Indirect evidence

7. Huge horizons

On a convex Earth there is a Pythagorean way of calculating the horizon. It is based on two assumptions: 1. The observer rests on a convex sphere, and 2. Light moves in straight lines. Both convex heliocentrists and geocentrists believe these tenets to be near practically true. The Earth is an oblate spheroid which for all intents and purposes is practically the same as a sphere (maximum 0.34% difference); and light does travel in straight lines except for minor deviations when entering air of different densities, temperature and/or humidity – refraction. (There are big problems with this model when trying to triangulate the Sun, but that is another topic.)

 The Pythagorean equation shows us that the convex ball Earth is stopping light from a distant object hitting our eyes at “OG” distance away.

As long as the height of the observer (and object observed) is less than the radius of the Earth (which it always is) then the simple equation is OG = square root of 2 x (R x h). The radius of the Earth is about 6378 km or 6378000 m. So, a man whose eyeballs are 1.8 m above the ground would see 6378000 x 1.8 x 2 and then square root that number = 4791.7 m or 4.79 km. Making it even easier for us are the online horizon calculators such as ringbell.co.uk and boatsafe.com. These give a horizon distance of 4.8km for an observer 1.8 m high, which is the same to one decimal place.

Refraction also needs to be added. To get an exact amount of even estimated refraction is complicated because it would depend on the height difference of the observer and object being observed. The greater the height difference, the less the refraction, as the angle of incidence of light coming from the object is more vertical. The more horizontal the path of the incoming light through a medium of different density, the more the angle of refraction.

 Light refracts the most at the horizontal than from vertically straight above the object.

It is even worse when trying to incorporate possible pressure (density), temperature and humidity differences; let alone try to find out any actual readings. However, the California State University states in its extra educational Youtube videos:

“Refraction or “r” is affected by temperature, atmospheric pressure and geographic location. Rather than creating a complicated equation incorporating all of these variables, engineers are safely able to assume that the refraction is roughly equal to 1/7th of the curvature area.”

+++

 Refraction is roughly equal to 1/7th of the curvature area.

We just add this 1/7 to the radius of the Earth: R′ = R × 7/6. This gives us 7440km or 7440,000m for the Earth radius as the “goto” figure when calculating standard refraction into the horizon calculation. So, a 1.8m high observer can see 7440000 x 1.8 x 2 and then square root that number = 5175m, or 5.17km away, if light travels in straight lines on a convex ball. This adds about 8% on top of any figure from a horizon calculator which doesn’t calculate refraction in their equation: 5175 – 4791 = 384; 384/4791 = 0.08; 0.08 x 100 = 8%. It also agrees with the wiki figure of adding 8% for refraction to the total horizon distance calculated.

Unfortunately for these assumptions, the real world begs to differ. Below are four clear cut examples of the horizon being way further out than the above calculations allow. (There are more anecdotal ones in the horizon article).

1. YouTuber Joeseph Winthrop has conducted tests with a blue and a green laser at 20 miles distance across mostly water at night. The height of the lasers was 45 feet. The cameraman is on a pier 15 feet above the water. This is a total of 60 feet elevation which should see 4,623 (Earth radius in miles) x 0.14 (refraction) = 647.22; 647.22 + 4,623 = 5270.22 miles or 27826762 feet. 27826762 x 60 x 2 and then square root that number = 57786 feet (or 10 miles and 1661 yards). The naked eye was able to pick up both lasers, but only the camera was sensitive enough to register the blue laser pen 20 miles away. This is a fraction under twice the allowed horizon distance on a convex Earth.

 (Click to animate). “The cameraman detects two very faint direct streaks of blue light. The cameraman was otherwise able to see this laser with his eyes, and most noticeably when the direct hits were made.”

2. On the David Icke forum a previous mainstream model believer “Spock” posted that a friend of his had spotted Blackpool Pleasure Beach (amusement park) from Ainsdale beach in Merseyside 11 miles away across the beach itself (low tide – no water).

 The distance was roughly 11 miles away. Rhino Binoculars used to spot a shoreline 11 miles away. The Blackpool shoreline across the sand is seen 11 miles away.

The camera looks to be approximately 5 foot above the flat shoreline (after the tide had gone out). Without going through the conversions and calculation for refraction we can just add 8% on to the online horizon calculator. Five foot elevation sees 2.7 miles without refraction; and 2.7 x 1.08 = 2.916 miles with refraction. The binoculars saw 3.77 times (277%) the allowed horizon distance on a convex Earth.

3. The lights of Milwaukee were seen at night across a large lake 136 km away in Grand Haven from an elevation which looks like the observer is just above the beach. The picture below isn’t clear enough to make out exactly how much of Milwaukee is visible; however, the tallest building in the city is 601 feet. Only 32 buildings are above 230 feet with all but 5 of those between 230 and 400 feet tall. The observer looks to be about 20 foot above the water level, but lets double it to be conservative. I count at least 16 bright dots on the horizon which means at least one of those 400 foot high skyscrapers was seen. This gives a grand elevation total of 440 feet (conservative – probably less). 440 feet is supposed to see 25.7 x 1.08 = 27.76 miles away, not over 84 miles distance (136 km). This is over 3 times (200%) the maximum allowed horizon.

 The Milwaukee lights seen at fantastic distances just above the beach. The distance between Grand Haven and Milwaukee is 136km!

4. Donald Sarty found this photo of the Canadian shore from Huntington beach in Bay Village courtesy of an article on newsnet5.com dated May 7 2013.

 The shoreline 50 miles distant can be seen with very little elevation. Big thanks to Don for finding the video. The actual distance is about 50.527 miles according to daft logic from Bay Village across Lake Erie.

I do know the shoreline was visible to many this past Sunday night. Friend and fellow scientist Jay Reynolds, a professor at Cleveland State University, sent in the above pictures on Monday. This shot was taken at Huntington Beach in Bay Village, Sunday at 11 p.m. It includes a close-up shot, which clearly shows the lights of the Canadian shore. Jay measured the distance to Canada from his vantage point as about 50 miles… “Because of the curvature of the Earth, we are limited to approximately 16 miles.”

+++

We have no need to guess the elevation of the camera this time as they say they can normally see 16 miles (I assume they have included the extra 8% refraction). That is 3.12 times (212%) more than they should if the Earth were convex.

Super refraction
But wait, they say instances such as those above are caused by “super refraction”.

Unfortunately, the refraction varies considerably from day to day, and from one place to another. It is particularly variable over water: because of the high heat capacity of water, the air is nearly always at a different temperature from that of the water, so there is a thermal boundary layer, in which the temperature gradient is far from uniform.

But the structure of thermal boundary layers guarantees that there will be large variations in the gradient, even in height intervals of a few meters. This means that on two different days with the same temperatures at the eye and the water surface (and, consequently, the same dip), the distance to the horizon can be very different. In conditions that produce superior mirages, there are inversion layers in which the ray curvature exceeds that of the Earth. Then, in principle, you can see infinitely far — there really is no horizon.

+++

“You can see infinitely far” with certain thermal boundaries. Is that possible? What differences in temperature and/or humidity over the curvature drop is necessary to produce an increase in refraction between 12 and 34 times the norm in the above four examples? Has anyone done those calculations? For argument’s sake, let’s take this statement as true. The key word here is “variable“, i.e. not constant.

So the nice-looking formulae for calculating “the distance to the horizon” are really only rough approximations to the truth. You can consider them accurate to a few per cent, most of the time. But, occasionally, they will be wildly off, particularly if mirages are visible. Then it’s common to see much farther than usual — a condition known as looming.

+++

The key words are “accurate” and “most of the time“. What is looming?

The appearance above the horizon of a distant object that would normally be hidden below it. This effect is caused by unusually large terrestrial refraction, usually due to a thermal inversion. Looming is the opposite of sinking. Both are refraction phenomena, but not mirages.

+++

So super refraction is caused by temperature (thermal) inversions. This is when the air is colder at the ground or ocean than directly above it; so you have ground, then cold air, then warmer air above that.

Given enough pressure, the normal vertical temperature gradient is inverted such that the air is colder near the surface of the Earth. This can occur when, for example, a warmer, less-dense air mass moves over a cooler, denser air mass. This type of inversion occurs in the vicinity of warm fronts, and also in areas of oceanic upwelling such as along the California coast in the United States. With sufficient humidity in the cooler layer, fog is typically present below the inversion cap. An inversion is also produced whenever radiation from the surface of the earth exceeds the amount of radiation received from the sun, which commonly occurs at night, or during the winter when the angle of the sun is very low in the sky. This effect is virtually confined to land regions as the ocean retains heat far longer.

+++

So a normal inversion where the radiation from the surface of the earth exceeds the amount of radiation received from the sun is over land only; but there are cases when warm wind moves over colder air (ocean or land) – warm fronts. These are of course variable. The other cause is said to be ocean upwelling which “involves wind-driven motion of dense, cooler, and usually nutrient-rich water towards the ocean surface, replacing the warmer, usually nutrient-depleted surface water.” Wind is variable. Interestingly, inversions never occur over the oceans during winter: “there is no trace of inversion of temperature over the oceans during the colder months.”

In a nutshell, over oceans/seas thermal inversions are caused by winds, with no inversions during the winter.

Three out of the four huge horizon examples above were over water (albeit very large lakes rather than ocean). Other examples on YouTube of larger-than-normal horizons are nearly always over water. This is just to make sure elevation isn’t variable more than anything else. It is possible that the four examples above were freak events caused by inversion, and that the Blackpool Pleasure Beach shoreline is usually way below the horizon except on that day at that time.

However, a poster on the concave Earth forum, Primalredemption, claims that his huge horizon observations are always there every time he walks the beach:

I could actually see the waves crashing against the shoreline of Molokai all the way from Sandy Beach on Oahu. All the way down to the shoreline. “ho that’s Coo bra”. “Yups it’s coo” until you realize that Molokai is 66 miles away, which would put the shoreline 2900 feet beneath the horizon on a convex Earth… I was about 5 feet above sea level for the most part… I have, all my life, different times of day and seasons. It is always the same scene and therefore is not caused by atmospheric refraction. The limiting factor is the clarity of the air.

+++

The distance isn’t 66 miles, but 26 miles.

 The distance between Sandy beach on Oahu to the Molokai shoreline is 26 miles.

26 miles is still a big problem. With the observer 5 feet high, the convex horizon is 2.916 miles distant (including standard refraction). Thermal inversion is ruled out, because the observations have been made at different times of day and seasons all his life, i.e. constant.

Do-it-ourselves (2)
The above example is anecdotal, however. How do we know he is really telling the truth? We don’t. We need to prove this to ourselves either way by recording a huge horizon over an ocean or sea in the colder months (winter). And to be absolutely 100% sure, it would be preferable to do this several times on different days. I would suggest a few minutes of video at around 9am, then another few minutes around 1pm and another session at around 4pm just before it gets dark (winter months). It would be uncomfortable to spend the entire day on a beach in the winter months, so splitting this up over three times throughout the day sounds doable. If you can do this on half a dozen days throughout winter or during any season in fact, then even better.

Any camera with a decent optical zoom will help to find such “huge” horizons. The Panasonic LUMIX DMC-FZ70 has a x60 magnification and allows teleconverter lenses to be added for even extra optical zoom. The FZ70 is the cheaper previous model to the the Panasonic LUMIX DMC-FZ72, but does the job we want just as well. The camera on its own costs about \$250. A tripod is necessary with such magnification to stop camera shake, but otherwise the standard memory card and battery charger package is fine.

To add a teleconverter, you will need either the DMW-LA8 Lens Adapter, or this alternative. The adapter allows for the attachment of any 55mm thread teleconverter. The Panasonic seems to have cheap and powerful teleconverters, but they either don’t add much to the real magnification and/or add a lot of fog, chromatic aberration, don’t fit and above all often don’t allow the camera to focus at all. It is a much better idea to get the official telephoto lens for the DMC-FZ270/2 which is the 1.7x Panasonic DMW-LT55E – Converter. It is quite expensive (\$177), but at least it should do what it says.

 (Click on image). You need this 55 mm adapter to fit the 1.7x telephoto lens attachment to the Panasonic. (Click on image). This 1.7x telephoto lens from Panasonic themselves for the Lumix will do what it says on the tin.

With the telephoto lens plus adapter the whole lot should come to about \$500. This will give you an official x102 magnification. However, there is an even “zoomier” teleconverter that fits the FZ70’s 55mm adapter thread and has 2.2x magnification instead of 1.7x, and that is the \$200 Raynox DCR-2025PRO High Definition 2.2x Telephoto Lens. It seems to do what it says on the tin. This will give a total of x132 optical magnification for around \$550.

 (Click on image). The Raynox DCR-2025PRO High Definition 2.2x Telephoto Lens seems to work and can be used with the 55mm thread adapter for the FZ70.

Other superzoom bridge cameras such as those from Sony and Canon have threaded lenses which means that in theory you should be able to add the Raynox 2.2 teleconverter lens with the appropriate adapter, but you will have to look into that yourself. Cost-wise, the Panasonic looks to be the most value-for-money.

If you are only going to get a super-zoom bridge camera without a telephoto lens attachment and don’t mind spending \$200-\$300 more, then there is always the Nikon P900 with 83x magnification and good reviews. There is an appropriate, cheap 2.2x telephoto lens attachment for the P900, but according to the reviews it is utter pap and is really only a 1.1x teleconverter. (I’d personally avoid all cheap teleconverters.)

 (Click on image). The Nikon p900 has the highest stand-alone optical zoom out of all bridge cameras as of 2015.

Other frequencies of light
So far, these horizons are seen in the visible light spectrum. It seems the lower the frequency of light, the further the horizon when we look at radar and radio waves. (This is covered in more detail in the horizon article.)

Boat radar has a maximum range of 150nm (277.8 km).

A civil marine radar, for instance, may have user-selectable maximum instrumented display ranges of 72, or 96 or rarely 120 nautical miles, in accordance with international law… and maximum detection ranges of perhaps 150 nautical miles.

+++

The company Raymarine uses radar with a maximum range of 72nm or 133km. Boat radar is attached to the top decking as seen in the photos below:

 The open array radar on top of the boat looks to be about 3m? above the waterline. This open array radar looks to be about 6m? above the water.

Let’s take 5m as the observer height. The boat radar should have a maximum 8.64km (including normal refraction), not 277km! That is 32 (3100%) times more than it should. The radar isn’t bounced off the ionosphere as only radio waves of the AM bandwdith (3 and 30Mhz) do that – skywaves.

Marine (small-boat) radar typically operates at frequencies of 9.3 to 9.8 GHz, with most operating at 9.3 and 9.5Ghz.

+++

Radio waves are even worse. According to the ex-Navy electronics technician and the Great Yarmouth Radio Club, the horizon depends on the frequency of light:

“Given two signals of equal strength and different frequencies, lower frequencies travel further than higher ones… The ground wave follows the curvature of the Earth and its range does not depend upon the height of the antenna. However, the range does depend upon the transmitter power and also upon the operating frequency. Low frequencies travel further than high frequencies. Thus under ideal low noise conditions (noon, during winter), it is possible to communicate over distances of about 500 nautical miles at 2 MHz by using a 100 W transmitter. At 8 MHz, under the same conditions and using the same transmitter power, the maximum range is reduced to about 150 nautical miles.”

+++

Wikipedia say that radio waves bend around the Earth.

“During the day, AM signals travel by ground wave, diffracting around the curve of the earth over a distance up to a few hundred miles (or kilometers) from the signal transmitter.”

+++

Diffraction means “to break up or bend”. So their own official definition is stating that light is bending around the curve of the Earth. So how do radar and radio waves bend so much around the Earth? It isn’t temperature inversion as this is variable. Do lower frequencies refract a LOT more than visible light? Not really. This phenomenon is called dispersion, which is described more in terms of resonance between the EM wave and the refractive material:

“In a typical material like glass this will correspond to electronic excitations, and will be in the UV. As you increase the frequency of the light and get nearer to this natural frequency the magnitude of the induced oscillations increases, and hence the interaction with the light increases. This is no different from any driven harmonic oscillator. As you pass through the resonance and carry on increasing the frequency the interaction strength, and hence the refractive index will fall again.”

+++

This means there is a rise and fall of the amount of refraction as the frequency of the EM wave gets closer to the matching frequency of the refractive material. This isn’t a one direction relationship between frequency and refraction; it’s a resonance point. It gets worse. The greater horizons at lower frequency can only be explained by standard refraction in the convex Earth, if these lower frequencies bend more around the Earth. This means that lower frequencies must refract more than the higher ones to diffract around the Earth. It turns out the opposite is the case.

If we actually look at the calculations of the amount of dispersion of visible light of different frequencies through air at the same pressure and temperature, refraction increases for the higher frequencies (shorter wavelength). The refractive index is 1.000268479 for a wavelength of 1700 nm (long wavelength/lower frequency) and 1.000286581 for 300 nm (shorter wavelength/higher frequency) for example. This shows that the resonance point of air is below 300 nm, i.e. above visible light frequency.

Conclusion
In the visible light spectrum, constant huge horizons are only anecdotal. However, both radar and radio wave horizons cannot be explained on a convex ball. This evidence alone is an indication for both concave and flat Earth, giving a 75% chance that the Earth is concave.

Next: 8. Binocular Effect

882 Responses to Concave Earth Theory

1. trigun4 says:

What if the Sun comes few 100 kilometers closer to the earth during spring/summer seasons? I think that is the reason for fast increase in heat during these seasons while in winter season sun is further away causing colder temperatures. So starting at spring equinox sun begins to come closer to earth while at fall equinox, sun begins to go further away. Suns coming close will also heat up the glass sky.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

In my theory that doesn’t happen, but it is only a theory.

View Comment
2. Atlas says:

Ok. WH. More than 24hs to pass a comment?!
Go bless yourself.

View Comment
3. Atlas says:

” Neither quantitative nor qualitative researchers ever discerned an “aether drift” correlated to the (supposed) rotations of the “earth in space”. Quantitative science took this supposition as proof that no motional reference exists.”

This isn’t correct.
Aether Drift has been detected and this, many times.
Even Relativists trying to prove Time Dilation, did in fact only bring the evidence for Aether Drift.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Interesting. Any links? Could prove useful.

View Comment
4. Atlas says:

A very good, rational article, which I did read with pleasure.
The only missing part is the behaviour of the Aether in the Atmosphere, directly over the ground and the corresponding behaviour of Light in this Aether.
It is very difficult to find a fixed point of reference in Nature.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

That is a bit much for me at this moment in time, although I have had an idea or two.

I’ll tell you the idea now. I think matter is an alternating magnetic field (Gerlach experiment). Therefore, EM waves are constantly being emitted (as EM waves are being produced by alternating magnetic fields – see radio waves). I think this interpretation is foundational. Now when I spin my spoon in my coffee in the morning I produce one large vortex. When I spin it the other way (which I always do when stirring food and drink for some reason), I notice one or two or more very small vortices are formed which spin out away from the center of the liquid until they dissolve. I think these vortices are EM waves in the “aether” which are being produced all the time. It is easy to see how these are produced. When the direction of the large magnetic vortex is reversed it creates a counter flow inside the large vortex, with the original vortex flowing the other way, so little vortices are created and spin out. You will also notice turbulence in the counter spinning. This I believe is friction and creates heat. There are probably other ways to create these EM vortices without the constant counter-spinning which creates the heat side effect. I have a few ideas there too, but I will leave those to myself.

I would be sorely tempted to use this foundation to build up matter, its properties and bonding; maybe search out other experiments which also point to this… or not.

WH

View Comment
5. JMAC1978 says:

WH any way we can get a drawing of how you envision this? I’m with you on thinking the Moon could be the reflected sunlight. but I have so many people needing to see it.. I figure once you feel comfortable with your findings you will share your secret with the world… great work again as always…

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

It is very early days yet Mac. The moon was extremely high last night. I am thinking it was having to do with direction of the plasmasphere rotation. Anyway, there is a small hiccup and that is I had envisaged the moon reflection rotation around the Sun to be going clockwise, but the sunspots (plasmasphere) travel anti-clockwise in the same direction as the Sun travels in the cavity. Otherwise it fits too well. I’ll keep observing the moon and thinking about it.

I hope to get a fully mapped out path of the moon and cause like I did for the Sun, but that won’t be ready for at least a year I’d say, probably longer… if it all works out of course.

EDIT: The moon reflection around the Sun must move clockwise to agree with what I am seeing so far. I wonder if there is a counter current to the sunspot rotation that causes it? I know that electrons (negative current) moves in the opposite direction to positive current in (or is that around?) a wire. If we look at standard electricity generation here:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/genwir.html

then we can easily apply that to the Sun. The magnetic south is the geographic north pole in the earth cavity. The Sun (metal wire) in my model does move a bit perpendicular to the magnetic cavity current. The Sun moves slightly out from equinox to solstice and in towards the center from solstice to equinox (perpendicular direction). This would create a positive current moving clockwise around the Sun, whereas the electrons would move anti-clockwise. So, sunspot rotation would be caused by electron diffusion to the West (anti-clockwise), and the moon reflection rotation is caused by positive current flow to the East (clockwise).

That would work.

View Comment
• JMAC1978 says:

love the work brother. I was able to see the moon last night too. like you said its path was higher than the night before. i will be watching this year with you.. anything i notice i will be sure to pass along..

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

I could do one without vertical inclination, but it will take too long to do and it is still in the idea stage so I won’t do it yet. Just picture the reflection from the back of the Sun (left side in this diagram), detach it from the line going through the center and move the reflection around clockwise. Full moon is how the diagram stands now. New moon is the fully detached reflection having rotated 180 degrees so that it is inline with the daylight side and so on.

View Comment
6. R.E. says:

Fascinating. First time I have seen / noticed the concave lat / longitude markings. Unmistakable once pointed out. Huh.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

I know. What is more startling is that a whole massive chunk of history has been wiped out over this time period. Only the maps remain. At least one group wants to keep us in the dark. It’s fun speculating and throwing conspiracy theories out there as to who, but I’m not bothered at the moment who the dark forces are, just that I recognize that they exist and to find out a little more of the truth.

View Comment
• R.E. says:

To be fair I guess: a skeptic would say that it’s not a concave earth model as much as a flattened sphere effect which the cartographers sketched. That is, a sphere whether concave or convex experiences distortion and this is an acknowledgement of that. For example, if you sketched a grip on an intact orange peel then flattened it against a counter – the grid lines would distort.

Me I tend toward believing that Earth is a penal colony for rebellious souls.

View Comment
• R.E. says:

make that “sketched a grid…”

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

To be fair I guess: a skeptic would say that it’s not a concave earth model as much as a flattened sphere effect which the cartographers sketched. That is, a sphere whether concave or convex experiences distortion and this is an acknowledgement of that. For example, if you sketched a grip on an intact orange peel then flattened it against a counter – the grid lines would distort.

Absolutely. But they put the lines the opposite way than history said they should have.

Me I tend toward believing that Earth is a penal colony for rebellious souls.

Certainly we would fit that description lol 🙂

View Comment
7. Chandra Devi says:

The moon is the back of the sun. It appears convex as the back of a mask appears convex despite it being concave. The earth is concave and along with the glass sky throws out so many possibilities it is hard for mere men to study and understand. But the moon is not there. Yet it is there because the sun and moon come together. They are created together because they are two sides of the same coin. The bible says earth is created then sun and moon. Krishna says in Vedas he is sun and moon. Together. They always go hand in hand. You can see stars through the illusion of course. It can appear that the clouds go in front of the moon even but if you go above those clouds you will see the moon still the same distance from you. It is thus like a rainbow which depends on the subjective. It is not a rock. It is not created by people other than the original person who everyone seems to have forgotten about. Your work is good.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Thanks Chandra. It is interesting to explore alternative ideas. I think a lot of us are at the testing phase now. The debate was very 2013. It is nearly 2016 which will be the year of reality and the end of marketing. A lot of tests will be carried out over the next few years. The more the merrier.

When/if proven that the earth is concave, well, bye bye space marketing and a lot of other things sold to us as true.

View Comment
• Bob says:

Hey Wild 🙂 I was looking at the moon the other day and I had an interesting thought. If the heavens are a ball of perfectly clear water about 7000 miles in diameter over our heads and the Sun is revolving around it, then the moon could very well be the reflection of the Sun filtered through what is effectively a Crystal Ball. The massive pressures of a thousand miles deep of water could account for sonoluminescence or stars could simply be pockets of reflective material suspended in the relatively still waters of the great crystal ball, that are lit by the, always on, light bulb Sun of ours.

Some study into the optical properties of Crystal Balls might be in order. Especially if the angle of view creates the moon phases effect and especially an eclipse effect. Now for this to work it would mean that one side of the Sun always faces down so the backside would always be shining straight into the crystal clear heavenly waters. A ‘balanced’ ball could do this. Then relative geographic positioning would give the effect of a monthly cycle, eclipses, etc.

So the moon would be an actual object as I have always suspected, its just that its the Sun… (is a perfect irony at least lol)

When I observe the Sun through a telescope with a Sun filter the ‘plasma’ of the light bulb blocks the surface except for the black spots which if you place a spotlight at a camera you will see everything behind the spotlight it looks black anyway (not that the moon is known for being colorful). Could it be that when filtered through thousands of miles of a ball of crystal clear water we would get the anomalous moonlight glow but have enough light filtered as to be able to see the bulb’s (sun) and filament (moon) itself?

Also monthly lattitude shifts of the Sun could cause the Lunar ‘cycle’ effect maybe? Or perhaps the Suns distance to the crystal ball changing its focal point? Meaning the Sun would bob up and down a bit each month in relative distance to the crystal ball changing the focal length and causing a phase effect.

A quick study into the optics of Crystal Balls should prove or disprove this pretty easy. Focal point of observer I think would be a very critical factor in the Eclipse effect. But if you can get a moon ‘phases’ effect with a ball of light through a crystal ball at the proper focal points that would be very noteworthy.

We have to keep in mind the relatively MASSIVE size of the crystal ball and what effect that would have to the observer on the ground. This would explain why often the Sun and moon are seen in the sky at the same time as well.

Perhaps something about the magnetic fields could explain why there would be water ‘polarized’ in such a manner so that some accumulates in the center and the rest is pushed to the edge creating a neutral zone of gravity big enough to drive a Sun through. Could it be that like magnets have north and south that gravity also has north and south?

And on the atomic level…
Maybe neutrons are neutral because they dont really exist per se but the ‘reflection’ made by a proton through a crystal ball in the center of every atom does exist and therefore must possess independent properties like light reflected off a filtered mirror. Is this why protons and neutrons are always equal in atoms? One is just the reflection of the other? Time being relatively much faster in smaller particles by reason of common sense, the number of protons and neutrons we think are in there could just be relative to the size and mass of the cave, sun, and crystal ball of which it is made, and that actually all atoms have 1 sun and 1 crystal ball and 1 hard metallic shell, all of varying sizes and shell properties. When they smash atoms together and destroy worlds at the Hadron Collider the pieces they think are this or that are just fragments of the electron shell that they think is tiny when it is actually a large crust containing a Sun and a Crystal ball that has been smashed to pieces in a violent fire of electrical discharge.

Even the slightest chance of this being true is worth stopping all the smashing of atoms until we KNOW we aren’t destroying worlds as that would be very very very bad karma for us all.

And some people think the concave Earth is a crazy idea hahaha
I give you… Atom Worlds.

Anyways keep it up brother the site is looking real good 🙂

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

I’m interested in the micro, but haven’t looked looked much into it as of yet.

The site could be a lot better with additions and revisions to the early stuff and adding the night sky in depth, but like Steve, I will concentrate on testing this year. It’s time.

View Comment
• B2 says:

Then how is it I see them both in the sky today..hmm looks like two different objects to me.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

The theory behind the moon being the back of the Sun is that light bends by different amounts in a concave earth hence you can see both the moon and the sun at the same time sometimes. I’m going to draw a diagram I think to show this.

View Comment
• Justin says:

Jesus reading these comments gives me a headache, you guys are all a bunch of brainless idiots, it is not hard to see what the moon is, looking at it with any telescope you can clearly see it is a rock. What about the planets and their moons I can watch orbit them? I am curious as to what you think those are?

View Comment
• Chris C says:

Nice try genius but for a good part of the month you can actually see the moon in the sky during the day. This means the moon and Sun at the same time as two separate bodies in different parts of the sky.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Yes, we know all this. 🙂 Keep following the discussions.

This means the moon and Sun at the same time as two separate bodies in different parts of the sky.

No, it doesn’t because light bends in the cavity at different rates at different times during the day and night. Hence when the observations of the moon are complete this year, I’ll take the proposition that the moon and sun are the same thing and see how the model works. I already know how it works for tonight’s and last night’s showing.

Nobody knows for sure, it’s only an idea.

Tonight, the moon (at just after 6pm) is following the path of the Sun at the equinoxes (very, very roughly). The moon is just behind where I saw the sun today but about twice as high up off the ground.

View Comment
• JMAC1978 says:

if I get a clear sky id love to help observe in ohio for you… just not sure how you are conducting experiment? some people just cant see how the CONCAVE model works… but once you see it YOU GET IT!!!!

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Exactly. Once you get it, there is no going back. I’ve figured out the moon path and phases as well. It’s reflected sunlight being pushed around by the Sun’s plasmasphere. Sunlight during the day isn’t pushed around the plasmasphere because it is the main direct light and is far too strong. A small portion of the Sun’s light is pushed around however, and this is reflected off both the front and back of the Sun which forms the “moon” and its paths and phases. A new moon is invisible because the reflection is once again inline with the daylight Sun (front of the Sun). Get it? I felt good after finally getting it. I could have only done it by observing the moon in the sky and then predicting where and when it it was going to show up next. I feel I am 100% right on this.

So if nothing else good came about from getting that x60 zoom bridge camera, then the money was very well spent. I couldn’t figure out the moon looking at it on paper.

View Comment
• Wise One says:

I think you are going to find that the sun and moon are one and the same, just different effects. What I can’t figure out is which one is creating the other one or if they are both created by something else altogether. Did you ever see the video Crrow777 posted showing the anomaly on the moon within the same 24 hours there was a sun flare on the sun in the exact spot? I’ll see if I can find both videos…

View Comment
• Wise One says:
• Wild Heretic says:

Thanks for that. it’s great videoing the moon yourself. I’ve found it becomes a lot easier to visualize how it would look in a certain model. The moon I have been recording looks just like the video above except his camera looks to have a much higher exposure in low light. I can’t see stars in my mini sensor high zoom bridge camera. My take on that light point at the edge of the moon is just that it is part of the of the moon being lit up by the sun. It’s really a continuation from the crescent even though there is a non-lit part before it to the lit crescent part.

When I videoed the moon a a few days ago during the end of its last quarter phase, for two or three days in a row there was always a “star” at the same distance from the moon to the right. It followed the moon around. The star was still visible when the moon disappeared when the Sun came up. I’m guessing this “star” was Venus.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

I’ve had a bit of a breakthrough regarding the moon and how it reflects light in terms of the moon being reflected light from the back of the Sun. I was mapping out the reflected beams in my head to what I have been seeing in the sky the last week or so. I have found that the bend of the light rays match the same as the bend of the Sun’s rays except that these moon rays (reflected sun rays) are revolving around the Sun itself, NOT the Earth cavity. It also explains the phases perfectly.

The only thing I know to immediately revolve around the Sun is the Sun’s plasmasphere. So I looked up its revolution time and lo and behold sunspot rotation was first discovered in the 19th century to take 27.28 days. http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/explore/lessons/diffrot9_12.html

Guess how fast the moon is said to take one revolution around the Earth? 27.3 days – https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061210034237AAdG0wW

Here is another:
“As any amateur who has studied sunspots drift slowly across the sun from day to day though special filters would know, the Sun’s rotation period is about 27 days.” – http://www.smh.com.au/news/Big-Questions/Does-the-sun-revolve-on-an-axis-or-is-it-stationary-in-the-middleof-the-solar-system/2005/06/10/1118347582434.html

I know sunspot rotation is supposed to be between 25 and 35 days from equator to pole, but actual observed times seem to be about 27 days.

That is 90% of the moon puzzle solved right there. Just the moon and sun eclipses to go.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

No, I think I missed that video. Do you have a link?

View Comment
8. SPACE says:

How would you prove concave earth, if there would be no Sun, only Moon. Moonlight does not bend.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Hi Space, long time no hear.

We don’t know, Space, if moonlight bends or not as we haven’t tested it. Could it be tested like the bendy light experiment, but at night with no light-bulbs at the sighting board? The moon would have to be very bright. Would it be bright enough? I’m not sure. Interesting experiment if it could be done. I assume it bends like sunlight or the light-bulbs or any other non-coherent diffuse light, but less, because it is night time.

View Comment
• SPACE says:

Hi WH,

Did you noticed, that when moon sets, it not changes color. Sun when sets, becomes orange, red, various colors, atmospheric effects, bending light, horizon effect.
Moonlight seems not affect atmosphere. Need to check somewhere by seashore, disappearing ship effect. Of course, must be full moon. Some photo cameras can make photos at night.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Great observation. Never thought of that! I’d like to check that myself. It has to be because at night light bends the least, hence the lack of distortion which they say is down to atmospheric refraction, but must really be down to the electric effect on the bend of light. Otherwise the moon would show the same distortion as the Sun on the horizon, but doesn’t.

You’ve got something there.

View Comment
• Donald Sarty says:

I have seen the moon with a brown hue at moonrise and almost twice the size also when it rises, like it is being magnified, interesting stuff
Timelapse Moon rising
http://i.stack.imgur.com/TTrCz.jpg
Timelapse Moon setting

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Moon disappeared today Don, this morning. It just fades out. I’m going to capture it tomorrow morning on camera. I never thought to film it this morning.

View Comment
9. BlueMoon says:

The mapparium just allows the entire globe to be viewed at once. It is not necessary to view the continents’ locations accurately.
And Game of Thrones is set in a purely fantasy planet.
None of your other points on here are worth explaining, but it’s pretty obvious that the maps can be projected to a convex globe as well.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

The mapparium just allows the entire globe to be viewed at once. It is not necessary to view the continents’ locations accurately.

Correct, it isn’t necessary; but it does.

View Comment
• BlueMoon says:

You’re missing the point. The maps apply equally well whether the earth is convex or concave, as long as it is spherical, so it doesn’t qualify as proof either way.

View Comment
10. I notice you mentioned Plato as believing in a concave earth, however the website with his quote also has him saying, “Well, then, he said, my conviction is that the earth is a round body in the center of the heavens…” Would that just make him a geocentrist?

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Yeah, it isn’t an absolute clear-cut fact because different sources say different things. He existed so long ago, that I wouldn’t put too much weight on evidence either way. It is the same with Newton. I smell shenanigans though with both.

View Comment
11. snakelogos says:

Its interesting that concave earth fits what is said in the nag hammadi secret gospel of john.
There it is said that the world is a cave or tomb where we are locked in by the false god. His intentions of making us asleep and unaware and the fact that his creation is a cheap copy of the true world, are the reason for the many deceptions and illusions around us.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Very interesting. I must give that text a read.

View Comment
• snakelogos says:

Yes, its interesting how the text gives a model that is so consistent with reality from many points of view: philosophical, political, psychological, and even geographic/astronomic.
Its not surprise that such suppressed christianity has been incorrectly labelled ‘gnostic’ and its obvious proto-anarchist nature not found in any other religion (except maybe early jainism) shadowed with bullshit new-ageism and bogus interpretations.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Yes, I am more inclined to your view as well. I was speaking to a young Hungarian man who is definitely on the same lines of thought. He views this world as a poor artificial replica of the real one and that everything here breaks down (entropy) and this collapse is accelerating over the centuries. Looking forward to seeing you on the forum snakelogos. I can see many thoughtful contributors adding stuff when it is up and running (probably tomorrow).

WH

View Comment
12. Avvakum says:

Been reading a lot of your work the past few months and I am impressed. Please don’t assume that types like me, the ‘religious Christian’ types, would be against your work. For me, the Concave model ‘works’ for me quite well as an Orthodox Christian both rationally and Scripturally and from the teachings of the Early Fathers. The Cosmology of the world in early Christian times was pagan geocentric or covert esoteric Heliocentrism, expressed later in the Hermetic and Cabbalistic literature before it became open in modern times. Being free of earlier systems errors and in fact reflecting the true nature of reality, I have nothing against it and everything for it.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Yeah, Christians are for this model, while atheists don’t like it. I think the obvious reason is that this model is an artificial philosophy rather than than a natural one, so therefore for Christians, God fits in much better.

They tell us that the Hermetic literature denoted a heliocentric model, but there is a passage quoted in a book which suggests a wrong interpretation. I outlined it here: http://www.wildheretic.com/why-hide-the-concave-earth/2/

WH

View Comment
13. trigun4 says:

WH,

I would like to know what Sumerians say about the shape of the Earth. Can you research and make article on it?
We all know how flawed heliocentrism is and how Sitchin imposed heliocentric model on Sumerians talk on sun, moon and planets. It could be Celestial Sphere with star of david sacred geometry instead of Sun in the center.
I think it is important thing to do to connect sumerians with concave earth theory. Lets see how sumerians fit in concave model as they are the oldest civilization after north polar civilization.
Sun, moon and stars were created on 4th day, sumerians are older than that so they could be very well describing octahedron and planets orbiting it.
I would like to know what’s your take on Sumerians using concave earth model. 🙂

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

I’ve only read a smattering on old Sumerian texts. I would find them marginally interesting in regards to concave Earth theory because I wouldn’t necessarily expect them to know the correct cosmology. About their own creation on the other hand, is very interesting indeed. I don’t trust Sitchin either. So, it would take a long time to try and find what is and what isn’t. I don’t read ancient Sumerian either, so all sources cannot be truly verified. After a while I could get a lot of sources together and see if anything stands out, but I’m more interested in their ancient history accounts than anything else.

Research it yourself and upload it on the new forum I’m putting up. I’m about to make a separate forum with lots of different but possibly related topics (including concave Earth) to give us a more community feel to what I want to write about.

WH

View Comment
14. steve says:

WH, this is a site I found wondering if you’ve already read it.
Eric Dubay Real Flat Earther Interview
March 23, 2015
It says it’s about flatearth but, it does have an interesting picture of a HOLE AT THE NORTH POLE…if the pic is real, here’s visual proof.
Here’s a link to the pic.
https://outofthisworldx.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/flatearth.jpg

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

I saw that when I was writing a couple of the articles. To be honest I am not sure. I’m much more inclined to believe that it is the limitations of the satellite sensor and/or movement of the satellite than evidence for a hole. Unfortunately, I can’t make out any landmass underneath the clouds to get a better idea. The hole isn’t supposed to be anywhere near as large as that and also a bit closer to Russia than Alaska or Scandinavia. That hole area could have been blacked out, but it looks like a satellite image limitation if you look at the edges of the “hole”. The date of year is also very important, because it is dark at the north pole during the weeks around December – however, it could be an infrared picture, so…

Found the date: January 6, 1967 by ESSA-3, and in November 23, 1968 by ESSA-7.

ESSA-3 looks to be because it is the Dec solstice time (a less defined hole and more graduated light). ESSA-7 looks like a limitation of the composite image due to the movement of the satellite orbiting around the north pole? And maybe ESSA-3 was orbiting around the south pole and therefore could see more of the north pole? Just a guess though. I would have thought both satellites were sent to the south pole as the Americans still continue to do that.

It looks to be a visible light composite (but still not sure) – Weirdly, I am more with the agency’s reasoning with this one.
http://www.thehollowearthinsider.com/go-deeper/Site_-_N_ew/ESSA_7.html

View Comment
15. OneOfLove says:

The world you live in in is a kind of mixture of a flat earth and concave earth.

That is, you are living inside a round spherical body (you could call it a Dyson Sphere/concave). Thereby you are living on a “kind of” flat surface inside this sphere which basically encapsulates this “kind of” flat surface.

Why “kind of” flat? This seems to be correlated to the Torus-structure. That is, the bottom of the ocean, which encapsulates the continent surface(s) is at a lower altitude than the surface of the continents. So you essentially would see a half torus/doughnut shape on the “upper” part inside the sphere.

Thereby the kind of flat surface is consisting of higher dimensional artificial super computer like structures, like processing or computing units. These can bee seen on many pictures and videos taken by the alleged ISS and so forth. Or you see it brilliantly on other planets.

Further more the sun and moon are located INSIDE the sphere. The sun especially is thereby a reflector or converter that transforms energy from the higher dimensions (or a potential sun outside of the earth dome/sphere – whereby this potential outer “sun” would then transform energy – from another dimension – into the solar system sphere and channel it through into the planetary spheres).

There are now a few possibilities regarding the moon and the sun inside the sphere/dome which we like to adress.

Most likely they both are of the same type of construction, only WAY smaller in scale. They are in this sense comparable to space crafts in a fixated circular orbit. That is, they are these spherical domes with a kind of flat surface (which is shape shifting, thus simulating that the sun is moving around its own axis) inside and the concave view lets it appear to be round (which only is correct for the outer shell/encapsulation).

Or the sun would be a flat disk in the sky channelling through energy from “outside”. This is less likely (flat disk shape).

ALso the sun inside the earth dome/sphere also is used as a portal to exit (“comets” flying into the sun could therefore be UFOS) or enter the dome. This is another hint, that it is a sphere inside the dome, a kind of black hole if you like, since solar bodies are essentially black holes.

planetary bodies are black holes also in a way, since the kind of flat surface has black hole characteristics. the whole data or information that is 3D holographically processed inside the dome (resulting in the environment you visually perceive) is stored on a black hole kind layer/kind of flat surface – additional information: galaxies are generated or projected from a black hole sun in the middle, the same accounts for solar systems and so forth, in holographically decreasing scale.

That is, in general, the kind of flat surface which is essentially the motherboard of the planetary (or solar and so forth, since it is the same type of construction) body creates the environment you live “on” (allegedly). It processes the information and energy virtually, digitally, holographically.

Regarding the moon:

The moon is also (MOST likely), therefore, a sphere as well with a kind of flat surface in the middle (the inside earth’s moon such as a potential “real moon” outside of it, which would be of the same type of construction).

It exists orbiter footage (pictures and videos) of the moon that suggest that someone or something approached the moon and AT LEAST flew around it or in front of it.

Now you maybe have already realized that none of your “space shuttles” can leave the dome/sphere.

Thus material which would be allegedly taken in outer space would have to be taken by technology that you are not using officially. They can say we put an Apollo module into space to fly to the moon, whereby they used complete different technology. This could be one explanation.

Another explanation could be, that they only flew to the moon inside the earth’s sphere/dome. The question remains how did they get the footage of the far side of the moon. This is something the instrument is still figuring out.

It could be that they have camera technology to lid up the darkened parts of the moon in a way that they can receive results that are looking like you would make a picture of the front part of the moon.

But anyway, maybe you remember some experiments that were supposedly done by the Apollo astronauts where they descended a part of the module “onto the lunar surface”. The moon then “rang like a bell”. This is due to the module part hit the moon’s dome. The question remains which moon dome did it hit? The one inside the earth’s sphere or outside in space. Both is possible. Some footage even seems to be taken inside the moon sphere, but this could also be a misinterpretation. This needs still to be clarified.

Then lets take a look at the “night sky”. The night sky you look at is a simulation. It is generated by the inward surface of the dome/sphere. It is thereby, most likely, duplicating the stars and planets (and alike) outside of the dome. This is under the assumption that they actually exist out there to begin with, which should be the case.

However, when you zoom in on planets and stars at the night sky you can observe that they are no planets or stars but rather shape shifting structures that emit a light.

That is, it is VERY likely that NASA and other space agencies ONLY make pictures of the earths dome inward surface motherboard that generates these “images” of stars, planets, nebulae and alike.

This is corroborated by the fact that their pictures also show these subtle substructures (at the dome surface, they are like processing units) that are underlying nebulae, planets and galaxies. They are all areas where light is emitted, resulting in these dots you see at the night sky without zooming in on them.

When agencies with their big telescopes zoom in on these structures/areas they get a big image of a planet or nebulae and so forth.

This mentioned artificial substructure (earth’s doom inward surface motherboard) can also be seen on own pictures and so forth, thus it highly suggests that the agency pictures are also only focussing the faked duplicates at the earth’s doom surface.

The sun they show you on SOHO cameras most likely resembles the sun inside the dome/sphere. They take this material (as well as all other images of planets and stars, galaxies and so forth) with EARTH BASED telescopes.

They can thereby zoom in that far that you get pictures like from the alleged curiosity rover which is NOT on the mars surface but pasted in to these areal pictures they take from the area where the mars hologram/duplicate planet is created. because the surface of mars, when you see through the fake sand and smudging/blurring obfuscation looks the same as the surface of the moon, pluto and the other planets although some like Jupiter have a more “not see through” hologram coverage.

That is because all of them are only existing at the dome surface which has a specific kind of structures which – on first sight – look like buildings/bases/industrial areas created by other entities. But in general the surface of all of them has this artificial/constructed stuff “on the surface” which resembles the computer motherboard that creates the surface experience inside such a dome.

Of course when looking at these duplicates at the staged/faked/projected night sky you cannot see the surface (in holographic fashion like you see it when you look around) of a planet, you only, ever, see these structures. but they are covered with a kind of hologram cloak which is sometimes really see through (moon, for instance) and sometimes less see through (Saturn, Jupiter and alike). this hologram cloak could be a representation of the surface when you would be inside the dome/sphere. This would make sense but can as of now not be answered definitively.

That is, all you see when you look through a telescope or high zoom camera is a product of the earth’s dome motherboard. A representation of that which should be outside of the dome.

It is thereby possible that all the measurements (temperatures, scale, atmosphere and so on) that the space agencies have conducted are information from the real one’s outside of the earth dome/sphere. That is, when you take measurements of the duplicate planets and such, they receive channelled/filtered through data that originates from the duplicate in outer space. The earth dome channels through this information, into the duplicate inside the dome/at the dome inward surface.

It could also be, that this information is received from the higher dimensional originals (see above regarding the sun converter). So the small duplicates at the earth dome surface are picking up the information from their original and filter it through into the third dimension which then is measured by your scientists.

Of course they could have made it all up, like they normally like to do (big bang hoax, moon landing hoax, mars probes hoax, voyager hoax, satellite hoax, ISS hoax, gravity hoax and so forth).

Essentially (to fit it into a bigger picture) the third density where you are located in right now is a computer like simulation that originates from the beyond/soul realms. The experience you have is a very elaborate consciousness simulation that souls use to learn and progress. It is projected from afterlife type realms but also connected to the other dimensions inside the universe simulation.

This is the reason why planets and solar bodies and so forth are “super computers” that create digital virtual realities that are holographically processed and visualized such as sensed. They are basically “soul technology”. Very elaborate, very illusive, very “real” looking, but it is a simulation, or a video game or holographic movie, whatever resonates most with you.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

It is much simpler than that. No need for science fiction for the most part.

View Comment
16. David L. says:

Yes, if the mappers wanted to show convexity, then they would have used barrel distortion on the lat/long lines. Note that they used pin-cushion distortion which indicates concavity.

View Comment
17. Observer says:
• Wild Heretic says:

As Julius Caesar was once supposed to have said: “Men willingly believe what they wish.”
http://www.quotes-positive.com/quote/men-willingly-believe-wish-53/

That’s why I’m doing a concave Earth questions article. I’ve nearly finished it. Just adding to the “other candidate” for gravity and fill out some ideas for why they are hiding CET. A lot of people need help, or a mental framework as to how things could work in another model before accepting any empirical or scientific evidence.

It is a huge stumbling block, which Caesar recognized. People are people though. I’d do my thing whether I was alone in the world or surrounded by billions. It’s really a selfish desire I have to find out what is going on, at least to a certain level of understanding.

View Comment
• Observer says:

Here is an interesting theory: that reality changes depending on what the humans are thinking:

The theory starts with the following understanding, and understanding which doesn’t focus so much on the fact that humans were genetically engineered by higher beings, but zooms out to the ultimate big picture of “Yes, and what created them, and what created them, and at the very very very beginning, what was the original consciousness which created all of creation” so either way, whatever the shape of the environment we live in, this theory begins with the understanding that creator’s body is what we are living in and what we consist of, thus, just as an ocean containing life should itself be recognized “a living ocean”, so too ALL OF EXISTENCE ITSELF should be recognized as “a living environment”, and thus no living being inside this living environment should foolishly think that one is separate from the creator. All of creation is just parts of the creator, swimming within the creator, so all is one, the creator created creation to interact with itself, and the more we realize this fact, the more we are actually able to function harmoniously for the benefit of all existence, like a huge body in which the parts are no longer fighting each other and seeing each other as competition, all of the parts move towards realizing that the most benefit for all comes from all parts working together in harmony, synergistic cooperation style, to do whatever it is the whole wills, which means basically to align one’s own will with the will of all existence (existence being the creator, aka creation, aka all beings within creation) and that probably what the creator/creation really wills to do is to know itself more and more (and thus every living being is basically an information collector which, unconsciously during sleep passes all of its daily observations to the main overall whole living creator/creation existence-wide consciousness. Just as oil permeates the olive, so too this total consciousness permeates all of existence. Actually, that summary right there is put forth by me, OK, here comes the new theory which I just read which I want to share with you, because bear with me now, this is totally related to our convex vs concave question here:

The theory which I just learned from “I see freely” (“ICFreely”) (one of the most intelligent folks over there at CluesForum) goes like this:

The physical sector in which we happen to live flip flops back and forth between two very different states, these two states take turns being true, depending on… (drumroll please) … depending on what one happens to be thinking:

A) if one is more sure about the creator’s existence, even more than one’s own existence, then suddenly the reality one lives in is: we humans really do live in a place where our home revolves around the sun, a state which is called geocentric.

B) if one is more sure about one’s own existence, even more than the creator’s existence, then suddenly the reality one lives in is: we humans really do live in a place where the sun revolves around our home, a state which is called geocentric.

I recommend everyone reads ICFreely’s post, it might be true, it might be false, but either way, it is a very interesting “both camps are right” statement.

http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2397675#p2397675

The one correction I want to make, is that I think the “B” option above is being misinterpreted. The “B” option, when read with the concave understanding, can be seen as saying, “B) if one is more sure about one’s own existence, even more than the creator’s existence, then suddenly the reality one lives in is: we humans really do live in a place where THE SUN REVOLVES AROUND INSIDE OUR CONCAVE HOME, a state which we call Concave Earth.”

OK, actually, I don’t mean to imply that the concave earth reality sprouts from not recognizing the creator.

What I’m trying to say is that perhaps there are two states: convex and concave, and that we actually flip-flop back and forth between each depending on what we vibe we are currently resonating with.

And on that note, here is a very interesting page which I discovered last night as well:

http://mandelaeffect.com/major-memories

Enjoy! 🙂

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

I personally think the core tenets of reality are unchangeable. If I click the heels of my ruby slippers together three times and shut my eyes repeating the words “the earth is flat, the earth is flat, the earth is flat”, when I open them again will the Earth become flat so that I can finally fly from Australia to New Zealand in 15 hours, or see the Sun move as it should on a flat earth? No. The basic observations always stay the same. The sun rises and sets in roughly the same position each year, I don’t float up to the center of the Earth cavity etc.

I will say that reality is flexible however, but I don’t think it is 100% subjective so that anybody’s opinions can be and are 100% correct. If unbelievers carry out the laser experiment and find that the earth is concave, then that “all of reality is 100% subjective” theory can be thrown away. Otherwise we may as well hang up our boots and join Einstein or Newton in their thought experiments.

It’s quite a simple thing to try out. Take three people – one hardcore atheist heliocentric mainstream thumping troll, one hardcore flat earth fundamentalist, and Steven Christopher. Each of them have to perform the exact same laser experiment with the exact same equipment at the exact same location. One carries it out on Monday, another Tuesday, and another Wednesday, each day at 12pm. If each person gets the results that they like, i.e atheist gets a measurement for a convex Earth, flat earther gets a flat earth etc. then the theory that reality is subjective and purely based on belief is a very good one and that the macro world is the same as quantum theory describing the supposed flip-flopping micro world. If however, the results are the exact same, then reality has an external program to it which defies opinion, expectation and beliefs. This is essentially what science is, repeatable experiments. This is of course not to say that the external program cannot be influenced by other external practices (magick), but these practices are more scientific in nature and they would be taught from person to person, i.e. the variables don’t change, i.e. if I do A+B, then C always happens.

I’ve been reading off and on about the mandela effect for a few years now. Glitches in the matrix at reddit is even better and more varied in possibilities and ideas. Sure, the external program isn’t always perfect or runs smoothly (one possible explanation for glitches), but that is not to say that the external program doesn’t exist and just by changing my opinion will all the results of my experiments now change accordingly.

The next question is why the macro is different to the micro? Is it because of poor interpretation of the micro, or the fact that the external program is more flexible with the micro due to its size and essence?

View Comment
• Observer says:

Yes, you’re right WH, one person simply thinking something doesn’t suddenly change the environment, no matter how much one might try, I agree with you there. If positive thinking really worked miracles, I would be enjoying a huge field of high-CBD green by now. So yeah, sorry it seemed I was implying the ruby slipper click-click path was possible.

I guess the post which ICFreely was sharing (not written by him, he was just sharing what some guy shared in a Stanford lecture, and ICFreely still hasn’t explained whether he agrees with that flip-flop theory or if he disagrees with it) was basically saying that if ALL (or perhaps a strong majority) a majority of the beings in a certain sector of existence (for example, the beings here within this 12,756km diameter hole in the rock here) were to mentally “vote” in a high enough percentage toward one a certain vibe, that then, in that case, it would be enough to flip the sector from concave to convex, or vice versa.

And, looking at my post above, I see I stupidly made another silly typo again (damn it, just like back when I was mixing up the suffixes -cave and -vex, haha, and Simon used that as an excuse to ban me from posting any more concave earth points at Clues Forum, haha) the “A” option paragraph I just wrote above obviously should have ended with the word “heliocentric”, not “geocentric.”

I guess what I was really trying to say above is, look at this sentence here, from ICFreely’s post:

“Modern science clearly teaches that the earth is actually revolving around the sun, the solar system being heliocentric, whereas in the Torah the universe is considered geocentric, with all the heavenly bodies, the sun, the stars and the moon revolving around the earth, but… the ultimate Torah experts say we that both are true: we flip-flop back and forth between both states depending on humanity’s vibe.”

Well, I’m proposing an interesting possibility that modern folks (like the person who gave that Stanford lecture in the ICFreely link above) might be slightly misinterpreting what the Torah actually said about this, and that the paragraph could be rewritten as follows:

“Modern science clearly teaches that the earth is actually revolving around the sun, the solar system being heliocentric, whereas in the Torah the universe is considered ConCAVE, with all the heavenly bodies, the sun, the stars and the moon revolving around *INSIDE* the earth, but… the ultimate Torah experts say we that both are true: we flip-flop back and forth between both states depending on humanity’s vibe.”

So to make it even simpler, perhaps “convex heliocentric vs. convex geocentric… it’s both” as mentioned in the Torah was really trying to say, “convex heliocentric vs. ConCAVE… it’s both.”

So the first point I wanted to make above, about the “isn’t this ‘both’ answer interesting, I understand, you’re not buying that. That’s fine, I’m not attached to it, I just wanted to throw that possibility out there.

The next point I’m making there, is that people who assume the earth is convex (almost everyone nowadays), when interpreting old texts, always ASSUME that the old texts were talking about “flat OR convex geocentric OR convex heliocentric”, but the folks here can see that many of the old texts (just like the old maps Karol & Donald and you have shared) really are talking about ConCAVE.

For example, in that post by ICFreely mentioned above, the modern Rabbi thinks Psalms 24 is talking about a convex world, when it says, ‘To GOD is the earth (ha’aretz) and all that fills it…’ but to me that sentence is obviously talking about conCAVITY because it’s saying “…all that FILLS the conCAVITY of the Earth.” I mean to me that sentence only makes sense if interpret, unless you’re talking about filling the ConCAVE Earth cavity.

Now, next point, separate yet concurrently related, the reason I suddenly last night became open to the possibility of reality being changeable (please forgive my sudden far-out-ness) is because right before reading ICFreely’s post I somehow found that “Mandela Effect” site, which really blew my mind.

The “M.E.” site blew my mind and opened me up to accepting the possibility of “changeable reality”, or “dimension jumping” because of the following points, I wonder if any of these apply to you:

I happen to remember Berenstein Bears vividly from my childhood.

I happen to remember South America being directly south of Mexico.
Now, suddenly I see I have jumped to a timeline in which Brazil is south of Maine!
For some reason, totally contrary to my memory, there is absolutely nothing directly below Mexico.

I also am quite sure New Zealand was slightly NORTH-east of Australia, Australia was NOT so close to Indonesia, Poland was not so HUGE as it is now, Baja did NOT have a huge scoop missing from its west coast, Alaska did NOT have huge scoops missing from its west coast, Russia was NOT a mere stone’s throw from Alaska, and Cuba was NOT a mere stone’s throw from Florida, and Cuba itself was NOT so HUGE, and Madagascar was a tiny uninhabited island, not a HUGE island which reportedly has over 22 Million residents, all of these little changes don’t match my memory.

I remember Peanuts was created by Charles M. Shultz, not Charles M. Shulz.

I remember “Mirror, Mirror, on the wall…”, not “Magic Mirror on the wall.”

I remember “It’s a beautiful day in the neighborhood…”, not “It’s a beautiful day in this neighborhood…”

I also vividly remember that Holbein-style painting of King Henry the VIII holding a huge turkey leg with a bite already taken out of it, but now here I am in a timeline in which that painting never actually existed.

So yeah, this “Reality has somehow changed, for some folks at least” theory being proposed might be a clever psy-op to fool me into looking foolish, thus tarnishing the image of whatever I am interested in (Media Fakery + Concave Earth) but if so, they sure have done a good job at fooling me, because: I’m kinda’ convinced that somehow (maybe due to a car accident which would have resulted in my death) maybe my soul (and many other folks as well) somehow jumped into a 99%-similar but 1%-different dimension. Maybe people do jump a lot. Maybe half of the folks in any given universe are “native”, and maybe half have jumped from different universes. And of those who have jumped, many don’t notice the slight difference, but some do.

Which is why, it seemed like an interesting synchronicity that immediately after spending all last night awake reading about and thinking about the possibility of dimension jumping, suddenly today I see a new post by ICFreely in which someone is bringing up the possibility of “dimension jumping between convex heliocentric to convex geocentric, and vice versa” so I just wanted to point out that an even BETTER remix of that Rabbi’s theory would be “dimension jumping between convex heliocentric to conCAVE, and vice versa.”

The idiots who keep claiming they are living on the outside of a convex ball (haha), or living on the top of a pizza (haha), maybe those folks really ARE living in such dimensions.

Meanwhile, here I am, quite confidently living in the conCAVE earth dimension, in which space is tiny, and meanwhile those conVEXers are so absolutely sure about their space being vast and huge… maybe each of us really does live in a different dimension/matrix/holodeck/dream/trip/VirtualRealityProgram, even though we somehow are able to interact with each other face to face and online.

Oh yeah, final point for today, do heliocentric convex supporters really know how frickin’ crazy the belief system they hold is?

#1. A person standing standing at the equator is moving in a counter-clockwise rotation at a speed of 1,037 mph.

#2. Meanwhile, the earth is moving in a counter-clockwise revolution around the sun at a speed of 66,666 mph.

#3. The next factor is the sun (with the solar system) is moving in a northward direction at a speed of 420,000 mph.
This is the point which most heliocentric folks don’t realize is part of the heliocentric package: the fact that the sun is flying around!
And since factors #2 and #3 are happening at the same time, the earth is thus moving in a helical motion (like a curly telephone wire.)

#4. And now all the heliocentric theorists have to take that whole package described above, and turn it 90 degrees sideways:
http://i.imgur.com/Z7FpC.gif
because although from Earth’s perspective the sun is moving “north”, from the perspective of someone floating far far away,
looking at the frisbee called the milky way galaxy, with the frisbee being seen in a horizontal position of course, not vertical,
the sun is moving in a counter-clockwise revolution around the milky way. And now get this, the milky way is moving “upward”:
(this “upward” direction simply means “away from the initial point where all of this matter exploded out from in the big bang”.)
And thus, since factors #3 and #4 are concurrent, our galaxy is also moving in a helical motion (again, like a curly telephone wire.)
OK, so the milky way galaxy is moving away from “the big bang center birthplace of all matter” at a speed of about 2,237,000 mph.

http://i.imgur.com/nsGkZxD.png

So a person on the equator is traveling through space, from the ‘big bang’ center
(in a helix motion, which is in a helix motion, which is in a helix motion)
at the speed of 1000+66,666+420,000+2,237,000 = 2,724,666mph!

So, convexers are either living in a universe in which their bodies are traveling 2,724,666 mph… wow.

Or, and this is just a possibility here, maybe the simplest explanation is that convexers are simply… wrong.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

I’ll read the mandela stuff later, but my opinion on that Standford lecture is that there is a conflict in the “Jewish” community as to whether their religious texts say helio or geocentric. The Torah (old testament) says geocentric, the Kabbala says heliocentric. Oh no! How can we resolve this? I know, let’s say it is both and it is just a matter of perspective. lol. Or, forget your religions and start doing some science to find out for sure. If they did the science, they would find that it is concave and then they can argue about perspective or use common sense and logic for further speculation, whether the Earth is spinning or it is the Sun etc.

There is no dimension jumping between convex and concave and flat pizza. The different properties of all three models are far too vast and drastic. You would notice them for sure. A 93 million mile away Sun versus possibly 6000 miles, different sun paths and southern hemisphere flight times for flat earth etc. No, the observational evidence is far too consistent as far as I have seen and read. Iron meteorites don’t suddenly go from an iron-nickel alloy to a ball of helium/hydrogen gas depending on what dimension I am in. If there was a ton of individual subjective experiences like this validating the three models, I could agree, but there isn’t. The core model is immutable. The rest is up for grabs.

View Comment
• Observer says:

Yeah, you’re right again, I think I was almost pulled away from reality, thanks for bringing me back.

That site is simply listing the top things that humans have faulty memories about, and making people think “Yeah, yeah, other people’s memories match mine, so this isn’t just a case of faulty memories, we must have JUMPED TO ANOTHER DIMENSION!” craziness.

And if one accepts that idea, then suddenly one starts thinking that nothing is real, that reality is highly mutable, and… the end result will be not being sure of anything since “Well, we keep jumping around to varying universes, each universe being different, so nothing can really be said for sure about reality.”

And then that Torah lecturer’s words coincidentally were placed in front of me the next day, with a similar theme of, “We jump back and forth between this universe and another universe…” which (in my grogginess from having stayed up the entire previous night contemplating my childhood memories) I stupidly thought, Yeah, reading about the M.E. multi-universe theory, and now this Torah multi-universe theory, one right after another, this must be synchronicity, this must be a sign that this the multi-universe theory is right!

Yeah, I think the rulers would love for this idea to get popular, because it sends thinkers off into some meaningless realm of “Nothing is real, we are not in reality, why even bother trying to figure anything out, it’s just going to change mysteriously, we’re just going to get sent to some other universe again next week, so no need to contemplate the details of the environment we are living in right here right now…”

Thanks for helping to bring me back. I’m gonna’ take a break from typing posts for awhile.

Before I go, a totally unrelated question, but something I’m curious about: do you happen to have red hair WH?

[My totally racist theory is that folks with red hair have a slightly higher-than-average ability to observe reality slightly more-clearly than most…]

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

haha. Do I have red hair? No not really. I have red haired ancestors in places but that’s it. My hair is darkish brown (what I have left lol). I do have red hair in my beard (if I were to grow a beard) and eyebrows.

You’ll like my next article, as the last question as to why they could be hiding the concave Earth is really long, speculative and philosophical with glitch examples and other interesting reads thrown in.

View Comment
• Errol says:

All that we see is within our body/soul. We are exploring our self/God.

This is why the chakra or kundalini system in the human body is actually the solar system. There are 7 chakras. Though some believe there are 9 chakras or even more. Just as some believe there are 7 planets while others believe there to be 9 or more. The ultimate chakra is the golden crown chakra at the top of the head – represented by the sun. This is the higher self or soul and connection to spirit or God. Just as the sun is thought to be a direct link to the One Creator.

This is represented somewhat in an “Outer Limits” show, where the camera is shown looking into space. As the camera zooms out it slowly comes out of a face of a man. The universe can then be seen within the head of this man. The final message of the story was that each individual is the master of his reality, through his thoughts – to an extent.

View Comment
18. Wild Heretic says:

I have updated the concave earth article. It is ten pages long and mentions 3 experiments for you to try out (not 4). The rectilineator, tamarack Mines and 19th century balloon observations have not really changed. I’ve added the “falling object” effect to Tamarack Mines, Steve’s video and redoing of the rectilineator experiment and my own conclusion to the balloon observations.

The indirect evidence is newly written, but has taken a lot from the horizon and bendy light articles. All the maths is included.

This is now a great basis for further experiments which can link to this article. I hope you like it.

View Comment
19. Observer says:

I recently added one more little piece to my mental painting of our environment:
The “Earth is expanding” concept WORKS within the Concave Earth understanding.

Meaning, smart folks have realized the jigsaw continent pieces show the earth is expanding.
Before coming to the concave earth understanding, I knew this expansion makes sense.

This expansion is what causes the large spaces between the continents which we see now.
Whether a convex-er, or a concave-er, the continent shapes prove they once were one.
NOT “Fake Pangea: surrounded by water, with assumption of constant diameter.”
Instead, “Real Pangea: one land, back when Earth’s diameter was much much smaller.”

So now, I see that expansion understanding meshes well with the concave earth understanding.
This hole in the rock, this hollow space, the concave earth, started out much SMALLER.

The pressure which starts at the center and pushes outward in all directions (aka “gravity”)
is thus, continuously over time, making the concave earth hollow space LARGER every year.

So currently the hollow space within the concave earth has a diameter of about 12,742km.
This additional “expansion” theory simply says the diameter previously was LESS.

The initial size was so small that all of the continents were fused together as one land.
As the “gravity” pressure from the center pushed outward, the diameter increased.

Anyway, my current mental description combines Concave Earth with Expanding Earth.
Just like “100km Glass”, this “Expanding Earth” detail is NOT a vital part of the Concave Earth.

The fact that we live INSIDE a spherical space, the Concave Earth. is the main vital fact to realize.
All of the other details (like glass, expansion, etc) are mere details tempting endless debates.

Like the “Mason/Jesuit/Ashkenazi/Aryan/RhNegative/Alien/ParasiticSpirit” problem.
The fact is that ALL beings exist by parasitically stealing energy from other beings to live.
Even a vegetarian like myself is constantly killing plant beings for all my selfish activities.
Some groups of beings are conspiring more ruthlessly, more effectively, than other groups.
As somebody born with Ashkenazi+Basque+Celt+Aryan DNA, I know my evil ego is strong.
All humans carry this “horizontal-transfer” of alien DNA injection, some simply carry more.
If my spirit had been born into a blacker body, I could proudly claim to carry LESS evil DNA.
But even then, even as a rare black-as-night human, I would STILL carry a tiny amount of it.

So, in whatever body we are born in, the goal is to resist the parasitic programming we inherited.
To resist the “kill others for energy, enslave others for energy” programming there in our DNA.
And to resist the “produce fear (which feeds the parasitic spirits)” impulse in our mind programming.

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/howtovanquishfear23may07.shtml
(Not vouching for that author, nor that site, simply vouching for the “Be Courageous” message)

The SeptemberClues forum is united about the understanding that most “news” images/movies are computer generated.

The WildHeretic forum is united about the understanding that we live INSIDE a spherical space called the Concave Earth.

View Comment
20. Observer says:

http://i.imgur.com/boCQhUj.jpg

This is a good visual summary of nice solid points,
attempting to convince the reader of a “flat-earth”,
some of the points are useful for those who realize
that we are actually living inside the Concave Earth.

For example, the angle of rays peeking from clouds,
which instantly proves the “sun is far” belief is false.

To view the above photo easily, start on the top left,
scroll down, then move a little to the right, & repeat.
A long skinny presentation would have been better. 🙂

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Thanks for that. The new CET article should be ready by this time next week or sooner. I’ve added 4 do-it-yourself experiment instructions to help people do it themselves to find out what the story is. The article will be 10 pages but on one link (the same one it is on now) and is the most thorough to date.

View Comment
• Observer says:

Wow! One link, with 10 pages, thorough, new, including 4 self-experiments (SELF-experiments being the real definition of science) all sounds great, looking forward to it! 🙂

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Yes, it is time to bring this to the next stage of development. I haven’t added much to the Tamarack mines and rectilineator parts, just a little about steve’s video and his current repetition of the experiment. With TM I’ve just added a small bit about the falling objects effect.

If nobody else does the experiments, I know that I definitely will at some near stage in the future. I know where to do them in my locale and know what equipment to get. I don’t know the absolute practical details in one of them, but these experiments are nice and simple and will prove once and for all the arguments put forward… or not 😉 haha.

WH

View Comment
• Observer says:

http://i.imgur.com/9CGbvVt.jpg

The same image, but this time without accidental shrinkage. 🙂

View Comment
21. Observer says:

A goldmine of information being is in the link which I am about to share, a link which I found 30 minutes ago, first I would like to describe it as well as to describe my current understanding of reality.

The website I am about to share, contains some interesting admittances which are very interesting to the readers who are able to view these sentences from the correct perspective of “we are living within the concave earth and thus ‘space’ is merely the 12,700 diameter ball of non-vast, surprisingly-tiny, space existing WITHIN the concave earth.”

This website which I am about to share, thus contains sentences which begrudgingly and/or accidentally provide evidence of the concave earth understanding, and yet at the same time, to avoid being led into a fantasy falsehood, one must remember that this website contains there many, many, many purposeful and accidental phrases of misinformation and disinformation, claims which to the uncritical reader gives a false impression of reality.

So to summarize this website which I am about to share, it is a website which contains “the official story”, and thus contains both embarrassing facts which they have been forced to admit due to the few awake researchers who have publicized what the actual human senses notice when the brain is actually turned on and actually reporting relatively correctly to the rest of humans what is actually being sensed from first hand sensing (a rare action indeed, for most humans, for most of the time) while concurrently this website which I am about to share contains many mistakes and lies, which, as mentioned already, is very interesting (to me, at least) to read while mentally noticing and mentally correcting the various false impressions which this entire collection of words imply (both purposefully by the higher authors who know the concave earth reality, and accidentally by the lower authors who actually believe the convex earth falsehood.)

Basically, we here at WildHeretic’s site, are about to disect and analyze the official cannon of the convex earth belief system claims, a hundred-thousand-phrase collection of claims meant to support the huge grandest hoax of all: the hoax that we are living on the outside of a ball and thus surrounded by vast space. That grandest hoax is meant to hide the fact that we are living on the INSIDE of a ball, that space is tiny and surrounded by earth, and that earth is thus surrounded by vast amounts of rock, with the absolute possibility and high probability of tunnels existing, tunnels leading from here (this little 12,700km diameter bubble of air existing within the vast rock, a bubble which we call earth) to other locations far away (other little XX,XXXkm diameter bubbles of air existing in other locations within the vast rock, bubbles which could be rightly defined as “the place where the older, more technologically advanced beings, came through one (or more) tunnels long ago, entered this bubble known as earth through holes in the earth, created what we now call ‘humans’ (ourselves) through genetic splicing and genetic manipulation, and then set up this lamp that moves/rotates around within the concave earth, a lamp which we ‘humans’ now call ‘the sun’ as well as other things which move around, like the thing which we call ‘the moon.’)

And let’s remember that if the lamp was created and placed in the center (or the semi-center, either way) of our 12,700km bubble of space which we call earth, then probably before the arrival of these lamp-placing energy parasites (parasitic in the physical labor sense, and in the physical food source sense, and in the vibrational “loosh” energy source (the energy produced by your brain and body while existing, energy which increases and decreases and changes in vibrational character depending on the “thoughts” and “feelings” that each being is pumping out during each moment of its existance, energy which most beings assume are NOT being absorbed by ‘higher beings’ but quite possible COULD be one of the three sources of energy which the creators of the lamp, as mentioned above, parasitically feed off of, in this concave loosh farm they set up, which we, the almost entirely non-cognizant sources of labor/meat/vibration live inside of every day.

Probably, in our original form (and in this sentence “our original form is defined as “the form which our ancestors happened to have BEFORE our line of procreation was subjected to the first act of genetic splicing and genetic modification”) in that original form we were probably darkness-living / darkness-loving / darkness-thriving beings (since, before the lamp makers arrived through the tunnel(s) which lead to their bubble(s) in the vast rock which really is the substance of the actual reality in which our bubbles respectively sit (unspinning, of course, simply bubbles of space interspersed within vast rock, swiss cheese is the best image analogy to create a mental picture of this reality.)

So, before the lamp arrived, we darkness-dwelling mammals produced each day, via the chemical factory located within the very center of our brains, a chemical factory called the pineal gland, a LOT more DMT each day, since darkness is what tells the body to produce more DMT, and light is what tells our body to produce less DMT. So before the lamp-placers came and placed their lamp circulating within this bubble (leaving periods of vital darkness every 24 hours so that we DMT producers can still get a tiny daily amount of unconscious DMT production time which we now call ‘sleep’ and ‘dreaming.’

So anyway, this website I am about to share contains the official collection of claims which are currently used to support the granest hoax ever performed: the hoax of us NOT living within a loosh farm, a loosh farm set up by more technilogically advanced parasitic energy consumers which we would call ‘aliens from space’ except they are not from space (wince space is small) they are from far away spaces in far away parts of the huge rock swiss cheese actual universe.

Here, just to whet your appetite, are just two sentences from this treasure chest of sentences: “At an altitude of approximately 100 miles (160 km) the sky is totally black. Stars do flicker and the area between stars is black since there is not enough air to scatter light rays.” – http://fas.org/spp/military/docops/army/ref_text/chap5im.htm

Alright, here is the treasure chest I have been waving around in a teasing fashion for the past many paragraphs, here it is, enjoy:

http://fas.org/spp/military/docops/army/ref_text/

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Nice Observer, real nice.

I enjoy a good read :)!

View Comment
22. karol says:

Two private experiments confirming Concave Earth. Cheap and easy to do. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhiIA2Cb5LQ

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Thanks karol. I noticed what you posted on truthseeker and had to add the ferry one to the horizon article. I’ll be doing this experiment myself sometime in the future when I get a zoom camera and extension. I have an ideal place to so in Ireland. Looking forward to that.

View Comment
23. Steve Christopher says:

WH, can you come to South Padre Island? I can provide housing for you and yours. I am about to re-conduct the Rectilineator and would like your expertise. Let me know via email or facebook.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Steve, I was thinking of you yesterday having to do that experiment alone which is daunting for anyone. If I was in the locale I would be there like a shot, but there is no way for me to be there as I live in the Republic of Ireland and my wife works as a teacher (she isn’t interested in the concave earth and is working at this time of year).

I’m a newbie to this too, but if you have any questions at all then we can chat and hopefully we can work things out. I need to get skype and give you an address. I’ll type the address in this comment when I have it.

WH

On the positive side, I will be visiting a place regularly in Wexford Ireland from now on which has an ideal beach and pennisula 30 miles away to take horizon readings with a telescopic lens. Wexford has some great beaches and a ferry harbour too. I’ll just have to get the camera. I saw the x60 Panasonic one and a x4.5 attachment which was pretty cheap. The quality of the photo with the cheap x4.5 attachment will be shit, but that’s fine. I’m only be doing it for the horizon. That’s what I have in mind for the future at least.

EDIT: Steve, my Skype username is “wildheretic”. Call me anytime you see me online if you want.

View Comment
• Steve Christopher says:

ok, just sent you a skype contact request.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Just accepted. How are you doing so far?

View Comment
• sully says:

WH, is there some way we might create a private but social network for this community? I appreciate your blog and work greatly, but blogs are terrible for connecting as a community with each other.

Just a thought….

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

That is very true. Would a facebook page on “private” settings do? I know nothing on facebook is really private, but private enough in a public sense.

What about an open forum like Concave Earth Forum?

View Comment
24. dan says:

The Gofast Amateur Rocket proves zetetic flat earth. It launches over Nevada on July 14th 2014, 7:30AM and witnesses the full moon over Australia high over the horizon.

The heliocentric establishment holds that it should have only been 9% visible over the horizon.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

I saw that argument on Youtube. To be honest I wasn’t sure either way.

View Comment
• dan says:

It is my understanding that the concave model is trying to framework the heliocentric.

That’s what I get from Stephen Christ’s material anyway. If that’s the case then this rocket launch would dispel that.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

The night sky is tricky because we have to make sure the observational data is correct to start off with. I don’t think I have heard anyone argue against the accuracy of Stellarium yet, so maybe software like that is pretty reliable. It’s tough with the illusion that bending light gives also.

I haven’t really looked at the planets so I couldn’t comment on that.

View Comment
• Alex Fresh says:

The Earth is invariably flat and light bends upwards as it extends away and falls below the vanishing point of the perspective vision as it comes toward the observer.

View Comment
25. What a bunch lovely open minded folk.
A true Platonic Cyber Symposium dedicated to the trapping the truth with reasons Gambit, and not a bunch of people dogmatically preaching unassailable fallacies or truths, who usually miss the point entirely, and always omitting the Stone the builders forgot that Heisenberg and Bohrs so artfully reminded us of.
Very impressive, and joy to behold.It actually gave me hope compared to usually prevalent venom spitting. I don’t know if you guys a right or not when it comes to this subject, but I know quality people when I see them.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Thanks for that. A compliment is always appreciated I am sure.

View Comment
26. trigun says:

Scripture don’t agree with another concave sphere so it has to be convex surface.
Philippians 2:10 – So that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth
We would be those “under the earth” while those “on earth” would mean those on convex surface of earth.

I think this will solve the mystery behind 24/7 light of the hollow earth said in The Smoky God book.
Surely you have read Etidorhpa book which talks about what is called “soft white light” with no apparent source William Morgan and his guide the eyeless being encountered starting 25 miles below the surface.
Joseph Cater in his book The Ultimate Reality says that light/radiation from the Sun not only is reflected by the Earths crust but also continues to penetrates Earths crust. Even Etidorhpa talks about this if i remember right. Joseph Caters says that soft electron disintegration is what causes that soft white light. It will continue to penetrate until it is out on the convex side and illuminate convex surface from all sides at the same time leaving no place for night so even if there happens to be reddish smoky sun, there will be no night.
http://i.imgur.com/Nd2t7Av.jpg Joseph Cater is hollow earth believer but you can just invert the diagram in the image and think instead of soft electron sun, its concave soft electron layer above the convex surface illuminating that world, no shadows will exist on convex side.
Beyond that would be the bottomless pit or void/hell if there really are no other outer stars or planets.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

That is a plausible interpretation of that passage. I always interpreted “under the earth” meaning the underworld, but your interpretation is equally valid.
I think in the KJB there is an even 50% spread of “in earth” and “on earth”. I don’t know if this is because of the different level of knowledge of the many authors, or mistranslations or not. In other words, I don’t know the legitimacy of “in heaven and on earth and under the earth”. Should it read “in heaven and in earth and under the earth”; or perhaps “in heaven and on earth and in the earth”?

That is why the bible for me is such a hot potato.

The soft diffuse light as the source of light for the “other side” of the Earth sounds ok, but I don’t believe that is how the Smokey God pair described how the other side was illuminated. If our Sun is illuminated their side with soft light, then is their smokey purplish Sun diffusing our side with its light? Thinking on a slightly different tact, perhaps the “other side” is more spirit like and has its own luminescence, like a dream world, which emanates not from penetrating sunlight necessarily, but from “matter” itself?

I remember the caverns in Etidorpha being illuminated by soft light, but I can’t remember if they mentioned the source. I assumed it was self luminescence, which points more towards the spirit/dream state of being I think. I recall that gravity became less, until it was zero at one point. My take on that was that the telluric currents (originally emanating from the Sun) can’t penetrated that far down.

I quite like the idea of soft electron disintegration. Could it be perhaps that there is less of that here due to the magnetic h-field in the Earth cavity which would hold everything together. Less magnetic “glue”, more leakage – hence more spirit and malleable shapes? Could it be that the “solidity” of our material world relies on its distance from the h-field? That brings up the other point. In the amazon jungle tale, the Indians also experienced the same less, then zero gravity when venturing downwards. However, after the halfway point, gravity got stronger again as they got closer to the other world. Eitdorpha experienced pure spirit instead. Could it be that there are only certain underground portals or tunnel systems to the other world (the holes near the poles being two of them). I think that is why I thought of the nerve cell idea. It is unformed aether or spirit (or soft electrons) which surround the concave Earth – the analogy is the watery solution outside the brain cell. But some paths lead to another brain cell – some tunnels lead to the other world. It’s just an idea.

WH

View Comment
• trigun says:

It makes more sense to me that Suns light/radiation penetrated throught earths crust and became soft light that evenly illuminates the deep caverns and outer earth to the point that no shadow will exist. If earth were to be viewed from the outer side space, it will look like the star. You should read The Ultimate Reality by Joseph Cater to know more about science behind this soft light/soft electron. This soft lights frequency is very close to the gravity or ether so it radily penetrates the solid matter. The smoky sun is reddish not purplish and is seen after going through the poles deep enough, i am also thinking that this sun may be artificial or this is where God sent the sinned angels, that reddish sun could be hell.
The outer side of earth is definitely physical as the sanskrit speaking people have visited our side many times. http://www.ourhollowearth.com/passporttoeternity.htm
http://www.holloworbs.com/Geo%20Model.htm

They said soft light had no apparent source and later explained the source of light if i remember correctly. The soft light penetrates all the way through as it is etheric like the ether.

Etidorhpa didn’t experience pure spirit, William Morgan was taught to have full control over matter so he can become a spirit or flesh at will. Outer earth is also the source of freemasons occult knowledge aparently.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

It makes more sense to me that Suns light/radiation penetrated throught earths crust and became soft light that evenly illuminates the deep caverns and outer earth to the point that no shadow will exist.

Wouldn’t it make more sense that the Sun’s radiations are mostly not penetrating 25 miles deep? Otherwise wouldn’t we see soft visible light in a shallow cave rather than pitch black? Are these soft electrons merely the infra red spectrum in the shallow cave, which transform into the visible light frequencies further down? Possible I guess. Would it fit in with Carter’s theory of gravity being radiations in the low infrared spectrum? If this spectrum is transformed to a higher one such as visible light, maybe gravity as an effect ceases to exist? I don’t know to be honest.

EDIT: Been thinking about this. Here is a stab in the dark theory: The negatively charged field moving up from the crust (after being charged by the Sun due to lightning strikes) would be Carter’s “soft electrons”. These soft electrons radiate light in the infra-red spectrum (including the very low infrared “Carter gravity” frequencies), hence we can use infra-red goggles to see in the dark. Now the further we go through the crust, the less charge reaches these depths. This means there is less positive current flow pushing downwards at these depths. Also, we are further from the h-field keeping the Earth together. The charge that is getting through excited the rock more because it’s atoms are more free to move about (vibrate) hence the soft electrons emit the visible light frequency. Hence gravity is not radiations in the low infra-red but rather those radiations are the effects of the positively charged telluric currents (gravity) and the strength of the magnetic h-field on matter. It is the positively charged telluric currents which is the real origin of gravity.

The above is only an idea. I’d have to look into the zero g effect in Etidorpha to see if the soft glow was more visible or not, so as to amend this idea. For example, maybe the h-field is the primary determining factor and the charge travels right the way through the crust. This means that the positive telluric currents are approximately equally strong at great depths than at the surface, but matter is more free to move and vibrate at depth (further away from the Earth’s magnetic h-field and center; and also thick rock may dampen the field too) hence matter becomes “lighter” and whose soft electrons now emit visible light. Sounds better to me. Could be a mixture of both.

The outer side of earth is definitely physical as the sanskrit speaking people have visited our side many times.

Everything is “physical” in that sense. What piqued my interest is when one of the giants, which the Indians met on the “other side”, said that the returning Indians could meet the giants again in their giant world when the Indians were deceased in our world. This means there is a non-physical connection that doesn’t easily exist here. This points to spirit merely being that which is not or less affected by our Earth cavity’s h-field (magnetism). When they enter our world, they too become “physical” as they are subject to our h-field, just as we would be subjected to their environment if we entered their world. There have been plenty of anecdotal evidence of deceased people saying goodbye in the “physical” to loved ones. One involved a friend of mine and his family. Is it that this alive person is more in tune with the spirit? Perhaps. Or is it that the spirit can “tune down” more to the “physical”, like the story teller in Etidorpha BTW.

This leads on to the giants in the bible. Some giants could well have come from this other world, and then in the post flood environment shrunk to our size in successive generations. This means that some of those giants could well be us. And vice verse if we went to their world. The Indians that stayed on the giant’s world grew to a size in between their previous Earth size and those of the giants. Perhaps their future generations became giant size.

WH

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Etidorhpa didn’t experience pure spirit, William Morgan was taught to have full control over matter so he can become a spirit or flesh at will.

I think I remember him saying something to the effect of he was between spirit and flesh. Even better. Sounds like a true “multi-dimensional” being who can visit many worlds. He doesn’t need a UFO vehicle for that. I have a suspicion that pre-flood cycles were closer to this level of reality (between spirit and flesh) hence the longer ages and giantism etc.

View Comment
• Hebrew Logician says:

To the contrary, the original untranslated text of Philippians 2 (in the ancient Greek) does not indicate a convex or concave earth. In fact, one could even argue that “under earth” actually refers to snakes and over organisms that dwell under the ground. As it is literally translated as “that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend — heavenly, and earthly, and underground.” Also, @Wild Heretic the reason that there is variation in the translations of Philippians 2:10 is because of the discrepancy in the original text.

http://studybible.info/interlinear/Philippians%202:10

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Thanks for that explanation HL.

It seems then that “heavenly” would mean sky, “earth” is ground, and “underground” is under the ground.

View Comment
• sully says:

Well, biblically there are three “heavens”, depending on the context where the same word is used: 1/clouds & sky; 2/stars & planets,etc. 3/ Heaven, as in where God dwells. This leads to a good bit of confusion.

In the same way, there are three different greek words for love in the new testament, all different in meaning but all translated into English as simply “love”.

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

I’ve noticed that is a main issue with biblical translations. I’ve read that it is even worse for the word “God”… far far worse. In fact, there were so many words for “God” that quite a few translators and authors blame the original translators for deliberately putting a heavy monotheistic slant on stories which related to plural beings – because of the religion they were promoting.

It really has made a big mess of things.

I had two jehovas witnesses come round today. Nice intelligent ladies, but it didn’t take long to boil it down to this common denominator which these Christian sects seem to have in common. They assume/excuse/paper over three things: 1. The God in the bible refers to one being only the whole time. 2. the God in the bible is a good God who really cares for the well-being of humankind (which likely stems from a misunderstanding of point 1.). 3. The bible is the ultimate authority as it was written by God. I asked about this last point as I said it was written by people. They said yes, but written by people who had visions from God and so therefore it is “his” direct word. I said I respect the bible and believe that to a certain extent it is written history of a people, but not some higher spiritual ultimate authority. They put a “supernatural” blanket over the whole thing which as far as other dimensionality goes, is correct, but I find that viewpoint to be very primitive and puts God on a pedestal of ultimate being which is far from the descriptions in the bible. It hands over their own power and responsibility. In my understanding responsibility is love. The are giving away their love by falsely letting a person (God) do the loving for them (in their own heads). Thereby they denote their responsibility.

I have come to realize that these are the three fundamental points where I differ from the fundie sects. Out of body experiences and visions are interesting but are the least reliable testimonies and observations and actually makes this other dimensional “God” rather suspect if anything else. This is not to say that some visions are correct, but scientific experiments come first, and visions last.

Easy proof of the contradictory nature of visions is to take Teed and Steve’s vision or OBE of a concave Earth as true. But then I have read quite a few testimonies of NDEs who wanted to see the universe on death and said they saw countless planets with life on them and whooshed through the universe and galaxies and was filled with all knowledge of how everything worked and indescribable love which they cannot even remember properly.

So which visions are true if we rely on this sort of evidence only? We can’t rely on them as they are polar opposites. We have to do scientific experiments to find what is true and what is not. It also makes me deeply suspicious about some OBEs and opens up the possibility that perhaps certain realms of the afterlife is one big emotional astral con job. (They say the astral realm is the emotional realm after all). What better way to mess with people who don’t know any better (ignorant). Who is going to question incredible indescribable selfless love? This game may be much bigger than we had first thought.

WH

View Comment
27. trigun says:

This is intriguing. 🙂
This guy says auroras are actually energy leaving earth.
Same is said by hollow earthers that direction auroras is up not down.

Now since we actually live inside the earth, what does that tell us?
Right, energy is coming in from outside! 🙂

This means that the inner sun smoky god book talks about is actually the outer sun earth actually orbits! Cause of auroras.
So what if heliocentric model isn’t actually invalid, only invalid to us who live inside the earth?
Heliocentric doctrine came from masonic occultists anyway and Etidorhpa book confirms masonic connection goes all the way to inner earths actually outer earth (convex side).

View Comment
• Wild Heretic says:

Yeah, that was my first thought too regarding the hollow earth being the convex earth, but it doesn’t work with the Smokey God description. Does this mean that the book is really fiction or that the “outside” of the Earth isn’t the convex side as experienced when going through the pole holes?

The problem lies in its contradiction with the entire smokey god world having constant daylight everywhere all the time, which means it can’t be convex, unless light is bending fully around… and yet they sail through the Earth’s north pole and come out its south.

If both are true and light isn’t bending around fully then I can only resolve the contradiction by looking at the other world as also being concave and that the connection between the two is kind of another dimensional one, or vortexian portal; possibly like a synapse in a brain so that the two worlds are connected by two tunnels at both poles (a little bit like this https://pearlsofprofundity.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/synapse-group-1a.jpg)

… or perhaps that world is overlayed onto ours and the pole holes are one way to access it via “dimensional” portals so to speak, i.e. there is no here or there.

WH

View Comment
28. trigun says:

WH, can you ask Steven Christopher to make a video named:
“Top 10 Reasons We Know Why Earth is Concave”

I think its very important to debunk this misleading video. 🙂