Miles on the flat earth psyop

Miles calls the flat earth wave of interest a psyOp. mileswmathis.com/flatearth.pdf

I am getting so many emails on this one, I felt pressured to write this brief response. Very few of my
science readers are asking me about this, but many of those reading my history papers are. I think that
is because the spooks are running a very visible disinfo campaign on the Flat Earth, and a lot of people
are being snared by it. I am not sure why the Flat Earth is getting so much “alternative” press right
now, but I have my suspicions.

h/t Simon Shack

Be the 1st to vote.

8 thoughts on “Miles on the flat earth psyop”

  1. Interesting.
    He says ”Don’t miss the footnote.”

    But I’m not sure how a Free Radio Revolution video expose of Ed Chiarini is relevant here as a footnote to an article titled The Earth is not Flat? – ( note the small ‘n’ of the word ‘not’ )

    He opts out of any argument on the grounds that he’d only be drawn-in to a plot.

    Fine, but some of us don’t have those worries.
    I was awakened to 9/11 being an inside job by Loose Change and Alex Jones. Why wouldn’t the Flat Earth debate be deliberately led ? I think that part would be inevitable. That doesn’t rubbish the whole idea.

    With what we’ve come to know, surely we have to question these things? The very nature of the earth we stand on is a very obvious thing for us to have been fooled about. Some of us here are not going to over-look that one.

    It doesn’t really cut it, for me, to ignore the evidence, add a bit of attached Ed Chiarini nonsense and Simon Shack credibility and keep the ‘n’ of ‘Not’ as lower-case.

    The broad reaching stigma of the meaningless pejorative: ‘Flat Earther’ that Fetzer called Shack, is well understood.
    That should surely not invalidate the idea.
    Holocaust Denier, Climate-change Denier, No-planer.
    Don’t these fashionable terms suggest the idea has some validity? Flat Earther ? From Fetzer? It’s the language of ignorance.

    Yes, I agree, it looks like the flat earth argument has been deliberately stimulated in the alternative media, but I’m not sure that’s not giving it an airing and then putting it back to bed. You can’t kill the truth, you have to let it breath a little sometimes, if you will. Feed it bullshit and cover it back up.

    There’s a whole load of nonsense attached to the flat earth question. I don’t blame Simon Shack and others for avoiding it right now.
    This Miles Mathis article does make me think again, though, that there’s something in this flat earth question.

  2. Great comment Tom. Miles, if he is not genuine, could easily be the final gatekeeper. At this level, if true, it’s far harder to detect and one must really be sharp. Can our collective minds figure it out here?

    You pointed out a pattern above: if you are a denier, then you are quite possibly on the right, if not unpopular, side. If your tormentor labels you a denier, than you’re almost certainly on the correct side.

    Crrow777 recently stated that all that denied January 1, Caesar’s invention, as the beginning of the new year, as April Fools, something quite similar. April Fools thought it made more sense to make the spring equinox as the start of the year, as life takes hold again anew.

    If we look for patterns in the deception, it helps us decode what’s (close to) truth and what’s a lie.

  3. I agree with Miles.

    Nothing personal intended but the FE arguments are just plain stupid and anyone who credits them wouldn’t have the IQ to understand logical explanations anyway.

    1. that’s ironic seeing as i question the intelligence of anybody that naively believes in francis galton’s psichometric hocus pocus and spearman’s “g” factor.

      here’s a quote about spearman and les cousins darwin and galton from arthur jensen, who was berkeley man of course.

      “The London School, though most directly formed by Spearman, actually had its roots in the works of Charles Darwin (1809-1882) and especially those of Darwin’s half-cousin Sir Francis Galton (1822-1911). Spearman acknowledged Galton as having the greatest influence on his own activity in psychology. In recent years, the London School’s centre of gravity has shifted from London to the University of Edinburgh, where its most industrious exponent today is Ian Deary, the Professor of Psychology there. Previous luminaries of the London School were Professors Sir Cyril Burt and Hans Eysenck, both of the University of London (and both Fellows of the Galton Institute).”

      www.galtoninstitute.org.uk/Newsletters/GINL0003/charles_spearman.htm
      en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Jensen

      who knows perhaps we do live on a sphere and maybe psichology isn’t a scam.

  4. I have little doubt that among the many leading ‘flat earthers’ on YouTube there are bound to be at least one or two people who are not who they say they are. Who would be responsible for controlling them? I don’t know. NASA? The CIA? All speculation on my part.

    Sometimes I wonder if something like ‘flat earth’ could be used as a clever cover for slowly admitting to NASA fakery, a type of ‘cloaked hangout’. Unless there is some kind of ‘end times’ event, one would imagine that NASA will eventually have to own up to the Apollo fraud. What better way to do it than to cloak it in a viral flat earth meme? Those who wake up to Apollo fakery by hopping aboard flat earth will be easily demoralised and embarrassed if the leading flat earther(s) suddenly ‘flip’ and say ‘It was all a big ruse’, as Miles suggests.

    We touched on this on our most recent Ball Earth Skeptic Roundtable, with Mark Sargent as special guest. Fast-forward to 1:25:00 for the discussion about ‘shills’ and their potential strategies. I ask Mark directly if it is possible that somebody like him might have been planted here to pull a ‘Dylan Avery’ and ‘flip’; you can make up your own mind as to whether or not he answered it well.

    My view is that we ought to be willing to question everything, including the earth on which we stand. The two other fellas I do my Ball Earth Skeptic Roundtable are self-avowed ‘flat earthers’ whereas I remain a ball earth skeptic and am yet to be convinced by the flat earth models out there. I continue to do my research and perhaps one day I might (or even synthesise) a flat earth model I can subscribe to. For the moment I suppose I am an agnostic earther. If this agnosticism is ever used to discredit me or my work on other topics then so be it!

  5. I did not know Ed Chiarini was a Flat Earther. If that is all you can dig up on him then I’d say he is doing pretty well. Free Radio Revolution has been “exposed” by many people as being riddled with Disinfo Agents.

    There is no question to me that the FE is a PSYOP. We know the Government can’t admit to mistakes; they just keep throwing money at the problem until it is obfuscated. If, by chance, Admiral Byrd or someone else did finally get a good look-see at the Earth in the 50’s and said “hey, the Earth is Not a Ball,” the Government would Not reverse 500 years of heliocentric teachings.

    In my opinion the Flat Earth dwarfs all other PSYOPS. The FE PSYOP encompasses more than just a Flat Earth. It shows a pattern of deliberate lying and messing with our educational system over the years. It exposes NASA, ISS, Satellites and billions of taxpayer dollars flushed down the toilet.

    I’m sorry you are bothered by inquisitive people. They will soon learn as I did that their concerns are fallen on deaf ears. They will soon become apathetic. They will realize that when it comes to the Flat Earth, so called “Truthers” and “Alternative Media Outlets” can be just as close-minded as the MSM.

  6. I always take a step back when people start using the Bible or the Qur’an or any of the Big Three texts to back up their positions. I see both Christians and Muslims citing their books for Flat Earth proof, so I wonder. If I consider that perhaps the documented teachings of the big three religions as we know them today are mostly amalgamated from earlier more authentic sources (so the creators could maintain some credibility with the targeted believers), then it seems possible that they could retain some references to the true shape of our planet, assuming the truth of it was known at some point. To me this whole issue seems too rich to not have a strong synthetic/psy-op element to it. What matters more to the architects of agenda: the actual facts, or what a majority will believe?

    For all I know the Earth could be any shape and rotating in any manner, or not. Why does it have to be Flat or Ball? What about dodecahedron? It’s like the two party political system. I need a third option, a Cynthia McKinney of earth-shape theories.

Leave a Reply