Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 14, 2018 - The Unexplained - Howard Hughes

01:17:44

Edition 337 - Flat Earth?

Much-requested Mark Sargent - who believes the Earth is flat and isn't a globe...

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Across the UK, across continental North America, and around the world on the internet, by webcast and by podcast, my name is Howard Hughes, and this is The Return of the Unexplained.
	Thanks for your emails.
	I hope life is treating you well as we edge into spring here in the Northern Hemisphere.
	But if indeed there is a Northern Hemisphere, and that links in very much with the subject we will be talking about on this show.
	But more of that in just a moment.
	If you sent an email to me, thank you.
	If you want to send an email to me, you're welcome to.
	Just tell me who you are, where you are, and how you use the show.
	That information is always good.
	I've had some nice emails recently.
	Go to the website theunexplained.tv, designed and created by Adam from Creative Hotspot in Liverpool.
	Follow the link and you can email me from there.
	A couple of things to say before I tell you about the guest on this edition.
	I've had a lot of emails and some of them really, really nice lately.
	I had one in particular from a guy called Chris, though, who seemed not to like anything about the show.
	And that was very concerning to me.
	And, you know, I like to get to the bottom of anything.
	He was telling me that he didn't like the run of recent guests, which have included, of course, recently Leslie Kane, New York Times writer John Burroughs, who was at Rendlesham Forest.
	Chris didn't like the fact that I asked Larry Warren about the John Lennon photograph, a question that Nick Pope, the leading investigator, asked me to ask him, and also the questions about his lie detector test, the polygraph test.
	Chris didn't like those things, had a number of other things to say.
	And the only thing I can say is that the guests that I do are to fit in with the overall format of this program.
	We give you people who sometimes you won't get to hear anywhere else.
	And sometimes there'll be mainstream scientists with very interesting views.
	The last show, of course, from the National Physical Laboratory, I was talking with people who were at the very cutting edge of science.
	The show before, a lot of people really didn't like.
	Callista, the woman who believes that unicorns are real and they have power.
	I got emails from people saying, well done for having Callista on.
	She's marvelous.
	We want to hear more of her.
	And I got emails saying, why have you put that woman on your show?
	Well, I guess there is a thing called free speech.
	And it's very much at the core of the United States democracy and ours here in the UK.
	You know, I'm not saying that I'm part of the democratic process here, by the way, but what I am saying is that we have the right to express our opinions.
	And don't we have the responsibility to listen to other people's opinions, even if we think they're nuts?
	Because from that, we might learn something.
	And if we start suppressing people's opinions, not allowing certain books to be read, not allowing certain things to be said, I think we're in a real bad place.
	And I think some of that, and I'm seeing more and more of this, is driven by social media, where groups of people get together and suddenly a view forms.
	And anybody who doesn't have that same view, they better look out.
	That's a worry, because we know what starts from that.
	Now, that's all a million miles from a little show called The Unexplained.
	I know that.
	But I've always believed that people have a right to put their point, and we learn by listening to them, even if we think they're completely wrong.
	Personally, and I said it in the show, I have seen nothing to make me believe at any stage in my life that unicorns are a real thing.
	I did make that very clear, and Callista told me why that was not so.
	Now, you might disagree with that, but surely neither of us can disagree with her right to express her view.
	And I found it a very interesting conversation, and I liked her as a person.
	But I still don't believe in unicorns, but that's a matter for me and for many of you.
	Last edition was about pure science, so a lot of people like that, and we'll do a little bit more of taking the show out and doing shows in different places.
	This edition is about one of the most controversial subjects there is, maybe the most controversial subject.
	And before I tell you what it is, let me just say this, that of course we don't advocate people who put forward views that advocate law-breaking or harming people, anything like that.
	That is not what I've just argued for.
	Let me just, before anybody emails to say that.
	Okay, let's get to the subject on this edition.
	Deeply controversial.
	The flat Earth.
	Now, you might have thought that question was settled hundreds of years ago, maybe even before that.
	And I certainly thought that it was game set and match.
	We are a globe.
	We've seen it from space.
	But increasingly getting traction are the views of people who think that the Earth is completely flat, and they have what they think are scientific reasons for believing that.
	And they think that we have been told a lie.
	The king of these people may be.
	The man who is most often quoted by emailers to my show is a guy called Mark Sargent.
	And I've had emails saying, please don't put Mark Sargent on your show.
	And emails saying, you've got a show called The Unexplained.
	You've never had Mark Sargent on.
	Why not?
	That's the way it splits.
	So I'm going there in this edition, and I think it's going to be interesting.
	I personally believe that the Earth that we live on is an oblate spheroid.
	It is a globe.
	That's what I was taught in school.
	That's what I saw when I was a kid watching the Apollo missions.
	Mark Sargent is going to try and persuade me and maybe you otherwise.
	And I think he will be interesting.
	Thanks very much for being in touch with my show.
	Thank you for liking it if you have.
	Please keep the faith with me.
	All right, let's get to the US and the guest on this edition, Mark Sargent, talking about the flat earth.
	Mark, thank you for coming on.
	And thank you for having me.
	It's a pleasure to be here.
	Now, Mark, controversial, I guess, is a word that could be applied to you.
	And I'm sure you've heard that word used in relation to yourself on occasions.
	You know, you are the only guest in all the years that I've been doing this show, both on radio and online, where I've actually had almost equal numbers of people out of the blue emailing me saying, why haven't you had Mark Sargent on your show?
	If you've got a show called The Unexplained, you need Mark Sargent on there.
	And on the other hand, people emailing me out of the blue saying, whatever you do, don't talk with Mark Sargent and don't discuss flat earth.
	It's a little weird, really, but you know, which just made me want to have you on here all the more to be perfectly frank with you.
	I've heard and read over the last couple of years a lot about you.
	You tell me your story first then, Mark.
	What are you?
	What background do you come from?
	I come from a software background, a tech background, a geek nerd dork type background.
	I initially started playing video games for a living back in the mid-90s.
	I won a video game tournament a long time ago and was hired for a company in Colorado.
	And it was a dream job, traveling around the country, going to expositions and playing games and hanging out with gamers.
	And when that company finally folded, I taught proprietary software to blue collar factories.
	It was time in attendance software, which was timekeeping software for the better part of 20 years.
	And that's what I did.
	That was basically my background.
	Everything, every dorky thing you could ever think of a guy, you know, doing, playing games with his friends and drinking wine and watching a lot of movies.
	That's what I did.
	And in some of my spare time, I got into conspiracies.
	And, you know, the first conspiracy, I didn't even, I grew up in a very sheltered background on a little island north of Seattle called Widbe, W-H-I-D-B-E-Y.
	And that's where, and I, I, because it was a real rural environment, I didn't believe in conspiracies.
	Heck, I didn't even believe really people lied at a high level.
	I didn't.
	I honestly, I was like, wow, why would people lie about anything?
	Well, we've all come to see the truth about that one.
	I think we can probably agree on a lot of that.
	So there you were, a guy who was technically inclined in a way that I haven't been over my lifetime, full of admiration for people like you who do that, living in a place that is very remote, not particularly inclined to believe conspiracy theories or even give them any truck.
	In a country like the United States, there are a million conspiracy theories and millions of people who believe in them because your country has free speech.
	And I personally think, and that's something else that I referred to in the introduction to this show, that's a good thing.
	What is it that tipped the balance then for you?
	What is it that made you want to start asking questions of that which we have been told as a short fact?
	The JFK, the movie by...
	The movie, which was done by Oliver Stone in the early 90s, I saw it in the theater opening weekend.
	He did such a masterful job at mixing live footage with his own simulated footage that it was basically seamless.
	And the audience was engaged to where people were walking out of that thing, they were really angry.
	People bought it.
	I mean, they absolutely said, oh, yeah, if you really were invested in that movie, you walked out of there going, you know what?
	There was the lone gunman thing.
	You can throw that out the window.
	And that's what really kind of led me.
	Remember, the internet wasn't up and running yet.
	So once the internet, that's really what just exploded the conspiracy world over here in the States was the internet.
	And after that, I got into just about anything you could think of.
	I loved it.
	I loved mysteries.
	I loved anything that was unexplained.
	And, you know, then, of course, we had 9-11.
	But of course, I had looked at other things besides JFK, like every major American war, Pearl Harbor.
	If you name every conspiracy that came up, I just digested it.
	But I wasn't like a tinfoil hat type of wearing guy.
	I just really enjoyed the stories.
	And that's what, and to the point where I think I was conspiracy bored by the time 2015, sorry, about 2014 rolled around.
	I'd seen it and done it all and was like, all right, well, there's no conspiracies left.
	And everybody that's into conspiracies, and I mean everybody has heard of the flat earth.
	We've all heard of it.
	Everyone laughs at it.
	It's the book on the shelf you're never going to read.
	It's the DVD you got for Christmas you're never going to watch because it's ridiculous.
	Well, it's very much one thing to buy into the theory that John Fitzgerald Kennedy was killed by whoever, but it certainly wasn't Lee Harvey Oswald acting on his own.
	I think much of America believes that.
	It's completely another thing to believe things like we didn't go to the moon or indeed the earth is flat.
	They're very different.
	They challenge the nature of science.
	You're absolutely right.
	And a warning to the people that are out there, if you believe that the Americans went to the moon, you know, not just once, but six times in the late 60s, early 70s with almost no technology.
	And nobody died, nobody got injured.
	And then they just shut down the program for no apparent reason back in 1972 and never been back since.
	And nobody's ever gone since, then Flat Earth is going to be a really, really hard sell for you, which is why one of the litmus tests we throw out to people is, do you believe in the moon landing?
	That's what I throw out because you got to start somewhere.
	And that's a pretty good place to start.
	And honestly, I'm really surprised people in the United States give credit to the United States for throwing the propaganda out there that inside the United States, I absolutely understand, you know, wave the flag, rah, rah.
	Of course we went to the moon.
	We're great.
	We're in the United States.
	Outside of here, though, I'm really surprised that there wasn't more suspicion out of the gate.
	And because there's just a lot of inconsistencies.
	And for me, I never really, I always thought there was something wrong with the moon missions, but I couldn't put my finger on it because I was like going, excuse me.
	I didn't believe it, but at the same time, I couldn't figure out a good enough reason why to fake it.
	It's like, why would the Americans even bother faking the thing?
	It's like, yeah, okay, wave the flag.
	We're number one.
	But is that it?
	That's all.
	It's an awful lot of money to spend for a little bit of false reputation.
	But isn't one of the biggest arguments, and we'll get into the flat earth discussion because we have to.
	That's what this particular edition is about.
	But isn't one of the biggest arguments against we didn't go to the moon that if we didn't go to the moon, then competitors in the space industry, the space race, that's China, that's the Russians, that's anyone else who's ever fired a rocket up there, maybe even including Kim Jong-un these days, but they will be the first to out you.
	They will be the first to say, NASA is lying.
	Well, there's a problem there, and that is, there's a bunch of different movie references I could give to it, but that is, let's say I knew, let's say I had proof, absolute proof, document.
	Let's say I had an astronaut that on his deathbed told me everything and gave me photos and a taped testimony.
	Remember, I'm in the States.
	Who exactly do I go to to get that information out there nowadays?
	Do I, I mean, you can't, you can't exactly go to mainstream media because, you know, the producers, somebody's going to talk to somebody, and it's just not, there's too many corporations involved.
	Do I post it on Facebook?
	Because how long does that stay up?
	Do I post it on YouTube?
	What do I do?
	So anything that's coming from another country, let's say it's North Korea or not necessarily Russia, but North Korea or anyone that we consider an enemy, some country in the Middle East, supposedly, you know, that story is never getting in here.
	It's going to be spun in a certain way and it's just going to be discounted right away, as opposed to like, let's say, the Russians, who I believe were in on it since day one.
	I have always believed that Russia and the United States at the highest levels have never really been enemies.
	They're just kind of posturing each other on the chessboard.
	Two guys, two tough guys in the end of each street, kind of giving each other a nod.
	And everyone's, oh, yeah, these guys are going to rumble someday.
	And they never do.
	The troops, of course, they're taught to hate each other.
	We still, better dead than red and the communist threat and blah, blah, blah.
	But I think at the highest level, and you want me, I can go into a story, but at the highest level, I think we've always been there for each other.
	And it's just posturing.
	And it's brilliant tactic, in my opinion.
	Well, a lot of money was expended to do it on both sides.
	I mean, for example, the Russians and the Americans both had separate space station programs for a while until it was realized that was way too expensive.
	So there was cooperation.
	But why would we waste all of this money, effort, and resources then telling people that we'd gone to the moon when, in fact, we hadn't?
	What would be the point of faking something like that?
	That is the point.
	That's the one thing I don't think I would ever get.
	Think of it this way, because it's really only time and money.
	And you're saying, well, what's bigger than money?
	And it's like, well, keeping the society under control.
	And I don't want to steal too much from the matrix here, but control is such an important thing.
	What I'm talking about, let's jump into the flat earth thing for a sec, which is what I'm saying is if this world isn't a ball spinning in space, you know, this infinite little speck, just nothingness that could be snuffed out at any time in the vastness of space, but instead is this beautifully,
	wonderfully crafted, enclosed, pressurized system, you know, a Petri dish, a snow globe, a pizza box, whatever, you know, I like the domed stadium personally, then you've got to really do some extreme things to keep it a secret.
	Meaning, we didn't build it, obviously.
	The builders are much more advanced than us and probably far, far older.
	But you can't let the general population know where they are because they're not going to act naturally anymore.
	Meaning, if they found out, let's boil it down here.
	And I don't know what your religious angle is, and I'm not going to preach chapter and verse or anything.
	But if this place was built, if there's actual proof that it was built, we're living in a building, then it was created.
	And if it was created, then somebody, who's the creator?
	And at that point, you're giving the religious houses of this world, the big five, you know, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, and Christianity, you're giving them an advantage that science has been scared of for a long, long time.
	When you say an advantage, what do you mean by that?
	Well, remember, science has been beating religion over the head for the last 500 years, building their institution of science.
	And look, I love the stuff, even though I preach the war on science.
	I love some of the stuff that science has brought us, you know, light bulbs and air conditioning and microwave ovens and stuff like that.
	But they've also, in that process, has basically said that, you know, there is no creator.
	We're absolutely, it happened by accident and that science is the new religion.
	And so all of a sudden to go back the other way after 500 years and say, oh yeah, by the way, it was built, which means all the foundation, the foundations of science would be rocked to their core.
	Think of what would happen overnight if it was found out.
	And forget about just astrophysics and astronomy and every university in the world.
	Those would shut down overnight.
	But the remaining physical sciences, like geology, hydrology, archaeology, take your pick, anyology, they all start with the same premise, which is, oh yeah, we're a globe flying through space.
	I mean, they would still have a use, even if what you say is correct.
	And they still have had a use for centuries.
	They've been there.
	But they would have to be retooled.
	And it would all happen.
	We're talking about, not just talking about one retooling.
	We're talking about all of them.
	I mean, books would have to be, well, now, of course, it'd be text, but entire libraries would have to be scuttled and then rebuilt from the ground up.
	And we're talking about potentially a lot of chaos.
	And if there's one thing I have learned is that the powers that be, I like calling them the authority.
	If you want to put a name on a particular group, you can, but there's so many different groups at this point, that the authority doesn't like the potential of chaos.
	If they even suspect for a second that there'll be people running through the streets with pitchforks and torches, they're going to keep that thing under wraps for as long as they can.
	So if they found out, and we're not talking about a secret that was known for a long, long, long, long time.
	We're talking about a secret they couldn't even prove that, you know, that we're living in a structure.
	They couldn't even prove until the mid-1950s or late 1950s.
	I mean, up until then, really, until you had the tech to sort it out, meaning the internal combustion engine and pressurized planes and crap like that, what do you really know?
	If you say you're the king of France in 1400, someone says, oh, yeah, here's the map of the world.
	It's flat and it's like a domed structure.
	What's he going to do?
	He's got wooden ships and horses.
	He's not going to do anything.
	So when the Americans and the Soviet Union figure it out during Operation Deep Freeze in 1956, what do you do?
	You sit down, you have that meeting.
	We talk about what we just talked about.
	It's like, oh, what could go wrong?
	And once you kind of figure that out, it's like, well, you know, that's a short meeting, you know, a short X-Files.
	We have to make this really clear.
	I'm a big fan Of that movie, The Truman Show.
	Jim Carrey did a great job on that show.
	It worked on so many levels.
	You are saying that everything is the Truman show, and America and the U.S. know it, and America rather and the Russians know it.
	And they worked this out 60, I'm just trying to work out the numbers, 62 years ago.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying.
	I'm saying the United States and the Soviet Union, I'm saying they were looking for it since the 1920s.
	The best thing I could come up with was that there's been a map out there or a series of maps that showed what the world really looked like.
	And they've been around for a long, long time.
	But again, until you have the technology to actually do some serious exploring, you can't figure it out.
	So what happens is in 1928, they send our best guy, Admiral Richard E. Byrd, which was the youngest admiral in the United States Navy.
	He made admiral, I think, at 41, which is pretty amazing.
	They send him down to Antarctica, best living explorer of all.
	And he just goes down there and he's flying his own planes and doing his own missions.
	He goes year after year.
	He's doing his missions down there looking for something.
	And they're not talking about what he's looking for.
	And then World War II breaks out.
	Everybody leaves the ice except for one country, which was really an interesting little side story, which is Nazi Germany.
	They were the only ones down there during World War II, which is weird.
	World War II ends.
	Admiral Byrd immediately goes back down to Antarctica.
	As a matter of fact, he takes a full-blown carrier fleet with support ships called Operation High Jump.
	The rumor there was that he was trying to root out the last of the Nazi bases, which was down in Antarctica.
	And then after that, he just kept doing more missions.
	And then in 1954, and you guys can look this up.
	No, this is secret information.
	You can just connect the dots yourself.
	1954, he goes on an American television show called Long Genes Chronoscope.
	And it's kind of like the 60 minutes of its day, 1954.
	And he's talking about the next mission, which is going to be Operation Deep Freeze in 1955, 1956.
	And he's saying that Antarctica, there's a whole bunch of countries down there and it's full of resources.
	The place is basically made out of money.
	He's hyping up the corporations to go down there.
	He's saying there's oil and there's an entire mountain range made out of coal to supply everybody.
	There's uranium, there's minerals, all sorts of fun stuff.
	Then he goes down during Operation Deep Freeze in 55, 56, and whatever he found, and I have no doubt what he found, he found the outer marker.
	And it took him a long time to get there.
	It took him a better part of 30 years.
	The outer marker.
	The outer marker, meaning if this is a domed structure, eventually there's an end point, which is why you've got to hide it from the public, because people hate being enclosed.
	They hate confinement.
	And he found, no doubt in my mind, he found the outer barrier, whatever you want to call it, the soft wall, whatever it's made out of, a heavy element, a heavy water, a frequency modulation, electromagnetics, who knows what it was.
	Well, I've heard people who espouse the flat Earth theory say that the edge of the planet, the edge of the disk, is all ice.
	It's an ice wall all the way around.
	Is that what you mean?
	Well, that's just the first part of it.
	that's just the beginning of the edge.
	The edge is very, It's like, no, no, no, no.
	That's just the beginning of the edge.
	Meaning, imagine putting a quarter on top of like, say, a saucer, like a teacup saucer.
	How far out the edge of that quarter is from the actual edge of the saucer.
	That's what the sort of distances we're talking about here.
	Because when you get, Antarctica is the most unusual continent out of all the continents.
	When you get there, literally the beachfront is 150, 200 feet or higher of ice, straight up.
	Yeah, you could call it an ice wall, but really it's just the beginning of the ice continent.
	And then what else people don't know is once you get on top of it, then it just starts sloping up really, really quickly to where the average elevation, and I can't do it in meters for you, but the average elevation of the whole continent is about 14,000 feet.
	That's a long, long way.
	I mean, altitude sickness kicks in at about 7,000 feet.
	So you've got that happening.
	And then, of course, there's no indigenous plant life, no indigenous animal life, there's no ancient civilizations or anything.
	I mean, the whole place just screams, go away.
	If the icebergs don't scare you away from the coastline, the actual plateau will scare you away.
	Well, isn't that because we're on a globe and it just so happens that the poles are places where they're not in receipt of that much sunlight and that's why they're cold?
	Well, again, that's what science will tell you.
	And science has had a long time to get this story out there.
	And don't forget that this place was designed to simulate a globe type system.
	I'm meaning no different than a planetarium, no different than the Truman show.
	So, yeah, I mean, science can say whatever it wants, but at the same time, there's a lot of inconsistencies with the South Pole than opposed to the North Pole.
	Like, for example, flights go over the North Pole all day long.
	South Pole, they don't.
	GPS works absolutely fine around the northern hemisphere, if you believe in the northern hemisphere, which is the inner disk of the flat Earth.
	But when you get out to the southern hemisphere, the GPS system is useless.
	It absolutely does nothing.
	There's three massive oceans down there where you cannot be tracked.
	Your plane goes into approximated mode or estimated mode, and the latitude and longitude cannot be tracked.
	Isn't that just because the bulk of people and the bulk of usage is up north in the northern hemisphere?
	And what's the point of providing those facilities for a place where people tend not to go?
	Yeah, it's a nice idea, except that the GPS system is DOD and they've got redundancy built into everything they do.
	We're talking about, if you believe the DOD, 32 overlapping blanket coverage satellites, they should be covering everything.
	And yet there's three oceans, the southern Atlantic, the southern Pacific, and the Indian Ocean.
	You can look at them on yourself and different plane trackers.
	Those planes, when they get out of ground radar range, land-based radar range, which is the old Loran system, once they get out of that range, blink, they are gone.
	And they do not come back until they get within land radar range of the continent they're talking about.
	So anyway, let's circle around because We go to a whole bunch of different points.
	So, Antarctica, once they figured out that the outer edge, they basically confirmed what they already knew, what they were looking for for 30 years, which was, okay, we're living in a building.
	We're living in a giant Truman show.
	It's like, okay, what do we do?
	How do we keep this a secret?
	How would you hide the world?
	And that's how I kind of got into building the clues.
	It's like, okay, if I had to hide the world, I would do this and I would do this and I would do this.
	And I'll be darned if they weren't doing exactly that.
	One of the first things they did was they created NASA in 1958 and they started doing high-altitude atomic weapons testing, the United States and the Soviet Union for four years from 1958 until 1962.
	With all they did, every test they did, they fired weapons straight up for no apparent reason.
	And I knew it was like, okay, because they had to map out, yeah, they weren't going to bust through it.
	They tried to do that in the first three shots, which were megaton blasts.
	And then after that, it was kiloton shots.
	And they were basically mapping out the arc of this thing, you know, the dimensions of the structure so that you could eventually, because the only thing you really had to do, the only thing that was most important about faking this thing is you got to fake space.
	Space travel, to be specific.
	You've got to be able to convince people that you've gone to space.
	Let's unpick this then.
	You're doing missile tests and you're firing missiles straight up because you're doing research on what you know is the flat earth.
	Surely the reason for doing missile tests and firing them straight up is that if you do missile tests that fire across and along, which Kim Chong-in- has recently done, they might hit somebody.
	So that's why you fire missiles straight up.
	You're testing your capability.
	You fire the missile straight up, so it comes straight back down, don't you?
	Well, again, it's a nice idea, but if I was gonna do it, eventually you've got to figure out, You've got to map out everything as best you can.
	And since you can't send planes up high enough, there's no manned aircraft.
	You can go up high enough.
	You don't want to start killing people.
	Best thing is just fire rockets with huge payloads and see where they detonate or where they fail.
	And during the blast, you can kind of gauge where everything is.
	Again, the angles, the trajectories, because sooner or later, if you're going to fake space, you've got to fire rockets up and arc them over to where they don't hit any part of the structure, which is what they do.
	If you want to have fun, type in rocket launch or NASA rocket launch time lapse and look at the images.
	They all arc over.
	All rockets go over.
	They lean over and go horizontal very, very quickly into the trajectory, which doesn't make any sense.
	So they did that from 58 till 62.
	And then they did two things in 1959, though, which absolutely sunk it for me, which was, okay, in 1959, two very important things.
	One, the Van Allen radiation belts were announced by a NASA employee named Van Allen, who came forward and said, oh, yeah, there's lethal bands of radiation, you know, not necessarily a dome structure.
	It said lethal bands of radiation up there.
	Nobody should ever go up there, ever, ever, ever.
	Humans, you know, big warning sign, go away.
	And then also in 1959, the Antarctic Treaty was put into place.
	Remember, Antarctica, where Richard Byrd, just a few years before, said the place is made out of money.
	Everybody go get some.
	And in 1959, everybody left the ice at the same time, unilaterally.
	Nobody complained.
	Nobody protested.
	Everybody left.
	There was only like 12 nations, I think at the time, 11 or 12.
	And they signed a treaty saying nobody can ever set up shop in Antarctica to do anything from a resource standpoint ever.
	Wasn't that because it was a pristine and is a pristine and highly sensitive and delicate environment?
	And everybody agreed that it was.
	Not in 1959, it wasn't.
	1959, environmentalism wasn't even a word.
	Greenpeace wasn't the first, Greenpeace wasn't even founded until the 1970s.
	And that was just a couple of guys in time.
	I definitely concede that point.
	You know, it is a 1970s phenomenon.
	So you're saying that, did you say a dozen nations signed that treaty?
	A dozen nations signed it in that, you know, everyone that was down there.
	That means a dozen nations are in on it.
	Well, though, no, no, no, no, because you don't have to at the highest levels.
	Remember, some people really rubs them the wrong way and say, well, you're talking about a conspiracy where millions and millions and millions of people have to know.
	I'm going, no, no, no.
	This is need to know only.
	This is compartmentalization.
	Meaning, all you have to do is have the first big countries go along with it and talk to just a handful of people, the leaders or whatever, saying, look, it's a national security.
	You can make up whatever story you want.
	But all you have to do is tell them it's like, yeah, we need to get off of here as soon as possible.
	Nobody needs to come back.
	And that's it.
	And the treaty became iron.
	It's the only treaty in the history of mankind, which has never ever been broken.
	It's ironclad.
	And every country that comes online as an economic power has to sign it.
	So if you started a country tomorrow, you know, you decided to mine some mineral and you became an economic power.
	And all of a sudden, this piece of paper would be put in front of your desk and says, oh, yeah, by the way, you can't go down to Antarctica.
	And you say, well, for how long?
	And ever.
	What are you talking about?
	Well, I mean, it's not even up for review until 2041.
	And this is a long, long-term treaty.
	And it doesn't matter how much, you know, that part really, really, really bugged me.
	It really, it's like that, that raised more than an eyebrow.
	I'm a big plotline guy.
	You know, I love good, good writing.
	And that's the part that threw it off the rails.
	Forgive me for throwing this at you then, Mark.
	This is all intriguing, but forgive me for throwing this at you.
	If they wanted to keep people from getting to know the secret of this being the perimeter, the perimeter fence that keeps us all in, that's one thing.
	But why is the perimeter fence changing?
	Why are we concerned about the ice breaking up?
	Why are we concerned about temperature increase and the effect on whatever wildlife there might be down there?
	Surely, if it was all a model built by somebody, an ecosystem, then it would be constant, but it's not.
	The system, well, human beings do have an impact on this system.
	And let me address, because your thing kind of has a two-part question to it, which is, for the most part, Antarctica has been out of sight, out of mind.
	We even left Antarctica off the UN flag.
	The UN flag has all the countries and continents there, except that Antarctica is notably missing.
	It's not there on the UN flag, which is really, really strange.
	And One of the big reasons is nobody owns Antarctica.
	The landmass itself is claimed by no one.
	Literally, it's like, find me another piece of real estate anywhere in the world that is not owned by it, and no one even contests it.
	But as far as what you're saying about the ice cap, by the way, before the ice cap melting thing, you remember there was that, I don't know how old you are, remember it was that ozone thing.
	They said, oh, yeah, don't go to Antarctica ever because there's a hole in the ozone layer down there.
	I remember that was from the 80s.
	Which we've been able to, as far as I'm aware, and I'm not a scientist that we say this, but we've been able to partly address by controlling our use of CFCs.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And then as far as the ice breaking up, though, no, I do believe that human beings have an effect on the system, no question.
	Because remember, if it is a pressurized enclosed system, human beings, especially with the technology, and I do believe in some of this, I do believe in some sort of climate change.
	Global warming, yeah, probably because most of the temperature changes have been to the warm side and shouldn't be a big shock because the internal combustion engine, otherwise known as, well, your car, is just a big furnace.
	That's all it is.
	You're just burning fuel and we're burning, you know, there's billions of these things.
	You multiply, you know, spread all over the place and they're always going.
	And, you know, yes.
	On your model, then those fumes will stay within the dome.
	Yeah.
	And the dome will try to compensate for it.
	I mean, we're talking about an automated system that works perfectly, ironically, works perfectly without human beings.
	But with human beings, it has to compensate.
	No different than if you brought in a little propane lantern into your car, right?
	Well, the car that was always running.
	Well, your air conditioning system is going to try to compensate for that propane lantern's heat that's in the back seat, depending on where it is.
	And it's going to do it in a way that the car really doesn't know, even though cars are getting smarter every day.
	It's not going to know exactly.
	It's going to create little hot and cold pockets here and there.
	And it's going to change the climate system inside that car.
	And I know it's a simple demonstration, but you kind of see what I'm getting at.
	Meaning, yeah, we're changing stuff and there is extreme weather and it's happening.
	It's weird all over the place.
	And there's islands that are slowly disappearing.
	And then, you know, there's storms happening where there shouldn't be.
	But I also think the military has been kind of meddling as well.
	I believe in the HARP system and I believe that because weather is just energy, energy transfer, and we've been able to blow out hurricanes for a long time in a crude way.
	So if we decide to create weather in a certain place, the system is going to confiscate and transfer the energy somewhere else and there's going to be blowback.
	I've never been Mr. Cheap point scorer, so please don't think I'm trying to do this.
	As I say, I find what you say fascinating, but you use the same, the phrase global warming.
	If you don't believe there's a globe, how can you call it global warming?
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	It's because, well, it's because of the conditioning.
	And that excellent point to bring up.
	Global, the term global and sphere and ball have been used to describe our world for so long, and it's been in our psyche for so long, which is why people just brace against it.
	Mostly because the globe has been put in your classroom ever since you were in school.
	I mean, it starts out over here when we're six years old.
	It just sits in the classroom and it's just this little toy that sits with you for 12 years.
	I mean, that is amazing conditioning because you don't even have to reinforce it every day.
	It's like, oh yeah, this is where you live.
	This is your home.
	If the kids absorb that 12 years on this site unchallenged, what do you think is going to happen?
	When they get out, if somebody goes against it, the first thing is going to be denial, which I also have to bring up real quick, which is up until, you got to remember, up until NASA was formed, and people say, well, are you saying that NASA is fake?
	I'm going, no, no, no, it's way worse than that.
	The only reason NASA was even constructed was to keep this thing under wraps, a little play on words there, because eventually you're going to have to show a picture of the Earth from space.
	That's the big thing.
	Remember, the globe model has been around for a long time.
	The Copernicus model, what, 500 years or so?
	Globes have been around for a while, but they're globes that were founded on what?
	A little bit of mathematics, a little bit of geometry, and a whole lot of assumptions to where eventually you've got to take a picture of the Earth from space.
	You've got to show people where they live, right?
	And we do.
	Did we now?
	Because the first picture of the Earth, and I throw this back at people, they say, because people say, well, we know the Earth is a globe because NASA took, because of NASA.
	I go, fine, get rid of NASA for a second.
	NASA took the picture supposedly in 1972.
	Before NASA took that picture in 1972, because it's not like we woke up one day in the 70s and said, oh, the Earth is a globe, thank God.
	How did we know before that?
	It was a George Orwell line, which I loved.
	He wrote this in 1946.
	He said that, you know, you could go to the average person on the street and ask them how they know.
	He's talking about science, not necessarily flat Earth.
	And you say, how do you know the Earth is a globe?
	And they say, well, we know.
	It's just known.
	Kind of like, what was that Game of Thrones line?
	It is known, right?
	It's known.
	It's like, well, and if you push them on it, you say, well, how is it known?
	They get angry.
	So here's the, here's, here's where it gets interesting.
	So they literally waited until the Americans waited until the last mission to take the full disc picture of Earth, otherwise known as the Blue Marble.
	You guys can look it up, Blue Marble Earth picture.
	First one was taken in 1972.
	Waited until Apollo 17 to do it.
	Apollo 9 through Apollo 16 didn't even bother taking the picture.
	You would have thought they would have done it, I don't know, as early as possible, but they didn't.
	Do you know when the second blue marble picture was taken of Earth?
	Tell me.
	2015.
	Summer of 2015, right after we got going.
	43 years, they milked the exact same picture.
	And this is not an exaggeration.
	But we've seen segments of the blue marble globe, haven't we?
	From the International Space Station, from the Space Shuttle, from missions that we fired out into space.
	Oh, sure, sure.
	Do you believe space exists?
	No.
	Unfortunately, no.
	So why would let's leave NASA out of this government organization just for a half a second?
	Why would Elon Musk spend vast amounts of money firing his Roadster up into space?
	Oh, yeah, really.
	Had to bring that up as one of my sore subjects.
	Because eventually you've got to let NASA off the hook.
	You have got to take this thing Out to the subcontractors.
	One of the big reasons why you militarized space in the early days was to keep the subcontractors out of it.
	Because remember, billionaires were very far, few and far between back in the 1960s and 1970s.
	So, and remember, NASA is just a conglomeration of parts that are made by other companies, which you've heard of, like Boeing and General Dynamics and McDonnell Douglas, guys like that.
	And you don't want those companies getting involved.
	So you militarize it and you say, okay, only the government's going up there.
	And then eventually, as wealth increases and different things happen, you can shuffle it off to some of the guys that are trying.
	But remember, they got to get their engineers from somewhere.
	And a lot of those guys, a lot of the higher guys are coming from NASA anyway.
	So you have Virgin Galactic, you have the Google guys, and then you have Elon Musk.
	And Elon Musk's timing was good because he can try to reinforce space on the cheap.
	NASA has not been doing much lately.
	If you haven't noticed, the space shuttle program was shut down years ago.
	They haven't been to the moon, supposedly, since 1972, I guess.
	Yes, but they are actively at this moment planning to go to Mars.
	They have a mission that's going to the sun.
	They're looking at the moon at the moment again.
	And that's perfect because every time they bring up those stories, and I can't stress this enough, every time they bring up those stories, the subtext is always the same, which is, oh, we just sent a probe past Pluto.
	We're going to reclassify Pluto.
	It's not a planet anymore.
	Hey, there might be a face on Mars.
	Hey, there might be a hexagram on top of Saturn.
	Hey, look at this interesting thing we're thinking of doing.
	The subtext is always the same, which is face on Mars, reinforcing the globe.
	Saturn, globe.
	Sun, globe.
	Car in space that should have self-destructed in two seconds.
	It doesn't really matter because it's from a globe.
	That's all it is.
	That's all they care about.
	And Elon Musk, sending the car into space was just a very, they was trying to do it on the cheap.
	It's like, can we fake space on a budget?
	And it was, I don't know how much time you want to spend on Elon Musk, but I could go over some of the amazing points.
	All right.
	I want to ask you this.
	What about Mars?
	Because NASA's going to Mars, Musk is going to Mars, Mars One Baz Landsdop is going to Mars.
	A lot of people are going to Mars.
	They're putting human beings there.
	Are they now?
	I would love to see them fake it.
	Something I had said a couple of years ago now, which is if somebody came to me, and I consider myself a pretty clever problem solver.
	Someone came to me with a dump truck full of money and said, look, you need to fake the Mars mission.
	By the way, there's a movie made on a fake Mars mission called Capricorn One, which is brilliant.
	I knew that would come up.
	And we got to remember the reason why Capricorn 1 was even made was because it was an independent film because an American producer from a television station said hated the moon production so badly, not that he thought it was fake.
	He's going, it's just a terror, this is terrible television that he goes, I could make a better movie than what NASA's putting out.
	And he did.
	And in fact, he says, I'll make a better Mars movie than they even did on the moon.
	But as far as going to Mars, no, no, they can talk about it all they want, but it's just it's no different than, and again, you'll remember this, when people said that the hydrogen fuel cell cars were going to be the future.
	And nobody's talking about the hydrogen fuel cell cars.
	Well, I did a program the last edition of this show.
	I was at the National Physical Laboratory in London, and I was actually a passenger in a hydrogen cell fuel car.
	Yeah.
	And they're developing it.
	They've got a gas station for hydrogen cars there.
	Oh, no, no, they work, but they've got a huge, huge flaw, and that is they do not work in cold weather.
	They absolutely cannot.
	There's a physics problem.
	I have to say that it was the day that I went, it was the back end of February, and it was icy, and the car works beautifully.
	Well, I don't know what you were driving in, but the test they've been doing over here.
	Look, the hydrogen fuel cell car thing should have happened, not to digress, should have happened here years ago.
	I mean, they had California all ramped up.
	And you remember, the only reason hydrogen was even going to move forward is because the gas companies don't control electricity, but they do control the production of hydrogen.
	That's the only reason that it was even a thing.
	Anyway, it doesn't really matter.
	Let's get back to the Mars thing.
	So Mars is absolutely, even if it was real, even if you could get to Mars, even if Mars was a thing, even a planet you could land on, it is a freaking pipe dream because of the technology, the distance.
	It is a one-way trip.
	Even if you could get there, you're not going, that's it.
	You're done.
	There's no round trip ticket for this thing.
	When nightfall falls over London, which is going to fall quite soon and not for you in California, it's going to be eight hours beyond that.
	I look up here where I live and I can see constellations.
	I can see the plow.
	I can see the stars.
	It's a beautiful thing.
	Is that just a fake light show?
	Yeah.
	When you go into a planetarium, and I know that dates me, and planetariums, you know, have been around for, wow, late 60s, early 70s, I think.
	A fine example in London, yeah.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Well, hell, Neil deGrasse Tyson runs one.
	That's actually his day job is running the Hayden planetarium on the East Coast.
	It's a beautiful system that you can look up there.
	And people will say, I got into an argument with one of your countrymen where he was saying, look, I am an amateur astronomer and I've seen the moons of Jupiter.
	I've seen the rings of Saturn with my own telescope.
	As blurry as they may be, I've seen them.
	I go, that's fine.
	Take a pair of binoculars, go to a planetarium and tell me, does Jupiter look like a sphere to you?
	He goes, yes, it does.
	And he goes, but it doesn't matter.
	He goes, because you're in a planetarium.
	You're in a building.
	And I go, that's my point.
	Who's to say when you walk out of that building, you're just not in a much, much bigger one?
	Because that's really what we're talking about here.
	A massive, massive planetarium that is so huge and the projection system is so advanced that we weren't even able to detect it.
	All you had to do, remember, negative reinforcements on the edges, make the roof really, really high so that, you know, the average technology can't get there, and then just paint pretty pictures on the, on the ceiling in a very, very high resolution.
	Who's going to know the difference?
	It's a great, well-designed, designed system, and the public, for the most part, bought it.
	Of course, what do you say would happen if we got into a plane, you and I, one day with a lot of fuel in it that was able to go a long, long way, and we just kept flying, say, south, due south, all the way down.
	what would happen?
	You're saying that we're going to bump into something eventually, you would, but you'd have to bypass a lot of things.
	Remember, we're talking about systems in place here that have now, even our systems now to stunt anyone from going out there, have been in place for 60 years.
	So, let's say, let's say you got we had a private jet, a big one, you know, big, big, heavy, long-range sucker, and we took off and we headed, it doesn't have to be south, it can be in any direction.
	First thing you'd have to do is bypass GPS.
	You'd have to get a pilot to say, to ignore GPS and go off compass headings, and even the compass headings would be somewhat skewed because remember, in this map, the North Pole is at the center of the map.
	So everything points north.
	So you'd have to go off visual cues until you got to the outer, until you got to the coastline and then just hope to God you kept going.
	But yeah, eventually you would make it to some sort of barrier if you had enough fuel.
	But you'd have to go past the Antarctic Defense Force, the military that's out there, and they would turn you around in two seconds.
	You're not allowed to just fly freely anywhere you want.
	And do people in that defense force then know the secret?
	Because I can't believe if they did, maybe one day somebody retiring from that force wouldn't spill the beans.
	No, you don't have to.
	Compartmentalization is such a great thing.
	I'll give you the astronaut example.
	Back in the day, they let the Apollo astronauts, and there were not a lot of them, they let them know what was going on.
	And why wouldn't you?
	Take the chance.
	See what happens.
	And that is, okay, the Capricorn one style.
	You're going to fake it and we're going to tell you why.
	And hopefully they can handle it.
	Unfortunately, the combination of how big the magnitude of this thing is, plus the fact that they were getting accolades for stuff that they weren't doing weighed really heavily on the Apollo astronauts.
	And they all crawled into bottles.
	They all became recluses.
	I mean, these guys should have never come down from a high, especially, you know, going back to the moving bag.
	I think that's a description that a lot of those guys are not going to recognize.
	They're not going to think what you just said is terribly fair to them.
	But I hear what you just said.
	You mean as far as the Apollo astronauts?
	Yeah.
	Well, think of it this way.
	If telling them too much, there's an old saying by an American president, Franklin Roosevelt, from our side during World War II.
	And he said, only tell the public as much truth as they can handle and no more.
	And the Apollo astronauts, they told him too much.
	They said, look, you're faking it.
	Here's why.
	Deal with it.
	And they dealt with it the best they could.
	And it was unfortunate.
	But at the same time, they said, okay, we're not going to make that mistake again.
	So what they did was they just, every other astronaut since then has really been Air Force, the United States military, and they just make them sign disclosure agreements and say the old line, which is, it's above your pay grade.
	You don't have clearance to even ask us why you're faking it.
	Oh, you're no different than a spy.
	We send spies out into the field all the time to do missions.
	The spies aren't allowed to ask why they're doing this.
	Why am I killing this guy?
	You're not even asked, allowed to ask that.
	Same thing with the astronauts now.
	It's like they can fake stuff, but they're let off the hook.
	The less they know, the better.
	But how come in the entire history of NASA, which goes back a long, long way, decades and decades, nobody has ever, perhaps at an advanced age, come out and said, we're being told a lie?
	In the nature of humanity, in the nature of humanity, somebody would be bound to do that.
	And yet, as far as I'm aware, you might tell me different.
	It hasn't happened.
	It is.
	You're right.
	It hasn't happened.
	The one guy, and I've gotten a lot of subject matter experts from different disciplines, but I've only had one NASA guy approach me, and then he went to the hospital almost immediately.
	I hope he's still alive.
	But yeah, it's a tough call.
	I'm a good member, though.
	You said, hang on, you're saying that somebody who worked at NASA came to you to say, Mark, I've been following your work and actually you might be on the right lines here.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	And I still have all his information, but he was right there.
	How do you know that he worked at NASA?
	He gave me all his details.
	Did you check him out?
	Did you try and find out?
	It seemed to check out, but at the same time, because he didn't want to go live with it, it's like, all right, I'll wait until, you know, he said, wait till I get out of the hospital.
	I'll be fine.
	And it's like, all right, I'll wait.
	And it's been a few weeks.
	I'm going to give him a little more time.
	But he came at the very tail end.
	He wasn't even going to come forward, though, until all the other military guys and the surveyors and the engineers and everybody else I had talked to.
	And once I had gotten all those guys, then finally someone from NASA.
	But as far as the astronauts, what you're asking about, there's only been, even by public, you know, even if you believe the public records, there's only been 500 astronauts that have even claimed to have gone to space.
	That is not a lot of people.
	And considering they're all military, you can keep those guys pretty quiet because all you have to do is tell them, like, look, we're going to monitor your emails or monitor your phone calls.
	You get out of line and you won't exist.
	Remember, the military rules are different.
	They don't go to court.
	They just go away.
	If there was a big program, if there is, as you say, a big program to lie to us and to throw up a smokescreen, which includes Mars missions, moons missions, moon missions, trips into space, all the rest of it, if there was a big cover-up.
	I just don't get that because what they'd have done is they'd have tackled the problem at source.
	They'd have stopped science discovering that there were ways to get up into space, wouldn't they?
	They'd have stopped the developments of rockets that could do that and technologies that could do that.
	They'd have stamped on the astronomers.
	They could have nipped it in the bud.
	They could have, but unfortunately, what's the old saying?
	The tangled web we weave.
	And that is once you start lying, you gotta keep the lie going in every aspect, which means, for example, a lot of people would say, well, you know, satellites, you can't fake those.
	And it's like, well, yeah, you would.
	You'd have to fake just about everything, which in fact, there was a company I talked to out in California called Interorbital.
	And they're like a rocket booster, like a competitor to SpaceX.
	And in fact, I didn't even solicit them.
	It was a German company that wanted me to talk to them.
	And I talked to the CEO of this place.
	And because I was curious, I said, my theory was if NASA really wanted to keep this thing going on all levels, then they would take over the telemetry of just about everything that was ever shot into space, whether it be scientific or commercial or whatever.
	And so the first thing I asked them, I go, look, if you're the rocket company that, you know, you get satellites from people and you put them into orbit and you send up telemetry.
	I go, then do you have to file flight plans with NASA?
	And they said, No, we don't.
	And I go, Oh, well, that's interesting.
	They go, You know, who we do have to file plans with.
	I go, No, who?
	And they go, it's an organization called the Atmospheric and Transportation Safety Bureau.
	And she goes, and every country that has a rocket program has one of these.
	I go, really?
	What do they do?
	And they go, well, they ask for your everything, every little detail about your rocket, they ask for months and months in advance, like six months, eight months in advance, including the payload.
	They want to know exactly what the payload is, the frequency it's transmitting on, everything.
	And we need to know that is required before you send any rockets up.
	And that I've gone to work.
	Well, isn't that just because we want to know who's going to be putting stuff up there?
	Because we don't want them shooting death beams down at us.
	Again, a logical explanation, sure.
	But it's also quite convenient because, again, if I wanted to make sure that fake was space, well, fake was spaced, space was faked in all aspects, I would take over the telemetry of everything that was put up there.
	So I get all the details from whoever it is.
	I make sure, you know, the rocket goes up, it curves over.
	I take over transmission and as far as whatever frequencies and whatever data they want, we fabricate the data.
	And again, it seems like a lot of work, but we're only talking about time and money because what's the alternative?
	You know, they don't, they only want to release this to the public when they think it's time.
	And it's a losing game.
	You know, there's only so long you can keep this.
	It's kind of like hiding a pack of cigarettes from your roommate.
	You know, you can only, you can move it around here and there, drawer here, underneath the couch, but sooner or later, they're going to figure it out.
	So you have to create contingency plans.
	But until then, you do whatever it takes to fake it.
	And up until now, they've done a pretty good job.
	It's been pretty good.
	And other countries have to be let in on it.
	But since NASA blueprinted how the process works, it's been pretty good.
	Also, don't send anybody to the moon.
	Why did the space race end?
	Why was there a space race in the first place?
	But remember, it was supposed to be the United States and the Soviet Union.
	We're going to get to the moon.
	And it was supposed to keep going.
	That's the whole point of the space race.
	Everybody ran out of cash, didn't they?
	Did they?
	Really?
	Because that's what have stopped them.
	It's a matter of national pride.
	We put three people on the moon.
	The Russians put four.
	We put a small base.
	They put a bigger base.
	And next thing, Time magazine, has the Cold War moved to the moon?
	No, no, no.
	They had to end it right then and there, which was the Americans get there and then everybody else quits.
	The Soviet Union really just quits?
	That's it?
	They stop.
	They stop their space program.
	Well, of course, they had their other issues that culminated in the collapse of the Soviet Union.
	And one thing I must ask you— One thing I must ask you.
	What about things like, and I've also printed out a list, there are many lists out there of all the reasons people say this is garbage, but I'll go through some of those points.
	But one I'd like to put for myself to you is the Coriolis effect, the fact that a spinning globe, if you pour water down a plughole in the northern hemisphere, it goes in one direction.
	If you do it in Cape Town in the southern hemisphere, I've watched it, it goes in the other direction.
	We would have to be a spinning globe with a northern and a southern hemisphere for that to happen, wouldn't we?
	Right.
	Well, you'd think so.
	And I actually would have bought into that.
	And there was a guy who was not a flat earther who did the most amazing test.
	And he's still not a flat earther.
	It's a YouTube channel called Look It Up If you Get a Chance called Smarter Every Day because it was one of those things.
	He gets those questions all the time.
	It's like, you know, toilets and drains, northern hemisphere versus southern hemisphere.
	And he set up the most elaborate test with these small waiting pools with perfectly still water with a central drain, simultaneous test in literally, you know, they're doing a Skype test.
	One is up here in the States.
	The other one, I think, is down in Australia.
	And just to make sure the water was not disturbed really in any way, they used food coloring instead of like putting little markers, any physical markers down there.
	They pulled the drains and he said the spin was so infinitesimal that he could not even guarantee that it was happening at all.
	Are you sure about that?
	Listen, I've been in hotels in Durban, South Africa, places like that.
	And I've been in hotels in the UK and I get up in the morning, I have a wash, I let the water go.
	It goes one way up here, and it goes the other way down there.
	I've seen it.
	You may have seen it, but I can only tell you what I've seen on video.
	I can do the same thing now in a kitchen sink.
	You move the faucet to the left-hand side, it spins one way.
	You move the faucet to the right-hand side, it spins another way.
	Everyone that I have run into, not that it's a sticking point for me because it's minor, because even if it was true, I'd blame it on molecular magnetism because remember, the whole thing's a machine.
	You could simulate it, which we do in physics engines.
	But it's part of the conspiracy.
	Well, why not?
	Everything else is physical.
	It's a mechanical process.
	Why wouldn't that be as well?
	You say this with such relish, and I'm sorry I sound like a guy who's constantly interrupting you.
	It's just because I'm so interested.
	You say all of this with such amazing relish and a little bit of humor there.
	You do really believe all this.
	Oh, I absolutely believe it.
	The Truman show, as I was, because I come from a game development background, a simulation background, to where I know what can be done, what we can do with ones and zeros and graphics and simulations.
	So when it came to this, as I was building, I basically just took the Truman show and I started making it bigger.
	I said, okay, what if we make it instead of 20 miles wide or wherever that thing was, it was big, make it 100 miles wide, make it 1,000 miles wide.
	As you make it bigger, believe it or not, the scaling makes all the processes easier.
	Meaning, you know, the jet stream is the high wind jet stream that controls the upper atmosphere.
	That's just akin to a giant air conditioning system.
	The underwater conveyor system, which transfers huge amounts of water and energy in the oceans, that's no different than jets in a hot tub.
	The magma system underneath that, the heating coils in a heated seat in a car.
	We're talking about, we have much smaller, much more simple references to this thing, but we're talking about a terrarium.
	And because people say, well, you know, isn't anything organic?
	I love people that will jump on it and say, well, you can't say that the magma system is mechanical as well.
	And I go, why wouldn't it be?
	I go, if you have a pet lizard in a cage, I go, what haven't you provided for him that's organic?
	I mean, the light bulb is there, the water in the tank, the stuff on the ground, the case, everything about it is manufactured.
	But he doesn't know any different.
	It's not in his nature.
	So when it comes to what you're talking about, I'm sorry, the Coriolis effect, by the way, I've got to mention real quick, I've got a list of subject matter experts.
	That was one of the first things that they shot down, a little play on words, because they were all military guys.
	And yeah, I know mainstream news has said that, oh, yeah, sniper shots.
	Sometimes snipers will actually take into account the spinning of the earth.
	And I'm going, really?
	Because I've got a tank guy, an artillery guy, a missile guy, a submarine guy.
	All these guys are shooting far, you know, way, way.
	Snipers only shoot a mile at best.
	Artillery shooting 20 miles, 30 miles.
	I got missile guys at 50, 60 miles.
	Submarines, I didn't know torpedoes actually could go 30 miles and they do.
	They all, yeah, we've heard about the Coriolis effect.
	We never use it.
	It's never plotted into our firing solutions.
	It's a myth.
	It's just something you hear about that no one ever does within their nine-to-five job.
	I hear what you say.
	I've stood on the flight deck in the days when you were allowed to do these things of a 747 heading due south towards South Africa from London.
	And I've seen the sun come up over Africa.
	And I have been high enough up to watch what I believe is the curvature of the earth, to see it before me.
	And what was I seeing then?
	You want to see the curvature, unfortunately.
	You think I deluded myself.
	No, no, no, not deluded yourself.
	Unfortunately, it's not your fault.
	Or fortunately, it's your fault.
	It's kind of like the George Orwell thing, the five lights versus four lights, which is you're told there's a curvature.
	You're told it so many times that you want, you're going to try to see it.
	Your eyes are going to try to see it.
	I've made that challenge to somebody, to people, I think two and a half years ago now, where I said, look, you think you see the curvature?
	Fine.
	Take a picture, put it on your tablet or laptop or whatever.
	Hold a straight edge up to it.
	You still see the curvature on that laptop.
	You send it to me.
	I will quit flat Earth tomorrow.
	I've had a list of pilots that have all said that.
	In fact, the pilots are in this weird paradox where every pilot says the same thing.
	It's like, oh yeah, we absolutely, if you're in a pilot seat long enough, you know that it's flat.
	Well, your eyes see it as flat.
	But since they are raised, since we're raised, since we're children, that it is a globe, you're stuck in kind of this weird thing.
	So pilots say like, all right, we're just, as long as I can take off from point A and land at point B and nobody dies, nobody crashes, I'm just not going to deal with this.
	But yeah, pilots are in this weird, weird position.
	And I've had a number of them come to me.
	They said, even flight instructor came to me and said, oh, yeah, absolutely.
	Because the instruments show that it's flat.
	The only reason the pilots don't come out and talk about it being flat is because they'd be labeled as crazy, which is why I joked and said, look, you'd be better off telling people that you were chased by a UFO than to say it was flat.
	At least people would buy that.
	These days.
	So you think that because people are increasingly coming to buy the possibility of UFOs, they might actually come around to buying this?
	It is the ultimate open-minded test.
	I'll give you that.
	There are hardcore conspiracy people, you might be one included, that believe in all sorts of things.
	But nobody likes flat Earth when they first hear it.
	Again, because of the conditioning, we're told.
	I mean, it's literally something you're told when you're a kid, which is we used to think, you know, the Earth is a globe, but before that, we used to think the Earth was flat.
	All you have to do is repeat that a few hundred times and it sinks in.
	So as far as conspiracy guys go, look, I'm about as deep into it as anybody.
	And it still took me months to get my head around.
	I had much less content to work with, though.
	I've got this list here printed out from the internet.
	All the lists say much the same thing.
	One of the points is that, and this is pretty obvious, isn't it?
	If we were a plate and there was a dome above us, we would all look up and see at night the same constellations.
	If we were a spinning plate, then it would be the same.
	But I've been to the southern hemisphere.
	They're totally different down there.
	You're absolutely right.
	You're absolutely right.
	And so how can that be?
	multiple projection systems.
	It's so large that you can't, But if you have a stretch of sky that's thousands of miles wide, thousands, then what you do there is you instance the sky.
	That's a sophomore term, meaning you create multiple projections of almost the same thing.
	So you're standing, let's say in the southern hemisphere, and you're looking at the belt of Orion, and I'm looking at the Belt of Orion too, and we're on the phone with each other.
	We both think we're seeing the exact same belt of Orion.
	And to prove my point, I say, yeah, but my middle star in the belt is green.
	And you say, well, no, mine's red.
	Who's right?
	Well, actually, we're both right because you're looking at two completely different projections because it's based on region.
	And I've seen the time-lapse photography and movies.
	And I, of course, that's what I would do at the equator because you can actually see it.
	It's fascinating.
	You can see the one go clockwise and one go counterclockwise.
	Literally, there's a spot on the equator where you can see them simultaneously, you know, spreading out in different directions or different rotations.
	And that's because you got one projection on one side and one on the other.
	Not hard to do.
	But it's tough to explain to people because if you haven't been and done any, I'm not going to come off as too techie here when I say this.
	Unless you've done any world building, it's a little tough to grasp.
	Unless you've seen it, unless you've walked into a simulated environment and looked up and seen what can be done up there, it can be a little tough because people literally, it's like, well, there's only one, remember, it's the reinforcement.
	There's only one star system.
	so how can it be?
	Or if you're going to go down that road, and I don't know if it's on your list, it's like, how does a blunt moon even happen?
	How does a solar eclipse happen?
	How does anything in the sky happen?
	Well, on the list is eclipse, show you the earth shapes.
	The list says, have you ever seen a lunar eclipse?
	It's when the earth passes in between the sun and our moon and casts a shadow over your lunar surface.
	If you look closely, you can pick out a slight curvature, indicating we are not flat.
	Yeah, that's a good line.
	Although, I'm going to go back to the planetarium, and that is, have you ever seen in a planetarium a waxing or waning crescent or a half moon or full moon?
	And yes, you have.
	And that's because we can do that.
	It's not hard.
	We're talking about very simple graphical changes when it comes to in blood moon.
	The blood moon, I'm really surprised more people don't come at me about the blood moon, which is how do you even have a blood moon?
	Because technically on a flat earth, there's no earth between the sun and the moon.
	And it's like, well, it's because you just shade the moon whatever color you want.
	You got to remember that in a planetarium, you know, on weekends or certain special events, they shut off the stars and then they do, I don't know if they do it over in your place, they do rock, you know, concerts like Laser Floyd and Laser Led Zeppelin, where people get high and they lay it in the back and they just flash up whatever they want.
	A projection system, you can do literally anything.
	The eclipse, though, I got to mention this.
	The eclipses are fascinating because I was in the Great American Eclipse last year.
	And remember, if you believe mainstream science that says that the moon is 2,000 miles wide, the blackout zone is only 70 miles wide, which is really interesting because that means the shadow of the moon is being reduced by 97%.
	And people say, well, that's what happens.
	You know, it's a convex lens and it angles the shadow down.
	And I was in it.
	I was in that blackout zone.
	It's beautiful, closest thing to magic I've ever seen.
	I'm going, okay, then what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
	Why doesn't that happen on the moon?
	Meaning when the earth gets in front of the sun on the moon, and remember, the earth is only four times larger in terms of diameter than the moon, if you believe mainstream science, then that shadow, that blackout zone should be 200 and something miles wide, total blackout.
	And that should be easily visible on the moon.
	And yet what we see is completely different.
	The earth completely eclipses the moon in its entirety, and it's not hard at all.
	So where's the blackout zone?
	We don't see it.
	It's interesting.
	You can't have one without the other.
	Anyway.
	On the list, and I'm not going to read any more from the list, but this one appears in all of the lists about flat earth.
	And let me just read this bit.
	The same objects make different shadows.
	Here's one you can try at home.
	It says here.
	If the earth were flat, you could drive two sticks into the ground at any place on earth, and the shadows of those sticks would be the same length.
	Place a stick in the ground on a sunny day, then measure the length of the shadow.
	At the same time, call your friend who's a few miles away, and then tell them to do the same.
	The lengths you measure will be different.
	The curvature of a spherical earth means that sun rays will hit each stick differently if they are far enough apart.
	Game set and match, isn't it?
	Yeah, the sticks and shadows argument.
	No, I've heard that one since literally, I think, week two.
	Aristothanes, was that he's the guy that came up with that?
	The, you know, back in the day.
	And that's, yeah, the sticks and shadows argument works well.
	Unless, remember, because light and space is relative, unless that works.
	Yeah, if the sun is 400,000 miles in diameter and 93 million miles away, it works.
	But it also works if the sun is much, much closer and much, much smaller.
	Works the exact same way.
	You just don't know.
	Remember, let's look at it from the, if the, remember, I just talked about the eclipse shadow was like 70 miles wide, because people are saying, well, how big is the sun and the moon?
	We're talking about the sun and the moon would be approximately the same size.
	They're about 50 miles wide, maybe a couple thousand, 3,000 miles up.
	The sticks and shadows would work the exact same way.
	You can do the same thing with a flashlight and two sticks and, you know, real close, real close to each other.
	Move the flashlight around.
	You'll see the same sort of effect.
	Human beings have a horrible, horrible trait of not being able to gauge distances on generic shapes.
	The example would be if you, or relative motion for that matter.
	So if you have an object that is, like, for example, if you hold a pen, we all done this when we were kids.
	You hold a pen really close to your eye, right?
	Is that pen really, really huge or is it just really close to your eye?
	Well, we know it's close to our eye, and so there's no illusion because we know it's a pen.
	You do the same thing with a generic shape, like a like a sphere, and put it a distance away.
	We have no idea.
	No idea how far it is.
	So you buy this stuff that's appeared online lately where somebody says, oh, hang on.
	I've got a really great lens here on my camera.
	It's a fantastic zoom.
	And look at the way that I can zoom into the moon.
	Now, if the moon was as far away as we're being told, we wouldn't be able to zoom in like that.
	Yeah, the P900, the Canon P900 camera, well, there's a whole bunch of them out there, but the biggest reason if you're wondering why this thing has resonated recently is because of camera technology.
	Out of all the technologies that we've come up with recently, camera technology, basically putting a computer in a camera, has changed the game, meaning we can now zoom into things with HD that we couldn't even begin to describe 20 years ago.
	And so not just the moon, the big ones, the boats, which is you see a boat, and again, this is reinforcement.
	Most of the population lives on some sort of water.
	We've all seen a boat go off and into the distance and supposedly go over the horizon.
	And that's what we're told.
	Oh, it's gone over the horizon.
	It's gone over the curvature of the earth.
	It's like, okay.
	But now with this camera technology, you can zoom in and bring that boat back into frame.
	That boat pops up again.
	There it is.
	The boat should be gone.
	And then you can let it go again.
	You can crank up the zoom even further to the point where, and it doesn't register.
	Because remember, if the Earth's curvature is eight inches per mile squared, then eventually that boat should be over the hill.
	And it doesn't matter what sort of lens you have, you shouldn't be able to pull it back.
	And we keep pulling it back to where now I put out the challenge to science.
	I go show me a lighthouse, show me a boat, show me something out in the distance, which we can't within reason with like 200 miles because otherwise the atmosphere gets too thick that we can't pull back.
	But yeah, the moon is another thing.
	The moon's supposedly 237,000 miles away, and yet we can zoom in with amazing clarity.
	Last question, then.
	And you know, as I say, I found this fascinating.
	It is controversial.
	You know that.
	And I also know that I'm going to get emails about this.
	And maybe so will you too, Mark.
	But the world's most eminent scientists, one of whom sadly we've only just lost, and that is Stephen Hawking, have all rubbished the idea of flat Earth.
	Even people like Barack Obama in a speech rubbished the idea of the flat Earth.
	Aren't you fighting against a tide here?
	Aren't you really trying to do something that is going to be an impossible task for you?
	Because everybody sees it a different way from you.
	No, not at all.
	As a matter of fact, I go the opposite way, which is what has happened, and there has been a certain disparity in education, which means that we've, for whatever reason, the academic communities have sort of put it upon the general population to say, hey, leave science to the scientists, which is fine, you know, but there's not that many of them.
	And the masses are huge.
	And the masses absolutely will understand simple concepts.
	And so when I came up with what the flat earth clue is, which is basically the dummy's guide to flat earth, I didn't use any math.
	I used very, very little science.
	I just used observations and tried to connect the dots.
	And other people, you know, built off of some of those things.
	But the general population absolutely understands the core concepts and they understand some suspicious things.
	So, and people say, well, what are you saying that you're smarter than Einstein and Neil deGrasse Tyson and all these guys?
	I'm going, no, no, no.
	What I'm saying is these guys are built on the backs of other people and the foundations are the problem.
	It isn't that, yeah, there's some brilliant, brilliant guys out there with PhDs, but they never bothered to check the core of their beliefs.
	And so, no, let me end up with this.
	The resonating we've had when I initially did the clues back in 2015, when you went on YouTube, typed in flat earth, and you guys can do this now, and then sorted by upload date, you maybe got 50,000 search results.
	As of this morning, I think it's about 19.8 million search results each.
	Well, that's a feature of social media, isn't it?
	That's not a more enlightened person.
	What are we talking about here?
	Social media is the future at this point.
	Television is fading away.
	YouTube is the biggest television network now in the world.
	So social media has propelled the flat earth.
	So you think that those numbers are proof that people are becoming more enlightened?
	Oh, I know it is.
	I have an unlimited stream of emails that come into me.
	My phone basically doesn't stop ringing.
	I've done, I've never solicited an interview, and I think I've done pushing 200 at this point.
	201 today.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And some pretty heavy hitters.
	And it's like, and they're coming at me saying, okay, why is this?
	And yeah, a lot of them are on their heels going, holy smokes, this guy actually thinks it's real.
	But we just did our convention, you know, our conference, our first one in his 500 years down in Raleigh, North Carolina.
	The second one's going to be in Denver.
	There's a Canadian conference coming up in August.
	The documentary was just finished.
	It's going to be at a film festival in Toronto next month that I'm going to be attending.
	I'm getting flown out to meetups all over the place.
	Oh, no, this thing has got legs.
	And I don't know exactly how, where it's going to go.
	I'm just curious to see how the powers that be deal with it from this point forward.
	Less than a minute to answer this question.
	If this is ever proved to be so, how's it going to change things?
	How's it going to change governments?
	How's it going to change us?
	One of two ways, and I can do this quickly, is because it's a crossroads.
	Really, that's all it is.
	It's a big fork in the road.
	One side is a golden age, which is if it's spun in a certain way, we're all in the same place.
	We're in the same trim and show.
	We're all in the same building.
	We're all part of the same family.
	Hate crimes stop.
	Sex crimes.
	So you think it might bring us together?
	Potentially.
	It has the potential to save the world.
	I absolutely have no doubt.
	But there is a dark side to that, and that is depending on who it is, they could spin it the other way and you could turn it and let the people riot through the streets and use it as a catalyst for something darker, something more sinister.
	Well, that is a conspiracy theory.
	Yeah.
	Mark Sargent, thank you very much.
	If people want to look at your work, where should they go first online?
	Easiest place to go.
	Just go into any search engine and type in Flat Earth Clues.
	That'll take you to the YouTube page and the website eventually and the book and the audio book and all the other fun stuff.
	But really, focus on the community.
	Don't just focus on my stuff.
	Go into YouTube, type in Flat Earth and start looking through some great stuff.
	And if you're new to it, type in Flat Earth Shortlist for New People.
	That's a list of probably my top 25 people that have been doing Flat Earth work and you'll get a great dose of what's out there.
	Wow.
	By the way, don't take anything I said as gospel.
	Do your own research.
	Ask questions.
	Thank you.
	I've enjoyed this.
	I know I'm going to get emails from both sides, so bring them on.
	Mark Sargent, thank you very much.
	Thank you.
	I know you're going to want to have your say about that.
	Mark Sargent, the king of the flat earth theory, currently, I would say.
	If you have views about that, go to my website, theunexplained.tv, the website designed, created, and owned by Adam Cornwell from Creative Hotspot in Liverpool.
	We have more great guests in the pipeline here at The Unexplained.
	All kinds.
	We're going to do mainstream science.
	We're going to do weird science and we're going to do deep, pure paranormality here because that's what we've always done on the unexplained.
	So until next, we meet.
	My name is Howard Hughes.
	I am in London.
	This has been The Unexplained.
	And please stay safe, stay calm, and above all, please stay in touch.
	Thank you very much.
	Take care.

▲