What would you say if I told you that genuine science, and our own senses, not only disproves the heliocentric model but also provides conclusive proof for a flat and stationary Earth?
By comparing objective reality to what we’ve been told, and utilising the scientific method, this article will discuss the alleged rotation, and movement, of Earth, as well as the Earth’s shape.
To begin, I’d like to discuss the difference between real science and fake science.
So, what dictates true science?
The Scientific Method
noun: scientific method; plural noun: scientific methods
A method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
“criticism is the backbone of the scientific method”
In other words, genuine science begins with what we see, what we observe. Then we create experiments and tests, which must be measurable, repeatable, and verifiable. If the hypothesis, or theory, does not adhere to the scientific method, then it is classed as pseudoscience, or simply put, fake science.
Now that we are aware of the difference between genuine science and pseudoscience, I would like to discuss the mainstream model of our world, and it’s place in the universe.
The Heliocentric Model
Mainstream science claims that Earth is an oblate spheroid, with a circumference of 24,901 miles, and a 23.5° tilt on its axis of rotation. It states that the Earth is spinning at 1000mph at the equator, and a little less near the poles. And that the Earth orbits the Sun at around 67,000mph. All Whilst the Sun moves towards the constellation Lyra, at around 43,000mph, and the milky way galaxy expands at approximately 1,100mph.
With all this motion, one would think it would be detectable, observable, or at the very least, you would think that we would see some form of reinforcing evidence passed down through the ages. Knowledge of who we are, and where we are. Yet it’s those very carvings, those ancient recordings of the stars, and Sun, and Moon, that lead me to my first point.
For over 5000 years us humans have gazed upon the twinkling of the night sky and dreamt of the brightest stars as spirits, beings, signs, and guides. From the Sumerians, to the Babylonians, to the Mayans, and Egyptians, the constellations we see today are the very constellations observed, and imagined, by our ancestors. Passed down through history, and unchanged for millenia, the knowledge of those, twinkling, lights of the night, and their locations, disprove the very notion of Earth’s, alleged, rotation, orbit of the Sun, and movement through space.
This claim can be proven via ‘stellar parallax‘, the angular difference between two, or more, stars, relative to the observer.
Put simply, if you place an object at one end of a long table, and another object at the other end of the same table, then lower yourself to view them head on, as you move from one side of the table to the other, you will see the objects have more, or less, observable space between them, depending on your location.
In other words, the space between a close star and a distant star should change with Earth’s rotation, and movement through space.
So, why do we not observe stellar parallax when viewing the stars, given Earth’s alleged rotation, and movement through space? Why does the starry sky appear to move as though it was one body, with stars fixed to it? How are we able to record concentric circle’s formed by star trails via time lapse? And how have the constellations not changed after thousands of years of spinning, and spiralling, through space?
The answers to these questions are quite simple. We aren’t hurtling through space at ridiculous speeds. We aren’t rotating. The stars move above the Earth, rotating around us, fixed in place. Just as we observe. Just as the infamous experiment known as, ‘Airys failure‘, proved in 1871. The reason it is deemed a failure is because the experiment failed to prove Earth’s rotation, and instead proved that starlight moves above us. Just as our ancestors had recorded, and carved into stone.
‘Airy’s failure’ also reinforces my next point.
The Coriolis Effect
Mainstream science will have you believe that the Earth’s, alleged, rotation causes what’s known as the ‘coriolis effect’. This particular effect refers to the influence the Earth’s rotation has on a free moving object within Earth’s atmosphere, but not on objects connected/held to the ground.
A snipers bullet is often referred to by heliocentric defenders when discussing the coriolis effect. This is due to military ballistic manuals claiming the Earth’s rotation effects a projectile when fired into the distance. Yet no sniper has ever claimed to have taken Earth’s alleged rotation, nor its curve, into account when sighting a target. Not to mention the overwhelming mathematical capabilities required by said sniper in order for them to calculate the exact speed of rotation, given their location on Earth, and proximity to the equator. Add in the factors snipers actually use, like wind speed, distance, bullet drop, etc, and one is left wondering how a sniper would ever have the time to actually fire on the target.
This very same, alleged, effect also has zero influence on the likes of helicopters, hot air balloons, airplanes, etc. If the Earth were truly rotating, at 1000mph at the equator, then a helicopter should be able to hover above the ground, as Earth rotates beneath it, and let it’s destination come to it. Yet this does not occur. Similarly, airplanes would struggle to fly against the Earth’s rotation, but would have an easier flight when going with Earth’s rotation. The simple fact that airplanes have the same issues regardless of the flights direction is proof enough that the Earth doesn’t rotate. This is without factoring in birds, and other lifeforms, inventions, volcanic smoke plumes, etc, which remain unaffected by Earth’s alleged rotation. In other words, there is no detectable rotation of Earth whatsoever, and every test, and experiment, done to prove Earth’s rotation has ultimately disproven the very thing its sought to prove.
Now that we’ve discussed the lack of observable, and detectable, rotation, and movement through space, I feel it’s time to get into the meat of the matter. Earth’s shape.
It has been claimed that Earth can still be a ball in space, albeit geocentric. However, a ball in space, with everything revolving around it, is something no one has been able to prove. In fact, the very physics of water disproves the notion of a globe, and instead points directly to a flat Earth.
Everyone knows that Earth’s surface is approximately 70% water.
So, if Earth were an oblate spheroid, with a circumference of 24,901 miles, then there should be a detectable curvature of 7.8 inches per mile squared, according to the ‘pythagorean theorem’ used to calculate Earth’s alleged curvature.
For the sake of simplicity we can round this up to 8 inches of curvature per mile squared. Given this knowledge, one is left wondering how it is possible for large bodies of water to be curved to such a degree, yet remain visibly flat. So flat, in fact, that experiments done over the past few centuries, right up to this very day, repeatably disprove any notion of curvature.
From the ‘Bedford level‘ experiments, to those done by today’s civilian scientists who utilise extreme zoom technology and lasers, etc, to observe a perfectly flat surface across lakes, oceans, and all other bodies of water, genuine science has continued to prove a flat Earth.
What we observe also happens to adhere to the basic physics of water. Namely, large bodies of water will always seek their level. Only water tension, and the aerodynamics of water during free fall, postpones water from seeking it’s level, and instead displays differing measures of convexity, but this only applies to very small, lightweight, quantities of water. Any reasonable quantity of water will seek it’s level, unhindered. As observed on a window pane when it’s raining, droplets stick to the window until their weight overcomes the tension holding it in place, then it continues on down the window.
We can also observe this by slowly filling a container. The first droplets hit the base of the container and spread out, seeking their level, the edges slightly convex due to water tension, yet it’s overall surface is flat. Add a few more drops and they begin to collect together, spreading out, seeking their level. Continue adding water until it begins to touch the containers edge. Notice how the surface of the water, now that it’s body is contained, is completely flat, with zero convexity.
This same process fuels our oceans, lakes, and rivers. They are contained bodies of water, with boundaries set by land. This is why any person can take a, Nikon Coolpix900 camera, or a telescope, or powerful binoculars, and zoom in on ships, which, according to the pythagorean theorem, should be below the Earth’s curve, and, therefore, impossible to view. The fact that people all over the Earth have repeatably brought ships, buoys, city skylines, etc, back from “beyond the curve” simply by zooming in, is conclusive proof of a flat Earth. After all, it’s called ‘Sea level’ for a reason.
Similarly the world record landscape photo, ‘Pic Finestrelles to Pic Gaspard‘, displays a whopping 275 miles of flat Earth in a single shot. The mountain peaks in the distance should be obscured by an overwhelming amount of curvature, and the angular reduction in size is further proof that we live on a flat plane. As I’ll discuss in my next point.
The Laws Of Perspective
You see, we live on a flat plane of existence, minus it’s peaks and valleys of course, and we can observe this everywhere we go. The higher we go, the easier it is to see. One only has to research 3D drawing to see how our vision truly works.
A very simple drawing you can do yourself is as follows. Take a sheet of paper. In the center of the page draw a diagonal line to the bottom left corner. Then, from the same starting point, draw another diagonal line to the bottom right corner. You should have what looks like a 2 sided triangle, it’s base being the edge of the paper. Now, draw increasingly shorter, straight, lines from the middle of the triangles base up to the center point where you started the triangle. You should have a rough depiction of a long, 2 lane, road. You can also draw a straight line from left to right, going straight through the triangles peak, to display the horizon.
The starting point of your triangle is the vanishing point of our vision, all light rays, above and below the horizon, converge on this point and we see nothing beyond it. The lines that separate the lanes of the road get increasingly shorter the further they are from you, this is due to angular reduction along the convergence lines. In other words, the taller an object is, the smaller it appears at a distance. The road itself is also a victim of angular reduction, however, the width of an object/thing isn’t as affected as the height, which is why the edge of the road appears to slowly converge on the vanishing point, when compared with the lines which separate the lanes. This is all due to our eyes being largely horizontal when compared to their height, allowing more light to come in from the left and right of our iris, as opposed to above and below the iris. This is why you have peripheral vision, the ability to see what’s happening to your sides. Basically, we have wide-screen eyes.
As you can probably tell, the vanishing point of our vision is responsible for the apparent disappearance of ships as they go over the alleged curve of the Earth. And thanks to the invention of the Nikon P900 camera, and others, we are easily capable of disproving the idea of ships going over a curve, and instead prove that they’re simply beyond the limits of our vision.
This isn’t the only visual proof of our plane reality. The horizon itself is conclusive proof we do not live on a curved surface, of any degree. The simple fact that the horizon continues to rise to eye level as you gain altitude disproves any claim for curvature.
For example, let’s say we actually lived on a ball, just like NASA claims. As you rise up into the air the ball will curve down and away from you, in all directions. Therefore, the horizon would continually drop the higher up you go. Meaning, you would have to look down to see the Earth. Yet we continue to see a perfectly flat, and eye level, horizon, regardless of the height of the observer. Whether you’re stood on a beach, or flying in an airplane, the horizon is there, straight ahead of you. This is impossiBALL, unless the Earth truly was a flat plane.
There are many more pieces of evidence that prove a flat and stationary Earth, with stars, and wandering stars (planets), rotating above it.
The seismograph, used by geologist’s and geophysicist’s to study earthquakes, is a scientific instrument worth noting. The seismograph detects the slightest movement on Earth, even the movement humans are unable to detect. Given the heliocentric model states that planets are physical bodies of matter, and everything relies on the unproven force/effect of gravity to hold it together, the movements of these alleged bodies would push and pull the Earth, via the gravitational force/effect, on a physical level, creating movement on Earth’s surface, which would set off the seismograph’s. Yet no such occurrence has ever been recorded.
Other noteworthy pieces of evidence can be observed within the engineering world. Railroad tracks, in particular, are set flat on the ground; and often stretch for hundreds, if not thousands, of miles. We literally carve tunnels through mountains, and build bridges over valleys, to ensure the tracks are perfectly level; and the few exceptions where tracks do rise or fall are kept within a strict grade of 1% or less, with a few exceptions that very rarely exceed a 2.2% grade.
There are also bridges, canals, etc, which all fail to account for Earth’s alleged curvature.
Of course, nature also provides evidence against the current paradigm.
The river, Nile, which stretches for 4,258 miles, approximately, is located almost entirely in the northern hemisphere, and flows north against all of the alleged forces the spinning ball requires to sustain itself.
Other noteworthy phenomena, such as the lack of sunlight received by lands close to the Arctic, like, Svalbard, in Norway, during winter, only further the destruction of the heliocentric model. Svalbard, in particular, endures a complete lack of sunlight from mid-November to the end of January.
As well as the Sun not setting in those same lands during summer; as observed in, Alaska, where the Sun appears to circle overhead between the months of May and August. Which brings me to my final point.
On the flat Earth model, during the northern hemispheres winter the Sun is over the tropic of Capricorn, and during the northern hemispheres summer the Sun is over the tropic of Cancer. The opposite can be said for the southern hemisphere’s season’s. The Sun’s movement over the year is observed as the solar Anelemma. The Analemma displays a, practically italic, figure 8, when observed from near the equator. When the Analemma is viewed from the likes of, Svalbard, the bottom of the figure 8 isn’t visible at all, and all you have is the top loop of the 8.
The reason for the bottom loop of the Analemma’s figure 8 being invisible is the same reason people think ships go over a curve. The laws of perspective prevent us from seeing the Sun’s light, due to the Sun being so far away.
The flat Earth model makes sense of this by stating the Sun is much closer, and much smaller, than the heliocentric model would have you believe. It spirals above us, higher to lower, north to south, then back again. The likes of crepuscular sun rays are evidence of a localised Sun. High altitude photographs/videos that show a localised Sun spot further supports this claim. And although we may not yet know the true nature of our Sun, nor it’s exact dimensions, nor its precise location, we can rest assured that it’s not a ball of fusion, 93,000,000 miles away, transmitting heat through an infinite, and ever expanding, vacuum.
You see, the heliocentric model comes nowhere near to adhering to the scientific method and, after 500 years, it’s still unable to explain its gaping holes, even with new additions to the theory, like dark matter, and dark energy. It’s reliance on fantastical mathematics, and overwhelmingly large figures, as opposed to actual experiments, is nothing more than pseudoscience, plain and simple. And although the flat Earth model is currently unfinished, those who thirst for truth will soldier on, turning over every rock, and every leaf, until humanity finally knows their place within the universe. We fight for unhindered exploration of our land, and stand behind the truth. Unfortunately, until the likes of the Antarctic treaty is removed from play, and people arent shot at for sailing, or flying, in the forcibly restricted area, without an escort/government approval, no one will ever know the true shape of the Earth. Yet we continue on, spreading the truth we’ve gained because we know that what we’ve been taught is a lie. We know the, so called, facts we’re presented with are nothing more than fanciful theories, designed to distract, and mislead. We have literally observed the truth with our very eyes. We have done our own experiments, and made our own observations. We have used a fine comb to sift through the last 500 years of heliocentric nonsense and seen the reason they deceive us.
However, that is a discussion to be had another day..
200 proofs Earth is not a spinning ball:
Imposiball, flat earth documentary:
Svalbard, months of darkness:
Alaska, 24hour, circling, sun: