Why?

Can someone explain to me, Why there is a so called conspiracy where the governments of the Earth wish to "brainwash" the general population into believing the world is round?  What does this gain them?

The only reason they would need a conspiracy is if it gained them something.  It doesn't.  So, why would they do this? Especially since hundreds of years ago the general population believed that the Earth was flat.

Why change the views of everyone and make them think differently if gains them nothing?  If you can explain this, I might just convert to your side and believe that the earth is flat.  But since I don't think that you can explain it, I don't think I have to worry about being converted.

So this is the biggest conspiracy in the world, and you who "know that the world is flat" can't explain, what the government's of the world gain from this conspiracy.  

Cause you see there is nothing to gain from making the people of earth believe that the earth is round.  In fact there is much to lose by doing so.  Time, money, and effort.  A conspiracy of this size and magnitude would cost millions, if not billions, of dollars, an incredible amount of time and effort.  No one would spend that kind of resources into making people believe that the earth is round(that is if it were really flat) if it didn't gain them something and to spend the incredible amount of resources that it would take to keep such a conspiracy going it would have to gain them an incredible amount of something.  In fact it would have to be enough to justify the spending of such resources.

So, since there is nothing to gain by this, then there isn't a conspiracy.

I dunno, sounds pretty sketchy to me... very speculative argument.

-Erasmus

So this is the biggest conspiracy in the world, and you who "know that the world is flat" can't explain, what the government's of the world gain from this conspiracy.  

Cause you see there is nothing to gain from making the people of earth believe that the earth is round.  In fact there is much to lose by doing so.  Time, money, and effort.  A conspiracy of this size and magnitude would cost millions, if not billions, of dollars, an incredible amount of time and effort.  No one would spend that kind of resources into making people believe that the earth is round(that is if it were really flat) if it didn't gain them something and to spend the incredible amount of resources that it would take to keep such a conspiracy going it would have to gain them an incredible amount of something.  In fact it would have to be enough to justify the spending of such resources.

So, since there is nothing to gain by this, then there isn't a conspiracy.

Perhaps there is a conspiracy not for the purpose of gain, but merely to maintain the status quo.  Science relies on faith in its methods much more so than god does.  If science were shown to be flawed in it's stance on something so fundamental as the shape of the earth all hell would literally break loose.  Where would our faith in medical science rest if the scientists were shown as supperters of nonsense.  The theory of the round earth has becme so wideley accepted that science may be duty bound to uphold this standpoint despite it's frailty.  Hence the conspiracy!

Or maybe not

Answers on a postcard

I'm not saying this disproves the flat earth theory, just that there is no conspiracy.  If there is nothing to gain from having the conspiracy, then there is no reason for it. Like I said for a conspiracy of this magnitude the top people would be spending a butt load of money (millions maybe even billions), plus all there time and effort put into it.  This means there would have to be a really, really big pay off for such a conspiracy. With out that pay off no need for a conspiracy.

Look at the roswell crash landing.  The reason for a conspiracy there is:

With new alien tech. we get new tech.  Keeping this from public view helps keep our nations tech under wraps.  Plus if the public found out Aliens do exist there would possibly be wide spread panic (not counting what it would do to the major world religions).  So the pay off on this conspiracy is no wide spread panic, and the new tech.  Well worth the conspiracy.

<i>Perhaps there is a conspiracy not for the purpose of gain, but merely to maintain the status quo. Science relies on faith in its methods much more so than god does. If science were shown to be flawed in it's stance on something so fundamental as the shape of the earth all hell would literally break loose. Where would our faith in medical science rest if the scientists were shown as supperters of nonsense. The theory of the round earth has becme so wideley accepted that science may be duty bound to uphold this standpoint despite it's frailty. Hence the conspiracy!

Or maybe not

Answers on a postcard</i>


Ah, but this doesn't explain why they changed the world view hundreds of years ago.  Hundreds of years ago everyone (from the mighty kings to the lowest peasants) believed the world was flat.  Why would they change the world view to a round earth then?  The conspiracy part just doesn't hold water.

Ah, but this doesn't explain why they changed the world view hundreds of years ago.  Hundreds of years ago everyone (from the mighty kings to the lowest peasants) believed the world was flat.

First off, this statement is patently ignorant.  Unless by "hundreds" you mean "at least thirty hundreds", and I'm not sure that that's going back far enough.  Do you have any evidence to back up this belief about the dominant cosmology in medieval times, the Renaissance, or antiquity, or is it just something your teachers and textbooks told you in elementary school?

Your naivete shows through in other places as well.  "The people on top" don't have to spend any of they money at all -- we dump inordinate taxes in their laps to fund their rule over us.  Next, you clearly haven't given much thought to the means by which people are controlled in a totalitarian system.  If you control people's thoughts, you can make them do just about anything you want -- this is Orwell's thesis in 1984.  If there is a round-Earth conspiracy, an entirely reasonable motivation is that the only source of people's knowledge about *anything* is the government.  That's absolute power.

In any case, attacking flat Earth theory from the standpoint of ignorance ("I can't think of any reason why this might be happening") is entirely fruitless.  Just because you can't think of a reason, doesn't mean there isn't one.  You might as well say, "I can't think of any reason that people exist except that God created them," or "I can't think of any reason why space is curved in the presence of mass."  Ignorance is never a valid premise for any argument.

If you want to support the round-Earth cause, please get some background in it first.  I'm really not interested in educating everybody who comes around thinking Columbus prooved that the Earth is round.

-Erasmus

Yes, There is a slight flaw in your reasoning...the purpose of a conspiracy is to hide the truth...which may well be why you cannot see a reason.

Unless you know everything in the world, which if you did you would not be posting this argument because you would know the Earth is round anyway, you may well be unaware of the reason behind the conspiracy.

First off, this statement is patently ignorant. Unless by "hundreds" you mean "at least thirty hundreds", and I'm not sure that that's going back far enough. Do you have any evidence to back up this belief about the dominant cosmology in medieval times, the Renaissance, or antiquity, or is it just something your teachers and textbooks told you in elementary school?  Do you have any evidence proving your "thirty hundreds" remark.  

Your naivete shows through in other places as well. "The people on top" don't have to spend any of they money at all -- we dump inordinate taxes in their laps to fund their rule over us. Next, you clearly haven't given much thought to the means by which people are controlled in a totalitarian system. If you control people's thoughts, you can make them do just about anything you want -- this is Orwell's thesis in 1984. If there is a round-Earth conspiracy, an entirely reasonable motivation is that the only source of people's knowledge about *anything* is the government. That's absolute power.  I didn't say they were spending there own money just they were spending money.  Wheiter or not it comes from taxes is irrelavent.  Cause if they didn't have a conspiracy to hide then that would be money they could keep or use for some other conspiracy.

In any case, attacking flat Earth theory from the standpoint of ignorance ("I can't think of any reason why this might be happening") is entirely fruitless. Just because you can't think of a reason, doesn't mean there isn't one. You might as well say, "I can't think of any reason that people exist except that God created them," or "I can't think of any reason why space is curved in the presence of mass." Ignorance is never a valid premise for any argument. Who said i was attacking the flat earth theory.  Cause i wasn't.  I was asking a simple question, cause i can't think of any reason for such a conspiracy.  That's why i asked it.  If you want an answer to why your sink is clogged you ask a plumber, not an electrician.  If you want an answer about the flat earth conspiracy you ask someone who believes in the flat earth.  Thats what they call logic.

If you want to support the round-Earth cause, please get some background in it first. I'm really not interested in educating everybody who comes around thinking Columbus prooved that the Earth is round.  first I'm not trying to support anything here, I was just asking a question.  Second who asked you to educate me.  I didn't so get off your high horse.  

You attacked me for no valid reason, this makes you ignorant.  Step off your poduim and reread what I asked.  Your attack was unwarranted, so back off unless you can answer my question intelligently.

[/i]

It's interesting that you mention 1984.  Did you also happen to read the part where O'Brien explains that power is an ends and not a means?  If we accept this as true, then it seems downright logical that people would forulate this conspiracy, simply because they can.

Do you have any evidence proving your "thirty hundreds" remark.

Well, "I asked you first," but in the interest of discourse:  my estimate was intentionally liberal.  Eratosthenes and Aristotle both believed the Earth to be a sphere, and the latter lived 2400 years ago.  Aristotle's model of the world (and his views on just about every other empirical pursuit available to him) dominated Western thinking thoughout the middle ages.  A cursory examination of readily available sources (e.g. the Internet; see the Wikipedia article on "flat earth", which gives references) would have revealed this to you.

I didn't say they were spending there own money just they were spending money.  Wheiter or not it comes from taxes is irrelavent.  Cause if they didn't have a conspiracy to hide then that would be money they could keep or use for some other conspiracy.

I think it is entirely relevant.  You would be hesitant to spend a billion dollars out of your own pocket, even if it promised total control over my mind, wouldn't you?  Well, what if I offered you the money?  Then it wouldn't be so hard to dump it into supporting a vast conspiracy, now would it?

Who said i was attacking the flat earth theory.

You've stuck your neck out a bit by starting this thread; don't shirk away from it now.  Your "simple question" was riddled with rhetoric, such as your [improper] use of the identifier "so-called",  and your unnecessary placement of "quotes" around "brainwash" to indicate your contempt of the very suggestion.  You were not interested in an answer, as you so nobly assert; this is evidenced by your providing the answer yourself:

The only reason they would need a conspiracy is if it gained them something. It doesn't. ... But since I don't think that you can explain it, I don't think I have to worry about being converted. ... So, since there is nothing to gain by this, then there isn't a conspiracy.

Thats what they call logic.

No, the analysis of formal languages and valid arguments is what they call logic.

I'm not trying to support anything here,

See above; your agenda is clear.

Second who asked you to educate me.

I'm pretty sure you did when you "just asked a question."

You attacked me for no valid reason, this makes you ignorant.

Wrong, and I'll repeat this: having not even the most preliminary understanding of a given subject makes you ignorant (of that subject).  Attacking you for no reason would have made me aggressive and cruel.

It's interesting that you mention 1984. Did you also happen to read the part where O'Brien explains that power is an ends and not a means? If we accept this as true, then it seems downright logical that people would forulate this conspiracy, simply because they can.

Yeah, actually, I don't have a particularly good recollection of the book's details... but that's a good point.  The will to power is pretty strong.

-Erasmus

A cursory examination of readily available sources (e.g. the Internet; see the Wikipedia article on "flat earth", which gives references) would have revealed this to you.

so you critize me for using text books for my remark on the hundreds of years ago, but you yourself use the internet to back up your source.  Which if i'm not mistaken the internet is a compiled place of date of the worlds text books(not saying that's the only thing that makes up the internet but what you are refering to is).   And the reason i didn't provide proof is you did it for me by saying that i used a text book.

I think it is entirely relevant. You would be hesitant to spend a billion dollars out of your own pocket, even if it promised total control over my mind, wouldn't you? Well, what if I offered you the money? Then it wouldn't be so hard to dump it into supporting a vast conspiracy, now would it?

But once again you bring up the money issue.  Yes I would be hesitant to spend a billion dollars out of my own pocket to control your mind, but i would spend it if you did it for me.  But this proves my point, not disproves it.  I would then have something to gain from it.  I would then control you.  This is something to gain, especially if I don't have to pay for it.  On the original question, no one has explained what is to gain from the conspiracy.  So your explanation is still irrelevant.

You've stuck your neck out a bit by starting this thread; don't shirk away from it now. Your "simple question" was riddled with rhetoric, such as your [improper] use of the identifier "so-called", and your unnecessary placement of "quotes" around "brainwash" to indicate your contempt of the very suggestion. You were not interested in an answer, as you so nobly assert; this is evidenced by your providing the answer yourself:

I'm still not attacking the flat earth theory, i'm attacking the conspiracy angle.  Two different parts of one arguement but still different parts.  I don't care about the flat earth part just the conspiracy part.  Maybe I worded my original post a little to strongly, but I stand behind everything I said.  I used quotes around the word brainwash cause i wanted it to stand out. So once again stand down from your high horse and get over yourself.


As for me supporting either the flat earth or the round earth, see above.  I am only interested in the conspiracy bit.  This is why, I haven't mentioned gravity or anything else that would have to do with the debate over round or flat.


And as far as you educating me.  If you can't understand what i'm really trying to ask then go away and let someone else answer.  

Wrong, and I'll repeat this: having not even the most preliminary understanding of a given subject makes you ignorant (of that subject). Attacking you for no reason would have made me aggressive and cruel.

This is where you are wrong.  You see if i was attacking the flat earth theory then you would be correct, however since I am not you are the one being ignorant, this is attacking me for no reason.  You are being aggressive, by calling me ignorant and If you want to support the round-Earth cause, please get some background in it first. I'm really not interested in educating everybody who comes around thinking Columbus prooved that the Earth is round. that is a direct attack upon me.  

But once again maybe i did come on a little strong in my original post(see i can admit when i'm wrong, can you).  All I want to know is what there is to gain from such a conspiracy?  Since I can not formulate any idea of a reason, I figured I would ask this question here. And maybe someone could help explain this.  But so far,  I'll I have seen is one decent answer from cheesejoff and a pompus jerk trying to educate me on why i'm attacking the flat earth here.  So unless you can answer that one question for me stop your abuse and go elsewhere.

oh and one more comment on the "text book" thing (using quotes for dramatic effect, don't take offense to it).  I think it is funny when i read on here people say things like don't take text books seriously they are part of the conspiracy to control what people think.  Then those same people pull out math equations to prove that the earth is flat.  Where did they get these equations from?  The very text books that people should question.

so you critize me for using text books for my remark on the hundreds of years ago, but you yourself use the internet to back up your source.  Which if i'm not mistaken the internet is a compiled place of date of the worlds text books(not saying that's the only thing that makes up the internet but what you are refering to is).   And the reason i didn't provide proof is you did it for me by saying that i used a text book.

Simplistic, no?  And good work continuing to dodge the demand for references (the Wiki article provides some).

So the assumption I'm making is that Wikipedia's article is accurate with regards to the work of Aristotle and Eratosthenes.  Would you like more references to the effect?

While I go for them, please be so good as to find a reference to an influential medieval or Renaissance scholar describing the Earth as flat.  Preferably, as influential as Aristotle.

Yes I would be hesitant to spend a billion dollars out of my own pocket to control your mind, but i would spend it if you did it for me. ...  I would then have something to gain from it.  I would then control you.

Hidden in my cryptic response and in your stumbling comeback is the answer to your question!

I'm still not attacking the flat earth theory, i'm attacking the conspiracy angle.

Right, whatever.

So unless you can answer that one question for me stop your abuse and go elsewhere.

Seek within my skillfully scathing replies and 6string's terse but elucidating post for but one answer among many!

-Erasmus

Seek within my skillfully scathing replies and 6string's terse but elucidating post for but one answer among many!

you are very arrogant aren't you.

So the assumption I'm making is that Wikipedia's article is accurate with regards to the work of Aristotle and Eratosthenes. Would you like more references to the effect?

While I go for them, please be so good as to find a reference to an influential medieval or Renaissance scholar describing the Earth as flat. Preferably, as influential as Aristotle.

If i did try and find a source it would either be from a text book or an internet source.  And according to you this is a wrong way to look at things (even though you have admitted to it yourself).  And how do we know that wikipedia's article is accurate.  Was wikipedia there when Aristotle and Eratosthenes came up with there works, no it was not.  So you are going off the assumption that its accurate cause a web site says it is so, and not using your own observations (isn't that the true reason for the flat earth society, to make your own observations and not take things from a source that you yourself did not formulate).

And wheither you believe what i'm attacking here, is what i'm attacking here doesn't concern me.  Once again I admitted to be overly strong winded with my first post, you still can't admit that you were wrong in attacking me.  This makes you credible, why?  All you keep doing is making yourself look more like a pompus jerk. Your posting here is irrelevant, stop attacking me if you can't answer my question.

And as far as 6strings post:

It's interesting that you mention 1984. Did you also happen to read the part where O'Brien explains that power is an ends and not a means? If we accept this as true, then it seems downright logical that people would forulate this conspiracy, simply because they can.

Your making assumptions based off a piece of fiction.  Something that has nothing to do with the flat earth theory at all I might add.

you are very arrogant aren't you.

Hell yes!

stop attacking me if you can't answer my question.

Okay, I'll lay it out in plain language.

1)  We pay taxes.

2)  The government uses the money to convince us that the universe is so, including that the Earth is round, that it goes around the sun, etc.  In doing so, it achieves a certain power over us: intellectual tyranny.

3)  The government tells us we need a space program to continue studying the universe it made up and take pictures of the round Earth it made up.  Supposedly, our taxes will support this.

4)  Now that it's convinced the world that the world is round, the process is self-sustaining, because brainwash teachers and brainwashed authors of textbooks unknowingly pass on the lies to soon-to-be brainwashed students.

5)  Where does the money for the space program go?  Lines the pockets of the invisible masters, that's where.

Just so you don't make the terrible mistake of thinking that this is new (well, points 4 and 5 are new), here's a little recap of relevant posts in this thread:

If you control people's thoughts, you can make them do just about anything you want ...  If there is a round-Earth conspiracy, an entirely reasonable motivation is that the only source of people's knowledge about *anything* is the government. That's absolute power.

O'Brien explains that power is an ends and not a means? If we accept this as true, then it seems downright logical that people would forulate this conspiracy, simply because they can.

If you've gotten to this point in the post and still think I haven't answered your question, read the post again, and don't skip sentences that grind against your misconceptions about what I've said.

-Erasmus

Becasue ............ Flat earthers are moronic retards who can't see facts

Okay, I'll lay it out in plain language.

1) We pay taxes.

2) The government uses the money to convince us that the universe is so, including that the Earth is round, that it goes around the sun, etc. In doing so, it achieves a certain power over us: intellectual tyranny.

3) The government tells us we need a space program to continue studying the universe it made up and take pictures of the round Earth it made up. Supposedly, our taxes will support this.

4) Now that it's convinced the world that the world is round, the process is self-sustaining, because brainwash teachers and brainwashed authors of textbooks unknowingly pass on the lies to soon-to-be brainwashed students.

5) Where does the money for the space program go? Lines the pockets of the invisible masters, that's where.

Just so you don't make the terrible mistake of thinking that this is new (well, points 4 and 5 are new), here's a little recap of relevant posts in this thread:

The only problem I have with this arguement is I have actually seen a space shuttle launch with my own eyes.  So, they do use the money for the space program.  

My original point was that it would take billions of dollars to keep a conspiracy of such magnitude working for more than ten minutes.  So, if they are spending billions of dollars on such a conspiracy, plus actually sending space shuttles up (wheither they go into space or just out of eye sight is not the point they are launching something into the air which costs millions if not billions of dollars), then they are not getting the return on there money.  Why spend billions of dollars to only make millions(the millions would be what is left over from what they actually spend on the space program from you explantion)?  I disagree with your explanation, since I know for a fact that they are sending space shuttles up to somewhere.

The only problem I have with this arguement is I have actually seen a space shuttle launch with my own eyes.  So, they do use the money for the space program.

Yeah, but they could make launches a lot cheaper than they claim by building the space shuttle out of white crap with the NASA logo that would just burn up in the atmosphere or simply not make it into space (and crash into the ocean or glide onto the ground by remote control), never carry personnel or cargo, and have no function but to convince people like you and me (who has also seen a shuttle launch with his own eyes) that there's a space program.

If that's all the space shuttle is, then launches would be much, much cheaper.  So maybe they spend 5% of the claimed cost of launch per launch; the other 95% is profit margin.

-Erasmus

And the people who have died in the three NASA accidents?  Are those people figments of our imagination, too?

So all of our taxes are going to pay for this conspiracy, right?  Then how is the government paying for it's other programs?  Social Security?  The military?  Let me guess, those are just conspiracies too?  What ISN'T a conspiracy with you people?

As for the power deal, how much intellectual power does the government obtain just by getting us to believe that the Earth is round?

How do you explain the private companies that are launching satellites?  A private company exists to make money.  If their satellites were to simply fall back to Earth (according to your model), why would they keep spending money to try and put satellites?  If the Moon and Sun are able to stay up in the sky, then why not something man made?

And the people who have died in the three NASA accidents?  Are those people figments of our imagination, too?

They could be.  Or they could be actors.  Or they could be people who were witness to sensitive events so the government wants them to go into hiding.

-Erasmus

So all of our taxes are going to pay for this conspiracy, right?

I have suggested that it might be a self-perpetuating brainwash (see above).  It may cost very little nowadays to keep us convinced -- just maintenance of whatever tech is required.

Then how is the government paying for it's other programs?  Social Security?  The military?

Why do you believe that what the government claims such-and-such costs is what it actually costs?

Oh, and, have you noticed that the government's budget is always going up?  They *can't* pay for all their other stuff; they need to keep raising taxes and cutting back on social programs.

As for the power deal, how much intellectual power does the government obtain just by getting us to believe that the Earth is round?

Like, in watts?

Yeah, but they could make launches a lot cheaper than they claim by building the space shuttle out of white crap with the NASA logo that would just burn up in the atmosphere or simply not make it into space (and crash into the ocean or glide onto the ground by remote control), never carry personnel or cargo, and have no function but to convince people like you and me (who has also seen a shuttle launch with his own eyes) that there's a space program.

If that's all the space shuttle is, then launches would be much, much cheaper. So maybe they spend 5% of the claimed cost of launch per launch; the other 95% is profit margin.

I concede that is a good point.

I concede that is a good point.

On that note, the conspiracy is, I think unlikely.  While I can see motivation for such a conspiracy, I don't think governments have the means.

First, getting three average people to cooperate is, in my experience, practically impossible.  How are you going to do it with all the space powers of the world?  The logistics are mind-boggling.  Like, we're talking -- China, the U.S., France, and Russia, all working together towards a common goal.  I suggested riches might be a motivation -- could you imagine them trying to divide up the spoils?  Not just the executives, but all the cabinets and ministers and Senate oversight committees and joint chiefs of staff and field marshalls and air marshalls and national science advisers and national security advisors and the chiefs of national security agencies.  We can't even buy oil from each other without starting wars.

I've also suggested that power might be a motivation.  How come no power-hungry, individualistic politician has come forth and proclaimed the truth?  Could you imagine how he'd be lionized?  Sure, he'd be hunted down by the invisible masters, but he might have had his chance.  The laws of probability dictate that in the two millenia that this conspiracy has been underway, somebody would have tried to make it known for the purpose of winning popularity.  Any agreement among world leaders would be unstable, since there's incentive for each to defect.

And what's the incentive for academia?  There's no love lost there for the government.  Anybody here with experience in a scientific field (I don't expect too many FE'ers among their number) knows that you slobber and salivate for any chance to publish.  Forget Einstein, imagine a peer-reviewed, published paper, "The Earth is Flat."  It's not like the data aren't there.  It's just waiting for somebody to take advantage.

The government can't keep Mexicans from crossing the border, but they can silence anyone who isn't on this forum from bringing evidence about a flat Earth?

The government can't sort its files well enough to keep track of impending terrorist attacks, but they can organize a worldwide campaign of misinformation at all levels of society?

The government can't hide its under-the-table fraudulent use of the Oil-for-Food program, but it can hide the shape of the Earth?

I'm sorry, our governments are just not clever enough of an organism to pull it off.

And the only thing more fantastic to me than the concept of this conspiracy is the concept that there are people around who think and speak the way some of the people on this forum do.  Frankly, it's hard to believe.

Okay I'm done.

-Erasmus

On that note, the conspiracy is, I think unlikely.  While I can see motivation for such a conspiracy, I don't think governments have the means.

First, getting three average people to cooperate is, in my experience, practically impossible.  How are you going to do it with all the space powers of the world?  The logistics are mind-boggling.  Like, we're talking -- China, the U.S., France, and Russia, all working together towards a common goal.  I suggested riches might be a motivation -- could you imagine them trying to divide up the spoils?  Not just the executives, but all the cabinets and ministers and Senate oversight committees and joint chiefs of staff and field marshalls and air marshalls and national science advisers and national security advisors and the chiefs of national security agencies.  We can't even buy oil from each other without starting wars.

I've also suggested that power might be a motivation.  How come no power-hungry, individualistic politician has come forth and proclaimed the truth?  Could you imagine how he'd be lionized?  Sure, he'd be hunted down by the invisible masters, but he might have had his chance.  The laws of probability dictate that in the two millenia that this conspiracy has been underway, somebody would have tried to make it known for the purpose of winning popularity.  Any agreement among world leaders would be unstable, since there's incentive for each to defect.

And what's the incentive for academia?  There's no love lost there for the government.  Anybody here with experience in a scientific field (I don't expect too many FE'ers among their number) knows that you slobber and salivate for any chance to publish.  Forget Einstein, imagine a peer-reviewed, published paper, "The Earth is Flat."  It's not like the data aren't there.  It's just waiting for somebody to take advantage.

The government can't keep Mexicans from crossing the border, but they can silence anyone who isn't on this forum from bringing evidence about a flat Earth?

The government can't sort its files well enough to keep track of impending terrorist attacks, but they can organize a worldwide campaign of misinformation at all levels of society?

The government can't hide its under-the-table fraudulent use of the Oil-for-Food program, but it can hide the shape of the Earth?

I'm sorry, our governments are just not clever enough of an organism to pull it off.

And the only thing more fantastic to me than the concept of this conspiracy is the concept that there are people around who think and speak the way some of the people on this forum do.  Frankly, it's hard to believe.

Okay I'm done.

-Erasmus

For once I totally agree with you.

Unless of course the governments are really well organised, and they are deliberately making it seem as though they are uncooperative.

If any politican comes forward, he would obviously be brain wiped. Or he's being payed too much, or thinks no one would believe him....

Just playing devil's advocate.