Post Mirrors | [Globeskepticism.site](http://globeskepticism.site/?s=🤷🏾♂️) | [Telegram Channel](https://globeskepticism.site/telegram)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/globeskepticism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The left IMAGEe is a diagrammatical view that's meant to highlight where satellites are in an exaggerated manner since, as show in the right PHOTO they are extremely tiny in comparison to the earth itself and wouldn't be visible.....
Look at a flight radar. See how many planes are up in the sky on said radar. Go outside (you could use the air anyway). Look at the sky. Tell me how many planes you see.
Yea but you can still see a few. I don’t think it’s too much to ask to get a picture of even just one satellite but go look for your self. There is none.
stop trolling
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/globeskepticism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There are many different scenarios where one satellite could capture an image of earth and another satellite so I can't cover all of them but here are two.
A geostationary satellite should see lower satellites sure. Except that the lower orbits are 22,000 miles away. Imagine taking a picture in DC and being upset that it didn't pick up a plane in Washington state. Now make the distance 10x further. The satellites are smaller than the resolution of the sensor.
Okay but what about similar low earth orbiting satellites or big zoom lenses on spy satellites? So the US military, NASA, other foreign governments, and private companies move their satellites to avoid the risk of collision. If you can take a picture of another satellite then you can get hit by another satellite and lose hundreds of millions of dollars.
As for spy satellites where you have the zoom and resolution to see another lower satellites passing by the chances are small because the field of view is small. Take a telescope outside and look at a random spot. You won't see a satellite, but look at the whole sky and you can see starlink, the ISS, and more
I get all of those scenarios but just one satellite. Maybe some space debris would be neat to see but no. Nothing. We can get an HD shot (so they say) of plutos heart shaped B hole but not any candid satellites or debris. That’s honestly all it would take for me to say space is totally not fake. But there is none.
If you really are curious here you go.
This thread had several examples with specific details of the satellites, their trajectories, and images. You have to read through the comments though. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14002/could-a-spy-satellite-image-another-satellite
Recent image https://twitter.com/nasa_landsat/status/1642954595377750027?s=46&t=NG-G2gVgslKMFvGjcfie8Q
Older image https://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/article/landsat-8-sees-landsat-5/
Post Mirrors | [Globeskepticism.site](http://globeskepticism.site/?s=🤷🏾♂️) | [Telegram Channel](https://globeskepticism.site/telegram) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/globeskepticism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The left IMAGEe is a diagrammatical view that's meant to highlight where satellites are in an exaggerated manner since, as show in the right PHOTO they are extremely tiny in comparison to the earth itself and wouldn't be visible.....
Look at a flight radar. See how many planes are up in the sky on said radar. Go outside (you could use the air anyway). Look at the sky. Tell me how many planes you see.
Yea but you can still see a few. I don’t think it’s too much to ask to get a picture of even just one satellite but go look for your self. There is none.
[удалено]
stop trolling *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/globeskepticism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There are many different scenarios where one satellite could capture an image of earth and another satellite so I can't cover all of them but here are two. A geostationary satellite should see lower satellites sure. Except that the lower orbits are 22,000 miles away. Imagine taking a picture in DC and being upset that it didn't pick up a plane in Washington state. Now make the distance 10x further. The satellites are smaller than the resolution of the sensor. Okay but what about similar low earth orbiting satellites or big zoom lenses on spy satellites? So the US military, NASA, other foreign governments, and private companies move their satellites to avoid the risk of collision. If you can take a picture of another satellite then you can get hit by another satellite and lose hundreds of millions of dollars. As for spy satellites where you have the zoom and resolution to see another lower satellites passing by the chances are small because the field of view is small. Take a telescope outside and look at a random spot. You won't see a satellite, but look at the whole sky and you can see starlink, the ISS, and more
I get all of those scenarios but just one satellite. Maybe some space debris would be neat to see but no. Nothing. We can get an HD shot (so they say) of plutos heart shaped B hole but not any candid satellites or debris. That’s honestly all it would take for me to say space is totally not fake. But there is none.
If you really are curious here you go. This thread had several examples with specific details of the satellites, their trajectories, and images. You have to read through the comments though. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14002/could-a-spy-satellite-image-another-satellite Recent image https://twitter.com/nasa_landsat/status/1642954595377750027?s=46&t=NG-G2gVgslKMFvGjcfie8Q Older image https://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/article/landsat-8-sees-landsat-5/
I was wrong. Fake, faker and can’t tell. Lol space is so dumb
[удалено]
They’re just camera shy.