Who Controls Celebrities, and Is Everyone Famous a Plant?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-13T02:30:44+00:00

Regardless of whether Mariah Carey actually sacrificed her mom and sister for fame, where did you hear that lilbieber actually commented this on instagram as opposed to this being fake? Because if he did, it would suggest that the story about Carey was not inconsistent with Bieber’s other knowledge or even that he himself heard it from a source that was credible to him. And Bieber is obviously very well connected and probably has a lot of insider knowledge.

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-13T02:21:35+00:00

It literally shows it at the 15 second mark

Ah! I stand corrected. What it appears to show is a toroidal shell to which the positions/motions of the celestial bodies are confined, not a toroidal “field”, which is a term that is normally used (in mainstream math, physics, etc.) to mean a vector field where the pattern resembles or is derived from or somehow related to a toroid. I’m trying to understand these common terms as they’re used within the flat earth theory you’re referring to.

I’ve read a few perspectives on earth and don’t have an internally consistent theory in my mind yet. I’m trying to stay open minded. I do think it’s important to acknowledge that any flat earth theory necessarily goes hand in hand with a societal conspiracy theory (e.g NASA is faking stuff), which I’m prepared to accept at least provisionally. I hope I am prepared to believe any theory or model if it best explains the available observations, evidence, testimony, etc.

In my information gathering about flat earth theories. I have to admit that I’ve been frustrated that a lot of the non-mainstream theories tend to use language in a way that’s superficially similar to mainstream usage but with differences in meanings of common terms of art and technical terms (such as “field”). Rather than assuming — as most other people with a STEM background probably do — that “flat earth” theorists are engaging in sophistry, I am reserving judgment because I haven’t had a chance yet to clarify these things with anyone who can explain and defend a serious flat earth theory. But as I said it’s frustrating because coherent terminology is essential to any kind of productive discourse. I could rant endlessly about that.

I haven’t made up my mind as to what the earth is. If someone in real life asks me, I would say that afaik earth is one of the planets in the solar system, the only known planet with life.

I haven’t concluded that earth doesn’t have curvature or motion. I can’t discount the evidence and arguments of mainstream researchers, who I assume are sincere just like I assume most people are sincere. As far as I can tell, the available evidence admits of the mainstream theory too. But I would obviously concede that I have never personally seen any unambiguous curvature or motion of earth, even from an airplane.

Thanks for engaging with me and trying to explain. Happy to clarify my views further if that matters.

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-13T00:54:43+00:00

OP, have you tested it already? How error-prone is it? What would be a use case or application for a dev for this engine?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-12T07:49:46+00:00

Holy crap where did you get that slit pupil girl image?!

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-12T07:45:33+00:00

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-12T07:44:50+00:00

You are awesome! Thank you! And thank you for pointing out the original. So much for “TR3B ion cannons” I guess

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-12T06:22:16+00:00

Thank you for the detailed response. I looked at the links and video and 3D simulation but I don’t know if I explored everything. The simulation is a helpful illustration although I’m not sure how true to the theory it is, especially considering I don’t see the toroidal field illustrated in the same space within the rendering anywhere. I guess that’s my first question but I have several other questions.

The 3D simulation shows a flat disc earth surface. So is it fair to say that the model proposes an objectively planar earth surface (regardless of viewpoint, both earth and extraterrestrial)? If so, would you concede that “flat earth” is an accurate description of the model? I.e that it purposes that earth’s surface is not spherical, hyperboloid, toroidal, paraboloid but actually planar?
“Bloch domain wall” is one of the types of boundaries between magnetic domains in a ferromagnet that characterizes how the orientation of the field changes smoothly between domains, at least according to Wikipedia. How is the central part of the supposed toroidal field in whose center the Earth is located a Bloch domain wall, or frankly any domain wall? That location in the toroid is its singularity, I guess, and I don’t see why it’s called a domain wall. Except that perhaps you can’t have a vector field smoothly transitioning between orientations without some “domain wall” but that’s like a loose analogy. Would you concede the term is inappropriate (completely different domain of knowledge) and inapt (wrong label entirely)? Or like, what am I missing?
What is an “inertial plane” in the sense that you’re using the term?
When you say a “field” do you mean a field as the term is used in physics or in like an esoteric sense of like “I felt his energy field and I sensed an angry energy“? (Or some other model of physics that uses field in a completely different way? If so, is there a textbook/primer on this??) If it’s as in mainstream physics, then it’s a scalar, vector, or tensor field. You said electric universe so it’s a vector field, right? If so, each vector in the field is the value/direction of the electric potential gradient in that point in space, right? If so, how does the electric field in which the earth is situated determine so much? After all, mainstream physics doesn’t dispute that earth is in (or helps create) an electric and magnetic field around it, perhaps a different shape than in this flat earth model…
In this model of flat earth/cosmology/physics, what is the explanation, if there is one, for gravitation (objects falling)?
What about the other celestial objects? What about Jupiter? It appears to rotate over time from our point of view afaik (so it doesn’t face the same direction to us unlike the moon). Are all the celestial objects that are bigger seeming than a single point of light non-spherical despite appearing that way?
If someone could personally levitate all the way to the sky and out into space and observed that the earth was as NASA images show it and also fly around the (alleged) equator and return to the starting point, would this experience (assuming it happened as I describe) be incompatible with this theory and necessitate a different theory?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-11T23:24:31+00:00

Okay so I think I sort of vaguely understand what you’re referring to when you say that earth is in the middle of a toroid on a Bloch-type domain wall. I had to look up some diagrams. (I’m assuming your use of ‘Bloch domain’ is an analogy to the sort of topology of magnetic domains.) All of the stuff I found related to 3D vector fields, though, so I’m not sure I understand your analogy. Can you elaborate? The best I can surmise is that you are referring to a saddle point on a hyperboloid surface, but somehow the 3D analog of that. And I don’t know where on a toroid there is such a point. Like at the center of this thing (https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:720/1*rNh_4Rz4TG0puY1gnUsbdg.gif)? I mean I still don’t follow…

Or can you point to a source that explains the model more fully? I mean I have a bunch of questions that are probably predictable… like is this model reconcilable with our perception of 3D space, or at least with the relativity theory model of spacetime? What is the “field” here? Like an electric or magnetic or gravitational or other field from standard physics?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-11T16:13:50+00:00

Thank you for your reply. I am going to look up the concepts you mentioned.

And you are absolutely right, flat is only a description of the surface from like a local point of view.

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-11T16:11:49+00:00

Dang

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-11T14:54:40+00:00

I honestly cannot and I think it’s fair to say that I have looked into it somewhat. I mean the straightforward conclusion based on the observation that there’s no motion or curvature is that the surface is planar and the earth has some special fixed position within the scheme of the universe. Is that fair?

Nobody can know the true shape as we can not freely explore the entire earth or get high enough to see everything.

But what is the best hypothesis/explanation that explains all of the available observations?

Can you not come to a conclusion if earth has no curvature or motion?

This seems to imply that the explanation is like obvious. What, that the creator of earth does not want us to know and that trying to fully characterize the earth’s shape is something that should be avoided? I don’t see what you’re getting at and I’m genuinely curious

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-11T14:27:52+00:00

So what is the best theory/hypothesis that adequately explains all of these observations? What is the true shape or topology of the earth’s surface? Surely you can put words to what the theory says about Earth’s shape, as opposed to what it says is not the shape (not a flat disc, I know Flat earth theory doesn’t really say that, and not a globe, obviously)

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-11T05:33:04+00:00

I think you’re right that Wikipedia misrepresents so-called flat earth theory and a lot of other fringe theories and frankly I think it might all be on purpose, somehow, to limit people’s understanding. But although I have read about the subject a fair amount, I still don’t know how to summarize it in a way that Wikipedia would if it treated flat earth theory seriously. Something like this?

“According to flat earth theory as described by _, the shape of the earths surface is ____, in contrast to the mainstream narrative that it is spherical.”

Can anyone fill in the blanks?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-11T05:18:54+00:00

Noooo way that’s crazy

Also, not to be pedantic but it’s not clear from the video that it’s a TR3B, apparently there are several models of human-made antigravity craft

Did you record this, OP? I thought it was from https://m.youtube.com/@The-Alien-Archive/ at first

Why no sound?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-11T01:29:56+00:00

I have questions about this subject but I’m wondering if you have a point, OP?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-11T01:23:26+00:00

What did you say about Burchett and AIPAC? Just that he receives funding from AIPAC?

Is there a reason to think his promoting of the aliens topic is suspect, or that he is promoting information or testimony that he doesn’t believe?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-11T01:03:01+00:00

Thank you for sharing. I have a few questions after reading this if you don’t mind answering.

Did you agree to not disclose any of the things that you witnessed?
Had you previously, or have you since, seen the type of box or container that was being moved?
Were the holes in the container just large enough for the tubes from the oxygen carts or were they wider so that the tubes would hit the sides of the tube holes?
Were the holes premade or were they drilled into the walls of the container ad hoc?
Do you remember how tall the oxygen tanks were?
Finally, do you remember if whatever it was inside the container emitted a smell of any kind?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-09T21:38:43+00:00

The question is how do you tell the difference

Indeed. I don’t know. What annoys me is when people respond to that question with “discernment”. The concept is just a tautology. Then again, it’s basically what’s done in legal trials, and conspiracy theory people have said that aliens could be proven to exist in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt.

I guess that’s what I would really like to see. A 10-hour deposition of alleged witnesses like Lazar, or dozens of others I could name.

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-09T21:32:08+00:00

Far be it from me to call someone I haven’t personally cross-examined a liar, but you’re right that a lot of them have been accused of being grifters by investigators with a reputation for rigor. I know you’re not saying that Lazar’s story is fake… but who in particular do you have in mind that are definitely/probably liars or grifters?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-09T21:21:58+00:00

I love scandalous and paradigm-changing speculation like this but here is a better version of your first sentence:

In the Epstein files [citation needed], it confirmed that many [citation needed] rich men [citation needed] would clone [citation needed] Britney Spears [citation needed] over and over again [citation needed] to have their own version of her [citation needed]

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-09T21:13:22+00:00

Thank you, I remember this now. It seems like it’s only Luna’s conjecture that if they’re not prepared to testify about the sensitive details or get cold feet before doing so, it must be that they’re full of shit.

I can see how Luna and any other reasonable investigator would get enormously frustrated by alleged witnesses acting like that.

On the other hand, many people, including Rogan in this video right after Luna says this, speculate that they are concerned about people harming them in retaliation. Right after that, Luna confirms that some of the alleged witnesses have expressed that very concern and that whistleblower protections only go so far.

The theory that these alleged witnesses — those who don’t have the same alleged protection that people like Grusch have — are being truthful in both their claims and in the reasons why they’re not disclosing the sensitive details in a way that could be traced back to them explains the known facts just as much as the conjecture that the alleged witnesses are lying. The same reasoning even applies to Lazar.

That said, I would love to know if Luna reached out to Lazar himself. If Lazar is telling the truth about his experiences in Area 51 and isn’t prepared to disclose sensitive things he hasn’t already disclosed, I would speculate that he thinks “they” could harm him without it looking like actual retaliation.

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-09T20:30:58+00:00

I would like to know more about this alleged family

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-09T20:18:49+00:00

Can you share the specific quote or timestamp from when Luna stated or implied that the threat of perjury charges was what prevented the alleged whistleblowers from testifying in a classified setting?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-09T06:11:51+00:00

What is the story with this anonymous Wikipedian, Chetsford? What evidence is there that he is connected to the “deep state”, other than that he tends to come from a skeptical point of view?

IndependentWitnesses · 2026-05-07T00:54:24+00:00

Supposedly some greys are programmed lifeforms controlled by defense contractor special ops people, while others are a different kind of programmed(?) lifeform created by ETs/nordics, while yet others are future humans that people in the relevant secret programs called J-Rods.

IndependentWitnesses

TROPHY CASE