NASA and modern astronomy maintain that the Moon is a solid, spherical, Earth-like habitation which man has actually flown to and set foot on. They claim the Moon is a non-luminescent planetoid which receives and reflects all its light from the Sun. The reality is, however, that the Moon is not a solid body, it is clearly circular, but not spherical, and not in any way an Earth-like planetoid which humans could set foot on. In fact, the Moon is largely transparent and completely self-luminescent, shining with its own unique light.
The Sun’s light is golden, warm, drying, preservative and antiseptic, while the Moon’s light is silver, cool, damp, putrefying and septic. The Sun’s rays decrease the combustion of a bonfire, while the Moon’s rays increase combustion. Plant and animal substances exposed to sunlight quickly dry, shrink, coagulate, and lose the tendency to decompose and putrify; grapes and other fruits become solid, partially candied and preserved like raisins, dates, and prunes; animal flesh coagulates, loses its volatile gaseous constituents, becomes firm, dry, and slow to decay. When exposed to moonlight, however, plant and animal substances tend to show symptoms of putrefaction and decay.
In direct sunlight a thermometer will read higher than another thermometer placed in the shade, but in full, direct moonlight a thermometer will read lower than another placed in the shade. If the Sun’s light is collected in a large lens and thrown to a focus point it can create significant heat, while the Moon’s light collected similarly creates no heat. In the “Lancet Medical Journal,” from March 14th, 1856, particulars are given of several experiments which proved the Moon’s rays when concentrated can actually reduce the temperature upon a thermometer more than eight degrees.
“The sun’s light, when concentrated by a number of plane or concave mirrors throwing the light to the same point; or by a large burning lens, produces a black or non-luminous focus, in which the heat is so intense that metallic and alkaline substances are quickly fused; earthy and mineral compounds almost immediately vitrified; and all animal and vegetable structures in a few seconds decomposed, burned up and destroyed. The moon’s light concentrated in the above manner produces a focus so brilliant and luminous that it is difficult to look upon it; yet there is no increase of temperature. In the focus of sun-light there is great heat but no light. In that of the moon’s light there is great light but no heat.”-Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (144)
“Light which is reflected must necessarily be of the same character as that which causes the reflection, but the light of the Moon is altogether different from the light of the Sun, therefore the light of the Moon is not reflected from the Sun. The Sun’s light is red and hot, the Moon’s pale and cold -the Sun’s dries and preserves certain kinds of fish and fruit, such as cod and grapes, for the table, but the Moon’s turns such to putrefaction -the Sun’s will often put out a coal fire, while the Moon’s will cause it to bum more brightly -the rays of the Sun, focused through a burning-glass, will set wood on fire, and even fuse metals, while the rays of the Moon, concentrated to the strongest power, do not exhibit the very slightest signs of heat. I have myself long thought that the light of the Moon is Electric, but, be that as it may, even a Board School child can perceive that its light is totally unlike that of the Sun.”-David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma”(151-2)
So sunlight and moonlight clearly have altogether different properties, and furthermore the Moon itself cannot physically be both a spherical body and a reflector of the Sun’s light! Reflectors must be flat or concave for light rays to have any angle of incidence; If a reflector’s surface is convex then every ray of light points in a direct line with the radius perpendicular to the surface resulting in no reflection.
“Again, if the Moon is a sphere, which it is declared to be, how can its surface reflect the light of the Sun? If her surface was a mass of polished silver, it could not reflect from more than a mere point! Let a silvered glass ball or globe of considerable size be held before a lamp or fire of any magnitude, and it will be seen that instead of the whole surface reflecting light, there will be a very small portion only illuminated. But the Moon‟s whole surface is brilliantly illuminated! A condition or effect utterly impossible if it be spherical.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Earth Not a Globe, 2nd Edition” (97)
The Bible also confirms that the Moon is self-luminescent and not a mere reflector of sunlight in Genesis 1:16 where it states that “God made two great luminaries, the greater luminary to rule the day, and the lesser luminary to rule the night.”
Not only is the Moon clearly self-luminescent, shining its own unique light, but it is also largely transparent! NASA photoshoppers claim the Moon is a dark spherical planetoid, yet with our own eyes or through a telescope we can see it is actually a bright, circular, semi-transparent luminary. On a clear night, during a waxing or waning cycle, it is even possible to occasionally see stars and planets directly through the surface of the Moon!
On March 7th, 1794, four astronomers (3 in Norwich, 1 in London) wrote in “The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Astronomical Society” that they “saw a star in the dark part of the moon, which had not then attained the first quadrature; and from the representations which are given the star must have appeared very far advanced upon the disc.” Sir James South of the Royal Observatory in Kensington wrote in a letter to the Times newspaper April 7, 1848, that, “On the 15th of March, 1848,when the moon was seven and a half days old, I never saw her unillumined disc so beautifully. On my first looking into the telescope a star of about the 7th magnitude was some minutes of a degree distant from the moon’s dark limb. I saw that its occultation by the moon was inevitable … The star, instead of disappearing the moment the moon’s edge came in contact with it, apparently glided on the moon’s dark face, as if it had been seen through a transparent moon; or, as if a star were between me and the moon … I have seen a similar apparent projection several times … The cause of this phenomenon is involved in impenetrable mystery.” In the monthly notices of the Royal Astronomical Society for June 8, 1860, Thomas Gaunt stated that the “Occultation of Jupiter by the moon, on the 24th of May, 1860, was seen with an achromatic of 3.3 inches aperture, 50 inches focus; the immersion with a power of 50, and the emersion with a power of 70. At the immersion I could not see the dark limb of the moon until the planet appeared to touch it, and then only to the extent of the diameter of the planet; but what I was most struck with was the appearance on the moon as it passed over the planet. It appeared as though the planet was a dark object, and glided on to the moon instead of behind it; and the appearance continued until the planet was hid, when I suddenly lost the dark limb of the moon altogether.”
I have personally also seen stars through the edge of the waxing/waning Moon. It actually happens fairly often; if you are diligent and specifically observing for the phenomenon on starry nights you can occasionally see it even with the naked eye.
“During a partial solar eclipse the sun’s outline has many times been seen through the body of the moon. But those who have been taught to believe that the moon is a solid opaque sphere, are ever ready with ‘explanations,’ often of the most inconsistent character, rather than acknowledge the simple fact of semi-transparency. Not only has this been proved by the visibility of the sun’s outline through segments, and sometimes the very centre of the moon, but often, at new moon, the outline of the whole, and even the several shades of light on the opposite and illuminated part have been distinctly seen. In other words we are often able to see through the dark side of the moon’s body to light on the other side.”-Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (337)
“That the moon is not a perfectly opaque body, but a crystallized substance, is shown from the fact that when a few hours old or even at quarter we can through the unilluminated portion see the light shining on the other side. Stars have also been observed through her surface!”-J. Atkinson, “Earth Review Magazine”
A Star occulting a crescent Moon has long been a popular symbol of Islam, was the symbol of the Ottoman Empire, it is found on the flags of Algeria, Azerbaijan, Libya, Malaysia, Mauritania, Pakistan, Singapore, Tunisia, Turkey, and in the Coat of Arms of countries from Croatia, to Germany, Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, Ukraine and the United Kingdom. Its origins can be traced back thousands of years to ancient Hindu culture where it is found in the symbol for the word “Om,” the primary name for the almighty, representing the union of god Shiva and goddess Shakti. Why the symbol has carried such widespread historical significance is open to interpretation, but regardless of interpretation, the image of star(s) occulting the Moon has long been a prevalent and meaningful picture.
That stars and planets have been seen through the Moon is a fact, but to this day NASA, modern astronomy and a world full of brainwashed heliocentrists maintain that the Moon is a spherical, Earth-like habitation capable of landing spaceships on. They claim the Moon (and Mars for that matter!) are habitable desert planets, much like Star Wars’ Tatooine, Dune’s Arrakis and other such imaginary science-fiction worlds. Since long before the staged Apollo“Moon landings” these Masonic Sun-worshipping heliocentrists have been claiming the Moon to be a solid planetoid complete with plains, plateaus, mountains, valleys and craters though nothing of the sort can be discerned even using the best telescopes.
“Astronomers have indulged in imagination to such a degree that the moon is now considered to be a solid, opaque spherical world, having mountains, valleys, lakes, or seas, volcanic craters, and other conditions analogous to the surface of the earth. So far has this fancy been carried that the whole visible disc has been mapped out, and special names given to its various peculiarities, as though they had been carefully observed, and actually measured by a party of terrestrial ordinance surveyors. All this has been done in direct opposition to the fact that whoever, for the first time, and without previous bias of mind, looks at the moon’s surface through a powerful telescope, is puzzled to say what it is really like, or how to compare it with anything known to him. The comparison which may be made will depend upon the state of mind of the observer. It is well known that persons looking at the rough bark of a tree, or at the irregular lines or veins in certain kinds of marble and stone, or gazing at the red embers in a dull fire will, according to the degree of activity of the imagination, be able to see many different forms, even the outlines of animals and of human faces. It is in this way that persons may fancy that the moon’s surface is broken up into hills and valleys, and other conditions such as are found on earth. But that anything really similar to the surface of our own world is anywhere visible upon the moon is altogether fallacious.”-Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (335)
Before 1852 American education consisted of one-room school houses, independent teachers, and students of all ages attending of their own free will. Curriculums and funding came directly from local communities without a federalized bureaucracy ruling over every facet like today. From 1852-1918 things changed as the government began pushing to enforce compulsory schooling laws all across America. These were coupled with new “child labor laws” in an effort to take children off the farms from under their family’s tutelage and force them into indoctrination camps under the government’s tutelage. These laws were met with strenuous opposition at every turn by the US population and unless there was an incredibly well-backed agenda to make sure such laws passed, they would not have. If it was simply a matter of what the people in individual states really wanted, child labor and compulsory schooling issues would have been dropped as soon as they were raised.
“At first the laws were optional … later the law was made state-wide but the compulsory period was short (ten to twelve weeks) and the age limits low, nine to twelve years. After this, struggle came to extend the time, often little by little…to extend the age limits downward to eight and seven and upwards to fourteen, fifteen or sixteen; to make the law apply to children attending private and parochial schools, and to require cooperation from such schools for the proper handling of cases; to institute state supervision of local enforcement; to connect school attendance enforcement with the child-labor legislation of the State through a system of working permits.” -Ellwood Cubberley, “Public Education in the United States” 1934
“Since 1900, and due more to the activity of persons concerned with social legislation and those interested in improving the moral welfare of children than to educators themselves, there has been a general revision of the compulsory education laws of our States and the enactment of much new child-welfare … and anti-child-labor legislation … These laws have brought into the schools not only the truant and the incorrigible, who under former conditions either left early or were expelled, but also many children … who have no aptitude for book learning and many children of inferior mental qualities who do not profit by ordinary classroom procedures …Our schools have come to contain many children who … become a nuisance in the school and tend to demoralize school procedure.” -Ellwood Cubberley, “Public Education in the United States” 1934
At the turn of the 20th century Cubberley spoke of how children mechanically minded, without aptitude for book learning, or of inferior mental capacities, “become a nuisance in the school and tend to demoralize school procedure.” At the turn of the 21st century, Bush continues pushing the idea of “No Child Left Behind,” the complete opposite, which expands special-ed at the expense of gifted and talented programs, promotes “outcome-based education” (an atrocious educational philosophy now being promoted), and furthers state control of your children. If you believe in the myth of a benevolent nanny-state that looks out for your best interests from cradle to grave, “No Child Left Behind” might fit well into your philosophy, but for independent individuals, lovers of freedom, this is the final step in government mind-control.
California Education Administrator Ellwood Cubberley was the main anti-establishment voice speaking out against the standardizing and enforcement of our schooling. The leading pro-establishment voice was (1889-1906) US Commissioner of Education William Torrey Harris. Listen to Harris’ words from his 1906, “The Philosophy of Education”: “Ninety-nine [students] out of a hundred are automata, careful to walk in prescribed paths, careful to follow the prescribed custom. This is not an accident but the result of substantial education, which, scientifically defined, is the subsumption of the individual.” Is this a sane “Philosophy of Education” by anyone’s standards? This is the man who gave America scientifically age-graded classrooms to replace the long successful practice of mixed-age school houses. In “The Philosophy of Education,” Harris wrote his vision of the perfect classroom: “The great purpose of school can be realized better in dark, airless, ugly places … It is to master the physical self, to transcend the beauty of nature. School should develop the power to withdraw from the external world.”
“Reading through the papers of the Rockefeller Foundation’s General Education Board – an endowment rivaled in school policy influence in the first half of the twentieth century only by Andrew Carnegie’s various philanthropies – seven curious elements force themselves on the careful reader: 1) There appears a clear intention to mold people through schooling. 2) There is a clear intention to eliminate tradition and scholarship. 3) The net effect of various projects is to create a strong class system verging on caste. 4) There is a clear intention to reduce mass critical intelligence while supporting infinite specialization. 5) There is clear intention to weaken parental influence. 6) There is clear intention to overthrow accepted custom. 7) There is striking congruency between the cumulative purposes of GEB projects and the utopian precepts of the oddball religious sect, once known as Perfectionism, a secular religion aimed at making the perfection of human nature, not salvation or happiness, the purpose of existence. The agenda of philanthropy, which had so much to do with the schools we got, turns out to contain an intensely political component.” -John Taylor Gatto, “
Rockefeller charity and philanthropy influences many sectors of society from education to politics to religion. Here’s an abridged list of Rockefeller funded organizations: American Assembly, American Association for the United Nations, American Friends Service Committee, Atlantic Union, Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Science, Center of Diplomacy and Foreign Policy, Citizens Committee for International Development, Committees on Foreign Relations, Committee for Economic Development, Council on Foreign Relations, Federation of World Governments, Foreign Policy Association, Institute of International Education, Institute for World Order, National Planning Association US National Commission, The Trilateral Commission World Affairs Council, and United World Federalists. Notice any trends? Any doubt regarding the Rockefeller’s intent in starting the GEB should be clarified in John D’s own mission statement:
“In our dreams, people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present education conventions of intellectual and character education fade from their minds, and, unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people, or any of their children, into philosophers, or men of science. We have not to raise up from them authors, educators, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for great artists, painters, musicians nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen – of whom we have an ample supply. The task is simple. We will organize children and teach them in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way.” -John D. Rockefeller, General Education Board (1906)
In 1932, continuing their effort to change the philosophical goals of American education, the Rockefeller/Carnegie dominated NEA created the EPC (Educational Policies Commission). Years later the EPC put together its book “Education for All American Youth” which outlined federal programs for health, education and welfare to be combined under one giant bureaucracy. It outlined pre-school programs, sex education classes, and the removal of local control over educational issues “without seeming to do so.” A 1934 NEA report advised, “A dying laissez-faire must be completely destroyed and all of us, including the ‘owners’, must be subjected to a large degree of social control.” So these education “experts” actually speak of themselves as “owners” and worry about falling under “a large degree of (the) social control” which they themselves implement.
In 1942, the Institute of Pacific Relations published “Post War Worlds.” In it P.E. Corbett wrote, “World government is the ultimate aim … It must be recognized that the law of nations takes precedence over national law …The process will have to be assisted by the deletion of the nationalistic material employed in educational textbooks and its replacement by material explaining the benefits of wiser association.” In 1946, former editor of the NEA Journal, Joy Elmer, published, “The Teacher and World Government” saying things like, “In the struggle to establish an adequate world government, the teacher… can do much to prepare the hearts and minds of children for global understanding and cooperation… At the very heart of all the agencies which will assure the coming of world government must stand the school, the teacher, and the organized profession.” The next year in 1947 The American Education Fellowship, organized by establishment minion John Dewey (of the “Dewey decimal system”) called for the, “establishment of a genuine world order, an order in which national sovereignty is subordinate to world authority.” In October, 1947, NEA Associate Secretary William Carr wrote in the NEA Journal that teachers should, “teach about the various proposals that have been made for the strengthening of the United Nations and the establishment of a world citizenship and world government.”
Elitist Committee of 300 philosopher, Bertrand Russell, in his 1951 book “The Impact of Science on Society,” wrote, “Education should aim at destroying free will so that after pupils are thus schooled they will be incapable throughout the rest of their lives of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school masters would have wished…. Influences of the home are obstructive; and in order to condition students, verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective … It is for a future scientist to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for more than one generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen.”
During a personal meeting, President Rowan Gaither of the Ford Foundation told Reece Committee research director Norman Dodd that, “all of us here at the policy making level of the foundation have at one time or another served in the OSS [pre-cursor to the CIA] or the European Economic Administration, operating under directives from the White House. We operate under those same directives … The substance under which we operate is that we shall use our grant making power to so alter life in the United States that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.” As their meeting turned from civil to threatening, Gaither warned Dodd, “If you proceed with the investigation as you have outlined, you will be killed.”
Modern astronomy has absolutely convinced the world, as George Bernard Shaw stated, that nothing that is obvious is true. It is obvious that the Earth is flat, yet they say it is curved; it is obvious that the world is motionless, yet they say that it moves; it is obvious that the heavens revolve around us, yet they say it is us that revolves; it is obvious that the stars are stars yet they say the stars are suns; it is obvious that the Sun is bigger than the stars, yet they say the stars are bigger than the Sun; it is obvious that the Sun and Moon are the same size, yet they say the Sun is 400 times larger; it is obvious that Earth is the only “planet,” yet they say there are over a septillion (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) planets; it is obvious that up is up and down is down, yet they say it is not so!
“With the Modem Astronomer there is theoretically neither ‘Up’ nor ‘Down,’ though his experience belies his assertion, every time he looks ‘up’ to the heavens or ‘down’ to the ground. Such aberration of intellect is really to be pitied.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (274)
“The physical properties of a physical globe would create insurmountable difficulties for the being called ‘man’ for man is a two-legged, smooth-footed, clawless-toed, and heavily-built creature. Picture him on the outside of a sphere in our popular 34 degree South latitude. He has his boots on and his head is depressed in space 34 degrees to his feet. Consider him magnetized through his boots to the center of the globe, where the ‘big magnet’ is located. Picture him looking down in to the gaseous void, with his eyes gouging out of their sockets and his heart in his mouth; and his prayer that his ‘hob-nailed’ boots will not lose their magnetism. No wonder the world’s brain got addled! The reader has been hoaxed by the stupidest manifest hoax ever perpetrated.” -S.G. Fowler, “Truth – The Earth is Flat” (3)
They claim, contrary to our senses, that many of us are standing upside-down thinking we are right-side up on the underside of a spinning ball-Earth! They claim, contrary to our senses, that we are reeling through space at millions of miles per hour, that stars are actually suns, that the Sun is actually bigger than the Moon, and that most stars are actually bigger than the Sun! We can clearly see and feel, however, that we are standing right-side up on a motionless, flat Earth, the Sun and Moon are the same size, the stars are clearly smaller than both, and cannot be proven to be distant “suns” in other “solar systems.” With a little Photoshop , rocket technology, and a bunch of lying Freemasons, NASA has convinced nearly everyone on Earth to disbelieve their own eyes, common sense and experience.
Many of the first people to unequivocally call out the NASA Moon landings as being a staged hoax (besides knowledgeable flat-Earthers) were professional photographers. When the official NASA photographs of “the Moon” are closely examined it is clear that many were taken inside a studio using repetitive backgrounds, artificial lighting, wires and cranes. Others were composite desert photographs with the backgrounds blacked out and astronauts super-imposed in. Award-winning British photographer David Persey, photo-analyst/historian Jack White, photographer/Nexus magazine publisher Marcus Allen, and many others have put their professional reputations on the line to expose NASA’s photographic “evidence.”
“The numerous inconsistencies clearly visible in the Apollo photographic record is quite irrefutable. Some of the many errors we evidence were due to haste and poor thinking. Others were deliberately planted by individuals we have dubbed ‘Whistle-Blowers,’ who were determined to leave evidence of the faking in which they were unwillingly involved. Probably the most emphatic of these whistles was a bottle that rolled across the ‘moon’ landscape on the TV screens in Western Australia during a ‘live’ transmission from the ‘moon.’” -David Percy, “Dark Moon: Apollo and the Whistle-Blowers” (1)
None of the Apollo missions brought any extra studio lighting with them on the Lunar Lander, so the Sun should be the only light source on “the Moon” and in all pictures taken there. In that case, the light should only come from one direction and all shadows should be cast in the opposite direction. However, in dozens of official NASA photos there are shadows being cast in up to 3 directions simultaneously, often at up to 90 degree angles, which can only be the result of multiple light sources, not present on the Moon. Several pictures even show overhead spotlights reflecting in astronaut’s helmets and multiple lens flares originating from two or more light sources.
Analyzing several images from the 6 missions shows repeated background features (the exact same hills, dunes, craters) being used over and over again in supposedly different places on the Moon, as well as visible foreground and backdrop lines indicative of a studio set. In images from Apollo 11, Buzz Aldrin can be seen wearing different color gloves and different length boots in pictures that were supposedly taken within minutes of each other. If Buzz was really in the vacuum of space in a pressurized spacesuit, he certainly would not have had time or reason to de-pressurize and re-pressurize his suit just to make such fashion adjustments! Some pictures show the lunar rover with no tracks anywhere around it, others show rover tracks all over the foreground while it is yet to be unpacked and unloaded! A couple pictures even show what appear to be sneakers and lady’s heels tracks on the “Moon” in addition to the astronauts’ boot prints!
hey had to produce a considerable number of fake Moon pictures, for all six missions, otherwise the public would want to know why there were so few. Not all of NASA’s fake Apollo pictures have been altered with Photoshop. The main Apollo 11 picture of Buzz Aldrin, as well as press released pictures from Apollo 12 and Apollo 14 showing astronauts holding the flag. All of these press release pictures were taken in the fake Moonscape at Langley Research Center, and did not require any alteration to pass off as a Moon photograph.” -Sam Colby, “Apollo Fake”
Another glaring mistake is that none of NASA’s images or videos show stars in the background as they should, just complete blackness, likely because exact star maps as they should appear from the Moon would be quite difficult to fake. The testimony of different astronauts on different missions, in their autobiographies and interviews just muddies the waters even more, some of them bragging about the “astonishingly brilliant light of the stars” and others saying they “don’t remember seeing a single star while on the Moon!” Such inconsistencies, and the fact that none of NASA’s “Moon” pictures feature stars/planets in their appropriate positions, should raise a red flag that these astro-nots were not on the Moon.
Many pictures of the “Sun” on the Moon are clearly spotlights and not the Sun, including AS14-66-9306, AS12-46-6765, and AS11-40-5935. NASA image AS12-49-7278 clearly shows several studio lighting lens flares caused by multiple overhead lights. Image AS14-64-9089 shows studio lighting reflecting off a black background. Image AS17-151-23201 shows a shadow on the ceiling of “space” as the Lunar Lander lifts off. Images AS16-118-18894, AS17-134-20471, AS11-44-6581, and AS11-44-6642 show crude computer retouching to hide cables and background problems and add the round “Earth,” but NASA claims they are original photographs. AS14-66-9306 shows shadows of reticule crosshairs suspended in air over a print underneath, proving it to be doctored and not an original as claimed.
Image AS11-40-5922 of the Lunar Lander supposedly on the Moon shows a pathetic 1969 attempt at creating “high-tech-looking” equipment using what appears to be construction paper, gold foil, scotch tape, and metal shower rods. The idea that the piece of junk shown in this official NASA photograph flew to the Moon and back is so ludicrous it’s laughable. AS17-148-22756 also clearly shows when enlarged that the Apollo 17 Command Module was almost completely held together by scotch tape! In AS16-113-18339 there is a rock with a letter “C” clearly engraved into it, as well as another “C” drawn into the dirt next to it. This is characteristic of fake stage rocks on a stage set-up where the set designer demarcates prop positions, and not something we should see on “the Moon!”
When the video evidence is examined, even more anomalies are found. In certain frames, light pings can be seen reflecting off overhead stage-wires attached to astronauts’ backpacks. In one Apollo 16 clip an astronaut falls to his knees and is quickly jerked back up to his feet by what can only be an unseen wire hoisting him straight upwards. One of the more obvious video anomalies is how several Apollo missions show American flags flapping around in the non-existent space-wind. The “Moon” is supposed to have no atmosphere and so the flags should remain perfectly still but can often be seen moving quite boisterously. NASA claims the astronauts brushing up against them could cause this, but is clearly not the case, as the flags stay waving for long periods of time with no astronauts touching or even near them. Another interesting video anomaly is discovered by playing NASA’s “Moon” footage at 2X speed then watching the astronauts walking, running, jumping or cruising around on their little buggy. Without the speed adjustment there is a “low-gravity” illusion as the astronauts seem to float, drift, and glide slowly and smoothly along, but once they are seen at 2X speed it becomes clear that they are in “normal-gravity” walking, running, jumping and cruising at normal speeds! They simply reduced the play-speed by 50% in post-production, and voila, instant “Moon” motion.
“Most, if not all, of the photos, films, and videotape of the Apollo Moon Missions are easily proven to be fake. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of photography, lighting and physics can easily prove that NASA faked the visual records of the Apollo Space Program. Some are so obviously fake that when the discrepancies are pointed out to unsuspecting viewers an audible gasp has been heard. Some have actually gone into a mild state of shock. Some people break down and cry. I have even seen others become so angry that they have ripped the offending photos to shreds while screaming incoherently.” -William Cooper
Bill Kaysing, another Moon hoax researcher, worked at Rocketdyne where NASA Saturn V rocket engines were built and became exposed to documents pertaining to the Mercury, Gemini, Atlas and Apollo NASA programs, which proved trickery was afoot. Kaysing said of the documents that, “one does not need an engineering or science degree to determine that a hoax was being perpetrated.” He wrote a book about his findings called “We Never Went to the Moon: America’s Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle.” In it he exposes how NASA staged both the Apollo 1 fire and Challenger “accident” deliberately murdering the astronauts on board to silence them.
One of the most outspoken of the fallen astronauts was Gus Grissom. By 1967 Grissom had become increasingly irritated and vocally negative about NASA’s chances of ever landing man on the Moon. He stated the odds were “pretty slim” and famously hung a lemon on the Apollo capsule after it repeatedly failed safety testing procedures. Grissom threatened to go public with his complaints about the LEM, and even told his wife Betty, “If there ever is a serious accident in the space program, it’s likely to be me.” Right after his murder, government agents raided Grissom’s house before anyone had been informed about the fire or his death. They removed all his personal papers and his diary, never to be returned.
Since the faked Apollo moon landings in 1969 NASA has moved on to faking Mars landings with the 1976 Viking, 1997 Pathfinder, and 2007 Phoenix. Right after “landing” they got straight to work photoshopping the famous “Face on Mars,” Martian pyramids, and the supposed Martian city of Cydonia. NASA shills like Richard Hoagland and Steven Greer have ever since been propagating the idea that this and other “evidence” proves the existence of extra-terrestrial aliens. Just like the faked Moon landings, however, their science-fiction “Mars” landings are utter bold-faced lies.
Even assuming Mars was an actual spherical desert planet as NASA claims, it is impossible for them to have safely landed the probes based on their own trials and statistics. They say the surface pressure on Mars is only 3/10ths of 1% the surface pressure on Earth, and equivalent to the pressure at about 23 miles above Earth. There is not enough air matter at that pressure, however, to provide any lift for opening and billowing out th
e parachutes NASA uses to land its Mars probes. No parachute ever devised has been able to successfully deploy at that altitude; they simply stream straight back then never fill the rest of the way down. Joe Kittenger’s record highest, fastest, and longest parachute dive from the Earth’s upper atmosphere had him free-falling from only 19 miles high for 15 minutes at 767 mph and his drogue chute proved useless and offered no deceleration. Yet NASA would have us believe, for example, that Phoenix’s parachute managed to somehow slow it down from 12,738 mph to 123 mph in just 2.86 minutes before its final landing. In other words, NASA is claiming to do something on Mars that we have no evidence is even possible on Earth at significantly lower altitude and 16 times slower speed!
MX News on June 3rd, 2008 featured a picture given to them by NASA of the Phoenix’s first dig into “Martian” soil. But on June 6th, 2008, three days later, The London Daily Telegraph reported from NASA that “another communications glitch stopped NASA’s Phoenix lander again from making its first dig into Martian soil.” How could they give the photo to MX news if they had yet to make their first dig, and why can they never keep their stories straight?
Then “Mars” Phoenix Lander’s robotic arm photographed image 896662759 taken at 14:39:37 LST and image 896662868 at 14:41:23 LST only 2 minutes and 46 seconds later. In the first image there is a fallen loose screw visible by the leg which disappears before the second photo is taken. NASA themselves claimed the robot arm did not touch “Martian” soil until the next day so they cannot claim to have moved it themselves, and the topical arrangement of sand/rocks remains exactly the same, so it cannot be explained by strong winds. Thus the question remains, who picked up the screw? More than likely an observant and well-meaning stage-hand picked it up between shots!
“In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.” -Adolf Hitler
In my book “Famous Freemasons Exposed” I showed how Nicolas Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, and Isaac Newton, the four fore-fathers of the globalist heliocentric doctrine, all posed for Masonic portraits highlighting various symbols and hand-signs denoting their affiliation with the brotherhood. Galileo poses on a Masonic checkerboard floor, Kepler with the “hidden hand” sign, and all four of them pose with a Masonic compass and globe while flashing the Masonic “M” hand-sign. “Sir” Isaac Newton was even knighted by Queen Anne at Trinity College’s Masonic Masters Lodge.
An inordinate number of NASA astronauts, the current propagators of the globalist heliocentric doctrine, are/were admitted Freemasons as well. John Glenn, two-time US senator and one of NASA’s first astronauts is a known Mason. Buzz Aldrin Jr., the second man to lie about walking on the moon is an admitted, ring-wearing, hand-sign flashing 33rd degree Mason from Montclair Lodge No. 144 in New Jersey. Edgar Mitchell, another supposed moon-walker aboard Apollo 14 is an Order of Demolay Mason at Artesta Lodge No. 29 in New Mexico. James Irwin of Apollo 15, the last man to lie about walking on the moon, was a Tejon Lodge No. 104 member in Colorado Springs. Donn Eisele on Apollo 7 was a member of the Luther B. Turner Lodge No. 732 in Ohio. Gordon Cooper aboard Mercury 9 and Gemini 5 was a Master Mason in Carbondale Lodge No. 82 in Colorado. Virgil Grissom on Apollo 1 and 15, Mercury 5 and Gemini 3 was a Master Mason from Mitchell Lodge No. 228 in Indiana. Walter Schirra Jr. on Apollo 7, Sigma 7, Gemini 6 and Mercury 8 was a 33rd degree Mason at Canaveral Lodge No. 339 in Florida. Thomas Stafford on Apollo 10 and 18, Gemini 7 and 9 is a Mason at Western Star Lodge No. 138 in Oklahoma. Paul Weitz on Skylab 2 and Challenger is from Lawrence Lodge No. 708 in Pennsylvania.
NASA astronauts Neil Armstrong, Allen Sheppard, William Pogue, Vance Brand, and Anthony England all had fathers who were Freemasons too! The amount of astronauts known to be Freemasons or from Freemasonic families is astonishing. It is likely that more astronauts and people of key importance in NASA are affiliated with the brotherhood as well, but not so open about their membership. For there to be this many Masons, members of the world’s largest and oldest secret society, involved with the promotion and propagation of this globalist heliocentric doctrine from its outset to today should raise some serious suspicion!
“C. Fred Kleinknecht, head of NASA at the time of the Apollo Space Program, is now the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Council of the 33rd Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry of the Southern Jurisdiction. It was his reward for pulling it off! All of the first astronauts were Freemasons. There is a photograph in the House of the Temple in Washington DC of Neil Armstrong supposedly on the moon’s surface in his spacesuit holding his Masonic Apron in front of his groin.” -William Cooper
NASA’s logo is a giant red forked serpent’s tongue overlaying the starry heavens. Serpents, and specifically their forked tongues, have long been associated with lying, deceit, cleverness, two-facedness, manipulation, and with Satan, the Devil. Why would the National Aeronautics and Space Administration choose this as their official logo?
The United Nations, the New World Order government headquarters, built on land donated by 33rd degree Freemason John D. Rockefeller, is represented by a logo/flag which clearly depicts a Flat Earth divided into 33 sections! There are 33 official degrees of Scottish-Rite Freemasonry, and the UN flag features a Flat-Earth divided into exactly 33 sections! Why would the United Nations founders choose a logo/flag of a Flat-Earth map divided into 33 sections? How is it that C. Fred Kleinknecht, the head of NASA, retired and immediately became the head of the 33rd degree of Freemasonry? How is it that all the fore-fathers of the ball-Earth theory and so many NASA astronauts are all Freemasons!?
So why do NASA logos feature serpent tongues and eagles? And why are there an excessive number of Mason astronauts? The eagle-winged solar disk symbol with twin serpents found in every Masonic lodge holds the answer. The double-headed eagle is the official symbol of the 33rd degree of Masonry. The 25th degree of Masonry initiates are known as “Knights of the Brazen Serpent,” and the 28th degree are known as “Knights of the Sun.” The religion of the Druids, pre-cursor to modern Masonry, was the same as the ancient Egyptians, where priests ruled from “Heliopolis” or “The City of the Sun,” a city full of obelisks built for their Sun God Ra.
The first person to ever present the idea of a Sun-centered universe was Pythagoras of Samos in around 500 B.C. Pythagoras is also widely recognized by Masonic historians as being the very first Freemason! Master Mason Dr. James Anderson said in his “Defence of Masonry,” that, “I am fully convinced that Freemasonry is very nearly allied to the old Pythagorean Discipline, from whence, I am persuaded, it may in some circumstances very justly claim a descent.” Master Mason William Hutchinson wrote in his “Spirit of Masonry,” that, “the ancient Masonic record brings us positive evidence of the Pythagorean doctrine and Basilidian principles making the foundation of our religious and moral duties.” Master Mason William Preston wrote that Pythagoras was “among the first Masons” but contends in his “Illustrations of Masonry,” that, “the records of the fraternity inform us that Pythagoras was regularly initiated into Masonry; and being properly instructed in the mysteries of the Art, he was much improved, and propagated the principles of the Order in other countries into which he afterwards traveled.”
In addition to these admissions by Masonic historians, the life and work of Pythagoras closely resembles many aspects of the craft, from his obsession with triangles and geometry, to his school-cult full of initiatory rites and brain-washing. Candidates were “rigidly scrutinized” just like candidates for Masonry are “given the third degree” i.e. forced to answer many probing personal questions, and are then either given a white-ball or black-ball by Masons in the lodge, just one black-ball resulting in being “black-balled” / kicked out. If initiated, just like in Masonry, Pythagorean initiates had to swear oaths of secrecy and loyalty then submitted to various tests, trials and rituals. The “brethren” lived like communists and worshipped the Sun. Over time they progressed through a series of three degrees in which only the privileged few in the highest degree learned the truth of the symbols and rituals. The many parallels of the Pythagorean School and modern Freemasonry are far too similar to ignore.
He published his famous Treaty on the Revolution of the Celestial Spheres in 1543, the year of his death, and even then insisted on their purely hypothetical nature. Copernicus wrote, “The Pythagorean teaching was founded upon hypothesis and it is not necessary that the hypothesis should be true, or even probable. The hypothesis of the movement of the earth is only one which is useful to explain phenomena, but it should not be considered as an absolute truth.”
“Circular sailing no more proves the world to be a globe than an equilateral triangle. The sailing round the world would, of course, take very much longer, but, in principle, it is exactly the same as that of the yachtsman circumnavigating the Isle of Wight. Let me give a simple illustration. A boy wants to sail his iron toy boat by a magnet, so he gets a basin, in the middle of which he places a soap-dish, or anything else which he may think suitable to represent the Earth, and then fills the basin with water to display the sea. He puts in his boat and draws it by the magnet round his little world. But the boat never passes over the rim to sail under the basin, as if that were globular, instead of being simply circular. So is it in this world of ours; from the extreme South we can sail from East to West or from West to East around it, but we cannot sail from North to South or from South to North, for we cannot break through intervening lands, nor pass the impenetrable ramparts of ice and rocks which enclose the great Southern Circumference.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (68)
“A very good illustration of the circum-navigation of a plane will be seen by taking a round table, and fixing a pin in the centre to represent the magnetic pole. To this central pin attach a string drawn out to any distance towards the edge of the table. This string may represent the meridian of Greenwich, extending due north and south. If now a pencil or other object is placed across, or at right angles to the string, at any distance between the centre and the circumference of the table, it will represent a vessel standing due east and west. Now move the pencil and the string together in either direction, and it will be seen that by keeping the vessel (or pencil), square to the string it must of necessity describe a circle round the magnetic centre and return to the starting point in the opposite direction to that in which it first sailed.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (226)
The ball-Earther’s logical argument is that only a globe can be circumnavigated, the Earth has been circumnavigated, and therefore the Earth is a globe. This is indeed a logical modus ponens statement, but the conclusion is rendered invalid because the first premise – that only a globe can be circumnavigated – is categorically false. Another similarly logical but unsound argument ball-Earther’s make is that only on a globe would one gain or lose time when sailing/flying East or West, time is gained or lost when sailing/flying East or West, and therefore the Earth is a globe. Again, the logical conclusion is rendered invalid and the argument unsound because the first premise is incorrect. The same effect would be experienced on a stationary flat-Earth as it would on a spinning ball-Earth.
“The gaining and losing of time on sailing ‘round the world’ east and west, is generally referred to as another proof of the earth’s rotundity. But it is equally as fallacious as the argument drawn from circumnavigation, and from the same cause, namely, the assumption that on a globe only will such a result occur. It will be seen by reference to the following diagram, that such an effect must arise equally upon a plane as upon a globe. Let V, represent a vessel on the meridian of Greenwich V, N; and ready to start on a voyage eastward; and S, represent the sun moving in an opposite direction, or westward. It is evident that the vessel and the sun being on the same meridian on a given day, if the ship should be stationary the sun would go round in the direction of the arrows, and would meet it again in 24 hours. But if, during the next 24 hours, the ship has sailed to the position X, say 45 degrees of longitude eastward, the sun in its course would meet it three hours earlier than before, or in 21 hours–because 15 degrees of longitude correspond to one hour of time. Hence three hours would be gained. The next day, while the sun is going its round the vessel will have arrived at Y, meeting it 6 hours sooner than it would have done had it remained at V, and, in the same way, continuing its course eastward, the vessel would at length meet the sun at Z, twelve hours earlier than if it had remained at V; and thus passing successively over the arcs 1, 2, and 3, to V, or the starting point, 24 hours, or one day will have been gained. But the contrary follows if the ship sails in the opposite direction. The sun having to come round to the meridian of Greenwich V, S, N, in 24 hours, and the ship having in that time moved on to the position fig. 3, will have to overtake the ship at that position, and thus be three hours longer in reaching it. In this way the sun is more and more behind the meridian time of the ship as it proceeds day after day upon its westerly course, so that on completing the circum-navigation the ship’s time is one day later than the solar time, reckoning to and from the meridian of Greenwich.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (229-230)
Another favorite “proof” of ball-Earthers is the appearance from an observer on shore of ships’ hulls being obfuscated by the water and disappearing from view when sailing away towards the horizon. Their claim is that ship’s hulls disappear before their mast-heads because the ship is beginning its declination around the convex curvature of the ball-Earth. Once again, however, their hasty conclusion is drawn from a faulty premise, namely that only on a ball-Earth can this phenomenon occur. The fact of the matter is that the Law of Perspective on plane surfaces dictates and necessitates the exact same occurrence. For example a girl wearing a dress walking away towards the horizon will appear to sink into the Earth the farther away she walks. Her feet will disappear from view first and the distance between the ground and the bottom of her dress will gradually diminish until after about half a mile it seems like her dress is touching the ground as she walks on invisible legs. The same happens with cars speeding away, the axles gradually get lower and the wheels vanish until it appears as if the car is gliding along its body. Such is the case on plane surfaces, the lowest parts of objects receding from a given point of observation necessarily disappear before the highest.
“This law of Perspective meets us on every hand; and cannot be gainsaid. If, in a straight line, we look at a frozen lake from a certain distance, we shall observe people who appear to be skating on their knees, but, if we approach sufficiently near, we shall see them performing graceful motions on their feet. Farther, if we look through a straight tunnel, we shall notice that the roof and the roadway below converge to a point of light at the end. It is the same law which makes the hills sink, to the horizon, as the observer recedes, which explains how the ship’s hull disappears in the offing. I would also remark that when the sea is undisturbed by waves, the hull can be restored to sight by the aid of a good telescope long after it has disappeared from the naked eye, thus proving that the ship had not gone down behind the watery hill of a convex globe, but is still sailing on the level of a Plane sea.” – David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (75)
Not only is the disappearance of ship’s hulls explained by the Law of Perspective, it is proven undeniably true with the aid of a good telescope. If you watch a ship sailing away into the horizon with the naked eye until its hull has completely disappeared from view under the supposed “curvature of the Earth,” then look through a telescope, you will notice the entire ship quickly zooms back into view, hull and all, proving that the disappearance was caused by the Law of Perspective, and not by a wall of curved water!
In the mid 19th century a Frenchman named Léon Foucault became famous for swinging pendulums and claiming their consequent motions were proof of the Earth’s diurnal rotation. Since then “Foucault Pendulums” have regularly been swinging at museums and exposition halls worldwide purporting to provide everlasting perpetual proof of the heliocentric spinning ball-Earth theory. The truth is, however, unbeknownst to most of the duped public, that Foucault’s pendulum is a failed experiment which proves nothing but how easy it is for pseudo-science to deceive the malleable masses.
“This pendulum, modern scientists tell us, affords a visible proof that we are living on a whirling globe, which, according to a ‘work on science’ now before me, is spinning upon its so-called axis at the rate of over 1,000 miles an hour at the equator; and, in addition to other motions, is rushing on an everlasting tour round the sun (the diameter of which is said to be 813,000 miles, and its weight 354,936 times greater than the earth from which it is said to be about 93,000,000 miles distant,) at the rate of over 1,000 miles per minute. Now to prove that the earth really has these motions a pendulum is suspended at the show; the showman sets motion, and bids the gaping world of thoughtless men and women to ‘behold a proof’ that we are living on a whirling globe which is rushing away through space!” -Lady Blount, “The Romance of Science” (7)
To begin with, Foucault’s pendulums do not uniformly swing in any one direction. Sometimes they rotate clockwise and sometimes counter-clockwise, sometimes they fail to rotate and sometimes they rotate far too much. Scientists who have repeated variations of the experiment have conceded time and again that “it was difficult to avoid giving the pendulum some slight lateral bias at starting.” The behavior of the pendulum actually depends on 1) the initial force beginning its swing and, 2) the ball-and-socket joint used which most-readily facilitates circular motion over any other. The supposed rotation of the Earth is completely inconsequential and irrelevant to the pendulum’s swing. If the alleged constant rotation of the Earth affected pendulums in any way, then there should be no need to manually start pendulums in motion! If the Earth’s diurnal rotation caused the 360 degree uniform diurnal rotation of pendulums, then there should not exist a stationary pendulum anywhere on Earth!
“First, when a pendulum, constructed according to the plan of M. Foucault, is allowed to vibrate, its plane of vibration is often variable – not always. The variation when it does occur, is not uniform – is not always the same in the same place; nor always the same either in its rate or velocity, or in its direction. It cannot therefore be taken as evidence; for that which is inconstant cannot be used in favor of or against any given proposition. It therefore is not evidence and proves nothing! Secondly, if the plane of vibration is observed to change, where is the connection between such change and the supposed motion of the Earth? What principle of reasoning guides the experimenter to the conclusion that it is the Earth which moves underneath the pendulum, and not the pendulum which moves over the Earth? What logical right or necessity forces one conclusion in preference to the other? Thirdly, why was not the peculiar arrangement of the point of suspension of the pendulum specially considered, in regard to its possible influence upon the plane of oscillation? Was it not known, or was it overlooked, or was it, in the climax of theoretical revelry, ignored that a ‘ball-and-socket’ joint is one which facilitates circular motion more readily than any other?” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Earth Not a Globe, 2nd Edition” (153)
Also in the mid-19th century, another Frenchman named Gaspard-Gustave Coriolis performed several experiments showing the effect of kinetic energy on rotating systems, which have ever since become mythologized as proof of the heliocentric theory. The “Coriolis Effect” is often said to cause sinks and toilet bowls in the Northern Hemisphere to drain spinning in one direction while in the Southern Hemisphere causing them to spin the opposite way, thus providing proof of the spinning ball-Earth. Once again, however, just like Foucault’s Pendulums spinning either which way, sinks and toilets in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres do not consistently spin in any one direction! Sinks and toilets in the very same household are often found to spin opposite directions, depending entirely upon the shape of the basin and the angle of the water’s entry, not the supposed rotation of the Earth.
“While the premise makes sense – that the earth’s eastward spin would cause the water in a toilet bowl to spin as well – in reality, the force and speed at which the water enters and leaves the receptacle is much too great to be influenced by something as miniscule as a single, 360-degree turn over the span of a day. When all is said and done, the Coriolis effect plays no larger role in toilet flushes than it does in the revolution of CDs in your stereo. The things that really determine the direction in which water leaves your toilet or sink are the shape of the bowl and the angle at which the liquid initially enters that bowl.” -Jennifer Horton, “Does the Rotation of the Earth Affect Toilets and Baseball Games?” Science.HowStuffWorks.com
The Coriolis Effect is also said to affect bullet trajectories and weather patterns as well, supposedly causing most storms in the Northern Hemisphere to rotate counter-clockwise, and most storms in the Southern Hemisphere to rotate clockwise, to cause bullets from long range guns to tend towards the right of the target in the Northern Hemisphere and to the left in the Southern Hemisphere. Again, however, the same problems remain. Not every bullet and not every storm consistently displays the behavior and therefore cannot reasonably be used as proof of anything. What about the precision of the sight aperture, human error, and wind? What about Michelson-Morley-Gale’s proven motion of the aether’s potential effect? Why does the Coriolis Effect affect most storms but not all? If some storms rotate clockwise in the North and counter-clockwise in the South, how do those storms escape the Coriolis force? And if the entire Earth’s spin is uniform, why should the two hemispheres be affected any differently? Coriolis’s Effect and Foucault’s Pendulum are both said to prove the Earth moves beneath our feet, but in reality only prove how easy it can be for wolves in sheep’s clothing to pull the wool over our eyes.
“Those who are unacquainted with the methods of calculating eclipses and other phenomena, are prone to look upon the correctness of such calculations as powerful arguments in favour of the doctrine of the earth’s rotundity and the Newtonian philosophy, generally. One of the most pitiful manifestations of ignorance of the true nature of theoretical astronomy is the ardent inquiry so often made, ‘How is it possible for that system to be false, which enables its professors to calculate to a second of time both solar and lunar eclipses for hundreds of years to come?’ The supposition that such calculations are an essential part of the Newtonian or any other theory is entirely gratuitous, and exceedingly fallacious and misleading. Whatever theory is adopted, or if all theories are discarded, the same calculations can be made.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (151)
“The simplest method of ascertaining any future eclipse is to take the tables which have been formed during hundreds of years of careful observation; or each observer may form his own tables by collecting a number of old almanacks one for each of the last forty years; separate the times of the eclipses in each year, and arrange them in a tabular form. On looking over the various items he will soon discover parallel cases, or ‘cycles’ of eclipses; that is, taking the eclipses in the first year of his table, and examining those of each succeeding year, he will notice peculiarities in each year’s phenomena; but on arriving to the items of the nineteenth and twentieth years, he will perceive that some of the eclipses in the earlier part of the table will have been now repeated–that is to say, the times and characters will be alike … Tables of the places of the sun and moon, of eclipses, and of kindred phenomena, have existed for thousands of years, and were formed independently of each other, by the Chaldean, Babylonian, Egyptian, Hindoo, Chinese, and other ancient astronomers. Modern science has had nothing to do with these.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (153-154)
Another assumption and supposed proof of Earth’s shape, heliocentrists claim that lunar eclipses are caused by the shadow of the ball-Earth occulting the Moon. The idea is that the Sun, Earth, and Moon spheres perfectly align like three billiard balls in a row so that the Sun’s light casts the Earth’s shadow onto the Moon. Unfortunately for heliocentrists, this explanation is rendered completely invalid due to the fact that lunar eclipses have happened and continue to happen regularly when both the Sun and Moon are still visible together above the horizon! For the Sun’s light to be casting Earth’s shadow onto the Moon, the three bodies must be aligned in a straight 180 degree syzygy.
“That the eclipsor of the moon is a shadow at all is assumption–no proof whatever is offered. That the moon receives her light from the sun, and that therefore her surface is darkened by the earth intercepting the sun’s light, is not proved. It is not proved that the earth moves in an orbit round the sun, and therefore, by being in different positions, conjunction of sun, earth, and moon, ‘Day some-times occur.’ The contrary has been clearly proved–that the moon is not eclipsed by a shadow; that she is self-luminous, and not merely a reflector of solar light, and therefore could not possibly be obscured or eclipsed by a shadow from any object whatever; and that the earth is devoid of motion, either on axes or in an orbit through space. Hence to call that an argument for the earth’s rotundity, where every necessary proposition is only assumed, and in relation to which direct and practical evidence to the contrary is abundant, is to stultify the judgment and every other reasoning faculty.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (301)
As early as the time of Pliny, there are records of lunar eclipses happening while both the Sun and Moon are visible in the sky. The Greenwich Royal Observatory recorded that “during the lunar eclipses of July 17th, 1590, November 3rd, 1648, June 16th, 1666, and May 26th, 1668 the moon rose eclipsed whilst the sun was still above the horizon.” McCulluch’s Geography recorded that “on September 20th, 1717 and April 20th, 1837 the moon appeared to rise eclipsed before the sun had set.” Sir Henry Holland also noted in his “Recollections of Past Life” the April 20th, 1837 phenomena where “the moon rose eclipsed before the sun set.” The Daily Telegraph recorded it happening again on January 17th, 1870, then again in July of the same year, and it continues to happen during lunar eclipses to this day.
“It is alleged by the learned that at a lunar eclipse the earth casts a shadow on the moon, by intercepting the light of the sun. The shadow, it is alleged, is circular, and as only a globe can cast a circular shadow, and as that shadow is cast by the earth, of course the earth is a globe. In fact, what better proof could any reasonable person require? ‘Powerful reasoning,’ says the dupe. Let us see. I have already cited a case where sun and moon have been seen with the moon eclipsed, and as the earth was not between, or they both could not have been seen, the shadow said to be on the moon could not possibly have been cast by the earth. But as refraction is charged with raising the moon above the horizon, when it is said to be really beneath, and the amount of refraction made to tally with what would be required to square the matter, let us see how refraction would act in regard to a shadow. Refraction can only exist where the object and the observer are in different densities. If a shilling be put in the bottom of a glass and observed there is no refraction. Refraction casts the image of the shilling UPWARDS, but a shadow always downwards. If a basin be taken and put near a light, so that the shadow will shorten inwards and DOWNWARDS; but if the rod is allowed to rest in the basin and water poured in, the rod will appear to be bent UPWARDS. This places the matter beyond dispute and proves that it is out of the range of possibility that the shadow said to be on the moon could be that of the earth.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (78)
“Even if we admit refraction, and that to the extent seemingly required to prove that when the eclipsed moon is seen above the horizon, we are still confronted with a fact which entirely annihilates every theory propounded to account for the phenomenon. Taking the astronomers’ own equation of 8” to the mile, varying inversely as the square of the distance, for the curvature of the earth, where sun and moon are both seen at a lunar eclipse, the center of the sun is said to be in a straight line with the centers of the earth and the moon, each luminary being 90 degrees from the observer. This would give about 6,000 miles as the distance of each body from the observer. Now, what is the curvature in 6,000 miles? No less than 24,000,000 feet or 4,545 miles. Therefore, according to the astronomers own showing an observer would have to get up into space 4,545 miles before he could see both sun and moon above his horizon at a lunar eclipse!!! As lunar eclipses have been seen from the surface of the earth with sun and moon both above the horizon at the same time, it is conclusively proved THAT THERE IS NO ‘CURVATURE OF THE EARTH,’ and, therefore, that the world is a plane, and cannot by any possibility be globular. This one proof alone demolishes forever the fabric of astronomical imagination and popular credulity.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (78-9)
EricDubay.com 