Why does the subject of a flat earth cause so much ridicule and angst in so many people? The answer is, none of us like the thought of being lied to and deceived all our lives, so we have to defend what we've embraced and even supported in countless ways. Belief does not change science fact and actual data. This small presentation will NOT answer all your obvious questions, but it WILL challenge you. You will be able to follow up on this on your own if you choose to expand this subject in search for the fullest truth.

Why do you believe the earth is a globe? Have you personally proven the earth is round and rotates at 1000 miles an hour at the equator? Have you personally proven that it revolves around the sun at 67,000 miles per hour? Have you personally proven the earth moves through the universe at 1.3 million miles an hour?

Why do you believe those things? Because we were ALL taught this from childhood and, of course, we could not actually prove it for ourselves, and accepted what we were told as being true... like Santa Clause and the tooth fairy, right?

Of course, this topic (both sides) is far bigger than a simple article or web page can explore, but here are some challenging questions for you to consider, and discover for yourself, regarding the possibility of a flat earth. Remember, lies are being exposed at an exponential rate these days, so should we simply plod on believing everything we've presumed to be factual without using today's technology and scientific facts to challenges these beliefs?

This is a brief introduction to the flat earth concept and the puzzling and never-discussed quandaries many have discovered. Consider these simple challenges to see whether you want to pursue this topic in your travels in search of truth. There are many questions to ask and this isn't the answer to all of them. It is simply raising questions which have not been adequately answered, and in this day and age of exposing liars and fraud in our societies, this is but one more topic to finally examine.

Remember... for millennia, mankind had no means to actually quantify the conventional wisdom of the day, but today, we have every scientific tool at our disposal to prove or disprove the alleged facts we've been taught all our lives. Lies cannot run from the light of truth!

Air Travel (calculations for all flights are based on a "flat, non-rotating earth," and you will see "why" below).

• The earth is allegedly spinning at approximately 1030 miles an hour at the equator, (faster than the speed of sound ... another science quandary) and somewhat less as you allegedly go north or south of this line on a globe model. This would mean that if you were to fly from New York City to Los Angeles, California, approximately 2791 miles, the earth with Los Angeles on it is "traveling" toward where NYC airspace is at approximately 750 miles per hour (Washington, DC earth speed - all times are estimates and not official speeds) once the jet takes off. (On the return trip, New York City is traveling AWAY from Los Angeles air space at 750 miles per hour, discussed below). Shouldn't the travel time "TO" LA be fairly quick (approximately 2.2 hours to travel the 2791 miles at 1250 MPH (750 earth travel TOWARD the jet, plus 500 MPH jet travel speed toward LA)? NOTE: 500 miles per hour is a low estimate of actual jet speeds of approximately 550-650+ miles per hour, to make it simple.

  

• To expand on this... How can the west trip (NYC to LA) not take considerably shorter travel time than the return trip since the earth is moving LA "TOWARDS" NYC at 750 MPH while the jet is flying approximately 500 MPH on TOP of the 750 MPH earth speed? 1250 MPH combined speed of travel. Do the math. What removes the earth's rotation speed from the travel time? How can we ignore this spin speed if it is actually occurring?

• Of course, the reverse is also true... Traveling from LA to NYC, The earth is moving NYC "AWAY" from LA air space at 750 MPH, while the jet is traveling at 500 MPH trying to catch up. How does the jet every catch up to NYC if it is traveling away at 750 miles per hour while the jet is only traveling at 500 MPH? How, then, is the travel times for both trips almost identical for both flights in our real world experience, given trade wind speeds?

• When jets, or ANY aircraft, fly from point A to point B, in ANY direction, why is earth's rotation NOT entered into flight calculations? Ask any pilot. Let's imagine a flight from Miami, Florida, to Chicago, Illinois. While you take off from Miami, Chicago is moving east approximately 400 miles during the actual flight time, so why set a direct flight toward Chicago 400 miles west of Miami (longitude line) only to realize Chicago is MOVING East toward you? Are flights calculated for THAT earth movement? Let's do one better... Let's go from Miami to Kansas City, KS. While you are leaving Miami, KC is traveling east at approximately 750 MPH, meaning, if the airlines wanted to save time and fuel, the plane would simply fly mostly NORTH to meet KC at the pre-planned point. Do you see the issue? Why chart a "direct flight" to another destination when the actual destination is moving away from you or toward you at varying angles? Imagine a military jet traveling north, trying to land on an aircraft carrier moving east with the earth at 750 Miles per hour...

• When a pilot charts a course, they chart a straight line... point A to point B. The earth's alleged curve is approximately 8 inches per mile, squared - (8 inches drop the first mile, (1 X 1 X 8), 32 inches drop the second mile, (2 X 2 X 8), 72 inches drop the third mile, (3 X 3 X 8), etc.). This means that ALL destination points charted are well below the horizon. Has anyone ever heard about a pilot having to gradually nudge the nose of their aircraft DOWN to account for the curve of earth? Without that applied by the pilot, or built into the plane's "auto pilot," the aircraft would soon be climbing higher and higher, ignoring the 8 inches per mile drop, and theoretically end up in space. Ask any pilot if these calculations have ever been discussed or exist.

• Imagine a helicopter trip. Let's say, from Chicago, Illinois to the Quad Cities, Illinois (QC) almost directly west across the state... 150+ miles. The earth is bringing the QC toward Chicago airspace at, let's say 650 miles per hour, just to adjust for being more north than DC. This means, the helicopter SHOULD be able to simply rise up and hover, and WAIT for the QC to arrive in about 15 minutes, and then drop down to land. Have you every heard of this occurring? Helicopter trips from the QC to Chicago take the same time either way. How can that be possible with a rotating earth? Why waste all that fuel moving the helicopter when the QC is being brought right to you due to this alleged rotation? Some will say that the helicopter is already traveling as fast as the earth is rotating when it lifts off earth, but what KEEPS it traveling at that speed once it separates from earth? What force keeps it propelled at the same speed as the earth? The same could be said for a hot air balloon...

• Lastly on this topic, try chartering a direct flight from Melbourne, Australia to Buenos Aires, Argentina. In fact, try booking ANY direct flight in the "southern hemisphere" for that matter. I tried to schedule the above trip, and I could, but, the trip was completely out of line with Buenos Aires on a globe model. A direct flight from Melbourne, Australia, OR even Auckland, NZ was impossible. The distance from either is 7236 miles and 6395 miles respectively, however, the flight went from, let's say Auckland, to San Francisco (North) 6499 miles, then from SF to Houston at 1642 miles, then from Houston to Buenos Aires, Argentina at 5025 miles. So, we have a direct flight of 6395 miles from Auckland, but have to travel 13,166 miles to make that trip, with the huge out-of-the-way trip to the Northern Hemisphere and America. This makes zero sense on a global model but the ONLY real route on a flat earth model. Do you own trip planning for similar trips and track the path. How does any of that make sense.

• NOTE: There is a running argument against the above discussion which uses the term "conservation of momentum" to try to explain how a plane or helicopter aren't affected by the earth's motion and retain their earth speed when they lift from the rotating planet. Of course, this defies all rational science and physics, and even suggests "perpetual motion" that somehow magically appears when the plane or helicopter leaves the earth. Explain THAT one...

Other conundrums:

• The earth has an atmosphere which allegedly borders the vacuum of space. The elephant in the room is this... what keeps the atmosphere from rushing toward that vacuum? In any grade school science experiment with pressure and vacuum, it is well established that pressure moves TOWARD a vacuum. Take a container with a divider in it. One side you fill with air, the other you leave a vacuum. What happens when you remove the divider between the air and vacuum? Any child knows the air will fill the vacuum, and equalize the container. So, how can the atmosphere of earth be contained with no divider between the alleged vacuum of space and the atmosphere itself? What "physics" are so different up there that the atmosphere simply stays in pace, countering the 2nd law of thermodynamics? Continuing, this would call into question ALL the planets in our "solar system" with their atmospheres, clouds, etc. Are they real? What of all the alleged images of these bodies? How much of what we've been fed for all our lives is actually real and NOT computer generated?

  Many will say "gravity." Does this negate the pressure laws we just discussed? How can "gravity" (something they STILL cannot explain scientifically with any credibility) hold air away from such a huge vacuum of space? Space vacuum is tremendously powerful, as NASA and others portray. If this is the explanation of some, why doesn't the moon's "gravity" pull at the atmosphere? The moon is alleged to be the "pull" which causes the ocean's tides, so it certainly should be tugging at the atmosphere at the same time, especially without any barrier to stop the tug forces, right? And, while we're on the topic of tides, why do the oceans ONLY have tides when the largest bodies of water second to oceans, lakes... have ZERO tidal evidence? Why doesn't lake Superior or Michigan have similar tidal evidence? NONE!

• And another gravity issue: The earth's speed at the equator is approximately 1030 miles an hour... see photo above. As you go north or south below this line on a global model, the speed decreases. "Gravity" is allegedly what holds us to the earth and prevents us from flying off of the globe at hundreds of miles per hour. "Gravity" is what allegedly gives us "weight" and which counters the earth's physics to throw everything off the planet. So, given those accepted "scientific" facts, we have to ask a question: Given the chart above, as you go north or south, the earths speed decreases, which, from a physics point of view, "should" mean that the force trying to throw you off the planet lessens, and "gravity" should be pulling you down harder, making you "weigh" more as the speed lessens. What do we see in real world physics? You can go to the equator, and to Alaska, weigh yourself, and you will see that you weigh exactly the same. Remember, if the force trying to throw you off the carnival ride increases with speed, this lessens your weight on the ride. This means that, on the globe model earth, as you go north or south, you should weigh more, and hence, you would need much bigger muscles and strength to even walk, let alone do anything else that takes effort. See the problem?

• Continuing... if the moon's gravity is what pulls the tides, why aren't there equal or even greater solar tides as well. The sun, it is claimed, is what maintains the revolutions of the planets around itself, by gravitational pull, so there must be at least an equal force that would do the same as the moon and lunar tides on earth, but we do not see this.

• The 8 inch per mile curvature squared of the earth was discussed a bit above, but let's delve into this a bit more. For every mile of earth, the curve allegedly drops almost 8 inches, from end to end. If you have an expanse of water that crosses dozens or even a 100 or more miles, the drop should be easily measured. Take a laser, and a receiver and place it at the other side of a 100 mile body of water. The actual drop from one end to the other should measure 6100 feet... over a mile. This means that at the other end of this measurement, 6100 feet of the earth should be missing below the curve, except this doesn't happen. Not even an inch disappears below the horizon and all features which should be out of view are clearly seen using a good telescope or newer cameras like the Nikon COOLPIX P1000, which has been used to prove these facts in recent times. You can try this experiment yourself if you find this hard to believe. Many dozens of scientific experiments have been conducted across great expanses of "flat" ground or bodies of water. Using modern day optics and magnification, it has been conclusively proven that the alleged 8 inch curvature simply isn't there across many miles of territory. Objects which should be many feet below the earths curve can be readily seen by high magnification telescopes. This should be impossible if the earth curves downward and out of view.

• Similar experiments can be performed using laser measurements on buildings. As any building is further and further away, being built on a "curved" earth, the buildings should exhibit a leaning away effect from the origin of measurement.... \ /... as you measure further away buildings. However, when this is performed, the laser measures the same distance at the top of the building as at the bottom. This should not be possible unless the building is on flat ground, despite its distance.

• Speaking of water levels, the issue of water "bending" around a curved globe needs to be looked at as well. Water ALWAYS seeks it's own level. Simple experiments prove this every day, and this fact is actually used in landscaping and level measurements. So, the obvious question is, what maintains the "level" of water on a curved ball? Again, many call on "gravity" to come to the rescue. Does this make sense though? Water needs a container to maintain its level. Thinking scientifically and using simple physics, it is illogical to presume that water is held against the earth, "level," but then bends, but stays in level place as it bends. Again, using high powered telescopes on the ocean front, this can be proven that the water does NOT bend along with the earth.

• Ships and such that seem to sail "out of view" because of going over the curve at the horizon, are NOT disappearing out of physical view. They appear to using the naked eye, but the telescope or camera can soon bring these "disappeared" ships quickly right back into clear and FULL view without any amount of them missing despite being dozens or even a hundred miles away. Do the experiment yourself...

• If the earth is rotating at 1000 miles per hour at the equator, how can the atmosphere be so "still" and actually move faster than the earth to the east in general trade wind weather? Does it FEEL like we are traveling app. 500-650 MPH in America. Why aren't there massive wind storms?

• Have you ever seen this?

  

  If the sun is 93 million miles away (how do they know this?) how can a sunset reveal diverging light rays? Light travels in a "straight" line as science teaches, unless refracted by something, so how can this divergence be a regular occurrence on earth? Doesn't it appear that the sun is far closer to earth than they make it out to be? Would "refraction" be the answer to every unparallel sunset light rays shining through the clouds exactly the same way?

  

The heliocentric model of the earth revolving around the sun while traveling at great speeds through the universe can be easily disproven, and has been. Polaris... what we all know as the north star, has been photographed countless times in time lapse photography. These photos clearly show that all the stars are traveling around this star in perfect concentric circles. This has been true for as long as photography has been around, and the corresponding constellations have been recognizable for millennia. If the earth and all celestial bodies were traveling through space as is alleged, these constellations and stars would be changing and NOT staying exactly the same century after century. How can these lights travel in a perfect circle around Polaris if the earth is traveling around the sun, and the sun is traveling at 448,000 miles per hour?

The ONLY way Polaris could have all the stars traveling in a concentric circle around it is for them to be moving, and not the earth rotating. Earth rotation could NOT allow such a time lapse picture to occur.

Under the flat earth model, the Antarctic is a ring of ice wall 360 degrees around the outer perimeter of the earth which holds the oceans in place. The atmosphere is held above earth by a "firmament" as described in the bible in Genesis.

What would the flat earth, if fully proven as scientific fact, mean for humanity?

What other myths might crumble along with the enslavement and limitation of humanity under scientific voodoo?

• It would mean we never went to the moon in the 60's.

• No mars landing, space probes, etc., would be possible if there is a dome above us containing our atmosphere.

• What of Antarctic? Why did approximately at least 54 nations sign treaties declaring the Antarctic off limits? No one can go beyond the 60th parallel to explore this continent be. No fly-overs are allowed. Why if this is the shortest route for many flights? What is on other side of the Antarctic ice wall that is claimed exists? More land? Why did Admiral Byrd speak about abundance beyond the ice wall on this continent in his explorations?

• The biggest elephant in the room would be "who built the wall, and why?" It would soon be evident to all humanity that this dome and ice wall were deliberate creations and did not "evolve" over millions of years, destroying the false religion of evolution. The whole concept of God's existence would be inevitable, and THAT is a big reason this is being hidden and obfuscated. Evidence of design, intelligence and intention. We need to seek that level out as much as we can.

• I still have many questions I'm searching out that address all the brainwashing I received in schools in science, but the above are serious challenges that no one has been able to answer with any credibility and proof. Such a scientific fact being suppressed by the elite have a single purpose in keeping this hidden...

• ... that of hiding the fact that there being a creator God who established this "container" specifically for humanity. We are at the very center of the known universe, and are part of the most incredible creative process possible... that of being created in the very image and likeness of our creator. No one is leaving this planet without God and without being changed by His power and force to be able to survive outside this envelope. Humanity is being separated from God by the scientific misdirection and fraud being implemented on all humanity. The enemy, Satan, and his fallen angels, all want mankind to fail in this process, and thus, so many are being deceived and cast into a limitless universe, on an insignificant ball in the middle of the vastness of "space" and made to feel like accidents of evolution and no more important than some endangered species.
• This would mean earth is the center of creation and God's plan, not some remote speck in an endless sea of specks, making humanity appear to be meaningless and of no consequence instead of realizing that humanity s destined to be God's very offspring. Evil does not want that realization to enter the human mind. This fact demands humanity to look inward and then realize that it is only looking outward, toward our creator that we will ever be able to reach that level of existence where our creator lives and realize our destiny... that of being born into the God Kind Family!

Miscellaneous points:

• Have you ever seen the moon actually approaching the sun during an eclipse, and gradually covering it? See video below on this topic.

• The global flood of Genesis is even more plausible given a flat plane that could be flooded.

Here are some of the better explanations for the natural challenges our brainwashing raises:

• The Flat Earth Clock App website for many videos to investigate this for yourself

• Antarctic: Key to Flat Earth

• FLAT EARTH is a Conspiracy FACT!

• Magnetic Earth - Electromagnetic attraction and repulsion - Gravity explained

• My path to the flat earth

• Lunar eclipse proves globe wrong

• Atmosphere solves the "problem" of sunsets on a flat earth

• Atmosphere-supplement

• The Sun, stars and earth: Distance and light problems

• Mountain peak 160 miles away still seen at sunset: This peak is 8000+ feet tall, but can clearly be seen at sunset 160 miles away. The curve should make this peak one mile below the horizon at that distance.

• Humor in music on the weird facts of the alleged "moon landing."

• Many more Must See Videos on flat earth issues