Having been the target of constant overt and covert censorship by YouTube for years, the following is my experience and analysis of how YouTube is actively suppressing and banning legitimate flat Earth content, while allowing and promoting illegitimate disinformation and controlled opposition agents.
“Plans are underway to replace community, family, and church with propaganda, education, and mass media….the State shakes loose from Church, reaches out to School … People are only little plastic lumps of human dough.” -Edward A. Ross, “Social Control,” 1901
“Each year the child is coming to belong more to the State and less and less to the parent.” -Ellwood Cubberley, “Conceptions of Education” 1909
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
Once federalized mandatory schooling was employed countrywide, the compulsory attendance of 9-12 year olds, 10-12 weeks a year, was incrementally lengthened to the point that nowadays 4 year olds are entering pre-schools and 26 year old doctors are still being indoctrinated almost the whole year long. Ironically the longer students remain in their respective institutions, the more respect they are generally given in their field. Thus our “experts” in Medicine, Science, Technology, Philosophy, Economics, Politics etc. are generally those who have received the most government indoctrination.
“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.
“In 1909 a factory inspector did an informal survey of 500 working children in 20 factories. She found that 412 of them would rather work in the terrible conditions of the factories than return to school.” -Helen Todd, “Why Children Work,” McClure’s Magazine, April, 1913
“In one experiment in Milwaukee, for example, 8,000 youth …were asked if they would return full-time to school if they were paid about the same wages as they earned at work; only 16 said they would.” David Tyack, “Managers of Virtue,” 1982
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.”
The first federalized education board was the 1870 founded NEA (National Education Administration) which quickly announced that country-wide school science courses must be restructured to teach “evolution” as fact, not theory. Having gained a fair amount of pull in the NEA, in 1903, John. D. Rockefeller created the GEB (General Education Board) in an effort toward “this goal of social control.” Later, in 1923 he would also create the International Education Board providing over $20 million to promote education abroad. The Rockefeller, Carnegie and Ford groups have often funded (and thus steered) American education more so even than the government.
“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, “The Underground History of American Education” (201)
“One would assume that, since the Rockefellers are thought of as capitalists, they would have used their fortune to foster the philosophy of individual liberty. But, just the opposite is true. We have been unable to find a single project in the history of the Rockefeller foundations which promotes free enterprise … almost all of the Rockefeller grants have been used directly or indirectly to promote economic and social collectivism, i.e., Socialism-Fascism.” -Gary Allen, “The Rockefeller File”
“Philanthropy is the essential element in the making of Rockefeller power. It gives the Rockefellers a priceless reputation as public benefactors which the public values so highly that power over public affairs is placed in the Rockefellers’ hands. Philanthropy generates more power than wealth alone can provide.” –Myer Kutz, “Rockefeller Power”
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)
This is not a man looking out for the best interest of students. You can get a good sense of his demeanor from statements like “yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands” and talking about creating a “perfect system” of state education better than imperfect parental education. Martin Luther King Jr., for one, disagrees with John. D. Rockefeller saying: “The group consisting of mother, father and child is the main educational agency of mankind.” Who do you agree with?
Prior to WWI, in a speech to American businessmen, President Woodrow Wilson admitted similar goals as the Rockefellers: “We want one class to have a liberal education. We want another class, a very much larger class of necessity, to forgo the privilege of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks.” In 1931, Paul Mantoux, in his foreword to “International Understanding” wrote, “And the builder of this new world must be education…. Plainly, the first step in the case of each country is to train an elite to think, feel, and act internationally.”
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.
“The thesis I venture to submit to you is as follows: That during the past forty or fifty years those who are responsible for education have progressively removed from the curriculum of studies the Western culture which produced the modern democratic state; That the schools and colleges have, therefore, been sending out into the world men who no longer understand the creative principle of the society in which they must live; That deprived of their cultural tradition, the newly educated Western men no longer possess in the form and substance of their own minds and spirits and ideas, the premises, the rationale, the logic, the method, the values of the deposited wisdom which are the genius of the development of Western civilization; That the prevailing education is destined, if it continues, to destroy Western civilization and is in fact destroying it. I realize quite well that this thesis constitutes a sweeping indictment of modern education. But I believe the indictment is justified and here is a prima facie case for entering this indictment.” -Walter Lippmann, at the Association for the Advancement of Science, December 29th, 1940
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.”
“It was natural businessmen should devote themselves to something besides business; that they should seek to influence the enactment and administration of laws, national and international, and that they should try to control education.” -Max Otto, “Science and the Moral Life,” 1949
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.”
In 1953, Carroll Reece, Tennessee Congressman and Chairman of the RNC (Republican National Committee) along with research director Norman Dodd, and lawyer Rene Wormser, performed the first and only in-depth investigation into the activities of the Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford foundations and their effect on American education. Rene Wormser wrote that the Reece investigation, “leads one to the conclusion that there was, indeed, something in the nature of an actual conspiracy among certain leading educators in the United States to bring about socialism through the use of our school systems.” They discovered that the Rockefeller foundation was the primary culprit behind the NEA’s rapidly changing policies and the teaching of socialism in America’s schools / universities. Wormser continued, “A very powerful complex of foundations and allied organizations has developed over the years to exercise a high degree of control over education. Part of this complex, and ultimately responsible for it, are the Rockefeller and Carnegie groups.”
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.”
“This was the situation in the 1950s when the Reece Committee briefly investigated. The Rockefeller-Carnegie groups have continued basically unopposed for the next 40 years in controlling education. One of the educational book producers is Grolier, Inc. Avery Rockefeller, Jr. sits on Grolier, Inc. board meetings. Another interesting board member is Theodore WaIler who is the director of Grolier, Inc. He was a member of the International Book Committee of UNESCO.” –Fritz Springmeier, “Bloodlines of the Illuminati”
In the mid-sixties the Education Department produced a document called “Designing Education” which advised each state to “lose its independent identity as well as its authority,” in order to “form a partnership with the federal government.” Another important document at the time was Benjamin Bloom’s “Taxonomy of Educational Objectives” which was used as “a tool to classify the ways individuals are to act, think, or feel as the result of some unit of instruction.” Using B.F. Skinner’s operant conditioning and other new behavioral psychology models, American education shifted focus toward emotional/outcome-based learning, so-called “values clarification” and “sensitivity training.” As noted by Ph.D. Superintendent of South St. Paul, Minnesota schools, Ray I. Powell, in 1975, “It’s all brainwashing!”
In 1981, the NEA published the Special Committee on Instructional Technology Report, which as usual, addressed the public/children as lumps of clay to be molded to suit their will: “In its coming involvement with a technology of instruction, the profession will be faced again with the challenge of leadership – by example and by effective communication – the challenge of convincing the public that education is much more than treating students like so many Pavlovian dogs, to be conditioned and programmed into docile acceptance of a do-it-yourself blueprint of the Good Life.”
Through “outcome-based” learning and other sophisticated standardized mind-control methods which continue being refined to present day, our government schools are perpetually preparing a new workforce for job specialization.
“Outcome-based education, because it concentrates on the ‘end product’ of its process, can be said to restrict the student’s mental functioning … Success in an outcome-based environment is restricted to performing prescribed tasks to the point of automaticity. The functions of memory and creativity are not used, nor are they considered necessary to succeed in an OBE program or any program that uses Skinnerian mastery learning or direct instruction. Predictability is the bottom line for OBE, limiting the student to only those responses which are prescribed. When trained by OBE methodology, the student cannot fail unless he employs creativity and produces an unpredicted response. In an OBE environment, he can believe only that which is acceptable. The most predictable outcome, over time, is frustration – and ultimately, low achievement and behavior problems.” -Charlotte Iserbyt, “Deliberate Dumbing Down of America” (322)
“Schools at present are the occupation of children; children have become employees, pensioners of the government at an early age. But government jobs are frequently not really jobs at all—that certainly is the case in the matter of being a schoolchild. There is nothing or very little to do in school, but one thing is demanded—that children must attend, condemned to hours of desperation, pretending to do a job that doesn’t exist. At the end of the day, tired, fed up, full of aggression, their families feel the accumulated tedium of their pinched lives. Government jobs for children have broken the spirit of our people.”-John Taylor Gatto, “The Underground History of American Education” (298)
The Flat Earth Society is a controlled opposition group that mixes truth with lies and satire to discredit genuine flat Earth research, a job they have been doing for a long time now. Founded in 1970 by Leo Ferrari, a suspected Freemason and philosophy professor at St. Thomas’ University, Leo spent his life making a mockery of the legitimate subject of our flat Earth. Though he passed away in 2010, his Flat Earth Society still exists today online as a website/forum which, still true to form, purports several false flat-Earth arguments and treats the entire subject as a dead-pan joke.
In 1956 a genuine truth-seeker and flat-Earth researcher, Samuel Shenton, had started the IFERS (International Flat Earth Research Society) and was making quite an impact with his publications and interviews, revealing the truth of our flat Earth to the masses. The globalists attempted to ignore the threat posed by Shenton for over a decade before finally creating their competing, farcical controlled opposition FES (Flat Earth Society) which has spent the past 45 years steering all flat-Earth inquiry into the realms of satire and sarcasm.
Ferrari’s entire schtick involved approaching the flat Earth subject from every angle EXCEPT the rational and scientific. For example, he published a series of articles including “The Global Fallacy as a Cause of Racial Prejudice,” arguing that people in countries at the top of the globe felt superior to those at the bottom, when in fact there was no top or bottom to the world, so, “even if one assumed that the world was spherical, the ‘top’ and ‘bottom’ have been arbitrarily selected, resulting in racial discrimination against those in the south. How can the globularists, their hirelings and dupes, seriously claim to believe that all men are created equal when they teach that some men are eternally fated to hang like bats from the bottom of a globe on which other men stand upright? The only solution is a flat Earth!” So instead of presenting measurements or experiments, instead of presenting any proofs or evidence, Ferrari would often simply argue the flat Earth as a serendipitous satirical solution to social problems.
Around this time, Charles K. Johnson, another genuine flat-Earther, took over the IFERS from the recently deceased Shenton. He and his wife Marjory, along with being flat-Earthers, were also vegetarians and anti-vivisectionist activists who campaigned for better treatment of our animal friends. In 1974, when Johnson heard of Ferrari’s budding organization, he decided to contact him and wrote a cordial letter requesting further information about his society, to which Ferrari never replied. Two years later Johnson wrote another polite letter saying, how he was “delighted by the prospect of a like-minded campaigner,” and said how it was “a very happy day” when he learned of Ferrari’s society. “I feel sure at the core we can’t be too far apart in aims,” Johnson wrote, “I do try to practice what I preach, to think and seek and search out reasonable ideas and concepts.” He closed saying that “he could hardly wait” to hear from Ferrari and hoped very much he would please reply. After six months without a response, Johnson wrote one more time, explaining again his sole purpose to “enlarge his view” and “getting and holding onto the facts,” which would benefit himself, and in time, the rest of the world. He requested a reply and a copy of Ferrari’s FES magazine. In conclusion Johnson signed “thanks from the bottom of my heart,” in advance, but warned that if Ferrari insisted on ignoring him once again, “I will then know for sure you are some kind of enemy of the Flat Earth work.” Eventually Ferrari did reply this time, but not with a message or magazine as requested, he simply enclosed a FES paid-application form.
Nowadays the IFERS has disappeared and only Ferrari’s FES exists as a website and message board maintained by moderators who, following in the footsteps of Ferrari, make a mockery of the whole thing and turn every thread into a joke deterring any serious flat Earth researcher from pursuing further. The only redeeming aspect of their website is the library of other people’s flat Earth material they maintain, which is actually quite good. The current President, Daniel Shenton, (coincidentally NO relation to the genuine flat-Earther and IFERS founder Samuel Shenton) can be heard in the following clip, still “muddying the waters of truth,” with several false flat Earth arguments:
Notice he says he is “not sure about the Sun, Moon and planets, but that they’re probably spheres, but it’s definitely not proven, I think.” He flip-flops his answers and expertly fumbles his words as if intentionally trying to sound scatter-brained. Compare and contrast this shill with genuine flat Earth researchers like myself who will tell you unequivocally that the Sun, Moon, stars and “planets” are all merely luminaries, round discs of celestial light, NOT spherical terra firma capable of landing on as the Freemasons at NASA would have you believe. He then goes on saying “the effects of gravity, I feel, could be simulated by the disc Earth moving upwards, accelerating upwards at 9.8 meters per second, would have the same effects of what people traditionally think of as gravity.” This ridiculous false flat-Earth argument also appears on Wikipedia and the FES homepage. It is provably wrong as the “upwards accelerating disc” would smash into all helicopters, planes and hot-air balloons making sustained flight of any kind impossible, but they purposely promote these strawman arguments so flat Earth neophytes will rightly laugh off their dumb explanations, and then following suit, write off the entire subject.
To combat Ferrari’s Flat Earth Society controlled opposition forum, and in memory of Samuel Shenton, Charles Johnson, and other true flat Earth researchers of the past I have now (re)started IFERS, The International Flat Earth Research Society forum! Please join up and help make this a useful and informative board! Also help join and share my new Eric Dubay’s Flat Earth Society group on Facebook which already has triple the FES following and growing fast!
“In the Middle Ages people believed that the earth was flat, for which they had at least the evidence of their senses: we believe it to be round, not because as many as one percent of us could give the physical reasons for so quaint a belief, but because modern science has convinced us that nothing that is obvious is true, and that everything that is magical, improbable, extraordinary, gigantic, microscopic, heartless or outrageous is ‘scientific.’” -George Bernard Shaw
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)
“Astronomer Denison Olmsted, in describing a diagram which is supposed to represent the Earth as a globe, with a figure of a man sticking out at each side and one hanging head downwards, says ‘We should dwell on this point until it appears to us as truly up,’ In the direction given to these figures as it does with regard to a figure which he has placed on the top! Now, a system of philosophy which requires us to do something which is, really, the going out of our minds, by dwelling on an absurdity until we think it is a fact, cannot be a system based on God’s truth, which never requires anything of the kind. Since, then, the popular theoretical astronomy of the day requires this, it is evident that it is the wrong thing, and that this conclusion furnishes us with a proof that the Earth is not a globe.” -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (65)
“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)
It should be obvious that up truly is up and down truly is down, that flat truly is flat, and still truly is still. It should be obvious the universe was intelligently designed by an intelligent designer, purposefully created by a purposeful creator. Yet modern “science” and “astronomy” through centuries of deception and manipulation have obfuscated the obvious and left people blinded to the simple truth.
“The one thing the fable of the revolving Earth has done, it has shown the terrible power of a lie, a lie has the power to make a man a mental slave, so that he dares not back the evidence of his own senses. To deny the plain and obvious movement of the Sun he sees before him. When he feels himself standing on an Earth utterly devoid of motion, at the suggestion of someone else he is prepared to accept that he is spinning furiously round. When he sees a bird flying, and gaining over the ground, he is prepared to believe that the ground is really travelling a great number of times faster than the bird, finally, in order to uphold the imagination of a madman, he is prepared to accuse his Maker of forming him a sensiferous lie.” -E. Eschini, “Foundations of Many Generations” (8)
The truth is that the Earth is not a “planet”; it is a plane. Other than the heights and depths of mountains and valleys the Earth has no curvature or convexity and is for all intents and purposes flat. Just as it appears, the Sun, Moon and stars (fixed and wandering) all revolve around the flat Earth which is the stationary, immovable center of the universe. The magnetic North Pole is the center of the Earth and the universe. Polaris, the North Pole star remains always significantly situated atop the dome of the heavens, while the Sun, Moon, and stars revolve in circular cycles around us. The truth is that all standing wateris always flat, the horizon is always flat, and all canals, tunnels and railways are built without regard for the supposed curvature or convexity of the Earth. The light from lighthouses can be seen at incredible distances only possible on a flat surface. The truth is pilots do not make constant nose declinations or compensation acceleration to account for the supposed curvature and rotation of the ball-Earth. The truth is sailors do not use spherical calculations, but plane trigonometry when navigating.
“Rational people believe Salisbury Plain to be a Plane, and Lake Windermere to be horizontal, but our Astronomers say that this is all a mistake, that we must not trust our eyes, when we see these or other such places, as being horizontal, but that we should believe what they tell us, that Salisbury Plain, Lake Windermere, as also all other plains, lakes, and places upon the Earth, as well as the vast Pacific and all other oceans, are only parts of a great Globe, and, therefore, must have a curve; besides which, mirabile dictu, that all rush together round the Sun at the rate of 65,000 miles per hour! They give their law for this fancied curvature, based on the world being 25,000 miles in circumference at the Equator, as being 8 inches for the first mile, 2 feet 8 inches for the second, 6 feet for the third, and so on, the rule being to square the number of miles between the observer and the object, then multiply that square by 8 inches and divide by 12 to bring it into feet, the quotient being the supposed curvature. Unfortunately, however, for Astronomers, this theory does not agree with fact, for this rule of curvature has been found to be utterly fallacious both on land and water. All houses have to be built on level ground, but no allowance whatever is made for the curvature of the Earth, and all compasses point North and South at the same time even at the Equator, which incontestably proves that the sea is horizontal, and, therefore, that the world is not globular, for if it were, one end of the magnet would then dip towards the North and the other point to the Heavens.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (123-4)
The truth is that Antarctica is a giant ice wall holding in the oceans and the South Pole does not exist! Various anomalies and differences between the Arctic and Antarctic prove the earth is not a ball. The Arctic midnight Sun proves the universe is geocentric. The truth is the Sun and Moon are equal divine balanced opposites made for signs and seasons, to light the Earth, and divide day from night. The Moon is not merely a reflector of the Sun’s light but emanates a demonstrably unique light of its own; It is completely self-luminescent and semi-transparent. The truth is that man has not and cannot ever walk on the Moon or Mars because the heavenly bodies are simply luminaries and not terrestrial terra firma like the Earth. The Moon and Mars landings were/are all hoaxes staged and filmed by Freemasons on Earth. Orbiting satellites and space stations do not exist; all video and photographs you have ever seen from NASA, Hubble, and other “official” sources are all CGI (computer-generated images). Gravity does not exist, and all “floating” astronauts are simply using wires or filming aboard Zero G planes. Relativity does not exist, and that is why Einstein is always sticking his tongue out at you!
The truth is the universe was intelligently designed by anintelligent designer, purposefully created by a purposeful creator, not the haphazard result of some inexplicable cosmic accident. The truth is that life, consciousness, the incredible beautiful diversity and complexity of nature is divinely created, not coldly, blindly “evolved” out of nothing.
“When we consider what the advocates of the Earth’s stationary and central position can account for, and explain their celestial phenomena as accurately to their own thinking as we can ours, in addition to which they have the evidence of their SENSES and Scripture and facts in their favour, which we have not; it is not without a show of reason that they maintain the superiority of their system . . . However perfect our theory may appear in our own estimation, and however simply and satisfactorily the Newtonian hypotheses may seem to us to account for all the celestial phenomena, yet we are here compelled to admit the astounding truth, if our premises be disputed and our facts challenged, the whole range of Astronomy does not contain one proof of its own accuracy.” -Dr. Woodhouse, Cambridge Astronomy Professor
“The more I consider them the more I doubt all systems of Astronomy; I doubt whether we can with certainty know either the distances or the magnitude of any star in the firmament, else why do Astronomers so immensely differ with regard to the distance of the Sun from the Earth? Some affirming it to be only three and others ninety millions of miles away!” -Rev. John Wesley
“Many have been able to see through the delusions of modern astronomy. Letters from various parts testify that, in some cases, men and women have begun to make use of their brain-power, which had been stunted and dwarfed by acceptation, without the slightest proof, of the unscientific, unreasonable, unnatural and infidel teachings of men foisted upon a credulous public in the name of ‘Science.’ Others again, tell that the writers have thrown to the moles and to the bats the world-wide and almost universally believed hoax that we are living on a whirling sea-earth globe, revolving faster than a cannonball travels, rushing through ‘space’ at a rate beyond human power to conceive, and flying – with the whole of the so-called ‘solar system’ – in another direction twenty times the speed of its rotation.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny – Conclusive Evidence That the World is Not a Rotating Revolving Globe But a Stationary Plane Circle.” (ii)
In conspiracy research, the term “globalist” usually refers to “internationalists,” people in favor of a one world order, but more literally and more accurately, as the U.N. world government logo shows, the term “globalist” signifies those who propagate the centuries old myth of a globe Earth. Heliocentricism and the ball-Earth mythos have long been promoted by Masonic patriarchal pagan Sun-worshippers. In typical sun-worshipping fashion the Sun was made to be the most important and central entity of the so-called “solar system.” The Earth was demoted to being a mere planet like the wandering stars. All the fixed stars were turned into distant suns as well! The Sun was said to be the only giver of light and the Moon demoted to a mere reflector of the Sun’s light. The Sun was said to be the largest thing in our corner of the galaxy, bigger than the Earth, Moon and planets!
By removing Earth from the motionless center of the Universe, these Masons have moved us physically and metaphysically from a place of supreme importance to one of complete nihilistic indifference. If the Earth is the center of the Universe, then the ideas of God, creation, and a purpose for human existence are resplendent. But if the Earth is just one of billions of planets revolving around billions of stars in billions of galaxies, then the ideas of God, creation, and a specific purpose for Earth and human existence become highly implausible.
By surreptitiously indoctrinating us into their scientific materialist Sun-worship, not only do we lose faith in anything beyond the material, we gain absolute faith in materiality, superficiality, status, selfishness, hedonism and consumerism. If there is no God, and everyone is just an accident, then all that really matters is me, me, me. They have turned Madonna, the Mother of God, into a material girl living in a material world. Their rich, powerful corporations with slick Sun-cult logos sell us idols to worship, slowly taking over the world while we tacitly believe their “science,” vote for their politicians, buy their products, listen to their music, and watch their movies, sacrificing our souls at the altar of materialism.
“Such discrepancies remind me of the confusion which attended those who in olden days attempted to build the Tower of Babel, when their language was confounded, and their labour brought to nought. But no wonder is it that their calculations are all wrong, seeing they proceed from a wrong basis. They assumed the world to be a Planet, with a circumference of 25,000 miles, and took their measurements from its supposed centre, and from supposed spherical angles of measurement on the surface. Again, how could such measurements possibly be correct while, as we are told, the Earth was whirling around the Sun faster than a cannon ball, at the rate of eighteen miles per second, a force more than sufficient to kill every man, woman, and child on its surface in less than a minute? Then, the Earth is supposed to have various other motions, into the discussion of which I need not enter here, and will only notice that of its supposed rotation round its imaginary axis at the rate, at the Equator, of a thousand miles per hour, with an inclination of 23.5 degrees.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (12-13)
“Ptolemy had made it appear that the sun and stars revolved around a stationary earth, but Copernicus advanced the theory that it was the earth which revolved around a stationary sun, while the stars were fixed; and either of these entirely opposite theories gives an equally satisfactory explanation of the appearance of the sun by day and the stars by night. Copernicus did not produce any newly discovered fact to prove that Ptolemy was wrong, neither did he offer any proof that he himself was right, but worked out his system to show that he could account for all the appearances of the heavens quite as well as the Egyptians had done, though working on an entirely different hypothesis; and offered his new Heliocentric Theory as an alternative. Ptolemy shows very ingeniously that the Earth must be at the centre of the celestial sphere. He proves that unless this were the case, each star would not move with the absolute uniformity which does characterise it. He shows also that the Earth could not be animated by any movement of transition. ‘The Earth,’ argued Ptolemy, ‘lies at the centre of the celestial sphere. If the Earth were to be endowed with movement, it would not lie always at this point, it must therefore shift to some other part of the sphere. The movements of the stars, however, preclude this, and therefore the Earth must be as devoid of any movement of translation as it is of rotation.’” -E. Eschini, “Foundations of Many Generations” (6)
The Ptolemaic Geocentric system prevailed for over 1,400 years and even thousands of years before Ptolemy, Flat-Earth Geocentricism was the widely accepted truth. The modern Ball-Earth Heliocentricism popularized by the likes of Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, and NASA, however, is a comparatively recent belief system that has been foisted upon an unsuspecting world for 500 years. Ptolemy never imagined the scientific magicians of the future would be so brazen, nor the public so gullible, as to accept that we see no parallax change in the stars after hundreds of millions of miles of supposed orbital motion, simply because all those stars are trillions upon trillions of miles further distant at a sufficient enough scale for no change in relative parallax to occur! How convenient!? Yet another “fact” of modern astronomy which defies our common sense and experience!
“They expect us to ‘believe’ that the earth and sea together comprise a flying globe (which they speak of as a solid ‘orb,’ supposed by astronomers to have been ‘originally shot off the sun in a soft plastic mass, which, as the temperature decreased, gradually solidified,’) yet not one single fact or proof can they produce for this far-fetched idea, and in spite of the fact that the whirling globe theory was (even according to the open confessions of its founders) set forth to the world in the first instance as a mere ‘supposition,’ it is now presented as unquestionable truth.” -Lady Blount, “The Romance of Science”
“It was said, in effect, by Newton, and has ever since been insisted upon by his disciples: ‘Allow us, without proof, which is impossible, the existence of two universal forces–centrifugal and centripetal, or attraction and repulsion, and we will construct a theory which shall explain all the leading phenomena and mysteries of nature.’ An apple falling from a tree, or a stone rolling downwards, and a pail of water tied to a string and set in motion were assumed to be types of the relations existing among all the bodies in the universe. The moon was assumed to have a tendency to fall towards the earth, and the earth and moon together towards the sun. The same relation was assumed to exist between all the smaller and larger luminaries in the firmament; and it soon became necessary to extend these assumptions to infinity. The universe was parcelled out into systems–co-existent and illimitable. Suns, planets, satellites, and comets, were assumed to exist infinite in number and boundless in extent; and to enable the theorists to explain alternating and constantly recurring phenomena, which were everywhere observable, these numberless and for-ever-extending objects were assumed to be spheres. The earth we inhabit was called a planet, and because it was thought to be reasonable that the luminous objects in the firmament, which were called planets, were spherical and had motion, so it was only reasonable to suppose that, as the earth was a planet, it must also be spherical and have motion–ergo, the earth is a globe and moves upon axes, and in an orbit round the sun! And as the earth is a globe and is inhabited, so again it is only reasonable to conclude that the planets are worlds like the earth, and are inhabited by sentient beings. What reasoning! What shameful perversion of intellectual gifts!” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (348)
“Copernicus put forward the hypothesis of the revolution of the earth round the sun in order to explain the cycle of the seasons. His theory is not very satisfactory seeing that the earth is supposed to be at its greatest distance from the sun in the summer during the hot weather, and at its shortest distance in the winter when the temperature is at its lowest. These unusual conditions which clearly contradict the laws of nature as regards the effects of heat, are, it is said, due to the angle formed by the rays of the sun as they fall on the earth’s surface. It is also stated that the opposition of the seasons north and south of the equator is due to a tilt of the earth, first on one side, and then on the other, which conveniently occurs at the right moment. Nothing is said, however, of the shifting of the waters of the sea and rivers which this change in the centre of gravity and in the position of the earth would inevitably bring twice a year. It might also be assumed that under those conditions, very high constructions would swerve from the vertical. The American sky-scrapers and the Eiffel Tower, for instance, cannot be seen to lean right or left according to the seasons, although this should be a logical and natural consequence of the alternate inclination attributed to the earth.” -Gabrielle Henriet, “Heaven and Earth” (1-2)
If the Earth were a sphere that rotated daily on its vertical axis at a uniform velocity, revolving annually around the Sun, it would follow that half the “globe” would always be sunlit while the other half dark, every place on the globe receiving an equal amount of day and night. In actuality, however, the drastically varying lengths of day/night over the Earth are consistent with the Geocentric Flat-Earth model. If the Earth were a sphere it would follow that seasons the world over would be simultaneous due to distance from the Sun. When the Earth is farthest away from the Sun, the entire globe should be ensconced in winter and recording the coldest temperatures for the year. When the Earth is closest to the Sun, the entire globe should be summery and recording the warmest temperatures for the year. In actuality, however, this is not the case. The frozen depths of Antarctica remain forever frigidly foreboding while just a few thousand miles away it is tropical summer. How is it that the heat from the Sun could supposedly come from an eyebrow-raising 93 million miles away to simultaneously burn the skin of beach bums in Hawaii while leaving Antarctic explorers frozen in their boots just a few thousand miles away?
“It is geometrically demonstrable that all the visible luminaries in the firmament are within a distance of a few thousand miles from the earth, not more than the space which stretches between the North Pole and the Cape of Good Hope; and the principle of measurement – that of plane triangulation with, invariably, an accurately measured base line – which demonstrates this important fact is one which no mathematician claiming to be a master in the science will for a moment deny. All these luminaries, then, and the sun itself, being so near to us, cannot be other than very small as compared with the earth we inhabit. They are all in motion over the earth, which is alone immovable; and, therefore, they cannot be anything more than secondary and subservient structures continually ministering to this fixed world and its inhabitants. This is a plain, simple, and in every respect demonstrable philosophy, agreeing with the evidence of our senses, borne out by every fairly instituted experiment, and never requiring a violation of those principles of investigation which the human mind has ever recognized and depended upon in its every-day life. The modern or Newtonian astronomy has none of these characteristics. The whole system taken together constitutes a most monstrous absurdity. It is false in its foundation; irregular, unfair, and illogical, in its details; and, in its conclusions, inconsistent and contradictory. Worse than all, it is a prolific source of irreligion and of atheism, of which its advocates are practically supporters. By defending a system which is directly opposed to that which is taught in connection with the Jewish and Christian religion they lead the more critical and daring intellects to question and deride the cosmogony and general philosophy contained in the sacred books. Because the Newtonian theory is held to be true they are led to reject the Scriptures altogether, to ignore the worship, and doubt and deny the existence of a Creator and Supreme Ruler of the world.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (354)
“The facts and experiments already advanced render it undeniable, that the surface of all the waters of the earth is horizontal; and that however irregular the upper outline of the land itself may be, the whole mass, land and water together, constitutes an IMMENSE NON-MOVING CIRCULAR PLANE. If we travel by land or sea, from any part of the earth in the direction of any meridian line, and towards the northern central star called ‘Polaris,’ we come to one and the same place, a region of ice, where the star which has been our guide is directly above us, or vertical to our position. This region is really THE CENTRE OF THE EARTH; and recent observations seem to prove that it is a vast central tidal sea, nearly a thousand miles in diameter, and surrounded by a great wall or barrier of ice, eighty to a hundred miles in breadth. If from this central region we trace the outline of the lands which project or radiate from it, and the surface of which is above the water, we find that the present form of the earth or ‘dry land,’ as distinguished from the waters of the ‘great deep,’ is an irregular mass of capes, bays, and islands, terminating in great bluffs or headlands, projecting principally towards the south, or, at least, in a direction away from the great northern centre. If now we sail with our backs continually to this central star, ‘Polaris,’ or the centre of the earth’s surface, we shall arrive at another region of ice. Upon whatever meridian we sail, keeping the northern centre behind us, we are checked in our progress by vast and lofty cliffs of ice. If we turn to the right or to the left of our meridian, these icy barriers beset us during the whole of our passage. Hence, we have found that there is a great ebbing and flowing sea at the earth’s centre; with a boundary wall of ice, nearly a hundred miles in thickness, and three thousand miles in circumference; that springing or projecting from this icy wall, irregular masses of land stretch out towards the south, where a desolate waste of turbulent waters surrounds the continents, and is itself engirdled by vast belts and packs of ice, bounded by immense frozen barriers, the lateral depth and extent of which are utterly unknown. How far the ice extends; how it terminates; and what exists beyond it, are questions to which no present human experience can reply. All we at present know is, that snow and hail, howling winds, and indescribable storms and hurricanes prevail; and that in every direction human ingress is barred by unsealed escarpments of perpetual ice, extending farther than eye or telescope can penetrate, and becoming lost in gloom and darkness.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (91)
What remains unknown at this time are 1) the extent of the Antarctic ice-wall, how far can one travel Southwards atop the ice? Is it just water, snow, ice, and darkness forever, or is there some limit, like the glass wall in The Truman Show? 2) Is there a limit to space? Is the universe infinite, or as the Bible claims, contained within a physical “firmament,” the “vault of heaven?” 3) What exists beneath the “mighty deep?” Is it just deeper and darker water going downward forever, or is there some limit?
“If the earth is a distinct structure standing in and upon the waters of the ‘great deep,’ it follows that, unless it can be shown that something else sustains the waters, that the depth is fathomless. As there is no evidence whatever of anything existing underneath the ‘great deep,’ and as in many parts of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans no bottom has been found by the most scientific and efficient means which human ingenuity could invent, we are forced to the conclusion that the depth is boundless.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Earth Not a Globe, 2nd Edition” (201)
“From the earliest times it has been believed and said that the heavens were not an empty space, but a solid surface. The Chaldeans and Egyptians regarded the sky as the massive cover of the world; and in India and Persia it was thought to be a metallic lid, flat or convex, or even pyramidal. Up to the 17th century the earth was always regarded as the centre of an empty sphere with solid walls; and on this account, it was always represented with a cover. This indispensable complement, however, was eliminated upon the advent of the theory of gravitation, for convenience sake, as a solid dome limiting the space round the earth would have rendered impossible the extravagant motions of the planets which were sent revolving in the air at phenomenal distances. Thus from this time, the fact universally accepted for thousands of years that the sky is a firm surface, completely disappeared. Nevertheless, the possible existence of a solid vault over the earth is a question of great importance in view of the tremendous consequences which would result from this fact, if it happened to be true. There is no doubt that the general reaction is one of incredulity; but, on the other hand, it can be considered that it is not without reason that the ancients believed in the existence of the material vault of heaven; nor without reason, either, that this notion should have been consistently handed down through the ages since the earliest times up to the 17th century, in all parts of the world … The planets are not solid, opaque masses of matter, as is believed. They are simply immaterial, luminous and transparent discs; and in view of these circumstances, it is plain that the craters, asperities, mountains and valleys which were thought to exist on the surface of these imaginary masses, are the topographic features of the solid vault of the sky which are illuminated and thrown into relief by the luminous and transparent discs which we call planets. It is also to be realized that the lens of the telescope creates an appearance of convexity which, standing out in relief, conveys the impression of a spherical mass, but this convexity effect is merely an optical illusion.” -Gabrielle Henriet, “Heaven and Earth” (22-23)
Flat-Earthers historically have been subject to not only intense ridicule and ostracism, but many have even been threatened and assaulted for espousing their beliefs. I have personally been threatened by Freemasons on multiple occasions for my work exposing their conspiracies, hoaxes and manipulations. Flat-Earth Society president Charles K. Johnson claimed a man from NASA attempted to murder him, and later had a massive suspicious fire that burned his house down, likely the result of arson, which destroyed his entire Flat-Earth library, all records and contacts of Flat-Earth Society members. The most renowned Flat-Earther in modern times, Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, also had his fair share of violent opposition. He stated that, “For the long period of thirty-one years I have labored singlehandedly to bring this important subject before the world: both on the lecture platform and in local journals, and travelling from place to place – never resting longer than a few months in one locality, but like a scientific philosophic gypsy breaking up his tent and pitching it ‘here there and everywhere’ in order to draw this great question to the attention of all classes and degrees of intelligence. And as matter of course I have had to bear every possible form of opposition, the bitterest denunciations – often amounting to threats of violence and personal danger, the foulest misrepresentations, the most reckless calumny, and the wildest and most desperate efforts to stay my career and counteract my teachings. It has become a duty, paramount and imperative, to meet them in open, avowed, and unyielding rebellion; to declare that their unopposed reign of error and confusion is over; and that henceforth, like a falling dynasty, they must shrink and disappear, leaving the throne and the kingdom to those awakening intellects whose numbers are constantly increasing, and whose march is rapid and irresistible. The soldiers of truth and reason have drawn the sword, and ere another generation has been educated, will have forced the usurper to abdicate!”
“It may be boldly asked where can the man be found, possessing the extraordinary gifts of Newton, who could suffer himself to be deluded by such a hocus-pocus, if he had not in the first instance willfully deceived himself? Only those who know the strength of self-deception, and the extent to which it sometimes trenches on dishonesty, are in a condition to explain the conduct of Newton and of Newton’s school. To support his unnatural theory Newton heaps fiction upon fiction, seeking to dazzle where he cannot convince. In whatever way or manner may have occurred this business, I must still say that I curse this modern theory of Cosmogony, and hope that perchance there may appear, in due time, some young scientist of genius, who will pick up courage enough to upset this universally disseminated delirium of lunatics.” -Goethe
“I could easily cite other good authorities to similar effect, but I think enough have been already given, to show that the absurdities of Modem Astronomy have not been palmed upon the world without a strong protest from thoughtful minds, and I sincerely trust that the following pages may prove useful to some honest thinkers, not only in exposing the fallacies of this chimerical science, but in showing the true position of the world, as proved by facts in nature … I sincerely trust that, after considering the evidence which has been brought before him, the thoughtful Reader will clearly see that this world of ours is not a Planet, as supposed by our Modem Astronomers, but a real Terra Firma, founded upon the waters of the Great Deep, from which come and to which return, with unceasing flow, the rivers of the Earth, in accordance with the wise and beneficent purpose of our Divine Creator.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (20-271)
“Thus we see that this Newtonian philosophy is devoid of consistency; its details are the result of an entire violation of the laws of legitimate reasoning, and all its premises are assumed. It is, in fact, nothing more than assumption upon assumption, and the conclusions derived therefrom are willfully considered as things proved, and to be employed as truths to substantiate the first and fundamental assumptions. Such a ‘juggle and jumble’ of fancies and falsehoods extended and intensified as in theoretical astronomy is calculated to make the unprejudiced inquirer revolt with horror from the terrible conjuration which has been practised upon him; to sternly resolve to resist its further progress; to endeavour to over-throw the entire edifice, and to bury in its ruins the false honours which have been associated with its fabricators, and which still attach to its devotees. For the learning, the patience, the perseverance and devotion for which they have ever been examples, honour and applause need not be withheld; but their false reasoning, the advantages they have taken of the general ignorance of mankind in respect to astronomical subjects, and the unfounded theories they have advanced and defended, cannot be otherwise than regretted, and ought to be by every possible means uprooted.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (351)
The Globe-Earth lie or what I have titled “The Flat-Earth Conspiracy” is in my humble opinion, the greatest deception in human history and most important taboo issue which desperately needs to be exposed. If people knew the extent to which they have been lied to and brain-washed from birth, there would be a veritable revolution in critical thinking, personal sovereignty, and belief in God by morning. The New World Order “globalists,” Satan’s prophesized One World Government Masonic minions are everywhere spreading their “scientific” disinformation, “deceiving the very elect,” and herding the sheeple to their slaughter. Please help spread the word to your friends, family, neighbors and co-workers, direct them to AtlanteanConspiracy.com, Ifers.ace.st and send copies of this book to help awaken them and support my life-long efforts to bring Truth, Freedom, Peace and Love to the flat Earth!
The 1969 Apollo “Moon” landings, the 1976 Viking and other subsequent “Mars” landings, all images showing a spherical rotating Earth, all supposed “space stations” and “satellites,” orbiting the “ball-Earth,” every “Hubble” photo-shopped image, and the entire NASA organization are one big hoax created to convince you that the Earth is not flat. Over the past five decades, through lies and photo/video trickery, the Freemasons at NASA have effectively convinced the entire world to believe several myths totally contrary to our senses and personal experience.
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.
As mentioned in a previous chapter, stars and planets have often been seen through the Moon, which means it is semi-transparent, and if the moon is semi-transparent, it cannot be the solid, spherical planetoid claimed by modern astronomy. Samuel Shenton, President of the Flat-Earth Society, was quoted before the Apollo supposed “Moon landings,” stating that, “Stars have been seen through the moon. The astronauts had better be ready to come right back because there isn’t anything much to land on!”
“We so-called, ‘flat-earthers,’ observing certain false presentation used by the Americans in TV and films showing the orbits and descents of their ‘space’ vehicles, wish to place our views before young and interested people. In so doing, we trust that no more gibes about ‘flat earthers’ will be occasioned from Prime Minister Wilson of the Socialist Party and Enoch Powell of the Conservative Party.” -Samuel Shenton, “The Plane Truth”
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!
“If you look at the backgrounds of most NASA pictures, there is a relatively sharp transition line where anything beyond becomes smooth and featureless. This is a sure sign of a grade Z studio backdrop. Every time the American flag is shown there is a great deal of light on it, even if it is on the shadow side of the Lunar Lander. Also, NASA never filmed either stars or planets. The reason is simple: before the era of computer enhancement the stars would have been impossible to fake accurately enough to fool the world’s amateur astronomers.” -Ralph Rene, “NASA Mooned America!” (2)
“Michael J. Tuttle faked the so called Apollo training simulation photographs, using Photoshop 3, and then posted them on NASA web sites as being genuine photographs taken on the Moon. I regularly get email from people claiming that digital manipulation of photographs was not available back in 1969. People have been creating fake photographs ever since the camera was invented, and who is saying the pictures were faked back in 1969 anyway? People don’t understand that the majority of NASA’s fake Moon pictures were created in the mid 90’s. The proof lies in the fact that most do not appear in any books or magazines prior to 1990. Ninety five percent of NASA’s fake Moon pictures on their web sites were never seen prior to the launch of the internet. They 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!”
“The large rock in the left foreground is clearly marked with a big capital ‘C’. The bottom right corner has a crease similar to that caused by wetting a folded newspaper. This makes it a showbiz ‘flap’ rock, which the people who work in Hollywood studios throw at visitors. They used to be made from wet newspaper and paste and showed similar flaps. Stage rocks are usually placed by stage hands over similarly lettered markers positioned by the set designer. Did NASA really carry fake boulders and stage hands onto the Moon?” -Ralph Rene, “NASA Mooned America!” (7)
NASA image AS11-40-5926 shows a close-up of the footpads of the Lunar Lander without a speck of dust on them and without a burn print under its 10,000 pound thrusters, like it was just gently set down in place. NASA scientists in their own documents were worried about the LEM falling into its own massive burn radius, yet there it sits with no burn print and spotless clean pads. Even the astronauts’ boot-prints made deep impressions in the “Moon dust” yet the Lander’s 10,000 pound thrusters left not a trace, no blast hole, and no dust on the pads? Eugene Cernan of Apollo 10 and 17said in an interview that as they descended in the Lander that, “the engine was very loud,” yet when Alan Bean of Apollo 12 was asked the same question, he answered that “you couldn’t hear the engine at all in the vacuum of space.” I tend to believe Alan, because watching the Apollo 17 lift-off sequence from the “Moon,” it is clear the LEM is being hoisted by crane from above and not propelled by thrusters from below!
“I remember watching the first astronauts land on the Moon and wondering why the TV pictures were so murky. We watched two blurry white ghosts, who did little or nothing while they lurked in the shadow of the Lunar Lander. NASA seemed to have lost 100 years of photographic progress. It was boring, but I believed! During the next few years I caught glimpses of subsequent missions as they flashed in color upon my TV screen, and I believed. The pictures improved with each mission and toward the end of the Apollo program the Moon buggy tore up the Moon’s surface while NASA began to talk up a Martian adventure. I still believed in apple pie, the CIA, and NASA. Years later, watching a TV show, I thought I saw the Moon flag ripple on the airless Moon. The worm of suspicion slid into my system. I then began watching NASA film clips very closely and with less emotion. As those rose-colored glasses slipped lower on my nose I began to notice flaws in the pictures. The astronauts and their backpacks weighed less than 75 pounds on the Moon, yet they left deep footprints in the Moon dust and gravel. The blast of a rocket engine that lowered the 33,000 pound LEM (Lander) to the Moon’s surface left no crater. And apparently it didn’t even blow away the dust beneath the foot pads. Strange! Here on Earth footprints usually require some type of wetting agent. There is no wet on the Moon!” -Ralph Rene, “NASA Mooned America!” (1)
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
Not only is the video record fraught with fraud, but NASA claims the original Apollo 11 videos have conveniently disappeared from their records so no one can analyze them for authenticity! You read correctly, they spent over $30 billion of American taxpayer money travelling to “the Moon,” and then “lost” the video evidence! Those blurry, ghostly black and white images shown on TV were purposely lousy because NASA insisted at the time that all TV networks must broadcast directly from a big screen display in their operations room, a mandate which all the major networks accepted, and so what the public saw was just a video of a poorly magnified video, and now it is impossible to watch the original! Not only has the Apollo 11 original disappeared, but NASA claims to have lost all original audio tapes from the Apollo missions, and that their contractors have lost all prints/plans for the Lunar Rover, LEM Lander, and Apollo Ship Engines! What are the chances that these are actually lost, and what are the chances that NASA simply cannot have the public scrutinizing their records because of what might be exposed?
“Exploration of the moon stopped because it was impossible to continue the hoax without being ultimately discovered, and of course they ran out of pre-filmed episodes. No man has ever ascended higher than 300 miles, if that high, above the Earth’s surface. No man has ever orbited, landed on, or walked upon the moon in any publicly known space program. If you doubt this please explain how the astronauts walked upon the moon ‘s surface enclosed in a space suit in full sunlight absorbing a minimum of 265 degrees of heat surrounded by a vacuum.” -William Cooper
Temperatures on the Moon supposedly range from 279 degrees below zero “during the depths of the lunar night” which is far colder than even Antarctica’s coldest winter, and up to 243 degrees above zero at lunar midday, which is hotter than boiling water. NASA claims their special suits are fitted with both heating and cooling systems, but nothing which could withstand these incredible temperatures. These suits are also supposedly pressurized to keep the vacuum non-pressure of space from bursting their blood vessels, but they clearly have deep creases and wrinkles all over; astronauts in true pressurized suits would look like the Michelin Man bubbling out. Also the amount of radiation in space, especially through the Van Allen belt, is far too intense for them to be “space-walking” in such flimsy suits. One Russian study found that the amount of radiation present on the Moon would require astronauts to be clothed in 4 feet of lead in order to avoid instant death. John Mauldin, a NASA physicist, said they would need at least two meters of thick shielding around them at all times, yet there they are, bouncing around “the Moon” in their two-inch thin suits.
Another solid proof of NASA living up to its forked serpent-tongue logo are the many supposed “Moon” rocks given to museums the world over by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin. Shortly after Apollo 11, private investigator Paul Jacobs reported asking the U.S. Department of Geology head whether he had examined the Moon rocks and if he could verify their authenticity, to which the geologist simply laughed and insinuated that people high in the U.S. government knew all about the cover-up. More recently, in 2009, curators at Amsterdam’s Rijksmuseum investigated their “Moon rock” personally given to them by Armstrong and Aldrin in 1969 only to find that it was actually a worthless piece of petrified wood!
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.
Before the first Apollo mission ever even cleared the launch pad, eleven NASA astronauts died in highly suspicious “accidents.” Gus Grissom, Roger Chaffee and Ed White were all cremated together in an Apollo capsule fire during a completely unnecessary and dangerous test where they were strapped down and locked into a 100% oxygen chamber which incinerated the three of them to death in seconds. Seven other astronauts, Ted Freemen, Charles Basset, Elliot See, Russell Rogers, Clifton Williams, Michael Adams and Robert Lawrence died in six separate airplane crashes, and Ed Givens in a car crash! Eight of these deaths were in 1967 alone. So many astronauts coincidentally dying under such circumstances is highly unlikely, and lends credence to the idea that these were intentional hits by the Masons trying to find the right people to sell their hoax.
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.
“In a prosecutorial mode, I accuse NASA, the CIA, and whatever super-secret group that controls the shadow government of these United States of fraud on the grandest scale imaginable, of murder by arson, and of larceny of over $40 billion in conjunction with the Apollo program that allegedly landed men on the Moon. I also accuse them of violating a federal law against lobbying by government-funded entities and of serial murder of low-level NASA employees, witnesses, and other citizens who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Such accusations seem incredible because none of us ever want to believe our governmental father is deceiving us. However, by the end of this book, even the most trusting reader will have no doubt that NASA MOONED AMERICA!” -Ralph Rene, “NASA Mooned America!”
In 2001, investigative journalist and award-winning filmmaker Bart Sibrel produced the excellent documentary “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon.” When requesting footage for his movie, Sibrel was sent either by mistake or by a well-meaning whistle-blower, an official raw slated NASA clip from the Apollo 11 mission showing a young Buzz Aldrin, Neil Armstrong and Michael Collins, for almost an hour, using transparencies and camera-tricks to fake shots of a round Earth! They communicate over audio with control in Houston about how to accurately stage the shot, and someone keeps prompting them on how to effectively manipulate the camera to achieve the desired effect. First, they blacked out all the windows except for a downward facing circular one, which they aimed the camera towards from several feet away. This created the illusion of a ball-shaped Earth surrounded by the blackness of space, when in fact it was simply a round window in their dark cabin. Neil Armstrong claimed at this point to be 130,000 miles from Earth, half-way to the Moon, but when camera-tricks were finished the viewer could see for themselves the astro-nots were not more than a hundred miles above the Earth’s surface, likely flying in a high-altitude plane!
“Many gullible people still accept NASA’s claim of sending men to the Moon, without bothering to carry out any research, or investigation, to see if NASA are indeed telling the truth. There are some who will never accept the Moon missions were faked, regardless of how much factual evidence of a fake is put before them.” -Sam Colby, “N.A.S.A. Numerous Anomalies and Scams Abound”
In 2004, Bart Sibrel completed a second documentary entitled “Astronauts Gone Wild” where he set out to film interviews with Apollo astronauts and ask them to swear on the Bible that they walked on the Moon. In reaction to Sibrel’s accusations many of the astronauts indeed “went wild.” John Young of Apollo 10 and 16 threatened to “knock him in the head,” then ran away into a nearby closing elevator. Ed Mitchell of Apollo 14 literally kicked him out the door and threatened to shoot him! Buzz Aldrin punched him square in the face! The documentary is a fascinating psychological study, watching the astronauts repeatedly squirm and quickly escalate to threats and violence; they behave more like pathological liars than honorable cosmonauts. Many of them have battled depression and alcoholism since “returning from the Moon” as well.
Buzz Aldrin was once asked at a NASA banquet what it felt like to first step onto the lunar surface. He staggered to his feet speechless then left crying uncontrollably. On the 25th anniversary event for the Apollo 11 landing, one of the few interview appearances Armstrong ever made, he gave a cryptic speech basically telling the young people in attendance that there were many truths about Apollo they could uncover if they dug deep enough! He said holding tears back, “Today we have with us a group of young students, America’s best. To you we say we have only completed a beginning. We leave you much that is undone. There are great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of truth’s protective layers.”
In the past 45 years the Masons in Hollywood and NASA have only gotten more adept at Photoshop, CGI, and faking shots of Earth from space. Hit movies like “Apollo 13” and “Gravity” show how realistic and convincing these sound-stage, green-screen, computer-built environments can be. People believe it more too. A Knights Newspaper survey taken just after the Apollo landings found 30% of Americans were “suspicious of NASA’s trips to the Moon.” A Gallup poll taken in 1999 found only 6% of Americans had any doubt the Apollo astronauts walked on the Moon.
“NASA is now preparing to take us to Mars the same way they took us to the Moon. This time a small cadre of computer experts will astound us with photos created by the new digitized computer graphics which didn’t exist in 1969. Next time we will have no way of determining the truth.” -Ralph Rene, “NASA Mooned America!” (2)
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.
To begin with, the “planets,” (formerly known as “wandering stars”) are not terrestrial Earth-like habitations capable of landing anything on! The Sun, Moon and stars are all simply luminaries, celestial lights relatively close to Earth, not something tangible and solid that humans could ever walk on.
“The planets are not solid, opaque masses of matter, as is believed. They are simply immaterial, luminous and transparent discs.” -Gabrielle Henriet, “Heaven and Earth” (23)
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 the 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!
“On July 14, 1976 the orbiter modual which weighed 5,125 pounds detached its lander. I can find no listed weight in my encyclopedia on space but since it could carry up to 638 pounds of fuel in addition to its payload that lander had to weigh at least 1000 pounds. NASA claims that after the lander was detached rockets were used to slow it down to 560 mph at an altitude of 800,000 feet. Then it was allowed to fall 781,000 feet under Martian gravity before a parachute was deployed at 19,000 feet. At 4,600 feet this chute was detached and NASA tells us that it then had a velocity of 145 mph. Rocket engines under computer control then landed it. Martian gravity is about .37 that of Earth. Earth’s gravity accelerates an object at 32 feet per second. This gives Mars the ability to accelerate an object at 11.84 feet per second. The 560 miles an hour horizontal motion will not affect the downward velocity of an object that falls 781,000 feet on Mars. The terminal velocity at the time the chute was deployed was about 4,300 feet per second (which is almost 3,000 mph.) That’s much faster than a speeding bullet. NASA claims that in a matter of 14,400 feet that chute operating under near vacuum conditions reduced the lander’s speed to 145 mph. Sure it did! That was then; let’s look at now. The next probe to land on Mars did so on July 4, 1997. NASA tells us that the ‘Pathfinder’ came in at 16,600 mph and was then jettisoned to boldly plunge into the fringes of the Martian atmosphere without using retrorockets to enter orbit. As usual, there were two different histories given by NASA. The first states that by some miracle during the next minute its speed was reduced to 1,000 mph. The second states that it was jettisoned at 5,300 miles and its speed was reduced in 30 minutes while it fell to 80 miles. In the first case the de-acceleration would have been incredible. However, in the second case the Pathfinder would be at the 80 mile high place still doing 4,280 mph. The NASA story gets murky, but it is assumed the Pathfinder was again allowed to free fall until it was 7 miles high when NASA claims the parachute opened. Instead of streaming because it had been popped in almost a vacuum, it billowed forth and slowed the Pathfinder down. ‘When it was one mile up it dropped the chute, blew up the airbag, and fired retrorockets reducing its speed to 23 mph. Then the air bag hit the ground and bounced either 3 times or 16 times’ [depending on which official NASA source you ‘believe’]” -Ralph Rene, “NASA Mooned America!” (175)
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!
Jarrah White, a diligent Mars hoax researcher also noticed that the Columbia commemorative plaque attached to the Spirit rover on “Mars” photos and videos is not the same one pictured on Earth seconds before launch. This is blatant proof that photo trickery is going on with these Mars missions. Several photography experts have even mentioned how “Mars” looks exactly like Arizona or parts of the Australian outback desert and it appears NASA simply added a red tint to the atmosphere in post-production. By using the “Auto-Levels Tool” in Photoshop, official NASA Mars photographs lose their red-tint, however, and look exactly like the Earth.
“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
“Since 1973 over one billion children all over the world have grown into adults. They’ve been taught to believe in the fairy tale that we landed men on the Moon. I hope this book will one day banish forever this fanciful tale and relegate the story of NASA’s Moon and Mars landings to the realm of fraud where they belong.” -Ralph Rene, “NASA Mooned America!”
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!?
The Masons’ esoteric religion, the very basis of their symbols and rituals, is Sun-worship. From their first day in the lodge, Masonic initiates learn that Freemasonry is all about light, enlightenment, illumination (hence, the “Illuminati) and hence worship of the Sun as the giver of light. Masonic halls are all purposely constructed to correspond with the motions of the Sun. They are always situated intentionally facing East towards the Sun, with the “Worshipful Master” sitting in the far East on a throne engraved with a picture of the Sun. The high festival of the Masons is on Christian’s “St. John’s Day,” or the 24th of June, otherwise known as “midsummer day” when the Sun arrives at its annual highest elevation, the summer solstice. Regarding the Masonic “Rite of Circumambulation,” 33rd degree Freemasonic historian Albert Mackey says, “In Freemasonry people always walked three times round the alter while singing a sacred hymn. In making this procession, great care was taken to move an imitation of the course of the Sun. This Rite of Circumambulation undoubtedly refers to the doctrine of sun-worship.”
“Masonry is derived and is the remains of the religion of the ancient Druids; who, like the magi of Persia and the priests of Heliopolis in Egypt, were priests of the Sun. They paid worship to this great luminary, as the great visible agent of a great invisible first cause. The Christian religion and Masonry have one and the same common origin: both are derived from the worship of the Sun. The difference between their origin is, that the Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the Sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ, in the place of the Sun, and pay him the same adoration which was originally paid to the Sun. In Masonry many of the ceremonies of the Druids are preserved in their original state, at least without any parody. With them the Sun is still the Sun; and his image in the form of the Sun is the great emblematical ornament of Masonic lodges and Masonic dresses. It is the central figure on their aprons, and they wear it also pendant on the breast of their lodges, and in their processions … The Sun, as the great visible agent of the Creator, was the visible object of the adoration of the Druids; all their religious rites and ceremonies had reference to the apparent progress of the sun through the twelve signs of the zodiac, and his influence upon the earth. The Masons adopt the same practices. The roof of their temples or lodges is ornamented with a sun, and the floor is a representation of the variegated face of the earth either by carpeting or mosaic work … The emblematical meaning of the Sun is well known to the enlightened and inquisitive Freemason; and as the real Sun is situated in the center of the universe, so the emblematical Sun is the center of real Masonry … only the scientific Freemason knows the reason why the Sun is placed in the center of this beautiful hall.” -Thomas Paine, “Origin of Freemasonry”
The real reason the Sun is placed in the center of Masonic halls, is because it represents the core of their five-century long heliocentric deception! First, the Sun-worshippers took us off our ancient natural 13 month lunar calendars and replaced them with unnatural, irregular 12 month Gregorian solar calendars. Second, they put the Sun into the center of the universe, and then convinced people the Earth and everything else revolve around it! Third, they made the Sun the biggest object in the heavens, supposedly 119 times bigger than the Moon, even though we can clearly see they are of equal size. Fourth, they demoted the Moon to being a mere reflector of the Sun’s magnificent light, claiming the Moon to have no light of its own. And finally in 1969 the Sun-worshippers, aboard a craft named “Apollo” after the Greek Sun God, claimed to land on, and thereby spiritually and physically “conquer,” the Moon.
“The sun has ever been at the center of false religion. The Ancient Mystery religions venerated the sun, the solar disk, as deity. The Greeks honored Apollo as the child of the sun. The Romans paid homage to Mithra the sun God. These pagan philosophies form the basis for the worship of the illuminati and indicate the importance of the sun as symbol of satanic deity. Now today, the Masons, as did the apostate Jewish elders and priests in the days of Ezekiel, continue to worship Satan the sun God, also called Lucifer or Baal, by other names. The name of their great God Jahbuhlun, which is revealed to Masons in the higher degrees, is a synonym for the solar deity; two of the three syllable in the name, buh and lun, mean ‘Baal’ and ‘On,’ both of which represent sun and fire Gods.” -Texe Marrs, “Codex Magica”
The winged-disc symbol displayed prominently over the doorway of Masonic lodges shows a solar disc with eagles’ wings and two serpents. This ancient symbol was found in Egyptian, Sumerian, Mesopotamian, Hittite, Anatolian, Persian, Native American, Mexican and Australian tribal cultures, always representative of the Sun. Eagles have also long been associated with the Sun since they fly highest closest to the Sun and they can stare straight into its light. Roman Generals kept golden solar eagles atop their Rods as a sign of supremacy over the army. In Egypt, Horus the hawk was always symbolized with a Sun over his head. The Native Americans also associated eagles with the Sun, such as the Abenaki eagle-god “Kisosen, the Sun-Bringer.”
NASA’s Apollo 11 mission patch symbol shows an eagle landing on the Moon. The Apollo 16 and 17 patches also prominently feature eagles. The Apollo 13 symbol shows 3 horses pulling the Sun behind them which references the ancient Greek legend of Helios, the Sun God, traveling across the sky in a chariot drawn by horses. In total, NASA supposedly landed 12 men (and 0 women) on the Moon. Since the Moon has always been associated with the feminine and the number 13, the Sun associated with the masculine and number 12, putting 12 men on the Moon, once again is symbolic of the Masonic patriarchal brotherhood conquering the divine celestial feminine. This is also the occult reason why Apollo 13 “coincidentally” had an explosion at 13:13 on April 13th.
“To make interstellar travel believable NASA was created. The Apollo Space Program foisted the idea that man could travel to, and walk upon, the moon. Every Apollo mission was carefully rehearsed and then filmed in large sound stages at the Atomic Energy Commissions Top Secret test site in the Nevada Desert and in a secured and guarded sound stage at the Walt Disney Studios within which was a huge scale mock-up of the moon. All names, missions, landing sites, and events in the Apollo Space Program echoed the occult metaphors, rituals and symbology of the Illuminati’s secret religion. The most transparent was the faked explosion on the spacecraft Apollo 13, named ‘Aquarius’ (new age) at 1:13 (13:13 military time) on April 13, 1970.” -William Cooper, “Mystery Babylon”
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 Egyptians believe that the spirit of their Sun God, Ra, resides within the obelisk. Therefore, they would worship and pray to the obelisk, always facing East, three times daily, if possible. The greatest obelisk in the world is the Washington Monument, created by the Freemasons in honor of President George Washington. To see how important the obelisk is to the Mason, you only have to go to a cemetery where Masons are buried and look at the many graves which display obelisk grave stones.” -David Bay, “Freemasonry Proven to Worship Lucifer”
“The serpent is universally the symbol of the Sun, as the Sun was the great enlightener of the physical world, so the serpent was held to have been the great enlightener of the spiritual, by giving mankind the ‘knowledge of good and evil.’ And according to the Bible, you know who gave man the knowledge of good and evil: Satan, Lucifer. Now, if the adepts knew that the Sun was a symbol of something that the people would not support, such as a belief that Lucifer, the devil, was the god that they worshipped, they would have to continue with their charade, so that the people would not decide to stop worshipping. Because if the sheeple figured it out, they would no longer support their activities. They would have to keep their beliefs from the people, and conceal their secret worship in hidden symbols. So sun worship as a religion prospered.” -William Cooper, “Mystery Babylon”
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.”
33rd degree Freemasonic historian Albert Mackey in his “Encyclopedia of Freemasonry,” wrote that, “On his return to Europe, Pythagoras established his celebrated school at Crotona, a Dorian Colony in the south of Italy, about 529 B.C., much resembling that subsequently adopted by the Freemasons. His school soon acquired such a reputation that disciples flocked to him from all parts of Greece and Italy. Pythagoras taught as the principal dogma of his philosophy the system of metempsychosis, or the transmigration of souls. He taught the mystical power of numbers, and much of the symbolism on that subject which we now possess is derived from what has been left to us by his disciples. He was also a geometrician, and is regarded as having been the inventor of several problems … The schools established by Pythagoras at Crotona and other cities, have been considered by many writers as the models after which Masonic Lodges were subsequently constructed … The disciples of this school wore the simplest kind of clothing, and having on their entrance surrendered all their property to the common fund, they then submitted for three years to voluntary poverty, during which time they were also compelled to a rigorous silence. The doctrines of Pythagoras were always delivered as infallible propositions which admitted of no argument … Before admission to the privileges of this school, the previous life and character of the candidate were rigidly scrutinized, and in the preparatory initiation secrecy was enjoined by an oath, and he was made to submit to the severest trials of his fortitude and self-command. He who after his admission was alarmed at the obstacles he had to encounter, was permitted to return to the world, and the disciples, considering him as dead, performed his funeral obsequies, and erected a monument to his memory. The mode of living in the school of Crotona was like that of the modern Communists. The Brethren, about six hundred in number, with their wives and children, resided in one large building … They arose before day to pay their devotions to the sun … The meals consisted principally of bread, honey, and water, for though the table was often covered with delicacies, no one was permitted to partake of them. It was in this secret school that Pythagoras gave his instructions on his interior doctrine, and explained the hidden meaning of his symbols. There were three Degrees: the first or Mathematic, being engaged in the study of the exact sciences; and the second, or Theoretic, in the knowledge of God and the future state of man; but the third or highest Degree, was communicated only to a few whose intellects were capable of grasping the full fruition of the Pythagorean philosophy.”
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.
Luckily for the world, Pythagoras’ heliocentric model of the universe made little headway for almost two thousand years until another suspected Mason, Nicolas Copernicus labored 27 years of his life to create his updated model called the “Solar System,” which also featured a globe-Earth revolving around the Sun. Born in Prussia in 1472, Copernicus studied philosophy and medicine at Cvacova, and became Professor of Mathematics at Rome. The last decades of his life he become obsessed with the ideas of Pythagoras and when he first presented his heliocentric doctrine to the world, it was condemned as being so heretical that he was imprisoned and only released upon making a recantation of his opinions.
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.”
“The system of the Universe, as taught by Modern Astronomers, being founded entirely on theory, for the truth of which they are unable to advance one single real proof, they have entrenched themselves in a conspiracy of silence, and decline to answer any objections which may be made to their hypotheses … Copernicus himself, who revived the theory of the heathen philosopher Pythagoras, and his great exponent Sir Isaac Newton, confessed that their system of a revolving Earth was only a possibility, and could not be proved by facts. It is only their followers who have decorated it with the name of an ‘exact science,’ yea, according to them, ‘the most exact of all the sciences.’ Yet one Astronomer Royal for England once said, speaking of the motion of the whole Solar system: ‘The matter is left in a most delightful state of uncertainty, and I shall be very glad if any one can help me out of it.’ What a very sad position for an ‘exact science’ to be in is this!” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (10)
“The origin of the globular theory may be traced and shown to be pagan. It was introduced into Egypt by the Greek Pythagoras, about 500 B.c. He was a native of Samos, and a great traveler in his early days. He travelled much in the East. And he imbibed the fallacious idea that the earth and sea together formed a whirling globe and that the heavenly bodies were other worlds (inhabited.) Pythagoras returned to Europe, and introduced these serious errors into his own country … Newton was no logician and logic formed no part of his composition. Nor did he profess to possess this quality, which is absolutely essential to a discerner and founder of true Science. He spent his whole life in investing and formulating an elaboration which he called the Solar System, building upon the mythical fallacies which Pythagoras had brought from the East in the first instance; and which had been handed down by Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo. Without testing the nature of his foundations he accepted the whole fabrication, and took Copernicus’s hypotheses all for granted.” -Lady Blount, “The Romance of Science” (3-4)
“Copernicus had evolved another theory, which he also explains in his Treatise on the Revolution of the Celestial Spheres, that if a body is to revolve round another, the first one must have a spherical shape and rotate about its axis in the manner of a spinning top. Consequently, in order to make this notion fit in with the movement of the earth round the sun which he had devised in order to explain the seasons, he suddenly decreed that the earth was round, contrary to the general opinion at the time, and then proclaimed that it had a movement of rotation about its axis. The great inconvenience in this proposition is that the rotation of the earth cannot be seen to exist, either with regard to the position of the sun or clouds during the day, or of the moon and other planets by night. On the other hand, the fact of the immobility of the earth has an immense advantage over the theory of the rotation in that it can positively be recognized as such, and it can safely be said that if the earth cannot be seen to move, there are hundred chances in a hundred that it does not do so.” -Gabrielle Henriet, “Heaven and Earth” (9-10)
One of heliocentrist’s favorite “proofs” of their ball-Earth theory is the ability for ships and planes to circumnavigate, to sail or fly at right angles to the North Pole and eventually return to their original location. Since the North Pole and Antarctica are covered in ice and guarded “no-fly” zones, however, no ships or planes have ever been known to circumnavigate the Earth in North/South directions, only East/West; And herein lies the rub, East or West-bound circumnavigation can just as easily be performed on a flat plane as it can a globular sphere. Just as a compass can place its center-point on a flat piece of paper and trace a circle either way around the “pole,” so can a ship or plane circumnavigate a flat-Earth. The only kind of circumnavigation which could not happen on a flat-Earth is North/South-bound, which is likely the very reason for the heavily-enforced flight restrictions. Flight restrictions originating from none other than the United Nations, the same United Nations which haughtily uses a flat-Earth map as its official logo and flag!
“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)
“The Sun, as he travels round over the surface of the Earth, brings ‘noon’ to all places on the successive meridians which he crosses: his journey being made in a westerly direction, places east of the Sun’s position have had their noon, whilst places to the west of the Sun’s position have still to get it. Therefore, if we travel easterly, we arrive at those parts of the Earth where ‘time’ is more advanced, the watch in our pocket has to be ‘put on’ or we may be said to ‘gain time.’ If, on the other hand, we travel westerly, we arrive at places where it is still ‘morning,’ the watch has to be ‘put back,’ and it may be said that we ‘lose time.’ But, if we travel easterly so as to cross the 180th meridian, there is a loss, there, of a day, which will neutralize the gain of a whole circumnavigation; and, if we travel westerly, and cross the same meridian, we experience the gain of a day, which will compensate for the loss during a complete circumnavigation in that direction. The fact of losing or gaining time in sailing round the world, then, instead of being evidence of the Earth’s ‘rotundity,’ as it is imagined to be, is, in its practical exemplification, an everlasting proof that the Earth is not a globe.” -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (100)
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!
“On any frozen lake or canal, notably on the ‘Bedford Canal,’ in the county of Cambridge, in winter and on a clear day, skaters may be observed several miles away, seeming to glide along upon limbs without feet–skates and boots quite invisible to the unaided eye, but distinctly visible through a good telescope. But even on the sea, when the water is very calm, if a vessel is observed until it is just ‘hull down,’ a powerful telescope turned upon it will restore the hull to sight. From which it must be concluded that the lower part of a receding ship disappears through the influence of perspective, and not from sinking behind the summit of a convex surface.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (216)
Ball-Earthers will often quip that “if the Earth were flat, then we could see all over it!” but this is of course ignorant and inaccurate. If you stand on the beach, a plain or prairie, you will find the horizon extends about three to six miles around you depending on the weather and your eyesight. The range of the human eye, our field of vision is from 110 to 1 degree, and the smallest angle under which an object can still be seen is 1/60 of 1 degree, so that when an object is 3000 times its own diameter away from an observer, it will cease to be visible. So for example, the farthest distance at which one can see a 1 inch diameter penny, is 3000 inches, or 250 feet. Therefore, if a ship’s hull is 10 feet above the water, it will disappear from the unaided eye at 3000 times 10 feet, or 6 miles. This has nothing to do with the supposed “convexity” or “curvature” of the Earth and everything to do with the common Law of Perspective.
“The horizon of an observer is distant or near according to the greatness or otherwise of his elevation above the surface of the supposed globe. If he stands 24 feet above sea level, he is said to be in the center of a circle which bounds his vision, the radius of which in any direction, on a clear day, is six miles. A local gentleman tells me that he has watched a boat-race in New Zealand, seeing the boats all the way out and home, the distance being 9 miles from where he was standing on the beach. I have seen the hull of a steamer with the naked eye at an elevation of not more than 24 feet, at a distance of 12 miles, and in taking observations along the South African coast, have sometimes had an horizon of at least 20 miles at an elevation of 20 feet only. The distance of the horizon, or vanishing point, where the sky appears to touch the earth and sea, is determined, largely by the weather, and when that is clear, by the power of our vision. This is proved by the fact that the telescope will increase the distance of the horizon very greatly, and bring objects into view which are entirely beyond the range of vision of the unaided eye. But, as no telescope can pierce a segment of water, the legitimate conclusion we are forced to arrive at, is that the surface of water is level, and that, therefore, the shape of the world cannot be globular, and on such a flat or level surface, the greater the elevation of the observer, the longer will his range of vision be, and thus the farther he can see.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (56)
“On the shore near Waterloo, a few miles to the north of Liverpool, a good telescope was fixed, at an elevation of 6 feet above the water. It was directed to a large steamer, just leaving the River Mersey, and sailing out to Dublin. Gradually the mast-head of the receding vessel came nearer to the horizon, until, at length, after more than four hours had elapsed, it disappeared. The ordinary rate of sailing of the Dublin steamers was fully eight miles an hour; so that the vessel would be, at least, thirty-two miles distant when the mast-head came to the horizon. The 6 feet of elevation of the telescope would require three miles to be deducted for convexity, which would leave twenty-nine miles, the square of which, multiplied by 8 inches, gives 560 feet; deducting 80 feet for the height of the main-mast, and we find that, according to the doctrine of rotundity, the mast-head of the outward bound steamer should have been 480 feet below the horizon. Many other experiments of this kind have been made upon sea-going steamers, and always with results entirely incompatible with the theory that the earth is a globe.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (46)
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)
“Astronomers have made experiments with pendulums which have been suspended from the interior of high buildings, and have exulted over the idea of being able to prove the rotation of the Earth on its ‘axis,’ by the varying direction taken by the pendulum over a prepared table underneath – asserting that the table moved round under the pendulum, instead of the pendulum shifting and oscillating in different directions over the table! But, since it has been found that, as often as not, the pendulum went round the wrong way for the ‘rotation’ theory, chagrin has taken the place of exultation, and we have a proof of the failure of astronomers in their efforts to substantiate their theory.” -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (73)
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)
“We believe, with all due deference to the pendulum, and its proprietor, that it proves nothing but the craftiness of the inventor; and we can only describe the show and showman as deceptions. A thing so childish as this ‘pendulum proof’ that it can only be described as one of the most simple and ridiculous attempts to gull the public that has ever been conceived. It has been said that the pendulum experiment proves the rotation of the earth, but this is quite impossible, for one pendulum turns one way; and sometimes, another pendulum turns in the opposite direction. Now we ask does the earth rotate in opposite directions at different places at one and the same time? We should like to know. Perhaps the experimenters will kindly enlighten us on this point … If the earth had the terrible motions attributed to it, there would be some sensible effects of such motions. But we neither feel the motion, see it, nor hear it. And how people can stand watching the pendulum vibrate, and think that they are seeing a proof of the motions of the earth, almost passes comprehension. They are, however, brought up to believe it, and it is thought to be ‘scientific’ to believe what the astronomers teach.” -Lady Blount, “The Romance of Science” (8-10)
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.
Many people think that modern astronomy’s ability to accurately predict lunar and solar eclipses is a result and proof positive of the heliocentric theory of the universe. The fact of the matter however is that eclipses have been accurately predicted by cultures worldwide for thousands of years before the “heliocentric ball-Earth” was even a glimmer in Copernicus’ imagination. Ptolemy in the 1st century A.D. accurately predicted eclipses for six hundred years on the basis of a flat, stationary Earth with equal precision as anyone living today. All the way back in 600 B.C. Thales accurately predicted an eclipse which ended the war between the Medes and Lydians. Eclipses happen regularly with precision in 18 year cycles, so regardless of geocentric or heliocentric, flat or globe Earth cosmologies, eclipses can be accurately calculated independent of such factors.
“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 Chaldeans used to predict the eclipses three thousand years ago; with a degree of accuracy that is only surpassed by seconds in these days because we have wonderful clocks which they had not. Yet they had an entirely different theory of the universe than we have. The fact is that eclipses occur with a certain exact regularity just as Christmas and birthdays do, every so many years, days and minutes, so that anyone who has the records of the eclipses of thousands of years can predict them as well as the best astronomers, without any knowledge of their cause.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (40)
“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.
“The Newtonian hypothesis involves the necessity of the Sun, in the case of a lunar eclipse, being on the opposite side of a globular earth, to cast its shadow on the Moon: but, since eclipses of the Moon have taken place with both the Sun and the Moon above the horizon, it follows that it cannot be the shadow of the Earth that eclipses the Moon, and that the theory is a blunder.” -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (57)
“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)
“According to the globular theory, a lunar eclipse occurs when the sun, earth, and moon are in a direct line; but it is on record that since about the fifteenth century over fifty eclipses have occurred while both sun and moon have been visible above the horizon.” -F.H. Cook, “The Terrestrial Plane”
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)
In an attempt to explain away the inconsistencies in their theory, heliocentrists usually claim light refraction must be happening on a scale large enough to account for the phenomena. George G. Carey in his “Astronomy and Astronomical Instruments” claims that this is the reason the full moon has sometimes been seen eclipsed above the horizon before the sunset, due to a “horizontal refraction of 36 or 37 minutes, generally about 33 minutes, which is equal to the diameter of the Sun or Moon.” Even if this highly-implausible reverse-engineered damage-control explanation is accepted, it cannot explain how Earth-bound observers are supposedly able to see 12,000 miles 180 degrees around “the globe.”
“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)
If you fill a balloon with helium, a substance lighter than the nitrogen, oxygen and other elements which compose the air around it, the balloon will immediately fly upwards. If you fill a balloon with hydrogen, a substance even lighter than helium, the balloon will fly upwards even faster. If you blow a dandelion seed out of your hands, a substance just barely heavier than the air, it will float away and slowly but eventually fall to the ground. And if you drop an anvil from your hands, something much heavier than the air, it will quickly and directly fall straight to the ground. Now, this has absolutely nothing to do with “gravity.” The fact that light things rise up and heavy things fall down is simply a natural property of weight. That is very different from “gravity.” Gravity is a hypothetical magnetic-like force possessed by large masses which Isaac Newton needed to help explain the heliocentric theory of the universe.
“Most people in England have either read, or heard, that Sir Isaac Newton’s theory of gravitation was originated by his seeing an apple fall to the earth from a tree in his garden. Persons gifted with ordinary common-sense would say that the apple fell down to the earth because, bulk for bulk, it was heavier than the surrounding air; but if, instead of the apple, a fluffy feather had been detached from the tree, a breeze would probably have sent the feather floating away, and the feather would not reach the earth until the surrounding air became so still that, by virtue of its own density, the feather would fall to the ground.” -Lady Blount, “Clarion’s Science Versus God’s Truth” (40)
Wilbur Voliva, a famous flat-Earther in the early 20th century, gave lectures all over America against Newtonian astronomy. He would begin by walking on stage with a book, a balloon, a feather and a brick, and ask the audience: “How is it that a law of gravitation can pull up a toy balloon and cannot put up a brick? I throw up this book. Why doesn’t it go on up? That book went up as far as the force behind it forced it and it fell because it was heavier than the air and that is the only reason. I cut the string of a toy balloon. It rises, gets to a certain height and then it begins to settle. I take this brick and a feather. I blow the feather. Yonder it goes. Finally, it begins to settle and comes down. This brick goes up as far as the force forces it and then it comes down because it is heavier than the air. That is all.”
“Any object which is heavier than the air, and which is unsupported, has a natural tendency to fall by its own weight. Newton’s famous apple at Woolsthorpe, or any other apple when ripe, loses hold of its stalk, and, being heavier than the air, drops as a matter of necessity, to the ground, totally irrespective of any attraction of the Earth. For, if such attraction existed, why does not the Earth attract the rising smoke which is not nearly so heavy as the apple? The answer is simple – because the smoke is lighter than the air, and, therefore, does not fall but ascends. Gravitation is only a subterfuge, employed by Newton in his attempt to prove that the Earth revolves round the Sun, and the quicker it is relegated to the tomb of all the Capulets, the better will it be for all classes of society.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (8)
“The ‘law of gravitation’ is said by the advocates of the Newtonian system of astronomy, to be the greatest discovery of science, and the foundation of the whole of modern astronomy. If, therefore, it can be shown that gravitation is a pure assumption, and an imagination of the mind only, that it has no existence outside of the brains of its expounders and advocates, the whole of the hypotheses of this modern so-called science fall to the ground as flat as the surface of the ocean, and this ‘most exact of all sciences,’ this wonderful ‘feat of the intellect’ becomes at once the most ridiculous superstition and the most gigantic imposture to which ignorance and credulity could ever be exposed.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (36)
Einstein’s theory of relativity and the entire heliocentric model of the universe hinges upon Newton’s “law of gravitation.” Heliocentrists claim that the Sun is the most massive object in the heavens, more massive even than the Earth, and therefore the Earth and other planets by “law” are caught up in the Sun’s “gravity” and forced to orbit perpetual circles/ellipses around it. They claim that gravity also somehow allows people, buildings, the oceans, and all of nature to exist on the under-side of their “ball-Earth” without falling off.
Now, even if gravity did exist, why would it cause both planets to orbit the Sun and people to stick to the Earth? Gravity should either cause people to float in suspended circular orbits around the Earth, or it should cause the Earth to be pulled and crash into the Sun! What sort of magic is “gravity” that it can glue people’s feet to the ball-Earth, while causing Earth itself to revolve ellipses round the Sun? The two effects are very different yet the same cause is attributed to both.
“Take the case of a shot propelled from a cannon. By the force of the explosion and the influence of the reputed action of gravitation, the shot forms a parabolic curve, and finally falls to the earth. Here we may ask, why – if the forces are the same, viz., direct impulse and gravitation – does not the shot form an orbit like that of a planet, and revolve round the earth? The Newtonian may reply, because the impulse which propelled the shot is temporary; and the impulse which propelled the planet is permanent. Precisely so; but why is the impulse permanent in the case of the planet revolving round the sun? What is the cause of this permanence?” -N. Crossland, “New Principia”
“If the sun is pulling with such power at the earth and all her sister planets, why do they not fall down upon him?” -A. Giberne, “Sun, Moon, and Stars” (27)
Furthermore, this magnetic-like attraction of massive objects gravity is purported to have can be found nowhere in the natural world. There is no example in nature of a massive sphere or any other shaped-object which by virtue of its mass alone causes smaller objects to stick to or orbit around it! There is nothing on Earth massive enough that it can be shown to cause even a dust-bunny to stick to or orbit around it! Try spinning a wet tennis ball or any other spherical object with smaller things placed on its surface and you will find that everything falls or flies off, and nothing sticks to or orbits it. To claim the existence of a physical “law” without a single practical evidential example is hearsay, not science.
“That bodies in some instances are seen to approach each other is a fact; but that their mutual approach is due to an ‘ attraction,’ or pulling process, on the part of these bodies, is, after all, a mere theory. Hypotheses may be sometimes admissible, but when they are invented to support other hypotheses, they are not only to be doubted but discredited and discarded. The hypothesis of a universal force called Gravitation is based upon, and was indeed invented with a view to support another hypothesis, namely, that the earth and sea together make up a vast globe, whirling away through space, and therefore needing some force or forces to guide it in its mad career, and so control it as to make it conform to what is called its annual orbit round the sun! The theory first of all makes the earth to be a globe; then not a perfect globe, but an oblate spheroid, flattened at the ‘poles’; then more oblate, until it was in danger of becoming so flattened that it would be like a cheese; and, passing over minor variations of form, we are finally told that the earth is pear-shaped, and that the ‘elipsoid has been replaced by an apoid!’ What shape it may assume next we cannot tell; it will depend upon the whim or fancy of some astute and speculating ‘scientist.’” -Lady Blount and Albert Smith, “Zetetic Astronomy” (14)
How is it that “gravity” is so strong that it can hold all the oceans, buildings and people stuck to the under-side of the ball-Earth, but so weak that it allows birds, bugs, smoke, and balloons to casually evade its grips completely!? How is it that “gravity” holds our bodies clung to the under-side of the ball-Earth, but yet we can easily raise our legs and arms, walk or jump and feel no such constant downward pulling force? How is it that “gravity” can cause planets to revolve elliptical orbits around a single center of attraction? Ellipses by nature require two foci, and the force of gravitation would have to regularly increase and decrease to keep planets in constant orbit and prevent pulling them into direct collision courses!
“That the sun’s path is an exact circle for only about four periods in a year, and then of only a few hours – at the equinoxes and solstices – completely disproves the ‘might have been’ of circular gravitation, and by consequence, of all gravitation … If the sun were of sufficient power to retain the earth in its orbit when nearest the sun, when the earth arrived at that part of its elliptical path farthest from the sun, the attractive force (unless very greatly increased) would be utterly incapable of preventing the earth rushing away into space ‘in a right line forever,’ as astronomers say. On the other hand, it is equally clear that if the sun’s attraction were just sufficient to keep the earth in its proper path when farthest from the sun, and thus to prevent it rushing off into space; the same power of attraction when the earth was nearest the sun would be so much greater, that (unless the attraction were very greatly diminished) nothing would prevent the earth rushing towards and being absorbed by the sun, there being no counterbalancing focus to prevent such a catastrophe! As astronomy makes no reference to the increase and diminution of the attractive force of the sun, called gravitation, for the above necessary purposes, we are again forced to the conclusion that the great ‘discovery’ of which astronomers are so proud is absolutely non-existent.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (44-45)
“We are asked by the Newtonian to believe that the action of gravitation, which we can easily overcome by the slightest exercise of volition in raising an hand or a foot, is so overwhelmingly violent when we lose our balance and fall a distance of a few feet, that this force, which is imperceptible under usual conditions, may, under extraordinary circumstances, cause the fracture of every limb we possess? Common-sense must reject this interpretation. Gravitation does not furnish a satisfactory explanation of the phenomena here described, whereas the definition of weight already given does, for a body seeking in the readiest manner its level of stability would produce precisely the result experienced. If the influence which kept us securely attached to this earth were identical with that which is powerful enough to disturb a distant planet in its orbit, we should be more immediately conscious of its masterful presence and potency; whereas this influence is so impotent in the very spot where it is supposed to be most dominant that we find an insurmountable difficulty in accepting the idea of its existence.” -N. Crossland, “New Principia”
Heliocentrists claim the ball-Earth is perpetually spinning on its axis at a mind-numbing 1,038 miles per hour, or 19 miles per second, and somehow people, animals, buildings, oceans, and other surface phenomena can stick to the under-side of the spinning ball without falling or flying off. Take a ride on the “Gravitron” at your local amusement park, however, and notice how the faster it spins, the more you are pushed away from the center of spin, not towards it. Even if the centripetal (inward pulling) force of gravity did exist, which it does not, the centrifugal (outward pushing) force of the ball-Earth’s supposed 19 mile per second spin would also exist and have to be overcome, yet neither of these opposing forces have ever been shown to have any existence outside the imaginations of heliocentric “scientists.”
“Gravitation is the term now used to ‘explain’ what common-sense people look upon as inexplicable. Globularists say that all orbs in space are globes gravitating towards each other in proportion to their magnitude and power of attraction – there being a ‘centripetal’ force (tending towards the center) and a ‘centrifugal’ force (tending from the center); but how inert matter can set up any automatic force, and cause one body to gravitate towards another body, has never yet been made palpable to the senses. It belongs to the regions of Metaphysics (‘existing only in thought’).” -Lady Blunt, “Clarion’s Science Versus God’s Truth” (40-41)
“We are not like flies which, by the peculiar conformation of their feet, can crawl on a ball, but we are human being, who require a plane surface on which to walk; and how could we be fastened to the Earth whirling, according to your theory, around the Sun, at the rate of eighteen miles per second? The famed law of Gravitation will not avail, though we are told that we have fifteen pounds of atmosphere pressing on every square inch of our bodies, but this does not appear to be particularly logical, for there are many athletes who can leap nearly their own height, and run a mile race in less than five minutes, which they could not possibly do were they thus handicapped.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (3)
“The attraction of gravitation is said to be stronger at the surface of the earth than at a distance from it. Is it so? If I spring upwards perpendicularly I cannot with all my might ascend more than four feet from the ground; but if I jump in a curve with a low trajectory, keeping my highest elevation about three feet, I might clear at a bound a space above the earth of about eighteen feet; so that practically I can overcome the so-called force (pull) at the distance of four feet, in the proportion of 18 to 4, being the very reverse of what I ought to be able to do according to the Newtonian hypothesis.” -N. Crossland, “New Principia”
Newton also theorized and it is now commonly taught that the Earth’s ocean tides are caused by gravitational lunar attraction. If the Moon is only 2,160 miles in diameter and the Earth 8,000 miles, however, using their own math and “law,” it follows that the Earth is 87 times more massive and therefore the larger object should attract the smaller to it, and not the other way around. If the Earth’s greater gravity is what keeps the Moon in orbit, it is impossible for the Moon’s lesser gravity to supersede the Earth’s gravity at Earth’s sea-level, where its gravitational attraction would even further out-trump the Moon’s. Not to mention, the velocity and path of the Moon are uniform and should therefore exert a uniform influence on the Earth’s tides, when in actuality the Earth’s tides vary greatly. Furthermore, if ocean tides are caused by the Moon’s gravitation, how is it that lakes, ponds, and other smaller bodies of standing water remain outside the Moon’s grasp, while the gigantic oceans are so effected!?
“If the moon lifted up the water, it is evident that near the land, the water would be drawn away and low instead of high tide caused. Again, the velocity and path of the moon are uniform, and it follows that if she exerted any influence on the earth, that influence could only be a uniform influence. But the tides are not uniform. At Port Natal the rise and fall is about 6 feet, while at Beira, about 600 miles up the coast, the rise and fall is 26 feet. This effectually settles the matter that the moon has no influence on the tides. Tides are caused by the gentle and gradual rise and fall of the earth on the bosom of the mighty deep. In inland lakes, there are no tides; which also proves that the moon cannot attract either the earth or water to cause tides. But the fact that the basin of the lake is on the earth which rests on the waters of the deep shows that no tides are possible, as the waters of the lakes together with the earth rise and fall, and thus the tides at the coast are caused; while there are no tides on waters unconnected with the sea.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (130-131)
“It is affirmed that the intensity of attraction increases with proximity, and vice versâ. How, then, when the waters are drawn up by the moon from their bed, and away from the earth’s attraction,–which at that greater distance from the centre is considerably diminished, while that of the moon is proportionately increased–is it possible that all the waters acted on should be prevented leaving the earth and flying away to the moon? If the moon has power of attraction sufficient to lift the waters of the earth at all, even a single inch from their deepest receptacles, where the earth’s attraction is much the greater, there is nothing in the theory of attraction of gravitation to prevent her taking to herself all the waters which come within her influence. Let the smaller body once overcome the power of the larger, and the power of the smaller becomes greater than when it first operated, because the matter acted on is nearer to it. Proximity is greater, and therefore power is greater … How then can the waters of the ocean immediately underneath the moon flow towards the shores, and so cause a flood tide? Water flows, it is said, through the law of gravity, or attraction of the earth’s centre; is it possible then for the moon, having once overcome the power of the earth, to let go her hold upon the waters, through the influence of a power which she has conquered, and which therefore, is less than her own? … The above and other difficulties which exist in connection with the explanation of the tides afforded by the Newtonian system, have led many, including Sir Isaac Newton himself, to admit that such explanation is the least satisfactory portion of the ‘theory of gravitation.’ Thus we have been carried forward by the sheer force of evidence to the conclusion that the tides of the sea do not arise from the attraction of the moon, but simply from the rising and falling of the floating earth in the waters of the ‘great deep.’ That calmness which is found to exist at the bottom of the great seas could not be possible if the waters were alternately raised by the moon and pulled down by the earth.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (159-175)
“Even Sir Isaac Newton himself confessed that the explanation of the Moon’s action on the Tides was the least satisfactory part of his theory of Gravitation. This theory asserts that the larger object attracts the smaller, and the mass of the Moon being reckoned as only one-eighth of that of the Earth, it follows that, if, by the presumed force of Gravitation, the Earth revolves round the Sun, much more, for the same reason, should the Moon do so likewise, instead of which that willful orb still continues to go round our world. Tides vary greatly in height, owing chiefly to the different configurations of the adjoining lands. At Chepstow it rises to 60 feet, at Portishead to 50, while at Dublin Bay it is but 1 2, and at Wexford only 5 feet … That the Earth itself has a slight tremulous motion may be seen in the movement of the spirit-level, even when fixed as steadily as possible, and that the sea has a fluctuation may be witnessed by the oscillation of an anchored ship in the calmest day of summer. By what means the tides are so regularly affected is at present only conjectured; possibly it may be by atmospheric pressure on the waters of the Great Deep, and perhaps even the Moon itself, as suggested by the late Dr. Rowbotham, may influence the atmosphere, increasing or diminishing its barometric pressure, and indirectly the rise and fall of the Earth in the waters.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (259-260)
“Bearing this fact in mind, that there exists a continual pressure of the atmosphere upon the Earth, and associating it with the fact that the Earth is a vast plane ‘stretched out upon the waters,’ and it will be seen that it must of necessity slightly fluctuate, or slowly rise and fall in the water. As by the action of the atmosphere the Earth is slowly depressed, the water moves towards the receding shore and produces the flood tide; and when by the reaction of the resisting oceanic medium the Earth gradually ascends the waters recede, and the ebb tide is produced. This is the general cause of tides. Whatever peculiarities are observable they may be traced to the reaction of channels, bays, headlands, and other local causes … That the Earth has a vibratory or tremulous motion, such as must necessarily belong to a floating and fluctuating structure, is abundantly proved by the experience of astronomers and surveyors. If a delicate spirit-level be firmly placed upon a rock or upon the most solid foundation which it is possible to construct, the very curious phenomenon will be observed of constant change in the position of the air-bubble. However carefully the ‘level’ may be adjusted, and the instrument protected from the atmosphere, the ‘bubble’ will not maintain its position many seconds together. A somewhat similar influence has been noticed in astronomical observatories, where instruments of the best construction and placed in the most approved positions cannot always be relied upon without occasional re-adjustment.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Earth Not a Globe, 2nd Edition” (108-110)
In the past several decades, NASA has shown video of astronauts, supposedly in low-Earth orbit, experiencing complete weightlessness, or “zero gravity,” how is this weightless effect achieved if gravity doesn’t exist? As it turns out, for the past several decades, NASA together with Boeing have been perfecting so-called “Zero G planes” and “Zero G maneuvers,” which are able to produce weightlessness at any altitude. Aboard modified Boeing 727’s specially trained pilots perform aerobatic maneuvers known as parabolas. Planes climb with a pitch angle of 45 degrees using engine thrust and elevator controls, then when maximum height is reached the craft is pointed downward at high speed. The period of weightlessness begins while ascending and lasts all the way up and over the parabola until reaching a downward pitch angle of 30 degrees, at which point the maneuver is repeated. Therefore all NASA’s footage of astronauts aboard “space shuttles,” or “the International Space Station” can be easily hoaxed and simulated in Earth-atmosphere aboard a Zero G plane. In fact, watching footage of Zero G plane flights alongside footage of NASA astronauts supposedly floating around their “space shuttles” and “space stations,” no observable difference can be seen between the two.
Astronomers claim to have measured all the planets distances, shapes, orbits, weights, relative positions, and times of revolution all based on the “law of gravitation” and without gravity, their entire cosmology folds under its own weight. Without gravity, people cannot stand upside-down on a ball-Earth! Without gravity, the Earth and planets cannot be revolving around the Sun! Without Newtonian gravitation, Einsteinian relativity, Copernican heliocentricity, and the entire Big Bang ball-Earth mythos cannot exist and falls to pieces. Gravity, both metaphorically and quite literally, just does not hold any water; not as a sound theory of cosmology, and not as a law supposedly responsible for holding in the world’s oceans!
“Man’s experience tells him that he is not constructed like the flies that can live and move upon the ceiling of a room with as much safety as on the floor: – and since the modern theory of a planetary earth necessitates a crowd of theories to keep company with it, and one of them is that men are really bound to the earth by a force which fastens them to it ‘like needles round a spherical loadstone,’ a theory perfectly outrageous and opposed to all human experience, it follows that, unless we can trample upon common sense and ignore the teachings of experience, we have an evident proof that the Earth is not a globe … If we could – after our minds had once been opened to the light of Truth – conceive of a globular body on the surface of which human beings could exist, the power – no matter by what name it be called – that would hold them on would, then, necessarily, have to be so constraining and cogent that they could not live; the waters of the oceans would have to be as a solid mass, for motion would be impossible. But we not only exist, but live and move; and the water of the ocean skips and dances like a thing of life and beauty! This is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.” -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (21-88)
“Nearly a hundred years ago Kepler had suggested that some kind of unknown force must hold the earth and the heavenly bodies in their places, and now Sir Isaac Newton, the greatest mathematician of his age, took up the idea and built the Law of Gravitation. The name is derived from the Latin word ‘gravis,’ which means ‘heavy,’ ‘ having weight,’ while the Law of Gravitation is defined as ‘That mutual action between masses of matter by virtue of which every such mass tends toward every other with a force varying directly as the product of the masses, and inversely as the square of their distances apart.’ Reduced to simplicity, gravitation is said to be ‘That which attracts every thing toward every other thing.’ That does not tell us much ; and yet the little it does tell us is not true; for a thoughtful observer knows very well that every thing is not attracted towards every other thing . . . The definition implies that it is a force; but it does not say so, for that phrase ‘mutual action ‘ is ambiguous, and not at all convincing.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (14-15)
“The system of gravitation which makes the sun the moving centre of the Universe, the awkward principles of which are anything but certain since they apply to invisible circumstances so that they cannot be checked, is here replaced by the old geocentric system, universally accepted until the 17th century in view, of course, of its undisputable obviousness, and in which the earth, in a state of immobility and surrounded by the planets visibly moving round it including the sun, is at the centre of our Universe. These two facts which explain almost everything are firstly, the positive existence above the earth of a solid dome constituting the sky; and secondly, the non-material nature of the planets and constellations, which are not physical masses, but merely luminous manifestations without substance. These are the two circumstances which lead today to the fundamental transformation of astronomy.” -Gabrielle Henriet, “Heaven and Earth” (vi)
“The theory that motions are produced through material attraction is absurd. Attributing such a power to mere matter, which is passive by nature, is a supreme illusion. It is a lovely and easy theory to satisfy any man’s mind, but when the practical test comes, it falls all to pieces and becomes one of the most ridiculous theories to common sense and judgment.” -Professor Bernstein, “Letters to the British Association”
Around the turn of the 20th century, in order to save the dying heliocentric model from the conclusive experiments of Airy, Michelson, Morley, Gale, Sagnac, Kantor, Nordmeyer and others, Albert Einstein created his Special Theory of Relativity, a brilliant revision of heliocentricism which in one philosophical swoop banished the universal aether from scientific study replacing it with a form of relativism which allowed for heliocentricism and geocentricism to hold equal merit. If there is no absolute aetheric medium within which all things exist, then hypothetically one can postulate complete relativism with regard to the movement of two objects, such as the Earth and Sun. At the time, the Michelson-Morley and Michelson-Gale experiments had already long measured and proven the existence of the aether, but the church of heliocentricism was not to be deterred, Einstein never tried to refute the experiments scientifically, choosing instead to object philosophically with his notion of “absolute relativity,” claiming that all uniform motion is relative and there exists no absolute state of rest anywhere in the universe. Nowadays, just like the theory of heliocentricism, Einstein’s theory of relativity is accepted worldwide as gospel truth, even though he himself admitted geocentricism is equally justifiable:
“The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either coordinate system could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, ‘the sun is at rest and the earth moves,’ or ‘the sun moves and the earth is at rest,’ would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different coordinate systems.” -Albert Einstein
“People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations. For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations. You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.” -George Ellis, “Thinking Globally, Acting Universally”
Einstein’s necessary modification to the heliocentric theory ultimately resulted in transforming it into the “acentric” theory of the universe, because the Sun was no longer the center of anything, and all motion was only relative. Acentrists soon began postulating that not only is the Earth spinning 1,000 mph and revolving 67,000 mph around the Sun, but the Earth, Sun and entire solar system as a whole are simultaneously rotating around the Milky Way galaxy at 500,000 mph! Furthermore, the entire galaxy, with the Earth, Sun and entire solar system, are also simultaneously shooting 670,000,000 mph through the universe away from a Big Bang explosion at the beginning of time!
“The theory of the three [now four] motions of the Earth and subsequent ‘relativity,’ is the result of trying to cover up one lie by another. They say that as we whirl in London at the rate of nearly eleven miles a minute, we are shooting into space around the Sun at nearly twenty miles a second, and the Sun itself moves around a point in space, at the immense speed of 150,000,000 miles in a year, pulling our poor Earth with him at the added speed – the distance that separates us from the Sun – and in this maddening whirlwind of motions they try to apply Euclid’s spherical trigonometry to locate distances – which data was intended by Euclid to determine fixed points only – with the result that they have brought out wild calculations which have been fostered dogmatically on a gullible World, but are about as infallible as the utterances of Borgia.” -E. Eschini, “Foundations of Many Generations” (7)
“Most people who accept that the Earth is in motion believe it is a proven fact. They do not realize that not only has the motion of the Earth never been proven, but by the constructs of modern physics and cosmology cannot be proven. Again, even modern cosmology does not claim to be able to prove that the Earth is in motion. In fact the very best argument for Earth’s motion is based on pure ‘modesty’ not logic, observation and experience. If anyone could prove the Earth’s motion, that someone would become more famous than Einstein, Hawking and others. They may all be fools but even they would not make such an ignorant claim to proof of Earth’s motions, and those who do so don’t realize just how ignorant of physics they really are! Before folks go demonstrating how ignorant they are, they should consider: 1. The relationship between Mach’s principle and relativity. 2. The relationship between Gravity and Inertia, and Gravity and Acceleration (and the paradoxes that exist). 3. Relativity does not claim to prove Earth’s motions, in fact it ‘dictates’ the ridiculous idea that motion cannot be proven period. 4. Relativity proposes motion, it does not nor can it claim to disprove that the Earth is the center of the universe! 5. Only those who are ignorant of physics attempt to make arguments based on weather patterns, ballistic trajectories, geosynchronous satellites, and Foucault’s pendulums for evidence of Earth’s motions! For all those ‘geniuses’ out there, not even Einstein would claim such stupidity.” -Allen Daves
When Einstein first introduced his theory of relativity to the world, he often used the analogy of a wagon rolling along the street as an illustration. “What we mean by relative motion,” he stated in a Princeton University lecture, “in a general sense is perfectly plain to everyone. If we think of a wagon moving along a street we know that it is possible to speak of the wagon at rest, and the street in motion, just as well as it is to speak of the wagon in motion and the street at rest. That, however, is a very special part of the ideas involved in the principle of Relativity.”
“That would be amusing if we read it in a comic paper, but when Professor Einstein says it in a lecture at the Princeton University, we are expected not to laugh; that is the only difference. It is silly, but I may not dismiss the matter with that remark, and so I will answer quite seriously that it is only possible for me to speak of the street moving while the wagon remains still – and to believe it – when I cast away all the experience of a lifetime and am no longer able to understand the evidence of my senses; which is insanity … Such self-deception as this is not reasoning; it is the negation of reason; which is the faculty of forming correct conclusions from things observed, judged by the light of experience. It is unworthy of our intelligence and a waste of our greatest gift; but that introduction serves very well to illustrate the kind of illusion that lies at the root of Relativity. When he suggested that the street might be moving while the wagon with its wheels revolving was standing still, he was asking us to imagine that in a similar manner the earth we stand upon might be moving while the stars that pass in the night stand still. It is a Case of Appeal, where Einstein appeals in the name of a convicted Copernican Astronomy against the judgment of Michelson – Morley, Nordmeyer, physics, fact, experience, observation and reason.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (65-66)
On the surface relativity may seem plausible enough, especially when presented by a charismatic character of Einstein’s caliber, but is it really so simple and straight-forward? In fact Einstein’s theory of relativity is so complicated and convoluted that when it first came to the public’s attention, it was said that there were probably less than a dozen people on Earth capable of understanding it! After Einstein presented his theory to the Royal Astronomical Society, philanthropist Eugene Higgins offered a prize of $5,000 for the best explanation of relativity, in essay form, describing it so the general public could understand what it was all about. Prize winner Mr. L. Bolton himself admitted that “even when stated in its simplest form, it remains a tough proposition.”
Along with Einstein’s denial of the aether and anything absolute (except the absoluteness of relativity), he had to create a litany of new terms and ideas, each depending upon another and contributing to support the whole. For example, Einstein claimed there was no aether, that time is a fourth spacial dimension, that “infinity” and “eternity” do not exist, and that light is a material thing. This meant that time must be added to the three dimensions of length, breadth, and thickness, that “space” be renamed a “continuum,” and “points” in the “space-time continuum” be renamed to “events.”
“What we have always known as a ‘point’ in the terms of Euclid, Einstein calls an ‘event!’ but if words have any meaning a point and an event are two totally different things; for a point is a mark, a spot or place, and is only concerned in the consideration of material things; while an event is an occurrence, it is something that happens. There is as much difference between them as there is between the sentence ‘This is a barrel of apples,’ and ‘These apples came from New Zealand.’ While claiming ‘time’ as a fourth dimension, Einstein explains that ‘by dimension we must understand merely one of four independent quantities which locate an event in space.’ This is to imply that the other three dimensions which are in common use are independent quantities, which is not the case; for length, breadth and thickness are essentially found in combination; they co-exist in each and every physical thing, so that they are related – hence they are not independent quantities. On the contrary, time IS an independent quantity. It is independent of any one, or all, the three proportions of material things, it is not in any way related; and therefore cannot be used as a fourth dimension.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (69-70)
Einstein’s theory of relativity claims that light is a material thing which therefore has weight and is subject to gravity. This idea meant starlight could now bend under its own weight and curve its path based on the distance and mass of objects along its trajectory, which allowed heliocentrists like Einstein to claim stars are in reality not where they appear to be, and that with this new geometry the stars must be moved to much farther away than previously assumed.
“Consequently the heavenly bodies may be much further away than they have hitherto been supposed to be, and every method which is based upon the geometry of Euclid and the triangulation of Hipparchus will fail to discover the distance to a star; because its real position is no longer known. Wherefore Einstein has invented a new kind of geometry, in order to calculate the positions of the stars by what is nothing more or less than metaphysics.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (66-67)
Einstein’s “Law of the Constancy of the Velocity of Light” states that light always travels at the same speed, 186,414 miles per second (671,090,400 miles per hour), but Einstein also claims that gravity causes light to bend towards massive objects along its trajectory. If a ray of light can be said to bend, curve, or deviate from its course due to the gravitational pull of masses in its path, it must by necessity accelerate when approaching and decelerate when receding from these things. However, if light can bend under its own weight, or under the law of gravitation, as Einstein claims it does, than it is not and cannot be absolute.
“Strangely enough, while Einstein claims that everything is in motion and nothing is stable, he allows one thing, and one thing only, to remain outside the realm of relativity, independent of everything else; He claims that the velocity of light is constant under all circumstances, and therefore is absolute. This is a blunder of the first magnitude, but I do not imagine that he fell into it through any oversight; for it is quite evident that he was driven into this false position. He was compelled to say that the velocity of light is constant, because, if he did not his new geometry would be useless … We are told that light is a material thing, and that a beam of light is deflected from a straight line by the gravitation of any and every thing that lies near its course as it passes within their sphere of influence; and we are further assured that light always maintains a uniform speed of 186,414 miles a second. We have, however, to remind Professor Einstein that this was determined as the result of experiments by the physicists – Fizeau, Foucalt, Cornu, Michelson, and Newcomb, all of which experiments were conducted within the earth’s atmosphere, on terra-firma. In all these experiments a ray of light was reflected between two mirrors several miles apart, so that it had to pass to and fro always through the atmosphere, and it is not to be supposed that light, or anything else, can travel at the same speed through the air as it would through the vacuum Einstein supposes space to be. Let us reverse this in order to realize it better. It is not to be supposed that any material thing travels at no greater speed through a vacuum than it does through air, which has a certain amount of density or opacity. If anything does not distinguish the difference between air and a vacuum, then it is not a material thing; it cannot be matter. On the other hand, anything that is matter must of necessity make such a distinction, and in that case its velocity cannot be constant.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (70)
Conventional wisdom before Einstein’s theory was that light was not a material thing, that it discharged in a straight line in every direction from the source, that it could not be influenced by gravity, could not bend, curve, or be deflected from its course by anything; As Lord Kelvin said, “Light diverges from a luminous center outwards in all directions.” Its velocity may be affected according to the density of the medium through which it passes, but this fact simply proves Einstein’s “Law of the Constancy of the Velocity of Light” is incorrect.
“The length of the course used by Newcomb in the final determination of the Velocity of Light was 7.44242 kilometers. If the ray of light had deviated by a hair’s-breadth from an absolutely straight line, it never could have passed through the interstices between the very fine teeth of his revolving wheel, or return precisely to the appointed spot on his sending and receiving mirrors, which were 3.72121 kilometers apart. The fact that the ray of light did pass from mirror to mirror, and through the wheel, proves that it maintained a straight line; hence it is certain that it was not deflected from its course by the gravitation of the earth between the two mirrors; wherefore it is obvious that it was not affected by gravitation. So we find that the very experiments by which the accepted 186,414 miles per second as the Velocity of Light was measured – experiments which were carried out with the utmost painstaking and minute attention to detail – prove that a ray of light is not influenced by the gravitation of the earth in the slightest degree. Therefore, if those experiments were good enough to warrant all the world in accepting the ‘Velocity of Light’ they may be equally well adduced as proof that a ray of light does not bend by its own weight; and that light is not affected by gravitation.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (71)
“As for Einstein, if you want to believe that lengths shrink when an object moves, time changes in the process, and its mass increases, just so you can explain the anomalies of Michelson’s experiment, that’s your privilege, but I’d just as soon answer it by saying that mass, time and length stay the same and the Earth isn’t moving, and I’m just as ‘scientific’ as you for saying so.” -Robert Sungenis
“Relativity is clever; but it belongs to the same category as Newton’s Law of Gravitation and the Kant-Herschell-Laplace Nebular Hypothesis, in as far as it is a superfine effort of the imagination seeking to maintain an impossible theory of the universe in defiance of every fact against it.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (65)