*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11942
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Satellites
« Reply #160 on: March 19, 2014, 10:03:14 AM »
Meanwhile, we know that satellites provide us with communications, and have done for many years.
You have yet to substantiate that.

Why is it that RE'ers are obligated to show why FET doesn't work but FE'ers aren't obligated show why FET does work?  Seriously, how can Inquisitive properly refute Thork's ionospheric skip proposal when Thork did not provide a workable proposal to refute?
He can't, and I'm not asking for that. I'm asking that he substantiates his own claims. Thork at least made a sloppy attempt.
What claims have I made that need substantiating?
I've done a pretty good job when it comes to quoting the claims while making requests. In fact, the very post you've quoted features two of those. I made them bold and pink for your convenience.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 10:05:49 AM by pizaaplanet »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Re: Satellites
« Reply #161 on: March 19, 2014, 10:07:44 AM »
Meanwhile, we know that satellites provide us with communications, and have done for many years.
You have yet to substantiate that.

Why is it that RE'ers are obligated to show why FET doesn't work but FE'ers aren't obligated show why FET does work?  Seriously, how can Inquisitive properly refute Thork's ionospheric skip proposal when Thork did not provide a workable proposal to refute?
He can't, and I'm not asking for that. I'm asking that he substantiates his own claims. Thork at least made a sloppy attempt.
What claims have I made that need substantiating?
I've done a pretty good job when it comes to quoting the claims while making requests. In fact, the very post you've quoted features two of those. I made them bold and pink for your convenience.
Do you really doubt that satellites exist?  What do dishes point at, measure the angles to find the source.  Talk to people in the industry.

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11942
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Satellites
« Reply #162 on: March 19, 2014, 10:13:10 AM »
Do you really doubt that satellites exist?  What do dishes point at, measure the angles to find the source.  Talk to people in the industry.
Why, why, why are you so reluctant to just back your claim up? Two can play that game, you know.

*ahem*

The Earth is hollow and we've known that for ages. Just look at satellite dishes, measure where they point. Talk to people in tinfoil hats. Also, your claims about satellites are untrue because of simple maths and set theory. Simple physics tells us that you must be wrong. Please explain how satellites have enough fuel to keep flying around the Earth.

This is what your posts look like. They include empty claims with no substantiation at all, pretend to refer to "basic" and "simple" stuff (but never in any specific way), and claim that others said what they didn't say. Do you understand how worthless that is in a discussion?
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Re: Satellites
« Reply #163 on: March 19, 2014, 10:16:12 AM »
Do you really doubt that satellites exist?  What do dishes point at, measure the angles to find the source.  Talk to people in the industry.
Why, why, why are you so reluctant to just back your claim up? Two can play that game, you know.

*ahem*

The Earth is hollow and we've known that for ages. Just look at satellite dishes, measure where they point. Talk to people in tinfoil hats. Also, your claims about satellites are untrue because of simple maths and set theory. Simple physics tells us that you must be wrong. Please explain how satellites have enough fuel to keep flying around the Earth.

This is what your posts look like. They include empty claims with no substantiation at all, pretend to refer to "basic" and "simple" stuff (but never in any specific way), and claim that others said what they didn't say. Do you understand how worthless that is in a discussion?
So what would back up the claim or facts from millions who understand how they work, plus those who design and build them, are they wrong?

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11942
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Satellites
« Reply #164 on: March 19, 2014, 10:24:06 AM »
So what would back up the claim or facts from millions who understand how they work, plus those who design and build them, are they wrong?
Perhaps Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement will be of some use to you.



Currently, you alternate between "responding to tone" and "contradiction", introducing an occasional straw man along the way. For people to start taking you seriously, you'd have to bump it up to "counterargument" or "refuation".

Very importantly, saying "millions of people believe/know it" is not a valid argument in this case. It's a common logical fallacy known as argumentum ad populum. The popularity of an idea does not say anything about its truth value.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Re: Satellites
« Reply #165 on: March 19, 2014, 10:28:43 AM »
The existance of satellutes is not an idea, it is fact.

How does your satellite tv service work?

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11942
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Satellites
« Reply #166 on: March 19, 2014, 10:31:50 AM »
The existance of satellutes is not an idea, it is fact.
Then it should be very easy to prove, and I encourage you to do so.

How does your satellite tv service work?
Not much can be said about that, given that my satellite TV service doesn't exist.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Re: Satellites
« Reply #167 on: March 19, 2014, 10:49:00 AM »
The existance of satellutes is not an idea, it is fact.
Then it should be very easy to prove, and I encourage you to do so.

How does your satellite tv service work?
Not much can be said about that, given that my satellite TV service doesn't exist.
I suggest you refer to documents published by members of respected professional institutions and other organisations.  You could also contact the many companies in the industry to understand their products.

Have you seen how GPS works, which shows both US and Russian satellites?

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11942
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Satellites
« Reply #168 on: March 19, 2014, 10:57:30 AM »
I give up. There's no point in trying to teach you proper debate if you're not willing to even try. Off to the ignore list you go.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Re: Satellites
« Reply #169 on: March 19, 2014, 11:37:51 AM »
I give up. There's no point in trying to teach you proper debate if you're not willing to even try. Off to the ignore list you go.
There is not a lot to debate, nobody has explained an alternative.

Clearly GPS works according to all published documentation.  I see they will be using GPS to establish the location of possible plane wreakage 1500 miles from Australia.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2014, 09:07:36 AM by inquisitive »

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7237
    • View Profile
Re: Satellites
« Reply #170 on: March 21, 2014, 03:13:45 AM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN

/thread

Next idiot RE'er, please.

*

Offline markjo

  • Purgatory
  • *
  • Posts: 4739
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Satellites
« Reply #171 on: March 21, 2014, 12:24:07 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN

/thread

Next idiot RE'er, please.
Are you saying that LORAN works according to the published GPS documentation?  ???
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline pilot172

  • *
  • Posts: 84
  • Thunder down under
    • View Profile
Re: Satellites
« Reply #172 on: April 10, 2014, 11:53:38 AM »
for that part about how the satellites keep running well have you ever done the thing where you swing a bucket fall of water around and the water stays in the bucket instead of falling out, well its sort of like that concept but replicated with space. oh and you should all play kerbal space program gives you a great idea on how round earth theory works
1 in 10 suicides apparently could be stopped if someone smiled or made the person happy for a minute so its my goal in life to make as many people as happy as possible...also QUEENSLANDER!!!!

*

Offline pilot172

  • *
  • Posts: 84
  • Thunder down under
    • View Profile
Re: Satellites
« Reply #173 on: April 10, 2014, 12:20:06 PM »
oh and 10 countries have launched space capable rockets with another 8 more on the way. So you FEers are saying every single official in those countries have lied, even one such as the soviet union, the esa, iran, uk, china, America, and others. You know they based icbms off space flight as well can you explain how they would work if they cant orbit
1 in 10 suicides apparently could be stopped if someone smiled or made the person happy for a minute so its my goal in life to make as many people as happy as possible...also QUEENSLANDER!!!!

*

Offline Tau

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 911
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: Satellites
« Reply #174 on: April 10, 2014, 03:32:32 PM »
oh and 10 countries have launched space capable rockets with another 8 more on the way. So you FEers are saying every single official in those countries have lied, even one such as the soviet union, the esa, iran, uk, china, America, and others. You know they based icbms off space flight as well can you explain how they would work if they cant orbit

How many times have ICBMs been used in reality? Besides that, there are phenomena in FET which behave similarly to RET orbit. I can expand more on that if you wish.

for that part about how the satellites keep running well have you ever done the thing where you swing a bucket fall of water around and the water stays in the bucket instead of falling out, well its sort of like that concept but replicated with space. oh and you should all play kerbal space program gives you a great idea on how round earth theory works

Everyone here is aware of how RET works. Probably moreso than you are. We're quite well-versed in the subject. This is why we choose not to believe in it.

Also, centripetal force has nothing to do with RET orbit. Orbit is pure gravity. Centripetal force is more or less irrelevant.
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ

*

Offline markjo

  • Purgatory
  • *
  • Posts: 4739
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Satellites
« Reply #175 on: April 10, 2014, 04:26:42 PM »
How many times have ICBMs been used in reality?
Russia just used one about a month or so ago.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-test-fires-icbm-amid-tension-over-ukraine/
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline pilot172

  • *
  • Posts: 84
  • Thunder down under
    • View Profile
Re: Satellites
« Reply #176 on: April 11, 2014, 12:18:05 PM »
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Titan_II_launch.jpg/220px-Titan_II_launch.jpghttp://
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Peacekeeper-missile-testing.jpg/220px-Peacekeeper-missile-testing.jpg theres two photos of icbms in use a peacekeeper re-entry with mirvs and a titan II

and heres a link to a photo of all the countries that can launch satellites not just nasa and it includes ones like north korea and the soviet union and china which would never cooperate with America they would rather expose the hoaxes http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/Orbital_Launches.svg/800px-Orbital_Launches.svg.png
« Last Edit: April 11, 2014, 01:09:11 PM by pilot172 »
1 in 10 suicides apparently could be stopped if someone smiled or made the person happy for a minute so its my goal in life to make as many people as happy as possible...also QUEENSLANDER!!!!

*

Offline Tau

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 911
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: Satellites
« Reply #177 on: April 11, 2014, 05:37:21 PM »
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Titan_II_launch.jpg/220px-Titan_II_launch.jpghttp://
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Peacekeeper-missile-testing.jpg/220px-Peacekeeper-missile-testing.jpg theres two photos of icbms in use a peacekeeper re-entry with mirvs and a titan II

and heres a link to a photo of all the countries that can launch satellites not just nasa and it includes ones like north korea and the soviet union and china which would never cooperate with America they would rather expose the hoaxes http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/Orbital_Launches.svg/800px-Orbital_Launches.svg.png

None of what you've said contradicts FET in any way. I suggest reading through the Wiki.
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 6664
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Satellites
« Reply #178 on: April 11, 2014, 07:10:55 PM »
There is essentially nothing in the wiki on the topic of space travel or satellites.  There are only two sentences on Space Tourism.

*

Offline pilot172

  • *
  • Posts: 84
  • Thunder down under
    • View Profile
Re: Satellites
« Reply #179 on: April 11, 2014, 09:15:03 PM »
well the wiki says nobody has entered space, are you saying the soviet union and America who would of rather started a nuclear war then work together made an agreement to fake everything they did and not expose the other. look at the list below, they are all countries that have made it to space are you saying every one of those launches were fake, theres over 2000 satellites from over 50 countries in orbit are you saying all those are fake.

1  Soviet Union[c] Sputnik 1 Sputnik-PS Baikonur, Soviet Union (today Kazakhstan) 4 October 1957
2  United States[d] Explorer 1 Juno I Cape Canaveral, United States 1 February 1958
3  France[f] Astérix Diamant A Hammaguir, Algeria 26 November 1965
4  Japan Ōsumi Lambda-4S Uchinoura, Japan 11 February 1970
5  China Dong Fang Hong I Long March 1 Jiuquan, China 24 April 1970
6  United Kingdom[g] Prospero Black Arrow Woomera, Australia 28 October 1971
— European Space Agency[h] CAT-1 Ariane 1 Kourou, French Guiana 24 December 1979
7  India Rohini D1 SLV Sriharikota, India 18 July 1980
8  Israel Ofeq 1 Shavit Palmachim, Israel 19 September 1988
—  Ukraine[c] Strela-3 (x6, Russian) Tsyklon-3 Plesetsk, Russia 28 September 1991
—  Russia[c] Kosmos 2175 Soyuz-U Plesetsk, Russia 21 January 1992
9  Iran [j] Omid Safir-1A Semnan, Iran 2 February 2009
10  North Korea Kwangmyŏngsŏng-3 Unit 2 Unha-3 Sohae, North Korea 12 December 2012
« Last Edit: April 11, 2014, 09:22:16 PM by pilot172 »
1 in 10 suicides apparently could be stopped if someone smiled or made the person happy for a minute so its my goal in life to make as many people as happy as possible...also QUEENSLANDER!!!!