38 thoughts on “Audiochat-Ab,KHam

  1. UNreal

    glad to hear Khammad is as sceptic as JBL on the science we are fed about the model of earth.

    is a big ball any more likely than a flat, concave or small-ball earth ?

    would be great to hear more about the big-ball theory, how fast it spins at equator, where the south pole would be and my favorite: can water bend, even slightly ?

    1. Curious

      @Unreal

      Water is not just water as we have learned it. Go to: www.dichtes-wasser.de/ use English version.
      There are more very difficult questions to be explained with the flat earth model: how to explain the tides ( high and low level which can vary from a couple of meters to much more. Think of the “spring” tide. The whole thing raises a lot of questions.

      1. UNreal

        hi Simon,

        undeniable that water do bend and behave in malleable ways on the scale of a single droplet. when the droplets gets plentiful though, water is used as a level measurement,,, so it is precisely the malleable nature of water that would make this medium a perfect object for measurement of the true nature of the surface of earth. unfortunately, no such measurements seems to be done without relying on satellites,,, the shape of the surface of oceans, according to science, is that of a geoid : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoid

        1. smj

          the water droplet being the natural shape of water was one of john of holywood’s proofs that the earth is a motionless sphere in his tractatus de sphaera…

          “Though principally about the universe, De sphaera contains a clear description of the Earth as a sphere which agrees with widespread opinion in Europe during the higher Middle Ages, in contrast to statements of some 19th- and 20th-century historians that medieval scholars thought the Earth was flat.[3] As proof, he uses the fact that stars rise and set sooner for those in the east, and lunar eclipses happen earlier; that stars near the North Pole are visible to those further north and those in the south can see different ones; that at sea one can see further by climbing up the mast; and that water seeks its natural shape which is round, as a drop.”
          en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann…

          …but i’m pretty sure i’m not standing on a drop of water; then again i’m no psientist/cleric.

  2. rgos

    I think @rgos is here to agitate more than help us question what we are told from acknowledged liars, ie. NASA.

    Au contraire, dear webmaster, I’m all on board with the Fakeologist program. I just think this one is one question too far. I’m taking sides with the lady.

  3. Curious

    KHam’s statement that the “earthball” is bigger as we have learnt ( her suggestion) I simply don’t believe. As a former sailor we always knew the distance and sailingtime from port to port.

      1. xileffilex

        What about sailing around Antarctica, Curious, a complete circumnavigation? Ever heard of anyone doing that? I’m not taking sides, just curious, like you are, I suppose, by name.

        1. Curious

          @Xileffilex

          What about sailing around Antarctica, Curious, a complete circumnavigation? Ever heard of anyone doing that? I’m not taking sides, just curious, like you are, I suppose, by name.

          Let me very clear to you as I have stated before: I simply don’t go in with the “ball earth”model any more., for much other reasons, for which I simply won’t go in.
          How the REAL reality is ” THE EARTH” model I simply don’t know.
          What has your remark to do with my remark? Very stupid in the way you put it up.

      2. Curious

        @rgos
        My second trip was: Amsterdam -> Baton Rouge ( New Orleans ) -> Chiba ( Japan) -> Fremantle -> Perth ( Australia) -> Rotterdam.
        I made several around the worldtrips. Have to say to: with a lot of collegues. By the way sailed as an engineer.

        1. rgos

          I made several around the worldtrips.

          So you have been around the world several times? Made several circumnavigations?
          How do you picture these on a flat earth?

          And what about the seasons? The eclipses?

          Did you ever leave the boiler room during those trips?

          1. Curious

            @rgos
            Although I am not obliged to answer your questions. I will answer them.
            I’ll never ever stated that I am a Flat Earth Fan. I do have stated that I don’t believe in the ball earth THEORIE no more.
            I stated to in several posts: I don’t know how the Reality looks like.

            Did you ever leave the boiler room during those trips?
            When I was off duty,yes.

            You are a very low spirited person. This is my opinion about you and you consider yourself as to clever.

    1. khammad

      Curious, most likely your port times are still correct, as well as your mileage and speed. If I imagine the earth larger than we are told, it might happen this way. Perhaps all the continents are all just a bit more north than we think and the increase in bulk of our possibly larger earth comes from the southern hemisphere which is mostly water, and harder to map. See the region labeled ‘Less populated area’.

      One might use the fact that people go to the Antarctic as proof that this frozen island is exactly the same size and shape as in-charge types say it is. Yes, tourists do go to Antarctica. These cruise operators tell you that is where you will be taken if you give them money.

      If you want a cruise to Antarctica, you can only leave from a handful of places, southern Argentina, southern Chile, and the Falkand Islands, which is still in the general area.

      antarctica.html

      www.coolantarctica.com/Travel/…

      If you want to fly to the Antarctic, you can only fly out from one country, Australia, out of Melbourne or Sydney.

      www.antarcticaflights.com.au/

      Do you want a real life expedition to the frozen Antarctic? You can buy one here.

      www.oneoceanexpeditions.com/an…

      There are also yacht races to the Antarctic, but they only do one little loop, from the tip of Argentina to the northern most tip of Antarctic Islands, then right back up again. That’s it. Just to the tip of Antarctica. Cruise ships basically take the same route as yachts, the little loop.

      www.jameshagerphoto.com/newsle…

      Seems to me those in charge already have a tight control on the routes to Antarctica. Interesting that for tourists, planes only leave from one spot, and boats from another, not both airplanes and boats from the same country. Tourists have their sanctioned but limited ways to visit Antarctica. But consider this, how would a tourist even know if they were in the Antarctic, or just a frozen Island off the coast of Argentina? What about government type people, who are the biggest group of travelers to the Antarctic? How would they know where they are really being taken? How would the captain of a ship know or pilot of an airplane know if their destination was actually Antarctica or some frozen island that stands way before the actual Antarctica or unknown area? All of these people would not know the difference if their maps and data were falsified.

      Consider the moon and mars. The entire surface of the moon is mapped out, every nook and crater, see google moon. Mars is also mapped out all over its surface, which includes large faces and pyramids, see google mars. We are pretty sure those maps are frauds and they are just making that shit up. Why not falsify the Antarctic map to hide the true size of the earth?

      There is a pretty large empty area, in the graphic below. This less populated and less traveled area could be much larger than we are told, thus hiding our true size. Just a thought, still working on it.

      1. Curious

        @Khammad

        Hello, the ball earth model has become very problematic for me, this for the simple reason that the hughe amount of water should be for the greater part under the belly of the ball earth model. Water flows to the lowest point. As which is stated there is no gravitation, how do you explain this whole thing?

        1. khammad

          Problem with your ‘water flows to the lowest point’ theory is WHAT makes water flow to the lowest point. Find that and I bet you also find the theory behind what we call gravity.

          I have a lowest point theory for rocks. If given the opportunity, a rock will always choose to roll to the lowest point.

          Your ‘lowest point theory’ seems to be trying to explain our physical world, kinda like gravity tries to explain why things act as they do. Does my Rock lowest point theory show we are on a flat earth? I am not convinced that I can make that leap from ‘things drop to the floor if I let them go’ therefore ‘seems like we live on a flat earth’. There is a serious amount of research missing with this reasoning. What is your reasoning Curious, with your leap in logic from ‘water flows to the lowest point’ therefore ‘this hints at the earth being possibly flat’?

      2. Curious

        @Khammad,

        Curious, most likely your port times are still correct, as well as your mileage and speed. If I imagine the earth larger than we are told, it might happen this way. Perhaps all the continents are all just a bit more north than we think and the increase in bulk of our possibly larger earth comes from the southern hemisphere which is mostly water, and harder to map. See the region labeled ‘Less populated area’.

        Khammad, there are several measurepoints. On the of the main measerepoints is “Poppau”
        www.forschung-fischerprivat.de… click on Poppau. That will say every main building, stadiums, schools etc. you name it, are build on a place, measured from a central point, and this on a worldwide scale. this is on the thousends of mm’s accurate. See for this the forenamed website. Conclusion: “they” who are in charge must know quite a lot.

        1. khammad

          Curious, you do not control the measurepoints or the formulas that derived them. How do you know if they are correct?

          I found a bunch of measurepoints for the many isolated dinosaur bones that are sitting in boxes in vaults and I am pretty sure dinosaur bones, coming first from England in the late 1800’s, are a sham. People who have never touched a real dinosaur bone are producing data on them and adding it to the pile. Name your favorite dinosaur and google it with the word ‘holotype’ next to it. You will find the original bones that a dinosaur is drawn from. From a quarter of a jaw bone and nothing else, an entire T Rex was drawn. Future suspected T Rex bones were then just added to the mix in a “See, this bone fits nicely right here, so this must be a T Rex bone.” type of method. Because there exists a mountain of data on dinosaur bones that follow a pattern, does this mean dino bones are a real concept? No.

          If the dino industry can hide the fact that their industry is a sham, even though they have a mountain of data to back up their so called claims, what about the map industry?

          There is clearly a lot of truth to our maps of this earth, because we use them. What about places that most people do not use or visit? These would be the ideal locations to fudge the maps and hide the truth.

          Are our earth maps hiding a flat earth? It doesn’t look like it. Have you looked into many of the flat earth claims? I have, turns out most of them can’t be supported by observation. If you are not willing to do the research to answer that one, then you will be duped with the other flat earth supporters. And by the way, the place NOT to go for research about the shape of our earth is the fake flat earth research community which I am sure is cointelpro, on account of the purposely misleading physical science they weave into their videos. Jeranism, Mark Sargent, Eric Dubay, David Weiss, John LeBon, The Morgile, Patricia Steere, waykiwayki, and many more are all purposely misleading you and trying to convince you that a real science debate exists in general society about flat earth versus globe earth. I can say no real debate exists because I have looked for it, it is not there. These flat earth guys seem to be performing skits they call shows and broadcasts. I have not found one sincere flat earth researcher that also produces videos. Not one. Not yet.

          As far as I can tell, Clues Forum is the one of a handfull of place that looks at earth data and does a consistently authentic analysis of it. Clues Forum is one of the places that I feel has honest information. Consider what this means. The cointelpro (counter intelligence program) around flat earth is pretty large and pretty active. Why?

          Because we are discovering amazing research here and it is a threat to the established order. An effective method used to counter our discoveries (like rockets can’t work in a vacuum) is ‘dilution’. A bunch of purposely confusing earth science videos on on the internet effectively hides and dilutes the real earth science videos and information on websites that are really trying to explain the true earth science.

          Jeranism, Mark Sargent, Eric Dubay, David Weiss, John LeBon, The Morgile, Patricia Steere, waykiwayki, and many more are just a closed community of shills, all supporting/fighing each other, trying to convince us they are a real research community. I’m not buying it.

      1. rgos

        Ah, I see. Yes, the caveat is always: ‘weather permitting’.
        But are you willing to take a Dutchman’s word for it that the above picture, from wikipedia, where the earth’s round shadow is projected on the moon, is what we saw?

        1. Curious

          @rgos

          But are you willing to take a Dutchman’s word for it that the above picture, from wikipedia, where the earth’s round shadow is projected on the moon, is what we saw?

          Since when is a “Dutchman’s” word more “worth”as a word from somebody from another nation? I am Dutch and I simply don’t believe you too.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.