Author: T Mark Hightower

I am a Christian Universalist, All will ultimately be saved through Jesus Christ (1 Cor 15:22), a retired NASA engineer, a student of conspiracy theories, and started blogging in 2017 initially due to concern about the emergence of the flat earth movement, within which many Biblical literalists claim the earth is actually flat and that this truth has been hidden by Satan and science and NASA in the greatest of all conspiracies to keep people from the truth of God. I have ended up blogging on a variety of topics since then. In May 2020 I had the privilege and honor of being a reviewer of the English version of the book “The Ground Zero Model” by physicists Heinz Pommer and Colleagues. On the occasion of writing my review of the book, I updated my bio which is given below. T. Mark Hightower has both B.S. & M.S. degrees in chemical engineering from San Jose State University. He initially worked in the chemical industry and then worked for NASA for 25 years as a federal government employee, where he took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. He retired from NASA in 2015. His work at NASA included space life support systems for future long duration missions, hazardous materials management, arc jet testing of heat shield materials for spacecraft entry into planetary atmospheres, hyper velocity free flight aerodynamic testing of spacecraft and aircraft models in enclosed terrestrial ballistic range, facility water management including drinking water, storm water, industrial waste water, water conservation and reclamation, pollution prevention, above ground storage tanks, and climate change risk management. While at NASA he also served in the Ames Federal Employees Union as secretary, deputy chief steward, and vice president for safety. He became a born again student of conspiracy theories in January 2004 after stumbling upon Peter Meyer's Serendipity web site and learning that controlled demolition was a more likely explanation for the destruction of the Twin Towers than the official government story. Based on further research and conversations with fellow employees with extensive explosives expertise, it did not take long for him to see that the evidence pointed very strongly to 9/11 having been a neocon false flag operation designed to falsely blame Muslims for something they did not do in order to ignite the “war on terror” against them for the benefit of Israel. Ever since then he has been working hard with many others to obtain true justice in the exposure apprehension conviction and punishment of the many real perpetrators who have so far eluded justice. He has said, “The blood of many thousands if not millions in the world who have lost their lives and suffered horribly because of their traitorous schemes cries out for them to be brought to justice and severely punished.” In 2010 he became concerned when consulting with some retired military veterans with explosives experience that the evidence for nanothermite as a potential destructive agent for the twin towers was being overemphasized with exaggerated claims of its destructive potential, and in particular making unfounded claims that nanothermite could be a high explosive. This was leading many to believe that there was no need to look any further than nanothermite to explain the entirety of the wtc destructions. Based on his research in conjunction with others, by 2011 after searching the technical literature he had found that the highest detonation velocity obtained for an aluminum iron oxide nanothermite was 895 m/s, nowhere near that of a typical conventional high explosive like TNT with a detonation velocity of 6900 m/s. Shortly thereafter, he and some others reported these results in various ways on the internet and in print. His modest claim of benefit of this research is to have simply helped reign in the exaggerated claims that were being made for nanothermite, so that other more credible means of explosive destruction might not be foolishly overlooked. He applauds Jeff Prager’s tireless work in continuing to research and present evidence for the most credible hypotheses of the means of destruction used to take out the wtc towers, culminating in the publication of the English version of the book, "The Ground Zero Model," by Physicist Heinz Pommer and Colleagues, in June 2020. Mr. Hightower is a member of Scholars for 911 Truth, a petition signer at Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth, and a member of Pilots for 911 Truth. He is a contributor to the book “America Nuked on 9/11” from Moon Rock Books edited by Jim Fetzer, and a contributor to the 2018 Memoranda for the President on 9/11 Truth organized by Robert David Steele. He is also a life member of both the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers.

Flat Earth If It Doesn’t Fit It Must Be Shlt

INTRODUCTION

This presents more data and its processing and analysis just like the previous blog post. All the explanatory details do not need to be repeated here. If you need to, refer back to the previous post. As before, all files are shared freely on my Scribd account, so people can see and check and analyze my work, and use these files to do their own experiments for themselves no matter where they are in the world.

For review I just want to summarize the basic concept upon which these types of experiments are based.

You travel a route and track it with GPS and independent odometer and speedometer, and maintain constant speeds as much as you can throughout the trip and note this information also. Afterwards you process the latitude longitude data versus time according to spherical earth surface geometry and flat circular disk earth geometry and compare the results. Invariably what you will find is that the spherical geometry interpretation reconciles all the data with itself. The flat geometry interpretation leads to significant contradictions.

It is really up to flat earth advocates to explain how the data should be interpreted in order to make it conform in all ways to flat earth geometry and theory and at the same time to reality. I claim that to make this fit flat earth theory is an impossibility. The pizza pie is really in their pizza oven now.

Now the way that I am interpreting the data according to flat circular disk earth geometry is to take the latitude longitude data and interpret it with the azimuthal equidistant map as if it were a flat earth map. Now I have tried interpreting it in two other possible ways consistent with different aspects of flat earth theory. Both of these ways also lead to significant contradictions.

One way is shifting all of the latitude data points up by the same amount to bring the west east gradient in terms of miles traveled per degree of longitude the same on flat circular disk earth geometry as it is on the spherical earth where the data was actually taken. This ends up fitting the speedometer and odometer data pretty well, but obviously the location is way off, as it shifts my San Jose data north around 500 miles to approximately Sisters Oregon.

Could flat earth advocates actually have an uncertainty of locating a place on the flat earth map of as much as 500 miles? If their “map” which they claim not to really have yet, has this much uncertainty, then what business do they have using any so called “flat earth map” to justify all of their many claims that the earth is flat, like the way that the Sun and Moon circle around it, and the way that airline flights make more sense (they claim) on the flat earth map than on the spherical earth map?

And then the other way I have tried to make the data fit flat earth circular disk geometry is to essentially flatten the spherical data and then plop it somewhere on the flat earth map. The spherical data itself is close to being flat just by its nature of being a route of not much overall distance on the earth, but mathematically it is kind of like me taking that route that is already pretty close to flat and putting it on an ironing board and ironing it flat so I can then easily plop it onto any flat earth map. Here again, we would need the flat earth advocates to tell us where to plop it. So I choose making the starting point of latitude and longitude the same on the flat as on the spherical. When I do this, there is quite a bit of agreement, but the route ends up not coinciding with the actual route of the trip. Again, it just does not fit. At this point I am holding off on presenting this additional information in detail, until I can find a way to present it in as simple and understandable way as possible. Also, I want to give flat earth advocates a chance to struggle with trying to make their flat earth model fit the real world data.

How long can flat earth advocates keep hiding underneath their undefined flat earth map?

Eventually many will have no choice but to exclaim, “Look! The Flat Earth Emperor is wearing no map!”

SO NOW ON TO PRESENTING THE NEW DATA

Here I want to illustrate how a shorter trip can provide good data for this type of experiment and analysis. After this perhaps I will try an even shorter trip by car around just residential streets. If that ends up working OK, then the next step might be to see if the experiment can be done by walking a route around the neighborhood.

The same file naming scheme as before is still used. The previous blog explained the rationale behind this. In this case in the Excel files the data extends down to row 1642.

For this trip I was able to hold a constant speed with cruise control for almost the entire distance on the freeway. There was really just one place where I had to slow down briefly for some night time construction work. As before, the constant speed held shows up very clearly in the data processed according to spherical earth geometry, whereas when the data is processed according to flat earth geometry the long intervals of constant speed deviate markedly from being constant. Here’s the results.

Freeway Circle Around Home in San Jose

35.2 km (21.9 miles) by odometer

Duration by watch 0:32

Duration Start to Stop GPS 0:32:20

35.1 km 65.1 km/h ave speed 97.2 km/h top speed by GPS

35.054 km 65.015 km/h ave speed confirmed by calculations in Sph Excel spreadsheet

Speed versus Time plot for spherical model shows clear agreement with speedometer data

Speed versus Time plot for flat model shows large deviations from speedometer data

38.2 km 70.9 km/h ave speed by calculations in Flt Excel spreadsheet Inconsistent with odometer data

Spherical Earth model: Affirmed

Flat Earth model: Large deviations from reality

Speed versus Time according to Flat theory

Speed versus Time according to Spherical theory

Speed versus Time according to Spherical and Flat theory all on the same graph.

Speed versus Time according to Spherical and Flat theory all on the same graph

I have made these files available to the public through my Scribd account.

20171130214830-38065-data Text file

351651FreewayCircleAroundHome Excel file

351651FreewayCircleAroundHomeFlt Excel file

351651FreewayCircleAroundHomeSph Excel file

Anybody should be able to see the files by just going to the links. The graphs of Speed versus Time for both the spherical and flat cases should be able to be seen this way in addition to the links earlier in this post. To download the files you need a Scribd account, and a regular account should be free to set up.

I was not able to make the KML file Track-171130-210519 available through Scribd because it is not a supported file type.

I encourage people all over the world to take their own data and process it in this manner and report their results. Let me know if you have any questions. Comments are welcome. Thank you.

GPS + Odometer + Speedometer + Cruise Control = Spherical Earth Affirmed (San Jose to Berkeley)

GPS+Odometer+Speedometer+CruiseControl=SphericalEarthAffirmed(SanJoseToBerkeley)

INTRODUCTION

I recently got a very helpful suggestion from a person in Santiago, Chile, that expressing my work in metric units would be helpful to the international community, so this motivated me to travel metrically on a trip yesterday, as much as I was able, and to report the experimental results metrically as well.

In a nutshell, you track a car trip with your GPS and use cruise control to maintain intervals of constant speed as much as you can during the trip, noting the constant speeds you maintained as well as where on the trip you were able to do so. Once you get the GPS data you can analyze it and show that a spherical earth surface geometry interpretation of the data accurately gives the regions of constant speed and the overall trip distance in agreement with the car’s odometer and speedometer. On the other hand when you interpret the data according to flat circular disk geometry the intervals of constant speed do not show up as constant at all and the overall trip distance is much in error from the distance measured by the car’s odometer. I can already hear flat earth advocates saying something like the GPS data comes out right because it is based on spherical geometry, and indeed I agree that it is so based, but the car’s odometer and speedometer are independent of what theory of the earth’s surface you hold. The car should give accurate speeds and distances traveled whether you are on a flat earth or a spherical earth, or any other shape for that matter. The fact that the GPS data agrees with the independent data from the car’s odometer and speedometer is strong evidence that the spherical earth model is correct. The fact that the GPS data when interpreted according to flat circular disk geometry disagrees profoundly with the independent data from the car’s odometer and speedometer is strong evidence that the flat earth model is incorrect. I challenge all flat earth advocates and researchers to find a way to interpret the trip GPS data so as to show that it conforms to flat earth theory and also agrees with the independent data of the car’s odometer and speedometer.

The beauty of this experiment is that whenever someone does it they are going to get unique results that cannot possibly be predicted or planned for in advance. Where and at what speeds you are able to hold steady speeds with cruise control will vary with the road and traffic conditions. The path of the trip used will also impact the results in a unique way.

This type of experiment can easily be performed for a vast variety of trips all over the world and the data easily analyzed. I am going to share exactly how this can be done by showing how I did it for a trip from San Jose to Berkeley CA yesterday. All details are presented and the Excel files are made available to anyone through my Scribd account so they can see how it was done and use the spreadsheets to process the data from their own trips as well.

DETAILS FOR TRIP FROM SAN JOSE TO BERKELEY

I used the GPS in my smartphone, a Samsung Galaxy S4. I used the App GPS Essentials, where at the start of your trip you start tracking, and when you arrive at your destination you stop tracking. The trip file can then be exported as a KML file. From there you can process the data in various ways. I like to use the website GPSVisualizer.com for some things and Excel spreadsheet for many other things.

Car speedometer and odometer

It was easy to push a button to get my speedometer to read in km/h instead of mph, so that way I could easily see what my speed was in km/h during the trip. I was not sure how or if I could get the odometer to read in km, so I took the readings in miles and converted to km.

Trip from San Jose to Berkeley

91.1 km (56.6 miles) by odometer

Duration by my watch 1:10

Duration Start to Stop GPS 1:09:28

90.6 km 78.3 km/h ave speed 131 km/h top speed reported directly by GPS

From my smartphone I exported the trip KML file via email to my PC. The KML filename was Track-171126-105544. I then went to the website GPSVisualizer.com, where I uploaded the KML file and choose output format plain text table. I then clicked the link to download this text file back to my PC. I accepted the default filename 20171126171339-38065-data. I then opened the Excel spreadsheet application. My version happens to be from 2010. From within the Excel application, find the text file and open it. Either select to look at All Files or just Text Files to make sure you can see the correct text file to open. Once you open it, the Text Import Wizard comes up. The default settings are fine, so just click on Next, Next, and then Finish. At this point I like to do a Save As on the file, and save it as an Excel Workbook file, and give it a name that is more meaningful to me. So I gave it the name 906783SanJoseToBerkeley. I got the 906 from 90.6 km for the trip and 783 from 78.3 ave speed for the trip in km/h and added SanJoseToBerkeley to further help me identify this data. I will use this name with additional things added to it as more files are produced based on processing this data. I do not intend to make any further modifications to the Excel Workbook file 906783SanJoseToBerkeley so this can be kept as a record of this stage of the data processing procedure that could easily be returned to as needed. So then I will again do a Save As to the file and give it the name 906783SanJoseToBerkeleySph. This will be the file where some modifications will be made so it will do calculations according to spherical earth geometry. One other change I like to make at this point is to rename the data tab. So go to the lower left and right click on the data tab, that currently has the really long name that came from the GPSVisualizer when it created the text file from the KML file, and select rename. I like to rename it 906783-data. Once you do this be sure to save the file again. And then do another Save As and save it with the name 906783SanJoseToBerkeleyFlt. This will be the file where some modifications will be made so it will do calculations according to flat circular disk shaped earth geometry.

So let’s start by working on the 906783SanJoseToBerkeleyFlt file. If you have followed the directions exactly as above that file should already be open. If not, open it now. Also open the Excel file FltGeomMetricUnitsTemplate. This is the file where we are going to copy the section with the equations for calculation and paste them into file 906783SanJoseToBerkeleyFlt.

In the 906783SanJoseToBerkeleyFlt file select across from Column E to Column J, so that Columns E, F, G, H, I, and J are all selected. Be sure to select across the column headings so that the entire columns will end up being selected. Then Right-Click anywhere inside the selection and choose Insert. This then creates 6 empty columns from E to J, and moves the other stuff to the right so nothing is lost. In these 6 columns is where we are going to do some calculations on the data. So we are now going to get the equations from the FltGeomMetricUnitsTemplate file and copy and then paste into the new spreadsheet. So from FltGeomMetricUnitsTemplate select from E1 upper left to J12 lower right so that a rectangle of 12 cells down and 6 cells across are selected. Then Copy (Ctrl-C). Then go to the 906783SanJoseToBerkeleyFlt spreadsheet file and select cell E1 to define the upper left of where to Paste. Then Paste (Ctrl-V). At this point the equations need to be filled down to the extent of the data. Select cell E12 which defines the upper left. Scroll down to the very bottom of the data, in this case row 3416. Shift-Click on cell J3416. This will result in all cells bounded by E12 on the upper left to J3416 on the lower right to be selected. Then do a Fill Down (Ctrl-D). This then results in the equations being pasted all the way down so we get the calculations done that we wanted for the entire extent of the data. Two values can be read off of the spreadsheet at this point. If you go to cell G3416 the total distance of the trip according to flat earth interpretation is 96.2 km and to cell I3416 the average speed is 83.1 km/h also according to flat earth theory. Next we will create a plot of speed versus time. Column J is speed smoothed over several data points and is what I will use because it minimizes the natural scatter in the data for a better looking plot. If you want to use the point to point speed just use column H for speed instead. So select from cell B12 to B3416. The way I like to do this is first select cell B12, then scroll all the way down and shift-click on cell B3416. Next we want to add to the selection cells J12 to J3416. The way I like to do this is first Ctrl-click on cell J12 and then scroll down and shift-click on cell J3416. Now that we have selected two separate columns, one defined by cells B12 to B3416, and the other defined by cells J12 to J3416, we can create a plot of this speed versus time data. So go to Insert, select Scatter, and then Scatter with straight lines is the one I like. This puts the plot in front of the spreadsheet table. I like to make it separate with its own tab. So right click in the right area of the plot and chose Move. Then click the button and accept the default name of Chart1 or give it your own name. I like to call it SpeedVsTimeSm, for speed versus time smoothed. This then is the speed versus time plot based on the flat earth interpretation of the data. This will eventually be compared with the equivalent plot based on the spherical earth interpretation of the data. What we will find is that the intervals where the speed was held constant with cruise control show up clearly and distinctly constant on the spherical earth interpretation, but with much variability on the flat earth interpretation.

So basically to get the equivalent calculations for the spherical earth surface model, repeat everything above, but instead using SphGeomMetricUnitsTemplate and working on file 906783SanJoseToBerkeleySph.

Once you do this you will get the results that I have summarized below.

Trip from San Jose to Berkeley

91.1 km (56.6 miles) by odometer

Duration by watch 1:10

Duration Start to Stop GPS 1:09:28

90.6 km 78.3 km/h ave speed 131 km/h top speed by GPS

90.67 km 78.32 km/h ave speed confirmed by calculations in Sph Excel spreadsheet

Speed versus Time plot for spherical model shows clear agreement with speedometer data

Speed versus Time plot for flat model shows large deviations from speedometer data

96.2 km 83.1 km/h ave speed by calculations in Flt Excel spreadsheet Inconsistent with odometer data

Spherical Earth model: Affirmed

Flat Earth model: Large deviations from reality

If I am able to display the Speed versus Time graphs I will show them here. If not they can be seen at the Scribd links.

Speed versus Time according to Flat theory

Speed versus Time according to Spherical theory

I have made these files available to the public through my Scribd account.

20171126171339-38065-data Text file

906783SanJoseToBerkeley Excel file

906783SanJoseToBerkeleyFlt Excel file

906783SanJoseToBerkeleySph Excel file

FltGeomMetricUnitsTemplate Excel file

SphGeomMetricUnitsTemplate Excel file

Anybody should be able to see the files by just going to the links. The graphs of Speed versus Time for both the spherical and flat cases should be able to be seen this way. To download the files you need a Scribd account, and a regular account should be free to set up.

I was not able to make the KML file Track-171126-105544 available through Scribd because it is not a supported file type.

I encourage people all over the world to take their own data and process it in this manner and report their results. Let me know if you have any questions. Comments are welcome. Thank you.

How Anyone can be a Hands-On Spherical Earth Affirmer – A Global Call to Action

VERY STRONG EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE AFFIRMING THE SPHERICITY OF THE EARTH

A fairly common story from flat earth advocates is that they started out thinking that the earth being flat was a ridiculous idea, so they started trying to prove that the earth was a sphere, and since they were not able to do that as easily as they thought they should, at some point they gave up and concluded that the earth must therefore be flat. I know there is more to their overall spiel, but this is a significant part of what a lot of them say.

Well, I have gotten to the point where I feel that I have proved that the earth is a sphere, at least to my own personal and professional satisfaction. That does not mean that I have refuted every single flat earth argument, nor have I done experiments in all possible areas that might bear upon the issue. But I have done enough experiments and analysis that I do feel at peace knowing with confidence of the fact that the earth is a sphere. And I want to share with people all over the world how they can do simple experiments right where they live to verify for themselves that the earth is a sphere.

I welcome anyone to comment on this presentation as well as any of my other blog posts. Flat earth advocates, I challenge you to show me where I have made any errors in math, science, or logic.

SURFACE OF A SPHERICAL EARTH VS THAT OF A FLAT CIRCULAR DISK EARTH – CONCLUSIONS FROM INDISPUTABLE DIFFERENCES IN GEOMETRICAL PROPERTIES

The basic idea is that the geometrical properties of the surface of a sphere are very different than the geometrical properties of the surface of a flat circular disk. The spherical earth is laid out in terms of a defined grid of latitude and longitude. Any point on the surface of the earth can be uniquely specified by its coordinates of latitude and longitude. The azimuthal equidistant map is in reality just a projection of the spherical earth onto a circular disk. So the defined grid on this map of latitude and longitude is equivalent to that of the spherical earth map, with one exception. The nature of the projection causes the south pole, a point on the spherical surface of the earth, to project into a circle, the outer boundary of the azimuthal equidistant map. Flat earth advocates often present the azimuthal equidistant map as a flat earth map with the north pole at the center of the circular disk and the south “pole” not as a pole or single point, but as an outer boundary of the commonly known earth. But when people point out the obvious problems with this map in terms of giving unrealistic distances between points on the map, flat earth advocates often say that they know there are problems, and they are still working on getting an accurate flat earth map.

The azimuthal equidistant map is an accurate map of the spherical earth, where the map happens to be flat. But it must be interpreted properly to be useful. For example, any straight line distances between points that run exactly north south will scale properly. But any straight line distances between points that deviate at all from running north south will not scale properly. This is why when one tries to interpret the azimuthal equidistant map as a map of an actual flat earth, in which case the distances should scale properly in any and all directions, a distance between Perth Australia and Sydney Australia of around 5000 miles is determined when in reality we know the distance between these cities to be around 2000 miles.

Since the earth is really a sphere, there is no way that flat earth advocates will ever be able to tell you where anything is on the flat earth map in a way that all the distances will scale properly with reality. It seems clear that they maintain that the north pole is at the center of the circular disk and that the south “pole” is at the outer ring or boundary, and the equator is a circle half way between the north pole and the southern ring, but once they put that stuff on the map, why can’t they put the rest of the stuff on the map? The more that they try to put on the flat earth map, the more it exposes the flaws in this flat earth theory.

Even locating the equator exposes a fatal contradiction in their flat earth model. For the real distance around the equator on the real spherical earth is around 25,000 miles whereas the distance around the flat earth map’s equator is around 39,000 miles.

This and other implications of Flat Earth Science poses many contradictions with our world’s sophisticated system of weights and measures, geography, navigation, science, and commerce, that has taken civilization hundreds if not thousands of years to perfect to the very high level of precision and accuracy that has provided many benefits to humanity, but unfortunately has also been used in destructive and evil endeavors.

Countless examples could be found, but here I offer just one. In 1986 the aircraft Voyager set a record of flying around the world non-stop without having to re-fuel. They stayed pretty close to the equator for most of the trip except for when they took off from Edwards AFB in California and headed towards Hawaii, and upon return came up through Mexico back to their starting point in California. So the actual distance traveled by this plane was around 25,000 miles, but if the same route was done on a flat earth map the distance would have been over 34,000 miles. So their average speed reported as around 115 mph should have been over 156 mph. But wouldn’t the pilots have noticed this on their airplane’s airspeed indicator? So according to flat earth science this record needs to be revised, for it is a much more impressive accomplishment on the flat earth than on the spherical earth. Just think of the many other world records that will now need to be revised due to the proper application of flat earth science.

DO YOUR OWN TESTS AND YOU TOO CAN BECOME A HANDS-ON SPHERICAL EARTH AFFIRMER

But anyone can do their own simple experiments right where they live to verify that the readings conform to reality on the spherical earth model, but not on the flat earth model. I have done this for where I live in San Jose, California.

Basically what you do is drive your car a few miles between defined coordinate points on a road that runs west east and measure the distance with your car’s odometer. And then you do the same for a road that runs south north. From this data you can calculate the gradients, the west east gradient and the south north gradient, in terms of miles traveled per degree of longitude and miles traveled per degree of latitude, respectively.

Here’s the applicable equations that tell you what these gradients should be wherever you are on the spherical earth or the flat earth.

Spherical

Distance traveled/degree of longitude = (2*PI*Re*COS(latitude*(PI/180)))/360

Distance traveled/degree of latitude = (2*PI*Re)/360

Flat

Distance traveled/degree of longitude = ((90-latitude)/(90*360))*PI^2*Re

Distance traveled/degree of latitude = (2*PI*Re)/360

Where Re is the average radius of the spherical earth = 3958.755 miles, PI = 3.14159, and latitude is in degrees as usual.

However you got your coordinates of latitude and longitude for the points you traveled between, if you don’t trust these values and want to do some more checking on this, you can do the following. Go to any of several online sun calculators that will give you the time of solar noon where you are and also at some other place east or west of you and then verify that you get a difference in time of 4 minutes per degree of longitude. This is data that flat earth scientists should find very hard to dispute, because anyone can measure the difference in time for solar noon between two places. The data will be the same for all, no matter what their views on the shape of the earth are. So this should allow you to see if your longitude values you used for the points to determine your west east gradient make sense for where you live. For a check on latitude values you can check the sun angle for where you are at solar noon with the sun angle at a place either north or south of you and see if this makes sense. I am not going to go into the details of this here, as there is less potential for dispute here, because this is a case where the flat earth model and the spherical earth model happen to agree with each other. That is, on the south north gradient of miles traveled per degree of latitude, the value is a constant of 69.0933 miles per degree of latitude no matter where you are on either the spherical earth map or the flat earth map.

So basically what I did for where I live in San Jose is that back on the equinox of September 23, 2017 I verified the sun’s angle at solar noon and determined that it was indeed consistent with my latitude here. I took odometer readings with my car between defined points on both a west east road and a south north road, and calculated the gradients and found them to be consistent with what the spherical earth model would predict.

So based on the results I got I would have to be around 500 miles further north on a flat earth map in order for the results to be consistent with the flat earth model, somewhere around Sisters, Oregon on the spherical earth map.

If where you are, it is difficult to find roads that run close to south north or west east, just find the closest to that ideal and then correct the odometer reading from your car by multiplying by the cosine of the angle of deviation from the ideal path to the actual path to get the correct distance to use for calculating the gradients.

DETAILS OF THE DATA AND CALCULATIONS THAT I DID

Traveling from west to east was from 37.322909, -122.010161 to 37.323274, -121.937518. The odometer in my car said I had gone 4.1 miles. Notice that the latitudes of the two points are within 3 significant figures to the right of the decimal point to each other which is sufficient to establish that for practical purposes the points are east-west of each other. So calculating miles traveled per degree longitude = 4.1/(122.010161-121.937518) = 56.4 miles/degree longitude. Notice that since the odometer reading of 4.1 has only 2 significant figures, the result is only good to 2 significant figures, so it could be reported as 56 +/- 1 miles/degree longitude. Based on the spherical earth model the calculation is (2*PI*Rearth*COS(latitude*(PI/180)))/360 = 54.95 miles/degree longitude. So the experimentally determined value of 56 +/-1 is consistent with the spherical earth theoretical value of 54.95 within experimental uncertainty.

Traveling from south to north was from 37.321039, -122.014123 to 37.362467, -122.014167. The odometer in my car said I had gone 2.9 miles. Notice that the longitudes of the two points are within 3 significant figures to the right of the decimal point to each other which is sufficient to establish that for practical purposes the points are north-south of each other. So calculating miles traveled per degree latitude = 2.9/(37.362467-37.321039) = 70.0 miles/degree latitude. Notice that since the odometer reading of 2.9 has only 2 significant figures, the result is only good to 2 significant figures, so it could be reported as 70 +/- 1 miles/degree latitude. Based on the spherical earth model the calculation is (2*PI*Rearth)/360 = 69.1 miles/degree latitude. So the experimentally determined value of 70 +/-1 is consistent with both the spherical and flat earth theoretical values, which are the same, of 69.1 within experimental uncertainty

It is worth noting that in both cases above the experimentally determined number was a little greater than the theoretically calculated number. This could be due to the deviation of the actual path driven from a perfectly straight line.

According the flat earth geometry, you would need to be at about latitude 44.5 degrees to get a west east gradient of 54.9 miles per degree of longitude. The calculation is grad= ((90-latitude)/(90*360))*PI^2*Re = ((90-44.5)/(90*360))*3.14159^2*3958.755 = 54.9 miles per degree of longitude. So you would need to be at 44.5 degrees latitude on the flat earth map, where at this latitude on the spherical earth map you would be up right around Sisters, Oregon, if I keep the longitude the same as San Jose.

A CALL TO ACTION

Others all over the world could do similar measurements and calculations as I have done and determine if the results they get are consistent with the spherical earth map.

Remarkably, on the spherical earth the maximum west east gradient occurs at the equator with a value of 69.0933. But on the flat earth map you have to go up to 32.7 degrees latitude to get this same gradient, which would be right around the latitude of Yuma, Arizona on the spherical earth map. On the flat earth map, the gradient is 108.5 at the equator, and once you get down to the southern ring, the gradient is 217. In contrast, at the south pole of the spherical map the gradient is zero.

Ask any flat earth advocate to name one city on the earth where the west east gradient is greater than 100 miles per degree of longitude. There should be many according to flat earth theory, but they cannot even name one.

So much more can be said and further experiments done on this.

Flat earth advocates claim that GPS is not valid and it is not based on satellites, which they claim do not exist. Well, if you start doing experiments with GPS you will find that it is extremely accurate and also its results, when combined and compared with independent and complementary data, are consistent with the reality of a spherical earth.

Flat earth advocates will say something like, GPS is based on spherical earth geometry so that is why it works. But there is a problem with their logic. They are essentially saying that the spherical earth map is a projection of the real flat earth onto a sphere. Well, if that is the case, why can’t they provide a flat earth map that works giving us where things are on that map? They can’t. It is impossible. GPS can easily be shown to be consistent with a real spherical earth and its map when GPS experiments are done where trips are tracked with GPS combined with independent distance measurement methods, such as with a car’s odometer.

I am already working on these things and will report on the results in future posts.

I encourage others all over this Grand Spherical Earth that we share and live on to do their own similar experiments and report on their results also.

Gobsmacked by Flat Earth Theory – Reflections upon just 2 months of flat earth debunking

INTRODUCTION

I have been actively engaged in debunking flat earth theory arguments for the last couple of months. At this point, we are only 3 days away from the Flat Earth International Conference https://fe2017.com/ FEIC 2017 to be held in Raleigh North Carolina. The precise location is 201 Harrison Oaks Blvd, Cary, NC at 35.833, -78.772 on the spherical earth map but at a TBD (to be determined) location on the flat earth map. And a trivial point of curiosity is that it happens to be exactly 43.2 miles or 66.6 km, sorry just kidding, 69.5 km (great-circle distance) from Hightowers, North Carolina (36.327, -79.244 on the spherical earth map).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hightowers,_North_Carolina

Hightowers North Carolina

Are we really on the path to the total destruction of the globular earth as so many have come to know and love for so long? In just a few days? I offer some reflections. But first,

GOBSMACKED

Two nights ago I was doing some calculations on this flat earth theory stuff, and I was gob-smacked by the results I got. It showed how obviously ridiculous some of the claims of the flat earth advocates have been. So I have got to share that with you. I am sure I am not the first to have discovered this, but since I had never actually done these exact calculations before, I was surprised to discover how far off from reality some major flat earth promulgations have been. I was gobsmacked.

THE IMMOVABLE BM THAT JUST WON’T FLUSH

I discovered that on the equinox on the flat earth model, from anywhere on the equator the sun will rise exactly in the north-east, and at sunrise it will appear at an angle of 35 degrees up from the horizontal. (On the spherical earth in this case the sun rises exactly east and on the horizon.) Furthermore, from either the north pole or the southern ring the sun will appear at an angle of 45 degrees up from the horizontal. (This is clearly not what is seen from the poles on the spherical earth.) Again, I was gobsmacked. Later in this post I will present the details of how these things were determined, after I give my reflections on my two months of opposition to the flat earth movement, the immovable BM that just won’t flush.

REFLECTIONS

When I first started listening to the current flat earth advocacy movement about one and one half years ago, I have to admit that I was taken in by some of the arguments, even though there were some arguments that seemed immediately and clearly false to me (like the gravity is just buoyancy and density argument), and since I have been a student of conspiracy theories for many years, and many advocating this flat earth theory were also students of conspiracy theories with whom I would probably agree on many things, I kind of wanted the flat earth theory to be true, and was kind of rooting for them at first.

But once I started to do some of my own really serious research a little over two months ago and discovered that there were some truly fatal problems with flat earth theory as it was being promulgated, and especially when I discovered that literalist Bible believing Christians appeared to be a strong force behind this current flat earth movement

https://celebratetruth.org/

Celebrate Truth

I felt compelled that I had to speak out, so I started my blog.

I have concentrated upon doing my own research and coming to my own conclusions rather than taking in a lot of information from others who have been working on debunking flat earth theory for quite some time. I have had some limited communication with other flat earth debunkers, but not much. I am sure that probably most if not all of the conclusions I have come to, are in agreement with these others, as they should be, as math and science and logic form a system that has been proven over hundreds of years to be quite consistent with itself and reality.

So at this point, I have not refuted every single flat earth argument that has been proposed. It is kind of like playing wack-a-mole. If I ever find that I discover a flat earth argument that I either agree with or am not able to refute, I will certainly report my findings, as any good and honest scientist should do.

So here are some of the things I have learned from my serious involvement in the flat earth theory controversy over the last couple of months.

Flat earth advocates have a lot of arguments that seem to make some sense on the surface.

When you refute them, they do not answer back, or if they do it is not in a substantive manner, but instead involves throwing out vague arguments and/or insults.

Most of the time when I have made polite but substantive refutations on flat earther Youtube channels, I have found that my comments are not allowed.

When you point out to flat earth advocates problems with the azimuthal equidistant map that they for the most part have been vigorously using to promulgate their flat earth theory, the more knowledgeable ones will say that they know there are problems with that map, and they are still working on getting an accurate flat earth map.

Well I am sorry, but many if not most of their arguments that they have been putting out to justify flat earth theory have depended upon that map and their acceptance of it. If they now say that there are problems with the map that they are still working on solving, it is really like they are saying that most if not all of their previous arguments have been spurious, but “we are still committed to a flat earth as the Bible clearly teaches us, so please continue listening to us and be patient, and eventually we will prove that the earth really is flat, scientifically.”

And how flat is the flat earth? At least those in the spherical earth camp can tell you how spherical the spherical earth is. It is very close to a perfect sphere, but not quite. It is so close to a perfect sphere that assuming it is a perfect sphere for calculational purposes is plenty accurate for most purposes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Geodetic_System#WGS84

World Geodetic System WGS84

Have those in the flat earth movement not been deceptively raising false expectations in their followers in this flat earth concept for far too long? Have they no shame? How much money are people making off of this movement? Is it a money making scam preying on the gullible, mathematically and scientifically illiterate, and especially on the conspiracy minded population?

I have simply gotten to the point where I will seldom watch flat earther videos anymore. They simply do not deliver what they promise, so for the most part they are click bait.

I have debunked, rockets cannot work in space, the oceans would have been sucked into space, gravity is just buoyancy and density, and you cannot possibly see the planet Mercury from the earth according to spherical earth and solar system theory.

I have heard some of the most ridiculous arguments from flat earth advocates. Like they have special airline planes in the southern hemisphere that can fly 900 miles per hour, and that there is no such thing as a sound barrier.

PROPER ANGER TOWARDS THOSE WHO HAVE DECEIVED US

If one discovers that they have been deceived by someone, I think it is normal to feel some anger toward those who did the deceiving. So to the extent that I bought into some of the flat earth arguments, bought and read some of the books, and spent a lot of time watching their videos, I do have some anger towards these people. The ones who I am the most upset with are those who are knowingly peddling information that they know to be false, for some reason, whether it is for making money off of gullible and scientifically illiterate people, or whether they are paid government agents seeking to infiltrate and destroy legitimate truth movements and students of real conspiracies. For those who have been taken in and have become real believers that the earth is flat I have more sympathy for, for we are all as human beings subject to error and being deceived.

Maybe one of the first things that should be announced at the flat earth conference is an apology for all of the false arguments that they have previously been pushing so hard, but now, finally, are having to abandon, because they just don’t add up.

I have a certain amount of anger toward Christian preachers who have been preaching the “turn or burn” gospel which I grew up hearing and have since after many years of study come to not believe. I realize that probably a large portion of these are people who mean well and truly believe what they are teaching is the truth. But they have been guilty of the sin of claiming to be sure about something that no one could possibly be sure about, and they should have known better, but again, this is what deception does to people.

Flat earth advocates are guilty of a worse sin in that they are claiming to be sure about something that can and has been proven to be false. I feel that they are simultaneously committing blasphemy against God and science, if that is possible.

COULD CURRENT FLAT EARTH MOVEMENT BE A GOVERNMENT HATCHED PSYOP?

Can we imagine the hatching of a plan deep in the bowels of the intelligence agencies prior to the recent resurrection of the flat earth movement? (I say resurrected because there was a flat earth movement 150 years ago uncannily similar to the movement of today as documented in the book “Flat Earth: The History of An Infamous Idea” by historian Christine Garwood.) My review of her book on Amazon is here

https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/RA0IP2ZYH21RW/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B0052Z3J2E

Hightower review of “Flat Earth: The History of An Infamous Idea”

Could the hatching of such a plan have possibly been expressed something like this. “We have convinced most people that we went to the moon. We have convinced most people that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone nut assassin of JFK, that 9-11 was a conspiracy of Osama Bin Laden and 19 Arab hijackers and a few more, and countless other cover stories for the gullible masses for operations that we actually planned and carried out. Now we are going to convince a large portion of people that the earth is flat, and the people who for the most part we will convince of this are students of conspiracy theories who have seen through so many of our other lies, such as the moon landings that we faked. Do you believe we can do this? No way. OK, you just watch us.” Could NASA actually be in favor of the flat earth movement because it will somehow help them maintain the lie that we actually went to the moon, once the flat earth movement, that places so much emphasis on the moon landings having been faked, crashes and burns?

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/20/flat-earth-believers-youtube-videos-conspiracy-theorists

The Guardian article on Flat Earth Believers from 2016

IS ALL OF SCIENCE FAKE?

Man may have made some wrong turns in philosophy, science, religion, and theology, and other areas, but that does not nullify large portions of these areas of study that have a large portion of truth in them. Some flat earthers say that because NASA faked the moon landings we know that the entire space program is fake. I am sorry, but this is not sound logic. This would be like saying that because our government lied to us about the JFK assassination, that they lie to us about everything. They lie to us about a lot, but not everything.

DETAILS OF HOW I WAS GOBSMACKED TWO NIGHTS AGO

So I was looking into comparing spherical earth theory to flat earth theory for the equinox, that we just had on September 23, 2017.

And to make it simple I decided to look at this from the standpoint of an observer at the equator. On the equinox, if you are anywhere on the equator, the sun will rise exactly in the east, at solar noon it will be exactly overhead, and it will set exactly in the west. You can view this as either the sun stationary and the earth rotating once every 24 hours, or as the earth stationary and the sun going around the earth once every 24 hours. Geometrically it makes no difference how you view it. So this means that from your point of view on the equator with the sun directly overhead at solar noon, you will see the sun moving or going around at an angular rate of 360 degrees per 24 hours, which works out to 1 degree per every 4 minutes or 0.25 degrees per minute.

Now in order to compare this to what the flat earth model would dictate, I will make it so the sun will be directly overhead at solar noon at every point on the equator. This means that the sun is circling over the flat disk shaped earth (with the north pole at the center and the equator 6218 miles from the north pole) exactly over the equator and making one complete circuit every 24 hours.

The circumference around the equator of the flat earth is 39,071 miles. The sun is therefore traveling at a speed of 39,071/(24*60) = 27.1 miles per minute. Equating angular rate of sun movement between spherical and flat models, for they must be the same because this is what an observer on the earth sees, gives this equation 0.25*(PI/180) = 27.1/As where As is the altitude of the sun on the flat earth model. Solving for As gives an altitude of the sun of 6218 miles. So on the flat earth from the observer at a point on the equator, if they go back in time 6 hours before solar noon, the sun will be seen rising in exactly the north-east direction. So right here we see that the flat earth model is far removed from the reality of what one actually observes from the equator on the equinox, that the sun rises in exactly the east direction. Since the sun is at the same altitude as the distance from the north pole to the equator, an observer at the north pole would see the sun at an angle of 45 degrees from the horizontal, and an observer at the south pole (southern ring for flat earth model) would also see the sun at the same angle of 45 degrees from the horizontal, both of these predicted observations of the flat earth model being very far removed from reality.

The hypotenuse of the right triangle with two equal sides of 6218 miles is 8794 miles. This means that the equatorial observer will see the sun rising in exactly the north-east direction at an angle of arctan (6218/8794) = 35.3 degrees up from the horizontal. The hypotenuse of this right triangle is calculated to be 10,770 miles, so this would be the distance from the equatorial observer to the sun when it is rising. This again demonstrates how flat earth theory predictions are very far from reality.

THE END

T Mark Hightower turned down as FEIC speaker but gives “thumbs up” Flat Earth A$$hole

Four days ago I felt compelled to make an offer to speak at the upcoming Flat Earth International Conference in Raleigh North Carolina on November 9-10, 2017. The text of the email I sent making this offer is pasted below. Since 4 days have elapsed and the only response I have gotten was a negative response from one of the speakers who was cc’d on my email, it seems clear that they are not interested in having me speak.

After I sent the email below, a friend of mine referred me to a Youtube video by Flat Earth A$$hole, published October 25, 2017, entitled “The End of the FAKE Flat Earth.”

Flat Earth A$$hole Youtube video

I had heard of this guy, but had never watched any of his videos before. So I watched the whole thing, even though it was one hour and 5 minutes long, so that I could be prepared to intelligently discuss it with my friend. A major point of his video is showing that the azimuthal equidistant map in the shape of a circular disk with the sun and moon circling over it, which has so prominently been promulgated by the flat earth movement as their flat earth map and model, is simply not consistent with verifiable data that all of us on the earth have access to and can see for ourselves. His video has a lot of vulgar language, but I gave it a “thumbs up” because I definitely agree with his arguments against the azimuthal equidistant map as a flat earth map. Amazingly, he is still holding on to his view that the earth is definitely flat. This is how he describes this video of his.

“If this video resonates as truth with you please share the video on any and all social media platforms. Feel free to mirror this video on YouTube or wherever else you want to. The AE map is done and the time for a Boycott of that map and circle sun model is now!”

My offer to speak at FEIC is pasted below

October 31, 2017

To: Flat Earth International Conference 2017 organizers, Mr. and Mrs. Robbie Davidson

Cc: Mr. and Mrs. Bob Knodel, Mr. Mark Sargent, Mr. David Weiss, Mr. Rob Skiba

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Robbie Davidson,

I would like to offer to present my recent ground breaking flat earth theory research findings at the upcoming Flat Earth International Conference to be held in Raleigh NC on November 9-10, 2017.

Although there is some humor and satire in some of my work, I am serious about making this offer, and research conclusions I have reached are based on applying sound logic and math to some pretty commonly promulgated tenets of current flat earth theory. We should not be afraid to take Flat Earth Theory and Science wherever it leads us.

I think that my views as a retired NASA engineer, a student of conspiracy theories, and a devout Christian Universalist, will offer to your audience both scientific and religious perspectives that they might otherwise be missing. This would have the potential to be comforting to so many wrapped up in endless conspiracy theories with so many fears: the future, Satan and demons, nephilim giants, the wrath of God, and an endless punishment in hell if they don’t have the right beliefs.

I think you can see by my recent blog posts referenced below that I am a serious student and researcher of flat earth theory and quite capable of making new discoveries in applying flat earth theory to take it where it has never been before.

https://steemit.com/@tmhightower/

http://tmarkhightower.blogspot.com/

(Same posts are at both blog sites.)

Here are two examples of recent blog post titles that show original research and conclusions that to my knowledge have not yet been discovered and reported on within the flat earth theory and science research community.

Former NASA engineer makes major Flat Earth Theory discovery today October 17, 2017

Flat Earth Tri-Location – Former NASA engineer presents rigorous derivation of previously reported discovery

Even in the next few days I have planned some ground breaking experiments that I am really excited about and hope to have the results ready to present at the upcoming Flat Earth International Conference, if I might be so privileged to do so.

I eagerly await hearing from you and excitedly anticipate the prospect of possibly being able to present at the Flat Earth International Conference 2017.

Thank you.

In the Love of God and Jesus Christ which Never Fails,

Mark

T Mark Hightower

Most egregious Flat Earth claim – Gravity is simply buoyancy & density – Debunked

First of all, buoyancy depends on gravity. If there is no gravity, there can be no such phenomenon as buoyancy. Look up the definition of buoyancy on Wikipedia or search buoyancy NASA on google, if you don’t believe it.

If gravity is simply buoyancy and density then why does hot air rise and not go down instead, or sideways? I’ll tell you why. Because we live in an environment where there is a downward force acting on things based on their mass. This can be experimentally verified and it does not depend on assuming the earth is a sphere. If I put 5 apples in a grocery scale I will get a certain weight (force). If I put an additional 5 apples of about the same size in the scale, the scale will register about twice the weight. So the force known as buoyancy depends on this downward force proportional to mass. This is why the deeper you go in a body of water the more pressure there is. This is why the higher you go in the atmosphere the less pressure there is.

Liquid water is nearly incompressible, so its density does not change much as you go deeper. In contrast, the atmosphere is made up of a mixture of gases, and they are very much compressible. So as you go up in the atmosphere, with the decreasing pressure the gaseous mixture becomes thinner or less dense because it is becoming less compressed.

If a mass of air were of the same temperature as the surrounding air, it would not tend to go up or down, because the upward forces around it based on decreasing pressure with altitude are balanced by the downward forces upon it based up its mass. But if the air were hotter than its surrounding air, its density would be less so that the downward force based on its mass would be less than the upward force due to decreasing pressure with altitude so the resulting balance of forces would cause it to rise. This is how a hot air balloon works.

Interestingly, forces greater than 1 g (i.e. 1 earth’s gravity) acting upon masses and proportional to mass can be artificially produced mechanically with centrifuges, or in an airplane in a steep coordinated turn, where a very steep turn may be alternately referred to as a high g turn, or pulling many g’s.

Flat Earth Tri-Location – Former NASA engineer presents rigorous derivation of previously reported discovery

Warning: The following is satire. It could be viewed as blasphemous to some religious zealots (as I once was). Read at your own risk. If you are easily offended by satire, and not at all able to make fun of yourselves and your fellow earthians, whether flat or spherical or undeclared, as well as your creator God if you so believe, and religion, especially of the narrow-minded type, then you should stop reading right now. Get thee quickly far from here. You have been warned. Future complaints from those who proceed to read without heed and are offended by the satire will be ignored.

INTRODUCTION

As promised in the previous announcement of this discovery in flat earth theory made on October 17, 2017, the detailed derivation is given below of tri-location on the flat earth. It is shown that while one is present on the flat earth, they are actually simultaneously present in three distinct places, dubbed primary, secondary, and tertiary, hence tri-located on the flat earth. This derivation is presented to all flat earth researchers and other more mainstream scientists and others for open peer review.

LONGITUDE

First consider longitude. Whether you are on the spherical earth map or the flat earth map if you travel west to east (or vice versa) your position will change in longitude. In both cases if you travel a total of 360 degrees of longitude you will end up right back where you started. On the spherical earth the earth rotates once every 24 hours. If you used a reference frame of a stationary (non-rotating) spherical earth the sun would appear to be circling around the earth once every day traversing a total of 360 degrees of the earth’s longitude each day. On the flat earth the sun is considered to be circling above the stationary flat earth and around the north pole so that in one day it traverses a total of 360 degrees of the earth’s longitude. So longitude is consistent between the spherical earth and flat earth models. If you define zero longitude as the prime meridian through the Royal Observatory at Greenwich London for both spherical and flat models, longitude would have to be perfectly equivalent between both models. That means that if you are at a certain longitude on the spherical earth model, you would have to be at the same longitude on the flat earth model.

LATITUDE

Now consider latitude. Whether you are on the spherical earth map or the flat earth map if you travel south to north (or vice versa) your position will change in latitude. In both cases if you start at any point on the equator and travel north a total of 90 degrees of latitude you will end up at the north pole. The distance you will have traveled from equator to the north pole will have been the same whether on the spherical model or the flat model. Latitude is defined as zero at the equator and positive as you go north. Latitude is defined as negative as you go south from the equator. So on the spherical model if you start at the equator and travel south to -90 degrees latitude you will end up at the south pole. On the flat model if you start anywhere on the equator and travel south to -90 degrees latitude, instead of ending up at a point you end up on the “polar” ring. But the distance traveled from equator to south pole on the spherical model will be the same as the distance traveled from the equator to the “polar” ring on the flat model. And that distance is also the same as the distance from the north pole to the equator (same whether sphere or flat as earlier established). It is clear from the above that latitudes are equivalent whether on a spherical or flat model. Therefore if you are at a certain latitude on the spherical earth model, you must also be at the same latitude on the flat earth model.

PRIMARY LOCATION

So based on the above two paragraphs, when you are at a certain latitude and longitude according to the spherical earth map, you are actually at the same latitude and longitude on the flat earth. So when you realize that you are on the Flat Earth, this is the primary place where you are, at the same latitude and longitude as you would be if you were on the imaginary spherical earth. But beyond this, is where it really starts to get interesting and exciting.

SECONDARY LOCATION

This is where it really helps to take some of your own measurements right where you live to make this as real to you as possible. For me, I live in San Jose, CA, so I used my car and its odometer to measure the distance between two defined points of longitude on a street that runs east-west, as well as between two defined points of latitude on a street that runs north-south. From this data you can calculate the south to north gradient in terms of miles traveled per degree of latitude, as well as the west to east gradient in terms of miles traveled per degree of longitude. For the two gradients I got 69.1 miles traveled per degree of latitude, and 55 miles traveled per degree of longitude. My location in San Jose is approximately 37.3 degrees latitude.

The south to north gradient is as expected and would be the same whether on a spherical or flat earth model. The west to east gradient however needs to be factored into the correct equation for a flat circular disk in order to determine the latitude at which this gradient would occur. That equation is gradient = 55 = (((90-deg lat)/90)*3959*3.14159^2)/360 and solving for latitude gives 44.4 degrees. This means that while I am at 37.3 deg lat in San Jose on the Flat Earth as my primary location, I am also at 44.4 deg lat on the Flat Earth as my secondary location, which is just a few miles from Sisters Oregon. As remarkable as this is, to realize that on the flat earth I am actually at two distinct places at the same time, it gets even more remarkable as we apply more principles of flat earth theory to the problem.

TERTIARY LOCATION

Back on the equinox of September 23, 2017 I took some of my own data where I live and found it to be consistent with what one would expect based on looking up the various parameters on the web. Although I did not travel personally to the equator, I am relying on generally accepted parameters available on how one would experience the equinox there. Based on this, and the flat earth assumption, I was able to determine that the sun was 5322 miles above the surface of the flat earth at the equator on the equinox. Based on where I saw the sun in San Jose on the equinox, and the flat earth assumption, I was able to determine that I am 4054 miles north of the equator where I am in San Jose, CA, which would put me at 4054/69.1 = 58.7 deg latitude. Incredibly then, this puts me up in the northern part of British Columbia Canada, a few miles from Fort Nelson BC. So this would be my tertiary location.

So now I have established that according to flat earth theory, when I am present in San Jose, CA on the flat earth as my primary location, I am actually simultaneously present in two other distinct places on the flat earth, at the same longitude, but at two distinct places further north in latitude, one placing me in Oregon and the other placing me in Canada.

ADVANTAGES OF FLAT EARTH SCIENCE OVER CONVENTIONAL SCIENCE

Within conventional physics, science, and mathematics, when different lines of reasoning and logic lead to different conclusions, called by those in the discipline contradictions, theories are often considered to be refuted. But within flat earth science, also known by some as Biblically Based Science (BBS or Double B S), these apparent contradictions of the theory are actually viewed as further confirmation of the theory. This is what is so beautiful and elegant about flat earth science, the more that it is seemingly refuted by conventional scientists and others, the more it is actually established as the absolute truth from God and His word the Bible, which cannot lie. Satan is so clever to concoct so many contradictions to deceive us, but we know his game, as God’s word the Bible tells us, he is the father of lies. The more Satan lies, the stronger our faith in the immovable flat earth becomes, so that the truth of the flat earth is irrefutable.

WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING

Many flat earth advocates and believers, having heard of these discoveries for the first time, are saying that they always felt like they were in multiple places at the same time, and now they are comforted to know that they were not crazy after all, that Biblical science confirms what they always knew in their hearts to be true.

LOOKING TO THE FUTURE

Future possibilities and ramifications of this research are far reaching and possibly limitless. That tri-location has been proven on the flat earth, multi-location is not ruled out. As further advances are made in flat earth theory, the limit may even be beyond the firmament, or even beyond the firmament of firmaments.

Comments, feedback, questions, further insights are sought from fellow flat earth researchers, establishment scientists, and others, as a period of peer review is conducted. After a period of peer review extending until the end of calendar year 2017, a report will be made on the results of the peer review, and its ramifications for the future of flat earth research in the twenty-first century and the ages to come.

Where on earth on The Flat Earth will the Flat Earth International Conference 2017 be held?

I pose this question to all within the current Flat Earth Theory advocacy movement, especially those who will be presenting at and attending the upcoming Flat Earth International Conference to be held November 9-10, 2017 in Raleigh, North Carolina. I have already posed this same question to three of the speakers to be at the conference, in private communications, Rob Skiba and Mark Sargent (myself having been a purchaser and reader of their books), and also, Bob Knodel, but so far, have gotten no responses.

Can you inform the World Community of the coordinates of latitude and longitude for Raleigh, NC on the flat earth (in particular 201 Harrison Oaks Blvd, Cary, NC 27513), the location of the upcoming Flat Earth International Conference? It would seem very odd indeed if flat earth advocates could not even tell the world where on the flat earth they are holding their flat earth conference. I realize that flat earth theory is quite primitive at this point, but could you at least determine where on the flat earth map Raleigh, NC is within a 100 mile radius? This seems like a very legitimate and fair question.

The coordinates on the spherical earth map for 201 Harrison Oaks Blvd, Cary, NC are 35.833, -78.772.

The World Community eagerly awaits The Flat Earth Movement’s answer to this very simple and important question.

Former NASA engineer makes major Flat Earth Theory discovery today October 17, 2017

It was discovered today by T. Mark Hightower, formerly an engineer with NASA but now retired and actively engaged in flat earth theory research, that current flat earth theory implies that while one is present in one place on the flat earth they are actually at the same time also in two other far away distinct locations on the flat earth. (It may alternatively be possible that no one is actually present anywhere on the flat earth, but flat earth researchers consider this the null case where further study is not merited.) The ramifications of this discovery are far reaching for the fledgling resurgence of flat earth research in the recent past as many were hoping that flat earth theory would be a tremendous simplification of our understanding of God’s fish bowl in which we live, but now it appears that flat earth theory may be just as complex, enigmatic, and paradoxical, as Einstein’s theories of relativity, quantum mechanics, string theory, and multiverse theory, where our cozy fishbowl with the ceiling of a planetarium was erroneously viewed as being the result of a big bang billions of years ago resulting in an expansive and seemingly infinite multidimensional space time continuum containing countless galaxies, stars, black holes, planets, moons, asteroids, hemorrhoids, comets, explosive diarrhea, and aliens. Practical applications of these new discoveries are firmaments away, but some day it is hoped that the average Flat Earthian will be able to transport him or herself to other places within the flat earth fishbowl instantly and at will, thereby saving tremendous amounts of energy, and also making it unnecessary for NASA to continue faking the launching of satellites and other spacecraft, saving even more money and energy and improving NASA’s public image on Youtube, Facebook, and Google, and also making it much less likely that it will be necessary to target NASA employees in a future false flag incident possibly made to appear as if it were carried out by a lone nut Flat Earthian. Rigorous documentation of this discovery will be given in the near future (perhaps in a week or two) for peer review by fellow flat earth researchers, as well as conventional scientists and others.

The Gospel of Salvation through Jesus Christ with the Fine Print

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

I am going to give a pretty lengthy description of how I came to understand and conclude these things based on my experiences in life. But I want to try to give a brief introduction first, so you have some idea where I am going with this before you read the whole thing.

So I maintain that there is a lot of fine print associated with the gospel of Jesus Christ that many who become Christians don’t learn about upfront but instead over time they learn these things that can be very worrisome and distressing.

I believe that a key factor in this is that there are many different belief systems and denominations within Christianity and that most difficulties arise from dogmatic teachings on things that are clearly debatable and can have widely differing yet legitimate interpretations so no one can really know for sure who is right, even those who think, claim, and preach that they are right. And a common theme is that God is a pretty angry God toward sin and even though He may not want to do this, His perfectly good and righteous nature forces Him to place some of His creatures in a chamber of unending torture known as hell, if they don’t come around to seeing things His way during their short time on this earth before they die. It took me a long time but eventually I started to see that some pretty major doctrines are not as clear cut as you might have originally been lead to believe, causing the whole house of cards to come tumbling down. So I have come to the conclusion that to teach something as absolutely true, especially when it has very harsh ramifications, when you really cannot know for sure if you are correct, is one of the worst sins.

I have also come to the conclusion that Christian Universalism, the belief that God will ultimately save all through Jesus Christ, makes the most sense to me.

So the typical gospel I was raised under goes something like this. We are all sinners and are headed to hell, but God sent his Son Jesus Christ to die for your sins so that you could be saved from hell, but you need to accept (believe, trust) Jesus Christ to be saved. If you don’t do this before you die, then you will go to hell forever. There are no second chances.

If you end up believing, here is some of the fine print you might eventually come across. Calvinists teach that God predestines many to hell. What if you were predestined by God to hell? There is such a thing as an unpardonable sin taught in the Bible which is quite debatable exactly what it is, but what if you had already committed this before trying to be saved by faith in Christ? Some will say that you can be too far gone into sin to be saved, like Judas Iscariot, who they say couldn’t have been saved even if he wanted to be. Some will say that there are other things that are important and necessary for salvation besides faith in Christ, such as water baptism, but others say that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone, and if you add anything to faith in Christ then you are not saved. And then there are many areas of disagreement among Bible believing Christians where some feel that holding certain views are really contradicting the bedrock of their faith in God and Jesus Christ. Here we have young earth creationists, old earth creationists, and believe it or not even today we have a revival of flat earth creationism. And there are those who reject evolution as a lie from the Devil, and those who accept evolution as a part of how God created. Some believe in once saved always saved, and others believe that you can lose your salvation. For some Satan, demons, and Satanism, figure prominently in their view of evil, and others not so much. For some Bible prophecy being fulfilled even today and in the future is a major part of their faith, but others not so much. Some put the modern state of Israel on a pedestal believing it is God’s regathering of His chosen people as prophesied in the Bible, whereas other do not think that this is the case at all.

Many preachers are a lot like the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain, scaring people with the prospect of unending torture by God in hell and they are the messengers of God to warn you and instruct you how to avoid such a horrible fate. But can anyone know for sure that this horrible message is true in every way? Perhaps the preacher should confess that he is not absolutely sure of what he is preaching. What if the word “unending” is the key word where the message is not correct. What if hell is a place of serious but finite punishment from God for the purpose of correction and ultimate salvation with God? For those who end up believing the preacher’s threatening message, the preacher’s power and authority over them is certainly made very strong.

So this concludes the introduction. Next will be a more lengthy discussion to explain how I came to these views. After that I will make an attempt to give the gospel with my own Fine Print.

WHY THE FINE PRINT OF THE GOSPEL IS SO IMPORTANT

Most people at some point in their lives have experienced having been convinced to buy into something and then later when they learn more, what I am calling the fine print, they have buyer’s remorse, wishing they had not been so hasty in making the decision to buy. Sometimes they can reverse the process, other times not.

When people have been through an experience such as this hopefully they learn to not be as hasty in the future and make sure they carefully read and understand the fine print, and perhaps sleep on it at least, and/or consult friends or other trusted sources of information, before making a hasty decision that they may end up regretting.

The seriousness or gravity of the decision certainly is a key factor. Picking a barber to go to for a haircut may deserve some careful consideration but the ramifications of making a poorly considered choice likely will not be of major consequence. But if you are going to need some surgery where the risks are high and you have the time to carefully select a surgeon, then giving this decision very careful attention is certainly in order. And another factor would be the factor of urgency. If you have been seriously injured in a car accident and have been treated by paramedics and you are being rushed to a hospital for further emergency treatment, then your time and opportunity for decisions may by necessity be quite limited.

So I want to examine the giving of the Gospel of Salvation through Jesus Christ (the sales pitch) so as to convince the recipient to make a decision to buy the product, to buy into it, to believe and be Saved, within the context of the other sorts of decisions I have described above.

So I need to give at least a bare bones description of what the typical gospel presentation might be like, if nothing else to at least have something as a starting point for the sake of discussion. So here goes. We are all sinners and are headed to hell, but God sent his Son Jesus Christ to die for your sins so that you could be saved from hell, but you need to accept (believe, trust) Jesus Christ to be saved. If you don’t do this before you die, then you will go to hell forever. There are no second chances.

Now you will notice a couple of things about the nature of the sales pitch of the gospel. It is very serious, more serious than brain surgery, but also there is a certain urgency to it, because if you don’t decide to buy it right then and there, and you should die before you have a chance to make that decision, you could end up going to hell forever.

And often the above giving of the gospel will add a suggested prayer you can say to God if you want to be saved, the so called sinner’s prayer, where you basically agree that you are a sinner, and you believe in Jesus Christ and want to be saved. And you are told that if you said such a prayer to God, and really meant it, that God will have saved you. Depending on the situation, like if it were a Billy Graham crusade, you might be asked to come forward to show your act of commitment to Jesus Christ.

Anyway, the above is basically the kind of gospel I grew up under. I don’t recall my parents ever spelling it out like this to me, but I heard it enough in our church and when we visited other churches and also when we actually went to a Billy Graham crusade, to get the basic message. I recall responding positively to the gospel on numerous occasions, usually in silent prayer to God. But my earliest recollection of God and Jesus are from when I was about five years old. I don’t recall having heard the gospel at that young age, but I do recall having a children’s Bible with a painting of Jesus on the cover with a bunch of children all around Him. I do recall I had a positive attitude toward God. My parents’ taught me that when you die you go to heaven. I believed that, but my only concern was would there be toys in heaven? I don’t recall hearing anything about hell at that age, and I am glad for that.

So when I was a senior in high school with a troubled life and searching for God, a friend of mine said I should talk to his mom. So she introduced me to a type of Bible teaching that was of the same basic theological background as the church I had been raised in, except that the Bible teacher (pastor) had a very dogmatic militaristic style and he really emphasized going to an unending hell if you didn’t believe, and many people all over the world followed his teaching by listening to his Bible sermons on reel to reel audio tapes. So I ended up becoming a gung ho follower of this guy’s teaching. I swallowed everything, hook, line, and sinker. He taught “the truth” and I now knew “the truth.” I was so thankful to have found “the truth.” So while listening to his tapes, the first time I heard him give the gospel, I said the suggested prayer silently to God just to make sure I was saved in case I had not been saved before.

So let’s examine a little about what is going on here with this sort of scenario. You have an authority figure, a pastor or an evangelist, or perhaps it’s an ordinary believer sharing verses from the Bible and what they have learned from their pastor or evangelist, and of course you have the authority of God, from the Word of God, the Bible, which is the ultimate source that is being relied upon for the information that is being shared as the sales pitch of the gospel and how very serious a matter it is, and how very urgent it is as well to make a decision to believe before it is too late.

So suppose you are one who has responded positively to such a gospel sales pitch, as I did, and as many people do. You end up feeling tremendous relief that when you die you are not going to go to hell but instead you are going to go to heaven. You are grateful to God, Jesus Christ, the person who shared the gospel with you and convinced you to believe, and you look forward to moving forward and learning more about the truth of God and sharing your faith with others so they also can go to heaven when they die rather than hell.

So I want to use another example to compare to the above scenario to help us understand it from a very much human psychological standpoint. Suppose instead of the gospel, you had a friend who had become a distributor for some sort of multi-level marketing product, and they were showing you how they have made so much money, or those above them who got them to sign up had done very well and made a lot of money, and how there was very much the prospect of becoming independently wealthy by becoming a distributor for this multi-level marketing product so that you wouldn’t have to live the rest of your life as a wage slave, and you could spend more time raising and helping your family and doing all of the things that you ever wanted to do in your life. So you get carried away with all the positive prospects and sign up without looking into it very much, because there is really very little downside risk, but a lot of upside potential. The worst that could happen is that you become a distributor for a really good product that you are going to want to purchase and consume as a family anyway, but you will get a better deal on it because you are a distributor, and getting others to sign up under you will be a piece of cake, once people see how well you are doing, and how great the products are etc. Many people have been through this sort of thing, myself included, and have signed up, but never really made a success of it like you were originally sold on it and thought you would.

Well the gospel has a lot in common with the above multi-level marketing scenario. I have to credit the author and skeptic Michael Shermer as the source of this idea that witnessing for Jesus Christ by Christians (spreading the gospel far and wide) is kind of like multi-level marketing with Bibles.

Both have the same sort of sales pitch. The upside and downside of buying into the product differ in degree, but they both have the similarity of inducing a hasty decision to buy the product. For the gospel you have been told that you might end up going to hell forever if you don’t buy the product, and to buy the product is very simple. All you have to do is say a simple prayer to God and you are in, safe and sound forever,

Realize also, that if it were a friend, or neighbor, or stranger coming to your door, or a stranger street evangelist giving you the gospel and trying to get you to believe, it would be kind of like if any of these people were trying to get you to decide to have brain surgery like they have had done to themselves by a particular brain surgeon who they can personally testify to their abilities and the excellent results and you better decide to have it done right away before it is too late. How ridiculous this would be. So how ridiculous it also is when the gospel is given in the same way. How presumptuous and rude these people are. But of course they are justified in this approach because of the tremendous seriousness and gravity of the issue. People could go to hell forever if you don’t get the gospel to them.

Anyway, back to the scenario of the person who just became saved by saying the sinner’s prayer to God. So now you know the truth and how easy it is to be saved so you want to go tell everyone else about it so they all can be saved too.

But eventually you might start getting some of the fine print. And you might find that the fine print is actually different from different Christians. And you might discover some of the fine print by reading the Bible for yourself. I can only share how some of this ended up becoming apparent to me. So after learning more from the reel to reel tape Bible teacher, I learned that the tiniest bit of faith in Jesus Christ secures eternal salvation. This was very comforting. I thought, I must have actually been saved as a young boy then, because I certainly did believe. But when I shared this insight I had gained from the teachings with my friend’s mother, she told me that the teacher has since taught that if you invite Christ into your heart you are not saved. So I thought back to the way I heard the gospel back when I was a kid and I did seem to remember something about inviting Christ into your heart. So maybe when I was a kid there was something wrong about the way that I got saved so that I really wasn’t saved back then after all. But then what about now? I remembered that when I had re-affirmed my faith in Jesus Christ in prayer to God based on the direction of the reel to reel tape Bible teacher, I had just followed exactly his suggested prayer, which I recalled had three verbs in it, trust, believe, and receive. And I thought the word receive sounded like it could have a similar meaning to invite, so I thought, what if again I had not done it correctly, so perhaps even now I wasn’t saved.

So this got me off on the whole thing about doubting my salvation, which I have since learned is not all that uncommon.

But now let me just fast forward to where I am now looking back on everything I have learned since then that I would consider some of the fine print of the gospel that it would be better to share ahead of time to prospective converts in my view, instead of having this all be stuff they will learn unexpectedly over time, and often causing a lot of distress.

First of all, I have learned that most Bible teachers, pastors, evangelists, ordinary believers, preaching the gospel are simply spreading what they were taught by others, be it in seminary, or in church. They for the most part have not studied things for themselves and come to their own independent conclusions. And often times their seminaries and churches have statements of faith that they need to affirm just to be accepted to go to the school or to be considered in good standing at the church where they go.

And a really key point that took me many years to even find out that this was a legitimate option for a Biblically based belief system, was that there is a form of Christian theology known as Universalism that is traced back to some of the earliest church fathers in the early centuries after Christ, where it is believed that all will ultimately be saved through Jesus Christ.

Thomas Talbott, author of the book “The Inescapable Love of God” explains three types of Christian theologies, Augustinianism (aka Calvinism), Arminianism, and Universalism. Calvinism says that God is able to accomplish all that He wills, and it is His will that only some be saved, so that all others will go to hell forever. Arminianism says that it is God’s will that all be saved, but God is not able to accomplish all that He wills, because man’s will supersedes God’s will in this case, so many will go to hell forever. Universalism says that it is God’s will that all be saved, and that God is able to accomplish all that He wills, so that no one will be lost, that is, go to hell forever. Christian Universalism does not say that there is no hell, only that it is a place of correction of finite duration, so that all will ultimately be saved by God and welcomed into heaven.

Now it turns out you can find various scriptures in the Bible that appear to support any of the three theological systems described above. Those who support any one of the three views will seek to harmonize with their view the scriptures that don’t seem to agree with it and will perhaps bring in other arguments from logic, philosophy, and common sense to help support their view. Biblical interpretation is not an exact science as many would like to have you believe. I have come to be a supporter of the Universalism viewpoint. But I don’t have to prove it to be true (something no one could possibly do anyway) to make my point, and that is that Bible teachers and evangelists who preach the “turn or burn” gospel, threatening a never ending hell to those who do not believe, are committing the sin of claiming to be certain of something that they can’t possibly be certain of, if they are honest, well read, educated students of the Bible, theology, and history.

The Universalism viewpoint solves many theological problems. The other viewpoints have countless problems.

Before I started learning about Universalism a little over 10 years ago, I did not even know that there was such a form of Christian theology known as Universalism. I had heard of Calvinism and Arminianism but I did not even know which of these two viewpoints was taught as the truth by the church where I was raised or by my reel to reel tape Bible teacher. I guess I had gotten the impression that in either case, hell lasted forever, and that was really all that mattered, so there was no need to dig deeper.

So now I am going to list all of the sorts of things I heard or learned from Bible teaching and my own Bible reading through the years, before I came into looking into Universalism, that tended towards promoting doubt in one’s salvation.

So you will hear that God saves sinners, and that no sin is too great in order to be able to be saved by God. The Apostle Paul of the New Testament referred to himself as the worst sinner because he persecuted the church. But I eventually heard the Bible teacher I was listening to say that Judas Iscariot had rejected Jesus Christ so much that there was no possible way that he could be saved, that he was too far gone to be saved. So to me, this raises the question, how does anybody who has ended up trying to be saved by believing in Jesus Christ know whether or not they might have been too far gone to be saved before they tried to be saved by believing in Jesus Christ? And another question would be how great of a savior from sin is Jesus Christ if some can be too far gone to be saved by Him?

If one eventually learns what Calvinism is, that essentially God predestines some to hell, how does one who has tried to be saved by believing in Jesus Christ know whether or not God has already predestined them to hell?

And then there are all sorts of nitpicking about just what is necessary for salvation. Some go through the Bible and find every possible verse they can related to salvation and then come up with a lengthy list of all the things you need to do, such as repent, believe, trust, accept, receive, be baptized, and on and on. And this really becomes quite confusing. And then there will be those who say salvation is through faith alone in Christ alone, and they may go on to say that if you try to add anything to that you are not saved. So if you were at a Billy Graham crusade and you thought that you had to go forward to be saved and you did go forward, then you are really not saved. I am sorry, but I just happen by my God given nature to have a very logical and mathematical approach to things along with a tendency to be obsessive compulsive, so I can’t help but examine these things very carefully to see if they make sense and whether those who say these things are consistent. So I had heard the same Bible teacher who taught that you are not saved if you add anything to faith in Christ, also say that you are not saved until you tell God the Father that you are believing in Jesus Christ. So I then observed over listening to many Bible teaching lessons of his on tape that at the end when he would give the gospel, sometimes he would suggest that the individual pray silently to God that they are believing in Jesus Christ, and other times he would not say anything beyond just quoting some verses from the Bible related to believing in Jesus Christ for salvation. Is this because he really doesn’t know what the right way is, so he is hedging his bets and at least he will be right 50 % of the time? And what if one thinks that saying the prayer is necessary for salvation? Isn’t that possibly adding something to faith alone in Christ alone?

Then you might hear others say that believing is not enough. The Bible says that even the demons believe and shudder. Some will say that if you believe just to avoid going to hell, you are not saved. Somehow this does not show the commitment to Christ necessary for salvation according to some. Some will say that just because you said the sinner’s prayer that doesn’t mean you are saved. Having said the sinner’s prayer is not a valid fire (hell) insurance policy.

Some believe in once saved always saved and others believe that you can lose your salvation. So if a believer goes off heavily into sin, some will say he probably did not truly have saving faith when he believed, so he was never saved to begin with. Or others will say he has lost his salvation. Then others might say he is still likely saved, but he is living as an unbeliever, and God is disciplining him, and if he does not come back to God he will die a horrible death as a final punishment from God, because God is not able to punish him once he dies, because he is a believer.

Then you have the whole question of the unpardonable sin. What exactly is it, and how do you know whether or not you might have committed it?

There is a principle in law that if you are induced to enter into an agreement where there was some deception or fraud involved, it voids the agreement.

Does this have any bearing upon those who hear the gospel and then believe, that is, enter into the agreement, while not fully understanding everything and possibly basing their decision on some false information that was contained within the sales pitch?

What about those who reject the gospel because of some false information contained within its presentation or sales pitch?

There are people who have lived lives of terrible sin and eventually came to salvation through Jesus Christ. So they have their testimonies. But there are also people who lived as committed believers in God and Jesus Christ who eventually came to turn against it and repudiate it, some becoming agnostics, some atheists, some finding their place in less dogmatic forms of Christianity, and some other faiths or religions. These people also have their testimonies.

There is also the sense in which one who becomes a believer in Jesus Christ by believing the “turn or burn” gospel, whereby they were threatened with unending hell if they did not believe, has been a victim of a sort of mind control, and perhaps even a sort of trauma based mind control. (Dr. Boyd Purcell’s groundbreaking books “Spiritual Terrorism” and “Christianity without Insanity” while probably not specifically using the terms “mind control” or “trauma based mind control,” these concepts are certainly included in principle within his work and at his web site at christianitywithoutinsanity.com)

They were informed that if they did not do a sort of mental ritual, the sinner’s prayer, that they were at risk of being tortured forever by God in hell. So they did the ritual, so now they are safe, but they have also entered into an agreement with God (at least so they think) and have also consented to have a sort of psychological mind trick played on them, the ramifications of which they really do not fully understand, nor was much of anything explained to them before scaring them into entering into the agreement. I will make you an offer you can’t refuse. And of course there are many who find the threatening of this gospel offensive and soundly reject it on that basis.

I finally came to realize that the only way I could be confident in my own salvation was to realize that God will ultimately save all. So there is nothing I could have done or can do to screw it up. God will be victorious over sin on my behalf and on behalf of the entire human race and it doesn’t depend on me or anybody else. This could be elaborated on much more, but I just want to mention one scripture. Ephesians 2:8,9 “For by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.” So if I were a Calvinist who believed that I was saved, then it seems to me that I could certainly feel that I am pretty special to God, after all He chose to save me, while many others He chose not to save. On this basis it would seem I would have something to boast about, how special I am to God. On the other hand, suppose I were an Arminianist who believed that I was saved, then it seems that I could credit myself that it was because I was so smart to make the right decision to believe, that I am saved. So I also would have something to boast about. Only the Universalist who knows that all will ultimately be saved by God has nothing at all to possibly boast about.

SO WITH ALL THIS IN MIND I GIVE THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST WITH THE FINE PRINT

Man has a tendency toward sin, doing wrong things, failure, and misery. Man can and has done good things also, but his negative tendency toward sin and failure is still there. Christians believe that God sent His Son Jesus Christ to the world to turn the tables on man’s sin problem, to be man’s savior. Jesus Christ is God’s revelation of Himself to mankind by becoming Himself a human being like us and living among us, and also dying under an unjust death sentence of crucifixion, but through the power of God subsequently being resurrected, raised from the dead to live forever as man’s victorious savior from sin. Christians follow Jesus Christ by faith in order to be victorious over sin in this life and for the promise of eternal life, living with God forever.

Beyond what I just described above, Christians vary all over the map in terms of how they give the gospel, and how they say man came to be, and also came to be a sinner, and what is necessary for salvation, and what the negative consequences might be for not following Jesus in faith. A very large portion of evangelical Christians give the gospel by threatening people with never ending hell if they do not believe before they die. This certainly has the effect of scaring a lot of people into making a hasty decision to believe, but it also turns a lot of people off as well. Whether threatening unending hell is a part of the true gospel (good news) of Jesus Christ is really an open question regardless of what many think. A key word here might be “unending.” Sin can have very negative consequences leading to much suffering in this life and also very possibly beyond this life as well, but whether God has in store for a portion of humanity an unending torture chamber called hell, this really is a very problematic position that many take but which has many legitimate and convincing arguments against it.

So I would counsel one considering the gospel of Jesus Christ to seek and learn and ask questions and go to God in prayer, and try to make as fully an informed decision as possible.

I realize that it does not always work like this in real life, because often people are in a state of crisis when they reach out to God for help, and they become very susceptible to making hasty decisions, and due to the urgency do not have the luxury of having all their questions answered or having 100 % accurate information.

So if there is urgency involved and you feel you want to go to God with a decision based on what you now know, then by all means go to God in prayer and express your faith and urgency. God seeks us out, draws us to Himself, and takes us as we come. Certainly do not think that you have to determine for sure what the absolute truth is on any or all of these things in order to make a decision.

Take the example of the salvation of the Apostle Paul, who was formerly Saul of Tarsus, a devout Israelite who was persecuting Christians even to the point of death, and how Jesus Christ himself appeared to him on the trail to Damascus and blinded him and spoke to him, and took him through an extreme crisis, and how he eventually took the name Paul instead of Saul, and became a renowned preacher of the gospel of Christ and a major writer of the New Testament scriptures.