NASA is the world's largest buyer of helium... So there's that.

"Space Industry - NASA is the single biggest buyer of helium globally, consuming approximately 75 million cubic feet of helium annually, primarily used in rocket propulsion."

Do some research of just how many satellites hit the ground with white translucent balloons attached to them...

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Starlink satelittes look like they go much faster than balloons?

True, they do look that way based on what we've been shown. Do we trust what we've been shown? Can we actually verify what we've seen? Can there be other explanations? We still have much discovery to do, and I don't have answers for everything, but there sure are trends unfolding that would suggest things are nothing like what we've been told.

Agree - but starlink sats can be seen moving accross the sky with a telescope. Definately not balloons. I dont think the flat earth stuff is 100% correct and there are still some iffy explanations - but the official narrative is definately not correct. Bens series so far convinced me of that.

Please send any videos of the starlink sats, I saw some time ago a video of the trail of the starlink SATs moving at night, when some were complaining they were too bright... It was puzzling, and I'm not sure what it is. Was it another type of technology within the atmosphere? Something else? We should all dig in and keep looking.

In general though we need to be careful to weigh all things evenly without bias. For example, many people will require you to disprove something they believe 100% before changing their mind, and force you to prove something they don't believe 100%. When in reality things we currently think are true, should be weighed evenly with things we never contemplated as true. Especially in this world of lies.

Give all models a fair and unbias analysis with a critical eye. There will always be unanswered questions, but those are independent from other evidence in the sense they have a cumulative effect, not a negating effect.

And lastly, we shouldn't "believe" anything. Know, or don't know, either is fine. Belief is just outsourcing critical thinking.

So with all that said, I agree, the starlink sats are curious and I don't know what is happening there. For me that has very little effect on the overall paradigm analysis and other evidence, but I'd like to know.

I mean the starlinks are there no matter if they are balloons or not. Just so many people working on the starlink satellites - and then be conned by someone who sends up a balloon instead. Same can be said about geostationary satellites

Same can be said for NASA...