Flat Earth

[Quiahuitl]

Some FEers think the NWO agents of deception will fake a flight to justify the fake icy continent at the bottom of the spinning ball


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wEgsS95Qknw

The video you have posted shows the face of a well known youtuber who is an experienced commercial pilot and also has millions of views on youtube. He's a recognised expert on commercial aviation.

However he has nothing to do with this video. This video is intentionally deceptive.

If you're going to call other people liars and stupid, etc, it's best not to promote false information yourself.

I've done my own research into flights in the Southern hemisphere, and I can confirm that I was not able to find any direct flights between Australia and South Africa, even after spending many hours searching on websites like cheapflights, kayak, skyscanner etc.

 

[grav]

This video is intentionally deceptive.

If you're going to call other people liars and stupid, etc, it's best not to promote false information yourself.

how so?
Please specify where the video violates ethics.
Also, your language accuses me of calumny and, even worse, bad manners.
Admin frowns on such behavior. if you are reprimanded, it will not be because I reported you.

At least you admit that southern-hemisphere flights are unobtainable.

 

[Quiahuitl]

Grav - I haven't 'Admitted' anything, because I'm approaching this subject with an open mind.

I've looked into the aircraft routes and it seems to me there are no direct flights within the southern hemisphere, so that constitutes evidence that the Copernican ('Spinning ball') model is wrong. Or that there is something else going on that we don't know about.

The video you've shared is unethical because it is using the image of a renowned expert on commercial aviation to promote a message which is nothing to do with him.

I expect you didn't know that when you posted the video. Maybe I should have expressed myself differently to make it clear my problem was with whoever made the video.

 

[otl2021]

What is the graphic you have presented to us? Is it a computer simulation?

I got it awhile back. I believe it was from Skiba who came to flat Earth with a background in graphics. Iirc, you are looking at two time-lapse series of shots, from two different vantage points in two different directions.

When looking north at Polaris, we see the counter-clockwise spin and from the second vantage point several degrees east, we see the circles straighten out and then seemingly s[pin the opposite way. I believe that he then used his computer to 'splice' the images together to show this.

The main thing is that no matter where you are, the stars appear in the east and disappear to the west.

 

[TommelBommel]

from a GLP thread,

View attachment 21326

View attachment 21326​

...

Its a nice idea - but its fantasy. I havent seen any proof so far.

 

[grav]

Its a nice idea - but its fantasy. I havent seen any proof so far.

unproven does not mean fantasy.
The globe is an outright fantasy, a complete fiction. a fraud. fable. a fake
and other f-words

Image exceeds set limits. Click to view full size image


1. Curvature. Spherical trigonometry dictates that the globe should exhibit a curve of 8 inches per mile squared. No experiments on land or water have ever proven this math to be accurate. On the contrary, with proper telephoto lenses, objects can be detected far beyond the expected curvature. Example: Photos of Chicago from across Lake Michigan.

2. Atmosphere vs space vacuum. Space theoretically begins 62 miles above the earth’s surface, at the Karman Line. The laws of physics say that a vacuum can not exist next to an atmosphere. Without a barrier to separate the two areas, the atmosphere would instantly escape into the hard vacuum of space. Example: open a tank of compressed air; the oxygen or other gases inside the tank will rush outside to achieve equilibrium of air pressure. A vacuum cannot exist next to the atmosphere.

3. Water. Liquid water always seeks its own level. Gravity, which is really the function of density (weight) of objects over distances, cannot cause oceans to curve around the globe. Sea level must be consistent throughout the world. Water, in other words, can not curve. Example: the Pacific Ocean, sea level.

4. Centrifugal force. If earth rotated at 1000 mph at the equator, nothing could withstand being thrown off of it along a curved or tangential path. Gravity is said to be the weakest force in the universe. It is, under any circumstances, unable to overcome the extreme speed of rotation. Gravity is actually the ratio of densities of adjacent objects, such as the density of water compared to that of air.. Examples include insects, clouds, smoke, other low density-objects which rise above the earth despite the alleged gravity and centrifugal force. Example: merry-go-rounds.

5. Authorities. Professionals in many fields --pilots, engineers, surveyors, gunners, artillerymen, radar operators, etc. -- do not account for curvature in any manner. Example: surveyors never adjust for earth curvature when they design canals, causeway bridges, railroad lines.

6 Moon and sun. Both objects appear to the eye to be the same size, though the moon is around 238,000 miles away and the sun is 93 million miles distant. Sunlight beams deny the claim that rays enter earth’s atmosphere in parallel beams. Using simple geometry, one can determine that the triangular pattern results in a distance of only 3000 miles above. The moon emits a cooling light which illuminates only the clouds which are near it, not those that are further away. Example: sunlight beaming rays through clouds (crepuscular rays) form a triangle with a base of less than 8,000 miles miles

7. Constellations. Star patterns have not altered appreciably in human history. Considering speeds of celestial objects which travel billions of miles per year in multiple directions, as well as earth’s own rotation, revolution around the sun, following the sun through the universe, we should observe some changes in as little as 6 months (stellar parallax). But no such changes have been seen in 6000 years. Example: Orion, Polaris in the same locations for millennia.

8. Airplane travel. Flights to and from countries in the southern hemisphere always pass over countries in the north, even though they could refuel in places along a direct route. When plotted on the flat earth map, the planes show that they follow a straight line. Example: flights between South America, Africa, Australia..

9. No Sensation of movement. If earth actually rotated and revolved around the sun at 67,000 mph, we should hear sonic booms and be swept away by winds far beyond hurricane strength. Examples: quiet, calm days, east-to-west winds

10. Photographs of earth from space. There are no legitimate pictures or videos of earth. All pictorial evidence is computer-generated, as are almost all photos of celestial objects. NASA even says that these photographs were created to “match people’s expectations.”

Other evidence includes fakery from space agencies, including the ISS and the Space Shuttle, further supports the argument that our ideas about space are entirely faked.

 

[Liberated Collective]

I am new to this forum and don't see an active thread on flat earth. Is there any interest in the topic?
SH's format is quite impressive. And imposing, to the point that navigating it is tricky for a simple mind like mine. Generic forums have become gross mockeries of their original designs, and so I am looking for a new home where I may spout my heresies, primarily the most basic hidden truth upon which all other distorted truths are based. The Infinite Plane of the Electric Universe.

My overall guesstimate of reality is a computer program which is crashed and rebooted every 300 years or so.

The gnostics may have had insights about our true history, starting with creation by an aeon named Sophia.
Who, if memory holds, became Gaia "in the flesh" so to speak.
I also respect ancient "myths" like that of Pyrrha and Deucalion, who threw rocks over their shoulders to repopulate the world after the Deluge. Rocks growing into organic beings? And vice versa. Nope, human beings are not imaginative enough to come up with such a crazy conspiracy theory.

I like to say non globe earth, because we know its not a globe, that is for sure. (We are in a natural light holography,)

I am sitting on literally tons (lol) of proof of biogeology, extinct animals, from pieces to some whole structures, but from my research now, I am fairly certain there are no "rocks", everything seems to have biological origin, its mind blowing....

Its a nice idea - but its fantasy. I havent seen any proof so far.

That isnt exactly the best representation that he gave you, moon is absolutely plasma and absolutely an image of our larger earth.

 

[Quiahuitl]

This is a great post. Strong arguments, well written. There is little in here I can find fault with.

1. Curvature. Spherical trigonometry dictates that the globe should exhibit a curve of 8 inches per mile squared. No experiments on land or water have ever proven this math to be accurate. On the contrary, with proper telephoto lenses, objects can be detected far beyond the expected curvature. Example: Photos of Chicago from across Lake Michigan.

This is very strong evidence the Earth is flat. The alternative explanation is that light does not behave as conventional science dictates, i.e. does not travel in straight lines.

2. Atmosphere vs space vacuum.

Tesla believed in the steady state theory, and so did Edmund Halley and several other renowned 20th century scientists and astronomers. The universe is full of Aether, and it is only near Earth that is converted to Air. Earth creates its own atmosphere. You can make Gravity part of this theory or say it is irrelevant.

4. Centrifugal force.

The Earth is big and rotates slowly, once every 24 hours. So the centrifugal force is very small, equivalent to about 0.3% of the mass of the object. You would need to have very good scales to measure this, but theoretically you could measure up to a 0.3% difference in weight of the same object near the equator or near the poles. It would probably cost around ten grand to test this.

5. Authorities. Professionals in many fields --pilots, engineers, surveyors, gunners, artillerymen, radar operators, etc. -- do not account for curvature in any manner. Example: surveyors never adjust for earth curvature when they design canals, causeway bridges, railroad lines.

The problem is to get them to say this on the record. I've seen videos of several airline pilots saying they think the Earth is flat.

6 Moon and sun. Both objects appear to the eye to be the same size, though the moon is around 238,000 miles away and the sun is 93 million miles distant. Sunlight beams deny the claim that rays enter earth’s atmosphere in parallel beams. Using simple geometry, one can determine that the triangular pattern results in a distance of only 3000 miles above. The moon emits a cooling light which illuminates only the clouds which are near it, not those that are further away. Example: sunlight beaming rays through clouds (crepuscular rays) form a triangle with a base of less than 8,000 miles miles

I think there is much more going on with the Sun and Moon that we don't understand. Again, it's possible light itself is not what modern science tells us.

7. Constellations. Star patterns have not altered appreciably in human history. Considering speeds of celestial objects which travel billions of miles per year in multiple directions, as well as earth’s own rotation, revolution around the sun, following the sun through the universe, we should observe some changes in as little as 6 months (stellar parallax). But no such changes have been seen in 6000 years. Example: Orion, Polaris in the same locations for millennia.

The conventional science says the stars are incredibly far away which is why they do not appear to move.
Solar parallax has been measured by astronomers for hundreds of years. Using conventional telescopes the parallax distance of hundreds of stars was successfully measured long ago. Modern science claims that with the Hubble telescope it is possible to measure the parallax of billions of stars.

8. Airplane travel. Flights to and from countries in the southern hemisphere always pass over countries in the north, even though they could refuel in places along a direct route. When plotted on the flat earth map, the planes show that they follow a straight line. Example: flights between South America, Africa, Australia..

I have confirmed this with my own research.

9. No Sensation of movement. If earth actually rotated and revolved around the sun at 67,000 mph, we should hear sonic booms and be swept away by winds far beyond hurricane strength. Examples: quiet, calm days, east-to-west winds

Yes. It's hard to believe we are moving at a thousand MPH, or that we get completely still air very often in most parts of the world. If you imagine that the Earth is a ball spinning at around 1000MPH at the equator, while the surrounding 'Space' is still, then you would expect to see a velocity gradient in the atmosphere. In other words, for every mile or so you travel upwards, you would expect the air to be moving in the opposite direction to the supposed rotational speed.
In fact the opposite is the case. The Earth rotates West to East (so the Sun appears to move East to West) while the jetstream at 5/6 miles altitude moves at over a hundred miles per hour faster in the same direction.

10. Photographs of earth from space. There are no legitimate pictures or videos of earth. All pictorial evidence is computer-generated, as are almost all photos of celestial objects. NASA even says that these photographs were created to “match people’s expectations.”

A lot of the moon landing photos are fake. However that does not prove that all of them are fake or that the moon landings never happened.

 

[inthefade]

A lot of the moon landing photos are fake. However that does not prove that all of them are fake or that the moon landings never happened.

Burden of proof is on NASA. They need to prove they went to the moon first. All the Apollo film and photography are fake (not taken on the moon). At this point I'm not convinced the moon is even a solid object that could be landed on.

 

[otl2021]

This is very strong evidence the Earth is flat. The alternative explanation is that light does not behave as conventional science dictates, i.e. does not travel in straight lines.

And this would place far too many 'observations' that have become 'facts,' and that must hold true for heliocentrism to exist, into complete disarray.

Tesla believed in the steady state theory, and so did Edmund Halley and several other renowned 20th century scientists and astronomers. The universe is full of Aether, and it is only near Earth that is converted to Air. Earth creates its own atmosphere. You can make Gravity part of this theory or say it is irrelevant.

Irrelevant to his point that a vacuum cannot exist next to a pressurized system. And this is regardless of 'gradient.'

The Earth is big and rotates slowly, once every 24 hours. So the centrifugal force is very small, equivalent to about 0.3% of the mass of the object. You would need to have very good scales to measure this, but theoretically you could measure up to a 0.3% difference in weight of the same object near the equator or near the poles. It would probably cost around ten grand to test this.

This is purely a nasa shill argument to muddy the waters. Every single thing, on every single point on the equator must be traveling at over a quarter of a mile per second! The weight and friction required for these objects to remain in place is 'astronomical.'

No human, animal or building for that matter could withstand such a force. The idea that any mathematical speculation makes this possible is more ridiculous.

In addition, we are told that the equator is some 13 miles longer than the central line of longitude. We are told this is because of the centrifugal force. We are told, ultimately, that a force that can move our Earth miles, cannot move water, buildings, animals, or humans.

The problem is to get them to say this on the record. I've seen videos of several airline pilots saying they think the Earth is flat.

View: https://youtu.be/YQnLw_OWPZk

That is not a problem. Above, an hour and a half of experts in their fields explaining this very clearly.

The conventional science says the stars are incredibly far away which is why they do not appear to move.
Solar parallax has been measured by astronomers for hundreds of years. Using conventional telescopes the parallax distance of hundreds of stars was successfully measured long ago. Modern science claims that with the Hubble telescope it is possible to measure the parallax of billions of stars.

It should be required for all students to go to their backyards, mount a steel pole set in cement, and to that mount a 1/4 inch diameter tube pointed directly at Polaris. For the rest of their families' lives, Polaris will be there.

A lot of the moon landing photos are fake. However that does not prove that all of them are fake or that the moon landings never happened.

men landed on the moon, the then none would be fake.


That is an actual nasa photo of what took the bad actors to the moon.

Burden of proof is on NASA.

Yes.

 

[Liberated Collective]

Oh, I forgot, You can prove to yourself the moon doesent rotate around the earth, rather does clockwise circles overhead. Get the moon As early as possible, and take a picture so you can see a lil detail. Take one picture every two hours until it sets. Observe your images, you'll notice the moon is rotating clockwise as it traverses the sky overhead, a hair under 15 degrees an hour. That's 360 degrees in 24 hours. You'll notice as moon rotates clockwise on its face, the shadows never move whatsoever, and if it was moving around us, as we moved around sun, there would be a lot of changes in the stationary light shining to the earth moon. Give it a try,

 

[Quiahuitl]

Oh, I forgot, You can prove to yourself the moon doesent rotate around the earth, rather does clockwise circles overhead. Get the moon As early as possible, and take a picture so you can see a lil detail. Take one picture every two hours until it sets. Observe your images, you'll notice the moon is rotating clockwise as it traverses the sky overhead, a hair under 15 degrees an hour. That's 360 degrees in 24 hours. You'll notice as moon rotates clockwise on its face, the shadows never move whatsoever, and if it was moving around us, as we moved around sun, there would be a lot of changes in the stationary light shining to the earth moon. Give it a try,

Have you actually done this yourself?

 

[Liberated Collective]

Have you actually done this yourself?

I wouldnt recommend something I havent done myself for one thing, YES. All the time.

 

[Quiahuitl]

I wouldnt recommend something I havent done myself for one thing, YES. All the time.

OK, good. I shall give this a try. I've never noticed any pattern in the rotation of the moon apart from it looks a different way up in Mexico compared to the UK where I live.

Can you clarify why it rotates a 'hair under' 15 degrees per hour? Because 15 x 24 is 360 so if it's rotating slightly less than 15 degrees per hour then it must be rotating slightly less than 360 degrees per day. So if you looked at it the same time every day it would appear to be rotating slowly anticlockwise?

 

[Liberated Collective]

OK, good. I shall give this a try. I've never noticed any pattern in the rotation of the moon apart from it looks a different way up in Mexico compared to the UK where I live.

Can you clarify why it rotates a 'hair under' 15 degrees per hour? Because 15 x 24 is 360 so if it's rotating slightly less than 15 degrees per hour then it must be rotating slightly less than 360 degrees per day. So if you looked at it the same time every day it would appear to be rotating slowly anticlockwise?

I say a hair under 15 because the moon and Sun although should be clocklike, at some point there was something that happened that gave the sun its analemma, and so the sun and moon are slightly out of sync, you know what Im saying now? They dont rise and set at the same rtime everyday, they slowly change, hence it cant be exactly 15.,,,

Youre last question, I would say that is a correct the aNTiclockwise thing... Yes so mexico and uk can prob see moon at the same time, take picture at same time both places, itll look like it rotated, because it does cartwheels in the sky

 

[Quiahuitl]

I say a hair under 15 because the moon and Sun although should be clocklike, at some point there was something that happened that gave the sun its analemma, and so the sun and moon are slightly out of sync, you know what Im saying now?

I didn't know what 'Analemma' meant so I looked it up. It is the path that the sun describes in the sky when photographed at the same time every day. Here is a set from Stanford university which are all taken from Greece and I'm baffled why they would look different from different positions within one small country. They are taken at different times to be fair.

Stanford SOLAR Center - Viewing and Understanding the Analemma

 

[Liberated Collective]

I didn't know what 'Analemma' meant so I looked it up. It is the path that the sun describes in the sky when photographed at the same time every day. Here is a set from Stanford university which are all taken from Greece and I'm baffled why they would look different from different positions within one small country. They are taken at different times to be fair.

View attachment 21477​

Stanford SOLAR Center - Viewing and Understanding the Analemma

Because the earth is flat my friend. The sun travels from the norther tropic to the southern tropic in a sin wave pattern and back to make the whole year, Everything makes a million times more sense when you use the common sense nature model, mother earth isnt complex, she's simplex, but not complex. The globe deceivers give us impossible numbers to deter us from learning the intricacies of our reality. The analemma is actually decreasing meaning that it is slowly getting back to normal after some sort of man made cataclysm.

 

[Quiahuitl]

The Copernican model explains why the face of the Moon appears to rotate with the passage of time.

This sketch shows the spherical Earth with the North pole at the top. The stick figure is at latitude 51 degrees (
London). Assuming you could be hovering in space at a point in line with the equator, then this is what you would see during a twelve hour period. You can see that the stick figure has rotated by 78 degrees. 2 x (90-51) = 78

So the Copernican model predicts that someone observing the Moon over a twelve hour period from latitude 51 (London) would see the Moon rotate by 78 degrees.

The Copernican model also predicts that the rate of rotation of the Moon's face would not be consistent throughout the night. The Moon would appear to rotate faster in the middle of the night and slower at either end of the night.

Furthermore the Copernican model predicts that the Moon's face would not appear to rotate at all if you were at latitude zero, on the equator.

Liberated Collective has suggested that the Moon's face should rotate the same speed as the hour hand on a clock, performing one complete rotation every 24 hours. I'm assuming on a flat disk model of the Earth this also means the rate of rotation of the Moon's face would be the same at every point on the Earth.

So we can test the models by measuring the rate of rotation of the Moon's face at different latitudes. If it appears to rotate at the same rate at all latitudes, that would support the flat disk model. If it rotates at different speeds at different latitudes that would support the Copernican model.

 

[Liberated Collective]

The Copernican model explains why the face of the Moon appears to rotate with the passage of time.

This sketch shows the spherical Earth with the North pole at the top. The stick figure is at latitude 51 degrees (
London). Assuming you could be hovering in space at a point in line with the equator, then this is what you would see during a twelve hour period. You can see that the stick figure has rotated by 78 degrees. 2 x (90-51) = 78

So the Copernican model predicts that someone observing the Moon over a twelve hour period from latitude 51 (London) would see the Moon rotate by 78 degrees.

View attachment 21530​

The Copernican model also predicts that the rate of rotation of the Moon's face would not be consistent throughout the night. The Moon would appear to rotate faster in the middle of the night and slower at either end of the night.

Furthermore the Copernican model predicts that the Moon's face would not appear to rotate at all if you were at latitude zero, on the equator.

Liberated Collective has suggested that the Moon's face should rotate the same speed as the hour hand on a clock, performing one complete rotation every 24 hours. I'm assuming on a flat disk model of the Earth this also means the rate of rotation of the Moon's face would be the same at every point on the Earth.

So we can test the models by measuring the rate of rotation of the Moon's face at different latitudes. If it appears to rotate at the same rate at all latitudes, that would support the flat disk model. If it rotates at different speeds at different latitudes that would support the Copernican model.

Lol, there is absolutely no way , impossible, that no shadows would change on the moon if its moving around the earth and sun, move any object in existencve in relation to a flashlight, what happens? Shadows change. They expect us to not critically think, they expect us to be that dumbed down we wouldnt think about shadows changing on its face. Just, so insane we dont think about reality as far as how nature works, and just view it through the lens of the pseudoscientists

 

[Quiahuitl]

Lol, there is absolutely no way , impossible, that no shadows would change on the moon if its moving around the earth and sun, move any object in existencve in relation to a flashlight, what happens? Shadows change. They expect us to not critically think, they expect us to be that dumbed down we wouldnt think about shadows changing on its face. Just, so insane we dont think about reality as far as how nature works, and just view it through the lens of the pseudoscientists

I don't understand what you mean by shadows on the Moon? As far as I can see the way the Moon looks changes all the time and I have no way of knowing if that's due to atmospheric conditions or the Moon itself.