ISS altitude measured

Here is a link to Red's Rhetoric and how he measured the altitude of the ISS.


That is cool.

Here is a link to Red's Rhetoric and how he measured the altitude of the ISS.


That is cool.

I'm not going to watch that video without more information first. Could you summarize it?

I'm not going to watch that video without more information first. Could you summarize it?

Guy measures altitude of the ISS

Quote from: EvolvedMantisShrimp on March 06, 2018, 02:10:14 PM

I'm not going to watch that video without more information first. Could you summarize it?

Guy measures altitude of the ISS

How does he do it, at least in general? Also, how long is the video?

I'm with EvolvedMantisShrimp on this. "Watch this!" isn't a very compelling reason to watch a youtube video of unknown length.

From the still, it looks like a telescope with an electronic mount might be involved. Does he try several methods?

Quote from: mike247 on March 06, 2018, 02:16:20 PM

Quote from: EvolvedMantisShrimp on March 06, 2018, 02:10:14 PM

I'm not going to watch that video without more information first. Could you summarize it?

Guy measures altitude of the ISS

How does he do it, at least in general? Also, how long is the video?

I'm with EvolvedMantisShrimp on this. "Watch this!" isn't a very compelling reason to watch a youtube video of unknown length.

From the still, it looks like a telescope with an electronic mount might be involved. Does he try several methods?

Exactly. I'm not willing to contribute to an imbecile's income.

I watched a couple of Red's Rhetoric video's to hear some arguments against flatearth.
But his aggressive style ..and more so ..his comments below his own video's reveals an extremely unpleasant person who clearly wasn't around when humor was handed out.
So i'll pass this time....no more ''Red's Rhetoric'' for me.

Ps i also avoid Eric Dubay video's after his very first sickening display of antisemitism and positive attitude towards Adolf Hitler.
And there are also insane ''flatearthers '' out there that are clearly have some twisted motives.

But again ...Red's Rhetoric is to much to swallow for anyone ...i hope..

Quote from: mike247 on March 06, 2018, 02:16:20 PM

Quote from: EvolvedMantisShrimp on March 06, 2018, 02:10:14 PM

I'm not going to watch that video without more information first. Could you summarize it?

Guy measures altitude of the ISS

How does he do it, at least in general? Also, how long is the video?

I'm with EvolvedMantisShrimp on this. "Watch this!" isn't a very compelling reason to watch a youtube video of unknown length.

From the still, it looks like a telescope with an electronic mount might be involved. Does he try several methods?

Holy, holy, holy.
If you had simply clicked on the vid you would have your answers.
The video is just over 14 minutes.

They use 2 cameras separated by a little more than a KM (mile?)
Then they compare the 2 tracks of the ISS going across the moon.

Then some math comes in to figure out angles and such.
Watch the video, you can shut it off at any time.

I watched a couple of Red's Rhetoric video's to hear some arguments against flatearth.
But his aggressive style ..and more so ..his comments below his own video's reveals an extremely unpleasant person who clearly wasn't around when humor was handed out.
So i'll pass this time....no more ''Red's Rhetoric'' for me.

Ps i also avoid Eric Dubay video's after his very first sickening display of antisemitism and positive attitude towards Adolf Hitler.
And there are also insane ''flatearthers '' out there that are clearly have some twisted motives.

But again ...Red's Rhetoric is to much to swallow for anyone ...i hope..

I do not like Reds' technique either.
He seems to delight in putting people down.
Also agree with your take on Dubay.

Anyway, the video is worth watching.
Just to see the ISS going across the face of the moon.
It's not a hologram, it's not an airplane.
It is what they call it,
The International Space Station.

Red makes the best videos. This one is no longer exception. Flat brained will ignore this thread.

I watched a couple of Red's Rhetoric video's to hear some arguments against flatearth.
But his aggressive style ..and more so ..his comments below his own video's reveals an extremely unpleasant person who clearly wasn't around when humor was handed out.

I must remember not to bother with anything written by dutchy about NASA, moon landings or space in general.
"As his aggressive style ..and more so ..his comments reveal an extremely unpleasant person who clearly wasn't around when humor was handed out."

So i'll pass this time....no more ''Red's Rhetoric'' for me.

So I must try to pass any of dutchy's posts about NASA, moon landings, space and most other things.

Ps i also avoid Eric Dubay video's after his very first sickening display of antisemitism and positive attitude towards Adolf Hitler.
And there are also insane ''flatearthers '' out there that are clearly have some twisted motives.

Agreed! And have you watched much of Jeranism? - talk about ignorance about both physics and astronomy!

But again ...Red's Rhetoric is to much to swallow for anyone ...i hope..

He is a bit "too much to swallow" and I don't like his language, but have you seen the language used in flat-earthers in their comments to his and other videos?

But here is one where I doubt FE is even mentioned:Up till 2:45 it's mainly the practical aspects of setting up a telescope and even after that it doesn't have the fast shutter speed of the P900, so there is no detail.

But, you would not dare make your own personal observations of the ISS or it might overturn some of your precious beliefs - keep your eyes wide shut!

And then, there is this one:

Another one excellent video. When actual work is done you find a round earth. Daydreaming at a window is worthless.

Quote from: Alpha2Omega on March 06, 2018, 02:40:01 PM

Quote from: mike247 on March 06, 2018, 02:16:20 PM

Quote from: EvolvedMantisShrimp on March 06, 2018, 02:10:14 PM

I'm not going to watch that video without more information first. Could you summarize it?

Guy measures altitude of the ISS

How does he do it, at least in general? Also, how long is the video?

I'm with EvolvedMantisShrimp on this. "Watch this!" isn't a very compelling reason to watch a youtube video of unknown length.

From the still, it looks like a telescope with an electronic mount might be involved. Does he try several methods?

The video is just over 14 minutes.

They use 2 cameras separated by a little more than a KM (mile?)
Then they compare the 2 tracks of the ISS going across the moon.

Then some math comes in to figure out angles and such.

Thanks! That's exactly the type of info to provide when recommending a video. I encourage anyone pushing a video to provide at least this much information.

Now I'm intrigued. If it had been a two-hour video, I might have been less interested.

Ps i also avoid Eric Dubay video's after his very first sickening display of antisemitism and positive attitude towards Adolf Hitler.

He really is a vile individual.

I watched a couple of Red's Rhetoric video's to hear some arguments against flatearth.
But his aggressive style ..and more so ..his comments below his own video's reveals an extremely unpleasant person who clearly wasn't around when humor was handed out.
So i'll pass this time....no more ''Red's Rhetoric'' for me.

Ps i also avoid Eric Dubay video's after his very first sickening display of antisemitism and positive attitude towards Adolf Hitler.
And there are also insane ''flatearthers '' out there that are clearly have some twisted motives.

But again ...Red's Rhetoric is to much to swallow for anyone ...i hope..

Facts are facts.  It looks more like you are just dodging.  Why even bother commenting?

So did anyone watch the video?
Was their execution of the experiment valid?
Was the math that they used appropriate to the data collected.

The math made sense to me but was it applied properly?

So did anyone watch the video?
Was their execution of the experiment valid?
Was the math that they used appropriate to the data collected.

The math made sense to me but was it applied properly?

If jroa sees that, I'm sure he would ask:  Did you allow for atmoplanic lensing?

It has been postulated that the atmoplanic lensing effect negates the change in angular size that one would expect due to perspective.  In this model, density changes in atmoplanic pressure combined with the natural curvature of the sky act similarly to a magnifying lens.

So, I'll be kind and save him the trouble.

So did anyone watch the video?
Was their execution of the experiment valid?
Was the math that they used appropriate to the data collected.

The math made sense to me but was it applied properly?

Great evidence such as this is often ignored as they have no rebuttal.

So did anyone watch the video?
Was their execution of the experiment valid?
Was the math that they used appropriate to the data collected.

The math made sense to me but was it applied properly?

Once you determine the angle A the rest of it is correct.
It works on both models, flat and globe.
Looking at that last diagram we can conclude that altitude calculation would be even more accurate on flat model.

The only thing that might be inaccurate would be the very first step, determining the angle A.
Now let's calculate for how much.

Angle A was determined as if the distance from Moon to ISS is equal to distance from Moon to obdservers on the ground.
The mentioned 0.52 degrees of the Moon is from the ground.

In globe model that ratio is 400 over 384 400, ISS is just about 0.1% closer and angular diameter of the Moon from ISS would be about 0.1% bigger.
Error in determining A would be about 0.1% and altitude of ISS would finally be 0.1% lower. (418.64 km instead of 419.06)

In flat model Moon would be 5005 km above the ground, which is 5005 / sin(53) = 6267 km from observers.
In that case ratio is 400 over 6267, ISS is 6% closer, Moon angular diameter from ISS 6% bigger, ISS 6% lower. (393.91 km instead of 419.06)

It is still 10-20 times higher than anything else, except for rocket gliders. ISS is "only" 4 times higher than they can reach.
Balloons can not move at even 10% of the ISS apparent speed across the sky.
Piston-driven and jet propelled aircraft would never be able to carry enough fuel to cover any possible location at any date and time where observers could decide to watch from.
Rocket propelled glider with 112 km is still based on rocket boost, not on air lift, and fuel consumption is even higher.

Altitude records:
hot-air-balloon - 21,290 m (69,850 ft)
helium balloon - 41,424 metres (135,906 ft)
piston-driven propeller monoplane (without a payload) -  18,552 m (60,866 ft)
electrically powered aircraft is 29,524 m (96,863 feet)
jet propelled aircraft - 37,650 metres (123,520 ft)
rocket propelled aircraft - 112,010 m (367,487 ft)
(from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_altitude_record)

Here is a link to Red's Rhetoric and how he measured the altitude of the ISS.


That is cool.

Okay, because you all insist !
This is another Red Rhetoric vid ''catching'' the  ISS


This is as fake as can be !!!
Look at 2.42 - 2.47 and see how the moon's dark craters shine through the non transparent structure of the ISS !
Reminds me a lot of the ghostly images from 1969 when the not so intelligent majority was dooped into SF.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Now look at 2.42 and see for yourselves and see what clown testosteron Red really is !!

And here amature footage of the moon that has an ''ufo'' at 2.58 crossing the moon starting from the right bottom corner !

So much debris between earth and the moon .....

C'mon dutchy, you should be able to do better than that.
Post a video and just make an offhand comment about a transparent ISS.
If you actually saw a frame where you could see through the ISS why wouldn't you just post a screen shot?

Then you post another vid and simply point out a glitch you noticed.
Oooh you spot something that you think shouldn't be there.
Pointing out glitches in vid's is going to get harder and harder as technology gets better.

Course you can always go back to the FE standard of:
"It's all fake, you're all sheeple."

Just an FYI:
Dooped is spelt duped.
Amature is spelt amateur.

And a prediction:
Since infrared cameras are becoming much more affordable, you are soon going to be flooded with pictures of the moon being heated by the sun.  Just another thing you'll have to figure out an answer to.
I mean besides the "It's fake etc." 

This is another Red Rhetoric vid ''catching'' the  ISS


Look at 2.42 - 2.47 and see how the moon's dark craters shine through the non transparent structure of the ISS !

OK. I see you don't know much about photography and optics.

This is cropped from a capture at 2:43. It shows a somewhat blurry ISS in front of the southern rim of the crater Plato.



Here's a sharper image of the ISS (from closer and not looking through dozens of miles of air). Notice that the solid parts are pretty spindly and there are gaps between them?



Here's a series of pictures taken through the slats of Venetian Blinds in a window. The first is focused on the slats, the last is focused on the more distant house, and the others are between.









Notice how, as the focus changes, the slats appear to become transparent? Do you think the slats actually become transparent?

Reminds me a lot of the ghostly images from 1969 when the not so intelligent majority was dooped into SF.

That's a different phenomenon. The "ghosting" was an artifact of the conversion process from the narrowband slow-scan downlink to standard TV; it required long-persistence phosphors, so bright parts of an image would fade out slowly.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Trying to convince yourself you're right? Good luck!