q Chris and Walt Stickle talk flat earth – Fakeologist's Ball Earth Skeptic

Chris and Walt Stickle talk flat earth

Chris is back. Everyone has an opinion on the Copernican ball earth theory. Walt is no exception. (Walt was on my audio here).

“Someone asked me the other day if I believe in conspiracies. Well, sure. Here’s one. It is called the political system. It is nothing if not a giant conspiracy to rob, trick and subjugate the population.” -Jeffrey Tucker

Source: HOAX BUSTERS CALL: Hoax Busters, Work your way up to banana picker

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Leave a Reply

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
8 years ago

interesting discussion between Chris and Walt Stickle on the flat earth. mostly find C. Kendall’s thinking very clear and open-minded, so i’m surprised he has become so rigid on the flat earth debate in such a short time.

the apparent evidence of a direct flight between South America and Australia sure is a fact that needs to be investigated, not avoided. however, these (few) flights do not establish any answer as to curvature or lack of curvature in themselves. what these flights do prove, is that it is possible to fly from Australia to South America in less time than what a UN flat earth type of map would allow according to known maps projections and known aircrafts.

so, what about the UN map ? and what about the ball-earth map ? well, none of those can be proven correct. it is well known that it is near impossible to represent a sphere on a flat surface, so we actually do not have great precision as to the location and sizes of the continents. the inconsistencies of the size of the continents seems very obvious in NASA material and images, as well as in the different map projections and the GPS system (24 satellites orbiting the earth at an altitude of about 11,000 nautical miles). what do seem consistent though, are the vast areas of oceans in modern maps and the numerous different projections used that would allow for much manipulation as far as to the positions between continents and distances in general. it is quite remarkable that ancient maps did not contain near as much water as seen in more modern maps, and that these maps, based on what they believed to be a flat earth, did work very well for the great sailors of the day, who most certainly sailed across the oceans and seemed to reach every corner of the earth consistently, much as our planes do today.

with maps that are misleading, there is a good chance the earth is not in fact exactly what we believe it to be. if it really was, we would not have an entire division of the US Army misleading us every step of the way, forging imagery and science on such a big scale. what would stop such a powerful and resourceful entity from manipulating air travel if this was required for their purpose(s)? nothing would stop them from derailing us; the only question would be if it would be possible.

is it possible to fly 2-times the distance in half the time today ? well, we have definite proof that the Concorde flew more than 2 times as fast than a regular plane (1300mph) from 1976 and onward (planes produced between 1965–1979). these planes were “retired” after a very dubious (fake?) accident in Paris. i for one believe that technology has improved a lot since 1965 and that it would indeed be possible to fly 2times as far 2times as quick with more modern technology and fuel optimisation. in this regard, it is notable that direct flights between Australia and South America only have occurred only since 2000 or thereabouts, and these flight routes only became more widely available from 2012 and onwards. it is also worth to mention that there are more mysteries to flight routes than the South America/Australia conundrum that needs to be resolved as well,,, no flights over the south pole, no consistent radar tracking in the southern hemisphere etc.

overall, the evidence that Chris Kendall exclusively grabs on to is quite open to be manipulated in regards to flight times, distances, technology and cartography. with the above discrepancies and room for manipulation, the only way to relate to the question of curvature (or not) is by actually making direct observations, and an airplane route just is not a direct observation of anything other than flight times and known geolocations. if the earth is curved or flat we must establish its shape by direct measurement, not by a possible straw man argument a flight route, aircraft or a map could turn out to be.

el sushi de la mancha
8 years ago
Reply to  UNreal

Would tend to agree with your last proposition dear UNreal. Those who really own the world map and its accurate representation (mostly the military) hold the truth and can further control the whole picture.

8 years ago

el sushi de la mancha:
Yes, we are owned by those with eyes to see a big enough picture,,,

our limited scope of view to has even fooled us to accept the disappearance of ships on the horizon to be due to curvature, whereas it is only du to a lack scope (the reason why binoculars and telescopes actually work).

supposing those with tools to see beyond the limits of commoner are mostly freemasons, we can then deduct from their propaganda an upsetting habit of reversing truth and facts to their contraries. when it comes to maps, we are exclusively served spheres and circles. as masons proudly parade their ability to square the circle, we might in fact be facing the opposite,,, if the cercle was in fact a square, we would actually be exactly where the freemasons (and satanists maybe) would like us to be: on the opposite end of knowledge and power. as night and day alternates on a square map, the checkerboard might be the ultimate symbol of the elites power over the common man,,,

under are some interesting videos with an alternative square map of a flat world. i’m really convinced we should not confuse the shape of the world with anything else than direct measurement and observation (curvature or not), but also stands to reason that we are indeed in an interdependent system that should be coherent if seen with a big enough scope or perspective (and we will of course always be deprived of such tools or opportunities).

the fish in the ocean would seem to have difficulty in understanding water, so i’m afraid we might encounter problems in understanding our “universe” just as the fish in their medium,, brainwashed as we are today, reality might surely not feel natural in any way, but what is is…(?)