[iHeres the REAL ISS. No CGI here.[/i

Hey - Stan!

Look - Wellington on Google Earth, from an approximately similar altitude. Note the scale at bottom right (100 km)


Wellington on Google Maps - you need to zoom in to this sort of resolution (200m as opposed to 100km) to be able to make out the planes at Wellington airport.


But, as ever, don't let simple logic or incontrovertible facts stop your drivel

Hey, Stan! Upside down planes at Sydney airport imaged by the non-existent SPOT-7 mapping satellite, for some reason that escapes me. As (obviously) there IS no such satellite - how did they do that, I wonder? www.geo-airbusds.com/en/147-spot ... te-imagery

Hey, Stan! Upside down planes at Sydney airport imaged by the non-existent SPOT-7 mapping satellite, for some reason that escapes me. As (obviously) there IS no such satellite - how did they do that, I wonder? www.geo-airbusds.com/en/147-spot ... te-imagery

Er, that's what's known on our planet as a "swimming pool", Stan. You could have asked your five-year-old to explain that one to you.

But, where's the pool and water in my earlier shot of the ISS over NZ?

[iYou're full of bull..Planes fly at high altitude there's thousands of planes over the whole of south East Asia you would see the planes trails aswell too from the ISS. There should be plenty of technologies like telescopes cameras on the ISS to spot this, even the naked eye would spot a plane from the ISS. If you say you can see the ISS with the naked eye from Earth, then a plane can be observed in flight from the ISS...Its all a bunch of boloney. Silly twisted excuses as i predicted.And the ISS wasn't over NZ . The Vantage point was over India. See twisting it again.[Here it is again. So you don't get confused.[/i

Compared to what? 31,000 ft or so is what, 10km? You are telling me that a plane is appreciably more visible from 390km than from 400km? Is that really your point?

Quote ="FLAT STANLEY"there's thousands of planes over the whole of south East Asia you would see the planes trails as well too from the ISS.'"

No, you wouldn't. What you can see depends on your optics. The ISS video camera, far from being zoom, is more wide angle. It is designed to give the best possible overall view.

You are so confused it is unbelievable. The ISS is neither a telescope nor a ground mapping craft.

And it wouldn't matter if it was, as there are many satellites that do, which provide literally billions of images of almost anywhere on the globe, but you dismiss every single one as a fake, by rote, knee jerk. You'd do the same if they fitted similar to the ISS.

Quote ="FLAT STANLEY" There should be plenty of technologies like telescopes cameras on the ISS to spot this'"

WHY? The role of the ISS is nothing to do with high res ground mapping!! What bit of that do you not understand?


Obviously, it wouldn't. What I see from Earth is the light reflected from the ISS and that's because of the way the eye can detect very bright points of light against a very dark background. But I can't resolve the ISS. However given a decent enough set of optics, yes (as indeed I've shown you) you can image the ISS from Earth (and many amateurs and pro photographers of course do).

OF BLOODY COURSE in principle WITH THE RIGHT OPTICS you could zoom in and see a plane, but you ask why planes etc are not visible in images beamed down from the ISS and the answer is so simple it beats me why you can't grasp it.

But, I have a final test for you. I want to see if you are honest. I have spent some time searching around because I know astronauts are allowed to take - and do take - plenty of personal images in their spare time relaxing on the ISS, and I found one, taken through a Nikon D4 with an 1150mm telephoto lens, (that would be around 23X magnification) of Great Exuma Island in the Bahamas.

the intention was not to capture an image of a plane. But when analysed, someone spotted that the image does indeed capture a plane, and its twin contrails. From space. from the ISS. With a zoom camera.

The image both illustrates and proves every single point I have made on this issue.

Can you spot it?

[iHahahaha no it doesn't. Just as i predicted. A plethora of twisted ramblings. It's like playing Chess with a pigeon, it knocks over all the pieces, s all over the board and walks of cooing victorious claims. Seriously Tell Twin Peake's to shoot=#BF0000 authentic images of upside down planes flying over the poles and the so called globe with Star Constellations in the background. I'll gladly convert to Heliocentric bullsm if these images ever went viral. In fact if there was just one=#800000 Authentic image ever taken of the spinning Ball i would convert immediately. It'll never happen because=#BF0040 Authenticity is the keyword which debunks the whole heliocentric, Darwinian, Freemasonic, NASA space programming network Simples Hahah not one=#800040 authentic image/Film can be provided. of a spinning Ball.

[/i

You are indeed seriously stupid!
Of course given the right optics, what you desire (allegedly) can be provided.
But of course to get the plane in view and the Earth in the same shot, the Earth would be massive and it's curvature almost undetectable.
The plane would indeed be upside down to your view.
But then you would say that it had been inverted on your flat Earth.
You are a simpleton.

[iLove the Ad Hom Sherlock. A planes lights would be seen no problem. And them thousands of Satellites should be visible too. Optics.. yeah right. The ISS is an Optical illusion [/i

Them (sic) satellites will be visible given the right optics and conditions.
You did see the plane on the islands photo that FA provided did you?
I did.
If they are provided you don't see them or say they are faked.
Ad hom aside, that does make you look stubbornly and wilully STUPID!

:1ap48cu9
Wow, even plagiarising my analogy of you! Have you got NOTHING of your own?
:1ap48cu9
You are too stupid for words. Any image of a plane would only be possible in daylight when no stars could be visible, and even if they were, they wouldn't be a background to a plane which would onviously be flying over the surface of the Earth, you moron.

You're an inveterate liar too, since you ignore the Chinese image of the globe that I posted earlier. What is the point of asking, when you are determined to ignore whatever is provided to you, moron?

True! Carry on!

I agree, it a good lesson in sound Science vs a little learning is a dangerous thing.
The weirdness of someone who thinks the Earth is flat giving lessons in Science and logic ........ seriously weird!
I personally like different views, but there has to be SOME logic somewhere.

Hahahahahahahahaha, as far as I am aware, is not a properly reasoned reply to a carefully considered question.

Do these upside down planes (presumably only over Oz and NZ) flip back over to land?

[i

Quote ="Ferocious Aardvark"Wow, even=#BF0000 plagiarising my analogy of you! Have you got NOTHING of your own? You are to=#800000 stupid for words. Any image of a plane would only be possible in daylight when no stars could be visible, and even if they were, they wouldn't be a background to a plane which would onviously be flying over the surface of the Earth, you=#800000 moron. You're an =#BF0000inveterate liar too, since you ignore the Chinese image of the globe that I posted earlier. What is the point of asking, when you are determined to ignore whatever is provided to you, =#BF0040moron?'"

[/i
[iGee Whiz how many times can one abuse in a single post. Slander becomes the tool of the loser. More Ad Hominem[/i

I genuinely worry for your child.

You have put a montage of rocket shots together which show what?
That rockets have a trajectory?
Wow!
Guess what? .... they do!

But it is not a trick.
Whatever path they are on is influenced by a number of things, force of propulsion, stability, gravity and moreover from the observer's point of view we have the Earth's rotation which introduces an APPARENT arc to MOST launches.
That my friend is physics.

It wasn't you of course who put together this nonsense which implies that all rockets are fireworks and as random as you are.
But you buy into this shoite.

In that clip we have, space rockets, missiles, failed launches and basically anyyhing that can go bang.
All in an effort to show space launches don't go straight up but curve to the flat and return to Earth in some uncontrolled fashion.
A lot of the launches in that clip aren't vertical anyway.
Stop calling space rockets fireworks, they aren't, they are controlled.

Stan is a moron. He has long given up any attempt at discussion or debate, he just inevitably posts abuse, mockery, derision and incomp[rhensible wild unrelated drivel. That is moronic.

Or, perhaps, he is not a moron, which would be worse as then he would be behaving like this deliberately.

He no longer has any wish to even think for a second about any of the many posts aimed at charitably and patiently trying to get him to face reality. He's happy in his religious nutjob delusional playground with his delusional halfwit YouTubers.

Either way I am done with being relatively polite with him since it is hardly reciprocated, he's an ignorant delusional troll and I'll in future treat the moron accordingly.

[iGee whiz i think Guinness needs to see this. Congratulations Aardvark you've won the most angst poster of all time never-mind the year award and also another record for the most ad hominem names posted in one post. Now i'll deter from lowering myself down to your level by calling you in return. However the word religious fits accordingly to your world view. The pearls i cast really make you that angst that you converse in Ad Hominem vitriolic abuse.. I'm sorry that the pearls of truth hurt you this way, cognitive dissonance is the diagnosis. Cheer up Bradford play my hometown Swinton tonight you'll be glad to know you'll finally get one over on me for once.

[/i

Likewise. Amusement aside, it's deeply concerning to think of any child growing up in such a delusional environment.

[iHow dare one sheep think/believe differently than the rest of the sheep. I worry for your children too, having being indoctrinated into the toxic mainstream world view. My kids are surrounded by love you know love that was Created by God not that love what magically evolved from rocks. My kids are blessings, are yours. ? Baaaaa [/i

Lol. I'm not the one who belongs to a cult whose leaders regularly refer to them as a flock.

Isn't the Lord your shepherd?

It's all a God vs Science battle with these chavs.
Clearly Science wins because, well for a start off, God never turned up!

It's a pity that Stan can't use his energies better and debunk God.

He won't of course, because if it is Kirkstaller reborn, Jesus came to see him in his back garden ... no not a trespassing tramp ... Jesus!
I think I would think Jesus too if someone was rummaging around my back garden!

No back passage jokes please!

Given that your kids are presumably like grasshoppers, do you keep them in a vivarium, and what do you feed them?