Chapter Two
Space: The Final Frontier Really???
Evidence to Consider #6
Space: Star Charts
Situation: When I was first discovering the whole topic of a flat earth I will admit to a large extent of prejudicial bias where I doubted and discounted many perceivable proofs for a flat earth versus a round spheroid one. I had a great deal of faith in what I had always been told by… well, everyone. The biggest chink in my defensive mindset of rejecting sound arguments in favor of dogmatic belief in the traditional and accepted view of the earth came when I watched a flat earth video on star charts. I was literally blown away by the simplicity of the truth to be realized that literally couldn’t be explained away no matter how one wanted to stretch things in order to stay in a nice cozy cocoon of blissfully blind trustfulness of the authorities that be. To put it simply the profoundness of star charts/star movement is this. Every day, day after day, year after year, all the stars in the heavens rotate around Polaris, the North Star. If you set a slow time release camera up and focus it at the night sky, it will show you star trails that perfectly orbit the North Star. The rhythm never changes. It is a fact, this really happens and is available for analysis by every step of the scientific process. The problem for a ball earth enthusiast is that what takes places in the sky every day simply is impossible to be replicated on a spinning ball hurtling through space. Why? Because anyone on earth can look up and observe the circular path of the stars orbiting the North Star and indeed the earth itself. (Note: The reason different constellations are viewable in different areas of the earth has everything to do with the limitations of human eyesight and nothing to do with evidence for northern and southern hemispheres.) If the earth was spinning the only place on earth that you could get a look at the night sky and see what is to be seen night after night is if you were standing on the very top of the north pole and even then the perspective would be warped some and you would not see the perfect cylindrical paths the stars make each night as well as during the day. If the picture of the differing perspectives coming into play still isn’t clear in your mind then by all means get out there and take a peek at the many graphics and videos that have been compiled on this one flat earth evidence alone. To investigate hurts no one, but to choose to remain ignorant after a question has been raised that you have no answer for is frankly dumb and I’m not dumb and I hope you aren’t either. This undeniable symmetry of the stars in relation to an earth that my Bible told me flat out was fixed and immovable opened my eyes truly to the reality that at least some of what I had been told (indoctrinated with) could not be true. I love the truth. I can’t live happily in a reality that I don’t know the truth of. It’s like being in a marriage relationship with an individual that you don’t know the true identity of and have no desire to find out even though you have serious questions about them. Who does that? Unfortunately the answer is many of us, but it doesn’t have to stay that way. We can stop at any time and ask, “Who the heck are you? Why have I always been told this when these star charts tell me of an entirely different reality that I can’t refute with any basis of sound logic?” Ask questions, it’s the only way to the truth. If you don’t you may just keep spending the years of your life away with a partner full of deceptions that has no good will for you in mind. One last point of perspective, if I can, to help demonstrate the need for critical thinking when it comes to rapidly altering points of view. If you truly still do believe that the earth is what popular science has told you for the last 80 years or so imagine the inconsistencies of the Hubble Telescope. They routinely focus in on a star. They study it for hours supposedly, but in the meantime the earth is spinning a thousand miles per hour at the equator, earth itself is traveling 67,000 miles per an hour around the sun, while our galaxy travels at 515,000 miles an hour through space. With this all considered we’re supposed to believe the Hubble Telescope can remain focused on any astral body for more than a split second let alone the time in its history that it was allowed to stare for 10 days into a “defined narrow sliver of the cosmos”? What! Did all of the mass of everything just come to a rolling stop for this epic photo stream? Really? Why aren’t photos of space released to the public every day? The point I’m trying to make is that so much of what we are fed is entirely theoretical mumbo jumbo. The Hubble Telescope’s technicians openly admit that they can’t measure the depths of space their viewing through but there measuring it anyway. What??? An awakening of critical thinking is sorely needed in this day and age.
Evidence to Consider #7
Space: Satellites – Where are you?
Situation: The Goddard Space Flight Center says there are currently 2,271 satellites up there in space orbiting the earth. Popular culture has in the past really talked up the effectiveness of satellites, especially when it comes to the military’s use of such an infrastructure. Three primary problems need to be answered.
1) If satellites orbit the earth, then why are their coverage dead zones over the oceans? Do the orbiting satellites that have to cross over the oceans anyway in their geocentric orbits just switch off as to conserve battery or something and then snap back on and begin broadcasting again when landfall gets close again? It’s a bit much to be believed isn’t it, but how else does one describe the vast coverage dead zones over the oceans?
2) Did you know that in terms of the Internet conductivity between continents that most of it is done almost exclusively through undersea cables? This would explain why the country of Australia almost lost their entire connection to the Internet for a month in 2016 when one of only three undersea cables feeding information to the country got snapped in an underwater fault zone. Where are the satellites? How is an entire modern nation almost plunged into unconnected darkness by one little undersea cable getting snapped? Oh, that’s right, undersea cables between countries/continents amount for 99.9 percent of data exchanged internationally. What exactly do satellites do again? I mean Google doesn’t even seem to use them anymore as it focuses on flying planes and wrapping its undersea cables in an anti-shark metallic mesh because sharks are irresistibly drawn to bite their cables. Also, don’t forget all those miles and miles of fiber optic cable strewn across the country buried deep in the median strips of major highways. Oh, and by the way, did you know that ‘they’ say it’s easier, faster and less expensive to lay an underwater sea cable into the ocean depths greater than Mt. Everest in height always being mindful to avoid fault zones and uneven terrain than it is to launch one satellite into orbit? Satellites are so outdated. We should just keep watching TV and not think about it too much as to how exactly signals get around the earth. Old technology once again makes a step back into the limelight. We don’t need expensive satellites when we have trusty old reliable undersea cables that have been put in use by humans since the 1800’s. It really begs the question of, ‘Are we actually getting smarter or not?’
3) America loves its satellite TV to be sure. It can be hard to find a house that doesn’t have a TV dish perched on the side of it angled at the sky. The dishes always point in specific directions because that’s where the satellite is located. ???? As previously mentioned the earth is spinning really, really fast and the satellite’s going on in its own unique journey, but having a dish pointed in a particular direction at all times always grabs in that signal to keep the tube going full blast or….. or are all the dishes instead being pointed at a firmament dome that hovers over a flat earth set in place by an all powerful Creator? Are all the dishes receiving their transmission signals by collecting it as it is being deflected at differing trajectories off the dome at the top of the world kind of like playing racket ball in an enclosed room at the gym? Would this be why satellite dish receivers nearer to the equator point straight up (the highest part of the dome, while further away locations have to angle the dishes over farther in order to catch a signal?
Evidence to Consider #8
Space: Satellites – What are you made of?
Situation: On earth we have this thing called the Periodic Table of Elements, essentially the elements that all things on earth are made from. According to NASA and other scientific sources, there are varying levels of the atmosphere and who knows, maybe there are, but to get to the point, satellites exist in their orbits in a region called the Thermosphere. Not a very nice place as it has temperatures ranging from 900 to almost 4,000 degrees F. The problem as to whether satellites even exist gets thrown into greater peril when one considers that there are only about seven elements on the Periodic Table that can withstand such temperatures and not melt and satellites aren’t comprised of any of these elements. So how do you put a hunk of high tech gadgetry into an area of the atmosphere where all the elements, it’s comprised of will easily melt, but somehow magically it doesn’t? Some defenders of the existence of satellites insist that it’s because the intense radiation in this level of atmosphere closer to the sun has a cooling effect instead of a heating effect. Really? How about that. I’ll try to remember that one if someone does indeed push the proverbial Cold War Doomsday button someday. Maybe that’s what the phrase, ‘When hell freezes over.’ is referring to. Other defenders of this admittedly tricky issue for satellites insist that the satellites survive because they radiate so much of the absorbed heat away so even though the satellite is sitting in an oven hot enough to melt it – it somehow rises above and radiates away more of the ‘heatness’ than it is receiving, outward from itself preserving itself in……. in… um, yeah I don’t get how that one works. Pies placed in the oven due tend to bake through and through eventually. The most important thing to remember though is that somehow about 50 years ago we sent actual human beings through this layer of the atmosphere and they didn’t melt. Maybe the loss of the technology to get through this hurdle of the earth’s atmosphere in route to the moon could explain the mysterious loss of sound logic to explain exactly why elements left in an oven hot enough to melt them don’t actually melt even as the international space station has somehow managed to do this for around 15 years now.
Evidence to Consider #9
Space: Squirrels – Inhabitants of Mars?
Situation: On September 28th back in 2012 NASA released a photo to the public taken by the Curiosity Rover depicting the red tinted barren landscape that we have been conditioned to believe is what Mars looks like. The problem is that several intrepid souls over the years have matched up the scenery from Mars photographs as being a dead ringer for the Mojave Desert located in Nevada and California sans a little red tint to the photoshopped outcome. While it could be argued that Mars and the Mojave Desertscapes look remarkably similar, what can’t be refuted easily at all by NASA is why is there a Mojave ground squirrel in their photograph. NASA refuses to address the fact that the squirrel is in their photo maintaining that the climate of Mars is completely inhospitable for animal growth with an atmosphere of 95.32 percent Carbon Dioxide. So NASA where did the squirrel come from? Maybe this is why relatively few photos are ever released to the public of the final frontier.
Evidence to Consider #10
Space: Satelites: - Smile.
Situation: Admittedly, this one isn’t so much of an evidence to consider as it is a personal observation of mine. When in the course of your daily life you happen to see a photo of a satellite at work, chances are it was a scene of it poised above the big blue green marble of earth spinning away happily underneath it as the darkness of space beckons in from all sides, even though the bright shiny solar array wings of the satellite are lit up like only golden tinfoil at its finest grade can be – seen a picture of a satellite posed in its tireless work like this before? I bet you have. My question is – Who took the photo of the satellite? I mean really, who snapped the photo? A ghost satellite flying along in piggyback formation for the sole purpose of photographing a satellite busy at work? Now remember the corporations of the world have stated that laying undersea cable between continents is cheaper than putting a satellite into space so where’s the fiscal argument for having a shadowing satellite meant to take pictures of other satellites? The question is really rhetorical because the admitted reality is that all these satellite photos with earth in the background are arrived at through the use of CGI graphics. Don’t believe me then look it up. The Internet still exists to this day as a ready fount of information at your keyboard finger tips courtesy of endless miles of undersea cable and median strip fiber optic cables to say nothing of the gazillion or so ‘cell phone’ towers that are in ever increasing existence everywhere. Incidentally, if you are blessed to live in the land of Nowhere, I hate to break it to you, but the towers will soon find you. Yes, the towers that you lose cell phone signal beneath, but that’s a whole other subject. For the moment, let’s just stick to discovering that terra firma may actually be just as flat as it appears to be.
Evidence to Consider #11
Space: The feel of sunlight.
Situation: Picture the scene – The temperature is in the eighties and the sun is blazing. There you are with a shovel in your hands digging a hole to plant a tree in your yard all the while sweat is just rolling off of you. Then suddenly something changes and the lawn around you shadows and with relief you feel a let up on the intensity of the heat that has been bearing down relentlessly upon you. With gratitude, you look up at the white fluffy cloud that has temporarily blocked out the sun from its steady torture of you. With remorse you see the cloud is a small one and in the passage of a couple more seconds the cloud has moved on and there you are baking in the sun again. The feeling of returning heat is an instant one isn’t it. As previously noted, though NASA is on the books as saying that a light photon given off from the sun takes 8 minutes and twenty seconds to reach earth. When the cloud moved away you felt the heat of the sun again instantly didn’t you. Now the counter argument is likely to be that because the sun is so far away and the cloud so much closer to you that the exchange only appears to be instant because things are moving so fast. Maybe. However can proponents of that belief explain why people prone to sunburn, indeed anyone for that matter, get the worst sunburns on cloudy days? The essence of the sun is still coming through the cloud. Let’s take it out further still – solar eclipses. If you’ve seen one then you’ve seen how the light of the sun is instantly restored as the moon moves on past. Again, how is this possible? Where’s the delay in the sunlight like there now is in a Super Bowl halftime show being aired ‘live’ so in the event of another Janet Jackson breast baring debacle they can shut things down before the feed enters your tube in the living room? The feedback delay simply doesn’t happen in nature. As the moon moves past the sun the light of the sun is instantly there upon you being reflected on the ground around you. These are simple tests that you need to look at and ponder on and just for a moment forget how you’ve been taught that all the people at NASA are really so much smarter than everyone else.
Evidence to Consider #12
Space: Moonlight ain’t Sunlight.
Situation: NASA and the scientific community at large tell us that the moonlight shining down on us is reflected light from the sun. If you believe this then answer the quandary of this observable fact that you can go out and measure for yourself. During the day the temperature under the shade of a tree is cooler than it is out in the open field next to it that is being exposed to direct sunlight. The observable twist with moonlight, though is that it is the opposite. It is warmer in the shade than out in the open that is being bathed in direct moonlight. If moonlight was reflected sunlight, then even in reduced heat tones it should be reacting just the same as sunlight impacts the environment during the day does, but the thing is the heat of moonlight is translucent and heats up those spaces that the sun skips over in the daytime. Beyond that, if you do research and weed through a lot of by the book faithful to the status quo rhetoric you will discover that when analyzed objectively that even the wavelengths of the two light sources are different from one another and not reproducible over into the other as in the case of sunlight being converted over into the actual wavelengths of light given off by the moon. As a Christian the moon being the source of its own light makes perfect sense after all, didn’t God say in the beginning that He made, the greater light to rule the day and the lesser lights to rule the night. He made no mention of the lesser lights being reflected light off of the greater light, but posed them as individual sources of light unto themselves. I will admit to some serious concerns I have about the moon as it has several inconsistencies about it. First off it is not mentioned explicitly in the Genesis creation account and only appears later in the Hebrew texts. Furthermore, there are observable issues where the stars have been photographed shining through the surface of the moon. There are still other things on top of this that make the moon a big question mark for me. I frankly don’t have all the answers, but I am in active pursuit of them and to do that it is critical to keep an open mind. As I stated at the beginning of this handbook – I can’t necessarily prove that the earth is indeed flat, because I simply don’t know everything and haven’t been everywhere, but I can prove that the earth isn’t either round or a spheroid shape hurtling through space. That’s better than NASA trying to quell speculation that the moon landings were all faked by donating ‘moon rocks’ to museums and universities only to later have it come out that all the samples given were verified as being native of earth origin material. A lie spoken boldly enough and propped up by the high and mighty of society is convincing, but when analyzed as in the case of all these donated moon rocks can easily be turned out for the lie it is. If questioning the reality of either your planetary existence or that of a flat stationary existence where Earth is the center of the cosmos with heaven positioned directly above it and hell beneath it is still too much to contemplate then ask yourself why you should trust someone implicitly with something vitally important that only they can verify and tell you is true or not? The moon rocks have been proven to be fake. The shadows are all wrong in the original moon landing films, which by the way have since disappeared along with all the advanced technology of the 1960’s to the point that current day NASA officials go on camera and publicly admit that they don’t know how to safely convey human life through the radiation fields of the Van Allen Belts. I’m not making this up. The evidence is staggering in regards to everything about NASA being a complete fake from the famous Hollywood Movie director rumored to have been brought in to make sure that the filming appeared authentic to the escaping air bubbles escaping astronaut suits and rising to the surface of a pool when the film being shot is supposed to be depicting astronauts in the dark of space and not that of an underground darkened pool. Look up green screen failures in regards to the international space station, along with the many harness clothing glitches and crazy female astronaut hairdos that feature enough hair product to put a salon out of business. You don’t have to be a flat earth believer to come to the conclusion that something is badly off with one particular government agency that receives more funding from the federal government than many countries in this world are able to post as their entire GDP. Why is an agency such as NASA so well-funded to continue in space exploration when as previously shown space technologies such as satellites are outdated and not as good as planes and undersea cable lines? It simply doesn’t make rational sense. Keep reading, we’re just getting started.
Evidence to Consider #13
Space: Moon Manipulation
Situation: A simple one. If someone – a lot of someones – are telling the truth about the moon then why Photoshop it? I mean, why? Why can’t any photo of the moon being handed over to the public be free of photo manipulation or simply be completely forgery free? For the evidence I speak of look up the many evidences that exist where official released photos by NASA are uploaded in plain run of the mill Photoshop applications and with a little manipulation of light exposure levels to bring out the pixels it becomes instantly clear that someone has been erasing / cropping / mopping / and fabricating all over the place with what is supposed to be a direct to the public photo.
Evidence to Consider #14
Space: Zippy Clouds
Situation: Have you ever seen NASA’s satellite 24 hour photo reel view of the earth spinning by? Look it up. Then on a windy day look up at a cloud zipping by overhead and notice the speed of the cloud a thousand feet or less above your head that is moving faster than the cloud mass shown circling the mass of earth rotating over a 24 hour cycle from the perspective of a satellite located way up in the Thermosphere. Does the disparity in what should be going on come to realization for you? From your minute perspective of only being able to see a few visible miles before your eyesight gives out you are seeing the cloud cover move faster or at least as fast as NASA’s satellite view of earth (that they say is in real time) depicting at least a 1/3 to a ½ sized pic of the earth’s surface equaling a swath of thousands upon thousands of square miles of cloud cover. The mathematical problem presented, however though is that the farther out the viewed in perspective is the faster the action should be the closer in you get to the action. In other words your view of the clouds passing by overhead should be one of seeing them pass by at warp speed at something like MACH 10 in order to account for how a perspective taken from so far out in space surveilling over a much greater area should look like given the fast rate of movement NASA shows the cloud swaths moving at. It simply does not compute in the real world. So the reality is that the people who have been proven to lie about so much are once again lying. Why do they need to lie so much?
Evidence to Consider #15
Space: The Great Wall
Situation: How many times growing up have you heard the released ‘odd’ fact that the only man-made structure visible from the moon is, The Great Wall of China? Thousands upon thousands of miles away and the Great Wall is the only visible man-made object? The Great Wall may be long, but it’s only about 20 feet wide a lot of places. Taking that into account exactly how is any kind of detail visible when the scientific community says the absolute visible spectrum for a human being of something small is 30 miles away? Now the Great Wall is really long, but the moon is 238,900 miles away and remember the width of the Great Wall is only20 feet or so. The squiggly length of it measuring 2400 km may well indeed be visible, but with a width of 20 feet how would it ever show up, especially considering that the wall is made up of the native stone material of the local area. There are interstate systems all over the earth that run a lot longer than the Great Wall, and they are typically wider than 20 feet, if not double the distance and often made of materials that are in direct contrast to their surroundings. None of these black asphalt roads stand out though against even a desert backdrop?
Evidence to Consider #16
Space: Planets – Wandering Stars
Situation: In the ancient world planets were known as wandering stars. If you do your research and look up some examples of alternative high resolution photography taken by high end consumer market grade cameras you will witness these, ‘planets’ come into much deeper perspective as big dancing orbs of light with light rays arcing off of them in every color of the rainbow in ever mesmerizing geometric patterning that is constantly changing. It really does you no harm to stop reading this book and go look up some of the imagery taken by these freelance photographers. Who knows, maybe they're lying about the imagery somehow, but then doesn’t NASA too? If both are being evaluated for honesty, my money is going to rest on the individuals who aren’t being paid to show their photography to the public and as the old, but neglected American legal precept goes, “innocent till proven guilty”, so take a gander at them. Just remember though, NASA says there’s a big old storm system on Jupiter that’s bigger than the earth and one that never ends. A storm system bigger than the earth and one that never ends – that’s frankly hard to imagine and that’s about all I can do, because details like that simply aren’t visible from earth. The strange thing though is that I can be anywhere on a planet smaller than a storm on another planet and yet look up and recognize every constellation in the sky, which again is simply a mathematical impossibility on a spinning ball.
Evidence to Consider #17
Space: Path of the Sun
Situation: The Bible tells me that the sun moves around the earth. The book of Enoch says the sun moves around the earth. All the great ancient cultures from the Egyptians to the Mayans and beyond believed the same. Cultures with such astute reckoning of the skies that they constructed items such as the Pyramids in perfect correlation with constellations and the like and yet one Jesuit Catholic Priest, a privately wealthy one at that, decides to alter the view of what all of previously recorded history dictated in great detail in terms of a sun mathematically shown to be about 32 miles above the surface of earth and one that moves or has a circuit of movement that wobbles in and out across the surface of a flat earth (change of seasons) and is equal in size to the moon to suddenly be 93 million miles away and eminently huge on a grand scale hard to even realistically imagine. This man, one Copernicus – Jesuit priest and author of the heliocentric model. Do you know he privately funded the construction of an observatory in order to prove his alternative math equations after the fact of announcing them publicly, but he never actually used the observatory to observe the sun that he had charted such an alternative view for. It was basically for show, an expensive prop if you will. It worked apparently because the Catholic Church reversed its view to align with his (The same organization that currently in the modern era owns and operates an ultra-high tech and highly illegal observatory in New Mexico located on a sacred native American mountain that has a telescope entitled , ‘Lucifer’ in its arsenal. Funny how a foreign entity can construct a state of the art facility in a native American historical land preserve without even a protest being waged over it or it even being agreed to by the native locals who regard the mountain as sacred in that they believe it is a portal opening to other dimensions of reality.) So armed with this new belief by one of their own Jesuit brethren, the Jesuits priests invading China in the 1800’s with the rest of the Western powers of the day demanded the eradication of observations by royal Chinese scribes that had thousands of years of painstakingly recorded data at their fingertips that proved that the sun was both small, much closer, and moving across the face of the earth in its circuit. Don’t believe me, well then look it up. Study the evidence. Develop an informed opinion through research that evaluates all the angles along with all that the past has to teach us and you might just realize a profound truth. Which is this – we are dumber today than we used to be in the past. Again, it’s basic provable math. Each new generation has more DNA copy mistakes, then the preceding generation, not to mention the valuable, healthy strands of DNA that go extinct in wars, famines, inner city violence, and drug riddled neighborhoods both far, and near. We humans are getting less capable of advanced cognitive function and overall health has declined from what we once possessed. No biological mutation has ever advanced the biological capabilities of an individual no matter how many movies you watch depicting it occurring. Adaptation and mutation are two very different things. Adapting is something humans are very good at, while mutation is a symptom of a system breaking down into less ordered random chaos. The Law of Entropy proves what I’m saying. We are truly less capable today, so who are we to throw all the wisdom of the ages still left to us down the drain because we think we’re so advanced today in that practically everyone now has the ability to have a smartphone? A smartphone doesn’t make anyone smarter. It’s simply an aid to help those who are no longer able to do what their predecessors used to be able to do in their own head. It is a human adaptation to help w