B flat B♭

[prodromos]

Incidentally, I think I may have come across what your picture might have been, which you said was a satellite attached to a balloon. (I may be completely wrong as I am not an expert on these things.):

I posted a couple of links to what it was back here.

 

[Apple Sky]

They can also talk confidently about their beliefs in flat earth, or whatever. But all that doesn't mean their "knowledge" is correct..

You could say this about anyone.

 

[Apple Sky]

I posted a couple of links to what it was back here.

And this.

Brazil fisherman nets UK space debris in Amazon​

UK Space Agency says object was part of payload covering that launched with satellite in French Guiana last year

Residents from Salinópolis hauled the chunk of metal ashore and reported the find to a local military base. Photograph: Tarso Sarraf/AFP/Getty Images

And this.



Google balloon falls on Chino Hills.

And all these, these are only a few for this year.

• 2025:
  • On 19 February 2025, a Composite overwrapped pressure vessel and other fragments from SpaceX Falcon-9 second stage survived reentry and impacted a village in Poland causing some damage to property.[71][72]
  • On 24 March 2025, the trunk of the SpaceX Crew-9 Dragon spacecraft reentered the atmosphere and its debris landed in Erg Chech region of Sahara desert.[73]
  • On 10 May 2025, three to four Composite overwrapped pressure vessels from a reentered space object were found in Armstrong and Cañada de Gómez towns of Santa Fe, Argentina.[74][75]
  • On 10 May 2025, the Soviet Kosmos 482 Venus descent craft crashed into either Indian Ocean, Europe or Australia on 10 May 2025 at an 6:04 to 7:32 UTC window.[76]
  • On 25 September 2025, A large cylindrical fragment of reentered space debris with 1.2 meter diameter and 1.7 meter length was found in Puerto Tirol (Chaco Province, Argentina). The object was wrapped in carbon fiber and had 40 cm hole on one end.[77][78][79][80] The object was marked with serial number FG-144A/GFFa3-11/S9-2305 [81] and could belong to the Chinese rocket Jielong 3.[82]
  • On 18 October, a suspected piece of space debris consistent with attributes of a Composite overwrapped pressure vessel was found in Pilbara region of Western Australia.[83][84] The object was in flames when discovered by mine workers.[85] Recovered object could be from reentered upper stage of Chinese rocket Jielong-3.[86][87]

It's like earth has become a junk yard for their supposed space junk.

 

[Strong in Him]

You could say this about anyone.

I'm saying it about flat earth believers.

 

[Apple Sky]

They can also talk confidently about their beliefs in flat earth, or whatever. But all that doesn't mean their "knowledge" is correct..

One who talks confidently about their beliefs in a globe doesn't mean that their knowledge is correct either.

 

[Phil G]

And this.

Brazil fisherman nets UK space debris in Amazon​

UK Space Agency says object was part of payload covering that launched with satellite in French Guiana last year

Residents from Salinópolis hauled the chunk of metal ashore and reported the find to a local military base. Photograph: Tarso Sarraf/AFP/Getty Images

And this.



Google balloon falls on Chino Hills.

And all these, these are only a few for this year.

• 2025:
  • On 19 February 2025, a Composite overwrapped pressure vessel and other fragments from SpaceX Falcon-9 second stage survived reentry and impacted a village in Poland causing some damage to property.[71][72]
  • On 24 March 2025, the trunk of the SpaceX Crew-9 Dragon spacecraft reentered the atmosphere and its debris landed in Erg Chech region of Sahara desert.[73]
  • On 10 May 2025, three to four Composite overwrapped pressure vessels from a reentered space object were found in Armstrong and Cañada de Gómez towns of Santa Fe, Argentina.[74][75]
  • On 10 May 2025, the Soviet Kosmos 482 Venus descent craft crashed into either Indian Ocean, Europe or Australia on 10 May 2025 at an 6:04 to 7:32 UTC window.[76]
  • On 25 September 2025, A large cylindrical fragment of reentered space debris with 1.2 meter diameter and 1.7 meter length was found in Puerto Tirol (Chaco Province, Argentina). The object was wrapped in carbon fiber and had 40 cm hole on one end.[77][78][79][80] The object was marked with serial number FG-144A/GFFa3-11/S9-2305 [81] and could belong to the Chinese rocket Jielong 3.[82]
  • On 18 October, a suspected piece of space debris consistent with attributes of a Composite overwrapped pressure vessel was found in Pilbara region of Western Australia.[83][84] The object was in flames when discovered by mine workers.[85] Recovered object could be from reentered upper stage of Chinese rocket Jielong-3.[86][87]

It's like earth has become a junk yard for their supposed space junk.

You have yet to give any rational explanation for where satellite tv signals come from if not from a satellite. Satellite tv signals need stability to be reliable. A balloon could not keep stability. Nor can the ionosphere. Both are unstable and completely unreliable for satellite tv requirements.

Aerial masts with or without dishes make absolutely no sense because all satellite receiver dishes are aligned to the sky. In the case of the UK tv satellite signals, all satellite receiver dishes across Ireland and the UK are aligned to the point in the sky where the Astra 28.2 satellite system is located. No system of aerial masts could replicate such a reality.

Underground or undersea cables make no sense as no such cables are attached to the satellite receiver equipment and the signals come from the sky, not the ground. Again all satellite receiver dishes are aligned to the sky in order to receive signals.

So where do the signals come from? Any answers you have given so far are proving that satellites located thousands of miles above the earth in geostationary orbit is the only rational explanation. And that the earth is a globe.

 

[Apple Sky]

You have yet to give any rational explanation for where satellite tv signals come from if not from a satellite.

I have & it is what I believe. If you believe otherwise then it is up too you to prove it.

 

[Strong in Him]

One who talks confidently about their beliefs in a globe doesn't mean that their knowledge is correct either.

But when they can back it up with studies, observations, and experiments, it is more likely.

For example, "I went to Antarctica and saw the 24 hour sun." Compared with, "I didn't go to Antarctica, (even though I was offered a free ticket) and I know they faked the whole thing."
Or, "I walked on the moon. This is my story, but I can tell you that walking on the moon was not as important as knowing Jesus." Compared with, "I haven't walked on the moon or been into space; it's all faked and lies."

 

[Phil G]

I have & it is what I believe. If you believe otherwise then it is up too you to prove it.

It is not up to me to prove it. I have given you rational thought out answers to your points. All of them are true and you can check them for yourself, as I have done with your claims.

Every claim you made regarding satellite tv signals, I have tested and checked to see if it has any validity. None of them have and I have given you clear reasons why. You believing what you believe does not change the fact that they are irrational explanations with no facts to back them up. A lie is still a lie even if you believe it.

The established facts are there for you to check for yourself. It is therefore up to you to prove otherwise. And I have shown I am willing to consider any explanation you have and respond to it.

So you prove your answers!

 

[Strong in Him]

I have & it is what I believe. If you believe otherwise then it is up too you to prove it.

It's not up to anyone else to prove/disprove your belief.
Whether or not your belief is based on facts, evidence and rational arguments is another thing altogether.
Saul of Tarsus believed that Jesus was the Messiah - despite having once thought otherwise. Jews and Gentiles argued with him and he spent many hours in debate, giving them facts and backing up what he said from the OT Scriptures. As a result, people were converted.

You don't believe that men walked on the moon, but all you have to back up your claim is "it was faked, Dean Odel says so and here is a YouTube clip I have found."
You don't believe the earth is a globe and all you have to back your claim is "it's faked, and here is a YouTube clip I have found."
Now you are being given information about satellites - from someone whose work involved satellites - and all you can say is, "here is a summary of a YouTube clip I have found."

If you don't know, then why would you not trust people who do?
If you haven't been somewhere - the Antarctic or the moon - why would you not trust people who have?
It's like if someone said "I've never been to Wales so I don't believe it exists - and it's obvious the language has been made up."

 

[Apple Sky]

"I didn't go to Antarctica, (even though I was offered a free ticket) and I know they faked the whole thing."

They did fake it.

Or, "I walked on the moon.

They haven't as the moon is flat & not a sphere & this guy proves it.

 

[Phil G]

Now you are being given information about satellites - from someone whose work involved satellites - and all you can say is, "here is a summary of a YouTube clip I have found."

Just a small correction, my work didn't involve satellites. One of my hobbies/interests has always been radio and tv. So my experience with satellite tv is purely from a personal interest and learning how to set up the equipment and learning what it is designed to do.

Also I've had experience with receiving radio waves being skipped off the ionosphere. So I know how unstable it is. One minute its there, the next it has faded away!

 

[Apple Sky]

It is not up to me to prove it.

Because you can't prove that satellites are up in space supposedly orbiting around.

 

[Phil G]

They did fake it.



They haven't as the moon is flat & not a sphere & this guy proves it.

View attachment 373081

Now you're changing the subject again! And nobody can prove the moon is flat (even your fellow flat earther says it's shaped in a curve). So this guy "proving" the moon is flat is a deceiver.

The next mission to orbit the spherical moon will (God willing) include a true Christian believer, Victor Glover. And he will be amongst those who prove the moon is spherical.

NASA Astronaut Victor Glover: “We Need Jesus”

Growing up just a few miles from Focus on the Family’s original headquarters in Pomona, Calif., Victor Glover had his sights on a career in the military, particularly becoming a Navy Seal following college graduation. “Well,” his father said, “with an engineering degree from Cal Poly and being a...

dailycitizen.focusonthefamily.com

 

[Apple Sky]

And nobody can prove the moon is flat (even your fellow flat earther says it's shaped in a curve).

A curve yes but not a sphere, like a circle is curved but it doesn't make it a sphere.

 

[Phil G]

Because you can't prove that satellites are up in space supposedly orbiting around.

It's the only rational explanation. It should be very easy to prove otherwise.

Show me the aerial mast where my satellite dish is pointing towards in order to receive signals. It ain't there. Not in the direction I have to align the dish towards.

Show me the cable that feeds my satellite receiver the signals. It ain't there.

Show me the balloon that gives me reliable and stable signals for my dish to be locked in one position to receive the signals. It ain't there.

Show me how the ionosphere is stable enough to skip the signals off and receive very reliable sound and pictures of very high quality any time of the day or night over many years. It can't happen. The ionosphere is unreliable for such a task.

If any of these claims had validity, I should be able to confirm it merely by my own experience. I can't because none of it explains what I have to do in order to receive the signals. You would know this if you set up the equipment yourself.

It's not a matter of belief, it's a matter of facts. Me believing or not believing satellites exist doesn't change the facts. There has to be a rational explanation for the consistently reliable and high quality tv signals. And the only explanation that makes any sense is satellites in geostationary orbit around a globe earth.

Again, in order to receive the UK satellite channels, satellite dishes must be aligned to a specific point in the sky. And I'm not talking only about Sky TV, it includes the free channels where nothing is paid to Sky TV. I don't pay Sky TV at all.

 

[Phil G]

A curve yes but not a sphere, like a circle is curved but it doesn't make it a sphere.

That's not what you said this guy "proves". You said flat. Flat does not mean curve, as in curved like a dish, as your fellow flat earther has claimed.

 

[Apple Sky]

There has to be a rational explanation for the consistently reliable and high quality tv signals.

There is & I've explained it.

 

[Apple Sky]

You said flat. Flat does not mean curve.

Yes a flat circle, just like the earth.

So a circle doesn't curve then ?

AI over view
A circle is defined by its curve and is constantly turning everywhere, so it does indeed curve.

 

[Phil G]

There is & I've explained it.

No you haven't. And I have given you clear and rational reasons why your explanations are wrong. You don't have to believe me, just check them out for yourself.

All you've done is made claims that other flat earthers claim which make no sense to anyone who has experience in satellite tv setups. What you have shown is blind faith in what they say. And as somebody with experience in installing satellite tv equipment, I know for a fact that their explanations are nonsense.

I'm not even starting with the assumption that satellites exist, I'm starting with where do these signals come from? I've heard what you say and I have my own experience.

Do any of your reasons explain it? No they don't.

If satellites exist, does that explain it? Yes it does. That explanation matches my experience. It explains how I'm able to install the equipment and receive signals.

Therefore satellites in geostationary orbit around a globe earth perfectly explains my experience. And I've yet to see any alternative explanation which even comes close to explaining it!

So none of your "knowledgeable" flat earth gurus are telling the truth. But I'm still waiting for the one thing which rationally explains it without satellites in geostationary orbit around a globe earth.

So get me an explanation which is honest and true, not nonsense from flat earth deceivers.