Pseudolites

Quote from: Lord Xenu on October 31, 2011, 08:51:47 AM

Sunlight is not bendy. The only type of light that bends is moonlight. This is owing to the unusual biological properties of the moonshrimp.

So are you saying that light can have different properties based on how it was created? Your kidding right?

Not in the slightest. Ichi's plant experiments have already proven that moonlight has the unique property of being harmful to organisms. Why should it not also have the unique property of bendiness?

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on October 31, 2011, 09:44:15 AM

Quote from: Lord Xenu on October 31, 2011, 08:51:47 AM

Sunlight is not bendy. The only type of light that bends is moonlight. This is owing to the unusual biological properties of the moonshrimp.

So are you saying that light can have different properties based on how it was created? Your kidding right?

Not in the slightest. Ichi's plant experiments have already proven that moonlight has the unique property of being harmful to organisms. Why should it not also have the unique property of bendiness?

Ichi's "experiment" was not a proper double blind experiment and was therefore quite useless.

Not in the slightest. Ichi's plant experiments have already proven that moonlight has the unique property of being harmful to organisms. Why should it not also have the unique property of bendiness?

What a joke. Ichi's 'experiment' fails in too many ways to list and still get some work done today.

If "moonlight" (not sunlight bounced from the moon to us) was at all harmfull to ANY organisims there would be no organisims on this planet. There would be no nocturnal creatures, no trees, no grass, nothing. Unless you have some evidence that shows how all the things that live on this planet which might come into contact with moonlight have a natural defence for said 'moonlight' except for Ichi's plant.

EVEN IF "moonlight" comes from bioluminescence its still light. its still part of EMR and still behaves like the rest of EMR. Does it bend or not? Visible light is just a narrow window in the Spectrum of EMR.

Please show a study or something that demonstrates the difference in behavior between sunlight and moonlight.

Sunlight is harmful and yet we survive so I don't see the joke.

If "moonlight" (not sunlight bounced from the moon to us) was at all harmfull to ANY organisims there would be no organisims on this planet.

Sunlight is harmful and yet we survive so I don't see the joke.

This.

EVEN IF "moonlight" comes from bioluminescence its still light. its still part of EMR and still behaves like the rest of EMR. Does it bend or not? Visible light is just a narrow window in the Spectrum of EMR.

Erm, why should it? Moonlight is bendy. Radiation in the electromagnetic spectrum does not bend. Moonlight is perhaps not part of the electromagnetic spectrum.

Please show a study or something that demonstrates the difference in behavior between sunlight and moonlight.

Look out of your window. The moon is flat, but looks circular from everywhere on earth. Moonlight is bendy.

Ichi's "experiment" was not a proper double blind experiment and was therefore quite useless.

So double blind experiments are the only valid form of experiment?

So little information about pseudolites. Do they even exist?

So little information about pseudolites. Do they even exist?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudolite
Pseudolites definitely exist.

So little information about pseudolites. Do they even exist?

There isnt a lot of info as there isnt a lot of use for them, or many in existence.

Quote from: EmperorZhark on October 31, 2011, 01:18:42 PM

So little information about pseudolites. Do they even exist?

There isnt a lot of info as there isnt a lot of use for them, or many in existence.

Stop trolling. The fact that there are so many "satellite" televisions in the world demonstrate that there are lots of pseudolites and/or stratellites.

Quote from: Theodolite on October 31, 2011, 01:33:08 PM

Quote from: EmperorZhark on October 31, 2011, 01:18:42 PM

So little information about pseudolites. Do they even exist?

There isnt a lot of info as there isnt a lot of use for them, or many in existence.

Stop trolling. The fact that there are so many "satellite" televisions in the world demonstrate that there are lots of pseudolites and/or stratellites.

Actually, the existence of the pseudolites is a hypothesis, not a conclusion

The existence of a network of pseudolites consistent enough to replace satellites is definitely not proven. Even on this forum the evidence shown is nearing zero.

The existence of a network of pseudolites consistent enough to replace satellites is definitely not proven. Even on this forum the evidence shown is nearing zero.

No one on this forum has presented evidence that satellites are broadcasting the signals. The evidence shown on this forum is nearing zero.

Quote from: EmperorZhark on October 31, 2011, 01:55:18 PM

The existence of a network of pseudolites consistent enough to replace satellites is definitely not proven. Even on this forum the evidence shown is nearing zero.

No one on this forum has presented evidence that satellites are broadcasting the signals. The evidence shown on this forum is nearing zero.

I have posted evidence from multi station gps tracking surveys that I have conducted that conclude the satellites altitude and speed are correct.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on October 31, 2011, 02:05:32 PM

Quote from: EmperorZhark on October 31, 2011, 01:55:18 PM

The existence of a network of pseudolites consistent enough to replace satellites is definitely not proven. Even on this forum the evidence shown is nearing zero.

No one on this forum has presented evidence that satellites are broadcasting the signals. The evidence shown on this forum is nearing zero.

I have posted evidence from multi station gps tracking surveys that I have conducted that conclude the satellites altitude and speed are correct.

Source? GPS signals don't send out altitudes.

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on October 31, 2011, 12:17:38 PM

If "moonlight" (not sunlight bounced from the moon to us) was at all harmfull to ANY organisims there would be no organisims on this planet.

Quote from: Mrs. Peach on October 31, 2011, 12:20:14 PM

Sunlight is harmful and yet we survive so I don't see the joke.

This.

*** facepalm ***  I know I'm loosing the trolling game right now. I know I should just move on but I can't.
Sunlight is good. It has lots of natural effects that give life to this rock we live on. Its not harmfull in any way. Overexposure to UV radiation (also sent to us from the dun) is bad for organisims that dont have a natural resistance to it or a shield from it. Otherwise Sunlight is a great benefit to life on earth. without it there would be no life on this planet.

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on October 31, 2011, 12:17:38 PM

EVEN IF "moonlight" comes from bioluminescence its still light. its still part of EMR and still behaves like the rest of EMR. Does it bend or not? Visible light is just a narrow window in the Spectrum of EMR.

Erm, why should it? Moonlight is bendy. Radiation in the electromagnetic spectrum does not bend. Moonlight is perhaps not part of the electromagnetic spectrum.
[/quoote]
Light = EMR
MoonLIGHT, FlashLIGHT, SunLight, Radiowaves, Microwaves all = EMR. No matter where it is in the spectrum its still EMR and it only goes staright. Please provide some citations for how you came to know that moonlight is different form regular EMR. I am curious. please enlighten me.

Quote from: Lord Xenu on October 31, 2011, 01:04:01 PM

Look out of your window. The moon is flat, but looks circular from everywhere on earth. Moonlight is bendy.

SO Whenever it is convenient for FE EMR bends, and whenever it's convenient for FE EMR goes in a straight line.You cant have it both ways.

EMR must go straight for pseudolites to even be Plausible.

if moonlight is not EMR please share with us what it is. Just guessing does not count.

Overexposure to UV radiation (also sent to us from the dun) is bad for organisims that dont have a natural resistance to it or a shield from it.

I have developed resistance to a poison, therefore it's no longer poisonous and anyone who claims otherwise is silly. Let's all enjoy a nice pint of poison.

Quote from: Theodolite on October 31, 2011, 02:09:27 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on October 31, 2011, 02:05:32 PM

Quote from: EmperorZhark on October 31, 2011, 01:55:18 PM

The existence of a network of pseudolites consistent enough to replace satellites is definitely not proven. Even on this forum the evidence shown is nearing zero.

No one on this forum has presented evidence that satellites are broadcasting the signals. The evidence shown on this forum is nearing zero.

I have posted evidence from multi station gps tracking surveys that I have conducted that conclude the satellites altitude and speed are correct.

Source? GPS signals don't send out altitudes.

If you set up 3 receivers at 3 locations around 30km apart, you can tell when each satellite comes into your field of view.  This is a common survey practice, you can determine that the satellites almanac data is correct.  Then you record of all the data the satellite transmits while it is visible, then you can calculate speed, and altitude.

You can make the arguement that the satellite is very low (like in your pseudolites), but this would fail simple tests of structure masking.  You can note when valley walls, mountains, and buildings mask the signal.  It is also very easy to test and confirm the behavior of the 2 frequencies, which act as an additional check.

Would you like to discuss why there are only 4 satellites in each of the 6 orbits, and how each satellite is visible every 11 hours at a point along its orbit?

I have developed resistance to a poison, therefore it's no longer poisonous and anyone who claims otherwise is silly. Let's all enjoy a nice pint of poison.

Lrn2mithridatism

Quote from: EmperorZhark on October 31, 2011, 01:55:18 PM

The existence of a network of pseudolites consistent enough to replace satellites is definitely not proven. Even on this forum the evidence shown is nearing zero.

No one on this forum has presented evidence that satellites are broadcasting the signals. The evidence shown on this forum is nearing zero.

You don't know how to use a TV dish? You don't phone overseas? Etc.

At least we have heaps of data regarding satellites and very little regarding pseudollites.

Light = EMR
MoonLIGHT, FlashLIGHT, SunLight, Radiowaves, Microwaves all = EMR. No matter where it is in the spectrum its still EMR and it only goes staright. Please provide some citations for how you came to know that moonlight is different form regular EMR. I am curious. please enlighten me.

Ichi's plant experiments, and the fact that moonlight is clearly bendy.

SO Whenever it is convenient for FE EMR bends, and whenever it's convenient for FE EMR goes in a straight line.You cant have it both ways.

If it is convenient it is because it is based on observation. The moon is the only celestial object whose shape appears distorted in the sky. Therefore, it must be only moonlight that bends.

The moon is the only celestial object whose shape appears distorted in the sky. Therefore, it must be only moonlight that bends.

Have you heard of optical telescopes?
They show that the Sun and the planets are round.

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on October 31, 2011, 02:32:30 PM

Light = EMR
MoonLIGHT, FlashLIGHT, SunLight, Radiowaves, Microwaves all = EMR. No matter where it is in the spectrum its still EMR and it only goes staright. Please provide some citations for how you came to know that moonlight is different form regular EMR. I am curious. please enlighten me.

Ichi's plant experiments, and the fact that moonlight is clearly bendy.

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on October 31, 2011, 02:32:30 PM

SO Whenever it is convenient for FE EMR bends, and whenever it's convenient for FE EMR goes in a straight line.You cant have it both ways.

If it is convenient it is because it is based on observation. The moon is the only celestial object whose shape appears distorted in the sky. Therefore, it must be only moonlight that bends.

Xzenu you have done a good job of derailing htis thread to the point that we are arguing about bendy light. Lets bring this one back in a little bit and get back to the point.

The pseudolite/satelite arguement comes down to line of sight. Low altitude fixed broadcasting stations -vs- satelites.
1 - TV and GPS signals are not light. They go straight.
2 - Pseudolites, ground based or hanging from baloons, have a shorter range by sight and require more power based on the amount of atmosphere they have to go through for long range transmissions.
    a. If pseudolites transmit only through 10 miles of atmo then 180,000 of them are needed to cover the Continental USA. This is a problem because the majority of the states are roling hills. plus with that number of these devises (which must exist because i currently ama Direct TV customer) people would know about them commonly.
    b. If pseudolites transmit as far as FM radio stations can (100 miles -ish) we still need 18000 of them to cover the states.
    c. If all these communications are coming in laterally or say within 10 deg of the horizon; Why are satelite dishes pointed at much higher angles?
    d. Why is it that the only time the satelite radio in my car cant get signal is when I am directly under something? never next to anything? I get signal in a canyon, or driving arround in a city, but not under a bridge or in the covered drive through at a bank?

This is a slam dunk for RE. Yu guys know it. Please while answering these questions provide a citation for your evidence so I can go check it out too.

FE belief about Pseudolites is a huge joke, PERIOD. You can point your $50.00 DirecTV line of site and disprove this joke.

It´s me, or this thread is just a random loop of Post-Ignoring?

It´s me, or this thread is just a random loop of Post-Ignoring?

It is just you.  Everyone else is ignoring posts in a non-random way.  They pick and choose the ones that they ignore.

The pseudolite/satelite arguement comes down to line of sight. Low altitude fixed broadcasting stations -vs- satelites.
1 - TV and GPS signals are not light. They go straight.

So do signals from pseudolites.

b. If pseudolites transmit as far as FM radio stations can (100 miles -ish) we still need 18000 of them to cover the states.

That seems a reasonable number.   

c. If all these communications are coming in laterally or say within 10 deg of the horizon; Why are satelite dishes pointed at much higher angles?

Pseudolites will be placed at high points. It makes sense. The signal will travel much further than expected because the earth is flat. Also, to receive signals from stratellites.

  d. Why is it that the only time the satelite radio in my car cant get signal is when I am directly under something? never next to anything? I get signal in a canyon, or driving arround in a city, but not under a bridge or in the covered drive through at a bank?

This makes perfect sense with stratellites and pseudolites too. If you are in a canyon, there is quite a large chance that a pseudolite will be transmitting a signal from somewhere past one end of the canyon. If you are under a bridge, since most pseudolites are on high places, you will not receive a signal.

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 01, 2011, 07:24:51 AM

The pseudolite/satelite arguement comes down to line of sight. Low altitude fixed broadcasting stations -vs- satelites.
1 - TV and GPS signals are not light. They go straight.

So do signals from pseudolites.

I think you misread the statement. This was not an issue of the source. Just the nature of the signal. Unfortunatley for you, agreeing with this is a slam dunk for a later RE point. Continue on.

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 01, 2011, 07:24:51 AM

b. If pseudolites transmit as far as FM radio stations can (100 miles -ish) we still need 18000 of them to cover the states.

That seems a reasonable number.   

18K pseudolites Just for the Continental USA seems Reasonable? There are not 18K suitable places to put them in the US. The US is mostly flat save for a few mountain ranges. Anyone on flat land more than 100 miles away from a high geographical point (like me) would never get these signals. What about places like Africa, Eastern Russia, Canada, Alaska, the OCEAN? There are not Pseudolites on every peak in Alaska. What would be the point when satelites do the job so much easier and dont need to be powered other than by the sun. 18K Its not a reasonable number at all. That is if we had a perfect grid of suitable positions spread all around the country. I estemate the need ov over 100K pseudolites just for the US. That means that to cover the rest of the world we are looking at somewhere 2-3M of them. Everyone wouuld know about them and there would be pseudolite repair techs everywhere. And they woudl not be called Pseudolites because that name is created as a replacement for the word satelite, meaning fake or alternative for real satelites.

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 01, 2011, 07:24:51 AM

c. If all these communications are coming in laterally or say within 10 deg of the horizon; Why are satelite dishes pointed at much higher angles?

Pseudolites will be placed at high points. It makes sense. The signal will travel much further than expected because the earth is flat. Also, to receive signals from stratellites.

Not all areas have high points that will serve what you claim. Ther are only 20 or so places in The Pacific northwest That would get what you need for this to work and that would still only cover a tiny percentage of the area. Please see the above point.

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 01, 2011, 07:24:51 AM

  d. Why is it that the only time the satelite radio in my car cant get signal is when I am directly under something? never next to anything? I get signal in a canyon, or driving arround in a city, but not under a bridge or in the covered drive through at a bank?

This makes perfect sense with stratellites and pseudolites too. If you are in a canyon, there is quite a large chance that a pseudolite will be transmitting a signal from somewhere past one end of the canyon. If you are under a bridge, since most pseudolites are on high places, you will not receive a signal.

Not all canyons are straight. I woudl say no canyons are straight. Your going to need a bunch more pseudolites if you plan to strategicly place them arround geographical features to get full coverage. What about in a city? even a small as Seattle or Spokane? The signal would be blocked (as you admited to them only going in straight lines) by buildings. Unless in cities there are pseudolites on every building top. In that case There would need to be far more than 18K of them covering the US.



The death nail in pseudolites is simple. Ground based LOS communications is not remotely feasable due to the simple effectiveness of satelites. The immense number of them required to pull off what is already happening on this planet today is impractical. There is not the amount of required suitable transmitting locations arround the world to properly cover everything. It is a lost cause and a bad arguement for FE.

You guys will need to come up with a new idea for how satelites are real and are also cought up in the celestial mechanics of the sun and moon. Something that allows more for a real world observed scenario. Simple unmanned rockets deploying satelites to 1000 miles up where  they are also engaged by the UA and are forced to rotate with the sun and moon.

For your own sanity and credibility please abandon pseudolites. They are not good for your position.

The US is mostly flat save for a few mountain ranges.

Another win for FE!

Edit: Th0A5andth Poast!!!!1111

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 02, 2011, 06:42:32 AM

The US is mostly flat save for a few mountain ranges.

Another win for FE!

Edit: Th0A5andth Poast!!!!1111

It´s flat, if you mean that the medium distance of points on the surface are almost at the same distance to the earth core. Also I´m getting bored of this site

Quote from: Lord Xenu on November 02, 2011, 06:56:24 AM

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 02, 2011, 06:42:32 AM

The US is mostly flat save for a few mountain ranges.

Another win for FE!

Edit: Th0A5andth Poast!!!!1111

It´s flat, if you mean that the medium distance of points on the surface are almost at the same distance to the earth core. Also I´m getting bored of this site

So the Earth is flat even in RET?