❌

Normal view

Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?

21 September 2026 at 20:33
Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?

Are Satellites located in Space or within Earth’s Atmosphere? 

MP 

Most people would probably agree that a satellite describes a man-made communication device that is launched outside of Earth’s atmosphere into space. 

According to the Cambridge Dictionary, a satellite is defined as: 

“A device sent up into space to travel around the earth, used for collecting information or communicating by radio, television, etc.” 

So as to determine if satellites are outside of the atmosphere, or not, the first logical question should be - at what altitude does space start? 

According to most scientific resources, and popular belief, space begins where the atmosphere ends. The layers of the atmosphere, in ascending order, are described as the Troposphere, Stratosphere, Mesosphere, Thermosphere and finally the Exosphere. Space is generally believed to be the endless, dark abyss beyond the Exosphere. 

When it comes to looking-up images of the layers of Earth’s atmosphere, there seems to be general agreement on the altitudes of the lower layers but it seems like guesswork when it comes to the precise extent of the Exosphere and therefore the beginning of space. It could be argued that the real reason for this lack of knowledge, or clarity,  is because no man or machine has ever actually been there or, at least, been beyond the atmosphere. 

Here are a couple of examples: 

Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?
Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?

If man has travelled 250,000 miles to land on the Moon, and supposedly been back again recently to do a lap of honour, then surely the exact altitude of the start of space should be fairly easy to define. This information would then help to provide the answer for the question posed in this article. 

 

Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?

The International Space Station 

The International Space Station (ISS) is officially described as travelling over 17,000 mph at a maximum altitude of 250 miles. Now, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realise that 250 miles into the sky is well below the outer layer of Earth’s atmosphere, defined as being around 6,000 miles up. In fact, it’s not even close to the outer edge of the Thermosphere.  

According to NASA, regarding the altitude of the space station, it states: 

“ISS orbits at an altitude of between 200 – 250 miles (370-460 km). 

Now, whether you actually believe the space station exists or not, the official altitude given for the ISS lies within Earth’s atmosphere, no matter what the discrepancy in the thickness of each layer. 

For a more precise location of the ISS, which overcomes the discrepancy between different definitions of space, photographic evidence is provided here:

Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?

Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?

Satellites 

According to worldatlas.com, “most satellites are found within atmospheric layers known as the Thermosphere and Exosphere”. To repeat once more, these altitudes are within layers of the atmosphere and not what most people assume to be in space. 

Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?

Nasa confirms this on spaceplace.nasa.gov: 

“The Thermosphere is home to the International Space Station as it orbits Earth. This is also where you’ll find low Earth orbit satellites.” 

 

The Karman Line 

Interestingly, most people probably don’t realise that the officially accepted altitude of the start of space is actually nowhere near the outer edge of the Thermosphere and certainly not 6,000 miles up at the extent of the Exosphere. 

Known as the ‘Karman Line’, the defining line for the beginning of space is described as being just 60 miles (100 kms) above ground level. According to an article on astronomy.com, The Karman Line, where Space Begins “Earth ends and outer space begins at the Karman Line, some 60 miles (100 kilometres) above the planet’s surface.”  

Quoting Wikipedia, regarding the Karman Line: 

“The Karman Line is a conventional definition of the edge of space; it is widely but not universally accepted. The international record-keeping body FAI defines the Karman Line at an altitude of 100 kilometres (54 nautical miles; 62 miles) above mean sea level.” 

However, the U.S. Army brings space even closer to Earth. Wikipedia goes on to mention: 

“The U.S. Armed Forces definition of an astronaut is a person who has flown higher than 50 miles above mean sea level, approximately the line between the mesosphere and the thermosphere.” 

That means whenever you see 24-hour news coverage of a rocket launch into space or yet another group of celebrities heading off into the cosmos, they only have to go 60 miles up in the sky in order to be officially regarded as having been to space. That puts a bit of a dampener on most people’s impression that their idols have been out into the realms of Star Wars and Star Trek.  

Even the astronauts that reportedly frequented the space station, for months on end, have never been outside of Earth’s atmosphere. This fact is proven by NASA’s own specifications on the altitude of the ISS relative to the layers of Earth’s atmosphere. The only space they have supposedly visited is just a layer in the atmosphere above which normal aircraft cannot fly. 

By this stage in the investigation, there seems to be an awful lot of discrepancy and lack of continuity in the official definitions of space. Why is that so? Surely, the truth is the truth. However, if the entire narrative of an ever-expanding universe beyond Earth’s atmosphere is actually make-believe propaganda then it is understandable why there is so much variation in the storyline. 

 

Van Allen Belts 

Most people familiar with the Apollo missions to the Moon will have heard of the radiation band known as the Van Allen Belts. However, the location is assumed to be at a distance somewhere out in space between the Earth and the Moon. 

Once again, discrepancies in the official narrative keep occurring.  Low Earth Satellites are affected by the radiation from the Van Allen Belts. This indicates that the Van Allen Belts are in fact bands of magnetic radiation that exist within Earth’s atmosphere itself.   

Solar Wind and Solar Particles 

According to mainstream science there is no air in space. This should also mean that there is no wind. This does somewhat contradict the phrasing of solar winds. Furthermore, if the Heliocentric Sun is 93,000,000 miles away, doesn’t it seem a bit strange that solar particles and solar wind affect satellites within the Earth’s atmosphere? 

Quoting from A.I., due to its ability to rapidly sift through mainstream articles, it states: 

“Solar wind reduces satellite longevity by causing orbital decay, degrading hardware, and disrupting electronic systems.” 

“Solar storms heat and expand Earth’s upper atmosphere (thermosphere), increasing atmospheric drag on satellites. This drag saps orbital energy, causing satellites to fall to lower altitudes faster than planned, as seen in the 2022 loss of 40 Starlink satellites.” 

“Continuous bombardment by solar particles causes ‘sputtering’, which sandblast satellite surfaces and solar panels, leading to gradual performance degradation and reduce operational lifespan.” 

 

Conclusion

If you believe that space is the dark expanse of the universe, starting above the outermost layer of Earth’s atmosphere, then satellites and the ISS are clearly not in space.  

That means communications satellites, the International Space Station and Starlink satellites, are operating just up there in the sky. To be more accurate, they are all located within the defined layers of the atmosphere. 

The only way that satellites can be described as being in space is by adapting the official definition of space itself. In other words, if space can be defined as being just 60 miles up into the atmosphere, then yes, satellites do most likely exist in space. The bottom line is that what most people think of as space is not what the mainstream media adopts for its’ own definition. 

This then leads to a much more important question. If satellites and the ISS are unanimously described as being in space, while actually existing within Earth's atmosphere, what is to say that the Sun and Moon are not also within the atmosphere? 

This video shows the sun is below the satellite

After all, the Sun and Moon can be seen with the naked eye and both seem to be exactly the same size and located just up there in the sky. The fact that the Thermosphere is so hot would also align with the idea that the heat of the Sun is in close proximity. Solar winds and solar particles occurring within the upper atmosphere also strengthen this argument. 

Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?

As a final thought, what if the entire narrative of a spinning-globe earth, hurtling through endless space is all make-believe? There is not one iota of evidence, outside of mainstream propaganda, Hollywood movies and NASA CGI, which proves that space, actually exists.  

Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?

The answer to that question is the key to understanding the truth about the world in which you live, why you are here and what life is really about. 


Original Article: Emailed to us from MP a Truth11.com reader.

Related:

Flat
Dylan Eleven | Truth11.com Yes I am going there: Flat earth or a spinning globe; what the truth means and why it matters. As a journalist I had originally dismissed the flat earth concept to be a psy op to discredit the truth movement and wrote an article that mentioned
Images and Memes 111 | Flat Earth Special
The truth is told very well with images. A picture says a thousand words, and memes a few more. These pages have lots of images and memes that focus on the truth. This page (111) is a flat earth special. 1011 flat earth memes and images. As crazy as it
Videos • 166 | Flat Earth Special
These pages contain many videos that show the truth. This page is a Flat Earth Special. NASA is Not A Space Agency + The Ice Wall. 0:00 /2:19 1× 0:00 /0:57 1× 0:00 /0:57 1× 0:00 /2:07 1× 0:00 /1:00 1×

Note: Comments placed in [ ] are added by Truth11.com editor.  For example; [Flu] + videos and images added to the original article.

Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?
Satellites in "Space" | Or Not?

Total PsAI-Op

21 September 2026 at 19:51
Total PsAI-Op

How Altman, Amodei, And The 'EA' Cult Are Milking "Rogue AI" Breakouts To Protect A Trillion-Dollar Bubble

ZeroHedge News | ZeroHedge.com | Tyler Durden

The sudden emergence of an 'AI Panic' over the past weeks and months was highly suspect from the beginning. According to tech insiders, Silicon Valley's apex AI labs are deliberately overselling "rogue AI" hacks to pressure the federal government into building a regulatory moat that would lock out future competition - and the timing, months after both OpenAI and Anthropic announced plans to go public, couldn't be more obvious.

Akhil Verghese, founder of AI software company Krazimo, told the NY Post the incidents were no rebellion: "They were simply told to get the best result possible on a test." Voice AI co-founder Abhi Kumar was blunter: "One man's 'the model escaped the sandbox' is another man's 'you failed to build the sandbox correctly.'" Taivo Pungas, chief intelligence officer at Pactum AI, said the leap from "we didn't build the right sort of box" to a whole-of-government emergency feels exaggerated.

Total PsAI-Op

PANIC! 

The AI "breakouts" that lit up Capitol Hill this summer were about as organic as #4 red dye. On July 16, OpenAI models running a cyber evaluation exploited a zero-day and got from their test range into Hugging Face's production systems; OpenAI disclosed it five days later, naming GPT-5.6 Sol and an unreleased model, and noting the models had been configured "with reduced cyber refusals so they could attempt offensive exercises that normal safeguards might reject." Nine days after that, Anthropic disclosed three incidents of its own.

According to Anthropic's July 30 write-up - the "waking up" narrative is total bullshit. "A misconfiguration left the machines that Claude accessed as part of the evaluation with live internet access," the company wrote; the models had been told they were offline. Claude Opus 4.7 went after a real company that happened to share a name with the fictional target and pulled "several hundred rows of production data." Mythos 5 published a booby-trapped Python package to the live PyPI registry that was "downloaded and run on 15 real systems." An unreleased research model scanned "roughly 9,000 targets" and got into one company's web app "using basic and well-known cyberattack techniques." Anthropic's own verdict: "We believe these incidents to be closer to a harness and operational failure than a model alignment failure." It halted cyber evals on July 23 and called in METR - their preferred Orwellian arbiter - to review.

Anthropic's account has one wrinkle: Opus 4.7 kept attacking after it recognized the system was real. Only the newer research model stopped. So the machines are not uniformly "blameless" - but a model that keeps following its instructions on a misconfigured network is Irregular's failure, not evidence of intent.

The Common Denominator

Every one of these evaluations was run by the same third party: Irregular, an AI security firm that tested the OpenAI, Anthropic and Google models and, per Axios, hit "the same security issues" each time. The Verge adds Meta to the list - a pattern Axios's Sam Sabin flagged in July:

Anthropic's models accidentally had access to the internet during model testing due to a "misunderstanding" with third-party testing partner, Irregular. no 0-days in this case, unlike the OpenAI/Hugging Face incident— Sam Sabin (@samsabin923) July 30, 2026

Then came Gemini. On Friday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Google's model had broken into three real companies during an Irregular capture-the-flag exercise. The incident happened in May, Irregular published its report on August 14, and Google didn't mention it until the Journal called - and then explained that it hadn't considered the hacks worth disclosing becauseGemini "acted appropriately" and stopped once it realized the targets were real.

Irregular told Axios the model "wasn't supposed to be able to get online, but internet access was unintentionally available," and the fictional target company "had the same name as a real one." In one case Gemini guessed passwords until it got in; in two others it found credentials sitting in a public repository. Irregular says "all known issues on our end were remedied and resolved weeks ago" and that the Gemini case "does not represent a materially separate incident." Google VP Heather Adkins: "Safe development of powerful AI models is critical and we invest deeply in this area."

But when looking at the actual events, the model was blameless.

To make it clear:
- Gemini was told it was it was in a fictional hacking eval
- Irregular unintentionally opened internet access after the eval started
- in all three cases, as soon as Gemini figured out it had hacked a real company it immediately stopped

Gemini was blameless.— Andrew Curran (@AndrewCurran_) September 18, 2026

So Google - which isn't asking Washington to pace anything, considered the incident a non-event - yet the two labs lobbying for a federal slowdown scrambled to put out press releases.

Industry commentator John Ennis put the obvious question, pointing out that "once is an accident, twice is questionable, but three times looks intentional".

Why does the Irregular keep "accidentally" connecting these models to the internet?

Once is an accident, twice is questionable, but three times looks intentional

And they are EA aligned

Something is rotten here, IMO— John Ennis (@johnennis) September 19, 2026

The Effective Altruism movement is the doomsday tendency that has spent a decade staffing AI safety boards and testing labs on the premise that AI will kill everyone unless the right people are in charge of it. Whether Irregular is EA-aligned is Ennis's call. That it is the one firm under all of these incidents is on the record from Axios, The Verge and Anthropic itself.

The Pacing Play

Six days before the Gemini story broke, Dario Amodei published a September 12 post warning that within 6 to 12 months an AI swarm could "take over the entire internet with a persistent botnet," potentially causing hundreds of billions of dollars in damage. His prescription: "We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of AI models." Sam Altman and Elon Musk signaled support. In a nutshell, Pacing the Frontier™is a bid to become strategically indispensable - too big to fail, with Beijing as the justification.

Nvidia's Jensen Huang - circle-jerker-in-chief noted: "What better way to create demand than to create a problem." lol yes. 

Palo Alto Networks CEO Nikesh Arora called it a "NINJA move" and then, after more time talking to labs, open-source projects and government, warned it could backfire:

Sequel to AI Pacing

I have now spent more time talking to people who run AI labs, Open Source projects and those in government and infrastructure.

I am beginning to feel the NINJA move could backfire.

I understand the pressure to come out and share where AI is "unmanageable ", and constantly share examples where it runs rogue. This fits in the category of "self-reporting" and an attempt to limit liability...

Here are the consequences of the NINJA move.
1. They have successfully encouraged every law maker around the world to have an opinion...
2. By proposing pacing - they have introduced uncertainty in the AI infrastructure trade...
...
It's time to rebuild the brand of AI - any marketing expert will tell you, this Ninja move has done more to harm the brand of AI and will take a while to rebuild. #letsbepositive in our actions and our narrative.— Nikesh Arora (@nikesharora) September 19, 2026

Lawmakers jumped on this right on cue.

Senator Josh Hawley opened an investigation into OpenAI on September 9, with a records deadline of October 1; Senator Bernie Sanders announced a bill to ban further frontier-lab development; Senator Elizabeth Warren demanded an "immediate pause." As we noted earlier this week, everybody in this conversation is talking their own book. On Friday the White House joined in from the other side: Trump posted that AI safety concerns are a "hoax" and said he will appoint an AI czar and stand up an "AI Force," per Bloomberg.

Follow The Money

Oh and then there's that, yes. A leaked OpenAI presentation obtained by the Financial Times projects negative free cash flow of $278 billion from 2026 to 2030, with the company's compute bill rising from a $600 billion estimate in February to $856 billion by July - against revenue it hopes to grow from $36 billion this year to $350 billion in 2030. As we detailed previously, Altman has already walked back the timeline on the economic transformation that was supposed to pay for all of it.

Anthropic, meanwhile, has shifted its planned IPO from October to November, per the Journal, on what Reuters reports is $100 billion-plus in annualized revenue. And a week after its CEO said the industry must slow down, Reuters reports Anthropic is considering rushing out a new model to counter OpenAI's momentum ahead of that IPO. Pacing for thee.

he meant AFTER the IPO https://t.co/KXIPQzEhUfpic.twitter.com/bCDDsPmWXl— zerohedge (@zerohedge) September 19, 2026

If an open-weight model out of Hangzhou does 95% of what Claude or GPT-5 does for a fraction of the cost, the valuations both labs are banking on implode. The only way to protect the margins, justify the cash burn and satisfy Wall Street is to make it legally impossible for anyone else to compete - a regulatory moat so thick, and compliance costs so high, that only a $100 billion corporation can afford to train a frontier model. Arora's point stands: no actual security fix has been proposed, only more "compute spent on safety" and a federal body to bless it.

The models didn't rebel. A contractor left the internet on, three times that we know of, and the two labs with IPOs to protect turned that into a case for federal pacing. Hawley's records are due October 1, Anthropic has promised a redacted PyPI transcript and an outside METR review, and Google's explanation for sitting on a May breach of three companies until a newspaper called is that the model behaved. Don't believe the byte.


Original Article: https://www.zerohedge.com/ai/total-psai-op-how-altman-amodei-and-ea-cult-are-faking-rogue-ai-breakouts-protect-trillion

Related:

The “Human Extinction by 2030″ Pysop | Their Solution To Rouge AI = Digital IDs + Restricted Internet
Problem ~ Reaction ~ Solution, again. In this looming world of “regulated” AI, governments could be empowered to shut down access to sites, networks or even the internet as a whole in the event of alleged “rogue AIs” becoming a “threat to national security”. ... the hype around the AI mass death threat
The Post Labor Day AI Panic Psyop Has Been Launched
Antthropic, Open AI & Government are the prime beneficiaries Ed Dowd | Beyond the Narrative | eddowdbeyondthenarrative.substack.com Background On Tuesday, September 8, the day after Labor Day weekend (love the timing!) a young man by the name of Jacob Coxon put out a post on X…his first post ever and
❌