Flat Sea’er

The Earth is neither flat nor round at a human scale. By simplifying the terms we use to describe the Earth into mere abstract shapes, we enter a conceptual terrain that is factually contrary to what we can empirically experience. Such a dissonance might be one of the most effective tools in use when the shape of the Earth is brought into question. We all (well mostly) live on land where the horizon seldom can be observed without some sort of backdrop or topographic element(s) that contradict the abstract notions (on a human scale and focal ability) of simplified geometric form. The most counter-intuitive concept in this artificial consideration would be the absence of topography altogether. When we compare flat to curved in this theoretic setting, it is evident that a curve is closer to our innate experience of some sort of topography or landscape than nothing at all. When mentally representing a landscape that is flat altogether we have nothing at all that ties to our natural perception of topography. To do such an abstract model we need water – not Earth.

Another advantage in an abstract Globe model is the complexity and scale of the design. Quite reminiscent of Santa Claus, nothing really makes the Globe theory fly on its own. If Santa goes to any tribe that has not yet been subjected to the advanced civilisation programming – they will not believe he dropped down the chimney or came bearing gifts to children. The Globe is equally counter-intuitive and can only survive as a product of indoctrination and in the quality of a known unknown. What is significant in the ‘globalist’ proposition is that the general population is naturally afraid of the unknown and that most potent environment to dominate is that of your own design governed by rules you are free to set and change at will. Nature is not as forgiving – there are natural laws you can not change and that are free for anyone to find. Not the kind of situation that is characteristic for the Elite to thrive within. And not something the upper class would give away willingly after the sweet taste of bending each and every rule in their own favour. This is why nature is no alley to the few – nature might even be their only competition*.

To claim knowledge of a known unknown is never factual but indeed demand a lot of cunning and artifice. Sound familiar ? Well, it is likely that a few conspiracy theorists have accidentally unmasked this very situation by studying Christianity, Nuclear arms, the Apollo landing or Aids – the examples are plentiful, but the principle stay the same. Dominion of a known unknown is straight forward and the results are guaranteed – it probably dates as far back as the first shaman who ever claimed dominion of the outcome of a hunting expedition, a factual known unknown until the magician makes his bid. At that point – it can no longer be neutral. Either the magician is good or bad… Either the Globe* is round or not. But was the shape of the Earth even a question to be asked to begin with or was it rather the Elite who found another known unknown they saw an opportunity to exploit ? After all, claiming dominion in afterlife with God and Jesus was getting overdue for an update.

The threat to the guardians of known unknowns is of course that natural facts might come in the way and open up for anyone to find them. The Elite is of course more aware of this than the common population and even seem to employ most of their resources to safeguard their fragile and often artificial public unknowns. There seems to be many ways to maintain known unknowns from the insistence of natural laws and common sense. In conspiracy research we mostly will be familiar with the technique of complexification. To better deflect our attention, the Elite constructs an myriad of plausible scenarios that all seek to make the basic questioning very far-fetched or simplistic as they lead us into unknowingness further and further away from solid ground with a continuous flood of new evidence and research. Ever wondered why we need to understand the core of the sun in order to determine factual, simple geology we can verify with existing knowledge ?

In addition to using abstraction and setting the debate outside of direct observation and verification, the semiology is equally put to use for constructing a public straw-man argument. As the land we live on has very significant topography that most of us have encountered and experienced first hand – the introduction of ‘Flat’ will necessarily be revulsive for our primary senses. To enforce the primal revulsion of this linguistic dissonance the term ‘Flat Earth‘ has been stigmatised and ridiculed as often as possible. The expression now becomes weaponised (since some time back already) in the hands of skilled communicators and disinformation agents. But as the communication experts remind us themselves – there is no such thing as bad publicity. What about offensive, derogatory language to our detriment – would that be a good thing ? Maybe, there are more YouTube channels and conspiracy theorists that i can mention that seem to all agree. Given a second thought, do you ?

To base the discussion about ‘Flat Earth‘ around better language with no subliminal or linguistic effects would be a relief, maybe even a step ahead. As i see no curve on lakes and oceans at distances that far outreach the current scientific model – maybe the term Flat Sea’er better describe the vanishing point that most of us share and be able to agree upon.

Danyang–Kunshan Grand Bridge
Danyang–Kunshan Grand Bridge, China (2011)
•bridge on the Beijing-Shanghai Railway 102.4 miles long (165 km)

*the Globe and the Earth are synonyms according to dictionaries…

*EGI is most likely an extreme expression of the Elite’s battle with nature