It sure would be. It also couldn't possibly be worth the resources to maintain that lie compared to the cost.
Look, for a Cabal to be as deeply-entrenched and powerful as they have apparently been for thousands of years, it requires a good deal of foresight and control.
So... this particular Cabal, with all of its foresight, decided to perpetuate a lie that they knew would become insurmountably difficult to protect in the near future? That anyone with a high enough vantage could see the edge of the Earth, and we now have private drones, millions of private pilots, private satellites, and countless other ways to see very high up into the air?
So either the Cabal never saw "humans go high up" as a problem they'd eventually have to deal with, or they did, and decided that tricking people about the shape of the earth was apparently worth the cost of bribing and controlling literally every space agency, every aviation industry, every space scientist, and everyone else.
Just for this lie.
That seems just a step below convincing everyone the sky has turned into a new color but also convincing everyone to stay inside and never actually look at the sky. Sure, it could be done, and yeah, there's an advantage to doing so, but it'll never be worth the cost it would take to maintain it.
There are WAY easier (and cheaper) ways to control people.
You can actually prove it yourself the same way the Ancient Greeks did.
How?
Pretty brilliant, actually. A guy named Eratosthenes had heard that in a specific city (Syene) during the summer solstice, there were areas where the shadows simply disappeared. This would happen, they knew, because during the summer solstice, in that spot, the sun was DIRECTLY overhead.
If the sun is DIRECTLY overhead a pole sticking out of the ground, it will cast no shadow. You can see this effect today.
So what Eratosthenes realized was that if the sun was directly over Syene and cast no shadow, then he could go to a nearby city and see that there were, in fact, shadows being cast there.
So he had three pieces of information:
1) There sun was DIRECTLY over Syene and cast no shadows (so, a shadow angle of 0 degrees).
2) At that exact same time in Alexandria, shadows were being cast with a 7.2 degree angle.
3) He roughly knew the distance from Alexandria to Syene.
Using this information, he was able to calculate pretty closely how big the Earth must be for these calculations to make sense.
You can perform a similar experiment much more easily using a smart phone and a friend in a different city, but the principle is the same if you got the math skills.
terrific im glad you brought this up. I pose a question:
Is it possible for this experiment to produce these results only in the heliocentric model? is there perhaps another cosmological model that works? Does this possibility invalidate the so called proof?
The mere possibility that my next bowl of soup might have been poisoned by an assassin whose family has waited eight generations to take revenge on my bloodline unbeknownst to me also exists.
But it does not stop me from eating until the evidence of such an assassin becomes apparent.
I can’t let hypotheticals paralyze my ability to exist. You operate on the best evidence you have until that evidence is proven wrong or is usurped by better evidence.
I can accept that the earth might not be round, but the mere possibility is not considered scientific controversy. And the mere possibility of something being wrong is not an empirical argument against it.
It sure would be. It also couldn't possibly be worth the resources to maintain that lie compared to the cost.
Look, for a Cabal to be as deeply-entrenched and powerful as they have apparently been for thousands of years, it requires a good deal of foresight and control.
So... this particular Cabal, with all of its foresight, decided to perpetuate a lie that they knew would become insurmountably difficult to protect in the near future? That anyone with a high enough vantage could see the edge of the Earth, and we now have private drones, millions of private pilots, private satellites, and countless other ways to see very high up into the air?
So either the Cabal never saw "humans go high up" as a problem they'd eventually have to deal with, or they did, and decided that tricking people about the shape of the earth was apparently worth the cost of bribing and controlling literally every space agency, every aviation industry, every space scientist, and everyone else.
Just for this lie.
That seems just a step below convincing everyone the sky has turned into a new color but also convincing everyone to stay inside and never actually look at the sky. Sure, it could be done, and yeah, there's an advantage to doing so, but it'll never be worth the cost it would take to maintain it.
There are WAY easier (and cheaper) ways to control people.
You make a very nice argument on its face. Can you demonstrate how the earth is round to me without citing NASA or any space agency?
You can actually prove it yourself the same way the Ancient Greeks did.
How?
Pretty brilliant, actually. A guy named Eratosthenes had heard that in a specific city (Syene) during the summer solstice, there were areas where the shadows simply disappeared. This would happen, they knew, because during the summer solstice, in that spot, the sun was DIRECTLY overhead.
If the sun is DIRECTLY overhead a pole sticking out of the ground, it will cast no shadow. You can see this effect today.
https://www.amusingplanet.com/2017/04/lahaina-noon-when-shadows-disappear.html
So what Eratosthenes realized was that if the sun was directly over Syene and cast no shadow, then he could go to a nearby city and see that there were, in fact, shadows being cast there.
So he had three pieces of information:
1) There sun was DIRECTLY over Syene and cast no shadows (so, a shadow angle of 0 degrees).
2) At that exact same time in Alexandria, shadows were being cast with a 7.2 degree angle.
3) He roughly knew the distance from Alexandria to Syene.
Using this information, he was able to calculate pretty closely how big the Earth must be for these calculations to make sense.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200606/history.cfm#:~:text=So%20Eratosthenes%20hired%20bematists%2C%20professional,to%20be%20about%20250%2C000%20stadia.
You can perform a similar experiment much more easily using a smart phone and a friend in a different city, but the principle is the same if you got the math skills.
terrific im glad you brought this up. I pose a question:
Is it possible for this experiment to produce these results only in the heliocentric model? is there perhaps another cosmological model that works? Does this possibility invalidate the so called proof?
The mere possibility? No, absolutely not.
The mere possibility that my next bowl of soup might have been poisoned by an assassin whose family has waited eight generations to take revenge on my bloodline unbeknownst to me also exists.
But it does not stop me from eating until the evidence of such an assassin becomes apparent.
I can’t let hypotheticals paralyze my ability to exist. You operate on the best evidence you have until that evidence is proven wrong or is usurped by better evidence.
I can accept that the earth might not be round, but the mere possibility is not considered scientific controversy. And the mere possibility of something being wrong is not an empirical argument against it.
That's fine.
The experiment is based in sound logic either way.
EDIT: Have you actually... looked at the primary site that is hosting all this stuff you keep linking me to?
https://www.big-lies.org/index.html