Have you personally verified they have a high altitude plane that looks exactly like the ISS?
Have you personally verified these high altitude planes even exist? (After all, your source is the NASA website, what if they're lies too just like satellites?)
Have you personally verified the military personnel patrolling Antarctica?
How about the flights that go there regularly to stock them back up?
If not, how can you claim any of these things are true by your logic?
you are the ones claiming to know everything about the ISS and present it as fact. i have provided evidence that it is very likely a NASA (or other agency) high altitude jet, which their own wesbite includes many clues to help support that. you RE'ers love to try and pose these questions, you act as if you know what you are talking about and you are just regurgitating what you have been told. I can do the same to you:
1. Have you worked for NASA and been involved in the design of satelittes
2. Have you ever viewed the satelittes with high powered telescope and track individual satelittes and make out there exact shape
3. have you ever determined the height of the ISS yourself and compared the geometry of its track with another person to triangulate the height?
4. Have you ever inspected a satelitte before it was loaded into a rocket?
I mean, its ridiculous the extremes you guys go to to try and prove a point. admit it, you have NO idea, other than what you have been told and/or read on the internet.
I question NASA and provide my thoughts. you have no thoughts. the thread topic was proving that satellites (and their images) are real. I have provided critical thought on exactly how these images can be faked by NASA.
1. No, I don't live anywhere near NASA bases.
2. Yes.
3. Yes.
4. See 1.
I've tested many of NASA's assertions, as well as many more made by the FE'rs on this site and others. 90% of the FE ones come up lacking ime. The only one that wavers in my experience is lasers over long distances. But that one is just an interesting oddity when taken with everything else. You're the one presenting this idea of 'think for yourself, do it for yourself' not me. I don't claim to know everything about the ISS, but my personal observations match the information that's given. You're making a claim and your only evidence is that something that could maybe work to fulfill the same role, likely exists. That seems like a pretty weak case to me. Yet you appear to believe it with zero personal evidence for it. You're making things up in an effort to have a position that isn't just 'I don't know'.