Curiosity File

Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #280 on: October 20, 2018, 04:00:27 AM »
You really don't need any repeater stations to use the moon for useful radio communications.  Amateur radio operators bounce their signals off the moon on a regular basis today.  They have been doing that for more than 50 years.  The well known delay in getting a signal back & forth at the speed of light confirms the actual distance to the moon in the vicinity of 239k miles.  There have been many laser reflectors placed on the moon as well.  One of them was by the Russians in one of their unmanned missions.  Since there is a good reflector now in place, a laser range finder can be used to very accurately measure the distance to the moon to well under a meter of accuracy.  It's really not confusing at all.  Any person, world wide can do a little study, obtain a license as a amateur radio operator, and conduct all the experiments he wants and can verify any of the claims I've made.  I've been told, repeatedly, that all the signals are being bounced off the dome.  Then when I mentioned the dome in one of my posts I was rebuked by a moderator that there was no dome.  Yes, I agree with that, there is NO dome mentioned in the wiki for this site that I could find other than a small drawing that kind of looked like a dome.  Since there is no dome, then a geosynchronous satellite is certainly possible. INMARSAT claims to have many satellites in orbit above the earth's equator.  KVH claims to have many more.  The satellites were in the category of 25000 miles above the equator. My measured travel time up to the satellite and back confirmed that distance.  While I was on cargo ships traveling around the world I was using these satellite systems all day, every day for routine communications with the company office and agents world wide.  It wouldn't be unusual for us to have 500 million worth of cargo on at any given time.  With that much valuable cargo aboard you can be sure everyone was wanting constant updates as to our progress.  Some of the containers on the top rows even had their own satellite beacons that were completely separate from anything under our control.  This was especially true when we were transporting military cargo.   Years ago all the ship's routine traffic was handled by high frequency radio communications via morse code.  A radio officer aboard the ship will communicate with another operator at a shore station and handle the messages.  Now the captain, or anyone really, can pickup the phone and call home, the office, or anyone, worldwide.  I had a computer with a full internet connection that I could use when necessary.  This kind of technology would not be possible with any kind of passive reflector, like a dome.  It can't be fiber optic, it can't be an undersea cable, we were on a moving ship traveling at about 25 knots.  If the folks out there who claim that what I'm saying is false and can prove it, then they could make a small fortune.  Satellites are very expensive for the shipping companies.  They pay anywhere from 9000 to 35000 per month for the level of service that they require.  All this is necessary because satellites are expensive to build, launch, and maintain.  A passive reflector would be so much cheaper.  It's a golden opportunity for the non-believers.  For those who have the proof, the world is at your disposal, go out and make your fortune.     
Ron you have a plethora of knowledge and real world physical experiences rare a unique stuff that makes FET cringe when they see it.
I have a questions that is of personal curiosity but is relevant to the subject.
#1 do you know the difference in height,(stories above water including the smoke stack) between cargo ships and Cruise ships?
I know cruise ships are 10 to 20 stories plus the stack making them near 30 stories above water. I could be wrong but here's what I remember.
I worked in San Diego on high raise buildings and we use to watch the cruise ships come into port.
This was an awesome sight for many reasons.
One being that their smoke stakes appeared to be level with the 24th an even the 37th floors.
What I remember was watching them raise from the sea, stack first then the rest of it as it got closer to port.
This happened rapidly and we even brought powerful binoculars and you could see with naked eye everything you could see with the B-nocs. Same as you described in opposite as you approached the shore.
On a clear day with calm seas you can easily see the horizon probably not even 20 miles out.. As fast as those cruise ships popped up out of the ocean we expected to see water dripping off them like submarines popping up out of the water.
You could calculate the distance if you wanted to by how fast they made it from first sight of the stack to the end of Point Loma prior to coming into the harbor where you could see them slow down a bit.
   
   

*

Offline J-Man

  • *
  • Posts: 681
    • View Profile
Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #281 on: October 20, 2018, 04:25:56 AM »
The #1 thread on this site which garners viewers from around the world to learn there is more than meets the eye or what NASA fanboys tell us has turned into a catch all for RE crybabies to post their nonsense which has nothing to do with the Satellite Hoax. Mods need a little clean up here. The Earth is FLAT and God rules !
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 RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1110
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #282 on: October 20, 2018, 05:13:34 AM »
To stay a little on the subject, a typical satellite antenna could be 130 to 140 feet above the water line.  This can improve the coverage just a little as it raises the distance to the horizon.  As we leave the coverage area of one satellite I would always see the needed elevation of the dish antenna get lower and lower until the signal was no longer usable.  At that point I would need to switch to another satellite that was visible at a higher elevation at the longitude where we were at the time.   Sometimes if the satellite was only about 15 degrees above the horizon and our ship was on a particular course the satellite could be blocked by the ships stack.  I can't say for sure about the size of a cruise ship, because I've never been aboard one.  A typical cargo ship would have a height of eye on the bridge of about 130 to 150 feet above the water.  Stacks or masts could easily add another 50 feet to 75 feet.  They like to keep these heights at a minimum because you have to get under bridges on a lot of voyages.     
For FE no explanation is possible, for RE no explanation is necessary.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1452
    • View Profile
Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #283 on: October 20, 2018, 05:38:08 AM »
To stay a little on the subject, a typical satellite antenna could be 130 to 140 feet above the water line.  This can improve the coverage just a little as it raises the distance to the horizon.  As we leave the coverage area of one satellite I would always see the needed elevation of the dish antenna get lower and lower until the signal was no longer usable.  At that point I would need to switch to another satellite that was visible at a higher elevation at the longitude where we were at the time.   Sometimes if the satellite was only about 15 degrees above the horizon and our ship was on a particular course the satellite could be blocked by the ships stack.  I can't say for sure about the size of a cruise ship, because I've never been aboard one.  A typical cargo ship would have a height of eye on the bridge of about 130 to 150 feet above the water.  Stacks or masts could easily add another 50 feet to 75 feet.  They like to keep these heights at a minimum because you have to get under bridges on a lot of voyages.   

To attempt to stay on point, it seems like either all of the world's maritime efforts are being unnecessarily forced to go to extraordinary efforts to navigate the oceans or satellites exist.

Point being, every nation, every shipping entity within which, is and has been, going through needless exercises, expenses, time, for decades in order to maintain the guise that they are navigating via satellite. Seems, well, cost prohibitive, at a minimum.

I guess the argument persists that GPS is all land based, Loran, etc. Or perhaps bounced off of the underside of a brass dome.

But if you simply remove one book from the equation out of 10's of thousands of various publications, experiments, observations, implementations, real world experiences, that show otherwise, sanity, logic, evidence and acumen dictate that satellite technology is real. The preponderance of evidence is not on the side of the book.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Curiosity File

Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #284 on: October 20, 2018, 05:42:19 AM »
The #1 thread on this site which garners viewers from around the world to learn there is more than meets the eye or what NASA fanboys tell us has turned into a catch all for RE crybabies to post their nonsense which has nothing to do with the Satellite Hoax. Mods need a little clean up here. The Earth is FLAT and God rules !

This is most certainly relevant to the subject of whether satellites are a hoax or not.
Knowing that the ships or shoreline vanish due to the curvature of the earth validates the information that satellites are needed to send and retrieve signals when you don't have line of sight or is blocked by solid objects.

Might I add too that I have witnessed satellites cross the night sky like clock work right on schedule on location night after night from the mid 80s on.
You can also see the ISS with your naked eye or with a telescope right on schedule like clockwork.
There is a plethora of physical proof that satellites are real. There is no proof of any kind that they are a hoax.

Moderators should warn people about insulting people by calling them crybabies, which BTW seems like what you are doing.       

Mysfit

Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #285 on: October 20, 2018, 06:25:54 AM »
The #1 thread on this site which garners viewers from around the world to learn there is more than meets the eye or what NASA fanboys tell us has turned into a catch all for RE crybabies to post their nonsense which has nothing to do with the Satellite Hoax. Mods need a little clean up here. The Earth is FLAT and God rules !
I get the feeling that J-man has been repeating religious views in a scientific argument for attention, rather than believing in earnest.
This bragging over popularity and their sig seems to be evidence, but all I have is belief... Which can be used as scientific proof.
Should we be quoting older religious texts to settle this? I don’t know how to win a religious argument about science that came about after a book.
I doubt the most recent version mentions internet. Yet, here we are. Believers and other folk. Bragging about Internet popularity like pride isn’t a sin.

Long story short, I am unsure J-man is arguing genuinely.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1452
    • View Profile
Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #286 on: October 20, 2018, 07:49:59 AM »
The #1 thread on this site which garners viewers from around the world to learn there is more than meets the eye or what NASA fanboys tell us has turned into a catch all for RE crybabies to post their nonsense which has nothing to do with the Satellite Hoax. Mods need a little clean up here. The Earth is FLAT and God rules !
I get the feeling that J-man has been repeating religious views in a scientific argument for attention, rather than believing in earnest.
This bragging over popularity and their sig seems to be evidence, but all I have is belief... Which can be used as scientific proof.
Should we be quoting older religious texts to settle this? I don’t know how to win a religious argument about science that came about after a book.
I doubt the most recent version mentions internet. Yet, here we are. Believers and other folk. Bragging about Internet popularity like pride isn’t a sin.

Long story short, I am unsure J-man is arguing genuinely.

Good point and I agree. It seems to be going nowhere and has been that way for pages. Any and all arguments/evidence is simply met with the book. And there's no getting around the book. The book is boring.

I think it's time to let the #1 thread die. I'm out.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1110
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #287 on: October 20, 2018, 12:52:27 PM »
If the earth is flat, if there's a dome or if the earth is round won't be solved here.  I am a believer that a flat earth with a dome (or without) would make communications at sea a whole lot easier and cheaper. Shipping companies pay a small fortune to the companies that claim to have satellites.  For the flat earth entrepreneurs out there there's a golden opportunity out there for you to make a better, cheaper, more reliable communications system for the shipping companies.  Much of the merchandise in stores these days comes across the oceans from Asia on thousands of container ships.  These all need good communications.  If the flat earth theory really is viable, then revamp the satellite communications systems to use shore-based systems that are cheaper to build, cheaper to maintain, and cheaper for the shipping companies to use.  The technology would allow you to do that.  You could make a fortune driving all the 'satellite companies' out of business with your cheaper technology.  Henry Ford and Edison built their fortunes on using the technological advances of their day.  If flat earth theory is viable, today is your day.
For FE no explanation is possible, for RE no explanation is necessary.

Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #288 on: October 20, 2018, 05:12:44 PM »
To stay a little on the subject, a typical satellite antenna could be 130 to 140 feet above the water line.  This can improve the coverage just a little as it raises the distance to the horizon.  As we leave the coverage area of one satellite I would always see the needed elevation of the dish antenna get lower and lower until the signal was no longer usable.  At that point I would need to switch to another satellite that was visible at a higher elevation at the longitude where we were at the time.   Sometimes if the satellite was only about 15 degrees above the horizon and our ship was on a particular course the satellite could be blocked by the ships stack.  I can't say for sure about the size of a cruise ship, because I've never been aboard one.  A typical cargo ship would have a height of eye on the bridge of about 130 to 150 feet above the water.  Stacks or masts could easily add another 50 feet to 75 feet.  They like to keep these heights at a minimum because you have to get under bridges on a lot of voyages.   
Whar were you using the satellite for?

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1110
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #289 on: October 20, 2018, 06:32:45 PM »
These days ships depend heavily on satellites for communications and navigation.  One satellite system we used would periodically transmit our current position, received by another satellite system, GPS.  This way governments, the shipping company office, or really anyone who needed our current position, course, or speed would have access to that information.  On that same system I would receive safety bulletins for known dangerous conditions such as typhoons, vessels adrift, mayday calls, hijackings, or we even had a bulletin when the North Koreans launched their last missile. We were in the area at the time.  Since the system has our position, via GPS, the information we received was only relevant for our particular area.  Another satellite system we used would allow us to send and receive emails.  All the ships paperwork was usually completed electronically.  The countries where we went into port all had customs requirements and any cargo, supplies or crew changes had to be declared in advance of our arrival if we didn't want to be delayed.  Ships are very expensive and the carried cargo was even more expensive so delays are costly.  Of course we had satellite telephones that would allow the crew members to call home if desired.  Company business was also conducted.  There was a distress alert system on board that would allow us to immediately communicate with the outside world if there was an emergency or hijacking.  There were several buttons in a few locations around the ship and all we needed to do was press one to send out an automatic distress alert with our ships name, location, course and speed.  On my desk, I had a computer with a good internet connection.  I could use that to look up information, file a report, or anything else that was required by the captain or chief engineer.  The captain and chief engineer also had computers with the same connection and was hooked up via the ships internal data network.  Some shipping companies also allowed complete engine room monitoring of all their systems by a shore based office.  All this data went back & forth via a satellite system.  In a few years I would expect to see fully autonomous vessels out there hauling cargo world wide on the high seas.  There will be no human on board.  Everything will be controlled via the shore over a satellite connection.  As outlined the data needs of ships is vitally important and growing each day.  If the flat earth theory is viable and the system can be made simpler and cheaper by using just shore based systems for transmitting this data instead of the complex and expensive satellites, then the door is wide open.  It's time for the entrepreneurial spirit of the flat earthers to emerge and revolutionize the communications system world wide.  Opportunities await, go for it.
For FE no explanation is possible, for RE no explanation is necessary.

*

Offline J-Man

  • *
  • Posts: 681
    • View Profile
Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #290 on: October 20, 2018, 07:23:41 PM »
Some people just don't stay up with the times or intentionally try to deceive. Microsoft owns a patent where a chip can be placed under the skin, powered by the glucose in ones body. What good is this? Well it's been around about 30 years or so and creates an ad-hoc network or MANET. Literally every human would be an access node for communications on the flat plane. Today satellites are not needed at sea as much as the old men in the sea thinks. MANET's are active and been used for decades, sometimes without the node even knowing, so we won't blame you old guy. Sats are dinosaurs, did they ever exist?

Navy ad hoc networks

Navy ships traditionally use satellite communications and other maritime radios to communicate with each other or with ground station back on land. However, such communications are restricted by delays and limited bandwidth. Wireless ad hoc networks enable ship-area-networks to be formed while at sea, enabling high speed wireless communications among ships, enhancing their sharing of imaging and multimedia data, and better co-ordination in battlefield operations.[27] Some defense companies (such as Rockwell Collins and Rohde & Schwartz) have produced products that enhance ship-to-ship and ship-to-shore communications.

Thanks for playing:
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 RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1110
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #291 on: October 20, 2018, 08:17:28 PM »
Yes, I am aware of what is going on with US Navy ships.  United States Merchant Marine officers can work as crew on ships owned by the United States Navy.  I've done that on many occasions during my career.  Some were research missions for the US Navy involving nuclear submarines that were classified in nature.  All of us were vetted and held the required paperwork for those missions.  We also delivered a lot of cargo to war zones to support ground troops.  Fairly recently crews were involved in the disarming of chemical weapons in the Middle East.  I wasn't involved in that operation but I did do the sea trials on the ship that was involved.  Satellite communications and HF radio communications is what I did to conduct the ship's business while on these operations. I wasn't ever implanted with a chip under my skin, that I know of.  That kind of thing is commonly done to dogs and cats.  I know someone who did get their runaway dog back because of the chip.  It does work, but is not hooked to a satellite, yet. 
For FE no explanation is possible, for RE no explanation is necessary.

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1110
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: satellite hoax
« Reply #292 on: October 20, 2018, 08:27:14 PM »
I found this announcement recently.   Nothing like this was given out when I graduated from the academy. 


KINGS POINT, N.Y., October 17, 2018 – Today, the United States Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA) began issuing personal satellite communication devices to Midshipmen who will be signing-on to vessels as Cadets participating in Sea Year training.

The water-resistant devices, which are being distributed for the first time, work in areas where there is no cell phone service. The device which connects to GPS, allows Cadets to send SMS messages to cell phones or email. Each device is preprogrammed to communicate with Academy Training Representatives (ATRs), the Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC), or Sexual Assault and Harassment Prevention and Response contractors. It also allows the recipient to respond directly to the Cadet.

Distribution of these devices satisfies requirements established in the National Defense Authorization Act by  “ensuring that each cadet from the United States Merchant Marine Academy who is participating in the Sea Year program is provided a functional satellite communication device.”

Updated: Wednesday, October 17, 2018
For FE no explanation is possible, for RE no explanation is necessary.