Sunday, May 29, 2016

The Natural Physics of Water Prove Earth Flat




It is part of the natural physics of water and other fluids to always find their level and remain flat.  If disturbed in any way, motion ensues until the flat level is resumed.  If dammed up then released, the nature of all liquids is to quickly flood outwards taking the easiest course towards finding its new level. 

The upper surface of a fluid at rest is a horizontal plane.  Because if a part of the surface were higher than the rest, those parts of the fluid which were under it would exert a greater pressure upon the surrounding parts than they receive from them, so that motion would take place amongst the particles and continue until there were none at a higher level than the rest, that is, until the upper surface of the whole mass of fluid became a horizontal plane.”  -W.T. Lynn, “First Principles of Natural Philosophy”

If the Earth is an extended flat plane, then this fundamental physical property of fluids finding and remaining level is consistent with experience and common sense.  If, however, the Earth is a giant sphere tilted on its vertical axis spinning through never-ending space then it follows that truly flat, consistently level surfaces do not exist here!  Moreover, if the Earth is spherical then it follows that the surface of all Earth’s water, including the massive oceans, must maintain a certain degree of convexity.  But this is contrary to the fundamental physical nature of water to always be and remain level!

The surface of all water, when not agitated by natural causes, such as winds, tides, earthquakes etc. is perfectly level.  The sense of sight proves this to every unprejudiced and reasonable mind.  Can any so-called scientist, who teaches that the earth is a whirling globe, take a heap of liquid water, whirl it round, and so make rotundity?  He cannot.  Therefore it is utterly impossible to prove that an ocean is a whirling rotund section of a globular earth, rushing through ‘space’ at the lying-given-rate of false philosophers.  -William Thomas Wiseman, “The Earth An Irregular Plane”

If we were living on a whirling ball-Earth, every pond, lake, marsh, canal and other large body of standing water, each part would have to comprise a slight arc or semi-circle curveting downwards from the central summit.  For example, if the ball-Earth were 25,000 miles in circumference as NASA and modern astronomers say, then spherical trigonometry dictates the surface of all standing water must curve downwards an easily measureable 8 inches per mile multiplied by the square of the distance.  This means along a 6 mile channel of standing water the Earth would dip 6 feet on either end from the central peak.  To the benefit of true science, and to the detriment of modern astronomy’s pseudo-science, such an experiment can and has been tested.

In Cambridge, England there is a 20 mile canal called the Old Bedford which passes in a straight line through the Fenlands known as the Bedford Level.  The water has no interruption from locks or water-gates of any kind and remains stationary making it perfectly suitable for determining whether any amount of convexity/curvature actually exists.  In the latter part of the 19th century, Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, a famous Flat-Earther and author of the fine book, “Earth Not a Globe!  An Experimental Inquiry into the True Figure of the Earth: Proving it a Plane, Without Axial or Orbital Motion; and the Only Material World in the Universe!” travelled to the Bedford level and performed a series of experiments to determine whether the surface of standing water is flat or convex.

A boat, with a flag-staff, the top of the flag 5 feet above the surface of the water, was directed to sail from a place called ‘Welche's Dam’ (a well-known ferry passage), to another called ‘Welney Bridge.’ These two points are six statute miles apart. The author, with a good telescope, went into the water; and with the eye about 8 inches above the surface, observed the receding boat during the whole period required to sail to Welney Bridge. The flag and the boat were distinctly visible throughout the whole distance! There could be no mistake as to the distance passed over, as the man in charge of the boat had instructions to lift one of his oars to the top of the arch the moment he reached the bridge. The experiment commenced about three o'clock in the afternoon of a summer's day, and the sun was shining brightly and nearly behind or against the boat during the whole of its passage. Every necessary condition had been fulfilled, and the result was to the last degree definite and satisfactory. The conclusion was unavoidable that the surface of the water for a length of six miles did not to any appreciable extent decline or curvate downwards from the line of sight. But if the earth is a globe, the surface of the six miles length of water would have been 6 feet higher in the centre than at the two extremities.  From this experiment it follows that the surface of standing water is not convex, and therefore that the Earth is not a globe!  On the contrary, this simple experiment is all-sufficient to prove that the surface of the water is parallel to the line-of-sight, and is therefore horizontal, and that the Earth cannot be other than a plane!  -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!  An Experimental Inquiry into the True Figure of the Earth: Proving it a Plane, Without Axial or Orbital Motion; and the Only Material World in The Universe!” (12-13)

In a second experiment, Dr. Rowbotham placed seven flags along the edge of the water each one mile distant from the next with their tops positioned 5 feet above the surface.  Near the last one he also positioned a longer, 8 foot staff bearing a 3 foot flag so that its bottom aligned precisely with the tops of the other flags.  He then mounted a telescope at a height of 5 feet behind the first flag and took his observations.  If the Earth was a globe of 25,000 miles, each successive flag would have to decline a definite and determined amount below the last.  The first and second flags simply established the line of sight, the third flag should then fall 8 inches below the second, the fourth flag 32 inches below, the fifth 6 feet, the sixth 10 feet 8 inches, and the seventh flag should be a clear 16 feet 8 inches below the line of sight!  Even if the Earth was a globe of a hundred thousand miles, an amount of easily measurable curvature should and would still be evident in this experiment.  But the reality is not a single inch of curvature was detected and the flags all lined up perfectly as consistent with a flat plane.

The rotundity of the earth would necessitate the above conditions; but as they cannot be found to exist, the doctrine must be pronounced as only a simple theory, having no foundation in fact--a pure invention of misdirected genius; splendid in its comprehensiveness and bearing upon natural phenomena; but, nevertheless, mathematical and logical necessities compel its denunciation as an absolute falsehood.  -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (14)

Dr. Rowbotham conducted several other experiments using telescopes, spirit levels, and “theodolites,” special precision instruments used for measuring angles in horizontal or vertical planes.  By positioning them at equal heights aimed at each other successively he proved over and over the Earth to be perfectly flat for miles without a single inch of curvature.  His findings caused quite a stir in the scientific community and thanks to 30 years of his efforts, the shape of the Earth became a hot topic of debate around the turn of the nineteenth century.

Is water level, or is it not?’ was a question once asked of an astronomer. ‘Practically, yes; theoretically, no,’ was the reply.  Now, when theory does not harmonize with practice, the best thing to do is to drop the theory. (It is getting too late, now to say ‘So much the worse for the facts!’) To drop the theory which supposes a curved surface to standing water is to acknowledge the facts.  Whenever experiments have been tried on the surface of standing water, the surface has always been found to be level. If the Earth were a globe, the surface of all standing water would be convex. This is an experimental proof that Earth is not a globe.”  -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe”

Since any given body of water must have a level surface, no one part higher than another, and seeing that all our oceans (a few inland seas excepted) are connected together, it follows that they are all VIRTUALLY OF THE SAME LEVEL.  -The English Mechanic, 26th, June 1896

Astronomers say the magical magnetism of gravity is what keeps all the oceans of the world stuck to the ball-Earth.  They say that because the Earth is so massive, by virtue of this mass it creates a magic force able to hold people, oceans and atmosphere tightly clung to the underside of the spinning ball.  Unfortunately, however, they cannot provide any practical example of this on a scale smaller than the planetary.  For example, a spinning wet tennis ball has the exact opposite effect of the supposed ball-Earth! Any water poured over it simply falls off the sides, and giving it a spin results in water flying off 360 degrees like a dog shaking after a bath.  Astronomers concede the wet tennis ball example displays the opposite effect of their supposed ball-Earth, but claim that at some unknown mass, the magic adhesive properties of gravity suddenly kick in allowing the spinning wet tennis ball-Earth to keep every drop of “gravitized” water stuck to the surface.  Again, their theory flies in the face of all practical evidence, but they have been running with it for 500 years, so why stop now?

If the Earth were a globe, rolling and dashing through ‘space’ at the rate of ‘a hundred miles in five seconds of time,’ the waters of seas and oceans could not, by any known law, be kept on its surface - the assertion that they could be retained under these circumstances being an outrage upon human understanding and credulity! But as the Earth - that is, the habitable world of dry land - is found to be ‘standing out of the water and in the water’ of the ‘mighty deep,’ whose circumferential boundary is ice, we may throw the statement back into the teeth of those who make it and flaunt before their faces the flag of reason and common sense, inscribed with a proof that the Earth is not a globe.  -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (86)

In one portion of its long route, the great river Nile flows for a thousand miles with a fall of only one foot!  This is a feat which, of course, would be a sheer impossibility if the Earth had spherical curvature.  Many other rivers including the Congo in West Africa, the Amazon in South America, and the Mississippi in North America all flow for thousands of miles in directions totally incompatible with the supposed globularity of the Earth as well.

Rivers run DOWN to the sea because of the inclination of their beds.  Rising at an altitude above sea-level, in some cases thousands of feet above the sea, they follow the easiest route to their level - the sea.  The ‘Parana’ and ‘Paraguay’ in South America are navigable for over 2,000 miles, and their waters run the same way until they find their level of stability, where the sea tides begin.  But if the world be a globe, the ‘Amazon’ in South America that flows always in an easterly direction, would sometimes be running uphill and sometimes down, according to the movement of the globe.  Then the ‘Congo’ in West Africa, that always pursues a westerly course to the sea, would in the same manner be running alternately up and down.  When that point of the globe exactly between them was up, they would both be running up, although in opposite directions; and when the globe took half a turn, they would both be running down!  We know from practical experiment that water will find its level, and cannot by any possibility remain other than level, or flat, or horizontal - whatever term may be used to express the idea.  It is therefore quite out of the range of possibility that rivers could do as they would have to do on a globe.”  -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (110)

Whoever heard of a river in any part of its course flowing uphill? Yet this it would require to do were the Earth a Globe. Rivers, like the Mississippi, which flow from the North southwards towards the Equator, would need, according to Modem Astronomic theory, to run upwards, as the Earth at the Equator is said to bulge out considerably more, or, in other words, is higher than at any other part. Thus the Mississippi, in its immense course of over 3,000 miles, would have to ascend 11 miles before it reached the Gulf of Mexico!  -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (126)




There are rivers which flow east, west, north, and south - that is, rivers are flowing in all directions over the Earth's surface, and at the same time. Now, if the Earth were a globe, some of these rivers would be flowing up-hill and others down, taking it for a fact that there really is an ‘up’ and a ‘down’ in nature, whatever form she assumes. But, since rivers do not flow up-hill, and the globular theory requires that they should, it is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.”  -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (85)



Support independent publishing: Buy this book on Lulu.




Buy The Flat Earth Conspiracy 252-Page Paperback, eBook, or ePub

52 comments:

Oz10 said...

25,000 miles around -
360 degrees in a circle -
1 degree = 69.4 miles
6 miles = less than 1/10th of a single degree of this circle.

Not going to notice this with the tests Dr. Rowbotham provided.

Please note this is just math, not fact.

'If the Earth was a globe of 25,000 miles, each successive flag would have to decline a definite and determined amount below the last'
While being true doubtful you would see it with the naked eye.

Eric Dubay said...

Spherical trigonometry dictates that a ball-Earth 25,000 miles in circumference would curvate 8 inches per mile varying inversely with the square of the mile, so after six miles there would be an easily detectable and measurable 16 feet, 8 inches of downward curvature. But there is not. It is math and a fact, and you certainly would see it with the naked eye.

Watch for yourself, over 20 miles high, able to see hundreds of miles to the horizon and it's perfectly flat all around:

No Curvature on the Flat Earth

Oz10 said...

8 inches per mile, can you show me how you came to this number?

Eric Dubay said...

Oz, the Pythagorean Theorum gives 8 inches per mile as the curvature on a sphere 25,000 miles in circumference, and
Spherical Trigonometry dictates that it varies inversely with the square of the mile so the first mile establishes line of sight, the second mile would fall 8 inches, the third mile 32 inches, the fourth mile 72 inches, the fifth mile 128 inches and so on.

Oz10 said...

since you trust Pythagoras, what about Newtons Law of Gravitation?

Oz10 said...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-video/8819931/Weather-balloon-captures-panoramic-view-of-Earth-from-space.html

Eric Dubay said...

So all it takes is a wide-angle lens and you're convinced the Earth is a ball, Oz? I don't "trust Pythagoras," I'm giving you the formula you asked for.

Gravity is not a "law," it's bullshit created by a knighted Freemason, "Sir" Isaac Newton, trying to explain why people don't fall off the underside of his spinning ball-Earth. Objects denser than the medium surrounding them fall while objects less dense than the medium surrounding them rise. This natural property of physics was well known and understood before Newton came along and piggy-backed his idea of "gravity" on.

If you fill a balloon with helium, a substance lighter than the nitrogen, oxygen and other elements which compose the air around it, the balloon will immediately fly upwards. If you fill a balloon with hydrogen, a substance even lighter than helium, the balloon will fly upwards even faster. If you blow a dandelion seed out of your hands, a substance just barely heavier than the air, it will float away and slowly but eventually fall to the ground. And if you drop an anvil from your hands, something much heavier than the air, it will quickly and directly fall straight to the ground. Now, this has absolutely nothing to do with “gravity.” The fact that light things rise up and heavy things fall down is simply a natural property of weight. That is very different from “gravity.” Gravity is a hypothetical magnetic-like force possessed by large masses which Isaac Newton needed to help explain the heliocentric theory of the universe.

Now, even if gravity did exist, why would it cause both planets to orbit the Sun and people to stick to the Earth? Gravity should either cause people to float in suspended circular orbits around the Earth, or it should cause the Earth to be pulled and crash into the Sun! What sort of magic is “gravity” that it can glue people’s feet to the ball-Earth, while causing Earth itself to revolve ellipses round the Sun? The two effects are very different yet the same cause is attributed to both.

“Take the case of a shot propelled from a cannon. By the force of the explosion and the influence of the reputed action of gravitation, the shot forms a parabolic curve, and finally falls to the earth. Here we may ask, why - if the forces are the same, viz., direct impulse and gravitation - does not the shot form an orbit like that of a planet, and revolve round the earth? The Newtonian may reply, because the impulse which propelled the shot is temporary; and the impulse which propelled the planet is permanent. Precisely so; but why is the impulse permanent in the case of the planet revolving round the sun? What is the cause of this permanence?” -N. Crossland, “New Principia”

“If the sun is pulling with such power at the earth and all her sister planets, why do they not fall down upon him?” -A. Giberne, “Sun, Moon, and Stars” (27)

Furthermore, this magnetic-like attraction of massive objects gravity is purported to have can be found nowhere in the natural world. There is no example in nature of a massive sphere or any other shaped-object which by virtue of its mass alone causes smaller objects to stick to or orbit around it! There is nothing on Earth massive enough that it can be shown to cause even a dust-bunny to stick to or orbit around it! Try spinning a wet tennis ball or any other spherical object with smaller things placed on its surface and you will find that everything falls or flies off, and nothing sticks to or orbits it. To claim the existence of a physical “law” without a single practical evidential example is hearsay, not science.

Eric Dubay said...


“That bodies in some instances are seen to approach each other is a fact; but that their mutual approach is due to an ‘ attraction,’ or pulling process, on the part of these bodies, is, after all, a mere theory. Hypotheses may be sometimes admissible, but when they are invented to support other hypotheses, they are not only to be doubted but discredited and discarded. The hypothesis of a universal force called Gravitation is based upon, and was indeed invented with a view to support another hypothesis, namely, that the earth and sea together make up a vast globe, whirling away through space, and therefore needing some force or forces to guide it in its mad career, and so control it as to make it conform to what is called its annual orbit round the sun! The theory first of all makes the earth to be a globe; then not a perfect globe, but an oblate spheroid, flattened at the ‘poles’; then more oblate, until it was in danger of becoming so flattened that it would be like a cheese; and, passing over minor variations of form, we are finally told that the earth is pear-shaped, and that the ‘elipsoid has been replaced by an apoid!’ What shape it may assume next we cannot tell; it will depend upon the whim or fancy of some astute and speculating ‘scientist.’” -Lady Blount and Albert Smith, “Zetetic Astronomy” (14)

How is it that “gravity” is so strong that it can hold all the oceans, buildings and people stuck to the under-side of the ball-Earth, but so weak that it allows birds, bugs, smoke, and balloons to casually evade its grips completely!? How is it that “gravity” holds our bodies clung to the under-side of the ball-Earth, but yet we can easily raise our legs and arms, walk or jump and feel no such constant downward pulling force? How is it that “gravity” can cause planets to revolve elliptical orbits around a single center of attraction? Ellipses by nature require two foci, and the force of gravitation would have to regularly increase and decrease to keep planets in constant orbit and prevent pulling them into direct collision courses!

Jack Spacey said...

So if you were to fly an aeroplane in solely one direction, where would you end up?

Eric Dubay said...

Depends what you mean by "one direction." If you mean starting 90 degrees to magnetic North and traveling East or West, you will eventually make a circle over the flat-Earth, around the North central pole, but will be periodically adjusting your course to remain 90 degrees from magnetic North. If by "one direction" you mean flying in a straight line regardless of compass / cardinal direction, then you will eventually end up in Antarctica no matter which direction you start, if you go straight on, you will eventually reach the Antarctic. Then if you continue flying, you will be the first person to ever even attempt a North/South circumnavigation of the Earth (Earth has only ever been circumnavigated East/West). If by "one direction" you mean a terrible corporate whore boy band, then you would probably end up in rehab somewhere :)

Echo said...

Through personal experience and an experiment with friends and a weather balloon I can safely say that at the very least the earth is round. The was from a standpoint directly above the U.S. From the data I have personally collected I would assume that the earth is roughly spherical in shape. Also I would like to know how flat the area/land around the river used for the flag experiment was because if it was perfectly flat and did not follow the same curvature(as I believe) and for instance went againts the curvature(as I believe) the water would be under pressure at the center greatly suing the results. I feel a better experiment would be to form the container with a the curvature and pour the water in to test rather than test the water in a container of unknown exact dimensions.

Eric Dubay said...

Round yes, spherical no. Or if you listen to NASA an oblate spheroid, flattened at the poles, chubby on the south-side, like a pear:

Neil DeGrasse Tyson Says Earth is Pear Shaped

And the following amateur balloon goes well over 100,000 feet high and not an inch of curvature! Not only this but you can clearly see a hot-spot on the clouds directly underneath the Sun proving it can NOT be 93 million miles away:

No Curvature on the Flat Earth

Footage showing curvature is either shot with wide-angle lenses or added in post-production like NASA's CGI ball-planets. Peace

Echo said...

But that only addresses half of my concerns. The first part was simply why I believe what I believe. The second was what I believe. The third was the challenge. I'm not even going to argue that the earth isn't flat, I'm just saying the river and flag experiment (while works with no curvature beliefs) Does not disprove curvature beliefs due to many undocumented pieces of information and possible problems. And it was a good chunk of the article.
(Sorry for any grammatically/spelling errors this is from a tablet and not my computer)

Eric Dubay said...

The Old Bedford Level still exists in Cambridge, England, so the test can easily be repeated and your concerns can be checked. And if you have the means to perform a better test of the type you described I'm sure we'd all love to see it.

Fabio Marin said...

Hello Eric, I' ve some doubt about the question of the south pole: wasn't it discovered by Amundsen in 1911? didn't Richard Byrd fly over it in 1929?
Thanks

Randall Selinger said...

Some selective thinking here........should be easy enough to prove.....fly or sail to the "end" of the "flat" earth, climb the 90 foot wall of ice, and show us already.

Anonymous said...

Eric Dubay Funny how no one has seen this "edge" of the earth if it was indeed flat and does the water just fall off this edge ? if there is no gravity as you suggest ? A oblate spheroid with gravity would account for this obvious flaw with your assertions .

Anonymous said...

Outer space does not exist, we are living in a holographic world. We are living in a prison that is controlled by Satanist.

Anonymous said...

Keep speaking your mind, Eric! I love your articles and your responses. It's nice having a blogger with the knowledge to argue his point. I would like to ask this question which is boggling my mind: what about the precession of the equinoxes? They account that phenomenon to the wobble of the ball/pear(lol)-earth on it's axis, how would a flat-earther explain this? Again, love reading your articles and sometimes the comment section even more. Keep doing what you're doing!

Eric Dubay said...

Thanks Anon, will do! The precession of the equinoxes is exactly what it's called, a precession of the stars movement and NOT the result of some inexplicable "wobble" of the spinning ball-Earth. It has been long proven in conclusive experiments by the top scientists of their time over a hundred years ago that the aether / firmament with the Sun, Moon, stars and "planets," revolves around a fixed Earth. Einstein admitted relativity was just to explain away these ground-breaking findings:

Geocentricity is Scientific, Heliocentricity is a Lie!

Antarctica is a 70,000+ mile ice-wall that surrounds us and holds in the oceans, so there's no water falling off the "edge." Whether deep along the Antarctic ice-plateau there is an edge, a barrier, or an infinite plane in unknown.

“How far the ice extends; how it terminates; and what exists beyond it, are questions to which no present human experience can reply. All we at present know is, that snow and hail, howling winds, and indescribable storms and hurricanes prevail; and that in every direction ‘human ingress is barred by unsealed escarpments of perpetual ice,’ extending farther than eye or telescope can penetrate, and becoming lost in gloom and darkness.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (91)

Eric Dubay said...

Fabio, the South Pole is a hoax, they merely picked an arbitrary point along the Antarctic ice and put a red/white barbershop poll with a ball-Earth on it. They even admit that it's not the South pole though:

Antarctica Has No South Pole

Earth is like a ring magnet with the north pole in the very center-point and the south "pole" being ALL points along the outer circumference. They claim to know where the "south pole" is, but using a compass you can only know where the north pole is. No matter where you are in Antarctica, the compass will point north towards the north pole and south will always be pointing further outwards along the Antarctica ice-plateau.

This is why they put the little red/white barbershop "south pole" somewhere that they ADMIT isn't the south pole! They didn't want tourists bringing their compasses to the little pole and saying, "hey, wait a minute, this isn't the south pole." So instead they claim "the real south pole" is several hundred meters away from the ceremonial pole they posted, that way you would have to spend hours outside your tour group with a compass scratching your head trying to figure out why the south pole clearly isn't the south pole.

Antarctica Key to Flat Earth

Anonymous said...

If they can fake the New Testament and the landing a man on the moon, they can fake anything. We live in the age of the Great Deception.

Oz10 said...

Watch and see the natural form of water, when not forced into the shape of the container that is holding it. Then please tell me what that shape that is, please.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF8aQHwcKN0

Good times ~

Anonymous said...

It is impossible for man to leave earths orbit and survive, NASA is a Hoax. Aliens are really Demons from the underworld, the under world. Why would America name the Space Program after Apollo,God of the Underworld?

Anonymous said...

First of all Eric a massive kudos to you for all your research and determination and courage to get the truth out.

Also I know you mention that you feel this discovery proves that we live on a world intelligently designed (I agree) - but who do you think created it?

I also have a question about the annual meteor showers that happen at various times in the year (and I've seen them) - what are they? And why do they happen the same time each year? How does this fit in with the flat earth? - would love to hear your thoughts.

Eric Dubay said...

Oz, your slow-motion video of water drops falling into water pools is supposed to prove what? The surface of the water pools in the video are completely flat and motionless until disturbed, then they wave and jostle until the perfectly flat level is resumed:

“The upper surface of a fluid at rest is a horizontal plane. Because if a part of the surface were higher than the rest, those parts of the fluid which were under it would exert a greater pressure upon the surrounding parts than they receive from them, so that motion would take place amongst the particles and continue until there were none at a higher level than the rest, that is, until the upper surface of the whole mass of fluid became a horizontal plane.” -W.T. Lynn, “First Principles of Natural Philosophy”

And thanks Anon. Meteors and shooting/falling stars are certainly a mystery. Some people say they are pieces of the solid glass sky dome falling to Earth and the regularity is caused by the Sun over-heating portions of the glass at certain times causing it to break off and fall to Earth:

There is Glass in the Sky

Flat Earth and Falling Stars

Eric Dubay said...

As for my ideas about intelligent design and the intelligent designer, check out this video and article:

God, Consciousness, Intelligent Design, Duality, Satan and the Ego

God, Brahma, Tao, Void, Oneness, Infinite Consciousness

Cory Troupe said...

Great Feed. I mean, really. Mind. Blown. At first, I was like, no dude, the earth is CLEARLY round. But the ship on the sea thing with the lighthouses got me. One thing I can say for both sides is be a little more respectful. This is going to be difficult for any one to believe. Eric, I was really interested in how you believe this world was created, and then I read your very last comments, and it fits RIGHT into the Luciferian Project and the Negation of God. If you youtube the Spirit Science videos, they talk a lot about this.

Eric Dubay said...

Hey, thanks Cory! Not sure how you think my article and video about God and intelligent design are "negation of God?" The atheist materialist Big Bang cosmic accidental evolution crowd like NASA and Darwinians are the ones negating God. I'm saying of course God/conscious intelligence pre-existed the material world. I wrote a book called Spiritual Science (which is far more scientific, discerning and to the point than "Spirit Science" which is just animated explanations of every new age theory in existence). What Luciferian Project are you talking about? How am I "fitting RIGHT into" this and "negating God," by affirming God? I think you've completely misunderstood my metaphysics if you're claiming this. Peace

Anonymous said...

I believe Cory means your work "fits right in" with exposing the negation, Eric, not propagating it ;)

Eric Dubay said...

Ohhh, thanks Anon, I didn't get that. Is that what you meant Cory? In that case, yes I agree! :) Peace

Anonymous said...

Why is the moon spherical when it's full, and other planets when seen through telescopes? That does apply to earth?

Eric Dubay said...

The Earth, Moon, Sun, stars and "planets" are all flat discs, not spheres. This is why everyone, no matter where/when, only sees the same one side of the Moon, because there is only one side:

“The Moon presented a special math problem for the construction of the heliocentricity model. The only way to make the Moon fit in with the other assumptions was to reverse its direction from that of what everyone who has ever lived has seen it go. The math model couldn’t just stop the Moon like it did the Sun, that wouldn’t work. And it couldn’t let it continue to go East to West as we see it go, either at the same speed or at a different speed. The only option was to reverse its observed East to West direction and change its speed from about 64,000 miles an hour to about 2,200 miles an hour. This reversal, along with the change in speed, were unavoidable assumptions that needed to be adopted if the model was to have any chance of mimicking reality.” -Bernard Brauer

“They want you to believe that the Moon's rotation is perfectly synchronized with its orbit so that's why we only ever see one side of the Moon, rather than conclude the obvious - that the Moon is simply NOT rotating. Moreover, they had to slow down the Moon's speed by 58,870 mph AND reverse its direction to West-East to successfully sell their phony heliocentricity system to a gullible public. I don't think there is one person in many, many thousands - regardless of education - who knows that the Copernican Model had to turn the Moon's observable direction around and give it a new speed to accommodate the phases and eclipses.” -Marshall Hall

Through a telescope the stars and "planets" (known for thousands of years as "wandering stars" because they differ from the fixed stars in their relative motions only) appear merely as tiny dots of light, non-physical luminaries, NOT physical terra firma capable of landing on as shown in NASA's CGI pictures / animations. During waxing / waning cycles you can even sometimes see stars and planets through the Moon:

Eric Dubay said...

On March 7th, 1794, four astronomers (3 in Norwich, 1 in London) wrote in “The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Astronomical Society” that they “saw a star in the dark part of the moon, which had not then attained the first quadrature; and from the representations which are given the star must have appeared very far advanced upon the disc.” Sir James South of the Royal Observatory in Kensington wrote in a letter to the Times newspaper April 7, 1848, that, "On the 15th of March, 1848, when the moon was seven and a half days old, I never saw her unillumined disc so beautifully. On my first looking into the telescope a star of about the 7th magnitude was some minutes of a degree distant from the moon's dark limb. I saw that its occultation by the moon was inevitable … The star, instead of disappearing the moment the moon's edge came in contact with it, apparently glided on the moon's dark face, as if it had been seen through a transparent moon; or, as if a star were between me and the moon … I have seen a similar apparent projection several times … The cause of this phenomenon is involved in impenetrable mystery." In the monthly notices of the Royal Astronomical Society for June 8, 1860, Thomas Gaunt stated that the "Occultation of Jupiter by the moon, on the 24th of May, 1860, was seen with an achromatic of 3.3 inches aperture, 50 inches focus; the immersion with a power of 50, and the emersion with a power of 70. At the immersion I could not see the dark limb of the moon until the planet appeared to touch it, and then only to the extent of the diameter of the planet; but what I was most struck with was the appearance on the moon as it passed over the planet. It appeared as though the planet was a dark object, and glided on to the moon instead of behind it; and the appearance continued until the planet was hid, when I suddenly lost the dark limb of the moon altogether.” I have personally also seen stars through the edge of the waxing/waning Moon. It actually happens fairly often; if you are diligent and specifically observing for the phenomenon on starry nights you can occasionally see it even with the naked eye.

“During a partial solar eclipse the sun's outline has many times been seen through the body of the moon. But those who have been taught to believe that the moon is a solid opaque sphere, are ever ready with ‘explanations,’ often of the most inconsistent character, rather than acknowledge the simple fact of semi-transparency. Not only has this been proved by the visibility of the sun's outline through segments, and sometimes the very centre of the moon, but often, at new moon, the outline of the whole, and even the several shades of light on the opposite and illuminated part have been distinctly seen. In other words we are often able to see through the dark side of the moon's body to light on the other side.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (337)

“That the moon is not a perfectly opaque body, but a crystallized substance, is shown from the fact that when a few hours old or even at quarter we can through the unilluminated portion see the light shining on the other side. Stars have also been observed through her surface!” -J. Atkinson, “Earth Review Magazine”

Anonymous said...

If you keep going then, what's beyond earth?

Shaggy Do said...

Travel overseas! Expand your horizons! At 30,000 ft, you will see the curvature of the Earth.

Why don't you perform a test yourself? Inflate a high altitude balloon, add a camera and view for yourself the far edges of our world :)

Eric Dubay said...

They won't allow independent exploration of Antarctica so no one really knows how far the ice-plateau extends Southwards, whether there is an edge like Dark City, a barrier like Truman Show / Under the Dome, or an infinite plane like video games.

“How far the ice extends; how it terminates; and what exists beyond it, are questions to which no present human experience can reply. All we at present know is, that snow and hail, howling winds, and indescribable storms and hurricanes prevail; and that in every direction ‘human ingress is barred by unsealed escarpments of perpetual ice,’ extending farther than eye or telescope can penetrate, and becoming lost in gloom and darkness.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (91)

And Shaggy Do, I live overseas and my grandfather's a pilot. I've done plenty of overseas travel and any curvature you think you see from 30,000 feet is just the curved glass windows in airplanes they use to remain flush with the fuselage. This amateur balloon footage goes up to 110,000 feet, almost 4 times higher than your plane was flying, and there is NO curvature whatsoever:

No Curvature on the Flat Earth

Anonymous said...

comn! this means that every single pilot in history has kept the damn secret, there ought to be thousands of claims around, and prob thousands of books about it.

anyone with a plane could realize this and make a thorough investigation.

also anyone with a plane could make the trip into the unknown iced wasstes.

Anonymous said...

Hello Eric, i am a new FE beliver. On some forum I posted a text regarding a Bredford Level experiment. As an answer I got this likn which says that other water level experiments proved the oposite. Do you know something about theese experiments? http://bit.ly/1JhOsRO
regards,
Aleksandar

Eric Dubay said...

Hey Aleksandar, yes, as a big media type event for the day, Hampden and Wallace made a $500 wager that Wallace couldn't prove the surface of the Bedford Level convex, as it had already been proven through several conclusive experiments to be perfectly flat. Wallace then created his own experiment which was a Masonic 13 feet 3 inches over the water. At one bridge he placed a white sheet with a black band on it, 3 miles in front a pole with a flag, and he stood 3 miles further atop another bridge covering a distance of 6 miles. Then looking through a telescope the top of the flag appeared above the black band and this was claimed as proof positive that the Earth/water curved upward towards the 3 mile point and curved back downwards to the second bridge. The flat Earthers of the day were rightly pissed off that Hampden and the world had been swindled by a rigged experiment. W. B. Carpenter published a 30 page pamphlet right afterwards called, "Water Not Convex, The Earth Not a Globe! Demonstrated By Alfred Russel Wallace on the 5th March 1870." Then Hampden himself wrote "Is Water Level or Convex After All? The Bedford Canal Swindle Detected and Exposed," where he explains the false measurements Wallace took by positioning the telescope too low on the first bridge. Hampden said, "Wallace will to their dying day regret and bewail the precipitate and indecent haste with which they grabbed and pocketed my $500. They must by this time hate the very sight of water: but as long as I live, neither they nor their friends shall be allowed to forget the lies, imposition, and fraud, which, for the sake of paltry gain, they disgraced themselves."

Anonymous said...

You do know that everything has two sides yes? even a disk has two sides, and to the flat earth thing? it would have to be the most stupid idea that anyone has come up with apart from religion. and the reason why water and anything else doesnt fly of is GRAVITY. If there wasny gravity then yes everything would fly off, and also if there was no such thing as space then the entire universe has breathable air. Please show us you breathing in space, that would prove everything

Anonymous said...

thewordwatcher

I have no doubts about flat Earth. My doubt is in measurement of Earth radius. It's crazy, because Earth is not a globe and all these measurements are nonsensical.

Of course we are using them to proof that a globe is non existent.

Another very important comment - actually two comments.

1. Sun is about 5000 km from Earth and has diameter 59 km. If in 'space' is a vacuum, Sun has no chances to warm the Earth. But it does through so huge isolator.

That means, if we don't understand how something works on flat Earth - it does not mean the Earth is not flat. It means that we don't understand how all of this works.

2. Why in Australia Southern Cross is not visible October/November?

I don't think that anyone has an answer, which again does not disprove a fact, that Earth is flat.

Similar problem we are having with distances on so called South hemisphere.

We know about maps - Peters projection and many possibilities of manipulating data on GPS's and using different speed on air traffic.

We're not sure how it works, but again - that does not disprove a flat Earth.

So the bottom line is - how can someone prove Earth as a globe!?

Good job, Eric!!!

Anonymous said...

Water is a liquid substance, formless, like the wind, this substance adapts to its surroundings by adapting to their form, regardless. A water drop that is falling in the air, like most liquids, will adapt the shape base of its surroundings, in this case, the air/wind that surrounds it and its friction will make the water to take that spherical form,(in its liquid form). Keep in mind that the amount of water in a drop isn't as many as let's say a stream of water. Other things to consider is the molecular status of water, for example, a snowflake is also water in a frozen state, yet, its form is completely complex, different, and beautiful to say the least. It can be said that a snowflake is the true form of water, unfortunately, every single snowflake, although look alike, they are completely different from one another. One thing is for sure, water in its liquid state, always find its level,(to rest),flat, straight, and horizontal surface. A drop, is a drop, i.e.: a drop of blood, or milk, or a tear, etc, therefore it cannot be take into account to try to depict the form of water, which is formless.

Water = liquid/formless/flow/adapt/to rest/find its level which is horizontal and straight.

Just an opinion! Nice blog Eric!

Tyndale Israel said...

dude, very funny stuff!

I mean, aside from a controversial idea (which I am undecided about) you have a gift for comedy, generally.

You might find it interesting that a scientist at Lockheed showed that forcing two same-charge magnets together caused them to fall from a building slower than normal.

YT: SECRET UFO Propulsion Systems - Senior Lockheed Martin Research Scientist - Boyd Bushman
min: 3:30

which seems to imply there is a force called gravity and it is probably electromagnetic in nature.

I think its funny we are told that Pole Shifts happen as an explanation for diminishing electromagnetism of the earth, as opposed to things just winding down…

Genomic Entropy seems to imply the same thing: gradual decay as the creation continues to fall:

Geneticists:
Dr. Crow: we are inferior to caveman.
Dr. Knodrashov: no human geneticist doubts man is degenerating.
Dr. Lynch Even assuming a lower mutation rate, we are degenerating at 1%-5% per generation.

John Sanford on Genomic Entropy
http://youtu.be/_edD5HOx6Q0

Average cell in 15 yr old - up to 6,000 mutations per cell. (all your cells are different)
Skin cell in 60 yr old - up to 40,000 mutations
Mutations primary cause of aging and death.
“...little potential for substantially increasing the upper limit of human life span.” (upper limit: 120 yrs)
--Michael Lynch (Population Geneticist)
50% reduction in sperm count in men.

Around 100 new mutations per generation.

Cheers!

Tyndale Israel said...

some more fun stuff:

"According to astronomical observations, galaxies like our own experience about one supernova (a violently-exploding star) every 30 years. The gas and dust remnants from such explosions (like the Crab Nebula) expand outward rapidly and should remain visible for over a million years. Yet the nearby parts of our galaxy in which we could observe such gas and dust shells contain only about 200 supernova remnants. That number is consistent with only about 7,000 years worth of supernovas."

According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to be the same age as the solar system, about five billion years. Yet each time a comet orbits close to the sun, it loses so much of its material that it could not survive much longer than about 100,000 years. Many comets have typical ages of less than 10,000 years.
So far, none of the theoretical assumptions of science to explain this have been substantiated either by observations or realistic calculations.

"The stars of our own galaxy, the Milky Way, rotate about the galactic center with different speeds, the inner ones rotating faster than the outer ones. The observed rotation speeds are so fast that if our galaxy were more than a few hundred million years old, it would be a featureless disc of stars instead of its present spiral shape."

“The measurement of the earth’s spin rate shows that the earth is slowing down at a rate of 1 second per year. If earth is billions of years old, it’s initial spin rate would have been too fast for life or even the existence of our planet.”

“Most astronomers agree that short-term comets have a lifespan of 1,500--10,000 years. Astronomers have observed the death of 10 of these comets in last 100 years.
Since evolutionists realize all short-term comets should have “died” if the universe is 7--20 billion years old, they invent unverifiable explanations.”

NASA recently fired scientist David Coppedge, highly placed in the Cassini project, because he was handing out dvds on intelligent design based on statistical likelihood:
youtube: "Privileged Planet"

Anonymous said...

Hi Eric, really enjoy your study, not sure if you still read comments after 2 months the first comments were made. I'd like to leave a comment:-) everything you said made sense, I kind of believe thef flat earth but I cannot still abandoned the spherical theory! I believe the phitagoras formulas does not match reality but it is only a sixt sense; how can there be such a drop for example. Even if it is true, the way I had studied at school many years ago, was that you would not notice the drop. Imagine a city of 40 miles, if you have a drop of 8 inches for mile only, and i don't believe in the exponential drop, we will have a rise and fall of around 1 hundred meters. If you could go higher enough into orbit and look down you will see people in that city walking not perpendicular to the earth, you will have people not only apparently walking up on one side of the city or walking down on the other side, but also peperdicular to the curvature of the earth. I kind of arguing with myself at this point; I believe the Pithagoras drop is too sharp, the sphere created would just be too little. Perhaps the earth is much bigger than we think, or perhaps is an eye trick meaning that the curvature is present but we do not see or perceive it. I would be too freaky to see it, the refraction of ligth formula can be wrong too. It is possible that ligth bouncing off an object reach our eyes and wee see it even if it is hidden below the horizon, binoculars help too because light reach the our sight farther away. It is a mistery but another possible explanation is that the curvature happened just for the athmosphere gradually and visibly, while it happens with steps on the earth according to the landscape and it is tricky because there is not really an up and down.
I am also thinking about how many scientists and pilots in the Wolrd would have to be involved and keep quite. I kind of agreee with everything you say, I am also a young earth believer and you would not believe how much the two theories fit together. In fact one of the theories for the big flood presuppone a huge amount of water above the dome but this is another story. Let's join minds and even though something I added to the comments might sound unscientifics I would check them out anyway. I enjoyed watching some of your videos, thank you for stretching my mind to new horizons! Nice comments are welcomed. Have a good day. Ciao

Anonymous said...

Could you also take a look and comment about you air displacement theory to explain gravity....

https://youtu.be/E43-CfukEgs


Anonymous said...

How could anyone compare a wet tennis ball to Earth? That in itself is a theoretically derived falsity based on theory in order to simplify. The ball is on Earth it is not Earth. Of course pouring water on it causes spills. The point is that the water is poured onto the Earth and it skips around the tennis ball as quickly as gravity pulls it away. Gravity to the tennis ball is different than gravity to the Earth.

Devin Van Mersbergen said...

If this earth is in fact a ball. Surely someone would be able to tell me the angle at which the oceans curve? If this is indeed a ball, the oceans need to be curved. How can water be curved? Is this the true reason for tides? Just a thought.

Andrew G said...

To ALL the deluded time wasters who claim and clutch sooo deperately to the globe "CurveBall" (with top-spin) are either trolls or lazy armchair spectators to this show!
If you actually get up and test any of what you say for yourselves and for once TRUST YOUR SENSES! YES WE HAVE BEEN (AND MOST SADLY STILL ARE) PLAIN IGNORANT ! Blindly believing in a CURVE-BALL (no accident) THE ONLY QUESTION THAT IS IMPORTANT IS:
IS THE EARTH A SPINNING BALL - PROVE IT ! (Not with fictitious or invented theory or Because thats what my teacher told me or i saw it on TV - A test that I can walk outside and without a question of a doubt trust my senses and see it or feel the breeze or something - And you because YOU CANT !
The importance is not on what the actual shape may result to be ,I can guess from extensive research but IF ITS NOT A BALL AND ITS NOT SPINNING (which is basically scientifically provable although nothing can compete with armchair nay-science ) THEN SOMEONE HAS GOT SOME EXPLAINING TO DO! BLIND BELIEF IN A MODEL THAT EACH DAY YOUR SENSES TELL YOU DIFFERENT BUT THE TRUST IS PLACED IN YOUR TEACHER or NASA??? -THE BIBLE , KORAN , VEDIC , VIKING , TORAH , MAYAN , INCA to name a few ALL knew the PLANATE (google this word) Earth is motionless and flatish. No curveball-only a circle? ---The horizon is proof and your eyes are the weak link in this optical distortion. (vanishing point vs telescopic lens; taking into account the refraction of light ... not to complete your research for you) . -- HOW TO BUILD ON A BALL (regardless of size even though this one is not as massive as your teacher told you it has dimensions) may very well be a universe best seller you should finish your research and publish - you will be rich even in pluto standards... ---THE FACT - NO ROAD, TUNNEL,BRIDGE,HOUSE, SKYSCRAPER OR ANY MAN MADE STRUCTURE FOR THAT MATTER BUILDS TAKING THE CURVE INTO ACCOUNT ! They use primitive tools like a spirit LEVEL or plumb to ensure that both horizontal and vertical are straight and true... WATER FLUID DYNAMICS - At no point on this curve-ball can you replicate water sticking to a ball ...STOP - THINK ... Ah you didn't think ... so the molten core or magical gravity or the velcro atmosphere makes this a fact .... STOP - don't think ! perfect, the research not yet found by armchair enthusiasts is that WE DONT KNOW WHAT THE EARTH INNERS LOOK LIKE CAUSE THE DEEPEST WE HAVE EVER BEEN IS 12KM ... yip and it was abandoned after 15years .... to drill down into the earths crust ONLY! SO HOW WOULD YOU KNOW ? WHAT I DO KNOW IS WHAT I SEE and test for myself -Water ALWAYS finds its lowest point ALWAYS and LEVELS .. ALWAYS !!! or if you like I come to your home and show you ? pls can I ?
Most people believe the moon landing cause they saw it on the radio .... go look -eyes x 2 ,go listen -ears x 2 , speak - mouth x1 for a reason! I DONT CARE WHAT SHAPE IT TURNS OUT TO BE ... DONT LOSE FOCUS OR ALLOW DISTRACTION .IS IT A SPINNING CURVEBALL ?? PROVE IT !!! CANT ... WHY NOT ... ?

AndrewG said...

To ALL the deluded time wasters who claim and clutch sooo deperately to the globe "CurveBall" (with top-spin) are either trolls or lazy armchair spectators to this show!
If you actually get up and test any of what you say for yourselves and for once TRUST YOUR SENSES! YES WE HAVE BEEN (AND MOST SADLY STILL ARE) PLAIN IGNORANT ! Blindly believing in a CURVE-BALL (no accident) THE ONLY QUESTION THAT IS IMPORTANT IS:
IS THE EARTH A SPINNING BALL - PROVE IT ! (Not with fictitious or invented theory or Because thats what my teacher told me or i saw it on TV - A test that I can walk outside and without a question of a doubt trust my senses and see it or feel the breeze or something - And you because YOU CANT !
The importance is not on what the actual shape may result to be ,I can guess from extensive research but IF ITS NOT A BALL AND ITS NOT SPINNING (which is basically scientifically provable although nothing can compete with armchair nay-science ) THEN SOMEONE HAS GOT SOME EXPLAINING TO DO! BLIND BELIEF IN A MODEL THAT EACH DAY YOUR SENSES TELL YOU DIFFERENT BUT THE TRUST IS PLACED IN YOUR TEACHER or NASA??? -THE BIBLE , KORAN , VEDIC , VIKING , TORAH , MAYAN , INCA to name a few ALL knew the PLANATE (google this word) Earth is motionless and flatish. No curveball-only a circle? ---The horizon is proof and your eyes are the weak link in this optical distortion. (vanishing point vs telescopic lens; taking into account the refraction of light ... not to complete your research for you) . -- HOW TO BUILD ON A BALL (regardless of size even though this one is not as massive as your teacher told you it has dimensions) may very well be a universe best seller you should finish your research and publish - you will be rich even in pluto standards... ---THE FACT - NO ROAD, TUNNEL,BRIDGE,HOUSE, SKYSCRAPER OR ANY MAN MADE STRUCTURE FOR THAT MATTER BUILDS TAKING THE CURVE INTO ACCOUNT ! They use primitive tools like a spirit LEVEL or plumb to ensure that both horizontal and vertical are straight and true... WATER FLUID DYNAMICS - At no point on this curve-ball can you replicate water sticking to a ball ...STOP - THINK ... Ah you didn't think ... so the molten core or magical gravity or the velcro atmosphere makes this a fact .... STOP - don't think ! perfect, the research not yet found by armchair enthusiasts is that WE DONT KNOW WHAT THE EARTH INNERS LOOK LIKE CAUSE THE DEEPEST WE HAVE EVER BEEN IS 12KM ... yip and it was abandoned after 15years .... to drill down into the earths crust ONLY! SO HOW WOULD YOU KNOW ? WHAT I DO KNOW IS WHAT I SEE and test for myself -Water ALWAYS finds its lowest point ALWAYS and LEVELS .. ALWAYS !!! or if you like I come to your home and show you ? pls can I ?
Most people believe the moon landing cause they saw it on the radio .... go look -eyes x 2 ,go listen -ears x 2 , speak - mouth x1 for a reason! I DONT CARE WHAT SHAPE IT TURNS OUT TO BE ... DONT LOSE FOCUS OR ALLOW DISTRACTION .IS IT A SPINNING CURVEBALL ?? PROVE IT !!! CANT ... WHY NOT ... ?

Anonymous said...

Evidence everywhere says flat.....theories, magic, unexplainable things say globe....