https://www.google.com/search?q=amateur+iss+photos

What is illuminating the ISS at night.

"carl eto" wrote:
>
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=amateur+iss+photos
>
>
> What is illuminating the ISS at night.

What is illuminating the Moon at night.

Same answer.

Sun is not switched off at night, you know?

On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 3:53:27 PM UTC-8, Python wrote:
> "carl eto" wrote:
> >
> >
> > https://www.google.com/search?q=amateur+iss+photos
> >
> >
> > What is illuminating the ISS at night.
> What is illuminating the Moon at night.
>
> Same answer.
>
> Sun is not switched off at night, you know?

The ISS is not high enough to reflect sun light at night.

"Checkmate, King Two, this is White Rook, over!"

On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 4:28:38 PM UTC-8, thor stoneman wrote:
> On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 3:53:27 PM UTC-8, Python wrote:
> > "carl eto" wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > https://www.google.com/search?q=amateur+iss+photos
> > >
> > >
> > > What is illuminating the ISS at night.
> > What is illuminating the Moon at night.
> >
> > Same answer.
> >
> > Sun is not switched off at night, you know?
> The ISS is not high enough to reflect sun light at night.

Backup lights?

On 1/23/2022 7:34 PM, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 4:28:38 PM UTC-8, thor stoneman wrote:
>> On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 3:53:27 PM UTC-8, Python wrote:
>>> "carl eto" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.google.com/search?q=amateur+iss+photos
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is illuminating the ISS at night.
>>> What is illuminating the Moon at night.
>>>
>>> Same answer.
>>>
>>> Sun is not switched off at night, you know?
>> The ISS is not high enough to reflect sun light at night.
>
> Backup lights?

It's a conspiracy!!!!! :-)

On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 7:00:56 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> On 1/23/2022 7:34 PM, Paul Alsing wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 4:28:38 PM UTC-8, thor stoneman wrote:
> >> On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 3:53:27 PM UTC-8, Python wrote:
> >>> "carl eto" wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.google.com/search?q=amateur+iss+photos
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> What is illuminating the ISS at night.
> >>> What is illuminating the Moon at night.
> >>>
> >>> Same answer.
> >>>
> >>> Sun is not switched off at night, you know?

> >> The ISS is not high enough to reflect sun light at night.
> >
> > Backup lights?

> It's a conspiracy!!!!! :-)

That's the ONLY possible explanation!

On 1/23/2022 11:18 PM, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 7:00:56 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>> On 1/23/2022 7:34 PM, Paul Alsing wrote:
>>> On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 4:28:38 PM UTC-8, thor stoneman wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 3:53:27 PM UTC-8, Python wrote:
>>>>> "carl eto" wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.google.com/search?q=amateur+iss+photos
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is illuminating the ISS at night.
>>>>> What is illuminating the Moon at night.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same answer.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sun is not switched off at night, you know?
>
>>>> The ISS is not high enough to reflect sun light at night.
>>>
>>> Backup lights?
>
>> It's a conspiracy!!!!! :-)
>
> That's the ONLY possible explanation!

Oh don't be silly. We all know the ISS has windows. We know the ISS is
lit on its inside. We're simply seeing the light from its windows.

Either that, or the light is from its headlights that it uses so its
pilot can see where it's going.

Trying to get all the kꙮꙮks kꙮꙮking by saying "Conspiracy!!!" is mean,
you're just teasing them.

carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote:

> It is not physically possible to view the ISS from the surface of the
> earth.

Wrong. (from personal experience)

> Maybe you should review a college physics text book and perhaps you can
> figure it out

Now that is a very good idea.
(the lack of understanding of the fundamentals of optics here IS a bit
surprising)

Your college textbook on optics will tell you that
the resolving power of a telescope is limted to \lambda/Diameter,
or, given that the wavelength of light is about half a micron,
to 1/2 10^-6 for a one meter telescope,
so for a one meter telescope to about 5 cm at 100 km.

Those spy satellites (with their one meter mirrors)
being able to read the Prawda on the Red Square were a myth.
(and reading license plates idem)

So, for the ISS, at about 500 km, a 20 cm (8") amateur telescope
will be able to resolve about 1.25 m, in practice more like 2 meter.
So it can give a good resolved view of the outlines,
and show large details.
This is of course just what all those amateur pictures that you can find
on-line show. (and NASA could do little better)

Binoculars with 50 mm lenses will be able to resolve 4 meter at best,
so you will be able to see just the bare outlines,
good enough to allow you to identify what you see as the ISS,
and not just some other satellite.
Again, in agreement with what everybody tells you.

Even the 5 meter telescope on Mt Palomar couldn't resolve
more than about 5 cm on the ISS,
so reading a name tag is out of the question.
(even if they could track)

Finally, resolution should not be confused with visibility.
There is no such thing as 'the range of binoculars'.
Typical example: the Galilean moons of Jupiter
are easily visible with ordinary binoculars,
as bright points, not resolved.
And of course stars can be seen thousands of lightyears away,
and galaxies at millions of lightyears.

So yes, the ISS exists, it is easily seen,
and anybody who wants to can verify that,
with own eyes, and in more detail with a telescope,

Jan

J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
> carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It is not physically possible to view the ISS from the surface of the
>> earth.
>
> Wrong. (from personal experience)
>
>> Maybe you should review a college physics text book and perhaps you can
>> figure it out
>
> Now that is a very good idea.
> (the lack of understanding of the fundamentals of optics here IS a bit
> surprising)
>
> Your college textbook on optics will tell you that
> the resolving power of a telescope is limted to \lambda/Diameter,
> or, given that the wavelength of light is about half a micron,
> to 1/2 10^-6 for a one meter telescope,
> so for a one meter telescope to about 5 cm at 100 km.
>
> Those spy satellites (with their one meter mirrors)
> being able to read the Prawda on the Red Square were a myth.
> (and reading license plates idem)
>
> So, for the ISS, at about 500 km, a 20 cm (8") amateur telescope
> will be able to resolve about 1.25 m, in practice more like 2 meter.
> So it can give a good resolved view of the outlines,
> and show large details.
> This is of course just what all those amateur pictures that you can find
> on-line show. (and NASA could do little better)
>
> Binoculars with 50 mm lenses will be able to resolve 4 meter at best,
> so you will be able to see just the bare outlines,
> good enough to allow you to identify what you see as the ISS,
> and not just some other satellite.
> Again, in agreement with what everybody tells you.
>
> Even the 5 meter telescope on Mt Palomar couldn't resolve
> more than about 5 cm on the ISS,
> so reading a name tag is out of the question.
> (even if they could track)
>
> Finally, resolution should not be confused with visibility.
> There is no such thing as 'the range of binoculars'.
> Typical example: the Galilean moons of Jupiter
> are easily visible with ordinary binoculars,
> as bright points, not resolved.
> And of course stars can be seen thousands of lightyears away,
> and galaxies at millions of lightyears.
>
> So yes, the ISS exists, it is easily seen,
> and anybody who wants to can verify that,
> with own eyes, and in more detail with a telescope,
>
> Jan
>
>

“Carl Eto” (not his real name of course) is a paranoid schizophrenic,
however, and so any simple elaboration of facts will be countered with a
complex elaboration of conspiracy, piled-on untruths, and just plain
crazy-talk. That’s because he is feeding a deep seated emotional need by
claiming to “see through” a mass deception that has fooled everyone else.
This makes him feel both justified in his anxieties and rather special for
having them.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote:

> J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
> > carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> It is not physically possible to view the ISS from the surface of the
> >> earth.
> >
> > Wrong. (from personal experience)
> >
> >> Maybe you should review a college physics text book and perhaps you can
> >> figure it out
> >
> > Now that is a very good idea.
> > (the lack of understanding of the fundamentals of optics here IS a bit
> > surprising)
> >
> > Your college textbook on optics will tell you that
> > the resolving power of a telescope is limted to \lambda/Diameter,
> > or, given that the wavelength of light is about half a micron,
> > to 1/2 10^-6 for a one meter telescope,
> > so for a one meter telescope to about 5 cm at 100 km.
> >
> > Those spy satellites (with their one meter mirrors)
> > being able to read the Prawda on the Red Square were a myth.
> > (and reading license plates idem)
> >
> > So, for the ISS, at about 500 km, a 20 cm (8") amateur telescope
> > will be able to resolve about 1.25 m, in practice more like 2 meter.
> > So it can give a good resolved view of the outlines,
> > and show large details.
> > This is of course just what all those amateur pictures that you can find
> > on-line show. (and NASA could do little better)
> >
> > Binoculars with 50 mm lenses will be able to resolve 4 meter at best,
> > so you will be able to see just the bare outlines,
> > good enough to allow you to identify what you see as the ISS,
> > and not just some other satellite.
> > Again, in agreement with what everybody tells you.
> >
> > Even the 5 meter telescope on Mt Palomar couldn't resolve
> > more than about 5 cm on the ISS,
> > so reading a name tag is out of the question.
> > (even if they could track)
> >
> > Finally, resolution should not be confused with visibility.
> > There is no such thing as 'the range of binoculars'.
> > Typical example: the Galilean moons of Jupiter
> > are easily visible with ordinary binoculars,
> > as bright points, not resolved.
> > And of course stars can be seen thousands of lightyears away,
> > and galaxies at millions of lightyears.
> >
> > So yes, the ISS exists, it is easily seen,
> > and anybody who wants to can verify that,
> > with own eyes, and in more detail with a telescope,
> >
> > Jan
> >
> >
>
> "Carl Eto" (not his real name of course) is a paranoid schizophrenic,
> however, and so any simple elaboration of facts will be countered with a
> complex elaboration of conspiracy, piled-on untruths, and just plain
> crazy-talk. That's because he is feeding a deep seated emotional need by
> claiming to "see through" a mass deception that has fooled everyone else.
> This makes him feel both justified in his anxieties and rather special for
> having them.

Yes, of course.
But that is not a good reason for letting him get away
with wildly counterfactual statements and misunderstandings
about the functioning of optical instruments.

We wouldn't want the kiddies who might stray in here
to get incorrect impressions, eh?

Jan

Odd Bodkin wrote:

>> So yes, the ISS exists, it is easily seen,
>> and anybody who wants to can verify that,
>> with own eyes, and in more detail with a telescope, Jan
>
> “Carl Eto” (not his real name of course) is a paranoid schizophrenic,
> however, and so any simple elaboration of facts will be countered with a
> complex elaboration of conspiracy, piled-on untruths, and just plain
> crazy-talk. That’s because he is feeding a deep seated emotional need by
> claiming to “see through” a mass deception that has fooled everyone

Fully Vaccinated Malta Reaches Record COVID-19 Death Rate.

J. J. Lodder wrote:

>> It is not physically possible to view the ISS from the surface of the
>> earth.
>
> Wrong. (from personal experience)

Volodymyr Zelensky is a Polish name.

Oh don't be silly. We all know the ISS has windows. We know the ISS is lit on its inside. We're simply seeing the light from its windows.

Dear Michael Moroney, ol chap. I do say that it is possible for the light sources that you claim to see could be produced by the ISS windows

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cupola_(ISS_module)

but I must say that by George you are a great man and a lover of fine wines and sprits. I personally prefer a half goblet of good old Scottish whiskey and my trusty old pipe with my jolly wife sewing and sitting by the fire place thinking of your response looking out the window contemplating how wonderful life is. So as you have said my dear friend and colleague that you then have not seen the outlines of the ISS and that you have only seen an illuminated dote in the sky at night which is quite admirable but bloody hell I just can't put my finger around it but both you an Bodkin and his Son who is also a good friend have not actually seen the ISS outline of the ISS or the solar panels since the illumination ol chap that you are graciously referring to does not correspond with the photos since you say that you are seeing a dote but the photographs do not depict a dote of light. I say there do you happen to know anyone that actually has a telescope since I am one of those clumsy people that cannot figure such a bloody contraption out.

https://www.google.com/search?q=amateur+iss+photos

On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 1:31:20 PM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> carl eto <carleto4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It is not physically possible to view the ISS from the surface of the
> > earth.
> Wrong. (from personal experience)
>
> > Maybe you should review a college physics text book and perhaps you can
> > figure it out
>
> Now that is a very good idea.
> (the lack of understanding of the fundamentals of optics here IS a bit
> surprising)
>
> Your college textbook on optics will tell you that
> the resolving power of a telescope is limted to \lambda/Diameter,
> or, given that the wavelength of light is about half a micron,
> to 1/2 10^-6 for a one meter telescope,
> so for a one meter telescope to about 5 cm at 100 km.
>
> Those spy satellites (with their one meter mirrors)
> being able to read the Prawda on the Red Square were a myth.
> (and reading license plates idem)
>
> So, for the ISS, at about 500 km, a 20 cm (8") amateur telescope
> will be able to resolve about 1.25 m, in practice more like 2 meter.
> So it can give a good resolved view of the outlines,
> and show large details.
> This is of course just what all those amateur pictures that you can find
> on-line show. (and NASA could do little better)
>
> Binoculars with 50 mm lenses will be able to resolve 4 meter at best,
> so you will be able to see just the bare outlines,
> good enough to allow you to identify what you see as the ISS,
> and not just some other satellite.
> Again, in agreement with what everybody tells you.
>
> Even the 5 meter telescope on Mt Palomar couldn't resolve
> more than about 5 cm on the ISS,
> so reading a name tag is out of the question.
> (even if they could track)
>
> Finally, resolution should not be confused with visibility.
> There is no such thing as 'the range of binoculars'.
> Typical example: the Galilean moons of Jupiter
> are easily visible with ordinary binoculars,
> as bright points, not resolved.
> And of course stars can be seen thousands of lightyears away,
> and galaxies at millions of lightyears.
>
> So yes, the ISS exists, it is easily seen,
> and anybody who wants to can verify that,
> with own eyes, and in more detail with a telescope,
>
> Jan

What is illuminating the ISS?

carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 1:31:20 PM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> carl eto <carleto4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It is not physically possible to view the ISS from the surface of the
>>> earth.
>> Wrong. (from personal experience)
>>
>>> Maybe you should review a college physics text book and perhaps you can
>>> figure it out
>>
>> Now that is a very good idea.
>> (the lack of understanding of the fundamentals of optics here IS a bit
>> surprising)
>>
>> Your college textbook on optics will tell you that
>> the resolving power of a telescope is limted to \lambda/Diameter,
>> or, given that the wavelength of light is about half a micron,
>> to 1/2 10^-6 for a one meter telescope,
>> so for a one meter telescope to about 5 cm at 100 km.
>>
>> Those spy satellites (with their one meter mirrors)
>> being able to read the Prawda on the Red Square were a myth.
>> (and reading license plates idem)
>>
>> So, for the ISS, at about 500 km, a 20 cm (8") amateur telescope
>> will be able to resolve about 1.25 m, in practice more like 2 meter.
>> So it can give a good resolved view of the outlines,
>> and show large details.
>> This is of course just what all those amateur pictures that you can find
>> on-line show. (and NASA could do little better)
>>
>> Binoculars with 50 mm lenses will be able to resolve 4 meter at best,
>> so you will be able to see just the bare outlines,
>> good enough to allow you to identify what you see as the ISS,
>> and not just some other satellite.
>> Again, in agreement with what everybody tells you.
>>
>> Even the 5 meter telescope on Mt Palomar couldn't resolve
>> more than about 5 cm on the ISS,
>> so reading a name tag is out of the question.
>> (even if they could track)
>>
>> Finally, resolution should not be confused with visibility.
>> There is no such thing as 'the range of binoculars'.
>> Typical example: the Galilean moons of Jupiter
>> are easily visible with ordinary binoculars,
>> as bright points, not resolved.
>> And of course stars can be seen thousands of lightyears away,
>> and galaxies at millions of lightyears.
>>
>> So yes, the ISS exists, it is easily seen,
>> and anybody who wants to can verify that,
>> with own eyes, and in more detail with a telescope,
>>
>> Jan
>
> What is illuminating the ISS?
>

Same thing that illuminates the moon.

Street lights from Hong Kong.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Same thing that illuminates the moon. Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

https://www.google.com/search?q=hight+of+the+iss&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS990US990&oq=hight+of+the+iss&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i10j0i390l5.4408j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://www.google.com/search?q=distance+to+the+moon&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS990US990&oq=distance+to+the+moon&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i512l9.4287j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Jolly good show but surely ol chap the ISS is just not high enough, Tally ho I say but I may be wrong since the English are not close to those tantalizing French or you may have something gorgeous to say in response I am anxiously waiting for your reply, my Love and dear friend and confident.

carl eto wrote:

> Oh don't be silly. We all know the ISS has windows. We know the
> ISS is lit on its inside. We're simply seeing the light
> from its windows.

Triple Vaccinated Trudeau in Quarantine as Trucker Convoy Grows to 43
Miles Long, kiss my ass.

Reiner Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer - CHD Press Conference in Brussels
1_23_22 https://www.bitchute.com/video/CIczmtXzlMBI/

"this is *_genocide_*, it's *NOT* invented by *Hitler*, no. It was
invented by some capitalist *_anglo_americans_* in 1900 something. And
they used Hitler for a while. But the same *_structures_*, the fairs of
the same people, are still around. That's why Vera correctly says, I'm
still fighting same people that I fought 80 years ago."

thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Same thing that illuminates the moon. Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=hight+of+the+iss&rlz1GCEA_enUS990US990&oq=hight+of+the+iss&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i10j0i390l5.4408j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
>
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=distance+to+the+moon&rlz1GCEA_enUS990US990&oq=distance+to+the+moon&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i512l9.4287j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
>
>
>
> Jolly good show but surely ol chap the ISS is just not high enough,

How high do you think it has to be for the sun to illuminate it at dusk?

> Tally ho I say but I may be wrong since the English are not close to
> those tantalizing French or you may have something gorgeous to say in
> response I am anxiously waiting for your reply, my Love and dear friend and confident.
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On 1/28/2022 3:20 PM, carl eto wrote:

> What is illuminating the ISS?

Its headlights. It needs headlights so the driver can see, and avoid
hitting, space debris.

How high do you think it has to be for the sun to illuminate it at dusk? Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

I say good show old chap, I was going to say that myself and you jolly well snatch it right out of my mouth but according to NASA the ISS can be view at night.

https://spotthestation.nasa.gov/

Sorry, bollocks, I almost broke me leg, bloke, we are wrong since the bloody ISS would not be high enough. It is the French's fault they made us do it.

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 1:53:26 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 1/28/2022 3:20 PM, carl eto wrote:
>
> > What is illuminating the ISS?
> Its headlights. It needs headlights so the driver can see, and avoid
> hitting, space debris

Going Mach 24 what would they do? Power up shields?

https://reelgood.com/tv/genre/science-fiction/on-hbo_max

Turn on the science fiction channel and use time-space to activate the forward shield or the cloaking device. Beam me up Michael Moroney we have a present danger.

carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> How high do you think it has to be for the sun to illuminate it at dusk?
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
>
> I say good show old chap, I was going to say that myself and you jolly
> well snatch it right out of my mouth but according to NASA the ISS can be view at night.

As long as the earth isn’t between the sun and the ISS.

>
> https://spotthestation.nasa.gov/
>
>
> Sorry, bollocks, I almost broke me leg, bloke, we are wrong since the
> bloody ISS would not be high enough.

How high is high enough?

> It is the French's fault they made us do it.
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

How high is high enough? Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

It would not matter how high at 12:00 am since the earth's shadow would be in the way.

Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

https://tubitv.com/movies/639799/the-good-liar?start=true&utm_source=google-feed&tracking=google-feed