How do satellites fly over flat land?

*** Instead it is produced as a dynamo...

Gentlemen, are you serious?

Well, you made me laugh -what law does this work for physics?

*** Instead it is produced as a dynamo...
Gentlemen, are you serious?
Well, you made me laugh -what law does this work for physics?

A spinning ball of molten metal produces magnetic fields.
It is known as dynamo theory.
Technically it requires a fluid which is capable of conducting electricity and which has convective currents, which is rotating.
People have replicated the results in lab conditions with other molten metals, which even results in magnetic field reversal.

Are you serious?

Your argument against Earth's magnetic field is a complete strawman, ignoring the actual origins of the magnetic field.
If you want to claim Earth's core can't produce a magnetic field, argue against the correct theory, not your pathetic strawman.

*** Instead it is produced as a dynamo...

Gentlemen, are you serious?

Well, you made me laugh -what law does this work for physics?

So, because you cannot understand the Dynamo theory, you ridicule it and refuse to believe it? Sound a normal flat earth " proof ".
Have a look at Dynamo theory.

In conclusion, I will say one thing.
I am not against satellites, I am opposed to where they fly.
The antennas are slightly higher than this according to what they tell us.
only up to 7 degrees higher - it's almost imperceptible
And that direct-focus is the Internet.
You can see for yourself ...
This antenna also receives satellites.
http://picua.org/img/2018-07/02/lfil4w1c2in8jmt0ze46irzq8.jpg

http://picua.org/img/2018-07/02/uehulwpcxeuz64irviof5he0f.jpg

I don't know where you live, but if there are any significant hills or mountains where you are with homes on them, go and look at their satellite dishes. There may be some goofy upside-down ones or broken ones (mine isn't hooked up for example, but I think it's probably still aligned). In general, most of them will point the same way. Just project out from where they point and see where it is. I suggest you start at the top of a hill because from up there, it's clear to see if they are pointing at a radio tower or not.

I have done this, and I've found that in my area, they all point southward, and all at around the same angle up into the sky. Not straight up, but up high enough that there is no ground-based object they could be pointing to. I have also noticed that they do not all point to the same angle southward. It's as if they are pointing to different satellites or something.

Keep in mind, virtually all satellite dishes these days are what is called "offset dishes". Here's a site to explain that... you'll want to know this before you try to work out where you think they point:
http://www.satsig.net/22-deg-offset-dish.htm

The antennas are slightly higher than this according to what they tell us.
only up to 7 degrees higher - it's almost imperceptible

Are you sure it is actually there? Or are you just seeing what you want to?
So far all we have are bad pictures of dishes where you can't tell.

This antenna also receives satellites.

And it is quite difficult to see where it is pointing as it is clearly an offset dish antenna.
You can tell this as if it wasn't, it would be pointing straight into the roof, making it a useless dish.

So what angle is it actually set to, and what do you think it should be?

I also notice you have given up on your claim about magnetic fields.
Does this mean you accept Earth's core can produce a magnetic field?

Now how about that explanation of how satellites magically fly over the FE without any significant propulsion or lift generating mechanisms?

In conclusion, I will say one thing.
I am not against satellites, I am opposed to where they fly.
The antennas are slightly higher than this according to what they tell us.
only up to 7 degrees higher - it's almost imperceptible
And that direct-focus is the Internet.
You can see for yourself ...
This antenna also receives satellites.

I can't see from the photo, but that could be an offset feed antenna aimed at quite an appreciable angle.

That is definitely an offset feed antenna.

See:

Quote from: Wikipedia Offset dish antenna An offset dish antenna or off-axis dish antenna is a type of parabolic antenna. It is so called because the antenna feed is offset to the side of the reflector, in contrast to the common "front-feed" parabolic antenna where the feed antenna is suspended in front of the dish, on its axis. As in a front-fed parabolic dish, the feed is located at the focal point of the reflector, but the reflector is an asymmetric segment of a paraboloid, so the focus is located to the side. The purpose of this design is to move the feed antenna and its supports out of the path of the incoming radio waves. In an ordinary front-fed dish antenna, the feed structure and its supports are located in the path of the incoming beam of radio waves, partially obstructing them, casting a "shadow" on the dish, reducing the radio power received. In technical terms this reduces the aperture efficiency of the antenna, reducing its gain. In the offset design, the feed is positioned outside the area of the beam, usually below it on a boom sticking out from the bottom edge of the dish. The beam axis of the antenna, the axis of the incoming or outgoing radio waves, is skewed at an angle to the plane of the dish mouth. The design is most widely used for small parabolic antennas or "mini-dishes", such as common Ku band home satellite television dishes, where the feed structure is large enough in relation to the dish to block a significant proportion of the signal. From: Wikipedia, Offset dish antenna So an offset feed antenna with a vertical dish might be aimed 30° above the horizon, as in:

So those dishes that seem to be pointing almost horizontally are aiming up at a considerable angle.

Tell me a curious pony. It is important for you that the antennas can be raised slightly higher for a given area. Than it follows? After all, they are directed to satellites. I understand the mathematics of what they tell us. And calculations where they should be - in theory. But I want to understand what exactly this means to you. At us nobody adjusts antennas under instructions. Everything is done by eye. And I did not refuse the fact that the core does not give a magnet. Here is another antenna for receiving the C range. I live in Ukraine.

http://picua.org/img/2018-07/04/ojl6po9te8euvd7380c17jyd1.jpg

For me there is not much difference even the direction of the antennas. I wanted to hear it from you.

nobody adjusts antennas under instructions. Everything is done by eye.

You can't see the satellites so it is not done by eye.
They would be aimed using the math to figure out where to point it and then fine tuned with a signal strength meter of some sort.

And I did not refuse the fact that the core does not give a magnet.

That's the problem, it isn't a fact. You made a pathetic strawman against the core producing a magnetic field, all because you don't understand how the magnetic field is generated.
When that was pointed out you ridiculed it, then didn't say anything else about it.

So are you going to admit you were wrong, or are you going to actually defend your claims?

Here is another antenna for receiving the C range. I live in Ukraine.

Which still shows no indication of being too high.

For me there is not much difference even the direction of the antennas.

Yet they are quite clearly pointing in vastly different directions.

Here is another antenna for receiving the C range. I live in Ukraine.

http://picua.org/img/2018-07/04/ojl6po9te8euvd7380c17jyd1.jpg

For me there is not much difference even the direction of the antennas. I wanted to hear it from you.

The most likely TV satellite serving the Ukraine seems to be the Astra 4A (Sirius) at 4.8°E. So the position of that satellite is 4.8°E 0°N (over the Equator).
The site Satellite Look Angle Calculator will give the elevation angle and direction to point the dish. It includes the "offset angle" for dishes with an offset feed.
Or the site Satsig, Satellite TV Dish Pointing UK Ireland seems to work for Kiev.

So for Kiev at 50.4°N, 30.5°E a dish without offset feed would need to point up at an angle of 27.3° to the horizontal and at bearing of 212° (32° west of south).In your photo, above, the right dish is a centre-feed dish and appears to be pointing up at about 30°.
That is a more than my 27.3° for the Astra 4A (Sirius) satellite at 4.8°E from Kiev but I don't know where the photo was taken or which of about 3 satellites it might be aimed at.

The dish on the left has an offset feed and is possibly aimed a little higher at a satellite further west. There are dozens of satellites covering central and eastern Asia.

There's not much more that I can offer.

The photo is taken in Kirovohrad at 48.5090791° north and 32.2594283° east.

rabinoz- and I say the same, the difference is only a few degrees. But a few degrees back or forth do not play a big role. The satellite is flying in the height belt. So these few degrees are completely permissible error. But the most surprising thing is that if you count all relatively flat land. That will leave the same height for the satellites.

I can disappoint you. all antennas are tuned to the sun and the compass. And further on the signal. If the sun and the compass are precise instruments. I will not say anything. nobody tunes in another way. Which devices can still use for tuning?

Here's how to set up. who - as they want.
http://picua.org/img/2018-07/05/6uvy03k94ahxqn94k4saxu8kp.jpg

I can disappoint you. all antennas are tuned to the sun and the compass. And further on the signal. If the sun and the compass are precise instruments. I will not say anything. nobody tunes in another way. Which devices can still use for tuning?

I'm guessing this hasn't translated very well.   Or maybe it was bollocks anyway.

The Sun and Compass sounds like a pub.

Um ... it translated from Russian. Maybe I do not know everything about such a translation. There simply words - "the compass and the sun"

rabinoz- and I say the same, the difference is only a few degrees.

But it will depend upon what satellite it is pointing at.

But a few degrees back or forth do not play a big role.

No, it can make a very big difference.

But the most surprising thing is that if you count all relatively flat land. That will leave the same height for the satellites.

No, it results in vastly different heights.

I can disappoint you. all antennas are tuned to the sun and the compass. And further on the signal.

A compass, if accurate enough and adjusted for magnetic declination can be appropriate.
But you wouldn't use the sun.
You want something to determine elevation. That would best be done using a level and appropriate tool.

rabinoz- and I say the same, the difference is only a few degrees. But a few degrees back or forth do not play a big role. The satellite is flying in the height belt. So these few degrees are completely permissible error. But the most surprising thing is that if you count all relatively flat land. That will leave the same height for the satellites.

No, the given directions do not work over flat land - they point to all different locations up in the sky "somewhere".

Satellite dishes are aligned roughly using a compass (or the sun at a particular time of day) to get direction (azimuth) and an adjustable level (or similar instrument) to get the elevation (sometimes called altitude).

Then the exact direction has to be adjusted using a meter (satellite finder) or sometimes just the TV set.
A dish 0.9 m in diameter at 12 Ghz loses half the power (-3 dB) when about 1° off perfect alignment from SatSig, Antenna beamwidth calculator.

There are many instructions on-line for this, though as one site says:

How to Align a Satellite Dish Without a Meter
There's a lot to be said for sitting back and relaxing while a professional installs your satellite dish for you. Unfortunately, the novelty wears off after you've paid for it a few times. Learning to align your own satellite dish can save you hundreds of dollars over the years, and isn't especially difficult. You'll need to orient your dish for the correct up-and-down angle, or elevation, and its left-to-right angle, or azimuth. Getting great signal is easiest with a commercial meter, but all you really need is your receiver, a television and a helper.

How to Align a Satellite Dish Without a Meter

If I had to do it often, as when using satellite TV in a caravan or motorhome, I'd certainly invest in a meter.

This is the site most often used in Australia: SatSig, Satellite dish pointing angle calculator for Australia and New Zealand.
The directions given all point to a satellite in geostationary orbit above the equator at the appropriate longitude (4.8° E for the one your dish seemed to point to)

I sighed. Well. So you understand the mechanism, how satellites fly over flat land. Read Tesla and Enoch and present Merkaba figures. Quod est inferius est sicut id quod est superius.
Allow me to bow out.
*Ваш Небесный Ветерок*

So you understand the mechanism, how satellites fly over flat land.

No we don't.
You asserted it works fine but have failed to provide any mechanism.

We understand how they work orbiting a round Earth.
We understand how satellite dishes point to various locations for the RE.

Jack Black - no comment.

http://j-p-g.net/if/2018/07/08/0934086001531032394.png

http://j-p-g.net/if/2018/07/08/0987595001531032394.png

How does the model of flat ground explain that we are watching satellite TV, and the most important is that we use the Internet through satellites?

Do you suppose it is beyond us to produce a dual system of astronomy?

Jack Black - no comment.

What are these pictures meant to be of?
They don't seem to be getting you any closer to showing a problem with RE or explaining how satellites fly over a FE.

**Do you suppose it is beyond us to produce a dual system of astronomy?**
Respected - John Davis - How long I've been waiting for this question.

You are on the right path of understanding. Our land is flat but at the same time there is cosmos. therefore both the theory of the earth ball, and the theory of the earth-the plane-are not true. I do not speak English. To correctly tell me everything. I need time.
I will prepare the material for some time and provide it.

This is my assumption on the basis of real facts. No one can deny that the earth is flatness, or that satellites are flying above us. So they fly over flat land. How - this is another question. I'll try to explain how this is possible. Since both classical theories do not explain this.

I'm not surprised - that all who believe that the earth is flat - are afraid to participate in the discussion. This is their weak point. And those who believe in the earth - the ball, are defended. Realizing that this can change their world.
But I'll try to show a common point of understanding.

The early Church (yes, it was the "Roman" church - there was little else then)

WROOOONG!

Sorry for going after you again, but I can't stand it when somebody is wrong on the Flat Earth Forum.

No one can deny that the earth is flatness

Yes they can, quite easily.
All the evidence indicates Earth is round or is unable to distinguish the shape.

You are not using facts, you are using baseless assertions and circular reasoning.
Satellites present a significant problem for a FE. Rather than try to address this problem, you dismiss it as a non-problem by simply asserting Earth is flat.

I'll try to explain how this is possible. Since both classical theories do not explain this.

We have been waiting on your explanation for quite some time.
So far we have clear, simple answers from RE models which explain how satellites work just fine, meanwhile we have either claims they work or claims they are fake from the FE camp, without any explantion.