The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Investigations => Topic started by: AllAroundTheWorld on March 31, 2022, 10:32:11 AM

Title: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on March 31, 2022, 10:32:11 AM
This photo has just been released of the ISS, taken from the ground in Germany

https://www.space.com/space-station-spacewalking-astronauts-telescope-photo

The structure of it is very clear and it claims to show one of the astronauts doing a spacewalk. It's admittedly just a dot, but what would you expect from that distance.

It's an interesting avenue of investigation for those of you who think the ISS is fake, there's clearly something up there and with not that expensive equipment you can see the structure of it from the ground. If it's not an orbiting space station then what is it, how did it get up there and what keeps it up there and travelling on the path it does?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Action80 on March 31, 2022, 11:23:52 AM
This photo has just been released of the ISS, taken from the ground in Germany

https://www.space.com/space-station-spacewalking-astronauts-telescope-photo

The structure of it is very clear and it claims to show one of the astronauts doing a spacewalk. It's admittedly just a dot, but what would you expect from that distance.

It's an interesting avenue of investigation for those of you who think the ISS is fake, there's clearly something up there and with not that expensive equipment you can see the structure of it from the ground. If it's not an orbiting space station then what is it, how did it get up there and what keeps it up there and travelling on the path it does?
LOL!!!

You write it is just a dot.

The first image in the article certainly presents more than a "dot."

The idiot in the article claims it captures a man performing a walk on the outside of the ISS from over 250 miles away.

None of you deserve any attention whatsoever, except to say you are both so wrong (you because you think the first image represents a dot) and the other guy who supposedly took the image, thinking he can spot a guy walking from 250 miles away.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Tumeni on March 31, 2022, 11:37:59 AM
LOL!!!  You write it is just a dot.  The first image in the article certainly presents more than a "dot."

No, the astronaut is the dot. We can see the space station clearly.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Action80 on March 31, 2022, 11:53:22 AM
LOL!!!  You write it is just a dot.  The first image in the article certainly presents more than a "dot."

No, the astronaut is the dot. We can see the space station clearly.
Oh, then how do you know it is an astronaut and not just a dot.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Gonzo on March 31, 2022, 11:53:35 AM
No need to call anyone an idiot, the photographer is a well known astrophotographer.

Action80, have you seen the ISS go overhead?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: JSS on March 31, 2022, 11:55:38 AM
LOL!!!

You write it is just a dot.

The first image in the article certainly presents more than a "dot."

The idiot in the article claims it captures a man performing a walk on the outside of the ISS from over 250 miles away.

None of you deserve any attention whatsoever, except to say you are both so wrong (you because you think the first image represents a dot) and the other guy who supposedly took the image, thinking he can spot a guy walking from 250 miles away.

I think you are confused. He was saying the astronaut was a dot, not that the entire picture was a dot. I suppose AllAroundTheWorld could have been more clear in the wording of his follow up sentence to indicate "It" was the astronaut, and not the picture. I hope that clears up your confusion.

I'm curious what you think he took a picture of if not the ISS and a spacewalk?

Do you have any calculations showing that a 11" Celestron telescope with a high resolution sensor is incapable of resolving the objects as claimed? From my own experience with telescopes and astrophotography, that kind of magnification is well within the limits of consumer grade telescope optics.  I've taken my own pictures of the ISS with much cheaper equipment.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Tumeni on March 31, 2022, 12:01:07 PM
Oh, then how do you know it is an astronaut and not just a dot.

What else would it be, given that the photo was taken at the time that an astronaut was in the process of a spacewalk?

Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on March 31, 2022, 12:29:50 PM
I think you are confused. He was saying the astronaut was a dot, not that the entire picture was a dot. I suppose AllAroundTheWorld could have been more clear in the wording of his follow up sentence to indicate "It" was the astronaut, and not the picture.
Fair enough, I could have been clearer.

But whether the dot is really an astronaut or not, the structure of the ISS is very clear. Which demonstrates that there's something up there.
So my questions remain. What is the something? How did it get there? What stops it falling and keeps it moving in the path it goes in - a path which means you can look up exactly where and when you'll see the ISS and then observe it for yourself.

I'm sure Action will now be doing his own investigations into this, I look forward to seeing his results. ;)
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Action80 on March 31, 2022, 12:59:36 PM
No need to call anyone an idiot, the photographer is a well known astrophotographer.

Action80, have you seen the ISS go overhead?
Yep.

It was a dot, traveling rather fast.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Gonzo on March 31, 2022, 01:36:04 PM
No need to call anyone an idiot, the photographer is a well known astrophotographer.

Action80, have you seen the ISS go overhead?
Yep.

It was a dot, traveling rather fast.

I'd recommend using some decent binoculars or even a telescope, it’s quite easy to make out the shape.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on March 31, 2022, 08:35:07 PM
No need to call anyone an idiot, the photographer is a well known astrophotographer.

Action80, have you seen the ISS go overhead?
Yep.

It was a dot, traveling rather fast.

If you had the rig Voltmer had (Celestron 11-inch EdgeHD telescope on a GM2000 HPS mount and an ASI290 planetary camera), the fast-moving dot you saw would look like this:

(https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AdpgVupzLEQYTBWYAjkMtT.jpg)

Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 14, 2022, 03:26:06 PM
This photo has just been released of the ISS, taken from the ground in Germany

https://www.space.com/space-station-spacewalking-astronauts-telescope-photo

The structure of it is very clear and it claims to show one of the astronauts doing a spacewalk. It's admittedly just a dot, but what would you expect from that distance.

It's an interesting avenue of investigation for those of you who think the ISS is fake, there's clearly something up there and with not that expensive equipment you can see the structure of it from the ground. If it's not an orbiting space station then what is it, how did it get up there and what keeps it up there and travelling on the path it does?

Yes, there is clearly something up there but there is no reason to think it's a space station and hundreds of reasons to think it's not. A simple application of Occam's Razor cuts this space station nonsense to ribbons. What's more likely? The super powers of the world put down their weapons, all collaborated together to magically launch lego-esque space station parts, assembled them while careening around the earth at a blistering 17,000 miles per hour all in a weightless and airless environment completely hostile to human life. OR, that the space station is just a dirigible spinning around and anchored to the North Pole?

It's honestly silly that we are still talking about this in 2022.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Tumeni on April 14, 2022, 04:46:25 PM
... no reason to think it's a space station and hundreds of reasons to think it's not. A simple application of Occam's Razor cuts this space station nonsense to ribbons. What's more likely? The super powers of the world put down their weapons, all collaborated together to magically launch lego-esque space station parts, assembled them while careening around the earth at a blistering 17,000 miles per hour all in a weightless and airless environment completely hostile to human life. OR, that the space station is just a dirigible spinning around and anchored to the North Pole?

If the latter, it would have to maintain the same distance from the North Pole in every sighting. But it does not.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 14, 2022, 05:57:10 PM
... no reason to think it's a space station and hundreds of reasons to think it's not. A simple application of Occam's Razor cuts this space station nonsense to ribbons. What's more likely? The super powers of the world put down their weapons, all collaborated together to magically launch lego-esque space station parts, assembled them while careening around the earth at a blistering 17,000 miles per hour all in a weightless and airless environment completely hostile to human life. OR, that the space station is just a dirigible spinning around and anchored to the North Pole?

If the latter, it would have to maintain the same distance from the North Pole in every sighting. But it does not.

Why? Could the tether not be slackened and tightened? Surely it is not beyond the grasp of humanity to adjust the length of a tether.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Tumeni on April 14, 2022, 06:32:03 PM
Why? Could the tether not be slackened and tightened? Surely it is not beyond the grasp of humanity to adjust the length of a tether.

Why would that be done? To give the impression that is in orbit around a globe, even when it is not?

Occam's Razor goes both ways. Either;

1. everyone involved in the ISS is either deliberately generating a fiction, manufacturing data, photos, videos, managing to make astronauts disappear from their families for months at a time, but set up comms where they 'look' weightless, but are in some form of simulation, or being duped by those who are generating this fiction .... OR

2. it's all real, and the sum total of 60+ years of orbital space flight and experience has gone into it.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 14, 2022, 07:04:37 PM
The super powers of the world put down their weapons, all collaborated together to magically launch lego-esque space station parts, assembled them while careening around the earth at a blistering 17,000 miles per hour all in a weightless and airless environment completely hostile to human life. OR, that the space station is just a dirigible spinning around and anchored to the North Pole?

From an Occam's perspective, do you really think making a blimp travel at 17,000 MPH attached to a rope at the North Pole is the simpler explanation?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on April 14, 2022, 08:58:29 PM
Yes, there is clearly something up there but there is no reason to think it's a space station
Apart from the endless video from it showing weightlessness, the fact you can clearly make out its structure from the ground with fairly basic optics, the fact that radio HAMs regularly contact the astronauts in it and close to 250 people have now been there including 10 space tourists with no whistle blowers so far.

Quote
and hundreds of reasons to think it's not.
And yet you haven't mentioned one which stands up to any scrutiny at all.

Quote
A simple application of Occam's Razor cuts this space station nonsense to ribbons.
Occam's Razor is, at best, a rule of thumb. There is no objective measure of how "credible" or "likely" something is, so you can use it to make any argument from incredulity you like, which is what you've done.

Quote
What's more likely? The super powers of the world put down their weapons, all collaborated together to magically launch lego-esque space station parts, assembled them while careening around the earth at a blistering 17,000 miles per hour all in a weightless and airless environment completely hostile to human life. OR, that the space station is just a dirigible spinning around and anchored to the North Pole?
So firstly, what weapons? The 5 space agencies involved were:
NASA (United States), Roscosmos (Russia), JAXA (Japan), ESA (Europe), and CSA (Canada).
Most of those are allies. There's obviously been some tension between the US and Russia over the years but no war.
Japan was on the other side in WW2 of course but that was over 50 years before the ISS was started.

Secondly, how are the launches "magic"? Rocket technology has existed for at least 70 years, you can observe launches yourself. The technology required so get things to the "blistering" speeds you mention is not new and can be observed. And while yes, the ISS is moving fast the parts being assembled were all moving at the same speed. It's like snorting derisively at the idea you can pour a drink on an airplane going close to the speed of sound. But of course you can because you, the glass and the can are all going at the same speed so it's no different to doing it on the ground, a slight bit of vibration aside - which wouldn't be an issue in space.
Space walks have been a thing for nearly 60 years so the idea of working in space is not new either.

Quote
It's honestly silly that we are still talking about this in 2022.
Well, agreed there. The idea that the ISS is anchored to the North Pole is obviously ludicrous. How long is this tether supposed to be? What material is it made of which could be strong enough at that length? Why can't it be observed? Surely people close to the Arctic Circle would be able to see it? You have made an argument from incredulity and then presented an alternative idea which is (in my view although it is admittedly subjective) significantly more incredible and provided zero evidence for it.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 15, 2022, 04:04:18 PM
Why? Could the tether not be slackened and tightened? Surely it is not beyond the grasp of humanity to adjust the length of a tether.

Why would that be done? To give the impression that is in orbit around a globe, even when it is not?

Yes.


Occam's Razor goes both ways. Either;

1. everyone involved in the ISS is either deliberately generating a fiction, manufacturing data, photos, videos, managing to make astronauts disappear from their families for months at a time, but set up comms where they 'look' weightless, but are in some form of simulation, or being duped by those who are generating this fiction .... OR

2. it's all real, and the sum total of 60+ years of orbital space flight and experience has gone into it.

Agree to disagree.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 15, 2022, 04:04:57 PM
The super powers of the world put down their weapons, all collaborated together to magically launch lego-esque space station parts, assembled them while careening around the earth at a blistering 17,000 miles per hour all in a weightless and airless environment completely hostile to human life. OR, that the space station is just a dirigible spinning around and anchored to the North Pole?

From an Occam's perspective, do you really think making a blimp travel at 17,000 MPH attached to a rope at the North Pole is the simpler explanation?

Yes. Easily.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 15, 2022, 04:15:37 PM
Quote
and hundreds of reasons to think it's not.
And yet you haven't mentioned one which stands up to any scrutiny at all.
If I declare something silly, for example, "The earth is round" then plug my ears and scream every time someone brings up evidence that contradicts my predetermined world-view, would you think I could say with integrity that there is no evidence that, "stands up to any scrutiny at all"?

Quote
It's honestly silly that we are still talking about this in 2022.
Well, agreed there. The idea that the ISS is anchored to the North Pole is obviously ludicrous. How long is this tether supposed to be? What material is it made of which could be strong enough at that length? Why can't it be observed? Surely people close to the Arctic Circle would be able to see it? You have made an argument from incredulity and then presented an alternative idea which is (in my view although it is admittedly subjective) significantly more incredible and provided zero evidence for it.
I can honestly say that I don't know the answers to your questions. However, that is a good thing because rather than Googling searching something like "What is the ISS wingspan" then running back here and blindly parroting the answer after giving myself a "well-earned" pat-on-the-back for my extensive "research", I can say that I do not know and it's an area for further study.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 15, 2022, 05:03:44 PM
The super powers of the world put down their weapons, all collaborated together to magically launch lego-esque space station parts, assembled them while careening around the earth at a blistering 17,000 miles per hour all in a weightless and airless environment completely hostile to human life. OR, that the space station is just a dirigible spinning around and anchored to the North Pole?

From an Occam's perspective, do you really think making a blimp travel at 17,000 MPH attached to a rope at the North Pole is the simpler explanation?

Yes. Easily.

Cool. How might it work? Are there examples here on terra firma that exemplify the methods used to make it happen in the way you describe? Like Tether-Tech™ 10's of thousands of feet long? 17,000 MPH propulsion? Blimp-Tech™ that can withstand 17,000 MPH of propulsion? How to mimic its oscillating, for lack of a better term, path (I've got an idea on this one, it involves a winch)? What are the Occam-Easy solutions for these things?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 15, 2022, 09:07:16 PM
Cool. How might it work?

I don't know. But just as I don't need to know how my cell phone works to know that it works, I know that dirigibles exist and work. 
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 16, 2022, 02:07:45 AM
Cool. How might it work?

I don't know. But just as I don't need to know how my cell phone works to know that it works, I know that dirigibles exist and work.

I don’t know either. I don’t have a cellphone, but I know they exist and work seemingly as advertised. I’ve seen videos and such showing people talk on them. Maybe they were actually using two tin cans that look like what we think cell phones would look like tethered together with a piece string. That might work. I know that tin cans and string exist and work.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: GoldCashew on April 16, 2022, 02:54:56 PM
Quote
and hundreds of reasons to think it's not.
And yet you haven't mentioned one which stands up to any scrutiny at all.
If I declare something silly, for example, "The earth is round" then plug my ears and scream every time someone brings up evidence that contradicts my predetermined world-view, would you think I could say with integrity that there is no evidence that, "stands up to any scrutiny at all"?

Quote
It's honestly silly that we are still talking about this in 2022.
Well, agreed there. The idea that the ISS is anchored to the North Pole is obviously ludicrous. How long is this tether supposed to be? What material is it made of which could be strong enough at that length? Why can't it be observed? Surely people close to the Arctic Circle would be able to see it? You have made an argument from incredulity and then presented an alternative idea which is (in my view although it is admittedly subjective) significantly more incredible and provided zero evidence for it.
I can honestly say that I don't know the answers to your questions. However, that is a good thing because rather than Googling searching something like "What is the ISS wingspan" then running back here and blindly parroting the answer after giving myself a "well-earned" pat-on-the-back for my extensive "research", I can say that I do not know and it's an area for further study.


Some additional feasibility considerations or questions to look into regarding the tethered theory would be:

- does one side of the ISS blimp always face the arctic circle or does the ISS tend to roll or change pitch or attitude? If the ISS tends to roll or change pitch, than how would a tether work that is attached to the arctic circle? For example, if the ISS pitches, angles, or rolls than the tether would have to pass through the ISS blimp which would not be feasible. So, your research would have to look at how the ISS is oriented over long periods of time to see if a tether could be feasible.

- there are other man made objects which can be observed from the ground orbiting Earth at over 17,000 mph, including thousands of pieces of space junk. If these are also small blimps tied to tethers, how or what is controlling and coordinating the thousands of tethers so that they do not get tangled? How does this work?

- other considerations might be to investigate the technical feasibility of a tether and blimp moving through the atmosphere (even of thin) at over 17,000 mph while able to withstand massive aerodynamic and frictional forces over a period of decades. In the vacuum of space, an orbiting ISS would experience no such forces.

Given the above, are you also open to the possibility that the ISS could indeed be a space station that is orbiting about a spherical Earth in space?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 18, 2022, 10:27:58 PM
Some additional feasibility considerations or questions to look into regarding the tethered theory would be:

Thank you for helping to further flat-earth theory. These questions will be looked into.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: DuncanDoenitz on April 19, 2022, 07:56:42 AM
Whilst you may think " . . . further(ing) flat-earth theory . . ." is facetious, its actually the only reason most roundies come on here.  The only way to prove a theory is to disprove the alternatives, so we explore all avenues of flat-research until it disappears up its own monopole. 

Or not, of course. 

What's more likely? The super powers of the world put down their weapons, all collaborated together to magically - perpetuate a round-Earth myth?

It's honestly silly that we are still talking about this in 2022.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 20, 2022, 06:51:47 PM
Whilst you may think " . . . further(ing) flat-earth theory . . ." is facetious, its actually the only reason most roundies come on here.  The only way to prove a theory is to disprove the alternatives...

It may or may not surprise you to learn that many flat-earthers only come here to show round-earthers how extremely tenuous their grasp of their own theories are despite how dogmatically they cling to them.

"The only way to prove a theory is to disprove the alternatives..." smacks of a famous Doyle quote, "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." While this sounds erudite on the surface, a mere sophomoric understanding of rhetoric will reveal this quote for what it is; a parade down the avenue of arguments from ignorance. Not only does the Scientific Method not teach this but nether does the Zetetic Method. Furthermore, theories aren't meant to be proven or disproven they are a body of knowledge that explains something. Like how the Theory of Evolution is true but is still called a theory. It's a semantic misunderstanding.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 20, 2022, 07:14:41 PM
Whilst you may think " . . . further(ing) flat-earth theory . . ." is facetious, its actually the only reason most roundies come on here.  The only way to prove a theory is to disprove the alternatives...

It may or may not surprise you to learn that many flat-earthers only come here to show round-earthers how extremely tenuous their grasp of their own theories are despite how dogmatically they cling to them.

It may or may not surprise you to learn that many globe-earthers only come here to show flat-earthers how extremely tenuous their grasp of their own theories are despite how dogmatically they cling to them.

"The only way to prove a theory is to disprove the alternatives..." smacks of a famous Doyle quote, "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." While this sounds erudite on the surface, a mere sophomoric understanding of rhetoric will reveal this quote for what it is; a parade down the avenue of arguments from ignorance. Not only does the Scientific Method not teach this but nether does the Zetetic Method. Furthermore, theories aren't meant to be proven or disproven they are a body of knowledge that explains something. Like how the Theory of Evolution is true but is still called a theory. It's a semantic misunderstanding.

I agree. But if you take a quick look at the wiki, it's steeped in discrediting theories not favorable to flat earth, obviously with some exceptions. Discredit NASA, discredit modern astronomy, discredit modern physics, etc. In other words, it cuts both ways regardless of FE or GE.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pete Svarrior on April 20, 2022, 07:35:55 PM
It may or may not surprise you to learn that many globe-earthers only come here to show flat-earthers how extremely tenuous their grasp of their own theories are despite how dogmatically they cling to them.
Coming from someone whose grasp of FE is non-existent and whose grasp of RE is somewhere between "poor" and "mediocre", that would be surprising. Nah, who am I kidding? You're exactly the type Pongo was talking about, and you just couldn't stop yourself from proving him right.

All that for a quick "UHHHH I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I???" quip.

I agree. But if you take a quick look at the wiki, it's steeped in discrediting theories not favorable to flat earth, obviously with some exceptions. Discredit NASA, discredit modern astronomy, discredit modern physics, etc. In other words, it cuts both ways regardless of FE or GE.
The Wiki addresses the most common arguments RE'ers come to us crying about. The only thing that "cuts both ways" here is your inability to ever be content. You pompously demand that we discredit your dogma, and then you complain that we humour you.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: RonJ on April 20, 2022, 08:00:13 PM
There’s a small problem with the contention that the space station is anchored to the North Pole under the flat earth theory.  That’s the fallacy of the earth’s upward acceleration to ‘simulate’ gravity.  In order for the space station to maintain a tension on a rope attached to the North Pole there would have to be a rocket engine on the space station to also maintain an upwards acceleration.  I’ve never seen any evidence of a rocket exhaust in any of the pictures.  Clearly there’s humans aboard the space station because I’ve personally heard them on the HAM radio frequencies.   
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 20, 2022, 08:08:57 PM
It may or may not surprise you to learn that many globe-earthers only come here to show flat-earthers how extremely tenuous their grasp of their own theories are despite how dogmatically they cling to them.
Coming from someone whose grasp of FE is non-existent and whose grasp of RE is somewhere between "poor" and "mediocre", that would be surprising. Nah, who am I kidding? You're exactly the type Pongo was talking about, and you just couldn't stop yourself from proving him right.

All that for a quick "UHHHH I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I???" quip.

Where have a demonstrated my grasp of FE is non-existent and that of RE is poor-mediocre? I'll totally cop to it if I've been misinformed or wrong about some aspect of each. I'm sure I have at some point. It's a vast subject that covers many disciplines, some of which I'm sure I have a poor-mediocre understanding of. However, I'm not sure exactly where a blanket non-existent and poor-mediocre come from. But you're allowed your opinion.

I agree. But if you take a quick look at the wiki, it's steeped in discrediting theories not favorable to flat earth, obviously with some exceptions. Discredit NASA, discredit modern astronomy, discredit modern physics, etc. In other words, it cuts both ways regardless of FE or GE.
The Wiki addresses the most common arguments RE'ers come to us crying about. The only thing that "cuts both ways" here is your inability to ever be content. You pompously demand that we discredit your dogma, and then you complain that we humour you.

I wasn't "complaining". I don't know exactly how you are able to gauge my level of contentment, but I guess you think you have that ability. I was just merely pointing out that both sides of the debate go about it pretty much the same way.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pete Svarrior on April 20, 2022, 08:18:56 PM
I don't know exactly how you are able to gauge my level of contentment
It's pretty simple - I assume you express your emotions truthfully. If you're lying, hey-ho, you've got me.

I was just merely pointing out that both sides of the debate go about it pretty much the same way.
Yes, which is why I presented you with evidence to the contrary. I guess you're just gonna ignore that and restate your "point". That's cool.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: GoldCashew on April 20, 2022, 08:25:34 PM
It may or may not surprise you to learn that many globe-earthers only come here to show flat-earthers how extremely tenuous their grasp of their own theories are despite how dogmatically they cling to them.
Coming from someone whose grasp of FE is non-existent and whose grasp of RE is somewhere between "poor" and "mediocre", that would be surprising. Nah, who am I kidding? You're exactly the type Pongo was talking about, and you just couldn't stop yourself from proving him right.

All that for a quick "UHHHH I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I???" quip.

I agree. But if you take a quick look at the wiki, it's steeped in discrediting theories not favorable to flat earth, obviously with some exceptions. Discredit NASA, discredit modern astronomy, discredit modern physics, etc. In other words, it cuts both ways regardless of FE or GE.
The Wiki addresses the most common arguments RE'ers come to us crying about. The only thing that "cuts both ways" here is your inability to ever be content. You pompously demand that we discredit your dogma, and then you complain that we humour you.


There are many FE concepts that you are absolutely correct; that RE'ers like myself don't grasp.

Pongo's suggestion of the ISS as a dirigible attached by a tether(s) to the North Pole is one example and it was fair for me to raise some initial feasibility questions.

This FE theory along with other concepts such as how the FE simplified animation model shows the Sun's spotlight projection as distorted on a flat earth model are FE theory items I don't have a grasp on but am trying to understand how they work.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 20, 2022, 08:57:42 PM
I don't know exactly how you are able to gauge my level of contentment
It's pretty simple - I assume you express your emotions truthfully. If you're lying, hey-ho, you've got me.

I guess in addition to claiming I have no grasp of FE and a poor-mediocre understanding of RE concepts and your ability to gauge my contentment, you also can divine and assess my emotional state. Impressive.

I was just merely pointing out that both sides of the debate go about it pretty much the same way.
Yes, which is why I presented you with evidence to the contrary. I guess you're just gonna ignore that and restate your "point". That's cool.

The way I see it, it's not evidence to the contrary. Of course, the wiki, in part, is meant to address RE arguments. And in doing so, goes about it in different ways. Sometimes, just simply stating the FE theories or POV's as more worthwhile explanations for phenomena. In others, attempts to discredit the RE side of things. The latter of which is what I thought Pongo was referring to. As in both perspectives play in the same space of sometimes simply trying to discredit the other. Maybe I was wrong in my interpretation. In any case, I don't think it's that controversial of an opinion to warrant insult. But that's just me.

As to the topic at hand, if there are better explanations as to what the ISS is, or if it even exists, then have at it. In terms of not being able to grasp a potential FE explanation of blimps and tethers, yes, I don't grasp it. Guilty as charged.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pete Svarrior on April 20, 2022, 09:07:10 PM
you also can divine and assess my emotional state
Considering I was just calling you unperceptive, you're really not making this easy for yourself. Allow me to repeat myself: I assume that your expression of your own emotional state is truthful. This is no divination. If you don't want to sound like you're whining, you can just stop whining.

The way I see it, it's not evidence to the contrary.
I'm sorry to hear about your predicament.

In any case, I don't think it's that controversial of an opinion to warrant insult.
You could have simply not started shit if you weren't willing to take it yourself. 🤷‍♂️ The "NUH UH NO U" post didn't exactly set the scene for your now-revised "oh nooooo I wasn't trying to be controversial" approach.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 20, 2022, 09:55:09 PM
There’s a small problem with the contention that the space station is anchored to the North Pole under the flat earth theory.  That’s the fallacy of the earth’s upward acceleration to ‘simulate’ gravity.  In order for the space station to maintain a tension on a rope attached to the North Pole there would have to be a rocket engine on the space station to also maintain an upwards acceleration.  I’ve never seen any evidence of a rocket exhaust in any of the pictures.  Clearly there’s humans aboard the space station because I’ve personally heard them on the HAM radio frequencies.

By this logic birthday balloons would not stay afloat. The dirigible-station sails the upper bounds of the atmoplain like a ship anchored in a bay.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 20, 2022, 10:20:25 PM
you also can divine and assess my emotional state
Considering I was just calling you unperceptive, you're really not making this easy for yourself. Allow me to repeat myself: I assume that your expression of your own emotional state is truthful. This is no divination. If you don't want to sound like you're whining, you can just stop whining.

The way I see it, it's not evidence to the contrary.
I'm sorry to hear about your predicament.

In any case, I don't think it's that controversial of an opinion to warrant insult.
You could have simply not started shit if you weren't willing to take it yourself. 🤷‍♂️ The "NUH UH NO U" post didn't exactly set the scene for your now-revised "oh nooooo I wasn't trying to be controversial" approach.

I don’t recall saying that Pongo lacks any knowledge of FE and RE. In other words, I don’t believe I insulted him or was “starting shit”. Nor do I recall addressing you. I perceived some hypocrisy and pointed it out. Could my perception have been wrong? Sure. I don’t think so, but I’ve been wrong before. For some reason you've embarked on a critical assessment of my intentions, honesty, and intelligence and I’m unclear why that’s a necessity for you and what that has to do with the topic.

My point was that both sides, at times, simply try and discredit the other. It’s not a mystery, nor is it controversial. Like I said, if my grasp of how blimps and tethers could adequately explain the presence of an ISS as opposed to the more common explanation for its existence, then yes, my grasp on this particular FE perspective is, in fact, lacking. Maybe Pongo can clear up my understanding, or lack thereof, on the FE perspective.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 20, 2022, 10:27:27 PM
There’s a small problem with the contention that the space station is anchored to the North Pole under the flat earth theory.  That’s the fallacy of the earth’s upward acceleration to ‘simulate’ gravity.  In order for the space station to maintain a tension on a rope attached to the North Pole there would have to be a rocket engine on the space station to also maintain an upwards acceleration.  I’ve never seen any evidence of a rocket exhaust in any of the pictures.  Clearly there’s humans aboard the space station because I’ve personally heard them on the HAM radio frequencies.

By this logic birthday balloons would not stay afloat. The dirigible-station sails the upper bounds of the atmoplain like a ship anchored in a bay.

My understanding of the FE acceleration is that it pushes the plane up, the plane shields us here on terra ferma from being pushed up above the earth. But that acceleration kind of curves back in far above us and pushes up the celestial bodies in concert with the plane. So if something, like an ISS, was high enough, it too would be accelerated upwards in unison with the celestial bodies and the plane. No rockets required.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: GoldCashew on April 21, 2022, 01:16:21 AM
There’s a small problem with the contention that the space station is anchored to the North Pole under the flat earth theory.  That’s the fallacy of the earth’s upward acceleration to ‘simulate’ gravity.  In order for the space station to maintain a tension on a rope attached to the North Pole there would have to be a rocket engine on the space station to also maintain an upwards acceleration.  I’ve never seen any evidence of a rocket exhaust in any of the pictures.  Clearly there’s humans aboard the space station because I’ve personally heard them on the HAM radio frequencies.

By this logic birthday balloons would not stay afloat. The dirigible-station sails the upper bounds of the atmoplain like a ship anchored in a bay.


The difference being that in the ISS dirigible theory, the dirigible is traveling at over 17,000 miles per hour, is tied to tether(s) that would have to withstand 17,000 mph movement in upper atmosphere and the forces of the dirigible pulling in it, is being moved and steared by a force that would need to be defined, is attached to tethers that would have to be thousands and thousands of miles in length, and that would somehow need a plan for servicing said tether(s) if said tether(s) were to break or become damaged. Additionally, what would be the method of servicing such tethers without the billions of people on the ground knowing. Lastly, how would employees at NASA be mistaken that the ISS is orbiting the Earth vs. the ISS as a dirigible attached to tether(s)? They would be monitoring the ISS and not realize it's actually a dirigible with tether(s) attached?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: RonJ on April 21, 2022, 03:38:09 AM
Could you imagine what the weight of a rope would be that would be heavy enough and long enough to restrain the space station in orbit?  So whatever fictitious force is causing the acceleration of the earth would also have to accelerate the heavy line that extends from the North Pole all the way up to the space station.  That would be a very tall order, don’t ya think?  The force would have to vary with the altitude.  Even if you could consider all that it still wouldn’t explain the forces necessary to keep the space station circling.  That would require a force vector that also had a horizontal component.  So, is that horizontal component constant, or variable?  What would happen if an airliner flew into the rope while on a great circle route between the USA and Asia.  I know they fly in that general area because I’ve been on flights that did, many times.  I know of no airspace restrictions on the air navigational charts because of space station ropes.  If the force horizontal components are constant, then the Sun couldn’t change its orbital diameter to explain the seasons.  If the forces are variable, then you could expect the space station’s obit to vary.  Wouldn’t it be easier to just accept the globe earth and gravity?  Occam’s  razor, don’t ya know? . 
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: GoldCashew on April 21, 2022, 05:17:09 AM
Other considerations and critical thought questions to Pongo's above ISS dirigible attached to a tether theory would be (but not be limited to):

- are there NOTAM's (Notice to Airmen) issued to pilots around the world to keep clear of the tether(s) or when said tether(s) are in the general airspace that would be traveling thousands of miles per hour?
- are pilots in on the ISS tether conspiracy or are all flights secretly coordinated by the Elite's so that flights miss the tether(s)? If yes, are Elite's also trained in the field of air traffic control?
- are there any pictures of the ISS tether(s) that exist?
- are the tether(s) constructed of some sort of stealth material so that when they are travelling in the atmosphere, they are hidden from pilots as well as the billions of people on the ground?
- is there any evidence that such tether technology was tested before being used to secure the ISS dirigible?
- did the Elite(s) and only specific NASA employees make secret trips to the North Pole to test the technology or was the testing done elsewhere to simulate a North Pole like climate?
- what do you think the tether(s) are made of?
- when the thousands of mile long tether(s) are moving in the atmosphere at thousands of miles per hour, are there any design considerations that the developers would have had to consider with respect to the tether(s) making any unforeseen noise, howling, or whistling?
- how thick are the tether(s) and what would the specific properties of the tether(s) need to be to hold the ISS, to move at over 17,000 miles per hour, and withstand the rigors of environment for the many years the ISS has been in service?
- how did the ISS dirigible reach the atmosphere when it was originally launched to then be able to move at over 17,000 miles per hour with tether(s) attached? How and where was it launched and what propelled it to the velocity at over 17,000 miles per hour?       
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: JSS on April 21, 2022, 11:45:10 AM
Could you imagine what the weight of a rope would be that would be heavy enough and long enough to restrain the space station in orbit?

This is an interesting question.  We could take a look at a lot of the space elevator tether research to get an idea of what could be theoretically possible. Carbon nanotubes come pretty close to the maximum strength of a material we might be able to produce in long segments someday.  That could probably be strong enough to fling a balloon around at 17,000 MPH. But it doesn't exist, yet.

It's hard to guess how long the tether needs to be as Pongo hasn't stated in his theory any distances and altitudes.

I'd say it's unlikely any current material is light and strong enough to perform such a feat. I don't think even spider silk could do it, but without any numbers to crunch it's all guesswork.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: RonJ on April 21, 2022, 04:31:44 PM
I suppose you could have a bunch of that ‘dark energy’ bend back around the edge of the earth and then make a turn in the opposite direction again to provide the shove upwards to keep the space station aloft and keep the tension on the rope attached to the North Pole.  That would mean that the ‘dark energy’ has mass.  You can’t have a massless object A impart any kind of momentum to object B that does have mass.  The implication then is what other kind of force would be available to cause a change of direction of the ‘dark energy’? All that ‘dark energy’ would also have to be ‘smart’.  Forces would have to be constantly adjusted because the winds (and the swirling dark energy) would be constantly blowing on the space station’s restraining rope and would distort the orbit if not compensated for.  Can you imagine what the effects would be in the summertime with all the typhoons in the Pacific?  I can personally attest to their presence and effects that can happen in the atmosphere.  There have never been any reports of turbulence caused by the ’dark energy’ to aircraft traveling to and from the research stations in the Antarctic. Surely there would be some swirling of that energy as it passes by the edge of the ‘flat earth’.  Try dragging a flat plate thru some water to see what happens at the edge of the plate.  I think that there’s just too many problems with the ‘theory of dark energy’ for it to have any credence at all and it needs to be revised.  Perhaps someone with plenty of education could be put to work.   
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 21, 2022, 08:18:09 PM
There’s a small problem with the contention that the space station is anchored to the North Pole under the flat earth theory.  That’s the fallacy of the earth’s upward acceleration to ‘simulate’ gravity.  In order for the space station to maintain a tension on a rope attached to the North Pole there would have to be a rocket engine on the space station to also maintain an upwards acceleration.  I’ve never seen any evidence of a rocket exhaust in any of the pictures.  Clearly there’s humans aboard the space station because I’ve personally heard them on the HAM radio frequencies.

By this logic birthday balloons would not stay afloat. The dirigible-station sails the upper bounds of the atmoplain like a ship anchored in a bay.


The difference being that in the ISS dirigible theory, the dirigible is traveling at over 17,000 miles per hour, is tied to tether(s) that would have to withstand 17,000 mph movement in upper atmosphere and the forces of the dirigible pulling in it, is being moved and steared by a force that would need to be defined, is attached to tethers that would have to be thousands and thousands of miles in length, and that would somehow need a plan for servicing said tether(s) if said tether(s) were to break or become damaged. Additionally, what would be the method of servicing such tethers without the billions of people on the ground knowing. Lastly, how would employees at NASA be mistaken that the ISS is orbiting the Earth vs. the ISS as a dirigible attached to tether(s)? They would be monitoring the ISS and not realize it's actually a dirigible with tether(s) attached?

Round-earthers say it’s moving at 17K mph. I’m not exactly sure how fast it’s moving but if it were closer then it wouldn’t have to move nearly as fast. 
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: DuncanDoenitz on April 21, 2022, 09:14:11 PM
Wrong ; it would have to "move nearly as fast".  It should be fairly obvious that, regardless of altitude, it completes an orbit every 90 minutes or so, that's equivalent to the length of the equator. 

Currently (22.00 UTC 21 April) over the southern ocean due south of Africa, in the next 90 minutes it will cross east of Madagascar, Myanmar, China, Kamchatka, the Aleutians, off the entire west coast of the Americas, cross Chile, Argentina and the South Atlantic to pass, again, off the southern tip of Africa. 

So tell us how much slower it is travelling. 
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: DuncanDoenitz on April 21, 2022, 09:25:20 PM
And can we have a little more clarity on the dirigible?  Further to the questions from other posters;

If its an ISS-shaped dirigible, it must have buoyancy.  How? 
Does it have sufficient volume to displace its own mass in atmosphere? 
Is it in the atmosphere?
Is it self propelled? 

Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 21, 2022, 09:32:15 PM
Regardless of the shape of the earth, at ground level to chase the sun one full revolution you’d have to be traveling at approximately 1000 MPH for 24 hours. Doable for let’s say some hi-tech blimp I suppose. But now you have to do the same thing in just an hour and a half. On land, to make one full revolution in 90 minutes, you’d have to be going something like 16x faster, or around 16,000 MPH. Rise in altitude, farther to travel, more speed required. Let me know if my math is wrong.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: RonJ on April 22, 2022, 12:12:35 AM
If you want something else to contemplate, then give the following some thought.  The path over the ground of the space station is well known and can be verified by those on the ground.  At any particular time, there is a zenith point where if someone was on the ground at that zenith point the space station would pass directly overhead at a 90-degree angle.  Now you could assume that you could stay in that same location and see the space station pass directly overhead about 90 minutes later.  However, you would be wrong.  On a flat earth map the known path of the zenith points wouldn’t be in a circle.  That would mean that there would have to be a winch on the north pole to constantly adjust the rope length in or out to maintain the known orbit.  Maybe NASA has control of that?  Perhaps Santa is providing the facilities for that equipment?   Perhaps the most well educated flat earther has some additional knowledge that could be passed on to provide us some more interesting insights. 
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 22, 2022, 01:19:01 PM
Regardless of the shape of the earth, at ground level to chase the sun one full revolution you’d have to be traveling at approximately 1000 MPH for 24 hours. Doable for let’s say some hi-tech blimp I suppose. But now you have to do the same thing in just an hour and a half. On land, to make one full revolution in 90 minutes, you’d have to be going something like 16x faster, or around 16,000 MPH. Rise in altitude, farther to travel, more speed required. Let me know if my math is wrong.

Well, I am still researching this so I didn't want to prematurely mention it, but I suspect that there are multiple dirigibles. As they move around some can "go dark" and not be visible. The "space station" is not always visible. Even round-earthers agree that you can't see it in day time. Plus there is no need to fly the dirigibles on cloudy nights. So with only a few windows of opportunity (night time, clear skies, outside of a high-light metropolitan area) mixed with having the right equipment to even see the dirigible there are only a handful of people at any given time who can confirm its existence. This severely limits the times and places where the dirigible needs to appear and with multiple dirigibles the illusion can be easily achieved.

On top of all that, if anyone here were to get the proper equipment, go out into a desolate field on a clear night and look for the "space station" and fail to find it? You would 100% chalk it up to user error. Tell me you wouldn't.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: DuncanDoenitz on April 22, 2022, 01:53:10 PM
No, I wouldn't. 

What ""user error"? Not having the right equipment?  Eyes not working? 

Every time I've looked for it; its been there.  Like the Sun.  Every time.  Anywhere in the world. 

You really need to give this more effort. Cloudy nights?  Like its cloudy everywhere at the same time?  I've even seen it from an airliner. 
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Tumeni on April 22, 2022, 02:33:24 PM
Round-earthers say it’s moving at 17K mph.

... which is entirely consistent with both the stated orbital height, and duration of orbit.

I've seen it twice in an evening, on more than one occasion; each appearance separated by 90 mins or so. Calculate the length of orbit, based on stated speed, height and textbook radius of Earth, and you arrive at an orbital time of around 90 mins.

It's also consistent with the first orbital satellite, Sputnik 1, which was not only seen, but heard, as folks on the ground both watched it and listened to its beep-beep radio transmission. Accounts of what people saw and heard also mention an orbital time of around 90 mins, implying similar speed.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 22, 2022, 03:12:25 PM
Round-earthers say it’s moving at 17K mph.

... which is entirely consistent with both the stated orbital height, and duration of orbit.

I've seen it twice in an evening, on more than one occasion; each appearance separated by 90 mins or so. Calculate the length of orbit, based on stated speed, height and textbook radius of Earth, and you arrive at an orbital time of around 90 mins.

It's also consistent with the first orbital satellite, Sputnik 1, which was not only seen, but heard, as folks on the ground both watched it and listened to its beep-beep radio transmission. Accounts of what people saw and heard also mention an orbital time of around 90 mins, implying similar speed.

How do you know it was the same object? What if they are like busses timed to pass by every 90 min?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Tumeni on April 22, 2022, 04:04:03 PM
How do you know it was the same object? What if ...

The overwhelming preponderence of evidence supporting it, and the total lack of any firm evidence to show that it could be anything else.

Do you have anything in support of your "What if ..." ???
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 22, 2022, 04:10:22 PM
How do you know it was the same object? What if ...

The overwhelming preponderence of evidence supporting it, and the total lack of any firm evidence to show that it could be anything else.

Do you have anything in support of your "What if ..." ???

It would just explain everything in a way that fits neatly with already established flat-earth facts.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: JSS on April 22, 2022, 04:33:39 PM
Well, I am still researching this so I didn't want to prematurely mention it, but I suspect that there are multiple dirigibles. As they move around some can "go dark" and not be visible. The "space station" is not always visible. Even round-earthers agree that you can't see it in day time.

No we do not agree. What is your source on this?

I can see the ISS during a bright and sunny day, I've even taken pictures of it as have many others. This is easily proven.

You can't even make the ISS go dark because it will pass in front of both the Sun and the Moon and be visible no matter how dark you make it. Even painting it with Vanta Black isn't going to help hide it's silhouette.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: SteelyBob on April 22, 2022, 04:50:49 PM
It would just explain everything in a way that fits neatly with already established flat-earth facts.

It doesn't really fit with anything at all, and there aren't any agreed 'facts' in the FE community, other than that the earth is flat. There is no agreement on even basic stuff like the layout of the north and south poles, or the approximate size of the various continents, or the distance between us and the moon or sun.

Your theory is an extension of the 'space travel conspiracy', and fails for numerous reasons, not least of which is the enormous number of people, working in complete secrecy, that would be required to perpetuate the illusion. You can see the ISS with your bare eyes, and you can see its form with very basic equipment - it is clearly not a 'tethered dirigible'. Where is the tether? How is it staying aloft? How does it travel so quickly?

You appear to be just waving around 'it might be x' type sentences, whilst dismissing the most obvious, which is that it might just be a large space station orbiting the earth, precisely as advertised. Is that not less absurd than multiple large tethered dirigibles operated by a team of secret engineers, who never spill the beans, despite the absurdity of their job?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 22, 2022, 07:51:13 PM
Regardless of the shape of the earth, at ground level to chase the sun one full revolution you’d have to be traveling at approximately 1000 MPH for 24 hours. Doable for let’s say some hi-tech blimp I suppose. But now you have to do the same thing in just an hour and a half. On land, to make one full revolution in 90 minutes, you’d have to be going something like 16x faster, or around 16,000 MPH. Rise in altitude, farther to travel, more speed required. Let me know if my math is wrong.

Well, I am still researching this so I didn't want to prematurely mention it, but I suspect that there are multiple dirigibles. As they move around some can "go dark" and not be visible. The "space station" is not always visible. Even round-earthers agree that you can't see it in day time. Plus there is no need to fly the dirigibles on cloudy nights. So with only a few windows of opportunity (night time, clear skies, outside of a high-light metropolitan area) mixed with having the right equipment to even see the dirigible there are only a handful of people at any given time who can confirm its existence. This severely limits the times and places where the dirigible needs to appear and with multiple dirigibles the illusion can be easily achieved.

On top of all that, if anyone here were to get the proper equipment, go out into a desolate field on a clear night and look for the "space station" and fail to find it? You would 100% chalk it up to user error. Tell me you wouldn't.

I took part in a thought experiment over on the other site on how to fake the ISS. We came up with the same thing, multiple identical objects (we came up with "planes", not dirigibles). But we got stumped at how you transition from one to another without being noticed. Along with refueling concerns.

And you can see the ISS, or whatever it is, during the daytime.

(https://i.imgur.com/a4kv472.png)
Using only an eight-inch telescope and a video camera, astronomer Scott Ferguson was able to capture images of the ISS with the docked Atlantis orbiter over an hour after sunrise. His only trick, besides experience in astrophotograpy, was specialized software to predict the position of the space station
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pete Svarrior on April 22, 2022, 08:34:38 PM
I can use specialised software to see much more than a magical space station. Be bold, name what you'd like to see. Specialised software will sort it out.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: GoldCashew on April 22, 2022, 08:52:47 PM
I can use specialised software to see much more than a magical space station. Be bold, name what you'd like to see. Specialised software will sort it out.


With Scott Ferguson's observation, specialized software wasn't used to "see" the ISS. It was used to predict the position of the ISS.

His observation and images of the ISS were taken using an eight-inch telescope and a video camera. There isn't anything of a magical space station (as you put it) or being bold and naming what you'd like to see.   

The magical part I think we are trying to figure out and question is Pongo's theory that the ISS is a dirigible attached with tether(s).
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pete Svarrior on April 22, 2022, 08:54:53 PM
With Scott Ferguson's observation, specialized software wasn't used to "see" the ISS. It was used to predict the position of the ISS.
Prove it.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: DuncanDoenitz on April 22, 2022, 09:04:17 PM
So, surprise, surprise; we're back to the "faked photo" response. 

Any comment on Pongo's dirisible dirigible, Pete?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: SteelyBob on April 22, 2022, 09:47:26 PM
]
Prove it.

It can’t be proved, or at least not with the resources at our immediate disposal, as I’m sure you know.

However, if you, and the other FEers, were really as curious about the world as you claim to be, you could very easily try something similar yourselves, and see if it works.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: GoldCashew on April 22, 2022, 10:02:52 PM
With Scott Ferguson's observation, specialized software wasn't used to "see" the ISS. It was used to predict the position of the ISS.
Prove it.


Why are you asking me to prove it if I sent you that specific proof a couple of days ago?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pete Svarrior on April 22, 2022, 10:13:43 PM
So, surprise, surprise; we're back to the "faked photo" response.
I said nothing of the sort. I simply asked you to prove your assertion. Surely you didn't state something with such great confidence if you didn't have proof?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pongo on April 23, 2022, 12:30:27 AM
I can use specialised software to see much more than a magical space station. Be bold, name what you'd like to see. Specialised software will sort it out.

Can you show me some Moon Shrimp?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: JSS on April 23, 2022, 12:50:18 AM
With Scott Ferguson's observation, specialized software wasn't used to "see" the ISS. It was used to predict the position of the ISS.
Prove it.

https://transit-finder.com/

I have used this specialized software and taken my own pictures of the ISS on many occasions on multiple continents.

If you don't want to take my word for it, you can try it out yourself. The software is free and you can get a small telescope and cell phone adapter for $50 to get a moon transit shot.

The software doesn't have anything to do with the picture itself, you use your own camera for that.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: GoldCashew on April 23, 2022, 01:34:03 AM
Regardless of the shape of the earth, at ground level to chase the sun one full revolution you’d have to be traveling at approximately 1000 MPH for 24 hours. Doable for let’s say some hi-tech blimp I suppose. But now you have to do the same thing in just an hour and a half. On land, to make one full revolution in 90 minutes, you’d have to be going something like 16x faster, or around 16,000 MPH. Rise in altitude, farther to travel, more speed required. Let me know if my math is wrong.

Well, I am still researching this so I didn't want to prematurely mention it, but I suspect that there are multiple dirigibles. As they move around some can "go dark" and not be visible. The "space station" is not always visible. Even round-earthers agree that you can't see it in day time. Plus there is no need to fly the dirigibles on cloudy nights. So with only a few windows of opportunity (night time, clear skies, outside of a high-light metropolitan area) mixed with having the right equipment to even see the dirigible there are only a handful of people at any given time who can confirm its existence. This severely limits the times and places where the dirigible needs to appear and with multiple dirigibles the illusion can be easily achieved.

On top of all that, if anyone here were to get the proper equipment, go out into a desolate field on a clear night and look for the "space station" and fail to find it? You would 100% chalk it up to user error. Tell me you wouldn't.


With respect to your theory of multiple ISS dirigibles and your research that you are currently doing to look into this further, was curious to know of the specific research you are doing.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pete Svarrior on April 23, 2022, 08:20:16 AM
I have used this specialized software and taken my own pictures of the ISS on many occasions on multiple continents.
You misunderstood my point slightly. My contention with stack is that he goes out of his way to Google for images that support his assumptions and posts them as if they were authoritative evidence.

The answer here isn't for me to do his work for him. That just lets him carry on being an intellectual slob.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: JSS on April 23, 2022, 01:01:14 PM
I have used this specialized software and taken my own pictures of the ISS on many occasions on multiple continents.
You misunderstood my point slightly. My contention with stack is that he goes out of his way to Google for images that support his assumptions and posts them as if they were authoritative evidence.

The answer here isn't for me to do his work for him. That just lets him carry on being an intellectual slob.

I would guess that Stack evaluates the images he posts the same way anyone researching would.  He didn't just post a random uncredited picture he found, it was from a well known and respected source, one that matched hundreds of other images and sources, the software mentioned he could evaluate himself, and likely match his own observations and make new ones.

Simply asking "Prove it" is unhelpful as you could reply with that to any post on any subject, and repeat endlessly for any answer given.  After all it's impossible to prove anything, except when using pure formal logic such as math.

If you have a doubt about the authenticity of his image, perhaps you could elaborate on your reasons and evidence instead.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: RonJ on April 23, 2022, 02:38:30 PM
Saying ‘prove it’ is a totally disingenuous answer because there are no stated ‘proof’ standards.  How can someone prove something without having acceptable procedures or standards?  Start with clearly defined standards in advance, then design a carefully documented experiment to lead the observers to a logical conclusion.  All the flat earth community would have to do is come up with VERIFIBLE alternatives in response to the round earth extensively verified observations. 
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 23, 2022, 03:36:19 PM
I have used this specialized software and taken my own pictures of the ISS on many occasions on multiple continents.
You misunderstood my point slightly. My contention with stack is that he goes out of his way to Google for images that support his assumptions and posts them as if they were authoritative evidence.

Kinda sounds like you're describing the wiki.

The answer here isn't for me to do his work for him. That just lets him carry on being an intellectual slob.

What sort of "proof" are you looking for? A sworn affidavit from Scott Ferguson?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pete Svarrior on April 23, 2022, 09:08:23 PM
He didn't just post a random uncredited picture he found
But he did exactly that. He posted an image with no source (other than imgur, I guess) and made a bunch of empty assertions about it. That you mistake these assertions for a citation is very telling.

the software mentioned he could evaluate himself, and likely match his own observations and make new ones.
Excellent standards of inquiry, I'm impressed. You personally think that something is "likely", therefore it no longer merits scrutiny.

After all it's impossible to prove anything, except when using pure formal logic such as math.
But of course! Nothing is provable, nothing ever requires evidence! We should just state any old shit as fact and demand that others accept it, that'll get us places!

You don't think before you speak, do you?

Kinda sounds like you're describing the wiki.
You will stop shitposting in the upper fora, with immediate effect. The only question is whether you will do so by choice.

What sort of "proof" are you looking for?
My brother in Christ, this is literally your argument. It's up to you to evidence it, not me.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on April 23, 2022, 11:39:29 PM
He didn't just post a random uncredited picture he found
But he did exactly that. He posted an image with no source (other than imgur, I guess) and made a bunch of empty assertions about it. That you mistake these assertions for a citation is very telling.

Yes, very sloppy of me, I should have cited the image. Here's the proof, evidence I think you're looking for, from Discovery Magazine:

ISS and Atlantis seen in broad daylight! (https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/iss-and-atlantis-seen-in-broad-daylight)

This is pretty amazing: on Sunday, July 17, amateur astronomer Scott Ferguson was able to get video of the Orbiter Atlantis docked to the International Space Station when they passed overhead in broad daylight!

The still I posted was a screengrab from Mr. Ferguson's video:

https://youtu.be/AgoVGWazev8
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Pete Svarrior on April 24, 2022, 08:05:29 AM
Here's the proof, evidence I think you're looking for, from Discovery Magazine
Yup, that's much better.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on April 30, 2022, 01:44:56 PM
While we are here, the first fully private trip to the ISS has just returned home.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-10750677/First-space-tourists-visit-ISS-heading-home-bad-weather-delayed-return-journey.html

Another avenue for investigation
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on August 19, 2022, 09:55:27 AM
https://metro.co.uk/2022/08/18/girl-8-makes-contact-with-iss-using-dads-ham-radio-and-gets-a-response-17207079/

Have any FE people tried contacting the ISS? An avenue for investigation.
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: J-Man on September 21, 2022, 04:22:27 PM
He didn't just post a random uncredited picture he found
But he did exactly that. He posted an image with no source (other than imgur, I guess) and made a bunch of empty assertions about it. That you mistake these assertions for a citation is very telling.

Yes, very sloppy of me, I should have cited the image. Here's the proof, evidence I think you're looking for, from Discovery Magazine:

ISS and Atlantis seen in broad daylight! (https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/iss-and-atlantis-seen-in-broad-daylight)

This is pretty amazing: on Sunday, July 17, amateur astronomer Scott Ferguson was able to get video of the Orbiter Atlantis docked to the International Space Station when they passed overhead in broad daylight!

The still I posted was a screengrab from Mr. Ferguson's video:

https://youtu.be/AgoVGWazev8

You really shouldn't post up stuff like that. Soooo photo shop BS
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: Tumeni on September 21, 2022, 04:35:17 PM
photo shop BS

How did you establish that?
Title: Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
Post by: stack on September 21, 2022, 07:08:20 PM
He didn't just post a random uncredited picture he found
But he did exactly that. He posted an image with no source (other than imgur, I guess) and made a bunch of empty assertions about it. That you mistake these assertions for a citation is very telling.

Yes, very sloppy of me, I should have cited the image. Here's the proof, evidence I think you're looking for, from Discovery Magazine:

ISS and Atlantis seen in broad daylight! (https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/iss-and-atlantis-seen-in-broad-daylight)

This is pretty amazing: on Sunday, July 17, amateur astronomer Scott Ferguson was able to get video of the Orbiter Atlantis docked to the International Space Station when they passed overhead in broad daylight!

The still I posted was a screengrab from Mr. Ferguson's video:

https://youtu.be/AgoVGWazev8

You really shouldn't post up stuff like that. Soooo photo shop BS

Anybody who is anyone would know that you wouldn't use photoshop to fake that video. More like AE.