See this now and wake up. . . . MOON LANDING CUT SCENES FILMED IN NEVADA DESERT. . .now you know it's fake!

If that were the case then no satellites would be possible, whether they were inside or outside Earth's orbit. Anyone with a DirecTV dish can tell you the satellites are there.

I wish I was being paid. It's interesting that you believe they would tell you the truth on one issue, but you also fail to realize that EVERYTHING they are telling you is a lie.

No orbital mechanics or megabits or megabytes are needed; it's all nonsense. They haven't been anywhere and are not going anywhere.

You seem to have forgotten about analogue voice, bio-metric telemetry and the telemetry of the multitude of the spacecrafts critical systems itself

Remember seeing all of those people sitting at computer consoles smoking Marlboro's?

They were receiving that data, coming from two sources, he command module and service module, and the LEM

Get it?

Alot of data

Show me how this video is wrong and does not show the basics that are taught in Orbital Mechanics all around the world.

The atmosphere also bends light.

However, there is one way to tell... The curvature of the earth prevents receipt of UHF signals over a distance of about 80 miles. This is why you cannot receive TV signals from terrestrial stations beyond the horizon.

Okay. What's the difference between a megabit and a megabyte?

You'd kill him before he testified lol pointless after

That's some leap of logic there, sparky



Electronics can be shielded effectively because they are compact, and since they have redundancy and backup built in they can withstand and "heal" from data loss. ALL satellites are built this way. And they are lost on occasion.

Less than 50%

"160) It is impossible for rockets or any type of jet propulsion engines to work in the alleged non-atmosphere of vacuum space because without air/atmosphere to push against there is nothing to propel the vehicle forwards. Instead, the rockets and shuttles would be sent spinning around their own axis uncontrollably in all directions like a gyroscope. It would be impossible to fly to the Moon or go in any direction whatsoever, especially if “gravity” were real and constantly sucking you towards the closest densest body."

161) "If Earth were really a ball, there would be no reason to use rockets for flying into “outer-space” anyway because simply flying an airplane straight at any altitude for long enough should and would send you off into outer-space. To prevent their airplanes from flying tangent to the ball-Earth, pilots would have to constantly course-correct downwards, or else within just a few hours the average commercial airliner traveling 500mph would find themselves lost in “outer-space.” The fact that this never happens, artificial horizons remain level at pilot’s desired altitudes and do NOT require constant downwards adjustments, proves the Earth is not a ball."

162) "All NASA and other “space agencies” rocket launches never go straight up. Every rocket forms a parabolic curve, peaks out, and inevitably starts falling back to Earth. The rockets which are declared “successful” are those few which don’t explode or start falling too soon but make it out of range of spectator view before crashing down into restricted waters and recovered. There is no magic altitude where rockets or anything else can simply go up, up, up and then suddenly just start “free-floating” in space. This is all a science-fiction illusion created by wires, green screens, dark pools, some permed hair, and Zero-G planes.
163) NASA and other space agencies have been caught time and again with air bubbles forming and floating off in their official “outer-space” footage. Astronauts have also been caught using scuba-space gear, kicking their legs to move, and astronaut Luca Parmitano even almost drowned when water started filling up his helmet while allegedly on a “space-walk.”

[link to flatearthfacts.com (secure)]

Not if you disappear his report, like they did. Forgot he whole thing, he asked for a leave of absence and was granted it, with a train

Slow scan television isn't digital. BTW SSTV is still used today over ham radio and also by satellites to transmit things like weather images.

Analog TV has no concept of Mbit/sec as it is not digital.

Classic Analog TV broadcast uses about 6 MHz of radio bandwidth, which conveniently fits on a single satellite transponder. As we know today, with modern compression techniques they can transmit about 40Mbps on a single transponder. Your 2.3Mbps figure implies some type of compression. Given the high bandwidth, probably MPEG2, which is antiquated and about to be replaced for OTA broadcast and already has been on satellite 15 years ago.

[link to honeysucklecreek.net (secure)]

Also radar has limited range due to curve of the earth.

Also why put Radio and TV towers so high if was flat. Seems higher towers broadcast further.....

Still laughing at this

As has already been shown, there is no "curvature". You could also say UHF signals are blocked by Santa's elves. And that would prove Santa has elves, and ergo, Santa exists. It's what is known as a "logical fallacy".

It's a fun game, really.

You really need to look up what slow scan television is before you embarrass yourself any further.

Voice mux is practically irrelevant. Only 8Khz is needed for that in uncompressed analog.

A byte consists of 8 bits.

So we are back to the same question, which you are dancing around.

Was 500 kilohertz of bandwidth enough or not?

So radar has a limited range because of curvature, but the Nikon P900 and telescopes are not limited by that same curvature, as has been shown.

Okay. Got it.

Literally everything you said is wrong



The Apollo "tv cameras" were digital, PERIOD

Analogue tv has the same frequency range /data transmission relationship as digital.

Digital takes less than analogue because it is not a smooth sine wave but plots along it.

Yeah, and you're a baying jackass too

And indeed humans as well can be shielded from radiation. What's your point? Aren't the van Allen belts mostly alpha and beta anyways?

What's interesting is that the US Navy's Rail Gun does not account for any curvature at all over 125 miles.

What's interesting is that the US Navy's Rail Gun does not account for any curvature at all over 125 miles.

Well, all you really need to prove it to yourself there genius is a flashlight, a basketball, and a flat piece of cardboard cut into a circle, but I digress.....

For some reason, this video seems difficult to post. It keeps posting a different vid. Last try:

Right. So you don't know the difference between a megabit and a megabyte and FFS can't even be bothered to look it up.

Pathetic trolling attempt.

Sage.

I'll stick with my P900 and my telescope. They have been consistent so far.

Particle radiation, electrons or protons captured by the earths geomagnetic field is the primary danger in the VAB.

These can be of an extremely high energy and flux value, intensity enough to kill in seconds have been recorded by NOAA sats.

ROLF

They believe rockets push off the air
A plane flying level stays at altitude, you have to increase power to go higher.

Why would a rocket go strait up it needs to get into orbit. Ok the bottom of the sea must be full of rockets and the ships they hit lol...Sailors must have a lot of film of them splashing down.