feature is that in this more distant image the relative sizes of Earth and Moon are more correct (4 to 1), than in the 1 million mile Goresat image at 2.8 to 1.
Here is an extended discussion of that variation on NasaWatch:
https://disqus.com/home/dis…
More I didn’t know, I always thought the mass of the moon was about 1/6 the mass of earth since I always heard you weight 1/6 what you weigh on earth.
The moon is what percent of the earths mass
The moon has a much smaller mass than the earth, less than 2%. The acceleration of gravity is dependent on mass and altitude from the center.
Don’t think I understand the details in that.
Does the density of the material play a factor?
I’m guessing the core of the earth is very dense but the outer layers are less dense and just keep you far from that dense stuff in the center?
My question is doesn’t the mass not at the earths center pull on us too?
Isn’t the stuff on the outer layers of the earth denser than most of the moon?
Some guestimates of the internal densities of the Earth In grams per cubic centimeter (g/cc)
Continental Crust: 2.7 to 3.0
Oceanic Crust: 3.0 to 3.3
Mantle (silicates): 3.3 to 5.7 (increasing with depth?)
Outer Core (liquid): 9.9 to 12.2
Inner Core (solid): 12.6 to 13.0
The current thinking is that a Mars-sized planet collided with the Pre-Earth (a REALLY bad day) and splattered away the upper layers. The iron cores merged in the superplanet Earth. The splatters, composed of the lightweight low-density crust and (mostly) mantle, congealed into our sister planet, the Moon..
http://nova.stanford.edu/pr…
http://www.ericjamesstone.c…
Very cool 🙂
Here is a video of the Big Splash that created the Moon and the current Earth.
http://www.history.com/show…
A few years ago a co-worker at the Ames Research Center told me of a plan to put a telescope on the dark side of the moon. At the time he was working for the Kepler project. I asked him a few questions about the advantages of putting a telescope there and he said it was very good because of the darkness. I don’t know if this plan went anywhere. He may have been referring to a radio telescope.
There were a few lunar observatory ideas kicking around during the Constellation days. The lunar far side would be an excellent place for a radio telescope.
Or was it something like this?
http://www.nasa.gov/centers…
The far side of the moon is the dark side when the Earth’s reflected light and synthetic RF emissions are considered. For those reasons it would be a good location for a telescope. A moon orbiting communication link would be needed for the same reason. And of course the far side is not the dark side when the Sun is considered.
“the far side is also referred to as the dark side of the Moon, originally in the sense of “unknown” rather than lack of light.”
Also, there is no shining “crazy diamond,” “Any Color You Like” doesn’t consist of any color, and the sheep and pigs thing is a metaphor.
“kcowing Mod • 6 days ago
I warned you people about gratuitous politician bashing and off topic comments.”
😀