#### Tumeni

• 3179
##### Is there more than one ISS? Does the ISS provide evidence to support the globe?
« on: June 30, 2018, 10:57:45 AM »
I've seen the ISS, on more than one occasion, cross my sky twice in the same evening.
Who says you saw the same vehicle?

I do, because it appeared exactly as predicted for a single vehicle, both for me, and for everybody else who looked for it those nights from other locations. Nobody saw any occurrence of it outwith this predicted timetable for a single craft. Otherwise, someone, somewhere would have reported it.

You saw TWO instances of a machine pass overhead. Why do you make the immediate inference they must be the same machine?

Because the predicted timetable is based on such. Because all the other data and documentation states as such. Because, if there were more than one, people would see one or more at different times from different places, and nobody has done so.

If I saw a train go past me on the platform at my local train station, and then another identical one go past 10 mins later in the same direction, I wouldn't leap to the conclusion it was the same train. I'd assume it was two trains run by the same company with the same paint job on them.

... but if that were the case, a train spotter at another station would note the one that's not passing your station go past at another station. But all the observations of the ISS occur in a serial fashion. If the only observations you and all the other trainspotters had were of one train passing them by, exactly at the time expected for one train, and each followed each other in a sequential timeline following the direction of track and sequence of stations, you would conclude there's only one train.

If the same happened again in 90 minutes, you could only conclude that -A  there's a track leading back in the opposite direction to get back to the start point before your first station (in which case someone would have to see the train going the other way - which never happens with the ISS), or -B  the train track must go around a sphere to return it to the start point.

What other conclusion is there? Matter transference, with a Star Trek-style transporter? Please don't suggest we google that to see .....

It did so exactly as predicted for me by in-the-sky.org,
My regional train company does that with trains.

100% of the time? Really? No breakdowns, no stoppages due to weather, absolutely NO changes in the timetable for years?

it went into Earth's shadow as predicted by the app, and went in the same direction each time. It shows no deviation from wind, weather or such, it shows no vapour, propellant or other trail behind it.
Again, how do you know what type of propulsion secret military aircraft use?

I don't. But I suggest it's impossible to have had a secret military aircraft in the air, 24/7/365, for this period of time. I also suggest you have NOTHING to actually reinforce this suggestion. No observations, no data.

I know that planes cannot cross my sky at one time, then cross my sky again in the same direction, 90 mins later, without doing one of two things
A- going around our planet in 90mins at approx 17k mph (Mach 16+), or
B- changing direction to go back to the starting point in my sky.
Or C, its not the exact same aircraft.

Again, that does not fit with the observations. The predicted timeline shows one craft. Nobody every sees another craft outwith the timeline. It's impossible to have more than one and have both fit a timeline based on one.

They're not putting on a display specifically for me, they don't know where I am when observing, so we have to rule out option B.   Else, how would they know when to turn?
Why would they turn? Fly straight, get from edge to edge. Fly a different route home, pretending to be any other 'satellite' on a different 'orbit' (route) going a different direction.

How can you fly a different route to get back to a starting point without turning? The only way to keep going straight, and get back to the same part of someone's sky is to go around a globe. Anything else involves a turn, and deviation away from the predicted path and timeline.

Also, other observers are seeing the ISS go in the same direction, nobody sees it change direction, nobody sees it go East - West, so we can further rule out B from that.
How do you even know what you are seeing? If I projected a hologram onto a glass-like firmament, you'd see whatever shape I decided to put there. This is even easier than multiple vehicles. I just point a powerful light source at the firmament and you'll see whatever I show you. And I can turn the light off whenever I want a 'shadow of the earth'.

I'm not the only one seeing it. Forget the "what if", and face up to it. Nobody is projecting a travelling hologram onto anything from different parts of a flat earth, in order to simulate a single craft going around a globe, such that every single observer on Earth, regardless of where they are, sees something that fits exactly with the timeline of such a craft.

Again, how would the pilot know when to turn, such that they were out of sight for the observer / all observers, and able to turn back to the starting point?
Pilot? We live in an age of UAVs. Why the hell would I want a pilot? He needs life support, oxygen, warmth, pressurisation, instrumentation, knobs and dials, ejection facilities ... he's a pain in the backside. I'm going to replace him with a pentium processor.

Good for you. Got any actual evidence that anyone is doing this? You still can't provide a realistic scenario to get the craft to go between end point and start point of my first personal observation, in order to set up the second, without it either changing direction (and being seen in a non-congruent path by others) or going around the globe

The only sensible option is A.
Or C ... multiple UAVs ... or better yet, D ... holographic projection.

C doesn't fit, as stated above. D is just idle speculation to conjure a counter-argument

You're just speculating - maybe a plane could do this, maybe that. Have you any proof that a plane is actually doing this?
You're just speculating that you are being told the truth.

No, I'm watching in person and basing my argument on the empirical observations that I and others have made.
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

#### Dr David Thork

• 5188
• https://onlyfans.com/thork
##### Re: Is there more than one ISS? Does the ISS provide evidence to support the globe?
« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2018, 05:17:13 PM »
You have watched the ISS travel all the way around the world.

At no point does it disappear from view, you have followed it right around the earth ... earth confirmed round. Thank you.

Now we've cleared that up, would you care to tell me what type of car you have? I would also like one that does 22,000 mph.
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

#### Tumeni

• 3179
##### Re: Is there more than one ISS? Does the ISS provide evidence to support the globe?
« Reply #2 on: July 04, 2018, 02:29:37 PM »
You have watched the ISS travel all the way around the world. At no point does it disappear from view, you have followed it right around the earth ... earth confirmed round. Thank you.

No, I did not see it go all the way around the Earth. However, lots of people watched it the same night that I did. I wasn't the only one, worldwide, watching it. Nobody saw it do anything other than follow a path which would take it around the globe, exactly on schedule, always in one direction, at consistent speed, in line with its predicted motion.

No, I don't have the names of everybody who did this on that night, but the probability of me being the only ISS observer worldwide at that time is so small as to be ridiculous.

As the previous poster (now deleted) said, has anyone seen the Sun go around the world at a distance of (say) 3000 miles up, all the way round? Shoulda kept a screen print.
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

#### Dr David Thork

• 5188
• https://onlyfans.com/thork
##### Re: Is there more than one ISS? Does the ISS provide evidence to support the globe?
« Reply #3 on: July 04, 2018, 07:53:59 PM »
For the logically impaired ... when my objection is that you can't verify it is the same machine and it is more probable to be two or more machines passing as trains would a station, don't reply with
No, I'm watching in person and basing my argument on the empirical observations ...
This implies you understood my objection and have watched the thing travel right round the earth yourself.

No, I did not see it go all the way around the Earth.
I realised that. So how do you know it is the same machine?

However, lots of people watched it the same night that I did.
Watched it, or watched them?

I wasn't the only one, worldwide, watching it.
Or them.

Nobody saw it do anything other than follow a path which would take it around the globe, exactly on schedule, always in one direction, at consistent speed, in line with its predicted motion.
Nor would people in the stations. They'd all just see the same type of train. Are you and your ISS watching bretheren coordinated into a line and covering places like the middle of the ocean where it would be obvious. And how do you know when you are told the vehicle is in the shadow of the earth, that they didn't just turn the lights off, and do the swap at that very obvious point, when no one is expecting to see it?

No, I don't have the names of everybody who did this on that night, but the probability of me being the only ISS observer worldwide at that time is so small as to be ridiculous.
How many people were watching it whilst it is in the 'shadow of the earth'?

As the previous poster (now deleted) said, has anyone seen the Sun go around the world at a distance of (say) 3000 miles up, all the way round? Shoulda kept a screen print.
It would be very hard to land and relaunch a celestial body every 12 hours. A machine, not so much.
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1