Astronaut Chris Hadfield will not discuss the science behind the concept of the flat earth. Hadfield is like most scientists who use ridicule to cut off discussion of the flat earth. The ridicule acts to censor any revelation of the evidence that the earth is flat. Hadfield states that those who believe that the earth is flat believe something that is so “patently untrue” that there is “no point” in even trying to engage in a “rational conversation” with such “stupid” people. Hadfield said:
If someone decides to put forward some stupid idea that is patently false like if somebody says the sky is orange, you can have an argument about it if you want, but it’s obviously not true, so there’s really no point in even engaging in conversation. Or, if somebody says the world is flat, it’s patently untrue, so there’s no point in engaging in conversation because all you’re doing is giving that person credibility for something that we’ve known for thousands of years to not be the truth. … If someone has chosen to take the facts and be deliberately stupid about them, then I think they’ve discounted themselves from rational conversation, so I don’t bother.
Hadfield is using the tried and true strategy that has been implimeted by the state educational authorities. The educational system conditions students to reject the flat earth by ridiculing it. Young and impressionable students will naturally then cling to the safe orthodoxy of heliocentricity. William H. Poole explained this stratagem. “There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. This principle is, contempt prior to examination.” Satan has used this method to keep people in a state of nescience about God’s creation. Such rejection of hard evidence, without a fair hearing, brings folly and shame. “He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.” (Proverbs 18:13) This folly and shame is manifested in devilish philosophies that permeate society.
Satan has created a hive mentality instilled at the earliest stages of education that protects the myth of helicentricity. Anyone who questions the legitimacy of heliocentricity has his character attacked by the hive as being ignorant. The evidence for a stationary, flat earth, no matter its validity, will be dismissed without examination. Thus the hive is kept in “everlasting ignorance.”
Is Hadfield being honest when he states his reason for not discussing the scientific evidence for a flat earth is that such a belief is stupid and irrational? No. Hadfield is a gatekeeper; his job is to keep people from the truth. The real reason for his refusal is that he is afraid that the lie that he is living will be exposed. Hatfield will not engage in debate about the shape of the earth because he would not be able to invalidate the evidence proving that the earth is flat. Hadfield could not rebut the simplest logical argument leading to an ineluctable conclusion that the earth is flat.
Premise 1: All water at rest is flat and level.
Premise 2: 71% of the earth’s surface is covered by water.
Conclusion: The earth, therefore, must necessarily be flat.
All water is flat and level. Indeed, in common parlance, the height of the surface of a body of water is called the water “level.” The oceans cover 71% of the earth’s surface. The earth can’t be a sphere when 71% of its surface is covered by water, which necessarily must be flat and level. The very existence of the oceans proves that the earth must necessarily be flat. That is just one of the many proofs that the earth is flat, for which the esteemed astronaut, Chris Hatfield, has no answer. So, he resorts to pejorative name-calling and questioning the sanity of those who believe that the earth is flat. His attack is a defense mechanism. His so-called science is indefensible; he knows it, and so he must preclude any discussion that might reveal its insufficiency.
Below is an excerpt from my book, The Greatest Lie on Earth, which presents a more detailed explanation of the verifiable reality that all water at rest is flat, thus leading to the inexorable conclusion that the earth, with 71% of its surface being covered by water, is necessarily flat:
The Suez Canal is just one example that stands as irrefutable proof that the earth is flat. The canal runs for 100 miles. There are no locks in the canal; it is perfectly level for the entire 100 miles. If the earth were a globe, each end of the canal would necessarily be over one mile below the horizon from the other end. That would mean that the middle of the canal would be elevated in a round hump 1,666 feet in the mid-point of the canal. However, that is not the case. David Wardlow Scott, in his book, Terra Firma, explained:
The distance between the Red Sea at Suez and the Mediterranean Sea is 100 statute miles, the datum line of the Canal being 26 feet below the level of the Mediterranean, and is continued horizontally the whole way from sea to sea, there not being a single lock on the Canal, the surface of the water being parallel with the datum line. It is thus clear that there is no curvature or globularity for the whole hundred miles between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea; had there been, according to the Astronomic theory, the middle of the Canal would have been 1,666 feet higher than at either end, whereas the Canal is perfectly horizontal for the whole distance.
The Suez Canal offers such stark proof that the earth is flat that a more detailed study of that canal is warranted. Samuel Rowbotham in his book, Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe, provides us that explanation, complete with actual illustrations from the authorities. The official illustrations reveal a flat earth.
The completion of the great ship canal, which connects the Mediterranean Sea with the Gulf of Suez, on the Red Sea, furnishes another instance of entire discrepancy between the theory of the earth’s rotundity and the results of practical engineering. The canal is 100 English statute miles in length, and is entirely without locks; so that the water within it is really a continuation of the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea. “The average level of the Mediterranean is 6 inches above the Red Sea; but the flood tides in the Red Sea rise 4 feet above the highest, and its ebbs fall nearly 3 feet below the lowest in the Mediterranean.” The datum line is 26 feet below the level of the Mediterranean, and is continued horizontally from one sea to the other; and throughout the whole length of the work, the surface of the water runs parallel with this datum, as shown in the following section, fig. 38, published by the authorities.
A, A, A, is the surface of the canal, passing through several lakes, from one sea to the other; D, D, the bed of the canal, or horizontal datum line to which the various elevations of land, &c., are referred, but parallel to which stands the surface of the water throughout the entire length of the canal; thus proving that the half-tide level of the Red Sea, the 100 miles of water in the canal, and the surface of the Mediterranean Sea, are a continuation of one and the same horizontal line.
The actual survey of the Suez Canal proves that the surface of the water is flat for 100 miles from one end of the canal to the other. That flat span of water could only be possible if the earth is in fact flat. Rowbotham modifies the official illustration of the Suez Canal to show a fictional depiction of how the Suez Canal would appear if the earth were a globe. The unreal depiction (which would be required if the earth were a globe) is not at all what is seen and measured at the Suez Canal. The convex bow of water (which is a physical impossibility) illustrates the impossibility that the earth is a globe.
Rowbotham continues with his proof of the flat earth by explaining the survey of a body of water that is exponentially larger than the Suez Canal. Rowbotham reveals the actual survey measurements of the floor of the Atlantic Ocean from Valencia, Ireland, to Newfoundland, Canada, prior to laying the transatlantic cable. That survey proves beyond any doubt that the earth is flat. Rowbotham describes the depth of the Atlantic Ocean in fathoms; one fathom equals six feet, which is two yards. Please note that Rowbotham discusses the distance across the Atlantic Ocean in nautical miles, whereas his discussion of the span of the Suez Canal is in statute miles. A nautical mile is equal to approximately 1.15 statute miles. In the equation for the supposed drop below the horizon expected if the earth were a globe (M2 x 8 inches = Drop), the miles (M) are always in statute miles.
The bed of the Atlantic Ocean, from Valencia (western coast of Ireland) to Trinity Bay, Newfoundland, as surveyed for the laying of the cable, is another illustration or proof that the surface of the great waters of the earth is horizontal, and not convex, as will be seen by the following diagram [fig. 40], contracted from the section, published October 8, 1869, by the Admiralty. C, D, is the horizontal datum line, and A, B, the surface of the water, for a distance of 1665 nautical, or 1942 statute miles. At about one-third the distance from A, Newfoundland, the greatest depth is found–2424 fathoms; the next deepest part is 2400 fathoms; at about two-thirds the distance from A, towards B, Ireland, while in the centre, the depth is less than 1600 fathoms.
The actual depiction of the Atlantic Ocean is a large flat body of water spanning 1,665 nautical miles from Newfoundland to Ireland. Such would be the case only if the earth is in fact flat. Rowbotham, again, modifies the official illustration to create a fictional depiction of the span across the Atlantic Ocean as it would necessarily appear if the earth were a globe (fig. 41). The unreal depiction is not at all what is found when surveying the Atlantic Ocean.
[W]hereas, if the water of the Atlantic is convex, the centre would stand 628,560 feet, or nearly 120 miles, higher than the two stations, Trinity Bay and Valencia; and the greatest depth would be in the centre of the Atlantic Ocean, where it would be 106,310 fathoms, instead of 1550 fathoms, which it is proved to be by actual soundings. Fig. 41 shows the arc of water which would exist, in relation to the horizontal datum line, between Ireland and Newfoundland, if the earth is a globe. Again, if the water in the Atlantic Ocean is convex–a part of a great sphere of 25,000 miles circumference–the horizontal datum line would be a chord to the great arc of water above it; and the distance across the bed of the Atlantic would therefore be considerably less than the distance over the surface. The length of the cable which was laid in 1866, notwithstanding the known irregularities of the bed of the Ocean, would be less than the distance sailed by the paying-out vessel, the “Great Eastern;” whereas, according to the published report, the distance run by the steamer was 1665 miles, while the length of cable payed out was 1852 miles.
Rowbotham puts the final nail in the coffin of the globular earth fiction by pointing out that the distance that the steamer traveled across the Atlantic Ocean as it laid the cable was approximately 1,665 miles, which is exactly what would be expected if the vessel was traveling in a straight line across the Atlantic Ocean on a flat body of water.
All water is flat and level. Indeed, in common parlance, the height of the surface of a body of water is called the water “level.” The oceans cover 71% of the earth’s surface. It is impossible for the earth to be a sphere when 71% of its surface is covered by water, which necessarily must be flat and level. The very existence of the oceans proves that the earth must necessarily be flat.
22 thoughts on “Why Astronaut Chris Hadfield Will Not Discuss Flat Earth”
Thank you for bringing to our attention the undeniable fact that the earth is indeed flat, and a creation of the Lord as plainly told in scripture. The reason Freemasons hold high level positions in society is to protect the lie of a globe earth in order to keep God as far away as possible in the imaginations of man by replacing a false belief of an ever expanding universe full of “dark matter, “dark energy”, and “black holes”. May God bless you for Christ sake.
Thank you for bringing to our attention the undeniable fact that the earth is indeed flat, and a creation of the Lord as plainly told in scripture. The reason Freemasons hold high level positions in society is to protect the lie of a globe earth in order to keep God as far away as possible in the minds of men by replacing with a false belief of an ever expanding universe full of “dark matter, “dark energy”, and “black holes”. May God bless you for Christ sake
Absolutely irrefutable. Well done and well written!
How do you account for the thousands of airline pilots that fly around the globe every day and not one single pilot has ever said they have come to the edge of your flat disc ??
You seem not to have actually asked pilots whether the earth is flat. Try it sometime.
Okay. . . ask me. I’m a pilot for an international carrier and have flown around the Earth – all 24,000 miles of it – 12 times in my career. At a cruising altitude of 36,000 feet, I can see over 15,000 miles ahead of me (study the physics of height and distance for this calculation) and I can assure you that the horizon curves. A lot. Funny, but in all these years, I’ve always ended up the same place I started on one of these trips, even after I left in the opposite direction. Imagine that.
If the earth were a globe, airliners would not be able to fly on a flat and level path. You know, being a pilot, that once a plane gets to its cruising altitude, the pilot “levels off” and flies in a straight and level path. Indeed, you as a pilot use the horizon to ensure that the plane is flying level. When visibility is poor, you, being a pilot, will use the instruments and fly a level heading, using an artificial horizon. Either way, at all times the plane flies level, once the pilot reaches cruising altitude. If the earth were a globe, you would have to constantly adjust the heading of the plane and dip its nose down to keep a constant altitude as you pilot the plane. However, the earth is in fact flat, so if you dipped the nose of the plane down, to adjust for the supposed curvature of the earth, you would find that he is losing altitude. If you kept on that downward trajectory, the plane you are piloting would crash into the earth. The fact that no such downward adjustment is made by you or any other pilots for the supposed curvature of the earth is proof that the earth is flat.
Eric Dubay explains: “If the Earth were truly a sphere 25,000 miles in circumference curveting 8 inches per mile squared, a pilot wishing to simply maintain their altitude at a typical cruising speed of 500 mph, would have to constantly dip their nose downwards and descend … Otherwise, without compensation, in one hour’s time, the pilot would find themselves 166,666 feet (31.5 miles) higher than expected! A plane flying at a typical 35,000 feet wishing to maintain that altitude at the upper-rim of the so-called “Troposphere” in one hour would find themselves over 200,000 feet high into the Mesosphere with a steadily rising trajectory the longer they go.”
But that does not happen. How do you explain that?
Thank you for refuting. The beginning premise of the syllogism is wrong. All water at rest is NOT flat and level. It actually is subject to gravity, just as all other elements with mass near other objects of mass. Thus, we have tides and we are not pelted with rain patties during a storm.
The author needs to revisit his Logic classes.
Indeed all water at rest is flat and level. Hence the term “water level.” That is why spirit levels (a.k.a. bubble levels) always use a bubble in water. If all water at rest were not level, a spirit level would not work. In the real world, standing water is perfectly flat and is not ever convex. That fact proves that the earth is flat since more than 70% of the earth’s surface is covered by water. If water is flat, the earth must necessarily also be flat.
Gravity is not based upon science; gravity is like a heathen religious superstition. People believe it to be true, simply because the modern-day witch-doctors, whom we call “scientists,” say so. There is no such thing as gravity; gravity is not necessary on a flat earth. It is density that keeps objects from floating off the surface of the earth. People and objects are heavier than the air and therefore do not float off the ground. There are some gasses, of course, that are lighter than air, and they float off the ground. Everyone has seen helium balloons float up in the air. Everyone understands that helium balloons are not some sort of anti-gravity devices; they float up in the air, because helium is lighter than air. Why do people not understand that apples fall from trees to the ground, not because of gravity, but because apples are denser than air? They believe in the mystical force of gravity, not because it has been proven true, but because they have been brainwashed into believing in it. Gravity does not exist.
According to the heliocentric model, the force of gravity at the equator is perfectly balanced against the centrifugal force of the spinning earth. All persons and objects are supposedly perfectly balanced through gravity by their mass against the centrifugal force of the spinning earth to remain attached to the earth.
The problem with the gravitational theory is that according to that theory, the gravitational attraction to the earth by all persons and objects remains the same at all places on the earth. That means that the gravitational force at the North Pole is the same as the gravitational force at the equator. That poses a very real problem if the earth is spinning as alleged. That is because the centrifugal force decreases every mile toward the north pole, where the centrifugal force is ultimately reduced to zero, because the North Pole is the axis of the supposedly spinning earth. On a globe, as you travel north or south of the equator the circumference parallel to the equator becomes less. Consequently, the speed of the earth’s spin at those more northern and southern latitudes from the equator would be slower than its speed of spin at the equator. For example, at 45 degrees north latitude, the earth’s spin should be approximately 700 miles per hour. As the speed of the spin is reduced, so also is the correlative centrifugal force. Thus, a uniform force of gravity with a non-uniform centrifugal force would necessarily result in objects having different weights depending on their latitude. The spinning earth and the mystical force of gravity are thus proven to be fictions.
A follow-up thought. How many of you claiming the Suez Canal is flat have ever actually seen it? I lived in Egypt for a year in the 1980s and visited it twice [at both ends, Port Said in the north and Port Tewfik (Suez) in the south]. The entire structure is 120 miles long and I am telling you for a fact that you cannot see one end of it if you are standing at the other. In fact, the furthest you can see is three miles. Watch any ship traversing it in either direction long enough and it will eventually disappear over the horizon. It’s just basic Earth science. Therefore, I must conclude that the only people who believe otherwise are: (1) idiots who know nothing about the fundamental of physics; and (2) idiots who have never set foot near the Canal itself to verify this simple observation.
The Suez Canal runs for 100 miles. There are no locks in the canal; it is perfectly level for the entire 100 miles. If the earth were a globe, each end of the canal would necessarily be over one mile below the horizon from the other end. That would mean that the middle of the canal would be elevated in a round hump 1,666 feet in the mid-point of the canal. However, that is not the case. The actual survey of the Suez Canal proves that the surface of the water is flat for 100 miles from one end of the canal to the other. That flat span of water could only be possible if the earth is in fact flat.
Too bad Newton’s apple didn’t fall into a pond. Then he would have noticed that while the apple fell through the air, it would have stopped falling and started floating.
He might have come to the logical conclusion that it was a change in density of the surrounding atmo’sphere’ that caused the apple to stop falling and no magical force was needed to make it fall in the first place.
A ship does not disappear over the “horizon”. It simply gets to far away for the naked eye to see. You have to be able to understand that. We have cameras and telescopes that are capable of seeing these images at least as far as the 120 mile Suez canal.
You are correct. The observation of the bottom-up disappearance of a ship’s hull does not prove sphericity. But that phenomenon is being deceitfully used to confirm a bias toward sphericity. The real explanation for the bottom-up disappearance of a ship’s hull is found in the laws of perspective. Ships disappear bottom-up because of where the observer is standing and the limited angular resolution of the human eye.
The size of an object dictates the distance at which an object disappears. For example, a U.S. penny, which is 3/4 (.75) of an inch in diameter, will disappear from a person’s vision when it gets to approximately 214 feet away from the observer. At that point, the penny’s diameter will have reached one arcminute (.017̊) which is the maximum angular resolution for a person with 20/20 vision. The larger an object, the further away it can be seen before it disappears from sight. Of course, a large ship at sea can be seen much further away than 214 feet. Indeed, a large ship can be seen for many miles before it reaches a distance where the angular resolution of the ship gets to one arcminute. The little known fact, though, is that the disappearance of the ship will not be uniform.
I explain all of this in great detail in my book, The Sphere of Influence.
There are no flights from the Pacific coast of South America directly to Asia but the proximity should guarantee them. Flights from Honolulu to Asia all leave at midnight or shortly after. Dawn is breaking when the destination is reached. How would the pilot see what was flown over?
Thank you Edward for your fine work. I enjoyed all of your books!
Point perspective is a very hard thing for global believers to understand, because of the indoctrination that they have been subjected to.
I have been studying flat earth for close to 10 years, and your efforts are starting to come to fruition.
Thank you, Steven. All glory to Jesus Christ.