Being seen from space - methods to demonstrate that sats are real and provide live video?

Jesse3959

Member
So obviously most flat earthers say the sat picture/video feeds are just CGI generated based on known weather patterns, so I've trying to think of ways to demonstrate at a primitive level that satellites do in fact provide realtime video feeds by doing something sane that would show up in the video/picture feed.

For example, how big of a retroreflector would it take to be seen? One could be built with a bunch of space blankets (mylar) and paracord for relatively little cost.

This should show up on the L Orbit sats, if big enough.

Probably it's a no-go for the full-disc images in the USA because each pixel probably covers several miles.
The 10000x10000 pixel full disk is interesting but I think they are not covering USA.

I'm wondering if my best bet is the ISS and it's live feed, since it's so close. But tracking it would be harder, or a retroreflector would only work during a solar transit.

So perhaps a tracking spotlight during the night could blink out morse code.

Indications that something like this might work include this capture of the ISS live feed (Ha! By Jaranism who showed it in his video where he showed the ISS solar transit) - in the right-third of the picture, half way up, where the "shadow" (bright spot) is under the ISS, you can see that something flat and shiny passes under the ISS and a bright spot shows up.

That and during night views, the ISS live feed can also just faintly see the brightest of cities.

It would bring me significant pleasure to blink greetings to my flat earth friends via the ISS live feed.
 
Weather satellites like Himawari-8 sometimes show the effects of non-weather events like volcanos, dust storms, wildfires, and floods. There are several good examples in YouTube videos by Australians WheresWally and WadesUnderworld. These effects could not be faked merely by computer simulation of 'known weather patterns'; they would have to be deliberately entered into the images by trained operatives, based on media reports or other sources. And it would be necessary for the operatives to scan a wide range of sources, to ensure that they enter all events that ought to show up in the images, otherwise the fakery would be easily exposed. It just shows the lengths that 'they' (NASA, etc) will go to in order to perpetuate the great satellite hoax!
 

Thanks! Yes this is super cool! But it was done in coordination with months of planning with the team onboard the ISS - and the video was not sent back in realtime via live feed.

Now to be clear, I'm NOT a flat earther. But after engaging flat earthers for the last year+, I know they won't trust something that took months of planning and human intervention with a greatly delayed video back to earth.

That's why I'm looking for ways that don't require any human intervention on the part of NASA - where it's literally impossible for it to be faked - a method where a flat earther can literally produce a flash in the ISS live feed even when they are the only ones in the world knowing that they are doing it, if that makes sense.

If we had a method like this to demonstrate that there are cameras in space, it makes quite a convincing set of arguments against flat earth because then rockets must work in space, and space must be real because sats are moving so fast without burning up, and they must be orbiting because it'd take too much energy to change direction at orbital speeds all the time, which means sats would have to go around the earth as a sphere, and so on. A whole manifold of problems arise for flat earth as a result of a single point of observation that NASA does in fact have cameras in space sending realtime video.
 
Weather satellites like Himawari-8 sometimes show the effects of non-weather events like volcanos, dust storms, wildfires, and floods. There are several good examples in YouTube videos by Australians WheresWally and WadesUnderworld. These effects could not be faked merely by computer simulation of 'known weather patterns'; they would have to be deliberately entered into the images by trained operatives, based on media reports or other sources. And it would be necessary for the operatives to scan a wide range of sources, to ensure that they enter all events that ought to show up in the images, otherwise the fakery would be easily exposed. It just shows the lengths that 'they' (NASA, etc) will go to in order to perpetuate the great satellite hoax!
I totally agree with you.
But the FE mindset doesn't know enough to realize all that, and in fact they have no lazy way to even confirm whether the dust storms seen on sat images are real.
That's why I'm trying to close the loop between the event and the observation, allowing the FE to witness or even cause the event, then see it in the live feed, or weather images, or whatever.
 
Bottom line: They won't be convinced by anything. There are 50,000 commercial vessels at sea right now, and none of them report anything unusual. Means nothing to FE beleivers. I've tried.


If you're interested, do it for yourself. But don't program your life around these people.
 
Probably it's a no-go for the full-disc images in the USA because each pixel probably covers several miles.
The 10000x10000 pixel full disk is interesting but I think they are not covering USA.
The GOES-16 & 17 CONUS product is probably the highest resolution, The red band, I think is highest.
https://rammb-slider.cira.colostate...s&p[0]=band_02&x=5992.1875&y=5466.66162109375
It looks black at night, but you can boost the brightness and see city lights, even making out some roads.
Metabunk 2020-04-28 09-55-59.jpg

Brightness is more important than size. You'd want to do like in the video, and have a very bright searchlight and/or laser. The good point here is that GOES-16 and GOES-17 are geostationary, so you should be able to have it fixed in position - just like aiming a satellite dish.
 
Back
Top