When you look up at the Sun and Moon you see two equally-sized equidistant circles tracing similar paths at similar speeds around a flat, stationary Earth. The “experts” at NASA, however, claim your common sense every day experience is false on all counts! To begin with, they say the Earth is not flat but a big ball; not stationary but spinning around 19 miles per second; they say the Sun does not revolve around the Earth as it appears, but Earth revolves around the Sun; the Moon, on the other hand, does revolve around the Earth, though not East to West as it appears, rather West to East; and the Sun is actually 400 times larger than the Moon and 400 times farther away! That’s right, you can clearly see they are the same size and distance, you can see the Earth is flat, you can feel the Earth is stationary, but according to the gospel of modern astronomy, you are wrong and a simpleton worthy of endless ridicule if you dare to believe your own eyes and experience!
With haughty arrogance the nearest hypnotized heliocentrist will then
inform you that the Sun is 865,374 miles in diameter and 92,955,807 miles from
the Earth, the Moon is 2,159 miles in diameter and 238,900 miles from Earth,
and those just happen to be the EXACT diameters and distances necessary
for a viewer from Earth to falsely perceive them as being the same size! So, you see, silly Flat-Earther, it is all an
illusion and the apparent equanimity of our day and night luminaries in the sky
results from mere coincidental parallax perspective! The Sun does not revolve around the Earth as
it appears; rather the Earth spins 1,038 mph under your feet and revolves
67,108 mph around the Sun! The Moon does
indeed revolve around the Earth, but not as it appears! Though it seems to move East to West just
like the Sun and everything else in the heavens, the Moon actually spins West
to East at 10.3 mph while orbiting Earth at 2,288 mph, which combined with the
Earth’s 1,038mph spin and 67,108 mph orbit around the Sun coincidentally results
in all motions perfectly cancelling out making the Moon seem to move across the
heavens with similar path and similar speed as the Sun while always only
showing us one side of its surface, and perpetually hiding its “dark side.”
“The Moon presented a special math problem for the
construction of the heliocentricity model. The only way to make the Moon fit in
with the other assumptions was to reverse its direction from that of what everyone
who has ever lived has seen it go. The math model couldn’t just stop the Moon
like it did the Sun, that wouldn’t work. And it couldn’t let it continue to go
East to West as we see it go, either at the same speed or at a different speed.
The only option was to reverse its observed East to West direction and change
its speed from about 64,000 miles an hour to about 2,200 miles an hour. This
reversal, along with the change in speed, were unavoidable assumptions that
needed to be adopted if the model was to have any chance of mimicking reality.”
-Bernard Brauer
“They want you to believe that the Moon's rotation is perfectly
synchronized with its orbit so that's why we only ever see one side of the
Moon, rather than conclude the obvious - that the Moon is simply NOT rotating.
Moreover, they had to slow down the Moon's speed by 58,870 mph AND reverse its
direction to West-East to successfully sell their phony heliocentricity system
to a gullible public. I don't think there is one person in many, many thousands
- regardless of education - who knows that the Copernican Model had to turn the
Moon's observable direction around and give it a new speed to accommodate the
phases and eclipses.” -Marshall Hall
“Astronomers tell us that the Moon goes round the Earth
in about 28 days. Well, we may see her making her journey round every day, if
we make use of our eyes and these are about the best things we have to use. The
Moon falls behind in her daily motion as compared with that of the Sun to the
extent of one revolution in the time specified; but that is not making a
revolution. Failing to go as fast as other bodies go in one direction does not
constitute a going round in the opposite one - as the astronomers would have us
believe! And, since all this absurdity has been rendered necessary for no other
purpose than to help other absurdities along, it is clear that the astronomers
are on the wrong track.” -William
Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (82)
There are several theories about the relative size and distance of
the Sun and Moon all with their points of evidence and points of
contention. Flat-Earthers throughout the
ages have used sextants and plane trigonometry attempting to make such
calculations, usually concluding the Sun and Moon both to be only about 32
miles in diameter and less than a few thousand miles from Earth. Perhaps the least plausible model, certainly
the most exaggerated and imaginative, is the reigning heliocentric theory
claiming the Sun to be a whopping 865,374 miles in diameter, 92,955,807 miles
from the Earth, and the Moon 2,159 miles
in diameter, 238,900 miles from the Earth.
Heliocentrists’ astronomical figures always sound perfectly
precise, but they have historically been notorious for regularly and
drastically changing them to suit their various models. For instance, in his time Copernicus
calculated the Sun’s distance from Earth to be 3,391,200 miles. The next century Johannes Kepler decided it
was actually 12,376,800 miles away.
Issac Newton once said, “It matters not whether we reckon it 28 or 54
million miles distant for either would do just as well!” How scientific!? Benjamin Martin calculated between 81 and 82
million miles, Thomas Dilworth claimed 93,726,900 miles, John Hind stated
positively 95,298,260 miles, Benjamin Gould said more than 96 million miles,
and Christian Mayer thought it was more than 104 million!
“As the sun, according to ‘science’ may be anything from 3 to 104 million
miles away, there is plenty of ‘space’ to choose from. It is like the showman and the child. You pay your money - for various astronomical
works - and you take your choice as to what distance you wish the sun to
be. If you are a modest person, go in
for a few millions; but if you wish to be ‘very scientific’ and to be
‘mathematically certain’ of your figures, then I advise you to make your choice
somewhere about a hundred millions. You
will at least have plenty of ‘space’ to retreat into, should the next
calculation be against the figures of your choice. You can always add a few millions to ‘keep up
with the times,’ or take off as many as may be required to adjust the distance
to the ‘very latest’ accurate column of figures. Talk about ridicule, the whole of modern
astronomy is like a farcical comedy - full of surprises. One never knows what monstrous or ludicrous
absurdity may come forth next. You must
not apply the ordinary rules of common-sense to astronomical guesswork. No, the thing would fall to pieces if you did.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (115)
“Regiments of figures are paraded with all the learned
jargon for which science is famous, but one might as well look at the changing
clouds in the sky and seek for certainty there, as to expect to get it from the
propounders of modern astronomy. But is
there no means of testing these ever-changing never-stable speculations and
bringing them to the scrutiny of the hard logic of fact? Indeed there is. The distance of the sun can be measured with
much precision, the same way as a tree or a house, or church steeple is
measured, by plane triangulation. It is
the principle on which a house is built, a table made or a man-of-war
constructed … The sun is always somewhere between the tropics of Cancer and
Capricorn, a distance admitted to be less than 3,000 miles; how then can the
sun if it be so many thousand miles in diameter, squeeze itself into a space of
about 3,000 miles only? But look at the
distance, say the professors! We have
already done that and not one of the wise men we have so often challenged, has
ever attempted to refute the principle on which we measure the sun’s distance …
If the navigator neglects to apply the sun’s semi-diameter to his observation
at sea, he is 16 nautical miles out in calculating the position his ship is in. A minute of arc on the sextant represents a
nautical mile, and if the semi-diameter be 16 miles, the diameter is of course
32 miles. And as measured by the
sextant, the sun’s diameter is 32 minutes of arc, that is 32 nautical miles in
diameter. Let him disprove this who
can. If ever disproof is attempted, it
will be a literary curiosity, well worth framing.” -Thomas Winship,
“Zetetic Cosmogeny” (114-120)
Measuring with sextants and calculating with plane
trigonometry both the Sun and Moon figure to be only about 32 miles in diameter
and approximately 3,000 miles away. As
shown last chapter, the Moon is actually a semi-transparent luminary and not
the solid, spherical, desert planet that NASA would have us believe. In fact, it is likely that both the Sun and
Moon are not densely physical at all and are simply luminous flat discs able to
pass by/through one another during eclipses.
“The results of recent research prove that the heavenly
luminaries are not Worlds, but lights, and should cause all men who have been
led to accept as proven Copernicus’ theory of the motions of the Earth, to
reconsider this subject.” -E.
Eschini, “Foundations of Many Generations” (3)
“The satellites of the earth are not masses of matter. They are
luminous and transparent discs without substance. The moon, in particular,
conveys the impression of being an ethereal manifestation, and the uncertain
and illusive character which is usually associated with this satellite results
precisely from its immaterial nature. It was recognized from the earliest times
that the satellites of the earth, particularly the sun and the moon, were not
solid, opaque bodies. They were first, until Aristotle, considered to be souls
or spirits, which does not imply a physical nature. To the ancients, they were
simply lights, and they gave the sun and the moon a very apt name. They called
them luminaries.” -Gabrielle
Henriet, “Heaven and Earth” (34-36)
In the Flat-Earth model, the Sun and Moon luminaries revolve around
the Earth once every 24 hours illuminating like spotlights the areas over which
they pass. The Sun’s annual journey from
tropic to tropic, solstice to solstice, is what determines the length and
character of days, nights and seasons.
This is why equatorial regions experience almost year-round summer and
heat while higher latitudes North and especially South experience more distinct
seasons with harsh winters.
The heliocentric model claims seasons change based on the
ball-Earth’s alleged “axial tilt” and “elliptical orbit” around the Sun. Their flawed current model even places us
closest to the Sun (91,400,000 miles) in January when its actually winter, and
farthest from the Sun (94,500,000 miles) in July when its actually summer
throughout much of the Earth. They say
due to the ball-Earth’s tilt, different places receive different amounts of
direct sunlight and that is what produces the seasonal and temperature
changes. This makes little sense, however,
because if the Sun’s heat travels over ninety million miles to reach the
ball-Earth, how could a slight tilt, a mere few thousand miles maximum, negate
the Sun’s ninety million mile journey, giving us simultaneous tropical summers
and Antarctic winters?
“The earth is a stretched-out structure, which diverges
from the central north in all directions towards the south. The equator, being midway between the north
center and the southern circumference, divides the course of the sun into north
and south declination. The longest
circle round the world which the sun makes, is when it has reached its greatest
southern declination. Gradually going
northwards the circle is contracted. In
about three months after the southern extremity of its path has been reached,
the sun makes a circle round the equator.
Still pursuing a northerly course as it goes round and above the world,
in another three months the greatest northern declination is reached, when the
sun again begins to go towards the south.
In north latitudes, when the sun is going north, it rises earlier each
day, is higher at noon and sets later; while in southern latitudes at the same
time, the sun as a matter of course rises later, reaches a lesser altitude at
noon and sets earlier. In northern
latitudes during the southern summer, say from September to December, the sun
rises later each day, is lower at noon and sets earlier; while in the south he
rises earlier, reaches a higher altitude at noon, and sets later each day. This movement round the earth daily is the
cause of the alternations of day and night; while his northerly and southerly courses
produce the seasons. When the sun is
south of the equator it is summer in the south and winter in the north; and
vice versa. The fact of the alternation
of the seasons flatly contradicts the Newtonian delusion that the earth
revolves in an orbit round the sun. It
is said that summer is caused by the earth being nearest the sun, and winter by
its being farthest from the sun. But if
the reader will follow the argument in any text book he will see that according
to the theory, when the earth is nearest the sun there must be summer in both
northern and southern latitudes; and in like manner when it is farthest from
the sun, it must be winter all over the earth at the same time, because the
whole of the globe-earth would then be farthest from the sun!!! In short, it is
impossible to account for the recurrence of the seasons on the assumption that
the earth is globular and that it revolves in an orbit around the sun.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (124-125)
“The seasons are caused by the Sun’s circuit round the
Earth in a spiral ecliptic. In the Winter Solstice (December 21st), the Sun is
vertical over the Tropic of Capricorn. Looking South from London, he appears to
make a small circuit in the Southern sky, during the same period he is seen to cross
the sky at almost overhead in Cape Town, thus causing Summer in the Southern
Hemisphere. In the Summer Solstice (June 21st), the Sun is vertical over the
Tropic of Cancer, (nearly overhead in London), while looking North from Cape
Town, he appears to make a small circuit in the Northern sky, causing Winter in
the Southern and Summer in the Northern Hemisphere.” -E. Eschini, “Foundations of Many
Generations” (7)
“The essential feature of the year is its division into two equal
periods of six months, based first on the predominating length of the days over
that of the nights, and vice versa, conditions which are governed by the
varying hours of sunrise and sunset; and secondly, by the either high or low
height reached by the sun in the heavens at mid-day. The first cycle, during
which the days are longer than the nights and the sun reaches its culminating
point of the year, extends from the spring equinox to the autumn equinox, i.e.
March 21st to September 22nd; and the second cycle during which, inversely, the
duration of the nights exceeds that of the days, and the sun descends to its
lowest point of the year, extends from the autumn equinox to the spring
equinox, i.e. September 23rd to March 20th. These two six-month periods are
also characterized by an opposition of temperature. During the first cycle
which corresponds to spring and summer, the heat gradually rises and falls,
while during the second cycle which comprises autumn and winter, it is the
intensity of the cold which progressively increases and decreases.” -Gabrielle Henriet, “Heaven and Earth” (3-4)
In the Flat-Earth model, the Sun and Moon spotlights are
perpetually hovering over and parallel to the surface of the Earth. From our vantage point, due to the Law of
Perspective, the day/night luminaries appear to rise up the Eastern horizon,
curve peaking high overhead, and then sink below the Western horizon. They do not escape to the underside of the
Flat-Earth as one might imagine, but rather rotate concentric clockwise circles
around the circumference from tropic to tropic.
The appearance of rising, peaking and setting is due to the common Law
of Perspective where tall objects appear high overhead when nearby, but at a
distance gradually lower towards the vanishing point.
“Although the Sun is at all times above and parallel to
the Earth’s surface, he appears to ascend the firmament from morning until
noon, and to descend and sink below the horizon at evening. This arises from a simple and everywhere
visible law of perspective. A flock of
birds, when passing over a flat or marshy country, always appears to descend as
it recedes; and if the flock is extensive, the first bird appears lower, or
nearer to the horizon than the last. The
farthest light in a row of lamps appears the lowest, although each one has the
same altitude. Bearing these phenomena
in mind, it will easily be seen how the Sun, although always parallel to the
surface of the Earth, must appear to ascend when approaching, and descend after
leaving the meridian or noon-day position.”
-Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Earth Not a Globe, 2nd Edition” (85)
“What can be more common than the observation that, standing at
one end of a long row of lamp-posts, those nearest to us seem to be the
highest; and those farthest away the lowest; whilst, as we move along towards
the opposite end of the series, those which we approach seem to get higher, and
those we are leaving behind appear to gradually become lower … It is an
ordinary effect of perspective for an object to appear lower and lower as the
observer goes farther and farther away from it. Let any one try the experiment
of looking at a light-house, church spire, monument, gas lamp, or other
elevated object, from a distance of only a few yards, and notice the angle at
which it is observed. On going farther away, the angle under which it is seen
will diminish, and the object will appear lower and lower as the distance of
the observer increases, until, at a certain point, the line of sight to the
object, and the apparently uprising surface of the earth upon or over which it
stands, will converge to the angle which constitutes the ‘vanishing point’ or
the horizon; beyond which it will be invisible.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy,
Earth Not a Globe!” (230-1)
Heliocentrists would have you believe the very opposite of
what every human who has ever walked the Earth has seen with their own
eyes. It is obvious to any child and
sovereign-minded adult that the Sun, Moon, stars and planets, every light in
the sky above, revolves around the motionless Earth beneath our feet. It is also plain to see that the Sun and Moon
are both approximately the same size and situated relatively close to Earth, not
400 times divergent and millions upon millions of miles away. To abandon your senses and every day
experience in favor of such unfounded science-fiction fantasies is a fallacy of
appeal to authority so extreme that it leaves the brain-washed believer
impotent to trust his own natural instincts and forever thereafter chained to
the fantastical explanations of astronomical charlatans.
“No one ever yet felt or saw the earth careering through space at
the terrific rates it is credited with, but everyone who is not blind can see
the sun move. But the matter can be
tested. It may be known for certain
whether the sun moves or not. Take a
school globe and place a stile on the semicircle that holds it in
position. Cause the globe to rotate
against a lamp on a table, and you will find that the shadow left on the globe
is always parallel to the equator, at whatever angle you may incline the
globe. Further, let the stile be of
sufficient length to allow the shadow to fall on to a flat surface, moving the
globe towards the lamp, and the shadow will be a straight line. If, therefore, the shadow left on the earth
by the sun be a straight line, then undoubtedly the sun is stationary. Drive a stake into the ground in such a
position as to expose it to the sun for the greater part of a day - the whole
day if possible. Mark the end of the
shadow every quarter of an hour, and you will find that the marks form part of
an elongated curve, clearly proving that the sun moves over a stationary earth.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (113)
20 comments:
Thank you, and I saw that Scientific American and others have even admitted that "The moon's surface sometimes glows with its own luminescence." "Luminescence" is a kind of cool light phenomena caused by chemical, biological, or other reasons that do not involve heat. So the sun is a hot light, and the moon is a cold light, according to science and our own observation. If we look at "planets" and "stars" through a powerful zoom lens and we can clearly see they are not solid objects, but are in fact transparent with an ever changing shape. Freaky.
So the sun would have to move much more quickly along the tropic of capricorn, correct? Otherwise this model wouldn't work, because a day wouldn't be 24 hours there. It would be longer.
Then in reality, the sun is always gradually changing speed, wouldn't that be so?
---David
Yes, from the Winter Solstice at the Tropic of Capricorn the Sun's spiral path narrows and its speed decreases daily until hitting the Tropic of Cancer at the Summer Solstice, at which point its spiral path widens and speed increases so as to always make one revolution in 24 hours.
Looking at mainstream sources and being sensitized to the issue it strikes me how the entire paradigm of a flat earth is being treated like a minor issue, with regards to previous ages. It is regarded as if it never really was such a big deal, despite the fact that it is in line with biblical terms & the church being the greatest worldly power for at least 1500 years - Mainstream History even puts Ptolomy in a place where he supposedly thought of everything as Geocentric while the earth being a ball (Ever reconsidered the true reason of the burning of the great library of alexandria? The event has been termed as the greatest loss of the "collective memory") - It is really bizzar and somewhat obvious once "in the know" - how it is intentionally belittled in historical terms and yet it cannot be hyped enough when it comes to pushing it as THE stereotype of "backwardness" & "silliness" just for daring to give this a second thought.
I was wondering what you think of this newspaper article by a man named George Orwell:
http://www.telelib.com/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/tribune/AsIPlease19461227.html
About a year leater he was finished with his novel 1948 (with clear pointers to the flat earth paradigm) and not much later then that he was dead. Not sure what to make of this...Your insights would be highly welcome. Also some pointers to the overall perspective as to what all this means (the big WHY) in spiritual terms would be highly appreciated. Thank you very much!
Regarding the previous comment with the orwell article:
Basically the first 3 paragraphs are the most interesting giveaways. I cannot help but understand this entire article as (in a way) practically demonstrating exactly the methods applied in terms of distracting from the underlying "real" issue, (which we can recognize everywhere, when trying to understand the subject,solely relying on mainstream sources)- One step forward - three steps back....
(Unfortunately I have not been able to get a hold of the pice by Shaw he mentions, I reckon as a literature critic himself, Orwell could have been more precise: So I guess there we might have a pointer to something else that should be interesting)
Brilliant piece Eric, and beautifully written.
Hi Eric, I'm interested in your work and like to delve more into flat earth. Today one of my countryman have said to find prove of Gravity! With their Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger. Can you study and explain what are they actually talking about for layman like me.
what I dont understand is, what causes the sun and moon to move?, are they being pulled by the earths magnetic core?,
if the earth does have one, as we have been taught so many lies, its just hard to wipe the slate clean and relearn all that we have ever been told, including all his-story.
@Val Not only that but the sun seems to accelerate and deccelerate, I'm also not sure how that works. Acceleration needs some kind of power, else it would be magic and that's not something we do have here on earth. The sun can't really be "pulled" as that would imply some kind of mechanism like gravity which doesn't exist according to some older post.
BinGhazali Ismail said...
prove of Gravity! With their Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger. ... explain ... for layman like me.
They have succeeded in making you believe that you are just a layman.
That's true John, and also as they are only light of different degrees, what could possibly make them move, and what would make it accelerate and then slow, there has to be a logical reason, Eric? or anyone got any ideas on this subject?
Hi Eric,
do you have an idea to what causes the sun and moon to rotate, the fact that it is supposed to accelerate and decrease, means there must be something in place to have caused it to begin and continue. Would really appreciate your input on this please.
Eric,
Good stuff.
Question:
How do we account for meteorites and also the black line all over Earth that supposedly comes from a gigantic meteor hitting the planet? And...tektite rocks which nobody knows how are formed but supposedly come from meteorites colliding with Earth and combining with earth/rock and creating the tektite rock.
Regards,
>David<
If the sun and moon are flat discs, they would appear round when straight above us, and oval when moving out of sight. How can that be?
Also they would look smaller when moving out of sight. Right?
Much love
Klas
Another great article. Keep these coming.
Eric, I really like your interviews, but haven't seen any new ones lately. Do you plan to do anymore soon?
"They want you to believe that the Moon's rotation is perfectly synchronized with its orbit so that's why we only ever see one side of the Moon, rather than conclude the obvious - that the Moon is simply NOT rotating. "
Who wants us to believe this, and why? This is great stuff, but this aspect is sort of confusing me.
Thank you for all you do. I have always been a flat earther but had not stopped to think of the implications of the globe model forced on us through education mind control! I bought my grandson a globe for xmas and then started to think about it!?! All the fuss about flat earth has eluded me but on mentioning it to people recently have noticed that the first reaction is shock and rude denial. I cannot talk to my children about it without a huge argument. I just wondered if you had any ideas Eric on where all those wonderful hackers who have released such amazing information exposing our criminal governments and their activities could hack to get info on the outer ice ring "Antartica" or indeed mapping organisations that would have info on what we look like. Perhaps the Vatican, Military Industrial Complex or such? Surely there is some infra ray technology that could record depth of earth or could be used to measure the earth say at 100 miles above earth? I wish my scientific education was more comprehensive and extensive as there is so much I want to understand. I have watched all your work and viewed many times. I really enjoy the scientific proof! How incredible that we actually do not know the construct of our Earth or have real photographic proof!
Could you comment please Eric on Santos Bonacci's Annalema (the figure eight structure that spans from Tropics) and of course would have the sun and moon speed up to fit the longer orbit of Capricorn? He also theorises that the sun is higher on Tropic of Cancer and comes lower on Tropic of Capricorn. Having spent most of my life in Australia with very fair skin which has suffered terribly from the summers in Australia and now living in the UK which I find much milder summers...this does make some sense to me. Also I have experienced a great different in the lengths of day in the summer between these two locations. Twilight in Australia is very different to what is experienced in the UK. I thought another good proof of immovable flat earth was the reaction when we feel an earthquake. It is terribly disorienting! We also dislike winds in excess of 10mph so the 1000mph is completely ludicrous. Often there is no breeze at all! I just laugh now when there is another satellite or more NASA stupidity...Lol. I have an understanding of the Holographic universe and wonder if we just create our world through our eyes and therefore each person has a different perception. Everything else in our world is level such as a dinnerplate on our table and the floors of our houses. We are in fact quite disoriented when surfaces are unlevel like putting a glass of water on an unlevel surface!
Just a small correction rather than state the sun rises and sets you may want to rephrase with arrives and departs. Great video's by the way.
Hi Eric,
Very interesting piece you have presented. I do have a question though that I had hoped someone else would've already asked, but to no avail:
If the sun constantly remains above the horizon line, shouldn't we be able to see it after sunset, whether that be with the naked eyes soon after, or with a telescope later on?
Thanks
Post a Comment