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
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Zane O'Neill Debunking the Space Preservation Act 2001 which mentions "Chemtrails" Contrails and Chemtrails 10
P Needs Debunking: "Alien interview" from the documentary Area 51: Alien interview UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 2
gtoffo Needs Debunking: "UFO crash" near Rio de Janeiro UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 17
Code-Beta Needs Debunking: CE-5, humans initiating UFO sightings UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 8
Mick West Debunking Correlations Between 5G deployments and Coronavirus Coronavirus COVID-19 14
Pumpernickel 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 13
Mick West TFTRH #34 - Stian Arnesen: Debunking, Censorship, 9/11, and UFOs Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 0
H Need Debunking: Hernando County platforms from more than 10 miles Flat Earth 9
Bill Statler Needs debunking: "Magnetic water" for treating diabetes Health and Quackery 8
Mick West TFTRH #14: Rory – Flat Earth Debunking and Spiritual Journeys Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 6
Qulaey Two problems need help debunking and debating tips? please. Flat Earth 9
Scaramanga The Easy And Logical Debunking Of UFO 'Size' UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
Mendel MediaWise #IsThisLegit program Practical Debunking 1
brad fuller Does the inverse-square law apply to the flat-earth debunking tool chest? Flat Earth 4
mudr0 Need Debunking: Video claiming zigzaggin objects and movement prove EVA filmed in pool General Discussion 33
vooke Need debunking: Writings in the sky Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 11
Mick West Debunking 9/11 Microsphere Myths 9/11 0
Starman Debunking Bob Lazar's drawing of S-4 hangers UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 15
Mick West Debunking Guidelines for: "Convex Earth - The Documentary" Flat Earth 0
T Debunking needed – anomalous mp3 recording distortion UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 12
Mick West Here's to the "Debunker"! Practical Debunking 1
ConfusedHominid Need Debunking (Claim): Metabunk Curve Calculator Does Not Calculate for Angular Size Flat Earth 13
Mick West NY Times: In Italian Schools, Reading, Writing and Recognizing Fake News Practical Debunking 60
Mick West Debunking: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Efficacy of Messages Countering Misinformation Practical Debunking 5
Rory Where online is debunking most effective? Practical Debunking 14
Whitebeard Martymer 81 Practical Debunking 4
N Neeson's anti-debunking thoughts Site Feedback & News 15
Mick West Fireproof Cabbage, Burning Snow, Flat Earth - Are Some Things too Silly to Debunk? Practical Debunking 7
Mick West Burying the Debunk: How Fake News about "Pyramids" in Antarctica Creates False Balance UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 2
Mick West Debunking911.com offline - How to Preserve Good Debunking Sites? 9/11 3
Mick West When Absence of Evidence is Evidence of Absence in Conspiracy Theories Practical Debunking 35
Rogerpenna Debunking Flat Earth with the Southern Hemisphere Flat Earth 11
Leifer Polite video interviewing/debunking Practical Debunking 8
Veronica! Any resources for debunking a 'cold case' UFO sighting? Practical Debunking 7
M Flat Earth theory simple debunking by the moon's appearance Flat Earth 48
mrfintoil Study: When Debunking Scientific Myths Fails (and When It Does Not) Practical Debunking 3
deirdre study on how to 'sway people' Practical Debunking 0
Leifer Pseudo debunking, trickery, product promos Health and Quackery 10
MikeG College Course on Conspiracies Practical Debunking 89
Leifer Harriet Hall, on debunking methods Practical Debunking 2
keefe Debunking guide Practical Debunking 3
Critical Thinker Why we debunk and who do we reach. Practical Debunking 2
G Needs debunking: Video of a solar eclipse is fake because we cannot see the moon covering the sun Flat Earth 5
Trigger Hippie Russian Troll Houses Practical Debunking 24
Mick West Finding the Original Source in a World of Aggregators, Shares, and Reposts Practical Debunking 32
David Ridlen Earth curvature refraction experiments - debunking flat/concave Earth Flat Earth 344
Mackdog Google to start debunking General Discussion 21
SabreSaint Need Debunking: CERN To Recreate Big Bang Science and Pseudoscience 26
Mick West Charlie Hebdo Conspiracy Theories - Ignore or Address? Conspiracy Theories 255
Pete Tar Vox article on Debunking, avoiding The Backfire Effect Practical Debunking 0
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top