It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Houston We Have A Problem. ISS is over NYC on 911 instead of Africa

page: 5
32
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   
The New World Order is unraveling and TPTB know it. As more people come forward like this it will accelerate other people coming forward.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by factbeforefiction]




posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   
just to say,every thread i go to phage is there saying that it is wrong etc.is he a disinfo agent?



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by glen200376
 

No.
I try to provide information. The OP is making an error in assuming the software he's using is giving him correct information.

As far as me "saying that it is wrong etc.". I don't really see any point in saying "Yeah buddy! Right on!" when I agree with someone but if I have something to add, I do.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
The OP has no way of knowing (unless he is using orbital elements close to 09/11) where the station was at 9:00.

The OP also claims that the astronauts were talking about the attack at 09:00. They were not talking about it at 09:00.

Nothing the OP says makes any sense.

(What the hell am I doing in the 911 forum anyway?)


Most likely got here the same way I did - it was on the front page.

Like I said before, I don't know much about this stuff, I was just pointing out some inconsistencies in what some people were saying. I just seen a few posts that were mentioning africa and the 9:00 and that the video at 10:30 was about right with the 90 minutes.

Outside that, no clue. Like I said, I don't see what the big deal is with the ISS's position.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by badmedia
 


1. Africa is NOT 1/2 way around the world from New York City -- it's more like 1/4.


Sounds about right, the point was the 90 minute orbit thing didn't apply.



2. As Phage pointed out, the OP does not know where the ISS was at 9:00 AM.


I was only posting in reply to the conclusion that the ISS could be in africa at 9:00, and also over NYC at 10:30. That is what couldn't be true. Outside that, like I said - I do not know.



Plain and simple, the OP is just saying a bunch of buzz words like "9/11" and talking about conspiracies -- but has no evidence whatsoever. I suppose if someone wants to get their Original Post noticed on ATS, all they need to do is say something about a 9/11 conspiracy -- no further evidence is required.


The OP is suspect IMO, but that's another topic in itself. It's yet another post that "someone else" told them to post. I don't pay attention to them anyway, and the only reason I opened the thread is because it was on the front page.

[edit on 12/1/2009 by badmedia]



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Aliensun
 


You can use your iggy button on me because I am one of those "half wits" that agrees with JWJr. It so happened to me after studying eight long years of the rants back and forth.

Also most relations with people on the other side of the pond reveal it is nothing new governments in general cannot be trusted, ours being no exception. But then again they must be half wits also?



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
(What the hell am I doing in the 911 forum anyway?)


I dunno. I'm surprised to see you here. Maybe it was something about satellites?

You earned a rep for being a space guy.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Evil
reply to post by Phage
 


well, you see you really should not assume. because you see I'm waiting on the Logs themselves to prove the software wrong. I see no need for software that lies... and I will have the logs soon enough. lets wait for the answer. how many skid marks were in the pilots underware>?

[edit on 30-11-2009 by Anti-Evil]


I already gave them to you. Why are you ignoring them?



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by JackWestJr
The darn towers were brought down by controlled demolition. Anyone with half a brain knows that.


Those of us with whole brains know there is no evidence for "controlled demolition."


Even if one of those darn planes had explosives that detonated on impacting with the building it still would not have brought down the buildings the way they came down.


Why would the towers have to come down? Give us a good reason why anyone would go to the effort and risk of exposure? Tell us why the damage, terror, fires, and death from the jets' crashes into the towers wasn't sufficient.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by JackWestJr
I am sorry super mods, it is just that no matter whether it is ISS or something else, it boils down to a 9/11 conspiracy. Now considering I have seen all the documentaries, read all the reports, etc, etc I have come to the conclusion (having seen documentaries on controlled demolitions) that this was a well thought out, well planned controlled demolition of the towers for various reasons that have been brought up by previous conspiracy theorists. A couple of those are:

The US needed a reason to invade Irak was it? God, there has been so many darn countries in the last 15 years to find what, a stargate, etc, etc, whatever the reason the fact of the matter was ofcourse people in certain positions knew about it, it was a well known fact that it was going to happen by a lot in the know. That is obvious.

The worst part of the whole thing is they killed, maimed and burnt their own citizens because of their own hidden agenda. Obviously there are still people about that cannot bring themselves to believe it still even now.


Bullsh*t. If the US was looking for a reason to invade Iraq, why were the hijackers identified as Saudis? It would have been fairly easy to make them Iraqis. If this was a controlled demolition as people like to claim, why use aircraft? Rig the lower floors and make it look like a truck bomb. Much simpler and less chance for failure. To me the biggest point against it being a controlled demolition is that the collapse started right at the aircraft impact points. Kind of hard to rig since YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHERE THE PLANES WILL STRIKE THE BUILDINGS!



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia

Most likely got here the same way I did - it was on the front page.

Like I said before, I don't know much about this stuff, I was just pointing out some inconsistencies in what some people were saying. I just seen a few posts that were mentioning africa and the 9:00 and that the video at 10:30 was about right with the 90 minutes.

Outside that, no clue. Like I said, I don't see what the big deal is with the ISS's position.


It couldn't have been over New York. As several posters pointed out, the trajectory would have had to been changed a very long time before 9/11 to get any sort of orbit that would go near or over New York. You couldn't have done it with one shove from any space shuttle around (not enough rocket power there) and it would have taken more than a year to correct the orbit so that it OCCASIONALLY flew over New York. The orbital paths vary as you can see here: spaceflight.nasa.gov...

Satellite tracking is a popular hobby, so EVERY astronomer and satellite watcher in the world would be aware of the shift. If true, this would have been reported within a few hours after 9/11 and you would have seen floods of messages about both the new orbital path and when it changed. You could have even stepped outside and confirmed the path for yourself.

The person releasing the information may have misunderstood something they read or misunderstood what's being shown outside the shuttle windows. It takes a lot of time and effort to move things in space; it's not like Star Trek or Dr. Who, where the Tardis can change orbit in a heartbeat and hover over a location.

If this was true, we would have been discussing it for the past 8 years.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by badmedia
 


1. Africa is NOT 1/2 way around the world from New York City -- it's more like 1/4.

Sounds about right, the point was the 90 minute orbit thing didn't apply.


2. As Phage pointed out, the OP does not know where the ISS was at 9:00 AM.


I was only posting in reply to the conclusion that the ISS could be in africa at 9:00, and also over NYC at 10:30. That is what couldn't be true. Outside that, like I said - I do not know.

I said that IF they were over Africa at 9:00, they could have been back around to see the smoke from NYC before 10:30 -- which is true -- probably around 10:10 or 10:15.

At the time I wrote that, I thought the OP's point was that the ISS would not be able to be over NYC, because it was over Africa at 9:00 and could not possibly get over NYC in time to see the fires. I was pointing out to him that the ISS moves quickly enough to do so.

It seems, though, that there was a photo taken from the ISS of the smoke around 10:30. Therefore my timing would be in error with respects to that photograph.

However, as said, the OP has no idea where the ISS was at 9:00, so the whole point is meaningless. There is no evidence at all that the orbit of the ISS was radically altered (or even that it could be radically altered) to be over NYC at 10:30.


[edit on 12/1/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

However, as said, the OP has no idea where the ISS was at 9:00, so the whole point is meaningless. There is no evidence at all that the orbit of the ISS was radically altered (or even that it could be radically altered) to be over NYC at 10:30.


[edit on 12/1/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]


I've given him the orbital elements for ISS for all days between it's launch in 1998 well into 2004. He can plug them into any decent satellite tracking program (Celestia is not one - it's an astronomical program) and see for himself that the orbit at any time in that period never was "altered."

This isn't rocket science.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   
It SEEMS the PTB are onto our investigation!

www.clickorlando.com...

they've opted to destroy the ISS rather let us get to the bottom of this. I can't believe its just a coincidence that this topic was on the front page only a day ago. The timing is just to close. Obviously, we need to get to the bottom of this within the next few hours.





posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by VonDoomen
 


?????What is that now??? The coincidence of debris that has a chance of striking the ISS is somehow planned and an intentional attempt to destroy the ISS?

See how rumors (unfounded) can get started and run wild?



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

I should of been clearer: This was an attempt at sarcasm/humor. This thread was getting grumpy so I decided to try and lighten it up a bit.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Let me offer up a summary so that I know I understand what is being discussed before the next round of bullets.

OP states the ISS was put into position to be over ground zero at the exact time of the 9/11 terrorist plot instead of where it should be which was over the Horn of Africa. Several others are stating that the software being used to calculate the position of the satellite is flawed and therefore the results aren't reliable.

If that summary is correct, I'm curious as to the probablity that the ISS would have passed by ground zero in time to take pictures of the disaster just as the disaster would look its worst. Had it passed over a few hours before or a few hours later, the smoke would either not exist yet or would have been too thick. Is that a safe summary? Just interested in this.

Also, by believing that the ISS was in place at the right time, does that also mean you must buy into the 9/11 event as being planned? I think I am beginning to see a pattern for those opposing this thread. Could it be that some don't want to believe this part because doing so would mean they have to believe the overall plan was inside?

Just a casual observer. Save your flamming.




posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Here, is what the scary math thing is. what are the odds that the ISS would be over NYC at the same time as the event. coincidences are numerous so many and all have reasonible plausible deniabilty. so, what my point - Its just something we need to take a closer look at. still waiting for the actual logged locations for a few weeks before and a few weeks after for coarse changes. plus, who is investigating this NYC - Port Authority or US Justice - where do you send your findings - just post them on the web.


[edit on 2-12-2009 by Anti-Evil]



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Evil
Here, is what the scary math thing is. what are the odds that the ISS would be over NYC at the same time as the event. coincidences are numerous so many and all have reasonible plausible deniabilty. so, what my point - Its just something we need to take a closer look at. still waiting for the actual logged locations for a few weeks before and a few weeks after for coarse changes. plus, who is investigating this NYC - Port Authority or US Justice - where do you send your findings - just post them on the web.


[edit on 2-12-2009 by Anti-Evil]


Tell us why you are avoiding the logs of ISS (Zayra) that I gave you several days ago to allow you to calculate the orbit of ISS from the day of its launch through 2004. Why are avoiding doing so, Anti-Evil?

You have the entire archive of satellite orbital elements available to you, for free, completely open to anyone who wants to use them:

NORAD Two-Line Element Sets Historical Archives - 1980-2004
celestrak.com...

The International Space Station's orbital elements are at this link I already provided you:

celestrak.com...

You will see quite clearly by looking at any time period before or after 9/11 that ISS's orbit was not "adjusted" in any way to be over NYC at any specific time on 9/11. YOU can do this all by yourself. There is nothing to "wait for" as you claim. It's been there all along.

Need a good satellite tracking software program? Take your pick:

Satellite Tracking Software Index
celestrak.com...

You will note that "Celestia", an astronomical program, is not listed as "satellite tracking" software.

If you still have "doubts" about ISS's orbit, I have given the means for you to learn how to calculate orbits for ISS yourself. Nobody is going to do your homework for you. You're not going to have us do it for you to give you yet another excuse to "question" the results. You can calculate the orbit yourself.

Any questions, Anti-Evil?







[edit on 3-12-2009 by jthomas]



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by remymartin
 


Totovaders - CNN says the zapping of the spire of steel was at 10:26... and what time did you say the Space Stations broadcast was...>?



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join