Preemptive strike

Okay so it's a balloon tethered to what?

^

Ironically, they did have WMDs, but not as what people typically think of.

World class miitary vs a third class shit hole

I'm really trying to follow here but occams razor is telling me it's probably a satellite.

And not what was specifically claimed.

occams razor says satelites should get hit by space junk more often and fall from the sky

They do. Space junk is usually just not big enough.

@Thinky they didn't even proposed it to each other, both of the nations brought it up to themselves and willfully signed it without any other requirements. it's like there's a hidden agenda right in front of your face

Yes, there is.

One if diplomatic maneuvering.

okay, how about just plain old malfunctioning, and crash to boot

And not of a ploy to hide Antarctica

Occans razor. No pics of satellites. You decide

That cat has been out of the bag for over 100 years

Well before the formation of the USSR

@ThirstyBranch no, that would imply one party to propose it to another. both parties made it up together

I would post pictures of satellites, but I lack the permissions.

your own pictures?

Dont fall prey to doing the governments dirty work

cgi satellite pictures 😂

That's convenient.

Any evidence I present is CGI

Whereas everything you present is not doctored in any way

I mean if i attached a camera to my scope I could post a picture... but I feel like you guys would just say it's fake: /

what's more convenient is posting pictures that neither you or i can prove but asssuming it's real 😂

That is the problem, to disprove that is nearly impossible.

are they your own pictures? that's a genuine question, not a convenient one

Because the burden of proof requires proving it is CGI

I have some, yes.

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.