Flat earthing to obsure NASA’s exposure

Simon says he does not believe in the flat earth, and that this sudden abundance of Flat Earth research /propaganda is to put a cloud of smoke between serious research and NASA via crazy by association techniques.

Since I always believe the deception is one more step than the obvious put before us, I’ll entertain the thought.

Now, lest I be called ‘unduly paranoid’, I guess I’ll have to address this ‘peculiar’ issue by sharing my personal musings with everyone (regardless of whether one sincerely believes the flat earth model has any merit or not – I do not, btw – for what it’s worth to anyone… ). Think about it: if YOU were a NASA propagandist / psychologist – and you were facing the horrific / catastrophic prospect of a mass-awakening to the BIG NASA FRAUD, what would YOU do ? Well, I know exactly what I would do : I would try and flood every single ‘conspiracy-site’ (which even remotely addresses / questions NASA’s legitimacy) with the most extreme theory imaginable – i.e. the sort of theory which I KNOW WITH CERTAINTY the general public will instantly associate with ‘pure madness’. I trust that (no matter what one’s stance on the flat earth model is) we may all agree that – at this historical moment in time – there could hardly be ANY ‘crazier’, ‘over-the-top’ /and thus offputting contention than this earth being flat as a pancake (ok, so perhaps I’ll have to eat my words some day – and mind you, I actually love pancakes, so don’t you ever dare misquoting me!). As it is, I simply cannot think of any more effective way for NASA to undermine our solid / rationally-acquired findings exposing the very real & demonstrable BIG NASA FRAUD.

www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?t=1758&p=2395303#p2395303

Be the 1st to vote.

14 thoughts on “Flat earthing to obsure NASA’s exposure”

  1. I completely agree with Simon’s post here about the flat-Earth thing. I believe “flat-Earth” is a disinfo tactic most likely by NASA designed to muddy the waters of the growing awareness of the Space Program Hoax and to associate the idea of NASA fakery with “conspiracy nuts” in the minds of the general pubic.

    In fact, it is so well written that I almost forgave Simon for his earlier insults about a certain opinion of my own. 🙂

    BTW, I have looked at the flat Earth “proofs” and find them to be nothing but illogical arguments, misdirection and unsubstantiated claims.

    1. Interesting.

      I noticed this presentation, just today, of Simon’s Challenger crew research on this ‘flatearth’ site:

      aplanetruth.info/2015/04/23/breaking-news-theyre-alive-challenger-space-shuttle-crew-safe-and-employed/

      Attaching flat-Earth to this research strikes me as an effective strawman, as suggested, regardless of the shape of the earth. Flat Earth is enough of a taboo right now – a leap too far – for a critical mass of people, anyway.
      It’s game over if you start talking about a flat Earth, even with many who would consider themselves alternative theorists. ”Give me back my ball and leave me alone”.

      I’m not sure about the shape of the Earth, at all, but I can see how the idea can be played-off against other more tangible down-to-earth( sorry) research, anyway.

      Hence, probably, Simon’s ( our, if I may, for the small McAuliffe clue) research condensed on ”aplanetruth”.

      1. I agree with you Tom. This is why I like to make this media site at least 2 dimensional, text and talk. If people don’t understand my position on things and want me depth, listen to me talk. If I sound nuts after you think what I’ve written is nuts, then there’s not much I can do. If upon hearing my and other discussions that i sound reasonable dealing with tricky topics, then that’s good. That allows me to talk about flat earth and more provable subjects at the same place. Hopefully visitors stay long enough to discover this.

        1. Ab, as a fellow Canadian educated person– I would appeal to your constructive objective sense that we grew up with– assuming the Canadian system of education retained what little remained of certain methods longer than did the American system of education. Without getting into the psyops, will you join with me in considering the very simple calculation of comparing longitudinal degrees with miles between two points, each, in the northern and southern hemispheres on land masses– and set aside the overseas trips? Enough said, right? If we have a problem with this relatively simple maneuvre, at least we know for a fact that we’re all in big trouble. I’m quite surprised Simon rejected flat earth summarily dismissing it from what I can gather so far– but then I’ll never forget his folks banned me from the clues forum– shockingly to me. I couldn’t believe it. It seems to me we’re nearing a crossroads with flat earth. Nobody has definitively countered the longitude vs. miles in the north and south challange I’ve made yet. You’ve spoken with me at length personally. I’m probably likely maybe thinking about putting together some talking points on this topic for a podcast for you in the near future. It’s clean. It’s politically neutral. It’s wired. It’s hot. It’s potentially tranformative and wacky at the same time. Nothing beats the current apparent crescendo of this idea given the bing image search and other internet sourced old documents and explorers that clearly reveal anomalies in the global theory. It’s astonishing that this topic has traction. That fact alone– that it has traction– is mezmerizing. I personally thing we’re all in trouble on this issue. Anyways, thanks again for not deleting and banning me like clues, eric dubay and that other forum.

    2. Lux, how is it illogical to match up two points of similar distances over land in the north and south hemispheres and then calculate miles per degree of longitude for both? That’s PERFECTLY logical. If the distance is greater in the south than the north, then we’re not on a sphere. It’s flat. If it’s the SAME– then we’re on a globe. it’s the easiest proof I’ve ever encountered. I arrived at it independently but I’ve seen references without calculations to it elsewhere. If we drill down on this one example, you and Simon can even prove that we’re NOT on a flat earth. You can single handedly defeat the flat earth guys on this point. Nobody in flat earth videos will be able to answer it. There’s your logic. So far in my own calculations, the miles per degree longitude over land in the south is 12-18% longer than miles per degree longitude in the north at 33 degrees latitude. I’ve done the calculation starting from scratch twice now with the same result. My hands are still shaking from being nervous about this. I’m asking myself what have I done here? Am I going to get into trouble? Why am I being banned? (Eric Dubay’s IFRS Int’l Flat Earth Research Socity Forum) Why are my posts being deleted (Lunatic Outpost). How could I spot something so obvious? Is Flat Earth being hidden in plain sight like this? Why am I not seeing any other flat earther zero in on this calculation either in history or now? Why are no better known flat earthers creating diagrams illustrating this simple calculation? Why are navigational flight compasses made with flat earth maps? Why are globes not taken along on overseas trips on ships– for navigating purposes? Logic is the ESSSENCE of the flat earth argument because there are logical anomalies that are not being answered. To declare that you find “flat earth “proofs” to be “nothing but illogical arguments” without citing any of over a hundred examples possible these days, you declare yourself unwilling to dig a little big deeper into this fascinating problem. In the human dimension of mind, no problem should be off limits. Anything at all can be considered. It’s what the mind is for. This is simply an epistemological conundrum that merits some attention. Being dismissive is not a proper argument.

      1. Rick, Occam’s Razr sure applies here. I’d love to hear what globalists or Eric have to say about this. It’s so simple even I can understand it. I’ll admit I have trouble arguing the details about each model but no trouble understanding deceit. Let’s chat about it.

        1. I’ll be attempting to get feedback from Dubay and Math Boylan on this approach to the proof but first I have to check my results again with different sources. Different websites are giving me different distances. I might have to go to the library and check printed maps rather than use anything online right now. Historical accounts as cited by Dubay on Captain Cook’s anomalous daily misses of 20 miles per day might have to be included in my own processing of this problem. I might have to bone up on how fight miles are determined when flying– stuff like that. We’re entering the Twilight Zone for sure. www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxf_Dvy0VLs

  2. I agree with Simon but I also think it’s useful to at least study the Flat Earth research in order to have a better understanding of the model and to open up one’s mind to other possibilities. There’s nothing wrong with the Flat Earth as a theory or model from which to contribute to one’s own understanding of the overall nature of alternative Earth models, even if just as a thought exercise.

    As silly as some of the flat earth stuff is, it’s certainly a better model than the ridiculous spinning round ball Earth, wizzing around the sun model, in my opinion. For me, studying the Flat Earth stuff has just helped me realize how ridiculous the heliocentric, spinning round ball theory is … for this reason alone, I think it’s worth taking a look at, but without attaching oneself to the theory.

  3. Since Simon’s post was in the Miles Mathis thread, here’s MM’s update on the god of pscience, as Sami styles it:
    Addendum, April 22, 2015: Two days after this paper went up, there was an internet death hoax for Hawking. Someone got over a million hits at Facebook with this hoax. I read that two ways: 1) the widely publicized hoax acts to cover this paper a bit, because some will dismiss my title without reading the paper, thinking it is linked to the hoax. For this reason, I assume the death hoax was started by the same people that are behind the longterm Hawking hoax. 2) We have seen that these internet death hoaxes often now precede a real death announcement. See the strange goings-on before the announcement of Robin Williams’ death (which I assume was faked like the rest). This confusion is created on purpose, because it prevents most people from making any sense of the news. Confusing news prevents questions—perhaps surprisingly—because it causes most people’s brains to shut down. You would think confusing news would create questions, and in a few people it still does. But in the majority of people, very confusing news acts as its own shield. If enough confusion is created, the reader or viewer will just see a tangled web he has no hope of unwinding, causing him to accept whatever he is told and “move on.” For this reason, I will double down on my prediction that the real death announcement of Hawking is coming soon. However, we know they are reading my papers, so they may stall just for the purpose of nixing my prediction. At any rate, my intuition tells me the blonde impostor died recently and they are already stalling. Maybe they are looking for another replacement, who knows. I think it will be hard to find someone who looked like the blonde impostor did at the end.

  4. Rick, I hope Ab will have you as a guest. I’m truly fascinated by the Flat/Concave Earth theory and I want to thank you and others for bringing these significant ideas to the forefront.

    No surprise you were banned on RF though… probably by that Hoi fellow who sounds like your boring old spinster aunt in interviews, but charges out in full armour with halberd at the ready in writing!

    Cheers!
    b

    1. Thanks for the encouragement. I consider this another exercise in epistemology– meaning “the philosophy of how we know things”. It’s never useless to pick up any “fresh topic” to put the epistemological boot to it to see what we can kick out of it. We’ve kicked the stuffing out of the shuttle, the mooon landing, 9/11 and more. We’ve beat them to death– as it were. So Flat Earth vs. Spherical Earth is simply “next!”.

      Simon’s idea that NASA flooded the net with this recently– to take the focus off space fakery– assumes that we humans have limited bandwidth and that therefore if we look at flat earth, we won’t have time look at space fakery. However I see it as all one “show” because if the earth is flat, then space is not a place. So not only is the moon landing a hoax but so is the moon. Nothing goes into space because there is no space as we thought we knew it.

      Simon invented an alternative pie plate solar system recently so he might have a vested interest already in protecting his model to some extent. If flat earth is true, and thus space doesn’t exist, then neither does his model.

      NASA is unlikely to have pushed this idea recently, in my view. The fact that it rose to the top of the “to do” list on the internet could simply be the result of the inherent fascination with this strange notion along with our ability to reference the original documents dealing with it, online now– both historical documents, all kinds of map projections, flight travel sites that give us speed, mileage, routes etc. It’s a critical mass of people, people with time, people with computers, references sources, history etc. all coming together at the same time.

      I became fascinated with the “easy to show online” proof that the longitude distance between two points (on land) in the north hemisphere and the south hemisphere lead to miles per degree longitude of 12 to 18% difference. How is this possible unless the lines of longitude separate further and further apart the further “south” you go? I insist on keeping the compared points “on dry land” because I trust “land measurements” more than “overeseas measurements” … and that’s because I think over-land journeys are easier for land-lubbers to get together to verify.

  5. Let me work on this a bit longer on my own before I try to talk about it. I need to recheck my numbers several more times. Thanks for the invite.

  6. OK, Rick. Congratulations on your proof. Show me the photos when you find the edge of the Earth and I’ll buy you a drink.

    1. There’s no edge. There are more earth ponds like ours… more land. That’s Math Boylans latest thinking on the problem. I’m still in the process of double checking my proof because I’m getting different distances from different websites. Simply by checking miles per degree longitude in the north vs. south hemispheres, we should be able to confirm flat or global earth. A flat earth would absolutely require MORE miles per degree longitude in the south. If you check my latest calculation, however, I proved we live on a globe and that flat earth can’t possible be. fakeologist.com/2015/04/19/ricks-flat-earth-proof/

Leave a Reply