There Are No “Satellites” Orbiting in “Space”

Do a Google Search for “photos of satellites,” then click “Images,” and all you will find are artist’s renditions and computer generated images of so-called satellites. Some of the images look more realistic than others, but if you take a really close look, you will see that all of the search results are not actual photos at all! Here… I’ve made it easy for you to do the search: Just click here.

Here below are literally the first five results in the search. You can see just how fake these photos look once you look at them with new eyes. When we do this Google search, why aren’t there any photos of satellites on the ground before the so-called launch? And if these are real photos of satellites, then who or what is taking the photographs? Most of the images that show up in the search are even admitted to be artist’s renderings:

Google search

Google search

Google search

Google search

Google search

The is no “outer space” in which the Moon is 238,000 miles away, and the Sun is 93 Million miles away, and the stars are trillions and trillions of miles away, etc. etc. And since there is no space, then it naturally follows that it is impossible to launch “satellites” into space and have them orbit around a so-called ball Earth. Have you or anyone else ever seen a satellite launch? Probably not. If you have, you probably either saw the launch fail as the rocket exploded, or the rocket made a giant parabola in the sky, eventually going out of sight and crashing somewhere out in the ocean. How come successful NASA rocket launches (forget the massive number of failed launches) never go straight up and into “space”? Why do they travel on a parabola, and even appear to make their way back down to the Earth before they go out of sight?

Check out this video of a supposedly “successful” satellite launch. This is apparently India’s space program. Notice that the rocket’s path is a giant parabola. Near the end of the video it even appears that the rocket is headed back down towards the Earth!!! But we are supposed to believe that this rocket made it into “space” and that there is now a satellite orbiting the Earth as a result?

Now, there may be “satellites” in the sense that there may exist some kind of aircraft or some other kind of technology flying at high altitudes in our own atmosphere.

“But what about cell phone transmissions and satellite TV transmissions?” you may ask. The answer to that is simple. All so-called satellite television and cell phone transmissions are accomplished through ground-based technologies.

“But what about all of the “satellite” photos that I see on Google Earth?” No, those are not taken by satellites in space. They are taken by high-altitude drone planes. Any images on Google Earth that show a curved Earth or any semblance of a spherical planet are artists renderings that are seamlessly married together with actual high-altitude photos. This article here says, “… the folks at Google Earth remind us that you’re not zooming in on just one picture. You’re actually going through a succession — seamlessly — of closer and closer shots, making the transition from a NASA shuttle shot to a satellite shot to a photograph made from an airplane. So that’s how they get such good close-up resolution.” But like I said, the “NASA shuttle shots” and “satellite shots” are computer generated/artist renderings.

“But what about the little dots of light that I see move across the sky on a dark, starry night?” I don’t know what those are… nobody does, but you can bet the house that they are not satellites in space. If I had to guess, I would say that we are seeing some kind of aircraft flying at high altitude. We are told that satellites are about the size of a school bus, and we are also told that they are about 90 miles away. Now, do you think we could see a school bus from 90 miles away? No, we couldn’t. It would be completely gone from our perspective.

This article here says, “…Earth’s orbit is actually crowded with a ton of stuff, from human-made satellites to many smaller pieces of debris whirling around at dangerously high speeds, as the film Gravity so memorably dramatized. In fact, there are an estimated 500,000 or so smaller orbital debris (between one and 10 centimeters in diameter) and about 21,000 larger bits (larger than 10 centimeters) spinning around Earth right now…” And I’ve seen an “official” figure of 2,271 man-made satellites in orbit around the Earth. Read the full article if you want a good laugh; it is an excellent example of the kind of fake research and stories that are produced by this factory of lies called NASA, with help from its sister-company in crime called “Hollywood.”

The article points to this ridiculous website here that supposedly “tracks the paths of hundreds of thousands of orbital objects in real-time.” Does anyone actually believe this?

So if there is all this stuff orbiting in space, including almost 2,300 satellites, then why do we never see any of this debris, nor any satellites whatsoever in any photos that come from the (fake) International Space Station, or from any of NASA’s other space missions. Why don’t we see these things? Obviously because nobody is actually in space, there are no satellites, and it would be way too difficult and take way too much effort to accurately fake photos and images of debris and satellites. This is why there were also no stars shown in any of Apollo 11’s so-called photos of Earth. They were too difficult to fake and would have likely been easily debunked if they had tried to place all of the stars in their appropriate places so that the lie would be believable. So they said, “Just forget about the stars. We’ll tell people that we couldn’t see them because of our position relative to the Sun.”

Can anyone show me a good photograph of a so-called satellite? I’d like to see one.

Fake crashed satellite


13 thoughts on “There Are No “Satellites” Orbiting in “Space”

  1. Great article. It is not hard to see how probable is the deception if you consider the reality under NASA’S umbrella. But how about the rest of the world? It is difficult to consider the notion that scientists from India, like in the video below, are all part of the deception. The rest of the world also supposedly deliver satellites as well. Cheers.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hi, It’s not difficult for me to consider the rest of the world being in on the deception. That satellite launch video that I showed in my article is actually from India. The rocket makes a giant parabola and then appears to actually come back down, not go up into space. I consider the rest of the world’s “space agencies” to be just as fraudulent as NASA. I believe there is no “outer space,” and I have never seen any non-NASA or non-Hollywood proof that there is. So rockets, spaceships, and satellites can’t go into “space” because it doesn’t exist (at least as we have been told). Regards.


  2. I couldn’t resist commenting. Well written!

    Liked by 1 person

  3. “The rocket makes a giant parabola and then appears to actually come back down, not go up into space”.

    “Appears” is the operative word here. The camera’s perspective, the rocket’s ‘gravity turn’ and perhaps an assumption that rocket’s travel straight up, have tricked you into seeing a “parabola”. Hence, if the rocket did not come back “down” to earth, it probably left the Earth’s atmosphere East over the Bay of Bengal… Best Regards.


    • Thanks for your comment, but No, I don’t think so. I think I’ll trust my own eyes that report to me that all “space” shuttle and satellite launches make giant parabolas and come back down to Earth. You’re basically saying that I should ignore my own senses, my own two eyes, my own experience, and trust that I am being fooled by “camera perspective,” “gravity turn” (whatever the hell that is supposed to be), and an “assumption” of rockets going straight up (I would think that would be the most direct path to this so-called “space”). You’re saying that my eyes are being tricked into seeing a parabola… but if my eyes SEE a parabola, ISN’T THAT A PARABOLA!!!??? Why don’t I observe regular jet passenger airplanes making similar parabolas in the sky?… and passenger jets aren’t even claiming to go to space. You are a typical defender of ball earth and “outer space,” saying that “appears is the operative word,” which to you means that we should not trust what APPEARS right in front of our faces. I think I will continue to trust what I OBSERVE with my senses, and not blindly trust that shuttles and satellites actually make it into so-called “space,” for which there is absolutely not one shred of proof — not ONE — only fakery. Best regards.


  4. Yeah I really don’t think you’d be able to see satellites at all from earth based on the fact that the light does not reflect how we think it would. In essence Vsauce made this clear to me one day when they raised the question of what it would be like if the moon were instead a big disco ball. Turns out you wouldn’t be able to see the moon at all, and satellites fall neatly into the same category. Satellites are not the moon and are closer to a disco ball in terms of reflective surface. You simply just would not be able to see them from earth.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. The reason there aren’t many photographs of satellites in space is the same reason there aren’t many photographs of airliners at cruising speeds and altitudes. Generally satellites are kept far apart to prevent them from crashing into each other, so the opportunities for one orbiting object to photograph another one would be fairly limited.

    On top of that, most satellites wouldn’t be equipped with cameras, and those that are probably have cameras with telephoto lenses suitable for photographing objects on the surface of the Earth not objects in orbit. The space telescopes have even more unsuitable levels of magnification.

    The only time a satellite in orbit would be likely to be photographed would be while it’s being deployed or if for some reason a manned craft decided to visit a satellite in orbit, which would be ridiculously hard to achieve, ludicrously dangerous and painfully expensive to do. Fortunately, none of those factors stopped NASA from sending a space shuttle mission to service the Hubble telescope in orbit, so we DO miraculously have photographs of an orbiting satellite in space, with a person in a space-suit right next to it. You couldn’t ask for better images to debunk the ridiculous claim that there should be photographs of satellites in orbit.

    I’m not going to bother linking to images of Hubble being serviced by astronauts because they’re easy to find and you fuckwits would just dismiss them as fake anyway. But my point stands: There exists at least one set of photograps taken in space of a satellite in orbit that any sane person would accept as proof that the central claim of this article is a lie.


    • Thanks so much for stopping by. Wow, what an incredible effort you put into your devious response. And thanks for not linking to any images of Hubble, because we all know, yourself included, that it is fake and that every one of your statements above is a lie. How amazing that the so-called space station was caught in a photograph against the sun during the big eclipse. So why do we never see any silhouettes of satellites between us and a full moon? I’ll answer…. Because satellites in “space” they don’t exist… that’s why. See this image here?… That cannot be explained away, and that one image by itself proves that NASA lies, thereby proving flat earth.


      • Those photos have nothing to do with the original topic, but I’ll bite.

        One image shows an enormous moon and a tiny Earth because it’s taken from the surface of the moon with no magnification so as to include the moonscape in the foreground, this illustrates how distant the Earth looks from the moon.

        The second image is taken from much farther away than the first image using a telephoto lens to magnify the Earth so it is large enough to fill the whole frame, the true size of the moon can be seen in relation to the Earth, but the distance looks compressed due to the “flattening” effect of a telephoto lens.

        I can’t believe that anyone would really need something so elementary explained to them. It’s almost as if you’ve never taken a photo before, or you’re just being wilfully ignorant.

        I suppose you could just be acting like an idiot for a laugh, but you seem genuinely convinced by this horseshit.

        Here’s a photo of an astronaut in an EVA suit next to the Hubble satellite in orbit, docked to a space shuttle, and with the Earth in the background:

        No doubt you’ll just say it’s fake, but you know deep down you’re full of shit, and not in a good way.


      • Awwwwww, did you bite? Yep, that photo is fake. Fake as hell. First, thanks for the name-calling and cursing in your last two messages. That’s the first sign that you don’t have any proof for a globe and that you’re a possible shill. The second sign is simply sharing fake CGI photos and calling that your proof. If this is all so dumb, then why are you spending your time here writing “thoughtful” messages to retards? Are you getting paid to do it? And the photo I shared is right on topic: the topic is flat earth. And it’s my blog, which means that I can write about and post anything I want, kay? And nice try at the explanation for the difference in sizes of the Earth in the two photos… sounds like the kind of BS I would write in a sociology term paper. And how stupid do you think humanity is that you believe the photo you shared of Hubble, just because it looks believable, isn’t fake? Do you think the movie Gravity looked real? Did Alfonso Cuaron film that in “space”? It must have been a tough shoot to get all of those amazing shots of Clooney and Bullock floating like magic. Hey, I used to believe movies were real, too.


      • You’re right, I’m a highly paid shill. NASA and the Jews and the reptillians and the Freemasons and the New Workd Order and the Catholic Church and the Illuminati and Satan all pay money to Shill & Shill Inc. who employ people like me to go to flat earth blogs and try to discredit the genius intellectuals who have unmasked the truth about the universe in a vain effort to try to stop the truth from coming out and waking the sleeping masses from their round-Earth induced slumber and discovering the truth about how they control everything from geopolitics to the weather.

        You found me out, there’s no point in lying any more, I’m just going to have to dispatch a kill-team to erase you and this blog before you leak the information any further. Enjoy your last day of life, and say hello to the big guy for me when you get to the hereafter.

        Let him know that we’re gunning for him too.


      • Spoken like a shilly, shill, shill. That was a clever cut and paste. You have good writers. I guess the other possibility, other than you being a shill, is that you have a hard time coming to terms with being so gullible, so you cling to the ball like your blankey. You have presented no evidence whatsoever, just a CGI photo that took you 1.3 seconds to Google and a lame explanation about the difference in sizes of the Earth in the photo I linked to earlier. Since you can present zero evidence, we’re done. But enjoy this thoughtful, well-researched documentary full of evidence in favor of a ball earth:


      • Please note that I deleted your last comment without reading it. Just an automatic delete. You went to all that effort for nothing.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s