Title: RAW FOOTAGE: Balloon, aka NASA "Satellite" Floats Across Full Moon Source:
YT URL Source:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAfdkWy0QtE&feature=youtu.be Published:Feb 3, 2018 Author:Flat Earth Dude Post Date:2019-09-28 17:41:37 by Liberator Keywords:NASA, Satellite, Balloon Views:31193 Comments:184
(Video taken through a Nikon P900 camera)
Poster Comment:
Cool! Great shot of the Moon as well. (Sure doesn't seem like it's 239,000 miles away.)
So.... is balloon technology how NASA really photographs earth? It appears they are able to attach an equipment gondola to the Balloon...and let 'er rip into Low Earth Orbit.
One also wonders if "Astronauts" are actually embedded into a special Balloon gondola instead what's depicted in those dodgy "ISS" shots. Orbital velocity is the velocity needed to achieve balance between gravity's pull on the satellite and the inertia of the satellite's motion -- the satellite's tendency to keep going. This is approximately 17,000 mph (27,359 kph) at an altitude of 150 miles (242 kilometers). Without gravity, the satellite's inertia would carry it off into space.
Moving juuuust a bit slower than 17,000 MPH. Source:
With respect to, 'HOW STUFF WORKS', I mis-formatted the post, so it's my fault there's some confusion.
OF NOTE:
According to 'HOW STUFF WORKS' and the link I provided:
"Orbital velocity is the velocity needed to achieve balance between gravity's pull on the satellite and the inertia of the satellite's motion -- the satellite's tendency to keep going. This is approximately 17,000 mph.(27,359 kph) at an altitude of 150 miles (242 kilometers). Without gravity, the satellite's inertia would carry it off into space.
We see neither traveling at 17,000 mph -- whether a gi-normous NASA balloon or the pix taken from NASA "Satellites" (which are actually "gondolas" tethered TO balloons at low earth orbit.)
NASA's Giant Helium Balloons will neither be escaping much beyond the stratosphere, nor dragged to earth via "gravity"...
They drift (or are guided) at a very manageable speed (as captured by this amateur videographer in front of the moon), thus it is the perfect medium from which to view and photograph the earth....or be its passenger.
#8. To: All, TooConservative, Hank Rearden, Deckard, Watchman (#6)
IF you're interested in the truth of the matter...(IF NOT, PLEASE IGNORE)
Check out the various links to related subject to the right (Top Chat Replay)
MIND BLOWING EVIDENCE...and presentation from someone who may not be your cup of tea in manners, but he is certainly one who crushes the truth. And that's really all that matters.
*Please don't dismiss this hour-plus video and case because of the uncalled for salty language within the first couple of minutes...as well as sprinkled here and there.* THIS IS WORTH YOUR ATTENTION.
The Content Provider (who was coincidentally also in the service and familiar with some missions) soon calmed down and proceeds to make the case based on researched information, analyses, de-classified official documents, videotape and photos that satellites are perhaps NOT actually in orbit in space but instead are floating from high-altitude meteorological balloons.
This included specific missions and sections of documents that testify to protocols, flight ranges and heights, and how HUGE balloons (the size of a football field)....(including "Drag Net" gondolas," payloads and capsules) have been captured by special aircraft.
This balloon program has actually been in effect since the mid-1950s.
Some interesting bookmarks:
Documents of Q & A interviews with a Flight Commander regarding various missions and
9:45 (protocol in capturing the Gondola payloads)
13:00 (video of balloon launch from Antarctica, Satellite "payload.")
15:45: Antarctica Balloon Launch Program and specially outfitted aircraft that capture balloons designed to carry 8,000 lbs satellites (according to docs.)
23:45... Pilot interviewed about role in balloon-capturing protocol
25:30... Astronauts are sent to Antarctica for training. (AND FOR PRIVACY SAKE...which MAY be one reason accessing ALL land latitudes 60 degrees and south IS STRICTLY VERBOTEN.)
Could satellite signals be emitters placed around the edge of the flat earth? From here do they send the signal to the sky (to the dome) and the signals bounce from the top to the ground? So it seems to come from above. Maybe that's why you can't go visit what's in Antarctica.
32:27 ...On Satellite Tracking by relatively primitive means, explanations and dynamics; Number of Balloon ID'd in missions, frequency % codes; purpose. (Also launched from several European nations as early as during the mid-1950s.)
HISTORY OF SATELLITE RECON (Dec-Classified 2012)
Among those listed: that you might remember: the Soviet Module/Space Station, "MIR", from 1997-2002. It was launched VIA BALLOON from Norway... (see docs under "Payloads" at 44:55 and onward.)
You will be shocked at just how many "Satellites" were launched NOT from "Space Rockets" but from BALLOONS.)
46:23 -- loose tethers hanging from payloard capsules)
48:05 -- NASA's Enviasat ...and other awkward listed Balloon payloads and NASA docs.
51:16 etc -- HOW IT WORKS, including balloon recon/capture aircraft like U-2S (mannned/unmanned.)
The NASA $$$$$$$ money and charade this 60 year old "Space Mission is costing the USA is stratospheric (pun intended.)
*Please don't dismiss this hour-plus video and case because of the uncalled for salty language within the first couple of minutes...as well as sprinkled here and there.* THIS IS WORTH YOUR ATTENTION.
No, it's not worth our attention. None of it is.
We aren't going to be truth-bombed into becoming your fellow-Flattards. Nor are any of us likely to be drawn into the usual endless lists of videos and the constant moving of goalposts to allow you to harangue us all with your little problem in understanding basic science concepts that are not at all mysterious to the rest of us.
It just isn't happening.
Maybe you should seek help for your paranoid personality traits and your learning disabilities and your authority figure problems. But none of those is our fault or our problem. Nor are they anything new in your life because they do date back decades IMO.
#54. To: Liberator, TooConservative, A K A Stone, Hank Rearden, Deckard, Watchman, GrandIsland, nolu chan, Pinguinite, All 25 Posters at LF, Undetermined Lurkers (#8)
In case you may have glossed over this video (and respective flagged time-markers), there are much pertinent information, analysis, official documentation, and awkward (for NASA) Balloon missions.
This analysis provides at least one major motive for making the entire continent Antarctica and any trespassing of HUGE area south of 60 degrees a strictly verboten "NO-GO" area.
One obvious Reason: It is a staging area and base for hiding NASA Balloon/Satellite departures, aka "Launches."
If you watch (please stay with it -- it'll open your eyes), you will learn the fascinating air force protocols and techniques for launching, monitoring and capturing these NASA Balloons; Technical information; and video.
IMPORTANT: This proves without a shadow of doubt that the "fuel" of actual NASA "Satellite Launches" is Helium, and the medium, BALLOONS. Need "proof"? The author of this video provides a copy of the official log of names of the Balloons/Satellites BY DATE and Project name that were launched. Including the one name you should recognize: 'MIR'. You remember it, right? MIR was called an "INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION".
Check out the logs from 1997-2002. MIR was launched VIA BALLOON. It was also supplied VIA BALLOONS. No, NOT via "Rocket Ships." (see docs under "Payloads" at 44:55 and onward.)
Why else should this cited official log and references of 'MIR' to the Balloon log be extremely fascinating? Let's refer to NASA's "facts":
... Adding modules over the years, and then sometimes rearranging them, the Russians had built the strangest, biggest structure ever seen in outer space. Traveling at an average speed of 17,885 mph, the space station orbited about 250 miles above the Earth.
SOURCE: NASA History
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4225/mir/mir.htm
FACT:
1) I think we can all agree that Balloon can NOT soar 250 miles above the Earth.
2) As already mentioned and cited, "Low Earth Orbit" is defined as between "99 miles and 1200 miles", true and actual "Low Earth Orbit" is considerably less. If NASA's Balloons are only able to attain altitudes of up to 120,000 or 140,000 feet, isn't that actually closer to say 25 miles??
3) This also obviously means 'MIR' was certainly NOT "traveling at an average speed of 17,885 mph" as NASA stated.
