Debunking "That's not a Space Station, it's an airplane"

Sam Hill

New Member
I took a look at some projected ISS transits over the United States, looking for one for which I could pick two observers with simultaneous and directly opposite observing locations. I found one on March 6, 2016 that fit the bill: it had a maximum apparent elevation at 5:00:40am Spokane WA time, and 5:59:39am El Paso TX time, one time zone over. Maximum elevation only 61 seconds apart, that's the best I could do for a simultaneous observation, and those observers in those two locations were looking pretty much directly at each other. This is important, because it means the angles of elevation from each location can be used to calculate the elevation above ground of the object being observed. Spokane and El Paso are 1237 miles apart, according to Google Maps "Distance Measure" tool. (I understand that an FE supporter might challenge that distance as being tainted by RE math, and I'll come back to that.) According to the ISS Astroviewer page (links at the bottom) an observer in Spokane saw the ISS rise to a maximum elevation of 14° above the horizon to the South East, while the El Paso observer saw it at 21° to the North West. Taking for the moment a flat-earth model, we thus have an obtuse triangle with a side (ground distance between the cities) and two angles known, we can calculate the rest. The angle formed at the vertex occupied by the object in the sky is 145°. The Law Of Sines allows us to calculate the line-of-sight distances from each observer to the object. The Spokane leg of the triangle is 772.9 miles, and the El Paso leg is 521.7 miles. From there, we can calculate the height above ground of the object using the Law Of Sine again, calculated using each observer's angle. The result is 186.97 miles high. This is far, far higher than any known aircraft has ever flown, or ever could fly. Therefore, we can conclude that the object observed at the sky location projected to contain the ISS is not an airplane.

Possible objections:
1) Maybe the elevations are wrong? I think we can take the projected elevation angles as accurate (instead of going out and observing it ourselves) because if they were not it would be very easy to expose the error, and should have been done by now. Amateur astronomers use these online resources without reporting massive errors, after all.
2) Maybe the distance from Spokane to El Paso is wrong? Perhaps it is, I'll grant you that. Let's say we call it 1 'ground unit' of unknown distance and do the math that way. We end up with the object being at an elevation of 0.15 ground units. Or put another way, Spokane and El Paso are 6.5 times as far apart as the object's elevation. Commercial aircraft typically operate with a ceiling of 42,000 feet, or 8 miles, so if the object is a commercial aircraft then El Paso is only 52 miles from Spokane. The aircraft with the highest known operating ceiling ever, the SR-71, could fly as high as 85,000 feet, or 16 miles, so if the object is a spy plane then El Paso is only 104 miles from Spokane. I think we can all agree that El Paso and Spokane are much farther apart than this.
3) A one minute time difference between observations? Maybe that is too much difference for these observations to be comparable when the object is visible for only four minutes? Seems like it is, yes. However, the object sweeps across the sky in a fairly flat curve, especially as viewed from Spokane. It rises from 10° to 14° and falls back to 10° during the transit. Doing the math again with Spokane's lowest elevation still yields an elevation of 149.46 miles, far too high to be any airplane we know about.

Spokane: http://iss.astroviewer.net/observation.php?lon=-117.4260466&lat=47.6587802&name=Spokane
El Paso: http://iss.astroviewer.net/observation.php?lon=-106.4850217&lat=31.7618778&name=El Paso

Replies
8
Views
812
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
101
Views
17K
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Needs debunking: flat earthers claim this reflection to show a harness in ISS video Flat Earth 10
Debunking the Space Preservation Act 2001 which mentions "Chemtrails" Contrails and Chemtrails 10
Debunking resource: Engineers Assess the Truth in AE911Truth (Scott & Hamburger, 2021) 9/11 9
Needs debunking: Pentagon plane could have been shot down 9/11 10
Need Debunking: Concert photograph from 8/27/21 (Billy Strings) fans claiming UFO. No eyewitness that I know of. UFOs and Aliens 12
Need help debunking FE video Flat Earth 42
Debunking backfiring Practical Debunking 36
Need Debunking: Apollo 12 LM caught on a wire Conspiracy Theories 12
Need Debunking: "Experimental Vaccine Death Rate for Israel's Elderly 40 Times Higher Than COVID-19 Deaths" Coronavirus COVID-19 7
Gabriel Sterling Debunking Trumps Accusations from the Raffernsperger Call Election 2020 3
Needs Debunking: That the GPS does not implement time corrections from Einstein's relativity Science and Pseudoscience 7
Needs Debunking: Proposed COVID Vaccine will become part of our DNA, make us programmable Coronavirus COVID-19 37
Needs Debunking: "UFO crash" near Rio de Janeiro UFOs and Aliens 17
Needs Debunking: CE-5, humans initiating UFO sightings UFOs and Aliens 15
Debunking Correlations Between 5G deployments and Coronavirus Coronavirus COVID-19 14
Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 16
TFTRH #34 - Stian Arnesen: Debunking, Censorship, 9/11, and UFOs Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 0
Need Debunking: Hernando County platforms from more than 10 miles Flat Earth 9
Needs debunking: "Magnetic water" for treating diabetes Health and Quackery 8
TFTRH #14: Rory – Flat Earth Debunking and Spiritual Journeys Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 6
Two problems need help debunking and debating tips? please. Flat Earth 9
The Easy And Logical Debunking Of UFO 'Size' UFOs and Aliens 1
MediaWise #IsThisLegit program Practical Debunking 1
Does the inverse-square law apply to the flat-earth debunking tool chest? Flat Earth 4
Need Debunking: Video claiming zigzaggin objects and movement prove EVA filmed in pool General Discussion 33
Need debunking: Writings in the sky Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 11
Debunking 9/11 Microsphere Myths 9/11 0
Debunking Bob Lazar's drawing of S-4 hangers UFOs and Aliens 15
Debunking Guidelines for: "Convex Earth - The Documentary" Flat Earth 0
Debunking needed – anomalous mp3 recording distortion Ghosts, Monsters, and the Paranormal 12
Here's to the "Debunker"! Practical Debunking 1
Need Debunking (Claim): Metabunk Curve Calculator Does Not Calculate for Angular Size Flat Earth 13
NY Times: In Italian Schools, Reading, Writing and Recognizing Fake News Practical Debunking 60
Debunking: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Efficacy of Messages Countering Misinformation Practical Debunking 5
Where online is debunking most effective? Practical Debunking 14
Martymer 81 Practical Debunking 4
Neeson's anti-debunking thoughts Site Feedback & News 15
Fireproof Cabbage, Burning Snow, Flat Earth - Are Some Things too Silly to Debunk? Practical Debunking 7
Burying the Debunk: How Fake News about "Pyramids" in Antarctica Creates False Balance Ghosts, Monsters, and the Paranormal 2
Debunking911.com offline - How to Preserve Good Debunking Sites? 9/11 3
When Absence of Evidence is Evidence of Absence in Conspiracy Theories Practical Debunking 35
Debunking Flat Earth with the Southern Hemisphere Flat Earth 11
Polite video interviewing/debunking Practical Debunking 8
Any resources for debunking a 'cold case' UFO sighting? Practical Debunking 7
Flat Earth theory simple debunking by the moon's appearance Flat Earth 48
Study: When Debunking Scientific Myths Fails (and When It Does Not) Practical Debunking 3
study on how to 'sway people' Practical Debunking 0
Pseudo debunking, trickery, product promos Health and Quackery 10
College Course on Conspiracies Practical Debunking 89
Harriet Hall, on debunking methods Practical Debunking 2
Related Articles