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.

Topics - gotham

Pages: [1]
The Lounge / Lady Elizabeth Blount redux
« on: July 03, 2016, 05:02:48 PM »
I worked with Daniel some number of years ago to provide content for a FES anniversary.  It was included on the site for a while and then was later lost. 

I just found a link that mentioned it back in 2012 before the music was removed, with the text that was posted on the site at the time.

This is the lost piece, Star-Dream, written by Lady Elizabeth Blount and recorded by Nordic Countess Ingeborg on violin and with gotham in accompaniment to honour Lady Blount and her involvement in FES.

When recorded, It was played to hopefully capture a sound as if played before an audience back in the late 1800’s and it was pleasing to see it reviewed as such by the listener who posted the article.

I spoke with Countess Ingeborg about finding the article and the repost of the music and she is most pleased.       

The Lounge / Ice wall travel
« on: June 18, 2016, 10:40:40 AM »
Made run at ice wall. Gone for months no internet. Back now, most glad.

Flat Earth Q&A / MOVED: Soccer
« on: July 18, 2015, 02:50:06 AM »

Flat Earth Believers / FEB in the merge
« on: March 15, 2015, 04:13:01 PM »
To Daniel and the Administrators of TFES relating to merge planning:

FEB status and some of the threads within have been and should remain an important and viable construct of TFES. In particular, the threads requiring special care in the merge are bullhorn's Study and sandokhan's Advanced Theory.

There are ongoing developments within each and they should not be lost in the merge.  It is also important to keep them within the context of current FEB access or something similar.

FEB is not always the most active realm of TFES but as we know, there is much work going on behind the scenes. FEBs sometimes keep their research in more private domains (not internet based) and this will remain the norm until a central TFES headquarters is established and research is consolidated.  When that will occur is not the issue. The issue is to keep FEB status or its similarity alive and well.  If it loses its standing after the merge, it will of course remain active beyond the website functionality of TFES.  Others are much more involved in the goings on of the merge but these concerns are better expressed before than after.

To be FEB is to understand the seriousness of our task and our goal. If FEB status becomes disallowed I believe there should still be a qualified portion of the website where the bullhorns and sandokhans can openly continue their research.         

Flat Earth General / Former scientists have their say
« on: December 30, 2013, 04:25:49 PM »
This thread is to welcome former scientists who do recognize FET as defining truthful Earth shape. It can take a while to arrive here because of RET's prevalence of late but here you are where all will be some day.   

Below is a list of statements that one of may have been used with the search function to direct you to this thread. They can remain resident here to help your other associates find this welcome thread throughout the years.   

Glad to have you, congratulations on your accomplishment and feel free to openly express your new found Earth shape views!

FET delivers truth.
I was a scientist and pleased that I discovered TFES.
I was a scientist, now I am a Zetetic.
Science failed me and I am now with TFES.
Don't let science stand in the way of truthful Earth shape.
It is great to get out of the lab and see the Earth for what it really is.
Thank you TFES for being here and giving former scientists a voice.   

Flat Earth General / The RE limitation
« on: July 15, 2012, 05:45:41 PM »
The REer (scientific) mind has limitations not evident in the FEer (Zetetic) mind.

Zetetic understanding and utilization of the subconscious mind provides superior thought processes allowing reality to be properly defined. A claim not available to those trapped in the quagmire of a RE perspective.

The subconscious mind matures the thoughts and knowledge we obtain through the experiences of our lives. This knowledge is then elevated throughout time and defines who we are as individuals, and what we believe as truth. If you are only fed a diet of RE perspective, you will misinterpret and promote that abnormal view of earth shape and incorrectly accept it as reality.

It is within the subconscious mind of a REer that "the world of the unreal” begins and is fostered and perpetuated until a Zetetic point of view can surface.  A correct perspective of earth shape reality can emerge after the Zetetic influence is established. 

If our perspective is our eyeglasses from which we view physical reality then the nature of a RE viewpoint eventually fails.  Their reality is certainly distorted by an inner-bias perpetuated through years and years of continuous and unrelenting RE theory.

It is only through the clear lens of Zetetic theory that earth shape is understood in its correct form. When the subconscious mind encumbered by years of RE educational misguidance is finally free to join the internal reason and common sense inherent within all of us.   

Those Zetetics familiar with an advanced understanding of the subconscious mind understand well what can be accomplished above and beyond just realizing the misguidance of RE theory.  That can be expanded upon another day…

Flat Earth General / FET Concepts
« on: May 06, 2012, 05:59:59 PM »
I am working on a list of concepts that represent pillars of FET as they compare with RET. It is just the start of what will be a long list and other members can add to the list, also.

1). The Earth is flat according to religious weltanschauung:

There are some in FET that make a compelling case for FET inclusion in the texts of Holy Books. This pillar is not about individual belief in faith, agnosticism, or atheism. The issue is that the Earth is flat when viewed from the perspective of religious weltanschauung.

2). The Earth is historically flat.

Take a good look at a FET/RET timeline. RET is only a recent entry into the long historical Earth shape record that was not in need of said recent entry.

3). The Earth is logically flat:

The first thing learned in the training of future scientists is that there is no truth in science. Hypothesis testing is offered as the best tool for determining a reality and that the process can not resolve in a definitive conclusion.  FET has truth. RET does not. Can mathematics come to the rescue of RET? No, is the correct answer. You can spend all day or a lifetime factoring equations to show that a ball is mathematically rounded. This has no relevance to Earth shape. It is a classroom dynamic, only.

The same RET is translated into all languages, printed in books and distributed throughout all countries. The infamous globe toys are evident in (probably) all countries, as well. Add a couple videos and pictures that are used over and over and that’s about it for the story of RET.  What is missing from that story is any actual proof of the claims made. 

4). The Earth is legally flat.

The evidence for FET rises to a level far exceeding that in RET. In a court of law, FET advocates prove a true Earth shape beyond any reasonable doubt. RET can maybe rise to the level of reasonable suspicion at best (see #3). The subsequent levels of probable cause and preponderance of evidence are unattainable within the framework of RET, unlike that of FET.  Therefore, FET sets legal precedence in Earth shape reality.

Flat Earth General / RET conferences
« on: September 01, 2011, 03:48:59 PM »
I was looking into how many RET conferences are held annually and came up with the number zero?

This laissez-faire confidence will surely prove troublesome for them in the near future.   

*A side note:
In the course of the research I came across an interesting fact. For all the belittling and insults that mr newton endures, he gets closer to earning some level of respect with his invention of the cat flap:

If he would have stayed with inventing, maybe his path would have been different and history would not have been forced view him in such a negative manner?

Flat Earth General / What was written about Rowbotham
« on: August 21, 2011, 04:26:54 PM »
Whether or not you agree with everything Dr. Samuel B. Rowbotham presented and discussed, it can be said he was respected by many then as he is today. 

To show proper respect for his efforts I submit the following, in his honour, that was written about him:

- "the matter is sufficiently important to claim the attention of the scientific world"

- "He is evidently a man of gifted intellect, and deep scientific attainments"

- "The audiences left strongly impressed"

- "The lecturer is evidently a gentleman of deep learning"

- "After the lectures he met the questions put to him by the most enlightened and scientific citizens with a readiness of reply which astonished his hearers"

- "The lectures were delivered in a manner which could not fail to be comprehended, and which left no doubt that the lecturer was thoroughly acquainted with the subject he was discussing"

- "approaching perfection, we cannot be surprised that such a beautiful system of Zetetic Astronomy as that expounded by 'Parallax' should entirely supersede the doctrine taught by Newton"

- "and his arguments are certainly very plausible"

Flat Earth General / FET in the library system
« on: May 23, 2011, 05:13:05 PM »
Many FET books are in the works and I have given some thought to how they will be recognized in the Dewey Decimal System when they are placed in the library system?

It would not be advantageous to FET to have book filed along with RET?  There are several Dewey numbers not being used and available within the existing sub-categories ("cat") that may work?   

The major cat number for science is 500. One thought would be to either take over cat 504, keeping it away from the fiction of the 520's where current astronomy and allied science reside.  The other option is to take over the available cat 524 for FET and go head-to-head with science?

Within the 510's of mathematics, cat 517 is available for FET mathematics for concepts such as 1+1 = 1 that are beyond the range of understanding of RET maths?

In a perfect world we could kick out cat 598 and keep it for dinosaur definition.

Cat 991 is available for major works defining concepts of the ice wall.

This matter of FET Dewey cats will be important to keep proper knowledge in its proper place. 

Flat Earth Believers / Academician
« on: March 17, 2011, 05:01:25 PM »
I am doing research into matters of FEB and was pondering how fortunate we are to have advanced so far beyond the scientific method and feel more than pleased to be associated with those that have had the opportunity to grasp more of the world as it really is.  This includes realms that apparently others are not as fortunate to consider, research, experience, and learn from.

There are no doubt brilliant minds currently pressed into the scientific mold that one day will be freed and be allowed to explore the vastness of the riches that really exist around them.

This brings me to a term I wanted to get an impression of.  Whether those that can see and experience life beyond the limitations of science should be referred to as an "academician"?

When I researched different definitions of that term there was only one that gave me pause:

-A member of an academy for promoting science, art, or literature.  

It was the science part that concerned me. There were far more definitions that I responded to favorably and some of these include:

-A follower of a philosophical tradition or a promoter of its ideas.

-A scholar who is skilled in academic disputation. (I like that a lot)

-Someone who by long study has gained mastery in one or more disciplines.

Do you think that "academician" is a term better left to the spoils of science?    

Flat Earth General / FET generations
« on: March 12, 2011, 06:04:29 PM »
It will be a fine day when most people wake up each day knowing that the earth is flat. These days, many people believe the earth is some sort of spherical abstraction because that is what they have always been told. 

I was thinking that this is just a generational phenomenon currently stuck in an anomalous script of RET with an unwitting population participating like actors in a stage play that self perpetuates itself.  One day, the lights will rise and what will emerge is none other than FET back again in the majority to be passed forward to the next generation of people and RET will have completed its current season of popularity.   

Flat Earth Believers / Life on a flat earth
« on: February 22, 2011, 04:40:58 PM »
Thank you for your kind welcome to FEB.  I do know that words will flow more freely once the realization of acceptance takes hold a bit more.     

I must humbly and sincerely thank the Zetetic Council for, upon review, concluding that my contributions have been indicative of my belief in a flat earth and that by admitting me to FEB your research into the matter was not an effort wasted.   

There are FEers that certainly can speak to issues related to a flat earth more competently than me but this does not diminish the fact that through personal journey and research, I have concluded that the earth is flat.

I am fortunate that previous exposure to RET along the path of obtaining a science degree did not destroy my need to always search for more and better ways of learning and that brought me to FET and Zeteticism. 

When I first arrived here at TFES I did the recommended searching and studying and that helped out tremendously. It was not long before I knew that truth could be found here and beyond.  To all those past and present who contribute to the lifeblood of FET, know that there are many that appreciate and learn from your efforts. 

I am committed to keep studying both FET and Zeteticism and to contribute in any way I can to the body of knowledge that defines flat earth theory and will continue my representations of FET to the best of my abilities.

Flat Earth Q&A / Just a question
« on: February 05, 2011, 06:18:09 PM »
I have been quite busy doing research for upcoming releases and am amused by the amount of data written about FET by REers.  This prompts a quick question for REers that will help my research:

(1) Why are you so afraid that RET will one day be rejected and will be replaced by FET?

It is really this certain tone that exudes and stands out. You can just sense the fear and loathing of such a realization that FET could ever re-emerge and even the thought of it is just reprehensible and scary.  Everywhere you look the term 'flat earth myth' is so used its overuse is symptomatic of hiding behind the fear of it being true.  

Some favorite terms so far when discussing FET are:

-Flat earth myth (of course)

-Savage and ridiculous.

-Uniformed scholars.


-Useful propaganda.

-Was invented by scientists.(?)

Just relax.  It won't be that bad once you do see the light.

Thank you for answering question (1)  

Arts & Entertainment / Bright Lights, Big City
« on: December 27, 2010, 02:04:55 PM »
I had a cassette from Neil Giraldos band (Pat Benatar's husband) that included the song 'Bright Lights, Big City'. I play lead and rhythm guitar and was learning the guitar solos on that song because they just sound that excellent.

I have misplaced the cassette.  It is driving my crazy to find that song recorded anywhere?  

If anyone gets a chance to look it up and post a link where I can hear it again you would be doing a really fine thing.

FYI it is not the version of the same name done by:


Jimmy Reed

Taj Mahal

Jim Jones

The Musical

The Movie

Rolling Stones

Umphrey McGee

The only lyric I can remember is right before the chorus of 'bright lights, big city'
they sing 'Catch the wind and ride, forever.'

Thank you for reading my rant.

Flat Earth General / Peer-review is good for all
« on: December 18, 2010, 11:29:26 AM »
I would like to see the power and prestige of the peer-review concept that RET uses in so many instances also be applied in FET. I looked through the site identifying how often the 'peer-reviewed' mantra is used in the RET reasoning.  Well, I have the most wonderful news. FET concepts can also be peer-reviewed and all the same reasoning that RET uses to produce this prestige can apply to FET.

Looking at the peer-review process it is evident that the RET think tank defines those included in the peer-review pool as all RE theorists.  This is necessitated by the narrow definition that at the core of the process, participants must be peers in the particular field of study that qualify them as either RE theorists or relevant institutes of a certain stature that understand RET and can review works with an impartial and critical eye.

Within the world of FET there are those that when identified with expertise expected to fulfill peer-review responsibility, will fulfill the role with equivalent task required and expected of similar responsibility within the world of RET. This community of FET experts maintains the same narrow definition at the core of the FET peer-review process and could only include either FET individuals or relevant institutes with the expertise to understand and properly review FET with an impartial and critical eye.  

It is inevitable that more articles, books, and other published works relating to FET will be coming forward into the mainstream.  It is only prudent to expect that FET peer-reviewed output will be as accepted and respected as the RET peer-reviewed output is and such integrity is bestowed upon.  

There is more work to be done within the FET infrastructure before the process is as vast as the RET world, but TFES is truly paving the way forward to where an equivalent FET peer-review process is active and the output of the process gives the same stamp of approval that RE theorists grasp at and then hold with such high esteem once completed.    

Flat Earth Q&A / The myth of gravity?
« on: December 08, 2010, 03:59:23 PM »
I was searching the FAQ and the site looking for this information but didn't see it addressed specifically so I will have to ask it to get the answer.

Pardon the simplicity but, Why don't we fall off the earth if it is round?  

I then went through page after page of search results on the net looking for the answer.  Time and time again the only answer is 'the invisible force of gravity'.  

If gravity has not been proven and it is invisible, is that not something that RET is just saying is fact without proof as they define proof and that FET makes more sense?

Flat Earth General / RET and mathematics
« on: November 27, 2010, 04:58:38 PM »
I see that the REers lean heavily on mathematics.  I have had college level algebra and calculus and have even had moments of being impressed with the almost 'parlor trick' notions you can perform with them.  

When you look under the veil of the seemingly ordered and logical world of these equations, there emerges a terrible secret.  Almost like a RET family secret that is better off not being exposed.  Just search for 'unsolved math problems' and you will get the message.  There are so many of them that it would be deemed harassment to list them all here. This exposes a weakness in RET and shows the impressive limitations of mathematics in general as it applies to real world situations and its susceptibility to incomplete solutions.  

On the flip side, FET has very few unresolved issues. A few of these are currently being discussed where total agreement has not yet been established but the number of those is so very small.  The process that will prove a solution for those is ongoing and is carried out in an open forum with maturity and transparency exhibiting such strength of character.  There is this subtle superiority with problem solving abilities within the methodology of FET.  

It is not an understatement to say that many pillars of RET are subject to the potentiality of excessive flaws hidden behind their cloak of secrecy. Enough to topple the evidence that is so readily offered by RET as the alleged finality in many a debate.

When RE theorists step forward with the boldness of lions, they just may be putting their paws over the edge of a precipice of their own undoing ready to tumble down into a jumble of growing ignominiousness.

Flat Earth Debate / Some thoughts on dinosaurs
« on: November 20, 2010, 12:26:43 PM »
Here are a couple of words on dinosaurs and why they were once able to perform complex tasks that they are not required to today. There seems to be doubts as to whether they could have had more advanced technological skills.

Dinosaurs we do know of have the capacity for speech, albeit mimicry.  There is a line of evidence that this could ultimately explain their previous use of tools and building capabilities and the subsequent devolution to their current traits devoid of such useable skills.

This is simply the evolution then devolution of the species relative to a thought to speech ability and is supported by natural selection and is proven by their current speech capacity. 

Dollo?s law is not abrogated as this is not total reversed evolution but is merely a change in thought to speech development in the brain that occurred in the evolutionary process.

Natural selection has demonstrated that speech impacted the technological ability and thusly the survival of Homo sapiens sapiens and the same is true with the referenced dinosaurs.  In the case of the dinosaurs, the ability of speech has mitigated reflecting the changing environment and the reduced need for tools and building apparatus required for survival.
When natural selection demanded that this lineage of dinosaurs could speak to one another expressing their thoughts and needs to build the necessities of survival, it was provided.  Now that they no longer need this for survival their speech abilities have been reduced to mimicry and natural selection is evidenced by their non-extinction.

Pages: [1]