« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31   Go Down

What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?

  • 915 Replies
  • 194019 Views
*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3743
  • +9/-8
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« on: December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM »
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.
Logged
Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

Trans rights are human rights.
*

TheGreatGray

  • 110
  • +0/-0
  • Spherical Earth Forever
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #1 on: December 22, 2015, 08:18:03 PM »
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.
This is going to be hilarious. Watch them try to prove something that exists doesn't. The tactics are simple and limited:
Deny evidence presented as part of a conspiracy
Refuse to perform experiments that can be done at home
Shift burden of proof onto the Spherical Earth when we have already proven it.

If satellites are not real, why does satellite TV lose signal when it's stormy, yet you can get signals in mountainous areas just fine? Are you going to say they use cables but intentionally screw with the signal so that we think it comes from space?
Logged
God forbid anyone challenge your beliefs, lest you be forced to defend or change them.
?

pacman_416

  • 6
  • +0/-0
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2015, 08:23:44 PM »
And don't even think about posting a picture or a video of a satellite, they will just scream that it is fake. pictures and videos have no value on this website.
Logged
*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #3 on: December 22, 2015, 10:14:37 PM »
Since sustained space flight is not possible with the accelerating FE, satellites would not be able to remain in 'orbit', thus satellites could not exit, but for short periods of time.
Logged


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson
*

Andromeda Galaxy

  • 207
  • +0/-0
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #4 on: December 22, 2015, 11:53:18 PM »
Quote from: TheEngineer on December 22, 2015, 10:14:37 PM
Since sustained space flight is not possible with the accelerating FE, satellites would not be able to remain in 'orbit', thus satellites could not exit, but for short periods of time.

"FE'ers believe that the earth is ACCELERATING at a constant 9.8 m/s^2.  This is not a SPEED, it is an ACCELERATION!

"At this rate of acceleration, we would have reached the speed of light in just 354.3 DAYS. 
   Now FE'ers whould have us believe that since we are in the same reference frame as the earth, this doesn't violate relativity.  Oh but it does!  In order to say that the Earth is accelerating, a reference frame at rest must have been chosen.  This is how someone can say that the Earth is accelerating- we are moving with reference to something.  Therefore, we would be moving at greater than the speed of light with reference to the frame at rest.  A clear violation of Relativity."
Logged
*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #5 on: December 23, 2015, 12:25:49 AM »
Quote from: Andromeda Galaxy on December 22, 2015, 11:53:18 PM
"FE'ers believe that the earth is ACCELERATING at a constant 9.8 m/s^2.  This is not a SPEED, it is an ACCELERATION!
Acceleration is an acceleration?  Say it ain't so!

Quote
"At this rate of acceleration, we would have reached the speed of light in just 354.3 DAYS. 
Sure, unless you believe in Special Relativity.  In which case it would require an infinite amount of time to reach the speed of light.

Quote
   Now FE'ers whould have us believe that since we are in the same reference frame as the earth, this doesn't violate relativity.  Oh but it does!
Nope.

Quote
  In order to say that the Earth is accelerating, a reference frame at rest must have been chosen.
No, there only needs to be an inertial frame of reference.  Not a frame at rest.  In fact, Special Relativity has no preferred frame of reference and all frames are equivalent.

Quote
This is how someone can say that the Earth is accelerating- we are moving with reference to something.
Drop something.  In reference to that.

Quote
Therefore, we would be moving at greater than the speed of light with reference to the frame at rest.
Nope.  We would approach the speed of light asymptotically, requiring an infinite amount of time to reach it.

Quote
A clear violation of Relativity
Again: nope.
Logged


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson
*

Andromeda Galaxy

  • 207
  • +0/-0
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #6 on: December 23, 2015, 12:55:51 AM »
Quote from: TheEngineer on December 23, 2015, 12:25:49 AM
Quote from: Andromeda Galaxy on December 22, 2015, 11:53:18 PM
"FE'ers believe that the earth is ACCELERATING at a constant 9.8 m/s^2.  This is not a SPEED, it is an ACCELERATION!
Acceleration is an acceleration?  Say it ain't so!

Quote
"At this rate of acceleration, we would have reached the speed of light in just 354.3 DAYS. 
Sure, unless you believe in Special Relativity.  In which case it would require an infinite amount of time to reach the speed of light.

Quote
   Now FE'ers whould have us believe that since we are in the same reference frame as the earth, this doesn't violate relativity.  Oh but it does!
Nope.

Quote
  In order to say that the Earth is accelerating, a reference frame at rest must have been chosen.
No, there only needs to be an inertial frame of reference.  Not a frame at rest.  In fact, Special Relativity has no preferred frame of reference and all frames are equivalent.

Quote
This is how someone can say that the Earth is accelerating- we are moving with reference to something.
Drop something.  In reference to that.

Quote
Therefore, we would be moving at greater than the speed of light with reference to the frame at rest.
Nope.  We would approach the speed of light asymptotically, requiring an infinite amount of time to reach it.

Quote
A clear violation of Relativity
Again: nope.

You said it dude.
Logged
*

TheGreatGray

  • 110
  • +0/-0
  • Spherical Earth Forever
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #7 on: December 23, 2015, 05:35:11 AM »
Quote from: TheEngineer on December 23, 2015, 12:25:49 AM
Quote from: Andromeda Galaxy on December 22, 2015, 11:53:18 PM
"FE'ers believe that the earth is ACCELERATING at a constant 9.8 m/s^2.  This is not a SPEED, it is an ACCELERATION!
Acceleration is an acceleration?  Say it ain't so!

Quote
"At this rate of acceleration, we would have reached the speed of light in just 354.3 DAYS. 
Sure, unless you believe in Special Relativity.  In which case it would require an infinite amount of time to reach the speed of light.

Quote
   Now FE'ers whould have us believe that since we are in the same reference frame as the earth, this doesn't violate relativity.  Oh but it does!
Nope.

Quote
  In order to say that the Earth is accelerating, a reference frame at rest must have been chosen.
No, there only needs to be an inertial frame of reference.  Not a frame at rest.  In fact, Special Relativity has no preferred frame of reference and all frames are equivalent.

Quote
This is how someone can say that the Earth is accelerating- we are moving with reference to something.
Drop something.  In reference to that.

Quote
Therefore, we would be moving at greater than the speed of light with reference to the frame at rest.
Nope.  We would approach the speed of light asymptotically, requiring an infinite amount of time to reach it.

Quote
A clear violation of Relativity
Again: nope.
Alright. All you said is "under my model a satellite is impossible". I have evidence that satellites are real. Your model has been disproven. Unless you want to give some sort of substantial evidence against satellites?
Logged
God forbid anyone challenge your beliefs, lest you be forced to defend or change them.
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • +0/-0
  • DET Developer
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #8 on: December 23, 2015, 06:44:08 AM »
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.

Everyone believes the objects that are claimed to be the satellites/ISS exist, they can be observed and detected. The important question is whether they adhere to the RE claim of being in space.
Logged
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.
?

inquisitive

  • 5108
  • +0/-0
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #9 on: December 23, 2015, 07:04:34 AM »
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 06:44:08 AM
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.

Everyone believes the objects that are claimed to be the satellites/ISS exist, they can be observed and detected. The important question is whether they adhere to the RE claim of being in space.
Where are they then?  We know the location.
Logged
?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
  • +0/-0
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #10 on: December 23, 2015, 07:18:56 AM »
Quote from: Jadyyn on December 11, 2015, 06:56:39 AM
Using:




See (http://www.universetoday.com/64776/incredible-image-atlantis-and-iss-transit-the-sun/) for details (3rd paragraph)...
  • Sun ~1920 arcseconds in the sky (32' 00" average); ~17.125" on my monitor
  • ISS height - 356' high; ~.5" on my monitor
  • ISS angle ~56.06 arcseconds
  • Calculated distance ~248.1 mi.
  • Per orbital info, 249 mi.
Not bad...
248 mi up = in space.
Logged
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #11 on: December 23, 2015, 07:34:59 AM »
Quote from: Andromeda Galaxy on December 23, 2015, 12:55:51 AM
You said it dude.
Wow.  You RE'ers never fail to disappoint. 
Logged


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson
*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #12 on: December 23, 2015, 07:36:23 AM »
Quote from: TheGreatGray on December 23, 2015, 05:35:11 AM
All you said is "under my model a satellite is impossible".
I'm pretty sure I said no such thing.
Logged


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson
*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3743
  • +9/-8
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #13 on: December 23, 2015, 07:56:45 AM »
Quote from: TheEngineer on December 22, 2015, 10:14:37 PM
Since sustained space flight is not possible with the accelerating FE, satellites would not be able to remain in 'orbit', thus satellites could not exit, but for short periods of time.

This is what he was refering to.
Logged
Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

Trans rights are human rights.
*

Andromeda Galaxy

  • 207
  • +0/-0
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #14 on: December 23, 2015, 08:00:05 AM »
Quote from: TheEngineer on December 23, 2015, 07:34:59 AM
Quote from: Andromeda Galaxy on December 23, 2015, 12:55:51 AM
You said it dude.
Wow.  You RE'ers never fail to disappoint.

You do realise that I'm referencing a quote you made in 2006...

You are picking apart your very own post.
Logged
*

TheGreatGray

  • 110
  • +0/-0
  • Spherical Earth Forever
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #15 on: December 23, 2015, 08:09:30 AM »
Quote from: TheEngineer on December 22, 2015, 10:14:37 PM
Since sustained space flight is not possible with the accelerating FE, satellites would not be able to remain in 'orbit', thus satellites could not exit, but for short periods of time.
Logged
God forbid anyone challenge your beliefs, lest you be forced to defend or change them.
?

inquisitive

  • 5108
  • +0/-0
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #16 on: December 23, 2015, 08:13:07 AM »
Quote from: TheGreatGray on December 23, 2015, 08:09:30 AM
Quote from: TheEngineer on December 22, 2015, 10:14:37 PM
Since sustained space flight is not possible with the accelerating FE, satellites would not be able to remain in 'orbit', thus satellites could not exit, but for short periods of time.
Yet many of us receive TV from satellites.
Logged
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • +0/-0
  • DET Developer
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #17 on: December 23, 2015, 08:44:38 AM »
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 07:04:34 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 06:44:08 AM
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.

Everyone believes the objects that are claimed to be the satellites/ISS exist, they can be observed and detected. The important question is whether they adhere to the RE claim of being in space.
Where are they then?  We know the location.
Can you please stop wasting everyone's time? All you ever seem to do is butt into a thread with childishly simple questions that you've had answered countless times before: and you never post a second time to offer any clarification or engage in any discussion.
We can see objects in the sky. How does this imply they are in space?
Logged
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.
?

inquisitive

  • 5108
  • +0/-0
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #18 on: December 23, 2015, 08:56:19 AM »
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 08:44:38 AM
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 07:04:34 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 06:44:08 AM
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.

Everyone believes the objects that are claimed to be the satellites/ISS exist, they can be observed and detected. The important question is whether they adhere to the RE claim of being in space.
Where are they then?  We know the location.
Can you please stop wasting everyone's time? All you ever seem to do is butt into a thread with childishly simple questions that you've had answered countless times before: and you never post a second time to offer any clarification or engage in any discussion.
We can see objects in the sky. How does this imply they are in space?
Where does space start?  At least you agree satellites exist for communication.
Logged
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • +0/-0
  • DET Developer
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #19 on: December 23, 2015, 09:11:48 AM »
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 08:56:19 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 08:44:38 AM
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 07:04:34 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 06:44:08 AM
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.

Everyone believes the objects that are claimed to be the satellites/ISS exist, they can be observed and detected. The important question is whether they adhere to the RE claim of being in space.
Where are they then?  We know the location.
Can you please stop wasting everyone's time? All you ever seem to do is butt into a thread with childishly simple questions that you've had answered countless times before: and you never post a second time to offer any clarification or engage in any discussion.
We can see objects in the sky. How does this imply they are in space?
Where does space start?  At least you agree satellites exist for communication.
I agree there are transmitters that exist for communication. That's verifiable. Stop wasting time, stop lying. Come back when you have a remotely meaningful question.
Logged
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.
*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3743
  • +9/-8
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #20 on: December 23, 2015, 09:15:05 AM »
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 09:11:48 AM
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 08:56:19 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 08:44:38 AM
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 07:04:34 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 06:44:08 AM
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.

Everyone believes the objects that are claimed to be the satellites/ISS exist, they can be observed and detected. The important question is whether they adhere to the RE claim of being in space.
Where are they then?  We know the location.
Can you please stop wasting everyone's time? All you ever seem to do is butt into a thread with childishly simple questions that you've had answered countless times before: and you never post a second time to offer any clarification or engage in any discussion.
We can see objects in the sky. How does this imply they are in space?
Where does space start?  At least you agree satellites exist for communication.
I agree there are transmitters that exist for communication. That's verifiable. Stop wasting time, stop lying. Come back when you have a remotely meaningful question.

First place he's not lying (at least on this post).

Second, that's a valid question. Where does space starts in your model? How high do we have to go to get up there? Does outer space even exist in your model.
Logged
Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

Trans rights are human rights.
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • +0/-0
  • DET Developer
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #21 on: December 23, 2015, 09:17:07 AM »
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 23, 2015, 09:15:05 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 09:11:48 AM
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 08:56:19 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 08:44:38 AM
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 07:04:34 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 06:44:08 AM
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.

Everyone believes the objects that are claimed to be the satellites/ISS exist, they can be observed and detected. The important question is whether they adhere to the RE claim of being in space.
Where are they then?  We know the location.
Can you please stop wasting everyone's time? All you ever seem to do is butt into a thread with childishly simple questions that you've had answered countless times before: and you never post a second time to offer any clarification or engage in any discussion.
We can see objects in the sky. How does this imply they are in space?
Where does space start?  At least you agree satellites exist for communication.
I agree there are transmitters that exist for communication. That's verifiable. Stop wasting time, stop lying. Come back when you have a remotely meaningful question.

First place he's not lying (at least on this post).

Second, that's a valid question. Where does space starts in your model? How high do we have to go to get up there? Does outer space even exist in your model.

He openly lied about what I said. How is that not lying?
Outer space, defined by a lack of atmosphere, clearly would exist under DET. It'd be at a little over 100km, probably: so what? It's a valid question, it's not remotely relevant or meaningful.
Logged
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.
*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3743
  • +9/-8
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #22 on: December 23, 2015, 09:20:41 AM »
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 09:17:07 AM
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 23, 2015, 09:15:05 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 09:11:48 AM
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 08:56:19 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 08:44:38 AM
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 07:04:34 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 06:44:08 AM
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.

Everyone believes the objects that are claimed to be the satellites/ISS exist, they can be observed and detected. The important question is whether they adhere to the RE claim of being in space.
Where are they then?  We know the location.
Can you please stop wasting everyone's time? All you ever seem to do is butt into a thread with childishly simple questions that you've had answered countless times before: and you never post a second time to offer any clarification or engage in any discussion.
We can see objects in the sky. How does this imply they are in space?
Where does space start?  At least you agree satellites exist for communication.
I agree there are transmitters that exist for communication. That's verifiable. Stop wasting time, stop lying. Come back when you have a remotely meaningful question.

First place he's not lying (at least on this post).

Second, that's a valid question. Where does space starts in your model? How high do we have to go to get up there? Does outer space even exist in your model.

He openly lied about what I said. How is that not lying?
Outer space, defined by a lack of atmosphere, clearly would exist under DET. It'd be at a little over 100km, probably: so what? It's a valid question, it's not remotely relevant or meaningful.
So why can't the ISS be up there as well? Why it has to be in the atmosphere?
Logged
Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

Trans rights are human rights.
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • +0/-0
  • DET Developer
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #23 on: December 23, 2015, 09:24:26 AM »
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 23, 2015, 09:20:41 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 09:17:07 AM
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 23, 2015, 09:15:05 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 09:11:48 AM
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 08:56:19 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 08:44:38 AM
Quote from: inquisitive on December 23, 2015, 07:04:34 AM
Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 23, 2015, 06:44:08 AM
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 22, 2015, 07:59:02 PM
I realize this is asking you to prove a negative but since you FEs make the claim that they don't exist then its up to you to provide physical evidence. And Jroweskepic this isn't for you since you believe that they do exist or at least the ISS.

Everyone believes the objects that are claimed to be the satellites/ISS exist, they can be observed and detected. The important question is whether they adhere to the RE claim of being in space.
Where are they then?  We know the location.
Can you please stop wasting everyone's time? All you ever seem to do is butt into a thread with childishly simple questions that you've had answered countless times before: and you never post a second time to offer any clarification or engage in any discussion.
We can see objects in the sky. How does this imply they are in space?
Where does space start?  At least you agree satellites exist for communication.
I agree there are transmitters that exist for communication. That's verifiable. Stop wasting time, stop lying. Come back when you have a remotely meaningful question.

First place he's not lying (at least on this post).

Second, that's a valid question. Where does space starts in your model? How high do we have to go to get up there? Does outer space even exist in your model.

He openly lied about what I said. How is that not lying?
Outer space, defined by a lack of atmosphere, clearly would exist under DET. It'd be at a little over 100km, probably: so what? It's a valid question, it's not remotely relevant or meaningful.
So why can't the ISS be up there as well? Why it has to be in the atmosphere?
Because space travel is impossible under the DE model, as you would know if you had taken the time to actually try and learn the model, rather than demanding I repeat myself countless times because you're too lazy to click a link.
Logged
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.
?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
  • +0/-0
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #24 on: December 23, 2015, 09:35:43 AM »
Logged
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3743
  • +9/-8
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #25 on: December 23, 2015, 09:36:17 AM »
How do you know there are whirlpools up there? I hate to bring this up again (mainly due to the fear of being cussed at) but how do you know Aether acts the way you say it does? Your Aether is different then Einstein's Aether and even then I think he made it obsolete.
Logged
Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

Trans rights are human rights.
*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3743
  • +9/-8
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #26 on: December 23, 2015, 09:37:52 AM »
Quote from: Jadyyn on December 23, 2015, 09:35:43 AM
Yet I've calculated it to be at least 248 mi up:
(http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65210.msg1741811#msg1741811)

This is what we're asking out you Jroweskepic. Actual, complete, repeatable measurements.
Logged
Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

Trans rights are human rights.
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • +0/-0
  • DET Developer
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #27 on: December 23, 2015, 09:40:19 AM »
Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 23, 2015, 09:36:17 AM
How do you know there are whirlpools up there? I hate to bring this up again (mainly due to the fear of being cussed at) but how do you know Aether acts the way you say it does? Your Aether is different then Einstein's Aether and even then I think he made it obsolete.
You hate to bring it up, I hate to deal with your bullshit. You ignore the answer EVERY FUCKING TIME. YOU KNOW WHERE THE MODEL IS. YOU KNOW WHERE THE EVIDENCE IS. LEARN TO READ.
Not once do you actually respond to the evidence. You outright lie. NO, the DE model of aether isn't identical to Einstein's, I HAVE NEVER CLAIMED IT IS FUCKWIT. IT IS AN EXTENSION, WHICH I HAVE EXPLICITY SAID MULTIPLE TIMES DESPITE YOUR COUNTLESS LIES.
And look at that, ooooh "I think," no evidence, no justification, just assertion.

If you're only going to ignore every word I say and repeat the exact same bullshit at a later date, why exactly do you waste everybody's time with your whining?!

GET. A. LIFE.
Logged
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.
*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3743
  • +9/-8
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #28 on: December 23, 2015, 09:46:59 AM »
Boy, you have a way of making my fears come true. However no matter what you call me it won't shake me. What will shake me is scripture, science, facts, stats, and logic. I'm a YEC and I'm currently in a evolution thread on this forum. Many here will disagree with me but I don't scream at them to read the model. I provide rebuttals and links to back up my claims and I think you should too. I ask that you put on my shoes in that thread and do as I do in the thread.
Logged
Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

Trans rights are human rights.
*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3743
  • +9/-8
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
Re: What evidence you have that satellites don't exist?
« Reply #29 on: December 23, 2015, 09:49:44 AM »
Oh btw, the point I was making comparing your Aether and Einstein's Aether is that what evidence you have for your Aether. Why should I buy your Aether instead of Einstein's?
Logged
Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

Trans rights are human rights.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31   Go Up
« previous next »