3 thoughts on “Satellites Do Not Exist As Described

  1. 100c

    Hoi Polloi, before I forget, at the first of the video, Crrow777 said that people claim to see satellites, and he says they are not satellites, but just lights in the sky, then he quickly moves on. That’s a pretty dismissive statement. Wouldn’t artificial satellites be seen as just lights? They would be so small to be resolved by his telescope.

    After watching the video again, I retract my point #1. I stand by my point #2, the objects seem to be irregularly shaped and rotating, as an asteroid would be expected to do.

    Now, about point #3, I would love to have access to a believable list of NEOs! Here’s what got me excited about this video –> objects that look real. We’re so inundated by NASA images and CGI from the entertainment industry. I plan to start videoing on my own and see what I can get.
    If this crrow777 is legitimate, I’m surprised that he recommends to focus on the moon, instead of trying to focus on these objects. These NEOs are more interesting and I would love to see them in higher resolution. Unfortunately, I live in the PNW USA and the rainy season has begun…

    Reply
  2. 100c

    Very interesting, a few points.

    1) I’m curious about the direction of the flyby objects. Most in this video seem to transit the moon in one general direction? That could just be the samples he chose.
    2) The objects, although very poor resolution, seem to be rotating and of irregular shape. Just my observation.
    3) The objects are dark (not reflecting sunlight), so I would assume that they are in the shadow of the Earth. Of course, the video is taken at night. Does this mean the objects are not very high? The brightness of the day atmosphere probably prevents these from being seeing during the day.

    Reply
    1. Hoi PolloiHoi Polloi

      Usual preface: not sure I trust Crow at all, but if the footage is legit (and it seems it may be depicting a real phenomenon, even if he mixes legit with lies on purpose — and I’m not saying I am going to specifically point to where that is happening or even commit to a position at this time) then I want to regard your point 3, using language as if this were footage that is rather raw, real and undoctored:

      The camera is focused on the moon, which is extremely bright. The same objects seen against the night sky with minimal light pollution might be brighter, and may — in theory — prove to be like some of the “bright” things we see slowly traversing.

      Also, note that the moon is full and it seems we aren’t looking at many phases or angles. It could be that these are mostly objects that are in Earth’s umbra, while the Moon is not.

      So it’s entirely possible some of the “satellites” we see in the “heavens” are being depicted here as asteroid or meteor type objects. Near Earth Objects, as the term goes.

      Please note: this isn’t a full explanation for all the moving lights in the sky, particularly lights that change direction faster than known aircraft can, but we tend to avoid those topics because it quickly gets into “secret technology” musings that may be impossible to get credible evidence for, if there is any evidence at all. The main point is that — yes, there seem to be many “satellites” that could just be NEOs that have been named/redubbed “technological marvels” though they are merely rocks.

      Is there a full public record of all NEOs that we can with very reasonable certainty know the history of and say that absolutely NONE of such listed items have ever been “converted” (on paper) to “manmade satellites”? That would be a good public record to have.

      (Sorry for any typos, I was writing this up very quickly)

      Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.