The tidal effect is caused by the vortex at the poles, it has nothing to do with the Moon or any other celestial body.
They associate it with the Moon because they want to present evidence for the "law" of gravitational force.
The tidal effect is caused by the vortex at the poles, it has nothing to do with the Moon or any other celestial body.
They associate it with the Moon because they want to present evidence for the "law" of gravitational force.
I agree with you on them attempting to use this phenomena to incorrectly support gravity.
gravity is a lie and a fiction.
I do not agree with you in regards to the other aspects of your statment.
Poles dont exist. We do not live on a ball earth/ inverted ball earth nothing visually supports such a notion. nothing we feel or experience supports such a notion.
nothing other than what is given to us by the controllers in the last few hundred years suggests we live on a spinny ball or in any form of a ball with poles either.
Reality determines that we live on a flat and unmoving plane.
You clearly feel strongly that gravity is given to you as a false concept yet you haven't made the next logical step and concluded that ball earth theory be it concave or convex is also false and given to you as well in the same package by the very same people.
Respectfully I would invite you to make such a conclusion.
As for a tidal effect caused by a vortex located centrally this is a somewhat dubious notion.
It would create only one effect on the waters of the place we call Earth, namely a pulling one. even with a vortex at each "pole" this would not account for the tides rising and falling as we see in reality. but only the falling as the waters were pulled toward such vorticies. So I have to discount it on this basis.
I will concede that a vortex positioned at a true north location (top) of the flat convex map above could create the larger amplitude areas as shown in red. I say this because the larger areas seem to lie underneath (from the maps perspective) of the bigger landmasses which would impede such a pulling force and collect waters in such areas as seen.
However I would also discount it on the basis we see the largest area of null amplitude at the very center of the map which wouldn't be the case if the waters where being dragged to a true north location such as a vortex. These waters bottlenecked at this point would have no where else to go so they would collect there and the amplitude would rise not lower.
In effect raising the tides there which is not what is shown by the evidence of zero tidal activity.
The clearest interpretation of the map and the data, indicates that an influencial force is pulling the waters in a clockwise direction and creating the build up areas (red) as seen on the flat convex earth map. This circular rotating influencial force also creates a deadzone at the center of the map as is seen in the purple area located there.
It also creates locations of zero tidal amplitude in the landlocked areas such as those shown as well. this can only be achieved from above and below of a flat plane. it cannot be created on a rounded surface be it ball shaped or even an inverted ball shape.
I am not proposing the fiction gravity is at work in any way shape or form in this example.
I consider the moon to be unsubstancial within our sky and therefore unqualified to be the driving force of this mechanism.
The force I refer to is of an electro magnetic nature which has power over water through its bipolar nature.
It is created by two localised suns located on either side of a flat plane, situated at mirrored points respectively.
Both exerting influencial force from above and below. The point at which these suns influencial forces intersect is the point where the pulling or pushing force is created. Similar to the effect we see in the use of magnets.
Again I state that I do not consider the moon to be a true entity within our earthly sky.
It is merely the image or a representation of the sun found in the sky on the reverse side of this flat plane. Our sun also creates a moon image or representation that is located in that upper sides sky using the exact same process.
This is my interpretation of the data of this thread but also generally from what I have been able to determine both in reality and also recently within extreme historical accounts.
I am as my name suggests here to learn, as I hope are most if not all of us.
So please if you have any evidence to suggest a tidal vortex is present at the poles or infact any tangible evidence that we live on a ball earth with poles, inverted or otherwise. I would be more than happy to consider and review anything you have that supports your claims.
I confess to not fully understanding concave earth theory.
My initial reaction is that it is ball earth but backwards. The Sky is in the middle, the place we call earth's layout is on the inside of the shell around it all. This is obviously a crude interpretation but basically it seems to imply that ball earth is real, but the reason it doesnt work in the real world is because its actually inside out.
If I am mistaken in this notion feel free to enlighten me.
Things that immediately come to mind to ask as they are the real world issues i found with ball earth overall are:
How do you account for the water levels being visually and evidencially flat?
Is there an account of water ever acting in a manner that denotes concavity?
Does this theory imply centrifugal force pushes everything to the inside of a curved surface?
If so how can you explain visually evidenced tides rising and falling if this outward force is happening?
How can you account for the ability of animals to fly if such forces are being applied to things on the inside of this ball?
How does this theory account for the inabillity to navigate the place we call Earth from north to south or from south to north?
how does this theory account for the mud flooding?
How could a biblical flood occur to a concave earth?
How does it explain the structures and locations submerged beneath lakes, rivers and seas?
How does it explain the unaccountable extra time the sun takes every year?
Where do appearing disappearing elements go and come from in the night sky if the entire sky is internalised?
How do you account for air travel flight paths inside of a concave earth?
I imagine a large proponent of such a theory is that reverse curvature is evidenced as opposed to the type implied in the outside of the ball theory. I am sure there is more evidence of things leaning in and thusly more evidence supporting this kind of curvature overall and especially over the other type. But over larger distances surely things such as laser tests establish flatness not curve either inwardly inclined or outwardly inclined?
I sincerely want to understand the place we live and I am desperate for evidence that will lead me to a true and clear interpretation.
Everything so far I have researched, tested or analysed implying ball earth has been unsubstantiated lies or built upon controller given notions. If concave earth holds answers that break this pattern i would be very grateful to recive them.
I look forward to your reply.
Kindest Regards.
