Posted on 04/10/2018 12:07:11 PM PDT by messierhunter
Let's see how long this thread lasts, the mods pull everything I post that offends or upset the delicate little flat earth and science hating snowflakes that have taken over FreeRepublic these days. Here's a simple method anyone can use to measure the altitude, size, and velocity of the International Space Station by capitalizing on a lunar transit (where ISS is silhouetted against the moon within a narrow corridor - you can find opportunities on transit-finder.com).
Anyone can do this with a friend using a good high magnification camera like a P900 or other long focal length telephoto lens on a tripod. You could also use a simple cheap telescope, even without tracking capability. The result is that ISS is exactly as high, fast, and large as NASA says it is. I used highly precise astrometry to perform the measurement, by shutting off my telescope's tracking and allowing the moon to drift out of the field of view immediately following the transit. A few minutes later when the moon was far enough away to reduce the glare, I took a photo of the background stars in order to calibrate the image and precisely measure the angular separation of the ISS transit in my footage compared to footage from a friend about a kilometer away from me.
Oh yeah, that genius with a pile of turds on her head.
That's no moon!
Never heard of that before and I thought you were joking, as the moon is such a small percentage of the earth’s sky and on top of that it is spherical and only a small portion of it’s surface will reflect back to earth. I’ve heard of bouncing skip off the ionosphere, but what kind of precise wave propagation would you need to actually bounce a signal off the moon at a specific spot over the horizon?
Recommended reading...
It's ISIS's little brother.
I can’t believe ppl would believe the earth is flat.
My conclusion, there isn’t. This is just a straw-man ppl are using to attract attention to themselves.
There are no flat earthers, stop making them up.
;)
The Earth is actually concave. We live in a big bowl. On the back of a turtle.
No joke. Generally, you use morse code and you send just your call sign due to the signal being so faint.
Also, keep in mind that you can’t use HF and a lot of power (1500W is the limit). You have to use VHF, which is 50W max. VHF because it can leave the ionosphere, hit the Moon, and bounce back again. Actually, you’d like use UHF (70 cm band)
It is indeed true - I am not quite ready to test it out, but I am building a "small" ham radio moonbounce antenna array that I hope to have functioning by summertime. I haven't done the complete link budget calculations yet, but stations smaller than what I'm putting together routinely bounce signals off of the moon and handle two-way communication with the moon reflecting their signals to distant locations that otherwise would be out of radio range for UHF signals.
I'm planning to use the 432 MHz band, and the antenna array that I am building will consist of four 22-element yagi beams, each antenna having a boom length of close to 15 feet (a single antenna gives almost 18 decibels of gain, and each additional antenna in the array incrementally raises the total achievable gain, if they are spaced and phased correctly), with all four mounted on an "H frame" so that they can all be aimed skyward in sync in the same direction, via an azimuth rotator and a separate elevation rotator.
Radio-wise I am currently planning to use at least 100 watts directly at the antenna power-divider feedpoint, but would like to go to 500 watts or even 1000 watts if I can afford it. These days, ham moonbounce stations typically use a digital radio transmission mode called JT65 which permits digging weak signals out of the background noise.
Clearly ball lightening
Yes. The earth is a flat disc lol
All one needs to do is discuss great circle navigation around the southern hemisphere of our world.
The flat-earthers have an answer for every piece of scientific evidence except this one.
Two Qantas flights, one that provides daily service between Australia and South America and the other between Australia and South Africa.
Such flights are impossible with a flat earth because the destinations are beyond the range of a 747-400.
The only way such flights are possible is via great circle navigation and great circle navigation is only possible with a global earth.
Needs repeating:
“... the delicate little flat earth and science hating snowflakes that have taken over FreeRepublic these days”
“... the delicate little flat earth and science hating snowflakes that have taken over FreeRepublic these days”
“... the delicate little flat earth and science hating snowflakes that have taken over FreeRepublic these days”
The fact that you would even question this and argue the point makes it tempting to join the flat earth argument. There are no sane people who believe this.
I'd just sent it to the guy up the block. He can fix anything. Only problem would be getting him there.
how do these geniuses explain pictures of the lander base and tracks from the rover taken by the LRO? 
No. I found the pics online.
Thanks messierhunter. Love your nick', regardless. :^) Ping to the old APoD list, which is something you should take over, IMHO.
Those guys had nerves of steel. If that had been me on the moon I would have stayed WAY close to the lunar module, LOL!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.