Wednesday, July 18, 2018

Tagged under:

Never A Straight Answer

Frankie McKillen muses on some of the things taken for true.

If I had of told the world in 1980 the Provisional IRA leadership will settle for less than was offered at Sunningdale, enter Stormont, sit on policing boards and also decommission their stock pile of arms with-out getting a united Ireland, I would have been called a crackpot. With that in mind.

Apart from death and taxes the only other two sure bets in life are 1 + 1 = 2 and the earth is a spheroid. At least thats what I believed until two years ago when I came across a video called Under the dome. Apart from the last 20mins when God came into the equation, I enjoyed it and the maths made sense in my head for the most part. Then I started to question the things I obvesrved around me, watching endless videos explaining what happens in deepest darkest space to finding out Jean-Luc Picard from Star Trek was based on a real person called Auguste Piccard, who in 1931 went 51,000 ft up into the stratosphere, planes cruise at 32,000 tops. Anyhow when Auguste looked out the port hole of his capsule his impression was the earth looked like a disk with up turned sides. Picard brought me to another 20th century explorer who I wasn't taught about in school either called Richard E Byrd, who in 1953 gave an interview stating there is land after Antarctic, un-touched by humans, bigger than the United States with enough minerals to fuel the world forever. Here is the interview he gave. Scroll to 1min 17seconds ends 2mins, listen to his words not mine.

Now between 1946-47, Rear Admiral Richard E. Byrd was also part of the command structure involved in a scientific expedition to Antartic called Operation High jump. What exactly happened there and why the US military got spanked so soon after maybe nuking two Japanese cities at the end of WW2 no ones knows. All we know is the US miilitary got spanked and Rear Admiral Richard E. Byrd says there is land after Antarctic bigger than the United States. Now to keep things in context, Operation High Jump was a few months after Operation Paper Clip when Nazi scientists who previously worked on everything from human experiements, V2 rockets and whatever Tesla secrets they stole went on to form NASA or were given high ranking US military positions.

In 1958 James Van Allen confirmed the discovery of two layers of deadly radiation covering this rock we live on and a few years after the discovery of the Van Allen belts the US military made their own radiation belt during Operation Fishbowl, when in 1962 bombs filled with tons of uranium, plutonium and who only knows what else were fired into the sky as far as possible and simply detonated. So now we have three layers of deadly radiation surrounding us. Two natural and one man made.

Now inbetween James Van Allens discovery in 1958 and Fishbowl in 1962, the same nations that today are starting proxy wars across the Middle East, going for land grabs in the South China Seas, screwing the island we live on with Brexit, carrying out politically motivated assination attemps, on the 1st December 1959 all signed The Antarctic Treaty System, no matter how many threats, non threats have been fired from The White House to the The Kremlin or vice-versa during the Cuban Missel crisis up the present day, no one has thought about breaking it, violating it or undermining it. Why do the the most powerful nations think it is ok to bomb children and families all over the Middle East with impunity, turn blind eyes to human trafficking....Yet feel the need to protect a few walruses and a half dozen penguines who live on a giant ice berg in the south Atlantic Ocean with more military muscel than went to D Day ....? Try obtaining for a permit to do a privately funded scientific expedition below 60* South. Also tell them you will be flying the same route as Byrd flew during High Jump.

Fast forward a few years until The Apollo moon missions. Why did NASA feel the need to stage anything about the biggest adventure mankind is meant to have taken? Here is some unseen footage that proves the photos said to have been taken unboard The Eagle on the way to the moon are fake. Was the real reason they faked pictures in 1969 no more than to slap one up the Russians in the middle of the cold war and a propaganda dream come true? NASA's Robert Simmons is on record saying even though he has never been to space, he is employed by NASA to take lots of compisites and photoshoot them into what he thinks the earth looks like. I know I can't rely on any of the Astronauts who went to space to tell me what this rock looks like. When they can't even agree if you can see stars from space or not. Alan Bean who is alledged to have landed on the moon with the Apollo 12 mission, ins't even sure if they went high enough to pass through the Van Allen belts. Think about that for a minute. An Astronaut, with degrees in maths and physics doesn't know if they passed through three layers of deadly radition on the way to the moon which is meant to be, give or take, 250,000 miles away.

In 1988 NASA's Scientific and Technical Information Division released a paper...Ref N* 1207 and after all the equations that no one really understands and double talk it says this.....
16. Abstract This report documents the derivation and definition of a linear aircraft model for a rigid aircraft of constant mass flying over a flat, nonrotating earth. The derivation makes no assumptions of reference trajectory or vehicle symmetry. The linear system equations are derived and evaluated along a general trajectory and include both aircraft dynamics and observation variables.
Why did NASA not use the globe earth model for their experiements? Why a flat earth model?

The coriolis effect in simple laymans terms is bollicks. The ship doesn't go over any horizon. It simply goes out of view. Get a decent pair of binoculars, telescope stand on a shore line and watch the ship come back into view until it again go out of view. It is all about your eyes perception. If I am to believe the earth is round and spinning just over 1,000 mph at the equator and gravity (not desitity and mass) is keeping everything rooted, then Newton and his laws of motion don't add up. A helicopter sitting stationary on its helipad is on the ground spinning like the rest of us. Then it flies up 100 ft in the air in a straight line and hovers for 30mins and then descends in a straight line, surely by the laws of the spinning rock theory and anyones definition of motion, the helicopter has to come down in a different spot And a plane taking off would either reach it's desination very quickly flying east to west or a good chance never if the plane flies west to east....the earth is meant to be spinning in a clock wise direction at least twice as fast as a 747 goes, do the maths yourself.

What I have shown is Picard in 1931 said the earth looks like a disk with up turned edges, when observed fron 51,00ft and that sometime during Operation High Jump Rear Admiral Richard E Byrd after a flight over Antartic is on record saying after Antartic, there is land bigger than the United States. Was the Antartic peace treaty really all about watching how a few seals and penguine's avoid being being a greats whites Sunday brunch.....NASA employee Robert Simmons who has never flown higher than a 747 freely admits to photo-shooting images of the earth so the blue marble image is the picture every ones comes to associate with this rock. NASA have said they can only fly in lower earth orbit, partly due to the two Van Allen radition belts and the third man made layer of radition caused largely by Operation Fishbowl, which blows any moon landing theories out of the water ( unless you go along with Don Pettits line about destroying the Apollo moon landing data and technology). None of the Astronaunts who went to space can agree what they could see when they looked out the window of the rocket/ISS they were in. Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins said you can't see a thing, describing space a a void and a blackness that they have never experienced. While both Mike Massimino and Don Pettit have said they see stars all the time from the ISS and Alan Bean doesn't know where he flew to.... I could go on but don't take my word for it. Do you own research.

Personally I believe there are rocks of all shapes and sizes floating about space. Some more flatter than others. Next time you walk on a mountain, along a beach or a quarry, are all the rocks the same shape? Aren't some flatter than others.

Frankie McKillen is a North Belfast Rockabilly and free spirit who for many years lived in Paris.

6 comments :

DaithiD said...

Frankie, some MMA Podcast guys discussed flat earth type theories a while back so I looked into it just to see, there is a lot here that maths explains but for lay people: when the helicopter takes off/ hovers , it still has the speed component of the earth in our frame of observation, you are not factoring in every component of its velocity.

It’s like throwing a ball to someone on a flying plane. To observers also on the plane, the ball travels at normal speed going between people, however if someone was able to watch from on the ground, they would perceive the ball travelling at the speed of the plane plus what ever extra component was given to throw it, it should never be possible to throw from the back to the front under your assumptions.

I’ve seen the flat earthists proposed shape of the earth, but if planets were non spherical, and from our perspective we are observing essentially flat disks, then every planet we can see would need to be conveniently orientated to give this perspective before we even had means to travel into space to tilt them to maintain the illusion. We can get multiple perspectives of planets through the telescopes traversing our solar system/galaxy that confirm this but I presume you wouldn’t trust that data, hence why restricted it to earth based observation.

Ps with respect to the radiation belts, doesn’t that suppose orbiting a sphere to model its distribution? A sphere really matters in this respect, but to incorporate it in this aspect would be a contradiction in terms wouldn’t it?

Steve R said...

1, Satellites have shown the earth to be a sphere.

2, If you fly east continually you will eventually arrive back where you started. Not possible on a disk.

3, Where does the sun go if the earth is a disk? It should be able to be seen from every point. It's not. It can be night-time when I ring Belfast and morning where I am, in Australia.

4, The arctic treaty was the first attempts at arm control. Far better to have an agreement that nobody would exploit the area than start a hugely expensive arms race there!

5, They knew about the Van Allen belt, that's why they heavily shielded the craft and went through it at its thinnest.

6, Hardly going to see stars from the surface of the moon as it's a very bright surface!

7, You can see stars from the ISS because the reverse is true, it's looking out into space.

8, Photos are routinely cropped and edited, to make a far more aesthetically pleasing shot!

9, There would have to be a monumental conspiracy, involving literally tens of thousands of people to keep this lie going. From astrophysicists to mathematicians, to Sky TV installers and farmers. Is this even remotely likely?

No. Stop smoking funny stuff and believing every crackpot wanker on YouTube who failed science class in high school. There's a reason why they post video 'evidence' on social media and not collect a Nobel prize for their ground breaking work.

Can you guess what it is?

David Higgins said...

Is flat earth not some Christian fundamentalist thing? Never paid it any attention. You can see Earth's shadow on the nights moon, can you not? How would eclipses work? So on and so forth. Snipers use the curvature of the earth to estimate long hits, no? When the ancient Greeks used geometry was that not based on the Earth's curvature? Is there not nasa telescopes that's caught the planet in it's entirey? You've lost me here.

frankie said...

Steve R
1, Satellites have shown the earth to be a sphere.

Here are two "live streams" that not only look nothing like each other when viewed side by side, feed 1 feed 2 I have also never seen one of the many 1,000's of alledged satellites come into view or float past. And in the back ground, where are the stars ? After all you said ..

7, You can see stars from the ISS because the reverse is true, it's looking out into space.

Have a look at both feeds and count the stars you see or satellites you observe.

6, Hardly going to see stars from the surface of the moon as it's a very bright surface!

Mankind hasn't a clue what can be seen from the surface of any rock except this one, never mind the moon. There is one simple fact people leave out of the equation and that's , that NASA up until 2016 still hadn't figured out how to get higher than lower earth orbit. Which makes what you said about the Van Allens pointless.

5, They knew about the Van Allen belt, that's why they heavily shielded the craft and went through it at its thinnest.

4, The arctic treaty was the first attempts at arm control. Far better to have an agreement that nobody would exploit the area than start a hugely expensive arms race there!

The Antarctic Treaty was set up to hide something under the guise of protecting wildlife to allow scientific experiements to be carried out. And anyone who violates it will be shot at dawn, using any of the hugely expensive weapons at their disposal. Why did Byrd say in a television interview that he seen land bigger than the States, while flying over a big ice berg in the south Atlantic you call the South Pole?

(I will clear up your other misconceptions later)

frankie said...

David,
Is flat earth not some Christian fundamentalist thing?

No they just hijacked it because it say's in the bible about a firment across the earth, which I take as nothing more than how they described the Van Allens. Other ancient civilisations believed this rock is flat and not a spinning ball hurtling through space at 11,000 miles per hour. The first video I linked 'under the dome' isn't a bad place to start apart from the last part when the christians come in.

"Snipers use the curvature of the earth to estimate long hits, no? "

If they do, then all the guns in the state of Kansas have to be either off by inches or made for that state. Kansas has no curve. It is flatter than a pancake .

"When the ancient Greeks used geometry was that not based on the Earth's curvature? Is there not nasa telescopes that's caught the planet in it's entirey?

NASA as I have shown in a few videos (and there are loads to choose from) aren't telling the truth on anything. What I do know is none of the employees are reading from the same script. As for what ancient Greeks, Sumerians, Mayans knew or didn't know about the earths susposed curve, is up for debate. I do know that a woman giving birth forced a plane to make an emergency landing in Alaska, which make more sense on a flat earth model than the globe version Copernicus talked about.

You've lost me here.

Basically I believe, think buy into the school of thought that this rock is flatter than we are told it is.

frankie said...

Stevie,
Your last comment "No. Stop smoking funny stuff and believing every crackpot wanker on YouTube who failed science class in high school" Is similar to my oldest daughter's .. "You wrote something about flat earth... DAAAAD PLEASE stop this nonsense!!!!!!!!!!!"

Who are the crackpots you are refering to Stevie? There are several Wiki pages linked covering topics such as Operation's Paper Clip & Highjump, Antartic Treaty System, the coriolis effect to mention a few. The youtube videos are either leaked footage showing how NASA faked photos on the Apollo missions, Astronauts contradicting each other and a link to a 1988 NASA document where they admit to using a flat non rotating earth to explain a globe...And a few classic quotes by Don Pettit. Explain why NASA want the world to believe we live on a Blue Marble, while Neil deGrasse Tyson wants everyone to believe the earth is pear shaped. What shape is the world Stevie, a round blue marble or a pear? Today for example most space agencies are talking about setting up bases on Mars. My money is on Mars being staged like it was in the movie Capricorn One.

Why all the secrecy with an ice berg in the South Atlantic? That's one of the elephants in the room that main stream news can't touch. They will pay lip service to it. Why did an Admiral go on national television and say there is land after Antarica bigger than the USA? Why did John Kerry feel the need to visit it on election day 2016. A quick google search will bring up map's that show the ice berg 200 yrs before Europeans knew of its existence and several that show what it looked like before the ice.

I am doing what you aren't and that's questioning science. Isn't science meant to be questioned, theories tested, re-examined.....science is not an absolute like religion claims itself to be. If I wanted to believe in absolutes I would borrow Abduls prayer mat and give it the habdulla's five times a day while saying the Hail Mary with Wolfie. And thats what you are doing with NASA, treating what they say as absolute and believing everything NASA said because they said so. As I pointed out, explain how man went 238,000 miles to the moon in 1969, yet in 2016 NASA (as I have shown in links) can't go above lower earth orbit. Showing photo shopped images and telling you the image is what earth looks like from space. Having live streams from the ISS and not piece of the alledged space junk that is meant to be above us in sight. If you want to know what Mr Sky satetilite is doing up the ladder to make sure netflix gets beamed into your house click here (it's a t mobile advert but it is the same for sky).