Dubay and DBA

Eric is no fan of most of the flat earth “researchers”. Is Eric the real deal or is he part of the deception? There’s no doubting the body of work with his name on it.

AtlanteanConspiracy.Com

Be the 1st to vote.

15 thoughts on “Dubay and DBA”

  1. Is Eric the real deal or is he part of the deception?

    Nothing is real on Flat Earth, which is why we’re being pushed there.

        1. @Khammad.

          Our roads crossing again!
          In this interview the man sounds sincere in my opinion.Chill or no chill, what he shows to me: the ball model has severe flaws and no small ones. So I had to say to myself you have to change your mindset and better start looking after it. I make a hughe difference between what he or she says or states: something is not correct and have to come forward with his or her’s own idea or idea’s. Here I keep the distance till the thing is proven 100% correct. When it is proven100% correct I will integrate it. For instance Prof. Kollath’s: Mesotrophie. Dr. med Ryke Geerd Hamer’s 5 Biological Laws . Moonlanding’s Hoax etc. For the rest when something is not 100% secured I keep the distance. No exceptions.
          About 13 years ago “the”search started with an agent provocateur E. Hufschmid, who worked at that time and maybe still for the Barnes Review. Worked together with Daryl Bradford Smith from iamthewitness.com/ , till he found out EH was an agent provocateur and a very clever one. Anyway this same agent provocateur showed that the moon landing was a complete hoax, but for me he, without realizing himself, put me on the track of some people who would going to play an important role in my life namely Kay Griggs and Eustace Mullins. That started the ball rolling.
          Agent provocateur, chill or no chill I don’t care that much J. Fetzer has some good stuff to. By reading the comments, which is very important, I found out about Sept. Clues, which was a real eyeopener and an absolute relevation and this webite Fakeologist.com. If J. Fetzer had not been there I probably would never have find out forementioned websites. So Khammad, chill or no chill it has its own advantages to. But as usual “be careful and keep the distance”.

          1. “The ball model has severe flaws and no small ones. So I had to say to myself you have to change your mindset and better start looking after it” -Curious

            Problem with your analysis, Curious, is that you are ignoring current evidence that the earth is a sphere, regardless of size or squashing (an oblate spheroid is just a sphere that has been squashed so it is flatter than before).

            If you look at the evidence, such as the impossibility of seeing beyond the horizon as it drops in front of you, the movement of the sun, etc, you have a much stronger argument that the earth is round than flat.

            Given the current solid arguments of both sides of whether the earth is a sphere of flat, the evidence points to 99.9% the earth is round and 0.1% that the earth if flat.

            This means, Curious, you are investigating the 0.1% and throwing out the 99.9%. This does not seem logical.

            Now that I have my charts up and running, I challenge any one to prove my charts wrong. Given a distance between two points at the same elevation, you can easily find out how far the distant point is below earths horizon, using 10th grade math that any of you can understand.

            This will give us a good chance to check on seeing long distances over water as well, if they are in fact correct or not, or if there is a phenomenon happening with light or not that may change what we actually see. Some people have been calling this refraction.

            Here are the equations we can all use to test the spherical nature of the earth.

            Equation of a circle:
            x^2 + y^2 = r^2

            Equation of a circle the size of earth, dropped to the horizon:
            x^2 + (y + 3959)^2 = 3959^2

            Same equation above solved for y for input into graphing software:
            y = SQRT(3959^2 – x^2) – 3959
            *SQRT means square root

            And here is a pretty simple graphing program to drop the equation into (just copy and paste) to investigate curvature:
            www.desmos.com/calculator

          2. @Khammad

            I have no problems with the ball model on its own, but I do have problems with the ball model as brought forward by NASA/Cambridge. That is the point.

          3. “I have no problems with the ball model on its own, but I do have problems with the ball model as brought forward by NASA/Cambridge.” -Curious

            Your behavior says otherwise.

          4. @Khammad

            Your behavior says otherwise.

            Nope, I stated several times, the ball model as brought forward by Cambridge-> NASA has hughe flaws. You drew the conclusion I am a FE fan.
            Audio-chat Yesterday: Ab, Tom Dalpra, Delcroix. In the last part of the chat Tom and Delcroix chatted a bit about the FE model versus Ball model. After some hence and forth, one of the two stated: I do think the truth is somewhere in the middle. I am of the same opinion.

          5. kHam,

            If the Earth is a sphere, why would you use equations that have to do with a circle? Can you link to your charts?

          1. Sayanim Jambon: “You are a stench! A stench, I say, in the nostril’s of God!” (unknown origin)

            Babette,

            I have noticed that your posts can seem like non sequitors and not clear as to which point they are specifically relating. This last post of yours seems cryptic in nature and confusing to the reader. I am not sure if you are aware of this or not. Perhaps placing quotes in your posts will clear up what you are trying to convey.

    1. Although all of Eric’s interviews are gems, this one is the best so far. Have a listen.

      “The Progress and Pitfalls of the Flat Earth Movement” (YT)

      As an aside, I enthusiastically applaud Unreal for his FE segment in the conversation with Ab. Perfection.

      Thanks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

wp-puzzle.com logo