Inescapable Conclusions.
Many of us who call ourselves "red pilled" have seen many things, the logical conclusion from which we cannot accept.
Why is this?
"How can you tell if a politician is lying?"
"Their lips are moving"
Lips are moving -> lying... but, not our guy/girl.
If the earth is a ball, of such and such diameter,
and you can see things that are should be over the horizon,
then, the earth is not a ball of that diameter, or light doesn't travel in a straight line.
And since there are many images and sightings that are taken from "over the horizon", "beyond the curvature of the earth" then we have to throw out our theory that the earth is a ball of certain diameter.
- Pictures have been taken across a great lake.
- Pictures have been taken of islands that shouldn't be able to be seen.
- Sightings of light houses from more than 50 miles away.
- Every attempt to measure curvature has failed.
So we have to conclude that the earth is not a ball of the diameter NASA has told us. (or that light does not travel in straight lines)
But why, after being given this information do most people not believe their own eyes, and instead continue to believe a falsehood?
Are we afraid of being prehistoric idiots who believed the world was flat?
Are we afraid to throw off the shackles of false indoctrination?
Are we afraid of being called kooks?
The only way something falls at free fall speeds is that nothing but air is in the way.
The twin towers fell at free fall speeds.
Thus, the lower sections of the tower were removed (somehow) before the top of the building got there.
Even the slightest resistance in falling creates at least 3x longer fall speeds.
This conclusion is air tight. Its physics.
So, why will people just ignore this? Why will they go to any lengths, usually changing the subject to some other "conspiracy theory" and never acknowledge this conclusion?
Is it because this conclusion leads to a group of people purposefully blowing up a building, with people in it? The ramifications of which are unsettling to say the least.
Currently the govern-cements of the world are moving towards tyranny, however, we are polite in our dealings with govern-cement officials. We get our "drivers license" and we show it whenever asked to a uniformed person.
"Ver are yo papars?" - stereotypical German Officer.
We all know what is going down.
But, we also know that if we are the nail that sticks up, we get pounded.
And our life is ok... the tax man only takes half of what we make.
Inescapable conclusions.
We had a known murderer, uranium dealer, child trafficker and possible pedophile run for the highest office in The US. Still more than 50% of those who voted, voted for her. And further, most of those people believe the 0.000001% chance that Hitlery is innocent. At least, their is a chance they could be correct.
Obomba-Bushy-Billy-Ol'Bush... all lied to us. But, we still believe in "our" party.
We'll repeal Obomba-un-care, you just have to elect us. This time for sure. If you elect us one more time we will surely dismantle it...
Inescapable conclusions.
Those of us who know, and have accepted these conclusions live in a strange world.
Where zombies run around shouting Hail Obomba, or MAGA. And the sheep all believe if they just work til 65, if they just elect the right person, if they break no laws, then everything will be all right.
So, you live your life as honestly as you can. Knowing, every minute, that this life is an illusion.
And, hopefully enough people will awaken to the illusion and step away from it.
I do enjoy reading your posts, even when I squirm at some of your conclusions. I agree with most of them, and this (along with a healthy dose of humility, which I find appropriate) enables me to enjoy them immensely.
I'll not comment on the points you make here that I agree with, and just state my thoughts regarding one I seem to not find quite so acceptable.
You point out that there is a dichotomy between the Earth being relatively spherical and images sometimes being able to be taken of things over the horizon. You point out that either the Earth isn't shaped as we are told, or that light must not travel in perfectly straight lines. However, there are known caveats regarding light's paths, and also that you can test for yourself the shape of the Earth, rather than simply basing your understanding on the statements of others.
These caveats include light passing through matter of various types, and being subject to other forces. It is known that light is affected by gravity, for example, and this is why black holes are posited to exist. It is also known - and you can also test this for yourself - that light passing through different materials is subjected to various factors which change it's path. In air or water, and other relatively transparent materials, it is known to refract and be bent. This explains why sometimes we can see things over the horizon.
Eratosthenes used simple geometry to measure the circumference of the Earth thousands of years ago, and the ability to do so is equally yours today. Whatever the latitude you are told you are at determines the shadow from a sundial. You can calculate this yourself, verify the equations yourself, and determine the applicability of the mechanism based on your own interpretation of cosmological and mathematical standards. If you have some disagreements with the math, I'd be eager to be apprised of them, as I am always interested in novel ideas.
You can then simply travel to a different latitude, and perform the same experiment, and do the calculations to ascertain whether the reported shape and size of Earth is as reported, or otherwise. This is not hard. Sooner or later you will need a vacation anyway, so why not do it?
I myself find the Flat Earth controversy most likely to be a psyop, intended to divert folks aware of other lies from attending to more salient matters. I am sure you do not want to have your ability to effect your freedom decreased by being frittered away on psyops, rather than actual harmful schemes and thuggery you could profit yourself and your community by opposing. I know the Earth is rounder than flat due to my travels, and this includes as a fisherman on a boat, dependent on navigating for my very life and livelihood. Had I been substantially incorrect in my understanding of latitude and longitude I would have certainly been very confused about my location on most every long trip I made in Alaskan waters. I also would have been completely snoggered by my trip from Alaska to Paris, France, where the location of the sun and time zones matched the official theory about the shape of the Earth quite well.
Lemme know if this impacts your considerations of the matter, if you feel so inclined.
Thanks!
So much of our cosmology is based on light travelling in fairly straight lines. If light curves on earth because of gravity, that has implications that are huge, astronomy shattering stuff.
Yes, there are all kinds of other possible explanations, however, right now people are denying that things can be seen and photographed that are supposed to be over the curvature of the earth.
One of the most recent, and that should be joy for all amateur physicists is that with a modern infrared camera and big zoom lens, you can take pictures easily of things that are over, what should be the horizon. IR travels further in air then other light wave lengths. So, we should be seeing a lot of very long range photos appearing.
Now, is this "flat earth" thing a psyop?
The ball earth thing is definitely a psyop. There is a mountain of evidence that the people we rely upon for this information are liars. There is also a mountain of evidence that says they have lied about this.
However, if you were about to be found out, what better way to hide things then to state "the apparent opposite"?
My theories are along the lines of, The earth that we experience is two dimensional, as in flat, and that this "earth" is painted on the inside of a toroid like space-time enclosure.
Or, in other words, to describe the shape of the earth requires 6 dimensions.
And there are many experiments that seem to conclude that the earth is an enclosed space. There are also many ancient cultures who describe the earth as an egg / egg shell.
Right now, i am just watching for more data. Don't believe anyone.
Light does travel in straight lines, in a vacuum. GR does describe light being affected by mass. That has been understood since 1919.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity
I known you're referring to me, but the irony is that you are the one that implied repeatedly that such things are impossible to be photographed if the shape of the earth is what it is, and inferred from that that because they are photographed then either the shape isn't what it is or light bends. I on the other hand pointed out that light refracts, that even the position of the moon can have an effect on the ocean and that we don't have all the factors at hand to consider why or how it is possible.
These cameras have been in the hands of very capable and highly intelligent and qualified individuals for decades now. Why haven't any of them essentially blown the whistle on the psyop?
I wouldn't call photographs that don't come with any real facts and information as mountains of evidence. You though, are convinced that the conspiracy over the shape of the world is true. There is no denying that. You also think that numerous countries that put satellites into orbit all collude to lie to regular people about the most mundane thing, so that when people observed Sputnik it was the Russian and American governments colluding. The ISS is also a combined collision, with no one blowing the whistle. The irony is that the shape of the world was recognized by numerous people from across the world for thousands of years from simple observations and no conspiracy could be maintained to hide it, despite the church decapitating scientists like Galileo for saying otherwise, and it's still as obvious as the sun rotating around itself if you grab any telescope or even a pair of binoculars and a filter to observe the same sunspot configuration every 28 days, and we can see from the shadow the moon has that spherical objects in the sky is not anomalous, and then there are the other planets and almost 200 moons, and comets.
Yet you are convinced that the psyop is not the fe, and that we cannot even trust our own eyes as space is only an illusion.
https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/november-2012/how-to-make-a-neutrino-beam
With that you could determine the shape of the world, except if you believe that the way neutrinos work is also based on 6 dimensional earth.
I wish you could illustrate exactly what that means, how the sun, moon, constellations and the horizon work, but it seems that it defies any kind of illustration.
Posted using Partiko Android
Light does curve because of gravity, but it requires a large force. In terms of the earth gravity it doesn't bend light for us to be able to discern it, to us it would look like it's traveling in a straight line, but as you mentioned light is refracted and reflected and these things have been studied and can be studied but to discern exactly the extent of the force at any particular image/location requires very precise equipment to know the exact distance I imagine and it would only tell you about the mirage, not about the curvature. There are other simpler ways to figure out with a fairly accurate figure the radius or diameter of the earth, like you mentioned, and like it has been done.
Posted using Partiko Android
Excellent my understanding of the situation as well.
Posted using Partiko Android
So the very precise equations required to keep satellites in orbit, which depend entirely on the diameter of the earth, are based on what exactly? And out of the numerous studies on the diameter of the earth, that predated NASA by thousands of years and have been done by parties of scientists from about every corner of the world, all colluded to obscure or blatantly lie about a factor that is as important to everyday people as the speed of light, but which is as important and probably the most important to numerous professionals and their field of study, and they obscured or blatantly lied about this factor without any such professionals blowing the whistle and for no discernable objective than to lie?
The earth is most certainly spherical, or a ball as you crudely refer to it, and it's obvious from the horizon and lunar eclipse to anyone who has the ability to reason well. Light does travel in a straight line, and this is undisputed as numerous disciplines hold that factor as pivotal to their own area of study, just like the precise shape of the earth is pivotal to numerous disciplines. Light can bend because it is a particle, it can scatter and refract but it does not travel in a curve, like the path an object takes as it's launched into the air and it falls back down to the earth.
You say that "every attempt to measure curvature has failed". The only obvious reason for a "measurement to fail" is if it does not reproduce a supposed measurement that is theorized or if the equipment that is used to make the measurement is faulty or flawed.
The curvature from eye level is 160+ miles. So lighthouses 50 miles away are not something to contend at all, especially when lighthouses aren't a measly 6 feet tall.
Pictures being taken across a great lake with undisclosed distance from an undisclosed height is not revelation. Neither is the claim that "islands have been seen that should not be able to be seen". The number of factors that need to be considered are absent, such as the location of the moon, the exact distance and the elevation and the latitude. These factors are always absent seemingly. The fact that the earth is not a perfect sphere has been known for over a century. The Russians depended on that, as did the Americans to put satellites, dogs and even people into orbit, and this required a level of precision that any such blatant lie or obscured estimates would invalidate all efforts to orbit.
Being given information, like you have, is tantamount to swallowing without careful consideration fiction as fact, roundabout as precise and obscuring of the obscure as of interest to people who have nothing to gain and everything to lose from such lies. So what "red" pill when you are neither skeptical of such things or critical, you seemingly want people to conclude what you uncritically and unquestionably concluded for yourself and if not, you think you can assert that they "don't believe their own eyes" when there was never anything to do with observation and everything with beliefs you hold. Your beliefs are not observations. Your as critical of the things you supposedly "saw" as someone who swallows anything and everything they read that is counter to established facts, and why would you extend the same skepticism that you have of established facts, as you do of this utterly absurd conspiracy, you are red pilled, not.
Posted using Partiko Android
Yes, i have heard all of this before.
The distance seen from eye level, 6 feet tall, is only THREE miles
https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=3&h0=5&unit=imperial
The curvature is 8" * distance² (distance in miles)
At 50 miles, the lighthouse would have to be 1,500 feet tall to be seen.
And longer distances have been recorded.
So, if the light house is only a few hundred feet tall, and it is seen at over 50 miles away, then the earth is not a sphere of the stated size, or light doesn't travel in a straight line.
After that, we either have to say, we didn't see what we saw, or we start looking at all of other variables.
I am not here to argue about all the other points. All of that gets into conjecture. There is other people who have done a much better job of debunking all of the points you have brought up.
Now, if you would like to discuss theories, mine is that we live on the inside of a toroid like shape. That the earth is painted on the inside of the toroid.
That the earth that we see and know is flat. As in two dimensional. And this two dimensional (or even three dimensional, but you really get into weird maths) is painted onto a further 3 dimensional space time. So, from our perspective, everything is flat, but it is also curved and enclosed.
Future scientists will look back and... not laugh, their thoughts will be more of pity.
You are correct about the curvature but still discount numerous other observations that go into determining wherever an object should be visible or not. These measurements predate the United States, they certainly predate NASA, and these measurements are pivotal to keeping satellites in orbit. You don't want to go into conjecture but you offer a hare brain theory that posits we never explored the solar system with satellites. It's got no explanation of the spheres we can observe, the sun, and the moon so in it's hole ridden premise it has nothing to offer but a vast conspiracy.
Posted using Partiko Android
In the post, i do not offer a theory.
I merely state a fact.
That objects can be seen over what should be the edge of the horizon.
And there is enough of these photos/sightings to warrant investigation to any thinking person. I have seen enough of them to be looking for a new theory.
The measurements you were taught about in school... amazing how they dovetail with all of the other NASA theories. Did you know that there are other theories and measurements (in really old writings too) that do not coincide with what NASA says?
There are anomalies with the, so called, spheres that we can see.
We only have NASA to state that the moon is a sphere and that the earth is a sphere. No, really.
We see only one side of the moon.
And there are many other shapes that would be more accurate for showing the oddities we have seen of the moon.
The images from NASA of the earth are... not consistent. And many of them are confirmed photoshopped images.
Of satellites we again only have NASA to confirm that those "precise formulas" are what is used to place them ... wherever they place them.
Ever get out a telescope and locate one of them?
There are too many anomalies in the official story for me to believe them.
And, of course, my theory is really weird. But, it has a lot of proof, but only if you believe in, and know of the structure of auras.
There are scientists who believe that the toroid is the building block of the universe.
Facts have figures and specific factors that they consider. You merely state things, they could be fiction or fact.
How you think your theory has any proof when it cannot explain the horizon is ridiculous as fuck. You whine about nasa when the figures are from the world over and predate nasa and America. You say we hadn't seen the other side of the moon but Galileo observed the sun, in its 28 day revolution around it's axis and there are gigabytes of lunar imagery from the Clementine satellite, plus we can observe it is a sphere by the shadows of the craters and from lunar liberation. Your theory has no way to explain how we mapped dozens of moons, out if the almost 200 moons in our solar system, and gigabytes of imaging data from all the planets. How satellites are geostationary, or how the model of the earth being spherical predates Nasa by millenia. Why don't you post some pictures and offer all relevant data and prove that it's not possible and then offer an illustration of your theoretical model?
Posted using Partiko Android
I will offer illustrations, but as you have pointed out, you need a ton of evidence, an air tight case, reams of supporting data, and then... scientific type people might look at it, and not reject it out of hand.
So, i'm working on it.
Here is an image that is half a toroid, imagine completing the rest.
How can you explain that we have mapped the surface of mars, and in all of those images, there is a base there? You know, a square compound, with hangers and parking spaces laid out just like you would find in many of the army bases on earth.
When you look into any of these things, the anomalies just get weird.
Now, i do not believe that the sun is a huge, gravitational/fusion engine. The electric universe model makes far more sense in explain all kinds of things like the solar winds increasing speed as they get further from the sun.
And such, taking images of the sun are not showing a rotation but more like the plasma bubble of a plasma torch.
The sunspots were what Galileo used to record the 28 day revolution. The model does not explain the horizon. Why are objects, like the sun and moon, falling behind the horizon.. You can get a telescope, I have a very cheap one, and look at the lunar surface and observe the shadow to confirm that it's a sphere. All the images I've seen of the horizon from airplanes show curvature, and it's easy to verify with any paint program, the bulge always in the middle and it falls off on either side equally. Your model does not explain where the data came from, from satellites that have been independently verified by radio signals and from telescopes. You also cannot explain why lie about the most obscure thing in the world?
I didn't ask for airtight case, only for your own illustration of how an inside of a toroid creates a horizon.
BTW, the electric universe does not challenge the shape of these easily observable factors, such as the sun rotating and lunar liberation.
Posted using Partiko Android
BTW I have looked at the numerous anomalies in the mapping data. Have you seen the Clementine Project dragon? The shipwreck and the footage of the Russian astronauts exploring it? Then there are deep space anomalies. The whole fe is a cover for the hollow earth expanding earth, for which there is plenty of evidence to substantiate it, from the way earthquakes travel along the surface to the growth oceanic crust but no sign of it's subtraction, and it seems the moon might also be hollow. The best analogy I read was of Seeds in the book Myths and Deceptions of The Bible. None of that works in an enclosed toroid. None of that explains satellites or why have such a grand conspiracy that predates the United States. None of that explains the horizon, lunar eclipse, solar eclipse. None of that explains any of that, besides making allegations of the largest conspiracy over the most banal and obscure thing to everyday folk.
Watch the documentary Beyond Majestic, it explains in very simple terms exactly why bases exist. Even better, read anything you can get your hands on about and from Billy Meyer, there are about three documentaries that pretty much corroborate the stuff in Beyond Majestic, I can't recall the titles but one is The Silent Revolution and the latest one I saw was And Did They Listen.
You suggest "Above Majestic" and you believe NASA about what the shape of our world is, so much so that you use disparaging words against me?
Sorry, doesn't add up.
From my view, everything in our current science books is wrong, EVERYTHING! It is all one big, centuries old, psyop.
And you never question it because you don't ever see conflicting theories.
Congratulations @builderofcastles! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click here to view your Board
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPThere will be a day of truth I keep thinking and maybe this is the year. But not all the truth, this would forever scare many forever and ever. They could not believe that their fellow man could be so evil for so long.
It's not easy to prove anything on the internet, but it is possible to find unbiased evidence concerning the Earth's shape. I can't prove the shape of the earth by sitting here at the internet, but based on this one amateur video of a simple sunset-- made without the blessings of the priests of NASA-- I'm more liable to conclude that there is a curvature there, instead of a flat plane.
It is easier to do this with boats than with the sun. As the sun tends to peg the senors to the top.
So, we see the boat... sail over the horizon. It seems to disappear bottom first.
This is illusion because what we really see is the edges of things, and when the details start merging together, what we see is the hull of the boat and the sea becoming one.
However, we think we have seen the boat go over the edge, then we take out a zoom lens, and viola, we can see the entire boat again. If it went over the edge, then we should only see part of the boat.
Now, on ThemTube there is also a video that shows the sun shrinking as if it is just going further and further away.
This video was taken in Africa on a very dry, very clear day.
The videos of sun setting in the sea are very moist, very hazy (because of moisture in the air) days.
The sun getting bigger as it "sets" is an optical illusion because of this moisture.
But, anyway, this doesn't disprove, or say anything about my statement that things can be seen that are further then the curve of the earth would allow. We would have to be looking through the earth to see them.
Now, why we can see them needs to be determined.
It could very well be that light follows the curve of the earth.
I have seen the sunset videos wherein the sun seems to fade away along the horizon, but around the equator it drops straight down behind the curve without any such illusion. As for ships on the horizon, I have a decent lens on my own camera, but I can't personally test the ships 'setting' over the horizon because there's no ocean near me.
Speaking of lenses, there is atmospheric lensing, and the bending of light makes it difficult to know where any celestial bodies really are from down here on the surface. The atmosphere makes a lens, and depending on conditions, will bend light just like a giant spectacle.
Yep, and we really need to see some studies on that.
I know of stuff they do to account for up and down position shifts, but i haven't seen anything on the side-side effects.
We also have several, very distinct layers of atmosphere. It would be good to know what those things do to light rays.
https://www.pixalytics.com/sats-orbiting-earth-2017/
A vast conspiracy
...
Posted using Partiko Android
Truth is often stranger than the fiction we are used to, and then its mixed with even more radical fiction and fed to fanatical people in order to make it look way too over the top for anyone to believe.
It hurts to much to believe that everything in front of you is a lie.
I am equally skeptical to those who speak or business and usual and those who speak of this theory or that. All I know is that I want to make sure I'm doing as much as I can to bring love trust understanding freedom and passion and peace wherever I go.
Also....perhaps the Earth is both round and flat, depending on who is observing it :-D
This is one of the theories i am working with.
That the earth is completely flat... as in 2D
But this 2D earth is painted on the inside of a toroid / merkaba.
So, any tool that is in/on/off the "2D" earth will only measure the earth as flat.
This theory makes a lot more sense when you try to add in stuff from ancient literature that describe the earth as an egg. Further, all the stories of "hollow earth" or earth that is on the other side.
So, yes, depending on how you view it.
Have you, yourself, actually seen buildings 50 miles away?
There are many people on ThemTube who, using infrared cameras, are taking pictures of such continuously. (you used to have to wait for a very clear day) You can look them up if you wish to see.
Somehow I'm not convinced.
I'm going to guess you think this ship is sinking?
And you should not be convinced.
This data goes smack against everything you have been told your whole life.
Sooo... does light bend over the earth's surface, or is the earth a different shape than what we are told?
The other big clue, that EVERYONE notices, but few think about is that the horizon is always at eye level.
If we lived on a ball, if you got in a plane, the earth should be down. The higher you go, the more down the earth is. But, its not.
Another piece of this is, you cannot see the earths curve from a plane.
Mathematically, given a point on/above a sphere, the area that you can see is a defined as a circle. And that circles is all the same elevation from that point.
So, the curve of the earth you see in a plane is an optical illusion. (because your eyes, being circular lenses, makes circles out of everything)
But why is my computer screen rectangular?
Because your mind says its rectangular.
If you actually widen your eyes and look out of your periphery vision (on both sides at once) you will notice that wall curves down/up towards a vanishing point.
If you take photographs and put them in PS™ and then draw straight lines, you will notice that everything you thought was a straight line is actually curved. (except the horizon)
I'm not sure that has anything at all to do with objects that don't fill my entire field of vision (like the Sun and the Moon).
Right, and how do you explain the sinking ship?