But those are of rockets.

Of satellites there are several we have images of.

I dunno, I saw something with my own observations and all you guys have told me is far fetched explanations when it just being a satellite is the easiest fit.

KH-11 and KH-12 come to mind

@Thinky the burden of proof is on you to first prove it's real, there's no way of observing them even with a telescope

you have some of satelites, but those are of rockets okay

There is.

The burden of proof also denotes you must prove the claim that all satellite photos are CGI

I've observed the supposed ISS with my own telescope @Flat earth BEAST

You cannot disprove a claim like that, that is the point of such a fallacy.

Watermelons are blue inside until you cut them open

supposed 😂

Now prove that such is not the case.

@Thinky that's not how it works, nasa could claim there are martians that are on mars. how could we ever disprove that?

I'm still being open minded

By going to Mars

ah so you're uneducated and don't know what burden of proof means

I think you've misinterpreted the function of such a fallacy.

well, you can't prove that they aren't CGI, and neither can we, so that's that debate ended right there

You have stated that all satellite photos are CGI

Have you not?

nasa claims to have satellites orbiting the earth, neither you nor i can prove that's real

I am asking for you to prove that claim.

how do u explain the planets in solar system to someone?

do you claim they are not CGI?

like seeing saturns rings

I have not made the initial claim @carlito

jesus

Nor can you disprove a negative.

Neither did i make a claim they were, but nvm @Thinky

That is why the burden of proof fallacy exists.

That is its function

Alright

If you did not

Then let us move along

no, why move along

making claims that aren't refutable then putting the burden of proof on the one who questions it 😂

how do u explain the planets in solar system to someone?

somoene help

asap