> that there are city sized satellites flying above them

I don't think this is so much the issue, as much as that I didn't think about it.

I opened it and my first thought was wow, it's packed up there. Didn't consider the size of the things it's displaying relative to things on the surface.

There is certainly some merit in ensuring that first impression is accurate.

> I opened it and my first thought was wow, it's packed up there

I mean, it is also pretty packed up there. Considering that a rocket launch has to give every object up there a decently wide berth, it's still a shit ton of moving obstacles that have to be constantly taken into account - the relative size of the gaps between them doesn't really change that equation much.

Yes. I once overheard a flat earther argue that spare reporting is fake because there are supposed to be tens of thousands of satellites, yet photos from the ISS don't show any of them.

Absolutely. Common sense and critical thinking is less common than you may think.

That's in part because "common sense" is an illusion and fantasy.

It's less illusion and fantasy and more code for "what I think." If you notice, it's only uttered by people who believe their own reasoning should be automatically accepted as truth. Ego leaves no room for doubt or embarrassment.

Yeah but I caught myself 3 seconds later.

Enough HN users are retarded enough that they'll start talking about Kessler syndrome because they don't understand what they're looking at.

My dude, some people look up at the sky and see airplane contrails and clouds and conclude all sorts of outlandish nonsense.