[Tumeni]

If that's a star in the first picture, then where are the others which belong in the same constellation? The observer DID establish which constellation they were looking at, didn't they? Or at least record date/time of observation?

Or is that not the point you're trying to make?

[ElTrancy]

Planes can dip below the horizon and end up on the opposite side. They're not in orbit, so why is a satellite?

First of all, nice job admitting planes dip below the horizon! Also, nice job admitting satellites exist. Because if a satellite wasn't in orbit, how would it stay up? Ever heard of gravity much? Or is it just "heavy"? Being in orbit allows the satellite to continuously fall towards the Earth, but at an angle so that it never crashes down to Earth. Airplans on the other hand, were built to fly, giving them their own propulsion.

[juner]

Hmm, the OP is a Holocaust denier... As I’ve pointed out before, it seems to be a trend among flat-heads (not all, I know, but a bit too many for it not to be a sign). Just sayin’...

So, I will give you one last warning to refrain from off-topic posting, derailing threads, etc. You are on 3 bans already, next one is permanent.

[Rushy]

Planes don't follow Kepler's laws because they aren't in orbit. As I said, they don't move at orbital speeds. If they did, they'd go around the world in 6 minutes.

If planes aren't in orbit than RET is wrong, because in RET everything is always in orbit around something else. In RET, a plane would be in orbit around the Sun, just like the rest of the Earth. How are you supposed to defend RET if you don't even understand your own rules?

Planes can dip below the horizon and end up on the opposite side. They're not in orbit, so why is a satellite?

First of all, nice job admitting planes dip below the horizon! Also, nice job admitting satellites exist. Because if a satellite wasn't in orbit, how would it stay up? Ever heard of gravity much? Or is it just "heavy"? Being in orbit allows the satellite to continuously fall towards the Earth, but at an angle so that it never crashes down to Earth. Airplans on the other hand, were built to fly, giving them their own propulsion.

If an airplane isn't in orbit, how does it stay up? It has its own propulsion, and so do your supposed "satellites" and yes, things do dip below the horizon, but only as an optical illusion. The horizon as it is understood in RET doesn't actually exist.

[ElTrancy]

I'm confused, why does it dip below the horizon and it's an optical illusion, mind elaborating on this concept?

[AATW]

If an airplane isn't in orbit, how does it stay up? It has its own propulsion, and so do your supposed "satellites" and yes

Are helicopters in orbit?

Sorry, fella, but you clearly don't understand what orbit is. You're criticising a model you do not understand.
First I suggest you go learn what orbit is, then you'll understand why aircraft and balloons and helicopters aren't in orbit but satellites are.

[ElTrancy]

If an airplane isn't in orbit, how does it stay up? It has its own propulsion, and so do your supposed "satellites" and yes, things do dip below the horizon, but only as an optical illusion. The horizon as it is understood in RET doesn't actually exist.

...As I had explained before, the satellites are always falling towards earth, because of the way they were launched, they continue doing so at an angle. And do you have zero clue how airplanes work? You know, thrust, lift? Simple things that most of society understand?

[isaacN]

You know, we can see satellites orbiting from the ground... They clearly aren't faked. You don't even have to be on the ISS to see them. We can also see the ISS from the ground.

I can also see airplanes from the ground, are you about to tell me airplanes prove the world is round because they're in orbit?

Thats a very odd logic you are employing! We know most commercial airlines fly at around 37,000 ft at a ground speed of around  575mph, give or take depending upon wind speeds. The ISS on the other hand is traveling at a speed of around 17,000 mph an altitude of over 130,000 ft.  If you were really serious about checking out the reality of the ISS and it’s orbit, or not, it would be a relatively simple matter.
http://www.isstracker.com
There are a few websites that do real time tracking. All you would need to do is have a number of spotters at locations along its flight path on particular days. As it’s a weather dependent study it might take a couple of weeks, to record all the data, but you would answer the question both regarding satelites and the shape of the earth.
The fact that flat earthers are always going on about doing research, but complain about being resource poor, here is an ideal study to undertake which would require minimum resources. Why has this simple study never been done? Is it because flat earthers would be terrified by the results!

[isaacN]

Planes don't follow Kepler's laws because they aren't in orbit. As I said, they don't move at orbital speeds. If they did, they'd go around the world in 6 minutes.

If planes aren't in orbit than RET is wrong, because in RET everything is always in orbit around something else. In RET, a plane would be in orbit around the Sun, just like the rest of the Earth. How are you supposed to defend RET if you don't even understand your own rules?

Planes can dip below the horizon and end up on the opposite side. They're not in orbit, so why is a satellite?

First of all, nice job admitting planes dip below the horizon! Also, nice job admitting satellites exist. Because if a satellite wasn't in orbit, how would it stay up? Ever heard of gravity much? Or is it just "heavy"? Being in orbit allows the satellite to continuously fall towards the Earth, but at an angle so that it never crashes down to Earth. Airplans on the other hand, were built to fly, giving them their own propulsion.

If an airplane isn't in orbit, how does it stay up? It has its own propulsion, and so do your supposed "satellites" and yes, things do dip below the horizon, but only as an optical illusion. The horizon as it is understood in RET doesn't actually exist.

Have you ever flown before? Have you ever watched a sunset?
It’s all very well taking part in a debate, but putting forward nonsensical statements, like your own does not really help in taking the debate forward.

[9 out of 10 doctors agree]

Planes don't follow Kepler's laws because they aren't in orbit. As I said, they don't move at orbital speeds. If they did, they'd go around the world in 6 minutes.

If planes aren't in orbit than RET is wrong, because in RET everything is always in orbit around something else. In RET, a plane would be in orbit around the Sun, just like the rest of the Earth. How are you supposed to defend RET if you don't even understand your own rules?

From the rest frame of Earth, planes are not in orbit. We don't simulate planes and satellites relative to the Sun, we just assume that they follow Earth's momentum with negligible deviation, and model their velocity relative to Earth. In this regard, satellites follow Kepler's laws, but not planes. Planes are not in orbit.

If an airplane isn't in orbit, how does it stay up? It has its own propulsion, and so do your supposed "satellites"

Planes have lifting surfaces that actively counteract gravity. Satellites are going too fast to hit the ground so they just fall in circles.

[Spycrab]

Not to mention that orbiting is fundementally being in freefall.
You're falling towards the center because of gravity, but there's no friction in space, so inertia and velocity keep you traveling faster than you can fall, so you repeatedly 'miss' the thing you orbit around.
When in orbit, folks still experience gravity, but they fall as fast as the spacecraft they are inside of, so they experience "zero g".
Aeroplanes can preform that same action, but they do it inside the atmosphere, so it is flight.
They do not skid through space with nothing to slow them down, they push off the air and propel themselves forward, as you have acknowledged.
However, satellites have no propulsion. Once they're put up there, there's nothing to stop the leftover momentum from the rocket, so they stay in orbit.
It's an understandable misconception.

[Obviously]

If I may, allow me politely disagree: my comment was to help others see the lack of credibility of the op, which is important when discussing pretty much anything, and thus is very relevant. Plus there’s no way to further derail this topic: the question has been answered and flat-heads have nothing to respond (as usual).

Hmm, the OP is a Holocaust denier... As I’ve pointed out before, it seems to be a trend among flat-heads (not all, I know, but a bit too many for it not to be a sign). Just sayin’...

So, I will give you one last warning to refrain from off-topic posting, derailing threads, etc. You are on 3 bans already, next one is permanent.

[juner]

Well, it's been awful. Have a nice life.

[SiDawg]

If planes aren't in orbit than RET is wrong, because in RET everything is always in orbit around something else. In RET, a plane would be in orbit around the Sun, just like the rest of the Earth. How are you supposed to defend RET if you don't even understand your own rules?

By that logic, if a butterfly flaps it's wings in Japan, then we have to account for that in every other scientific experiment, and if we don't, then we don't understand how butterflies work. If we don't understand how butterflies work, how can we possible defend anything!

You could quite easily calculate the forces of gravity on a plane from the sun, the moon, mars, jupiter, polaris, anything you want. But it's obvious those forces are negligible... By far the most important forces for a plane are gravity (towards earth), lift, thrust, and air density i.e. resistance to that thrust. The earth is really really really heavy... a plane is not. Given the atmosphere moves with the earth, and planes exist in that atmosphere, that's all the plane cares around.

In one way, as a complete system, then yeah everything on earth is in orbit around the sun. But that's just one way of looking at it. The atmosphere is tiny... roughly one millionth of Earth’s mass... so is the atmosphere orbiting the sun? Erm, in some ways, but for all intents and purposes, it's the solid mass of the earth itself which is in orbit around the sun. Everything else is just "hanging out" and hardly gives a crap about that orbit. The atmosphere, and planes, only care about gravity towards the earth. If you shot a plane in to space at the same distance as the earth from the sun (and nowhere near the earth), it would very slightly be attracted to the sun but just end up flying away for every. So obviously no, a plane is NOT in orbit around the sun... the only thing that's keeping it in roughly the same path as earth's orbit is that the plane is being pulled towards the earth and affected by the atmosphere.

The only thing that's keeping the atmosphere on the earth is the gravitational pull towards the earth: the atmosphere is not in orbit around the sun, it just follows the same path as the earth's orbit around the sun. So yes: from a simplistic "path" point of view, everything is on the same path as the earths orbit, and for the sake of argument, most people would just say "everything orbits the sun". As for "everything orbits something else".... that's not a universal law, i.e. if the universe consisted of only two masses, then they could just be attracted to each other and stick together permanently, or if they were moving for some reason they might be attracted to each other then begin orbiting each other. And obviously our sun formed when objects stopped spinning around something, and were attracted to each other in to one giant blob. But our sun orbits the black hole at the centre of the galaxy.. and apparently our galaxy doesn't really orbit anything: we're on a collision course with the andromeda galaxy. So there's that to look forward to... But yeah, asteroids usually orbit something (usually the sun) or sometimes asteroids from outside our solar system swing by to say hi, usually because they've escaped an orbit from a nearby sun. Things don't HAVE to orbit anything, they just fly around attracted to other masses. If they end up circling that mass, we call it an orbit.

But... getting back to satellites. They clearly couldn't stay in the air without generating "lift" and they can't generate lift without fuel, and they can't get fuel without returning to earth or being refuelled mid air (and obviously no one has ever witnessed that, and pretty sure every single amateur astronomer is not in on the "RE conspiracy"). OK they could be solar powered... but they would then need to be lower enough in to the atmosphere to get that lift from their wings. Satellites are much higher than the atmosphere, so they would need lift from rockets. That requires a lot of fuel.

Plus you realise there are geosynchronous satellites right? So there goes the giant solar wing idea... They would need to just sit there, rockets blazing, keeping them in one position, year after year. Again: amateur astronomers. You should see a blazing stationary rocket during day light, night time, 24 seven.

[Treep Ravisarras]

Flight times provided by "trustworthy internet sources" I'm sure.

As I said in other thread, last year 4,000,000,000 air passengers with zero deaths. Occam's Razor and some knowledge of the human race would tell us they would complain if the planes didn't run on time!!!

If an airplane isn't in orbit, how does it stay up?

Sorry, fella, but you clearly don't understand what orbit is.

And do you have zero clue how airplanes work?

He's just trolling. Mostly RE trolls here.

To get back to original post:

If there are supposedly thousands of satellites orbiting earth, why hasn't the ISS ever captured them on video? Maybe because both the ISS and satellites in general are hoaxes and the alleged ISS video footage of space is faked?

What I see and observe when I take-off in my plane, has always amazed me. At airport many many planes. As soon as you in the air - no planes to be seen! We pilots say Sky is big. Some call Big Sky theory.

[Westprog]

If I may, allow me politely disagree: my comment was to help others see the lack of credibility of the op, which is important when discussing pretty much anything, and thus is very relevant. Plus there’s no way to further derail this topic: the question has been answered and flat-heads have nothing to respond (as usual).

Hmm, the OP is a Holocaust denier... As I’ve pointed out before, it seems to be a trend among flat-heads (not all, I know, but a bit too many for it not to be a sign). Just sayin’...

So, I will give you one last warning to refrain from off-topic posting, derailing threads, etc. You are on 3 bans already, next one is permanent.

So someone starts a topic with a claim that the Holocaust is a hoax. That claim is still there, right at the start of this thread. Anyone who reads the thread can see it. A normal person would regard that as being far more significant that the rubbish she was spouting about satellites, which was debunked almost immediately. (Second post in this thread).

This is her signature

Hi y'all. I am a typical GENIUS girl who does NOT follow the masses and who does NOT blindly accept what is told to me without EVIDENCE. That being said, I don't believe in a lot of "facts" (the quotations mean they're NOT actual facts) including evolution, the holocaust, and the globular earth HYPOTHESIS.

My emphases.

I would have thought that a sensible, rational moderator would have thought "Oh, maybe allowing people to put forward explicit Holocaust denial is a bad thing for our movement. It will cause people to characterise us as a bunch of Nazis". Instead, we are treated to people being banned permanently for pointing it out.

I don't expect this post to get a different reaction, btw. However, when someone decides that denying the great crime of the twentieth century is less significant than a rambling nonsense thread about how satellites work, it says a lot about what kind of movement this is.

[Sushi]

If I may, allow me politely disagree: my comment was to help others see the lack of credibility of the op, which is important when discussing pretty much anything, and thus is very relevant. Plus there’s no way to further derail this topic: the question has been answered and flat-heads have nothing to respond (as usual).

Hmm, the OP is a Holocaust denier... As I’ve pointed out before, it seems to be a trend among flat-heads (not all, I know, but a bit too many for it not to be a sign). Just sayin’...

So, I will give you one last warning to refrain from off-topic posting, derailing threads, etc. You are on 3 bans already, next one is permanent.

So someone starts a topic with a claim that the Holocaust is a hoax. That claim is still there, right at the start of this thread. Anyone who reads the thread can see it. A normal person would regard that as being far more significant that the rubbish she was spouting about satellites, which was debunked almost immediately. (Second post in this thread).

This is her signature

Hi y'all. I am a typical GENIUS girl who does NOT follow the masses and who does NOT blindly accept what is told to me without EVIDENCE. That being said, I don't believe in a lot of "facts" (the quotations mean they're NOT actual facts) including evolution, the holocaust, and the globular earth HYPOTHESIS.

My emphases.

I would have thought that a sensible, rational moderator would have thought "Oh, maybe allowing people to put forward explicit Holocaust denial is a bad thing for our movement. It will cause people to characterise us as a bunch of Nazis". Instead, we are treated to people being banned permanently for pointing it out.

I don't expect this post to get a different reaction, btw. However, when someone decides that denying the great crime of the twentieth century is less significant than a rambling nonsense thread about how satellites work, it says a lot about what kind of movement this is.

Well said.

[juner]

If I may, allow me politely disagree: my comment was to help others see the lack of credibility of the op, which is important when discussing pretty much anything, and thus is very relevant. Plus there’s no way to further derail this topic: the question has been answered and flat-heads have nothing to respond (as usual).

Hmm, the OP is a Holocaust denier... As I’ve pointed out before, it seems to be a trend among flat-heads (not all, I know, but a bit too many for it not to be a sign). Just sayin’...

So, I will give you one last warning to refrain from off-topic posting, derailing threads, etc. You are on 3 bans already, next one is permanent.

So someone starts a topic with a claim that the Holocaust is a hoax. That claim is still there, right at the start of this thread. Anyone who reads the thread can see it. A normal person would regard that as being far more significant that the rubbish she was spouting about satellites, which was debunked almost immediately. (Second post in this thread).

This is her signature

Hi y'all. I am a typical GENIUS girl who does NOT follow the masses and who does NOT blindly accept what is told to me without EVIDENCE. That being said, I don't believe in a lot of "facts" (the quotations mean they're NOT actual facts) including evolution, the holocaust, and the globular earth HYPOTHESIS.

My emphases.

I would have thought that a sensible, rational moderator would have thought "Oh, maybe allowing people to put forward explicit Holocaust denial is a bad thing for our movement. It will cause people to characterise us as a bunch of Nazis". Instead, we are treated to people being banned permanently for pointing it out.

I don't expect this post to get a different reaction, btw. However, when someone decides that denying the great crime of the twentieth century is less significant than a rambling nonsense thread about how satellites work, it says a lot about what kind of movement this is.

No one here cares what people's personal beliefs are as long as you follow the rules. I really don't understand what is so hard about that for some of you to understand. Also, this post has nothing to do with the thread. You are on a long string of warnings and bans already. I will give you one more, but the next step is a permanent ban. Given that you still haven't figured out how this place works, I don't have much hope that you will gain any self-awareness before your next post. But again, one more chance.

Well said.

Refrain from "me too" posts that don't any anything to the topic or discussion. Warned.

[limprichard]

If I may, allow me politely disagree: my comment was to help others see the lack of credibility of the op, which is important when discussing pretty much anything, and thus is very relevant. Plus there’s no way to further derail this topic: the question has been answered and flat-heads have nothing to respond (as usual).

Hmm, the OP is a Holocaust denier... As I’ve pointed out before, it seems to be a trend among flat-heads (not all, I know, but a bit too many for it not to be a sign). Just sayin’...

So, I will give you one last warning to refrain from off-topic posting, derailing threads, etc. You are on 3 bans already, next one is permanent.

So someone starts a topic with a claim that the Holocaust is a hoax. That claim is still there, right at the start of this thread. Anyone who reads the thread can see it. A normal person would regard that as being far more significant that the rubbish she was spouting about satellites, which was debunked almost immediately. (Second post in this thread).

This is her signature

Hi y'all. I am a typical GENIUS girl who does NOT follow the masses and who does NOT blindly accept what is told to me without EVIDENCE. That being said, I don't believe in a lot of "facts" (the quotations mean they're NOT actual facts) including evolution, the holocaust, and the globular earth HYPOTHESIS.

My emphases.

I would have thought that a sensible, rational moderator would have thought "Oh, maybe allowing people to put forward explicit Holocaust denial is a bad thing for our movement. It will cause people to characterise us as a bunch of Nazis". Instead, we are treated to people being banned permanently for pointing it out.

I don't expect this post to get a different reaction, btw. However, when someone decides that denying the great crime of the twentieth century is less significant than a rambling nonsense thread about how satellites work, it says a lot about what kind of movement this is.

No one here cares what people's personal beliefs are as long as you follow the rules. I really don't understand what is so hard about that for some of you to understand. Also, this post has nothing to do with the thread. You are on a long string of warnings and bans already. I will give you one more, but the next step is a permanent ban. Given that you still haven't figured out how this place works, I don't have much hope that you will gain any self-awareness before your next post. But again, one more chance.

Well said.

Refrain from "me too" posts that don't any anything to the topic or discussion. Warned.

My intention was to abandon this group due to unfair moderation but I made a mistake popping my head round the door (hopefully wont happen again). Holocaust deniers are the scum of the earth, so I had to make this post. You dont care about peoples beliefs with regards to this, the rest of the world does. Banning anyone for stating this makes you one. Deleting this post or moving it somewhere else so people dont read it, makes you one. Not dealing with people who post regarding this makes you one. Either operate as a responsible moderator or pass the job on to someone else.

[limprichard]

If I may, allow me politely disagree: my comment was to help others see the lack of credibility of the op, which is important when discussing pretty much anything, and thus is very relevant. Plus there’s no way to further derail this topic: the question has been answered and flat-heads have nothing to respond (as usual).

Hmm, the OP is a Holocaust denier... As I’ve pointed out before, it seems to be a trend among flat-heads (not all, I know, but a bit too many for it not to be a sign). Just sayin’...

So, I will give you one last warning to refrain from off-topic posting, derailing threads, etc. You are on 3 bans already, next one is permanent.

So someone starts a topic with a claim that the Holocaust is a hoax. That claim is still there, right at the start of this thread. Anyone who reads the thread can see it. A normal person would regard that as being far more significant that the rubbish she was spouting about satellites, which was debunked almost immediately. (Second post in this thread).

This is her signature

Hi y'all. I am a typical GENIUS girl who does NOT follow the masses and who does NOT blindly accept what is told to me without EVIDENCE. That being said, I don't believe in a lot of "facts" (the quotations mean they're NOT actual facts) including evolution, the holocaust, and the globular earth HYPOTHESIS.

My emphases.

I would have thought that a sensible, rational moderator would have thought "Oh, maybe allowing people to put forward explicit Holocaust denial is a bad thing for our movement. It will cause people to characterise us as a bunch of Nazis". Instead, we are treated to people being banned permanently for pointing it out.

I don't expect this post to get a different reaction, btw. However, when someone decides that denying the great crime of the twentieth century is less significant than a rambling nonsense thread about how satellites work, it says a lot about what kind of movement this is.

No one here cares what people's personal beliefs are as long as you follow the rules. I really don't understand what is so hard about that for some of you to understand. Also, this post has nothing to do with the thread. You are on a long string of warnings and bans already. I will give you one more, but the next step is a permanent ban. Given that you still haven't figured out how this place works, I don't have much hope that you will gain any self-awareness before your next post. But again, one more chance.

Well said.

Refrain from "me too" posts that don't any anything to the topic or discussion. Warned.

My intention was to abandon this group due to unfair moderation but I made a mistake popping my head round the door (hopefully wont happen again). Holocaust deniers are the scum of the earth, so I had to make this post. You dont care about peoples beliefs with regards to this, the rest of the world does. Banning anyone for stating this makes you one. Deleting this post or moving it somewhere else so people dont read it, makes you one. Not dealing with people who post regarding this makes you one. Either operate as a responsible moderator or pass the job on to someone else.

I will assume that since this post has remained here and unchanged, no one here is a holocaust denier....good!
I will try not to pop my head round the door anymore. See you at the Bronie convention at the end of July, Pete (aka Twilight sparkle) your costume was a real knock out last time.

Quote from: Pete Svarrior on May 06, 2018, 10:35:38 PM
Also, if you haven't heard of bronies before, that reflects poorly on your understanding of the world that surrounds you. It's practically impossible not to know about them.