-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Chitchat The stationary flat Earth
- Thread starter flatearther
- Start date
Go and look for your alien mate with extraterrestrial penis to feel good again.
Lost alien, this NASA released video on aliens and UFO may help you find your mate for tomorrow night and return to where you belong for good.
https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-ISS-photos-show-any-of-the-thousands-of-satellites-orbiting-Earth
"Why don't we ever see the 1000's of near earth orbit objects in live feeds or pictures of Earth from space?
By astronomical standard, these objects are very small. They're also spread out through an enormous volume. Finding the cliched "needle in the haystack" is an easier task."
"Why don't we ever see the 1000's of near earth orbit objects in live feeds or pictures of Earth from space?
This type of picture..
Is quite misleading ( it's computer generated) the hardware in orbit is in real life so small that even the biggest, the ISS, would not even be a pixel on this scale"
https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-ISS-photos-show-any-of-the-thousands-of-satellites-orbiting-Earth
This type of picture..
Is quite misleading ( it's computer generated) the hardware in orbit is in real life so small that even the biggest, the ISS, would not even be a pixel on this scale"
https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-ISS-photos-show-any-of-the-thousands-of-satellites-orbiting-Earth
"The Int'l Space Station has a live video of space and earth that points outside the craft. Why don't I see any satellites or space debris?
....Satellites are also quite small compared to the vastness of even low earth orbit. The whole earth has a circumference of 24000 mi or so, and on orbit, the distance traveled by the ISS is even farther. The ISS travels that distance in a few minutes. It's easy to lose perspective.
You wouldn't complain that you couldn't see a fish in the ocean from a high flying passenger plane , and it would be a lot easier than seeing a passing satellite in another orbit."
https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-ISS-photos-show-any-of-the-thousands-of-satellites-orbiting-Earth
....Satellites are also quite small compared to the vastness of even low earth orbit. The whole earth has a circumference of 24000 mi or so, and on orbit, the distance traveled by the ISS is even farther. The ISS travels that distance in a few minutes. It's easy to lose perspective.
You wouldn't complain that you couldn't see a fish in the ocean from a high flying passenger plane , and it would be a lot easier than seeing a passing satellite in another orbit."
https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-ISS-photos-show-any-of-the-thousands-of-satellites-orbiting-Earth
Last edited:
"Why don't ISS photos show any of the thousands of satellites orbiting Earth?
What makes you think that none of the photos show satellites?
Just because the ISS is in space doesn't mean it is much closer to satellites than we are on the ground. 45% of the operational satellites are in orbits more than 35,000 km above the ISS. Another 5% are in orbits around 20,000 km above the ISS. In a picture they would look like stars. We would only really recognize they weren't stars if the picture had a long enough exposure that trails were evident and the satellites trail would not align with those of the stars.
As for the rest, that are in low Earth orbit (LEO), even they will be hundreds of km away from the ISS and also be mere bright points of light, and the closer they are, the faster they would move across the sky.
Space is bigger than we imagine. Don't imagine it as a crowded highway of satellites. There are around 1100 operational satellites and around 2600 inoperational satellites, so around 3700, total. The surface area of the Earth is 510,000,000 square kilometers. So, if we were to take all of those satellites and place them on the Earth's surface - evenly spaced - each satellite would have about 137,800 square kilometers all to itself. That's an area about the size of the state of Arkansas. Up in orbit we are talking about a much bigger surface area, in fact we are talking about a volume so satellites can be much farther from each other.
Look closely at the thousands of images of stars from the ISS and you'll see satellites, they'll just be small."
https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-ISS-photos-show-any-of-the-thousands-of-satellites-orbiting-Earth
What makes you think that none of the photos show satellites?
Just because the ISS is in space doesn't mean it is much closer to satellites than we are on the ground. 45% of the operational satellites are in orbits more than 35,000 km above the ISS. Another 5% are in orbits around 20,000 km above the ISS. In a picture they would look like stars. We would only really recognize they weren't stars if the picture had a long enough exposure that trails were evident and the satellites trail would not align with those of the stars.
As for the rest, that are in low Earth orbit (LEO), even they will be hundreds of km away from the ISS and also be mere bright points of light, and the closer they are, the faster they would move across the sky.
Space is bigger than we imagine. Don't imagine it as a crowded highway of satellites. There are around 1100 operational satellites and around 2600 inoperational satellites, so around 3700, total. The surface area of the Earth is 510,000,000 square kilometers. So, if we were to take all of those satellites and place them on the Earth's surface - evenly spaced - each satellite would have about 137,800 square kilometers all to itself. That's an area about the size of the state of Arkansas. Up in orbit we are talking about a much bigger surface area, in fact we are talking about a volume so satellites can be much farther from each other.
Look closely at the thousands of images of stars from the ISS and you'll see satellites, they'll just be small."
https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-ISS-photos-show-any-of-the-thousands-of-satellites-orbiting-Earth
Last edited:
"..most spacecraft are orbiting West to East, at around 17000 mph, like a freeway all going in the same direction. You can only see those cars nearby, and the ISS could typically see only a satellite nearby going the same speed and direction. Since satellites are purposely spread apart and range from micro sats to school bus size, the sheer distance between them makes it unlikely that the ISS will see many"
https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-ISS-photos-show-any-of-the-thousands-of-satellites-orbiting-Earth
https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-ISS-photos-show-any-of-the-thousands-of-satellites-orbiting-Earth
If the earth is flat, everything is on top, what is at the bottom ?
If the earth is round, we can travel shortcut by jumping into a hole we dig to USA.
If the earth is round, we can travel shortcut by jumping into a hole we dig to USA.
This must be the most idiotic question in the entire thread. Have read through the whole threads, seen silly arguments and stuff, but none as spastic as yours.
Of course now it is impossible to dig through the earth core when reaches the lava fire section.
Supposingly the tunnel is already there , when you jump down from sg you will fall into the tunnel. The other end isn't it USA ?
Flat earth theory-everything is on same side. So SG is not on the other side of USA. Base on globe earth theory, nope too.
I always thought other side is somewhere alaska region. Anyway if based on globe theory and let's assume a tunnel from sg pass through to other side, when we jump into the hole , what will be the outcome Base on physics ?
I couldn't care less whether the earth is flat but I would like to know whether your chichis are flat.
Maybe because your long dong is too silvery? :p
Or maybe because I'm so nice, that I want to protect you from losing?
Please answer my questions:
Yes, you will believe me, and not accuse me of booking the normal longer one-stop flight (when I show you my boarding pass or any other evidence), instead of the supposedly much shorter non-stop flight?I've already proven (or linked you to the proof) that it's a fake route, therefore there's no such flight to book.
Even if it's advertised, and I book it, and it turns out that it's a hoax (i.e. a stopover in the USA is required), will you believe me?
You'll probably accuse me of booking the normal longer one-stop flight, instead of the supposedly much shorter non-stop flight, right?
Therefore, in order to be ABSOLUTELY sure, it is YOU who should book that non-stop flight, right?
Just as NASA can cover up the fake moon landings and other fake activities in "outer space", while the majority of people still seem to believe/trust NASA, is it so difficult for Qantas to cover up a non-existent flight, while continuing to lie that it exists?
Last edited:
Similar threads
