Satellites

This is my first time posting here.  First i would like to say that i am not a believer in FE but i am intreaged by the theory and some of your arguments seem intelligent.

My question concerns satellites.  In rural areas were the the night sky is clearer if you stare at it for long enough you can see what look similar to stars moving slowly across the skys.  These are Satellites.  A few years back i was in very rural area of Vermont were i saw the night sky as clearly as i have ever seen it.   Lucky for me i brought my rather expensive  relly powerful Telescope.  Will i was there someone had pointed out these satallites to me so i thought i would check them out with my Telescope.  After about 15 minutes of trying to get one in viewer i saw it.  It was reflecting a good deal of light but once i got the focus right i was able to make it out it looked alot like what satallites are pictured to look like.

If the earth is flat and space travel is impossible how can there be satalites up there?

... If this isn't in the FAQ it needs to be.
The FE explanation is that the satellites you see are not in space, they are in fact suspended from helium balloons at the top of the atmosphere.

I don't see how it works, since the movement of observed satellites is quite regular, unlike the atmosphere.

No, they are not necessarily balloons, but just pseudollites.

Balloons cannot travel at the speed satellites do. 

No, they are not necessarily balloons, but just pseudollites.

Care to explain that further? How are they suspended? How do they travel so fast?

The issues it would need to overcome is that it'd have to be high up (lots of people in the same hemisphere can see them at the same time) and they need to travel fast (ballons will not do and eventually fail. They'd also not keep their consistent orbits)

Even though it was still small and hard to make out it was a Satellite and there was no visible balloon holding it up.

Yeah, if there are no balloons, what keeps them up? The UA?

Drink. lots and lots of drink holds it up

No, they are not necessarily balloons, but just pseudollites.

Just what is a pseudollite if it is not a satellite?   I have viewed the international space station many times in the last few weeks.  It arrives at precisely the predicted time and appears to travel at an incredible speed.  Some amateurs take pictures of it with their large telescopes:

http://www.astrospider.com/
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/2007/08/12/international_space_station_and_endeavou
http://www.astronomycamerasblog.com/2007/10/16/

Quote from: Username on February 22, 2008, 07:29:29 AM

No, they are not necessarily balloons, but just pseudollites.

Just what is a pseudollites if it is not a satellite?   I have viewed the international space station many times in the last few weeks.  It arrives at precisely the predicted time and appears to travel at an incredible speed.  Some amateurs take pictures of it with their large telescopes:

http://www.astrospider.com/
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/2007/08/12/international_space_station_and_endeavou
http://www.astronomycamerasblog.com/2007/10/16/

Fast, Small, Possibly LTA, flying devices.

Quote from: Moon squirter on February 24, 2008, 01:37:58 PM

Quote from: Username on February 22, 2008, 07:29:29 AM

No, they are not necessarily balloons, but just pseudollites.

Just what is a pseudollites if it is not a satellite?   I have viewed the international space station many times in the last few weeks.  It arrives at precisely the predicted time and appears to travel at an incredible speed.  Some amateurs take pictures of it with their large telescopes:

http://www.astrospider.com/
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/2007/08/12/international_space_station_and_endeavou
http://www.astronomycamerasblog.com/2007/10/16/

Fast, Small, Possibly LTA, flying devices.

While its concievable that they can float and appear to be satalites, they still travel way faster than an LTA craft can. To have that kind of propulsion, they have to have an engine of significant weight (no LTA engine). They also have to have enough mass not to be affected by high winds at that altitude.

Just what is a pseudollite if it is not a satellite?   I have viewed the international space station many times in the last few weeks.  It arrives at precisely the predicted time and appears to travel at an incredible speed.

How would you know how fast it was traveling? Did you clock it with a speedometer?

Quote

Just what is a pseudollite if it is not a satellite?   I have viewed the international space station many times in the last few weeks.  It arrives at precisely the predicted time and appears to travel at an incredible speed.

How would you know how fast it was traveling? Did you clock it with a speedometer?

The naked eye can track it going fast.

Quote

Just what is a pseudollite if it is not a satellite?   I have viewed the international space station many times in the last few weeks.  It arrives at precisely the predicted time and appears to travel at an incredible speed.

How would you know how fast it was traveling? Did you clock it with a speedometer?

I don't know. That's why I used the term "appears to be".   Do you know the shape of the earth, given that you have have based it on an ancient book with flawed reasoning and a conspiracy theory with no clear motive?

I don't know. That's why I used the term "appears to be".

I've never seen a fast moving satellite. They all appear to track across the sky at a pretty slow pace to me.

Therefore, since far away objects appear to travel slowly, the onus is on you to back up your claim that the satellite is actually moving at tens of thousands of miles per hour.

Do you know the shape of the earth, given that you have have based it on an ancient book with flawed reasoning and a conspiracy theory with no clear motive?

So you're saying that just because Earth Not a Globe is old, it must be false? Do you have any evidence demonstrating that truth has an expiration date?

Quote

I don't know. That's why I used the term "appears to be".

I've never seen a fast moving satellite. They all appear to track across the sky at a pretty slow pace to me.

Therefore, since far away objects appear to travel slowly, the onus is on you to back up your claim that the satellite is actually moving at tens of thousands of miles per hour.

OK well they can travel quite fast. I'd advise looking up from out in the boons and watching. They're fairly common.. and go quite quick. We've actually mentioned a few reasons why it has to be real high and going real fast so.. we've done our part.

How do these satellites fly anyway? They aren't exactly aerodynamic and they have no balloon canopy. What fuel do they use to stay aloft for so long?

OK well they can travel quite fast. I'd advise looking up from out in the boons and watching. They're fairly common.. and go quite quick. We've actually mentioned a few reasons why it has to be real high and going real fast so.. we've done our par

I'd say that satellites appear to travel across the sky about as fast as an airplane.

How do these satellites fly anyway? They aren't exactly aerodynamic and they have no balloon canopy. What fuel do they use to stay aloft for so long?

Satellites are ridged specially-molded structures filled with helium, just like the geostationary banana over texas.

Satellites are ridged specially-molded structures filled with helium, just like the geostationary banana over texas.

Satellites are not affected by atmospheric conditions. That Banana will be. It says on that site.

Ok so if they're small flying bananas, then how does one explain the fact that people in the same hemisphere see the same satelites?

Satellites are ridged specially-molded structures filled with helium, just like the geostationary banana over texas.

Tom...you are a GOD.

Satellites are not affected by atmospheric conditions. That Banana will be. It says on that site.

Well, not much in the way of an atmosphere exists at an altitude of one hundred miles. Any atmospheric conditions which might exist can easily be compensated for by computer controlled maneuvering.

Ok so if they're small flying bananas, then how does one explain the fact that people in the same hemisphere see the same satelites?

They can't. Only a small portion of the world can see a satellite at a time. The area of the world which can see the satellite depends of the satellite's altitude, of course.

As a rebuttal to your assertion that anyone in the Northern Hemisphere can see the same satellites; Can a person in New York see a satellite over China? Even in your own model this is impossible.

Quote

OK well they can travel quite fast. I'd advise looking up from out in the boons and watching. They're fairly common.. and go quite quick. We've actually mentioned a few reasons why it has to be real high and going real fast so.. we've done our par

I'd say that satellites appear to travel across the sky about as fast as an airplane.

Quote

How do these satellites fly anyway? They aren't exactly aerodynamic and they have no balloon canopy. What fuel do they use to stay aloft for so long?

Satellites are ridged specially-molded structures filled with helium, just like the geostationary banana over texas.

I've seen satellites move way faster than a airplane. To me they look to be going much faster than the speed of sound

Well, not much in the way of an atmosphere exists at an altitude of one hundred miles. Any atmospheric conditions which might exist can easily be compensated for by computer controlled maneuvering.

Any "pseudolite" with this technology would require to be much more bigger than this Banana cause of the equipment needed to achieve the same things as Satellites plus this "computer controlled maneuvering" system. This would make something that does not at all fit the visual profile of the satellites you can see in the sky. Plus this "computer controlled maneuvering" technology would not have existed in the 60's when satellites where first used. I'm no scientist, but if something 100km in the sky that can move as fast as satellites do...that would be a huge speed and I don't think the Helium balloon thing will do.

Quote

I don't know. That's why I used the term "appears to be".

I've never seen a fast moving satellite. They all appear to track across the sky at a pretty slow pace to me.

Therefore, since far away objects appear to travel slowly, the onus is on you to back up your claim that the satellite is actually moving at tens of thousands of miles per hour.

Not at all.  the onus is on you to back up your claim that they move slowly.  For example, the ISS is due to appear over London at  Wed Mar 05, 05:06AM and then Manchester at 05:07, covering a distiance of 200 miles in ~1 minute (12,000+ miles an hour).

Quote

Do you know the shape of the earth, given that you have have based it on an ancient book with flawed reasoning and a conspiracy theory with no clear motive?

So you're saying that just because Earth Not a Globe is old, it must be false? Do you have any evidence demonstrating that truth has an expiration date?

Again, no.  I am saying that it is ancient AND it is flawed.  I don't see why people are still interested in it, after 100+ years of being flawed.

Well, not much in the way of an atmosphere exists at an altitude of one hundred miles. Any atmospheric conditions which might exist can easily be compensated for by computer controlled maneuvering.

Computer controlled maneuvering doesn't part the sea or make people walk on water. Its not a miracle. The only thing it can do is measure many times a second to see where power is needed. You still need the onboard computer (which can be small but not feather light), maneuvering jets of somekind and propellant that could overcome the high winds of that altitude that can point in any direction, a constant power source (the sun isn't always there, so you'd need heavy batteries), a material that can withstand the torsional stresses of being thrown around by the wind, and (lets face it) a miracle.

They can't. Only a small portion of the world can see a satellite at a time. The area of the world which can see the satellite depends of the satellite's altitude, of course.

As a rebuttal to your assertion that anyone in the Northern Hemisphere can see the same satellites; Can a person in New York see a satellite over China? Even in your own model this is impossible.

Sorry i forgot to mention the quarter hemishpere. Now lets ask your question again with a more realistic mindset: Can someone in Toronto see the same satelites as someone in Florida? Yeah, they can. And before you ask for proof, I've been ALL along the eastern states of the US, and I can tell you, my dad tracks the same satelites we see here quite well.

Btw, though I have not proved it as I've never been to china, they can see the same satelites at different times. I assume you chose China and Ney York since they surely can't see them at the same time? Seems like you're lashing out.

Not at all.  the onus is on you to back up your claim that they move slowly.  For example, the ISS is due to appear over London at  Wed Mar 05, 05:06AM and then Manchester at 05:07, covering a distiance of 200 miles in ~1 minute (12,000+ miles an hour)

Do you really expect us to believe something written on a NASA website?

Again, no.  I am saying that it is ancient AND it is flawed.  I don't see why people are still interested in it, after 100+ years of being flawed.

Care to point out what's so flawed about looking across a body of water and measuring the amount of curvature to the earth?

I've read Earth Not a Globe and I haven't seen anything flawed about Dr. Rowbotham's math or experiments.

Computer controlled maneuvering doesn't part the sea or make people walk on water. Its not a miracle. The only thing it can do is measure many times a second to see where power is needed. You still need the onboard computer (which can be small but not feather light), maneuvering jets of somekind and propellant that could overcome the high winds of that altitude that can point in any direction, a constant power source (the sun isn't always there, so you'd need heavy batteries), a material that can withstand the torsional stresses of being thrown around by the wind, and (lets face it) a miracle.

Billions of dollars have gone into developing such technologies. I don't see what's so impossible about a ridged blimps with solar panels and thrusters/propellers. Another possibility is the use of ion drives for mobility. At that altitude there's not much wind resistence, so it's not so surprising that Satellites can reach high velocities.

Billions of dollars have gone into developing such technologies. I don't see what's so impossible about a ridged blimps with solar panels and thrusters/propellers. Another possibility is the use of ion drives for mobility. At that altitude there's not much wind resistence, so it's not so surprising that Satellites can reach high velocities.

Its not about wind resistance man. Its about the high velocity winds that would throw it around.

And ION drives, while a possibility today, would need to have been invented back when Sputnik was launched into space.

I don't care how much money you throw at a balloon, or how advanced you make it, there are too many factors involved for it to be a reality on an FE, or even RE at that.

I don't care how much money you throw at a balloon, or how advanced you make it, there are too many factors involved for it to be a reality on an FE, or even RE at that.

You should tell that to Sanswire, who operate a number of high altitude Stratellites.

None of which go whizzing around at the speeds we're talking about, in a direction often against the wind.