Radio Wave Reception Proves That the Earth is Flat
Below is an Excerpt From “The Greatest Lie on Earth (Expanded Edition)”
Radio waves are electromagnetic waves at a longer wavelength than microwaves. Both microwaves and radio waves are electromagnetic waves that require line of sight for communication. While electromagnetic waves can travel through some surfaces, like walls, it is generally thought that “earth’s curvature is a direct block to line-of-sight communication. When enough distance separates the two radio stations so that their antennas fall behind the curvature, the Earth itself blocks the transmitted signals from the receiver.” This fact confused the father of radio, Guglielmo Marconi. On 12 December 1901 he was able to make the first long distance Morse code wireless communication between St. Johns, Newfoundland, Canada, and the Poldhu Wireless Station, Cornwall, England. That radio signal was transmitted a distance of more than 2,000 miles across the Atlantic ocean. Such a transmission is an impossibility on a spherical earth. Indeed, it would be blocked by a 126 mile high bulge, if the earth were a sphere. Because Marconi thought the world was a sphere, and he understood that radio waves travel in a straight line, he was at a loss to explain how the radio waves traveled more than 2,000 miles on a globular earth.
Ham radio operators today can communicate with people all over the earth. This author remembers talking with a ham radio operator in the early 1970’s. He had a massive radio antenna in his backyard. He explained that he had records of contact with ham radio operators in every country in the world, except Russia. How could he communicate with fellow ham radio operators all over the world if the earth were a sphere?
Modern science has come up with all sorts of convoluted theories to explain such long distance radio transmissions, because they cannot allow it to be known that the earth is flat. The most prevalent theory is the ionosphere bounce theory. Under that mythology, radio operators can talk to people on the other side of the supposed spherical earth, not because the earth is flat, but because their radio signal bounces off the thin upper atmosphere, called the ionosphere.
Think about it logically. Under the ionosphere bounce stratagem, radio waves travel through the atmosphere until the atmosphere gets extremely thin (it is then called the ionosphere), and when those radio waves reach that thinnest part of the atmosphere, they bounce off and return to earth. Now, the modern scientists are not sure where the bouncing takes place, because the height of the ionosphere ranges from 50 miles to 600 miles in altitude. Does that make sense? No.
Radio waves, like light waves, are electromagnetic waves, and thus follow similar rules of refraction as they travel through the atmosphere. In most cases, the atmosphere refracts electromagnetic waves, it does not bounce (i.e., reflect) them. But reflection of radio waves as an explanation for long distance radio communication is not out of the question. The issue is what is reflecting the waves. It certainly cannot be reflected by a thin upper atmosphere. There must be something with much more physical density.
The modern myth of the ionosphere-bounce theory is completely impeached by the practice of what is known as moon-bounce, or earth-moon-earth (EME) communication. Moon-bounce communication or EME is where radio operators, including amateur radio (ham) operators, bounce radio signals off the moon. The moon is supposed to be 238,900 miles from earth. Think about this logically; if the ionosphere, which is the atmosphere that is at a height of 50 to 600 miles from the earth’s surface is supposed to reflect radio signals back to earth, how can those same radio signals pass through the ionosphere and travel all the way to the moon, which is supposed to be 238,900 miles from earth?
Obviously, the ionosphere bounce theory has a problem. Scientists cannot have a theory whereby radio waves bounce off the ionosphere, but also have those same radio waves pass through the ionosphere to bounce off the distant moon supposedly located beyond the ionosphere in outer space. The moon must be closer than the alleged 238,900 miles from earth and it cannot be above what scientists call the ionosphere. The only way the same radio signals that are supposed to bounce off the ionosphere can also bounce off the moon would be if both the moon and ionosphere were in the same place. The ineluctable conclusion is that the radio signals bounce off the firmament and the scientists are deceptively calling that phenomenon an ionosphere bounce. It also means that the moon must necessarily be in the firmament. That perfectly explains how radio signals can be reflected from both the moon and every other area in the sky where the moon is not located. Indeed, the evidence of radio signal reflection from both the sky and the moon confirms God’s word; the moon is in the firmament.
And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. (Genesis 1:14-19)
Elizabeth Howell, writing for Space.com, explains the generally accepted scientific theory that “Earth’s magnetic field and atmosphere shields the planet from 99.9 percent of the radiation from space.” That scientific theory poses a problem for the mythology of the moon being 238,900 miles away in outer space. Modern scientific theory has the earth’s atmosphere acting as a giant Faraday cage to protect the earth from the allegedly dangerous radiation made up of gamma rays, x-rays, and cosmic rays. There is not agreement among scientists whether cosmic radiation is made up of electromagnetic waves or subatomic particles. NASA categorizes cosmic rays as part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Just below cosmic rays on the electromagnetic spectrum are gamma rays and x-rays. Radio waves are also considered electromagnetic waves.
God is above us in heaven, watching over man. (Job 22:12; Ecclesiastes 24:5; Psalms 14:2 & 33:13) God states that “heaven is my throne.” (Acts 7:49) But Satan has used “science falsely so called” to remove God in the minds of men from his throne and replace the glorious abode of God with a dark and hostile empty vacuum, full of deadly x-rays, gamma rays, and cosmic rays.
Outer space is always portrayed as a black void. Apollo 12 Astronaut Pete Conrad described space as the blackest black he has ever seen. Apollo 17 Astronaut Eugene Cernan described the earth from his alleged Apollo spacecraft as “surrounded by the blackest black you can conceive in your mind.” Astronaut Leroy Chiao stated that “when you look out into space away from the sun, it’s the darkest black you can imagine.” Neil Armstrong, the alleged first man to walk on the moon said “the sky is a deep black when viewed from the moon as it is when viewed from … the space between the earth and the moon.”
Why do astronauts describe the mythical outer space as the blackest black? Because “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.” (1 John 1:5) Satan must remove any hint that God might be in heaven and so outer space must be void of all light. Because, in God there is no darkness at all, and outer space, which is supposed to be where the heaven of God is located is full of darkness. NASA, therefore, implants in the minds of men that the heaven of the Bible is a myth and there is no God.
Indeed, they have turned the glorious abode of God in heaven into hell. Jesus Christ describes hell as “outer darkness.” Which is exactly how outer space is described by astronauts. “And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 25:30) That “outer darkness” is the everlasting fire of hell. Jesus explained that fact 11 verses after describing “outer darkness” when he said: “Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:” (Matthew 25:41) Jesus explained that the fire of hell is the everlasting punishment due for those for their sins who have not been elected to salvation. “And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.” (Matthew 25:46)
Outer space, as portrayed by modern science, is a subtle and blasphemous attack on God. Only the chosen high priests of science (called astronauts), can venture into the devilish black void of space. They must wear special ceremonial protective suits before they enter into the godless void of space. The chosen astronauts come back to earth to report that instead of finding God, they found an empty, hostile, and blackest of black voids. Of course, outer space as portrayed by NASA is not real; it is religious mythology. Indeed, NASA has never explained how the special ceremonial garb, called space suits, that have no lead linings, can protect their astronauts (priests) from the dangerous x-rays, gamma rays, and cosmic rays that are alleged to exist in outer space. The dangerous environment of outer space seems very much like the perilous “everlasting fire” of hell. But making that point is impolite and marks a person as a lunatic (i.e., heretic) against science (i.e., religion).
The ingrained societal acceptance of the orthodox view that the earth is a sphere, usually brings with it the conditioned deprecatory charge that anyone who believes that the earth is flat must be crazy. Such a crazy person must be ostracized and excluded (excommunicated) from the scientific community. That marginalization is part of the conditioning process and is systemic in the hierarchy of the heliocentric scientific system. If ostracization is determined to be insufficient, the dissenter is marked as insane (apostate); such a person must then be subjected to psychological (ecclesiastical) treatment to cure him of his insanity (apostasy). They have established a special class of inquisitional priests (psychologists) who wear white priestly garb to administer the necessary treatment. Psychology is a religion without God.
Everybody who has had medical or dental x-rays knows that they are dangerous, and typically vital organs are covered by a lead shield. The x-ray technician will usually stand behind a lead lined wall when activating the x-ray machine. That is done because it is understood that the atmosphere is no barrier to x-rays. But modern scientists would have us believe that the same atmosphere that offers no barrier to x-rays in a medical facility, magically becomes an impenetrable barrier when the x-rays are trying to reach earth from outer space. It is impossible for the atmosphere to block x-rays. That means that there cannot be any x-rays coming from outer space. Indeed, x-rays cannot emanate from outer space, because there is no outer space.
If Earth’s atmosphere is actually able to block dangerous gamma rays, x-rays, and cosmic rays supposedly bombarding earth from outer space, it can certainly block radio waves. How could astronauts supposedly in outer space, and even on the moon, use electromagnetic radio waves to communicate through that purportedly impenetrable atmospheric shield to NASA mission control back on earth? Indeed, how can the alleged protection offered by the atmosphere in blocking out the supposedly powerful and dangerous electromagnetic waves, at the same time allow exponentially weaker electromagnetic transmissions from amateur radio operators to pass back and forth through that supposedly impassable atmosphere as they bounce off the distant moon?
The scientific community simply states that the atmosphere is able to block gamma, x-rays, and cosmic rays, but it cannot block radio waves. But they contradict themselves when they say the atmosphere (ionosphere) can in fact block and reflect radio waves when they travel upward from earth. Why have such illogical and opposing theories? Because the high priests of science need the ionosphere bounce phenomenon to explain long distance radio communications on the supposed spherical earth. And they, at the same time, need to allow for radio communications from earth with astronauts who are supposed to be in outer space.
Obviously, the ionosphere bounce theory poses a problem for outer space radio communications. There is simply no way for the radio signals to reach outer space if they purportedly bounce off the ionosphere. For radio signals to reach outer space would require the ionosphere to have an on/off switch that turns off the ionosphere reflector and allow waves through it when NASA wants to communicate with astronauts in space and on the moon. The on/off switch would also come in handy in allowing radio signals through the ionosphere when ham radio operators want to bounce their signals off the purportedly distant moon.
It sounds ridiculous, but it is a fact that the modern scientific theories have the ionosphere being both a reflector and a conductor of radio waves. Modern “science” uses the ionosphere bounce theory to explain the long distance radio communication that otherwise would be impossible on a globular earth. And then, presto-chango, the formerly impenetrable ionosphere reflector suddenly allows the radio waves to pass right through when they need to explain radio communication to and from the mythical vacuum of space.
That is obvious nonsense. It is “science falsely so called.” 1 Timothy 6:20. It is satanic religious dogma, masquerading as science, being promoted by evil men trying to keep a lid on the true nature of God’s creation. There is, in fact, no vacuum of space. The moon is close; it is in the firmament. When radio waves are being reflected back down to earth, they are being bounced off the firmament.
The radio signal sent by Marconi was Morse code. On September 29, 1915, the U.S. Navy, in cooperation with AT&T and Western Electric, was able to communicate by voice over radio waves from their naval radio station in Arlington, Virginia, near Washington, D.C., to their station in Honolulu, Hawaii. That milestone in radio communication was reported in the November 1915 issue of The Electrical Experimenter:
The most wonderful feat in wireless telephony was accomplished on the night of Sept. 29 last, when the human voice was projected through the ether from Washington, D.C., to Honolulu, a distance of 4,900 miles!
Notice that it was reported that the radio waves traveled through the ether. You will read in subsequent chapters how the existence of the ether has been hidden from the masses. The notable thing about the September 29, 1915, broadcast from Arlington to Honolulu is that radio waves trying to reach a distance of 4,900 miles on a supposed spherical earth would find an impassable hump of earth and water 758 miles high. Modern science gets around that obstacle by postulating the ionosphere-bounce theory.
The successful long distance radio communication was not a fluke. It was the culmination of years of experimentation and product development. The transmission was made in 1915, at a time before any relay stations were constructed and before any alleged space satellites were launched. It was so early in the development of radio communication that there were no means for those at the naval radio station in Honolulu to respond to the signal. “Owing to the lack of adequate sending apparatus at Honolulu it was impossible to communicate back to Washington, but a cablegram announced the fact that the message had been received and distinctly heard.”
The 4,900-mile Arlington/Honolulu radio transmission happened on the same day that a radio transmission was made 2,000 miles across the Atlantic Ocean from Arlington, Virginia to Paris, France. On the 100th anniversary of the event, Julia Zorthian, writing for Time Magazine explained:
A hundred years ago, the word “hello” spoken in Arlington, VA was heard in Paris. The word originated from the vibrations in the vocal chords of Mr. B. B. Webb, an engineer at the Arlington radio station. That sound passed through Webb’s lips, crossed Virginia airspace, entered a radio mouthpiece. There it was converted into electromagnetic waves, and in that moment on Oct. 21, 1915, human speech did something it had never done before: crossed the Atlantic.
On the European end, an antenna atop the Eiffel Tower picked up the radio waves. Two engineers with the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (now AT&T) stationed at the receiver, which demodulated information from the signals into audio, heard Webb’s voice on the Paris side.
That night, the American Telephone and Telegraph Company president Theo Vail sent a dispatch that said:
“The talk from Washington this morning, heard both in Paris and Honolulu…establishes as a fact that under favorable atmospheric and electrical conditions, with proper equipment which the engineers of the American Telephone and Telegraph Company have developed, we will be able to carry on conversation between New York and European points as well as to the western coast and points across the Pacific Ocean.”
The radio transmission from Arlington, Virginia to Paris, France, spanned 2,000 miles. That transmission to Paris would be impossible if the earth were a sphere. There would be a 126 mile high hump of water blocking the transmission. The fact that the radio transmission was successful is yet more confirmation that the earth is flat.
What is suspicious about Julia Zorthian’s Time Magazine commemorative article is that Zorthian only mentions the 2,000-mile Arlington-to-Paris transmission. The more significant radio communication from Arlington to Honolulu, at a distance of 4,900 miles, was not mentioned, other than the passing reference to Hawaii in the quote from AT&T President Theo Vail.
It seems that Time Magazine was trying to play down the distance of the 1915 radio transmissions by focusing on the shorter 2,000-mile Arlington-to-Paris radio transmission and omitting mention of the much longer 4,900-mile Arlington–to-Honolulu radio communication. That makes no sense if the objective of the article was to explain the monumental achievement on that day one hundred years earlier. But it makes perfect sense to play down the significance of the 1915 achievement if the objective is to hide proof that the earth is flat.
The inherent illogic and contradiction in the ionosphere-bounce theory make it a flawed and inconvenient explanation for long-range radio transmissions. But it is all modern science has, so they just go with it. A straight line transmission on a spherical earth from the Arlington Naval Radio Station to Honolulu (or Paris for that matter) would be impossible. Perhaps Time Magazine did not want to reveal or explain the longer 4,900 mile Arlington-to-Honolulu radio transmission because it reveals too much; i.e., it is stronger evidence that the earth is flat.
The Arlington Naval Radio Station had two 450-foot antenna towers and one 600-foot antenna tower. Arlington, Virginia, is 272 feet above sea level. That means that the radio signal would be broadcast from a maximum height of 872 feet above sea level. The problem is that the radio signal would have to travel in a straight course across the continental United States. That poses a problem even on the flat earth. That is because the radio signal would traverse over land that is on average more than 2,000 feet above sea level. While 2,000 feet is the average elevation, there would be areas much higher than that average. For example, the radio signal would have to travel over southern Colorado and northern New Mexico. The topography in that region has an impassible bearer of mountains rising to more than 6,000 feet above sea level. There is simply no possible way that a radio signal emitted at 872 feet above sea level could travel in a straight path across the continental United States and reach Hawaii with all of that mass of earth in the way. The radio signals would be stopped by that impenetrable land barrier.
We have established that the radio signal could not travel in a straight line of sight path to Hawaii, even on the flat earth, and the ionosphere bounce is an impossible myth. So, how was the 1915 radio transmission made from Arlington to Honolulu? The radio waves were bounced off the firmament that covers the flat earth. God describes the firmament as “strong, and as a molten looking glass.” Job 37:18. The radio signals that reached Honolulu were reflected off that strong firmament.
That is, perhaps, why the Time Magazine article did not mention the Arlington-to-Honolulu transmission. Any close examination of the details would cause people to ponder how the transmission was accomplished. That, in turn, would lead to the conclusion that the means of reflection could not be the thin upper atmosphere (ionosphere), it must be something that is “strong, and as a molten looking glass.” That would lead to an acceptance of the biblical model of a flat earth with a tent-like firmament over it. That could simply not be allowed. And, so, the decision was made to not mention the more significant achievement of the 4,900-mile Arlington-to-Honolulu radio communication and instead only mention the less significant 2,000-mile Arlington-to-Paris radio communication.
The radio signals that absolutely prove that the earth is flat are those of the LORAN system. LORAN, which is an acronym for Long Range Navigation, was a radio navigation system developed in the United States during World War II. It involved radio signals sent straight out to sea from shoreline antennae. The ships at sea would be able to mark their location on charts by LORAN instruments that compared the arrival time of the radio signals from different shoreline radio towers. The very existence of the LORAN system proves that the earth is flat, because the system would not work if the earth were a globe.
The Encyclopedia Britannica gives a succinct description of LORAN:
Loran, abbreviation of long-range navigation, land-based system of radio navigation, first developed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology during World War II for military ships and aircraft located within 600 miles (about 970 km) of the American coast. In the 1950s a more accurate (within 0.3 mile [0.5 km]), longer-range system (over 2,000 miles [3,200 km]), known as Loran-C, operating in the 90–110 kilohertz range, was developed for civilian use, and the original loran (renamed Loran-A) was phased out.
LORAN-C was terminated as a service in the U.S. by the U.S. Coast Guard on 8 February 2010. The tallest radio tower used by the Loran-C system was the 1,350 foot tower located at the LORAN Station at Port Clarence in Alaska. Port Clarence is 16 feet above sea level, which would put the top of the radio tower at a height of 1,366 feet above sea level.
What is notable is that the LORAN system required that the radio signal be sent straight out to sea to ships on the water. There could be no bouncing of the signals off the firmament. The water, being flat, offered no obstacle to the LORAN radio signals. The system required that the radio signals be sent horizontal to the water. For the system to work, the ships needed to receive at least two intersecting radio signals from two different towers. From those two signals they obtained their first line of position on their shipboard LORAN instrument. The shipboard LORAN instrument then needed to receive two separate signals from two other towers to obtain a second line of position. Where those two lines of position intersected gave the ship a fix on its position at sea. The captain would then plot his position on his shipboard LORAN chart.
The LORAN-C system had the capacity to send signals more than 2,000 miles out to sea. Assuming towers at a height of 1,366 feet above sea level, if the earth were a globe, the LORAN-C system would only be able to send radio signals 45 miles out to sea, before having the signals blocked by the earth’s curvature. And that 45 mile distance assumes that the signals are being sent out from the tallest tower in the United States. That means that if the earth were a globe, a ship 2,000 miles away from the towers would have the LORAN-C signals blocked by an impenetrable 1,955 foot long, 115-mile high, hump of water rising above the height of the LORAN-C radio signals.
Ships navigated across the vast oceans for more than 60 years in reliance on the LORAN radio signals. The LORAN system worked. It could not work if the earth were a globe. It could only work on a flat earth. The effectiveness of the LORAN radio navigation system is proof that the earth is flat.
Some have alleged (with good reason) that LORAN still exists; that it has just been revamped with improved technology and then rebranded as the Global Positioning System (GPS). GPS is being portrayed as a satellite-based navigational system. Updating and rebranding LORAN as GPS is the perfect scheme to keep a lid on the flat earth and convince the world that the earth is a spinning globe.
It seems that all supposed satellite signals are actually signals from land-based towers. For example, this author’s wife has a “satellite” radio in her car. We have noticed that when traveling over a mountain road that rises in elevation approximately 2,000 feet above the foot of the mountain, we always lose the “satellite” reception on the radio as we reach the top of the mountain. It seems odd to lose reception from an alleged “satellite” that is supposed to be overhead as one rises in elevation. The radio receiver should be closer to the supposed “satellite” and thus receive a stronger signal the higher we rise in elevation. We have noticed that at the same moment that we lose satellite reception, we also lose cell phone tower reception. I infer, therefore, from the simultaneous loss of cellular phone reception and “satellite” radio reception that the “satellite” radio transmissions are not actually broadcast from satellites at all, but are broadcast via cellular towers.
There may very well be objects in the atmosphere that perform the functions of what are today called satellites. But these satellites are not in outer space; they are actually tethered beneath massive helium balloons, floating very high in the atmosphere. Indeed, a little-known fact is that NASA annually consumes millions of cubic feet of gaseous helium that it uses to fill balloons to carry satellites into the upper atmosphere.
In 2014, NASA contracted with Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. of Allentown, Pennsylvania, to supply “128.6 million cubic feet of gaseous helium to support operations at 13 NASA locations” over the next five years, from 2015 to 2019. Yet in a report to Congress by the Secretary of the Interior, it was revealed that NASA needed a total of 401,535 million cubic feet of gaseous helium from 2015 to 2019. The 2015 report states that “[t]he two major Federal users of helium are NASA and the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA).” The report reveals that NASA consumes more than twice the helium consumption of the entire U.S. Military. It is not clear why the contract to supply NASA’s helium needs understates the actual needs of NASA by almost threefold.
Of course, NASA has a ready cover story for this massive helium consumption by what is supposed to be a space agency. In its publically posted 2014 document awarding the helium supply contract, NASA reported its reason for needing helium.
Helium is used throughout NASA as a cryogenic agent for cooling various materials and in precision welding applications, as well as lab use. Helium also is used as an inert purge gas for hydrogen systems and as a pressurizing agent for ground and flight fluid systems of space vehicles.
Notice that there is no mention of using helium for balloon projects. But in the 2015 report to Congress, the Secretary of the Interior explained in detail one of the reasons NASA needed helium. It was a reason that NASA did not mention in its public notice of the helium contract. The 2015 Congressional report states that “[h]elium is used at all NASA Field Centers, as well as at NASA’s Columbia Scientific Balloon Facility (CSBF) for their balloon campaigns in Antarctica and in the United States.” The real reason NASA needs helium is to fill balloons for floating objects in the upper atmosphere that they falsely portray as satellites located in outer space.
Who knew that NASA had such an extensive balloon program? NASA seems to be keeping the wraps on its balloon program. No doubt, they are concerned that people will add 2+2 together and realize that the NASA balloon program is actually the NASA satellite launch program, which is why they did not mention it in their publically posted helium contract. All of the gee-whiz rocket launches of alleged satellites are just theater to be shown on the nightly news to convince the public that satellites are being launched into space. There have been hundreds of NASA rocket launches of satellites reported in the news. But there is never any mention of NASA balloon launches.
Google, which is a company with a market capitalization of more than 700 billion dollars, with deep ties to the CIA, is certainly capable of launching space satellites, if space were real. Google has, instead, decided to forgo the facade of launching space satellites. Instead, Google has embarked on a program to launch atmospheric satellites tethered to helium balloons to provide worldwide internet service. Google explains its balloon strategy, which it calls Project Loon:
We aim to launch and maintain a fleet of balloons to provide Internet coverage to users on the ground, with our Autolaunchers capable of safely and consistently launching a new balloon every 30 minutes. We have flown over 25 million km of test flights to date since the project began – with one of our record-breaking balloons surviving for 190 days aloft in the stratosphere.
According to Google, “transceivers transmit connectivity from ground stations, across balloons, and back down to users’ LTE phones.” And just like the satellites that are supposed to be traveling in mythical outer space, “solar panels power the equipment during the day and charge an onboard battery to allow for nighttime operation.” The technology for the Loon balloon satellites is essentially that of cell towers. Google explains that “Project Loon has taken the most essential components of a cell tower and redesigned them to be light enough and durable enough to be carried by a balloon 20 km up in the stratosphere.”
Notice that there would be a regular need for balloon-assisted satellites, as each atmospheric satellite could only, at most, last 190 days. Under that program, there would be a constant need for replacement balloon satellites. Google is one of the few companies to publicly announce a balloon satellite program, but it is not the only player in the balloon satellite game. Satellite company OneWeb has entered into a joint venture with Airbus to construct the manufacturing capacity to build up to 15 satellites per week. “The initial production of 900 satellites is planned for launch into low Earth orbit beginning in 2018, to deliver affordable Internet access globally.” OneWeb portrays the satellites as being placed in low Earth orbit in space; but it is incredible to suggest that they would have 900 rocket launches in 2018. It is quite clear that OneWeb’s planned manufacturing capacity is for low atmospheric satellites tethered on helium balloons.
This author personally attended the Satellite 2018 conference. Oddly, it was a satellite conference with no actual satellites on display. That is not an exaggeration. I saw a total of four small models of satellites, two hanging by strings (approximately 3 feet in breadth from end to end, including the solar panels), one in a display case and one on a table (each about 12 inches in breadth from end to end, including the solar panels), but there were no actual satellites on display. There were all kinds of massive ground-based parabolic antennae, mock-ups of ground communication centers, and other large telecommunications equipment on display, but no actual satellites.
Imagine attending a car show that, instead of automobiles themselves, had booths dedicated to displaying the wonders of gasoline stations and car washes. Suppose that the only cars on display were a handful of small plastic models. Such an occurrence would be surreal. The Satellite 2018 conference was that kind of surreal experience. It was a satellite show with no real satellites on display.
It is hard to put something on display that does not actually exist. It is easier to create a false reality using CGI, or small plastic models that are portrayed as miniature replicas, than it is to create a convincing physical construction of what is supposed to be a real satellite. What if the materials used in the CGI cannot be convincingly fabricated? You can imagine the difficulty in creating an object that is supposed to work in space, but when put on display may be subjected to scrutiny that would likely reveal that it could not possibly work as designed. That is a risk that the devil and his minions could not take. And so, there were no actual satellites on display at the Satellite 2018 conference.
One of the small satellite models was by OneWeb on a display podium with a graphic that warned not to take pictures of it. Why would there be a warning not to take a picture? It looked no more sophisticated than a fun-meal toy. There was nothing about the model that was materially different from the many graphics displayed in the videos being projected and the publications handed out at the conference. Could it be that OneWeb did not want pictures taken because the display was so pathetic that it would undermine its credibility as a legitimate satellite manufacturer? It must be worrisome to portray yourself as a manufacturer of something that doesn’t actually exist.
This author walked throughout the entire Satellite 2018 conference area and only saw four booths from companies that claimed that they made things for satellites (not including the few other companies like OneWeb, Airbus, and Boeing who claim to build entire satellites). Every other booth addressed ground signal reception and dissemination of alleged satellite signals. This author spoke with one engineer who worked for a company that claimed to make thrusters for satellites in space. The engineer admitted that the thrusters his company made require that they expel a mass in order to work in space. He explained that is necessary because in the vacuum of space the simple thrust from a rocket does not work because there is no atmosphere to push against. So the thruster must supply the mass necessary to push against when in space. He stated that all satellites must have their own onboard fuel and that the fuel will run out within 15 years. As my questions became more searching, the company officials became very interested in who I was and who I represented.