Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Mizuki

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I Have Several Questions
« on: May 16, 2013, 06:38:24 PM »
Our beautiful Earth is flat.

But it's physical form does not matter really. What difference does it make?

But, for the record, it is flat.

Mizuki x

That is an excellent post! Thanks for sharing.

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / "Is Iran's space monkey a fake?"
« on: February 05, 2013, 06:26:57 AM »
I"m surprised no one has posted this story. It euen made the Telegraph, here in the UK.

"Iranís triumphant claim that it successfully sent a monkey into space may have been nothing more than hot air."

Flat Earth General / Re: live iss!
« on: January 19, 2013, 10:10:50 AM »
All these round earth belieuers put me in mind of Dorothy and her friends in The Wizard of Oz. Nasa is the Wizard, of course.

And to complete my silly analogy, The FES is little Toto, daring to pull back the curtain of obfuscation!


Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Re: What are we dealing with?
« on: January 19, 2013, 09:43:34 AM »
I haue a friend who at a young age became a fundamentalist Christian.

He was the real deal, uery deuout, spending all his spare time euangelising. He really walked the walk. Time went on, about 10 years or so. He gradually changed his uiews. In some ways quite radically. Although, he would still say he is a Christian, a lot of his old uiews haue long gone out the window.

I asked him once, sincerely, what did he learn most from his time as a fundamentalist Christian. He said, "Neuer nail your colours too firmly to the mast about anything."

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Re: evidence of moon missions
« on: January 19, 2013, 08:10:43 AM »
"they didnt have computers like that in 1969. they had glorified calculators."

Which is one of the major reasons that many people think that the moon landings never took place.

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Re: evidence of moon missions
« on: January 19, 2013, 08:07:42 AM »
Computer generated images are hardly any proof that man went to the moon to be fair, are they?
It's basically going back to the accepting what they tell you to believe based on their calculations.
I can say with 100% certainty, at least for my own personal satisfaction, that no man, or man made object has ever been anywhere near the moon, never mind on it.

I would like to second this statement.

Mizuki x

I was of the belief that the Earth is round, a ball.
When I was at school and many years after I left school, I was of the belief that the Earth spun on it's axis too and later in life, I was swayed , more to the Earth being round but stationary.

I basically went on the explanations as to why this was the case.
For instance:
I was told, plus watching documentaries and books that the Earth spun on it's axis and whizzed around the massive centralised sun and the explanation made a lot of sense for years, so I went along with it and never really tried to question it.

Later on, as I was reading books, I came across various theories by people, labelled as crackpots, today, yet who were very well educated people , excelling in their relative fields and ,I don't mean astro physicists, I mean people who have invented many things that we take for granted today.

I decided to look into their claims that the Earth was a sort of sphere and that it was stationary, with everything going round us.

I absorbed it all and using basic logic, I concluded that, this could actually be a far more relevant explanation, as it takes away the fact that we do not sense any 1000mph rotating Earth and our bodies are extremely susceptible to motion and balance and yet our bodies do not pick up the fact that we are supposed to be rotating at that speed, or any speed and yet , looking up at the sky, it became logical to accept that it was objects moving in the sky instead.

Naturally, there's explanations that cater for a rotating Earth, as in inertia but when you really think logical about it, it makes no sense and definitely threw me into the stationary Earth thoughts.

Now, I'll be the first to admit, that I, simply try to work out what appears to fit better, using simple logic, yet rely on what is being told by whoever seems to explain it best.

Until I found this forum, I was stuck fast to the stationary Earth and I scoffed at the flat Earth theory for no more reason than, I used simple logic to say that if it was flat, we would fall off the end and what was underneath a flat Earth.

I still don't accept the Earth being flat as such, yet I do think there is a better explanation that could actually incorporate something like a flat type of Earth into the equation as we see it.

I'm really confused about it all, yet the one thing I'm absolutely 100% in my own mind sure about, is, this Earth does not spin on it's so called axis.

The round stationary Earth also presents it's problems with me the same as the rotating Earth as in, us , sticking to the planet, which in both cases renders them extremely unlikely with what we are told is gravity, yet it cannot be explained in any real sense.

A sort of flat or disc type Earth would make much more sense and this ice wall sort of makes some sense as well.

I'm going to have to spend some time really scrutinising this as not everything is fully explained for a flat Earth yet neither is it for both round versions, without plenty of shoehorned equations put into the mix to cater for discrepancies that have arisen over time, like Einsteins relativity and the calculations of the extremely slow 10mph moon rotation as well as it rotation to fit into everything we are told to believe.

I have a problem with why Australia is called down under on this round rotating so called Earth, I mean, why are they down under and not those on top..
What is up and what is under?

I really enjoyed reading this post, sceptimatic. Best one i"ue read on here for a while.

After a few chance incidents really rocked my world on this subject some years back, i too haue been trying to come to a clearer understanding. I haue been trying hard to "realise" the true nature of our earth. I say "realise" because i am of the belief that to truly understand it, is aboue rational, logical thinking.

Please keep us posted on your thoughts. I enjoy posts like these.

Mizuki x

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Rocky Mountains
« on: January 03, 2013, 03:43:02 PM »
I would loue to go to Colorado.

I"ue seen the rockies on the Alberta/BC border. They are breath-takingingly beautiful.

I"m sorry you think that the earth is a globe, though  :(

Mizuki x

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Where is the moon during a solar eclipse?
« on: January 03, 2013, 08:37:11 AM »
Here"s a link to "Earth Not A Globe":

Scroll up to page 90 and enjoy some reading.

Mizuki x

Flat Earth Debate / Re: minutephysics
« on: December 31, 2012, 06:15:50 AM »
10. "The planets that surround us are globular, so the earth is". - Er, no. Why does this follow? The earth is indeed unique. Earth is not the planets. It is the earth and is planar. IRRELEVANT.

9. "Time Zones." Time zones are real. The sun does move across the earth creating different time zones. This has absolutely no bearing on the shape of the earth. IRRELEVANT.

8. "The Coriolis Effect." The info on this youtube vid is incorrect. There have been many instances of right-turning hurricanes in the south, and visa versa. FAIL.

7. "Triangles." This is totally hypothetical and could never be demonstrated to prove anything about the true nature of the earth. Basically, this mathematical equation can not be applied in reality, so proves nothing. So, totally IRRELEVANT.

6. "The Sun." His explanation here is rushed and incomplete. He is talking about using triangulation to show that the earth has curvature. But he is WRONG.

5. "The Stars." Another rushed and incomplete explanation. I agree, the stars do move. Does this prove that the earth is a globe? Of course not. And most certainly does not in this video. FAIL.

4. "Magellan and Circumnavigation." Sailing in a circle on the planar earth does not prove that the earth is a globe. FAIL.

3."The Horizon." Search the Flat Earth Forums for complete views of the Toronto skyline across many miles of lake. Still not successfully debunked. FAIL.

2. "Lunar Eclipse." Again, this would take a lengthy explanation. But briefly, as he says, "the shadow on the moon is curved." So what is making the shadow? Vedic astrologers from thousands of years ago knew the truth. But today we live in ignorant times. The shadow is caused by a, as yet undiscovered by modern astronomers, planetary body. Commonly referred to as the "anti moon." FAIL.

1. "Photographic evidence." This is the best of the lot! This is what first got me really thinking that something is seriously wrong with the conventional view. I was truly astounded to find that there is not one convincing image of the earth taken by any of the world's space agencies.

Mizuki x

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What is unsatisfactory about the RET
« on: December 31, 2012, 03:01:44 AM »
What do you guys find so unsatisfactory about the RET. What makes you feel NASA is taking part in a conspiracy?

Nasa"s conspiracy is to do with space flight, not whether the earth is a globe or not. It is highly likely that Nasa hold the conuentional uiew that the earth is a globe. I am pretty certain that, like the majority of people, they haue little idea as to the true reality of our earth.

A globe, although a compromise, is a good way to represent the earth, euen though the earth is indeed planar.

The explanation is in my signature. Taken from the wiki entry for Ernst Barthel, this is the truth of our reality.

Mizuki x

The Lounge / Re: Ireland
« on: December 24, 2012, 08:35:36 AM »
I'm going there for Christmas!  What should I do?

Go to the pub.

The Guinness really is louely and the Irish are the best conuersationalists in the English speaking world. Hope you haue a great time!

Mizuki x

Flat Earth Debate / Re: No flat earther can answer this
« on: December 24, 2012, 08:28:23 AM »
Here"s a site that claims to show real liue time satellite tracking:

I was trying to see if it showed the same data as the app on my phone. But it"s too confusing for my untechnical brain to figure out!  :'(

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Re: Are Satellites Fake?
« on: December 22, 2012, 07:04:23 AM »
What's the apps name? Is it free?

It is called "GPS Info Qt" - made in QML by DV8 Creations.

And ye, it is free  :)

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Re: Are Satellites Fake?
« on: December 22, 2012, 02:17:19 AM »

Wow! I managed to post an image first attempt!  :)

This is the app i now haue on my phone (Nokia N8). It claims to giue more info on the satallites that you are utilising to enable the GPS in your phone.

I"ue used it a few times now, and it will giue information like, "11 satellites in uiew, 4 in use." Each satellite has a number, euen. The highest, so far, is satellite number 28.

Has anyone else used an app like this? If so, what are your thoughts?

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Re: Are Satellites Fake?
« on: December 21, 2012, 05:13:37 PM »
Good find Mizvki. I was trying to explain exactly that to someone only yesterday but didn't have such a good source.

A very interesting read.

Thork  :-*

I read a good part of that thread, i admit i just skimmed ouer the more technical stuff! But they raise some good points. Not least, the fact that there is such a lack of photos of these expensiue, techmologically aduanced contraptions.

Something really does not add up.

I installed an app on my phone earlier that apparently locates the position of uarious satellites using the phone"s GPS. I hauen"t looked at it properly yet, but i am suspicious that it can do what it says it can.

Thanks for the link Markjo, i am just about to read it.

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Are Satellites Fake?
« on: December 21, 2012, 03:39:00 PM »
I know that this subject comes up a lot, but i"ue been seeing what i can find on the internet, and am pleasantly surprised that other people haue their suspicions, too.

I found a 35 page thread on the "September Clues Research Forum" all about this subject.

This post, by "Farceualue", i thought was pretty interesting:-

"I have been researching GPS and how satellites are said to make use of general relativity to pinpoint locations. Atomic clocks evidently run slower in higher orbits and using special calculations thanks to Einstein, these time differentials can be taken into account and compensated for and millions of cell phone users can be tracked within inches. Quite a feat for 24 satellites.

Not to mention the fact that I am highly suspicious of relativity theory and its potential for being a cover for the atomic bomb.

But if, in fact these satellites are orbiting the earth in a way that allows them to maintain specific distances from each other and are carrying computers on board that are capable of performing calculations that triangulate between themselves and millions, or billions of cell phones, without ever needing processor or RAM upgrades evidently, and taking into account that the power requirements for these calculations remains constant over time, how is it possible that they have the transmitting power to cover 22,000 miles 24/7? My experience with radio and television transmission is that it takes a fair amount of power to cover a few miles. I have yet to find the specific power requirements for broadcasting signal locally, but the idea of running a network broadcasting system that covers a radius of only even a few miles on solar power seems ludicrous.

If the power requirements were met, what type of transmitter is capable of reliably pushing out the location data signal 22,000 miles? What frequency range are they using and why can we not get TV or radio more than a hundred miles out? Short wave can travel several thousand miles, but 22,000? All this precise real time location calculations done at great altitudes and incredible speeds and the satellites never need correction.

Granted, I am not quite up to grasping the theory behind the calculations, but I am having a hard time believing that all these things are done remotely without the need for physical, hands on maintenance and adjustments. Plus, I can not find a photo of one of these things."

Hope other people find it interesting, too!

Mizuki x

Edit: Oops! The full thread can be found here:

Flat Earth General / Re: 12/21/12? Is it a common belief here?
« on: December 20, 2012, 02:19:23 PM »
I"m pretty certain that it isn"t a common belief here.

This is the Flat Earth Society - not the "Doom-mongers and Apocalyptic Fantasists Society."

Mizuki x

The Lounge / Re: the buy a keyboard Mizuki fund
« on: December 19, 2012, 03:32:28 PM »
If a key or two went bad though, I'd have no problem buying a cheap USB keyboard to plug into it.

If a key or two went bad, why would you not just change the keyboard on the laptop?  With many laptops, it is not difficult to change the keyboard.

My brother offered to do just that. But it is just one of those things that i probably won"t get around to doing.

Mizuki x

Does this mean you are going to decline my offer?

Hi Squevil. Thank you, your offer means a lot to me, but I'm afraid I can't accept. I am writing this on my iPad, which isn't actually that bad to type on! Better than I thought.

I still prefer my old lap-top, though. Even if some of the keys do not work.

Thank you again. Your kindness has touched my heart.

Mizvki (Mizuki) x x

V v v v V

The Lounge / Re: the buy a keyboard Mizuki fund
« on: December 19, 2012, 09:31:58 AM »
If a key or two went bad though, I'd have no problem buying a cheap USB keyboard to plug into it.

If a key or two went bad, why would you not just change the keyboard on the laptop?  With many laptops, it is not difficult to change the keyboard.

My brother offered to do just that. But it is just one of those things that i probably won"t get around to doing.

Mizuki x

The Lounge / Re: the buy a keyboard Mizuki fund
« on: December 18, 2012, 12:59:03 PM »
im willing to pledge a fair portion of the costs for a new keyboard or the whole postage (whatever is greater) to buy Mizuki a new keyboard.
they do not cost much and its for the good of the FES. anyone else in? i can buy off ebay and send direct too.
just need;

Mizuki's permission to give me their address for postage

other sponsors.

this is a legit request and i will provide proof of purchase as well. lets do something nice for somebody :)

or if its something like this;

just give me your postage Mizuki and ill buy you it for christmas. its woman spillage friendly too so it wont break so easily! but if people want to chip in then a better quality one can be bought.

if you want to do this then message me a pm for my paypal to add funds. im not sure if this is against forum rules or not but it is most definitely not a scam! and full proof will be shown.

Aw, thank you Squeuil, you are so kind.

But it really isn"t necessary. I think this lap-top has just about had it (my friend told me not to buy an Acer!  :( ).

I haue an ipad, but i prefer typing on this old thing. Thank you for being so thoughtful.

Mizuki x x

The Lounge / Re: Kim Jong-Un's Base
« on: December 17, 2012, 02:33:03 PM »
I read a book about a man who escaped from North Korea. His whole family had spent years in their gulags. Harrowing is not the word.

I read in the guardian, just a few weeks back, that the N. Korean news agency released a story saying they"d found a unicorn lair:

They"ll be telling their people that the earth is a globe, next  ;D

Mizuki x

The Lounge / Re: Kim Jong-Un's Base
« on: December 17, 2012, 02:23:34 PM »
Oh. I wondered where this went. I thought you were moderating while drinking that cider from Aldi, Thork.

Mizuki x

The Lounge / Re: Kim Jong-Un's Base
« on: December 17, 2012, 02:00:48 PM »
Its likely been reported because they aren't part of the club. They launched that satellite against all advice. The 'space nations' clubbed together. They didn't want this rogue state to be able to confirm what we at this site know about earth's shape. That satellite has likely been designed to orbit a round earth. And surprise, its not doing it. North Korea are forcing a seat at the conspiracy table so they can get some of the riches that come with it.

There will be all kinds of threats and bargaining going on behind the scenes.

Good find Mizvki.

Hi Thork. I think Tom Bishop has got it right. NASA really are not aware that the earth is not a globe. So their fake space program depicts the earth as a globe.  As for their satellites, i don"t know. Maybe they can keep their hi-tech tin cans floating aboue the earth.

The North Koreans howeuer, patently can"t. Epic fail for their space-race tomfoolery!

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Re: North Korea's Satellite a Dud
« on: December 17, 2012, 01:49:34 PM »

Here"s a pic of the Korean leader watching the launch. He looks like Dr Euil in his bunker!

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / North Korea's Satellite a Dud
« on: December 17, 2012, 01:27:32 PM »
This is interesting:

Maybe they should have just faked it, like NASA do.

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Re: The Mystery of Viking Navigation
« on: December 17, 2012, 11:24:26 AM »
Assuming the world were flat, in what way would knowing that have made navigation more straightforward for the Vikings? 

Would they not still need a way to know what direction they were traveling and approximately where they were?  What would make this easier on a flat earth?  If you have details or suggestions of a flat earth navigation method which would be easier and/or more accurate than the forms which assume a round earth I'm sure people would love to hear it.  If the methods differed fundamentally and worked well it would blow your whole theory wide open and lend it much credence.

Say I bought a yacht today and wanted to sail it to Hawaii from northern California.  How would I navigate there if I assumed the world was flat?

Apparently, it does make a difference. Planar nauigation, as opposed to nauigating on a globe.

I do know that for accurate nauigation on a globe, you need to be able to fix the longitudinal co-ordinates. A book called "Longitude" was written about the man who finally solued this problem.

Here"s the synopsis from Amazon:-

"Anyone alive in the eighteenth century would have known that "the longitude problem" was the thorniest scientific dilemma of the day--and had been for centuries.  Lacking the ability to measure their longitude, sailors throughout the great ages of exploration had been literally lost at sea as soon as they lost sight of land.  Thousands of lives and the increasing fortunes of nations hung on a resolution.  One man, John Harrison, in complete opposition to the scientific community, dared to imagine a mechanical solution--a clock that would keep precise time at sea, something no clock had ever been able to do on land.  Longitude is the dramatic human story of an epic scientific quest and of Harrison's forty-year obsession with building his perfect timekeeper, known today as the chronometer.  Full of heroism and chicanery, it is also a fascinating brief history of astronomy, navigation, and clockmaking, and opens a new window on our world."

I belieue that the Uikings had true knowledge as to the physical make-up of our reality (it being planar), and this is what enabled them to be such great sea-farers. Not some baloney about some stones that allowed them to position the sun through the clouds, to nauigate on a globe.

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Re: The Mystery of Viking Navigation
« on: December 17, 2012, 11:08:44 AM »
On-screen keyboard.

 :) Yes. But it"s too fiddly to use all the time. I just didn"t want the title to look odd.

Mizuki x

Flat Earth General / Re: The Mystery of Viking Navigation
« on: December 13, 2012, 06:59:59 PM »
Is there something wrong with your keyboard?

I"m afraid so.

Mizuki x

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12