[Sydney]

The Flat Earth Society's general opinion on the International Space Station is that it is a hoax. However during the 2017 eclipse, the YouTube channel Smarter Every Day was able to capture the ISS transition the eclipse.
How do you know what he "captured" was the ISS? Because he said so? Because there is nice, questionable footage?


Although I think the whole video is worth watching, at around 3:23 into the video you can see the ISS quickly transition the eclipse near the bottom right of the eclipse followed by a slowed down and zoomed in capture where you are able to see the shape of the ISS.

They were able to calculate the position of the ISS and the exact time it would pass, thanks to a mathematical formula which is explained in a different video on his channel.

I am just curious on The Flat Earth Society's opinion on this footage.

My opinion is that I saw video footage of some guys in a field and they had cameras. Footage changed to a scene of some lights, with a small, dark shape sailing past one of the lights. Actual or fabricated with some spiffy software? Possible? Indeed yes! Who knows? What they say in the video and what they presented (spliced in) to me is anathema to any legitimate truths. I am not buying it, but the whole presentation seemed pleasant and seemingly convincing to the average non-thinker.

Kindest Regards

See, this is a perfect example of the difference between Round Earth and Flat Earth on this forum. Round Earth does research and thinking to back up its claims. Flat Earth does mere speculation and what-ifs to try to poke holes in something they don't understand. Your opinion was formed in less than 5 minutes and you didn't even do the most basic of research. How do I know? Because you're questioning whether the video makers faked the video of them observing the ISS from the ground. Well, why don't you just take out your telescope and look toward it?. It's been well-documented that the details of the ISS are visible from the ground to anyone with a good telescope. There are tons of people who have replicated looking at the ISS. So your rebuttal is just an ad-hoc, poorly thought-out, reactionary, and ignorant machination; you didn't even consider that you might be wrong and look up evidence to support your claims.

I have to say I completely agree with you on this. I have learned that any argument that simply tries to cast doubt without actual evidence isn't worthy of consideration. The video of the ISS is evidence. To argue it was a fake requires more than just your say so.

If Mad Mike Hughes were to ever launch himself high enough to prove the earth was flat, and had photos and videos to prove it was flat, I wouldn't try to argue they were fakes just because they go against what I believe. I would take them seriously and look into how a round earth could look flat.

The Man Who Saw The Flat Earth (From a Balloon!): Auguste Piccard


I am not arguing with you. I am simply curious about it all.

[Sydney]

The Flat Earth Society's general opinion on the International Space Station is that it is a hoax. However during the 2017 eclipse, the YouTube channel Smarter Every Day was able to capture the ISS transition the eclipse.
How do you know what he "captured" was the ISS? Because he said so? Because there is nice, questionable footage?


Although I think the whole video is worth watching, at around 3:23 into the video you can see the ISS quickly transition the eclipse near the bottom right of the eclipse followed by a slowed down and zoomed in capture where you are able to see the shape of the ISS.

They were able to calculate the position of the ISS and the exact time it would pass, thanks to a mathematical formula which is explained in a different video on his channel.

I am just curious on The Flat Earth Society's opinion on this footage.

My opinion is that I saw video footage of some guys in a field and they had cameras. Footage changed to a scene of some lights, with a small, dark shape sailing past one of the lights. Actual or fabricated with some spiffy software? Possible? Indeed yes! Who knows? What they say in the video and what they presented (spliced in) to me is anathema to any legitimate truths. I am not buying it, but the whole presentation seemed pleasant and seemingly convincing to the average non-thinker.

Kindest Regards

See, this is a perfect example of the difference between Round Earth and Flat Earth on this forum. Round Earth does research and thinking to back up its claims. Flat Earth does mere speculation and what-ifs to try to poke holes in something they don't understand. Your opinion was formed in less than 5 minutes and you didn't even do the most basic of research. How do I know? Because you're questioning whether the video makers faked the video of them observing the ISS from the ground. Well, why don't you just take out your telescope and look toward it?. It's been well-documented that the details of the ISS are visible from the ground to anyone with a good telescope. There are tons of people who have replicated looking at the ISS. So your rebuttal is just an ad-hoc, poorly thought-out, reactionary, and ignorant machination; you didn't even consider that you might be wrong and look up evidence to support your claims.

You seem convinced in your beliefs. I am curious as to why you haunt forums like this simply to ad hominem those who aren't satisfied with the Mainstream Narrative. Why are you here? To save us all?

Your entire comment is a strawman you use to bludgeon those in dissent of your vague and ambiguos defenses... the standards you hold us to and yet which you do not abide by. Where are your citations of a round earth? Oh... let me guess... you will cite the same jabberwocky that I grew up with and believed in until the advent of the Internet.

Google, "NASA admits to losing Moon Landing Tapes". Go figure!

I have no problem with you believing what you wish in this matter. If you wish to troll forums where people wish to believe something else and research for supportive citations then please demonstrate "YOUR" views with civility and citations (counter proof, if you will).

Respect

[JohnAdams1145]

See, the problem with Flat Earth is it's just a more extreme manifestation of the broader problem of backward science denial. It's the same sort of conspiracy theorists that waste the government's time with chemtrail junk, who don't vaccinate themselves or their kids to spread infectious disease, and who deny global warming. The latter two have a large impact on society. Hopefully by debating people on Flat Earth, we can convince people on the fence to second-guess these conspiracy theories and show what they really are: misinformed junk.

You are defending an untenable position. The fact remains that the ISS has been observed by hundreds if not thousands of amateur astronomers with their own telescopes. If you can't do a simple Google search to find all of the pictures, and then assert that I don't have any citations, then you're hopeless and intellectually dishonest. There's no hypocrisy here. You should've looked some stuff up before immediately deciding to assert the obvious opposite to anything that sounds like it was produced by NASA.

http://lmgtfy.com/?t=i&q=international+space+station+telescope

[douglips]

I think JohnAdams1145 is just frustrated at the lack of effort displayed.

If you doubt a video just because you think it's fake and don't have any advice for how to make the video better, and you don't bother to try to recreate the video with publicly available methods and information, then it's not a very constructive conversation.

If I doubt one of your videos I'll try to tell you why and how you could make it better, if I have time to watch it and reply. I may even try to make a video myself, if I don't find someone who has already done it better than I could. You'll notice I'm not attacking your Auguste Piccard video, because I haven't had a chance to watch it yet so I don't yet have an opinion.

[Buran]

The Flat Earth Society's general opinion on the International Space Station is that it is a hoax. However during the 2017 eclipse, the YouTube channel Smarter Every Day was able to capture the ISS transition the eclipse.
How do you know what he "captured" was the ISS? Because he said so? Because there is nice, questionable footage?


Although I think the whole video is worth watching, at around 3:23 into the video you can see the ISS quickly transition the eclipse near the bottom right of the eclipse followed by a slowed down and zoomed in capture where you are able to see the shape of the ISS.

They were able to calculate the position of the ISS and the exact time it would pass, thanks to a mathematical formula which is explained in a different video on his channel.

I am just curious on The Flat Earth Society's opinion on this footage.

My opinion is that I saw video footage of some guys in a field and they had cameras. Footage changed to a scene of some lights, with a small, dark shape sailing past one of the lights. Actual or fabricated with some spiffy software? Possible? Indeed yes! Who knows? What they say in the video and what they presented (spliced in) to me is anathema to any legitimate truths. I am not buying it, but the whole presentation seemed pleasant and seemingly convincing to the average non-thinker.

Kindest Regards

See, this is a perfect example of the difference between Round Earth and Flat Earth on this forum. Round Earth does research and thinking to back up its claims. Flat Earth does mere speculation and what-ifs to try to poke holes in something they don't understand. Your opinion was formed in less than 5 minutes and you didn't even do the most basic of research. How do I know? Because you're questioning whether the video makers faked the video of them observing the ISS from the ground. Well, why don't you just take out your telescope and look toward it?. It's been well-documented that the details of the ISS are visible from the ground to anyone with a good telescope. There are tons of people who have replicated looking at the ISS. So your rebuttal is just an ad-hoc, poorly thought-out, reactionary, and ignorant machination; you didn't even consider that you might be wrong and look up evidence to support your claims.

I have to say I completely agree with you on this. I have learned that any argument that simply tries to cast doubt without actual evidence isn't worthy of consideration. The video of the ISS is evidence. To argue it was a fake requires more than just your say so.

If Mad Mike Hughes were to ever launch himself high enough to prove the earth was flat, and had photos and videos to prove it was flat, I wouldn't try to argue they were fakes just because they go against what I believe. I would take them seriously and look into how a round earth could look flat.

The Man Who Saw The Flat Earth (From a Balloon!): Auguste Piccard


I am not arguing with you. I am simply curious about it all.

I skimmed thru the video. I am confused as to what it has to do with the topic.

[Tumeni]

Picard may well have claimed to have seen a Flat Earth, but

He was looking through vintage spectacles
He was peering through thick porthole glass of small diameter, even smaller than today's aircraft windows and

Someone has suggested his craft was leaking, so he have been suffering oxygen deprivation and mild hallucination

So, how reliable?

[totallackey]

That's a really odd shaped balloon that I would like to see...

It is not like odd-shaped balloons have no basis in reality...

[totallackey]

Picard may well have claimed to have seen a Flat Earth, but

He was looking through vintage spectacles
He was peering through thick porthole glass of small diameter, even smaller than today's aircraft windows and

Someone has suggested his craft was leaking, so he have been suffering oxygen deprivation and mild hallucination

So, how reliable?

Piccard knew what he was looking through.

He did not make just one flight. His craft was not leaking all the freaking time.

[StinkyOne]

Picard may well have claimed to have seen a Flat Earth, but

He was looking through vintage spectacles
He was peering through thick porthole glass of small diameter, even smaller than today's aircraft windows and

Someone has suggested his craft was leaking, so he have been suffering oxygen deprivation and mild hallucination

So, how reliable?

Piccard knew what he was looking through.

He did not make just one flight. His craft was not leaking all the freaking time.

At the altitude they achieved, you'd need a wide field of view to see the curvature of the Earth. Their field of view was limited. Further, their flight occurred over land, which would have influenced what they saw.

Beyond the physical, he is also credited as being the first human to see the curve of the Earth and referred to the Earth as a globe in his writings. This is huge case of confirmation bias. Take one sentence and ignore everything he wrote and studied. (he was a scientist and not a flat Earther)

[Tumeni]

Piccard knew what he was looking through.

He did not make just one flight. His craft was not leaking all the freaking time.

How many flights did he make?

He might have KNOWN what he was looking through, but does that make his observation any more reliable, given the size of the portholes, and his defective vision?

[totallackey]

Picard may well have claimed to have seen a Flat Earth, but

He was looking through vintage spectacles
He was peering through thick porthole glass of small diameter, even smaller than today's aircraft windows and

Someone has suggested his craft was leaking, so he have been suffering oxygen deprivation and mild hallucination

So, how reliable?

Piccard knew what he was looking through.

He did not make just one flight. His craft was not leaking all the freaking time.

At the altitude they achieved, you'd need a wide field of view to see the curvature of the Earth.

Yet the claim by Piccard is he saw it as flat with concave(curved up) lip...

Their field of view was limited. Further, their flight occurred over land, which would have influenced what they saw.

Funny! Have you ever taken to task any RE-tard claiming to see curvature from a commercial jet?

Beyond the physical, he is also credited as being the first human to see the curve of the Earth and referred to the Earth as a globe in his writings. This is huge case of confirmation bias. Take one sentence and ignore everything he wrote and studied. (he was a scientist and not a flat Earther)

So, you spend your entire first paragraph arguing against his capability to adequately see what he was looking at and then close your post, virtually AFFIRMING BY GOD he was able to see the curve...

WTH is the matter with you?

[Tom Bishop]

We don't talk much about the ISS here. Globebusters focuses on the ISS hoax. Check out their Youtube channel.

[totallackey]

Piccard knew what he was looking through.

He did not make just one flight. His craft was not leaking all the freaking time.

How many flights did he make?

Look it up yourself.

He might have KNOWN what he was looking through, but does that make his observation any more reliable, given the size of the portholes, and his defective vision?

You do not want to believe anything he wrote as a result of his observations, fine.

What do I care?

None of the people who had immediate access to his work and reports called out any of his physical shortcomings or possible equipment shortcomings into question.

Only modern day RE-tards think they have the credentials to do so...

[xenotolerance]

As far as I can find, Globebusters offers mid-air holograms as the explanation for people seeing the ISS from the ground.

Starting roughly at 10:30:


This isn't remotely close to a satisfactory answer to Smarter Every Day's observation of the solar transit. Holograms don't cast shadows

[StinkyOne]

Picard may well have claimed to have seen a Flat Earth, but

He was looking through vintage spectacles
He was peering through thick porthole glass of small diameter, even smaller than today's aircraft windows and

Someone has suggested his craft was leaking, so he have been suffering oxygen deprivation and mild hallucination

So, how reliable?

Piccard knew what he was looking through.

He did not make just one flight. His craft was not leaking all the freaking time.

At the altitude they achieved, you'd need a wide field of view to see the curvature of the Earth.

Yet the claim by Piccard is he saw it as flat with concave(curved up) lip...

Their field of view was limited. Further, their flight occurred over land, which would have influenced what they saw.

Funny! Have you ever taken to task any RE-tard claiming to see curvature from a commercial jet?

Beyond the physical, he is also credited as being the first human to see the curve of the Earth and referred to the Earth as a globe in his writings. This is huge case of confirmation bias. Take one sentence and ignore everything he wrote and studied. (he was a scientist and not a flat Earther)

So, you spend your entire first paragraph arguing against his capability to adequately see what he was looking at and then close your post, virtually AFFIRMING BY GOD he was able to see the curve...

WTH is the matter with you?

I was addressing the limitations of the craft in the first couple of sentences and then pointing out that the very guy you're trying to claim thought the Earth was flat, in fact, knew it was a globe. Wipe the spittle from your mouth and go back and re-read what I wrote.

BTW, referring to logical, educated people as RE-tards pretty much shows you're have the mental age of a child. Do you laugh when you type it? "hehehe, I said RE-tard." Grow up.

[Tom Bishop]

As far as I can find, Globebusters offers mid-air holograms as the explanation for people seeing the ISS from the ground.

Starting roughly at 10:30:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0iQzxRqW4U

This isn't remotely close to a satisfactory answer to Smarter Every Day's observation of the solar transit. Holograms don't cast shadows

Why are you leaving me comments about a Youtube video you found? They have a comment feature.

[AATW]

Mid-air holograms 
That's the dumbest thing I ever heard.

Honestly, for people who claim to value empirical evidence they sure do go out of their way to do everything they can to dismiss empirical evidence which doesn't fit in with their world view.

[Buran]

We don't talk much about the ISS here. Globebusters focuses on the ISS hoax. Check out their Youtube channel.

Globebusters aren't flat earthers. They only make controversial videos to generate views.

[JohnAdams1145]

Also asserting that Piccard saw a flat Earth contradicts what the FE wiki has to say on high altitude photographs, namely that they show a roundness explained by something else. Get your arguments together before resorting to just saying everything is wrong.

[totallackey]

Picard may well have claimed to have seen a Flat Earth, but

He was looking through vintage spectacles
He was peering through thick porthole glass of small diameter, even smaller than today's aircraft windows and

Someone has suggested his craft was leaking, so he have been suffering oxygen deprivation and mild hallucination

So, how reliable?

Piccard knew what he was looking through.

He did not make just one flight. His craft was not leaking all the freaking time.

At the altitude they achieved, you'd need a wide field of view to see the curvature of the Earth.

Yet the claim by Piccard is he saw it as flat with concave(curved up) lip...

Their field of view was limited. Further, their flight occurred over land, which would have influenced what they saw.

Funny! Have you ever taken to task any RE-tard claiming to see curvature from a commercial jet?

Beyond the physical, he is also credited as being the first human to see the curve of the Earth and referred to the Earth as a globe in his writings. This is huge case of confirmation bias. Take one sentence and ignore everything he wrote and studied. (he was a scientist and not a flat Earther)

So, you spend your entire first paragraph arguing against his capability to adequately see what he was looking at and then close your post, virtually AFFIRMING BY GOD he was able to see the curve...

WTH is the matter with you?

I was addressing the limitations of the craft in the first couple of sentences and then pointing out that the very guy you're trying to claim thought the Earth was flat, in fact, knew it was a globe. Wipe the spittle from your mouth and go back and re-read what I wrote.

No, you argued against the validity of all of his observations, and then tried to claim those same observations earned him the title of the first person to ever observe the "curve," of Globe Earth...

So which side you on...You cannot have it both ways.

By the way, please pony up a valid source indicating Piccard ever claimed to see the "curve of the Earth."

BTW, referring to logical, educated people as RE-tards pretty much shows you're have the mental age of a child. Do you laugh when you type it? "hehehe, I said RE-tard." Grow up.

I see no evidence of logic or education in a post or in a source, I am going to call it like I see it.

If that offends you, so be it.

So, the question remains...You ever corrected a Re-tard for claiming to see the curvature of the Earth from a commercial plane?