Without spoiling the show, because I know most of you won't watch it. I can rate this world that difficulty because there's no way an ordinary individual born outside of influence can effect this world to the degree that is necessary for the people who want to be free. There's plenty of people in this world who want to be controlled and control others. To me, that fact is sickening.
Another fact that is sickening to me as well is that I cannot trust everyone I come across. I have to choose my company wisely. Sure, it's possible to trust everyone if you look them straight in the eyes and call them out for being untrustworthy. I was at a party with a few bros a couple months ago. I left a couple hundred bucks in my wallet and set it on the table in my wallet. I went forward and greeted everyone there.
I called them all out for being untrustworthy. I asked them point blank? Can I trust you? You might take that to sound as a creeper. To me, that was a test. The next day I woke up with all of my money in my wallet.
The point I'm trying to elaborate is this. To fix this world, you need control of many institutions. Unless society crumbles past what the elites expect then it will never happen. To truly save this world you have to express facts and facts alone. There has to be doubt and uncertainty everywhere.
I'm merely expressing this as a follower of the bible and jesus and the demon of alocohol.
What does a free person want? He wants to live comfortably with very few disturbances. If he wanted to disturb or be disturbed, he'd go to the more populated areas. So the NWO agenda of concentrating people into the cities isn't that bad, because those people will gladly be controlled.
For the people that want to be free however, that is a nightmare. Imagine a small box surrounded by people you cannot trust. Sounds like hell to me.
I'll look over your board from time to time. One of the most amazing things I haven't heard a flat earther speak of is polaris. I'd like to see it spin over head a few times with five cameras. One straight up, two to the south, and another to the east and west. Essentially a star trail from those five frames.
Cool! It is early days, but I'm working on it!
Many do! I am not much for the pseudoscience/mythology/religion of astronomy, but I know a LOT about it and its history!
I'd love that as well! Long exposure (even from distinct angles) pretty well demonstrates that it doesn't cause (much, if any) of a star trail though :(
What if it did, and what if it didn't? What would these imply, or could you infer from them as a result (in each case)?
Proving the north pole and thus the maps is simply done by that observance.
That's if the polar star DOES change apparent location or does not? And what about in the alternative case?
You should be aware that virtually no flat earth researchers I have encountered in any way doubt tue existence of the north pole, nor polaris. Just, by the by.
You're now talking about stellar parallax which I've never personally observed. In fact, it's hard to even prove it exists.