Was in aller Welt ist passiert? - Teil 2/13 - DeeTube

Here is a nice picture of the new standard world map of Alex Gleason from 1892 on the projection of the Modern College in Blackheath, England. At the top of the map it is written that it is scientifically and practically correct. Gleason's map differs from the standard world maps mainly by the representation of the poles. As the comparison with the standard world map shows, the main difference in Gleason's map is that the North Pole is actually in the center of the earth. And at first glance, the South Pole, the so-called Antarctic, seems to be missing. However, a closer look shows that the Antarctic is actually present and accounts for most of the landmass on the map. The Antarctic on Gleason's map is an all-encompassing ice ring that covers the entire outer earth's surface. Gleason's map has become a kind of canonical historical document for followers of the flat earth. Many of them put the picture on the Internet and call it an oppressive evidence that contradicts the heliocentric model of the earth. In other words, it proves that the earth is not a spinning ball in space, but a circular, flat and immovable plane. That was no proof for me yet. And although I consider the idea of ​​a giant all-encompassing ice wall to be a nice concept, I knew that we have a huge amount of evidence for the existence of space, spherical planets and whole sciences, which deal with the solution of mathematical puzzles of physics. I mean, we landed on the moon, for heaven's sake. If the earth were flat and immovable, someone would have recognized that by now. These brave souls did the unthinkable. They flew to the moon, they landed, took their first careful steps and hoisted the American flag. NASA sent several crews to the moon during the subsequent Apollo missions. They even managed to film Apollo 17 leaving the moon. But wait! Stop! If these are shots of the crew leaving the moon and returning to earth, who did they leave behind to film the launch of the spaceship? And don't you think that these colorful missions look somehow unreal at the start? After that I didn't see any more rockets that produce this kind of glittering colors. And I assume that they admit it because they lost all the data of the mission. That was probably just a coincidence. I began to investigate NASA a little more closely and what I found was shocking. I can say with certainty that NASA has actually been lying to the world since its founding in 1958. But don't take me by the word. Sometimes you can't tell people the truth, you have to show them. So let them show me to you. Fasten your seatbelt and stay seated, because Houston, we have a big problem. Let me zoom in here and show you what the problem is. These are all composite images where they are really not very good at Photoshop. Because they're using the Photoshop clone tool to replicate clouds. This cloud is a copy of this cloud. See the formations? They're identical. Identical formations. These right here, side by side, side by side. See this kind of W-looking shape right here? Replicated right here. This cloud is exactly the same as that cloud. You know, same clouds right there. And same thing on the other side of the world. They got the same thing going on. They got careless here, look. One, two, three, four, five. The same formations replicated right there. These two replicated. Same exact formations right here. This right here is a clone of that right there. I mean, really? So you're telling me that we can take pictures of Jupiter and Saturn. Huge, massive planets. And now we're out going to Pluto. But we don't have one legitimate picture of the Earth from space that's not a composite? Click on this picture right here. Supposedly the same mission, same guys that took the most famous picture of our Earth. I'm going to do Save Image As. And let's see, Apollo Moon. Let's call it Apollo Moon 17. And I'm going to open that in Photoshop. And if those of you think this technical difficulty was planned and think I'm scamming you, go do it for yourself. Because you're going to find the exact same thing. I've got nothing to hide here. This is live on the air, okay? I'm going to zoom in on the Earth in Photoshop. You see the Earth? Go to Image, Adjust, Levels. And I'm going to put the levels over here. And I'm going to bring the levels up. Uh-oh. What is that? Why is there a square box around the Earth allegedly taken from the scientists on the Moon in Apollo 17? People wonder why I don't trust NASA. That's why I don't trust NASA. Just another example of NASA faking space. Let's take a look here at this supposed image of Jupiter. Nothing more than CGI fakery. The supposed auroras towards the north. Let's take a look here again at NASA's official website where it states Hubble captures vivid auroras in Jupiter's atmosphere. Here's the problem. The date of June 30, 2016. Now take a look at this. Another so-called official image of Jupiter. This one's from back in 2014. You see the problem here? Now let's take a closer look at the supposed two images provided from NASA of Jupiter. Here's the problem again. 2016. 2014. What's the difference here? Well, the difference is they added the supposed auroras on the north. This is nothing but a Christmas tree. Give me a break. Take a look here. I mean, all the clouds are in the same exact position. This 2016 image is a bit, I would say, darker. It's a bit lighter than 2014. Here's a side-by-side. People can't see what's taking place here with NASA. Nothing more than fakery. I mean, give me a break. This is a complete insult if you have a brain in your head. And you can tell it's real because it looks so fake, honestly. It became instantly clear how they do it. And it's just video game technology. Now, if you're part of the geek squad or the techie crowd, well, then you already know about this technology. And so let's get to the video that caught my attention, and you will see the same things that I saw. Let's watch. We have to introduce the concept of free fall. So let's use this model of the Earth. And let's enlist the help of a friend. That's, you might know her. So what is significant about this video is, number one, it was live to schoolchildren. Number two, we have this stuffed animal that is transitioning in on another video channel. And the actor is able to reach up and grab this doll in real 3D space and manipulate this doll with their hands. And so the only way you're going to pull that off is with one technology. And that technology is virtual reality. More importantly, though, something called augmented virtual reality. It's taking the objects in 3D space from a virtual reality world and putting them in our world on another screen, which we can see, manipulate, and touch with virtual reality contacts or glasses. In this next segment, I'm going to show you how NASA grabs objects in 3D space, rotates them around, manipulates them. They can do this with water, with cloth, anything. And the cool thing about it is we can take what they're doing, what they're seeing with their contact virtual reality augmented lenses and put that on a separate video layer live. Yes, live, and do it all in real time. Oh, 45 minutes straight of NASA messing up their virtual reality setup. I tried to pick some clips that were obvious and some not so obvious, show you some of the contacts. We're going to see Tim Peake with his contacts in, but these are virtual reality contacts overlaid on the eyes so actors can interact with things in 3D space. All in real time. In this next shot, we will get to see the whole arm setup and the virtual reality glove that covers all the way down the arm and hand. This allows the software to broadcast what we see video-wise as his arm in a shirt sleeve. Okay, I have a lot of Tim Peake screw-ups, but this one here, the system glitches. The software does not track his hand properly. And Tim slips his hand underneath his other fingers, which is tightly holding onto the mic, which would be impossible. I don't think this is Tim's fault. Normally Tim always moves his other fingers up while he slides his hand under. I just think the system didn't respond to his movements here. It's virtual reality. They're wearing augmented contact lenses so that they can interact with these 3D objects. Now in this scene, the guy on the left in the green shirt, he sees an object in 3D space that's being broadcast to him. So he grabs it and he puts it off to the side. He's looking straight ahead because he's looking at an object rotating in front of him. But the video channel is down that is supposed to show the viewers what we're supposed to see. And so we don't actually get to see the object that he is seeing. And I would just sum this up as a very terrible, bad, horrible day for NASA doing live feeds. So many times during spacewalks outside the International Space Station, we can see air bubbles rising up. Can you touch on how there are air bubbles in space? Can you be more specific? Air bubbles? So yeah, like a lot of times during the footage, the NASA footage, you can see bubbles coming up out of the helmets or kind of from underneath you. How do you explain bubbles in space? Yeah, I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about. Now sometimes you get water in the helmet and it's either from sweat or from the cooling garments. And on some of my spacewalks, I had water in the helmet. Not like I was going to drown in the helmet, but little bits of water probably came from sweat. Often on the outside of the space station, you'll liberate little pieces of, you know, it's a really harsh environment out there and the outside of the space station gets beat up pretty good. And sometimes, you know, you'll see just little flecks of paint or something that you might have disrupted floating away from the suit. And, you know, that's generally what that is. I've never seen any kind of air bubble anywhere. Could it be that you're filming in an underwater pool and you're not really out there? Why don't you swear in the Bible that you walked on the moon? You're the one who said you walked on the moon when you didn't. Call him a kettle black if ever thought of saying that misrepresentation. Get away from me. You're a coward and a liar and a thief. And then there's this. Official NASA research about the dynamics of an airplane that would work on a flat, non-rotating Earth. A flat, non-rotating Earth. What? I know that NASA has a huge multi-billion dollar budget, but why should they waste resources for research on an airplane that works on a flat, non-rotating Earth? I thought we were living on a spinning ball in space. Isn't that like Toyota developing a new car that drives through lava? It would never be used and would be a huge waste of money. It's all just fun and games until you get caught up in the lies of NASA. Why should the largest space travel organization, whose vision on their website states that it's their goal to discover and expand knowledge for the benefit of mankind, lie? And where exactly does a budget of several billion dollars flow? In the last five years, NASA's annual budget has increased by a total of over 100 billion dollars between 2016 and 2020. Why should they commit such treacherous acts if they want to help mankind with their understanding and research of space? And if we can't trust the world's most famous space organization to tell us the truth, is the Earth really what we believe in? And then I remembered the United Nations Treaty of 1959, which prohibits and regulates all global activities on the Antarctic continent and ensures that the continent does not belong to any nation. With a map of Gleason in front of me, I began to wonder if the Antarctic was really what we were told. Was it really an ice-cold, untouched paradise, in which, as Sir David Attenborough shows, the penguins are playing in the snow? Could it really be a huge ice wall that encloses the whole Earth? And then something dimmed and let me talk. How could I miss that? It literally hit my face all the time. Gleason's map, visibly hidden in the logo of the United Nations. Look at it. Apollo is in the middle, just like Gleason's map. But why is the Antarctic missing? Or is it not missing? When I looked closer, I noticed that the logo was framed by a circular laurel leaf. From ancient Greek mythology, I know that the laurel leaf symbolizes Apollo. Apollo again. Just like the moon mission. Hmm. In ancient Rome, the laurel was not allowed to be used for profane purposes and lighting or burning in the open air was strictly prohibited. I knew from the treaty that the UN strictly prohibited the exploration and exploitation of the Antarctic. Could there be a message behind it? I began to research and found that not only the United Nations use this logo, but also the International Maritime Organization, the International Civil Aviation Organization and the World Health Organization. The Maritime Organization controls the seas and the Aviation Organization the sky. The World Health Organization controls, roughly speaking, the entire communication about health and diseases in the world, as it did during the Covid-19 pandemic. Does the UN military really dominate the Antarctic together with the seas and aviation organizations? Or is it just a peace treaty to honor the last untouched place on earth? Stop, stop, stop, Josh. They take it seriously. What did they say? You got to yield. You can't just fucking... Do they think you're going to charge them? We don't know for sure, but they did say something to us. No, they can't. They can't. They, um, they come back whilst on. Yeah, fucking talk to them. Actually going around. He's turning. Stop. He's turning. He is actually turning. He said about the ship yesterday. No, he is turning. What have we done now? He's turning, Josh. Just sit still. He's slowed down. Has he? Yeah, he's really slowed down. No doubt we were in trouble. What for? It's coming to us. He's coming to us. He's got the shits because... This is Warship Hobart. Warship Hobart. Channel 1-6. Over. 1-6. Yeah. Exclusion area. Please report your intentions. Who the fuck's that? We're heading to the shelf to go... Just say we're heading out fishing. Heading out fishing. We've got a... Going that way. We're going to set up a demo today with this Cessna and the Air National Guard. I'm going to be inside of this Cessna and we're going to be going rogue. We're going to fly into that no-fly zone and we're going to see how the Air National Guard does it. They scramble the fighter jets that come... Flying for miles and miles until... Until... Our pilots aren't talking to air traffic control, ignoring their calls to reach them. That triggers an alarm at the Air National Guard base. These fighter pilots scrambling to their jets. They're on alert and ready to take action 24 hours a day. Today, racing to their F-16s, suiting up, climbing on board and rushing to the runway. Taking off to intercept our rogue Cessna. Reaching the target in just minutes. This is the view from the F-16. That's my Cessna right there. Another F-16 swooping in on the right, calling us on aviation frequencies. He wants us to identify her. What? The fighter jet giving us one last warning. After all of this, the pilots still won't listen. The plane won't leave the airspace. Will you shoot them down? If required, we'll execute the rules of engagement per the command of the North American Aerospace Defense Command. And yes, we would do that. Shoot the plane down? If it meets the rules of engagement, yes, we would, to defend the airspace. Why are they monitoring the borders of Antarctica in such a warlike manner? Surely they only protect the penguins and seals, which we have seen so often in documentaries about the frozen planet Earth. I don't know. I'm not really sure anymore, because after that I stumbled across this. A huge ice wall that seems to stretch for hundreds of kilometers. I don't know how you feel about it, but I found this footage to be deeply disturbing. With the lies of NASA in the back of my head and the huge ice wall, which was in the distance, I began to experience what some call cognitive dissonance. I began to reject it. Of course all of this couldn't be true, and of course our Earth is a spinning ball, as we have been taught all our lives. It is one thing that NASA lies, but do all the professors and scientists lie? Is there even the National Geographic Channel? And what about Newton, Einstein, Hawking and Attenborough? Do they all lie? This is a complicated answer, and I will do my best to show you the truth. But before we deal with the guardians of knowledge and the trustworthy voices of our world, I have to show you more of our Earth. However, I don't want to lose you now. Come with me to part 3, where we will explore some possibilities for how our Earth could function as a flat and stationary plane.