Posted by Pharos
(here)
Looking into an assertion, which on the surface seems blatantly false, such as the flat earth, might seem like a pointless exercise to some, but I would like to offer a different perspective. I have been looking into the flat earth mainly because of an article in "The Atlantic" monthly (In Defense of Flat Earthers January 27th 2016), but also because of a technique I was taught in school years ago.
I was told by one of my professors that when I was looking at a new project, if was stuck on an idea it was sometimes good to consider the most absurd scenarios and investigate them instead for a while. Often in doing so you could make out new avenues where logic would not take you.
It is interesting to observe how many people brush off the notion of flat earth with incredible force. One has to wonder, why such resistance... Are they soft headed, what harm can it do to listen to another point of view with an open mind? There is never any harm in considering new avenues... What harm does considering new paradigms cause. More importantly why jump straight to belief?
I don't "believe" the earth is flat, but there is definitely something that doesn't work well with the curvature equation we are currently working with. I know so because thirty years ago I was on a beach with someone who pointed out a shoreline in the distance, I argued that it was physically impossible to see that far. I was wrong. You can see much further into the distance than the earth curvature equation seems to allow for. That is undeniable. I verified this for myself and did the math. Does that make the earth flat, no, but it does point to some un resolved description of our reality.
For many flat-earthers, this is a starting point. Let's look at our source of information concerning the earth, images provided by NASA. NASA is not doing itself any favors by not providing multiple pictures of the earth. The ONE picture," the blue marble", the only picture from 1972 until the new ones last year, "the NEW blue marble" points to a miserable performance by a well funded agency to say the least. With an estimated fifteen to forty thousand satellites orbiting this earth, one has to wonder why no optics company if not NASA has found it of value to send a camera up in orbit even if only as a publicity vehicle. Curious indeed in an age where people film everything all the time. Add to that Mr Neil Degrasse Tyson's assertions that the planet is an "oblate spheroid" and one starts to wonder... I doubt they are hiding the "flat earth" But I've grown to suspect what is not being shown might be a much stranger reality.
I my work, I have had to research pictures of the globe a few times. I have yet to see a real "photograph" and certainly never any image of an "oblate spheroid". Last time I checked it is impossible to take a picture of something that is not there. Light aberrations, distortions, etc... still reflect aspects visible in our reality. Taking a picture of an "oblate spheroid" that looks perfectly spherical would cause distortions that would be detectable. So here we have Mr Neil DeGrasse Tyson claiming the earth is an "oblate spheroid", surrounded by "journalists" having a great big chuckle about flat earthers... instead of asking a simple question. Where is the non-computer generated image of this oblate spheroid?
I sense a distraction manœuvre in the making, active in both camps. On the sphere earth side there's a disingenuous aspect to many of the images, inconsistencies in the equations and strange observations when it comes to the building of large scale engineering projects such as railroad tracts and bridges.The narrative on the flat earth side shows many unanswered questions, irreconcilable observations with the mercator projection and at the moment there is no solid, workable map to describe the flat earth. The difference here is that there is a growing, thriving, dynamic group of people who have been energized by all the questions that the flat earth idea brings about. New advances such as the Nikon P900 have turned average people into passionate investigators, looking at the horizons for land masses beyond the reach of the naked eye, taking sharp images of the moon without telescopes, following chemtrail making orbs throughout the skies, and filming cloud formations going behind the sun. Those people don't really come across as the idiots described in certain posts... and I'm not sure the average person who reads science articles and sits back in their chair thinking they just got some answers by reading other peoples theories is any better off..
But it is at this fork in the road where one needs to consider why are we being offered these two very specific avenues in the first place, where's the slight of hand? If there's anything true about this realm we inhabit it is certainly that there is always another less travelled road we are being prodded not to consider.
As the article in the Atlantic Monthly points out, the flat earth shows an inquisitive mindset that one should not dismiss. Personally I have seen the most fantastic chemtrail photographs on the net provided by flat earth photographers. People are taking their money and buying balloons to take pictures in the upper atmosphere to see for themselves how the earth looks from higher altitudes. Folks are digging deep into the mathematics describing the sphere, looking into optics and perspective in fresh ways and discarding the notion that to understand the world all you need to to is to bury your head in a book written by someone you never met, who probably died a long time ago and might have been funded by some shady characters
Does Marty Leeds come across as an idiot, Michael Tellinger a unimaginative dunce, Santos Bonnaci an un-inquisitive novice? Who is August Piccard, and what did he see, Trekkies might want to know? Before you throw out the baby with the bathwater consider the thought that most of what we believe to be science fact, is offered only as "theories". There is no substitute for real life observation and direct contact with nature. The alchemist of old knew the value of hands on work combined with theoretical musings. This still holds true today.
There is much to be learned by crossing the divide into that unknown frightful territory across the way. Crying pys-ops every time someone does not agree with us is puerile. Every piece of information you come in contact with holds a measure of truth. The only path and tool we need to develop is the path of discernment.
Re: 'Flat Earth' Psychological Operations
Reply With Quote
Re: 'Flat Earth' Psychological Operations
combine these stats with: 59 replies & 11,338+ link: 
)
Bookmarks