The aim of this post is to invalidate the modern Theory of Gravity, by analyzing and scientifically scrutinizing pertinent facts related to one of the biggest lies ever sold.
For anyone new to this blog, and for those simply wishing to refresh their memories, below are a list of posts that are highly relevant to what will be discussed in this post.
If you are new to this blog you may find it useful to read these before reading on below, but this post can certainly stand on it’s own as well without any prior reading.
- 16. The Torus and Ancient Cosmology – where a mathematical model of the Universe was derived using magnetism, nature, and mathematics (i.e. sacred geometry, vector equilibrium, and the golden mean/phi). The model matches the model of the cosmos shared by every ancient culture.
- 17. The Greatest Liars of All Time – a study of many of NASA’s lies.
- 18. Look Around, it will Astound You – where the expected curvature of the globe was calculated and compared to reality (to find that we see no curvature); and where perspective was discussed in depth.
- 19. What Goes Around, Comes Around – where we analyzed the behaviour of the sun and moon.
- 20. You Spin Me Right Round Baby – where we scrutinized the spinning ball model of Earth provided to us by NASA and scientists.
In the last post, we analysed much of the evidence available to us regarding Antarctica:
- 21. Another Brick in the Wall (Part 1/2), where we covered:
- Hidden symbolism in Pink Floyd’s music;
- Antarctic explorers
- Our education (i.e. indoctrination) system; and
- An estimation of the circumference of Flat Earth.
- 22. Another Brick in the Wall (Part 2/2) where we covered:
- Southern hemisphere flight paths;
- The legal framework surrounding Antarctic travel;
- Flat Earth in plain sight, including in music and movies; and
- Disinformation (brainwashing) programmes.
There are two things in particular to keep in mind from previous posts as you read this post:
- 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:
- 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:
In this post, we will turn our attention to “Gravity”… which is science’s explanation for everything.
To best understand and contextualize the gravity deception, we will first take a look at some historical background. In particular, you will see that the Vatican and Freemasonry are undeniably closely linked to the Royal Society, where the theory of gravity originates.
We will then scrutinize Newton’s theory of gravity, with nothing more than some good old-fashioned common sense, after which you will see a scientific show-down between the genius hero of modern science – Albert Einstein, and suppressed inventor Nikola Tesla.
Finally, to wrap up this post and start to lead us into the next post, we will put on our lab-coats and make use of the scientific method to start to unravel what is really going on where we live.
Please note that this post focuses primarily on deconstructing the gravity lie. You will probably have lingering questions about what gravity is (given that Newton was wrong) after reading this post, but it’s important to thoroughly dissect the problem before piecing together the solution – which we will start to do at the end of this post.
For your reference here’s a Table of Contents for this post:
Table of Contents
- History of the Royal Society
- Vatican connection
- Freemasonry connection
- The Theory of Gravity
- Isaac Newton
- Scientific Experiments
- The Theory of Relativity
- Albert Einstein
- Spacetime Curvature & Nikola Tesla
- The Scientific Method
Let’s start off with some straightforward questions and answers…
- How can the Earth orbit the sun?
- How can the moon orbit the Earth without drifting off into space?
- How can satellites the size of a school bus levitate in mid-air above our atmosphere without falling down?
- How can gravity be strong enough to stick 321,000,000 cubic miles of seawater on the globe, but at the same time be weak enough to let a helium balloon float upwards?
- How can the water curve around, and stick to, a spinning ball (despite the fact that water always finds its level)?
- How come we don’t fly off when the ball spins?
- How come people and water can stick to the underside of a ball?
Lets start with the man who invented gravity… when an apple supposedly fell on his head…
The story goes that Isaac Newton discovered gravity when an apple fell on his head…
Cool story right?…
Do you really believe this fairy tale?!
I mean seriously… did no one else ever notice that apples fall to the ground before an apple fell on “Sir” Isaac Newton’s head in 1666?!
By the way, these guys are laughing too…
To explain “gravity”, Newton wrote Principia Mathematica…
Coincidentally, Newton just happened to invent Calculus in the same year that the pesky apple fell on his head…
Now, I’m not one to believe in coincidences, so judging by the coincidental timing of the falling apple and the invention of Calculus, it would seem that this knowledge of Calculus was only introduced to the public by the establishment in order to enable them to promulgate the gravity story…
… Perhaps… But let’s dig deeper.
You may be asking yourself who the “the establishment” is that was mentioned above…
Well, the organization responsible for establishing “modern science” as we know it is the Royal Society… which we will now scrutinize a bit before delving into the science behind gravity.
Bear with me, as there’s a little bit of history in this next section, though as you shall see it’s very important to understand the historical context of the introduction of the theory of gravity before we get sink our teeth into the actual gravity lie itself…
History of the Royal Society
In this section, you will see that the Royal Society has very strong connections to the Vatican as well as Freemasonry.
Please don’t get bogged down on historical detail in this section;… the key point to note is simply the connection between the Vatican, Freemasonry, and the Royal Society.
First off, a quick intro courtesy of wikipedia:
Note above that “The Royal Society” got its name through royal charter by King Charles II, who played a key role in the founding of the Society…
Here is a portrait of him in all his glory:
Allow me to point out some key symbols that you may already be familiar with…
First, notice the crown on King Charles II’s head, bearing the Templar’s Cross, which can be found in Washington DC’s street map, and has strong connections to the Vatican.
For more on the Templars Cross see my earlier post 12. Templars Cross, Square and Compass, and The Night Owl.
Notice also the orb (globe) in his left hand, as well as on the crown itself…
You may recall from 17. The Greatest Liars of All Time that this orb (globe) symbol is rather popular among many royals…
These same symbols can be found in pretty much any national museum…
Here for example are the Polish crown jewels (left); and the and British crown jewels on display at the Tower of London (right).
Below are two Swedish royal crowns featuring the orb (globe) and Templars Cross (left and center):
Serbian (left) and British (right) crowns, all fitted with the orb and Templars Cross on top:
You may notice on the Serbian crown above that there is a double-headed eagle (or phoenix) on the crown…
The double-headed eagle/phoenix symbol can be found on many notable national coat of arms throughout history, up to and including the present day… even clutching the orb and scepter in many cases…
Left to right below:
- Coat of Arms of the Russian Federation, present day;
- Coat of Arms of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, c.1815;
- Coat of Arms of Mongenegro, 2004
- Coat of Arms of Charles I of Spain, Charles V as Holy Roman Emperor, 1516
- Coat of Arms of Hellenic (Greek) Army
- Pope Benedict XVI and the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of the Orthodox Church in Istanbul (note the eagles on the head-piece), 2009.
The two-headed eagle symbol has ancient origins that you can read about more here, but what’s important to note is that it has been used as a key symbol to represent the (so-called) Holy Roman Empire (i.e. the Vatican)…
Below left is the Eagle of the Holy Roman Empire, and on the right is an illustration of The Imperial Eagle and the Imperial Estates of the Holy Roman Empire (1510).
Not surprisingly, the Knights of Malta – the militia of the Pope – has the double-headed eagle on their crest as well:
The short passage below (taken from here) provides a concise summary of these symbols and their connection to the Vatican and the Knights of Malta:
One of the symbols of the military orders of the Vatican, the masonic double-headed eagle emblazoned with the Maltese cross, signifies omnipotent royal dominion over both East and West.
The orb signifies temporal dominion over the globe of Earth, and the scepter signifies control over the spiritual and religious impulses of humanity.
This eagle symbol is used in the masonic rite of Memphis and Misraim, under which it reads, “Order Out of Chaos” the Hegelian method of crisis creation [i.e. “Ordo ab Chao” in latin].
[As seen above] it is found on the seals of many European and Eurasian nation states including that of Russia, indicating direct Vatican control over those countries.
It symbolizes the desire of a predatory elite with virtually unlimited resources, to totally dominate the entire world under a New World Order global government system using secrecy, manipulation, coercion and terror with the ends justifying the means.
Clearly, these aren’t an ordinary group of boy scouts we’re talking about here!
If you think that this sounds like some mystical tales from the Middle Ages, please note that these organizations are still very much exercising their power today.
For example, here are the Knights of Malta celebrating their 900 year anniversary in 2013…
… and here are just a handful of examples to give you an idea of the influence of the Knights of Malta (left to right)…
- Nelson Mandela in London with Duke of Gloucester after being invested as a Knight;
- Successor to Fascist Dictator Francisco Franco and Knight of Malta, King Juan Carlos of Spain, with Grand Master of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, Andrew Cardinal Bertie, 2000;
- Queen Elizabeth II;
- Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands.
So, why have I showed you all this, and what does it have to do with gravity?!
Well, what the material above illustrates, is that all the ruling governments and monarchies featuring these symbols are under Vatican influence…
… including the Royal Society! …
… which was created by these people to effectively control the dissemination of scientific information (and disinformation!) to the public.
By the way, note that the Royal Society is based in the City of London, which as you may recall from 4. Obelisks and City Plans is one of the three independent City-states that control the world. This is not a coincidence.
We won’t go into too much detail on this, but the information above also shows that many (if not all) Vatican-controlled countries have been purposefully steered against each other in countless wars by their own “leaders” for political and financial gains…
To ram this point home further, recall from 12. Templars Cross, Square and Compass, and The Night Owl that the Vatican-influenced Templars Cross appears on the British OBE and military medals in both the US and UK…
The Templar’s cross also appeared on the Nazi Iron cross (left); and here is Hitler meeting the Pope:
And clearly, Hitler isn’t the only one who’s fond of the Pope…
It shouldn’t come as a great surprise then that the US imported hundreds of Nazi scientists – many of them war criminals, who went on to form NASA as you learned in 17. The Greatest Liars of All Time…
Below is the famous rocket scientist Werner von Braun, first seen on the left with the Nazi SS High Command, and on the right with President John F. Kennedy:
By now it should be abundantly clear that NASA was created by freemasons and Nazi’s…
… and that Freemasonry and the Nazi’s have a strong connection to the Vatican.
This is further exemplified by some freemasonic logo’s, such as the flag presented to the 33rd degree Sovereign Grand Commander by Buzz Aldrin (the 2nd man to supposedly step on the moon)…
Notice the two-headed eagle on the flag above… no doubt born out of Vatican influence…
Thus, if you really trace the roots of NASA, you see that the people behind the promulgation of the propaganda and narrative about space, gravity, etc… are really the Jesuits and Papacy at the Vatican…
… though that is far from what gets presented to the unsuspecting public!
Are you starting to see the pattern here yet?
Let me spell it out clearly for you…
Click ‘play’ for added dramatic effect…
Given the connection between royal families, freemasons, and the Vatican, we know right from the start that there’s something fishy going on with the Royal Society.
With that in mind, let’s take a look at the Royal Society itself to see what else we can find…
The Royal Society was founded on 28th November, 1660…
November 28th is the 333rd day of the year (1660 was a leap year) with 33 remaining…
Do you think that choice of date (heavily featuring the number 33) was a coincidence?…
To make it abundantly obvious that freemasons were behind the establishment of the Royal Society, let’s take a look at some of the people involved…
Before we do, a quick reminder about freemasonic hand gestures, which were introduced in 5. Links to the Ancients…
Sir Christopher Wren (Founding member & President 1680-1682)
Looking at the historical timeline on the Royal Society website, the first name mentioned is Sir Christopher Wren.
A founding member of the Royal Society, he served as its president between 1680 to 1682.
He was a known freemason, and some sources even claim that he was a Grand Master mason.
Notice the hand gesture below:
He was best known for building St. Paul’s Cathedral in the City of London after the Great Fire in 1666…
Interesting to note that the Great Fire of London (September 4th, 1666) occurred just a month before Newton discovered Calculus… and Christopher Wren was a great beneficiary as he got to rebuild much of the city…
Needless to say, it certainly seems there was a lot of “restructuring” going on in London in 1666…
King Charles II (Founding Member)
King Charles II was a founding member of the Royal Society, and is listed as a freemason by many sources, such as this.
He’s also flashing the masonic hand-sign in his portrait:
Interesting to note that the second Royal Charter giving the Royal Society its official name was signed by King Charles II on April 23, which is the 113th day of the year, and thus encodes both the freemasonic numbers 13, and 33 (11×3).
Henry Oldenburg (Founding Member and First Secretary)
The third person named by the Royal Society timeline is Henry Oldenburg, the first Secretary of the Royal Society.
Again, notice the hand sign:
Sir Robert Moray (Founding Member & First President)
Alexander Bruce (Founding Member)
One of the original 12 founding members, and a known freemason:
Elias Ashmore (Founding Member)
According to this freemasonic website, Elias Ashmore (1617-1698) became a Freemason in 1647, and was a founding member of the Royal Society.
Some other notable freemasons who helped found the Royal Society:
- Robert Boyle (1627-1691) – Founder of modern Chemistry, son of 1st Earl of Cork (known for Boyle’s Law)
- Christian Huygens (1629-1695) – Dutch mathematician
- John Evelyn (1620-1706) – helped to found the Royal Society; and even has a freemasonic lodge named after him (Lodge 5518)
According to the Freemasonry Museum in London, there have been over 8,000 (!) freemasons in the Royal Society in its history:
That’s an awful lot of freemasons for an organization who’s primary stated purpose is supposed to be primarily scientific, especially considering that they have strict limits on how many members they can have (currently 1,600)!
Clearly, the Royal Society was founded by Freemasons, and has continued to be totally dominated by Freemasons ever since.
Now, you might be getting bored of the history lesson, and be wondering what this has to do with gravity…
Well, would it surprise you that Isaac Newton was a big-time freemason, and an early member of the Royal Society, including serving as its President for 24 years?…
Isaac Newton (Early member & President 1703-1727)
Although definitive information about him being a freemason are hard to find, Newton’s portraits give him away as a likely freemason:
The most interesting part about Newton that very few people are aware of, is that Newton had a keen interest in the occult sciences and religion, which you can read more about here.
Several books have been published outlining some of these details, such as the one below:
It’s interesting to note that Newton was born on Christmas Day (December 25th), and died on the vernal equinox (March 20th), which seems like a rather big “coincidence”, given that these are freemasons we are dealing with.
Newton was knighted by the British royals, suggesting he had close ties to the Vatican-influenced monarchs too.
What’s most interesting to note in this regard is that Newton adopted a coat of arms featuring crossed bones immediately after being knighted, as per this interesting article about his sinister background.
Needless to say, that coat of arms is very suspicious give that similar symbols have been used by secret societies like the Skull & Bones, as shown above.
According to this freemasonry website, one of Newton’s closest friends was John Theophilus Desaguliers, who was a Grand Master and is commonly regarded as the “father of the Grand Lodge System“.
In the portrait below he is seen holding a book titled “Constitutions of the Free-Masons 1725” (you can see in better resolution here):
In fact, the wikipedia page on History of Freemasonry even dubs Desaguliers the “father” of modern freemasonry…
In his capacity as President, Newton nominated Desaguliers as Curator of Experiments in 1712, and he would later also became Secretary of the Royal Society.
According to the London Museum of Freemasonry, Desaguliers was both a leading freemason, as well as an important publicist for Newton’s scientific ideas.
Worth noting in the passage above how “Desaguliers insisted that the ritual[s] be remembered rather than written down, leading to a dearth of material on the development of English ritual…“.
So here we have a guy who was
- a close confidant of Newton;
- responsible for publishing Newton’s scientific material; and
- a Grand Master freemason intent on keeping secrets.
Thus, plenty to be suspicious about, given the enormous influence of freemasonry in Newton’s life.
The Bigger Picture
Now, looking at the bigger picture, if you were the Pope sitting on your glorious golden throne at the Vatican, and you wanted to spread some lies to deceive and control the world, then the following would probably be pretty close to a perfect plan…
Firstly, create an official (“royal”) organization that can effectively monopolize what the public believes is “scientifically” true…
Putting the parts in yellow in other words:
- “Promoting science and its benefits“: Publish material that presents only your narratives, whilst censoring out or ridiculing alternative scientific views.
- “Recognizing excellence in science“: Publicly and officially recognize only your own agents/scientists (and ridicule those who disagree).
- “Supporting outstanding science“: Offer funding only to scientists who follow your narrative.
- “Providing scientific advice for policy“: Influence politics and law using your publicly accepted “science” (eg. energy policy…).
- “Fostering international and global cooperation“: Push towards a system where a central government body controls the flow of information (i.e. One World Government).
- “Education and public engagement“: Control the education and publishing sectors to indoctrinate the public with your narrative of history.
Secondly, ensure that no one except those of your choosing are allowed membership to this “official” organization…
… and subsequently promote the work of said scientists over-and-above all else in the “royal” scientific journals, so that their work becomes accepted over time, no matter how ridiculous.
Lastly, ridicule and censor scientists who present material that opposes your chosen narrative.
Over several decades and even centuries, the scientists found in most – if not all – textbooks will most certainly be those of your choosing… as over generations the alternative (truthful) information is blurred and/or lost in time.
Worth noting how all of the most famous “scientists” responsible for shaping the modern day worldview are freemasons…
Haven’t you ever wondered why a brilliant inventor like Nikola Tesla never shows up in any high school text books, whilst a whole bunch of freemasons who only stole other people’s ideas (eg. Thomas Edison) and spread lies (eg. Newton/Kepler/Copernicus/etc) do appear all the time?
The sad truth is that the vast majority of people who go through school will never think twice about material they are told repeatedly is “obviously” true…
Most people simply swallow whatever lies are published by this “royal” organization as fact, and then go on regurgitating those lies the rest of their lives.
And if anyone questions it, they are mad, because of course the “Royal” Society couldn’t be wrong… could they…
Here’s another coincidence to consider…
- 1660: Royal Society founded by a bunch of freemasons;
- 1663: Royal Society gets its official name via royal charter (by a freemason);
- 1666 (late summer): an apple falls on the head of one of the freemasons;
- 1666 (October): that same freemason invents Calculus;
- 1687: that freemason then goes on to publish “Principia Mathematica” that becomes the bed-rock of “science” for the next 300+ years.
Most people might look at that and think that it’s just a coincidence that the organization responsible for promulgating the gravity story was created just a couple of years before Newton randomly “discovered” gravity…
… However, others (like myself) would look a that and think that the Royal Society was created specifically for the purpose of introducing the public to some grand theories like gravity, that had already been planned well before the apple incident…
Pause and think about this for a second…
What are the odds that a guy just happens to stumble upon (what is considered) the most significant “discovery” of modern science, AND creates a revolutionary form of mathematics, at about the same time that the organization in charge of promulgating said discovery was created… simply by chance?
To summarize these events more clearly…
A bunch of freemasons set up a “Royal” organization to decide what is true and what is not true,…
… that only they and their carefully selected friends can be part of…
…. and then immediately afterwards, these same freemasons just happen to make a string of historic “discoveries” that lay the foundations for science for the next 300 years…
All things considered (with regards to the Vatican and freemasonic influences), without even looking at any actual science, there are already plenty of reasons to doubt the official narrative here!
You’ll be glad to know that this is the end of the history lesson, as we’re now going to close our history textbooks, and instead we’re going to do some science!
Before we dive in the cest-pool of modern “science”, allow me to briefly qualify myself in the humble interest of hopefully adding some credibility to the analysis to come.
Below you can see that I have some familiarity with Calculus, as well as Newtonian physics having studied Mechanical Engineering for 4 years…
… which is posted here simply to illustrate that I’m not completely illiterate when it comes to grasping “science”…
Now, please don’t take this as an invitation to blindly follow what I’ve written.
As I’ve stated repeatedly in this blog, you should be questioning everything, including what you read here.
Don’t take my word for anything; but test and research the validity of things for yourself.
Now, insufferable bragging and patronizing advice aside, let’s take a closer look at the G-man’s fruity theory…
2. The Theory of Gravity
In a nutshell (1min), this is what mainstream science teaches:
Let’s pick that apart now shall we…
Newton’s law of universal gravitation states the following:
Now in language we can easier understand…
In even simpler terms, mass attracts other mass.
Now, what better way to start de-constructing this fable, than by reading the reservations of Isaac Newton himself, from a 1692 letter (i.e. 5 years after he published Principia Mathematica)…
As you can see above, Newton was clearly very uncomfortable with the idea of “action at a distance” that his equations implied.
In other words, he thought that the idea that a mass could affect another mass at a distance was “absurd“…
Moreover, as this passage (from here) makes clear, Newton also admitted that he had no idea what was causing gravity…
So, despite the fact that Newton had absolutely no idea what caused gravity, he defined his equations as “laws” simply because they worked for the (heliocentric) model he was working with…
In other words,
“If the Earth is a spinning ball……..
* 3 volumes and a new invented form of mathematics later*
……… then these gravitational equations must be true.”
So basically, the entire premise that holds the spinning globe together (i.e. gravity), is based on nothing more than one man’s imagination and assumptions, rather than on any actual scientific experiments…
Allow me to point out, that this is the very definition of…
Why don’t we let “super-scientist” Michio Kaku summarize this for us…
Allow me to point out that to this day, “gravity” is still strictly speaking known as the “theory of gravity”…
This is because gravity itself has never actually been proven…
In other words, the theory of gravity is a “supposition of ideas intended to explain [gravitation], and is “based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained”.
Put simply, Newton assumed that the world was a ball, and invented some maths to suit that narrative…
… which of course is exactly how Nikola Tesla described “mainstream” scientists like Newton…
(Quote from New York Times, 11 July 1935, p23, c.8)
For those who don’t know, Nikola Tesla was one of those rare scientists who actually used experiments and the scientific method to figure out how things in nature worked, rather than inventing wild theories based on his own imagination.
Tesla is often cited as the “inventor of the electrical age”, but he has been heavily suppressed from history books, for reasons that will become clear later on in this post and in the next post.
Understandably, Tesla wasn’t the only notable person to question Newton’s ridiculous ideas…
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749 – 1832) was a German writer and scientist, most famous for his work involving colour theory – an area in which Newton himself also did some work in his later years.
This is what Goethe thought of Newton, as well as the scientific field in general at the time:
Moreover, just like Tesla, Goethe also pointed out that Newton liked to trust his fancy equations over his senses…
Now, despite the fact that Newton’s ideas had no scientific backbone whatsoever, his theory has nonetheless become accepted and taught in the mainstream as scientific fact…
For starters, here is what modern (pseudo-) scientists tell us about Gravity:
As you can see above, “gravity” is treated by mainstream science as being a “natural phenomenon by which things with all things with mass [attract each other]”…
…. that “gives weight to physical objects”, and…
…. that is “responsible for many of the large scale structures in the Universe”…
As you’ve seen until now, there is literally NOTHING that suggests that any of that is true. It is all speculation, based on Newton’s assumptions!
Not surprisingly, there are many theoretical and observational inconsistencies with the theory – even within the mainstream model for which gravity is supposed to be a “law”…
Here are just a few examples of “theoretical concerns” that remain unresolved to this day…
All in all, Newton’s theory can be summarized by this short passage, borrowed from here:
Despite being commonly referred to as a force, Newton himself realized the absurdity of instantaneous action at a distance and infinite force propagation.
His equation for universal gravitation being proportional to mass and inversely proportional to distance fell short in certain instances and did not fully describe observation.
Although being a close approximation mathematically and a marvel of it’s time, gravity as a force was flawed.
Despite these obvious flaws, Newton’s theories steadily grew to be accepted into mainstream science…
… no doubt aided by the perpetuation of pathetic propaganda like this…
The rise of science through the industrial revolution enabled more and more scientists to conduct experiments to try to prove the validity of gravity and the heliocentric* model…
(*heliocentricism = the model of the solar system with the sun at the center)
…But as it happens, all such attempts to prove heliocentricism failed… and to cover this up, Relativity was invented…
Before digging into the absurdity of Relativity though, we’re going to look at some of the most important experiments that forced the establishment to invent it.
Please bear with me – as this information is included here for the sake of adequately setting the scene for the Theory of Relativity… as well as giving you some more concrete scientific evidence that the Earth spin is completely unmeasurable (i.e. fabricated).
Scientific Experiments that Disproved Heliocentricism
“Every experiment ever designed to detect the motion of the earth has failed to detect earth’s motion and/or distinguish it from relative counter motion of the universe.”
-Mark Wyatt, Author of “Is Geocentricism Possible?“
Mickelson Morley (1887)
The 1887 Michelson-Morley experiment aimed to measure the change in speed of light due to the (supposed) motion of Earth through space.
They aimed to do this by separating a light beam, and mirroring it back onto a light detector off two mirrors at right angles to each other.
Their experiments included measurements taken in every different direction, as well as experiments on numerous locations on the Earth’s surface…
… but no matter how hard they tried they couldn’t detect any change in the velocity of the two light beams whatsoever… (and certainly not a 1036mph spin of the Earth)…
This text sums up the aftermath of these experiments well:
They thought that their experiment was a complete “failure”, they could find no evidence that the Earth was moving at all. Something was radically wrong. Michelson tried experiment after experiment for the rest of his life and could find no evidence that the Earth was moving relative to an aether or to space.
This sent the physicists into a quandary, Michelson thought his experiments were all failures – what was he doing wrong?? How could he detect the Earth’s motion. Michelson thought maybe the Earth dragged the aether along with it but a later experiment proved that this was not the case. Other scientists also tried various experiments and all failed. Or did they??
George Fitzgerald, an Irish physicist, came up with the adhoc explanation that, as the Earth sailed through the heavens it “contracted” in the direction it was going just enough to compensate for its forward motion (how convenient!). Hendrik Lorentz, a dutch physicist, had the same idea but he put it down as mathematical equations that became known as the Lorentz transformations. Einstein liked these equations so much that he used them in his “Theory of Special Relativity”.
Most scientists were aware of the Michelson-Morley experiment at the time, and that it had failed to detect any movement of the earth round the sun. This had to be overcome so the Fitzgerald-Lorentz shortening of the apparatus was proposed, and eventually the paradoxical Relativity Theory was invented by Einstein to overcome this problem.
However, there are three other experiments that have been deliberately ignored by universities because they support geocentricity.
(The text above and the next 3 examples are taken from here)
The Michelson-Gale experiment detected the aether passing the surface of the earth with an accuracy of 2% of the speed of the (supposed) daily rotation of the earth!
Thus, the Michelson-Morely experiment (outlined above) detected no movement of the earth around the sun, yet the Michelson-Gale experiment measured the earth’s rotation (or the aether’s rotation around the earth!) to within 2%! This surely speaks volumes for geocentricity.
(Reference – Astrophysical Journal 1925 v 61 pp 140-5)
George Biddell Airy, “Airy’s Failure” (1871)
Telescopes have to be very slightly tilted to get the starlight going down the axis of the tube because of the earth’s “speed around the sun”. Airey filled a telescope with water that greatly slowed down the speed of the light inside the telescope and found that he did not have to change the angle of the telescope. This showed that the starlight was already coming in at the correct angle so that no change was needed.
This demonstrated that it was the stars moving relative to a stationary earth and not the fast orbiting earth moving relative to the comparatively stationary stars. If it was the telescope moving he would have had to change the angle.
(Reference – Proc. Roy. Soc. London v 20 p 35)
Here is an excellent 6min animated video on Airy’s failure for any geeks who want to learn more. 🙂
The Sagnac Experiment (1913)
Sagnac rotated a table complete with light and mirrors with the light being passed in opposite directions around the table between the mirrors.
He detected the movement of the table by the movement of the interference fringes on the target where they were recombined.
This proved that there IS an aether that the light has to pass through and this completely destroys Einstein’s theory of Relativity that says there is no aether.
It is for this reason that this experiment is completely ignored by scientists. More recently Kantor has found the same result with similar apparatus.
(Reference – Comptes Rendus 1913 v157 p 708-710 and 1410-3)
Aether is going to come up again later on in this post, and again in a later post, so to get a basic understanding of how it was proved to exist I’d recommend watching this short video that does an excellent job of explaining Sagnac’s experiment, even for non-technical viewers:
Now, instead of acknowledging these amazing scientific discoveries, the scientific community simply swept these experiments under the carpet; as well as purposefully misinterpreting and heavily suppressing them.
Not surprisingly, most physicists have never even heard of these experiments, as they are never mentioned in textbooks or at university’s.
The only experiments you will read about, are experiments like those of “science legend” Henry Cavendish – who in 1797-98 apparently proved gravity…
… The funny thing about Cavendish’s experiments however, is that they have never been succesfully replicated…… by anyone……… EVER.
Furthermore, Cavendish himself was hardly an independent scientist, as he was part of the royal families, being a grandson of the 2nd Duke of Devonshire. Yeah…
Should anyone be interested in learning more about this science fraud, this 6min video provides a good breakdown:
Needless to say, with the emergence of experiments like those conducted by Sagnac, Airy, and Mickelson-Morley, evidence against the heliocentric model was quickly piling up, and the noose appeared to be tightening on the heliocentric lie, so it was only a matter of time before it fell apart…
Knowing this, the establishment knew that they needed to pad their card house of lies with something new and even crazier to explain away and cover-up the “theoretical inconsistencies” and experimental anomalies…
… Enter Albert Einstein…
3. The Theory of Relativity
Einstein was heavily influenced by Lemaître, who was a Jesuit priest with strong ties to the Vatican… and who also happened to invent the Big Bang Theory in later years coincidentally based largely on Einstein’s Theory of Relativity… (more on that in a later post)…
Interestingly, Einstein (1879-1955) was born on March 14…
Why is that interesting?
Because March 14th is 3.14… the first three digits of pi.
That could be a coincidence, but knowing the freemasons I wouldn’t put that past them…
Also, March 14th in the Julian calendar is March 1st, or 1/3…13 (a key freemasonic number).
So who was Albert Einstein other than a freemason?
To borrow a passage from here:
“Dr.” Albert Einstein’s name is synonymous with GENIUS….In the “scientific” community he is hailed as the greatest scientist since Sir Isaac Newton.
He is credited with discovering the “theory” of relativity and is called the “father” of the atomic age because of the famous equation E=MC2. This formula says that matter can be translated into energy at the incredible rate of the square of the speed of light.
He was the first superstar of “science” and an international icon and media celebrity for most of the first half of the 20th century.
In 1922, he was awarded the Nobel Prize for physics for his work on theoretical physics, and especially for his “discovery” of the law of the photoelectric effect.
In the U.S. he is credited with ‘fathering” the atomic bomb because of a letter he wrote to President Roosevelt in 1939, urging him to begin research on producing a nuclear bomb before Nazi Germany.
An hour sitting with a pretty girl passes like a minute, but a minute sitting on a hot stove seems like an hour.
What a genius right…
So where did this genius come from?
Well, in a matter of years he went from being rejected from the University of Bern for being too “radical” and having his work described as “more artistic than actual Physics”…
… to winning the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics…
Though there is a lot more to the story than simply a plagiarizing patent office clerk, I think there’s probably some truth in this Family Guy clip:
I won’t copy it here but I recommend reading this article which does a good job of outlining Einstein’s story, as does the article copied below from reddit, which is included here for your viewing pleasure:
In other words:
As for the meaning of his famous equation…
Einstein = Mind x Control ^every second
Whilst I wish I was insightful enough to come up with that myself, credit for spotting that joke goes to Mark Knight, who’s article on gravity includes some great information and videos:
Now, as discussed earlier, the Theory of Relativity was invented in order to solve some of the obvious inconsistencies with Newton’s theory…
Effectively, what they did was to build one lie on top of the other to “solidify” the earlier lies… all whilst claiming that gravity is a “universal law” and that only smart people could understand Relativity, when in truth, it was designed to be confusing.
Einstein’s solution to the “theoretical inconsistencies” with Newton’s theory of gravity was as follows:
We’re going to get into spacetime, but first of all, notice above that they actually had the audacity to call the gravitational force in relativity a “fictitious force”… (also called a “pseudo force”)…
To introduce us to spacetime, here are a couple of paragraphs from the article shared above:
By the late 1800’s, others had found error in Newton’s theory (most known is the errors with the movement of Mercury).
By 1915, Einstein believed he had fixed the errors in Newtons’ work, with his Theory of Relativity. He theorised that gravity is what happens when space and time (the same thing) is curved or warped around a mass, such as a star or a planet.
Thus, a star or planet would cause kind of a dip in space so that any other object that came too near would tend to fall into the dip. Einstein basically explained how gravity is more than just a force: it is a curvature in the space-time continuum.
Einstein was pretty cool though, with quotes like, “Nothing will end war unless the people themselves refuse to go to war.”
The Theory of Relativity is still taught today. It teaches that in our own Solar System, not only does the Sun exert gravity on all the planets, keeping them in their orbits, but each planet exerts a force of gravity on the Sun, as well as all the other planets, too, all to varying degrees based on the mass and distance between the bodies.
And it goes beyond just our Solar System, as actually, every object that has mass in the Universe attracts every other object that has mass — again, all to varying degrees based on mass and distance.
Given that there is absolutely no measurable proof of this fanatical idea, this is simply another example of…
Yes, you guessed it:
Just as with the Theory of Gravity, notice that it is called the Theory of Relativity:
… and there’s good reason for that… It is is un-provable…
And the best part?
… Einstein even admitted so himself:
In fact, Einstein’s words in a 1949 letter are rather telling as well…
When questioned about his genius, Einstein said this:
For once Albert has a good idea!
Let’s ask Nikola to see what he has to say about Einstein shall we…
It’s gonna be good, so you might want to pull up a chair…
Didn’t I tell you it would be good! 😀
For your reference, the full quote (from New York Times (11 July 1935) p23, c.8) is as follows:
“The “Theory of Relatively” wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors.
The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists. Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved.
Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.”
Here is that “beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king”:
…. “a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors”…
In case you were wondering, here is what Tesla had to say about spacetime curvature in particular… from New York Herald Tribune, 11 September 1932:
I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making.
Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.
Tesla also published a prepared statement on his 81st birthday (July 10, 1937) critiquing Einstein’s spacetime curvature:
Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves.
Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible – But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed.
Only the existence of a field of force can account for the motions of the bodies as observed, and its assumption dispenses with space curvature.
All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion. So are all attempts to explain the workings of the universe without recognizing the existence of the ether and the indispensable function it plays in the phenomena.”
* Tesla drops the mic *
Allow me to walk through that passage step-by-step, just so it can be clear just how thoroughly Tesla dismantled a whole bunch of pseudoscience with just a few words…
“… Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves.”
Newton’s 3rd law states that “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction”… so if that is true, then Tesla’s statement above must also be true…
“Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible – But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed.
Only the existence of a field of force can account for the motions of the bodies as observed, and its assumption dispenses with space curvature.”
Now, let’s look at some of the immediate repercussions here…
So… if gravity is “most accurately described (…) as a consequence of the curvature of spacetime”….
… and spacetime is a bunch of this…
… then I guess that means gravity is a bunch of that ^ too…
Or, in the more eloquent words of Tesla,
All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion. So are all attempts to explain the workings of the universe without recognizing the existence of the aether and the indispensable function it plays in the phenomena.”
More on the workings of the universe in a later post… but for now let’s just finish the job of dismantling gravity here first…
It’s interesting to note that they say that Newton’s theory of gravitation is only an approximation… that is superseded by Einstein’s theory of Relativity…
So Relativity, which is mainly based on this:
… is the “extreme precision” alternative when dealing with “very strong
gravitational fields bullsh*t”…
Furthermore, as you can see below, scientists claim that gravity is most accurately described NOT as a force, but as a consequence of the curvature of space-time…
So, if that is the case, then WHY have we all been told in school for years that it is undoubtedly, literally, and scientifically “a force” then?!
In fact, in the globe model, it has to be to a force to counterbalance the centrifugal force created by Earth’s spin…
Needless to say, this is just another confusing contradiction in a sea of complex and insane maths that has been created in such a way as to be beyond everyone…
Here’s a good 10min video that discusses some of the things we’ve covered so far with some nice animations:
Notice a few other things in the same passage as earlier:
So, lets see if I got this right:
- gravity is a consequence of space-time;
- space-time is caused by the uneven distribution of mass/energy;
- all of which results in gravitational time dilation;
- where time-lapses more slowly in stronger gravitational potential.
Tell me, how many of these things are things you can actually observe with your own 5 senses and test with the scientific method?
I mean, does space-time, uneven distribution of mass/energy (caused by space-time), gravitational time dilation, slower time-lapse, and gravitational potential sound like things you’ve ever seen or felt before?
… Or is it something you’ve just been told is true by these guys:
Believing in a spinning ball and an imaginary force no one has ever proven is starting to sound a lot like “faith” to me…
Maybe that’s why they call it:
This 5min clip from a presentation by Wal Thornhill provides an excellent and well-reasoned introduction to what is wrong with modern science:
Now, unlike the rubbish the clowns of pseudoscience spew out, REAL science is observable, measurable, and repeatable…
… unlike gravity, relativity, spacetime curvature, etc… which have absolutely nothing to do with reality…
Needless to say…
This is NOT science:
THIS is science:
It also helps to have some character in one’s scientific pursuits too, unlike the dogmatic fanatics who fill people’s heads with lies…
From Goethe’s Maximen un Reflexionen, 1833 – which by the way is a delightfully refreshing read if anyone can spare a few minutes:
Now, with a thirst for truth and active skepticism, let’s have some good old-fashioned fun and put this to the scientific method to the test shall we!
4. The Scientific Method
Labcoats and safety goggles on please!
We’re going to do some very simple experiments, and to do so, we’re going to go take a trip back to 8th grade science class and make a point of meticulously following the scientific method step-by-step (like any good student of science would)…
Step 1: Observation
Here are three things that we can observe with our own eyes
- Helium balloons float upwards when released outdoors;
- Scuba divers can be buoyant in water; and
- Apples fall from trees to the ground.
Step 2: Question
Can what is happening be explained by any other way than an imaginary force called “gravity”?
Step 3: Research
- Helium (~0.17 kg/m³) is about 7 times less dense than Air (~1.25 kg/m³):
2. The average density of a human is about 985 kg/m³, which is slightly less than the density of seawater (1020 kg/m³).
3. The density of an average apple is 0.24 g/cm³,… or 240 kg/m³, which is significantly higher than the density of air (~1.20 kg/m³).
Step 4: Hypothesis
I hypothesize that the reason why
- a helium balloon rises in the air;
- scuba divers can be buoyant in water; and
- apples fall to the ground…
… is due to difference in density between each object and the medium (i.e. air or water) they are in.
Step 5: Experiment
- Helium Balloons
Go to a birthday party, and you will see that helium balloons will rise in the air:
… and if you have enough of them they can even make a fully-grown man levitate in mid-air:
There is no mass in the sky that magically attracts the balloons upwards (as the theory of gravity would suggest); they simply rise until they reach the point at which the surrounding air is of equal density.
If gravity was true, then balloons could not float upwards, because they would be attracted to the ground – because the mass of the Earth is much greater than the balloons mass so would pull it down.
2. Scuba Divers
Small weights and a little bit of air in a vest allow a diver to perfectly match the density of the water around him, such that he neither rises nor sinks in it, remaining buoyant.
In case he wants to go up, he simply adds some air to his vest (from his scuba tank). If he wants to sink a bit more, he releases some air. It’s effectively a means of regulating the divers’ density relative to the water.
And in case anyone was wondering – yes, I have tested this myself 🙂
3. Apple falling to the ground
As you are well aware of by now, apples do indeed fall to the ground, where they stop.
Step 6: Data
- 100% of the time that we filled up Helium balloons, they rose in the air;
- A scuba diver can be buoyant in water and regulate his buoyancy by adding or removing air to change his density; and
- An apple will fall to the ground 100% of the time (and not go past the ground because the ground is more dense than the apple)
Step 7: Conclusion
Based on the data we have gathered, we can conclude that there is a direct correlation between an objects density and density of the medium they are in, with the direction of their motion.
- Objects with lower density than the medium they are in will float upwards;
- Objects with the same density as the medium they are in will be buoyant (or levitate);
- Objects with higher density than the medium they are in will drop downwards.
This suggests that apples fall from trees because they are denser than the air around them, and not because of some made up imaginary force.
Thus, we have proven that you really DON’T need gravity to explain why some things float and others drop to the ground…
… It is simply density at work!
You can see this clearly exemplified in the image below, where liquids and solids alike have layered according to their relative densities:
Here is a good 3 min video on the subject:
Should you wish to watch more material on density as it relates to gravitt I would suggest watching these two videos:
Now, we’ve seen how most everyday phenomena (like a balloon rising, or a boat floating) can be attributed to density…
… However, that isn’t the entire picture here…
To find out what the entire picture is, simply:
One time offer only…
To briefly summarize what we’ve seen here…
First, we scrutinized the history of the Royal Society, and established clear links to the Vatican and Freemasons.
Second, we tore into Newton’s Theory of Gravity with some common sense, and then looked at numerous scientific experiments that proved the heliocentric model wrong.
Thirdly, we analyzed the Theory of Relativity with help from Nikola Tesla, and it became clear that there is no substance to any of Einstein’s work.
Finally, we followed the scientific method to establish that a large part of the “natural phenomena” attributed to “gravity” can actually be accurately described by density.
Hopefully this post provided a sneak peak of Nikola Tesla’s work, because it will become a key topic in a later post where we will take a look at the electromagnetic nature of our reality.
Now, before you leave this page I have some homework for you to complete…
This video will give you an excellent overview of the material covered in this article, as well as insight into what we’re going to be covering here soon!
To be continued…