In the last post (What Goes Around, Comes Around), we learned that:
- the sun and moon are both only about 3,500 miles away;
- they are both 32 nautical miles in diameter;
- they only appear to change height due to perspective;
- they travel in a circular path above the Flat Earth (FE) plane;
- the sky is reflective and dome-shaped, as proven by the existence of rainbows and sundogs;
- the 24 hour sun in both the Arctic and Antarctic are accounted for by the FE model;
- the lunar phases are perfectly explained by the FE model;
- eclipses make perfect sense on the FE model, but would be practically impossible on a globe;
- the sun and moon are kept at the height they are at due to electromagnetic levitation;
- the opposing energies of the sun and moon are responsible for the tides;
- weather patterns (including temperature, wind, currents, etc) correspond perfectly to the movement of the sun and moon on a FE map.
That’s a pretty good case for the Flat Earth on its own…
… but in any case, let’s recap some of the other things we have learned thus far as well:
- We’ve seen (in Templars Cross, Square and Compass, and The Night Owl) that the Templars cross represents the four corners of the world, as depicted by every ancient culture:
.jpg)
- We’ve seen (in Templars Cross, Square and Compass, and The Night Owl) that the highly symbolic freemasonic logo (which also appears in Washington DC’s street map, among other places) depicts the drawing of a circle within a square…
- We’ve seen (in Magnetism: Tesla’s Key to the Universe) that the men who brought you the heliocentric model of the Universe were all freemasons:
- We’ve seen (in Templars Cross, Square and Compass, and The Night Owl) that star trails at the equator are inconsistent with what we would expect to see if we were on a ball:
- We have mathematically proven that the Earth is a flat plane (in The Torus and Ancient Cosmology), using magnetism (as observed in nature) and mathematics – including vector equilibrium, sacred geometry, and the golden mean (phi):
- We saw in The Torus and Ancient Cosmology that the mathematical model (shown above) matches the cosmological model of ancients all over the world:
- We also saw in The Torus and Ancient Cosmology that the flat Earth map appears on the UN logo, as well as in the logos of many other leading institutions:
- We’ve seen (in The Greatest Liars of All Time) that all footage of space, the moon, and Earth provided to us by NASA is faked using a combination of CGI, photoshop, and many other means:
- We calculated the expected curvature on a spherical globe (in Look Around, it will Astound You), and saw that there is in fact, no noticeable curve around us – neither visibly, nor by observing the behaviour of water (which always finds its level):
… and finally,
- We have also seen (in Look Around, it will Astound You) that the reason for why the sun appears to “rise” and “set” each day is due to perspective.
Thus, the evidence for the Flat Earth is starting to stack up rather quickly…
… but you’ll be happy to know that there’s still plenty left for us to pick apart! 🙂
In this post, we’re going to add to that mounting pile of evidence by addressing the magical spinning ball.
First, some words of wisdom to get you in the right frame of mind…
On that note, here’s hoping that what you learned in The Greatest Liars of All Time will help you keep an open mind in this post…
We begin, by taking a look at the ball found in the top-left corner in the picture above – the globe Earth…
The Spinning Ball
We are told by science that the Earth spins at 1040 mph…
… while travelling around the Sun at 30km/s… (66,6000 mph)…
… which itself orbits the Galaxy at 450,000 mph…
… which spins at 515,000 mph…
… which moves at an astounding 1.3 million mph in a random direction through the vacuum of the Universe…
… which is expanding at H0 = 67.15 ± 1.2 (km/s)/Mpc…
… and which gets faster in its acceleration as it gets bigger.
Are you confused yet?
Want to know why you’re confused?
Because…
Next question…
Do you feel that?
Is it:
- because the Earth is so big relative to us that we can’t feel it?
… or is it
2. because the Earth isn’t actually moving?
Wrong answer, Number 2!
Another question – but first some (real) science to give you some background…
If the Earth is a ball spinning about the axis that connects its poles,
… then the speed of rotation would be fastest at the equator and slowest at places north and south of the equator, and a whopping 0 km/h at the poles…
This is due to centripetal force…
The formula for centripetal force (F) is given by
… where
- F is the force;
- m is the mass of the object;
- v is the angular velocity*; and
- r is the radius.
*angular velocity means that it is the tangential velocity (as shown below), not the radial velocity (it is labelled slightly wrong in the diagram above):
Multiplying both sides of the equation above by r, the formula above can also be written as
F r = m v²
Thus, we see that the radius is proportional to the velocity squared…
r ∝ v²
… Meaning that, the further one is from the central axis, the greater the speed will be (much greater in fact, because the velocity is squared).
Now then, looking at the diagram below, you will notice that as you move away from the equator (towards the North or South), the distance away from the central axis (i.e. the radius of the circle) would decrease.
Therefore, the further away you are from the equator (north or south), the slower you spin…
As you can see above, the speed at the equator is given as 1,650 km/h (or 1,040mph).
As your distance away from the axis (your radius) at the North pole is zero, your spinning speed would be 0 km/h at the pole.
Thus, if you traveled from the equator to the North pole, the speed that you are spinning at would change by 1,650 km/h.
That is, you would go from spinning at 1,650 km/h, to spinning at 0 km/h,… (or 1,040 mph to 0 mph).
Another example:
If you flew from Nairobi, Kenya (which is located on the equator) to Stockholm, Sweden, the speed at which you spin around the globe would change by about 800 km/h…
To put that in perspective,
- 12 km/h
- 30 km/h
- 150 km/h
- 300 km/h
- 900 km/h
- 2,200 km/h
This means that the difference between being on the North pole, and being somewhere on the equator, is roughly equivalent to the difference between standing still (0 km/h), and travelling in a fighter jet going at 1,650 km/h…
… and the difference between being in Nairobi, Kenya, and being in Stockholm, Sweden, is roughly equivalent to the difference between standing still, and travelling on an airliner at 800 km/h…
Sooo…
The question I was going to ask (before all this scientific stuff)…
… is this:
Have you ever felt any change in your speed when moving from north to south (or south to north)?
…(let alone a change of 100’s of mph)…
“oh but if the change is gradual you won’t feel a difference”
Here’s another fun fact:
As you can see below, the speed of sound is given as 768 mph…
Now, the Doppler Effect – which you already encountered in Purple Haze: up in my brain… tells us that sound waves will be compressed in the direction of motion…
… This is why you can hear the sound of a police siren getting louder as it moves towards you, and quieter as it moves away from you:
With the Doppler effect in mind, and considering that the Earth is spinning towards the East at 1040mph – which is considerably greater than the 768mph speed of sound…
… that means that if we say something towards the West (against the direction that the Earth in spinning)… then nobody will be able to hear anything, because the sound will have traveled in the other direction (towards the East) already!
By contrast, if you spoke to the East (i.e. the direction the Earth is spinning), the sound would come at the person listening so fast it would be both extremely loud and incomprehensible.
Here are two short videos explaining this in a little bit more detail:
So with that in mind, if your mother-in-law is visiting, or if your wife is nagging you…
…. all you have to do, is make sure they’re facing West and you won’t have to listen to them!
and
Anywaaaays, to get back on topic…
That’s a lot of common sense!
Shall you tell him or shall I?
Anyways, lets take a look at some more actual common sense…
Are you ready?
Great, lets dive right in then!
Let’s first take a look at flights on a spinning ball, because…
Flights on the Spinning Ball
For an introduction on why flights are impossible on the spinning ball, please watch this quick 2 min video. Note that the link appears broken but it works fine (or did when I last checked!)
To build on what was said in the video above,
In other words, without correcting its course downwards, a pilot would fly his plane straight off the ball, like illustrated here by the red line:
In order to maintain a steady altitude and not fly straight off the ball and into space, an airliner traveling at 800 km/h would have to dip its nose and descend by 850m… per minute!
Now, if we were on a spinning ball, it would be impossible for planes to land on the ground like they do, unless the Earth was not moving.
Allow me to illustrate:
If the Earth is spinning to the East (at 1,040mph), and a plane is moving towards a runway in a Northwestern direction (with a landing speed of a Boeing 777 is around 160mph)…
… then it would be impossible for the plane to land, as the Earth would spin out from under it (remember, the Earth is moving at 1000mph, and the plane at an angle to it at 160mph), so the plane would simply crash sideways off the runway immediately after touching down!
In other words:
Furthermore, as outlined in the video above, if the Earth was spinning the distance flown between two points in opposite directions could never be the same…
In fact, a plane flying at 800mph towards the East, would actually be flying backwards, as the Earth below it would be spinning at 1000mph in the same direction… so its target destination would be moving away from it.
In other words, relative to the ground, the airplanes speed would be 240mph, backwards… just like the speed of sound you saw earlier!
Thus, a flight going East, would fly backwards, and a flight flying West would get to its destination super quick as the destination would move towards the plane.
For a good explanation on flights relative to the Earth spin, watch this video:
The graphics below illustrate why airplanes can’t physically take-off on a spinning ball.
For example, any plane taking off towards the West would have to overcome a 1,040mph headwind:
Here’s another useful visual for explaining the huge effects of drag on an object in the air:
There are other proofs related to flights showing that the Earth cannot be a spinning ball, such as the omni-directional radio:
Gyroscope’s also offer us an obvious proof:
In essence, the reason why Gyroscopes prove that we do not live on a spinning ball is illustrated below. A gyroscope simply doesn’t behave as we would expect if we were on a ball.
Below is an 11 min video that goes into a lot of detail about why gyroscopes can prove that the Earth is flat.
As its a rather complex explanation I’m going to let the video do most of the talking on this occasion, and only briefly cover the most obvious point below.
Pilots use gyroscopes to ensure that they are level with the ground when coming in for a landing…
Now, think about this for a second…
How can a gyroscope find its level, if we are on a ball?
The answer is that it can’t, because a curved surface is never level!
Aircraft trimming is further evidence that we do not live on a spinning ball, as outlined by this 3min video:
So how could so many pilots be deceived?
Well,
Pilots have learned the same pseudoscience as everyone else, and thinking themselves to be intellectual and well-educated they probably never thought to question the strong-held beliefs that they’ve been told are true their whole lives…
Anyways, we’re now gonna move on from planes…
… because quite frankly,
Now then, the video above (i.e. the one titled The Earth is Not Moving) shows you how we would experience the atmosphere if the Earth was spinning, so I will cover the basics of that here.
The Atmosphere on a Spinning Ball
As you’ve seen above, if the Earth is spinning at 1,040 mph, it would be impossible for planes to land.
It would also mean that hot air balloons and helicopters should just be able to fly straight up, and then hover for a while until the location then wanted to get to appeared below them!
Taking this a step further, if the ground was spinning at a constant velocity of 1,040 mph, that would mean that there would be a constant wind outside of 1,040 mph…
To put that in perspective, a category four hurricane (the strongest type) typically reaches speeds of up to 150 mph…
If 150 mph winds can do this…
… then you better hold onto your hat next time you go outside into the 1,040 mph winds!
As such, we know that the Earth doesn’t spin relative to the atmosphere, otherwise if you put your head out of your bedroom window it would get torn off at 1040 mph!
“Oh but the atmosphere moves with the spin of the Earth!”
“Bet you can’t explain that!”
Logical, but there are two big problems with that reasoning.
Firstly,
As explained in the video above (i.e. the one called The Earth Is Not Moving), it would not be possible for the air to be moving with the Earth, because it would not be moving in a straight line…
… Air higher up would have to travel faster…
This is because of centripetal force which you learned about above…
As you know the radius is proportional to the velocity squared…
r ∝ v²
Now, anything that is higher up in the sky has a greater radius (as measured from the center of the globe), so the higher up in the sky you are, the higher the velocity will be…
By the way, we also saw this behaviour with the sun and moon in What Goes Around, Comes Around, as the sun travels faster further out and slower further in while circling in its annual path – due to covering a greater distance in the same amount of time…
In the same way, air that is further up in the sky needs to travel further than air that is lower down.
Thus, fireworks, rain, and clouds (and anything else we see in the sky), would not behave anything like they do, as the drops/clouds/fireworks higher up in the sky would be moving faster than those below, so what we would see would be nothing like what we actually observe in the sky.
To give you a simple example, a cloud above our heads would never be able to be still in the sky in the absence of wind… because each “layer” would be moving at a slightly different speed…
Essentially, clouds higher up would always be travelling faster than clouds lower down…
… But of course, that is not what we see, as clouds generally tend to move uniformly at the same speed regardless of their height.
Secondly,
Another reason why the atmosphere moving with the Earth wouldn’t work, is that exiting and entering space would be utterly impossible.
Consider this:
Science tells us that space begins at a height of about 100 km…
If the Earth is spinning at 1,040 mph at ground level on the equator – at a radius of just 6,371 km…
That means that, at a height of 100km the atmosphere would be spinning at a speed even greater than 1,040 mph… (it would be greater because you are 100km above the ground, so your radius is bigger).
So with that in mind…. what do you think would happen when a space shuttle flies out of the atmosphere and into the vacuum of space (which as a vacuum, would have a speed of 0 mph)?…
I’ll give you a clue:
Many people like to claim that a ball being thrown into the air in a moving car and subsequently not hitting the back windshield is “proof” that the Earth is a spinning ball, but as this video eloquently outlines, that is most certainly not the case:
To summarize, if the Earth is spinning,
Either you have
- The Earth spinning without the atmosphere – in which case you have 1,040 mph winds that tear your head off if you go outside…
… or…
- The atmosphere moves with the ground – in which case the clouds you see outside would appear totally differently, and spaceships entering the vacuum of space would be torn to shreds due to the speed difference with space (of much greater than 1,000 mph).
Now, with all that in mind, ask yourself…
Do you believe the Earth spins because of anything you have experienced or seen for yourself,…
… or do you believe it spins because you have been told that it spins, and been bombarded with that message constantly on TV your whole life?
Let’s move on to another “proof” our “experts” tell us about…
“Coriolis Effect”
It is claimed by scientists that bullets, hurricanes, and other flying objects will swerve due to what is called the “Coriolis Effect”…
So let me get this straight,
The Coriolis effect occurs, because the Earth spins and the atmosphere is affected by the spin…
This is all great, except for the fact that it overlooks the first point we made above:
… That if the Earth was in fact spinning separate from the atmosphere, the wind speed on the surface of Earth would be so fast and violent (1,040mph) that nothing could exist on the Earth’s surface…
Nonetheless, let’s briefly consider it, just so we can put it out of its misery…
Now, the main factors for snipers to take into account in long-range shots are
- distance to target;
- humidity;
- height from the target; and
- wind variation…
… and as it happens, snipers never actually adjust for this mythical Coriolis Effect… because if they did, they’d be shooting in completely the wrong direction, as these simple calculations show:
As you can see, the Coriolis Effect is clearly a load of…
Here is a short 4 min video on the Coriolis Effect which also rubbishes the idea that toilets in the northern and southern hemisphere flush in different directions:
As discussed in the video above, contrary to popular belief water does not spin in opposite directions in the northern and southern hemisphere’s.
And on that note, let’s take a look at water as it pertains to a spinning ball…
Be forewarned:
Water on a Spinning Ball
The USGS states that about 71% of Earth is covered by water, with 96.5% of its water in the oceans. The total volume held by oceans, seas, and bays is estimated to be 321,000,000 cubic miles*…
*to put that in perspective, this page gives a good comparison for how much water fits into one cubic mile.
There is also plenty more water in bodies like river, lakes, (along with water in vapour, icecaps, glaciers etc)…
Basically, there is a whole lot of water floating around on this ball…
Beyond the obvious deduction that water never actually curves, but always finds its level – as discussed in Look Around, It Will Astound You)…
… the photo below should be enough to show you what is wrong with the spinning globe…
In fact, water never sticks to any ball, regardless if its spinning or not…
Not on a golf ball…
… Not on a football (soccer) ball…
… Not on a cricket ball…
… Not on a tennis ball…
… Not on a bowling ball…
… Not on a water fountain ball…
… Not on a ping pong ball…
… Not on a basketball…
… Not on a baseball…
… Not on a snooker ball…
… Not on a volleyball…
… not on a handball…
… not on play-pen balls…
… not on an orange (ball)…
… not on a floorball…
… not on a water polo ball…
… not on an exercise ball…
… not on a squash ball…
… not on a beach ball…
… not on a medicine ball…
… not even on a “water ball”…
… and most certainly not on a dodgeball wrench…
Yet, despite all the obvious evidence right in front of our eyes, we still believe that water can stick to this ball?!
As most 6th graders (should) know, the very first step of the scientific method is “Observation”…
Real science is repeatable at any scale, no matter how big or how large or small.
With that in mind…
The wait begins…
… (and will never end)
To conclude this post, I will leave you with Dead or Alive, who’s song You Spin Me Round (Like A Record) inspired the title of this post.
The music video below is drowning in occult symbolism, so those of you who have read most of my earlier posts will probably find it interesting to read my analysis below, which is based on what we have covered thus far in this blog.
Those who haven’t read my earlier posts will unfortunately think some of the analysis is a bit silly, but I recommend going back and reading earlier blog posts (I have linked to them as appropriate below), to get a better grasp of what is being said below.
Anyways, here is the song. Enjoy!
In the music video above you will find the following symbolism:
- Spinning (globe/disco) Ball…
- Shown zoomed in at the start and end of the video (as pictured below).
- As you know by now, freemasons and royalty like to mock us by putting the fake globe/orb in plain sight, and this is more of the same – along with serving as subconscious globe programming.
- The Colour Purple
- Purple appears everywhere in the video, as well as on the album cover above.
- We discussed the significance of the colour purple in depth in Purple Haze, up in my brain.
- Jupiter/Zeus rules the colour purple, and George Washington was portrayed as Jupiter/Zeus in purple at Capitol Hill (as discussed in Capitol Hill and Dollar Bills).
- The Colour Gold
- Gold appears on the present ribbon, on clothing, on the flags that are waved, and on the ribbon entwined around the singer.
- Gold symbolizes finance/money, wealth, and power, and you can find it on the pope’s robes and royal crowns and robes too (as shown above).
- Gold is often found on Egyptian hieroglyphs and at the tip of obelisks, as seen in Obelisks and City Maps (eg. the Paris obelisk), due to its excellent electromagnetic properties.
- One-eye Symbolism
- The eye-patch hides one eye, and is thus a popular symbol for the eye of Horus, which we discussed in Links to the Ancients.
- Notice that the singer only has the eye-patch on when he is wearing the colour black.
- The evocation of Shiva
- Shiva is the Hindu god of destruction.
- The pattern formed by the arms at about 1:25 in the video is the same hexagonal pattern that Shiva statues form (as pictured below).
- There happens to be a statue of Shiva at CERN – the world’s largest particle accelerator which isn’t not dissimilar from the one at Brookhaven which we discussed in Energy Weapons: Tesla’s Suppressed Technologies.
- Now what in the wooorld could a statue of “the god of destruction” be doing at the most advanced scientific facility in the world?!…
- Beast and Effeminate symbolism
- Notice how you never see who’s arms are coming out from behind the singer… a hidden hand pulling the strings perhaps?…
- You are shown (twice even, for effect) that the hands behind him are beast-like in their appearance, with claw-like uncut nails
- Also notice that the lead singer has many effeminate characteristics, including:
- the way he dances;
- the length and style of his hair;
- eye-liner; and
- lipstick…
- … what message does this send to young boys and men watching do you think?…
- Notice how you never see who’s arms are coming out from behind the singer… a hidden hand pulling the strings perhaps?…
- The Entwined Ribbon/Serpent
- At multiple points in the song the singers have ribbons entwined around them.
- The colours of the spinning ribbons (at 1:10) are purple and gold.
- The black ribbon has the singers tied down nice and tight (remember, black represents death/time…).
- Judging by the symbol for Medicine (which is the same hexagonal symbol that was shown earlier in the video related to Shiva, as discussed above) then it is clear that this is serpent symbolism.
- As seen in Leylines: An Introduction and Leylines: Part 2 serpent worship has been on-going for a long time.
- Notice how the golden ribbon entwirled around the lead singer below looks very much like that of a serpent wrapped around a tree…
- Notice also that the spinning (disco) ball (pictured above) has a present ribbon on it.
- “Pres-ent” is an anagram for “Serp-ent”…
- At multiple points in the song the singers have ribbons entwined around them.
- Seductive Lyrics
- The lyrics are very seductive and include the following phrases:
- I, could trace your private number, baby
- Open up your lovin’ arms
- I want some, want some
- I’ve got to have my way now, baby
- Open up your lovin’ arms
- I would like to move in just a little bit closer
- I want your love
- Watch out, here I come
- The lyrics also include:
- You spin me right round (…) like a record.
- Does that allude to the flat Earth (record-shaped plane)?…
- You spin me right round (…) like a record.
- The lyrics are very seductive and include the following phrases:
- Occult Release Dates
- This single was released November 5th, 1984
- November 5th is Guy Fawkes day, which is a key date on the pagan calendar, involving fire, with huge bonfires lit ceremonially…
- The album this song appeared on – Youthquake, was released in May 1985
- May is the period of the Beltane Fire festival, as discussed in depth in Festivals of Fire.
- November 5th is 11/5, and 6 months and 6 days later on the reverse date of 5/11 (May 11th, 1985) was when the Bradford City fire happened (56 deaths, 265 injured).
- It may be completely unrelated, but I’m just documenting dates and numbers here for reference sake, so don’t go tearing out your hair if you’re not familiar with synchronicity (which we discussed in An Introduction to Synchronicity).
- This single was released November 5th, 1984
- Production
- The song reached number 1 in March 1985
- It was included on Dead or Alive’s Greatest Hits album “Evolution“
- Directed by Vaughan Arnell and Anthea Benton
- They have done many notable music videos, and would thus no doubt have clear ties on the occult side of the music industry.
- Notice the titles of many of the major songs they have produced share similar themes as You Spin Me Right Round (Like a Record):
- Curiosity Killed the Cat – Down to Earth (1986)
- Jamiroquai – Space Cowboy (1994)
- George Michael – Spinning the Wheel (1996)
- Take That – Back for Good (1995)
- Robbie Williams – Let Me Entertain You (1998)
- Robbie Williams – Eternity (2001)
- James Blunt – Bonfire Heart (2013)
- Cover Versions
- Aged Teen
- Crystal Waters (1997)
- Adam Sandler
- cover version in the opening to the movie The Wedding Singer (1998)
- part of the soundtrack for Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel (2009)
- Ten Masked Men (2000)
- Gigi D’Agostino (2000)
- Thalía (2002)
- RoboSapien (2004)
- Dope (2005)
- Jessica Simpson (2006)
- Danzel (2007)
- Konami (2007)
- featured on video game Dance Dance Revolution Hottest Party.
- Thea Gilmore feat. Mike Cave (2008)
- Flo Rida (2009)
- featured prominently in the movie The Hangover (2009)
- Indochine (2009)
- Glee
- Episode “The Hurt Locker, Part 2” (2015)
The song clearly involves a ton of occult symbolism in both the music video and lyrics.
As you can see from the long list of covers and movies the song has appeared in, the music industry and Hollywood love to re-package and redistribute their favourite songs, in order to repeat the occult subliminal and subconscious messages to unsuspecting listeners.
And in this case, that message is this:
To be continued…
THE NARROW GATE 
This one time on an international flight I had a cup of coffee – to my astonishment the cup didn’t fly off the desk and smash into my torso when I put it down.
This made me think that I was actually on a helicopter just floating in the same spot, would that be possible? I mean, otherwise the cup would’ve smashed around the cabin and I would’ve burnt myself, and probably peed all over the walls in the lavatory too. So obviously the thing wasn’t moving at all and someone was just deceiving me.
What are your thoughts?
LikeLike
Hi, thanks for your question.
Allow me to make an analogy –
If you hold a cup of coffee in your hand in a car moving at a steady 50km/h, it won’t spill. However, if the car were to suddenly brake, your coffee would fly everywhere. This is due to a change in acceleration (or rather, a de-acceleration in this case), as the coffee would suddenly go from a constant velocity to another very different velocity.
Thus, the key here is the acceleration.
On an airplane, your cup of coffee is moving at a constant velocity (just as it would in a car moving at a steady 50km/h). However, if the airplane were to suddenly accelerate or de-accelerate, then your coffee would spill, just as it would if you were in a car that suddenly de-accelerated.
Hope that answers your question 🙂
LikeLike
Me likey.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very Interesting, can you please clarify that moon and sun are round and how does the sun circulate the earth?
LikeLike
Hi David, thanks for reading. The movement of the sun and moon is explained extensively in the previous post (19. What Goes Around, Comes Around), linked here: https://thenarrowgateweb.wordpress.com/2016/08/29/19-what-goes-around-comes-around/
Hope that will answer your questions. 🙂
Regards,
Richard
LikeLike
Hi, thank you for your reply.
That’s brilliant. Just a few clearing questions.
Is the moon actually light source itself or is it only reflecting suns light?
Also, few questions regarding the lunar eclipse. Sorry if I missed it there between all the exciting information. if you can clarify it here that would be great. What i gathered and studied is that it’s suns shadow object that cause it. Which are never else seen expect when the lunar eclipse occur.
How can they predict then when is the next lunar eclipse happening? How come this strange shadow object doesn’t block the sun any other times?
Regards
LikeLike
Thanks David. 🙂
Those are some really good questions, and I’m glad you asked them as I didn’t really cover them in my post.
The moon is a most certainly NOT reflecting the suns light. We know this for several reasons; here are three:
1. As seen by the naked eye, moonlight and sunlight behave the same way. For example, we can see moonlight reflecting on water, and light rays from the moon diverge in exactly the same way that sun rays do.
2. Moonlight produces its own heat – and interestingly enough it has the complete opposite properties to sunlight (as shown in the video linked below), which incidentally also supports the fact that the sun and moon have opposite electromagnetic energies (in relation to tides as explained near the bottom of Post #19).
3. If the moon was a sphere only reflecting the suns light, we would expect to see the middle of it to be brighter than the edges, given that light shone onto a sphere wouldn’t all be reflected in the same direction (as illustrated here: goo.gl/btbDFm). What we see in reality is that the moon is lit up equally all over its surface.
Regarding the lunar eclipse, I think this is on the right track: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXHCu39LQdw
Predicting when lunar eclipses will happen is simply a matter of keeping track of the motion of the sun and moon, and recording the dates and times of all eclipses. Once you know how long it takes for each cycle it becomes fairly straightforward to predict eclipses. Chinese astronomers were particularly good at it, and their records go back thousands of years.
As to why the sun doesn’t get blocked out, we know from solar eclipses that the moon can travel in front of the sun, and that could only happen if they weren’t level with each other.
As such, (and with regards to the video above) it would seem that the sun’s circular path is slightly higher than that of the moon, and that the transparent shadow object travels at a height in between the sun and moon.
Hope that answers your questions adequately! 🙂
Kind Regards,
Richard
LikeLike
Hi,
Thanks again for the information. No offence, but this is getting a bit weak and contradicting.
You ask us to believe what we see but yet you believe that there is an invisible, transparent objects that creates the lunar eclipse and all the phases of moon.
Previously one of the videos were saying the phases are due to the positions of the moon and the sun and now it’s the invisible shadow object.
Is the shadow object actually near the sun or the moon?
Is the moon producing it’s own light or is there a hidden light source behind it?
Either way this really doesn’t work with how we see the phases of the moon.
It’s very easy to invent another invisible object every time someone questions your theory.
Regards
LikeLike
Hi David,
I can see why you would think that the explanation would be contradicting, but allow me to clarify.
The fact that the moon’s light changes according to its position relative to the sun does NOT mean that it is reflecting the sun’s light. The moon light is independent of the sun, even though its phases changes correlate to its position relative to the sun.
Based on evidence documented by astronomers for centuries, it would appear that the moon is a translucent disc. Astronomers have in fact documented that they have seen stars THROUGH the moon, as is discussed in this 13 min video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fH7BjIzXWOg
The light source appears to be coming from BEHIND the moon, and it changes its angle according to the moons position. This sounds a bit crazy, but if you shine a flashlight on the back of a translucent disc at a changing angle you will see that it perfectly matches what we see with moon phases. I tried finding a video I’ve seen on that but couldn’t locate it, but I’ll share it once I find it.
This 14min video will also outline numerous examples of what astronomers have documented with regards to the moon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBbyDye4bS4
As mentioned in the video above, based on ancient astronomy, as well as what we can see in the sky, there appears to be another transparent celestial object causing the eclipses. Ancient vedic astronomers referred to this as Rahu, or the Black Sun, and you will find evidence for it in many other astronomical archives too, so I am not in fact “inventing another invisible object”.
This 2min video does a nice job summarizing this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpuOmsYtSGE
I appreciate that my original explanation might have left a hole or two, but I’ll add some more content to the post to plug those holes soon. In the meantime, please do check out the videos above 🙂
Regards,
Richard
LikeLike
David, you might also find this comprehensive study on the moon useful:
http://www.waykiwayki.com/2015/07/flat-earth-advanced-moon-free-ebook.html
LikeLike
Hi, in a rather synronistc way, the day after I read this post, Pete Burns died. I just was wondering if there is any significance in the date and time of his death? I know how they like their sacrifices and so on.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Louise,
Wow, I hadn’t noticed that he died! That’s crazy!
Funny that you should ask about that as I just published a post on Gematria and Synchronicity that discusses the significance of dates and numbers: https://thenarrowgateweb.wordpress.com/2016/10/25/26-timing-of-the-nwo-alien-deception/. I anticipate that the stuff below won’t make much sense to anyone who hasn’t read the post linked here.
Further to the post #26 linked above I would point out the following which I’ve picked up on at a glance:
Dates
Born August 5th, 1959.
– His birthday is 5/8, and he died in his 58th year in life (i.e. at 57). 58 is closely tied to 69, so just like Prince (dead at 58 in 2016) Pete Burns follows the same pattern of celebrity deaths associated with the number 69 this year.
– The release of his most famous song (“You Spin Me Right Round (Like A Record)”) was in 1985, 85 is a numerical mirror with 58.
– August 5th converted to the Julian calendar is July 23rd, which has 161 days remaining. 161 are numbers that come up a lot, as you’ll have seen in Post #26.
Dead October 23rd, 2016
– October 23 is the 296th day of the year, with 69 remaining… Another 6/9 mirror.
Pete Burns was born in Bebington, England, which has coordinates of: 53.350°N 3.003°W.. Notice the freemasonic 33 in the coordinates.
Gematria
– The gematria of “Peter Burns” in the English Reduction system equals 48, which is the same as “Illuminati”
– His middle name “Jozzeppi” in the English Reduction system equals 51
The gematria of his band “Dead or Alive” also includes both 51 (same as “conspiracy”, and Area 51), as well as the familiar 96 (6/9):
– “dead or alive” in the English Ordinal system equals 96
– “dead or alive” in the English Reduction system equals 51
The gematria of his most famous song includes a mirror of the freemasonic number 13:
– “You Spin Me Round Like a Record” in the English Ordinal system equals 310
– “You Spin Me Round Like a Record” in the English Reduction system equals 130
Thanks for pointing this out to me Louise, I’ll actually add it to the aforementioned post! 🙂
Regards,
Richard
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: 26. Timing of the Coming NWO Alien Deception | THE NARROW GATE
Great site. You explain every part of your facts including math, and using memes right after to alieve confusion effects on the brain. There are many other things that are wrong with the modern gravity mathematics itself. g= 9.80665 m/s2 is only a representation of rotation. They go as far as saying gravity can also represent 1g. Well if you use calculus, 1 cannot represent a constant in any equation that is multiplied or divide. Example: 1×5=5……1×453=453 1 will never affect the result. Any person taught algebra knows x+y=1 for example. Well in fact it represents 1x+1y=1. negating to add the 1 in front of the letter variable, will not get you the right answer. I have known about gravity being non existent since my course Mechanics and statics in engineering. No gravity is used to calculate pulleys, trusses or rotating shafts. When I asked why, professor said ” If you add gravity to any of these formulas, people will die.” He meant shafts would shatter, pulleys would fail, and trusses would not operate proper loads.
Since 2002 I have looked into this topic and found many other problems. Like the northern hemisphere having moon and sun most of the day in summer. When the moon is in Australia during their night, it is impossible for me to see it through the globe. I was ridiculed back then, so I left it on the shelf. Now to see the resurgence, I must say this. Look to old books, where internet is always manipulated, books remain unchanged. I found many old encyclopedia’s dismissing the globe and showing flat maps, as you needed a flat map to properly navigate. This was common knowledge before the misinformation started to hit the scene. They started changing editions of books around 1935.
Take care.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: 23. Destined for Oblivion | THE NARROW GATE
What are falling stars?
LikeLike
That’s a tough question to answer. I’m covering space and stars in the post I’m currrently working on right now, #24, and hopefully that should give you some ideas.
LikeLike
Pingback: 24. Made in a Hollywood Basement | THE NARROW GATE
Pingback: 27. The Stars Declare the Truth | THE NARROW GATE
Pingback: Destroying Gravity by Richard | Plane Not A Planet
Hey,
Looks like some of the images are dead links – mind finding replacements? Or just host them on your website instead of hotlinking.
Also it seems that you omit thickness of the atmosphere and water comparing to the radius of the proposed globe and (in both: flat and spherical earth) gravity effects that come of out that enormous mass and volume.
LikeLike
Thanks for pointing that out! I don’t often have the chance to read back over my posts once their published as I immediately start working on new ones, so I really appreciate that you commented to alert me to that.
I’ve now gone through and re-uploaded several of the images plus some new ones, as well as some videos as it seems that YouTube are slowly but surely removing content they don’t like. If you spot any more missing links or videos be sure to let me know as I have them all saved offline.
As for the water in the atmosphere, that’s a very good point, though I think there’s already enough evidence for the ridiculousness of the water on the ball (321,000,000 million cubic miles of it, plus lakes, glaciers, etc) that there’s no need to get overly technical by mixing in the atmospheric water too!
Kind Regards,
Richard
LikeLike
I have read up to this page so far, I haven’t looked at most of the videos due to personal time restrictions. I may go back later. I am a pure scientist in that I am willing to always keep an open mind and at the same time there is truth to the idea that extraordinary claims required extraordinary evidence. There are simple ways to disprove disc verse disc surfaces. And it only take ONE clear falsehood to disprove an entire theory. That being said your website’s disc theory is comparing itself to, what I consider a failed theory, the standard model of the universe which says Eather does not exist and that there are four forces and not just one, the electro-magnetic force, and that gravity rules the cosmos; which has been disproven false so many times it is a joke. Eather accommodates almost all your arguments regarding a rotating globe for an Earth and other anomalies. And I think it can accommodate the bending of light around the globe as well to give the impression that it is much flatter then it should be. I haven’t researched that much but I would hypothesize that to be the case. The alternative theory I am suggesting you look closely at is the Electric Universe theory promoted by the website thunderbolts.info and the youtube channel ThundetboltsProject. This alternative theory is the new paradigm shift, in my opinion and I am confident solves mot or all of your concerns with a globe in the standard model. They are evidence based and accept basically all of Tesla’s ideas and rejects most all of Einstein’s.
There are fatal gaps I see in your argument so far and I will continue to check out your later pages when I have more time:
Please explain Foucault’s Pendulum. Why does it not show that the land wether is it a disc or a globe is not rotating? From what I have seen, it does certainly make 15 degree arc in one hour.
If the world is flat and it is rotating we would certainly see evidence of that in a simple experiment with a plumb bob. I live in Indonesia at about 7 degrees south of the equator and I see no accelerated frame of reference effect on a plumb bob. I would be able to see a 3.5 mm shift on a one meter long string and bob from a perpendicular position to the ground in Indonesia. So you have to explain the Foucault Pendulum effect or your flat earth theory is bunk since you claim the Earth disc does not rotate.The Foucault is well explained on a globe.
Also you reference the speed of light connected to the latitude of the Giza pyramid way back in #2, but if the world is flat why would the “very wise” ancients use spherical coordinates and not polar coordinates in the architectural patterns? I mean latitude would not be measure in degrees on a flat circle it would be measure in distance from the center.
Also here is a very interesting article about the connection between the Pyramids latitude and the length of the year. http://www.occultphysics.com/Great-Pyramid-of-Giza.html
When you present leylines in #2 and #3, you are presenting them on a globe and the relationships would change on a flat surface. You have not accounted for this in later pages. I hypothesize it would force them to become ellipses.
Most of the maps you use, with the exception of one, show Australia massively distorted and elongated. And that the distance between Aukland and Sydney would be about the same as the distance from Alaska to Florida. But it is a 3 hour flight from Sydney to Auckland. How do you reconcile that you are using inaccurate land distorted maps most of the time with the exception of one map?
And that one map has the oceans as much bigger than on globe maps but that could be verified using travel times again. There exist non-stop flights from Aukland, New Zealand to Santiago, Chile that take and average of about 12 hours, which I know from experience is about the time it takes to go from Shanghai to San Francisco, but on the map where land masses are not distorted and the oceans are much bigger in the south, this would be a clearly impossible flight time.
The issues with flight time are not hard to verify at all. They are public knowledge experiences. I would also consider this a fatal flaw in the flat earth model.
I did find a factual error (not related to flat Earth) and that is the Romans certainly did not found Liverpool in 1190AD as they were long gone by then.
You have a picture of the sky and relate it to Owl Eyes; this seems deceptive to me. You are showing a 360 degrees panorama time lapse picture of the night sky and yet you never actually claim that it is a 360 panoramic view, but you spend much effort into falsifying NASA photos. I am not saying NASA photos are real or fake (that is another issue entirely) but I think you are being inconsistent here. It does not reflect reality. The movement of the stars, where I live in Indonesia, move across the sky in concentric rings with the rings decreasing in size as you look both North and South and this can easily be verified.
The website called Saturn Death Cult is a replaceable theory to yours to connect the modern secret societies with ancient times in the context of the Electric Universe theory. http://saturndeathcult.com
It accommodates most all your Masonic, Illuminati speculations quite nicely.
Also your picture of a photo of Europe with Italy in the bottom has some problems with it. I can clearly see England in the upper left corner of the photo and Denmark was much closer to the left side of upper center. So your projection of the photo on a globe surface in the map graphics above the picture are not accurate at all.
You seem like a very intelligent person and know plenty of Math and Science principles. But I think honestly you have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. The bathwater being the current standard model and that there are secret societies running the wold like a prison planet but what is being hidden is not a flat world but an Electric Universe with breakaway civilizations on Mars and the Moon and perhaps other planets. I think the resurgence of the Flat Earth Theory is in fact an intentional distraction to keep people from seeing the Earth as a globe but in an Electric Tesla Universe.
Cheers,
Ken
LikeLike
I have read up to this page so far, I haven’t looked at most of the videos due to personal time restrictions. I may go back later. I am a pure scientist in that I am willing to always keep an open mind and at the same time there is truth to the idea that extraordinary claims required extraordinary evidence. There are simple ways to disprove disc verse disc surfaces. And it only take ONE clear falsehood to disprove an entire theory. That being said your website’s disc theory is comparing itself to, what I consider a failed theory, the standard model of the universe which says Eather does not exist and that there are four forces and not just one, the electro-magnetic force, and that gravity rules the cosmos; which has been disproven false so many times it is a joke. Eather accommodates almost all your arguments regarding a rotating globe for an Earth and other anomalies. And I think it can accommodate the bending of light around the globe as well to give the impression that it is much flatter then it should be. I haven’t researched that much but I would hypothesize that to be the case. The alternative theory I am suggesting you look closely at is the Electric Universe theory promoted by the website thunderbolts.info and the youtube channel ThundetboltsProject. This alternative theory is the new paradigm shift, in my opinion and I am confident solves mot or all of your concerns with a globe in the standard model. They are evidence based and accept basically all of Tesla’s ideas and rejects most all of Einstein’s.
There are fatal gaps I see in your argument so far and I will continue to check out your later pages when I have more time:
Please explain Foucault’s Pendulum. Why does it not show that the land wether is it a disc or a globe is not rotating? From what I have seen, it does certainly make 15 degree arc in one hour.
If the world is flat and it is rotating we would certainly see evidence of that in a simple experiment with a plumb bob. I live in Indonesia at about 7 degrees south of the equator and I see no accelerated frame of reference effect on a plumb bob. I would be able to see a 3.5 mm shift on a one meter long string and bob from a perpendicular position to the ground in Indonesia. So you have to explain the Foucault Pendulum effect or your flat earth theory is bunk since you claim the Earth disc does not rotate.The Foucault is well explained on a globe.
Also you reference the speed of light connected to the latitude of the Giza pyramid way back in #2, but if the world is flat why would the “very wise” ancients use spherical coordinates and not polar coordinates in the architectural patterns? I mean latitude would not be measure in degrees on a flat circle it would be measure in distance from the center.
Also here is a very interesting article about the connection between the Pyramids latitude and the length of the year. http://www.occultphysics.com/Great-Pyramid-of-Giza.html
When you present leylines in #2 and #3, you are presenting them on a globe and the relationships would change on a flat surface. You have not accounted for this in later pages. I hypothesize it would force them to become ellipses.
Most of the maps you use, with the exception of one, show Australia massively distorted and elongated. And that the distance between Aukland and Sydney would be about the same as the distance from Alaska to Florida. But it is a 3 hour flight from Sydney to Auckland. How do you reconcile that you are using inaccurate land distorted maps most of the time with the exception of one map?
And that one map has the oceans as much bigger than on globe maps but that could be verified using travel times again. There exist non-stop flights from Aukland, New Zealand to Santiago, Chile that take and average of about 12 hours, which I know from experience is about the time it takes to go from Shanghai to San Francisco, but on the map where land masses are not distorted and the oceans are much bigger in the south, this would be a clearly impossible flight time.
The issues with flight time are not hard to verify at all. They are public knowledge experiences. I would also consider this a fatal flaw in the flat earth model.
I did find a factual error (not related to flat Earth) and that is the Romans certainly did not found Liverpool in 1190AD as they were long gone by then.
You have a picture of the sky and relate it to Owl Eyes; this seems deceptive to me. You are showing a 360 degrees panorama time lapse picture of the night sky and yet you never actually claim that it is a 360 panoramic view, but you spend much effort into falsifying NASA photos. I am not saying NASA photos are real or fake (that is another issue entirely) but I think you are being inconsistent here. It does not reflect reality. The movement of the stars, where I live in Indonesia, move across the sky in concentric rings with the rings decreasing in size as you look both North and South and this can easily be verified.
The website called Saturn Death Cult is a replaceable theory to yours to connect the modern secret societies with ancient times in the context of the Electric Universe theory. http://saturndeathcult.com
It accommodates most all your Masonic, Illuminati speculations quite nicely.
Also your picture of a photo of Europe with Italy in the bottom has some problems with it. I can clearly see England in the upper left corner of the photo and Denmark was much closer to the left side of upper center. So your projection of the photo on a globe surface in the map graphics above the picture are not accurate at all.
You seem like a very intelligent person and know plenty of Math and Science principles. But I think honestly you have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. The bathwater being the current standard model and that there are secret societies running the wold like a prison planet but what is being hidden is not a flat world but an Electric Universe with breakaway civilizations on Mars and the Moon and perhaps other planets. I think the resurgence of the Flat Earth Theory is in fact an intentional distraction to keep people from seeing the Earth as a globe but in an Electric Tesla Universe.
Cheers,
Ken
LikeLike
I should have read on before posting before!
Absolutely furthering my theory of the Sun’s rotation above us – The example of a record on a record player.. “You spin me right round, baby right round, like a record baby, right round..”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hey Richard, just a question, if I’m in a car travelling at 100 km per hour and I toss a ball up in the air, using the same logic it should smash into the back window of the car in less than 1/10 of a second right?
I think there are many different ways to approach any number of questions, and they all can have an internal logic that accounts for different effects. You can maybe say there is a flat earth ontology, and its interesting. However, if this existence is (like the hindus have said and perhaps quantum physics is demonstrating) just an expression of consciousness, I prefer an ontology that allows for an expansion beyond my living on a prison planet, and all that comes with that. I believe that to be possible. an infinite universe
cheers..
Ben
LikeLike
Hi Ben,
Regarding your first question, i think this video (posted in the article above) should clarify things: https://youtu.be/QwrwFUOpxuY
The Flat Earth model doesn’t necessarily rule out the holographic universe/expression of consciousness model. Hopefully some of my upcoming posts (~28-30) can lend some more credibility to that notion.
Regards,
Richard
LikeLike
Hi.
I discovered you on Wednesday on the Richie Allen Show and I’ve made it to Chapter 20 of your blog so far! It’s very addictive!
Maybe you mentioned or will mention, but I’ve recently learned that scientists discovered a magnetic anonomoly at the Antarctic and wondered if you knew this and do you believe it’s because the Antarctic is actually around the edge of the earth, as opposed to the bottom, like we are told.
This is the source of my info, by TruthStream Media.
Thanks and can’t wait to keep going with your work!
Joseph V
LikeLike
Thanks, glad you’re finding the website interesting! 🙂
I hadn’t seen that anomaly at Vostok lake but it is intriguing, so thanks for bringing that to my attention. The secrecy and events relating to Antarctica strike me as having a key role to play in the future deception discussed in post 25. One scenario (relating to Project Blue Beam) would be if archaeological “discoveries” are made that change the way mankind views historical accounts found in religious texts and scripture. Whatever the case Antarctica is certainly one to keep an eye on!
Kind Regards,
Richard
LikeLike
hi richard enjoying reading through your blogs found out about them from your richie allen show appearance. was already looking into flat earth at the time i heard you. many years i did not question the globe model but now the whole idea of a globe is rediculious to me to the point where i feel that the globe should the ridiculed model. i have been questioning weather it is an infinetle plane or a dome you definetly presented some strong eveidance for the dome.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think you said that the flat Earth accelerates at 32 feet per second per second. I am having trouble finding where you said that. If you did say that, can you point it out? Also, how fast is the flat Earth moving now? Here are my calculations for how fast the flat Earth is moving now if the flat Earth accelerates at 32 feet/sec/sec.
The Giza pyramid was built around 2,500 BC. If true, this means the Earth has existed at least 4,500 years (or 126,230,400,000 seconds). This makes the flat Earth’s speed to be at least 32 * 126,230,400,000 feet/sec = 4,039,372,800,000 feet/sec = 239,072 mph and forever increasing speed.
Previously, you said “[the solar system] orbits the Galaxy at 450,000 mph”. This speed is almost double the speed of the flat Earth but both models have the Earth traveling within the same order of magnitude.
Perhaps, the Earth is much older and if so, then we will need to adjust the calculations. If the Earth is 8,470 years old, then the flat Earth is traveling at 450,000 mph and forever increasing speed. This speed matches the galactic speed of the globe Earth. If the Earth is 188,227 years old, then the flat Earth is traveling at 10,000,000 mph and forever increasing speed. This speed is way beyond the galactic speed of the globe Earth.
I bring all of this up because the flat Earth is moving and perhaps moving faster than the globe/heliocentric/galactic Earth. Of course, all of this assumes that you said that the flat Earth accelerates at 32 feet per second per second. On this page, you said “because the Earth isn’t actually moving”. So, if you said that the flat Earth accelerates, then this page needs to be corrected. If you did not say that the flat Earth accelerates, then please correct me.
LikeLike
I’ve read this post entirely, and there is some points that seems strange for me.
First of all, your main argument is that if we were moving at this very high speed we would feel it. But in fact the human body does no feel speed, it feels acceleration (a delta of speed). That means that as long as thevehicle you’re in don’t change his speed, your body don’t feel it. That’s why you don’t feel the speed of a plane when you are in, of a train, or even of a car. Because in a car, to know the speed at which you are moving, you can only see the landscape moving. As long as you are in the car your body don’t feel the speed at all. The same goes for the earth. As long as the earth is moving just at the same speed you won’t feel any speed. But you can, just as in a car see the landscape change. How do you explain the fact that we don’t see the same constellations in a year ?
Secondly, the other main argument you have is that water won’t stick on a ball. And to prove this, you use two things. First, you make a list of balls where water don’t stick on. But you use balls used in games. Made in plastic. And everyone know that the earth is made in plastic. In fact the main difference between the earth and the balls you are listing is the mass and the density. The earth is heavy. And you don’t use the gravity in you calculations ? ( and don’t tell me gravity does not exist) To continue with water “The surface of all water, when not agitated by natural causes such as winds, tides, earthquakes etc. is perfectly level”. Actually it is not. And this you can observe it with your eyes when you go in a port. When boats start to go far away from you, you see them disappear from the bottom to the top, just as if with there were a curve in the water level.
Lastly, I’ve always asked myself: if the earth is flat, why can’t you touch the edge ? And where are the borders ? What are the countries who are the closer to the edge ? Why no one has ever seen the edge of the earth where many people gone around the earth and did came back where they started ? And why does a spheric representation of earth will be perfectly proportional to the true seize of continents where a flat map needs ( at a high scale ) to be distorted ? Why there is only one spheric representation of th earth where there is many differents distortions to represent the earth on a flat map ? And why the planes travels are that short, if the earth is flat ?
P.S : I really love flat earth theory, and it would be so cool if the earth were effectively fat.
P.P.S : english is not my mother tongue, so there might be some enormous grammar, vocabular or spelling mistakes and I apologize for it. I still hop you will understand what I said
LikeLike