Constellations Debunk the Globe

Constellations are a great topic for Flat Earth. The stars in our night sky bear witness to our stationary earth, and make it impossible for earth to be a globe. How?

Constellations debunk the globe in two basic ways. First, their year-round visibility  proves we don’t orbit the sun. Second, their visibility from far-flung latitudes proves the earth is not a ball.

The Big Dipper shows up in the Northern latitudes all year round. This would be impossible if we were spinning, orbiting and whirling through space. So that’s Debunk Number One.

The Resilient Earth

Debunk Number Two: The Big Dipper is visible as far south as Northern Australia. This should be impossible on a globe, for it would be hidden behind a hill of curvature.

field of view round flat earth
If earth were a globe, The Big Dipper could not be visible from Northern Australia.

Next we have Orion, the Hunter. Orion is a seasonal constellation, meaning he only shows up in winter (summer for the southern latitudes). But when he does appear, he is visible all over the earth. You can see him everywhere on our stationary plane. How could this be possible on a globe?

orion the hunter

On a globe, it’s impossible for any constellation to be visible everywhere. The curvature of the earth would hide certain stars from view. And yet, Orion is visible all over.

Observe the Southern Cross. The pride of Australia and New Zealand, the Southern Cross is visible year-round from the Southern latitudes. Another globe debunk. If we were spinning and orbiting, we would lose alignment, remember?

The Southern Cross is also visible from Northern latitudes, like Hawaii and the Florida Keys. If we were on a ball, the Southern stars could not be visible from the North.

southern cross hawaii 2

Southern Star Trails. Southern stars seem to move in an opposite direction from the Northern ones. There’s basically two schools of thought on this. One is that refraction causes them to appear to move in the opposite direction, as if seen through water, that is, the waters above the firmament. This fascinating video illustrates the concept perfectly.

The second idea is that we have two points of rotation, one in the North and one in the South, like two cogs in a timepiece.

I personally don’t have the answer; if you would like to weigh in, please do so in the comments.

To summarize, constellations debunk the globe. Thanks for reading! Stacey


Measuring the Sun

This article was prepared and written by @rokro11, not Stacey McStationary, and is a guest article appearing on this site.  If you have any questions or comments you may contact @rokro11 on Twitter or leave a comment below.

The last article was about measuring the moon.  This article will be about measuring the moon’s brother — the sun.  

Scientist, engineer, and educator – Eric Dollard, says nobody knows what the sun is.  He confirms the sun is not burning anything and it’s not related to fusion. He indicates the sun produces electromagnetic light and heat as a transformer.

The earth is stationary and the sun moves above the earth.  The speed of the sun changes from its slowest of about 952 mph, while it is above the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, to its fastest of about 1,038 mph, when it’s above the Equator.  

measure_sun_flat_earth.jpg provides the sun’s speed.  The speed of the sun from this site varies because the sun is not traveling at a constant speed.  Some may incorrectly think the sun is not moving and the earth is the one orbiting around the sun, while also spinning, and hurling through space – but it’s not.

To measure the sun, just like with the moon, its movement must first be captured on video. The ideal time to capture this video is when the sun is directly 90 degrees overhead to eliminate atmosplane refraction.  

On June 7, 2018 at 12:14 pm, I recorded the sun traveling from its leading edge to its trailing edge in 2:14 minutes.  The sun’s speed on this date, which is the sun speed relative to earth, is 957 mph.

957 mph divided by 60 minutes, is 15.95 miles per minute.  Take 15.95 and divide that by 60 seconds to arrive at .2658 miles per second.  

Since the sun crossed itself in 2:14 minutes, this amounts to 134 total seconds.  How wide is the sun? It is 35.62 miles wide. (134 second x .2658 miles per second).

sun speed flat earth.jpg

Wait a minute!  Didn’t Nasa and others report the sun’s size is 864,337 miles wide?  It’s time to figure out that both the moon and sun appear about the same size because they actually are roughly the same size.  

I didn’t use the heliocentric model to determine the above measurements because that model is not accurate.  I’m not going to assume the earth is flat and stationary; I’m going to let NASA and other organizations make that declaration in regard to the flat and stationary earth.  If you have any questions concerning NASA and other organizations that confirm earth is flat and stationary, you should direct your concerns to the appropriate organization, and not to the article’s author.

See the following confirmations by NASA, US Army, MIT, and Princeton University, in which their tests, models, aircraft, UAVs, radar, and other topics refer to the actual flat and non-rotating earth or the assumption of operation on an actual flat and non-rotating earth. 

Official Reports Referring to a Flat Non-Rotating Earth:

NASA in 1972: The method is limited, however, to application where a flat, nonrotating earth may be assumed. (Pg. 2)

NASA in 1978: The earth is flat and non-rotating.  (Pg. 14)

NASA in 1988: “This report derives and defines a set of linearized system matrices for a rigid aircraft of constant mass, flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat, nonrotating earth.” (Pg, 36)

NASA in 1993: Lastly, the equations of motion for the zeroth-order problem of flight in a vacuum over a Flat Earth are presented. (Pg. 32)

The Army Research Laboratory: In its title, Propagation of Electromagnetic Fields Over Flat Earth, (2001)

MIT in its Abstract, “Three targeting methods were considered: assuming a Flat Earth…” (2006)

Routledge Taylor/Francis Group, for MIT, via Princeton, reports  a flat, non-rotating Earth even if the trajectory is plotted on a round Earth. (2006) (pg. 3)

In my Measuring the Moon article, the moon’s size was determined to be about 34 miles wide. The measurements relating to the sun have determined the sun is about the same size of the moon, at 35.5 miles wide. Both the sun and moon move East to West over our flat and stationary earth and at almost the same speed of over 2 minutes to cross themselves. Do the sun and the moon look the same size? Of course they do. A mile or two of variance is not noticeable in celestial bodies which are both less than 4,000 miles away.  

sun clouds lovely
The sun is a small, local light

Nasa misled the world beginning in the late 1960s by faking the moon landings 6 times. Nothing gets to space but in order for NASA to exist and remain relevant to collect $52,000,000 per day, they have to lie about what they can do.  Although they have lied about many things, they cannot lie about everything – that has been pointed out and referenced above.

Is the sun closer to 35.5 miles wide or is it closer to 865,000 miles wide?  Is the information Nasa provides about the size of the sun reasonable at 865,000 miles wide when both the moon and sun appear about the same size?  

That’s something you need to determine on your own. I can provide the facts, but I can’t make people who are unwilling to accept reality understand those facts.

Ten Talking Points Debunked

When you Google “How to prove earth is round,” this article comes up first. It’s a roundup of globe earth talking points.

Many post it when they encounter Flat Earth, and think their work is done. But all the points are based on assumptions and easily debunked. Let’s go through them one by one.

1) The Moon.

The author states eclipses are caused by earth’s shadow. We have no evidence that shadows affect the moon.

The sun and moon sometimes appear simultaneously during an eclipse. This is called a selenelion. It proves that not all three bodies are lined up in a row. This would be necessary for a shadow to cause an eclipse.  We don’t know what causes lunar eclipses, but it’s not earth’s shadow.

1b) Foucault’s Pendulum.

 Foucault’s pendulum doesn’t prove earth is moving. A pendulum can swing in any direction, depending on the force acted on it. It requires an electrically powered magnetic source to keep it in motion. If the earth were really moving, no pendulum anywhere would be motionless!

2) Ships and the Horizon.

We encounter this argument a lot, and it’s an ancient one. When globers see a ship disappearing on the horizon, they were taught to believe it’s the ship going over the curve. There’s a couple of problems with this.

First, we observe no curvature on the horizon of the ocean. The line where the ocean appears to meet the sky is the X axis, if you will. It’s always a perfectly straight line with no curve.
ocean horizon_no_curve 2

So, if there were a curve between the observer and the horizon, that would mean the ocean is shaped like a cylinder.

ocean horizon x axis z axis 2

And no one is saying it’s a cylinder. I hope.

The second problem with the “ship goes over the curve” argument is that ships, when they disappear behind the line of convergence, can be brought back into view with a zoom lens. If they had gone behind a hill of water, no zoom lens could bring them back.

2b) Ant and Orange. 

The idea is that if you were observing an ant walking towards you on an orange, you would see his antennae come up over the edge, then his head, body, and legs. This phenomenon of seeing the ant’s body in stages would occur on a flat surface as well, if the ant were able to approach you from the point where he had disappeared into the line of convergence. Also, the relative size of an ant vs. an orange is not comparable to that of a ship vs. the ocean, so the point is moot anyway.

3) Constellations.

 The article states that Aristotle noticed different constellations are visible from different regions, and he concluded that earth is a ball. If that’s true, Aristotle didn’t think about it very much.

We see different constellations in different regions because the celestial dome has different stars in different areas. Some are invisible from some locations because of perspective. For example, you can’t see Polaris from Australia. But you can see The Big Dipper from northern Australia, which would be impossible if the earth were a globe.

big dipper debunk

4) Sticks and Shadows.

This beloved talking anecdote is based on an experiment supposedly done by Eratosthenes, the ancient Greek astronomer. Trouble is, there’s no evidence of his work, and all the records were destroyed when the library in Alexandria burned.

So, even if I’m being generous, and assume Eratosthenes did an experiment where he calculated the circumference of the earth, his numbers were wrong, and likewise his conclusions. If sticks demonstrate different shadow lengths, it’s because of the movement of the sun, not the curve of the earth.

5) Seeing Farther from Higher.

 Being able to see farther from higher would be true whether earth is curved or flat, so this doesn’t prove either shape. However, the horizon continues to rise to eye level, no matter how high you go, which could not happen on a globe. If the earth were a globe, the horizon would curve down and away from the observer, and could never form a straight line at a high altitude.

120 k feet clouds
We can see much further from 120,000 feet than we could from the ground.

6) Airplanes.

The author’s argument on airplanes is twofold: 1) that an airplane can go a long distance without falling off the edge, and 2) that you can see the curve of the earth from an airplane. I think it was late and the author was getting tired.

Airplanes can go a long distance before they reach the edge, that is, unless they’re heading due South. At some point they will reach the southern latitudes and travel is regulated by the Antarctic Treaty.  But planes can and do circumnavigate the earth East to West, in the style of Magellan. magellan with impact

As for the curve of earth, no one has seen it from an airplane, unless they were looking through a curved window, or using a fisheye lens (a type of wide-angle lens that can cause distortion).

at what point
The horizon is flat and level from any altitude.

7) Other planets.

I’ve written about this before, and since all we think we know about “other planets” comes from NASA’s CGI and artist’s renderings, this isn’t a valid proof of round earth at all. What they call planets are wandering stars, lights in the firmament. We have no proof that they are spheres, just that they are round.



8) Time Zones.

Time zones are a great Flat Earth proof since they are caused by the sun travelling over our stationary plane, casting light in different areas as it goes. If earth were a globe, exactly one half of the world would be in darkness at all times. That is not what we experience.

9) Gravity. 

This section is meaningless because it relies on the assumption that gravity exists. Assumptions are meaningless (h/t @rokro11). Gravity is only required to explain how objects of great mass would be attracted to each other, or spin, or orbit; but since all those are assumptions gravity is not required.

10) Images of Space. 

moon and earthI notice the author saves this til her last point, hoping most people have gotten bored and stopped reading by now. Because images of space are fake and easily debunked. NASA admits that all their images are composites, i.e., Photoshopped. My favorite is the grey refrigerator magnet. I think it’s supposed to be the moon.

Thanks for reading! Stacey

Lunar Eclipses

They told us earth’s shadow causes eclipses. But that’s impossible. In order for the sun to cast a shadow on the earth, all three heavenly bodies—Earth, Sun and Moon—would have to line up in a row like three billiard balls:

billiard balls sun earth moon cropt
Sun, earth and moon would have to line up in a row.

Simple observation reveals this doesn’t happen. This explanation of eclipses relies on many assumptions, including earth being a spinning ball. More on that here.  But in this post I’d like to share one way we know for sure that the heavenly bodies don’t line up in a row.

Many times in the history of lunar eclipse observation, the sun and moon have appeared in the sky at the same time. This phenomenon is called the selenelion. If you can see the sun and the moon in the sky at the same time, the three bodies are definitely not in a row. They’re in more of a triangle configuration.sun moon triangle eclipse 2In that case, it’s impossible for the sun to cast a shadow on the moon. Some say refraction causes the sun and moon to appear simultaneously. Even the article I linked explains it away with refraction. But can you deny your own senses, and deny that the sun and the moon appear in the sky at the same time? Many of us have noticed the sun and moon together in the sky, and it happens during eclipses as well. This argument that we don’t really see the sun and moon together in the sky is consistent with globers’ insistence that we deny our own powers of observation in order to believe the standard narrative.

It doesn’t happen every time during a lunar eclipse. But if it even happened once, it would debunk the standard explanation of eclipses. And in reality, it’s happened many times.

So, if not shadows, what causes lunar eclipses? I don’t know. But the standard explanations do not suffice. Therefore, we must seek a better explanation.

Thanks for reading! Stacey


Measuring the Moon

Please note: This is a guest post by @rokro11. He uses info from to calculate the moon’s size. I, Stacey, have not looked into this personally. If you would like to comment or ask any questions, you can do that below or to on Twitter.

How to Calculate the Moon’s Size

In this article, I will provide some insight on how to calculate the size of the moon.  The moon moves above the earth and all we need to know is the speed of the moon to do some simple math to calculate its size.

In order to obtain the speed of the moon, which varies throughout the duration of its travel while it moves above the earth, go to the site  This company is located in Norway and it reports the moon speed relative to the ground speed of earth. You can contact them at 


Go here for the Day and Night World Map.

Under the heading called “Sun & Moon”, click on “Day and Night Map.” About half-way down the page, it will indicate, “Position of the Moon” and you will find the speed of the moon relative to the ground speed of earth as indicated below:   


According to the site, the speed of the moon changes between about 933 mph to about 1005 mph.  The moon’s speed can change over 20 mph in a 24 hour period.

I captured a video of the full moon at 2:10 am on 05-30-2018. See how it moves:

First screenshot from my video.
moon_flat_earth 2.0
Second screenshot from video.

For this specific example, I will be using the Timeanddate speed of the moon relative to the surface of the earth of 952.5 mph because I captured the video of the full moon at 2:10 am that morning.  Now that we have the moon’s speed, along with video from a camera on the ground, we have to view how long it takes the trailing edge of the moon to reach the leading edge of the moon. The time it takes the moon to travel its width is 2:10, or two minutes and ten seconds.  

Because the moon is traveling at 952.5 mph, it travels 15.875 miles in 1 minute.  (952.5/60 minutes = 15.875 miles). The moon traveled across itself in 2 minutes and 10 seconds.  We add 15.875 to 15.875 and come up with 31.75 miles, over 2 minutes.

How do we take into account the additional 10 seconds?  Simply take the distance traveled per minute of 15.875 miles and divide that by 60 to arrive at the distance it travels per second.  That yields .2646 miles per second. (15.875/60 = .2646 miles per second).

To account for 10 addition seconds, take .2646 and multiply it by 10 seconds, which results in 2.646 miles.

For the total amount of distance traveled, we add the 2 minutes of travel distance of 31.75 (for the 2 minutes) and 2.646 (for the 10 seconds) and that yields 34.396 miles.

By this method, the width of the moon is 34.396 miles.

moon size.jpeg
My calculation of the moon’s size.

This is not a complicated method and this is how to determine an object’s size if its speed is known.  

Nasa claims the size of the moon is 2,158 miles wide.  It’s not. The moon is also not 238,900 miles from earth.  The moon’s size and distance is much less than we have been led to believe.  

We don’t need Nasa to continue lying to us.  If anyone finds errors in this method, provide your feedback.  Don’t Google search the speed of the sun because that Google search result is misleading and the results only back up the heliocentric theory.  It’s a diversion to keep you from finding the truth. Find a way to calculate the moon’s speed using information that makes sense, not based on unfounded and unreliable information from Nasa and other subjective and unverifiable sources.

Do this simple measurement and provide your own moon size calculations in the comments below.  If you have any questions, ask here or @rokro11 on Twitter.

If Earth is Flat, Why Are the Other Planets Round?

People often ask: If Earth is flat, why are the other planets round? This question comes from two assumptions:

1) That other planets exist
2) That they are round

These assumptions stem from the indoctrination that we received since we were infants.  By the time a child reaches school age, he has seen the globe and “planets”  hundreds of times. When he begins his schooling, this bombardment only increases.

universal studiosIt’s no accident that a child sees the globe multiple times before he has capacity for critical thought. This is deliberate, methodical brainwashing.

We see the images and hear the narrative so many times, that by the time we encounter Flat Earth we say, “No…it couldn’t be.” The images of our “planet” and “solar system” are embedded deep in our psyche, through images and constant repetition.

So when Flat Earth comes across our desk, we respond to the anomaly: Why would earth be the only flat planet? We know all the other planets are round, don’t we?

In reality, we have no proof that any of the heavenly bodies are spheres. We have evidence that they are circular. Circular does not equal spherical.

My readers will argue, “But we can see the spheres through a telescope!” We see circles through a telescope. A “planet” viewed with a Nikon P900 looks like this:

venus 2
Venus via Nikon P900 zoom lens.

What they call “planets” are wandering stars, and they are visible with the naked eye. The ancients saw them, wrote about them, and made accurate predictions about them long before the telescope was invented.

We know the heavenly stars are circular, and we know they move. But we don’t know they are spheres. The only evidence we have for the spheres is CGI, and that doesn’t count as evidence.

So the “round planet” question comes from a lifetime of indoctrination, not from any observation or experiment. Any other Frequently Asked Questions you encounter, let me know in the comments.


Nothing Ever Goes to Space

This is a guest post by @rokro111.

Nothing Ever Goes to Space

This is a guest post by @rokro111.

The Soviet Union supposedly launched Sputnik 1 into orbit On October 4, 1957.  The United States couldn’t afford to allow another nation to be the first to land a man on the moon. Being the leader of the space race was a matter of pride for our nation.

On July 29, 1958 NASA was established with a yearly budget of $58,000,000.  That budget climbed yearly and NASA’s budget for 2018 is $20,736,000,000 – or $52 million per day!

On July 16, 1969, NASA launched Apollo 11 to space with the moon being its destination. The Apollo 11 was equipped with five F-1 rocket engines.  The thrust generated from those engines totaled 7.5 million pounds.

Those 5 rocket engines had to propel 6,100,000 pounds (3,050 tons) to space.  Their plan was to do it in stages. All they had to do was get 3,050 tons to a speed of 24,200 mph to get to the moon.  It was all planned on paper by professionals.

But wait…..

Wernher von Braun said, “It is commonly believed that man will fly directly from the earth to the moon, but to do this, we would require a vehicle of such gigantic proportions that it would prove an economic impossibility. It would have to develop sufficient speed to penetrate the atmosphere and overcome the earth’s gravity…”

Did we get to the moon?  Mission commander Neil Armstrong and pilot Buzz Aldrin said we did – but did they really?

Surely the videos of the moon landing were real because we all saw it on television.  We even heard President Nixon make a phone call to Buzz and Neil. The videos are reviewable for those who have any uncertainty.

That’s where I get involved.  President Ronald Reagan once said, “Trust, but verify.” When extraordinary claims are made, extraordinary objective verification is needed.

Nothing gets to space….  Nothing ever has, and nothing ever will get to space.  The requirements to get to space include both sufficient speed and fuel to overcome the force that keeps things on earth – more specifically, an object’s density or weight including the rocket, fuel, supplies, food, space suits, oxygen, crew, batteries, testing equipment, lunar module, and command module. None of those mentioned items contributes to propelling the rocket to space.  When all that cargo takes up space, that means there is less room for fuel.

The rocket weighed 3,050 tons.  Some of that weight will be discharged during the stages but it still falls significantly short to even make it close to space.  

The furthest a rocket can climb against its own weight while pushing through the drag of the sky doesn’t allow any rockets to even get near space. Rockets go up; just far enough out of view, and then fall back down to earth every single time.

Surely our government wouldn’t lie. Or would they? If getting a rocket to space is impossible, how did Buzz and Neil get to the moon?  

To be honest, no one has been to the moon. No person or vehicle has ever been to space. The mission to get to the moon, let alone space, is impossible. So how did Nasa do it? We have been lied to. I don’t know all the specifics of what Nasa did to fool the world, but they did.  How they lied is not as important as the fact that they lied.

It’s nearly impossible to objectively verify the claims of Nasa because nobody has the resources and funding of Nasa. That differentiates Nasa from regular people.  There is so much misleading and blatantly incorrect information that nobody can objectively verify their claims. Is all hope lost to find the truth? No, we must tirelessly demand objective and verifiable proof. We should verify all claims concerning rockets – especially since getting to space is impossible.

That leads me to the Civilian Space exploration team, known as CSXT.  On July 14, 2014, the CSXT team launched a rocket called GoFast. That rocket was launched from Black Rock Desert in Nevada and their claimed success can reviewed here

They claimed their rocket reached a maximum speed of 3,580 miles per hour and a height of 73.07 miles.  The launch was reviewed and certified by FAA after analysis of the data from the recovered military grade Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) was concluded.

How can we objectively verify their claim besides trusting the CSXT team and the review and certification by the FAA?  We can review the video of the launch and do some research to see if their claims make sense. You can see their GoFast launch video here.

While reviewing the on-board camera launch video, the heights didn’t appear accurate. Anyone who has ever been in an airplane, should realize the observation of the ground terrain in the video doesn’t look as high as claimed.

In the video, the thrust exhaust from the rocket lasts about 30 seconds. The rocket appeared to still be ascending even after the ammonia perchlorate rocket fuel had been completely exhausted. The ascent continued for about another 30 seconds until the yo-yo de-spin mechanism was activated.

After about 10 more seconds, the top portion of the rocket separated from the lower portion. During this time, the rocket was stabilized enough to review the landscape below. After a total of 80 seconds after the launch, the rocket started tumbling downward.  During the 20 second span between the yo-yo de-spin and the rocket’s tumble, I was able to review some still video images.

Objective and verifiable comparison is through Dwayne Kellum, who uploaded the high-altitude balloon footage to the internet did not know I would be using it to verify the KY Michelson, FAA, and CXST’s claim of achieving an rocket altitude over 73 miles.

The height of the rocket was about 50 miles short of its claimed altitude.  The actual height of the CSXT rocket is closer to 21-23 miles.  The error in the rocket’s height claimed by CSXT, Ky Michelson, and the FAA is in error by over 50 miles in regard to their claim. 

Let me start by providing a few examples.  This first image is captured from a high altitude balloon launched near Madera, CA on November 10, 2018 carrying an infrared camera at the current height of 22,939 feet (4.34 miles).  The measured feature is the San Luis Reservoir in Merced County, California.  The line measuring the reservoir is almost 5 inches at this elevation.

The next image below is from the same high-altitude balloon and camera at a height of 39,059 feet (7.39 miles).  The line measuring the reservoir is 3 inches at this elevation.

The image below is from an altitude of 78,496 feet (14.86 miles).  The line measuring the reservoir is slightly over 1 inch at this elevation.

At 114,227 feet (21.63 miles) the length of the line measuring the reservoir is about ¾ inch.

The following image is from the CSXT rocket at the alleged height of 73 miles.  This is the
“duck” shaped land feature at the moment the rocket stage is detached.  The duck feature is smaller at 6.5 miles than the water feature above which is 6.75 miles.  For sake of simplicity, each is roughly the same size but the high altitude balloon is objectively verified at 21.63 miles high.

Comparing these water and land features, it appears the CSXT rocket is roughly the same altitude of 21.5 miles high.  If these two comparable land features display roughly the same size, should we rely on the height from an amateur high-altitude balloon activist (who didn’t know I was going to compare CSXT’s rocket with his high-altitude balloon video footage) or Ky Michelson and the FAA government organization who certified the rocket attained a height of over 73.07 miles in altitude?

It appears, using objective and verifiable comparison information that the rocket achieved a height not exceeding 23 miles.  Where did the extra 50 miles in altitude come from?  I assert no vehicle or human has been above about 26 miles from earth. The details, visual confirmations, and facts provided here support that.  Any images on google earth cannot be relied upon if over about 26 miles. There is no proof anything has ever exceeded that altitude.

The videos are attached to this article and I encourage everyone to do the research so you can obtain an understanding of what these videos show, and which one we can rely on, and which one we cannot.

View and verify the infrared high-altitude video by Dwayne Kellum here:

View the CSXT rocket launch here:

I have no affiliation with the CSXT team or the FAA and I believe my review of the launch video is objective. I insist the GoFast rocket did not attain its claimed altitude, but did reach a confirmed height of approximately 21-22 miles which remains 50 miles short of its claimed height.

The FAA may need to review and correct its certification of the 2014 CSXT rocket launch and the Wikipedia page and any other source that wrongfully claims the rocket achieved a rocket elevation of 73.07 miles.

Realize – nothing gets to space. I don’t want you to take my word for it; I want you to do your own research.


A Man Kills His Wife. Nobody Knows Why He Did It. So She’s Not Dead.

When normies can’t fathom a reason why our beloved government would lie to them, they dismiss Flat Earth as nonsense. Consider the arrogance: Because I, by my own intellectual powers, can’t come up with a motive, it can’t be true. Or my naivete prevents me imagining people could perpetuate such an enormous lie. Nothing exists beyond what am capable of conceiving.

After all, our government overlords have shown themselves so trustworthy in other cases. And of all the things they could lie about, why would they lie about the shape of the earth?

What’s really happening: The person hits a wall of Cognitive Dissonance, and his subconscious quickly scrambles to find an excuse not to look any further. Imagine the number of people who would have to keep quiet about it! Impossible! Ha! Crisis averted!

The reasoning goes like this: Knowing human nature, and how people love to attention-seek and gossip, there’s no way so many hundreds of people could keep quiet about such a secret. If a journalist offered a fake astronaut money to blow the whistle, surely he would do it. Everyone has their price, they think.

But what about people for whom money is no object? The Rothschild family fortune, for example, reportedly worth 1.61 billion, makes the elite immune to such offers. Since the international bankers own the banks and therefore the nations of the world, they could not be tempted to share their story.

When they hear about Flat Earth, some people contrast the number of people who would have to keep quiet, against the probability of even one person keeping quiet, and that comparison is enough to give them reason not to look into it. It turns off the Cognitive D and makes the pain stop. You can’t keep a thousand people quiet, therefore it’s impossible.

They don’t understand the power structure is more like a pyramid and less like a comparison of numbers. The ones at the top know earth is flat, but they are immune to offers of fame or fortune. Also, it would be very dangerous for them. The elite have ways of keeping people in line.

Elites at the top can’t be tempted with offers of fame or fortune.

The ones at the bottom of the pyramid don’t know the earth is flat. They are just following orders and doing what they are told. Additionally, they believe what they’re told, and they are told the earth is a sphere.

Globers insist that we provide a motive for the crime before they will investigate the crime. Meanwhile, they won’t look at the evidence that’s right in front of them! They ask us to provide a motive first, in addition to providing evidence and answering all their questions.

Why would they lie? is one of the top ten most frequently asked questions about Flat Earth. It has to be in the top three, along with Why don’t you go to the edge and take a picture?

My answer: I don’t know the minds of the elites; I don’t know how they think or what their motives are. It would be arrogant of me to guess. Most of them inherited this system of lies since the globe hoax has been going on for centuries.

crime scene
Investigate the crime before you establish a motive.

It’s as if a normie and I walk onto a crime scene. A dead body on the floor, a murder weapon, blood everywhere. And I say, “We have to report this. We should call the police!” And the normie says, “No, no, we have to figure out why he did it.” And I say, “No, no, that comes later! They have to search for fingerprints and take photos of the crime scene!” And the normie says “No, I can’t imagine why anyone would do this. People are basically good. We have to figure out why he would do this.”

Globers won’t look at the evidence right in front of them—the stationary earth, the flat horizon—because they can’t fathom a reason the government/elites would lie. Investigate first, please, everyone.

The title and inspiration for this post via @rokro11 on Twitter.

Thanks for reading. Stacey