Quote from: stack on March 30, 2022, 05:42:44 AMEchostar IX was under the purview of the International Telecommunications Satellite Corporation (ITSO):ITSO is an intergovernmental organization with 149-member states, that incorporates the principle set forth in Resolution 1721 (XVI) of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which established that communication by means of satellite should be available to the nations of the world as soon as practicable on a global and non-discriminatory basis.Looks like more of a UN connection, if anything, and not NASA.Your argument appears to be here that the US Government is not involved because the US Government is involved.
Echostar IX was under the purview of the International Telecommunications Satellite Corporation (ITSO):ITSO is an intergovernmental organization with 149-member states, that incorporates the principle set forth in Resolution 1721 (XVI) of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which established that communication by means of satellite should be available to the nations of the world as soon as practicable on a global and non-discriminatory basis.Looks like more of a UN connection, if anything, and not NASA.
Quote from: Tom Bishop on March 30, 2022, 03:16:53 PMQuote from: stack on March 30, 2022, 05:42:44 AMEchostar IX was under the purview of the International Telecommunications Satellite Corporation (ITSO):ITSO is an intergovernmental organization with 149-member states, that incorporates the principle set forth in Resolution 1721 (XVI) of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which established that communication by means of satellite should be available to the nations of the world as soon as practicable on a global and non-discriminatory basis.Looks like more of a UN connection, if anything, and not NASA.Your argument appears to be here that the US Government is not involved because the US Government is involved. Nope, my argument is that NASA was not involved with Echostar IX. Or about as much involvement as they had with the Chinese satellite launch I referenced.If you have an issue with satellite launches and tech and governments in general, maybe take that up with the 149-member states of the International Telecommunications Satellite Corporation & the UN. I'm sure they'd be more than happy to entertain your opinions on the matter.
Quote from: stack on March 30, 2022, 05:34:56 PMQuote from: Tom Bishop on March 30, 2022, 03:16:53 PMQuote from: stack on March 30, 2022, 05:42:44 AMEchostar IX was under the purview of the International Telecommunications Satellite Corporation (ITSO):ITSO is an intergovernmental organization with 149-member states, that incorporates the principle set forth in Resolution 1721 (XVI) of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which established that communication by means of satellite should be available to the nations of the world as soon as practicable on a global and non-discriminatory basis.Looks like more of a UN connection, if anything, and not NASA.Your argument appears to be here that the US Government is not involved because the US Government is involved. Nope, my argument is that NASA was not involved with Echostar IX. Or about as much involvement as they had with the Chinese satellite launch I referenced.If you have an issue with satellite launches and tech and governments in general, maybe take that up with the 149-member states of the International Telecommunications Satellite Corporation & the UN. I'm sure they'd be more than happy to entertain your opinions on the matter.Yeah, like when the UN got together and decided to do this they asked the country of Chad to organize it with their expertise of space travel. I'm sure something like that happened.
UAll I'm suggesting is that you take your concerns to ITSO & the UN and let the 149 member states know that you think satellites and space-travel are faked by NASA.
Quote from: Tom Bishop on March 30, 2022, 06:19:37 PMQuote from: stack on March 30, 2022, 05:34:56 PMQuote from: Tom Bishop on March 30, 2022, 03:16:53 PMQuote from: stack on March 30, 2022, 05:42:44 AMEchostar IX was under the purview of the International Telecommunications Satellite Corporation (ITSO):ITSO is an intergovernmental organization with 149-member states, that incorporates the principle set forth in Resolution 1721 (XVI) of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which established that communication by means of satellite should be available to the nations of the world as soon as practicable on a global and non-discriminatory basis.Looks like more of a UN connection, if anything, and not NASA.Your argument appears to be here that the US Government is not involved because the US Government is involved. Nope, my argument is that NASA was not involved with Echostar IX. Or about as much involvement as they had with the Chinese satellite launch I referenced.If you have an issue with satellite launches and tech and governments in general, maybe take that up with the 149-member states of the International Telecommunications Satellite Corporation & the UN. I'm sure they'd be more than happy to entertain your opinions on the matter.Yeah, like when the UN got together and decided to do this they asked the country of Chad to organize it with their expertise of space travel. I'm sure something like that happened. Who said Chad was involved regarding Echostar IX? Just like who said NASA was involved regarding Echostar IX?All I'm suggesting is that you take your concerns to ITSO & the UN and let the 149 member states know that you think satellites and space-travel are faked by NASA.
To be honest I am getting pretty bored of this place.
Posting UN nonsense and claiming it that somehow disconnects US Government involvement is just absurd.We don't need to take our concerns anywhere else, most certainly anywhere you suggest.
We don't need to take our concerns anywhere else, most certainly anywhere you suggest.
Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.
What's your concern about the footage?
That footage in the OP is a joke.
Quote from: Action80 on March 31, 2022, 10:18:02 AMThat footage in the OP is a joke.Why?
Look at the footage for about 20 seconds from 00:50 to 01:10. What do you see?
Yeah, the point is there is nothing consistent about the amount of what you like to call reflected dirt.
Quote from: Action80 on March 31, 2022, 11:52:14 AMYeah, the point is there is nothing consistent about the amount of what you like to call reflected dirt.1. I didn't say anything about "reflected"2. What do you find inconsistent about it?
I think you need to consider how anything not emitting its own light, let alone dirt, can be visible to you at all without reflectivity occurring, prior to believing you are capable of declaring any video is valid.
Quote from: Action80 on March 31, 2022, 12:37:38 PMI think you need to consider how anything not emitting its own light, let alone dirt, can be visible to you at all without reflectivity occurring, prior to believing you are capable of declaring any video is valid.Are we still talking about the specks on the lens, or are you referring to the reflected light from the crescent?
Is that a Yes or No?
Quote from: Tumeni on March 31, 2022, 01:08:19 PMIs that a Yes or No?That is a "I am no longer going to engage you in this thread."Have a good day.