Jump to content
Sign Up To Remove Ads!


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies. Want this topic removed from the archive?


50-Point Case for the Flat Earth

Recommended Posts

 Rothbard    2,257





Exhibit 1 - No Visible Curvature


Exhibit 2 - No Photos of Earth from Space


Exhibit 3 - Water Seeks Its Own Level


Exhibit 4 - Airline and Submarine Pilots Do Not Account for Curvature


Exhibit 5 - Artillerymen, Naval Gunners, Air Traffic Controllers, Railroad and Industrial Engineers, Surveyors, et al. Do Not Account for Curvature


Exhibit 6 - The Cover-Up


Exhibit 7 - The Vacuum of Space Against the Atmosphere


Exhibit 8 - Fluid Dynamics vs. the Atmosphere Wheel


Exhibit 9 - No Worldwide Change of Stars When the Earth is at Opposite Sides of the Solar System


Exhibit 10 - No Change of Weight From the Equator to the North Pole


Exhibit 11 - Weather Patterns and Jet Streams Fit Perfectly on a Flat Earth


Exhibit 12 - International Space Station (ISS) Fakery


Exhibit 13 - The Space Shuttle Hoax


Exhibit 14 - No Complete Shift Between Night and Day When the Earth is on Opposite Sides of the Sun


Exhibit 15 - The Horizon Remains at Eye Level No Matter How High You Go Up


Exhibit 16 - Moonlight is Cold and Uniform


Exhibit 17 - Admiral Byrd


Exhibit 18 - The Lunar Wave


Exhibit 19 - Tides and the Moon


Exhibit 20 - Plane Flights Over the Southern Hemisphere


Exhibit 21 - The Sun is Not 93 Million Miles Away


Exhibit 22 - No Star Parallax


Exhibit 23 - The Selenelion (Horizontal Eclipse) Problem


Exhibit 24 - Airy's Failure


Exhibit 25 - Stars that are Light Years Away Should Not Be Visible by the Naked Eyes


Exhibit 26 - Discrepancies between the Northern and Southern "Hemispheres"; Other Equator Problems


Exhibit 27 - No Bulging of Oceans at the Equator


Exhibit 28 - Satellites are Fake; the Thermosphere is Too Hot to Support Satellites, ISS, and Hubble


Exhibit 29 - The Earth Does Not Spin; the Round-trip Airplane Model Would Produce Unequal Times on a Sphere Spinning 1,000 mph; Planes Could Not Land on a Spinning Ball at 1,000 mph; the Cannonball Test


Exhibit 30 - The Counter-Clockwise Rotating Moon (and Matching Sun)


Exhibit 31 - The Phases of the Moon Every 6 Months Do Not Evince Movement of the Earth around the Sun


Exhibit 32 - The Diverted Flat Earth Baby Flight and International Shipping Routes


Exhibit 33 - Various Clues:  the Illuminati Card Game, Gleason's 1892 Illuminati "New Standard Map of the Earth," and the United Nations Flag


Exhibit 34 - The Concentration of Sunlight


Exhibit 35 - Eclipses Prove that Mainstream Science is Wrong


Exhibit 36 - View of the Moon When it Should Be on the Other Side of the Earth


Exhibit 37 - No Movement of the North Star


Exhibit 38 - No Eclipses of Objects Other than the Moon


Exhibit 39 - Gyroscopes and Gyro Navigation would Not Work on a Spherical Earth


Exhibit 40 - The Coriolis Effect Proves the Flat Earth


Exhibit 41 - The Farce of Gravity


Exhibit 42 - NASA et al. FAKED the Moon Landings; Why Not the Shape of the Earth?


Exhibit 43 - The Compass Problem


Exhibit 44 - Captain Cook and The Old Explorers of Antarctica


Exhibit 45 - No G's for Our Astronauts; Impossible Video Stabilizers on Space Rockets


Exhibit 46 - The Sun and Moon are the Same Size


Exhibit 47 - Antarctica the Closed Continent


Exhibit 48 - Because Sound is Independent of the Earth's Alleged Spin, the Doppler Effect Proves a Flat Earth


Exhibit 49 - The Moon is Not 234,000 Miles Away


Exhibit 50 - No Sound or Feelings Associated with the Spin of the Earth




Questions and Answers



Other Relevant Threads on ConspiracyOutpost:



NASA says the Earth is Round.  Where's the proof?


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Introduction – A Time for Reconsideration

Like many others, I entered the flat Earth debate because I wanted to debunk what I considered an insane theory for the sake of my conspiracy-minded friends.  I was going to save legitimate flat earthers from a seemingly obvious government Psychological Operation (PSYOP) meant to forever discredit “conspiracy theorists” everywhere.  I truly believed that the leading flat earthers were likely government agents who wanted to discredit, by way of guilt by association, anyone who doubted the moon landings, 9-11, Sandy Hook, the Boston Bombing, vaccinations, etc.

I was mistaken.

From politicians to even “conspiracy theorists,” and across all political spectrums, nearly everyone derides flat earthers.  For example, Obama preached, “We don’t have time for a meeting of the Flat Earth Society,” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB9–MF0tx0); derogatorily referred to Republican candidates as people “who would have been founding members of the Flat Earth Society” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rsz3uLxTwQs); and then again made certain to tell us how much “scientific evidence” supports the spherical Earth (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-dXBsZzR24).

Shockingly, Neil deGrasse Tyson even said that influential flat earthers were dangerous to democracy and “harmful to the health, the wealth, and the security of our citizenry” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHBZkek8OSU).  He repeated the claim that flat earthers were “irresponsible” and “destabilizing the foundations of an informed democracy” as though flat earthers were terrorists (https://youtu.be/CuwjWZV8EA0?t=5m40s).

On the other side, you have “independent” Joe Rogan (a former moon landings skeptic) who now repeatedly makes fun of flat earthers “obsessing over nonsense,” conservative Alex Jones who referred to the flat Earth theory as “clearly ridiculous” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmOB36NuvDw).

We learned in Kindergarten (it’s a requirement) that Columbus discovered we live on a globe despite the fools who doubted him (is it coincidental that an official American holiday centers around the globe model).  Only crazy and dangerous imbeciles would ever consider the arguments of the flat Earth, right?  You can see boats disappear behind a curvature?  You can see the curvature from an airplane or high mountain?  Boats would fall off the edge of the Earth, right?  And all of those photos of the Earth, how can anyone doubt the globe, NASA, and all of the other “official” space agencies?

That’s where I began – to expose once and for all the silliness and supposed PSYOP origins of the flat earth movement.  I continually researched, considered, pondered, and somewhat hoped to uncover the falsehoods of the flat earth movement.  After several months and dozens of hours later, it didn’t happen; instead, I found many valid arguments in favor of the flat Earth – arguments that were NOT being answered effectively by mainstream science – in fact, I and many others were severely ridiculed for even asking questions.  Since when is asking questions considered “stupid”?  Since when does “science” need to threaten doubters at terrorists who threaten the security of democracy?

After over a year of incessant investigation, I believe the evidence supporting the flat Earth is far more compelling and clearly exceeds the evidence supporting a spinning-vortexing-wobbling ball Earth zooming at 2 million mph chasing after the Sun as it speeds across the universe.  As you will see, the evidence in support of a globe Earth is mostly scant, intellectually vacuous, refutable, and often based on little more than name calling and “scientific” conformity.

This is not easy but I am asking you, as a reasonable thinking person to consider the following 50 arguments in favor of the flat Earth theory.  For a quick visual of how the flat Earth model works, please watch this short video from Rob Skiba: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R52_PdZlSq8.

I fully understand how ridiculous it sounds to you.  Indeed, for someone to say that the Earth is flat sounds so awful that it may even shock you to your core as though someone attacked one of your most cherished beliefs.  But ask yourself, why is it so offensive?  Logically, it shouldn’t be offensive at all but society has made it extremely taboo, why?  Why has the globe been equated with intelligence and been thrown in your face in thousands of television shows and movies?  Why does astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson and others equate influential flat earthers with terrorists instead of just using it as an opportunity to let everyone scientifically prove our underlying cosmos?  You should ponder these questions.

If I am wrong, and I could be, at the very least you’ll gain a much better understanding of how the world works as you logically defend the “official” model.  But don’t let years of conditioning since you were a child prevent you from allowing scientific inquiry; true science would always welcome such questions but mainstream “science” has devolved into something similar to strict religious conformity that makes no allowance for independent thought or questioning.

I have no stake in this investigation other than the truth.  Being new in very recent history, the flat Earth theory doesn’t have an answer for every question but if we all work together we may be able to create a true model of the Earth.  If I am wrong, then I would appreciate well-reasoned counter arguments instead of irrelevant Wikipedia talking points or just pathetic name-calling.  There isn’t a legitimate flat earther out there who wouldn’t welcome being proven wrong because the implications of control and widespread ignorance are so frightening.  As for me, I believe it is more likely than not that we live on a flat Earth and so I now refer to myself as a flat earther.  If you can, please prove me wrong and pull me out of this rabbit hole.

“He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.”

– Proverbs 18:13

Flat Earth Overview

Before progressing into the 50 exhibits proving the flat Earth, I recommend you watch all of the videos below as an overview.  These videos will provide a good understanding of many arguments and counter-arguments underlying the flat Earth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNVvRxQWb6g (martyleeds33)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp_awTGVRRw (Dave Murphy)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=debcXgOi0T0 (ODD Reality)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1DQSBI42Eg (ODD Reality)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBuPiVzQLxo (ODD Reality)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGx1zs0k4qw (Globe Skeptic – An Engineer’s Struggle with the Flat Earth)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuBVCmC0ACM (Dave Murphy)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BjRYBDAfYA (My Perspective – Part 1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5u9SIGMnMxA (My Perspective – Part 2)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZlS5SG8pDw (My Perspective – Part 3)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5i_iDyUTCg (Eric Dubay – 200 Proofs)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdxgIyEPCxk (Scrawny2Brawny)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDaiw-G1VGE (P-Brane)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YQ0dMJEjsk (WaykiWayki)

“The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either coordinate system could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, ‘the sun is at rest and the earth moves,’ or ‘the sun moves and the earth is at rest,’ would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different coordinate systems.”

– Albert Einstein, The Evolution of Physics, p.212 (p.248 in original 1938 ed.)

“In whatever way or manner may have occurred this business, I must still say that I curse this modern theory of Cosmogony, and hope that perchance there may appear, in due time, some young scientist or genius, who will pick up courage enough to upset this universally disseminated delirium of lunatics.”

– Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

“In the Middle Ages people believed that the earth was flat, for which they had at least the evidence of their senses: we believe it to be round, not because as many as 1 percent of us could give physical reasons for so quaint a belief, but because modern science has convinced us that nothing that is obvious is true, and that everything that is magical, improbable, extraordinary, gigantic, microscopic, heartless, or outrageous is scientific.”

– George Bernard Shaw

“Earth is a realm, it is not a planet. It is not an object, therefore, it has no edge. Earth would be more easily defined as a system environment. Earth is also a machine, it is a Tesla coil. The sun and moon are powered wirelessly with the electromagnetic field (the Aether). This field also suspends the celestial spheres with electo-magnetic levitation. Electromag levitation disproves gravity because the only force you need to counter is the electromagnetic force, not gravity. The stars are attached to the FIRMAMENT.”

– Nikola Tesla

“While I was thinking of this problem in my student years, I came to know the strange result of Michelson’s experiment. Soon I came to the conclusion that our idea about the motion of the Earth with respect to the ether is incorrect, if we admit Michelson’s null result as a fact. This was the first path which led me to the special theory of relativity. Since then I have come to believe that the motion of the Earth cannot be detected by any optical experiment, though the Earth is revolving around the Sun.”

– Albert Einstein, “How I Created the Theory of Relativity?” http://inpac.ucsd.edu/students/courses/winter2012/physics2d/einsteinonrelativity.pdf

“The theory of relativity is a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense … The theory, wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists. Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved.”

– Nikola Tesla

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Exhibit 1 - No Visible Curvature

The fact that the curvature has not been witnessed by anyone but NASA and other space agencies is one of the strongest pieces of evidence in support of the flat Earth and it has not been debunked by anyone.  As I have done, you can test this evidence yourself with an ultra-zoom digital camera which makes this evidence very dangerous to the official story.

What astounds nearly everyone is how much drop in curvature there is based on the “official” dimensions of the alleged globe Earth and how this curvature should be EASILY detectable not only by instruments but also by just everyday life.  Based on the “official” dimension of the globe, at just 10 miles of distance, you should have a 66-foot drop in curvature, i.e., 66 feet should be hidden from view (taking into consideration the average eye height of a male at 5 feet 7 inches the observable drop from eye height is 33 feet).  At 100 miles away, there should be an amazing 6,666-foot drop in curvature, i.e., 1.26 miles should be hidden from view.  These calculations are 100% correct and have been affirmed through computer drafting software.

Did you witness a hump of earth 755 miles tall (or 3,985,350 feet) when you took that flight or drove from Los Angeles to New York (distance of 2,445 miles)?  Did you witness a sloping tall mountain of 6,666 feet when you recently drove just 100 miles or did the world seem flat to you (excluding mountains, hills, valleys, etc.)?

The telescopic measurements reach the same conclusion – there’s absolutely no detectable spherical Earth curvature.  Furthermore, no one ever taught you the Earth’s curvature math at school or college, why?  Every engineer, surveyor, mathematician, artillerymen, and astronomer should have a thorough understanding of the curvature and cite exactly how much curvature there is per mile and be able to demonstrate it through simple experimentation and measurement, but no one does, why?

If you’re new to the flat Earth and are still skeptical (and you should be), you may argue that you have seen boats disappear over the curvature or that you saw the curvature from an airplane.  However, these common knee-jerk responses you heard in school are provably wrong.  First, you can bring the boats, hull and all, back into view with a powerful telescope.  The boats are usually disappearing behind the atmosphere (sometimes waves), not a curvature, and the video proof is compelling.

For example, here’s a cargo ship, only visible by a telescope, that should have disappeared behind the curvature long ago but instead became obscured behind the atmosphere: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awCx5ob04ZY. Here’s a video from wide awake that again shows a boat disappear behind the atmosphere – not a curvature:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbAGhXyf_a0 Perspective also plays a vital role in understanding how ships disappear at a distance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pjm_oeN5j1g.  The fact that boats disappear behind the atmosphere (not the curvature) also explains why objects cannot be viewed across extreme distances on a flat Earth with a powerful telescope (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63bK7AnWNWw).  In short, MANY objects that should be hidden sometimes behind thousands of feet of curvature are clearly visible with an ultra-zoom camera and the official excuses of refraction and looming are insufficient explanations.  Here’s a great compilation by Cofo72 of many boats that should be below the curvature but aren’t:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOb5V-ha8bc

Second, in addition to there being no measurable curvature at the ground, there is no curvature at an altitude of at least 121,000 feet as proven via video of weather balloons and others.  For example, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQITXbcz2hg (121,000 feet), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja94eRVLWEM&feature=youtu.be, or even 470,000 feet (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqzQMr1ijYE).  Thus, you did not see a curvature in an airplane at 30,000 feet and very likely witnessed an optical illusion caused by a curved window.  Besides NASA and other space agencies, what about all of those photos and videos showing a curvature of the Earth from parachutists, airplanes, weather balloons, etc.?  All of those photos and videos of the supposed Earth’s curvature were filmed with fish-eye or wide-angle lenses, like the GoPro, which created a false curvature effect.  This isn’t a theory because you can easily witness the distortion as the alleged curvature alters between convex and concave during the Felix Baumgartner jump or any other GoPro footage.

How do you calculate the curvature of the Earth?  The distance below the curvature (how much of the object should be hidden behind the Earth) is calculated by squaring the distance to the object in miles and multiplying the answer by 8 inches: “To find the curvature in any number of miles not given in the table, simply square the number, multiply that by 8, and divide by 12.”  Remember, this is trigonometric math based on the “official” globe model dimensions.  This is easy math that every child should know.  We all learned that E=mc2 (which is never used) but we never learned how quickly objects dip below the curvature – simple math that can be demonstrated and proven across schools everywhere.

As shown below, after the first few miles, the curvature becomes so great that there should be no difficulty in detecting it.  This can be tested on land as well as you can see mountains in the far distance that should be substantially below the curvature but never are (as seen in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPgYTP7tf74). This curvature chart is proven accurate but it is IGNORED by everyone.  At just 10 miles away, easily visible with binoculars, you should see a visible 66-foot drop in the horizon, but you don’t see it.

Curvature Table

Miles Away                          Math                                                  = Drop (Hidden From View)

1                                           1 x 1 x 8                                              = 8 Inches

2                                           2 x 2 x 8                                              = 32 Inches

3                                           3 x 3 x 8 / 12                                       = 6 Feet

4                                           4 x 4 x 8 / 12                                       = 10 Feet

5                                            5 x 5 x 8 / 12                                       = 16 Feet

6                                            6 x 6 x 8 / 12                                       = 24 Feet

7                                            7 x 7 x 8 / 12                                       = 32 Feet

8                                            8 x 8 x 8 / 12                                       = 42 Feet

9                                            9 x 9 x 8 / 12                                       = 54 Feet

10                                          10 x 10 x 8 / 12                                   = 66 Feet

20                                          20 x 20 x 8 / 12                                   = 266 Feet

40                                          40 x 40 x 8 / 12                                   = 1,066 Feet

60                                          60 x 60 x 8 / 12                                   = 2,400 Feet

80                                          80 x 80 x 8 / 12                                   = 4,266 Feet

100                                        100 x 100 x 8 / 12                               = 6,666 Feet

120                                        120 x 120 x 8 / 12                               = 9,600 Feet

Curvature calculator:   https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/

This is an AutoCAD version of the Earth’s curvature (proving the above math is correct):  http://flatearthfiles.com/index.php/file/4-earth-curvature-autocad-chart-with-excel-formula

The version created by Dr. Zack also via AutoCAD:  https://s32.postimg.org/mofd3p5px/Curvature_Chart_By_Dr_Zack.png

In the following video, Oahu is visible from Kauai – approximately 100 miles away.  Based on the spherical model, 4,559 feet of Oahu should be hidden below the curvature.  The highest point on Oahu is 4,003 feet but the whole island is clearly visible in the photograph.

Here’s amazing footage of different islands off the coast of Wellington Harbor in New Zealand.  Many of the islands should be ENTIRELY below the curvature but aren’t.

From islands, buildings, mountains, to lighthouses, there are many examples of objects that should be below the curvature from the observer’s point of view but are clearly visible.

A great video from bmisb69 who methodically shows two more islands off the coast of California that should be well below the curvature.

Very often globe theorists counter the curvature argument with videos and photographs showing the bottoms of buildings and ships disappear behind an alleged curvature.  These theorists ignore the fact that angular resolution causes the zoomed-in waves at the convergence point to often obscure the bottoms of boats and buildings.  To prove this angular resolution effect, this gentleman showed the effect on distances where there should be little curvature.

For more information regarding angular resolution, please watch these two videos from Curious Life of a Flat Earther:

Beginning at 10:16, Jeranism provides a few examples of how boats do not disappear behind the curvature.

In the next video, a weatherman accounts for a photograph of the Chicago Skyline from Michigan as a “Mirage.”  Ridiculous!

Footage from Felix Baumgartner GoPro:  Red Bull Stratos jump (watch for the flat horizon images in comparison to the fish eye lenses).

Another video from Jeranism showing video evidence of Toronto without a curvature (begin at 37:40):

Rob Skiba shows that there is no curvature at even 130,000 feet.

Many examples of objects that are visible but should be far below the purported curvature.

Start at 8:36 to see other examples of objects that should be below the curvature.

The following video was created to DEBUNK the flat Earth; instead, Reds Rhetoric again proved that ships disappear behind the atmosphere, not a curvature (watch at 2:40 to see the sail disappearing behind the atmosphere).  Waves and swells can make hulls disappear on boats as closer waves that are zoomed-in can obscure the now tiny boat further away.  Globalists use this to their advantage in various videos but you must move beyond the globalist videos and watch all of the videos here to make your own determination.

At 12 miles out, the ship in the next video should have disappeared behind the horizon but it is still visible.  Waves do begin obscuring the bottom portion of the boat as it get further away (the waves closer to the photographer become bigger in relation to the size of the boat) but the entire boat should have disappeared.

Here’s a video from the Air Force that shows a flat horizon at supposedly 317,000 feet.  I don’t believe it went that high but the claim and the footage is extraordinary.

Here’s a video of a letter written from a truck driver that describes his experience and belief that he has never seen a curvature of 750+ miles between Los Angeles and New York.

This is a major proof by an air traffic controller.  Air traffic controllers can monitor airplanes from the one airport’s radar as far away as 350 miles away until the planes have even landed.

Perspective plays an interesting role in the investigation of the alleged flat Earth.  Watch these videos (most importantly watch the very short 3rd video down from Cofo72 “FLAT EARTH PIECES – 16 SECONDS” – you can see for yourself that the horizon line comes closer as the camera zooms outward, i.e., the horizon line depends on magnification of the zoom):

Under the globe model, radio towers, which operate under direct lines of sight, would have to impossibly transmit through hundreds of feet of Earth (watch at 9:56).

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Exhibit 2 - No Photos of Earth from Space

One of the primary but programmed rebuttals to the flat Earth is the claim that there are hundreds of photographs of Earth from space.  However, the allegation is provably wrong – there are no legitimate photographs of the Earth from space.  This was very surprising to me, and I scoffed initially, but the evidence is clear.

Did you know that NASA admits that all of the photographs from 1972 to 2012 were faked to meet “people’s expectations”?

All of us have seen dozens of photographs of the Earth from space, right?  Unfortunately, each of those “official” photographs is provably false. 

Do a quick Google search for “photographs of the Earth from space” with a critical eye and see the deception for yourself.  All of the alleged photographs of the Earth were made by CGI, paintings, and composite aircraft photographs – nothing more.  In other words, you were deliberately deceived.  Why the deception?  NASA has even admitted that nearly all of its photographs of the Earth were fake and based on “people’s expectations.”  Again, this was shocking to me – I thought there were hundreds of legitimate photographs of the Earth, but there aren’t and the ones that are “official” have unmistakable errors (e.g., repeating cloud patterns, changing land mass sizes, clouds that span the entire diameter of the Earth, the word “SEX” spelled out by the clouds, etc.).

The most famous photograph of the Earth (“The Blue Marble”) was allegedly taken in 1972 by Apollo 17 during the obviously faked moon landings and so that photograph must also be fake.  All of the remaining pictures are admitted paintings and artist CGI renditions.  In addition, many alleged time-lapse videos of the Earth’s rotation have failed to show morphing clouds as the Earth rotated, an unequivocal impossibility.  However, CGI is getting better and morphing clouds have been recently included by an alleged Japanese satellite but the video still seems to have distinct errors and may be nothing more than weather radar superimposed on a spherical picture of the Earth.  Also, if NASA and other space agencies lied continually for the past 50 years, why should we now believe them?

In the following video and article, NASA’s Robert Simmon (aka Mr. Blue Marble) admitted in 2012 that NASA’s photographs of the whole Earth from space (from 1972 to 2012) were fake and based on “people’s expectations”:

“The last time anyone took a photograph from above low Earth orbit that showed an entire hemisphere (one side of a globe) was in 1972 during Apollo 17 …. Then we wrapped the flat map around a ball.  My part was integrating the surface, clouds, and oceans to match people’s expectations of how Earth looks from space.  That ball became the famous Blue Marble.”

– NASA’s Robert Simmon, http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/about/people/RSimmon.html

This isn’t a conspiracy theory – NASA admitted on its own website that it FAKED its photographs of the Earth to match your mistaken beliefs.  That is how propaganda works, NOT science.  A reasonable person should ask, “Why does NASA and other “official” space agencies have to fake anything when there are supposedly thousands of satellites in space that are far enough away to take a picture of the entire Earth?”

Here's another admission from NASA that it has only used CGI in the "past."

If you really want to know what utter nonsense NASA tries to pass as real footage, watch the recent alleged video of the moon crossing the Earth.  According to NASA:  “This animation features actual satellite images of the far side of the moon, illuminated by the sun, as it crosses between the DSCOVR spacecraft’s Earth Polychromatic Imaging Camera (EPIC) and telescope, and the Earth – one million miles away.”  Try not to laugh because this “real” satellite footage is painfully fake as the CGI Moon fails to rotate, cast a shadow, is the wrong brightness allegedly being directly in the sunlight, etc.

On Apollo 11, the crew, which was supposed to be approaching the Moon, plainly attempted to fake a picture of the Earth (with a cloud that spans the entire diameter of the Earth) by using the circular window of their high-flying craft just above the Earth to frame a circular Earth.  If Apollo 11 faked this and man did not go to the Moon (as proven by many points of evidence- http://tabooconspiracy.com/blog/moon-landing-hoax/), why would you believe the Apollo 17 “The Blue Marble” photograph is real?

One hyper-realist artist, Mathew Boylan (aka Math Powerland), has come forward and fairly convincingly said that he was a freelance hyper-realist artist for NASA and painted “photos” of distant planets, etc. that were used by NASA as “real” photographs and that the cartoon blue of the oceans of the Earth is an impossibility.  His sole testimony would not be of substantial value except for the fact that Boylan’s claim only confirms NASA’s admission above that the photographs were faked.  In addition, Boylan claimed that upper-level NASA employees told him at a party that the Earth was flat.  Here’s Mathew Boylan’s interview as an alleged NASA insider followed by a subsequent comedy routine.

Rob Skiba takes a look at some of NASA’s fake photographs.

NASA’s recent “real” photo of the Earth includes the word “SEX” in the clouds (watch at 0:50).

More fake photos of the Earth (watch at 11:45).

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Exhibit 3 - Water Seeks Its Own Level

The natural physics of water is to be level; even a small child can prove the same – “Water seeks its own level.”  However, mainstream science wants you to ignore your experience and experimentation and instead believe that an invisible force, which cannot be replicated, detected, or proven in a lab, is responsible for bending oceans, lakes, and rivers and has created uniform spherical bulges in water measuring thousands of miles deep.  When I first heard about the flat Earth, I assumed that gravity was well-proven in a lab since science says that gravity constitutes the driving force behind the formation of the universe.  I was shocked to find out that gravity has never been proven and remains an unsubstantiated theory.  Gravity is a farce that was created ex nihilo to only explain why we’re not flung from a ball spinning at 1,000 mph.  Have you ever seen gravity bend water?

“The surface of all water, when not agitated by natural causes, such as winds, tides, earthquakes, etc., is perfectly level.  The sense of sight proves this to every unprejudiced and reasonable mind.  Can any so-called scientist, who teaches that the earth is a whirling globe, take a heap of liquid water, whirl it round, and so make rotundity?  He cannot.  Therefore it is utterly impossible to prove that an ocean is a whirling rotund section of a globular earth, rushing through ‘space’ at the lying-given-rate of false philosophers.”

– William Thomas Wiseman, “The Earth An Irregular Plane.”

Under the globe model, as a result of gravity, EVERY body of water, even small basins (although too small to measure), must be curved and match the appropriate curvature drop of the Earth.

Samuel Rowbotham wrote in “Zetetic Astronomy – Earth Not a Globe, “If the earth is a globe, and is 25,000 English statute miles in circumference, the surface of all standing water must have a certain degree of convexity – every part must be an arc of a circle.”  http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/.

Beginning in 1838, Samuel Rowbotham began a series of experiments on the Old Bedford River at the Bedford Level in Norfolk, England at a distance of 6 miles.

Essentially, Rowbotham marked a sign on a bridge and then traveled on a small boat down the river with a telescope affixed to the base of the boat at precisely 18 inches.  He wrote, “As the boat receded the noticeboard was kept in view, and was plainly visible to the naked eye for several miles; but, through the telescope it was distinctly seen throughout the whole distance of six miles.”  He then even lowered the telescope to 8 inches and still the sign was visible.  At an observational height of 8 inches, and the board being 6 miles away, there should have been a curvature drop of 16 feet 8 inches (i.e., the sign should have been completely hidden below the curvature).  However, there was no measurable curvature as the sign was clearly visible.

The curvature math can be worked out here:  https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/

Rowbotham repeated the experiment in 1844, 1849, 1856, 1862, and 1870 (after the “official” faked test) – all with the same result – no curvature.  Of course, “official” science claimed that Rowbotham was wrong and the experiment was a failure and so propagandists created a fake experiment with a maladjusted instrument in 1870 that resulted in failure.  But we don’t have to take anyone’s word for it.  To prove Rowbotham, we ourselves conducted our own test at 6 miles across a body of water to replicate the findings of Rowbotham and recorded the whole thing.

Here’s a video from Taboo Conspiracy proving Rowbotham:

Unequivocally, there was no curvature on the body of water as required by “official” science; ergo, the Earth is flat.

Some have countered by claiming that the flatness of the water is the result of refraction; however, “[r]efraction can only exist when the medium surrounding the observer is different to that in which the object is placed … Being surrounded with atmospheric air only, and the observer being in the same medium, there is no bending or refraction of the eye line.”  Rowbotham, Zetetic Astronomy.  In most circumstances, refraction will not play a noticeable role as there is usually no measurable change in conditions (e.g., temperature, air pressure, moisture, etc.) between the two opposing points.  Further, refraction, if it should have a noticeable impact, most certainly would not create the illusion that the Earth is flat but would instead produce a result similar to a Fata Morgana which looks like a distorted mirror with upside down images – not a clear visible flat horizon as shown in the video above.

Long rivers pose a problem under the globe model as the rivers eventually have to flow up the curvature.  According to Eric Dubay’s “200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball” (http://www.mediafire.com/view/l679prcg097ny8u/200_Proofs_Earth_is_Not_a_Spinning_Ball%21.pdf): 

“Rivers run down to sea-level finding the easiest course, North, South, East, West and all other intermediary directions over the Earth at the same time. If Earth were truly a spinning ball then many of these rivers would be impossibly flowing uphill, for example the Mississippi in its 3000 miles would have to ascend 11 miles before reaching the Gulf of Mexico …. One portion of the Nile River flows for a thousand miles with a fall of only one foot. Parts of the West African Congo, according to the supposed inclination and movement of the ball-Earth, would be sometimes running uphill and sometimes down. This would also be the case for the Parana, Paraguay and other long rivers.”

Another proof of the flatness of water is the fact that under the sphere model, the bed of the ocean should be considerably less than the distance at the surface.  Nevertheless, cables laid at the bottoms of the ocean, considering changes in terrain, etc., equal the distance at the surface.  This shouldn’t happen.

Watch this short clip from Dave Murphy beginning at 5:36:

More explanation regarding the water issue from Vince Bryant.

In the next video, Yoda, among other good arguments, points out that water on a sphere is impossible (start at 2:23).

Here, Know the Truth shows how water in a lake forms a level plane and has no curvature.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Exhibit 4 - Airline and Submarine Pilots Do Not Account for Curvature

If the Earth were a sphere, airplane pilots would have to constantly correct their altitudes by dipping their nose downward to account for the curvature of the Earth.  At a normal cruising speed of 500 mph, a commercial airplane pilot would would have to repeatedly dip the nose of the plane downwards and descend 2,777 feet every minute (approximately 50 feet per second) or the plane would quickly fly into space.  Airplane pilots never perform this action.

Gravity doesn’t solve this problem because gravity could supposedly pull the entire plane down but could not pull the nose downward more than the rest of the plane.  So, even if gravity could somehow keep the plane at the same altitude around a spinning ball, the nose of the plane would eventually be pointing towards space.  The lack of curvature can be tested yourself – get on a small airplane and level it out in the air and pay no attention to the horizon as you just maintain that exact same angle of flight.  After about 45 minutes, if the spherical model is correct you should have to make a correction of nearly 6,000 feet to return to the same altitude; instead you will remain perfectly level with the ground.

Submarine captains say the same thing – they make the submarine level and maintain that angle for hundreds if not thousands of miles and never accidentally launch out of the ocean due to a failure to consider curvature.

As shown in the video below, at a distance of 200 miles (only 30 minutes of flight) a jet would be 5.1 miles higher than when it started if the jet flew level.  Could you imagine how difficult it would be to keep nudging the nose downward when you’re just a few dozen feet over the surface.  How does gravity account for this when the aircraft are at widely varying heights and speeds?

This next video is popular on YouTube and details an airline pilot’s experience with seeing objects that should be well beyond the curvature and other facts supporting a flat Earth (start at 4:29 to skip the boring introduction).

Here, a flight instructor confirmed that he flies over a flat Earth (the interview starts at 11:40; at 31:00 the pilot says that even flying distances of up to 300 miles that nothing changes with respect to an alleged curvature).

An experienced retired NAVY submarine Chief confirmed that no curvature is taken into account as he helps pilot submarines over hundreds of miles at flat levels below the ocean (at 10:45, the submarine Chief confirmed the same via an introductory letter; the interview starts roughly at 11:15).

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Exhibit 5 - Artillerymen, Naval Gunners, Air Traffic Controllers, Railroad and Industrial Engineers, Surveyors, et al. Do Not Account for Curvature

But it doesn’t end with airplane pilots and submarine captains.  Naval gunners, snipers, and artillerymen do not account for curvature.  Missiles make no adjustment for curvature.  Targeting lasers “light up” targets that should be thousands of feet below the curvature as calculated under the spherical model.  What about surveyors, railroad, and other industrial engineers?  Again, no curvature is ever taken into consideration (except in textbooks) as actual plans do not account for curvature over even hundreds of miles.  For example, in order for the Australian train racks to span across the entire continent, the curvature between the two edges would be approximately 750 miles high – and yet the railroad engineers don’t account for a curvature of 750 miles.  Also, large canals like the Suez and Panama Canals were constructed with no adjustments for curvature.  These facts are simply impossible on a spherical Earth.

What about geodetic surveyors?

Some have claimed that surveyors account for curvature – well, they don’t.

This is an excerpt from Wikipedia regarding plane vs. geodetic surveying (article titled “Surveying”):

“Plane and geodetic surveying

Based on the considerations and true shape of the earth, surveying is broadly classified into two types.

Plane surveying assumes the earth is flat. Curvature and spheroidal shape of the earth is neglected. In this type of surveying all triangles formed by joining survey lines are considered as plane triangles. It is employed for small survey works where errors due to the earth’s shape are too small to matter.

In geodetic surveying curvature of the earth is taken into account while calculating reduced levels, angles, bearings and distances. This type of surveying is only employed for large survey works. Generally the survey works below 260 kilometers radius are treated as plane and beyond that is treated as geodetic. Thus in this type of surveying necessary corrections are applied to reduced levels, bearings and other observations.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveying (emphasis added).

260 kilometers = 161.56 miles

Curvature drop for 161.56 miles = 17,399 feet (https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=30&h0=10&unit=imperial)


Furthermore, the article says 260 kilometers “radius.”  Does that mean that we should double the amount?  520 kilometers = 69,458 feet drop in curvature.  Either way, it is clear that surveyors (including geodetic surveyors) do NOT account for curvature and any reasonable person must conclude that such calculations would be necessary in practice.

In further support, curvature or geodetic surveying is not used for cities.  According to Wikipedia:  “A survey of a city would likely be computed as though the Earth were a plane surface the size of the city.  For such small areas, exact positions can be determined relative to each other without considering the size and shape of the entire Earth.”  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_the_Earth. If an entire city is surveyed as though “the Earth were a plane surface,” then geodetic curvature surveying is not used in actual construction projects and is therefore meaningless except in manuals.  An examination of the National Geodetic Survey (NGS) governmental organization’s website similarly shows that curvature is not realistically considered.  http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/INFO/WhatWeDo.shtml


Naval Missile Instructor – No Curvature.

U.S. Army Artillery Radar Operator – No Curvature.

Industrial Valve Expert – No Curvature.

Career Land Surveyors (Two Different) – No Curvature.

Aviation and Military Expert – No Curvature.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Exhibit 6 - The Cover-Up

From fake photographs of Earth and space, to CGI 24-hours of daylight videos in Antarctica, to FAKING the curvature even when there clearly isn’t one, NASA and other official groups are deliberately DECEIVING the people about the globe model.  For example, the first video below shows that this deception is intentional as they took video from a weather balloon showing a flat horizon and artificially (with software) bent the photographs to make the Earth appear spherical.  The Felix Baumgartner jump is another example (videos earlier in Exhibit #1).  The one picture of Felix taken from inside the capsule as the door is opened shows a flat horizon but the actual jump photos and video were made with wide-angle lenses which are evident from the distortion of the curvature as the horizon line alternates between concave and convex.  Further in the videos below, you will see unmistakable and intentional DECEPTION associated with the 24-hours of daylight in Antarctica – if there was no 24-hours of daylight in Antarctica, then the globe would have to be false.

In the next video, the editors purposely changed a flat horizon into a curved horizon to fit the spherical model.

If there were no 24-hours of daylight days in Antarctica like in the Arctic, then without question the globe model would be false.  However, the repeated fakery is evident and constitutes a damning proof that the globe model is a lie.  Why else would they fake these 24-hours of daylight other than to hide the truth about the “official” model?

In the next video from DITRH, he shows how they deliberately FAKED a major video of the alleged 24-hours of daylight in Antarctica.  This is 100% proof of fraud – why would that be necessary if the model was true?

Here’s a YouTuber’s attempt to use the above video as “proof” against the flat Earth theory.

Another video proving fakery associated with the purported 24-hour days in Antarctica (for the first video, begin watching at 1:48).

Here’s another example of using a fish-eye GoPro camera to produce a deceptive spherical Earth.  The distortions are clear but the curved picture of the Earth was still advertised on mainstream websites everywhere.

Rob Skiba again shows that there is no curvature at even 130,000 feet but also points out how often fish-eye lenses are used to fake the curvature.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Exhibit 7 - The Vacuum of Space Against the Atmosphere

According to the "official" model, the vacuum of space surrounds our atmosphere and yet our atmosphere isn’t sucked out into this enormous vacuum.  What holds the atmosphere in place?  Supposedly, gravity is the answer but our common sense says that gravity generated by the mass far below, which should have very little effect on the low-mass atmosphere, could not counteract the more powerful force resulting from the immeasurably immense vacuum of space.

Further, if gravity causes the atmosphere to be figuratively Velcroed to the Earth’s surface, how does gas ever flow upward from the surface and escape the stronger force of gravity closer to the surface?  One must also ask why the Moon’s claimed gravitational pull has no effect on the Earth’s atmosphere but still causes the tides.  Global theorists counter that the mass of the atmosphere is so little that the Moon wouldn’t have an effect on it; but if that’s the case, how does the gravitational pull of the Earth counteract the powerful vacuum of space if gravity has so little effect?

Nature abhors a vacuum (horror vacui) and any pressure seeks to equalize with its surroundings and mainstream science has no good explanation of how our atmosphere parallel to a very large vacuum is maintained.

Dave Murphy explains this argument beginning at 6:18:

The following video discusses the above argument and makes some other excellent points.

DITRH presents proof that a vacuum is much more powerful versus gravity.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Exhibit 8 - Fluid Dynamics vs. the Atmosphere Wheel

According to the spherical model, the entire atmosphere moves synchronously, like a solid wheel, with the ground that is spinning at approximately 1,000 mph.  This is pure nonsense!  First, imagine a model of the globe Earth being placed in a swimming pool and begins spinning at speeds over 1,000 mph.  Empirical experience tells you that the water would quickly begin spinning around the sphere as well.  However, the speed of the water would NEVER be synchronous (like a wheel) with the spin of the ball.  Now imagine that you’re looking down at the spinning ball in the swimming pool.  The water closer to the ball would move much faster than the water further away and the water would form a spiral like a whirlpool around the ball as the ball spins in the pool; you would NEVER see the water spin like a wheel connected to the ball like spokes connected to an axle of a bicycle.  This whirlpool motion is fluid dynamics and if the spinning sphere model was correct, our atmosphere would most certainly behave like a whirlpool but doesn’t.  In fact, we see ZERO evidence of the fluid whirlpool dynamics of a spinning atmosphere.

Second, because the mass of the atmosphere (already very low) substantially decreases as you get higher in elevation, the increasingly lower mass atmosphere (the higher you go up) would necessarily be impacted less by the claimed gravitational pull of the Earth and so the atmosphere could not move synchronously with the ground.  Among other problems, this raises the skydiver problem.  High-altitude skydivers should end up hundreds of miles away from their targets but always fall where they started (excluding weather patterns).  Weather balloons can stay high up in the atmosphere for hours (up to 130,000 feet) and still manage to fall nearly where they were launched.  How is this possible under the globe model?  Watch the following video from My Perspective:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kUNqH0smC8. Similarly, excluding wind and other weather, volcanic eruptions always shoot straight up into the air; however, logic says that if the Earth was spinning, the top of the plume should be well pointed away from the rotation of the Earth if the Earth was indeed spinning at 1,000 mph.

Third, if the ground was spinning at 1,000 mph, the top of the atmosphere would have to be moving at a ridiculous speed of roughly 10,000 mph (the ISS supposedly travels at 17,000 mph) to keep up with the Earth far below – it would be very difficult to re-enter Earth’s atmosphere from space.  In short, the wheel-like or synchronous theory of the atmosphere makes no sense and violates the testable and empirical principles of fluid dynamics.

Here’s a video from BS Detector that raises some of the issues presented here.

Watch the plumes of these volcanic eruptions and try to explain to yourself how these plumes rise straight up into the air over the ground that is supposedly spinning at 1,000 mph.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Exhibit 9 - No Worldwide Change of Stars When the Earth is at Opposite Sides of the Solar System

Under the sanctioned model, the Earth revolves around the Sun and is at opposite sides of the Sun every 6 months.  Now, imagine or sketch a picture of the Earth on the left of the Sun and a second Earth (6 months later) on the right side of the Sun.  For both Earths, the daylight of the Earth will always be pointed towards the Sun in the center.  For the Earth on the left side of the Sun, daylight will always be on the right side.  For the Earth on the right side of the Sun, daylight will be on the left side.  Therefore, nighttime on the Earth will point in opposite directions away from the Sun every 6 months. 

Accordingly, the Earth should have a substantially new set of stars every 6 months.  To be clear, although the stars do shift between the northern and southern hemispheres, the stars remain constant for the entire Earth.  Meaning, on any given night, you could traverse the Earth from the northern to the southern hemisphere and you would pretty much see every star and constellation out there.  This should be impossible under the heliocentric model as approximately 40% of the nighttime sky should be obscured by the Sun until the Earth reaches the other side of the Sun.  Because the Earth is necessarily facing a substantially different nighttime sky every 6 months under the globe model, the stars should be approximately 40% different – they’re not.  This proves that the Earth does not move and so the entire heliocentric model of the solar system is wrong.

A video from Jeranism describing this issue in part (start at 31:39):

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Rothbard    2,257

Exhibit 10 - No Change of Weight From the Equator to the North Pole

We are told that gravity keeps us from being flung from the Earth as it rotates at nearly 1,000 mph.  However, the speed of the Earth’s rotation is admittedly much less at the poles than at the equator.  There’s no question here – the speed of rotation must be less at the poles since the ground at the poles does not traverse as much distance than the ground at the equator every day.  Because you’re moving much faster at the equator, you arguably need more gravity to keep you from being flung from the Earth to offset the centrifugal force.  Because you’re moving much slower at the poles, you should need less gravity to keep you from being flung from the Earth.  Accordingly, it seems that gravity would have to be stronger at the equator (to keep you from flying into space) and a weight should weigh more at the North Pole (where no centrifugal force is causing you to be flung from the Earth but only the force pulling you towards the ground remains) than it would at the equator; or, someone who was at the north pole would be able to jump higher should he travel to the equator.  But there here is no change in weight.

A few naysayers have argued that the weight change is very small and should be only approximately 0.3%, due to the smaller radii at the poles which reduces the impact of the slower spin, which makes reasonable sense, but a 0.3% change is still measurable and no evidence of weight change has ever been witnessed.  Further, precision manufacturers in Alaska, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Northern Russia do not make adjustments to their equipment to account for differences in weight.  This issue must also be considered along with the claims that the alleged globe orbits at 66,600 mph, which would only increase/decrease the momentum of the spin as the spin moves with and then against the orbit.

More importantly, the distance of the radii is irrelevant to the fact that the outer layer of the Earth could not withstand a speed of approximately 1,000 mph.  Outer edge velocity is all that are considered in determining whether a sphere can withstand falling apart.  As to the Earth, its extraordinary speeds would cause the rim of the Earth to disintegrate.




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites