« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9   Go Down

Pseudolites

  • 262 Replies
  • 64789 Views
?

Sentient Pizza

  • 281
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #120 on: November 02, 2011, 10:49:10 AM »
Maybe you are unfamilliar with the term "contecxt".

My whole point is that FE or RE Pseudolits are a joke as a suitable replacement for orbiting satelites. So in this context the large scale shape of the earth does not matter. FE or RE Pseudolites are bunk.

As I hve shown in this thread a wide variety of explanations for this and since you have yet to refute any of them I am considering this matter closed. Pseudolites are aslam dunk win for RE and you know it.

Quote from: Conker on November 02, 2011, 08:02:09 AM
ItŽs flat, if you mean that the medium distance of points on the surface are almost at the same distance to the earth core. Also IŽm getting bored of this site

Its irrelevant to the point but yes that is what I was getting at.
Logged
Your god was nailed to a cross. Mine carries a hammer...... any questions?
*

Lord Xenu

  • 1027
  • +0/-0
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #121 on: November 02, 2011, 01:31:13 PM »
Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 02, 2011, 10:49:10 AM
Maybe you are unfamilliar with the term "contecxt".
I certainly am.
Logged
*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8781
  • +1/-2
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #122 on: November 02, 2011, 11:50:27 PM »
Quote from: Lord Xenu on November 02, 2011, 01:31:13 PM
Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 02, 2011, 10:49:10 AM
Maybe you are unfamilliar with the term "contecxt".
I certainly am.

I chuckled.


Psuedolites (terrestrial or otherwise) are capable, in my opinion, of delivering anything broadcast by "satellites". I see no reason to conclude otherwise.
Logged
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."
?

EmperorZhark

  • 2229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #123 on: November 03, 2011, 02:37:44 AM »
Quote from: Ski on November 02, 2011, 11:50:27 PM
Psuedolites (terrestrial or otherwise) are capable, in my opinion, of delivering anything broadcast by "satellites". I see no reason to conclude otherwise.

You might be right if unless there was a proof of commercial networks of pseudolites.
Logged
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.
?

LinearPlane

  • 259
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #124 on: November 03, 2011, 06:30:10 AM »
Quote from: Ski on November 02, 2011, 11:50:27 PM
Quote from: Lord Xenu on November 02, 2011, 01:31:13 PM
Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 02, 2011, 10:49:10 AM
Maybe you are unfamilliar with the term "contecxt".
I certainly am.

I chuckled.


Psuedolites (terrestrial or otherwise) are capable, in my opinion, of delivering anything broadcast by "satellites". I see no reason to conclude otherwise.

Yeah except you can't see fake made up Psuedolites with your telescope can you. Hence, they don't exist.

End thread.
Logged
The FAQ needs updating to reflect the falsehood of the FAQ.
?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #125 on: November 03, 2011, 06:34:12 AM »
Quote from: LinearPlane on November 03, 2011, 06:30:10 AM
Quote from: Ski on November 02, 2011, 11:50:27 PM
Quote from: Lord Xenu on November 02, 2011, 01:31:13 PM
Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 02, 2011, 10:49:10 AM
Maybe you are unfamilliar with the term "contecxt".
I certainly am.

I chuckled.


Psuedolites (terrestrial or otherwise) are capable, in my opinion, of delivering anything broadcast by "satellites". I see no reason to conclude otherwise.

Yeah except you can't see fake made up Psuedolites with your telescope can you. Hence, they don't exist.

End thread.

I suggest a sky search first.  This might take you awhile.
Logged
*

Conker

  • 1557
  • +0/-0
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #126 on: November 03, 2011, 07:49:16 AM »
As always, FEŽers refuse to make nothing, trying to make you to do the investigation and then refuse it for being "REŽer"
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on February 14, 2016, 10:57:31 AM
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.
?

LinearPlane

  • 259
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #127 on: November 03, 2011, 07:49:54 AM »
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 03, 2011, 06:34:12 AM
Quote from: LinearPlane on November 03, 2011, 06:30:10 AM
Quote from: Ski on November 02, 2011, 11:50:27 PM
Quote from: Lord Xenu on November 02, 2011, 01:31:13 PM
Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 02, 2011, 10:49:10 AM
Maybe you are unfamilliar with the term "contecxt".
I certainly am.

I chuckled.


Psuedolites (terrestrial or otherwise) are capable, in my opinion, of delivering anything broadcast by "satellites". I see no reason to conclude otherwise.

Yeah except you can't see fake made up Psuedolites with your telescope can you. Hence, they don't exist.

End thread.

I suggest a sky search first.  This might take you awhile.

I searched the sky and saw a sat in a telescope. Go buy a telescope and recreate my incredible discovery. Oh wait you can't do such a simple thing.
Logged
The FAQ needs updating to reflect the falsehood of the FAQ.
?

LinearPlane

  • 259
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #128 on: November 03, 2011, 07:51:09 AM »
Quote from: Conker on November 03, 2011, 07:49:16 AM
As always, FEŽers refuse to make nothing, trying to make you to do the investigation and then refuse it for being "REŽer"

I firmly believe there are only 1 or 2 complete weirdos here who actually believe it and the other supposed FE's are sock puppets of RE's. As I said before, there's no way anyone can be this ignorant.
Logged
The FAQ needs updating to reflect the falsehood of the FAQ.
*

Conker

  • 1557
  • +0/-0
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #129 on: November 04, 2011, 08:24:48 AM »
Quote from: LinearPlane on November 03, 2011, 07:51:09 AM
Quote from: Conker on November 03, 2011, 07:49:16 AM
As always, FEŽers refuse to make nothing, trying to make you to do the investigation and then refuse it for being "REŽer"

I firmly believe there are only 1 or 2 complete weirdos here who actually believe it and the other supposed FE's are sock puppets of RE's. As I said before, there's no way anyone can be this ignorant.

Everybody knows that there are no real FEŽers here
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on February 14, 2016, 10:57:31 AM
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.
?

EmperorZhark

  • 2229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #130 on: November 05, 2011, 03:55:42 AM »
So can we conclude there are no network of pseudolites for a commercial use?

That they are merely theories, experiments and tests, no more?
Logged
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.
*

Conker

  • 1557
  • +0/-0
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #131 on: November 05, 2011, 04:48:00 AM »
As I posted a long ago, ground pseudolites in SAT frecuencies are impossible. For the flying ones, "Stratellites", I always ask for a picture of one, but they refuse. So, yes, Zhark, RE WINS
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on February 14, 2016, 10:57:31 AM
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.
?

EmperorZhark

  • 2229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #132 on: November 05, 2011, 05:41:28 AM »
And again, what's the theory behind stratellites being airborne for such a long time that they do exactly the same job as satellites?
Logged
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.
*

Lord Xenu

  • 1027
  • +0/-0
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #133 on: November 05, 2011, 05:45:11 AM »
Quote from: EmperorZhark on November 05, 2011, 05:41:28 AM
And again, what's the theory behind stratellites being airborne for such a long time that they do exactly the same job as satellites?
A hot-air balloon will stay up for an almost indefinite amount of time if you keep refueling it.
Logged
*

Conker

  • 1557
  • +0/-0
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #134 on: November 05, 2011, 06:48:02 AM »
How do you refuel a balloon in mid-air? With another  air transport medium. HOW YOU CAN CONSTANTLY DO THAT WITHOUT BEING NOTICED?
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on February 14, 2016, 10:57:31 AM
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.
?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #135 on: November 05, 2011, 08:58:28 AM »
Replacement instead of refueling would be my guess.
Logged
*

Conker

  • 1557
  • +0/-0
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #136 on: November 05, 2011, 09:05:13 AM »
Quote from: Conker on November 05, 2011, 06:48:02 AM
How do you replace a balloon in mid-air?  HOW YOU CAN CONSTANTLY DO THAT WITHOUT BEING NOTICED?
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on February 14, 2016, 10:57:31 AM
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.
?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #137 on: November 05, 2011, 09:26:59 AM »
Why would you call a replacement a mid-air operation?  Anyway, paint it black and launch the thing under cover of a dark night?  I believe this is the usual way of hiding strange aircraft.  Anyway, I see no reason the fuel wouldn't last as long as the RE version of things, about five to seven years.



Logged
*

Lord Xenu

  • 1027
  • +0/-0
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #138 on: November 05, 2011, 09:27:53 AM »
Quote from: Conker on November 05, 2011, 06:48:02 AM
How do you refuel a balloon in mid-air? With another  air transport medium. HOW YOU CAN CONSTANTLY DO THAT WITHOUT BEING NOTICED?
What do you think that NASA is doing with all these supposed "space launches"?
Logged
?

EmperorZhark

  • 2229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #139 on: November 05, 2011, 10:47:05 AM »
Launching satellites built by proper companies, with proper scientists and engineers, transmitting relevant data, not imaginary things.
Logged
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.
?

LinearPlane

  • 259
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #140 on: November 07, 2011, 12:54:30 PM »
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 05, 2011, 08:58:28 AM
Replacement instead of refueling would be my guess.

All you have are guesses. All your "beliefs" are guesses. Thank you for confirming.
Logged
The FAQ needs updating to reflect the falsehood of the FAQ.
?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #141 on: November 07, 2011, 01:12:30 PM »
Quote from: LinearPlane on November 07, 2011, 12:54:30 PM
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 05, 2011, 08:58:28 AM
Replacement instead of refueling would be my guess.

All you have are guesses. All your "beliefs" are guesses. Thank you for confirming.

It's a much better guess than the globularist guess of mid-air refueling of a pseudolite/stratellite.  Maybe you can instruct us as to how that works?
« Last Edit: November 07, 2011, 01:33:26 PM by Mrs. Peach »
Logged
?

Sentient Pizza

  • 281
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #142 on: November 07, 2011, 02:35:14 PM »
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 07, 2011, 01:12:30 PM
It's a much better guess than the globularist guess of mid-air refueling of a pseudolite/stratellite.  Maybe you can instruct us as to how that works?

um....no

No RE person thinks or has suggested that there is any kind of refueling necessary (mid air or otherwise) because there are none of them that suggest pseudolites/stratelites are in use. 

The speculation so far has been about how to sustain FE contraptions that would be able to replace RE satelites.

 
Logged
Your god was nailed to a cross. Mine carries a hammer...... any questions?
?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #143 on: November 07, 2011, 05:00:17 PM »
Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 07, 2011, 02:35:14 PM
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 07, 2011, 01:12:30 PM
It's a much better guess than the globularist guess of mid-air refueling of a pseudolite/stratellite.  Maybe you can instruct us as to how that works?

um....no

No RE person thinks or has suggested that there is any kind of refueling necessary (mid air or otherwise) because there are none of them that suggest pseudolites/stratelites are in use. 

The speculation so far has been about how to sustain FE contraptions that would be able to replace RE satelites.

FE contraptions?  It's curious that you would use those terms.  Much work has been done on atmospheric 'satellites.'  Denying their existence won't make them go away.
Logged
?

Sentient Pizza

  • 281
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #144 on: November 07, 2011, 06:07:57 PM »
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 07, 2011, 05:00:17 PM
Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 07, 2011, 02:35:14 PM
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 07, 2011, 01:12:30 PM
It's a much better guess than the globularist guess of mid-air refueling of a pseudolite/stratellite.  Maybe you can instruct us as to how that works?

um....no

No RE person thinks or has suggested that there is any kind of refueling necessary (mid air or otherwise) because there are none of them that suggest pseudolites/stratelites are in use. 

The speculation so far has been about how to sustain FE contraptions that would be able to replace RE satelites.

FE contraptions?  It's curious that you would use those terms.  Much work has been done on atmospheric 'satellites.'  Denying their existence won't make them go away.

thats what you take issue with? The use of the term "contraptions"? What term would be more to your liking? Claimin gthey exist does not make them real.

Please enlighten me. What 'work' has been done on atmospheric satelites? wich btw is a contradiction in terms. Also you may want to depart from the notion of your atmospheric satelites because NASA funded most of that research.

Even Thork gave up on this one quite a while ago. That should be a bit of a hint to the rest of you FE zealots.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2011, 06:09:55 PM by Sentient Pizza »
Logged
Your god was nailed to a cross. Mine carries a hammer...... any questions?
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45082
  • +87/-109
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #145 on: November 07, 2011, 06:09:16 PM »
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 07, 2011, 01:12:30 PM
Quote from: LinearPlane on November 07, 2011, 12:54:30 PM
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 05, 2011, 08:58:28 AM
Replacement instead of refueling would be my guess.

All you have are guesses. All your "beliefs" are guesses. Thank you for confirming.

It's a much better guess than the globularist guess of mid-air refueling of a pseudolite/stratellite.  Maybe you can instruct us as to how that works?

First of all, someone needs to come up with a better term for the high altitude air vehicles that FE'ers claim perform the functions of satellites.  Pseudolites don't necessarily need to be airborne and Stratellite is a registered trademark of a high altitude airship that is not yet in production.  Secondly, who says that RE high altitude airships are refueled mid-air?
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #146 on: November 07, 2011, 09:00:15 PM »
Atmospheric satellites seems reasonably descriptive.
Logged
?

Sentient Pizza

  • 281
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #147 on: November 08, 2011, 07:10:58 AM »
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 07, 2011, 09:00:15 PM
Atmospheric satellites seems reasonably descriptive.

ok. Atmospheric satelites it is. So what "work" has been done as you claim?

Or is this another post of FE point dodging in this thread?

This thread looks like a pretty clear RE win.
Logged
Your god was nailed to a cross. Mine carries a hammer...... any questions?
?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6229
  • +0/-0
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #148 on: November 08, 2011, 07:37:14 AM »
Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 08, 2011, 07:10:58 AM
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 07, 2011, 09:00:15 PM
Atmospheric satellites seems reasonably descriptive.

ok. Atmospheric satelites it is. So what "work" has been done as you claim?

Or is this another post of FE point dodging in this thread?

This thread looks like a pretty clear RE win.

You could hang out around Edwards AFB and maybe catch a glimpse of some aircraft NASA is working on and described as 'telecommunications platforms' or maybe they've moved them to Kauai.  Then there's a company called Sky Station and one JP Aerospace.  Sanswire is in Atlanta.  Then there's Angel Technologies.  You might want to look around for yourself for more.
Logged
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • 37800
  • +1/-0
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Pseudolites
« Reply #149 on: November 08, 2011, 07:54:42 AM »
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 08, 2011, 07:37:14 AM
Quote from: Sentient Pizza on November 08, 2011, 07:10:58 AM
Quote from: Mrs. Peach on November 07, 2011, 09:00:15 PM
Atmospheric satellites seems reasonably descriptive.

ok. Atmospheric satelites it is. So what "work" has been done as you claim?

Or is this another post of FE point dodging in this thread?

This thread looks like a pretty clear RE win.

You could hang out around Edwards AFB and maybe catch a glimpse of some aircraft NASA is working on and described as 'telecommunications platforms' or maybe they've moved them to Kauai.  Then there's a company called Sky Station and one JP Aerospace.  Sanswire is in Atlanta.  Then there's Angel Technologies.  You might want to look around for yourself for more.

So this proves what?  Because people are trying to make this technology happen, then the technology must have been around as long as GPS, Satellite TV, and even Satellites?

You claim that what are known as satellites are really either earth based or hovering machines, yet you give no evidence.  Your only proof is that people have published writings that say it is possible, or that the technology exists to do such a thing.  Yet, you quote the people that are supposedly covering everything up.  What is up with that?

Ground based transmitters are possible.  I will give you that.  No one has denied this to my knowledge.  Yet, you somehow make the leap to say that this is proof that our "satellite receivers" get their signals form ground or hovering based transmitters? Everyone knows that there are antennae on the ground and in the air.  This does not mean that all or our received transmissions come from these devices.

Get a real theory and return to this thread.  I would really like to hear a plausible one.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9   Go Up
« previous next »