I think a humble attitude to what we can truly ever know is a good thing. I promote that. I fight the dogmas of mainstream everything on a daily basis. I fight the dogma of mainstream science mainly. For the very reason outlined. Beyond this I think we must try to be as broadly informed as we can. Be of critical thinking mind. Be a true sceptic of everything, especially institutions. Examine logic relationships within science and its claims. Examine all institutionalized knowledge and claims. Be able to unlearn what you were taught. Be self aware of your own preferred paradigm and bias. Realise that all is mind and we attract that which we give our attention. Understand that truth is elusive but worthy of persuing in life. It is most likely the only thing worth persuing in life. That and love.


local and / or general

We must always work locally of course, and many will. But the big ideas, the thinking that will change human consciousness needs a big platform where the big thinkers can discuss and disseminate new thought that filters out and beyond and into the local.

Speak loudly we’re not done yet.

Flat earth

Flat Earth was amusing when people thought it was some internet gag. Then debating began as light entertainment. Then the globe believers got their asses whipped.

We’ve done our homework and we know the science better than you.

Then we kept on trying to say wake up everyone you’ve been lied to. The Earth cannot be what they’ve told us.

Everybody laughed and looked blank with a fluoride stare.

We were stealing the noise and they had Trump and Brexit to fight about after all.

Stop laughing. Pay attention.

This Earth is not what you think.

So you want to argue the point? Go and look, really look. Learn the facts and study the science.

We only came to this because we were sceptical too.

We are not pushing flat Earth…. we are seeking truth.

in reply – 2 (from Facebook)

I do get a lot of questions about this as you may imagine. yes it’s to be expected but it still becomes tiring. it’s the way people come endlessly expecting me to answer this or that question – which I have most likely already answered somewhere in the last few weeks about 20 times at length. With all respect your assertion: “I don’t think you are taking into account just how big the earth is supposed to be.” is an assumption worded in a way which presumes I am an idiot. Of course I have considered such things. I have done numerous observations and I know the math. I KNOW how big the earth is supposed to be ok. next, “if it Is flat how do u suppose that the air doesn’t just blow off of the edge.” is a simplistic question which shows you come to me with NO research. would you go to a professor of physics and ask that? No. But you assume to ask me a silly question. IT presumes some “edge”, it presumes that air WOULD “blow off of this hypothetical edge” and it is nonsense. YOU seem to have no problem with a ball earth flying around a “solar system” holding onto an atmosphere while spinning in UNISON with that atmosphere as if it were Velcro’d to the ground, and air which has pressure held by “gravity” ( magical all pervasive force or curved “space-time” fantasy of Einsteinian math) against the EXTREME vacuum of space. ALL whilst the earth goes around the Sun and the Sun “orbits” the “galaxy” whilst the galaxy hurtles at breakneck speed toward a “Great Attractor” somewhere in the endless void. YOU have exactly NO direct evidence of ANY of that yet you BELIEVE it all because it was taught and reinforced by pop science on TV and text books. YOU have been hypnotised into believing that ALL of that garbage is self-evidently TRUE because “Math” and “smart dudes” from academia said so (“priests” of scientism). Now reconsider in this context, how I may view your simplistic questions which force me to enter into a reformed physics lesson and critique of the state of modern science.and its failings. There is no room for simple replies to sceptical enquirers. I DID 18 months of hard research and (on-going) as a citizen scientists (yes we can be scientists), and I looked deeply into the claims these highly intelligent “flat Earthers” were making and I did my own measurements and observations and so I arrived at a point of seriously questioning my own beliefs – and yes it was a painful moment. At NO time did I feel I had to confront flat earthers or propose simplistic questions.

in reply (from Facebook discussion)

I will say that “gravity” remains an unproven (scientifically and empirically) mathematical model which predicts fall-rate of objects on earth. It was invented by Isaac Newton (not “discovered”), and it was subsequently tweaked and expanded upon by Einstein. This revision was and remains extremely flawed and problematic. Nevertheless it was quickly adopted by an eager academia keen to forge careers and gain prestige. To restate it: “gravity” is not real. it’s a big one. We need to let the penny drop. People will fight me endlessly on this one point alone. Why? Because EVERYTHING else in astronomy and cosmology is built upon the assumption (axiom) of “Gravity”. Things FALL. On Earth. To infer from this that 1. “planets” are formed spherical is presumptive of spheres 2. To infer from this that the Sun and Moon are spheres is presumptive of spheres. 3. To infer that Stars are formed by this is presumptive of spheres. 4 ALL of this presumes that “Gravity” IS a force. 5. It has NOT been scientifically or empirically PROVEN as a ‘force’ as defined in physics. 6. Einstein realised the problem and invented a cunning ruse: “space-time curvature” and made this a function of you guessed it, “Gravity” (Big ‘G’ now). 7. Critical thinking analysis requests a definition within empirical physics principles of exactly HOW “nothing” (ie ‘space’) can ‘CURVE” (crickets chirp). 8. “dark matter”, “dark energy” black holes” and other exotic stuff: UNICORNS and FANTASY and nonsense. 9. NO mechanism of action has EVER been detected or demonstrated by empirical experiment to prove HOW this “Gravity” fantasy achieved what is claimed. 10. ‘LIGO’ and the infamous Cavendish Experiment have widely been debunked by serious scientists as NON scientific claims to have demonstrated some causational machinery of “Gravity” – they did NOT. (flawed and deceptive science). Your statement “the earth is an irregular surface body that is neither flat nor spherical but unique to the conditions that gave it birth” presumes that the Earth has some form created by “Gravity” or otherwise is essentially meaningless (respectfully). Serious flat earth researchers do NOT push this “flat” idea and it is a terrible moniker we are stuck with. The claim being made is THAT: the widespread and orthodox assumption of a spherical earth in orbit around a massive and distant Sun appears, under scrutiny, and scientific analysis, to be flawed and faulty science and we are asking for further valid and acceptable evidence OR a reappraisal of where we stand and an entirely NEW truly scientific and empirical investigation into exactly WHAT this realm may actually be (NOT math and “theory” based dogma). Personally the whole phenomena of this strikes a sense of dread and awe in me beyond belief – and simultaneously filling my mind with wonder at what this world really is – if we have been lied to about the “ball in space” science fiction narratives. I know it still seems preposterous and completely the work of mad men. Forgive us our enquiring sceptical minds and come with us. Open minds and hearts, and the wonder of children. What is this place? Who are WE? Where are we? What is this life?

Latest from NASA

NASA scientists have discovered that two plus two now equals five.

This incredible discovery has been peer reviewed and tested by Physicists at Harvard University who said they had to agree by George. Spokesperson for the NASA team, Don Pettit, one of the “Science Guys” said in a statement to press in attendance: “Um… it seems we have been wrong until now! Umm…yep golly! ”

Calculations performed on the Harvard Physics Department’s very impressive “Particle Computer System” known as ‘MAX’ confirmed the fantastic discovery and everyone else in the department jumped up and down with glee as new funding was guaranteed.

Pettit added that they would use the new result to “Do more science! Yeah!” and somebody behind him laughed. Updates soon.



Any concept of a pressurised gas existing adjacent to a hard vacuum is going to run into problems logically within the principles of the second law of thermodynamics which forbids this happening – unless a barrier or container separates and contains that gas. This precludes even the notion of a ‘pressure gradient’ existing without a barrier against the hard vacuum. Logically and in physics, the earth cannot hold a pressurised gaseous atmosphere even with gravity as the atmosphere would have long ago been instantly and violently ripped away to the depths of the vast void we are supposedly surrounded by. Of course the science fan boys cannot pull themselves away from gravity for five seconds to understand this anomaly and it conveniently gets glossed over (like most other aspects of “gravity” – like that fact that it’s just a mathematical formulation of fall rate on Earth and never been empirically or scientifically proven as a cause of this falling effect we see).