Sceptimatics theory

Something about the equivalence principle here. A lot of people here on these forums like to use it as some sort of proof that gravity doesn't exist. This was never the purpose of Einstein coming up with the equivalence principle. Equating gravity to accelerating in a rocket was important so that we could ask ourselves if those two situations were equal. Are those two situations completely identical?
This is an important question because using that example of a rocket accelerating through space we can easily conceptualize how time and light would both seem to bend to an outside observer, but not to the observer inside the rocket. If the two are equivalent (which FE'rs would probably agree they are, and RE too probably) then it would follow that the same thing occurs in a gravitational field.

This raises all sorts of questions about relative perception and it also indicates that we may be accelerating in a fashion that's as simple as an accelerating rocket.

So then, if it's a spherical object then it's obviously impossible for it to accelerate in all directions and if the rate of acceleration is dependent on the mass of the object then it follows that something profoundly strange is happening.

Are you saying you agree with the FES that the Earth is accelerating upward at the same speed of "gravity" and that therefore the Earth cannot be a sphere?

No. Not at all. I am saying that Gravity fields cause acceleration similar to that of a rocket but cause it in all directions toward a center of mass. Don't be obtuse.

The Cavendish experiment has been discussed a few times in the other threads and it was brought to everyone's attention that electromagnetism was not accounted for in the experiment.  So, once again, your evidence is flawed.  It's time to look at other explanations guys!

Talking about fabrics of spacetime isn't really relevant. I was trying to explain how gravity isn't a force in the Newtonian sense and how Einstein showed that gravity is an effect caused by mass warping spacetime. Its basically relevant because it takes gravity away from the accusations of magic. Same with something like coriolis. We don't call it a force because isn't one itself, its the result of some other phenomena. Gravity is the result of curved spacetime which is caused by mass. The more mass the more displacement and therefore the more acceleration.

Hahaha!  You seriously buy into this?!  You cannot displace space.  Not when space has been defined as "dark matter" which you do not fully understand.  If there are virtual particles in a vacuum (and in space), how can they be displaced when they are virtually existing?  LOL  I can't stop laughing at how gullible you people are!

The Cavendish experiment has been discussed a few times in the other threads and it was brought to everyone's attention that electromagnetism was not accounted for in the experiment.  So, once again, you're evidence is flawed.  It's time to look at other explanations guys!

You're right.  Lead, an element that is barely affected by any kind of electromagnetism, was affected by the the same force to such a degree that it caused movement where even a very strong electromagnet could not.  Makes sense.

The direct relationship between gravitation and time are the result of infinite velocity propagations of SubQuantum particles. There is also a direct relationship between gravitation and the electric field, and a direct relationship between the electric field and time.

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher of France. Dr. Francis Nipher conducted extensive experiments during 1918, on a modified Cavendish experiment. He reproduced the classical arrangements for the experiment, where gravitational attraction could be measured between free-swinging masses, and a large fixed central mass. Dr. Nipher modified the Cavendish experiment by applying a large electrical field to the large central mass, which was sheilded inside a Faraday cage.When electrostatic charge was applied to the large fixed mass, the free-swinging masses exhibited a reduced attraction to the central mass, when the central mass was only slightly charged. As the electric field strength was increased, there arose a voltage threshold which resulted in no attraction at all between the fixed mass and the free-swinging masses. Increasing the potential applied to the central mass beyond that threshold, resulted in the free-swinging masses being repelled (!) from the fixed central mass. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.

The pace of Time is directly linked to electric field gradient variations by the mathematical function known as "delta grad E", which function is simply describing variations in the gradient of an electric field. Experimentally, such electric field variations measurably and instantly result in changes in the pace of time, variations in the measured force due to gravitation, variations of inertia, variations in the speed of light, and variations of the measured permittivity and permeability of the physical vacuum, all at the same time!

Further, the electrical resistance of carbon changes in direct correspondence to the aether flux density at the given moment and the given location, which fact has profound implications in studies of the behaviors of biological systems. This fact has also led to the development of an instrument known as an Aether Flux Density (AFD) meter, which can be used in any study of Aether actions. When the AFD is applied as a gravitometer, it demonstrates a sensitivity to gravitational variations thousands of times greater than standard 4 axis gravitometer systems, and is capable of measuring gravitational transients as fast as 20 nanoseconds. (Needless to say, the force due to gravitation is never a "constant" value.)

From the above considerations, time is linked to gravitation, through the electric field. All the items in the preceding discussion (and many others) are linked by the unifying precursor activities of the infinite velocity infinitesimals. Based on instrumented astronomical observations and laboratory experiments, Kozyrev computed an infinite velocity of propagation for the "time substance", which corresponds with the view that there is an infinite velocity involved in gravitational aether fluxes. Thus both time and gravitation are due to the same superluminal aether flows. Additional properties of the time flux are involved with information flows, information densities, information content (such as the quantum potential), and so on, which add together to result in variations in the pace of Consciousness Time (CT). Kozyrev also discovered that the aether fluxes which cause Universal Physical Time (UPT) are also responsible for producing Metabolic Time (MT) in biological entities.

Variations in aether flux density have been experimentally connected to biological and electrical transmutations of the atomic elements, variations in the rates of chemical interactions, variations in spring stiffness, variations in mechanical tolerances from day to day, variations in elasticity, non-locally correlated variations in measured weight, non-locally correlated variations in measured inertia, information-correlated variations in the measured PH of remotely located substances, and a vast array of additional and surprising physical effects, none of which may be attributed in any way as being due to any manner of Heisenberg uncertainty. Aether fluxes are also responsible for many after-effects and precursor events associated with physical events. For example, there inevitably arises an aether precursor to any explosive event, which is measured as an aether flux density pressure wave, which aether density variation always precedes the physical shock-wave event itself.

http://www.victorzammit.com/articles/Klein10.htm

Quote from: rottingroom on September 21, 2013, 03:46:49 PM

Talking about fabrics of spacetime isn't really relevant. I was trying to explain how gravity isn't a force in the Newtonian sense and how Einstein showed that gravity is an effect caused by mass warping spacetime. Its basically relevant because it takes gravity away from the accusations of magic. Same with something like coriolis. We don't call it a force because isn't one itself, its the result of some other phenomena. Gravity is the result of curved spacetime which is caused by mass. The more mass the more displacement and therefore the more acceleration.

Hahaha!  You seriously buy into this?!  You cannot displace space.  Not when space has been defined as "dark matter" which you do not fully understand.  If there are virtual particles in a vacuum (and in space), how can they be displaced when they are virtually existing?  LOL  I can't stop laughing at how gullible you people are!

Look, its a theory that can explain why gravitation happens. What the equivalence principle tells us is that gravitational fields behave just like an accelerating rocket. That combined with the fact that the earth is a sphere tells us that something is causing acceleration and we know through empirical evidence confirmed by observation and then solidified with simply observing the earths true shape that it is a sphere. You can either decide that the planets shape is a fabricated lie or decide that we just don't currently know how gravitation works. It just seems a lot more likely that we have more to learn than it does that the entire thing is a lie.

Quote from: rottingroom on September 21, 2013, 03:46:49 PM

Talking about fabrics of spacetime isn't really relevant. I was trying to explain how gravity isn't a force in the Newtonian sense and how Einstein showed that gravity is an effect caused by mass warping spacetime. Its basically relevant because it takes gravity away from the accusations of magic. Same with something like coriolis. We don't call it a force because isn't one itself, its the result of some other phenomena. Gravity is the result of curved spacetime which is caused by mass. The more mass the more displacement and therefore the more acceleration.

Hahaha!  You seriously buy into this?!  You cannot displace space.  Not when space has been defined as "dark matter" which you do not fully understand.  If there are virtual particles in a vacuum (and in space), how can they be displaced when they are virtually existing?  LOL  I can't stop laughing at how gullible you people are!

We are the gullible ones? You are the ones who think the whole world is conspiring against you...

The direct relationship between gravitation and time are the result of infinite velocity propagations of SubQuantum particles. There is also a direct relationship between gravitation and the electric field, and a direct relationship between the electric field and time.

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher of France. Dr. Francis Nipher conducted extensive experiments during 1918, on a modified Cavendish experiment. He reproduced the classical arrangements for the experiment, where gravitational attraction could be measured between free-swinging masses, and a large fixed central mass. Dr. Nipher modified the Cavendish experiment by applying a large electrical field to the large central mass, which was sheilded inside a Faraday cage.When electrostatic charge was applied to the large fixed mass, the free-swinging masses exhibited a reduced attraction to the central mass, when the central mass was only slightly charged. As the electric field strength was increased, there arose a voltage threshold which resulted in no attraction at all between the fixed mass and the free-swinging masses. Increasing the potential applied to the central mass beyond that threshold, resulted in the free-swinging masses being repelled (!) from the fixed central mass. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.

The pace of Time is directly linked to electric field gradient variations by the mathematical function known as "delta grad E", which function is simply describing variations in the gradient of an electric field. Experimentally, such electric field variations measurably and instantly result in changes in the pace of time, variations in the measured force due to gravitation, variations of inertia, variations in the speed of light, and variations of the measured permittivity and permeability of the physical vacuum, all at the same time!

Further, the electrical resistance of carbon changes in direct correspondence to the aether flux density at the given moment and the given location, which fact has profound implications in studies of the behaviors of biological systems. This fact has also led to the development of an instrument known as an Aether Flux Density (AFD) meter, which can be used in any study of Aether actions. When the AFD is applied as a gravitometer, it demonstrates a sensitivity to gravitational variations thousands of times greater than standard 4 axis gravitometer systems, and is capable of measuring gravitational transients as fast as 20 nanoseconds. (Needless to say, the force due to gravitation is never a "constant" value.)

From the above considerations, time is linked to gravitation, through the electric field. All the items in the preceding discussion (and many others) are linked by the unifying precursor activities of the infinite velocity infinitesimals. Based on instrumented astronomical observations and laboratory experiments, Kozyrev computed an infinite velocity of propagation for the "time substance", which corresponds with the view that there is an infinite velocity involved in gravitational aether fluxes. Thus both time and gravitation are due to the same superluminal aether flows. Additional properties of the time flux are involved with information flows, information densities, information content (such as the quantum potential), and so on, which add together to result in variations in the pace of Consciousness Time (CT). Kozyrev also discovered that the aether fluxes which cause Universal Physical Time (UPT) are also responsible for producing Metabolic Time (MT) in biological entities.

Variations in aether flux density have been experimentally connected to biological and electrical transmutations of the atomic elements, variations in the rates of chemical interactions, variations in spring stiffness, variations in mechanical tolerances from day to day, variations in elasticity, non-locally correlated variations in measured weight, non-locally correlated variations in measured inertia, information-correlated variations in the measured PH of remotely located substances, and a vast array of additional and surprising physical effects, none of which may be attributed in any way as being due to any manner of Heisenberg uncertainty. Aether fluxes are also responsible for many after-effects and precursor events associated with physical events. For example, there inevitably arises an aether precursor to any explosive event, which is measured as an aether flux density pressure wave, which aether density variation always precedes the physical shock-wave event itself.

http://www.victorzammit.com/articles/Klein10.htm

I'm not terribly shocked that you found a person who agrees with you.  I'm also not terribly shocked that I can't find any third party verification for any of this.  That's a nice bit of nonsense you have there, though.  I particularly like the part about time being a substance, rather than a dimension of space-time. 

Too bad there's no verification, this guy could revolutionize the world if he's right.  You should get him to publish, we'll see how his experiments, tools, and hypotheses hold up to scrutiny by his peers.

And just to be clear, the nonsense doesn't help your position, either.  It says that yes, gravity attracts objects, but that somehow electromagnetism reverses the flow of time for gravity by making some time controlling substance more or less dense.

Quote from: 11cookeaw1 on September 22, 2013, 07:02:06 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 22, 2013, 05:18:07 AM

Quote from: g el on September 22, 2013, 03:54:24 AM

This has been stated again and again, the sciences you consider false, especially what you called space sciences and its related fields have been studied well enough and have made important theories that are used everyday, they have benefited telecommunication and made it possible for you to read this same message. Stop thinking that they are just playing around / have been fooled and are wasting their time / are fooling us for whatever reason, this is wrong

I'm not disputing the gadgets we use today and the brains behind them. All that is brilliant stuff made possible by clever minded people. I don't have any problems with any of that.

My problem is in how it's portrayed to us, the public, in how we are told we receive those communications, like being told they are from space from satellites and what not, which they are not.
Also astro physicists making out they know what's above them in so called space and they know jack skippety, except that they see a more close up version of what most others see, so they hang light years and quantum baloney, plus dark matter, black holes and all the rest of the absolute gunk to it.

If you want to hang onto that, then good for you. I don't buy it for one second.

It's not baloney, it's backed up by experiments, observations and evidence. Also, you still haven't pointed out any flaw in the cavendish experiment.

The Cavendish experiment is irrelevant. It proves nothing at all.

Why is it irrelevant?

Very interesting. If they're finding this stuff where it is. Imagine what is close to the centre circle of the earth.

Please educate yourself about these crystals before you connect any fallacious dots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Crystals

This isn't even compatible with your theory anyway. Due to my objections concerning spectroscopy you had to alter the composition of your dome to account for the fact that spectrographs infer an abundance of variant elements in the Universe (or your dome). There are just a few things here.

Please educate yourself about these crystals before you connect any fallacious dots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Crystals

This isn't even compatible with your theory anyway. Due to my objections concerning spectroscopy you had to alter the composition of your dome to account for the fact that spectrographs infer an abundance of variant elements in the Universe (or your dome). There are just a few things here.

If those elements are heavier than helium, they cannot exist in this universe of yours. Think about it.

Quote from: rottingroom on October 03, 2013, 11:05:25 AM

Please educate yourself about these crystals before you connect any fallacious dots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Crystals

This isn't even compatible with your theory anyway. Due to my objections concerning spectroscopy you had to alter the composition of your dome to account for the fact that spectrographs infer an abundance of variant elements in the Universe (or your dome). There are just a few things here.

If those elements are heavier than helium, they cannot exist in this universe of yours. Think about it.

I can't imagine why you think that. Please think before you reply.

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 03, 2013, 11:34:50 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on October 03, 2013, 11:05:25 AM

Please educate yourself about these crystals before you connect any fallacious dots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Crystals

This isn't even compatible with your theory anyway. Due to my objections concerning spectroscopy you had to alter the composition of your dome to account for the fact that spectrographs infer an abundance of variant elements in the Universe (or your dome). There are just a few things here.

If those elements are heavier than helium, they cannot exist in this universe of yours. Think about it.

I can't imagine why you think that. Please think before you reply.

I'll explain, shall I.

If the other elements that your spectrograph picks up are heavier than helium, then it's inside the dome, simple as that. If it's lighter, it would be the outer skin of the dome. I't cannot be in space for the reasons I told you before.

Quote from: rottingroom on October 03, 2013, 11:49:43 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 03, 2013, 11:34:50 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on October 03, 2013, 11:05:25 AM

Please educate yourself about these crystals before you connect any fallacious dots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Crystals

This isn't even compatible with your theory anyway. Due to my objections concerning spectroscopy you had to alter the composition of your dome to account for the fact that spectrographs infer an abundance of variant elements in the Universe (or your dome). There are just a few things here.

If those elements are heavier than helium, they cannot exist in this universe of yours. Think about it.

I can't imagine why you think that. Please think before you reply.

I'll explain, shall I.

If the other elements that your spectrograph picks up are heavier than helium, then it's inside the dome, simple as that. If it's lighter, it would be the outer skin of the dome. I't cannot be in space for the reasons I told you before.

Okay. So you make a comment that it "cannot exist in this universe of mine." Pretty sure you meant my world view and not the dome since I do not agree with that. Then you explanation about my universe is an explanation of the dome?

You apparently don't understand spectrometry even after my eloquent explanation that you've seen. You seem to be inferring that there should be some helium problem because of how a spectrometer has to see through the atmosphere. It looks at light, scepti.

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 03, 2013, 11:55:57 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on October 03, 2013, 11:49:43 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 03, 2013, 11:34:50 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on October 03, 2013, 11:05:25 AM

Please educate yourself about these crystals before you connect any fallacious dots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Crystals

This isn't even compatible with your theory anyway. Due to my objections concerning spectroscopy you had to alter the composition of your dome to account for the fact that spectrographs infer an abundance of variant elements in the Universe (or your dome). There are just a few things here.

If those elements are heavier than helium, they cannot exist in this universe of yours. Think about it.

I can't imagine why you think that. Please think before you reply.

I'll explain, shall I.

If the other elements that your spectrograph picks up are heavier than helium, then it's inside the dome, simple as that. If it's lighter, it would be the outer skin of the dome. I't cannot be in space for the reasons I told you before.

Okay. So you make a comment that it "cannot exist in this universe of mine." Pretty sure you meant my world view and not the dome since I do not agree with that. Then you explanation about my universe is an explanation of the dome?

You apparently don't understand spectrometry even after my eloquent explanation that you've seen. You seem to be inferring that there should be some helium problem because of how a spectrometer has to see through the atmosphere. It looks at light, scepti.

It may look at light, but it's doing it inside the dome. It cannot work for outside of the dome. That's what I'm saying.
Your universe exists outside the dome, in your mind only. The reality is, it does not exist at all, except for the colour black, which is just our interpretation of the colour we see around us and seeing light against that colour, gives the impression of that light being in outer space, but it does not exist as space, except in your mind.

I'm not trying to be clever or funny here, I'm deadly serious.

Quote from: rottingroom on October 03, 2013, 12:02:35 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 03, 2013, 11:55:57 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on October 03, 2013, 11:49:43 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 03, 2013, 11:34:50 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on October 03, 2013, 11:05:25 AM

Please educate yourself about these crystals before you connect any fallacious dots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Crystals

This isn't even compatible with your theory anyway. Due to my objections concerning spectroscopy you had to alter the composition of your dome to account for the fact that spectrographs infer an abundance of variant elements in the Universe (or your dome). There are just a few things here.

If those elements are heavier than helium, they cannot exist in this universe of yours. Think about it.

I can't imagine why you think that. Please think before you reply.

I'll explain, shall I.

If the other elements that your spectrograph picks up are heavier than helium, then it's inside the dome, simple as that. If it's lighter, it would be the outer skin of the dome. I't cannot be in space for the reasons I told you before.

Okay. So you make a comment that it "cannot exist in this universe of mine." Pretty sure you meant my world view and not the dome since I do not agree with that. Then you explanation about my universe is an explanation of the dome?

You apparently don't understand spectrometry even after my eloquent explanation that you've seen. You seem to be inferring that there should be some helium problem because of how a spectrometer has to see through the atmosphere. It looks at light, scepti.

It may look at light, but it's doing it inside the dome. It cannot work for outside of the dome. That's what I'm saying.
Your universe exists outside the dome, in your mind only. The reality is, it does not exist at all, except for the colour black, which is just our interpretation of the colour we see around us and seeing light against that colour, gives the impression of that light being in outer space, but it does not exist as space, except in your mind.

I'm not trying to be clever or funny here, I'm deadly serious.

Yes, I know. You're serious.

Here is your logic again proving it to be a dome.

P1. Everything exists inside the dome.
P2. We have never been outside of the dome.
C. It's a dome.

There is no true premise here.

That's our existence though. We are organisms in a sealed unit with it's own life giving characteristics, among other organisms of varying sizes.
Earth is a living cell, maybe among an infinite amount of other like cells, yet we are cocooned in our own world and everything we see, is in our world.
Nothing exists outside of it, to us "physically" but it can exist in our minds.

That's our existence though. We are organisms in a sealed unit with it's own life giving characteristics, among other organisms of varying sizes.
Earth is a living cell, maybe among an infinite amount of other like cells, yet we are cocooned in our own world and everything we see, is in our world.
Nothing exists outside of it, to us "physically" but it can exist in our minds.

Well until you can prove nobody has ever been to space you have no right to use P1 or P2.

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 03, 2013, 12:24:26 PM

That's our existence though. We are organisms in a sealed unit with it's own life giving characteristics, among other organisms of varying sizes.
Earth is a living cell, maybe among an infinite amount of other like cells, yet we are cocooned in our own world and everything we see, is in our world.
Nothing exists outside of it, to us "physically" but it can exist in our minds.

Well until you can prove nobody has ever been to space you have no right to use P1 or P2.

I have every right. What I don;t have the right to do, is to preach it as a compulsory subject in mainstream schools and colleges and such, without physically backing it all up, which I cannot do, So therefore, I won't be doing that.... yet mainstream science can push their stuff onto people and they cannot physically back all theirs up, either. Strange that, isn't it.

Teaching people something that they will never get to physically verify.

Quote from: rottingroom on October 03, 2013, 12:27:04 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 03, 2013, 12:24:26 PM

That's our existence though. We are organisms in a sealed unit with it's own life giving characteristics, among other organisms of varying sizes.
Earth is a living cell, maybe among an infinite amount of other like cells, yet we are cocooned in our own world and everything we see, is in our world.
Nothing exists outside of it, to us "physically" but it can exist in our minds.

Well until you can prove nobody has ever been to space you have no right to use P1 or P2.

I have every right. What I don;t have the right to do, is to preach it as a compulsory subject in mainstream schools and colleges and such, without physically backing it all up, which I cannot do, So therefore, I won't be doing that.... yet mainstream science can push their stuff onto people and they cannot physically back all theirs up, either. Strange that, isn't it.

Teaching people something that they will never get to physically verify.

Well you deny the evidence. That's your problem. So until you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the evidence is a sham you can't expect anyone to take you seriously when you say that it isn't verified.

It's the mainstream model of the Earth that needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.  FE's have not one, but many reasonable doubts.

It's the mainstream model of the Earth that needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.  FE's have not one, but many reasonable doubts.

Pictures from space prove the earth is round. You deny that though. Denying the evidence does not mean that there is none.

"The earth is a dome therefore your experiments proving that the earth is round are false."

Typical Sceptimatic logic. Defending his theory with itself. You're really a successful troll, you know.

"The earth is a dome therefore your experiments proving that the earth is round are false."

Typical Sceptimatic logic. Defending his theory with itself. You're really a successful troll, you know.

Common sense alone should tell anyone that the earth is not a spinning globe. The problem is, too many people discard their common sense in favour of peer pressure.

I bet if the situation had been reversed all these years, and the worlds scientists, math, visual observations, popular belief, etc, all held that the world was indeed inside an ice dome, that sceptimatic would be arguing right now that the earth is round...... because scientists lie, science is not to be trusted, sceptimatic is not a sheep and he dances to the beat of a different drummer boy, so on and so on.

I bet if the situation had been reversed all these years, and the worlds scientists, math, visual observations, popular belief, etc, all held that the world was indeed inside an ice dome, that sceptimatic would be arguing right now that the earth is round...... because scientists lie, science is not to be trusted, sceptimatic is not a sheep and he dances to the beat of a different drummer boy, so on and so on.

Your problem and the problem of some others, is...you get it into your heads that I just go for any alternative to the main crock of main stream nonsense and have me down as a rebel against it and yet never taking the time to actually delve into stuff like this yourselves, preferring to simply push the agenda you have been given to push and everything else is tin foil hat rubbish.

Well guess what?
Your thoughts on how I operate and what I do are way off the mark. I've been through all the theories of just about all the shapes and workings of every earth like theories and I'm still not fully nailed on to a certain one, 100%, because I cannot physically prove anything I say.
Weirdly though, neither can you, no matter how much you shout and scream from the roof tops. All you can go on is what you were given, nothing more. If you are honest, you will accept this as the truth.

I was brainwashed at school and went with a rotating globe and 93 million mile sun and super distant twinkling sun like stars. Yes...I swallowed it all and enjoyed it and walked home looking at the sky and being amazed at how I can see this 93 million mile sun whilst I'm spinning around on a ball.
The innocence of kids eh?

The thing is, how do you top that. What would make you change your mind from something as amazing and magical as this?
I mean, imagine me walking down the street and seeing a man with a placard proclaiming the earth is flat and another saying the earth is hollow and so on. I'd be walking past sniggering at them. Not because I KNEW the earth is a spinning ball, but because my brainwashing by mainstream schooling made me see these people as goons, nutters, delusional, crackpots and yet my arrogance and ignorance in thinking that, is all borne out of schooling.

It's hard to break away from something like that.
The quiet man up the road, we've all seen them as youngsters. You know...the man who bothers no one but looks a bit strange and becomes a target and who gets a bit sick of being that target of bullies that he comes out to tell them to go away, only for the little bullies to run like hell shouting, "we are being chased by a mad man" or , " we are being chased by the bogey man."

The point I'm making is, it spreads and the man becomes known as the weirdo or a pervert/monster/madman, all because it was put into the psyche of anyone willing to listen to rumours, which spreads like wild fire.
Even in later life, people will say, "can you remember the weirdo that lived in that house"...."oh yeah, I remember him", someone will say.

It's the same with being schooled. You follow what you are told to follow and you do it...well....because everyone does it, except for 1 or two and we know that they are just disruptive unruly scum, don't we?...do we?...hmmmm.

One thing about life though. You always get the chance to question your beliefs and you get the chance to piece together, alternatives that make better sense, but not necessarily the whole truth, just a better fit.

I've checked just about all the shapes and sizes of what the earth is and some have  TO ME a certain element of common sense and truth to them. One of which is the Bedford level experiment and things like that, which helped me get my bearing as to the fact that we are not walking about on a ball, as in a solid ball, held on by a fictional force of so called gravity.

There's a lot of flat earth stuff that I do not follow, but the crux is, it is a disc like area we live on and I'm 100% sure in my mind that the atmosphere above us is covered by a dome of ice, like a glass bubble.

The top and bottom of it all, is this.
I go with what makes the most sense. It may not be all correct in its entirety, which is why I look for ways how it can all be pieced together.
I may never find out and I might be pondering it till I die, but as long as I'm not pondering a silly rotating globe with a 93 million mile nuclear sun and light year stars and what not, then I feel I'm getting somewhere.

Skepti...the mainstream theory isn't a theory; it HAS been proven. We've been to space. Have I? No, but I can't believe that all this mainstream stuff is a conspiracy. If there were a dome on a flat earth, we'd know it by now, but we KNOW otherwise. Sorry to burst your "bubble" but facts are facts. People didn't make up the spinning round-earth-rotating around a 93-million-mile-away-sun "idea"; they discovered it and had to abandon their flat-earth idea. Simple as that. Gravity has been proven and the universe is infinite, with unimaginably large stars up to billions of light years away. You can't DISPROVE that!