The Existence of Satellites is a Fraud and a Hoax? Here's 5 Ways You Can Know For Sure

in science •  7 years ago 

I can't believe that I am really having to write this article, but we've been discussing the recent rise in people who believe in a flat earth, and one of the things flat earthers deny is the existence of satellites. This is because they believe that we live under an impenetrable dome, and hence space does not actually exist.

When your fantasy cosmology requires space to not exist, well, the existence of satellites is an inconvenient fact that needs to be explained away somehow. One way they have done this is to simply deny they exist, or to claim that the lights we see in the sky passing over us are just fake satellites attached to weather balloons as part of a giant conspiracy designed to trick us into believing that space and satellites really exist.

satellite_orbin.png
Image Credit: Kirkland Air Force Base

In support of their insane theory, Flat earthers will put up deceptive videos like one entitled 'PUTTING TO REST FAKE SATELLITES USING HALE TELESCOPE' (google it if you wish, but I'm not going to promote this deceptive video by linking to it). This sounds very scientific. If one of the most powerful satellites in the world proves satellites don't exists, well, it must be true!

But this is just another one of the flat earth lies (not even a half truth in this video, just outright lying) and the sum total of all the 'evidence' in the video that claims to 'put to rest' the existence of satellites, is this image, without any supporting evidence. Literally, there is nothing more about satellites in the entire video.


Image Credit: the video mentioned above

Unfortunately, the vast majority of the video is just a series of psychological triggers, such as attempting to associate the moon landing and NASA with Nazis, and an image saying, "Level 6 thinkers prove the earth is a stationary linear plane". Apparently, Level 6 thinkers think the earth is not just a plane, but a 'linear' one (very strange), and don't require evidence, just claims, since there was no evidence satellites don't exist.

Sadly, this video has over 200,000 views and there are actually people who believe this and keep spreading this video around as if it actually contains evidence proving satellites don't exist when it doesn't. Because of this, I wanted to give you all the evidence you need to prove that satellites do, indeed, exist using your own observations.

1. See Them Yourself

The first proof satellites actually exist is that you can simply see them yourself. There are several ways you can track satellites and even get phone alerts when one is going to be in your area. There are several phone apps, including:


Image Credit: HotAstronomy

While many of these satellites are too small to really see anything but lights in the sky, if you have a telescope or a really good zoom on your camera, you can actually see the International Space Station (ISS) yourself just as thousands of people have, like astronomer Torsten Edelmann did when he caught the transit of the ISS across the moon in this time lapse just above.

2. Satellite Dishes Pointing in the Direction of the Geostationary Satellites

Geostationary satellites are satellites that orbit the earth at a speed that makes them appear to be stationary relative to the earth. Most satellite dishes for internet get their satellite signals from these satellites because most areas of the world can connect to a single geostationary satellite located on the equator.


IMage Credit: Pixabay

Flat earthers deny this and say that the dishes on people's homes are really just getting data from ground based towers and not satellites. However, if you go on Google earth, or travel to extreme latitudes, you can compare where each area points their dishes. You will find that each area on earth points their dish to the equator. At the equator, dishes are pointed straight up. This is pretty solid evidence that satellites really do exist.

3. Check the raw satellite data against known events

Here's a fun way you can prove that the raw satellite data is real and hasn't been faked. There are three sets (that I am aware of) of raw satellite data that is freely available for public use:

  1. Himawari 8 Satellite- live image every 8 minutes
  2. GOES Satellite
  3. Copernicus Satellite Data- shout out to @fredrikaa for letting me know about this one

As an example of what you can do, this guy took the Himawari satellite data, cross checked it against a cloud pattern someone took from a plane, and matched up the date, time, and location of the flight and found the exact cloud pattern on the satellite data.

Such level of detail would be impossible to fake, and since anyone can check this data for themselves against weather patterns, tornados, hurricanes, wildfires, or even to Count Penguin Populations in Antarctica there would simply be no way to fake this data, especially with the incredibly high resolution each of the images provides.

4. Watching Satellite flares

Satellite flares are glints of sunlight that reflect off the surface of satellites and can be seen with with the naked eye at night. Iridium satellites are a group of 60+ satellites that are well-known for their particularly bright flares due to the size and configuration of their solar panels. Below is a video of an amateur capturing an iridium flare.

These flares can even be predicted with great accuracy, and you can go to the website Heavens-Above to track satellite flares, or some of the satellite tracking apps mentioned above also track irridium flares and will notify you of when one will occur in your area.

5. Geostationary Satellites in Star Trails

Star trails are those beautiful time lapse images of the stars that show the stars as they appear to circle the earth during the night like the one below.


Image Credit: By A. Duro/ESO via Wikimedia Commons

Well, as we mentioned, geostationary satellites are satellites that appear stationary relative to the earth. As such, they don't move on star trails and, as such, you can see these satellites as a ball of light amidst all of the lines of stars. This evidence rules out the possibility that these are fake satellites attached to weather balloons, as well, since weather balloons cannot remain stationary, particularly for months and years on end like these geostationary satellites do.

Bonus!

As an added bonus of supporting evidence for the existence of satellites, but not included in the 5 above because not directly observable, are all of the companies that make satellites and their equipment, such as: Spacex, United Launch Alliance, Bloostar, Interorbital Systems (which makes affordable 'hobby' satellites for private individuals), Arianespace, Vulcan Aerospace, and hundreds of others into which venture capitalists have invested over $8 billion in the past 5 years alone.(1).

Just think about it, does it make more sense that satellites just really do exist and what you are seeing are truly satellites, or that the government pays companies to do work to make fake satellites, fake launches, and even keep fake satellites flying through the air constantly on weather balloons, somehow keeping them flying around the world on a tight schedule (balloons are at the mercy of the winds) such that they give us apps to track them?

Since we can actually see satellites and match the raw data to real life events in the world, it's safe to say that satellites really do exist. If you don't believe me, you can find out for yourself in at least 5 easy ways.

Love science? Join us on the SteemStem project.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Two nights ago I was watching the meteor shower. There were minimum 5 a minute, in all directions. One of them flared a bright phosphorescent green (I was worried about that one for an instant...)

Flat earthers don't have an explanation for this, nor a predictive mechanism to know when the next one is.

But then, they don't believe in satellites either. So when one sees satelites moving across the sky, or shooting stars.....it's just more magical logic from them.

Yes, I saw a few good ones too, good sized ones. It's part of the Geminid Meteor Shower. We'll move right into the Quadrantids meteor shower around the 3rd of January as the first major meteor shower of 2018. All part of the annual movement through space in our elliptical orbit around the sun.

The green light from a meteor is a sign that neverbeast is about to wake up. Hehehe... pixiehollow thing.

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

As much as one may laugh with this matter, it is rather a deplorable situation underlining a very serious one...

This article is an absolute gem in my books and I want to thank you for all the great education you provide to the masses through your excellent writing skills, links and, I guess, humour!

Upvoted for its high quality content, resteemed to spread the "gospel" ;) and shared.

Namaste :)

Superb article.

Let's just hope we don't get too many of those flat-earth people posting their 30+ "video proof" comments in here :/

I always wonder about the general format of those posts. It seems like a lot of pseudo-science ends up resorting to "evidence" bombing where they put tons of videos and arguments in a single post, hoping to convince someone by the sheer number of arguments they've found.

Though, of course, it's often video's like the one you showed that talk a lot and turn around the point, without ever proving it XD

It does become argumentation whack-a-mole as they refuse to address any points in depth.

Congratulations @kerriknox, this post is the tenth most rewarded post (based on pending payouts) in the last 12 hours written by a Hero account holder (accounts that hold between 10 and 100 Mega Vests). The total number of posts by Hero account holders during this period was 354 and the total pending payments to posts in this category was $6215.39. To see the full list of highest paid posts across all accounts categories, click here.

If you do not wish to receive these messages in future, please reply stop to this comment.

This flat earth nonsense is belligerent anti-intellectualism. One of the grade-school kids who regularly visits the library told me she thought the earth was flat. Admittedly, she wasn't old enough to have studied plane geometry, much less spherical geometry, but still, it was unnerving.

If you haven’t seen this yet, you might love it:

Such poignant points, I just sincerely hope you aren't simply screaming into the void.

Why do you spend so much time debunking these ridiculous theories?
It's like spending hours explaining why santa klaus doesn't exist, I mean you never see people doing this..
Responding to these claims in such detailed fashion gives conspiracy theories more weight than they deserve, so probably not the desired outcome..

Oh I don't know.

Threre's a lot of potential to educate oneself.

To debunk something requires knowledge and specifics and the ability to articulate stuff.

One might know the flat earth stuff is retarded but can one (you?) debunk it with actual scientific argument and specifics? I sure couldn't before I started. I realized that I knew it was retarded but couldn't actually articulate WHY, other than 'that's retarded'.

Knowing it's dumb, and being able to articulate why, are two very different things. It's been very educational learning WHY the flat earth arguments are, well, retarded (I think that's the best descriptor for them).

That's definitely one of the thoughts and is a valid complaint. However, there is very little good information out there countering this with easily accessible information that plays by 'their' rules that you have to be able to see things yourself or be able to do the experiments yourself to prove it.

This movement is growing , and is growing particularly in developing world countries like Indonesia and some African countries. Providing a counterpoint could at least keep some of those 'on the fence' from going over into complete cult mentality... or maybe it won't. I don't know.

I definitely hear where you are coming from and don't necessarily disagree. But it's what I'm into at the moment, and if anyone could show I was doing more harm than good, I'd stop doing it, but I'd like to believe I'm doing more good than harm.

I learn a lot about the earth doing this, and I try to make it educational for everyone as well. Like, how many people know you can do star trails of geostationary satellites or get an app to track the ISS?

I think this artical is best today

Thanks for the well-researched well-written article - always good to have an arsenal of provable facts as a rebuttal to the ridiculous flat earthers. Can't believe it's even a discussion.

Excellent article. The problem is, you are attempting to apply logic and facts to change the beliefs of people that choose not to rely on such structures.

I just never get how flat earthers continue to believe in the face of solid evidence. Keep fighting the good fight @kerriknox.

"I just never get how flat earthers continue to believe in the face of solid evidence."

This meme explains it perfectly.

I've seen them while working at night on wildfires.

I flew up above 30000 ft and I dont see any sign of dome.

It's invisible, silly.

I don't doubt they exist, but I have never met anyone so naive to think that the world is flat. With all we know now about space, why would anyone still believe such nonsense?

Dude not only are there flat earthers there are middle earthers as well. They don't believe in the existence of the poles.

Un-freaking-believable.

Proud Flat Earther here - wandering into a quagmire. :)

Dont be proud of using this same tired ass meme.

Tired ass (as every meme is) is what makes a meme a meme. This one specifically also happens to be full of wisdom.

Please stop being proud of being stupid. You have a brain. Please use it.

Bummer, steemit is sizing that graphic incorrectly...

LOL.

it is incredible that today there are still people who believe in the theory of the flat earth.

I love this recent rise in skepticism surrounding commonly agreed upon topics. It's all pretty retarded but it keeps conversation interesting. It's all, "prove me wrong bro!" logic.

I'm starting to think the Earth is flat myself. Just for the laugh though.

Akhirnya saya sudah sadar tentang semua ini

To win an argument with a flat earther, just ask them to explain day and night. That's right they also don't believe the Earth is rotating its very sad.

All of your points are correct, but personally I think the biggest clue to satellites being real is, why would somebody go into so much trouble and expense just to make us believe the earth is round and not flat?

They also believe that microbes don't exist and the microsope is a tool of Satan. Disease is actually demonic possession.

Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of earth
And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;
Sunward I've climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth
Of sun-split clouds - and done a hundred things
You have not dreamed of - wheeled and soared and swung
High in the sunlit silence. Hov'ring there,
I've chased the shouting wind along, and flung
My eager craft through footless halls of air.
Up, up the long, delirious, burning blue
I've topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace
Where never lark, or even eagle flew -
And, while with silent lifting mind I've trod
The high untrespassed sanctity of space,
Put out my hand.... and touched the face of God.

                                           "High Flight" by John Gillespie Magee Jr.

Thanks for share information. This post very usefu in the world educator. I like post @kerriknox....amazing post my friend

I see moving objects in space at night, they are satellites right?

Geostationary satellites are a dream - please consider:
A geostationary satellite is a body that DOES NOT MOVE in relation to the ground below it. Now traditional satellites use a smart equation - and thus can be somewhat believable (not that I do).
However a geosationary satelite says that I can take a very large metallic object, say the size of an SUV- take it straight up in the air - let it go: and it will just magically float there for decades.....
Wait I must be missing something right??
Ah but the speed of its orbit is what keeps it afloat, right? - wait- what 'speed' of orbit?
If the only objects we are considering are the Earth and the satellite relative to one another, and by its very definition the satellite is GEO STATIONARY: then what you are telling me is you just take an object into the sky - let it go - and it will magically hover there for decades totally breaking its gravitational bonds with the Earth.

What goes up must come down. Another asinine masonic theory easily disproven with childs logic.

Also, next full moon - bust out your hi definition camera and videotape the moon, you should be able to see THOUSANDS of satellites as small dots as they block the light of the moon in their orbit. Count them.

Spoiler alert - done this many times - answer is zero.

I think this post is a good starting point - but it shows how weak you are in your belief systems when you are CONTINUOUSLY insulting those which have a differing belief system than yours, especially when your first point of evidence is an android app...

Denial of easily observable reality is not a belief system, it's simply denial. And why would we see THOUSANDS of satellites swarming around the moon? You seem to have no understanding of the concepts you deny. When you are going to reject a theory, to do it intelligently, it helps to actually understand the model and concepts you are rejecting. For instance, relative speeds, and how much space there is per satellite.

satellites why we don't see them.jpg

Well, you continue to try to insult me , yet you didn't respond to my main point: how can geostationary satellites avoid the pull of the Earths gravity when there are only two objects in said system, and they ARE NOT MOVING in relation to each other?
And I never said Satellites would be SWARMING around the moon, but the numbers vary between 1.100 and 3.500 operational and defunct satellites depending on your source and in addition 21 THOUSAND pieces of space debris larger than 10 cm....

So my challenge to you is go out on a full moon and with a high def camera, on a clear night, take a single video still or photo of ANYTHING in between you and the light of the moon. Again spoiler it will not happen, because things dont magically float around in space.

Where is your 'easily observable reality'? On an android app? On NASAs website? A photo with a fish-eye lens? I think your definition of 'observable reality' might be a bit off scope..
Again since you insult my response yet provide no intellectual debate yourself, I will further explain how the very concept of satellites is farcical.

Textbook and observable physics: A bullet dropped and a bullet fired along a straight parallel to the horizon will make contact with the ground at the same exact millisecond. Please reread that, then go look it up. This is how physics work in observable reality - it has even been proven on the show 'mythbusters', if it's too hard to grasp for you.

What this means: even thought there is an enormous change in speed in relation to the surface of the Earth, there is no difference whatsoever in the downwards pull of gravity against any object, be it dropped or moving at hundreds of feet per second. Welcome to reality.
The satellite idea was cooked up by theoretical physicists on paper, and it's called 'Newton's Cannon' the ridiculous concept that if you took a powerful enough cannon onto a tall enough mountain and fired it, it would magically float around the Earth with gravity having no downwards effect on it whatsoever.

I realize this might be a lot to take in, so another way to observe reality: Next time you are in the middle of the woods, or the middle of a large body of water, take out your 'GPS' connected smartphone - notice how Google maps has no clue where you are? That is because 'gps' works by triangulating pings from towers, as was designed over 100 years ago, long before the first 'satellite' launch.

Want another experiment to try: in your spare time, try to get a cotton ball to orbit around a skyscraper (this is a joke, as no one has EVER detected any form of gravity from any direction but down.) How about getting a grain of sand to slightly attract to the vertical face of the rocky mountains? Am I getting over your head here? Waiting for your intelligent response to these points I have made.
In case you got lost I will summarize:

  1. Please explain how geostationary satellites avoid the pull of the Earth's gravity when they are not moving in relation to the face of the Earth.
  2. Please explain why it is impossible to photograph by a regular civilian a SINGLE object between the observer and the light of the moon?
  3. Please explain why a fired bullet makes no difference to the pull of gravity, but NASA claims that is how satellites stay in perfect orbit for decades.
  4. Please show any example of one body orbiting another body here on Earth, or one instance of gravity making a sideways pull against an object (ie feather to mountain)

"What goes up must come down. Another asinine masonic theory easily disproven with childs logic."

Speaking of a child's logic. Geez.

  1. 'Please explain how geostationary satellites avoid the pull of the Earth's gravity "

They don't avoid the pull of earth's gravity.

  1. "Please explain why it is impossible to photograph by a regular civilian a SINGLE object between the observer and the light of the moon?"

You can if there happens to be something between you and the moon and your lens is good enough AND the object is large enough to even have a chance of being seen.

  1. "Please explain why a fired bullet makes no difference to the pull of gravity, "

A fired bullet is affected by the pull of gravity.

  1. "Please show any example of one body orbiting another body here on Earth or one instance of gravity making a sideways pull against an object (ie feather to mountain)"

You really haven't thought that one through? FFS.

Loading...

{"Please explain why a fired bullet makes no difference to the pull of gravity, "
A fired bullet is affected by the pull of gravity.}

Yes, that is my point, a fired bullet is affected by gravity in the EXACT same way as a bullet dropped from the same height of the firing chamber... So in conclusion we see that the SPEED makes no difference in the rate of fall - GET IT? So a fast object falls at the same rate as a still object thus disproving newton's cannon- are you still missing something?

{"Please show any example of one body orbiting another body here on Earth or one instance of gravity making a sideways pull against an object (ie feather to mountain)"
You really haven't thought that one through? FFS.}

What about this is hard for you to understand? So a satellite can orbit the earth, the earth can orbit the sun etc etc but this idea is in no way reproducible in any setting here in the realm of actual physics. If you drop some micron dust flakes next to the great MASS of the Andes mountains they will fall in the exact same way as they would in the middle of the pacific ocean. In other words, gravity doesnt work the way it ought to. Keep thinking about it, go on, you got this.

I am answering your original questions on the first thread you started. Please, no one answer this, thus continuing a new subthread. She is Gish Galloping and starting multiple threads with multiple questions, and I'm asking her to stick to one single thread with the questions that we are already discussing.

Bravo Sir! Thanks to taking the time to write this. It really is frustrating that common sense needs to be defended... be here we are.

it helps thanks