The earth is flat, not round. We are being mind set by Annunaki/Illuminati/TPTB

[panopticon]

Posted by Freedom (here)

Posted by panopticon (here)
Please describe your argument.

Putting up over an hours worth of video without one is unhelpful at best.

-- Pan

all these videos are about 10 minutes long...you'll miss the point if I give you the cliff notes for this...I just felt it was important and I was excited to have watched it and think about it and wanted to share....I can't believe it...either watch or don't...or take the time...again...I state that it was important to me and I thought I could find some good dialog about it here on Avalon...boy has this forum ever changed...it was the bomb in the very beginning...perhaps everyone is so bombarded with information these days they want the unabridged version....I say pick your interests and go with that. You can't build a building from the top down....no short cuts.

Fair enough. I shall pick my interests. Thanks for the advice.

BTW, I think you've copied the part 4 youtube video url wrong (it's the same as the #3 one).

I think it should be:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=U5FsdlGLynI

--Pan

[Freedom]

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)

Posted by Freedom (here)
well you can lead a horse to water....but.....I'm just a messenger...did you even bother to listen to all the video's before adding your two cents DeDukshyn?

I've examined the arguments -- not in these videos, but they all ignore the laws of physics. In fact, one has to believe the laws of physics are not constant to believe in a flat earth. The laws of physics can be bent a little in the physical plane, but not nullified.

A hollow earth still may follow physics, but I imagine vast underground caverns with a populous are to credit for those theories, and may well be plausible. A flat Earth I cannot accept. Too many satellites and space junk following the laws of physics ... so basically, via deductive reasoning, I cannot see validity in the theory, no matter how well presented.

Again, my 2 cents.

I feel for you...sounds like your entrenched, programed, conditioned, ridged...not much of a creative visionary....I know, I know it, it's not physics...

[DarMar]

Sure DeDukshyn, game on...

draw me a particle.. or wait, draw me a wave? which shape is it?
you are too much shape oriented.. did i draw enough or should i continue?

or should i just play captain obvious and state that its shape depends on observer?

[DeDukshyn]

Posted by Freedom (here)

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)

Posted by Freedom (here)
well you can lead a horse to water....but.....I'm just a messenger...did you even bother to listen to all the video's before adding your two cents DeDukshyn?

I've examined the arguments -- not in these videos, but they all ignore the laws of physics. In fact, one has to believe the laws of physics are not constant to believe in a flat earth. The laws of physics can be bent a little in the physical plane, but not nullified.

A hollow earth still may follow physics, but I imagine vast underground caverns with a populous are to credit for those theories, and may well be plausible. A flat Earth I cannot accept. Too many satellites and space junk following the laws of physics ... so basically, via deductive reasoning, I cannot see validity in the theory, no matter how well presented.

Again, my 2 cents.

I feel for you...sounds like your entrenched, programed, conditioned, ridged...not much of a creative visionary....I know, I know it, it's not physics...

Thanks for your pity, shall we get to the topic? What does the earth look like to you? Can you describe it? And then answer my questions after you have described the way it looks to you? I will have a lot of questions. You can use any youtube video to explain your reasoning; I'll just use logic and deductive reasoning so you should have the advantage here.

Let's start. I'll ask the first question: Is the earth a plane or does it have any depth? How deep is it if it has depth? Is it all soil? or does magma actually exist to cause volcanoes? Let us start with these ... go!

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Posted by DarMar (here)
Sure DeDukshyn, game on...

draw me a particle.. or wait, draw me a wave? which shape is it?
you are too much shape oriented.. did i draw enough or should i continue?

or should i just play captain obvious and state that its shape depends on observer?

"too much shape oriented"? -- sorry I don't understand, what shape is the Earth? Is it flat or does that not matter?? The argument presented is that it is flat ... do you have a differing opinion, or do you believe the "shape" of the earth is not important?

[Freedom]

Dedukshyn.... Give me a break....I did not start this thread for your ego...stop wasting my time and go home with your bad self...your eating up space.

[DeDukshyn]

Posted by Freedom (here)
Dedukshyn.... Give me a break....I did not start this thread for your ego...stop wasting my time and go home with your bad self...your eating up space.

Who's ego did you start it for?

Let's take a look at DarMar's last argument.

I see Earth as not flat, because of my observational status. I don't really know what evidence he has for this or what proof or evidence exists for this,. perhaps it is presented in one of the videos ... but let's grab this and say, yeah, I view the earth as non-flat because I observe it that way. Let's say it may or may not be true. Am I being judged because I see it this way? Am I being condescended? Is the goal of the OP to convert people like me that believe that the earth is not flat, that our observations are to be nullified because of yours or someone's else's observations - however they may have came about with disregard to physics which are ubiquitous in our physical Universe? Am I to believe this is the goal of this thread?

All I stated was that I cannot subscribed to the theory due to the fact they defy all physics. Anything else that others have proposed that I am/have done/etc. has been the creations of those who are not me, and yet, presented as such.

If you don't want the debate just say "no thanks".

[Freedom]

I got that edit on Part 4...thanks

[DeDukshyn]

Waxing moon .. isn't it? ... I get feisty.

[Freedom]

for the last time Dedukshyn...your wasting my time...your not on topic...I want dialog with people who've seen the videos and maybe get an intelligent conversation going...your all puffing your chest out wanting attention without even knowing what the hell is in the videos...fool....those videos can answer the questions you have...you don't have to believe anything....God forbid you should change your stance...get off my thread....your annoying.

[DarMar]

Started pretty bad.. this should be conversational not exclusional.

DeDukshyn, you really think if I draw anything would make you consider?
Who am I to draw?

I was trying to stress imho very important point, and that is flat acceptance of round earth.. Served by USGS and controllers, which we all know by know are truth only speakers.
This threads are interesting because they get one person out of linear box thinking, and least we need someone to jump in with facepalms and science physics proofs..if they speak... first jumping even without watching videos and derailing.. tells me a lot.

For me? I watched all those videos, and even more.. concave, convex, torus, sphere, flat.. geesh so many theories out there, same as history.. no DEFINITE version, but many versions.
i hope we know what DEFINITE means.

I stated many times that what nasa serves are image manipulations and software renderings. For me speaks more than enough, and tend to think out of science box.
I can draw you whichever shape you want.. but thinking would still be dead FLAT

OT--

get off my thread....your annoying.

He gave opposite opinion, his writing in this thread shows possibility of two things:
1. he is interested in subject and ready to discuss
2. trolling

If you are not ready to discuss.. I can leave too, because i really think shape is in question, but not even close to spherical or flat one. If you think is trolling, let mods know and decide.. simple

I would still love to see dead proof of spherical earth.. xcept google-wiky-philia..
moon and earth are so much clone stamped that even Kim Kardashian would feel ashamed..not to mention mars ones..

We as humanity need to stop bash each other, and converse more openly.. whats wrong with that?
what it would hurt xcept science? which btw. holds water until new science is 'discovered'

[Wind]

How dare you DeDukshyn use some common sense here!

[Dennis Leahy]

Not only physics (creating spherical planetary-sized objects), but to even entertain the thought for a nanosecond, you'd have to believe that every photo taken from space (there are hundreds and hundreds of thousands of them - taken by cameras on orbiting satellites, shuttles, and space stations, over the course of decades, by numerous different people from different nations) are all part of an elaborate hoax. You'd have to believe that the ships taking iron ore from my port town of Duluth, MN, through the Great Lakes, and across the oceans to China somehow navigate on the water on the flat earth yet somehow never get to the edge... Sailing or even taking a long walk where you can observe the horizon presents evidence that was correctly interpreted many hundreds of years ago - before space-based photography. Objects of known height and known distance can be used to calculate (estimate) the curvature of the spherical Earth.

I said this last time the "flat Earth" thing came up on Avalon: this is beyond ridiculous, an utter waste of time, and embarrassing for a forum with a subtitle that includes the word "science."

I do respect the perspective that anything we think we know (or were taught) deserves a fresh look, a new application of discernment, and may require a completely open mind to "see" reality in a new way. (The concept of an "electric universe" falls into this realm, I believe.) But taking a notion as easily disprovable and nonsensical as a flat earth, and conflating someone's discerning mind into deserving ridicule for not being open-minded enough to accept the possibility of the "flat earth" concept (and calling DeDukshyn "entrenched, programed, conditioned, ridged...not much of a creative visionary") is flat wrong.

There are many things that are very complex, hidden, or esoteric and at best we can form an opinion based on evidence (or "evidence") and cannot know if our opinion is correct or not. The shape of planet Earth is not one of them. If, by posting drivel like this, you are trying to discredit the group intelligence of Avalon, it isn't working. (Most people have simply ignored this thread - I can't.) If this thread is an attempt to get people to leave Avalon, well, if enough inane crap is presented and accepted as "science" here at Avalon, you might just get me to give up and leave.

[Atlas]

Posted by Freedom (here)
I thought I could find some good dialog about it here on Avalon...

Hi Freedom, you can find some discussions in the following threads:

• Flat Earth Theory (projectavalon.net/Flat-Earth-Theory)
• Maybe the Earth IS flat! (projectavalon.net/Maybe-the-Earth-IS-flat-)
• The earth is flat, not round. (projectavalon.net/The-earth-is-flat-not-round.-)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of evidence for a spherical earth

These are given in an order which approximates how they were observed historically:

1. When at sea it is possible to see high mountains or elevated lights in the distance before lower-lying ground and the mast of a boat before the hull. It is also possible to see further by climbing higher in the ship, or, when on land, on high cliffs.
2. The sun is lower in the sky as you travel away from the tropics. For example, when traveling northward, stars such as Polaris, the north star, are higher in the sky, whereas other bright stars such as Canopus, visible in Egypt, disappear from the sky.
3. The length of daylight varies more between summer and winter the farther you are from the equator.
4. The earth throws a circular shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse.
5. The times reported for lunar eclipses (which are seen simultaneously) are many hours later in the east (e.g. India) than in the west (e.g. Europe). Local times are confirmed later by travel using chronometers and telegraphic communication.
6. When you travel far south, to Ethiopia or India, the sun throws a shadow south at certain times of the year. Even farther (e.g. Argentina) and the shadow is always in the south.
7. It is possible to circumnavigate the world; that is, to travel around the world and return to where you started.
8. Travelers who circumnavigate the earth observe the gain or loss of a day relative to those who did not. See also International Date Line.
9. An artificial satellite can circle the earth continuously and even be geostationary.
10. The earth appears as a disc on photographs taken from space, regardless of the vantage point.

Several of these arguments have alternative explanations by themselves. e.g. the shadow thrown by a lunar eclipse could be caused by a disk-shaped earth. Similarly the north-south movement of stars in the sky with travel could mean they are much closer to earth. However, the arguments strengthen each together.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spheric...pherical_earth

[Ultima Thule]

I checked out the videos, quickly I admit.

Arguments in the videos:
- no movies about actual moon missions. My counter argument: may mean something, but not alluding to flat earth imo.
- UN map is the same as Fiat earthers map, centered around north pole. I would counter argue that the map is centered so that tha inhabited continents are present without centering on any particular country. No sign of flat earth to me.
- no direct flights from south africa to Australia, meaning the distance having to be so great(flat earth model) for it to be possible. My counter argument: virgin australia used to fly. Secondly it seems that at least partly the reason is that an airliner must be at a three hour distance from an airport in case of engine failure, that apparently is not possible when flying near Antarctica.
- We are living in a Truman-show type dome and the Harsh climates when going up(cold), digging deep(heat) or going far(sea) keep us from reaching the dome perimeter. My counter argument: there really was no argument in favor for that, more like a hypothesis. Way too complicated imo for us to having been living for all our history under an artifiacial dome with projected sky to look at and calculate from there a rotating earth with a round moon etc. Why would we need to be implanted with a "wrong" image of our surroundings with such an elaborate way. Whats there to benefit from that to the ones that would be responsible for the creation of the dome? And how about the satellites? Are they grabbed and then virtuaali entered into the system, then being visible in the projected image for the naked eye and someone then creates round earth supporting artificial data that is sent back to earth?
- aDmiral Byrds account - more expeditions to head south. Ergo there need be more land mass there etc. My counter argument: an enigma Byrds may very well be, his account might point to many things, but doesn't imo support flat earth.

No credible clues imho supporting flat earth. Sorry to say that, but these videos don't imo come up with a solid argument.

UT

[Freedom]

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
Not only physics (creating spherical planetary-sized objects), but to even entertain the thought for a nanosecond, you'd have to believe that every photo taken from space (there are hundreds and hundreds of thousands of them - taken by cameras on orbiting satellites, shuttles, and space stations, over the course of decades, by numerous different people from different nations) are all part of an elaborate hoax. You'd have to believe that the ships taking iron ore from my port town of Duluth, MN, through the Great Lakes, and across the oceans to China somehow navigate on the water on the flat earth yet somehow never get to the edge... Sailing or even taking a long walk where you can observe the horizon presents evidence that was correctly interpreted many hundreds of years ago - before space-based photography. Objects of known height and known distance can be used to calculate (estimate) the curvature of the spherical Earth.

I said this last time the "flat Earth" thing came up on Avalon: this is beyond ridiculous, an utter waste of time, and embarrassing for a forum with a subtitle that includes the word "science."

I do respect the perspective that anything we think we know (or were taught) deserves a fresh look, a new application of discernment, and may require a completely open mind to "see" reality in a new way. (The concept of an "electric universe" falls into this realm, I believe.) But taking a notion as easily disprovable and nonsensical as a flat earth, and conflating someone's discerning mind into deserving ridicule for not being open-minded enough to accept the possibility of the "flat earth" concept (and calling DeDukshyn "entrenched, programed, conditioned, ridged...not much of a creative visionary") is flat wrong.

There are many things that are very complex, hidden, or esoteric and at best we can form an opinion based on evidence (or "evidence") and cannot know if our opinion is correct or not. The shape of planet Earth is not one of them. If, by posting drivel like this, you are trying to discredit the group intelligence of Avalon, it isn't working. (Most people have simply ignored this thread - I can't.) If this thread is an attempt to get people to leave Avalon, well, if enough inane crap is presented and accepted as "science" here at Avalon, you might just get me to give up and leave.

OK Dennis fellow Duluthian...just delete the whole damn thing...shoot the messanger...I didn't realize this place was as bad as they say it was....all I was doing was sharing and you and yours come a running with pitch forks and fire...good grief.

[Atlas]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Violet (here)

You would have to assume an optical illusion which only makes other celestial bodies appear round (/distant/bright/with colours/...) when in fact they (too) are not so.

Here are some more optical illusions!



Of course, all these may be fake, and we may be being lied to (as in The Truman Show). Occam's Razor, though, suggests that this is a little unlikely.

We have to be smart. We can joke about it, of course, but it's genuinely a little worrying to me that this is being discussed (to the extent that even a tiny minority of members are considering the possibility of the thesis in the thread title being accurate).

If this is the extent of our ability to evaluate information, the global controllers have little to worry about when the real questions and the real complexities, some of which are genuinely mind-boggling, are a thousand times as hard to grasp -- and we are safely confused by issues that the ancient Greeks (Eratosthenes, to be exact) figured out on their own over 2,000 years ago with almost no technology to speak of, just very cleverly measuring the progression of the sun's shadow.

Do read:

Who Discovered The Earth is Round?
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithab...e-earth-is-ro/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Billy (here)
Good Lord.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/learningzone/cl...ical/2457.html

http://www.smarterthanthat.com/astro...h-is-not-flat/

http://www.howdoweknowit.com/2012/11...arth-is-round/

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=o_W280R_Jt8

[DarMar]

If i think better of it... I gotta admit Dennis has a point.
I respect too much human integrity, and members here to get involved into imprinting beliefs into someones head.
It is anyways DeDucted and conditioned to choose between two illusions.
I tried, i really did .. but arguing is not my mission, i rather walk than talk.

Since day one here i try to say it is not about arguing, even discussion is cool stuff, it is not definite.
When we enter space and see sphere I will gladly tell you that you are right and me was blind.. untill than we are all blind, only that I am aware of my own blindness and question EVERYTHING.

World is falling apart by couch know it all's, which intoxicate mother WOMB and drowning in it's own beliefs on daily bases.. working for paper, consuming nature, intoxicating air.
And while we discuss giant mantoids, possibility of shape of something or even stars and moon projections on firmament.. it all slowly but quite shurely going downwards.

Guys which had most strong points (not scientific) got laughed and some left, some leaded through doors out..
Through my own eyes i saw how most rational got angry and anger is not my game.
Honestly i have not time for this, it is quite obvious intention steerer.. and instead looking what to read and answer here i decided to rather stop doing that.

If you are interested on healing humanity conditioned state, you already know where to find me.. we can work together
I'm really small in talk.. this is thread with most of my posts if you got to know it by know, because i like to listen and i tend not to impose my thoughts too much..
They are direct and truthfull and comes from heart, maybe inversed a bit.. but english is quite different organised than my natural language..

If we can not at least laugh to fact of clone stamped renderings and accept some FACTS, and try stop call each other ugly attributes.. I'm out
In short term I love you all and respect your thoughts so much that i will stop to impose my opinions here.

And for someone that finished school for fine mechanics, have possibility to build from scratch from toothpick to train, being military airplane mechanic, specialised in navigation, mastered most musical instruments, drawing, modeling, understanding geometry, mathematics, building guitar amps for fun from scratch, repaired commodore when was kid (intuitively), kids brought me their computers for me to fix for them, while there was no youtube how to's, healing with nature, resonating with gaia, doing movies, animations, having most of computer languages in small finger, did quite few softwares, games.... and what not, you may call it ego, for me is truth.

you should at least consider.. for a moment what i try to say.
Earth, mother shape is of quite essential importance, and thing presented to mainstream is in complete form false... who cares, right? we can go just to sleep and wait until we wake up and see what yesterday's will tomorrow bring.
As if you did not notice that TPTB main task is to make our tomorrow be as much as yesterday and we are on marry go around trip..(that is only round thing here)
We can do our everyday jobs, and wait which info next will be served..Instead of actually doing and physical exploring we can daydream all day along and list youtube videos.

This is my last post here, and probably would not come back.. have task to fulfil which is not arguing and bashing on beliefs. And opening myself in this manner is too dangerous on such places

Have fun all! And thanks for great friendships here i found, and all great moments. Learned great lesson here.
For those interested feel free to contact me on skype or whatever else, i'm looking on actual doing and love to hear ideas. Quite open minded .. maybe too open for some places.

let the spherical curved wind be my guide...

[Atlas]

Neil deGrasse Tyson: "The Earth is not a sphere"

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SoCKapivHGM

Neil deGrasse Tyson: "Earth has been misrepresented to us by geologists [...] We've been fed this misrepresentation of our own planet"

-----------------------------------

The Earth is an irregularly shaped ellipsoid.

While the Earth appears to be round when viewed from the vantage point of space, it is actually closer to an ellipsoid. However, even an ellipsoid does not adequately describe the Earth’s unique and ever-changing shape.

Our planet is pudgier at the equator than at the poles by about 70,000 feet. This is due to the centrifugal force created by the earth’s constant rotation. Mountains rising almost 30,000 feet and ocean trenches diving over 36,000 feet (compared to sea level) further distort the shape of the Earth. Sea level itself is even irregularly shaped. Slight variations in Earth’s gravity field cause permanent hills and valleys in the ocean’s surface of over 300 feet relative to an ellipsoid.

Additionally, the shape of the Earth is always changing. Sometimes this change is periodic, as is the case with daily tides that affect both the ocean and the crust; sometimes the change is slow and steady, as with the drift of tectonic plates or the rebound of the crust after a heavy sheet of ice has melted; and sometimes the shape of the planet changes in violent, episodic ways during events such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, or meteor strikes.

The National Geodetic Survey measures and monitors our ever-changing planet. Geodesy is the science of measuring and monitoring the size and shape of the Earth, including its gravity field, and determining the location of points on the Earth’s surface.

http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/earth-round.html

[Violet]

Wouldn't it be a good idea to collect all the flat earth threads? At this point, there at least three in separate from (this one incl.).

Some of them already contain diverse (pro & contra) replies and perhaps many questions will be found already answered. And bandwidth, of course.

Just a suggestion.

[Dennis Leahy]

Posted by Freedom (here)
OK Dennis fellow Duluthian...just delete the whole damn thing...shoot the messanger...I didn't realize this place was as bad as they say it was....all I was doing was sharing and you and yours come a running with pitch forks and fire...good grief.

What is your personal limit? What would you consider as a ridiculous post? What shouldn't be on a forum that is supposed to be the meeting of science and spirituality? Is there anything at all about science that you accept as true, not just an opinion, but true? Do you want Avalon to fill-up with threads that declare all science to be bunk? So, you think water is H2O? What if I start a post challenging that, and say that there is only one element in the universe, carbon, and that water is really a form of carbon? Are you OK with that? Does it make sense that we should strive to keep the signal-to-noise ratio as high as possible, rejecting junk science (such as that there is only one element in the universe, and that an object falling in a vacuum does not really fall at 32 feet per second - per second, and that the earth is flat)?

And why don't you see that "the messenger" was DeDukshyn and that you shot him? If you had not attacked DeDukshyn, I probably would have been gentler, but go back and read what you wrote. He attacked the notion; you attacked him.

There are a number of things taught in mainstream science that are taught as fact, that are really a best guess, based on observation. Electron theory is a good example. They are so small and move so fast, that they have been described using a best guess. Now, quantum physics steps in with better methods to try to "observe" an electron, and finds the original theory (taught as fact) to be lacking. The key here is not that scientists were conspiring to keep hidden the reality of electrons, but that there is such difficulty in observing anything that small that the reality was more surprising than the previous best guesses.

That which is in the universe that is too small or too large to observe will be subject to "best guess" and will require scientific revision as techniques are devised to see the submicroscopic and better glimpse (the local?) universe. But the scope between those extremes can be observed well. The speed (acceleration, really) of falling objects is a well-known formula, and provides the basis for even non-scientists to understand that the buildings that were reduced to rubble on 9/11 could not have fallen naturally. 3000 years ago, humans could make a best guess as to the shape of the earth, 500 years ago math formulas were devised to improve the best guess (they got pretty close!), and with the advent of lasers for measurement the calculations became much more precise. Space-based video and still photography should have shaken the last holdouts of "flat earth" from believing their theory, but - in some cases - cognitive dissonance filled the void. What do you say to the guy that says there is only one element in the universe? Do we have to call him scientifically literate, just to be nice - and show we have open minds?

Posted by Freedom (here)
I didn't realize this place was as bad as they say it was.

You've been a member for 5 years. At this point, you shouldn't have to rely on what "they" (whoever "they" are) say; you discern for yourself. I'm not even "wearing a moderator hat" with my comments (or they would have been focused on only your personal attack on DeDukshyn), but speaking as a member here. We have so much to discuss that is valid and important, so many malevolent entities to battle for the sake of humanity and the non-human life forms on this planet, and I just cannot condone another rehash of the "flat earth" idea.