Yeah I don't really have time to ponder this stuff.
But if I did I wouldn't be wasting on is space fake.
Cosmology Debate Thread ("Space Is Fake")
- Thread starter Andy Dufresne
- Start date
But if I did I wouldn't be wasting on is space fake.
Exactly - unless you're in the satellite industry or similar, why waste time on it..
If you are into it there are a lot of astronomy nerds out there who probably have their own forums.
I heard that various unmanned missions keep on failing. Didn't an Indian moon probe recently crash or go out out contact?
It is also a sad thing that the last supersonic passenger plane the Concorde stopped service around 20 years ago. London to New York in 3½ hours - not a trip I do but still an impressive speed. People don't really need to go to the moon, it was done in the spirit of adventure, like climbing a mountain. Once they had proved the point they didn't need to do it multiple times. Still you'd think the costs of going to the moon would have come down since then and they'd do it again just because. There is a "dumbing down" which has something to do with no more supersonic transport and no more moon trips, but it is probably socialism in some form as well - didn't the moon trip happen when there was a peak of paranoia about a "red under the bed" ? Personal ambition was still a thing, and communisim was viewed as an evil force. Now all that socailist and marxist stuff has quietly permeated everything, from female and black empowerment, "diversity", welfare, redistribution. Supersonic flights or moon travel would be enjoying too much "privilege" so it's not on the agenda anymore because of the times we live in. Maths is racist, so you shouldn't use it too much.
Caduceus
Heritage
The 6 separate alleged moon landings between 1969 and 1972 all stopped in December 1972 with Apollo 17, which just a month before the Vietnam war ended in January 1973.
It was also around the same time the USA went off the gold standard.
It's all not just a coincidence.
Some people think the moon landing program was in large part a ginormous government money laundering operation.
Very little was actually spent on it, if they never actually went to the moon 6 times.
The many billions spent went elsewhere.
Last edited:
Caduceus
Heritage
One of the best documentaries on all the problems with the 6 moon landings between 1969 and 1972 which was made in the year 2017.
Be warned - it's 3 and half hours long and incredibly detailed ...so only for people who have lots of time free
American Moon by Massimo Mazzucco
(The same guy has also made one of the most amazing documentaries on all the problems with the attacks on September 11, 2001)
Be warned - it's 3 and half hours long and incredibly detailed ...so only for people who have lots of time free
American Moon by Massimo Mazzucco
(The same guy has also made one of the most amazing documentaries on all the problems with the attacks on September 11, 2001)
Space may as well be fake. I don't think we're ever going to colonize and terraform planets or become an interstellar race.
I basically buy the normie idea of space and I agree. Even the idea of a manned mission to Mars seems utterly impossible to me, based on conventional ideas about space, the distances involved, Mars, and how space travel works. It makes normies really angry when I say that though.
One thing I think we can ALL agree on... Is that NASA is a fraud and a sham to syphon money and redistribute it to the Government.
Re-read what I wrote slower, I never said the world is "flat," I said if the reality in the second instance is that the model we are sold is not true then it still ultimately wouldn't matter to change the destiny of our peoples if we don't act within our simplistic human methods of violently throwing off our oppressors. What is relevant to this thread is that the "outer space" component as we are told is a part and parcel of the entire scam.
It is impossible to ignore the nature of the earth when discussing the reality or existence of an outer space. Going off of a purely Biblical interpretation it is more of a toroidal dome than anything else, if it is to be measured according to a shape we recognize. The flatters are easily sold on anything that isn't globo-related, but to their credit, they don't seem to inherit what their counter in this schism seem to display at every chance, a smarmy more-knowledgible-than-thou attitude, and a desire to ostracize those with differing views of the world. I don't think I've ever seen a few of them gang up on someone and whisper to each other while snickering: "look at that sucker over there, he's a glober, don't associate with him." Many of them come from a noble approach to being intrinsically against judeo-freemasonry, and this nihilistic view of the cosmos that has permeated our minds from all this phony edjewcation.
I decided to make this a long post, for those who really want to look into this.
You're saying that there is no point to maintaining a conspiracy that the world is flat. That's not what I'm saying. It is beyond that. There is a conspiracy to dim the minds of the people, whom the occult claim to be profane useless eaters. You don't have to believe in a "flat" earth to be against them, you simply have to not believe their bullshit models which are all from dumbed-down scientism. There is plenty of evidence that the world is not a spinning ball hurling through the blackness with the measurements they give us, but this doesn't mean the world is "flat". Let's start with exposing the occultism. How is it that all of these "scientific" and "evidence-based" realities are measurements of truth when they contain these esoteric numbers everywhere? A number we have been warned about by the Saints.
Earth's orbital speed around the sun = 66,600 mph
Curvature in one mile squared = 0.666667 feet
Earth's axial tilt = 66.6 degrees
Arctic Celestial Spheres (Arctic and Antarctic Circles) = 66.6 north and 66.6 in the south
Diameter of the moon = 2160 = 6 x 6 x 60
1 speed of sound = 666.739 knots
Earth's circumference in nautical miles = 21,600 = 6 * 6 * 600
By accepting the gravity-globe model, one also is accepting these occult spells. To reject this logic based on numerology alone also would be equivalent to rejecting the jewish kabbalistic gematria that surrounds 9/11, and many people here would die on that hill because that is more sinister in the short-term. The truth is that these numerological spiritual wars are inherent in every thing they have their hands on. The faculties that result from the occult, is enough proof to debunk the current world cosmology of Big Bang, Space, and Planets. The Jesuits were created and tasked with discrediting the teachings of the Bible, as well as to destroy the protestant movement. Copernicus and Loyola were both Jesuits.
Copernicus came up with the globe earth idea and Loyola created Universities to promote that idea and other ideas to discredit Gods word The Bible.
This documentary will help those understand the history of the globe worship as well as mindset of these sorcerers:
"Heliosorcery - Exposing the Occult Origins of Heliocentrism. Full Documentary"
For those asking you how a Christian can believe in God and that God created this globe earth model? Well God didn't create a "globe earth," these five men did:
Some points of significance:
-These men were pupils of the earliest magicians, sorcerers of the world
-Their substitution of the Bible with their Secular tyranny held back knowledge
-John Wycliffe stood up to the tyranny and printed the Bible in English
-the Bibles were put around the necks of those and burned with them
-When Constantinople and Athens fell, Greek intellectuals with literature and learnings, manuscripts of the Holy Scriptures came into western Europe
-Gnostics upheld a "secret" way to salvation, that through the acquisition of secret knowledge and initiation rites, a man can attain "apotheosis".
-Goths were Christianized prior to Rome but were seen as heretics by the legality of Rome
Martin Luther even wrote about the "discoveries" of Copernicus at the time:
As well as Calvin:
Newton, the "founder" of gravity, who built on Copernican and Keplerian thought, of who took their ideas originally from pagan origin, was also an alchemist:
"The art or science of alchemy, so termed from Hermes Trismegistus, who was looked up to by the alchemists as the founder of their art." - Albert G. Mackey, "Hermeti," Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Sciences, Vol 2, 290.
This Egyptian sage lived during Pharaonic Egypt. As with all pagan religions, the object of worship in Egyptian religion was the sun. Newton was so taken by this sun-worshiping sage, that he translated at least one of Trismegistus' works into English, "The Emerald Tablet." It is from this document that the phrase, "as above, so below" originates. This happens to be one of the chief sayings of Satanists like Blavatsky and Crowley, and is depicted visually in the image of the baphomet. This "Emerald Tablet" which Newton loved so much concerns the operation of the sun. Trismegistus wrote a passage which Newton echoed in his own time with his theory of gravity: "Its [the sun] force is above all force, for it vanquishes every subtle thing and penetrates every solid thing."
"In the middle of all however, resides the sun. For in this most beautiful temple, who would place this lamp in any other or better place than this, from where it can illuminate the whole universe a;; at once? Not unjustly then, some call the sun the lamp of the cosmos, others its mind, and others still its government. Trismegistus calls it a visible god." - Nicolaus Copernicus, On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres, Chapter 10 (1543).
Such ramblings betray what is perhaps an unwelcome reality to many: that the heliocentric science promoted by Copernicus and others, is nothing more than a religion, and more specifically, a pagan religion, which places the sun, as its god, at the center of worship, around which all the planets, bearing the names of pagan deities, orbit in reverent obeisance.
Is anything a satanist does rational? In that rationality comes from reason, and reason comes from deductive reasoning, which come from logos, which is of God. You just stated in inverse, what they really are, is an irrational collective that has been influenced from the dawn of humanity until the present day by the demonic forces to deceive mankind in absolutely every way. They've been cognitively infiltrating the entire human population long before Cass Sunstein was a twinkle in his mother's sperm donor's eye.
While this man is no technical or forensic expert, he certainly understands the spiritual side of this viewpoint with a layman's knowledge of the "scientific" nonsense:
"Space Gravy - Owen Benjamin"
"So we took the action of looking up and seeing God, and we don't see God up anymore, we see empty space, coupled with infinite possibilities. It's the ultimate wizard spell."
"Anything you can imagine is there. All the grains of sands in the beaches, there's more "galaxies" than that. Space is completely empty, it has no atmosphere, it has nothing, it is the absence of everything."
"We look up and see complete emptiness, we are a speck, we are nothing, we are a ball spinning with no direction, in a sea of emptiness that we can't possibly conceive of. But simultaneously, anything you can possibly imagine, is up there as well. To bridge the gap between science fiction and reality, you had to put a human being "up there". You had to merge those two ideas. Infinite emptiness, and infinite possibilities, you put it in the same place people used to look at God with."
Last one for now. He's not advocating spiritualism or cosmology, but rather dissects it, so try to listen to how these "others" think. The most telling part of this is that nihilism itself was birthed out of the concept of the big bang.
Warning: Not for the easily offended in their faith. The second half of the video is unnecessary to get the point across.
"The Occult debunks the globe - mind unveiled"
"The goals is to control the power that is consciousness, to enslave us, because it is the natural order of things, and they have the power to do so." - the philosophy of the atheists of the Renaissance who have started this scientifically-run society. They all worshiped the teachings of Aristotle, and lets look at those:
Aristotle's politics were most explicit, his theory of the purpose of politics is to maintain inequality, the very basis for Aristotle's politics is the maintenance of the master/slave relationship, because it is, as he asserts, "natural that one should command another obey is both necessary and expedient. Indeed some things are so divided right from birth. Some to rule, some to be ruled. It is clear then that by nature, some are free, others are slaves, and that for these it is both just and expedient that they should serve as slaves."
Aristotle was widely influential in Venice, and Venice was a slave society based on the principle of Oligarchism. Our modern Heliocentric model and globe model came from these scientific and political minds in Venice, who believed it as their natural right to rule those who were born to be slaves. The globe theory is but a political spiritual agenda created by the University of Padua in Venice. Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, all in Padua.
Everything they put out there can be reduced down to two simplistic cosmologies, the cosmology of nothing or the cosmology of something. While I disagree with his take on how all religions are part of this cosmology of something, because the mysteries of Theosis and of Christ supersede all the rest. I also do not agree with the notion of passing our consciousness into other planes, but even in this unbeliever's philosophy there are truths that it exposes other liars for what they are. Nihilism is steeped in everything in our culture, especially the cosmology, and this non-Christian in the video even recognizes that. I do not condone the idea of attempting esotericism or anything metaphysical outside of praying through Christ, but these times make for unusual discussions. I have to look into these inconvenient videos to find missing pieces of historical truths because we will not be able to find them in ways to explain to those who don't believe. The Scriptures are good enough for me, but not enough for everyone else apparently.
I'm not trying to gaslight any of you, but those of you who are Christian that do believe this nihilistic judeo-masonic model should feel uncomfortable and seek more of God's truth, not to go believe in a "flat earth" model, but to seek the truth from the Creator and the creator alone. Seek humility in that perhaps we do not know what lies beyond our skies, and that the arrogance of presuming we do based on Luciferian teachings is not something that should sit well in the minds of Christians.
1 Timothy 6:20 "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:"
Last edited:
Saying that the sun revolves around the earth is pretty much at the same level of flat earth in terms of controversy. Same with saying that the earth is a something other then a sphere. Even if you aren't specifically promoting flat earth, your theories are still going to draw the same reaction. All of the criticism that was being directed to you by scorpion would still apply even if you weren't saying that the earth is flat.
You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think previously you were also implying these wasn't seven continents and four seas or gravity in your previous post when you wrote "If the earth truly is a spinning ball moving in an orbital pattern as defined in heliocentrism, a spinning ball that water magically clings to by the as of yet unexplained force of gravity and the unknown magnetic nature of the earth's core, which we are told is molten, and there are 4 primary oceans with 7 primary land continents..." The reason I thought that is because you are lumping those other things with the heliocentric model which you have already made the claim is false. If that's your stance, then it's just as controversial as flat earth and is going to get the same reactions.
I just thought of something as I was typing , what would be your explanation for why the other planets appear as spheres when they are viewed through a telescope as opposed to the model you were promoting? My first guess was that you were going to say those planets don't exist and are actually some other phenomena that the general public isn't being tricked into thinking are physical planets by first occultist astronomers in the past and currently by NASA but that might be going to far. My second guess is you are going to say something about how Earth is unique being the center of the universe and also the home of God's creation and hence is the only planet that isn't spherical like the other planets. Is that at least somewhat close to your views?
You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think previously you were also implying these wasn't seven continents and four seas or gravity in your previous post when you wrote "If the earth truly is a spinning ball moving in an orbital pattern as defined in heliocentrism, a spinning ball that water magically clings to by the as of yet unexplained force of gravity and the unknown magnetic nature of the earth's core, which we are told is molten, and there are 4 primary oceans with 7 primary land continents..." The reason I thought that is because you are lumping those other things with the heliocentric model which you have already made the claim is false. If that's your stance, then it's just as controversial as flat earth and is going to get the same reactions.
I just thought of something as I was typing , what would be your explanation for why the other planets appear as spheres when they are viewed through a telescope as opposed to the model you were promoting? My first guess was that you were going to say those planets don't exist and are actually some other phenomena that the general public isn't being tricked into thinking are physical planets by first occultist astronomers in the past and currently by NASA but that might be going to far. My second guess is you are going to say something about how Earth is unique being the center of the universe and also the home of God's creation and hence is the only planet that isn't spherical like the other planets. Is that at least somewhat close to your views?
I don't claim to be an expert, but I know history and I know that esoteric occultism is not a joke, as garden variety evil it may seem to some. The entire cosmology we are sold and propagandized with from birth to adulthood is rife with antichrist signatures and anti-creationist modes of thought. It was my faith that brought me to question this. Historically, Martin Luther may not be well liked by Catholics or Orthodox, but he was not a fool, and he knew the dangers that allowing the lies of the ancient mystery schools to take shape and lull Christian Europeans into believing would weaken their faith. How many souls have been lost to these "alternative" philosophies in the last 400 plus years? It is best for us to take the word of God, and use our God-given intellect and discernment to understand our reality, if this is a pursuit we really want to follow.
As followers of Christ's teachings and seekers of the truth we should embrace controversy, not shy away from it. Especially if it is controversy surrounding God's creation. But not simply embrace it for the sake of something being controversial, but to excavate the truth, no matter how many layers of lies lay covered over it. I do not ascribe to the "flat earth" model as it is a gross simplification, just like the "sphere earth" model is.
These questions are beyond a surface level answer, especially when it comes to the shape of the celestial bodies we have been taught to call planets, I can give an obvious answer as one who has spent countless nights in his childhood looking through a telescope to one who has spent countless hours studying electromagnetic fields as an adult, an answer that doesn't appear unless you have done both. I will try to simplify this, as I know not everyone is a fan of long posts.
"If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency, and vibration." - Nikola Tesla.
Origin of the word "planet," taken from the dictionary: Planet (N.) old English 'planete;, old French 'planete,' late Latin 'planeta', Greek 'planetes', from (ASTERES) 'Planetai': meaning "wandering (stars)," from planasthai "to wander," the Greek term Asteres Planetai means "wandering stars" and described the tiny lights that moved across the sky more dramatically than fixed stars.
This video briefly touches the concept I am going to expand upon, which I have already mentioned in posts before, as it relates to a fundamentally different understanding of reality than traditional understanding of atoms, gravity, and molecules.
"Footage of stars - Sonoluminescence"
This phenomena of the stars is so much more wondrous and revelatory of God's own divine creation than the simplistic measured mundaneness that is the current model.
Viewing celestial bodies, including "planets" as "wandering stars" that emit light is the first part of my answer. This emission of light associated with celestial bodies, whether its on a microscopic scale in a laboratory or on a cosmic scale with bodies in the night sky, is a reality. The planets are electromagnetic energy toroidal field forms that vibrate, one field is inside the other. The inner field with the outer, are separated with an electromagnetic ceiling, letting below an imprint with what is included below in an aetherial environment. Planets are these imprints, having an aetherial nature and not a solid or material constitution that can contain earthly physical life.
Where am I going with this? The entire planet is an energetic field rather than a physical, material object. The planets that have inner and outer fields, both which vibrate, and the nested nature of the fields indeed suggests a complex and dynamic structure. The electromagnetic ceiling is a boundary that separates the inner and outer fields. They exist in a realm that is beyond the physical and material, hence why I use the term "aetheric." These planets are imprints resulting from the interactions between the inner and outer fields, which gives the characteristic motions and behaviors attributed to planets, that are separated by the electromagnetic ceiling. The energy associated with the planet forms a dynamic, circular pattern. The spherical appearance is a consequence of their energetic structure rather than a physical, material constitution, and it is likely illusory to our human eyes as we cannot perceive the dynamic energy fields in our plain sight.
Aether was historically proposed as a medium for the propagation of light, it is an all-pervading substance that fills the space between celestial signatures. Our modes of science often require us to have a vehicle for the movement of a phenomena, and for how light traveled through a physical space, like sound, required a medium. There are further fields related to this, "luminiferous aether," which is said to have filled all of physical space and provided the medium through which light waves could travel, similar to how sound waves propagate through air or water waves through water. The wave theory of light follows off of this. Viewing the shape of the planets as spherical but recognizing it as a representation of their energetic structure in an aetherial environment even supports a scriptural basis, as this signifies a realm beyond the physical. Naturally this development was stunted due to other dark designs.
The following men were responsible for shifting the paradigm of our discoveries away from this as people began to see through the lies of heliocentrism as far back as the 1800s:
(((Albert Einstein))) - central figure in the rejection of the aether and the development of the theory of special relativity in 1905, his framework for understanding space, time, and behavior of light speedily worked to eliminate the ongoing research in luminiferous aether and instead adopted the "constant speed of light" idea.
Henri Poincare, a French mathematician and theoretical physicist, also backed up Einstein on the understanding of his "relativity" and the rejection of aether.
The Michaelson-Morley Experiment of 1887 was set up as a test to measure the Earth's motion through the aether, but it too had mysterious conclusions. This experiment employed an interferometer, which is a device that splits a light beam into two perpendicular paths and then recombines them. Interference patterns between the two beams are use to measure the difference in the distance traveled by each beam. The idea was that as earth was moving through space, it would generate an aether wind that affects the speed of light in different directions, and this experiment sought to detect this difference. If the earth was indeed moving through the aether, the speed of light along the direction of the earth's alleged motion would be presumed to be different from the speed at right angles to that motion and this difference was supposed to be observable in the interference pattern produced by the interferometer. No detectable differences in the "speed of light" were produced, and this indicated that the earth was not actually moving through the aether. The lack of detectable motion through the aether suggests that the Earth occupies a special and privileged position, and is stationary as a fixed reference point within a cosmic medium. Then from the results of this experiment if you combine the breakdown of the planets mentioned above, the circular paths (what we call orbits) of the sun, moon, and the others is evidence of these objects circling around the earth. The energetic fields of the celestial objects play a significant role in their motion, attributed to by the influence of the aetheric fields. The uniformity of these fields could be considered evidence for a harmonious and ordered geocentric system. If the earth was truly moving through "space," there woul dbe an aether wind affecting the motion of celestial bodies.
Here is a good video that breaks down fraud Einstein's theory:
""Special Relativity debunked"
A key takeaway from the paper, is this paragraph here, which admits it's own faultiness:
"Now we have to prove that every light ray measured in the moving system propagates with the velocity V, if it does so, as we have assumed, in the system at rest, for we have not yet provided the proof that the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is compatible with the relativity principle."
The switch to special relativity away from aether was also astro-turfed by the same establishment when there was significant studies and experiments being done in the 1800s and early 1900s that really could have brought mankind into a better and more just time. If Einstein didn't come along, another intellectual patsy would have taken his intended place.
The idea that certain aspects of our reality are beyond human measurement or interpretation due to their divine or transcendent nature also does not conflict with the scientific method, as these realms lie outside the scope of the approved "empirical" science. Occultist astronomers and NASA cannot even hide these realities.
To keep the topic on the thread for "space," here is another bit of interesting astronomy: astronomical clocks. All made pre-heliocentric takeover. The center dial is always marked with the earth represented as a disc. There is one in Venice also still working, albeit after a remodel, called St. Mark's clock. The one in Prague still stands and still works to this day:
"Prague Astronomical Clock"
This video is interesting, it does get a little conspiratorial towards the end, and one of the theories I am seeing a lot now is how the moon is allegedly plasma and a reflection of the earth, which I also think is a gross oversimplification of people who do not understand electromagnetic frequencies, and there is no human on earth who understands them the way God does. I hold to the answer I gave you above until I can ascertain a more articulate way of breaking it down.
As followers of Christ's teachings and seekers of the truth we should embrace controversy, not shy away from it. Especially if it is controversy surrounding God's creation. But not simply embrace it for the sake of something being controversial, but to excavate the truth, no matter how many layers of lies lay covered over it. I do not ascribe to the "flat earth" model as it is a gross simplification, just like the "sphere earth" model is.
These questions are beyond a surface level answer, especially when it comes to the shape of the celestial bodies we have been taught to call planets, I can give an obvious answer as one who has spent countless nights in his childhood looking through a telescope to one who has spent countless hours studying electromagnetic fields as an adult, an answer that doesn't appear unless you have done both. I will try to simplify this, as I know not everyone is a fan of long posts.
"If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency, and vibration." - Nikola Tesla.
Origin of the word "planet," taken from the dictionary: Planet (N.) old English 'planete;, old French 'planete,' late Latin 'planeta', Greek 'planetes', from (ASTERES) 'Planetai': meaning "wandering (stars)," from planasthai "to wander," the Greek term Asteres Planetai means "wandering stars" and described the tiny lights that moved across the sky more dramatically than fixed stars.
This video briefly touches the concept I am going to expand upon, which I have already mentioned in posts before, as it relates to a fundamentally different understanding of reality than traditional understanding of atoms, gravity, and molecules.
"Footage of stars - Sonoluminescence"
This phenomena of the stars is so much more wondrous and revelatory of God's own divine creation than the simplistic measured mundaneness that is the current model.
Viewing celestial bodies, including "planets" as "wandering stars" that emit light is the first part of my answer. This emission of light associated with celestial bodies, whether its on a microscopic scale in a laboratory or on a cosmic scale with bodies in the night sky, is a reality. The planets are electromagnetic energy toroidal field forms that vibrate, one field is inside the other. The inner field with the outer, are separated with an electromagnetic ceiling, letting below an imprint with what is included below in an aetherial environment. Planets are these imprints, having an aetherial nature and not a solid or material constitution that can contain earthly physical life.
Where am I going with this? The entire planet is an energetic field rather than a physical, material object. The planets that have inner and outer fields, both which vibrate, and the nested nature of the fields indeed suggests a complex and dynamic structure. The electromagnetic ceiling is a boundary that separates the inner and outer fields. They exist in a realm that is beyond the physical and material, hence why I use the term "aetheric." These planets are imprints resulting from the interactions between the inner and outer fields, which gives the characteristic motions and behaviors attributed to planets, that are separated by the electromagnetic ceiling. The energy associated with the planet forms a dynamic, circular pattern. The spherical appearance is a consequence of their energetic structure rather than a physical, material constitution, and it is likely illusory to our human eyes as we cannot perceive the dynamic energy fields in our plain sight.
Aether was historically proposed as a medium for the propagation of light, it is an all-pervading substance that fills the space between celestial signatures. Our modes of science often require us to have a vehicle for the movement of a phenomena, and for how light traveled through a physical space, like sound, required a medium. There are further fields related to this, "luminiferous aether," which is said to have filled all of physical space and provided the medium through which light waves could travel, similar to how sound waves propagate through air or water waves through water. The wave theory of light follows off of this. Viewing the shape of the planets as spherical but recognizing it as a representation of their energetic structure in an aetherial environment even supports a scriptural basis, as this signifies a realm beyond the physical. Naturally this development was stunted due to other dark designs.
The following men were responsible for shifting the paradigm of our discoveries away from this as people began to see through the lies of heliocentrism as far back as the 1800s:
(((Albert Einstein))) - central figure in the rejection of the aether and the development of the theory of special relativity in 1905, his framework for understanding space, time, and behavior of light speedily worked to eliminate the ongoing research in luminiferous aether and instead adopted the "constant speed of light" idea.
Henri Poincare, a French mathematician and theoretical physicist, also backed up Einstein on the understanding of his "relativity" and the rejection of aether.
The Michaelson-Morley Experiment of 1887 was set up as a test to measure the Earth's motion through the aether, but it too had mysterious conclusions. This experiment employed an interferometer, which is a device that splits a light beam into two perpendicular paths and then recombines them. Interference patterns between the two beams are use to measure the difference in the distance traveled by each beam. The idea was that as earth was moving through space, it would generate an aether wind that affects the speed of light in different directions, and this experiment sought to detect this difference. If the earth was indeed moving through the aether, the speed of light along the direction of the earth's alleged motion would be presumed to be different from the speed at right angles to that motion and this difference was supposed to be observable in the interference pattern produced by the interferometer. No detectable differences in the "speed of light" were produced, and this indicated that the earth was not actually moving through the aether. The lack of detectable motion through the aether suggests that the Earth occupies a special and privileged position, and is stationary as a fixed reference point within a cosmic medium. Then from the results of this experiment if you combine the breakdown of the planets mentioned above, the circular paths (what we call orbits) of the sun, moon, and the others is evidence of these objects circling around the earth. The energetic fields of the celestial objects play a significant role in their motion, attributed to by the influence of the aetheric fields. The uniformity of these fields could be considered evidence for a harmonious and ordered geocentric system. If the earth was truly moving through "space," there woul dbe an aether wind affecting the motion of celestial bodies.
Here is a good video that breaks down fraud Einstein's theory:
""Special Relativity debunked"
A key takeaway from the paper, is this paragraph here, which admits it's own faultiness:
"Now we have to prove that every light ray measured in the moving system propagates with the velocity V, if it does so, as we have assumed, in the system at rest, for we have not yet provided the proof that the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is compatible with the relativity principle."
The switch to special relativity away from aether was also astro-turfed by the same establishment when there was significant studies and experiments being done in the 1800s and early 1900s that really could have brought mankind into a better and more just time. If Einstein didn't come along, another intellectual patsy would have taken his intended place.
The idea that certain aspects of our reality are beyond human measurement or interpretation due to their divine or transcendent nature also does not conflict with the scientific method, as these realms lie outside the scope of the approved "empirical" science. Occultist astronomers and NASA cannot even hide these realities.
To keep the topic on the thread for "space," here is another bit of interesting astronomy: astronomical clocks. All made pre-heliocentric takeover. The center dial is always marked with the earth represented as a disc. There is one in Venice also still working, albeit after a remodel, called St. Mark's clock. The one in Prague still stands and still works to this day:
"Prague Astronomical Clock"
This video is interesting, it does get a little conspiratorial towards the end, and one of the theories I am seeing a lot now is how the moon is allegedly plasma and a reflection of the earth, which I also think is a gross oversimplification of people who do not understand electromagnetic frequencies, and there is no human on earth who understands them the way God does. I hold to the answer I gave you above until I can ascertain a more articulate way of breaking it down.
You're starting to write a book on this forum but you were already wrong about the axis of the Earth, so I'll pass.
I only referenced the axis once, and it was when I gave several key numbers as an example of the kabbalist numerology behind it.
I assume you're referring to my mention here:
Why is the Earth on an offset 66.6° tilt when the tilt is 23.4°? Geometry and Mathematics is why. The difference between horizontal and perpendicular is 90°, so 90 - 23.4 = 66.6°
I'm simply showing what the heliocentric model measurements claim to be, it's not me being wrong about the axis.
Look at this, in accordance with western occultism, each planet is associated with a series of numbers and a particular organization of those numbers. They place them in numerological arrangements called "magic squares".
I wonder what the magic squares number of the sun is, in accordance with these esoteric practices. The sun that they all worship so much:
"The divine names associated with The Sun all have numerological values of 6 or 36. The name of the intelligence of the Sun has a value of 111 and the spirit of the Sun has a value of 666. These values are calculated by writing out the names in Hebrew and then adding up the value of each included letter, as each Hebrew letter can represent both a sound and a numerical value.
The creation of the square of the Sun is messy. It is constructed by first filling in each square with numbers 1 to 36 consecutively, starting at the bottom left with 1 and working upward toward the upper right with 36. Numbers inside the boxes along the main diagonals of the square are then inverted, i.e., switch places. For example, 1 and 36 change places, as does 31 and 6."
Occult mysteries are veiled in spherical geometry, passed down from mystics. These numbers are plastered all over everything these satanic turds have their hands in. I am not afraid to reject their models, neither should anyone else once they know.
Your kabbalist numerology doesn't work when you use real units of measurement like metres and kilometres as are used in the first world countries though, do they?
Interesting to note: the older units of measure, like feet, are based on humans (feet-your foot,inch-your thumb width,etc). In other words, they are significant because they are human scale measurements and not some strange abstracted measurements where we are trying to gain total control.
That being said, I'm not sure how it relates to the kabbalist point @MusicForThePiano made other than I think metric is defacto more of an anti-christ system than the older systems. But it may be significant to also consider the time frame of when these things were initially being formulated.
Last edited:
Changed thread title away from clickbait nonsense that gets low info people to jump in with insults. However I left the original phrasing, "Space is Fake," to help newbs learn how to see through a pysop.
Even if common cosmological theories are false, and let's be real - they probably are as our knowledge is primitive - it doesn't mean we should be insulting or getting angry with each other.
It is partly a pysop designed to make online groups waste their time fighting each other with silly clickbait titles, which is easy to see over the past 9 pages, but it is also discussing stuff that has a lot of truth inside of it.
There are tons of assumptions regarding "space". For example, take a "light year," which measures the speed of "light". But what is actually light? Light is merely a measurement of energy captured by our eye and transmitted to our brains. When we see "speed of light," what we actually see is the speed of our eye processing power. So we think that is the amount of "light" that can travel in a year. In reality we have no idea how fast things are actually moving through "space". But space is another term that captures the limits of our senses.
There may be things in "outer space" that exist but cannot be perceived by normal human senses. That's why you've got stuff like "dark matter," which is just another cosmological theory to try and explain the universe that exists outside of our senses.
Everything I just described comes from Immanuel Kant, who is also the picture in my avatar.
This thread is allowed because cosmology is one of the oldest fields of philosophy known to man, and in fact Aristotle believed philosophy was born out of men trying to explain the earth, stars, and universe. So it may very well be cosmology is the original field of experimental and philosophical thought.
Carry on gentlemen, but don't waste your time on nomenclature. Whenever someone says "space" or something is "fake" you have to grill them on what exactly they mean because it's just a nomenclature low info trap otherwise.
Anymore insults from here on out gets a ban out of this thread.
Even if common cosmological theories are false, and let's be real - they probably are as our knowledge is primitive - it doesn't mean we should be insulting or getting angry with each other.
It is partly a pysop designed to make online groups waste their time fighting each other with silly clickbait titles, which is easy to see over the past 9 pages, but it is also discussing stuff that has a lot of truth inside of it.
There are tons of assumptions regarding "space". For example, take a "light year," which measures the speed of "light". But what is actually light? Light is merely a measurement of energy captured by our eye and transmitted to our brains. When we see "speed of light," what we actually see is the speed of our eye processing power. So we think that is the amount of "light" that can travel in a year. In reality we have no idea how fast things are actually moving through "space". But space is another term that captures the limits of our senses.
There may be things in "outer space" that exist but cannot be perceived by normal human senses. That's why you've got stuff like "dark matter," which is just another cosmological theory to try and explain the universe that exists outside of our senses.
Everything I just described comes from Immanuel Kant, who is also the picture in my avatar.
This thread is allowed because cosmology is one of the oldest fields of philosophy known to man, and in fact Aristotle believed philosophy was born out of men trying to explain the earth, stars, and universe. So it may very well be cosmology is the original field of experimental and philosophical thought.
Carry on gentlemen, but don't waste your time on nomenclature. Whenever someone says "space" or something is "fake" you have to grill them on what exactly they mean because it's just a nomenclature low info trap otherwise.
Anymore insults from here on out gets a ban out of this thread.
Last edited:
Just wanted to point out that this picture is full of lies. There is no mention of firmament in Genesis 1, unless you have a fake translation.
Likewise the rest of your post is full of errors. I would encourage you to slow down on your thinking, be more rigorous of your assumptions, and to check your sources.
Caduceus
Heritage
Genesis 1:7-9
King James Version
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
Last edited:
The only thing I got skimming over were the large images of old theologians. The thing is that at that time everyone was taught about science in a manner where you would get arrested or killed for stating something like that. It would take centuries of debate, mixed in with a few blatant Rick and Morty tier atheists in the Enlightenment for science to be able to progress in a good (and bad) manner.
There is the Gay Science, and there is the joyous science, as some translations of Nietzsche say. Science and SOYence, to sum it up further.
Going on a computer to deny basic science as an ultra-reactionary is not only the biggest contradiction ever, but also borderline leftist. If you decline basic geography and history with flat Earth memes and space being fake, you have almost no distinction of what a man and a woman is at that point, except which Jacobinist created political term/wing or Jews decide their answer for. In other words, contrarianism.
Yeah, it's not even close to the original text:
6 And God saith, `Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters, and let it be separating between waters and waters.'
7 And God maketh the expanse, and it separateth between the waters which [are] under the expanse, and the waters which [are] above the expanse: and it is so.
8 And God calleth to the expanse `Heavens;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day second.
9 And God saith, `Let the waters under the heavens be collected unto one place, and let the dry land be seen:' and it is so.
The original word in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek, was turned into "frimament" in lots of bad translations. Clearly not the original word which is literally an "expanse".
Last edited:
Caduceus
Heritage
The King James bible was published 400 years ago in the year 1611.
Sometime the word is also translated as "vault".
The word is used again in Psalm 19:1
Which strangely enough one of Hitler's nazi scientists, who later worked for NASA wanted put on his tombstone
.
Last edited: