your magical satellites have never been observed. you spend millions of dollars to send each satellite into space. but you don't put a $ 1000 camera in any of them to prove its existence. Is it convincing? Nope.
your magical satellites have never been observed. you spend millions of dollars to send each satellite into space. but you don't put a $ 1000 camera in any of them to prove its existence. Is it convincing? Nope.
your magical satellites have never been observed. you spend millions of dollars to send each satellite into space. but you don't put a $ 1000 camera in any of them to prove its existence. Is it convincing? Nope.You want them to take selfies now? Anyway, you just dismiss photos from space, so why would this be different?
Ahahah. I like to see you the globulards in pain. ;DWhat is your point? Still waiting for transmitter locations for satellite receivers.
All we know, comparatively the cost of camera is nothing compared to cost of satellites.
I have seen only a few cameras on rockets and then all we seen that the space isn't space they told us; right?
We have clearly heard a "plop" like something jumped to a pool. ;D
NASA has 20 billions of dollars budget, but has not enough money to connect a camera will show a rocket from launching to the orbit. They are poor. Having 20 billions isn't proving their being rich, maybe their money is going elsewhere.
Ahahah. I like to see you the globulards in pain. ;DWhat is your point? Still waiting for transmitter locations for satellite receivers.
All we know, comparatively the cost of camera is nothing compared to cost of satellites.
I have seen only a few cameras on rockets and then all we seen that the space isn't space they told us; right?
We have clearly heard a "plop" like something jumped to a pool. ;D
NASA has 20 billions of dollars budget, but has not enough money to connect a camera will show a rocket from launching to the orbit. They are poor. Having 20 billions isn't proving their being rich, maybe their money is going elsewhere.
Ahahah. I like to see you the globulards in pain. ;DThe rocket deployed an anti spin mechanism. It’s been covered many times.
All we know, comparatively the cost of camera is nothing compared to cost of satellites.
I have seen only a few cameras on rockets and then all we seen that the space isn't space they told us; right?
We have clearly heard a "plop" like something jumped to a pool. ;D
NASA has 20 billions of dollars budget, but has not enough money to connect a camera will show a rocket from launching to the orbit. They are poor. Having 20 billions isn't proving their being rich, maybe their money is going elsewhere.
Quote from: inquisitive link=topic=82387.msg2188644#msg2188644
[/quoteWhat is your point? Still waiting for transmitter locations for satellite receivers.
I am trying to answer all your sincere statements but you are numerically so many so that I can't reply all of the statements phsically, and statements of globulalists here are generally not at all sincere . My point still I am waiting a realtime real video.
All we know, comparatively the cost of camera is nothing compared to cost of satellites.Really? What is not right about space?
I have seen only a few cameras on rockets and then all we seen that the space isn't space they told us; right?
NASA has 20 billions of dollars budget, but has not enough money to connect a camera will show a rocket from launching to the orbit. They are poor. Having 20 billions isn't proving their being rich, maybe their money is going elsewhere.
I have seen only a few cameras on rockets and then all we seen that the space isn't space they told us; right?No, we never see that space isn't what they told us.
We have clearly heard a "plop" like something jumped to a pool. ;DThis has been explained to you repeatedly.
NASA has 20 billions of dollars budget, but has not enough money to connect a camera will show a rocket from launching to the orbit.The question isn't if they have enough money, it is what purpose does it serve and just what footage do you want?
Where does rocket booster falling to after separation?
Where does rocket booster falling to after separation?
Where does rocket booster falling to after separation?Typically the ocean. If you watch the video you see it at around 7 minutes.
Inside a Rocket From Take Off To Orbit (External Cameras) in HD[/b]
Rocket cam shots from launch to orbit, AtlasV launch of the #OA7 mission for Orbital ATK and NASA[/b]
Dashcam on a Space Shuttle - FRONT WINDOW launch[/b]
from this example, we see that a fast plane can be faster than a fast rocket. This is the highest speed. 7200 km / h. Moreover, this speed is not climbing speed. the speed during climbing is half that. So this rocket can be going no more than 3,600 km / h.No, we see none of that.
Remind; When hits, this one:Why repost the same refuted garbage as if it wasn't just refuted?
Arent everything clear?Yes, it is clear.
Remind; When hits, this one:
Arent everything clear? There are a water barreer rockets can't pass but swim in it. for a long time you all said that it is physically possible. you said that the separation of the part of the rocket caused it. Now you realize that this is impossible and you start to say fake. your defense is not convincing.
Remind; When hits, this one:
Arent everything clear? There are a water barreer rockets can't pass but swim in it. for a long time you all said that it is physically possible. you said that the separation of the part of the rocket caused it. Now you realize that this is impossible and you start to say fake. your defense is not convincing.
We've been over this ten times with you. Even the guy who made the video got schooled on what a yo-yo deadspin mechanism is and posted a video showing the rocket in question found and intact and not like it hit a 'dome' at hundreds of miles per hour. The closing words of his follow-up video, "So it didn't hit the dome, I hope that explains it for everyone."
Here:
It explains why it stopped spinning, not why it stopped forward motion.That's good, because it doesn't stop forward motion. Instead it continued on its way, slowing down due to gravity.
Ahahah. I like to see you the globulards in pain. ;DThe "plop" is not caused by the rocket hitting anything but is the yo-yo de-spin device being released.
All we know, comparatively the cost of camera is nothing compared to cost of satellites.
I have seen only a few cameras on rockets and then all we seen that the space isn't space they told us; right?
We have clearly heard a "plop" like something jumped to a pool. ;D
It explains why it stopped spinning, not why it stopped forward motion.But, as you see from the video that I showed, the rocket's forward motion does not stop - only it's spinning.
Ahahah. I like to see you the globulards in pain. ;DThe "plop" is not caused by the rocket hitting anything but is the yo-yo de-spin device being released.
All we know, comparatively the cost of camera is nothing compared to cost of satellites.
I have seen only a few cameras on rockets and then all we seen that the space isn't space they told us; right?
We have clearly heard a "plop" like something jumped to a pool. ;D
This video shows the rocket continuing it's climb, the payload separating and the rocket starting to descend.
Flat Earth Debunked: Glass Dome Hoax Exposed! by InfoStrike
But this has nothing to do with the topic, "Satellites follow a path around the globe".
Then you post this:It explains why it stopped spinning, not why it stopped forward motion.But, as you see from the video that I showed, the rocket's forward motion does not stop - only it's spinning.
No, it is not as you say. It stops both forward motion and spinning. First of all, we clearly heard that motor stops and not run anymore. and it is wandering in the water like a ship has lost its shovels.Incorrect! Learn to face the truth for once!
The video you show deceptively ends just after the yoyo de-spin and does not show the rest of the ascent but
look carefully at the following video you will find that it stops spinning but it does not stop ascending!
SpaceLoft-7 launch and de-spin video
This one presents the time of de-spin at T + 55.8 secs and 212,500 ft (about 65 km) and Mach 3.3 (still rising very fast!)
and the apogee at T + 165 secs and 119 km.
Now, Wise, face the facts! Those rockets do not hit any dome!
No, it is not as you say. It stops both forward motion and spinning. First of all, we clearly heard that motor stops and not run anymore. and it is wandering in the water like a ship has lost its shovels.Stop lying about who is posting.
No, it is not as you say. It stops both forward motion and spinning. First of all, we clearly heard that motor stops and not run anymore. and it is wandering in the water like a ship has lost its shovels.Incorrect! Learn to face the truth for once!
rocket do not hit any dome!
Stop lying about who is posting.
It is as we have both said.
The rocket does not magically stop its forward motion.
No, it is not as you say. It stops both forward motion and spinning. First of all, we clearly heard that motor stops and not run anymore. and it is wandering in the water like a ship has lost its shovels.Incorrect! Learn to face the truth for once!
rocket do not hit any dome!Stop lying about who is posting.
It is as we have both said.
The rocket does not magically stop its forward motion.
The only lies here are said by you. I mean both you one is.
We have clearly heard a "plop" then rocet does magically stop! Because there isn't any phsics law describe that forward motion stops immediately; other than either magic (according to globularist theory), or flat earth dome. I guess flat earth dome seems magic to you.
Inside a Rocket From Take Off To Orbit (External Cameras) in HD[/b]
Rocket cam shots from launch to orbit, AtlasV launch of the #OA7 mission for Orbital ATK and NASA[/b]
Dashcam on a Space Shuttle - FRONT WINDOW launch[/b]
The first one:
Rocket clearly begins to move horizontally after 2 minutes voyage. The goal is to fall into Antarctica. The speed appearently seems not more than 2.000 kms/h.
The fastest fighter aircraft in the world X-15 has a record speed of 7,200 km / h.
Patriot air defence rocket has to be faster than other rockets to catch them. Its speed 1,4 km/seconds= 5,000 km/h.
Nasa claims its rockets move 20 km/seconds. If it was really so, so no need to defence companies, lets give all the defence to NASA. It just a joke, you know. Nasa says what it needs only. It completely a lie. This is the speed of fastest vehicles in earth.
from this example, we see that a fast plane can be faster than a fast rocket. This is the highest speed. 7200 km / h. Moreover, this speed is not climbing speed. the speed during climbing is half that. So this rocket can be going no more than 3,600 km / h.
Lets calculate its maximum altitude:
2 minutes * 3600km/h /60 h/min = 120 kms. This is highest altitude. This altitude meanwhile approximate upper limit of the sky dome.
The second one climbs 2 minutes again. Then starts to move to Antarctica.
We know where they go. This is the Russian space shuttle over Abu Dabi.
rockets always go south, not because the equator is in the south, but because the antarctica is in the south.
What happens if a rocket touches the sky dome mistakenly when moving parallel to it? This happens:
Remind; When hits, this one:
Arent everything clear? There are a water barreer rockets can't pass but swim in it. for a long time you all said that it is physically possible. you said that the separation of the part of the rocket caused it. Now you realize that this is impossible and you start to say fake. your defense is not convincing.
We have clearly heard a "plop" then rocet does magically stop!
The only lies here are said by you. I mean both you one is.That is rich coming from someone who is currently falsely claiming that 2 different people are one person and falsely claiming that they said things that the other person said. Grow up.
We have clearly heard a "plop" then rocet does magically stop!No, it doesn't stop.
We have clearly heard a "plop" then rocet does magically stop!
The "plop" was activation of the yo-yo despinner, then it stopped the rocket spin.
How the rocket didn't smash the nose at the "dome hit" ? hehehe
And for yo-yo despinner, here is your chance to further educate yourself:
"Smart is not who knows. Smart is who learns."
No, the rocket stops spinning but it does not stop climbing!We have clearly heard a "plop" then rocet does magically stop!
The "plop" was activation of the yo-yo despinner, then it stopped the rocket spin.
How the rocket didn't smash the nose at the "dome hit" ? hehehe
And for yo-yo despinner, here is your chance to further educate yourself:
"Smart is not who knows. Smart is who learns."
It stops both spin and forward motion. Why can not you say its stopping the forward motion? Why do you need lying? Or why do not tell the all truth and tell a part of it (you think so) ? Because you need manipulation. Your needing manipulation proves that there is a dome and it has crashed it.
We have clearly heard a "plop" then rocet does magically stop!
The "plop" was activation of the yo-yo despinner, then it stopped the rocket spin.
How the rocket didn't smash the nose at the "dome hit" ? hehehe
And for yo-yo despinner, here is your chance to further educate yourself:
"Smart is not who knows. Smart is who learns."
It stops both spin and forward motion. Why can not you say its stopping the forward motion? Why do you need lying? Or why do not tell the all truth and tell a part of it (you think so) ? Because you need manipulation. Your needing manipulation proves that there is a dome and it has crashed it.
We have clearly heard a "plop" then rocet does magically stop!
The "plop" was activation of the yo-yo despinner, then it stopped the rocket spin.
How the rocket didn't smash the nose at the "dome hit" ? hehehe
And for yo-yo despinner, here is your chance to further educate yourself:
"Smart is not who knows. Smart is who learns."
It stops both spin and forward motion. Why can not you say its stopping the forward motion? Why do you need lying? Or why do not tell the all truth and tell a part of it (you think so) ? Because you need manipulation. Your needing manipulation proves that there is a dome and it has crashed it.
Seriously? Enough Wise. The rocket stops spinning because of a device that makes it stop spinning. It didn't hit a dome as the guy who made the original video claiming the rocket hit a dome made another video (all linked here in the thread) saying, yeah, he was mistaken, it didn't hit a dome.
So enough. If you got something satellites and stuff you want to lay down, have at it. But enough with your rocket/dome video bullshit. It's old. Can we move on?
We have clearly heard a "plop" then rocet does magically stop!
The "plop" was activation of the yo-yo despinner, then it stopped the rocket spin.
How the rocket didn't smash the nose at the "dome hit" ? hehehe
And for yo-yo despinner, here is your chance to further educate yourself:
"Smart is not who knows. Smart is who learns."
It stops both spin and forward motion. Why can not you say its stopping the forward motion? Why do you need lying? Or why do not tell the all truth and tell a part of it (you think so) ? Because you need manipulation. Your needing manipulation proves that there is a dome and it has crashed it.
Seriously? Enough Wise. The rocket stops spinning because of a device that makes it stop spinning. It didn't hit a dome as the guy who made the original video claiming the rocket hit a dome made another video (all linked here in the thread) saying, yeah, he was mistaken, it didn't hit a dome.
So enough. If you got something satellites and stuff you want to lay down, have at it. But enough with your rocket/dome video bullshit. It's old. Can we move on?
A device like that can't stop it. in order to do so, the mass of the part separated must be much greater. its mass is too small to be compared to the rocket and cannot produce the required torque.
And you globalists still have not an explanation how forward motion of rocket has stopped magically.
Incorrect!A device like that can't stop it. in order to do so, the mass of the part separated must be much greater. its mass is too small to be compared to the rocket and cannot produce the required torque.We have clearly heard a "plop" then rocet does magically stop!
The "plop" was activation of the yo-yo despinner, then it stopped the rocket spin.
How the rocket didn't smash the nose at the "dome hit" ? hehehe
And for yo-yo despinner, here is your chance to further educate yourself:
"Smart is not who knows. Smart is who learns."
It stops both spin and forward motion. Why can not you say its stopping the forward motion? Why do you need lying? Or why do not tell the all truth and tell a part of it (you think so) ? Because you need manipulation. Your needing manipulation proves that there is a dome and it has crashed it.
Seriously? Enough Wise. The rocket stops spinning because of a device that makes it stop spinning. It didn't hit a dome as the guy who made the original video claiming the rocket hit a dome made another video (all linked here in the thread) saying, yeah, he was mistaken, it didn't hit a dome.
So enough. If you got something satellites and stuff you want to lay down, have at it. But enough with your rocket/dome video bullshit. It's old. Can we move on?
Yo-yo de-spin (https://www.cs.odu.edu/~salam/wsdl/inforet/wikihtml/Yo-yo_de-spin.html)
A yo-yo de-spin mechanism is a device used to reduce the spin of satellite, typically right after launch. It is basically two lengths of cable with weights on the ends. The cables are wrapped around the final stage and/or satellite, in the manner of a double yo-yo. When the weights are released, the spin of the rocket flings them away from the spin axis. This transfers enough angular momentum to the weights to reduce the spin of the satellite to the desired value. The weights are often released.
De-spin is needed since some final stages are spin-stabilized, and require fairly rapid rotation (perhaps 50 rpm) to keep stable during firing (See, for example, the Star 48, a solid fuel rocket motor.) After the firing, the satellite cannot be simply released, since such a spin rate is beyond the capability of the satellite attitude control to cope with. Therefore after the rocket firing but before satellite release, the yo-yo weights are used to reduce the spin rates to something the satellite can handle (often 2-5 RPM).
As an example of yo-yo de-spin, on the Dawn Mission, roughly 3 kg of weights, and 12 meter cables, reduce the initial spin rate of 1420 kg of spacecraft from 36 RPM down to 3 RPM in the other direction[1]. The relatively small weights can have such a large effect since they are far from the axis of the spin, and their effect grows as the square of the length of the cables.
And you globalists still have not an explanation how forward motion of rocket has stopped magically.Because the forward motion of rocket has not stopped suddenly. The rocket continues ascending many kilometers after the despin device is deployed.
Why can not you say its stopping the forward motion?Because that is a blatant lie and unlike you we care about the truth.
A device like that can't stop it. in order to do so, the mass of the part separated must be much greater. its mass is too small to be compared to the rocket and cannot produce the required torque.Good job showing you either don't understand torque or are happy to lie about it as well.
It does not stop its forwards motion.So what does stop its forward motion, why do not you have an explanation? Since you have not an explanation hence You have accepted the rocket hits the sky dome.
It does not stop its forwards motion.So what does stop its forward motion, why do not you have an explanation? Since you have not an explanation hence You have accepted the rocket hits the sky dome.
There is no RabBlack! Stop changing the contents you quotes. Altering posts like this is simply dishonest and proves that you have no answer to the points raised.It does not stop its forwards motion.So what does stop its forward motion, why do not you have an explanation? Since you have not an explanation hence You have accepted the rocket hits the sky dome.
Because the forward motion of rocket has not stopped suddenly. The rocket continues ascending many kilometers after the despin device is deployed.
We have clearly heard a "plop" then rocet does magically stop!
The "plop" was activation of the yo-yo despinner, then it stopped the rocket spin.
How the rocket didn't smash the nose at the "dome hit" ? hehehe
And for yo-yo despinner, here is your chance to further educate yourself:
"Smart is not who knows. Smart is who learns."
It stops both spin and forward motion. Why can not you say its stopping the forward motion? Why do you need lying? Or why do not tell the all truth and tell a part of it (you think so) ? Because you need manipulation. Your needing manipulation proves that there is a dome and it has crashed it.
On July 4, 2017 North Korea tested an ICBM.
The missile flew for approximately 40 minutes, falling 930 km (580 mi) away from the launch site in the Sea of Japan.
The missile, named the Hwasong-14, reached an altitude of 2,802 km (1,741 mi).
The "plop" was activation of the yo-yo despinner, then it stopped the rocket spin.
How the rocket didn't smash the nose at the "dome hit" ? hehehe
And for yo-yo despinner, here is your chance to further educate yourself:
Forward motion slowed down and stopped because the propulsion ended.
<here we go again CAPS CAPS AND MORE CAPS>I don't read and reply writings contain many caps and different type of writing style. It is both disrespecting, ugly for readers and distractor. You have to give up this childish behaviour. You are doing it because you have the support of boydster the angry globularist here, never targets you and waits to attack me mercilesly. There is not an argument in your post to reply.
The "plop" was activation of the yo-yo despinner, then it stopped the rocket spin.
How the rocket didn't smash the nose at the "dome hit" ? hehehe
And for yo-yo despinner, here is your chance to further educate yourself:
Forward motion slowed down and stopped because the propulsion ended.
Repeating same lies does not make them stronger, just makes you a part of conspiracy. So you have lost your being amateur and started to fight to death like other angry globalists do here.
Yo-yo despinner does not magically create a great force to do it. It just has been discovered to explanation that event.
And your telling its slow down and stop is completely lie. We clearly heard a plup and it has stopped in same second. Stop lie, grow up and deal with flat earth truth. I can tell you truth but I can not recover your infidelity to a belief.
The "plop" was activation of the yo-yo despinner, then it stopped the rocket spin.
How the rocket didn't smash the nose at the "dome hit" ? hehehe
And for yo-yo despinner, here is your chance to further educate yourself:
Forward motion slowed down and stopped because the propulsion ended.
Repeating same lies does not make them stronger, just makes you a part of conspiracy. So you have lost your being amateur and started to fight to death like other angry globalists do here.
Yo-yo despinner does not magically create a great force to do it. It just has been discovered to explanation that event.
And your telling its slow down and stop is completely lie. We clearly heard a plup and it has stopped in same second. Stop lie, grow up and deal with flat earth truth. I can tell you truth but I can not recover your infidelity to a belief.
It stopped spinning, didn't hit anything.
The nose is intact and you saw it.
Be honest at least to yourself.
The North Korean Intercontinental Balistic Missile reached the altitude of 1741 miles, which is 1668 miles higher than your "dome at 73 miles".
Kim knows that, Trump knows that, You know that.
But you still call everyone else "liars" just to avoid the truth.
Repeating same lies does not make them stronger, just makes you a part of conspiracy.Well thanks for admitting you are part of a conspiracy.
We clearly heard a plup and it has stopped in same second.No, it hasn't.
Well thanks for admitting you are part of a conspiracy.No, I did not tell it at all. This is a lie and slander. Stop it. I am not you.
<insulting>How much are you being paid to shill for FE?</insulting>Stop to insult. It does not make your illogical arguments stronger.
<insulting>Who is paying you?</insulting>Ask this question when you look at a mirror.
Again, if it hit a dome it would disintigrate.As far as we see it, didn't disintegrate. Your baseless claim does not magically change the fact that it stops instantly.Everything that stops immediately does not need to be broken down. This is an example of it. The spider web is so. the animal stops immediately when hits, but they do not crumble until the spider eats them. Your illogical claim does not magically save an animal caught in a spider web.
<more baseless claims>This is not moderators like I do, because they whose your partners want I spend all my time for your worthless claims. I think your behave proves what is your aim. You are only trying to cause me waste of time with baseless claims, insults and meanwhile claims of I insult you by acting more sensitive than a pink pillow.
No, I did not tell it at all. This is a lie and slander. Stop it. I am not you.You stated that doing the actions that you have been doing here means you are part of a conspiracy.
As far as we see it, didn't disintegrate.That's the point.
Your baseless claim does not magically change the fact that it stops instantly.Prove it or shut up.
Everything that stops immediately does not need to be broken down.No, the velocity and size/mass of the object play a big role.
I think your behave proves what is your aim.Yes, it shows that I care about the truth and you want you to either admit the truth or at the least stop lying.
I showed in an earlier post that the rocket did not stop immediately but carried on climbing for a great distance before coming to a stop due to gravity and then falling back down undamaged.Well thanks for admitting you are part of a conspiracy.No, I did not tell it at all. This is a lie and slander. Stop it. I am not you.<insulting>How much are you being paid to shill for FE?</insulting>Stop to insult. It does not make your illogical arguments stronger.<insulting>Who is paying you?</insulting>Ask this question when you look at a mirror.Again, if it hit a dome it would disintigrate.As far as we see it, didn't disintegrate. Your baseless claim does not magically change the fact that it stops instantly.Everything that stops immediately does not need to be broken down. This is an example of it. The spider web is so. the animal stops immediately when hits, but they do not crumble until the spider eats them. Your illogical claim does not magically save an animal caught in a spider web.<more baseless claims>This is not moderators like I do, because they whose your partners want I spend all my time for your worthless claims. I think your behave proves what is your aim. You are only trying to cause me waste of time with baseless claims, insults and meanwhile claims of I insult you by acting more sensitive than a pink pillow.
I showed in an earlier post that the rocket did not stop immediately but carried on climbing for a great distance before coming to a stop due to gravity and then falling back down undamaged.Well thanks for admitting you are part of a conspiracy.No, I did not tell it at all. This is a lie and slander. Stop it. I am not you.<insulting>How much are you being paid to shill for FE?</insulting>Stop to insult. It does not make your illogical arguments stronger.<insulting>Who is paying you?</insulting>Ask this question when you look at a mirror.Again, if it hit a dome it would disintigrate.As far as we see it, didn't disintegrate. Your baseless claim does not magically change the fact that it stops instantly.Everything that stops immediately does not need to be broken down. This is an example of it. The spider web is so. the animal stops immediately when hits, but they do not crumble until the spider eats them. Your illogical claim does not magically save an animal caught in a spider web.<more baseless claims>This is not moderators like I do, because they whose your partners want I spend all my time for your worthless claims. I think your behave proves what is your aim. You are only trying to cause me waste of time with baseless claims, insults and meanwhile claims of I insult you by acting more sensitive than a pink pillow.
So if you think it stopped suddenly prove it!
You stated that doing the actions that you have been doing here means you are part of a conspiracy.No! Lie! I have stated that doing the actions that you have been doing here means you are part of a conspiracy. Do you know better than what I said, or do I know it better? Surely, I know my words better than you. So stop to do manipulate my words in your wrong benefits.
So I'm not the one lying here.As I have proved above you are the liar in this example, manipulating my words and changing them for your own ugly globalist benefits.
If it hit a dome, it would disintegrate.Nope, it would not. And the video proves it should not disintegrate. It is dome, so has different type of material. Hence it acts different other than materials you know in the earth.
It didn't disintegrate, thus it did not hit a dome.Your can't understand why he did not disintegrate does not magically it not hit the dome. It just proves you can't get it.
Prove it or shut up.I have already proved above, the dome has different material hence acts different. It stops objects without disintegrate them. Now you how has to shut up. Bye bye.
I have conclusively proven that it did not stop instantly.You have proven your not having anything about structure of dome.
You have done absolutely nothing to rationally counter that. Instead all you have done is repeatedly assert the same lie that it did magically stop.I think I have did more than you write it. Your denying the clear evidences does not magically make them dis apperar. They are exist, just you are closing your eyes.
Where is your proof that it stopped instantly?Here:
How do you explain the ground appearing to shrink if it stopped?Sorry, I have missed somebody has proved ground's going to shrink. Wait, I did not miss, nobody has proved its being shrinked. Stop talk baseless.
Dismissing/ignoring these facts does not help your case, it just shows you have no case.Having not enough time you jobless angry globularists isn't a proof of anything. You are attacking like an angry hyena gang attack an alone lion all the flat earthers, we can not find to respond all your statements, then you declare yourself the winners of any debating. You are clearly deceiving yourselves only. And all fair readers will be aware of this fact. You are constantly opening new statements, rabinoz and others are constantly insulting. And I have with a great calm can reply all the statements. You are like a gang, just you need to be fair. If your gang would be God believers would act fair. Since all you globalist gang are atheists here have not an idea about how you can be fair.
No, the velocity and size/mass of the object play a big role.Your theory does not work on sky dome. Its structure is different. However the object was, it stops it when come vertical.
If a 1 cm object is only travelling at 1 m per year then it can easily stop instantly without breaking apart.
But if a much larger object, travelling much faster stopped instantly, it would.
That is because of the momentum of the object moving is enough to overcome the strength of the material holding the object together.
Yes, it shows that I care about the truth and you want you to either admit the truth or at the least stop lying.No, it shows you don't care the truth at all. Otherwise your atheist angry globalist gang could give me enough time to reply you. But you are 3-5 or sometimes 6 person are asking different type of questions to cause me a time problem; then I have already not enough time to reply you then you are declaring yourself is the winner of any discussing. This is not about truth, we see. This is about the ego of your team. You are doing it as a punishment and torturing methods to believers. I resist them like how followers resiswted to tortures of infidels. 2000 years have passed but behave of infidels do not change.
The video footage clearly shows the ground appearing to get smaller. The only sane explanation for this is that the rocket continues moving upwards.Nope. It does not show. Your imagination does not turn to the truth.
If you want to claim the rocket magically stops, and care about the truth at all, you need to deal with this.I have dealed with it and defeated it. Your closing your eyes can not change this fact.
How come when you show us footage, we immediately have to believe it or your interpretation of it, but when somebody shows some video or photo that is proof for a round earth, you discard it as fake?
With that being said, I'd like it if the topic goes on the subject that mightyfletch started it with. Now it is heading to a "yes/no" conversation.
Weather satellite imagery is easily verifiable by looking up in the sky. You can see when clouds are about to clear out on those inages taken from orbit. Those satellites have to follow orbital mechanics or they would crash into the Earth. They barely have enough fuel to make minor course corrections, let alone power to stay aloft.
your magical satellites have never been observed. you spend millions of dollars to send each satellite into space. but you don't put a $ 1000 camera in any of them to prove its existence. Is it convincing? Nope.
your magical satellites have never been observed. you spend millions of dollars to send each satellite into space. but you don't put a $ 1000 camera in any of them to prove its existence. Is it convincing? Nope.
Your statement is false for a number of reasons. Satellites are easily observed with nothing more than a pair of binoculars, just go outside on a clear night using one of the many tracking apps, it's easy to prove, they are easy to see, unlike your fictitious dome that no one has seen! Many satellites have a whole range of sensing equipment including cameras. Images are regularly posted every day, particularly from weather satellites.
I think the problem is many flat earther, like yourself, have no option but to deny their existence rather than spending some time to find out the truth, which is pretty simple.
No! Lie! I have stated that doing the actions that you have been doing here means you are part of a conspiracy.No you didn't.
Repeating same lies does not make them stronger, just makes you a part of conspiracy.And you have been repeating the same lies that the rocket hits a dome and that it stops instantly.
Nope, it would not. And the video proves it should not disintegrate.The only way it "proves" it wouldn't, is by making a bunch of baseless assumptions involving assuming that it wouldn't and assuming the ground would magically start shrinking.
It quite simple to get it stops immediately.Again, prove it.
Sorry, I have missed somebody has proved ground's going to shrink.You mean you intentionally ignored it because it shows you are wrong.
Your theory does not work on sky dome. Its structure is different.It's structure is irrelevant. What is important is the structure of the rocket and your claim that it stops instantly, which you pretty much need to explain the rapid deceleration as it stops spinning.
Otherwise your atheist angry globalist gang could give me enough time to reply you.You have been given plenty of time, and you just repeat the same nonsense.
This is not about truth, we see.For you maybe, but for me it is about the truth.
Whenever I forward an argument instantly takes an objectionOnly the ones which are completely wrong.
Yo-yo spin theory has developed in two years agoNo, a yo-yo despin mechanism has existed for a very long time.
Your claiming satellites getting observed in a way or other can not been observed by any of our friends, nor a flat earther. Is it they are being visible only to some spesific globalists?You are yet to demonstrate anyone being unable to see them.
Your claiming satellites getting observed in a way or other can not been observed by any of our friends, nor a flat earther. Is it they are being visible only to some spesific globalists?Of course your friends do not see satellites because they don't even know how to focus their camera!
When our friends try to see the satellites then we see nothing but some weird objects.
Can you create a video like this and proves your satellites' existance in somewhere?It would waste my time because you would not believe it anyway! I have already posted videos of the geostationary satellites and you vandalised them!
Nikon P900 Captures ISS Lunar Transit by Reds Rhetoric | ISS through telescope by Trackingstation1 | |
3 satellites & the ISS filmed - just a drone? by daniella' S | Watching Satellites, Shooting Stars & Planes with Gen 3 Night Vison - July 10, 2016 by Rob Freeman - Atmospheric Anomalies | |
How to See Satellites!!! by antiprotons | Capturing the ISS (International Space Station) through my Telescope by J.W.Astronomy |
Weather satellite imagery is easily verifiable by looking up in the sky. You can see when clouds are about to clear out on those inages taken from orbit. Those satellites have to follow orbital mechanics or they would crash into the Earth. They barely have enough fuel to make minor course corrections, let alone power to stay aloft.
Weather satellite imagery is easily verifiable by looking up in the sky. You can see when clouds are about to clear out on those inages taken from orbit. Those satellites have to follow orbital mechanics or they would crash into the Earth. They barely have enough fuel to make minor course corrections, let alone power to stay aloft.
Yeah, and they also launched rockets almost 700 miles above today's ISS and set satellites with balloons near 1000 miles up. They inflated the balloon in the vacuum of space.
Here is a 1960s broadcast about this amazing technology.
What's this "launched rockets almost 700 miles above today's ISS"?Weather satellite imagery is easily verifiable by looking up in the sky. You can see when clouds are about to clear out on those inages taken from orbit. Those satellites have to follow orbital mechanics or they would crash into the Earth. They barely have enough fuel to make minor course corrections, let alone power to stay aloft.
Yeah, and they also launched rockets almost 700 miles above today's ISS
and set satellites with balloons near 1000 miles up. They inflated the balloon in the vacuum of space, OPPS, no vacuum.Why is that any evidence of "no vacuum"? It was one of the Echo satellites and not held aloft by buoyancy but by orbiting.
Here is a 1960s broadcast about this amazing technology.And you believe the rubbish in that "Nasa No vacuum in space , balloons can go up to 1000 miles , Project Echo" video?
Your claiming satellites getting observed in a way or other can not been observed by any of our friends, nor a flat earther. Is it they are being visible only to some spesific globalists?Of course your friends do not see satellites because they don't even know how to focus their camera!
When our friends try to see the satellites then we see nothing but some weird objects.
A good camera like the Nikon P-900 is completely waste on people like that who don't even bother to learn how to use it.Quote from: wiseCan you create a video like this and proves your satellites' existance in somewhere?It would waste my time because you would not believe it anyway! I have already posted videos of the geostationary satellites and you vandalised them!
But you wanted satellite videos:
Nikon P900 Captures ISS Lunar Transit by Reds Rhetoric
ISS through telescope by Trackingstation1
3 satellites & the ISS filmed - just a drone? by daniella' S
Watching Satellites, Shooting Stars & Planes with Gen 3 Night Vison
- July 10, 2016 by Rob Freeman - Atmospheric Anomalies
How to See Satellites!!! by antiprotons
Capturing the ISS (International Space Station) through my Telescope
by J.W.Astronomy
It is a clear fakeSee, why ask for videos when you just dismiss them all as fake without any rational justification?
Clear cgi.
not convincing at all. Fake.
Those are not satellites god damn it!
So animated. lol
Fake.
What are you raving about? What is wrong with two little videos in the one row?Your claiming satellites getting observed in a way or other can not been observed by any of our friends, nor a flat earther. Is it they are being visible only to some spesific globalists?Of course your friends do not see satellites because they don't even know how to focus their camera!
When our friends try to see the satellites then we see nothing but some weird objects.
A good camera like the Nikon P-900 is completely waste on people like that who don't even bother to learn how to use it.Quote from: wiseCan you create a video like this and proves your satellites' existance in somewhere?It would waste my time because you would not believe it anyway! I have already posted videos of the geostationary satellites and you vandalised them!
But you wanted satellite videos:Stop to use special effects on posts! It disturbs the reading quality! >:(
Rubbish! That is what the ISS looks like from underneath!
Nikon P900 Captures ISS Lunar Transit by Reds Rhetoric
It is a clear fake image seems like a tie fighter on an amiga game not the ISS something.
Why ever should there be any "zoom in zoom out shows where the observer it"?
ISS through telescope by Trackingstation1
Clear cgi. There isn't any zoom in zoom out shows where the observer it. Believing it requires to more poor, I am not, sorry. Try it to convince the globalists, they can be fooled easy.
Incorrect! It's a genuine video. If you don't recognize reality, tough!
3 satellites & the ISS filmed - just a drone? by daniella' S
You do know the iss is the size of a football field and the satellites are the size of a fridge. The objects in that pic look almost like Saturn v debris. So, not convincing at all. Fake.
Incorrect! It's a genuine video. If you don't recognize reality, tough!
Watching Satellites, Shooting Stars & Planes with Gen 3 Night Vison
- July 10, 2016 by Rob Freeman - Atmospheric Anomalies
Those are not satellites god damn it! Where is your evidence of them being satellites? So, all the bright objects in the sky are satellites, right? What do you think of us, a bunch of fools?
In other words you know nothing about photography, nothing about telescopes and nothing about satellites. OK, got that!
How to See Satellites!!! by antiprotons
So animated. lol Reminds me of my geology teacher. Lots of arm waving while talking about rocks. Where is the satellite? This man is just doing propaganda from first minute to the end video. Are you joke? Where are the satellites on video?
Rubbish! You don't know what you are talking about so you just make up stories!
Capturing the ISS (International Space Station) through my Telescope
The right side shows a tie fighter on amiga game representing the ISS but we don't see it in video at all. Fake.
All debunked.Incorrect! None have been debunked!
Since you have only fake, ISS videos so you have admitted you have not a real satellite footage. Inother say you have admitted them being not exist.All I have admitted is thst you don't know genuine satellite videos what you see them.
Can you create a video like this and proves your satellites' existance in somewhere?And I replied: "It would waste my time because you would not believe it anyway! I have already posted videos of the geostationary satellites and you vandalised them!"
I can’t believe people still defend a NASA led fantasy.
Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity.
Vacuum no vacuum, it was a lie to make people believe in space.
The satellite was a magnesium container and has a melting point of 650°F
The balloon was 0.5 thick and made of Mylar and has a melting point of 482°F
When the direct sun rays hits the satellite (1000 miles up) it is going to start melting and the gas in the balloon is going to expand until it pops.
They probable hung it off the balloon a few miles up. Balloon satellites is nothing new and are used all the time. They were setting the stage of “faking space” so they could get more money off suckers. Please see the following video about the history of faking space.
I can’t believe people still defend a NASA led fantasy.
Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity.
Vacuum no vacuum, it was a lie to make people believe in space.
The satellite was a magnesium container and has a melting point of 650°F
The balloon was 0.5 thick and made of Mylar and has a melting point of 482°F
When the direct sun rays hits the satellite (1000 miles up) it is going to start melting and the gas in the balloon is going to expand until it pops.
I can’t believe people still defend a NASA led fantasy.
Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity.
Vacuum no vacuum, it was a lie to make people believe in space.
The satellite was a magnesium container and has a melting point of 650°F
The balloon was 0.5 thick and made of Mylar and has a melting point of 482°F
When the direct sun rays hits the satellite (1000 miles up) it is going to start melting and the gas in the balloon is going to expand until it pops.
Where is your knowledge of any of the above coming from? How would a flat earther know:
"Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity."
Rubbish!
Rubbish!
Incorrect!
Rubbish!
I can’t believe people still defend a NASA led fantasy.
Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity.
Vacuum no vacuum, it was a lie to make people believe in space.
The satellite was a magnesium container and has a melting point of 650°F
The balloon was 0.5 thick and made of Mylar and has a melting point of 482°F
When the direct sun rays hits the satellite (1000 miles up) it is going to start melting and the gas in the balloon is going to expand until it pops.
Where is your knowledge of any of the above coming from? How would a flat earther know:
"Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity."
And how do you a globalist know?
I can’t believe people still defend a NASA led fantasy.
Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity.
Vacuum no vacuum, it was a lie to make people believe in space.
The satellite was a magnesium container and has a melting point of 650°F
The balloon was 0.5 thick and made of Mylar and has a melting point of 482°F
When the direct sun rays hits the satellite (1000 miles up) it is going to start melting and the gas in the balloon is going to expand until it pops.
Where is your knowledge of any of the above coming from? How would a flat earther know:
"Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity."
And how do you a globalist know?
I never said I do know. Just curious as to how a flat earther who doesn't believe space flight is possible would know what the temperature ranges are 1000 miles above the earth. Where is that information coming from?
I can’t believe people still defend a NASA led fantasy.
Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity.
Vacuum no vacuum, it was a lie to make people believe in space.
The satellite was a magnesium container and has a melting point of 650°F
The balloon was 0.5 thick and made of Mylar and has a melting point of 482°F
When the direct sun rays hits the satellite (1000 miles up) it is going to start melting and the gas in the balloon is going to expand until it pops.
Where is your knowledge of any of the above coming from? How would a flat earther know:
"Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity."
And how do you a globalist know?
I never said I do know. Just curious as to how a flat earther who doesn't believe space flight is possible would know what the temperature ranges are 1000 miles above the earth. Where is that information coming from?
You have not answered my question. How do you (you can take it as not you but globalists) know it?
I can’t believe people still defend a NASA led fantasy.They don't, as there is no NASA led fantasy. Just rejection of reality by those who want to pretend NASA is lying to everyone.
Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphereAre completely irrelevant due to the negligible thermal mass of the thermosphere.
When the direct sun rays hits the satellite (1000 miles up) it is going to start meltingWhy?
I can’t believe people still defend a NASA led fantasy.
Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity.
Vacuum no vacuum, it was a lie to make people believe in space.
The satellite was a magnesium container and has a melting point of 650°F
The balloon was 0.5 thick and made of Mylar and has a melting point of 482°F
When the direct sun rays hits the satellite (1000 miles up) it is going to start melting and the gas in the balloon is going to expand until it pops.
Where is your knowledge of any of the above coming from? How would a flat earther know:
"Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity."
And how do you a globalist know?
I never said I do know. Just curious as to how a flat earther who doesn't believe space flight is possible would know what the temperature ranges are 1000 miles above the earth. Where is that information coming from?
You have not answered my question. How do you (you can take it as not you but globalists) know it?
I know because I operate satellites that orbit the globe. It's part of my job.I can’t believe people still defend a NASA led fantasy.
Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity.
Vacuum no vacuum, it was a lie to make people believe in space.
The satellite was a magnesium container and has a melting point of 650°F
The balloon was 0.5 thick and made of Mylar and has a melting point of 482°F
When the direct sun rays hits the satellite (1000 miles up) it is going to start melting and the gas in the balloon is going to expand until it pops.
Where is your knowledge of any of the above coming from? How would a flat earther know:
"Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity."
And how do you a globalist know?
I never said I do know. Just curious as to how a flat earther who doesn't believe space flight is possible would know what the temperature ranges are 1000 miles above the earth. Where is that information coming from?
You have not answered my question. How do you (you can take it as not you but globalists) know it?
I know because I operate satellites that orbit the globe. It's part of my job.I can’t believe people still defend a NASA led fantasy.
Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity.
Vacuum no vacuum, it was a lie to make people believe in space.
The satellite was a magnesium container and has a melting point of 650°F
The balloon was 0.5 thick and made of Mylar and has a melting point of 482°F
When the direct sun rays hits the satellite (1000 miles up) it is going to start melting and the gas in the balloon is going to expand until it pops.
Where is your knowledge of any of the above coming from? How would a flat earther know:
"Above 120 miles (200 km) above sea level, temperatures in the thermosphere can vary between 600° and 2000°C (1100 and 3600°F). The actual temperature range is highly dependent on solar activity."
And how do you a globalist know?
I never said I do know. Just curious as to how a flat earther who doesn't believe space flight is possible would know what the temperature ranges are 1000 miles above the earth. Where is that information coming from?
You have not answered my question. How do you (you can take it as not you but globalists) know it?
I'm sure you do. Do you have a real proof other than your job?
With the use of satellite data being used for everything from GPS, surveying, weather forecasting to even things like archeology
https://www.globalxplorer.org/about
Is it not about time for flat earth believers to re-think their position on this subject. With around 8000 satellites having been launched and 5000 give or take currently in orbit launched from over 31 facilities involving over 50 countries, with more being launched on almost a weekly basis, so much so that each launch receives very little if any news coverage. Last week for example very little was made here in the west of India’s moon mission Chandrayaan-2 that will arrive in lunar orbit in early Sept and set to make a landing soon afterwards.
Labelling all space related activity as being part of a greater conspiracy does not look at all credible.
With the use of satellite data being used for everything from GPS, surveying, weather forecasting to even things like archeology
https://www.globalxplorer.org/about
Is it not about time for flat earth believers to re-think their position on this subject. With around 8000 satellites having been launched and 5000 give or take currently in orbit launched from over 31 facilities involving over 50 countries, with more being launched on almost a weekly basis, so much so that each launch receives very little if any news coverage. Last week for example very little was made here in the west of India’s moon mission Chandrayaan-2 that will arrive in lunar orbit in early Sept and set to make a landing soon afterwards.
Labelling all space related activity as being part of a greater conspiracy does not look at all credible.
Additionally, Space-X is planning on launching almost 12,000 cubesats, so you can access broadband connections almost at any point on the globe. They'll be in Low-Earth Orbit at 340km, 550km, and 1,150km for their Starlink program.
Next week, I'm going to track the International Space Station with their app, and take a picture of it as it flies by.
With the use of satellite data being used for everything from GPS, surveying, weather forecasting to even things like archeology
https://www.globalxplorer.org/about
Is it not about time for flat earth believers to re-think their position on this subject. With around 8000 satellites having been launched and 5000 give or take currently in orbit launched from over 31 facilities involving over 50 countries, with more being launched on almost a weekly basis, so much so that each launch receives very little if any news coverage. Last week for example very little was made here in the west of India’s moon mission Chandrayaan-2 that will arrive in lunar orbit in early Sept and set to make a landing soon afterwards.
Labelling all space related activity as being part of a greater conspiracy does not look at all credible.
Additionally, Space-X is planning on launching almost 12,000 cubesats, so you can access broadband connections almost at any point on the globe. They'll be in Low-Earth Orbit at 340km, 550km, and 1,150km for their Starlink program.
Next week, I'm going to track the International Space Station with their app, and take a picture of it as it flies by.
If that is your plan you may wish to read this:-
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/tutorials/how-to-easily-photograph-the-international-space-station
It’s not as easy to get a good shot as one would imagine. I’m not sure about your photographic expertise, but tripod, wide angle lens at f4, low ISO and 60 second exposure or so is a good starting point to get a nice trail. I would shoot some trial shots at your chosen location, and for the composition try and include some ground features, buildings, trees etc. Planning is all for this kind of shot. Trying to shoot the ISS with a telephoto requires a bit more skill and careful planning and positioning, but it can be done for sure.
https://petapixel.com/2017/11/06/photographed-iss-crossing-full-moon/
Good luck.
Satellites don`t exist, otherwise they would show us this picture which makes completely sense ::) :
(https://pics.me.me/thumb_all-planets-connected-picture-in-one-its-flat-60527017.png)