What globe? Flat Earth and Flat-Earthers

Aeneas

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
The 'flat earth' theories if one can even call it a theory works wonders as psyop. In the ocean there is something called drift nets. These nets can be a mile long and 100 feet deep. If they break free due to storms, accidental loss or deliberately discarded they end as ghost nets which keep on fishing. These nets catch fish, dolphins whales etc. and then under the weight of them sink to the bottom of the ocean, only to resurface later when the 'catch' has decomposed, allowing the nets to come to the surface again to gain another catch ad nauseum.
The flat earth theory is a bit like that, it floats around, catches some discontented people who might have woken up to certain things and then questions everything. After a while these theories get debunked, disappears of the radar for a while, only to appear again when new people wake up a little and start questioning everything. Getting caught in the ghost net of 'flat earth', then makes them look less than credible when they question issues like the covid narrative or the vaccine or the great reset agenda. In that way the psyop works wonders by tarring people with a loony theory thus making them appear like anti-science and starry eyed nutters when the same people question the official narrative.

So it is something to be aware of as entertaining those beliefs can seriously threaten one's trustworthiness on other issues which is understandable.
 

MatiaS

Jedi
So I would really like people on the forum to chime on the research that this film maker has done. In the last few years I've seen an increase in researchers looking into our relatively recent history for clues as to just what's going on here on earth. The creator of the documentaries presents his findings in a very thorough manner and it's undeniably a ton of research he's sank into these documentaries.

I know this forum is not currently entertaining any thoughts about flat earth, as all I could find using the search function was a few scattered posts from quite many years ago already. Also the C's in response to a question about flat earth simply replied "How could you even ask?" or something to that effect. Ever since I first introduced myself to the talking points of the flat earth theory I have to admit I was intrigued. I devoured most of the research I could find on the topic and even though I kind of left in the back of my mind in the "probably not...but maybe" category, there still are so many of the points the theory presents that I can't find a satisfactory "debunk" to for me to completely exclude this possibility.

I also notice the extreme hostility and ad hominem attacks that ensue on Youtube comments sections and forums when somebody tries to have the discussion. Very similar to how people just rush to scream "antivaxxer" when people try to have a discussion about the jabs.

I would like to start another thread where I compile the most compelling pieces of the flat earth theory and would hope for some open discourse on the subject. I acknowledge that a lot of things this forum holds as truth has to be put into question, or alternative explanations be sought, in order for that discussion to be possible, and my few years of relatively shallow research is surely dwarfed by the amount of time Laura and other forum members have spent in finding pieces of the puzzle and putting things together. That being said, I think there's a lot of stuff in these documentaries that might be new for many of you. Much of the information presented also aligns perfectly with lines of inquiry I know for a fact this forum shows great interest in.

Even if the maker of these documentaries has the wrong "big picture conclusion" about his research, I think all the separate pieces of information presented in the documentaries can serve as stand-alone pieces of great value.

He presents information on the so-called mudflood theory, the many inconsistencies of the 19th century narrative, orphan trains to incubatoriums, he presents compelling information relating to all the architecture of this time period among other things. His narration style I can assume is triggering to some, but please, take the time to at least watch the first 2 hours of the first film to get an idea of what it is he's presenting.

I find all this highly fascinating and as I said, a great percentage of his research aligns perfectly with things I've read on this forum and SOTT, even in The Wave. Do refrain from shooting the messenger and disposing of the baby with the bathwater. Look at the information presented with an open mind (hardly something I would have to specify for people on this forum, but as things I've shared in the past have been labeled "misinformation", I feel like giving this reminder before you watch) and decide for yourself.

I've come to view this forum very highly because of the seriousness and healthy skepticism applied to everything that gets discussed here. This is also a reason I'm hesitating to share this, as it is kind of "out there", even for this forums standards.

Give the first film a try for a few hours and let's talk more about this.


 
Last edited by a moderator:

MatiaS

Jedi
I did read through parts of that thread and did find some of the talking points addressed. Again, I'm not saying I believe in a flat earth per se, just that I do find many of the arguments presented quite interesting.

The flat earth aspect is not the main reason for me to share these documentaries (even though the film maker presents that as the core of his theory), but all the other bits of information he shares along the way. As I said, maybe his "big picture conclusion" is wrong, but all the separate pieces of information he presents definitely hold value without having to attach them to a flat earth model of the world. I know it might be hard to get people to watch the documentaries solely because of the flat earth aspect, hence me making the baby-bathwater comment above. The film maker presents a variety of puzzle pieces and chooses to put them together in a way that proposes the flat earth. The puzzle pieces by themselves however, I believe, have value, and I'm sure the members of this forum could put the pieces of the puzzle to better use, and arrange them in a way that might show a whole other story.

If, on the contrary, you find holes and inconsistencies in his research, I would have you point them out to me, so that I myself may align my own perspective more with objectivity. I'm here wishing to learn, that's why I'm sharing this, hoping for others to chime in.
 

Aeneas

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I know this forum is not currently entertaining any thoughts about flat earth, as all I could find using the search function was a few scattered posts from quite many years ago already.
Good news! The earth hasn't in the intermeaning years turned flat, so thus the discussion is appropriate in that thread. It also means that a lot of people who have looked deeply into it will easierly find it.
Also the C's in response to a question about flat earth simply replied "How could you even ask?" or something to that effect.
The response by the C's was to the effect that this is a no brainer and that there was no need to ask such a silly question as we ourselves could put 2 and 2 together and see the nonsense for what it is. Laura does oblige from time to time and ask such questions never the less so as to also cater for doubters.

The above videos are respectively 5 hours and 8 hours. It is not very considerate to expect people to go through a few hours of video without any preamble. Perhaps you could do the work of writing down detailed notes of exactly what is so great about it. Find sources for the assertions and also time brackets from the video where the things are which you find valid. It migh take you a couple of days, but then you have something to bring here and it might also be a good exercise for you. While looking for what you find compelling evidence for the alternative theories, then perhaps also add the existing theories and why they have held water for so long. You will find some help in some of the comments to the above videos and some of the commenters pose good questions, which the above videos don't address. Both the videos are full of images and assertions, but there are no sources to any of it. Also not in the notes to the video.

For the record, I was sent the above from two people I know and did skim through it, yet I wasn't impressed...to say the least. So perhaps do the above suggested exercise and report back, but report back in the other threat dedicated to it. Please.
 

Konstantin

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
So I would really like people on the forum to chime on the research that this film maker has done. In the last few years I've seen an increase in researchers looking into our relatively recent history for clues as to just what's going on here on earth. The creator of the documentaries presents his findings in a very thorough manner and it's undeniably a ton of research he's sank into these documentaries.
I have a quick look of these videos and I cant see anything of real importance in there. He is just using classical New Age tricks to backup the whole nonsense about the Flat Earth theory.
Even if the maker of these documentaries has the wrong "big picture conclusion" about his research, I think all the separate pieces of information presented in the documentaries can serve as stand-alone pieces of great value.
All these " information" could be found at any New age source over the Internet.
I find all this highly fascinating and as I said, a great percentage of his research aligns perfectly with things I've read on this forum and SOTT, even in The Wave. Do refrain from shooting the messenger and disposing of the baby with the bathwater. Look at the information presented with an open mind (hardly something I would have to specify for people on this forum, but as things I've shared in the past have been labeled "misinformation", I feel like giving this reminder before you watch) and decide for yourself.
I still think that watching these videos is just waste of time. Maybe someone will find them interesting, I don't know
The film maker presents a variety of puzzle pieces and chooses to put them together in a way that proposes the flat earth. The puzzle pieces by themselves however, I believe, have value, and I'm sure the members of this forum could put the pieces of the puzzle to better use, and arrange them in a way that might show a whole other story.
He arranges everything just to back up his narrative about the Flat Earth.
If, on the contrary, you find holes and inconsistencies in his research, I would have you point them out to me, so that I myself may align my own perspective more with objectivity. I'm here wishing to learn, that's why I'm sharing this, hoping for others to chime in.
I didn't saw anything spectacular in his videos. I even don't like the voice in the videos. He is trying to make them sound spectacular.
The above videos are respectively 5 hours and 8 hours. It is not very considerate to expect people to go through a few hours of video without any preamble. Perhaps you could do the work of writing down detailed notes of exactly what is so great about it. Find sources for the assertions and also time brackets from the video where the things are which you find valid. It migh take you a couple of days, but then you have something to bring here and it might also be a good exercise for you. While looking for what you find compelling evidence for the alternative theories, then perhaps also add the existing theories and why they have held water for so long. You will find some help in some of the comments to the above videos and some of the commenters pose good questions, which the above videos don't address. Both the videos are full of images and assertions, but there are no sources to any of it. Also not in the notes to the video.
I agree with this. Watch the movies and give us a short notes of all important information that you think are worth discussion and research. Otherwise I don't think anyone will get this seriously.
 

genero81

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I work with a guy who's cousin, Haley, just went to space on the 'Inspiration 4 Space X' mission on Sept 15th of last year. There's a docuseries on Netflix about it. On the last episode there is video from space of the Earth. I would recommend seeing it just for that footage, which is just far enough out in space that you can see the surface of the Earth but also see that it's definitely not flat. For sure the most amazing footage of the Earth I've ever seen!
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
I work with a guy who's cousin, Haley, just went to space on the 'Inspiration 4 Space X' mission on Sept 15th of last year. There's a docuseries on Netflix about it. On the last episode there is video from space of the Earth. I would recommend seeing it just for that footage, which is just far enough out in space that you can see the surface of the Earth but also see that it's definitely not flat. For sure the most amazing footage of the Earth I've ever seen!
We've seen enough of the crazy conspiracy theorist type to know what their response will be: CGI and actors. There's no getting through to these people because they have a ready-made answer for everything, and it's a typical "left hemisphere capture" phenomenon. The resemblance to individuals who have experienced right hemisphere damage or dysfunction is uncanny. For example, the types of delusions experienced by such people include the delusion that the people around them have been replaced by "actors" who are only pretending to be the people they know. And the CGI thing is a kind of amped up form of "conversive thinking." The left hemisphere doesn't let evidence change its mind, it simply reframes the evidence in order to align with the preexisting delusional system, which in turn creates even more delusional thinking.
 

Woodsman

The Living Force
I did read through parts of that thread and did find some of the talking points addressed. Again, I'm not saying I believe in a flat earth per se, just that I do find many of the arguments presented quite interesting.

The flat earth aspect is not the main reason for me to share these documentaries (even though the film maker presents that as the core of his theory), but all the other bits of information he shares along the way. As I said, maybe his "big picture conclusion" is wrong, but all the separate pieces of information he presents definitely hold value without having to attach them to a flat earth model of the world. I know it might be hard to get people to watch the documentaries solely because of the flat earth aspect, hence me making the baby-bathwater comment above. The film maker presents a variety of puzzle pieces and chooses to put them together in a way that proposes the flat earth. The puzzle pieces by themselves however, I believe, have value, and I'm sure the members of this forum could put the pieces of the puzzle to better use, and arrange them in a way that might show a whole other story.

If, on the contrary, you find holes and inconsistencies in his research, I would have you point them out to me, so that I myself may align my own perspective more with objectivity. I'm here wishing to learn, that's why I'm sharing this, hoping for others to chime in.

Most of us took the "Flat Earth" course long ago, learned the material, contrasted, compared and came away informed. It's done. Asking people to watch 5 hours of the same old arguments done up in fresh paint, elicits the same groans as would asking a University post-doc to re-do all their first year assignments. They can do it, but it'll be an insufferable time-waste of a chore.

I'd recommend going through the Flat Earth Society website and looking at their FAQ or wherever they list their very best arguments, and then one by one, search for the 'debunked' counter-arguments on any major search engine, and read those. That way, you'll get the products of the best minds available on each side of the point, and then you can make your own assessment.

You'll run across items like this:

The Flat Earth people manage the phenomenon of ship bottoms disappearing over the horizon while flags and mast tops remain visible in the following way:

Their 'truth' is revealed through a complicated series of axioms and "therefore" statements accompanied by diagrams illustrated by an experimental philosopher from 100 years ago who wrote with an assumed and calming tone of authority. -Essentially, one of the axioms was that "significant details" vanish from view as an object recedes in the distance before the entirety of the object vanishes. Since the hull of a ship is more significant than the mast, it is only logical that it should vanish first. Right?

When I last checked, that was their best response to the ship problem. (And I just love it! It's so wonderfully silly. It feels like a sequence from a Mark Twain novel. Obviously ridiculous, but Huck Finn isn't quick enough to not be snagged by the snake oil salesman, infuriating the reader so that he stands up and slaps the book and argues loudly with nobody.)

If you need faulty, sleight of hand 'logic' hacks to make your case, then you have no case. It becomes a personal decision to believe in lies.
 

mkrnhr

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
One of the most nonsensical replies to airplane or spaceship pictures of the Earth is that we shouldn't "believe NASA" on anything. And yet ancient people knew about the shape of the earth long long long before the existence of space agencies. It is understandable that on a very small scale, say on the scale of the village or a town, the ground is more or less flat for all practical purposes. One has only to travel to see by themselves that it's not that simple on larger scales.
I suspect that many of the flat earth advocates around the globe (and of those who engage in sterile controversies with them) are CoIntelPro agents. There are of course trolls and true believers as well. There is a tendency in mixing historical critic (for instance the inconsistencies in the datation of Roman history) with the Great Tartaria mud flood (which I suspect is a way to distract from the archaeological finds related to the ending of the Roman civilization) with the flat earth nonsense, thus discrediting the legitimate criticism of the official narrative.
 

MatiaS

Jedi
Well, nothing left for me but to take a few steps back and head on back to the proverbial drawing board.
Most of us took the "Flat Earth" course long ago, learned the material, contrasted, compared and came away informed. It's done. Asking people to watch 5 hours of the same old arguments done up in fresh paint, elicits the same groans as would asking a University post-doc to re-do all their first year assignments. They can do it, but it'll be an insufferable time-waste of a chore.
I can see where you're coming from. I'm relatively new to many of the "fields" of research we have to choose from (flat earth, alternate history, timeline deceptions etc.) when we're digging for the truth. I mean many on this forum have been looking into all these things from since before I was even born. Excuse my ignorance.
I'd recommend going through the Flat Earth Society website and looking at their FAQ or wherever they list their very best arguments, and then one by one, search for the 'debunked' counter-arguments on any major search engine, and read those. That way, you'll get the products of the best minds available on each side of the point, and then you can make your own assessment.
The majority of the flat earthers I've come across specifically make the point that the Flat Earth Society is "controlled opposition" and not representative of what most of the flat earthers believe.

I kind of regret posting these videos now as it seems I'm painting myself in a bad light. I should've directly in my post pointed out what was my main interest in the videos, namely the presentation about all the cathedrals, mosques, churches, star forts and other huge buildings built between 16th-19th centuries and their potential purposes. The theory presented in the documentary being one of energy harvesting/storing/distributing.

You guys have made your point though. I will be sure to look deeper into things myself before sharing things here. I'm okay with admitting my "research-skills" are lacking and it would probably do me good to take some pointers from people here.
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
but all the separate pieces of information he presents definitely hold value without having to attach them to a flat earth model of the world

Why don't you outline some of them in brief and we can discuss. I did find his images of below ground windows and doors in buildings interesting, although it would have been nice if he had given precise locations of the pictures rather than ascribing them all to the same cause. It's very obvious that a lot of them are basement windows.
 

Possibility of Being

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Why don't you outline some of them in brief and we can discuss. I did find his images of below ground windows and doors in buildings interesting, although it would have been nice if he had given precise locations of the pictures rather than ascribing them all to the same cause. It's very obvious that a lot of them are basement windows.
Here are numerous examples, considered in the context of a mysterious mud floods.


There is a lot of material in Russian, really impressive. Whole underground storeys discovered during excavations all over Russia. We know about ancient Rome, but in these cases there exists documentation indicating that whatever happened, happened within the last 300 years. Not to mention that, as far as I know, there were no towns in Russia built of bricks earlier than that. The official soil accumulation narrative is full of holes. There are places where town markets were discovered several meters under current ground level.

A short video of Moscow museum of science and industry (posted in comment section of the above linked post). It's in Russian, but the footage speaks for itself.

"Foundation" of the Polytechnic Museum in Moscow after removing 4 meters of dirt

The Bolshoi Theatre in St Petersburg goes 27 meters underground!

Video in English with examples:

In short, no one really knows so far.
 

MatiaS

Jedi
Well firstly what just boggles my mind, is the sheer grandiosity of all these different buildings. Cathedrals, mosques, churches, government buildings, water towers, star forts etc. that were built hundreds of years before motorized power tools were a thing. The immaculate beauty of these structures is something that I never really gave any extra thought to. Consider these few examples:

Lichfield Cathedral in England
IMG_9119.JPG
lichfield-cathedral51.JPG

Originally built in the 13th-14th century, the cathedral has been restored in the 19th century (as were 80% of all Church of England churches according to Wikipedia). In a time where horse and carriage were the main mode of transportation it seems unbelievable to me the level of mastery of this architecture. May be I'm just underestimating the capabilities of people back then, and seeing as I have no extensive knowledge about architecture and historical building methods, this could just be a layman's misconception, but I'm absolutely awestruck by the perfection of these structures.

Also to note, what the documentary draws attention to, the ornaments and windows that have in many cases a similar or exact shape of a cavity magnetron. This is something that is to be found in many of these structures, all over the world. In the first video I posted, he goes into this topic around the 1:28 mark. What he ties into this hypothesis (buildings as 'machines') is also the fact that most domes and roof ornaments are made out of copper and gold (conductors of electricity).

Here's an interior view of Lichfield Cathedral.
2cd51800e5e98c459bcdaf091b1139f1.jpg
26.jpg


Exeter Cathedral, also in England
SAM_1117.JPG

This one also finished in the 14th century, sports - according to Wikipedia - "the longest uninterrupted medieval stone vaulted ceiling in the world".

Interior view:
exeter-cathedral-nave.jpg


Saint Basil's Cathedral in Moscow, Russia
St-Basils-Cathedral-2.jpg
From Wikipedia: "Dmitry Shvidkovsky, in his book Russian Architecture and the West, states that "it is like no other Russian building. Nothing similar can be found in the entire millennium of Byzantine tradition from the fifth to the fifteenth century ... a strangeness that astonishes by its unexpectedness, complexity and dazzling interleaving of the manifold details of its design."

A shot from inside.
st-basil-interior.jpg

dcae64e0cad98eb387fbd784080bb177.jpg


A thing I remembered now from the documentary was the fact that red bricks apparently are capable of storing electricity, another possible point for these theories. The hypothesis being that the buildings were batteries of sorts.

I will stop uploading images now as it truly is an uphill struggle to put this together with my dreadful internet connection.

Continuing around the 1:40 mark in the first documentary, he gives countless examples and further dissection of this theory.

He also mentions hydrotherapy and the subsequent sweeping under the rug of that practice at the turn of the century.

He later (after the 2 hour mark) goes more in-depth on the topic of star forts and shows numerous examples from all over the world where even many major cities seem to have a very similar geometric outline as we see in the designs of the smaller star forts. In the aerial shots we can see pretty much the level of perfection of crop circles in these structures and towns. How were they able to do this without advanced technology?

He also shows this video, of a moving sidewalk apparently in Paris at the turn of the century. What's up with this? What technology are they using?

Another aspect which I find interesting is that apparently in many of the buildings from this era, there are no toilets, and no kitchens. Where did people make peepee and poopoo?


At 2:48 he mentions amphitheaters, that yes, do look like speakers. Amp = unit of electric current. Amplify = make something louder. Amplifier = increase signal. Also in that vein, Cathedral - Cathode.

At the 3 hour mark he goes on to trying to decipher Fulcanelli's writings in the Mysteries of the Cathedrals. Check it out yourself and see if you think his interpretations are any good. I can't say.

These are at least some of the points I found interesting.

We know about ancient Rome, but in these cases there exists documentation indicating that whatever happened, happened within the last 300 years.
This is something that's hard for me to wrap my head around. Still up to about a year ago, I really did believe that history (at least as recent as a few hundred years) was a open and shut case, that we know what was going on. It seems to me now, more and more, that a lot of things were much more recent than we are led to believe, and that a lot of historical events are kind of fragmented into pieces and spread over a longer time period, and that one event serves as the basis or source for what we perceive as being many separate events.
 
Top Bottom