BREAKING NEWS FOR THE SCIENCE COMMUNITY

Gabrielle Birchak/ April 1, 2025/ Future History, Late Modern History, Modern History/ 0 comments

PODCAST TRANSCRIPT AND RESOURCES

So today is a very somber pod­cast because it’s a bad day for sci­ence. I’ve been doing some deep research. I’ve found some new plat­forms because I, for some rea­son, could­n’t obtain my sci­ence data from my tra­di­tion­al plat­forms like ArX­ive and NASA’s Sci­ence Data Por­tal. But I did find some oth­er plat­forms that pro­vide real­ly good infor­ma­tion up to date and steeped in cred­i­ble research. And like I not­ed, I’ve been doing some exten­sive research on these plat­forms for a while now and so I will pro­vide exten­sive resources. While you’re here, please help sup­port Math! Sci­ence! His­to­ry! by click­ing on that Cof­fee But­ton and con­tribut­ing to the pod­cast! Every cup of cof­fee helps!

Any­how, I know you’re not going to believe me. And I can’t believe I’m say­ing this, because I have read all the books that say that our plan­et is a sphere. For cen­turies, we’ve believed that our plan­et is a spin­ning sphere. When I first read about the analy­sis by Eratos­thenes, I was sold. And we’ve been taught about grav­i­ty, orbits, and even that we’ve land­ed on the moon. But what if I told you that I now have valid data, high­ly researched, exten­sive proof that the Earth is, in fact, FLAT? Before you stop, please keep read­ing. I had to as I move for­ward, I just want to note that all of the quotes I pro­vide our con­ver­sa­tions that I record­ed with their permission.

When I first tried to access data on NASA’s Sci­ence Data Por­tal, I could­n’t access a par­tic­u­lar page about women in lead­er­ship, so I start­ed look­ing around for oth­er reg­istries and data por­tals. I came across the Advanced The­o­ret­i­cal Repos­i­to­ry of Empir­i­cal Data (ATRED), which at first seemed sus­pi­cious. But the more I researched this plat­form the more I real­ized that this is valid data. And though I was unsure with the research because it was all by white men, I clicked through and came across the Glob­al reg­istry Cur­va­ture Dis­crep­an­cy & Gravi­met­ric Anom­alies Reg­istry (CDGAR).Apparently, this plat­form uncov­ers what NASA and oth­er agen­cies have alleged­ly been hid­ing for cen­turies. Using cut­ting-edge Hori­zon Sta­bi­liza­tion Ana­lyt­ics, researchers have deter­mined that the Earth’s cur­va­ture, long thought to be about twen­ty cen­time­ters per mile squared, sim­ply does not exist.

Ital­ian researcher, Dr. Cecil­ia Ret­tan­go­lare, explains:

“We ran mul­ti­ple tests. We launched high-alti­tude weath­er bal­loons equipped with state-of-the-art laser gyro­scopes, and every sin­gle time, the laser remained per­fect­ly lev­el. If the Earth were tru­ly a sphere, as we’ve been told, shouldn’t the laser curve down­ward? And yet… it doesn’t.”

Thus, accord­ing to a peer-reviewed study pub­lished in CDGAR, researchers found that grav­i­ta­tion­al cur­va­ture equa­tions have been mis­cal­cu­lat­ed for cen­turies (Ret­tan­go­lare, Etoile, & Orbiter, 2024).

And once I saw this I asked myself, as most of us in the sci­ence com­mu­ni­ty would ask, “What about all the pic­tures from space?” So I dug a lit­tle deep­er and I actu­al­ly found proof that NASA, the amaz­ing orga­ni­za­tion that I once worked for and advo­cat­ed for, has been fab­ri­cat­ing images for decades! An exclu­sive whistle­blow­er from the Fed­er­a­tion of Orbital & Opti­cal Lay­er Stud­ies (FOOLS) has revealed that all space images are gen­er­at­ed using state-of-the-art AI. Researchers at the Obser­va­tion­al Space Phe­nom­e­na Data­base (OSPD) have ana­lyzed NASA footage and found sus­pi­cious fish-eye lens dis­tor­tions (Lens­ing & Optik, 2023). At first, I did­n’t believe it because I’ve been read­ing about around earth since I was a kid and I referred back to the writ­ings of Eratosthenes.

How­ev­er, I came across ground­break­ing new research by doc­tor Dr. Luboš Čapek, a his­to­ri­an spe­cial­iz­ing in ancient math­e­mat­i­cal epis­te­mol­o­gy. He uncov­ered lost let­ters from Eratos­thenes him­self. In these long-sup­pressed man­u­scripts, Eratos­thenes alleged­ly admit­ted that his famous shad­ow exper­i­ment was deeply flawed due to errors in mea­sure­ment and assump­tions about light refrac­tion. Dr. Čapek’s study, pub­lished in the Jour­nal of Pre-Clas­si­cal Epis­te­mol­o­gy (JPCE), reveals that Eratos­thenes lat­er cor­rect­ed his cal­cu­la­tions and wrote: ‘The Earth appears not to curve but to stretch infi­nite­ly, like the great waters of the Nile.’” In oth­er words, Eratos­thenes, alleged­ly admit­ted his famous “Earth cur­va­ture” exper­i­ment was flawed due to faulty measurements.

Of course, this new rev­e­la­tion brings into ques­tion all of our so-called “sci­en­tif­ic truths.” The 1969 moon land­ing? A well-orches­trat­ed dis­trac­tion. The astro­nauts? Just actors. The proof? Researchers from the Insti­tute of Geospa­tial Realign­ments (IGR)  had ana­lyzed the shad­ows in moon land­ing footage and found unde­ni­able evi­dence that they were cast by stu­dio lights. The research first began in 1994, and I found some 1996 footage on Fox News that val­i­date this In fact, one inves­ti­ga­tor even found what appears to be a Cof­fee Bean and Tea Leaf cup in the back­ground of a “new­ly released” Apol­lo 11 image. I will give the direc­tor props for pick­ing bet­ter cof­fee than the oth­er place.

And what about all those astro­nauts? Six hun­dred of them, in fact! Sure­ly, at least one of them must know the truth! I know there are astro­nauts who say that they are asked to sign a non-dis­clo­sure agree­ment (NDA). But sure­ly at least one of the 600 astro­nauts would have spo­ken up, right? Could all 600 of those astro­nauts be actors? And that led me to think, why would NASA hire me, a for­mer actress? Now it makes sense. It was inten­tion­al. That’s why they had no prob­lem with me tak­ing extra time dur­ing my lunch breaks to go do Den­tyne Com­mer­cial auditions.

Now, let’s talk about those so-called ‘live feeds’ from the Inter­na­tion­al Space Sta­tion. Ever notice how the hori­zon is always curved? That’s not Earth, it’s a fish-eye lens! In fact, I did my own exper­i­ment, I took a pan­cake, held a curved piece of glass in front of my cam­era, and boom! It looked just like the ‘globe’ Earth. Case closed! It’s all start­ing to make sense.

And final­ly, there’s the unde­ni­able proof of the fir­ma­ment! New high-pow­ered tele­scope images have alleged­ly cap­tured the faint reflec­tion of a giant dome over Antarc­ti­ca. That’s right, every sin­gle satel­lite is actu­al­ly stuck to the dome, only mov­ing when NASA updates their ‘posi­tion­ing soft­ware.’ Ever won­der why no com­mer­cial flights go over the South Pole? It’s not because of safe­ty, it’s because they’d bump into the sky!

In an inter­view with Dr. Gre­go­ry Bal­lon­rond with the Extra­galac­tic Research and Cos­mo­log­i­cal Ephemerides Sys­tem (ERACES), I asked him about this dome. He con­firmed his research and then stat­ed stated:

“Our high-alti­tude sur­veil­lance flights have repeat­ed­ly encoun­tered an impen­e­tra­ble force above Antarc­ti­ca. The data is unde­ni­able, planes do not mere­ly adjust alti­tude, they expe­ri­ence an abrupt halt as if col­lid­ing with an invis­i­ble bar­ri­er. This con­firms what ancient civ­i­liza­tions and sup­pressed sci­en­tif­ic records have sug­gest­ed for cen­turies: the sky is not infi­nite, but rather a struc­tured dome encas­ing our world.” (Celesti & Bal­lon­rond, 2022).

Please under­stand, I was skep­ti­cal at first too until I did one more ele­ment of research and that was to study fish. This is unde­ni­able actu­al­ly. Fish Yes, fish! Think about it, have you ever seen a fish strug­gle to swim uphill? No? Exact­ly! That’s because the ocean is flat. If the Earth were tru­ly curved, fish would have to con­stant­ly adjust their swim­ming angle to com­pen­sate for the cur­va­ture of the earth. And yet, every sin­gle fish in the ocean swims per­fect­ly lev­el, nev­er once ques­tion­ing their envi­ron­ment (Chi­heisen & Lev­el, 2022).

And this, my friends, is where every­thing comes togeth­er. The great­est minds in his­to­ry, Galileo, New­ton, Ein­stein, some­how missed the most obvi­ous proof of all. The answer has been swim­ming right in front of us this whole time. Fish don’t lie. I feel like I’ve been deceived. And that means…

The real ques­tion is why? Why would the sci­en­tif­ic com­mu­ni­ty, world gov­ern­ments, and NASA all con­spire to con­vince us the Earth is round? The answer: prof­it. The globe-mak­ing indus­try alone makes bil­lions of dol­lars annu­al­ly sell­ing inac­cu­rate spher­i­cal rep­re­sen­ta­tions of our world (Dis­in­fo & Mis­di­rect, 2023).

In an exclu­sive phone inter­view with a senior car­tog­ra­ph­er from Geospa­tial Imag­ing & Ter­res­tri­al Sur­vey­ing (GITS) Inc., who request­ed anonymi­ty due to ‘seri­ous pro­fes­sion­al reper­cus­sions,’ states,

“I’m not allowed to be talk­ing about this but the maps we make and the globes we make are all lies. And though I signed an NDA, I had to speak up because I was mad for the decep­tion. Most­ly I was mad that they made me share my cubi­cle with anoth­er employ­ee. And then they got mad at me because I put a divider up between the two of us and it kept falling over. I like my pri­va­cy. Espe­cial­ly when I’m gassy. So I thought I would just speak up because I’m mad.”

Now, I know this might be over­whelm­ing. A life­time of believ­ing in a round Earth, gone in a sin­gle pod­cast episode. But before you stop lis­ten­ing to Math! Sci­ence! His­to­ry! First go to the web­site at MathScienceHistory.com, click on that cof­fee but­ton, and buy us a cup of cof­fee to help pay for the pro­duc­tion of the podcast. 

Then, before you chal­lenge your sci­ence pro­fes­sors or teach­ers and throw their globes in the trash, first look at your cal­en­dar. What’s the pub­lished date of this pod­cast? If you’re lis­ten­ing to this on the day that it airs and if you’re lis­ten­ing in Italy or France you may already know that the day is Pesce d’Aprile and you just got slapped with a paper fish on your back. En France! Pois­son d’avril ! In Ital­iano! Si, Ami­ci miei, questo intero episo­dio è un pesce gigante sul­la vos­tra schiena! Pesce d’aprile! A day when peo­ple stick paper fish onto each other’s backs as a joke… which means, my friends, this entire episode is one giant fish on your back! April Fools!

If you’re in Cana­da or the UK, lis­ten­ing to this after 12:00 PM, I have bad news, you’re offi­cial­ly the fool! Because April Fool’s pranks are only sup­posed to last until noon! So, if I got you, well… the joke’s on you, eh?

Of course, the Earth is round. Sci­ence is built on evi­dence, not con­spir­a­cies! But this lit­tle exper­i­ment shows how easy it is to cher­ry-pick data and make any­thing sound con­vinc­ing, if you ignore real sci­ence. Just because you think it and just because it’s val­i­dat­ed through some obscure news source, that does not mean it is true.

So what can we learn from today’s podcast?

1. Sci­ence is built on repeat­able evi­dence. Eratos­thenes proved over 2,000 years ago that the Earth is round using sim­ple shad­ows and math, an exper­i­ment any­one can still repli­cate today. Real sci­ence isn’t based on secre­cy; it’s based on obser­va­tions we can test.
2. Extra­or­di­nary claims require extra­or­di­nary evi­dence. Sci­ence doesn’t ask us to believe blind­ly, it pro­vides proof through exper­i­ments, peer review, and real-world test­ing. If a claim rejects all exist­ing evi­dence but offers no real way to test it, it’s not sci­ence, it’s storytelling.
3. Crit­i­cal think­ing means ques­tion­ing with log­ic, not just skep­ti­cism. It’s good to ask ques­tions, but real sci­ence gives us tools to find answers through exper­i­ments, math, and data. If an idea requires a mas­sive glob­al con­spir­a­cy to explain why it hasn’t been proven, it prob­a­bly isn’t science.
4. Not all “research” is real, know how to spot fake sci­ence. Mis­in­for­ma­tion spreads when peo­ple cher­ry-pick data, ignore peer review, or use com­plex-sound­ing jar­gon to make non­sense seem cred­i­ble. Real sci­ence wel­comes scruti­ny, so always check the source, look for expert con­sen­sus, and ask: Can this be tested?
5. We have first­hand proof from space. Astro­nauts aboard the ISS see the cur­va­ture of the Earth every day, and any­one can watch a weath­er bal­loon rise high enough to show the planet’s round hori­zon. No spe­cial access or con­spir­a­cies, just real footage from real people.

Thanks for tun­ing in to this Math! Sci­ence! His­to­ry! April Fools’ spe­cial. Be sure to sub­scribe, share, and leave a review, espe­cial­ly if I fooled you for a minute! See you next time, and remem­ber, stay curi­ous, stay crit­i­cal, and stay ground­ed. (On this very round Earth.) Until next time, carpe diem!

Bib­li­og­ra­phy 😉

Flat Earth Research & Empir­i­cal Data:

1. Rec­tan­gle, C., Etoile, L., & Orbiter, S. (2024). Empir­i­cal Grav­i­ta­tion­al Dis­crep­an­cies and the Flat Hori­zon Mod­el: A Crit­i­cal Review of Cur­va­ture The­o­ries. Cur­va­ture Dis­crep­an­cy & Gravi­met­ric Anom­alies Reg­istry (CDGAR), 42(1), 13–29.
2. Flat­man, G., & Sharp, E. (2023). Aero-Opti­cal Devi­a­tions in Ter­res­tri­al Obser­va­tions: Why Flight Tra­jec­to­ries Do Not Sup­port a Spher­i­cal Mod­el. Geospa­tial Anom­alies & Realign­ments Data­base (GARD), 28(3), 44–62.
3. Chi­heisen, B., & Lev­el, F. (2022). Hor­i­zon­tal Plane Con­sis­ten­cies Across Large Bod­ies of Water: Ana­lyz­ing 1,000 Miles of Ocean­ic Flat­ness. Hydros­pher­ic Earth Mod­el Index (HEMI), 17(2), 93–105.

Astro­nom­i­cal & Space­flight “Exposés”:

4. Orbiter, S., & Vacu­ity, T. (2024). Chal­leng­ing Orbital Mechan­ics: Anom­alous Incon­sis­ten­cies in Sup­posed Satel­lite Paths. Fed­er­a­tion of Orbital & Opti­cal Lay­er Stud­ies (FOOLS), 51(4), 201–220.
5. Lens­ing, F., & Optik, D. (2023). Fish-Eye Lens Dis­tor­tion in Sup­posed Space Imagery: A Crit­i­cal Opti­cal Analy­sis. Obser­va­tion­al Space Phe­nom­e­na Data­base (OSPD), 39(1), 11–28.
6. Celesti, G., & Bal­lon­rond, I. (2022). Evi­dence of Atmos­pher­ic Con­tain­ment: High-Alti­tude Pho­to­graph­ic Proof of the Fir­ma­ment. Extra­galac­tic Research and Cos­mo­log­i­cal Ephemerides Sys­tem (ERACES), 34(3), 71–85.

Math­e­mat­i­cal “Proofs” for Flat Earth Models:

7. Euler, T., & Fibonac­ci, G. (2024). Math­e­mat­i­cal Incon­sis­ten­cies in the Grav­i­ta­tion­al Cur­va­ture Equa­tion: A Reeval­u­a­tion of Orbital Assump­tions. Math­e­mat­i­cal Inquiry & Log­a­rith­mic Epis­te­mol­o­gy Net­work (MILE-Net), 12(4), 30–47.
8. Pythago­ras, A., & Pi, C. (2023). Geo­met­ric Flaws in the Spher­i­cal Trigonom­e­try Mod­el: Why Right Angles Can’t Bend. Uni­fied Log­a­rith­mic Com­pu­ta­tion­al Archive (ULCA), 19(2), 55–70.

Gov­ern­ment Con­spir­a­cy & His­tor­i­cal Manip­u­la­tion Studies:

9. Coverup, N., & Clas­si­fied, X. (2024). The Car­to­graph­ic Decep­tion: How Map­mak­ers Have Manip­u­lat­ed Our Per­cep­tion of the Earth’s Shape for Cen­turies. Advanced The­o­ret­i­cal Repos­i­to­ry of Empir­i­cal Data (ATRED), 46(2), 99–113.
10. Dis­in­fo, P., & Mis­di­rect, J. (2023). The Mul­ti-Bil­lion Dol­lar Globe Indus­try: Who Prof­its from a Spher­i­cal Earth? Mul­ti­dis­ci­pli­nary Aca­d­e­m­ic Cita­tion Repos­i­to­ry (MACR), 23(3), 81–96.
11. Čapek, L. (2023). Eratos­thenes’ Lost Let­ters: A Reex­am­i­na­tion of Ancient Geo­det­ic Assump­tions. Jour­nal of Pre-Clas­si­cal Epis­te­mol­o­gy (JPCE), 29(4), 67–84.

MORE READING:

https://www.landoverbaptist.net/forum/church-forums/creation-science/37168-scientific-proof-the-earth-is-flat

Flat-Earth­ers Explain Why The Earth Is Flat

https://clickhole.com

https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Flat_Earth_Wiki

https://www.reddit.com/r/FlatEarth/
Look for posts tagged with “Satire” or “Shtpost­ing.”*