Satellites : general discussion and musings

[fbenario]

*

One of my favorite Zappa tunes...


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjPlhb4f9P8

Unlike Green Day (among many similar examples), who are stupid guys that sometimes make smart music, Zappa is a smart guy making stupid music, which critics cloak in terms like 'jazz improvisation, 'technically superb guitar-playing and top-notch drumming', 'odd and unexpected time signatures', and such-like, in a failed attempt to make it seem to be hi-falutinly worth their time. Please, gag me with a spoon. While some of his 60s stuff is marginally listenable, his oeuvre as a whole is a bunch of entirely unnecessary mental masturbation.

Except, of course, for this, with his daughter Moon Unit pretending to sing.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB8JVTDOK-g
[ADMIN: This was a Zappa fan upload of the song "Valley Girl with lyrics" which was removed by YouTube or the user and doesn't seem worth replacing as it's somewhat off topic anyway. - HP Dec. 21, 2017]

[fbenario]

Knowledge is power is probably the simplest explanation.

Wouldn't it be nice if all the myriad forms, and contents of, the manifold knowledge discovered and uncovered on this forum could somehow be monetized to support the forum's continued existence. Sounds good to me.

[fbenario]

As I believe you are more than welcome to have your opinion on this subject since nothing has actually been concretely proven either way, curiously missing is a post immediately following, attacking your character for an opinion opposite to his from a certain member whose conduct I mentioned yesterday. The post prior to this and immediately after by time stamp and in different subjects contain mild knocks from him to the posting authors but you were curiously skipped, and in of all things, a topic near and dear to him.

It only took one day to prove my point, and perhaps someone will take notice.

Oh, come on, Libero! You'll recall I posted yesterday 4 names of new members whose future absence from the forum would pain me. Your name was one of them. This means I have found your posts helpful, informative, and think they contribute to the forum's goals in every way. You also seem, to me at least, to have a good heart and want the world to be a better place for us all.

Can you see how the quoted material (whether or not you have a point) distracts the forum from its goals, wastes the time of everyone reading it, and makes the forum seem a less congenial place for prospective new members, who might be ready to approach us with good hearts and something valuable to contribute? Remember, no one else's sins or flaws justify your own, ever at any time. If another member is a jerk to you in some way, point out the analytical holes in his posts ONCE AND ONLY ONCE, otherwise leave him be.

I know you can do better, and I don't know the first thing about you. Please do so.

[Libero]

As I believe you are more than welcome to have your opinion on this subject since nothing has actually been concretely proven either way, curiously missing is a post immediately following, attacking your character for an opinion opposite to his from a certain member whose conduct I mentioned yesterday. The post prior to this and immediately after by time stamp and in different subjects contain mild knocks from him to the posting authors but you were curiously skipped, and in of all things, a topic near and dear to him.

It only took one day to prove my point, and perhaps someone will take notice.

Oh, come on, Libero! You'll recall I posted yesterday 4 names of new members whose future absence from the forum would pain me. Your name was one of them. This means I have found your posts helpful, informative, and think they contribute to the forum's goals in every way. You also seem, to me at least, to have a good heart and want the world to be a better place for us all.

Can you see how the quoted material (whether or not you have a point) distracts the forum from its goals, wastes the time of everyone reading it, and makes the forum seem a less congenial place for prospective new members, who might be ready to approach us with good hearts and something valuable to contribute? Remember, no one else's sins or flaws justify your own, ever at any time. If another member is a jerk to you in some way, point out the analytical holes in his posts ONCE AND ONLY ONCE, otherwise leave him be.

I know you can do better, and I don't know the first thing about you. Please do so.

fbenario,

Many thanks for the kind words, however yesterday I made an insinuation and today I provided the proof. I also care about the integrity of this forum, if you hadn't noticed. And if the new members are constantly being attacked, especially falsely, can you see how this can possibly be productive?

I stand by what I posted today and I hardly think that it was counterproductive. But to each his own.

Edit: Having had the night to think things through, I believe I will extend the olive branch to Reichstag and let bygones be bygones and so forth. We'll just chalk it up to being one big misunderstanding... no harm, no foul.

[Frost]

Frost wrote:
What about satellites deployed by american shuttles ...
Heiwa wrote:
They are evidently fake...

http://www.myalbum.co.uk/GroteFoto-YDT3RQ7M.jpg

So we have two kinds of satellites.Fake and real ones.Both work perfectly well.

[Heiwa]

Frost wrote:
What about satellites deployed by american shuttles ...
Heiwa wrote:
They are evidently fake...

http://www.myalbum.co.uk/GroteFoto-YDT3RQ7M.jpg

So we have two kinds of satellites.Fake and real ones.Both work perfectly well.

No, you have not understood, blocked by indoctrination of some kind. The shuttles Discovery, Challenger, Coulombia, etc. cannot have disposed of any orbiting satellites or anything, because the shuttles are all hoaxes for the simple reason they cannot re-enter intact. They burn up on re-entry.

The shuttles are just a simple scam to rip off money from US tax payers. Basic! Only real rockets, e.g. our French Arianes, can deploy satellites into Earth orbits.

[Frost]

I understand you very well. You don't need to repeat that shuttles are fake, I already said so. That's not a problem. The problem is: They deployed several satellites as we've been told. They have names, locations, a list of TV channels they provide and you can point them with your dish (or you could in the past) My question is : How were they deployed? Secretly by Arianes? Is this possible? Secret series launches of rockets? And please refrain from comments like the one about indoctrination. Just answer my question.

[mayor]

No, you aren't understanding.

Here on the forums there is extensive study on these so-called satellites not being what they're made out to be. Simply put, these space waves propagated by TPTB which are, more likely, skywaves, signals bounded off of devices here on the surface.

[Heiwa]

@Frost
I don't know how many satellites are up there orbiting Earth but I assume some are real, i.e. sent up by real rockets and some are fake, the latter part of some financial crime, money laundering or tax evasion or similar scheme as per usual NASA standard. You know, it is very difficult for the tax man to check assets up in space.

[fast67vellen2o]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49332445/ns ... nce-space/

[reichstag fireman]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49332445/ns ... nce-space/

fast67vellen2o,

What is noteworthy in that article (about "space junk")? Will you provide an explanation, please?

[Dcopymope]

After the enormous amount of research piled on this thread, no conclusion has been made that proves without any shadow of a doubt that satellites are real or fake, and I would say no conclusion ever will be made at this point. I guess that's why this thread is titled 'musings', it can go on forever.

[reichstag fireman]

no conclusion has been made that proves without any shadow of a doubt that satellites are real or fake

Well I am totally convinced of the non-existence of artificial satellites. They are vapourware.

What burden of proof are you using, Dcopymore, and how are you applying logic to arguments for and against?
You must have applied very different evidential standards when deciding to believe in God.

[fast67vellen2o]

fast67vellen2o,

What is noteworthy in that article (about "space junk")? Will you provide an explanation, please?

I'm sorry. I jumped the gun on my post. I tried linking the photo in the article. The photo that the Pleiades Earth observation satellite took of the Envisat satellite looked to be completely bogus. I'm not much of an expert on such things but I was just trying to contribute.

[reichstag fireman]

The photo that the Pleiades Earth observation satellite took of the Envisat satellite looked to be completely bogus.

[RF: this image?]

Aside the larger question of the non-existence of artificial satellites: what is it in that image which makes you sure that it is "completely bogus"? Your conclusion must have been based on personal study. Please talk us through that analytical process.