Most of what happens on this planet is being recorded.

a reply to: Jesuslives4u
yeah now i understand, your saying the pictures are of such high quality that any part of the picture can be zoomed in on without losing details in the picture.
even though the camera isn`t aimed at me specifically if it records the entire city that i live in they can zoom in close enough to identify me without losing quality or details in the picture.

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
a reply to: Jesuslives4u

a reply to: Jesuslives4u

I believe your friend either flat out lied to look cool or doesn't have a clue of what he/she is talking about...or, you are making this up. Satellites move to fast to actually capture any useful video, the live feed from ISS will give you and idea of that. Images can though, be so good that time can be read off of a watch; however, not every image, a lot of factors come into play. However, there are some nifty little tricks and secrets that are used for imaging to capture more information. Developing drones and blimps that stay in the air for several to dozens of hours, even days, however, is a different matter.

Having had a TS//SCI clearance with numerous caveats to include Talent Keyhole and Gamma, worked closely with NSA analysts, and submitted countless collection requests for various information utilizing various satellites, I can tell you this is absolutely fiction.

I don't think you understand. Not all satellites travel like you suggested. Many travel with the earth, same speed and angle. This one statement alone shoots your post down. Research it yourself.

I too was in the military at one time. Maybe you are not aware BUT SCI is the highest level of Top Secret. Talent Keyhole and Gamma clearance is long long gone. SCI clearance is adjusted as needed. Your 1950's theory is right but the times have changed.

There is no reason for me not to believe my friend. He was a highly decorated man with honor. You.... I do not know.

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: Jesuslives4u
yeah now i understand, your saying the pictures are of such high quality that any part of the picture can be zoomed in on without losing details in the picture.
even though the camera isn`t aimed at me specifically if it records the entire city that i live in they can zoom in close enough to identify me without losing quality or details in the picture.

Yep, that is how I understood it. And not just photographs but film as well. Apparently the technology that governments use is a bit higher and better than what Sears or J.C. Penny has to offer.

a reply to: Jesuslives4u
That would require overlapping drone flights by the way to do that ,Satellites are tasked to missions as they are few and expensive to use.

Geostationary statellites are above the equator only. Theortically you could put video on these, but it would be pointless because your angle of view would be skewed the more you move from the equator. Only having one view, becoming more angled the more you move from the equator, would be useless to analyst. Also, because geostationary is above the equator, it is limited prime real estate.

a reply to: Jesuslives4u

That's an amazing story you have there.

Where do you suppose that all this data has been stored for 30 years in a format that can be immediately queried like that?

CLOUDS!!!!

Can they see if I shaved this morning looking through a thick cloud layer? I doubt it!

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Jesuslives4u
That would require overlapping drone flights by the way to do that ,Satellites are tasked to missions as they are few and expensive to use.

I agree with you however there are more satellites circling our planet then what we are being told. There is so much trash, a few space rockets from the 60's (both U.S. and Soviet) a couple with dead astronauts inside them, and numerous satellites circling our planet.

I believe drones also do the same type of surveillance as other aircraft but only satellites from outer space.

Yeah this isn't true...

Negative....

a reply to: AllSourceIntel

so what about the Tundra orbit ?

en.wikipedia.org...

Not saying they can record everything but sure they are eyes in the space watching us.

i think your friend was lying. data storage from the 80s onwards you would need a small country to store all that info, and even today the best satelites will only have 1metre/pixel.

a reply to: Jesuslives4u

SCI is a caveat of Top Secret and it is not anywhere close to the highest or most restrictive one. Talent Keyhole and Gamma are very much active and used today.

The satellites you are think of, geostationary...read above.

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
Geostationary statellites are above the equator only. Theortically you could put video on these, but it would be pointless because your angle of view would be skewed the more you move from the equator. Only having one view, becoming more angled the more you move from the equator, would be useless to analyst. Also, because geostationary is above the equator, it is limited prime real estate.

Now you are talking above my pay grade.

I only know what my buddy told me that one night while having a few to many beers with him.

a reply to: Jesuslives4u

Ask him about weapons platforms if he says no he doesn't know ,if he says he can't talk about it a big MAYBE he knows, either way they haven't gotten the NSA rolling completely in Utah yet and to THAT would almost COMPLETELY task a system like that at this time.

Can I buy a Copy of a Special Event that happened back in 1995, best night of my life.

originally posted by: Rikku
i think your friend was lying. data storage from the 80s onwards you would need a small country to store all that info, and even today the best satelites will only have 1metre/pixel.

You think so? Take a look at commercial CCTV equipment and its storage capability. Storing Terabytes of data on one HD is easy.

I remember computer simulation UCOFT (Unit Conduct of Fire Trainers) back in the EARLY 1980's and they came with terabyte hard drives......

Compressing digital data onto hard drives. The military police use CCTV and have years of surveillance data on one HD! Now I know that data is nothing compared to recording the surface of this planet but it can easily be done.

originally posted by: Jesuslives4u

originally posted by: Rikku
i think your friend was lying. data storage from the 80s onwards you would need a small country to store all that info, and even today the best satelites will only have 1metre/pixel.

You think so? Take a look at commercial CCTV equipment and its storage capability. Storing Terabytes of data on one HD is easy.

I remember computer simulation UCOFT (Unit Conduct of Fire Trainers) back in the EARLY 1980's and they came with terabyte hard drives......

Compressing digital data onto hard drives. The military police use CCTV and have years of surveillance data on one HD! Now I know that data is nothing compared to recording the surface of this planet but it can easily be done.

CCTV is completely different because its a mostly static picture, hardly anything changes hence its easily compressed. Scanning the world at a resolution capable of seeing whether a person has shaved AND storing it would require the very best tech that we have now.

Try asking them to look at what happened to Maddy McCann. Should be easy if what your saying is true!

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
a reply to: Jesuslives4u

SCI is a caveat of Top Secret and it is not anywhere close to the highest or most restrictive one. Talent Keyhole and Gamma are very much active and used today.

The satellites you are think of, geostationary...read above.

Nope......

The reason for SCI is to Compartmentalization our classified info. On a need to know basis so that no one person or group knows the complete mission in case of capture etc.... Nothing more than signing a piece of paper and then you can sit in on the meeting and then the debrief. I remember all the fancy top secret compartments (lol) they all sounded so cool.

originally posted by: VoidHawk

originally posted by: Jesuslives4u

originally posted by: Rikku
i think your friend was lying. data storage from the 80s onwards you would need a small country to store all that info, and even today the best satelites will only have 1metre/pixel.

You think so? Take a look at commercial CCTV equipment and its storage capability. Storing Terabytes of data on one HD is easy.

I remember computer simulation UCOFT (Unit Conduct of Fire Trainers) back in the EARLY 1980's and they came with terabyte hard drives......

Compressing digital data onto hard drives. The military police use CCTV and have years of surveillance data on one HD! Now I know that data is nothing compared to recording the surface of this planet but it can easily be done.

CCTV is completely different because its a mostly static picture, hardly anything changes hence its easily compressed. Scanning the world at a resolution capable of seeing whether a person has shaved AND storing it would require the very best tech that we have now.

Try asking them to look at what happened to Maddy McCann. Should be easy if what your saying is true!

I know CCTV I do not know how satellites work.

Really? You want me to ask my buddy to use government equipment in an unauthorized mission.

Can you hear me laughing?

originally posted by: Jesuslives4u

originally posted by: VoidHawk

originally posted by: Jesuslives4u

originally posted by: Rikku
i think your friend was lying. data storage from the 80s onwards you would need a small country to store all that info, and even today the best satelites will only have 1metre/pixel.

You think so? Take a look at commercial CCTV equipment and its storage capability. Storing Terabytes of data on one HD is easy.

I remember computer simulation UCOFT (Unit Conduct of Fire Trainers) back in the EARLY 1980's and they came with terabyte hard drives......

Compressing digital data onto hard drives. The military police use CCTV and have years of surveillance data on one HD! Now I know that data is nothing compared to recording the surface of this planet but it can easily be done.

CCTV is completely different because its a mostly static picture, hardly anything changes hence its easily compressed. Scanning the world at a resolution capable of seeing whether a person has shaved AND storing it would require the very best tech that we have now.

Try asking them to look at what happened to Maddy McCann. Should be easy if what your saying is true!

Really? You want me to ask my buddy to use government equipment in an unauthorized mission.

Can you hear me laughing?

Well, it was a case that was seen by the whole world, so why didn't they use it to find the girl? Why dont they use it to find missing troops, or find lost airplanes?
Your buddy is full of it..