1

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is the government hiding the flat earth from us?

« on: September 12, 2016, 07:35:17 PM »

where's your evidence for your claim?

you're actually kind of correct, it is an energy barrier, protecting us from the sun

nothing comes in or out though? That's wrong, we can track meteors and there's artifacts ON the moon that humans left there

you can't just say the reflector test doesn't exist, I've personally seen it work

There were numerous attempts to nuke the dome in "operation fishbowl" with rockets and the highest they ever got was 680 miles. Since the fake Moon landings astronauts have only been traveling within 400 miles.

I clearly said "Meteorites maybe be able to fall into it, but we can't send rockets out of the dome."  I think the dome is there mainly to trap us the inhabitants of earth. Like a giant roach motel it may let physical objects fall in though the top, but it won't let us leave.  After all we seem to be valuable livestock to whom or whatever constructed the dome, and ranchers don't just let cattle wonder outside their fenced property.

 The reflector test can easily be explained by the fact that some parts of the moon are more reflective then others.  We also have more powerful and precise lasers now then we did when MIT first did reflective tests on the moon in the 1950s.

2

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is the government hiding the flat earth from us?

« on: September 11, 2016, 04:15:18 PM »

its not the goverment its the zionist jews who own them,every one of them

By zionist jews do you mean the Rothschild dynasty?  The Rothschilds answer to the far more ancient Vatican bank. The Vatican bank assigned the Rothschild bloodline as frontmen to their mafia operations so that they could take advantage of prejudices and play the “just blame the jew” card whenever their corrupt crime rings were exposed.




   

3

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is the government hiding the flat earth from us?

« on: September 11, 2016, 02:03:06 PM »

Ummmm...there are no laser's that can reach the moon...lol. Nice try though.

Wrong. There's a long range laser ranging facility at Wettzell, Germany which is capable of reaching the moon (https://www.bkg.bund.de/DE/Observatorium-Wettzell/Messsysteme-Wettzell/Wettzell-Laser-Ranging-System/wettzell-laser-ranging-system.html) - use google translate. You can go there yourself and see it in action.

Yet we still don't have comercial visits to space. Makes no sense. None of what they do makes sense. Everything is marketed for money but space!?! BS, it stinks to much to be true.

yes we do have commercial space visits..

or are the people who have been also paid shills?
the owner of Cirque de Soleil has been into space

do some research

I would daresay that a lot of scientists consider it their duty to reveal the truth without regard to whether people find it depressing or amusing.  In fact, the revelation of a dome would probably start an entirely new science and industry to try to drill through it.  I am not sure how a FE indicates limited resources more than a RE but proof of a FE might invigorate new science and industry to explore over the edge - for all we know there are resources - and maybe even forms of life - beyond the edge (or beyond the dome).

And it's a simple economic fact that there's not enough money to go around to bribe everyone to keep quiet about a FE.  Do you honestly think the severely underpaid teachers and professors around the world are being secretly bribed??  At the same moment, if there were any truth to a FE, the one scientist who first reveals it to the world would be assured of money, fame, and pretty lab assistants!  Isn't that sufficient motivation?

There are also lots of scientists who are bound by non-disclosure agreements to never disclosure research details for various reasons.  Agreements which have severe loss of career consequences if breached. In reality that first scientist would get punished like Edward Snowden and Chelsa Manning.

Also a lot of science, industry, and military efforts seem to be attempts to break out of the dome.  Both the USA and USSR tried nuking the dome with countless atmosphere tests in the 60s-70s, Russia tried drilling past 8 miles underground, and Japan is trying to make a 10 petawatt  laser that will concentrate the equivalent of the entire world's electricity consumption times 10,000.

No, it is not an economic fact. It is just a cliched slogan and your opinion.  Are you not aware that National Central banks create currency out of thin air for their respective governments?  Also there are huge pension slush funds for government employees and teachers all over the world.  The CalPERS structure isn't limited to just Calfornia it has been implemented globally. So I completely disagree with the sentiment that there just isn't enough money to bribe so many people.

the glass/ice dome is disproven by the existence of meteors

Even billionaires like Elon Musk and the owner of Cirque de Soleil are middle class compared to the banking dynasties that run the UN.

Never said the dome was glass/ice. Personally I think the dome is a type of energy barrier. Meteorites maybe be able to fall into it, but we can't send rockets out of the dome.

4

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is the government hiding the flat earth from us?

« on: September 11, 2016, 01:39:53 PM »

I looked up as much as I could of Auguste Piccard and he evidently did not believe that the planet was shaped flat.  He merely described the view from a Montgolfier balloon, which is pretty much like the view from the Observation Deck of the Empire State Building.  The intriguing thing is, wherever you go up in altitude, the earth looks like a disc - which is to say circular - never one side so much closer than the other sides, all the edges equidistant no matter where on earth you take a balloon ride.  That suggests that there is no Edge anywhere, that the earth is a sphere without an edge.

Or it suggests that balloon passengers at 3,000 ft just aren't close enough to the Antarctic edge. After all they can only see the horizon for 67 miles which is nothing with in the grand scale of the earth's size.

Why only 67 miles from 3000 feet if the Earth is flat?
What hides the rest, say, 120 miles away?

The limits of perspective for the observer is the same regardless of the shape.

5

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is the government hiding the flat earth from us?

« on: September 11, 2016, 11:24:31 AM »

I looked up as much as I could of Auguste Piccard and he evidently did not believe that the planet was shaped flat.  He merely described the view from a Montgolfier balloon, which is pretty much like the view from the Observation Deck of the Empire State Building.  The intriguing thing is, wherever you go up in altitude, the earth looks like a disc - which is to say circular - never one side so much closer than the other sides, all the edges equidistant no matter where on earth you take a balloon ride.  That suggests that there is no Edge anywhere, that the earth is a sphere without an edge.

Or it suggests that balloon passengers at 3,000 ft just aren't close enough to the Antarctic edge. After all they can only see the horizon for 67 miles which is nothing with in the grand scale of the earth's size. 

6

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Classic and Advanced Sattelite types on the Flat Earth ! (Topic With poll)

« on: September 11, 2016, 11:18:17 AM »

Satellite receiver dishes point to space. FACT.  PROVEN.

Satellite dishes don't point up to space at 90 degree angles. They point to the nearest ground based radio tower at a near 45 degree angle.

In my area they all point nearly horizontal to the ground towards towers.  As for dishes pointed at 90 degrees they are merely getting the radio wave signals that are reflected off the atmosphere. Cause radio waves don't actually go though the atmosphere.




What ground based radio tower could be at a near 45 degree angle?

A ground based radio tower would be roughly horizontal from most dishes!

Are you going to tell me that these "satellite dishes don't point up to space at 90 degree angles"? Well close anyway!

Satellite TV Dishes in Indonesia

Please put brain into gear before touching keyboard.

7

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Classic and Advanced Sattelite types on the Flat Earth ! (Topic With poll)

« on: September 11, 2016, 11:01:21 AM »

That is a microwave dish used for point to point communication for eg linking mobile phone base stations. Take it from someone who knows.

Exactly and that further illustrates how satellites are a false narrative.  According to the globe earth narrative microwaves dishes point up to up-linking data to satellites past the atmosphere, where mere radio waves are reflected.  Yet as you point out that isn't the case at all. These microwave dishes are for ground to ground linkage NOT space linkage.  See the satellite tv dishes are pointed up at the sky to get the reflected radio waves that bounce off the atmosphere and the high powered microwave dishes link ground base stations instead of actually uplinking to (non-existence) satellites past the reflective atmosphere.

8

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Classic and Advanced Sattelite types on the Flat Earth ! (Topic With poll)

« on: September 10, 2016, 09:34:29 AM »

Satellite receiver dishes point to space. FACT.  PROVEN.

Satellite dishes don't point up to space at 90 degree angles. They point to the nearest ground based radio tower at a near 45 degree angle.

9

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is the government hiding the flat earth from us?

« on: September 08, 2016, 07:09:35 PM »

Non-disclosure agreements:  This supposes that a scientist is/was hired or under contract to someone, which usually happens AFTER he has attained some experience as a scientist.  But we have lots and lots of scientists, all around the world, and in previous decades and centuries, that were not under any contract.  And yet they also all held to a Round Earth.  And I am sure that every one of them knew that the first one to prove the "true flatness" would get fame and fortune and the cute lab assistants.  Do you really believe that ALL scientists, everywhere on earth, for the past four or more centuries, were crooked and were being paid off??

Not to be catty, but your grasp of economics is as simplistic as your attitude about scientists.  Money is not made out of thin air.  In the US, it is necessary that the Federal Reserve purchase Treasury bonds in order to issue an equivalent amount of currency.

No, not every scientist held to a Round Earth model. Most notably Auguste Piccard, the first scientist to see the earth from the stratosphere, described the earth as a flat disc with an upturned edge. 

No, it is just your fantastical opinion and confirmation bias that such a scientist would be rewarded with fame, riches, and pretty women. 

No, I never implied that ALL scientists were crooked and paid for. Shame on you for trying to twist my argument with such dishonest rhetorical questioning.

That is a very ignorant and ineffective economic argument. Treasury bonds are paper IOUs with fiat digits on them just like the Federal Reserve Notes they are exchanged for. This exchange process of fiat paper for another form of fiat paper just further proves my point that currency is printed out of thin air.  Also your completely silent about the pension fund structures that provides financial incentives to every scientist and teacher on government and public education tenure.  The pension funds alone annihilate your naive opinion on there not being enough money to provide incentive to silence.

10

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is the government hiding the flat earth from us?

« on: September 08, 2016, 05:22:53 PM »

There is no dome and you have no proof of it.

*Yawns* Not an argument.

11

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is the government hiding the flat earth from us?

« on: August 20, 2016, 11:06:47 PM »

I would daresay that a lot of scientists consider it their duty to reveal the truth without regard to whether people find it depressing or amusing.  In fact, the revelation of a dome would probably start an entirely new science and industry to try to drill through it.  I am not sure how a FE indicates limited resources more than a RE but proof of a FE might invigorate new science and industry to explore over the edge - for all we know there are resources - and maybe even forms of life - beyond the edge (or beyond the dome).

And it's a simple economic fact that there's not enough money to go around to bribe everyone to keep quiet about a FE.  Do you honestly think the severely underpaid teachers and professors around the world are being secretly bribed??  At the same moment, if there were any truth to a FE, the one scientist who first reveals it to the world would be assured of money, fame, and pretty lab assistants!  Isn't that sufficient motivation?

There are also lots of scientists who are bound by non-disclosure agreements to never disclosure research details for various reasons.  Agreements which have severe loss of career consequences if breached. In reality that first scientist would get punished like Edward Snowden and Chelsa Manning.

Also a lot of science, industry, and military efforts seem to be attempts to break out of the dome.  Both the USA and USSR tried nuking the dome with countless atmosphere tests in the 60s-70s, Russia tried drilling past 8 miles underground, and Japan is trying to make a 10 petawatt  laser that will concentrate the equivalent of the entire world's electricity consumption times 10,000.

No, it is not an economic fact. It is just a cliched slogan and your opinion.  Are you not aware that National Central banks create currency out of thin air for their respective governments?  Also there are huge pension slush funds for government employees and teachers all over the world.  The CalPERS structure isn't limited to just Calfornia it has been implemented globally. So I completely disagree with the sentiment that there just isn't enough money to bribe so many people.

12

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is the government hiding the flat earth from us?

« on: August 19, 2016, 01:45:56 PM »

However, what are the potential motives that "the man" has, as far as keeping the truth about Flat Earth a secret goes?

• Flat earth with a dome would indicate that everyone on Earth is trapped like pets in a gigantic fishbowl. Such a revelation could trigger mass depression, suicides, rioting, and looting in some areas.
• Promises of space exploration brings a lot of money laundering opportunities. Gift insiders billions of tax money to go to space,  spend millions in Hollywood productions, and pocket the difference. 
• Flat Earth=finite resources and less volatility for the Government pension funds that trade on Wall Street.  Hyped false promises of flooding markets with rare minerals gathered in space brings opportunities worth trillions to short selling insiders.

13

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Planets

« on: August 18, 2016, 10:37:24 PM »

Try looking for a video of an actual telescope, not some canon digital camera.

"Actual" Telescope? You mean like the CG rendered photos from the Hubble telescope? Cause even the SOFIA telescope images are too blurry to see much detail. 

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Faked Moon Landing

« on: July 14, 2016, 07:58:56 PM »

MIT reflected lasers off the moon back in 1962. No need for a reflector some parts of the moon are more reflective then others.

"Looks like you are simply ignorant about science."

Yes, the first laser pulse reflected from the moon was in 1962, but if you look into it you will find a dramatic improvement in accuracy since the corner reflectors were installed.

You can read a bit about it in:
Reminescenses of Early Work at MIT and ESRIN 1963-1974
But these early experiments needed very high power and comparatively long pulse lengths (around 1 ms in the 1962 MIT case), so could not achieve very high accuracy. I could not find much of the accuracy of this one, bit a later one (still without corner reflectors) described in

3 .1. Accuracy of Distance Measurement
This accuracy is limited by several factors:
(a) The duration of the pulse emitted by the laser, that is, about 50 nsec. This time interval corresponds to an uncertainty of 15 m in the distance.

May 9, 1962: Laser beam first used to measure distance to the moon
In 1962, laser technology was a new and exciting science. Lasers produce a light that is intense, coherent, and monochromatic. The beam of light emitted by a laser is also extremely narrow. It would be impossible to bounce a flashlight beam off the moon, as the light disperses too much to travel any distance. But a laser beam is so narrow that it can make the roughly 239,000 mile journey to the moon and still be detected back on Earth. The first time this was done, MIT scientists using a ruby laser to bounce a light beam off the moon in a series of pulses, estimated that its area on the moon's surface was just four miles in diameter. Later they were able to reduce this to under 2 1/2 miles.

From Cosmeo View Today In History Events

The measurements with the corner reflectors have achieved millimeter accuracy, enough to determine that the Moon is spiraling away from Earth at a rate of 3.8 cm per year - a figure unexpectedly high.

Sure they did bounce lasers off the moon in 1962, but needed very high power lasers and the accuracy was relatively poor.

Finally how do you reconcile the 239,000 miles or so measured by a number of methods with FE "a bit over 3,000 miles" purely guessed?

Keep guessing, but just remember that "Thanos " stating something does not make it true!

There has also been dramatic advancements in laser and sensor technology since 1962.  Also as I said before some parts of the lunar surface are more reflective then others. All Nasa had to do is find a highly reflective patch and bingo they had the coordinates for a reflective panel story.

Easy. The 239,000 mile measurements are all based on the assumption that the lasers are traveling in the vaccuum of space. However the lasers are being refracted by the "waters above" and the super-dense firmanent dome.  Slower refracted lasers=illusion of lasers traveling a greater distance in a vacuum.   

15

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Faked Moon Landing

« on: July 13, 2016, 08:03:02 PM »

Just wanted to drop some common bulletpoints and information from an author by the name of Guy P. Harrison.
• They lied. Hundreds of thousands of NASA personnel and contractors might have lied and then kept lying about it for all these decades, but I doubt it. Over the years I have interviewed more than twenty Apollo engineers, mission control personnel, and astronauts. Maybe they lied to me about their work and personal memories, but I doubt it. There are too many people telling the same story. Faking a Moon landing would be easy compared to the challenge of getting thousands of conspirators to keep the lie all these years.

• The US lied because it was determined to win a public relations war with the USSR. And the Soviet Union could have won by exposing such a vast American fraud. But the Soviets, also technologically sophisticated in space, knew the landings were real and acknowledged it.

The contractors won't have be to told anything. They are just told to produce and deliver x,y,z items following Nasa's specs. 

It is also very easy to get conspirators to keep a lie when a lot of monetary gain is involved.  Case in point look at all the government bureaucrats that abuse the massive wealth in pension investment funds while openly lying that taxes and fees are government's only revenue source.  Governments are masters at distracting people with Budget Reports, which don't show the entire financial picture, while hiding the revenue sources listed in the Comprehensive Annual Finical Reports out of public comprehension.

Also the Soviet Union would never reveal a truth about a staged moon landing because American bankers financed and ran the entire country.  David Rockefeller, president of the Chase Manhattan Bank, would vacation to the Kremlin and even decided when Nikita Khrushchev would be replaced and by whom.  The Soviet Union was more or less a giant shell company for the very bankers that financed the communist revolutions.

16

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Faked Moon Landing

« on: July 13, 2016, 07:39:56 PM »

with a decent telescope, you can zoom in and see what we have left behind, you can do the reflector test too

that's evidence that we've been

Tiny low resolution pixels of dark spots don't really prove anything really.

MIT reflected lasers off the moon back in 1962. No need for a reflector some parts of the moon are more reflective then others.

The Lunar video/photos also have clear evidence of being faked:

1) identical landscapes for different official "locations" and even moon landings.
2) The videos were played at 50% speed to create the Hollywood magic of low gravity.  Double the speed of Nasa's videos and it becomes clearly obvious that the Lunar buggy is just kicking up sand/dirt in regular gravity on Earth.
3) The crossmarks layers were behind some objects. Which shows NASA was just photoshoping the Crossmarks in for appearance. They weren't really using the crossmarks etched onto a clear lens plate because there was no need for photogrammetry in their fake moon studio.

17

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Interesting vid on angular momentum in space

« on: July 10, 2016, 02:48:48 PM »

Thanos, let me take you through this one step at a time...

1) There is software that you can see where and when the ISS is near your location (latitude and longitude). Google it.
2) The ISS is in orbit at an inclination of 51.6° (https://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-ISS-at-51-6-degrees-orbital-inclination)
3) The Sun's inclination is 23.5°.
4) The Moon's inclination is 28.58°.
5) Therefore, every now and then the ISS will transit the Sun and Moon.
6) We have cameras and telescopes (with solar filters).
7) We can and do take pictures of the Sun and Moon.
8 ) We can and do travel to places on Earth where the ISS will transit the Sun and Moon.
9) Are you suggesting we can't take a picture of it transiting the Sun or Moon?

Why not?

Your ISS sun and moon photos are fake CG. It's no different then how they broadcast fake videos inside the ISS from a studio.  I get it though you will believe any of the Hollywood star magic that comes from the high priests of NASA.

18

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Interesting vid on angular momentum in space

« on: July 09, 2016, 11:09:21 PM »

virtual azimuth and elevation numbers are assigned to mask the land based towers

As for the ISS it is a simple hologram projection. Darpa has had the high altitude hologram technology since the 70s.

See, this is why the FE debate tactic of letting arguments just "roll off" is so bad. Many of these types of arguments have already been covered but here we go again...

I have even brought up this topic months ago here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65080.msg1736930#msg1736930

Please, by all means, explain how:

1) The position of the ISS, that is calculated beforehand so people with telescopes can travel to where it will transit the Sun, is fake. They actually set up equipment and do take pictures. BTW, (1) the image actually has the shuttle docking with the ISS, just like it was supposed to and (2) there are also pictures of it against the Moon as well (calculated beforehand).
2) Exactly how does a hologram work against the Sun? Please provide some evidence of this ludicrous claim. This is why I started that thread in the first place.
3) Using basic high school mathematics, we can (and I did) demonstrate the altitude of the ISS based on the telescope picture (and there are several more you can find). If you know some math, you can calculate it as well.

So, FEers are just making up stuff - as usual. REers have photographic, repeatable, measurable, verifiable proof/evidence. FEers only have "maybe", "if", invisible objects, theoretically possible (?) hopes/beliefs (i.e. religion) with no demonstrable, verifiable evidence something is ACTUALLY being done. The FE concept is just a fantasy/religion for believers, and an underdog debate topic for non-believers.

As I keep saying, amateur astronomy (visual/photographic) supports/proves or falsifies/disproves/destroys/annihilates all Earth models.

For starters the image of the ISIS over the sun and moon look very CG.  The "docking shuttle" that you mention is merely an indiscernible mass of black 7x10 pixels.  So no its not solid photographic evidence at all.

If the ISS is just a holographic projection system then obviously they can steer the holographic ISS where ever they want and provide the viewer calculations.  The whole point of having a holographic projection would be for it to be seen.



 

19

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Interesting vid on angular momentum in space

« on: July 09, 2016, 10:46:44 PM »

It's evidence of collusion, dickhead.

Just like you following each other here to do the same shit is.

And just like you being a member of JREF is evidence of you being a homosexual paedophile.

Which we knew already.

Dude that language is very much uncalled for.

Also explain how James Randy, and all his JREF followers, qualify as "pedophiles" which is quite a serious personal accusation.  James Randy has a consensual relationship with a full grown adult.

20

Flat Earth General / Re: Do the "big nations" (China, Russia, USA, Europe,...) cooperate?

« on: July 09, 2016, 04:21:20 PM »

Oh I will prove right now the moon landings were fake with some sound facts and logic.
1) Nasa admits that they can't send humans though the Van Allen Radiation belt with current technology:
Since Nasa doesn't have the current tech TODAY in 2016 then it was utterly impossible for them to have the tech back way back in 1969-1972.

they are specifically talking about testing the electronics on Orion which are more sensitive than Apollo.  They also specifically say they need to test before sending humans through that region.  Two things about that, first you want to make sure you have a working spacecraft before adding humans to it.  Second, Apollo didn't go through that region.  Orion specifically went through the center of the belts while Apollo went AROUND them.

2) For the sake of this argument lets assume the astronauts some how got to the moon. In which case all the "beautiful" photos they took would be completely unusable. The film would literally boil in the 123 C moon day heat, freeze in the negative 153 C lunar nights, and would be over-exposed from the space radiation.  Hence all those beautiful moon photos had to be faked.

You've shown you can quote the min and max heat of the SURFACE but you haven't shown the film would get to that heat, nor that the surface was that heat when they were there.  It takes time to heat up and cool down the surface of the Moon.  All of the Apollo missions landed in lunar morning and none experienced that max heat

3) All the moon photos Nasa has released have zero visible stars

As they should.  Stars are relative dim compared to the sun.  You can't have pictures showing stars and not have the surface be massively over exposed.

yet depict shadows from multiple light sources.  Further evidence that the moon landings were faked with studio lights and not actually taken on the moon.

None show multiple light sources.  Multiple light sources would show multiple shadows on a single object.  That is never seen.

Yeah right. If Apollo circumnavigated the Van Allen Radiation belt then Orion should be able to do so even easier with more sophisticated guidance systems.  Also it is very easy to harden electronics with shielding from EMP and radiation interference.

The film in the cameras were not insulated from heat, cold, and there was no lead shielding for radiation.  As I stated before the radiation rays would over expose the film.

21

Flat Earth General / Re: Why is the Flat Earth Theory right?

« on: July 09, 2016, 03:35:13 PM »

Lol. Yeah it is so perfectly normal and "non-fake" for NASA, China, and Russia to all use scuba equipment for "legit" space walk mission videos.   

So you don't know how training for space walks is done,   that's  not unreasonable that you would misunderstand that given your lack of comprehension generally. 

Since you raised the subject of GPS,  You are probably unaware that the satellites actually transmit their co-ordinates in real time,   you can build your own receiver and write your own decoding software if you wish,  the satellites are in orbit at about  20,000 km,  but don't believe me,  you owe it to yourself to discover the truth.   

I don't understand why you think WGS84  ellipsoid is a flat earth?   It's just a simple XYZ cartesian co-ordinate system,  and the surface of the earth is mapped in that co-ordinate system as an ellipsoid,  so you can get correct altitude fixes.

I have use LEO systems extensively, and they aren't "blimps"  that's just showing your ignorance.   There are also plenty of amateur radio satellites in orbit,  built and operated by amateur radio groups around the world.   I used AMSAT OSCAR 7 many years ago.

Here is a list of current AMSAT satellites
http://www.amsat.org/status/


"LEO systems are simply solar-powered blimps that float in a fixed position indefinably"   Thats just pure BS.   If you think otherwise,  I challenge you to prove that ANY of the amateur satellites are fake.

Sanitarium happy hour here we come....  !!

They use pool footage for the Live TV streams of supposed space walks. Not just the training missions.

"so you can get correct altitude fixes."  To get correct altitude fixes. Exactly. The WSG 84 reference model won't be able to provide correct altitude fixes if it a curved spherical model applied for navigating on a flat earth.  Also just like the International Terrestrial Reference Frame the WSG 84 is a no net rotation model.  IF we were on a rotating globe then the WSG 84 and ITRF would be ineffective for aerospace navigation and missile targeting.

Interesting that you mention AMSAT-OSCAR 7 its pretty fishy how it went silent with a dead battery in 1981, goes silent for 21 years with a malfunctioned battery, and then was heard from again in June 2002.  What was the radio frequency you used with AMSAT-OSCAR 7?

22

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Interesting vid on angular momentum in space

« on: July 09, 2016, 12:43:17 PM »

virtual azimuth and elevation numbers are assigned to mask the land based towers

As for the ISS it is a simple hologram projection. Darpa has had the high altitude hologram technology since the 70s.

23

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Interesting vid on angular momentum in space

« on: July 09, 2016, 12:13:43 PM »

Galaxy 19 is in geostationary orbit above 35,700 KM. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_19
http://www.n2yo.com/satellite/?s=33376


do you have a reference for you claim that it is only at 42 km?

35.7 or 42km it makes no difference.  You miss the actual point. Under 100km orbits are well within the pull of GRAVITY.  A satellite system would instantly "glide" like a rock unless it was a lighter then air airship platform. It is that simple.

that is 35 THOUSAND 700 km.  Are you unable to read?

Nothing gets above the 100Km ceiling not even rockets.

24

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Interesting vid on angular momentum in space

« on: July 09, 2016, 11:07:20 AM »

Galaxy 19 is in geostationary orbit above 35,700 KM. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_19
http://www.n2yo.com/satellite/?s=33376


do you have a reference for you claim that it is only at 42 km?

35.7 or 42km it makes no difference.  You miss the actual point. Under 100km orbits are well within the pull of GRAVITY.  A satellite system would instantly "glide" like a rock unless it was a lighter then air airship platform. It is that simple.

25

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Interesting vid on angular momentum in space

« on: July 09, 2016, 11:00:32 AM »

Also hundreds of billions shared among millions of people works out to spoils in the hundreds of thousands.  Many people would gladly make harmless PR lies about satellites for an extra hundreds of thousand in their bank account.

Without a single whistleblower?  LOL.  The conspiracy idea is ludicrous....what the fuck is the point of it?   

Do you have a single shred of evidence to support your conspiracy speculation?


And where the fuck are these thousands of blimps?   Why can't anyone see them floating about?

Whistle-blowers lose their jobs, retirement pension funds, and even prison time for revealing classified information.  So why would a whistleblower give up everything they have just to expose a simple lie that LEO satellites are actually HAPS blimps?

Do you have a single shred of evidence of LEO satellites in orbits below the space boundry line at 100km well under the constant pull of gravity for 10-15 years of operation?  Or do you just take the science fiction fantasy at face value? My Lighter-then air HAPS blimps can float indefinitely against gravity without fuel consumption, but your satellites need constant thrust to "fly" in a geosynchronous orbit for years.  Therefore my theory of HAPS blimps is actually physically possible while your satellites fantasy is totally impossible. It really is that simple.

People do see the HAPS blimps floating about as the little dots 35+km away from them in the sky.  Your imaginary satellites were never there flying at 35km within the Stratosphere to begin with.

26

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Interesting vid on angular momentum in space

« on: July 09, 2016, 10:15:15 AM »

the tiny stationary white dots!

Those tiny white dots are hauling ass!   

They are merely stationary blimps that function as geosynchronous satellites for the globe deception. 

Triangulation from dish angles puts those " stationary blimps that function as geosynchronous satellites  " at the right altitude to be in geosynchronous orbit.

A geostationary equatorial orbit (GEO) is a circular geosynchronous orbit in the plane of the Earth's equator with a radius of approximately 42,164 km (26,199 mi) (measured from the center of the Earth). A satellite in such an orbit is at an altitude of approximately 35,786 km (22,236 mi) above mean sea level.

So you are guessing that there are blimps at an altitude of 35,786 km!  not much air there!

Still any old bit of guesswork to stop the flat earthers from thinking.

I have noticed a few of your other posts and you seem to be dragging out all the old ideas that have been answered dozens of times.

You must have just graduated from the "Flat Earther Indoctrination Course 101"!

Maybe you should wait till you get through the third level before making serious posts.

See if this post means anything to you

OK, here it is - your proof that satellite dishes are point at the same object. I am using towns at the 97° longitude to make this a 2D trigonometric problem:

You'll need to go and look at it.

Obviously you need to do more research into HAPS "High altitude platform station" blimps that reach 50Km. As someone that studied Aerospace Engineering nearly 10 years ago I will provide a little lesson of how things really work.

HAPS offer all the same data transmission capabilites of "satellites," are routinely positioned 20-50Km, AND have outrageous benefits:
- They are orders of magnitude cheaper
- They can be landed for repairs and upgrades
-  rapidly deployable and replaceable without launch platforms 

Now think about those practical benefits for a moment...  You really think that Government agencies and corporations have been blowing $50-500 million a pop on 2,271 fragile, impractical, non-upgradable satellites? haha

Quite the opposite. For about $200K a HAPS blimp you can have 2,271 blimp "satelite" platforms deployed for only $454,200,000. Less then the price of a single staged $500 million shuttle launch! Think about the magnitude of that and the money laundry opportunities of such a scam.

BTW take a good look at these two articles and the conflicting stories.  One claims that Google will use 180 satellites to provide free internet while the other claims they will use HAPS platforms. Very interesting isn't it? 

"Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) supports the idea of the FCC authorizing resources for the study of broadband delivered from high-altitude platform stations (HAPS), which are 20 to 50 kilometers above ground." (hmm satellite dishs aimed at 35km objects would work with this right? lol)

http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/google-pushes-fcc-study-high-altitude-platform-stations-broadband-services/2015-05-20
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2646039/Googles-plans-world-domination-Search-giant-launch-180-satellites-bring-internet-access-ENTIRE-planet.html

Many things are theoretically possible. So what? Theoretically, you can build a tower for every Dish TV. So what?

Did you actually read and comprehend what the article says? "Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) supports the idea of the FCC authorizing resources for the study of broadband delivered from high-altitude platform stations (HAPS), which are 20 to 50 kilometers above ground." So they are LOOKING into STUDYING the HAPS. This does not say they actually used them. Considering you have 10 yrs of engineering, you should comprehend what you read a bit better.

We (REers) are interested in what really happens (reality - the real world, not the fantasy FE world). Companies are looking to save money all the time. If these were possible and practical, they would do it - especially if it would reduce their costs by billions of dollars. Even NASA started using reusable shuttles instead of plain rockets to reduce costs. They would not be doing this to "prove" a FE.

Regardless now-a-days, TV Dishes are using SATELLITES - specifically geostationary ones 35,000+ km above sea-level. Bye Bye FE FANTASY.

It shows that LEO satellites are completely unnecessary thanks to high altitude airship technology that has been around for decades before Arthur C. Clark introduced satellites as a Science Fiction concept.

Google knows HAPS work and are filing the paperwork with the FCC to use them. That certainly points to plans to use them.

So lets be clear you actually believe there is a Galaxy 19 satellite at a low earth orbit of 42 Km since 2008?  Do you realize the Karman space line and effects of gravity reach up to 100km?  Either Galaxy 19 magically has enough fuel for 8 years of constant thrust to fly with or it floats on hot air like a blimp. haha

27

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Interesting vid on angular momentum in space

« on: July 09, 2016, 09:16:10 AM »

No, of course not.  Instead all the world's major governments and coporations are involved in a massive conspiracy involving millions of people across decades and involving hundreds of billions of dollars spent.  They are all in fact using 10s of thousands of invisible blimps whilst pretending to use satellites.  Why do they do this?  Well, reasons.

Politicians and world leaders from around the world have been conspiring at annual Bilderberg, Davos, and Bohemian Grove meetings for decades.  So your conspiracy dismal is without actual merit.  Also hundreds of billions shared among millions of people works out to spoils in the hundreds of thousands.  Many people would gladly make harmless PR lies about satellites for an extra hundreds of thousand in their bank account. 

28

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Interesting vid on angular momentum in space

« on: July 09, 2016, 02:47:22 AM »

the tiny stationary white dots!

Those tiny white dots are hauling ass!   

They are merely stationary blimps that function as geosynchronous satellites for the globe deception. 

Triangulation from dish angles puts those " stationary blimps that function as geosynchronous satellites  " at the right altitude to be in geosynchronous orbit.

A geostationary equatorial orbit (GEO) is a circular geosynchronous orbit in the plane of the Earth's equator with a radius of approximately 42,164 km (26,199 mi) (measured from the center of the Earth). A satellite in such an orbit is at an altitude of approximately 35,786 km (22,236 mi) above mean sea level.

So you are guessing that there are blimps at an altitude of 35,786 km!  not much air there!

Still any old bit of guesswork to stop the flat earthers from thinking.

I have noticed a few of your other posts and you seem to be dragging out all the old ideas that have been answered dozens of times.

You must have just graduated from the "Flat Earther Indoctrination Course 101"!

Maybe you should wait till you get through the third level before making serious posts.

See if this post means anything to you

OK, here it is - your proof that satellite dishes are point at the same object. I am using towns at the 97° longitude to make this a 2D trigonometric problem:

You'll need to go and look at it.

Obviously you need to do more research into HAPS "High altitude platform station" blimps that reach 50Km. As someone that studied Aerospace Engineering nearly 10 years ago I will provide a little lesson of how things really work.

HAPS offer all the same data transmission capabilites of "satellites," are routinely positioned 20-50Km, AND have outrageous benefits:
- They are orders of magnitude cheaper
- They can be landed for repairs and upgrades
-  rapidly deployable and replaceable without launch platforms 

Now think about those practical benefits for a moment...  You really think that Government agencies and corporations have been blowing $50-500 million a pop on 2,271 fragile, impractical, non-upgradable satellites? haha

Quite the opposite. For about $200K a HAPS blimp you can have 2,271 blimp "satelite" platforms deployed for only $454,200,000. Less then the price of a single staged $500 million shuttle launch! Think about the magnitude of that and the money laundry opportunities of such a scam.

BTW take a good look at these two articles and the conflicting stories.  One claims that Google will use 180 satellites to provide free internet while the other claims they will use HAPS platforms. Very interesting isn't it? 

"Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) supports the idea of the FCC authorizing resources for the study of broadband delivered from high-altitude platform stations (HAPS), which are 20 to 50 kilometers above ground." (hmm satellite dishs aimed at 35km objects would work with this right? lol)

http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/google-pushes-fcc-study-high-altitude-platform-stations-broadband-services/2015-05-20
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2646039/Googles-plans-world-domination-Search-giant-launch-180-satellites-bring-internet-access-ENTIRE-planet.html

29

Flat Earth General / Re: Why is the Flat Earth Theory right?

« on: July 09, 2016, 12:08:10 AM »

Is it easy to discount us and call us "conspiracy theorists nutjobs"? Sure. Does that make us wrong? No, not anymore so than saying "It is not right, the Earth is round."

First to answer your question, I must state its not hard to show there are centuries of flat earth evidences too. However, at the base of Rowbotham's method is a return to real empiricism and a real science that puts the accountability into everyday observation and testing. These observations check out, whereas when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting fitting together. Like somebody shoved three boxes of puzzles into one container.

Actually it's not so easy to discount all flat earthers as conspiracy nutters,   there  seem to be as many models of  flat earth theory as there are youtube channels,   I have personal direct experience of satellite systems,  there is nothing fake about space,  NASA,  ESA,  JAXA,  all the TV and weather satellites,  GPS,  LEO systems...  you name it.   All real,  all perfectly normal.   

If you choose to deny objective reality,  that's your business,  I can imagine lots of people are happier in their own version of reality.   

Who am I to say they are wrong?   Happy hour at the sanitarium with scepti on the piano. 

Just stop pretending it's objective reality.  Most of us live in the real world.

Lol. Yeah it is so perfectly normal and "non-fake" for NASA, China, and Russia to all use scuba equipment for "legit" space walk mission videos.   





GPS doesn't use any satellites.  GPS is based on the analog technologies of the LORAN and Decca naviation systems from WWII. It runs entirely on triangulating locations from all the groundbased cellphone towers.

LEO systems are simply solar-powered blimps that float in a fixed position indefinably.  Really simple dirt cheap technology. The satellites in Geosynchronous orbit worked as a great marketing fiction though. A lot of $200K blimps got to be sold at "inflated" prices as $500 million satellite packages to investors. haha 

30

Flat Earth General / Re: Why is the Flat Earth Theory right?

« on: July 08, 2016, 11:42:45 PM »

These observations check out, whereas when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting together.

Please elaborate.  Experts in the fields of aerospace, seismology, navigation, weather, astronomy, geodesy, and countless others all agree that the earth is a spheroid planet with a radius of 6,371 km, and for all of them, things would fall apart if this were not the case.  In fact, everything fits together so well that the only ones that disagree are a small group of conspiracy theorists, none of which are knowledgeable in any of these fields.

All those fields rely on GPS which was made using the WGS 84 reference model.  If you read the actual WGS 84 literature it defines itself as a re-worded flat earth model.  Ellipsoid shape with a flatting factor, ceiling (flat earth dome), no-net rotation condition like the International Terrestrial Reference System (ITRS), and geocentric system (in other words with the celestrial objects all orbiting the earth as the geo-center) You and many others don't realize it, but all the guidance models actually fitted together so well on flat earth models the whole time. lol