ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.

  • 185 Replies
  • 34748 Views
?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« on: August 14, 2012, 03:40:28 PM »
Check out this link:
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/

From this page, you can easily link to your own location to check visible sightings of the International Space Station, which is variously claimed by the weak minded FE'ers on this site to be an aircraft, a ghost, a magic projection, or a figment of the imagination.
I have twice this week checked out the data for my location with my own eyes. (i.e a ZETETIC OBSERVATION). It was 100% accurate regarding the position and duration of the sighting. This shows the data is not fictional, regardless of how much Tom starts babbling that it's based on a mathematical model and therefore a lie. The fact is, the prediction has been shown to match reality.
The astute will be ahead of me already on how this dents FET, but for the simple souls such as Thork, the problem FET is faced with is one of triangulation. If you know where you are, and another observer knows where they are, and they can both see the ISS at the position it's predicted to be in from their location, then simple trigonometry can give you a good estimation of the height of the ISS and how fast it's going. It doesn't take much calculation to show that this thing is higher and faster than an aircraft, and what's more, combine these observations with data from any home astronomy program (I use Redshift) and you can see it pass into the shadow of the earth at exactly the correct place for where the sun is supposed to be located relative to the earth's surface.
We all know FET is made up garbage, but it always satisfies me to toss in yet more disproof.  8)
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

?

dado

  • 107
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #1 on: August 14, 2012, 04:21:09 PM »
Great stuff...
Thork, Tom Bishop, do not dispair, Creationist community will gladly accept you as their followers.
Please close this site and thanks for a good fight.

?

dado

  • 107
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2012, 04:24:20 PM »
Oh no, wait, one last try with something called .......
PSEUDO-ISS?!?!
ANTI-ISS???

No? Nevermind.

Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #3 on: August 14, 2012, 08:06:29 PM »
I regularly check ISS predictions for my area and I show my family. Alaways bang on time. It was the same for the Space Shuttle. So sattllites and Space travle are varified.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2012, 08:48:03 PM »
I've seen the "ISS" through my telescope. That you can actually believe its a 227 ton man made object in space is laughable at best. How gullible can you really get?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 40504
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2012, 08:55:42 PM »
I've seen the "ISS" through my telescope. That you can actually believe its a 227 ton man made object in space is laughable at best. How gullible can you really get?

So you're saying that seeing isn't believing?  ???
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.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #6 on: August 14, 2012, 09:19:54 PM »
I've seen the "ISS" through my telescope. That you can actually believe its a 227 ton man made object in space is laughable at best. How gullible can you really get?

So you're saying that seeing isn't believing?  ???

Even at high magnification the ISS looks like a cardboard kite. Saying that small speck is a space station is like pointing at a Chinese lantern and claiming it is an alien ship.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17648
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #7 on: August 14, 2012, 09:28:04 PM »
The astute will be ahead of me already on how this dents FET, but for the simple souls such as Thork, the problem FET is faced with is one of triangulation. If you know where you are, and another observer knows where they are, and they can both see the ISS at the position it's predicted to be in from their location, then simple trigonometry can give you a good estimation of the height of the ISS and how fast it's going. It doesn't take much calculation to show that this thing is higher and faster than an aircraft, and what's more, combine these observations with data from any home astronomy program (I use Redshift) and you can see it pass into the shadow of the earth at exactly the correct place for where the sun is supposed to be located relative to the earth's surface.

So stop posting and actually do one of these thought experiments then. We get people here every day saying "if you do this... this will happen" and then think that they won.

Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #8 on: August 14, 2012, 09:35:01 PM »
I've seen the "ISS" through my telescope. That you can actually believe its a 227 ton man made object in space is laughable at best. How gullible can you really get?

What is it then exactly?

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #9 on: August 14, 2012, 10:51:53 PM »
I've seen the "ISS" through my telescope. That you can actually believe its a 227 ton man made object in space is laughable at best. How gullible can you really get?

What is it then exactly?

I haven't gathered enough observational evidence to show what it is, only what it isn't, and it isn't a space station.

Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #10 on: August 15, 2012, 12:22:20 AM »
I've seen the "ISS" through my telescope. That you can actually believe its a 227 ton man made object in space is laughable at best. How gullible can you really get?

What is it then exactly?

I haven't gathered enough observational evidence to show what it is, only what it isn't, and it isn't a space station.

We have all our evidence, why havn't you? It's not good enough for you to say I don't know, then tell us that it's not. Why then was the Shuttle visible when it was scheduled for space flight, then gone once landed?

Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #11 on: August 15, 2012, 01:06:10 AM »
until disproven, space flight is very possible.
otherwise we would be crashing into the sun. 
objects in space are also affected by the UA

?

dado

  • 107
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #12 on: August 15, 2012, 03:42:53 AM »
I've seen the "ISS" through my telescope. That you can actually believe its a 227 ton man made object in space is laughable at best. How gullible can you really get?

So you're saying that seeing isn't believing?  ???

Even at high magnification the ISS looks like a cardboard kite. Saying that small speck is a space station is like pointing at a Chinese lantern and claiming it is an alien ship.
Surely you realize that a speck can weight 227 tons since you are observing it from a great deal of distance?
How about this, try to observe other objects, or cut down magnification and climb a mountain and observe something else close to that weight... Buildings, bridges, etc... Will they be half the size of a speck if you decrease magnification...
Ever thought of that...

In any case, if ISS is up there, no matter if it was cardboard or actual 227 ton ISS, how come it manages to be up there with this FE laws?

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #13 on: August 15, 2012, 04:55:36 AM »
The astute will be ahead of me already on how this dents FET, but for the simple souls such as Thork, the problem FET is faced with is one of triangulation. If you know where you are, and another observer knows where they are, and they can both see the ISS at the position it's predicted to be in from their location, then simple trigonometry can give you a good estimation of the height of the ISS and how fast it's going. It doesn't take much calculation to show that this thing is higher and faster than an aircraft, and what's more, combine these observations with data from any home astronomy program (I use Redshift) and you can see it pass into the shadow of the earth at exactly the correct place for where the sun is supposed to be located relative to the earth's surface.

So stop posting and actually do one of these thought experiments then. We get people here every day saying "if you do this... this will happen" and then think that they won.

Er, have you STILL not learned to read? Did you see the bit that says that I made zetetic observations myself? The experiment has been done, idiot. If you'd like to see some maths on it:
Altitude from southern England: 40 degrees
Altitude on same pass seen from western Wales: 71 degrees.
Distance between these two observation points is roughly 325km. If the ISS position is taken as the point of a triangle and the observation sites as the other two points, that gives an angle between the two lines of sight of 69 degrees. This is therefore not far off an isoceles triangle, which means that
the minimum distance the ISS could be from the ground to create this view is somewhere around 200km - which would be if the plane of the triangle was perpendicular to a line between the two observing locations. However, it's not, it's actually leaning over somewhat, which means the triangle plane described between these three points is "stretched out" in the direction of the ISS. I'm not sure what mathematics is required in order to account for this, presumably by adding in a third observation point, say from mid Scotland at 25 degrees. Then you can create a tetrahedron with only one possible vertex position, but I'm not sure exactly how that is calculated. However, even my simple working out has given a minimum height above the ground well above that of aircraft.
If anyone can do more precise calculations, please feel free to correct me.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #14 on: August 15, 2012, 04:58:43 AM »
I've seen the "ISS" through my telescope. That you can actually believe its a 227 ton man made object in space is laughable at best. How gullible can you really get?

Argumentum ad ridiculum - "it can't be true because I think it's silly"
Tell me, sticky skinned youth, what telescope did you use to observe the ISS, and how did you guide it? Because I think you're telling lies.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #15 on: August 15, 2012, 06:28:19 AM »
Argumentum ad ridiculum - "it can't be true because I think it's silly"

Please do not put words in my mouth. It simply shows you're incapable of finding a real point to make.

Tell me, sticky skinned youth, what telescope did you use to observe the ISS, and how did you guide it? Because I think you're telling lies.

Irrelevant.

Surely you realize that a speck can weight 227 tons since you are observing it from a great deal of distance?
How about this, try to observe other objects, or cut down magnification and climb a mountain and observe something else close to that weight... Buildings, bridges, etc... Will they be half the size of a speck if you decrease magnification...
Ever thought of that...

In any case, if ISS is up there, no matter if it was cardboard or actual 227 ton ISS, how come it manages to be up there with this FE laws?

That is your only reason? It can therefore it does? Why do RE'ers always resort to this invalid reasoning? "The Earth could be round, therefore it is!"

How silly.

Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #16 on: August 15, 2012, 06:32:25 AM »
The An-225 Mriya jet flew just fine at a maximum weight of around 275 tons.
There should be no reason they couldnt get 275 tons into space.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #17 on: August 15, 2012, 07:16:23 AM »
Argumentum ad ridiculum - "it can't be true because I think it's silly"

Please do not put words in my mouth. It simply shows you're incapable of finding a real point to make.

Tell me, sticky skinned youth, what telescope did you use to observe the ISS, and how did you guide it? Because I think you're telling lies.

Irrelevant.


That wasn't putting words in your mouth, it was a demonstrative example of the principle of argumentum ad ridiculum, for those who don't understand it, like yourself. (If you understood it you wouldn't do it, QED.) As for finding a real point to make - I started this thread. I made quite a big point there, don't you think? Then I did some maths. What have YOU contributed other than argumentum ad ridiculum?
And no, it's perfectly relevant that I think you're telling lies because you are basing your silly argument on observations you claim to have made. To expect information regarding these observations is both reasonable and relevant.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #18 on: August 15, 2012, 07:55:42 AM »
That wasn't putting words in your mouth, it was a demonstrative example of the principle of argumentum ad ridiculum, for those who don't understand it, like yourself. (If you understood it you wouldn't do it, QED.) As for finding a real point to make - I started this thread. I made quite a big point there, don't you think? Then I did some maths. What have YOU contributed other than argumentum ad ridiculum?
And no, it's perfectly relevant that I think you're telling lies because you are basing your silly argument on observations you claim to have made. To expect information regarding these observations is both reasonable and relevant.

So, you had no real point to make, noted.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8812
  • Semper vigilans
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #19 on: August 15, 2012, 08:16:27 AM »
There were only 2 days last year when the supposed location of the ISS didn't match what I observed so I believe it is fairly reliable. However, it looks an awful lot like a plane when I was using a telescope.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #20 on: August 15, 2012, 09:15:08 AM »
There were only 2 days last year when the supposed location of the ISS didn't match what I observed so I believe it is fairly reliable. However, it looks an awful lot like a plane when I was using a telescope.

Still on the "it looks like... therefore it is..."

I wonder how you can perform any science.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8812
  • Semper vigilans
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #21 on: August 15, 2012, 09:20:09 AM »
Well there is no reason one set of the solar panel branches should appear larger than a commercial jet in my telescope. Especially at the supposed distance above earth.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8812
  • Semper vigilans
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #22 on: August 15, 2012, 09:21:13 AM »
There were only 2 days last year when the supposed location of the ISS didn't match what I observed so I believe it is fairly reliable. However, it looks an awful lot like a plane when I was using a telescope.

Still on the "it looks like... therefore it is..."

I wonder how you can perform any science.
Doesn't apply since I never said "therefore it is" anything. I'll give you a couple of days to come up with a better comeback.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #23 on: August 15, 2012, 09:22:40 AM »
There were only 2 days last year when the supposed location of the ISS didn't match what I observed so I believe it is fairly reliable. However, it looks an awful lot like a plane when I was using a telescope.

Still on the "it looks like... therefore it is..."

I wonder how you can perform any science.
Doesn't apply since I never said "therefore it is" anything. I'll give you a couple of days to come up with a better comeback.

You implied it very hard.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 40504
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #24 on: August 15, 2012, 09:26:00 AM »
Well there is no reason one set of the solar panel branches should appear larger than a commercial jet in my telescope. Especially at the supposed distance above earth.

Why not?  First of all, how do you know that it's just one set of solar panels that you're seeing? Also, the solar panels on the ISS are much more reflective than a commercial jet (especially at night).
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.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #25 on: August 15, 2012, 09:35:18 AM »
That wasn't putting words in your mouth, it was a demonstrative example of the principle of argumentum ad ridiculum, for those who don't understand it, like yourself. (If you understood it you wouldn't do it, QED.) As for finding a real point to make - I started this thread. I made quite a big point there, don't you think? Then I did some maths. What have YOU contributed other than argumentum ad ridiculum?
And no, it's perfectly relevant that I think you're telling lies because you are basing your silly argument on observations you claim to have made. To expect information regarding these observations is both reasonable and relevant.

So, you had no real point to make, noted.

So you have no reading ability, noted.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #26 on: August 15, 2012, 09:36:45 AM »
There were only 2 days last year when the supposed location of the ISS didn't match what I observed so I believe it is fairly reliable. However, it looks an awful lot like a plane when I was using a telescope.

Please tell us what telescope you used, what level of magnification, and by what method you tracked the ISS with the telescope. Sticky Pig Boy was asked this and failed to provide any information, can you do better?
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8812
  • Semper vigilans
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #27 on: August 15, 2012, 09:44:17 AM »
Celestron 6 inch Newt. reflector, sky align tracking version 4.2
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8812
  • Semper vigilans
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #28 on: August 15, 2012, 09:45:39 AM »
Well there is no reason one set of the solar panel branches should appear larger than a commercial jet in my telescope. Especially at the supposed distance above earth.

Why not?  First of all, how do you know that it's just one set of solar panels that you're seeing? Also, the solar panels on the ISS are much more reflective than a commercial jet (especially at night).
Since when is brighter=bigger  ???
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: ISS proved to be what it's claimed to be, i.e a Satellite.
« Reply #29 on: August 15, 2012, 09:45:52 AM »
Celestron 6 inch Newt. reflector, sky align tracking version 4.2

And the magnification, as requested?

I'm also curious how you were able to get the telescope to track the ISS across the sky accurately, since from the information I can find the Sky Align tracking system has sidereal, lunar and solar tracking speeds but not one for the variable speed of the ISS. Especially since whatever magnification you were using, it would have to be pretty powerful to pick out details on the ISS. So hardly any margin for error in tracking.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2012, 10:03:04 AM by The Knowledge »
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.