chuck22 wrote:Pull out your own telescope and you'll be able to confirm that there are no satellites. Radio waves run the show with encryption plus triangulation in conjunction for GPS. All such proprietary systems are set up for streams of income.
You said it chuck man.
Put these words into google images. "satelitte showing up in astronomy photography".
What might you expect?
A streak, or even numerous across the sky with the stars in the background?
The first page containing over 250 results has but 3 or 4 such images. 'Show more results" and there are hardly any more images. THis is odd. Given the rich profusion of orbiting satellites numbering in the thousands, you would expect that this phenomenon of satellites literally ruining astronomical photographic plates would be a hot topic among astronomers and that they would display their seeded goods on the net just as eagerly as they are wont to display their non seeded goods.
For some fair to middling contrast put these words into google images..."plane in front of moon". Not exactly the same thing but interesting.
The first result from above search about satellites leads to this site.
http://www.spaceacademy.net.au/watch/debris/gsd/gsd.htmScroll down and you come to this piece.
"
NATURAL SPACE DEBRIS AND SPACE TRAVEL
As well as artificial space debris there is also a population of natural space debris (meteoroids) that, while they don't orbit the Earth, do pass through all orbital altitudes. In fact prior to the space age, some scientists predicted that the hazard from natural debris might be so great as to make space travel very dangerous. In fact NASA spent considerable effort in trying to evaluate this hazard. Ground visual and radar observations were examined, and most of the early satellite carried meteoroid detectors.
The early satellite detectors were often microphones to record the sound of a meteoroid impact. A large number of impacts were recorded by these detectors and this appeared to reinforce the idea of a large natural orbiting debris cloud. This was referred to as an anomalous debris cloud because it indicated a population much larger than ground observations (mainly radar) could account for. Continued investigation found that microphone type detectors were registering impacts that were in fact expansion and contraction noises of satellite panels.
And thus it was found that the meteoroid collision hazard is usually low but not negligible."
The early satellite detectors were often microphones to record the sound of a meteoroid impact That would be all fine and dandy if you could record sound in space. Sound needs something to carry it i.e. air.
Satellites cannot exist in 'space' and this has been known since the start of 'space' exploration. This is because 'space' is not empty. If you follow the etymology of the the word SPACE you will find that it is only in the last few decades that the idea of space as being completely empty has come into vogue. Before that space was thought to be filled with 'the ether' or 'the luminiferous aether' or other substances including material ones.
This is the reason as I have stated here before, why early satellites were round metal balls and not the French haute couture gallianoesque contraptions we
sometimes see now.
All of this satellite pounding does not even take into account the ravages of a solar mass ejection. Would your garden shed survive a hurricane? Same principle.
Even at the end of the war the lads were still speculating on it all things beyond our atmosphere..
"
In 1918 Einstein publicly alluded to that new definition for the first time.[A 18] Then, in the early 1920s, in a lecture which he was invited to give at Lorentz's university in Leiden, Einstein sought to reconcile the theory of relativity with his mentor's cherished concept of the aether. In this lecture Einstein stressed that special relativity took away the last mechanical property of Lorentz's aether: immobility. However, he continued that special relativity does not necessarily rule out the aether, because the latter can be used to give physical reality to acceleration and rotation. This concept was fully elaborated within general relativity, in which physical properties (which are partially determined by matter) are attributed to space, but no substance or state of motion can be attributed to that "aether" (aether = curved space-time)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aetherThe Americans created the idea of 'space' equals 'nothingness' to avail of the mind bending possibilities that this idea opened up.
"
Typographical sense is attested from 1670s (typewriter space bar is from 1888). Space age is attested from 1946; spacewalk is from 1965. Many compounds first appeared in science fiction and speculative writing, e.g. spaceship (1894, "Journey in Other Worlds"); spacesuit (1920); spacecraft (1930, "Scientific American"); space travel (1931); space station (1936, "Rockets Through Space"); spaceman (1942, "Thrilling Wonder Stories;" earlier it meant "journalist paid by the length of his copy," 1892). Space race attested from 1959. Space shuttle attested by 1970."
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=spaceMore crap from the 'space debris' site..
http://www.spaceacademy.net.au/watch/debris/gsd/gsd.htm
"
When photographing near the celestial equator the problem becomes a lot worse because of the number of large satellites and debris objects that are in or near geosynchronous orbit. The following image shows almost 20 trails from these objects over a total of one hour exposure. Imaging was interrupted every 10 seconds for 10 seconds to allow underlying fainter objects to be seen. The bright short trail in the center of the image is the asteroid Vesta."
One hour exposure . Work it out lol.
Contributors here have said on more than one occasion that they have seen Satellites in the night sky.
?
?
I have spent many months over the last couple of years in an area in Middle Europe where the skies were totally lit up with stars. Maybe one unexplained light in all that time.
I would like these contributors to photograph what they see and post it online because I cant work it out personally.
