[Pete Svarrior]

Well ok, this particular event might be difficult to observe because of its remoteness.

Did you notice that this is a recurring problem with you? You say something ridiculous, it's pointed out to you, and then you go "Well, okay, in this particular case you're right/I was joking/I was exaggerating, but in another scenario I'd be totally right!"

This thread is about the ISS's supposed spiral of death'n'doom in 2031. I propose that today, in 2022, FES shouldn't be doing much about it at all, due to a lack of credible alternatives.

[GoldCashew]

Well ok, this particular event might be difficult to observe because of its remoteness.

Did you notice that this is a recurring problem with you? You say something ridiculous, it's pointed out to you, and then you go "Well, okay, in this particular case you're right/I was joking/I was exaggerating, but in another scenario I'd be totally right!"

This thread is about the ISS's supposed spiral of death'n'doom in 2031. I propose that today, in 2022, FES shouldn't be doing much about it at all, due to a lack of credible alternatives.

Difficult to observe due to its remoteness doesn't mean not technically feasible.

I offered just one example of a potential path to observe remotely, per my latest above post.

There are likely more empirical ideas or solutions?... maybe continue to take this idea further or build off of this idea but I don't recommend to just give up or look for reasons not to try.

Try and look for ways to get creative such as idea's to observe without being in the vicinity. Brainstorm within the FE community, be resourcefull, innovate but don't recommend to look for excuses to say No, can't be done.

In "Behind the Curve" FE believers invested about $20,000 in a ring gyro. So, raising money within the FE community has been demonstrated as being possible.

Maybe other solution ideas might include not being in the general vicinity but using how powered cameras / scopes to observe... if the ISS will enter the Earth's atmosphere in a specific trajectory, maybe position such observing to the west of a trajectory that might be moving east. Maybe other ideas.

The event is 9 years away.

Also, if your FE cohorts, like Thork, are suggesting that the ISS is a projection, maybe stress test this notion. Where might such projection stations be located? How does such image projection technology work through our atmosphere without the projection image becoming diffused, scattered, or distorted?

[Pete Svarrior]

The event is 9 years away.

Indeed - which is why I asked what you're expecting us to be doing now:

Okay, give me an idea of what effort you expect us to be putting in 9 years in advance of an event outside of our control.

[GoldCashew]

The event is 9 years away.

Indeed - which is why I asked what you're expecting us to be doing now:

Okay, give me an idea of what effort you expect us to be putting in 9 years in advance of an event outside of our control.

The answer to your question is in my above post and in my post before that one.

[Pete Svarrior]

The answer to your question is in my above post and in my post before that one.

The only idea you've presented that's vaguely on-topic is a decade-long fundraiser in order to re-invent (for some reason?) a drone with a gopro strapped on to it. You did so immediately after we finished discussing why a fundraiser is unlikely to work. Please remember that you're not currently in AR - a modicum of effort is expected.

[GoldCashew]

The answer to your question is in my above post and in my post before that one.

The only idea you've presented that's vaguely on-topic is a decade-long fundraiser in order to re-invent (for some reason?) a drone with a gopro strapped on to it. You did so immediately after we finished discussing why a fundraiser is unlikely to work. Please remember that you're not currently in AR - a modicum of effort is expected.

That wasn't the only idea I presented. I stated a couple of things:

"I offered just one example of a potential path to observe remotely, per my latest above post. There are likely more empirical ideas or solutions?... maybe continue to take this idea further or build off of this idea but I don't recommend to just give up or look for reasons not to try."

"Maybe other solution ideas might include not being in the vicinity but using high powered camera / scopes to observe... if the ISS will enter the Earth's atmosphere in a specific trajectory, maybe position such observing to the west of trajectory that might be moving east. Maybe other ideas".

So essentially, start to build a foundation for seedbed idea's as a starting point of how a team might be able to observe within the constraints of (to your point) cost of funding. TFES site was built from the efforts of your fellow TFES cohorts. It obviously took a ton of effort to get it to where it is today and so I have to assume that the folks and leaders that built this FE site could also participate in brainstorming methods and innovate around potentially clever ways to try and observe the event. 

I think that in parallel, I also said to challenge or stress test the notion of what some of your FE cohorts suggest (like Thork) which is that the ISS isn't even real but a projection. If you can prove that the ISS is a projection, than it's game over and no work needed to prove anything more.
"Where might such projection stations be located? How does such image projection technology work through our atmosphere and against a firmament dome without the projection image becoming diffused, scattered, or distorted?"

[Pete Svarrior]

"I offered just one example of a potential path to observe remotely, per my latest above post. There are likely more empirical ideas or solutions?... maybe continue to take this idea further or build off of this idea but I don't recommend to just give up or look for reasons not to try."

Ah, yes, the fantastic idea of "just find an idea". What would we do without you?

If you have nothing useful to say, please do not post in the upper. Your speciality is airing your insecurities in AR - stick to it.

"Maybe other solution ideas might include not being in the vicinity but using high powered camera / scopes to observe... if the ISS will enter the Earth's atmosphere in a specific trajectory, maybe position such observing to the west of trajectory that might be moving east. Maybe other ideas".

What the fuck is a "high powered camera"? You don't know much about photography/videography, do you?

And, again, responding to a call for specific ideas - what is it that you want us to be doing 9 years in advance of the event? - with "idk find ideas or something" is not very useful.

[AATW]

Well ok, this particular event might be difficult to observe because of its remoteness.

Did you notice that this is a recurring problem with you? You say something ridiculous, it's pointed out to you, and then you go "Well, okay, in this particular case you're right/I was joking/I was exaggerating, but in another scenario I'd be totally right!"

This thread is about the ISS's supposed spiral of death'n'doom in 2031. I propose that today, in 2022, FES shouldn't be doing much about it at all, due to a lack of credible alternatives.

I don’t see how this is a problem.
I was using the 2031 event as an example.
But doing so to shine a spotlight on a wider problem I perceive with FE which is putting the whole of “space exploration” in an “it’s all fake so let’s not think about it too much” box.
And that might well just be simply a perceived problem, but given the number of launches going on in multiple countries there are plenty of opportunities for investigation. With the regard to the ISS, there are plenty of opportunities for investigation before 2031. The locations you can see it are published in advance, there are transits and there are even opportunities to contact the astronauts directly. It seems to me that people claiming to seek truth would be putting more effort in to this.

[GoldCashew]

"I offered just one example of a potential path to observe remotely, per my latest above post. There are likely more empirical ideas or solutions?... maybe continue to take this idea further or build off of this idea but I don't recommend to just give up or look for reasons not to try."

Ah, yes, the fantastic idea of "just find an idea". What would we do without you?

If you have nothing useful to say, please do not post in the upper. Your speciality is airing your insecurities in AR - stick to it.

"Maybe other solution ideas might include not being in the vicinity but using high powered camera / scopes to observe... if the ISS will enter the Earth's atmosphere in a specific trajectory, maybe position such observing to the west of trajectory that might be moving east. Maybe other ideas".

What the fuck is a "high powered camera"? You don't know much about photography/videography, do you?

And, again, responding to a call for specific ideas - what is it that you want us to be doing 9 years in advance of the event? - with "idk find ideas or something" is not very useful.

I guess by high powered camera I was referring to a high performance digital camera attached to a ground based (optical) telescope. With a wide field of view this could be a potential solution. I know that these types of technologies are used by NASA and other agencies to track space debris and so perhaps the same could be used to track the ISS entering the Earth's atmosphere as well. I would admit that I don't know how much a setup like this would cost, but to answer your above question, this is something that the FE community could at least start looking into now. If such a setup is feasible (including cost) than other work that could be done would be using it to perform preliminary observation (of the ISS orbiting or space debris) so that operators know how to use the device when the time comes.

Other question(s) would then be where exactly is NASA going to be putting the ISS in terms of it's re-entry 9 years from now so that the ISS entry could be observed with above device. I would concede that the answer to this question is obviously unknown and could prove to be a challenge unless NASA provides such re-entry information within a sufficient timespan for setup.

So, the above is one short term path that FE community could be looking into.

As also mentioned, the theory that the ISS is a projection (by some FE believers) could also be challenged or stress-tested in parallel to the above work. Where might such projections be located? Could such a projection be able to project crisp images upon a firmament dome, without any diffusion or scattering through the Earth's atmosphere? 

[Pete Svarrior]

I don’t see how this is a problem.

It's a problem because many arguments you make are extremely poor, and they distract away from meaningful debate of the subjects. You make a half-arsed argument, it turns out it was completely inapplicable, and then you go "okay yeah so I obviously didn't mean what I said". It happens non-stop. Oh, you were joking. Oh, you were obviously exaggerating. Oh, okay, so maybe your argument doesn't make sense right now, but maybe it will at some other point?

Considering that you keenly hold others to high standards and expect them to get banned for making similarly poor arguments, it'd be nice if you could start practising what you preach.

I guess by high powered camera I was referring to a high performance digital camera attached to a ground based (optical) telescope.

What in Bambi's name are you talking about? RET or FET, no telescope or camera will enable you to see the supposed crash zone from a ground-based facility, nor will it enable you to reliably see the edge of the atmolayer.

I would admit that I don't know how much a setup like this would cost

Debating the cost of something that's completely unfeasible from an optics standpoint is rather meaningless.

[AATW]

Oh, okay, so maybe your argument doesn't make sense right now, but maybe it will at some other point?

As I have explained multiple times, I was using the announced event in 2031 as an example of a general principle/perceived problem I see in FE. Which is the general lack of effort in investigating claims which, if true, would show FE to be incorrect. (Or maybe they wouldn't, you seem to believe space exploration is not in contradiction to FET, I am yet to understand how you square that circle).
So sure, when I suggest you collectively hire a pedalo to go to the most remote spot on earth to observe this event I am clearly being facetious. When I explain, on cross examination, that I am talking about a more general problem I see with FE then I am not. Does a thread really have to be so laser focused that it can't extend from an example to a more general principle?

So do you have any response to the more general problem I have highlighted.
And do you think FE is compatible with space exploration as claimed by multiple countries and now private enterprises who take part in it? If so then could you explain how that would work?

[GoldCashew]

I don’t see how this is a problem.

It's a problem because many arguments you make are extremely poor, and they distract away from meaningful debate of the subjects. You make a half-arsed argument, it turns out it was completely inapplicable, and then you go "okay yeah so I obviously didn't mean what I said". It happens non-stop. Oh, you were joking. Oh, you were obviously exaggerating. Oh, okay, so maybe your argument doesn't make sense right now, but maybe it will at some other point?

Considering that you keenly hold others to high standards and expect them to get banned for making similarly poor arguments, it'd be nice if you could start practising what you preach.

I guess by high powered camera I was referring to a high performance digital camera attached to a ground based (optical) telescope.

What in Bambi's name are you talking about? RET or FET, no telescope or camera will enable you to see the supposed crash zone from a ground-based facility, nor will it enable you to reliably see the edge of the atmolayer.

I would admit that I don't know how much a setup like this would cost

Debating the cost of something that's completely unfeasible from an optics standpoint is rather meaningless.

I didn't say the ground based (optical) telescope will enable one to see the supposed crash zone. I said that "...the same could be used to track the ISS entering the Earth's atmosphere." This would be a starting point to putting "eyes" on the object in question (the ISS) by the FE community as it enters and begins to break up.

If this isn't done than the FE community would likely say something like, yes I observed something crashing but that it was NASA faking something coming from space; i.e. debris was dropped from a really high altitude weather balloon or a high altitude aircraft to make it appear as the ISS. So, we need to begin with eyes on the ISS entering and breaking up in the Earth's atmosphere as a starting point.

In terms of cost of equipment to track the ISS entering the Earth's atmosphere, I didn't suggest that it's a debatable item. I simply admitted that I didn't know how much a setup like this would cost.
 

[Pete Svarrior]

So do you have any response to the more general problem I have highlighted.

Yes, but it's not one you'll like. I'll politely ask you to stay on topic, and if you want to discuss another topic, start a thread on it. This thread is about what is supposed to happen to the ISS in 2031, and a few people's outrage with the fact that we haven't yet built a network cutting-edge ISS tracking facilities along Pacific coastlines.

I didn't say the ground based (optical) telescope will enable one to see the supposed crash zone.

Luckily, I covered both cases.

[GoldCashew]

So do you have any response to the more general problem I have highlighted.

Yes, but it's not one you'll like. I'll politely ask you to stay on topic, and if you want to discuss another topic, start a thread on it. This thread is about what is supposed to happen to the ISS in 2031, and a few people's outrage with the fact that we haven't yet built a network cutting-edge ISS tracking facilities along Pacific coastlines.

I didn't say the ground based (optical) telescope will enable one to see the supposed crash zone.

Luckily, I covered both cases.

You didn't cover both cases and you incorrectly assumed something I said. The ground based (optical) telescope with high performance digital camera (that I mentioned above) can indeed be used to observe the ISS, is used to observe space debris, and could be used to observe the ISS entering the Earth's atmosphere and it's start of breaking apart.

[Pete Svarrior]

You didn't cover both cases and you incorrectly assumed something I said.

I see. I'm not sure how you'll reconcile that with what I wrote, which explicitly covers both possible assumptions, but hey-ho.

Get serious or get out of the upper. I won't repeat myself.

[AATW]

I’ll stick this here and it’s related to the OP, it’s something FE people could be doing to investigate the ISS now ahead of 2031. This radio ham got a signal from the ISS during a couple of passes. During the first pass he picked up a signal of them talking to students at a school, during the second he managed to contact them himself

[Tron]

Thats pretty cool.  I didn't know you could just "patch in" to the ISS and speak with them.