Falsifying the Geosynchronous Satellite Concept
Inserting words such as “anti-gravity, electromagnetism, Van Allen Belt, magneto-sphere, geosynchronous satellites", etc., into a search engine will lead one into about a year and a half of reading material. Mercifully, the conclusions vary but little from those in the five chapters relating to the geosynchronous satellite controversy I put in The Earth Is Not Moving several years ago (pp.239-264).
The question of whether certain specific satellites orbit the Earth synchronously--as they would have to be doing if the Earth is rotating--or if they are actually stationary over a non-moving Earth as they are observed to be at all times, needs to be answered. Indeed, since challenges to the Copernican Rotating Earth Model are being brought more and more into the open, that need is very real.
We can start here: Which force would be stronger when acting on the two mutually exclusive Satellite Models.? Is Gravity stronger or is Electromagnetism?
As physicist Wal Thornhill (et al) agree: “Electromagnetic forces are infinitely more powerful than gravity…”[See: Electric (p. 4)] As we know, a child can test this statement with a plain magnet or an electromagnet and a coin on the ground. Gravity holds the coin on the ground, but pass the magnet over it at some appropriate height and….
When the mysteries and the facts are brought together to try to explain why there is a precise slot in the sky at 22,236 miles altitude where these satellites appear to be stationary overhead at all times (unless moved a little by ground control in an east or west direction), the resolution invariably comes down to the more fundamental question of whether the earth is rotating or not.
Since that question has long been considered settled—and especially since Einstein’s relativity rescued Copernicanism from 20 years of deep trouble it was in—little thought if any is given to whether these satellites rotate geosynchronously with a rotating earth below. There they are right in the same spot any time you look. That is an observable fact. And we all know, don’t we, that the earth rotates; so, there can be only one conclusion, namely, the satellite revolves with it, right?
Wrong! The only fact in that concept is that the satellite is always overhead. We know this is a fact—a scientific truth--no one challenges...
The rotating earth concept, however, is based entirely on assumptions which not only have never been observed by anyone who has ever lived, but which flatly contradict that which has always been observed by everyone who has ever lived. (Go to Assumptions for a list of seven assumptions which are upholding a rotating, orbiting earth…and Size-Structure Pt 4 for photographic evidence we can all see that tell us that the earth is stationary with everything going around every day…unless, again, we assume what we can’t see and do not know, i.e., a rotating earth…and then call that assumption “science”.)
These and other factors tend to level the playing field somewhat for any who would simply dismiss any concept of a stationary satellite hovering over a stationary earth. Add these other three quick arguments in support of a stationary earth (and hence a stationary satellite) and that playing field will do more than become level, and, will in fact tilt sharply against both a rotating earth and geosynchronous satellites:
1) For those who do not dismiss Biblical teachings outright, but are open to giving those teachings various degrees of credibility, it should be noted that the Bible plainly and repeatedly teaches that it is the sun that moves and not the earth. [See: Sixty-seven References, Gram-Semant] Hundreds of millions of people, who are a lot smarter than evolutionists think they are, stand ready to welcome evidence which confirms the Bible.
2) Recently revealed hard facts declare that the rotating, orbiting earth theory is an indispensable component of the entire Big Bang Paradigm of 15 billion years of evolutionism. Also revealed is the fact that this evolution-based “creation scenario” was written by Rabbinic “sages” over many centuries in the Kabbala, an occult “holy book” of the Pharisee Religion. [See: Kabbala 2, Kabbala 6, NASAs Spirit.Roots] Who is ready to declare this “holy book” the correct one and align themselves with the Christ-hating Pharisee religion on the creation issue?? This subject goes to the heart of all beliefs, namely: Belief in Billions of years of evolution—with or without g’d and promoted by an anti-Christ Religion disguised as “secular science”… OR belief in six days of creation by a God with an eternal plan and resources to carry out the plan.
3) Equally hard facts confirm [See: NASAs Hanky-Panky, Size-Structure Pt 6, Redshift Fraud, Mars Missions 1] the incredible level of high tech fraud involved in computerized manipulation of mirrors in telescopes, funny cameras, phony use of parallax and two dozen other deceptive star distance measuring techniques, virtual reality lies, misleading simulation and imaging techniques, etc. It’s all been concocted by a Theoretical Science Establishment geared to upholding and furthering the implementation of today’s Kabbalic Kosmos. In this Kosmos the Copernican Model of a rotating, orbiting earth is the Keystone that must be protected against all challenges… including very prominently this issue: Are those satellites geosynchronous or truly stationary?
Now, About Electromagnetism, etc, and Geostationary Satellites….
As mentioned, both the moving and non-moving satellite models stay overhead at the precise altitude of 22,236 miles. They basically do not stray up or down or east or west.
One thing is certain regarding both models: Some force or combination of forces which no one really understands is keeping those particular satellites--unlike thousands of others!!—overhead at all times.
From Newton till today the standard mathematics which attempt to explain all space phenomena centers on the concept of “gravity”. The apple and all else falls to the ground and this observed fact needs a name. Call it “gravity”. No problem.
But to attribute the formation of the earth and all else in the universe to gravitational forces pulling and shaping and rotating and orbiting Big Bang debris into its present mind-blowing order and function and precision is more than a bit off the wall when you think about it, isn’t it? Take one quick example, viz., the matter of tides on the earth. Here we are told that the scientific explanation is that the Moon’s weak gravity stretches the earth like a rubber ball and thus controls tides on both sides of the earth. This utterly sappy, contra-scientific nonsense has become a scientific “fact” that is in all the books. [See: Tides] How can we have been brought to believe such pseudo-scientific balderdash?!
Well, Kabbalic “science” (“falsely so called”: I Tim. 6:20, 21) rules over the world’s “knowledge” today, [See: Knowledge Impact] that’s how. This “knowledge” must have a non-Biblical, naturalistic “explanation” for the tidal phenomena; so “gravity” got the job.
It’s the same with the geosynchronous satellite concept. “Gravity” gets the job of explaining how this could work. I submit to you that this explanation—even when coupled with centrifugal force is fundamentally incapable of sustaining this concept. There is, however, another explanation for what is going on.
But first, the alleged gravity-enabled geosynchronous model: Consider what is required to make this particular satellite geosynchronous after it is placed in this unique slot in space where it remains day in and day out for decades:
a) It must attain and maintain an exact speed of 6865 MPH throughout those decades. To be off by even 1 MPH would throw it out of pocket by over 700 miles in one month. Off 10 MPH = 7000 miles out of position in one month. This is a serious problem. No other satellites retain an unassisted, unvarying speed; why should this one??
b) It must perform a perfectly circular orbit with absolutely no apogee or perigee. This is something no other satellite has done.
c) It must stay confined top and bottom and on both sides within a small invisible circular space tunnel at all times. Breaking out of this 4-way confinement in any direction would of necessity affect the required speed and direction and hence bollix everything up…including the location where your satellite dish points.
d) The ring of geostationary satellites now over the equator has very nearly the maximum permitted number of vacancies filled, i.e., 180 at 2 degrees apart. Because of this limited capacity, the rush is on to get “virtual geostationary satellites” with orbital apogees of 13-16000 miles along certain latitudes no closer than 15 degrees N and S (so as not to interfere with the geostationary ring). These are needed in order to overcome the 2 degree limitation and to augment the amount of information traffic that can be handled through the geostationary satellites.
This technologically exciting operation employs multiple satellites in highly eccentric orbits which are arrayed so that they only power-on when in their apogee arc that is closest to the geostats…. One of the characteristics of the orbits of this new “virtual geostationary satellite” invention actually contains proof that the geosynchronous concept is wrong!
What characteristic?! This: Their orbits can be clockwise OR counterclockwise… while all geostat orbits must be counterclockwise to match the alleged counterclockwise rotation of the earth.
How does that prove the geosynchronous concept is wrong?
It is noted that these “virtual geostat” constellations can make 2 and 3 and 4 orbits a day, and we find, for example, in the three-orbit-a-day model that “…each of the satellites [in the array] is enabled [turned on] near its apogee for a duration of four hours, which is 50% of its total orbit period”. It is further noted that this capability causes these “…satellites to appear to ‘hang’ in the sky because their angular velocity at or near apogee approximates the rotation rate of the earth” [at a given latitude]. (Ibid. p.5)
The point here is that this almost stationary, observable “hanging” satellite over a limited area would not be possible for those “virtual geostats” which are traveling in a clockwise orbit if the earth is rotating. This is obvious because the same observable “hanging” effect could not be produced by “virtual geostats” going in opposite directions over a rotating earth any more than the alleged counterclockwise moving geosynchronous satellites could produce the effect of “hanging” stationary if they were to turn around and go in a clockwise orbit. (Is a stentorian Eureka! in order here?!) (This may also disprove the goofy but necessary assumption that the earth’s atmosphere turns with its alleged rotation, adjusting its speed with every inch from the equator to the poles…and unaffected by an alleged orbital speed of 67,000 MPH.)
e) The geostationary satellites have little propulsion jets on them for use now and then to get them back in place when they have moved a little bit. In the old days when one satellite conked out, they would move a good one in the direction of the bad one just far enough so that the traffic from both directions could still be handled. These were re-positionings within the circular geostationary ring that were done to maintain coverage and not to correct a problem within the ring itself. One such case involved a good satellite that was moved 675 miles. Neither it nor the bad one had gotten out of their assigned slots in the ring at 22.236 miles altitude. Both were observable overhead right where they were supposed to be at all times.
But note this: The good satellite was moved “…674.42 statute miles westward!—from 97.45 to 107.2 degrees W Longitude--over a period of 42 days at the precise speed of 16.06 MPDay.”. This maneuver was carried out based on “fixed earth” calculations according to a letter from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.[See: The Earth Is Not Moving (Part IV)]
Given the fact that this successful maneuver was predicated on a fixed earth without mentioning whether the satellite was also fixed in the calculations or whether it continued orbiting eastwardly at 6865 MPH, let us try that option and see what happens: Option #1: The earth is stopped from its alleged rotation and the good satellite and the bad one and all others continue their alleged eastwardly orbits. The propulsion jets slow the speed of the good satellite 16.06 MPDay for 42 days and when the good satellite has lost 675 miles in the 42 day slowdown it is now 675 miles closer to the bad satellite to its west and can handle its responsibilities. Perfect. The deed is done.
But wait…. There is no real model wherein the earth is fixed and the satellite orbits a stationary earth!! So, obviously, this option could not produce the required maneuver, and is ruled out. That leaves only Option #2: Again, the earth is stopped from its alleged rotation and is “fixed”. Along with the others in the ring, the good satellite is stopped in its alleged orbit and also becomes “fixed”. The propulsion jets move the now inert good satellite westward (as was actually done) at 16.06 MPDay for 42 days and it ends up 675 miles closer to the bad satellite than it was before, and the operation is complete. Perfect. The deed is done.
But wait again! This is a geocentric model!! It works and the other one doesn’t! The official admission that “a fixed earth” is required for a successful maneuver is true; but the satellite (and all the others in the ring) must also be fixed for it to work.[See: The Earth Is Not Moving (pp.260-264)]
f) Getting to the “gravity” part, we find that this weak and overworked concept is given the acid test when called upon to explain how a so-called geosynchronous satellite could do what it has to do. Think it through: Fact: There is an invisible circular ring with a circumference of some 165,000 miles around the earth which can “contain” as many as 180 satellites, all of which are at an altitude of 22.236 miles, and all of which can be observationally confirmed to be in the same place all the time.
Based on the fact that other satellites orbit the earth, it is natural—without thinking of the complications of making these geosynchronous --to jump to the conclusion that the stationary one overhead is also orbiting. Add to that knee-jerk reaction, the rule Physicists use which declares that there can be no inertia in the universe [See: TSE Pt 2-Hist.BigBang (p. 9)] and one can see why people just accept the conclusion that the satellite is orbiting geosyn-chronously and consider the matter closed.
As already seen, what is not natural is to dogmatically insist that geosynchronous movement of the satellite is the only possible conclusion. The reason this conclusion is not truly natural is because there is not now nor has there ever been any proof that the earth is rotating on an axis. If it isn’t and we believe it isn’t after seeing the evidence, the only truly natural question that would come to mind is: What is keeping that thing up there?! But after centuries of indoctrination into the heliocentricity concept from Copernicus through Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Sagan, etc., it has become “natural” to “know” the earth rotates and hence the satellite must be orbiting geosynchronously and that is what keeps it up there.
Five things are certain at this point: 1) The ultimate reason for insisting that these satellites are in geosynchronous orbit is based on the unproven and wholly vulnerable assumption that the earth is rotating; 2) This geosynchronous dogma is absolutely and totally sacrosanct to the entire theoretical science establishment now in control of the world’s “knowledge” [See: Knowledge Impact]; 3) If these satellites are not geosynchronous, then the earth is not rotating as the whole world has been led to believe; 4) That conclusion alone will cause the entire false science Idol to implode; 5) The Pharisee Religion’s Big Bang Paradigm of 15 Billion years of evolutionism [See: Kabbala 6]—and all the false science built on the Kabbala’s model of the Origin of the universe [See: Kab.Superstring]—will do the Humpty-Dumpty number…expressed in Biblical terms as The Fall of Babylon (Rev. 14:8; 17:14; 18: 2, 4,10; etc.).
So don’t be surprised when the hounds of hell are unleashed to prevent any serious threat to the rotating earth model, whether on this point about satellites or any other. It is a spiritual battle at bottom and it will be settled “one hour” after the GGG (Global Government Gangsters) get their briefcases open (Rev. 17:12, 14)
But there needs to be something besides the weak “gravity” concept to cause those truly stationary geostationary satellites to just “hang” up there even in the Non-moving Earth Model. But what?!
Well, one is reminded that the Bible says that God “hung the Earth on nothing” (Job 26:7). A simulation of such a non-moving Earth can be seen (www.fixedearth.com). The question under the picture asks: “Could God not have engineered something like this?? That is to say, since a $50 Levitating Globe Novelty can demonstrate clearly and simply that something gravity would normally pull downward is caused to hang in space by an unseen force, we need to know if such a proven force is available. We are told and we know that such a force is available. It is called electromagnetism.
Thus, while we take into consideration that an apparently equal gravitational force of some 14.7 lbs psi covers the surface of the Earth, we also know this is not the kind of force that could play a significant role in causing a geostationary satellite to hang motionless in space at an altitude of 22,236 miles. We don’t need any occult/ Kabbalist mathematics to confirm this. We just know it!
We do not have to search very far for the only force known to man that could cause the satellite to “hang” there motionless just as well over a hundred of them are doing as we speak. Would not electromagnetic forces in perfect balance top and bottom throughout that 165,000 miles of invisible “tubing” allow the satellites to be popped into a slot anywhere along the tube and hang there essentially motionless?? Considering the miraculous design inherent in everything that exists—including gravity and electromagnetism and other things we half-way understand but could not have created—it seems that anyone who is open even to the most likely naturalist explanation--let alone a Biblical one--would say: “Yeah, a balance of electromagnetic forces could hang those satellites up there like that…just like the Levitating Globe….”
One other thing that needs to be underscored here is that…if the scientists who know about the role electromagnetism plays in the universe were able to get their findings published and aired in the other media, we would soon learn some reasonable explanations for a lot of the phenomena that is now subject only to interpretations that fit the Big Bang Paradigm from the Kabbala.
For example, those scientists say things like: “There was no Big Bang…” & “The visible universe is much smaller than we thought…. We have no idea of the extent of the universe.” & “We have direct evidence of stellar evolution but in a time scale comparable with the human life time” & “We don’t know the age of stars since the thermonuclear evolution theory does not apply to them….” & “We have no idea of the age…of the universe”…. & “Time travel is impossible….” & “Space has no extra dimensions in which to warp or where parallel universes may exist….” & “There are no neutron stars or Black Holes….” & “Gravity is an exhausted and bankrupt concept….” Etcetera. Read these in context and much more in this 5 page link: “The Electric Universe” [See: Electric].
So it is then, that when one puts the known facts on the table about the reality of well over a hundred high-tech satellites hanging in space around the equatorial region of the Earth at 22,236 miles altitude, it does not take long to see that this exquisite phenomenon holds the key to discovering the near-perfect flaw that must exist in the counterfeit Copernican Model. That Model is the Keystone that is holding up the Bible-destroying and Christ-destroying Kabbala-based occult physics of the Pharisee Religion [See: Keystone]. That Religion has perverted and virtually conquered modern man’s ability to know Truth by virtue of its long career masquerading as secular theoretical science.
The days of that masquerade’s success are rapidly running out….
A note on GPS Satellites:
"The GPS satellites are not in geo-stationary orbit, but instead orbit twice every time the earth orbits once. This means that for any observer the satellites appear to orbit once overhead each day." (From: GPS Satellites: Wolfram Research)
Fact: #1 - We see and know they orbit overhead once a day.
Fact #2 - One orbit a day will produce Fact #1
Fact #3 - Two orbits are...and must be assumed because...
Fact #4 - The earth's rotation is assumed.
Fact #5 - Unproven assumptions that are required to explain phenomena that are readily explained without the assumptions constitute false science.
Fact #6 - One orbit a day around a stationary earth produces all the known behavior of GPS Satellites.
Fact #7 - Sans contra-scientific assumptions, GPS Satellite behavior proves a non-rotating earth.