Comments (Concave Earth Theory)

Page 8

2014/07/18 at 11:46 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to Andrew.
Excellent Andrew. Thanks for your active involvement in all of this. My current idea why we can see further over water with binoculars is that the bending light reflects off the water at acute angles, which would only work in a concave Earth with light bending upwards.

My last understanding challenge is how a concave shape is seen as a dome in the sky, such as the stars or skydome. I’ve seen a mathematical angle to it, but I’m not a mathematician and it is above my head (no pun intended). The Russian fellow below has a theory on it too which I will look at again, but the translation hampers things a bit.

BTW, I’ve seen 70x and 80x optical zoom camcorders knocking about. Maybe worth a look.

Andrew did you see the beach at Wales or just the top of the ground? It doesn’t matter as you shouldn’t see above 4000 feet anyway, but I’m wondering if you would be able to see the beach with higher powered magnification or not. I’d love to know the limit of this phenomenon.

2014/07/19 at 11:00 am
Andrew
In reply to Wild Heretic.
I only had a decent pair of 8×40 Binoculars and a crap pair of 10×25 Binoculars so all you can make out is a fuzzy land mass on the Horizon which was too blurry and not enough magnification and clarity of vision to make out beaches. I doubt that even higher magnification would bring beaches into view from 75 miles away due to the distortion of light passing through air which is why things things over 30, 40 or 50 miles away plus for example seem blurry in photos. Yet not the moon, funny that. The opponents would make out we can see these things through refraction as an excuse as an admission to bending light but they would have light bending downwards and not upwards.
One short video showing the basin effect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoY7qz9aaIk
This one is interesting because we can see it’s taken from a very low level height, though though we don’t the distances to the yachts.
And the YouTuber seems more interested in showing of their zoom than than anything else. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqCKeNJez2k

2014/07/19 at 10:51 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to Andrew.
Yet not the moon, funny that.
Quite. Our very strange moon.

The opponents would make out we can see these things through refraction as an excuse as an admission to bending light but they would have light bending downwards and not upwards.

It has to be super duper fraction for the large distances, but the refractive index of air at STP compared to a vacuum is minimal and where small distances e.g. 5 to 7 miles are seen, the air density over this tiny difference in height (convex Earth/straight light scenario) is so small to make any difference. In fact, the air density changes over time with air currents and all that. The water vapour argument doesn’t hold because water vapour is less dense than air and so light would refract upwards instead of the needed downwards direction.

I’d love to see a video where land is 100% invisible to the camera with no zoom and the naked eye, and then when zoomed in we get to see it, even perhaps the beach too.

2014/07/20 at 11:12 am
Andy
whodotheyserve.com
In reply to Icecoldsun.
Maybe it’s just the perspective which causes parallel rays to look like that, rather like looking down lanes on a straight motorway.

2014/07/22 at 7:46 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to Andy.
You mean the 3D perspective of the flat earth? Yeah sure. Nothing is straight though in nature and that includes light.

2014/07/22 at 10:10 pm
sumstuff52[Donald Sarty]

Concave Earth Maps
nice collection too
http://searchworks.stanford.edu/?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=zb871zd0767&view=gallery

2014/07/26 at 2:33 am
sumstuff52[Donald Sarty]
In reply to sumstuff52[Donald Sarty].
http://searchworks.stanford.edu/?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=zb871zd0767&view=gallery

2014/07/26 at 2:38 am
Wild Heretic
In reply to sumstuff52[Donald Sarty].
Looks like the 18th century Japanese knew the earth was concave.

2014/07/27 at 6:04 pm
PartOfYou/Awaken Chesee
In reply to Andrew.
Nice, thanks for giving idea where i shall do this test, i try to make video of it.

2014/08/01 at 2:24 am
vhalborg

I know it’s probably a bit late to join the discussion, but since I came across the concave earth model, I have been wondering about stories about people visiting the inner side of the hollow earth, such as, for example, (a) Admiral Byrd’s supposed flights “beyond” the north and south pole, (b) about “The Smoky God” and “Etidorpha” published on sacred-texts.com, to name but a few.

Are all these stories to be written off as pure fantasy ?

2014/08/01 at 6:59 am
vhalborg
In reply to Wild Heretic.
as per my other post, I would be really interested in hearing from you how you see “Etidorhpa” fitting in with the concave earth reality, if it fits at all.

By the way, thanks for putting up a great site!

2014/08/01 at 10:38 am
Wild Heretic
In reply to vhalborg.
I always took Etidorpha to be a true account masquerading as fiction. The lack of gravity deep down fits with another story of a windy blow-in cave (forgot the technical term) in the Amazon jungle introduced to three English explorers at the beginning of the 20th century I think by the Indians.

http://one-vibration.com/group/mygroup/forum/topics/macuxi-indians-of-the-amazon?xg_source=activity#.U9tztmT3XIU

I know they haven’t drilled further than 12 km or so (or was it a bit further?) with that Russian bore hole but I think there is a whole world of difference between artificially drilling a hole in solid ground and naturally formed passages within the Earth – the former is a shape not natural for a cavity. Copy nature and all that.

2014/08/01 at 11:03 am
Wild Heretic
In reply to vhalborg.
More like pure fact. Although I’m not in love with Byrd’s account because I don’t trust accounts by the military. The only information from those sources seem to be deceptive; in fact I would expect that as they are supposed to have the advantage and win wars etc.

2014/08/01 at 11:05 am
Terese
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_calendar

When someone writes an piece of writing he/she maintains the idea
of a user in his/her brain that how a user can understand it.
Thereforre that’s why this piece of writing is amazing.

Thanks!

2014/08/04 at 2:58 pm
Tangus

Hello.

I would like to say it is a great website and great theory of concave earth.
Convex theory is developing for a hundreds years by a thousands scientists so this is unfair to expect all the answer from one man who believes the earth is concave.

However I’ve got few questions and thoughts

Concave model does not explain solar eclipse (as it has been said before). It is serious hole.
There is a problem of EME communication (Earth-Moon-Earth) in concave model. Signal delay is around 2.7 sec. That probably means the moon is around 385000km away from earth (not the 4-6 (000) km). What is your opinion or interpretation of this fact.
What the gravity is at concave model? Aether is not the answer. Classical (Newton’s) model of gravity is also looks weird. Cannot be verified even by quantum physics. Sometimes it looks to me like there is no such force like gravity at all.
What do you think about idea that when we live inside the earth the earth is spinning, rotating very fast – 256 degrees per hour. That would cause centrifugal acceleration 9,85 m/s^2 and that would means there are two point on the planet almost without gravity. Points like this one :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExgAbZV6RuA

However why there is biggest gravity force on poles and lowest on equator. I don’t know.
First I thought the sky is rotating in opposite direction (360 deg per 24 hours) causing 0,03-0,05 m/s^2 acceleration but we would get a 1000km/h air speed on the planet unless of course there is a glass sky. But If there is a glass sky there is no centrifugal force 0,03 m/s^2

Glass sky – who fix glass? Some people say there is a glass on the moon. I don’t know. Maybe UFO are the machines for this job? 😉 Once I read witness of US high altitude nuclear explosion over desert. He said long after explosion, the sky was yellow and everywhere was glass.
Stars – we still don’t know what they are in a concave model. It is pretty important.
In concave model light bends. So what about earth’s circumference? Are we sure of 40,000 km? and 6400 km radius?

Regards
Tangus

2014/08/07 at 1:45 pm
Michael

Hello again,

i am very intrigued by thinking about the shape of our earth/universe/cosmos. i studied technical physics, learned about many interesting stuff, more or less explainable, and about a lot of phenomenons, which cannot properly be explained by our science/physics/chemistry/…
What is missing in our educational system, is a comprehensive understanding of life, healing, time, water, principles of life…actually the mainstream-system (government, media, mafia, …) is installed for the complete opposite purpose, subversive distraction and misleading of the majority of the human beings, double and manifolded tricks are played with our mind, we get served a mixture out of truth, lying, and a lot of unreal and therefore unimportant stuff.

Energy comes along with attention, that means, we feed what we consume. All is life, in perpetual motion, happening in reoccurring cycles, construction/destruction, all is self-organized, trying to influence/alter something else than me leads to tension, war, destruction, concurrence, … letting everything in its self-organizing structures leads to healing, peace, cooperation, …

ok… after putting away (nearly) all i learned, my universe (the earth´s shell) flipped and everything was upside-down, like the her(m)etic principle of correspondence/analogy… as above, so below…. inside = outside,
same found in languages (gr. hypo/hyper, lat. sub/super) and in Spanish: (caldo = warm, invierno = winter), there are really a lot of interesting relationships interconnecting our languages/tones/sounds/frequencies…

i dont feel that i am with the 1% who thinks we live inside earth-shell just because of radically thinking the opposite of the majority…
but what does the majority think?
When i speak controversially about science, and in particular about the solar-system and how it would look like from a concave perspective, people have either very strong, firm boundings to their thinking/believe-system and behave fundamentalistic (with a certain base secured, which is far from being questioned) or they dont really have their own opinions, just blabla…what others say, this is the biggest part, zombie-like people, thinking our mass-system and mass-technics is good/best as it is…
And there is (for heavens-sake) a part in ourselves which is self-thinking, self-organized, self-reflective, … which i try to stay in and when finding myself outside such way of being, i try to come back to my roots/energy/inner-chi…

I will now contribute some old/new questions regarding geostationary satellites, sunsets and refraction, with a flavor for the bigger/convex point of view.
Coming back from the distraction (NASA, Media, …) to a self-perceiveable, experienceable bottom, may call it: law of nature

1.) Geostationary Satellites
A lot of money/energy/time flows into military science/industry, the major purpose of their inventions we aren’t told (e.g. surveillance, controlling, …), we may consume/pay for an intended side-purpose (e.g. TV, Radio, …), which we usually adapt to in a certain time, just think of telecommunication, transport, electric-energy, we are bound to their installed “railways” where we have to pay, at least attention, for the use of it.
e.g. training the own mental capability of communication without the use of their devices would make one independent and is therefore not wanted by the communication companies.
Don’t forget the already penetrating sado-maso-artificial technic era (SMART), with every (produced) thing identifiable and connected (RFID, IPV6), smart cars, smart living, smart working :-), smart pills, smart dust, smart (nano) robots/drones, smart fridge, smarties (cloud-9, crystal) for everyone…

i do see a real military and commercial use for real satellites, and they do work (?), don’t you have a satellite-dish?
i hope you too escaped from TV or maybe you never were addicted to this mind-slaving, dumping-down device.
But actually we can see (many) satellite dishes pointing UP in the sky direction equator, where the supposed geostationary orbit/satellite should be, instruction for finding a desired signal is logical explained, when properly installed the dishes do face to a certain point in space (the satellite), the more direction equator you go, the more increases the angular elevation of the sat-dishes…
If you calculate this in convex model, it perfectly fits the supposed 35.000 KM, when i looked out of the concave-perspective, the dishes would not face to a common point in space,
but….ok… in concave-view (maybe in convex too?), light and waves are bent, and therefore…
Please, try it yourself… draw a circle (i suppose you already drew a lot of circles, i did draw a lot and know the relaxing feeling when thinking that everything fits inside… :-), and look whereto the sat-dishes are pointing (ask people from different Long./Lat., read different instructions)
in a certain region around the equator you cannot point directly in the sky with a normal satellite dish, it would be a bowl where water and things could settle, therefore it needs to be hidden (e.g. by plastic-coverage) (i think therefore i didnt find pictures with solid dishes facing up 🙂

My question is:
How in a concave perspective would this work, that certain signals (by certain satellites) are being received under different angles in different regions (perfectly fitting the convex-model),
is there a device or technology for influencing the dishes’ angle of perception, or somehow influencing the transmitted signal ?
There are several hundreds of these satellites (with known long/lat/elevation) and millions of dishes pointing to these, at least in the industrialized part of the world…
I am very familiar with the ATS (ApplyToSky) – Glass Sky – Theory by Lord Steven Christ, but also very suspicious if the angle of perception could really be faked… but maybe…

2.) Sunsets
Sunrises and sunsets… wonderful impressions, changing colors, romantic moments… i love sunsets and watched them very often in my life.
After switching to the concave point-of-view, i often wondered how this perception can happen if the sun in the evening goes up and i perceive it as down, but like in Platons Allegory of the Cave, what we can do is… calculate… calculate cycles of recurrences… even the frog deep down the well, can calculate when the sun will reach him again…
Sunsets, sunrises, starsets, starrises… they look like… as they look like… When you watch long-time recordings of the night-sky, the stars set and rise in homogeneous circular motion (with its axis around Polaris),
i wonder… if we are inside… and the stars/firmament is rotating inside… i would expect some kind of distortion happening around the horizon, a distortion, because concave says that it is not as it seems (going up – not down!)
But there is (nearly) no distortion perceivable, (e.g. they just set HOMOGENEOUSLY below the horizon) the stars (also sun/moon) travel in (nearly) perfect circular motion down (SET) and up (RISE) into our view-field, the horizon.

3.) Refraction
breaking back… circular aperture, bending on an edge/rim, refractive index…seeing around the corner…
light bends at the circular aperture, as it is bending on an edge… light is refracting in water… the atmosphere is getting less dense the higher up we go, therefore it has a different refractive index…
When light/waves gets bent at an edge, corner, rim, water drop, vapor or just a different medium then for me it is understandable that we can actually see further then geometrical (with straight lines) possible.
we can see the opposite riverside several kilometers away… and the mountains which don’t lay in a straight line to the receiver… because of bending and dispersion…
Earth doesn’t have to be concave to fulfill this effect/phenomenon/experience…

WH, i really love to read this blog, love to see people self-thinking about what touches them, i am also looking forward seeing your new big-part of your theory,
hope maybe you or someone can shed a concave light on my suspiciousness, my consciousness is awaiting many new thoughts and insights in this everlasting generation of possibilities…

Love and Joy, inside or outside Earth, wherever you may feel,

Michael

2014/08/10 at 3:55 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to Michael.
I am very familiar with the ATS (ApplyToSky) – Glass Sky – Theory by Lord Steven Christ, but also very suspicious if the angle of perception could really be faked… but maybe…

That’s one possibility. The other I found on a German blog. They have what’s called pseudo satellites – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudolite
The horizon I think may have a possibility in the gravity as a line theory combined with bending light which may now be due to reflecting gravity (or electricity). I’ll talk about it in the next article.
Refraction can’t explain the “distant horizon over water” problem. That part is already explained in the article. Reflection can explain it, as will I in the next article.

2014/08/11 at 8:11 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to Tangus.

Concave model does not explain solar eclipse (as it has been said before). It is serious hole.

Physics itself has many serious holes. Who knows how the Earth/sky system works. The one thing I know is real is the Sun. Every other process and “thing” up there is open to speculation. We must get completely away from current theory on the relationship between the Earth and the sky and start from the ground up as to what we actually see if we are to attempt to develop any sort of working model on the concave Earth. At the moment I am wondering about comets a little, but first things first.

There is a problem of EME communication (Earth-Moon-Earth) in concave model. Signal delay is around 2.7 sec. That probably means the moon is around 385000km away from earth (not the 4-6 (000) km). What is your opinion or interpretation of this fact.

It could be an issue to do with the medium in which light travels seems to be much less dense at higher altitudes and so perhaps the speed of light becomes much slower in space. I remember reading some fellow theorizing that the speed of light depended on aether density change. Let me have a look. It is Ionel’s PDF: http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Astrophysics/Download/2370

On page 18
“… and the speed of this wave is given by this expression which is the square root of the ratio of the increase in the aether pressure when its density increases… and as long as this ratio is constant, the speed of light is constant. But, we do not have a definite proof of this constancy and this is why more research is needed on this topic.”

and on page 36
“I did not finish studying the subject of radio waves and antennas but, as a preliminary result, I think that it is safe to say that the so called electro-magnetic waves are in fact aether wakes following one after the other in a succession of compressions. So it is not that electric and magnetic fields detach themselves from the wire and travel through space as “electro-magnetic waves” as it is believed today; what travels away from the wire are waves of aether and the only connection with the electric phenomenon a is that these waves of aether are generated electrically as wakes in the aether. This view was actually supported by J. A. Fleming and is in a very good compatibility with the picture in which light was considered a compression wave in the aether.”

I’m not a mathematician, but I think this means that if the rate of change of aether pressure remains proportional, then the speed of light is constant, but if it is say “square lawed” (like everything else appears to be) then the speed of light changes accordingly. I don’t know if he is right, but it tends to agree with what I am only beginning to speculate as what is happening inside a concave Earth.

What the gravity is at concave model? Aether is not the answer. Classical (Newton’s) model of gravity is also looks weird. Cannot be verified even by quantum physics. Sometimes it looks to me like there is no such force like gravity at all.
What do you think about idea that when we live inside the earth the earth is spinning, rotating very fast – 256 degrees per hour. That would cause centrifugal acceleration 9,85 m/s^2 and that would means there are two point on the planet almost without gravity. Points like this one :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExgAbZV6RuA
However why there is biggest gravity force on poles and lowest on equator. I don’t know.
First I thought the sky is rotating in opposite direction (360 deg per 24 hours) causing 0,03-0,05 m/s^2 acceleration but we would get a 1000km/h air speed on the planet unless of course there is a glass sky. But If there is a glass sky there is no centrifugal force 0,03 m/s^2

I don’t think the earth is spinning full stop as already reasoned in one of the articles. I’m soon to speculatively write about this. I think gravity is spinning aether and ultimately is the source of the external power which the Sun needs. Gravity first reflects off the crust and goes back to the center powering the Sun. The problem I am having with gravity is that it tumbles into the question of what matter is and its relationship to gravity. Early days, but I hope to put something speculatively together when I get to the keyboard.

Glass sky – who fix glass? Some people say there is a glass on the moon. I don’t know. Maybe UFO are the machines for this job? 😉 Once I read witness of US high altitude nuclear explosion over desert. He said long after explosion, the sky was yellow and everywhere was glass.

Probably isn’t fixed unfortunately; unless the engineers are still here and in charge.

Stars – we still don’t know what they are in a concave model. It is pretty important.

I’ve no problem with that. There are a few speculative models out there. Mine is that stars are small parts of the Sun (meteorites and asteroids) which have broken off the Sun due to electrical discharge and got trapped in the middle (not enough centrifugal force to expel them).

In concave model light bends. So what about earth’s circumference? Are we sure of 40,000 km? and 6400 km radius?
Pretty much I would have thought due to travel times by ship and plane. But you have an interesting question which I wasn’t sure of when writing the next article that because bending light bends more at dusk/dawn than noon (and also travels further), does light travel a fraction slower at dusk/dawn or not? I suppose at 4000 miles distance, the difference wouldn’t be noticeable, but still, I don’t know about that and is a question about the properties of the medium in which it travels.

2014/08/11 at 9:50 pm
Awaken Cheese
In reply to Wild Heretic.
I am not inventing new earth shape theory, just saying, that on ground which we stand and travel, is concave, and i believe its not necessarily is a ball, but probably is. It could be maybe ball cut in half, and bottom part is earth/ top sky. I mean its a possibility,..
And stars i believe is just a simple holes in the some layer of the “sky”, and they shine thanks to the Sun presence on other side.. But that’s just a guess. I wonder do the world rulers know them-self that for sure.

2014/08/13 at 12:59 am
Awaken Cheese
In reply to Michael.
A bit off-topic here.
I was read your thoughts, and saw you was saying:
“Energy comes along with attention, that means, we feed what we consume. ”
its really interesting.. Not long time ago i understood few things about attention.. I think, i must say this:
– I have experienced “enlightenment” or “satori” (in Japanese) or some sort of spiritual awakening or third eye activation, i am not sure my self how religious or some kind of BS people call it.
But..i understood one and insane thing, and i can`t disprove it yet to myself. We are “made” from 3 things:

Body – automated fully self healing, self controlled, , etc.. peace of meat. (including brain)
Thoughts/mind – which is learns IT SELF, its semi-automatic, but you can control it, you can develop the way of thinking..
Its mysterious everyone known soul. – But i think i find out what soul really is.
Its Attention. The only one thing what we really can control – attention, and nothing, completely nothing else.. Concentrated controlled directed energy – attention. Just think about you first time in the car, learning driving. And Your control of attention. So i found, that attention is real you, trapped in this body and controls this body thanks to attention alone. It can interact with brain and make look there, think that, and that… I mean you may say: its dead obvious dude.. but its much more matters. To improve attention is very important, for meditation, learning, memory, feeling taste, sex, thinking, smell, completely anything…
Heretic you can delete this after few days 🙂 Sorry for that..
P.S. About satellites i thought its clear to everyone.. Its on ground bases beaming signal to so called ion-sphere, bot not these GPS local stations. Can`t find picture now..but its like that HAARP (if its true) antennas, round stations.. Like in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuYkDKtca-U

2014/08/13 at 2:02 am
Douglas Adams

You have some awesome stuff on this site. I think a lot of people forget that there are no facts in science, only theories. Some theories have more evidence to support them than other theories, but to elevate a theory to a fact a person would have to claim to know how everything in the universe worked.

I recently read an article about the hollow earth theory, and it piqued my interest (more for the challenge of trying to find evidence of how it could work than out of any sense of conviction). I came up with a few ideas that may or may not be of interest to you, so I thought I would share them.

First, I’ve noticed that ‘rationalists’ like to use Occam’s Razor to debunk conspiracy theories. Since it is such a popular tool for people who accept the first story they are told without looking at the other side with an open mind, I thought I would try using it as well. In this case, which is more likely: Gravity is the result of an invisible force generated by atomic mass, or it is the result of centrifugal force? Considering we can simulate gravity via centrifugal force, yet we still cannot simulate gravity at all via the atomic model, Occam’s Razor would suggest that mass has nothing to do with gravity.

Next, I find the idea of the glass dome interesting because it mimics what we already see in biology; membranes surrounding cells. I think that rather than the hardened glass we are familiar with on Earth, the membrane above our atmosphere is probably more pliable. When objects designed to penetrate the membrane come into contact with it, they punch a hole through it just like a virus does to a cell. Perhaps the membrane surrounding the atmosphere acts like our skin, and has platelets that clot around any damaged areas. This gel-like substance could also be the refraction lens that creates the star field we see at night. Perhaps stars are the direct result of large objects that have penetrated the membrane throughout the ages, leaving behind permanent scar tissue. Those amazing supernovas we see could be an effect of a previously damaged area getting hit by a comet or other debris, creating an effect similar to what you would see if you dropped a marble into a Petridish filled with gel. All of the small fractures from the previous scar would expand and create a prism. Just speculating here.

The next idea is a bit radical, but makes sense to my warped way of thinking. Imagine that the earth really is a sphere, and that it is made up of many layers. The layers are a little muddled right now, but when it was brand new there was a hard outer shell, a layer of ice, a layer of earth, an atmosphere, a membrane, and then a core/sun. In the beginning, the oceans were all solid ice with the solid earth on top of it. Before the ice melted, the solid earth was all one complete continent that formed an unbroken sphere. When water is frozen, it takes up nine percent more mass than when it is in liquid form. That means that if it melted, all of the land on top of it would break apart as the second layer in the sphere became thinner. If you look at a globe, you will notice that the continents don’t just fit together in one direction; they fit together on all sides. The east side of Asia and Africa conform perfectly to the west side of the Americas, just like the west side of Africa and Europe conform to the east side of the Americas. Simply put, if your shrunk our world without shrinking the continents, they would form a perfect sphere. So my theory is that at some point the ice layer melted, and when it did, the continents all broke apart as the layer holding them together lost altitude. This seems like pretty good evidence to me that we live on the INSIDE of the earth. If the oceans were frozen and the continents were actually the outer layer of the earth, then we wouldn’t have any oceans at all on the surface when they melted. The only way we could be on the outside of the planet with that concept, would be if the planet grew in diameter (and I know there is a whole expansion theory model out there).

A lot of people have wondered what the purpose could be for all of the deception generated by the powers that be, and I think I have one possible answer. If we take it as a given that gravity is not generated by mass, then we also have to re-think the entire concept of how our universe formed. Planets (if there are any others) could not have formed, nor could any physical object. The one thing that may have existed without gravity is electromagnetism. What if instead of a whole bunch of carbon-based life forms evolving, the first entities to evolve were some kind of energy beings. Much like our own sphere of development, they began as very simple organisms and evolved into more complex organisms until they became sentient. At some point, they must have realized that they could manipulate physical matter through electromagnetic stimulus. As they became more advanced, they would have created more complex constructs. Before they could do anything really fun with physical matter, they had to develop a way for it all to stay together. That’s where spherical planets came into the equation. They created these giant (giant to us) spinning orbs that would create a stasis field where biological organisms could develop. Why would they do this? If they were anything like humans, that answer would be: to see if it could be done. Depending on their level of sensory perception as energy beings, they might see things from a very different perspective than organic life forms. Do they feel pain? Can they feel pleasure? All of these sensations we experience are derived from chemical interactions in our body that interface with our electromagnetic brain. Perhaps the entire purpose of creating this globe was to generate a sensory arena where these entities could experience new sensations. Perhaps you and I are unknowingly playing host to these entities right now. Or perhaps they see us as a farm and siphon some kind of psychic energy from our emotional race. Who knows? The main point is that if Newtonian physics are bunk, we have to rethink every aspect of what our existence really is and how it came to be.

2014/08/13 at 4:27 am
Wild Heretic
In reply to Douglas Adams.
Nice post DA.

Centrifugal force is the obvious contender for gravity, and I think it probably is, at least I’m going with that.
I wondered about some astronomical objects being part of a melted glass or scars. I hadn’t thought about prisms being formed after an object enters the already entered glass. My take is that all meteorites etc. melt through the glass, so there are bound to be some differences in the glass up there.
I like your Pangea theory a lot. I had never thought of the water being originally below the crust, but after reading Etidorpha, it seems that you could well be right as it describes a unfathomably vast water reservoir beneath Italy. I think the Sun was manufactured and put in later. The Sun then would melt the ice creating the oceans etc.
Yes, this concave Earth paradigm opens Pandora’s box to many issues in both science and philosophy. Who are we? Where are we? What is going on here really – Computer? Farm? Prison? Stage? School? Or a mixture of the lot or something we haven’t thought of. Are we the question to the answer of 42 (a reference to your poster name)?

2014/08/13 at 10:52 am
Icecoldsun

Hi WH,

during my vacation I came across two things I’d like to know your opinion on:

1) You’ve written somewhere you’re still working on how the central sphere(s) inside our world (containing stars also) appear to be like a skydome. I remember from some article I read in the past that (given the traditional “space”-model of distances of billions and billions of kilometers) the stars normally would appear so tiny that the human eye should not be able to see them at all. A healthy eye has a limit of how tiny an object it can see, and the stars (all of them) would fall far into this category. In the article I think they explained that by the fact that these objects emit (and not just reflect) light. Didn’t convince me back then. But it might be worth considering in the “dome-problem”,

2) Newton’s gravity doesn’t make any sense, amen to that. But the “pressure model” doesn’t convince me either (or, not yet…). If there is pressure, lets say, on an object, and it is (e.g.) pressured against another object (e.g., the surface of the earth), you should be able to feel and measure this pressure both on the surface (“weight”, which is no problem of course), but on the “other side” of the object as well (i.e., on a standing human, mainly the top of the head and shoulders). But we can’t feel it, and we can’t measure it. In my opinion, this force isn’t there, simple as that.

Another hint we are living inside a computer? Some “beta”-mode? Working, but with some inner contradictions? Of course, just because I can’t figure out a convincing reason for gravity, that doesn’t necessarily mean it can’t be explained… 😉

Just some of my recent thoughts I wanted to share with you.

2014/08/13 at 11:06 am
Wild Heretic
In reply to Icecoldsun.
Thanks for your thoughts icecoldsun.

“Gravity as a pressure” isn’t the normal type of pressure we are used to or measure right now. It isn’t air, plasma, water or any kinds of atomic pressure in that sense, at least not directly. It would be the aether pressure which flows through everything like it nearly isn’t there, because matter isn’t there. Nearly all matter is not there in the atomic sense. Didn’t Rutherford do a deflection experiment at one point? One idea is that the aether only reflects off the very loosely packed central node points called atoms ( I need to work through this much more fully though). Air has fewer atoms density wise than your body and so you are pressed down more than air hence you don’t feel pressure above you. There is still air pressure though above you, just as there is water pressure above you too if you are under water. And also two objects of different weight falling at the same speed in a vacuum is because the centrifugal aether force is the same for both heavy and light objects. The energy or motion of the force doesn’t change, just the density of the objects it reflects against.

Unfortunately, this is very incomplete and I am just beginning to look at standing waves and the parts in between the atoms as waves, but I am not sure yet.

2014/08/13 at 1:59 pm
Douglas Adams
In reply to Wild Heretic.
Another thought on a possibility for gravity would be electrostatic charge. If you rub a balloon against your hair, it will stick to the ceiling. It will also attract dust particles, hair, and other objects that will stick to it. We know our planet generates an electromagnetic field already. What if we stick to the earth as a result of living in a giant ion cloud?

See this YouTube video for a demonstration of ion crafts that use this principle to lift objects via high voltage: http://youtu.be/Zm-beOwyxBo

While it seems like a lot of mass is held down to the earth via this ion cloud, viewed from a distance we are actually only a very thin layer on this globe.

2014/08/13 at 6:02 pm
Douglas Adams
In reply to Douglas Adams.
Here is another really fascinating animation demonstrating that land once covered the entire world. Neal’s theory is that the world is growing (and that may be true too, I have no idea), but the model may work as a result of my theory of a warming ice layer on inner earth as well.

http://youtu.be/oJfBSc6e7QQ?list=UUOW3e4Kxx02XQ-ZpF8T1Cuw

2014/08/13 at 7:57 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to Douglas Adams.
I’ve briefly looked at the “coloumb’s law as gravity” thing. I’ve decided just to slowly work through things at their own pace and if this happens to mesh with what I am working on then great, otherwise I’ll leave it alone. I don’t think I’ll include gravity in the next article as it belongs better to the solstices which is the article after next.

Having said that, at the moment I have gravity as the Sun’s electric field with light following its magnetic one. Bizarre I know. Most things are intimately connected to the Sun as I’ve found out. The Earth is involved as well but as a semiconductor role. People will say it is impossible for light to follow a magnetic field, but it turns out not to be the case under certain conditions.

2014/08/14 at 12:06 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to Douglas Adams.
Great video Doug. I appreciate that kind of graphic as it shows the truth in a few seconds unequivocally. What we don’t know is what caused it and how sudden and of course when.

2014/08/14 at 12:20 pm
Nils Esche
youtube.com/watch?v=nZVcSI1Rhtk

Maybe we all should kind of take the Bible more into consideration as the storyboard for what is true, for what we are seeing now – and are being in. And take scripture a bit more serious as most of us did so far:

“The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork.” Psalms 19,1

Although this video, I show you, is seen from the wrong perspective of earth as convex, I found this one interesting and worth mentioning. It does not really matter though, if outside or not for this one – it is all the same INSIDE. May you please have a look into it and let me know your thoughts about it. Some “evidence” are strong, others are more week. But interesting watching it, anyways.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZVcSI1Rhtk

God bless.
Cheers, Nils

PS: The island vulcano really blew me away, the zebra aswell.

PPS: ‘Wernher von Braun’ the great German scientist (who humiliates himself for surviving during “operation paperclip” and for the price of faking moon landings with Walt Disney, Kennedy and others) – he knew about the concave earth and that there is a ceiling as if a glass sky. Look at his Gravstone: Psalms 19,1.

2014/08/14 at 7:18 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to Nils Esche.
Thanks for the tip Nils. I’ll look at it now.

2014/08/14 at 8:23 pm
Awaken cheese
In reply to Nils Esche.
AMAZING BIBLICAL PROOF:
Its too professional work to be a truth, and mind you guys, what i have found, that 99% of videos where is spinning earth or some kind of sun system, space stuff, – its THEIR videos, they are ready to tell you all earth secrets (fake they or not) to make sure, that you will believe that earth is a globe, that space is infinite, etc..etc. Why its so important to them? You may wont believe , but its about fake alien invasion in future. Just have a look around about information of extraterrestrial life, UFO, USO, Annunaki, reptilians, skitters, Project Camelot, magic afterlife boys, info on biggest brainwashing channels like discovery, explorer, loads info about bullshit 10th dimensions, bending time, space, holographic universe, holes, portals – its ALL lies. They will attack you with all kind of information, to make you believe any kind of alien form, no matter you believe it or not, but you will be always open to possibility. And once everyone is ready, they will bring it in, Fake Alien Invasion, combined with fake meteorites (like the “test” in Russia a while ago), with all kind of fake global disasters.
You guys can identify 80% of lies on internet by knowing 2 facts:

Earth is not a globe and doesn’t spin, space doesn’t exist..etc..
Aliens do not exist.
And anyone who push along this kind of info mixed up with other info, they are THEY, the ones who are been setup by world rulers to make you believe it, trough science, movies, cartoons, stories, PC games, “real” evidence, bible (new bible stuff), etc..etc..
Its all about “falling sky”. have a look chicken little 1954, predictive programing, that’s their plan in a way, just learn to see it.
Now “whist-blower” campaign happening. Lets wait while they get their soldiers ready around the earth, and tell us to run in to the “caves”.
Lol, i hope you know what i am all about.

2014/08/14 at 11:51 pm
dizzib
whodotheyserve.com
In reply to Awaken cheese.
Excellent excellent point, cheese, I never made that connection before between fake alien invasion and convex earth, thanks for the insight!

The stakes couldn’t be higher, as the plan is to trap your soul by getting you to take a chip or take cover in DUMBs with the cover story that it’s for your own survival. What awaits is being revealed by certain whistleblowers, recently including clone torture victim Donald Marshall.

Sorry for going slightly off topic.

2014/08/15 at 9:34 pm
Lord Steven Christ
missteribabylonestar.com/posthypnoticepiphany.html
In reply to dizzib.
Yes, true they are pushing the fake alien invasion. I just recently spoke to a DOJ operative who is now working in FEMA camps getting ready for martial law (he says on May 15, 2015). He also says there will be a “rapture” and UFO’s flying all across the sky. This is where you have to understand the reality of the concave earth with glass/ice sky. The sky will definitely fall, and all people who are left above the surface will surely die. So, what’s the alternative? Well if you’re not in a DUMBs shelter you are fucked. So, where does that leave the righteous good people of the earth? Listening to Donald Marshall will surely get you killed. (I’ve caught him in many lies, btw.) Not that there are not nefarious powers that operate underground, but that there is simply no alternative place to go. If you build your own bunker, you will still die because the sun will stop and burn up the earth. You have to trust and believe in God, that he has provided a way for you to escape. You have to also trust that there is some benevolent force that will overcome the operators of evil and escort you underground into shelters, and transported to the new kingdom in Australia.

Basically, you have to listen and trust me. Be meek and seek first the kingdom of God. Hard to accept for you vain pompous assholes, but I will save your lives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGdIdvG6urM

2014/08/18 at 4:57 pm
Lord Steven Christ
missteribabylonestar.com/posthypnoticepiphany.html

New Eratosthenes Test Challenge (Concave Earth)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjGGRc6WEUk

2014/08/27 at 5:46 pm
Icecoldsun

Hi there,

have you already seen ka rol’s latest video about Tycho Brahe’s refutation of Copernicus? Fascinating, to say the least…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVAAn1Hy_Ws

2014/08/28 at 11:50 am
Wild Heretic
In reply to Icecoldsun.
Yes, I’ve seen it. I don’t exactly understand retrograde motion etc. except that it is just a couple of planets going in the opposite direction than the others around the Sun. Is it that the Earth can’t move because a comet’s orbit doesn’t change even though it is observed over 200 days and the Earth is in a different place around the Sun? Is it that the two comets were seen during the day as well? My brain hasn’t quite clicked on this.

2014/08/28 at 6:22 pm
Lord Steven Christ
missteribabylonestar.com/posthypnoticepiphany.html
In reply to Icecoldsun.
great find for karol.

here’ my take on retrograde within the earth.
it’s a magnetic confusion caused by the sun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9-TmZj5K5A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfXl2tHZWVg

2014/08/30 at 5:08 am
Anonymous

The following appears in RationalWiki: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hollow_Earth

The Hollow Earth theory is a pseudo-scientific belief and conspiracy theory stating that the Earth is hollow. Theories include that the inhabitants of the “Inner Earth” walk around the inside feet-up,[1] or that a smaller sphere is inside the larger (sometimes it is stated this object works like a sun for the inner earth denizens), which is more in line with the theory of gravity, though not geology.

The conspiracy aspect supposedly relates to a large hole providing access to the underworld, which is located somewhere in the arctic or Antarctic regions,[2] and the attempts to keep it quiet made by the superpowers in conjunction with whatever the Grand Theory du jour is, be it reptilians, Tibetan masters, Atlanteans and/or aliens. That there are undisclosed entrances to these “inner worlds” extends also to the moon, with one video purporting that you can see it on Google Earth,[3] though it should be noted that this is very clearly just a graphics glitch caused by stitching multiple low-resolution and high-contrast images together in combination with the usual seam errors produced at the poles when using spherical UV mapping. These theories are also associated with apocryphal stories of apparently bottomless holes in various locations, such as Mel’s Hole in Washington, USA.

It’s not clear what supports the surface of the Earth according to the Hollow Earth Theory, since the surface of the earth we can see would most likely collapse under the force of gravity without a substrate (the mantle and inner core are solid, the outer core is liquid, and both states are highly resistant to compression). Nor is it clear what keeps the denizens from floating away from the inner surface.

There’s also the problem that the “shell” would need to be really dense, in order to produce a gravitational field this strong.[4]

Finally, there’s the question of exactly why this would be kept secret – as with several other conspiracy theories, there seems to be no motive behind this one aside from “Let’s make the unwashed masses look really stupid!”

How do you counter their “key points” against the Hollow Earth/Concave theory?

2014/09/03 at 1:15 am
Wild Heretic
In reply to Anonymous.
Rational wiki needs use other forces rather than just their skeptical intellect. I personally like the other dimensional/underworld inhabitants theory such as this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5S35sU7WU4&list=TL5CcTfjF2qxzf17cUalrZoutgrgvP8l9G

It is us who walk inside the Earth feet up. Hence the concave Earth and I will explain the basic mechanics very soon.
and 3. Suspiciously not really secret at all as they got one of their own, Admiral Byrd, to spill the beans. Any military source I treat as disinfo off the bat unless they have some higher purpose strategic aspect to correctly informing the public. The only evidence we have of the “hollow earth” is anecdotal or second hand, but at least it is better than nothing.
Nobody knows what gravity is so they are getting very silly and presumptuous.

Finally, what reasons do the people who wrote rationalwiki page think why this is to be kept secret? Where is their imagination? Don’t they have one? I guess not as the intellect is only a computer. Immediately a few reasons spring to mind. The underworld people don’t want to be discovered and be happy clappy with us plebs and the military. If they have their own great technology why bother with us unless they need the odd resource here and there which they can do secretly? In fact, what if some are controlling us for supposed good reasons or supposed exploitative reasons? Such as they are working to a divine plan and making sure we follow it (whether that is seen as good or bad) or exploiting us for other resources or something higher dimensional like our emotions. I’m sure if you put your imagination cap on, some other reasons could spring to mind too. All the stories of encounters with the underworld have one theme in common and that is none of the residents want the outside world to discover them.

We know nothing of our reality to make any incredible presumptions such as these. We don’t even know where we are. Born and dead in three score and ten and nobody knows a thing. That alone makes me extremely suspicious of our situation; does it not worry you at all?

2014/09/03 at 10:20 am
rodin

Lens distortion always causes a fish eye effect around the centre. In a normal lens this effect is much muted, but still measurable especially towards the edges. There is therefore a simple way to refute the concave Earth theory, and that would be if you had a genuine and verifiable camera shot showing convexity of an Earth horizon lying BELOW the centre of the image.

Such as here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQw_C5KLhFM

2014/09/04 at 8:24 am
Wild Heretic
In reply to rodin.
The horizon should still be straight at 121,000 feet though. So maybe this lens is a normal lens with only mild distortion especially towards the edges?

There is therefore no simple way to refute concave Earth theory with balloons and camera lenses.

2014/09/04 at 12:10 pm
rodin
In reply to Wild Heretic.
No, the curvature is more or less the same and certainly convex both above and below the lens focal point. (I have taken stills to show this, but its obvious from just looking at the film). So I would have to say that yes, this is a way to refute concave Earth.

Also, a credit to amateur rocketry!

2014/09/04 at 1:37 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to rodin.
Exactly, the curvature is more or less the same, even well before the rocket was at high altitude. There is no increase in curvature the higher we go up? There shouldn’t be any curvature at all at 30km let alone the same curvature much lower down. I’ve never seen the horizon but flat 10km up (on a plane). As you said, this static effect is caused by the mild curvature of the normal lens. You solved the problem yourself.

Problem solved (3:12) –
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lie0diOhfdg

That slightly curved static horizon at very low altitude taken with a Canon Vixia HF20 HD Camera.

Case closed.

2014/09/04 at 2:26 pm
Lord Steven Christ
missteribabylonestar.com/posthypnoticepiphany.html

THE BEACH LAY DOWN/STAND UP SUNSET ILLUSION (Concave Earth)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFrhjJyB8aA

2014/09/04 at 5:28 pm
rodin
In reply to Wild Heretic.
There shouldn’t be any curvature at all at 30km

Actually the horizon distance is 1/10th of the Earth’s radius at this point if you do the maths, which yields precisely the curvature observed at apogee if you plot this graphically. The horizon by the way goes from flat at launch progressively towards curved if you capture frames and perform measurements. Also consider how a lens works then ask – how can lens distortion be the same above and below the focal point? Because any lens distortion is wrapped around the focal point, and a horizon’s distortion would invert as it passes through it.

2014/09/04 at 6:24 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to rodin.
Fair enough about the 30km. However, the horizon was flat at launch, but not when cut to the various stages of higher altitudes (although in fairness the horizon wasn’t well defined at launch until around 1min 9secs). I just showed you a video of a normal camera only at about 1000 feet in the air, or even less (with the same mild curvature as your rocket video) which stayed at the same curvature throughout despite the focal point moving. So your point to show that the Earth is convex because of this static mild curvature at various altitudes is mute, whatever the theoretical proposition as to how a lens works.

2014/09/04 at 7:47 pm
Wild Heretic
In reply to Lord Steven Christ.
Good call.

I didn’t know about that illusion of the lie down/stand up thing, but the horizon always at eye level puts an end to their explanation of that. I fact, the horizon always at eye level buts an end to convex theory full stop.

2014/09/04 at 8:06 pm
Lord Steven Christ
missteribabylonestar.com/posthypnoticepiphany.html
In reply to Wild Heretic.
oh yea, a typo, it’s LIE down. 🙂 lol

The convex lie is down!

2014/09/04 at 11:48 pm
Andrew

Just to correct my former post. It was the Hartland peninsula i was seeing from Trevose Head in Cornwall on the Horizon 33 miles away, not the coast of Wales.