*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
I believe what you actually said was not to trust NASA at all
Not trusting someone is not the same as assuming everything they say is false by default. Information from an untrusted or mistrusted source (or even a distrusted source, since I suppose you could interpret my statement either way) is still valuable once scrutinised. Of course, if you had any doubt as to what I meant, the prudent thing to do would have been to ask, not to choose the least generous assumption and assert it as fact.

I eagerly await your results, should you choose to post them. As mentioned before, you're under no compulsion to disclose them - your personal growth is all I hope to achieve here.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2019, 11:58:58 AM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
Quote
Not trusting someone is not the same as assuming everything they say is false by default. Information from an untrusted or mistrusted source (or even a distrusted source, since I suppose you could interpret my statement either way) is still valuable once scrutinised. Of course, if you had any doubt as to what I meant, the prudent thing to do would have been to ask, not to choose the least generous assumption and assert it as fact.
That's fair, apologies for misunderstanding your meaning there. Language can be easily mistaken with context and individual interpretation. :)

As for showing my results, I'll need to go through the content again and mark things up which may take a little time, I'm rarely at home, but I may as well do it just to further this discussion otherwise we're at a standstill disagreement. I do understand what you're trying to point out, that I may well have missed a lot or not fully understood things as I scrutinised the footage for myself, or maybe never even looked and just parrot what I heard. You should also strive for your own personal growth here too, you may hate the idea but I could well be correct.

I did actually once think the moon landings were a hoax when I was a kid (because I grew up around people who said it was and I just assumed it true). Those people (my mum, my brother, other family members and friends) only parrot what they've been told and lack any critical thinking skills. Once I realised this I began to rely mostly on information I've looked up for myself which I try to fact check with multiple sources (especially better when the sources are heavily opposing each other but still have the same information). Over time I've come to what I think is a reasonable understanding of integrity in sources of information. When I checked through the moon landing thinking it was a hoax I still came to the conclusion that it was actually not likely a hoax.

My mum on the other hand will still parrot how it's a big hoax (only when asked, she's not obsessed or anything), all the while never having actually looked at the information. In this sense I think this is what you seem to think of me here, but I can only assure you I've done the research for myself and I'm not just here saying "look, NVIDIA said so, so it must be true!". :) I used the nvidia video because it shows my reasoning and I'd like to think it's a trusted source of information in this instance. I agree with their assessment though they didn't go into much detail regarding shadows, which is one of the things I first looked into.

Anyway. Would you agree that (if true) the mars rover are a much bigger achievement in technology than the moon landings? and on less of a budget.
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

*

Offline J-Man

  • *
  • Posts: 568
    • View Profile
It's pretty clear we'll be faking the next moon mission and Mars landing. Nobody is going anywhere and never has. Step right up to the greatest launch in history !!!



What kind of person would devote endless hours posting scientific facts trying to correct the few retards who believe in the FE? I slay shitty little demons.

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 897
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
It's pretty clear we'll be faking the next moon mission and Mars landing. Nobody is going anywhere and never has. Step right up to the greatest launch in history !!!



Ok, I'll play along.   Why is Space X spending so much money on heavy-lift boosters that come back and land?  Think about that technology.  What about the satellites they are launching that you can see with your own eyes?
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline J-Man

  • *
  • Posts: 568
    • View Profile
Why is NASA using a guy that fails and smokes pot on Joe Rogan?  Has anything he's made work right? 1 minute mark lmao

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/22/782052992/elon-musk-unveils-teslas-cybertruck-with-a-polarizing-wedge-shape
« Last Edit: November 22, 2019, 09:07:02 PM by J-Man »
What kind of person would devote endless hours posting scientific facts trying to correct the few retards who believe in the FE? I slay shitty little demons.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1439
    • View Profile
Why is NASA using a guy that fails and smokes pot on Joe Rogan?  Has anything he's made work right?

Because, despite a few failures, they have made the business of landing and RE-USING their first-stage rockets a routine business. It's no longer the exception, it's the rule.

You can see the satellites that were recently launched for Starlink for yourself, if you're in the right part of the world at the right time. They have a host of satellite makers queuing up to take advantage of the savings that they can make by using SpaceX in preference to other launch providers.



 
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline J-Man

  • *
  • Posts: 568
    • View Profile
Please tell me what a satellite does that an aerial photography/data link plane or drone doesn't do? Throw in the millions of fixed data towers laid out on the flat earth.

It looked so fake, it must be real. nod, giggle giggle pass me the blunt dog !
« Last Edit: November 23, 2019, 04:50:22 AM by J-Man »
What kind of person would devote endless hours posting scientific facts trying to correct the few retards who believe in the FE? I slay shitty little demons.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1439
    • View Profile
Please tell me what a satellite does that an aerial photography/data link plane or drone doesn't do? Throw in the millions of fixed data towers laid out on the flat earth.

1. Domestic satellite TV.

Data towers are irrelevant to this. Nobody anywhere has proved that my satellite signal, or anyone else's, is coming from a fixed data tower. They could do so easily; find tower, buy or borrow portable satellite dish and receiver. Go to tower, and within a few metres of it, point dish at tower from North, South, East and West. If the tower is genuinely broadcasting the local satellite provider's signal, it will come through loud and clear.

In the absence of this, one has to note that (in the UK, for instance) all satellite dishes point South. Even the ones on the South Coast, which are then pointing out to sea. UK above the equator, satellite in equatorial orbit, so dish points South. Dishes in Australia point North, for the same reason in reverse.

In my case, I know where the local towers are. They're North, West and East of me, and my dish points South. No tower in its direction.

2. Fleet Tracking

One of SpaceX's early customers was Orbcomm, who provide fleet vehicle tracking services. If you want to expose them as a "fake", you could always buy their service and devise an experiment to show that they're only using towers, similar to the one above.... but nobody will.


3. Remote news-gathering and outside broadcast

etc

etc


==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline J-Man

  • *
  • Posts: 568
    • View Profile
Stop being foolish. You couldn't point one of these miniature disc's within 5 thousand miles of a sat, if in fact it could float in the same location 25,000 miles up. Which it can't, no such thing dog, pass the blunt again. Live TV broadcast, no fricken latency, no delay to cut the nude streaker or murder in progress. Once the signal is out, it's available. The things peeps are asked to believe....amazing !!!
What kind of person would devote endless hours posting scientific facts trying to correct the few retards who believe in the FE? I slay shitty little demons.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1439
    • View Profile
You couldn't point one of these miniature disc's within 5 thousand miles of a sat

I invite you to prove the signal is coming from anything else. If you think it's coming from a tower, any tower, I've shown you the method above by which you could prove this. Look forward to the YouTube video when you do. It should be easy, shouldn't it?

Like I said, I know where the towers are in my locale, and I know my own dish is not pointing at any of them.



==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline J-Man

  • *
  • Posts: 568
    • View Profile
It couldn't bounce off the firmament or nanometal particles dropped via chemtrails since the 1970's.....Daaaaaaa
What kind of person would devote endless hours posting scientific facts trying to correct the few retards who believe in the FE? I slay shitty little demons.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1439
    • View Profile
You mentioned the towers. By all means, show proof that anyone is getting a domestic satellite TV signal from a tower. Method outlined above. Shouldn't cost a lot, shouldn't take much time, but NOBODY that I have suggested it to has actually gone and done it.

Why not, do you think?


News teams use portable satellite uplink equipment in the field. I invite you to show that any of these are actually connecting with a convenient communications tower whilst in some far-flung. war-torn corner of the Middle East. Where's the infrastructure going to come from to do this?
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1439
    • View Profile
SpaceX's upcoming launches from https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

Dec. 4 Falcon 9 • SpaceX CRS 19

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the 21st Dragon spacecraft mission on its 19th operational cargo delivery flight to the International Space Station.


Dec. 15/16 Falcon 9 • JCSAT 18/Kacific 1

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the JCSAT 18/Kacific 1 communications satellite jointly owned by SKY Perfect JSAT Corp. of Japan and Kacific Broadband Satellites of Singapore.


TBD Falcon 9 • Starlink 2

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is expected to launch the third batch of approximately 60 satellites for SpaceX’s Starlink broadband network, a mission designated Starlink 2. Delayed from Nov. 4. [Oct. 9]


TBD Falcon 9 • Starlink 3

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is expected to launch the fourth batch of approximately 60 satellites for SpaceX’s Starlink broadband network, a mission designated Starlink 3. [Sept. 11]


January 2020 Falcon 9 • GPS 3 SV03

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the U.S. Air Force’s third third-generation navigation satellite for the Global Positioning System.


TBD Falcon 9 • Starlink 4

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is expected to launch the fifth batch of approximately 60 satellites for SpaceX’s Starlink broadband network


TBD Falcon 9 • Crew Dragon Demo 2

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch a Crew Dragon spacecraft on its first test flight with astronauts on-board to the International Space Station


February 2020 Falcon 9 • SAOCOM 1B

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the SAOCOM 1B satellite for CONAE, Argentina’s space agency.


March 1 Falcon 9 • SpaceX CRS 20

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the 22nd Dragon spacecraft mission on its 20th operational cargo delivery flight to the International Space Station


May 2020 Falcon 9 • GPS 3 SV04

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the U.S. Air Force’s fourth third-generation navigation satellite for the Global Positioning System



These folks video pretty much all the launches, and lots of movements of the boosters around Port Canaveral.

EDIT - YouTube channel "USLaunchReport"

In particular, they video the boosters returning on the landing barge from the Atlantic;



..and here's the above being moved around the port



A lot of effort to go to in order to generate a "fake", wouldn't you say....?

If they're not doing what they say they're doing, why bother? 
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6551
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
What makes you think that the rockets have no payload that its operators are deploying for financial benefit?

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1439
    • View Profile
What makes you think that the rockets have no payload that its operators are deploying for financial benefit?

Who are you asking?
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 897
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
What makes you think that the rockets have no payload that its operators are deploying for financial benefit?

Of course, the rockets have commercial payloads.  Even if the customer is the same company.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

It's pretty clear we'll be faking the next moon mission and Mars landing. Nobody is going anywhere and never has. Step right up to the greatest launch in history !!!

I'm genuinely confused about the FE beliefs in this area.

You see this failure of evidence of something but all the footage of the successful launches...what, they faked those? It's like hearing about a plane crash and concluding that planes can't fly.
I mean, firstly, there are loads of witnesses to successful launches - I saw a Shuttle launch back in the day and these launches are being witnessed too.
And secondly if you're claiming they fake the successful launches did they fake this? Why did they bother faking a failure?
Or is it that this was real but the fake ones aren't? I honestly don't know what your point is.

Similarly I don't understand Tom's questions about the payload. Of course SpaceX are delivering payloads, they have launched satellites for the US military. What does anyone think is going on here? The military pay SpaceX to deploy a satellite into orbit and just assume they've done it without checking? Or SpaceX are just somehow simulating the deployment but really using some other technology to fool the military into believing they have done it?

I am genuinely baffled by FE beliefs in this area.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1439
    • View Profile
https://www.spacex.com/missions

There's at least two missions in there that SpaceX completed for Orbcomm. Please take a minute to look Orbcomm up. Their speciality is commercial fleet vehicle tracking, and they use their satellites for this.

https://www.orbcomm.com/eu/hardware/devices

So, in order for the fakery to be complete, there are options;

1. Orbcomm is "in on it", and only pretends to its customers that it is using satellites. Unlikely, since at least one of their products is specifically intended for marine, off-shore use

2. SpaceX is somehow managing, without deploying a satellite, to convince Orbcomm that it has, and is generating a signal that resembles a satellite signal, and is somehow generated for areas that cell networks do not cover.

Possibly others, and variations on the above.

One group of FE-ers has already funded a ring laser gyroscope in order to try and prove flat earth.

Is there another group that will purchase Orbcomm's products and use them in a similar effort?   
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6551
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
I see that SpaceX is putting up satellites for Argentina, Indonesia, Tiawan, Bulgaria, Japan, and Malasia. Interesting that the zealots claim that that space is an international endeavor, yet a few organizations are relied on for access.

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
I see that SpaceX is putting up satellites for Argentina, Indonesia, Tiawan, Bulgaria, Japan, and Malasia. Interesting that the zealots claim that that space is an international endeavor, yet a few organizations are relied on for access.
Strange way of thinking... There are very few space agencies that work internationally, so that's somehow suspicious? It's a very specialized endevour. and spaceX are doing it comercially for cometitive prices. That's just how a monopoly works.

Do you also think it's 'interesting' that there isn't a seperate FES per country?
« Last Edit: December 01, 2019, 01:31:26 AM by ChrisTP »
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?