Flat Earth Research

Sunday, November 26, 2017

ZOOMED IN SUNSET - FLAT EARTH PROOF

Note: Valid REPEATABLE (do this experiment yourself, you can find a camera and a sunset) FLAT EARTH proof. Unfortunately, I don't agree with the sentiments expressed at the end. God is not benevolent yet has fallen into thievery and gets sadistic pleasure at what goes on in this world.
FLAT EARTH PROOF!!!
At 31 inches height you have a viewing advantage of about 2 miles (earth curve droppage at 2 miles would be about 2.6ft =~ 31inches). Subtract 2 miles from the distance of 7.56 miles and you get 5.56 miles that should provide droppage of over 20ft - you should not be seeing shoreline. The girl with the spotlight at the water should not be visible she would have to be holding it up at a height of 20ft if the Earth were curved and then it would be pinned at the horizon itself. Yet you can see the shore itself. Glad to see the P900 camera causing the world admins problems! =)

Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Historic Flat Earth Newspaper Clippings Archive

As recent as the 1930's Flat Earth was making headlines in major newspapers all across the country.
Brave smart people, such as John S. McClelland, were still battling --- and managed to gain respectful coverage in mainstream media outlets.
Here is a link to over 5000 articles, in 6 rar archive files (totaling ~4GB), downloaded directly from the Library of Congress website dating (1836-1970) -- they are not all perfect matches yet many of these pdfs contain a treasure trove of very interesting stories of people who were very aware that we live on a Flat Earth. Download a copy, share links and repost!


The Flat Earth media black out is fairly recent, after the wars, at around the time NASA started (NACA->Langley->CIA/NASA) in the 1950's is when American society really seems to have been converted into believing that the Earth was a globe.

After reviewing several dozen of the articles, I have noticed a general trend of castigation with regards to press coverage of the Flat Earth leading up through the 1950's with very few exceptions -- possibly in preparation for the looming prospect of airplane travel and rocketry.

Here is a link to a YouTube video that is the source for this blog entry: Flat Earth Goldmine!

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Sonoluminescent Starlight - Frequency of The Heavens

Saturday, April 23, 2016

Triangulating the Height of The Sun

"The solar elevation angle is the altitude of the sun, the angle between the horizon and the centre of the sun's disc." -- Wikipedia. Published daily on the timeanddate.com website are the Solar elevation angles of the sun altitude for the sun at various locations around the world. Using a little trigonometry we can utilize this data to calculate the height of the sun.

First we will need to pick two cities on the same longitude:

Choosing New York City,USA and Valdivia,Chile. Next, for the same day, we need to get the respective Solar Elevation Angles while the sun is directly between the two cities along the same longitudinal line -- also known as the Meridian. You can tell that it is at the Meridian by the Heading, the Heading should state due North or due South.
April 22, 2016
Sum of the 3 angles of a triangle is 180: A + B + C = 180
Law of Sines: a/(sine A) = b/(sine B) = c/(sine C)
b = (sine B) * (a/sine A)
c = (sine C) * (a/sine A)
h = (sine B) * c = (sine C) * b
Solving:
A=80°               a=5,561 miles
B=38°               b=3,476.509 miles
C=62°               c=4,985.817 miles
Height of the Sun = 3,069.57 miles
Note: If the Sun were truly 93 million miles away the Solar Elevation Angle at any Meridian on Earth on any day of the year would be a little bit less than 90° -- 89.99...0.

If the above equations are intimidating for you, you can utilize any of a variety of online triangle calculators, such as:
Note: Shortly after this posting, the Casio keisan high accuracy triangle calulator went offline. If it's not up, just google: triangle calculator.
Linux Aliases, for 50 decimal places precision:
alias sine='_(){ echo "scale=${2:-50};s(${1}*.01745329251994329576923690768488612713442871888541)" | bc -l; };_'
alias sun_height='_() { (($#<3)) && echo "Usage: <distance> <solar elevation angle1> <solar elevation angle2>" && return; a=${1}; B=${2}; C=${3}; A=$(calc "(180-(${B}+${C}))"); calc "($(sine ${B})*$(calc "${a}/$(sine ${A})"))*$(sine ${C})"; };_'
alias calc='_(){ echo "scale=50; ${1}" |bc; }; _'
Note: They are co-dependent upon one another. You can put them all in a file and source the file.

Monday, April 18, 2016

Beatles -- Fool on the Hill / Flat Earth References


Beatles -- Fool on the Hill

“The fool on the hill
Sees the sun going down
And the eyes in his head
See the world spinning round”

This song already seemed to be laden with Flat Earth symbolic references. Yet this video, down to the names of the companies and people involved including the title of the movie "Dinner for Schmucks" is amazingly loaded with Flat Earth references.

Thursday, April 14, 2016

Nasa Disingenuousness

Here are some exposes with regards to NASA disingenuousness:

Cartoons were being utilized by the media/Nasa since the first US spacewalk! At the inception of the US space program, they were already conditioning the public to be accustomed to cartoons and animations in the context of serious coverage of the US space program. Also notice how the words are curved across the screen, that's an interesting subliminal NLP device.
What does it tell you if you had to pick apart the subliminal insinuation of seeing the text reel across the screen in a curved manner?

Looks like a psychological trick designed to get the wide-eyed viewer to associate the concept of curvature with the data they are being shown -- while their senses are already overwhelmed at the tremendous importance of the novelty of the situation. A situtation that further combines elements of pride, nationalism and curiosity about what exists beyond the boundaries of our apparent atmosphere. All done with a delivery mechanism that provides grainy scratchy images over the old television technology of cathode ray tubes that had a low refresh rate resulting in hypnotic inducement, facilitating the bypassing of mental/logical filters.

04:29 Bizarrely, the astronauts literally start talking out of the ass of the Gemini space capsule!

Note this is during a live broadcast, they planned to do that! This is supposedly a tremendous triumph for the United States space program, the very first manned spacewalk for the US. Why would they go through the trouble of making this graphic, to start speaking out of the ass of the Gemini space capsule? Think of the symbology.

Wednesday, April 13, 2016

Distant Shorelines -- Jackpot for Flat Earth Proof



Viewing the Chicago skyline from The Whitcomb in Saint Joseph, Michigan.
Using a Nikon D5100 with 70-300mm lens with 1.4x extender.
After looking up The Whitcomb online, it is a building in the town of St. Joseph, Michigan off the shore by a few hundred feet that looks to have an observation deck about 8 stories high (est. 120ft); at 13.42 miles away the curvature of the earth should make distant objects disappear by about 120ft. Using that as an approximate height of the Whitcomb building results in a 13.42 mile viewing advantage.

The distance from The Whitcomb St.Joseph, MI to Chicago, IL is approximately 60 miles. If you subtract the 13.42 mile viewing advantage provided by The Whitcomb, you get the same apparent Earth curvature drop as that of Chicago being 46.58 miles away -- approx. 1446ft. The tallest buildings in Chicago are the Willis Tower (1,450 ft) and Trump International Hotel (1,389ft). Yet we are seeing a lot more than the very top of the Willis Tower.

This is something you could do yourself! If you can afford a reasonably powered camera take your next trip to the shores of Lake Michigan, and take photos of the Chicago Skyline.


Private pictures of shorelines may be the Holy Grail for flat Earth proofs, since picture experiments are easily replicated and provide concrete evidence.

If you can't afford to directly experiment on your own, you can scan posted photos from websites such as skyscrapercity.com: http://www.skyscrapercity.com

Use the Google Earth Ruler tool to find the distances.
The following formula calculates the Earth curvature drop:

Where, d = distance in miles:
Earth Curvature Drop = (d² * (2/3))

Useful corrective approximations for height: a distance of 3 miles corresponds to 6ft drop due to the supposed curvature of the Earth, so if you take a picture from a shoreline from a viewing perspective about 6ft in height subtract 3 miles from the distance that Google Earth gives to you to account for the viewing advantage.

E.g. 40 miles away, from ~ 6ft high -> 3 miles reduction -> same as 37 miles away
Resulting in an Earth curvature drop of 912.66ft

E.g. 40 miles away, from ~ 50ft high -- a logically easy way, to find the proper amount of miles reduction to use, is to keep plugging in distances into the formula until you get a curvature drop that roughly corresponds to the height advantage you need to make up for. At 8 miles we get a curvature drop of 42.66 and at 9 miles we get a curvature drop of 54ft, focusing in we find that at roughly 8.66 miles we hit 50ft -- so we have an 8.66 miles viewing advantage reduction -> the depicted view has the same curvature drop as though it were 31.32 miles away.
Resulting in an Earth curvature drop of 654ft

Chicago Skyline From Indiana Dunes National Park -- Distance is approximately 31 miles away, accounting for a height of 6ft that corresponds to a an additional 3 miles worth of perspective resulting in the same curvature drop off as being 28 miles away or 522ft. Yet we apparently see the shoreline!

From Hammond Indiana -- 16 miles away at 6ft high -- 13 miles of droppage or 112ft. We shouldn't be seeing shoreline!

Chicago Skyline from Michigan City, Indiana -- 37.9 miles away -- estimating a height of 180ft (from the Observation Tower in Washington Park) that's an approximately 16.432 miles advantage resulting in 21.468 miles of Earth curvature drop or 307.25ft. Yet we seem to be looking directly at the shoreline.

Some people argue that if the Earth is flat, why can't you simply see onward indefinitely. The reason why you can't is because your optics and visibility due to the atmosphere, is limited. Air is generally a fog, it obstructs visibility even on "clear" days. The difference between a foggy day and a "clear" day is that the obstruction due to water content makes visibility on a "foggy day" drop down in a very noticeable way - but the visibility obstruction is always there, regardless of whether the day is said to be clear or foggy, ipso facto. Also, if you improve your optics - beyond the limits of your naked eyes - you can see farther. This would not necessarily be the case if the Earth were a globe since there is no way to improve visibility beyond a true horizon with improved optics, the view is simply not there to be seen since it is a tangent off the side of a sphere.

World Magic - Part 1 Sun Heat is Faked

The visible thermal spectrum of the Sun is in the 5000°K range, and the visible light does not change over distance regardless of any drop in thermal temperature.

Imagine the blue flame of a torch lighter, if you hand it to your friend who is on the other side of a sliding glass door that shields the heat do you suddenly see a yellow torch flame?

No, you still see the torch emitting a blue flame because that is the appropriate thermal visible light spectrum.
Advertised Temperature in the Center of the Sun: 1.57×10⁷° K
That's 15700000.00° K or approximately 28 Million° F!

Although supposedly insulated in the near perfect vacuum of space, somehow moving out from the center of the Sun, the Sun's temperature mysteriously drops down to an advertised temperature of only approximately 5,778° K at the Sun's surface. Hmm.

That's less than 10 thousand° F. There is no well established advertised explanation as to why this is, yet it is necessary in order to explain how we see the Sun as a yellow ball.

Our Sun has a Planckian locus consistent with a temperature of no more than ~ 5000° K. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planckian_locus

A true vacuum is a near perfect insulator, at 93 million miles of near perfect insulation there is no thermal heat left. The only visible light that would reach the earth from 93 million miles away is non thermal visible light. The same as if you were not near an incandescent light while you were viewing the light from outside through a window.

The same is true for Ultraviolet light radiation -- widely advertised as having responsibility for a variety of heating effects including a, completely unfounded, capability of transferring high energy through a vacuum that is converted to heat energy upon arrival at the Earth's surface. There is no evidence to suggest that Ultraviolet carries enough energy through a vacuum to support the amount of heating effects witnessed on Earth.



The advertised dilution of radiation theory, is the inverse Square Law stipulated by Newton (who I'm not a proponent of):

Inverse Square Dilution = 1/d²

E.g. Sun -> Earth

Sun Power Intensity Dilution = 1/9300000² = .000000000000011562030292519366

That's quite a bit of dilution, for a body that far away with an advertised surface temperature of a paltry 5000° K.

The scientific community seems to be simply taking the solar intensity measured on the surface of the Earth, of 1367 watts per square meter, and plugging it into the inverse square dilution equation to arrive at the advertised power output of the Sun.

No wonder the equations always seem to work out! If the results and equations are rigged, what does this mean?

We should probably not be experiencing the extent of the heating effects from the Sun that we are currently experiencing. The true amount of Sun heat we should experience should probably be more along the lines of what you would experience if you washed a bright LED light over your face, you get visible light yet not much thermal energy.

What if we're in a dome? In the dome flat Earth model, the Sun is a near point light/heat source -- again, there are some heating effects shining light through a glass yet not nearly enough to explain the amount of heating effects that we are experiencing. Shining a light through glass would take away yet more of the mysterious Ultraviolet thermal radiation according to the advertised theories. Furthermore, presuming a dome, there is still a partial vacuum near the top of the dome with our heavier air portion of our atmosphere remaining close to the surface, and we still see a low thermal spectrum of no more than 5000°K any thermal heat would again be largely blocked by the partial vacuum of our upper dome atmosphere.

So what's going on? World magic. I develop software, if you have enough technology to implement this world system you probably have enough technology to easily code false heating effects for it.

Pseudocode:
   if (sunlight(human)) human_warming effect(human);
   if (sunlight(plant)) plant_warming_effect(plant);
   etc..

The bottom line is it is already established that we have been lied to in a big way. There exists the means and motivation to make things the way they are experienced by us. If our world system administrators are willing to go through the trouble to convince everyone on Earth that they are on a globe, what else would the world administrators be willing to do?

If I had to guess, I'd say the Sun is approximately a limelight, it's luminance chosen according to the personal preferences of the world administrators and the false heating effects, witnessed on Earth, are being implemented via high-technology.

Note: Thermal dilution effects would be magnified if our situation is as described in the Bible, with a firmament/dome having an ocean of water above.

Tuesday, April 12, 2016

Sunset Showing Sun Apparent Size Reduction

Very obvious apparent size reduction of the Sun. This would be impossible if the Sun were 93 million miles away and dipping below a true horizon. What we should be seeing, if we are truly living in a globe model of the Earth, is a uniformly sized Sun dipping uniformly down below a true horizon.

What we see instead, and in line with the flat Earth model, is the Sun moving away from the point of reference reducing in apparent size as it dips below the apparent horizon until the Sun finally disappears at the vanishing point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanishing_point

Unexplained Ocean Currents

Why are the oceans spinning faster than the planet?

Globe theorists often cite that because of gravity there is no way to sense that the atmosphere is moving around with us as though everything should remain perpendicularly static, yet if that's true why would there be very deep underwater currents moving faster than the supposed rotation of the Earth?

It's not the wind pushing water at depths thousands of feet down underwater.

The Gulf Stream is typically 100 kilometres (62 mi) wide and 800 metres (2,600 ft) to 1,200 metres (3,900 ft) deep. The current velocity is fastest near the surface, with the maximum speed typically about 2.5 metres per second (5.6 mph).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Stream

The ACC is the dominant circulation feature of the Southern Ocean and has a mean transport of 100-150 Sverdrups (Sv, million m³/s), making it the largest ocean current.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Circumpolar_Current

The total transport of the ACC at Drake Passage is estimated to be around 135 Sv, or about 135 times the transport of all the world's rivers combined.

Rintoul, of the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Center in Hobart, said it proved to be the fastest deep ocean current yet found, with an average speed of 7.9 inches a second. It was also found to carry more than 12 million cubic meters a second of very cold, salty water from Antarctica.

The team deployed measuring devices anchored to the sea floor at depths of up to 4.5 km (3 miles) and recorded current speed, temperature and salinity for a two-year period. http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2010/04/26/fastest-ocean-current-flows-beneath-antarctica.html

The entire global input of fresh water from rivers to the ocean is equal to about 1.2 sverdrup. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sverdrup

The bottom line is that there is ample evidence to suggest that there is a problem with the currently advertised theories on how the worlds oceanic conveyor belt system of currents operates, and it looks a lot like there is an undescribed and unaccounted for influx of water occurring at the depths of the seas.
Without getting into an extended discussion about Thermohaline circulation and katabatic winds, let's just say that the model advertised relies heavily on exotic theories, language and contorted paths. If I had to guess, I would say that there very likely exists a series of vents on the ocean floor that creates the general ocean current paths - they do not appear natural.

NASA Lies - Flat Earth Conspiracy

Interesting notes regarding 666:
 Earth's tilt is 23.4° that leave's 66.6° of perpendicular 90°
 Moonlanding 1969 --->>> 1*666 = 6 6 6
 Isaac Newton -- Mirabilis Annus 1666 --->>> 1*666 = 6 6 6
 FOX --->> F=6 O=15 X=24 --->>> 6 6 6

200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

God's Enclosed Earth Investigation

Learning Curve -- Unveiling Flat Earth 2016

True World -- Flat Earth Documentary 2016

EnclosedWorld.com -- Flat Earth Clues 2016

Flat Earth -- Earths Atmospheric Impossibility

If you take a glass jar and cover it with a balloon and evacuate the chamber to a relatively weak vacuum what happens?

The balloon is pulled into the glass chamber.

Those supporting the model of the Earth as a globe argue that the Earth holds onto its atmosphere by gravity, yet what happens if you were to flip over the depicted evacuated glass with balloon pulled inward due to a weak vacuum and and pierce it with a knife?

Would the strong gravity near the surface of the Earth preclude the heavy low atmosphere of the earth from escaping upward into the chamber?

If you try this experiment you will see that the glass is immediately filled with air pulled in by the partial vacuum, no new sources of air need to be formed beneath the chamber. It's the weak partial vacuum alone that does the work.

Also consider an air pump, can you gently pull the handle of an air pump up? How would that be possible, with the advertised theory that gravity is so strong that Earth maintains our atmosphere, that a weak tiny vacuum such as that created by the gentle upward pull on an air pump handle can cause the air to rush in?

How is it that the very strong near perfect vacuum of space is not capable of pulling away Earth's atmosphere up near where Earth's gravity is relatively weak?

The current situation only makes sense if the Earth is domed.