Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Tumeni

Pages: < Back  1 ... 63 64 [65] 66 67 ... 83  Next >
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Common sense?
« on: April 29, 2018, 08:47:42 PM »
What makes you think that groups like this are entirely different people?

Do you have any evidence that they are NOT 'different people'?

Furthermore, even if they were different people, what makes you think that they are not just creating an easy interface which tells the user where to point, based on a lower layer api or data source from NASA on where they say to point?

Furthermore, do you have any evidence of such an interface actually being used?

Given that most of the satellites already in orbit, and those upcoming this year, are NOT NASA craft, why's it still all about NASA?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Common sense?
« on: April 29, 2018, 08:44:50 PM »
I fee like a lot of my time is being wasted.

Boo Hoo ....

Why don't you guys come up with something that truly cannot be refuted and post a thread about it, instead of trying to engage me with a hundred different subjects and fallacious appeals.

All anyone has done is respond to your baseless assertions after you wandered into the thread.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Common sense?
« on: April 29, 2018, 08:41:22 PM »
That is not a demonstration that all of the satellites can be seen.

Nobody claimed it was. It's a demonstration of their telescope tracking (some) orbital satellites, and of the telescope switching between satellites.

We have no idea how big those satellites are or what time of the day it is in that video.

So what?

It is not true that you can just point your telescope up into the sky and see the ISS or any satellite when they are overhead.

It is true. Plane Wave Media are demonstrating it in their video. That's not their only video, look at the rest on their channel

This video is insufficient as evidence that they can all be seen at all times of the night when they are in the sky.

Nobody claimed that, anyway

Clearly they are selecting carefully selected targets.

So what?

Look at NASA's website for how long the ISS appears in the sky: a very short amount of time near the edges of night.

So what? They're not tracking the ISS

A small prick of light does not lead to the direct conclusion that it is in orbit around a globe earth.

The video shows the output from the telescope - the orbital satellite being tracked, with stars rapidly flashing across the background, whilst the tracked satellite remains in centre frame. It shows the telescope in motion as it tracks and switches targets. There's a star field, which shows which constellation it is pointed at, and there's a data window pertaining to the satellite being tracked, along with other data.

What possible motive would there be to fake this? What could the tracked object be, other than a satellite? 

They're different from these guys, who use laser ranging to track satellite trajectories

And what are the results of such experiments?

Look deeper at their website. Take more than the few minutes since I posted here. There's a LOT of data to find there. Take your time. Read. Think.

And they're different from this guy, who tracked the SpaceX Falcon Heavy/Tesla mission

He tracked the rocket stages as they ejected? Super. No one said the rockets were fake.

So you accept that he tracked the stage 2 rocket as claimed, out beyond the Moon?

And dishpointer is a UK company who make their money from software development

They developed the satellite finding software and gave it away for free? Doesn't sound like good business to me.

Yes, they're a software house based in the UK. Not affiliated to NASA. That was my point, not the range of their products.

Your assertion was that they're all connected to NASA, so I'm showing you a range of folks who are not.

Flat Earth Media / Re: Best Flat Earth Video's
« on: April 29, 2018, 08:27:58 PM »
It takes only a little more processing to smooth precipitation out into whites and greys.

Again, do you have any proof of this being done in the context of the video we're talking about?

Or are you just speculating that it COULD be done?

The government gave them billions of dollars. Why wouldn't they at least put on a rocket show?

Because it won't, as was claimed above, be a means to "embezzle money".

And because every space agency is judged by results. 

Flat Earth Media / Re: Best Flat Earth Video's
« on: April 29, 2018, 08:09:32 PM »
Look into how Doppler Radar creates top down images from ground based radar.

Can you prove beyond all reasonable doubt that this was used either for the SpaceX Tesla mission, or for the Himawari imagery?

Flat Earth Media / Re: Best Flat Earth Video's
« on: April 29, 2018, 06:47:02 PM »
Radar passes through the clouds face on. The top down cloud imagery is generated with algorithms. The same way it is done with regular weather radar.

And you have cast-iron proof of this being done, have you?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Common sense?
« on: April 29, 2018, 06:41:31 PM »
You will have to show that all of the communication satellites can be seen with a telescope.

There's a good few hundred of them. Would you settle for a subset, for the sake of brevity?

As far as I'm aware,

Your unawareness is no proof of anything

the smaller ones are not seen.

Wrong. See below

And if they were seen, it does not follow that a small prick of light is a "satellite" in an orbit around a globe earth.

Yet everyone who tracks them does so on the basis that they are in orbit.

Here, these guys make telescopes with automatic tracking software.

They're different from these guys, who use laser ranging to track satellite trajectories

And they're different from this guy, who tracked the SpaceX Falcon Heavy/Tesla mission

And dishpointer is a UK company who make their money from software development

Flat Earth Media / Re: Best Flat Earth Video's
« on: April 29, 2018, 05:31:15 PM »
the information could come from weather balloons, weather radar stations, weather monitoring buoys, etc, all of which exist in abundance.

It couldn't. These don't get high enough to get the full-face pictures that Himawari gives us.

The SpaceX craft was in an elliptical orbit, and therefore the perspective on the clouds varies according to orbital height and position. The craft moved in relation to the Earth, Himawari didn't. This can all be seen and accounted for by comparison between the two.

Flat Earth Media / Re: Best Flat Earth Video's
« on: April 29, 2018, 05:25:42 PM »
I am not saying that anyone used phony clouds.

You've got an exceedingly peculiar way of phrasing your posts, then.

Did you even watch the video that YOU posted?

I authored that video I posted.

"The author is trying to show that the SpaceX video is legitimate because the cloud patterns from that video are the same as cloud patterns in other sources."


"The author is assuming that if it was illegitimate the cloud patterns would be phony."

No, I don't think I'm 'assuming' that at all. My premise is that the SpaceX and Himawari imagery is absolutely legitimate.

I'm not concerned with how, why, or whatever would apply IF it was illegitimate. 

There is no reason for the cloud patterns to be phony in such a hoax because meteorological services provide a cloud layer, which we see when the weather man overlays the clouds on different images.

Again, you've got a weird, backwards, convoluted way of phrasing this. It's not a hoax. The cloud patterns are not phony.

Flat Earth Media / Re: Best Flat Earth Video's
« on: April 29, 2018, 04:07:17 PM »
... why would they just make up cloud patterns for such a hoax when meteorological services provide a cloud layer, which you have seen when the local weather man overlays the clouds on an image of his choosing?

You're proceeding on the basis that SpaceX have either "used phony clouds" or have "(made) up cloud patterns for such a hoax", without proof of either. Where's your proof of either "phoney" or "making up" ?

Flat Earth Media / Re: Best Flat Earth Video's
« on: April 29, 2018, 02:55:58 PM »
Why would they use totally phony clouds when the NOAA and other sources provides weather data and a cloud layer with weather monitoring services? Even the local weather man can overlay a cloud layer over an image. Why can't SpaceX/NASA?

Prove to us that they are "phony clouds".

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Space travel conspiracy
« on: April 29, 2018, 02:46:09 PM »
It's hard taking evidence like this seriously that is devoid of any facts and just relies on opinions.

Not to mention some of the links to sources on the page are no longer available.

Exactly. The "hostile environment of the moon's surface" was a vacuum, nothing else.

Here's the pressure vessel viewed toward the top of the vehicle, showing the docking hatch which connected to the Command Module, and the rectangular window for viewing the docking aid. The windows and hatch used for entry and exit on the Moon are hidden, and are to the top of the assembly.

( )

Here's the view from the rear once most/all of the ancillary 'stuff' has been bolted onto the side of the pressure vessel. This includes various tanks, and the electrical/system panel (to the left in this photo). The CM hatch is to the top, and lunar hatch hidden to the right.


The ancillaries did not need to be pressurised, just needed a basic covering. There was no wind, weather, or other atmospherics to cope with.

As you can see, we have pictures noID-05 and noID-16 here - change the URL manually in your browser bar, and you can see a host
of others, from 02 to nn.

02 shows the intermediate stage of foil wrap
03 shows a tech working on the rear section, with CM hatch to the top
04 shows the descent stage
05 is referenced above
06 shows the descent stage from below
07 shows the ascent and descent stages together
08 shows both stages from the side, lunar hatch to the right
09 shows ascent stage with lunar hatch to front right
10 shows ascent stage with lunar hatch to the front, and some ancillaries attached
11 shows ascent stage from below with lunar hatch front left
12 shows ascent and descent stage with some ancillaries
13 shows 'naked' ascent and descent stages
14 shows descent stage
15 shows descent stage
16 is referenced above
17 shows transport of LM
18 shows rear of ascent stage with ancillaries, especially the electrical panel
19 shows the ascent stage with lunar hatch to the front
20 shows ascent stage from rear left with ancillaries
21 shows descent stage
22 shows transport of LM
23 shows ascent stage with ancillaries, lunar hatch front right
24 shows the fairing to go around the LM on the Saturn V
25 shows an almost-complete ascent stage, lunar hatch to the left
26 shows the pressure vessel atop the descent stage skeleton
27 shows almost-complete ascent and descent stage from the rear
28 shows almost-complete ascent and descent stage from the side, lunar hatch to the left


Flat Earth Theory / Re: Space travel conspiracy
« on: April 29, 2018, 02:14:15 PM »
The evidence for the 'conspiracy' comes under five headings;
2.1   Project Apollo
2.2   Mars Missions
2.3   Cassini Saturn Mission
2.4   International Space Station
2.5   Chinese Space Hoax

Contributions by SpaceX, India, Russia/Soviet Union, Europe, and others are apparently ignored, even though Russia notched up the first;

Orbital satellite
Animal in space
Man and woman in space ...

It also seems to focus on NASA, but the next dozen launches, according to, are;

United Launch Alliance for NASA
New Zealand (Rocket Lab Electron)
SpaceX for Iridium
Orbital ATK Antares for NASA
SpaceX for SES of Luxembourg
SpaceX Falcon for Telesat of Canada
India GSAT 29 communications satellite
Russian Soyuz crewed mission to ISS

Not a lot of NASA in there....

Since we're talking about signatures;

"I am a typical GENIUS girl who does NOT follow the masses and who does NOT blindly accept what is told to me without EVIDENCE"

I'll bet, in your daily life, you take hundreds of things at face value, with no expectation of evidence, and don't give them a second thought. 

You're just cherry-picking the flat-earth vs. globe-earth argument out of all this for the sake of the argument. 

Flat Earth Media / Re: Best Flat Earth Video's
« on: April 29, 2018, 08:46:25 AM »
Proof that there was, and still is, a car in space, by comparison with weather satellite imagery

Now, space agencies are used to embezzle money from tax payers for very powerful and greedy individuals. It's about greed for money.

... and they do this by building big-ass rockets, and launching them every few days with no purpose, with huge numbers of support staff, massive launch sites, huge assembly buildings, all to make money ???

Seems like a cast-iron certainty to lose money, that does.

How do you make a profit from throwing stuff away (I'm assuming you follow the standard Team Hoax line of "All rockets level out and crash into the sea", with its typical American perspective, casually disregarding those that launch from Baikonour and such ...) ?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Observation of the ISS
« on: April 29, 2018, 08:04:38 AM »
A balloon of some sort. What makes you think it's a heavier-than-air object?

The fact that it doesn't behave like a balloon?

It turns up, on time, with a regularity that shames any kind of public transport system; exactly where expected, exactly when expected, never late, never early, never missing.

It can sometimes be seen twice in one evening, and I have observed it personally thus. Each appearance separated by exactly the stated orbit time. Both times, it appeared from the same horizon, and travelled toward the same, opposite horizon. It clearly didn't change direction to go back for the second pass, else I or someone else would have seen it moving in the 'wrong' direction.

As was stated above, you can receive radio transmissions from it.

It's been photographed numerous times from Earth's surface, and it does not have the shape of a balloon.

You can calculate its speed from the ground, using simple trigonometry. School children do this for science projects. The results are inconsistent with it being a balloon.



Round earthers take cheap shots and gang up on us that it becomes too tedious and time-consuming to continue the debates.

Ah, there it is AGAIN. The "I don't have the time for this", or "I'm bored with this conversation" get-out clause.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Horizon is Always at Eye Level
« on: April 29, 2018, 07:53:45 AM »
We have no idea about all of the details of your experiment. What brand of tools and what methods were done to ensure accuracy?

We have no idea about details of experiments, info on brand of tools and methods in ENaG, beyond the word 'clinometer'.

Pages: < Back  1 ... 63 64 [65] 66 67 ... 83  Next >