I’ll just address the last point and the others when I have more time. I believe that the earth plane has a sun/moon near earth phenomenon which warms one of the ‘four corners’ of the plane. Each of the quarters is exposed and habitable for around 6400 years (a quarter of the precession of the equinox) with constant thawing on one side and freezing on the other side. The ice wall is simply the edge of the frozen part of the plane. This is explained in Lost History of Flat Earth. The dome (‘firmament’ in the bible) is necessary if you believe in a terrarium. What lies above or below I have no idea. We hardly even know what lies beyond this part of the plane. I don’t expect anyone to believe this but I have come to these thoughts in the last six years so I am very new to this. Look at the Prague clock to get some awareness of what people once knew. It was recently ‘restored’ to make it less beautiful and less functional and now uses the globe earth as part of the distortion. Other things I’ve noticed recently relate to ‘Antarctica’ (which doesn’t exist - see the UN logo for an idea of what they’re hiding in plain (plane?) sight). The thawing is occurring on the ‘Western side’ and the freezing is occurring on the ‘Eastern side’. This would line up with the solar-lunar system rotation clockwise as we move into the age of Aquarius. So we’re in God’s clock as others have said.
Flat Earth
- Thread starter grav
- Start date
Following the same format for clarity if you don't mind.
I believe that the earth plane has a sun/moon near earth phenomenon which warms one of the ‘four corners’ of the plane.
Each of the quarters is exposed and habitable for around 6400 years (a quarter of the precession of the equinox) with constant thawing on one side and freezing on the other side.
Quite how anyone alive today or in the past could measure the passage of 6400 years I know not. In terms of the equinox precessing that has to be a belief just as the 6400 years is for the same reason.
If I am reading your words correctly then you believe that the land we live on was once frozen and at some point after we have both long gone it will freeze again?
The ice wall is simply the edge of the frozen part of the plane. This is explained in Lost History of Flat Earth.
Sorry got to disagree the the Lost History of Flat earth author(s)/writer(s) do not explain anything. But I understand why you would believe the 'ice wall'/'frozen edge' is a reality from listening to them.
The dome (‘firmament’ in the bible) is necessary if you believe in a terrarium. What lies above or below I have no idea.
As far as my research goes nobody knows what was or is the definition of the firmament let alone when the word made its first appearance in whichever incarnation of the stories was written. The bible is a book of the words of man not a god.
The terrarium idea may be on the money it may not. It would only make sense if there was something on the other side of the container pushing on it to keep it in p!ace as the only force in this reality is the push force. There is nothing in my lived experience to suggest there is a firmament nor anything on the other side of it.
We hardly even know what lies beyond this part of the plane.
I have no idea if there are limits to this plane or even if humans would recognise the limit if they saw it. What I do have an inkling of this plane is bigger in area than we are told it is and at the same time the 'known places' are closer together than our measuring tools tell us they are. That it is a level plane is beyond question as the ocean is bonafide evidence for it.
Look at the Prague clock to get some awareness of what people once knew. It was recently ‘restored’ to make it less beautiful and less functional and now uses the globe earth as part of the distortion.
The clock in Prague is indeed interesting but as for putting an age on it and by extraction the people alive at the tine of its invention and construction its impossible.
Its purpose is equally unknown however what is known its is unique which is in and of itself odd. If this device is from some golden age of knowledge surely they would be everywhere in their time and to me at least it would be inconceivable for only one to survive or be left standing.
This attribution of unique artifacts to a golden age is a recurring theme.
Other things I’ve noticed recently relate to ‘Antarctica’ (which doesn’t exist - see the UN logo for an idea of what they’re hiding in plain (plane?) sight).
The UN logo is nothing more than the globe lie laid out flat best I can tell.
Fwiw I don't believe anything I am told or sold about the earth any more. After swallowing lie after lie about and getting really angry that I actually fell for them I am now calmly sitting in the "I don't actually know" chair looking at claims from the position of what I do actually know from personal experience. And yes personal experience could arguably be described as too narrow a lens however its what I have so there it is.
I believe that the earth plane has a sun/moon near earth phenomenon which warms one of the ‘four corners’ of the plane.
Each of the quarters is exposed and habitable for around 6400 years (a quarter of the precession of the equinox) with constant thawing on one side and freezing on the other side.
Quite how anyone alive today or in the past could measure the passage of 6400 years I know not. In terms of the equinox precessing that has to be a belief just as the 6400 years is for the same reason.
If I am reading your words correctly then you believe that the land we live on was once frozen and at some point after we have both long gone it will freeze again?
The ice wall is simply the edge of the frozen part of the plane. This is explained in Lost History of Flat Earth.
Sorry got to disagree the the Lost History of Flat earth author(s)/writer(s) do not explain anything. But I understand why you would believe the 'ice wall'/'frozen edge' is a reality from listening to them.
The dome (‘firmament’ in the bible) is necessary if you believe in a terrarium. What lies above or below I have no idea.
As far as my research goes nobody knows what was or is the definition of the firmament let alone when the word made its first appearance in whichever incarnation of the stories was written. The bible is a book of the words of man not a god.
The terrarium idea may be on the money it may not. It would only make sense if there was something on the other side of the container pushing on it to keep it in p!ace as the only force in this reality is the push force. There is nothing in my lived experience to suggest there is a firmament nor anything on the other side of it.
We hardly even know what lies beyond this part of the plane.
I have no idea if there are limits to this plane or even if humans would recognise the limit if they saw it. What I do have an inkling of this plane is bigger in area than we are told it is and at the same time the 'known places' are closer together than our measuring tools tell us they are. That it is a level plane is beyond question as the ocean is bonafide evidence for it.
Look at the Prague clock to get some awareness of what people once knew. It was recently ‘restored’ to make it less beautiful and less functional and now uses the globe earth as part of the distortion.
The clock in Prague is indeed interesting but as for putting an age on it and by extraction the people alive at the tine of its invention and construction its impossible.
Its purpose is equally unknown however what is known its is unique which is in and of itself odd. If this device is from some golden age of knowledge surely they would be everywhere in their time and to me at least it would be inconceivable for only one to survive or be left standing.
This attribution of unique artifacts to a golden age is a recurring theme.
Other things I’ve noticed recently relate to ‘Antarctica’ (which doesn’t exist - see the UN logo for an idea of what they’re hiding in plain (plane?) sight).
The UN logo is nothing more than the globe lie laid out flat best I can tell.
Fwiw I don't believe anything I am told or sold about the earth any more. After swallowing lie after lie about and getting really angry that I actually fell for them I am now calmly sitting in the "I don't actually know" chair looking at claims from the position of what I do actually know from personal experience. And yes personal experience could arguably be described as too narrow a lens however its what I have so there it is.
You guys are having a good conversation, keep going. I wanna chime in, but not derail anything. Quick stream of consciousness my thoughts re a dome/firmament
Context: simulation theory (I'll wait, eye rolling proceed)
Space is real. In here it is simulated. Video game maps work this way. I can see space, but the playable map where I am has limits. That invisible wall (dome) gets slammed into if you try to go past it. Not in a "you're imprisoned here" way, simply in a "yeah we can't go any further this way" kind of way. Those who usurped this video game have woven layer upon layer of fictional stories in order to a) make us believe this is a real world and not a VR, and b) keep us hopelessly lost in any search for truth.
I think this makes a lot of sense
I feel like I can a thousand percent relate. Also thanks for your honesty. I've believed in virtually every belief system out there at one time or another, and feel mostly like a dumb ass for it, but c'est la vie right? I wasted a lotta years drinking too. Personal experience would mostly be too narrow methinks if it's a case of making an argument for or against to someone else. Otherwise it's the only thing that really matters imo
I also agree that personal experience should be our default. But one issue with the simulation theory is the evidence of resets. If you wanted to reset a simulation once the people taking part in it begin to get an inkling they’re in one, couldn’t you just reset it back to its original settings to give yourself more time before the discovery is made again? You could also control the ‘physics’ of the simulated world to make it easier to control the narrative. By the way, Nick Bostrom, an Oxford Professor of the Future of Humanity (yes such a person exists!) came up with a theorem to show that we are most likely in a simulation and the best course of action knowing that would be to keep quiet about it - well they would say that, wouldn’t they? I don’t think we are. I think they discovered the firmament (dome / force field / shield whatever) with the atomic bomb (think of the shape of the mushroom cloud) and realised they couldn’t hide it any more. It was after that that the UN / WHO / NASA et al were set up. They had to have these ‘global’ organisations to control the narrative. I may well be wrong, but I think the word ‘global’ to replace ‘international’ has become increasingly prevalent in the last 75 years. Global agenda sounds sinister whereas international agenda sounds less so to me. And it was post WW2 that we had a huge rise in science fiction and space travel films which morphed into simulation stories with the rise of computers: The Matrix / The Truman Show among others. That’s the way the controllers want us to think, it seems to me. As I said earlier, if we’re in a simulation as avatars it denies the existence of a soul / of divinity / of a purpose and undermines any attempts to unearth our origins.
Super quick, not necessarily, that's presumptive; also, and this is one of my issues with simtard shit is there sooooo isn't just one 'theory', there are a whole bunch of very disparate theories that share a common belief in some sort of virtual reality as a starting point
Maybe, again presumptive
I do
Maybe, also, all large explosions tend to exhibit mushroom clouds I think?
Could you explain this one a bit? I'm not sure I understand your meaning
Last edited:
Chime away its not exclusive. Who knows between us we might discover something.
Ring any bells?
Religions have the exact, exact same pattern.
Rinse. Wash. Repeat.
Spot on. Oh it was an atomic bomb...shout the media.
If so why was TNT being shipped to the atol for a considerable time?
If so why were the ships full of tnt moored nearest to the atol?
Also why do all the photographs of Nagasaki and Hiroshima look the same as all the photos of Dresden?
All the wood gone but concrete brick and stone left standing.
The true power of an "atom bomb" or its modern successor the "nuclear bomb" is the fear of devastation that has been attached to it.
Last edited:
I agree it was probably a direct energy weapon and that all explosions form the same or a similar shape apparently due to the Rayleigh-Taylor instability (thank you Google). I was wondering why the mushroom cloud following the biggest dew explosion (over Hiroshima) was so low (12 miles) when the official edge of our atmosphere (the Karman line) is 53 miles. But it’s ok - I’m discovering some totally baffling and fascinating ‘facts’ about the reason why we only ever see one face of the moon and, given that Artemis is about to reveal the ‘dark side’, I need to look into the unbelievable synchronicity of the moon rotating on its axis and orbiting the earth which is miraculously fortuitous in enabling us to only ever see one side. Yeah right.
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2020
- Messages
- 1,140
- Reaction score
- 2,171
In the photos I've seen of Nagasaki, I think lots of wood is standing, trees and telegraph poles, as seen in this image I just googled.
Human senses are a specific combination that are used to get about in the physical reality the body bearing them moves around within. The human brain nervous network seems to be the 'interpreter' or 'guide' is probably a better word which takes all the sensory information and moves the body accordingly.
It does this instantaneously during life. In truth it is the source of the experience we call life.
The senses are self evident but "the mind" cannot be found, cannot be placed. Weirdly though we pretend its real or believe its real but why?
Best fist I make of it is because I was told often enough when young.
Perhaps just as the eye cannot see itself nor the nose smell itself etc is applicable to the mind however the body feels itself so maybe not.
We are told we discern things though the use of the mind and then we get told its the brain, the good 'ole duality mask in play yet again and we somehow conflate the mind existing in the brain!
When we look up to "the sky" we see blue during daylight and little lights in an otherwise darkish ground. We presume because we are told so often that the thing we are stood on is moving and the sky isn't except it does a bit as it rotates around the "one fixed star" named Pole.
That is a visual experience. Eyes doing what they do no other senses are involved. However we seem incapable of 'just looking' and acceptng what we see as what we see, we literally colour what we see by what we have been told to see.
So we see lights but colour them stars. Even dafter we then colour patterns of lights as constellations. Even dafter still we colour certain lights into planets.
As the strongest light in the sky comes into view its focussed light "disappears" the tiny lights and the dark background replacing both with a blue colour. This light is observed and felt so thats two of the bodies senses in use.
So that is the way our bodies experience the sun.
What is between the sun and us?
There is water vapour between us and the sun.
Our body is a flowing combination of two of the three describable states of water. Liquid and vapour therefore our senses are artifacts of this combination. Both light and heat occur within water vapour and liquid water. No light occurs in frozen water aka ice. It reflects light and absorbs heat.
The heat from tbe sun is at its maximum at the edge where water vapour meets liquid water. This fact demonstrates there is focus in play.
Could there be anything else between us and the sun?
Yes.
As we cannot physically get up into the water vapour beyond the height above the liquid water level offered by mountains there could and I stress could be anything that is translucent enough to allow the suns light and heat through of another push force invisible to eyes that lets light and heat through.
That the water vapour becomes less dense and colder relative to our living needs is demonstrated by going up a mountain. We get nearer the light and heat of the sun and it does get brighter but the heat lessens.
That is counter intuitive to what we are told about the "physics" of how light and heat interact with our bodies.
To really boil you noodle walk uphill towards a stand of dark conifers on a still cold night and you will experience warmth coming down towards you from the trees!
As there is demonstrably only push in this reality people, me included, tend to assume it is directional. A push force exists when something is exerting pressure on something else. If the two somethings are exerting an equal pressure there is no movement. If one weakens for whatever reason and the other maintains its pressure it seems able to expand its presence and push the other something away from itself but must or presumably weaken its own force which in turn gives other somethings pushing on it the opportunity to push it out of the way and expand.
Instead of directiional push what if tbe entirety of the push is found in the manifestation of water changing state?
That means what we experience is the entirety of all that is. It also means that water is the creator or facilitator. I accept I may well be going mad but the more I look at the experience for what it is and try my level best to abandon the "what I am tolds" whatever I am its got everything to do with water.
So what has any of that got to do with the title of this thread? I don't hear anyone ask.
Its this dome idea. A dome needs something inside and something outside to exist. People seem to assume its some sort of curved physical structure but as Tomkat points out it could also be pressure. Makes no odds it has to have something outside of itself and inside of itself and there is no physical evidence for the existence of either.
It could be literally anything. Magnetism, electrical, plasma, ice, etc etc but the underlying point is its a container. Keeping two things or a portion of one thing seperated from another.
Assuming a cntainer exists we humans are unable to interact with it in any way shape or form. Go high enough and we pass out and freeze to death.
As I said even going up as high as walking can take is all it takes to put us in dire straits.
Accept it or not our bodies operate best at sea level. The edge between water vapour and liquid water is our living realm. When it comes to the sky lights its impossible for us too discern wher they phyically are other than saying 'they are above my head.' They could be inside a dome or outide a dome.
What phsyical properties the dome has would influence the way our eyes see the sky. It could for example magnify or it could obfuscate similar to a heat haze. Point is we only see the sky through water vapour. We can see the light of the sky through liquid water but go deeper than a few inches and the drop off in light is noticeable.
It does this instantaneously during life. In truth it is the source of the experience we call life.
The senses are self evident but "the mind" cannot be found, cannot be placed. Weirdly though we pretend its real or believe its real but why?
Best fist I make of it is because I was told often enough when young.
Perhaps just as the eye cannot see itself nor the nose smell itself etc is applicable to the mind however the body feels itself so maybe not.
We are told we discern things though the use of the mind and then we get told its the brain, the good 'ole duality mask in play yet again and we somehow conflate the mind existing in the brain!
When we look up to "the sky" we see blue during daylight and little lights in an otherwise darkish ground. We presume because we are told so often that the thing we are stood on is moving and the sky isn't except it does a bit as it rotates around the "one fixed star" named Pole.
That is a visual experience. Eyes doing what they do no other senses are involved. However we seem incapable of 'just looking' and acceptng what we see as what we see, we literally colour what we see by what we have been told to see.
So we see lights but colour them stars. Even dafter we then colour patterns of lights as constellations. Even dafter still we colour certain lights into planets.
As the strongest light in the sky comes into view its focussed light "disappears" the tiny lights and the dark background replacing both with a blue colour. This light is observed and felt so thats two of the bodies senses in use.
So that is the way our bodies experience the sun.
What is between the sun and us?
There is water vapour between us and the sun.
Our body is a flowing combination of two of the three describable states of water. Liquid and vapour therefore our senses are artifacts of this combination. Both light and heat occur within water vapour and liquid water. No light occurs in frozen water aka ice. It reflects light and absorbs heat.
The heat from tbe sun is at its maximum at the edge where water vapour meets liquid water. This fact demonstrates there is focus in play.
Could there be anything else between us and the sun?
Yes.
As we cannot physically get up into the water vapour beyond the height above the liquid water level offered by mountains there could and I stress could be anything that is translucent enough to allow the suns light and heat through of another push force invisible to eyes that lets light and heat through.
That the water vapour becomes less dense and colder relative to our living needs is demonstrated by going up a mountain. We get nearer the light and heat of the sun and it does get brighter but the heat lessens.
That is counter intuitive to what we are told about the "physics" of how light and heat interact with our bodies.
To really boil you noodle walk uphill towards a stand of dark conifers on a still cold night and you will experience warmth coming down towards you from the trees!
As there is demonstrably only push in this reality people, me included, tend to assume it is directional. A push force exists when something is exerting pressure on something else. If the two somethings are exerting an equal pressure there is no movement. If one weakens for whatever reason and the other maintains its pressure it seems able to expand its presence and push the other something away from itself but must or presumably weaken its own force which in turn gives other somethings pushing on it the opportunity to push it out of the way and expand.
Instead of directiional push what if tbe entirety of the push is found in the manifestation of water changing state?
That means what we experience is the entirety of all that is. It also means that water is the creator or facilitator. I accept I may well be going mad but the more I look at the experience for what it is and try my level best to abandon the "what I am tolds" whatever I am its got everything to do with water.
So what has any of that got to do with the title of this thread? I don't hear anyone ask.
Its this dome idea. A dome needs something inside and something outside to exist. People seem to assume its some sort of curved physical structure but as Tomkat points out it could also be pressure. Makes no odds it has to have something outside of itself and inside of itself and there is no physical evidence for the existence of either.
It could be literally anything. Magnetism, electrical, plasma, ice, etc etc but the underlying point is its a container. Keeping two things or a portion of one thing seperated from another.
Assuming a cntainer exists we humans are unable to interact with it in any way shape or form. Go high enough and we pass out and freeze to death.
As I said even going up as high as walking can take is all it takes to put us in dire straits.
Accept it or not our bodies operate best at sea level. The edge between water vapour and liquid water is our living realm. When it comes to the sky lights its impossible for us too discern wher they phyically are other than saying 'they are above my head.' They could be inside a dome or outide a dome.
What phsyical properties the dome has would influence the way our eyes see the sky. It could for example magnify or it could obfuscate similar to a heat haze. Point is we only see the sky through water vapour. We can see the light of the sky through liquid water but go deeper than a few inches and the drop off in light is noticeable.
I don't get the point of this other than showing me I am wrong or possibly too broad with my statement. If either is the case fair does.
‘A dome needs something inside and something outside to exist.’ Says who? Once you’re positing ideas such as flat earth or a domed firmament all rules of physics or logic can be abandoned. I’m sure when you were told about space / the cosmos as a child you wanted to know ‘what lies beyond?’ Infinity never worked for me - think of the old infinity plus one premise which turns the whole thing on its head. Maybe there’s nothing beyond the dome, maybe the flat domed earth is a space ship hurtling through space. That isn’t the point though. The existence or otherwise of anything shouldn’t be judged based on potentially erroneous science. Certainly not on a science which is doing everything it can to prove it doesn’t exist. I believe we’re in a world that has been overlaid with lies in which, as you say, we grow up baffled and confused and not trusting the evidence of our own eyes. And just one thing about the sun / moon. Both bodies don’t just look the same size - they are the same size (imo) and much much closer than we have been led to believe.
‘A dome needs something inside and something outside to exist.’ Says who?
My experience of the physical reality.
Once you’re positing ideas such as flat earth or a domed firmament all rules of physics or logic can be abandoned.
No. You have experience as your own innate guide. Logic is a figment of the thoughts we call imagination. Anything goes there.
I’m sure when you were told about space / the cosmos as a child you wanted to know ‘what lies beyond?’
Nope. I was sold the space stories as a kid and they are still being peddled today but honestly space stories held no fascination nor interest for me other than entertaiment (Thunderbirds) it was animals, plants and insects which did
And just one thing about the sun / moon. Both bodies don’t just look the same size - they are the same size (imo) and much much closer than we have been led to believe.
All I know about the sun and moon is they are both lights.
The sun is demonstrably a sphere and its light is either focussed in and off itself or there is a lens physical or effect over it, between it and me which focuses it precisely down onto the living layer where the liquid and vapour meet.
As for the moon. It is demonstrably not a sphere and it has a translucent cover which seems to move back and forth across it in a rhythmic pattern and it can vanish completely and also move position considerably over the course of the night and from night to night.
It can follow the path of the sun closely and on other occasions go its own way.
Just recording the things I have come to accept that prove beyond any doubt I live on level plane in specific density of water vapour.
The level plane is proven by the observable behaviour of water which creates a level surface with the water vapour above it whenever the water is contained.
The shape and size of the container is immaterial.
Gravity is merely the lie that obfuscates density and is used to explain away the centrifugal effect of the alleged spin.
The only force in the physical reality is push. Pull is merely a descriptor of direction.
Euclidean geometry only works on a level plane.
Our eyes and ears keep is informed of when we are vertical to the level or horizontal with the level.
The horizon we see is a visual imagining that is a product of the function of the bodies two eyes the brain nervous system and its purpose is to help us physically navigate the reality.
The life layer is the edge meeting of the two boundaries of liquid and vapour water. Go beyond this specific range and the body dies.
The suns heat and light are focussed into this life layer.
The water vapour is at its densest in this life layer.
The level plane is proven by the observable behaviour of water which creates a level surface with the water vapour above it whenever the water is contained.
The shape and size of the container is immaterial.
Gravity is merely the lie that obfuscates density and is used to explain away the centrifugal effect of the alleged spin.
The only force in the physical reality is push. Pull is merely a descriptor of direction.
Euclidean geometry only works on a level plane.
Our eyes and ears keep is informed of when we are vertical to the level or horizontal with the level.
The horizon we see is a visual imagining that is a product of the function of the bodies two eyes the brain nervous system and its purpose is to help us physically navigate the reality.
The life layer is the edge meeting of the two boundaries of liquid and vapour water. Go beyond this specific range and the body dies.
The suns heat and light are focussed into this life layer.
The water vapour is at its densest in this life layer.
I've mentioned this before, but there's one other huge issue with what science tells us about space in relation to the place we live. Science claims that "outer space" is a vacuum. Last I checked, you can't have a vacuum next to an open air system. It's literally impossible and easily demonstratable.
Interesting conversation here. I think everything above us is a non-physical world. The sun, moon, planets, and stars are like a rainbow. You can’t touch them. The sun isn’t a ball of fire. I think we live in a torus field—specifically, on the flat surface of the torus field. Nothing exists outside the torus field. I’m studying the movements of the celestial bodies and now I know how the sun and moon move. Super interesting.
Perhaps I'm an idiot, but it would appear that in this video from NASA the only stars visible are in the CGI renderings. The purported video from the actual craft never show any stars behind the moon. Might just be my imagination tho /s.
Also got a nice head tilt pointing "upwards" at 9:27:49.
And how about that woman's hair doing a nice bob back and forth instead of free flowing in any and all directions.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-j1uxBmis0
Also got a nice head tilt pointing "upwards" at 9:27:49.
And how about that woman's hair doing a nice bob back and forth instead of free flowing in any and all directions.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-j1uxBmis0
What a big snooze this was. I mean to be fair, at least NASA put a bit of effort into the CGI; probably at least sophomore in high school level skills. The Chinese and indians should be rightfully ashamed. We also managed to get actual product placement with the fucking Nutella. Truman show goes to space haha.
To pivot a bit: I just saw this pic and thought it was curious possibly in a flat earth way, not about if it's chem or con trail bullshit, but specifically how that shadow works? Any thoughts?
Today I saw a thin, dark blue-gray streak visible in the sky in front of an aircraft—I estimate 500 meters ahead of it, and about 2 kilometers long—where that aircraft seemed to be flying in that trail. So it seemed to be following a kind of trail. Exactly, that is. It did fly under the trail, I reckon, but into it, from my position.
It wasn't a contrail-making aircraft, by the way. So, it just looked as if I saw a trail in the sky that the aircraft seemed to be flying into, and that trail once again stretched out in front of that aircraft.
