Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,763 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

4,468 profile views
  1. Shame on you. Slander and poisoning the well of public opinion. I did not post in this thread until someone used my name in an offensive manner. Your second sentence is a lie. Please edit and retract it. Like Lear, I am far more sinned against than sinning. I apologize to DK for the intrusion. I had no intention of posting until I saw my name was dragged through the mud again. Some ct is better than other ct, it seems. A pity. There is only one ct. The individual ct-s combine to reveal the hand of the whole Mind Control Matrix. Very tiresome to see so many people pointing fingers and chasing real critical thinkers away. Specifically Rothbard, Jibby Jedi, Infinity. And threads attacking alternative science. Why? On a forum with conspiracy in its name?
  2. I appreciate the sign-ins to let everyone know who is still here. Han says he reads almost every day, have not heard from him in weeks, Rothbard popped in a few days ago. Jibby says he doesn't visit any more. Best guess is 10 regular FEers still on the board. I will update my file. In case any of you want to reach me outside the forum, and if the internet is down but e-mail is possible, try [email protected] Speaking of things going down, in both the real world and the digital one,
  3. I wondered if that was you. You were not that sarcastic, if memory serves. Don't go away again, please. Here is my dilemma. Your link is what I used to accept as factual. But does it prove the ionosphere -- or does it assume that a charged layer of ions exists? That radio waves are reflected back to earth is not disputed. And charged particles may indeed create a barrier for signals. I don't see how, since I've never seen a proper experiment showing the process under controlled conditions. HAS it been demonstrated in a lab? The main problem is that radio waves will work on both models. That leaves us where we always start, at the mercy of a Control System which owns Science, such as it is. I'm afraid this particular road is a dead end. My top reasons are more suitable for empirical evidence gathering. Water, visibility of targets at long distances, no observable motion, lack of stellar parallax, atmosphere adjacent to space vacuum. Have you seen my list of top ten reasons on the Nasa says thread? I rewrote it after you left. It's new and improved!
  4. Naming me again, in this thread????? Stalkers gonna stalk, jus' sayin' You drove all the others away. I'm the last one still standing.
  5. Finally, someone has presented an idea. No one has addressed my question about sea level, plainly affirming the flatness of oceans. It is asinine to claim that water curves around a ball because of gravity. Gravity is an effect, not a force. No one will argue against that simple proof. So another poster has joined the fray and actually put meat on the table to dig into. The FE thread did have a ham operator on for a while. He gave up. It is a thin rationale, unfortunately, to think that the upper atmosphere contains "ionized" particles that bounce radio signals to another part of the sphere. And how, pray tell, can we landlubbers verify that alleged zone called the ionosphere? It extends from about 30 miles, up to about 600 miles. 62 miles or so is supposed to be the Karman line, at which space begins and oxygen is almost nil. Again, the body scientific says they have lofted equipment to detect these things and we must accept their authority because they say so. Because they make the rules and we must abide by them. These same authorities also send disruptors to public discussion boards to attack any pesky voices that suggest that the official model is a fabrication, and that radio waves may bounce off something. So what am I saying is bouncing radio and other EM waves back to earth? A solid dome, which you Bible believers call the firmament. I see no way a ham operator can communicate with someone on the other side of the globe. The curve would require several bounces. This should be easy to visualize. I stand for correction. But I won't stand for abuse. Challenger, oops, I mean Jostler, if you want to make trouble, I will take you on and any other posters who accuse me falsely. I have mocked this thinly disguised smear campaign of FE, but I have attacked no one personally. @Malevolent, is it permitted for me to call someone disgusting and nasty? Just give an answer, because I have a fairly substantial vocabulary and only refrain from using it to abide by forum policy.
  6. Can I report a whole thread? for being boring? Sheesh, I see nothing worth raising hackles about. Friday night and THIS is the best forum fight going on? I guess I need to schlep over to glp and start some s**t. I ALWAYS get a rise out of the Nasa fan boys and shills there. My bad.
  7. That site is so great. Mucho ct. I will save it. Thankee.
  8. Sssweeet Great to see you back from your mental health break. Sometimes the flat world is too much with us. Not the world, the people who mess it up.
  9. Rothbard posted this on fefriends. Look at his comment, about the latest definition/explanation/fairy tale of what suns (stars) are made of: "Giant hydogren and helium nuclear fusion generators held together by gravity trillions of miles away .... yeah, right." His other video about the horizon may go into research. I will ask him to create a meme to expose the failure of astronomy to guesstimate distances to any celestial object. He simplifies triangulation as a method still used by astronomers. @Walk Softly, Zechariah Sitchin claimed that the Anunnaki came to earth for gold to repair their atmosphere. Sounds reasonable. ZS also linked Anunnaki leaders with pagan gods and events in the OT. Also reasonable. But not the totality of human experience. I am still exploring Gnostic texts, the ones that survived destruction by the Church, which also burned all but a handful of Mayan codices. Thereby, my distrust of the canon as many many books were redacted, rewritten, then passed down over centuries.
  10. Hildabeast is making nice nice with Catholics. She is as sincere as a used car salesman. As Snoopy says, bleah.
  11. Show me the door? As if! I'm wondering if you watched your own videos. What do you want me to refute? I feel like I'm in an Abbott and Costello skit. What? No, he's on first. Who?
  12. Who cares what you believe in? Or what I believe in? Flat Earth is not a belief. It is a theory, and science and logic should prove its form. Pick a point of debate. Any point. Examples: vanishing point of buildings across a body of water, the laws of physics that say that water always seeks its own level, that stars that can be photographed from earth cannot be parsecs away. Lots of points. Pick a point. No points, no point in clicking on the thread. Was I pointed enough?
  13. So give us the points in text. Videos are too hard to recall after the first viewing. Debates are carried out with words. So give me words, or give me text, or give me sentences written in plain English. Have you done that? Or just posted a video and told us to do all the work? Produce your proofs, please.
  14. CT can consume your free time. Not politics, though. I never worry about that when I get off the forum or watch the circus on tv. But I do lie awake at night sometimes thinking about what new alt-sci idea I ran across that day. Electric Universe (theory) is the way. I'm pretty sure of that. But even their top dogs must adhere to mainstream cosmology, which Copernicus proposed long ago. It's all connected. Advanced Beings have us trapped like rats here. Not rats. Hamsters. Ye Olde Hamster Cage. Sounds like an English tavern. Here is another ct to get into, Cinn -- Gnostic writings about the Pleroma and Creation. Jesus may have studied with them. I feel like all the puzzle pieces have been scattered around us. But some of the pieces have been stomped on, chewed up, burned, buried under false pieces.
  15. Hypothetical describes many scientific phenomena. Like the theory of gravity. Ha, Cinn just answered. Truth! We're heretics.
Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.