They are all recorded from a moving car going in an opposite direction from a handheld camera. Say the car is going at 50 - 60 mph, and the aircraft in the opposite direction is travelling at about 140kts, it would be easy to think the aircraft is static even though it's moving.
As for the single piston towing the banner, that proves to me what fakery this is. It's a poster or photo and they are trying to convince the viewer that it is real.
It is technically possible (and has been done many times) for a small aircraft to go backwards if the indicated airspeed is less than the the oncoming windspeed. Banner towing pilots would never go up in those type of conditions though. But that's not what's going on here. This whole video is just taking the you know what.
24 Jan 2020 18:16:35 So, I still don't know where I sit so trying to prove either way.
Used to listen to this Michelle Thaller "scientist", but won't hold what she says with any weight anymore.
Starts the argument with, "You have all the beautiful pictures of the Earth". Which NASA has, said are photoshopped. But the bit that made me go WTF?!?, was just after 6 mins.
"So the gas right around the Earth is actually millions of degrees hot. That's actually true"
Maybe she's getting confused with the Sun? . Oh no wait, it's a proof the Earth is a globe video.
3 proofs that debunk flat-Earth theory | NASA's Michelle Thaller
24 Jan 2020 15:39:36 I thought it would be a lot harder passing behind foreground objects, but maybe not? . I not that familiar with AAA or programs like that. So I don't know.
24 Jan 2020 13:17:46 Just for my inner peace. I didn't say it WAS fake. But agreed if it is, really well done. And expensive. Why waste that sort of money?
24 Jan 2020 12:55:30 An intriguing one this, Ed. Does really look like they are hardly moving.
Could this have been faked? Possible, but expensive due to foreground running across view of plane. Less likely as a lot of seemingly individual cases of seeing this independently and on different occasions. And why would you fake so many different occasions (expense again) .
Could it be an optical illusion? Possible. But for a plane to appear stationary? at a few hundred feet? hmmm. The inside view of this happening on a high altitude flight is probably more likely to come across as an illusion, as air speed is not related to the Earth. It is the speed of air passing across/ over the wings.
But I thought these planes travel between 350-550mph, so you would need the equivalent windspeed in the opposite direction the plane is travelling to be at the planes speed. 350-550 mph jet stream I doubt it! . (without delving a little more, I am not sure how altitude effects airspeed as the air is thinner. My thinking right now is that it just allows the plane to travel faster as less resistance. The air still travels ( although less air as thinner) across the wings the same speed.
The A380 flights from Dubai to London fly directly over my house multiple times a day. They always appear slow and lethargic in the sky, and seem to fly oddly (not how you would expect, maybe because of there size?! ) but I haven't witnessed anything like what this video shows. And I do make a point of watching for odd things happening in the sky. Seen a few, but not relevant to this thread.
Is it possible, plane engineers are mistaking a mix of liquid helium and avgas as just avgas? . I know helium is only light as a gas, not a liquid, but releasing a pressurised gas (liquid) into a space where it would not be pressurised (just release the equivalent volume of uncompressed gas as a liquid), it would still become a float-able gas mixed with avgas.
I am just spit-balling to take my mind off my potentially anger inducing day. Thanks.
23 Jan 2020 21:19:09 I'm going to look in to this more. As I don't know enough about the subject to think it through properly. (I don't think being 4 hours in to " the greatest story never told" is helping my mental state right now. )
I know avgas is denser at colder temperatures maybe this could somehow effect the amount used?
This being said, Though. Prices for anything are set as high as they can in relation to what people are willing to pay. And I doubt anything would stand up in a court of law even if they were using no fuel.
23 Jan 2020 17:16:39 Not all of the fuel is stored in the wings. There are 6 other tanks in the main body of the A380 not including the wing tanks.
I get that the video was displaying it was too much fuel to fit, it was just his calculations seemed weird.
I don't remember him mentioning the other fuel tanks either?
I'm not writing off his theory. Just figuring out the if he is right.
Always thought Tesla's turbine has been very underused considering, on his deathbed, Tesla said it was his favourite invention. Maybe because it doesn't run on million year old squashed plant juice?
23 Jan 2020 16:14:26 It possible. I was trying to do some calculations on what he was saying and I am not sure what he was saying was right. Was just going to run through some bit again and now its gone, so I guess I won't be sure, now.
The answer is 7.727 . As in the Olympic pool holds 7.727 times the amount of fuel on board an A380. Not seven thousand seven hundred and twenty seven litres.
Or did I miss something here?
I did get to figure out that the pumps work out to be around 1000 litres a minute. Fuelling time (standard) is about 2 hours, so 120,000 litres of fuel. Not a full tank, but it depends on the destination. Full tank is about 8,500 miles. and would weight about 90,000kg I think (6lb per gallon is the standard pilots use).
It would have been nice to re-watch and go over things again.
21 Jan 2020 08:38:02 OK, so it turns out it's the "Book of Veles". An apparent "literary forgery" of ancient Slavic text with accounts dating from the 7th century BC to the 9th century AD.
19 Jan 2020 13:21:05 "valis" was what the uploader's (and creator of the video? ) subtitles said, but that could be down to interpretation? . Usually, search engines throw up the correct spelling or what you think you are looking for. Funnily there was nothing this time! . Like I said, that was the only book I could find. I did expect it to be an older text / book too.
I'll try and touch base with her. She sounds very knowledgeable so let's hope I can get hold of her and acquire some good info.
19 Jan 2020 07:00:42 Do you think, that is who she is referring too? . A lot of the reviews on that book said it wasn't really Scifi. And it was all I could find with "valis".
Thanks for the pdf link, Ed. Appreciated. I did find that. But, still, I have brought the 1st volume as I like hard copies to make notes in. If I find they're something I can interpret, I would probably get the remaining (4/ 5?) volumes on pdf as it will get pretty expensive otherwise.
I started to read and research this Velikovsky book supplement last night but got too late. Was very interesting what I read so far.
18 Jan 2020 21:12:43 I'm guessing the Fomenko book (s) (just vol 1 for now) will be a hard read, Ed. A lot of his work if not all is based on astronomy, so to check in to things accurately, will probably involve some pretty complex mathematics. I speculate though. I'll just have to wait and see.
You can be assured any knowledge or insight I can gain from said books, will be passed on.
As for book of valis. All I can find is Valis (SF MASTERWORKS) by Phillip K Dick. Does that name ring any bells? (no pun intended)
18 Jan 2020 19:00:58 Thanks for the OP, I think this is a better avenue of research, for now, rather than ancient languages that may or may not have been altered, with timelines that don't appear to match.
I was beginning to think Newton was a shill, what with that pesky apple! But what, with his book. Guess that puts things into question. Unless the apple incident was post-book? Maybe taken into the cult and forced to reinforce lies, after?
I'll read Newtons and Fomenko's books and start delving into this properly, from there. Hoping they have references!
Any idea what the lady means when she talks about "the book of valis"?
18 Jan 2020 15:39:02 I have not watched that video yet, but I had thought about there being dis-info as well, which is why I wanted to get hold of un-revised editions. Not that I would believe everything I read, but you understand?
I have been thinking about trying to learn some of the old languages (Sanskrit, Egyptian, Hebrew, Tamil) so I could at least read the original scrolls and scripts. Possibly even learn cuneiform. But the same problem would exist. I doubt I would be able to transcribe any of it from scratch so I would need to trust the person/ book/ information that was teaching me to understand these languages/ writing systems. Again its the problem of knowing who or what to trust.
18 Jan 2020 12:53:28 Basically because of the last few months research and although the internet can be a great source of info, I have turned my eye to old texts/ scriptures. The older and unsullied the better. Which can be hard as everything is "revised" these days. I just want to expand my knowledge and get my own facts and insights. Funnily enough I'm waiting for an Ignatius Donnelly book form the late 1800's. Would have been apt had I already read this book, to add more to this conversation.
Ed033
Southern Monkey · 24 Jan 2020 22:21
Rian · 24 Jan 2020 22:21