Sattelite TV

I'm sure one of you flat earthers have sattelite tv right? How do u explain that??? Obviousness FTW

I know that this is a stupid question, but have you tried reading the FAQ?  An answer to your question lies within.

I know that this is a stupid question, but have you tried reading the FAQ?  An answer to your question lies within.

I would rather say, the "answer" within it is a lie

Yeah, satellites don't exist, there are stations on earth that send out the signals etc rightio.

I know that this is a stupid question, but have you tried reading the FAQ?  An answer to your question lies within.

The probably being, though, that the FAQ has, shockingly, a stupid answer to the question.

"Q: "What about satellites? How do they orbit the Earth?"

A: Since sustained spaceflight is not possible, satellites cannot orbit the Earth. The signals we supposedly receive from them are either broadcast from towers or any number of possible pseudolites. However, temporary space-flight is possible."

Even better than satellite TV, what about satellite phones? Those clearly work in areas where cellular phones do not.

While on the topic of satellites, here is a list of 43 satellites that I can observe going passing over my area of the globe tonight:

http://www.heavens-above.com/allsats.asp?Mag=3.5&lat=43.367&lng=-80.983&loc=Stratford&alt=359&tz=EST

These are the just the satellites that will go over tonight with a magnitude of at least 3.5, so just the brightest satellites.

 

Quote from: markjo on August 18, 2010, 05:41:48 AM

I know that this is a stupid question, but have you tried reading the FAQ?  An answer to your question lies within.

I would rather say, the "answer" within it is a lie

Yeah, satellites don't exist, there are stations on earth that send out the signals etc rightio.

I said an answer, I didn't say the correct answer.

Quote from: MrBoB on August 18, 2010, 05:49:34 AM

Quote from: markjo on August 18, 2010, 05:41:48 AM

I know that this is a stupid question, but have you tried reading the FAQ?  An answer to your question lies within.

I would rather say, the "answer" within it is a lie

Yeah, satellites don't exist, there are stations on earth that send out the signals etc rightio.

I said an answer, I didn't say the correct answer.

And trust us when we say you're lucky that there is even an answer written up on the question. Not writing down their various, often conflicting, conjectures is their best defense against being shown wrong.

why would i bother reading an FAQ filled with unanswered, unproven BS?

Remember that there is not only the FAQ but you can also use the search function to look into your question(s).

do u really believe this poopy?

FUCK YOU NIGGER CHINKY FAGGOT MOTHER DOUCHER SON OF A BITCH PICE OF SHIT FROM HELL WITH A DILDO IN HIS FOUR INCH DIAMETER ASSHOLE WHOS MOM IS AS FLAT AS THE EARTH

Remember that there is not only the FAQ but you can also use the search function to look into your question(s).

If you understand how satellite dishes work, you wouldn't get a signal worth a shit by pointing it into the sky under FE. There is a reason why you have to actually aim the dish to that which is transmitting the signal. Hence under FE the Dish would not be pointing up into the sky. Sorry, but dish alignment matters!  If you think I am wrong, feel free to point your satellite dish to face the horizon in any direction. So when you learn that the direction of the signal is coming from space, you might just have an epiphany.  After you are done, you can call your provider to come out a fix your alignment because you thought the earth was flat lol.

I'm sure one of you flat earthers have sattelite tv right? How do u explain that??? Obviousness FTW

I have cable.

do u really...etc. etc.

I am quite new, too.  Just letting you know there is also a Wiki that has been referenced to find information. Lots of resource for you.

why would i bother reading an FAQ filled with unanswered, unproven BS?

...to save us from posting it here.  We're not going to give you different answers to what's in the FAQ.

Quote from: Noitsround on August 19, 2010, 05:10:10 PM

why would i bother reading an FAQ filled with unanswered, unproven BS?

...to save us from posting it here.  We're not going to give you different answers to what's in the FAQ.

If only there were answers in FAQ and FEW that represented the consensus of FE. Alas, there are none.

Quote from: gotham on August 19, 2010, 06:02:14 PM

Remember that there is not only the FAQ but you can also use the search function to look into your question(s).

If you understand how satellite dishes work, you wouldn't get a signal worth a shit by pointing it into the sky under FE. There is a reason why you have to actually aim the dish to that which is transmitting the signal. Hence under FE the Dish would not be pointing up into the sky. Sorry, but dish alignment matters!  If you think I am wrong, feel free to point your satellite dish to face the horizon in any direction. So when you learn that the direction of the signal is coming from space, you might just have an epiphany.  After you are done, you can call your provider to come out a fix your alignment because you thought the earth was flat lol.

(While I realize that pictures are not evidence, and that this one is a bit oddly colourful,) I have seen satellite dishes not pointing upwards many times. Like this:

Are you saying these people weren't very bright and probably had no TV reception in their houses?

Quote from: TheJackel on August 19, 2010, 11:52:51 PM

Quote from: gotham on August 19, 2010, 06:02:14 PM

Remember that there is not only the FAQ but you can also use the search function to look into your question(s).

If you understand how satellite dishes work, you wouldn't get a signal worth a shit by pointing it into the sky under FE. There is a reason why you have to actually aim the dish to that which is transmitting the signal. Hence under FE the Dish would not be pointing up into the sky. Sorry, but dish alignment matters!  If you think I am wrong, feel free to point your satellite dish to face the horizon in any direction. So when you learn that the direction of the signal is coming from space, you might just have an epiphany.  After you are done, you can call your provider to come out a fix your alignment because you thought the earth was flat lol.

(While I realize that pictures are not evidence, and that this one is a bit oddly colourful,) I have seen satellite dishes not pointing upwards many times. Like this:

Are you saying these people weren't very bright and probably had no TV reception in their houses?

1) You're wrong. Pictures are evidence. The FAQ claiming that pictures are not proof does not stand and is different.
2) Yes, some dishes are not functional. No, your inference about the intelligence of those in such houses is unfounded.

1) You're wrong. Pictures are evidence. The FAQ claiming that pictures are not proof does not stand and is different.

I may or may not agree with you. However, if I didn't put that in my post, someone would jump me with "OH MY GOD PICTURES ARE NOT EVIDENCE". The way I did it was simply... simpler. Then again, I didn't expect you to attack me for that. You're one of the few RE'ers who usually respond to the point instead of nitpicking on words.

2) Yes, some dishes are not functional.

Some of them, quite possibly. However, as presented by the picture, which (as we have just established) constitutes evidence for you, there exist blocks of flats in which most flats have their antennae situated like that. Why do they keep clearly useless satellite dishes?

No, your inference about the intelligence of those in such houses is unfounded.

And again, nitpicking. My "inference about the intelligence of those in such houses" is also irrelevant to the point. Feel free to cease your attempts to derail this thread.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 01:13:40 PM

1) You're wrong. Pictures are evidence. The FAQ claiming that pictures are not proof does not stand and is different.

I may or may not agree with you. However, if I didn't put that in my post, someone would jump me with "OH MY GOD PICTURES ARE NOT EVIDENCE". The way I did it was simply... simpler. Then again, I didn't expect you to attack me for that. You're one of the few RE'ers who usually respond to the point instead of nitpicking on words.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 01:13:40 PM

2) Yes, some dishes are not functional.

Some of them, quite possibly. However, as presented by the picture, which (as we have just established) constitutes evidence for you, there exist blocks of flats in which most flats have their antennae situated like that. Why do they keep clearly useless satellite dishes?

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 01:13:40 PM

No, your inference about the intelligence of those in such houses is unfounded.

And again, nitpicking. My "inference about the intelligence of those in such houses" is also irrelevant to the point. Feel free to cease your attempts to derail this thread.

Simplifying can lead to inaccuracies and in this case your simplifying did so. If you expect to make such errors here after your record, you might want to reconsider your expectations.

That the picture doesn't establish that the antennae are working. Therein lies your logic error.

As far as derailing the thread, you need to remember that you first made the implication about the residents' intelligence. Perhaps, you'd like to avoid such unfounded insults in the future.

On about the OP, realize that you can get your own antenna and test whether the statelite is at the RE predicted angle yourself. You could then test a second location. You could also test at various times. Of course, you could just trust the satellite companies.

That the picture doesn't establish that the antennae are working. Therein lies your logic error.

So you do claim that the antennae in that picture, as well as those I claim to have seen, are not functional, right?

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 02:05:02 PM

That the picture doesn't establish that the antennae are working. Therein lies your logic error.

So you do claim that the antennae in that picture, as well as those I claim to have seen, are not functional, right?

I am not making a claim. You're just not supporting yours.

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on August 21, 2010, 02:21:32 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 02:05:02 PM

That the picture doesn't establish that the antennae are working. Therein lies your logic error.

So you do claim that the antennae in that picture, as well as those I claim to have seen, are not functional, right?

I am not making a claim. You're just not supporting yours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_dish

A satellite dish is a dish-shaped type of parabolic antenna designed to receive microwaves from communications satellites, which transmit data transmissions or broadcasts, such as satellite television.

Except for the "satellite" part, my claim is that the dishes are most often, if not always, used for what they're designed for. This is a yes/no situation. If you claim my claim to be untrue, you also claim the opposite of my claim. So yes, you are making a claim, and yes, you are not supporting it.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 02:29:45 PM

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on August 21, 2010, 02:21:32 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 02:05:02 PM

That the picture doesn't establish that the antennae are working. Therein lies your logic error.

So you do claim that the antennae in that picture, as well as those I claim to have seen, are not functional, right?

I am not making a claim. You're just not supporting yours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_dish

Quote

A satellite dish is a dish-shaped type of parabolic antenna designed to receive microwaves from communications satellites, which transmit data transmissions or broadcasts, such as satellite television.

Except for the "satellite" part, my claim is that the dishes are most often, if not always, used for what they're designed for. This is a yes/no situation. If you claim my claim to be untrue, you also claim the opposite of my claim. So yes, you are making a claim, and yes, you are not supporting it.

It is not a "yes/no". You need to understand that I don't have to say the claim is false only that we don't have reason to believe it to be true. Please study the Scientific Method. It's your claim that the picture demonstrates something, so please either support your claim or withdraw.

It is not a "yes/no".

Please present an example of something in between a fully functional satellite dish and a not fully functional satellite dish to support your claim.

You need to understand that I don't have to say the claim is false only that we don't have reason to believe it to be true.

You have no reasons to believe anything to be true if only you choose not to have any.

Please study the Scientific Method. It's your claim that the picture demonstrates something, so please either support your claim or withdraw.

My picture demonstrates satellite dishes not being aimed upwards. I support my claim by the fact that the satellite dishes in the picture are not being aimed upwards. This is in response to TheJackel's claim that RET satellite dishes are, in fact, aiming up in the sky, as opposed to FE dishes, which apparently for some reason would be aiming at the horizon, as demonstrated by this quote:

Quote from: gotham on August 19, 2010, 06:02:14 PM

Remember that there is not only the FAQ but you can also use the search function to look into your question(s).

If you understand how satellite dishes work, you wouldn't get a signal worth a shit by pointing it into the sky under FE. There is a reason why you have to actually aim the dish to that which is transmitting the signal. Hence under FE the Dish would not be pointing up into the sky. Sorry, but dish alignment matters!  If you think I am wrong, feel free to point your satellite dish to face the horizon in any direction. So when you learn that the direction of the signal is coming from space, you might just have an epiphany.  After you are done, you can call your provider to come out a fix your alignment because you thought the earth was flat lol.

I hope that this has erased the confusion and that you understand my post now.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 03:12:40 PM

It is not a "yes/no".

Please present an example of something in between a fully functional satellite dish and a not fully functional satellite dish to support your claim.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 03:12:40 PM

You need to understand that I don't have to say the claim is false only that we don't have reason to believe it to be true.

You have no reasons to believe anything to be true if only you choose not to have any.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 03:12:40 PM

Please study the Scientific Method. It's your claim that the picture demonstrates something, so please either support your claim or withdraw.

My picture demonstrates satellite dishes not being aimed upwards. I support my claim by the fact that the satellite dishes in the picture are not being aimed upwards. This is in response to TheJackel's claim that RET satellite dishes are, in fact, aiming up in the sky, as opposed to FE dishes, which apparently for some reason would be aiming at the horizon, as demonstrated by this quote:

Quote from: TheJackel on August 19, 2010, 11:52:51 PM

Quote from: gotham on August 19, 2010, 06:02:14 PM

Remember that there is not only the FAQ but you can also use the search function to look into your question(s).

If you understand how satellite dishes work, you wouldn't get a signal worth a shit by pointing it into the sky under FE. There is a reason why you have to actually aim the dish to that which is transmitting the signal. Hence under FE the Dish would not be pointing up into the sky. Sorry, but dish alignment matters!  If you think I am wrong, feel free to point your satellite dish to face the horizon in any direction. So when you learn that the direction of the signal is coming from space, you might just have an epiphany.  After you are done, you can call your provider to come out a fix your alignment because you thought the earth was flat lol.

I hope that this has erased the confusion and that you understand my post now.

Again, your claim is that the satellite dishes in the picture refute the notion that functioning satellite dishes point to satellites. You haven't demonstrated your position. The picture is not evidence that 1) the dishes are currently functioning, and 2) are pointed below the horizon.

The third choice that you seem unwilling to learn is that we don't know and can't make a conclusion. I remind you that studying the Scientific Method will reduce the change that you will error again in a similar manner.

I will await for evidence to support your claim before I accept it.

The picture is not evidence that 1) the dishes are currently functioning, and 2) are pointed below the horizon.

I agree. The picture is not evidence of any of those. Neither are my claim, too.

The third choice that you seem unwilling to learn is that we don't know and can't make a conclusion.

My claim is that satellite dishes are not aimed up in the sky in that picture. The evidence is the picture itself. The conclusion is clear.
Also, you're wrong. The dishes are either functional or not. Whether we know it or not doesn't change that fact.

I will await for evidence to support your claim before I accept it.

It would seem you have to understand my claim first. The evidence has been presented as part of the claim.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 06:41:56 PM

The picture is not evidence that 1) the dishes are currently functioning, and 2) are pointed below the horizon.

I agree. The picture is not evidence of any of those. Neither are my claim, too.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 06:41:56 PM

The third choice that you seem unwilling to learn is that we don't know and can't make a conclusion.

My claim is that satellite dishes are not aimed up in the sky in that picture. The evidence is the picture itself. The conclusion is clear.
Also, you're wrong. The dishes are either functional or not. Whether we know it or not doesn't change that fact.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 06:41:56 PM

I will await for evidence to support your claim before I accept it.

It would seem you have to understand my claim first. The evidence has been presented as part of the claim.

If your claim is indeed that in that picture at that time those dishes were not aimed at the sky, you then have failed 1) to show your premise as the picture is inconclusive and 2) to show that an aim as you claim means anything.

Regarding the third state, please study quantum mechanics, in particular http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger's_cat.

Also is mathematics, a conjecture can be proven true, falsified, yet undetermined, and indeterminable.

If your claim is indeed that in that picture at that time those dishes were not aimed at the sky, you then have failed 1) to show your premise as the picture is inconclusive and 2) to show that an aim as you claim means anything.

1) My premise can be seen right above the picture. It is: "I have seen satellite dishes not pointing upwards many times.". The picture was used as a visualization of the premise.
2) That is TheJackel's claim. He's the one who claims that it means something. You've actually made a very good point there, and I shall join you in the waiting for evidence.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 07:12:01 PM

If your claim is indeed that in that picture at that time those dishes were not aimed at the sky, you then have failed 1) to show your premise as the picture is inconclusive and 2) to show that an aim as you claim means anything.

1) My premise can be seen right above the picture. It is: "I have seen satellite dishes not pointing upwards many times.". The picture was used as a visualization of the premise.
2) That is TheJackel's claim. He's the one who claims that it means something. You've actually made a very good point there, and I shall join you in the waiting for evidence.

No, it cannot. Until you provide evidence of functioning satellite dish that doesn't get a better signal when aimed at the satellite's purported location, you have shown nothing.

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on August 21, 2010, 07:17:45 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 07:12:01 PM

If your claim is indeed that in that picture at that time those dishes were not aimed at the sky, you then have failed 1) to show your premise as the picture is inconclusive and 2) to show that an aim as you claim means anything.

1) My premise can be seen right above the picture. It is: "I have seen satellite dishes not pointing upwards many times.". The picture was used as a visualization of the premise.
2) That is TheJackel's claim. He's the one who claims that it means something. You've actually made a very good point there, and I shall join you in the waiting for evidence.

No, it cannot. Until you provide evidence of functioning satellite dish that doesn't get a better signal when aimed at the satellite's purported location, you have shown nothing.

Please read what my premise was once again. I said that such satellite dishes exist. Do you deny or doubt this?

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 07:29:19 PM

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on August 21, 2010, 07:17:45 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on August 21, 2010, 07:12:01 PM

If your claim is indeed that in that picture at that time those dishes were not aimed at the sky, you then have failed 1) to show your premise as the picture is inconclusive and 2) to show that an aim as you claim means anything.

1) My premise can be seen right above the picture. It is: "I have seen satellite dishes not pointing upwards many times.". The picture was used as a visualization of the premise.
2) That is TheJackel's claim. He's the one who claims that it means something. You've actually made a very good point there, and I shall join you in the waiting for evidence.

No, it cannot. Until you provide evidence of functioning satellite dish that doesn't get a better signal when aimed at the satellite's purported location, you have shown nothing.

Please read what my premise was once again. I said that such satellite dishes exist. Do you deny or doubt this?

I say that you have not proven that such satellite dishes exist, or even provided evidence that such (functioning satellite dish that doesn't get a better signal when aimed at the satellite's purported location) dishes.