It's 2015 and you aren't even close to owning a Spaceship

lol

Pictures are not reality?

lol

Images are not reality, psycho.

What are you so scared of?

Anyhow; you liars claim the ISS is visible through a telescope; I say it is merely a light in the sky...

But if it is not the ISS, what then is the true nature of that light in the sky?

Opinions please, criminals...

Obviously no one is going to give their opinion about a known light in the sky, which they already know is the ISS.

Why don't you share your thoughts about what your opinion is about 'the true nature of that light in the sky?'

Obviously no one is going to give their opinion about a known light in the sky,

So; you acknowledge that what you claim to be a manned space-station IS in fact also known to be a light in the sky.

Good; now we're getting somewhere.

So; if the aforementioned light in the sky is NOT in fact the ISS, what else could it be?

Use your imaginations, sci-fi cultists; offer alternative perspectives & hypotheses, if your atrophied brains are capable of such a thing...

Quote from: chtwrone on September 11, 2015, 08:59:21 PM

Obviously no one is going to give their opinion about a known light in the sky,

So; you acknowledge that what you claim to be a manned space-station IS in fact also known to be a light in the sky.

Good; now we're getting somewhere.

So; if the aforementioned light in the sky is NOT in fact the ISS, what else could it be?

Use your imaginations, sci-fi cultists; offer alternative perspectives & hypotheses, if your atrophied brains are capable of such a thing...

The only time I've seen the ISS is after I've looked up the orbiting schedule to confirm when the next opportunity is for viewing.  So therefore, what I am looking at IS the ISS.

There is no point in answering your hypothetical question, when the real and only answer is known and obvious.

The picture below shows the ISS orbiting over where I live in New Zealand - what a beautiful country I live in.

LOL!!!

There's a lot of detail in your fake photo for it being allegedly taken from 250 miles away.

& I couldn't give a flying f**k where you claim to live, cowardly lying-machine, so STFU about it.

Anyhow; we've now firmly established that you are a craven dissembler who cannot distinguish Images from Reality, so; anyone else care to offer us an alternative hypothesis on what the now-acknowledged light in the sky that you claim is a manned space-station could be?

Use your Imaginations, sci-fi cultists!

LOL!!!

There's a lot of detail in your fake photo for it being allegedly taken from 250 miles away.

& I couldn't give a flying f**k where you claim to live, cowardly lying-machine, so STFU about it.

Anyhow; we've now firmly established that you are a craven dissembler who cannot distinguish Images from Reality, so; anyone else care to offer us an alternative hypothesis on what the now-acknowledged light in the sky that you claim is a manned space-station could be?

Use your Imaginations, sci-fi cultists!

My hypothesis is that the light in the sky is billions of photons hitting the back of our retina, and being processed as a light against the dark sky, after having being produced by the sun and then reflecting off of a football field sized space station built by an international consortium of space agencies.

I asked for an ALTERNATIVE hypothesis, criminal space-nonce Mainframes.

Learn to read...

Or learn NOT TO LIE; same difference.

Also; LOL!!!

I asked for an ALTERNATIVE hypothesis, criminal space-nonce Mainframes.

Learn to read...

Or learn NOT TO LIE; same difference.

Also; LOL!!!

What other hypothesis would there be?

We have masses of evidence pointing to the 'light in the sky' being the ISS.

No you don't; you have a light in the sky & masses of LIES.

Now; carry on brainwashing, Liar.

No you don't; you have a light in the sky & masses of LIES.

Now; carry on brainwashing, Liar.

lol

Just because you don't agree with the evidence doesn't mean it's a lie.

lol

Get on our level.


lol

Your level?

Never, psycho!

Now; if - as you acknowledge - what you claim to be the ISS is no more than a light in the sky, as seen from the ground, please offer an alternative hypothesis as to what it could be.

Simple question; strangely hard to answer, though...

Well, for professional liars, at any rate.

Your level?

Never, psycho!

Now; if - as you acknowledge - what you claim to be the ISS is no more than a light in the sky, as seen from the ground, please offer an alternative hypothesis as to what it could be.

Simple question; strangely hard to answer, though...

Well, for professional liars, at any rate.

We already told you were aren't going to come up with a hypothesis.
But here, it's a giant bowl of dicks.  You better go chase it as you seem to always have dicks on your mind.

So; you daren't answer.

Sock-arul's cowardice is noted.

Now; anyone else care to hazard aguess: if - as you acknowledge - what you claim to be the ISS is no more than a light in the sky, as seen from the ground, please offer an alternative hypothesis as to what it could actually be.

Simple question; strangely hard to answer, though...

Well, for professional liars like sock-arul, Mthwrone et al, at any rate.

Now; anyone else care to hazard aguess: if - as you acknowledge - what you claim to be the ISS is no more than a light in the sky, as seen from the ground, please offer an alternative hypothesis as to what it could actually be.

Why are you asking someone who believes that the ISS is real for an alternative hypothesis?  It's like asking a fat person for an alternative hypothesis as to why they're so heavy.

It's like asking a fat person for an alternative hypothesis as to why they're so heavy.

Quite, Markjo; many fat people have a problem they will neither acknowledge nor fix for themselves.

Like Mikeman does...

And the same goes for people who believe that what they perceive as a light in the sky is, somehow, a manned space station.

I am trying to CURE these people, markjo; I am providing a SERVICE.

Now; use your Imaginations, obese cultists; please try to offer alternative hypotheses as to what the light in the sky you claim is the ISS could, in fact, be.

Come on  - THINK!!!

Quote from: markjo on September 12, 2015, 01:11:12 PM

It's like asking a fat person for an alternative hypothesis as to why they're so heavy.

Quite, Markjo; many fat people have a problem they will neither acknowledge nor fix for themselves.

Like Mikeman does...

And the same goes for people who believe that what they perceive as a light in the sky is, somehow, a manned space station.

I am trying to CURE these people, markjo; I am providing a SERVICE.

Now; use your Imaginations, obese cultists; please try to offer alternative hypotheses as to what the light in the sky you claim is the ISS could, in fact, be.

Come on  - THINK!!!

The moving light in the sky could be a high flying albatross holding a flash-light in its beak?

Your turn - what's your opinion?

Mhtwrone just spammed 3 shitposts in 20 minutes; starting to see a pattern yet, neutrals?

F**k him, though; use your Imaginations, obese cultists; please try to offer alternative hypotheses as to what the light in the sky you claim is the ISS could, in fact, be.

Come on  - THINK!!!

Quote from: markjo on September 12, 2015, 01:11:12 PM

It's like asking a fat person for an alternative hypothesis as to why they're so heavy.

Quite, Markjo; many fat people have a problem they will neither acknowledge nor fix for themselves.

Yes, like your case of denialism.

And the same goes for people who believe that what they perceive as a light in the sky is, somehow, a manned space station.

Looking through a telescope (or binoculars if you insist on stereo vision) and seeing more than just a blob of light doesn't sound like a problem to me.

I am trying to CURE these people, markjo; I am providing a SERVICE.

Physician, heal thyself.

Now; use your Imaginations, obese cultists; please try to offer alternative hypotheses as to what the light in the sky you claim is the ISS could, in fact, be.

The problem is that there is nothing else that it could be that has the same characteristics that are readily visible to anyone open minded enough to look.

LOL!!!

There's a lot of detail in your fake photo for it being allegedly taken from 250 miles away.

& I couldn't give a flying f**k where you claim to live, cowardly lying-machine, so STFU about it.

Anyhow; we've now firmly established that you are a craven dissembler who cannot distinguish Images from Reality, so; anyone else care to offer us an alternative hypothesis on what the now-acknowledged light in the sky that you claim is a manned space-station could be?

Use your Imaginations, sci-fi cultists!

& I couldn't give a flying f**k where you claim to live, cowardly lying-machine, so STFU about it.


Oh dear, seems I've hit a bit of a nerve there, but I can imagine your jealousy about me living in New Zealand - certainly a better country than the one you live in.


There's a lot of detail in your fake photo for it being allegedly taken from 250 miles away.

Not sure what level of detail you would expect to see?  Why wouldn't the land mass be defined. The same with the sea - why wouldn't this amount of detail be visible?  And the highly reflective clouds - why wouldn't they be visible.  If you're going to label the picture as fake, at least explain what's wrong with it?

Oh, and just so we're clear, the picture below of another picture of my country taken from the ISS, is obviously NOT fake either.

LOL!!!

Four posts in fifty minutes from 'chtwrone' on 'flat earth general' alone...

STARTING TO SEE THE PATTERN YET, NEUTRALS?

If not, google 'online persona management software' & see the light...

Wow!

For allegedly open-minded, scientific types you are all quite extraordinarily resistant to any kind of free-thinking...

None of the REAL scientists I know are like this; guess it's just FAKE scientists who are such 'happy fascists'.

Nevertheless, let's try again; use your Imaginations, obese cultists; please try to offer alternative hypotheses as to what the light in the sky you claim is the ISS could, in fact, be.

Come on  - THINK!!!

None of the REAL scientists I know are like this;

How many of those "real scientists" that you "know" believe that rockets work just fine in a vacuum?

Wow!

For allegedly open-minded, scientific types you are all quite extraordinarily resistant to any kind of free-thinking...

None of the REAL scientists I know are like this; guess it's just FAKE scientists who are such 'happy fascists'.

Nevertheless, let's try again; use your Imaginations, obese cultists; please try to offer alternative hypotheses as to what the light in the sky you claim is the ISS could, in fact, be.

Come on  - THINK!!!

I HAVE offered an alternate hypothesis about the 'light in the sky' - you must have missed my suggestion that it could be a high flying albatross holding a flash light in its beak.

I then asked you to make a suggestion, but as yet, you have offered none.

How many of those "real scientists" that you "know" believe that rockets work just fine in a vacuum?

LOL!!!

'work just fine'; yet another phrase straight from the shill handbook.

Just come off-duty from policing the youtube comments section, Troll?

As for the scientists I've met; you jealous, bro?

Plus, I note that chtwrone has just barfed up yet another THREE shitposts inside 20 minutes on 'flat earth general' alone...

STARTING TO SEE THE PATTERN YET, NEUTRALS?

Anyway; the ISS.

We see a light in the sky pass overhead; the psychotic brainwashed scum here insist it is a manned space station.

I do not believe them; & neither should you.

So; what else could that light in the sky actually be?

THINK, cultists; THINK!

No you don't; you have a light in the sky & masses of LIES.

Now; carry on brainwashing, Liar.

Let's see, we have:

A light that resolves to an image of the ISS using bio ultra or a telescope.

Multiple website publishing the times of flyby a for your area.

Video from the light in the sky in real time that matches weather patterns as seen from below.

Masses of online material providing information on ISS.

Thousands of witnesses of shuttle launches lifting personnel and materials to build and maintain the ISS.

You:

LA LA LA. Lies. Lol. Lol. Shill.

Pretty cut and dry to me.

LOL!!!

Yes, yes; you have plenty of badly-cooked-up Fake data to support your quasi-religious delusions...

We all know that, psycho.

But as I've shown through the course of this thread that space travel as depicted is a physical impossibility, then we must conclude that your ISS is not what it is claimed to be.

Which leaves us with the problem of your light in the sky.

It cannot be a manned space station, so what is it?

For people who've invested their entire existences into concocting & supporting cosmic space-fantasies, your Imaginations are surprisingly sluggish on this issue...

I wonder why?

LOL!!!

Yes, yes; you have plenty of badly-cooked-up Fake data to support your quasi-religious delusions...

We all know that, psycho.

But as I've shown through the course of this thread that space travel as depicted is a physical impossibility, then we must conclude that your ISS is not what it is claimed to be.

Which leaves us with the problem of your light in the sky.

It cannot be a manned space station, so what is it?

For people who've invested their entire existences into concocting & supporting cosmic space-fantasies, your Imaginations are surprisingly sluggish on this issue...

I wonder why?

Why do you consider that space travel as depicted is an impossibility?  Your notion that a rocket can't operate in the vacuum of space is quite wrong, and for some silly reason you actually think that an atmosphere is required for it to push off. The following link explains why this is not the case at all -

http://macaulay.cuny.edu/eportfolios/messenger/2011/04/22/propulsion-through-a-vacuum/

It would be helpful to the discussion if you would convey your thoughts as to why a rocket engine cannot operate in a vacuum, and then maybe we can put each of our cases forward.

The following picture show the ascent stage of the LEM half a second after it has blasted off the moon's surface during the Apollo 17 mission, obviously confirming my stance that rockets CAN and DO operate in the vacuum of space.

LOL!!!

Read the thread, dumbass; you'll find all the proof you need here that rockets rely on an outside mass in order to produce thrust, including simple evidence & experiments you can try at home which support my case.

Also, you just made another THREE shitposts on 'flat earth general', but in 25 minutes this time... Slowing down a bit so it doesn't look too obvious, are you, shill?

THE PATTERN IS CLEAR, NEUTRALS.

Now f**k off, & take your enormous spammed photos of laughably fake space-toys with you, Troll.

Which still leaves us with the problem of your light in the sky.

It cannot be a manned space station, so what is it?

Any ideas?

For people who've invested their entire existences into concocting & supporting cosmic space-fantasies, your Imaginations are surprisingly sluggish on this issue...

I wonder why?

We don't need to imagine anything. We are actually capable of looking at evidence and discerning that the light in the sky is the ISS.

And no, rockets do not need an outside mass to push on. They never have and they never will.

LOL!!!

You say you are capable looking at evidence, then state that rockets can work in vacuum, despite ALL the evidence & experiments I have provided proving they can not, & you lot providing ZERO evidence & experiments to prove that they could...

You are utterly lost in your psychotic delusions, vile space-nonce mainframes.

Now; if - as the laws of physics demand - the light in the sky we see CAN NOT be the ISS, then offer alternative explanations as to what it in fact is.

Just Try, eh, criminals...?

Btw; this is post 19; next post turns the page so get the 1st word in shills...

LMFAO - at how pathetic you all are!!!