ISS Hoax - The International Space Station Does Not Exist!

IS THE ISS A HOLOGRAM WORN BY A U2 SPY PLANE

Look in the background during this video. You see one of the "Astronots" gliding by in his harness setup....oops must have been edited on a Friday.

Has anyone compared the live feed from the ISS and compared the cloud coverage to say any weather maps. I bet they don't match. Would be a good test i think as more proof to the fakery.

Root wrote:Has anyone compared the live feed from the ISS and compared the cloud coverage to say any weather maps. I bet they don't match.   Would be a good test i think as more proof to the fakery.

We were doing this with their feeds when they were "live" but they stopped doing them last October. First mention of anything exposing their fakery and you were instantly banned from commenting on youtube. We've also done this with their DSCVR images to prove they are fake, that the model itself doesn't even correctly display the time of year they claim these images are being taken. It's not even difficult to prove with all the fraudulent evidence in their photos and videos.

Do you guys think they gave Scott Kelly a fake twin Mark  so he could go out in pubic while he was supposed to be in space for a year?

This is absolute evidence of ISS camera trickery somewhere in a studio -



Please skip to 4:50. At 4:54 as soon as the woman says "really shocking.." a man with a purple shirt on is seen in the reflection.

Anyone seen the latest farcical footage from the 'alleged' ISS?
It shows astro-nots creating pizzas in space, I kid you not

Amazing that with a limited amount of weight carry-able on the rocket to get to the ISS (so they claim) they can take balls, guitars, (piano) keyboards and now the dough and toppings to make pizzas

https://mobile.twitter.com/astro_paolo/status/936958158680989696/video/1

They are merely taking the piss now, it's almost as if they are testing just how much rubbish the masses will accept.

Here is an 'alleged' photo taken from the ISS on December 5th 2017 of the California wildfires.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/12/07/15/47102D9A00000578-5154893-image-m-50_1512662270585.jpg


Anyone notice anything 'strange' about this picture? Check out the size of California, it would place the USA at covering 80% of the 'globe'

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/12/06/20/470DC0B900000578-5152225-image-a-109_1512591826315.jpg


Check the lake at the bottom right corner and the top left 'Santa Maria' in this map, and compare it to the ISS photo.



Now look at an 'official' map of the USA on a 'globe'

https://www.mapsofworld.com/world-maps/maps/america-centric-world-globe-map.jpg

If you cannot see the HUGE discrepancies I fear you are beyond help

Screenshots of Nasa Live feed taken about 24 hours apart...

Look closer...

Proof of screenshot;

I compared the first ISS photo with a normal view from an airplane...

http://il8.picdn.net/shutterstock/videos/3010705/thumb/1.jpg

Not much difference to me. The ISS must have been flying at airplane altitude that day (haha!) or the camera zoomed in to California very deeply. If the ISS actually existed, then it should be the latter. But then it begs the question, how did the camera capture the foreground object so clearly or at all if it's zoomed in?

FL@T-E@RTH wrote:Here is an 'alleged' photo taken from the ISS on December 5th 2017 of the California wildfires.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/12/07/15/47102D9A00000578-5154893-image-m-50_1512662270585.jpg


Anyone notice anything 'strange' about this picture? Check out the size of California, it would place the USA at covering 80% of the 'globe'

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/12/06/20/470DC0B900000578-5152225-image-a-109_1512591826315.jpg


Check the lake at the bottom right corner and the top left 'Santa Maria' in this map, and compare it to the ISS photo.



Now look at an 'official' map of the USA on a 'globe'

https://www.mapsofworld.com/world-maps/maps/america-centric-world-globe-map.jpg

If you cannot see the HUGE discrepancies I fear you are beyond help

whoever has worked with photoshop knows what the "picking tool" is, and knows that sometimes when you pick a color to extract,like on green screen image..there is a little of this color still on the boarders of the selection area cause the green pixels are mixing with the colors of the boarder..so sometimes you can still see some green left on the boarders.As it happened to this guy that photoshopped (badly)these ISS pictures..https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3e/ISS-27_Dmitri_Kondratyev_and_Paolo_Nespoli_photograph_the_Earth_through_the_Cupola.jpg

Here we can see Karen Nyberg,on a zero gravity plane washing her hair and of course not caring at all about the water spreading anywhere.In this kind of videos you can hear the engines of the plane.
But here there is something more interesting..a very cheap nasa trick: parabolic flights cannot last more than 30 seconds,so you can see how they make this "flash effect" since the begining of the video to make your eye get used to the cool effect.In the begining of the video the flashes are used in the same cut..but later you dont know how much time has passed..watch it with attention to understand the trick and the illusion.You cant count a take more than 30 seconds,is always interrupted by a cut

macgyver wrote:
zero gravity plane
cheap nasa trick
parabolic flights
30 seconds

There is No Gravity - The Zero G Plane provides a protected environment for Free-Fall; unlike Sky-Divers who must fall through differing air resistance based on speed and conditions. For the Sky-Diver, without the protected cabin, air resistance increases with velocity until equilibrium is reached and acceleration stops; this is called terminal velocity.

[G]ravity replaced Abracadabra
Theoretical Physicist is another term for Science Fiction Writer

Here's another little doozy of a debunker:



Every single shot of the solar panels shows fish-eye lens warpage. Pause the video at 6:37 and hold a straight-edge up to the edge of the solar panel. It's so bowed that it looks like a boomerang, lol!

Nice plastic toys you got there NASA:

Admin wrote:

The International Space Station, just like everything else brought to us by NASA, is a Freemasonic hoax, a complete fabrication done with special effects, models, pools, zero G planes, and various camera tricks.  The following video exposes key points of evidence for the hoax and breaks down exactly how the illusion is created and maintained.

Is it just me, or is the window showing a green patch of grass, perhaps at the side of the runway? Leading up to the 5:18 mark of the video, the narrator shows an astronot floating through the "space station" presumably because she is in space where there is limited "gravity". However, at the 5:18 mark, I saw through the airplane window what appears to be a patch of grass, perhaps by the runway. I would not expect to see this nice green if I were 100s of miles above the earth orbiting in "space".

Or have I simply misinterpreted what I am seeing?

From the video posted at the very beginning of this thread, there is what I see as young boy on the space station. the narrator is showing anomalous scenes aboard the space station, yet the 36:15 minute mark, a figure resembling a boy is shown without comment. are children coming aboard the space station? is that a boy or am I misapprehending?

Well my research is complete, this must mean the international space station is real, this TOTALLY isn't taken from an airplane or helicopter
Mount Fuji seen from the International Space Station.

OK I think it pays to be open minded. I'm convinced by other simpler things that our world is flat and stationery, space ISS and all of that I have to rely on others.

There's a strong FE thread on David Ickes forums with some very aggressive and relentless opponents.

One of them posted this and I am having difficulty because it looks quite convincing in relation to the time in weightlessness.

Any views please? I had a cursory look for signs of editing but couldn't see anything.



Is it possible that they can recreate the phemomenon just by being at that point (75 - 100km?) where the V2 test and amateur rockets lost all energy suddenly and floated around a bit before falling down again.

nowhereelsetogo wrote:OK I think it pays to be open minded. I'm convinced by other simpler things that our world is flat and stationery, space ISS and all of that I have to rely on others.

There's a strong FE thread on David Ickes forums with some very aggressive and relentless opponents.

One of them posted this and I am having difficulty because it looks quite convincing in relation to the time in weightlessness.

Any views please? I had a cursory look for signs of editing but couldn't see anything.



Is it possible that they can recreate the phemomenon just by being at that point (75 - 100km?) where the V2 test and amateur rockets lost all energy suddenly and floated around a bit before falling down again.  

This looks convincing? Why? To me, i don't know if you have actually looked at all the other recordings of so called space, but to me it looks like the same hairspray head. Of course since we have the short end when it comes to real information i can't say anything for sure. This completely goes past the main point though, you see that? They are not in space period. The rest is simply a information problem. See they can on video do all kinds of shit there is no way you can say for sure that it is continues film, especially with newer techniques. To believe that it is 100% proof is very naive especially since we know the many lies nasa has already pulled of. It is also the context and reputation and history that you have to take into account. Just like for example 9/11, many people that asked serious questions started inquiring into many other government statements since if 1 thing is a lie then what else is a lie? That is very important also to see context and also to see fabrications history.

nowhereelsetogo wrote:OK I think it pays to be open minded. I'm convinced by other simpler things that our world is flat and stationery, space ISS and all of that I have to rely on others.

There's a strong FE thread on David Ickes forums with some very aggressive and relentless opponents.

One of them posted this and I am having difficulty because it looks quite convincing in relation to the time in weightlessness.

Any views please? I had a cursory look for signs of editing but couldn't see anything.



Is it possible that they can recreate the phemomenon just by being at that point (75 - 100km?) where the V2 test and amateur rockets lost all energy suddenly and floated around a bit before falling down again.  

--
It definitely does Not pay to be open-minded when you are facing these charlatans. These nasa performance tricksters have had nearly 70 years of honing their illusionary crafts and staged productions.

But obviously, you may need some assistance with seeing through the magic tricks. Okay then, if you watch her shoulders closely and her sweatshirt, you will see points and pulls of fabric that would not occur if she was floating weightlessly. At/around 3:45 minutes, she demonstrates the exercise bike and you can plainly see several points and pulls of fabric and she even has to pull out a bit of a wedgie when her shorts bunch up at the 4-minute mark.

As vincey84 points out, her nasa hair-explosion hairdo is also a tell-tale sign -- hair does not behave that way in free fall or underwater. It is quite obviously spritzed and glued into a very clownish perm.

The video has very few cuts and edits, you are correct. It appears to me that she is suspended by wire. She appears to be dangling belly-first down a cylindrical puppet stage and the entire stage is gimble-mounted to have a rolling effect in three dimensions. This is apparent if you watch the behavior of the silver necklace she is wearing.

They are most definitely not on rocket ship or free-falling at 75 kilometers. They are in a motion picture studio. Their entire career existence is based exclusively on crafting these types of illusions.

--

Ah yeah, oliver. It looks like another wire circus act. See i am not very observant sometimes with these things(or i just dont like to go through a vid like this). But once you know it you start seeing it more. I do know that there are some glaringly obvious examples of the wire thing for other videos claimed by nasa are from the iss. To me thats enough, just 1 is enough and i have a big fuck you in mind towards anything from nasa. I have been going through pictures, lithographs and edgings and paintings from the past. It is not just nasa. There are so many fabrications. I am truly blown away by the fact that it is so obviously visible. Like it isnt hidden at all. I gues that is also some kind of mocking isnt it. Some kind of demorilazation.

Thanks very much.

That's all very helpful and I'm going to examine it more thoroughly so I can spot things a bit better.

A bit of fun and very clever!