Running thread: how did they manage to alter our history?


Those are the best 9 videos which illustrate the idea that we live in a hollow, stationary "womb-like" Concave Earth.
In this Concave Earth idea "outer-space" is actually the opposite: a roughly 12,000km ball spinning within the center.
The flat earth idea (and crater earth as well) is proven illogical very simply in one of the above videos (see video #8).
Since this reality is likely to become widely known now, CIA fed some perfect animations to this "Steven Christ" actor.
The goal is to Discredit-By-Association the Concave Earth reality by having the modern presenter add his crazy claims.
So nevermind the messenger, simply focus on the animations in these 9 videos which show the logic of Concave Earth.

Also, a very-Real-and-Respectable non-actor WildHeretic wrote 18 perfect pages which show the logic in written form: (archived)

By the way, the Infinite Plane Society idea of "why should the flat earth idea limit itself to just a small area" idea is nice.
But again, as you'll realize when you watch that 8th video above, flat earth (plus crater earth) is simply proven illogical.
Instead, just imagine an infinite block of swiss-cheese with an infinite number of concave earths, connected by tunnels.
This topic is connected with the "how did they fake history" topic since the various "aliens" arrived here via the tunnels.

The question remains: did they create this concave earth, and/or did they create the ball of spinning stuff in the center?
Or did they just arrive here in this naturally-created womb, and then just created/altered what we now call humans: us.

Anyway, I'm sure "aliens" created/altered us, but not sure what techniques they used to forge/alter so many documents.
Whoa. That’s… well… incredibly viable… except the bending of the light part. If light truly behaves that way, which it could perhaps, that would elegantly explain a lot of the physics of the concave earth model presented.

But, how can that explain a sunset?

That’s a well reasoned theory, but it’s asking me to accept something that doesn’t intuitively present itself to me, and it’s asking me to distrust my own eyes when I see the sun dip below the horizon.
Actually, it turns out the official mainstream convex earth story claims that light from the sun does indeed bend, when they try to explain how we can see ships and islands further from the beach than the official convex earth calculations allow. For example, with your toes in the water, you should not be able to see ships 14 kilometers away, but strangely, with regular telescopes and zooming cameras, we can indeed see and film ships further than the supposed convex curvature would allow. When you get into a conversation with an official mainstream convex earth story regurgitator, suddenly they will chide you for not knowing light bends around the horizon due to refraction, and they will go even further into surprising you by telling you the first 2 minutes of sun at sunrise and the last 2 minutes of sun at sunset are both optical illusions due to this bending of light caused by refraction caused by stuff in the air hitting those light particles down, thus they say light slightly wraps around the edges of the convex earth.

Thus it makes sense for the concave earth realizers to reply, "Well, since the official story already admits light bends, it's not so great a leap to say it simply bends in the opposite direction." :)
Last edited:
Hahahah. That’s funny. I guess my take is a little different, as it seems to me that in the globe earth construct, “light is bent” by refraction. Personally I find that assessment to be bullshit, because the prevailing science says refraction is impossible to predict or measure as it depends on so many variables… yet it somehow always and only changes what you see to support globe earth.

My takeaway from these videos isn’t “light is bent by…” but “light bends”. Globe earth refraction is a passive effect of our environment (so they say) but it sounds like concave earth light bending is an active function of the phenomena of light.

I didn’t get through all of the videos, was there an explanation for the blue sky? Or still Rayleigh scattering? I also call BS on that
Let's remember, this divergence from the original topic of this thread went like this: Sonofabor wanted a thread for us to discuss "How did they manage to alter our history?" And so, I thought we were going to be discussing whether they merely used conventional means to forge all the 'historical documents' (such as paid writers and forgery accomplices) or whether they had computers already (in the 1500s, 1600s, 1700s, 1800s, or whenever it was in which we theorize they did this huge forgery project) helping them write all the 'historical' stories, or whether we have to consider even more far out unconventional means to explain things (such as some kind of parallel universe jumping time machine style powers or something). And also, when we say "they", are we talking about merely the wealthiest humans who became even wealthier after each apocalyptic reset by having the resources and preparation and thus ability to survive better (through having homes in relatively safer locations, which I guess would be higher mountain tops?) and then the resources to sail around the world grabbing ('founding') all the best land and buildings remaining from the previous civilizations. Or, when we say "they", are we talking about the 'aliens/gods' who no doubt created/altered us modern-day humans? Or, when we say "they", are we mistakenly failing to recognize there is a combination which should be separated: the wealthiest humans might have merely used paid writers to forge the bullshit-stories-of-what-happened which we call 'history' (which we should really call 'accounts of history', since history originally meant "what happened", but now history is just "accounts of what happened"), while the 'aliens/gods' might have used totally different means (either before, during, or after the BS put out by the human paid writers) to rewrite accounts of history using help from their higher-level computers, and again, when we start allowing for the possibility that 'aliens/gods' were involved then suddenly the possibility of unconventional 'metaphysical' 'magical to us' means of altering documents and even altering the past itself becomes a discussion point. And then there is the question of whether there are/were various differing/competing 'aliens/gods' over the past millions of years here at this location we call Earth, and if so, were/are some of them malicious while some of them were/are benevolent, or were/are they all always malicious. Or, going back to the 'they' question again, are we wrongly using the label of 'aliens/gods' when perhaps all the seemingly-amazing-feats (whether DNA manipulation of humans over time, history manipulation, buildings creation, technology creation) might all have been simply plain old humans, a specific group of humans who simply have managed to hold on to a little more of the culture/knowledge which humans accumulated over the past millions/billions/trillions of years, which makes such humans SEEM like 'aliens/gods' when compared to us regular orphan humans who were born into this most recent post-reset world of lack of true knowledge.

Those are the kind of questions which I thought Sonofabor wanted to discuss in this thread: How were all the accounts of history forged/altered (meaning what conventional or unconventional methods might have been used) and when we say 'they' WHO are we referring to: aliens/gods or merely wealthy humans with more technology than us regular humans?

I noticed the conversation was drifting away from what I saw as the original topic, so my original intent in posting on this thread was to help bring the topic back to the original topic, and thus I tried asking Sonofabor if my understanding of the original topic was close to his original intent. But while doing so, I had to use the word 'aliens', which made me realize I should make it clear I wasn't talking about 'aliens flying in from outer space', since that would be perpetuating the hoax of the conventional space-surrounding-a-convex-ball falsehood. And since most folks think there are only two options: convex ball, or flat earth, I felt an obligation to mention what I see as the third and more realistic option, namely: concave earth. And now suddenly here I am, plainly guilty of dragging this thread off-topic into trying to prove we live inside a concave bubble. OK, about concave earth: I posted the 9 videos (all very short) which I feel best illustrate the basic idea of concave earth (which again, simply was brought up to dispel the idea of aliens flying in from outer-space, since outer-space is merely a 12,000km ball of various lights spinning inside this concave bubble) and I posted WildHeretic's archived site (where there are 18 links on the upper LEFT side, which go into the details of WildHeretic's ideas about concave earth). And I'll post right now a few more images to help answer the question of why would light bend within the concave earth (basically, in my opinion, there are various reasons why light would be bending: a little bit of bending can be explained by the 'refraction' of light bouncing off particles in the sky, even more bending can be explained by the layer(s) of glass inbetween us and sun lamp, and finally - but most importantly - I think the proponents of concave earth have forgotten to realize/mention the biggest reason why light would bend so much within the concave earth, namely: the light bounces off the concave earth itself. Meaning, when the lamp is directly over your head, that light illuminating the area close to you is quite straight, but when you look off to the distance in any direction (the 'horizon') the bending happens more there since you're looking towards where the light is of course being bounced away due to the shape of the concave earth itself. Mentally place a flashlight INSIDE a basketball, now imagine how the light will hit one spot inside that basketball directly yet at the same time bounce away from that one spot in a way which accumulates into an effect which can be called 'bending-light'.

Anyway, here again is the site which goes into the most detail of the various details of the concave earth idea: (archived)

And here are some images/ideas to ponder:






But now, having said/shown all that, shall we now get back to the original topic of this thread?

HOW did 'they' alter our (written accounts of) history? :)
Last edited:
All the issues you point to are in play, no doubt. It is metaphysics, so we're in the realm of speculating. I never looked at concave earth, so I'm glad you brought it up. I have my ideas, and I laid some of them out. It seems to me that only common denominator is bafflement. If we remain in that condition/spirit (which is closely related to wonder and awe), I'm sure we'll all learn something.
HOW did 'they' alter our (written accounts of) history? :)
Maybe the history wasn't changed as part of a conspiracy. Today a solar flare could become an extinction level event (ELE).

Some older people say the younger people couldn't live without their phones. But the older people couldn't live without their "meds" - insulin/statins/etc.. The young would adapt to the phone-less way by preoccupying themselves with sex. No birth control/morning after pills and there would be a young boom. But the med-less old people carry 'history' and are dead.

What do you write down if the ELE is power related? If power goes out I have two or three pens in the house and a couple of 5" x 8" pads of paper. How much from the old systems do you have laying around?

A few years after the ELE the die-off will end and whoever is left has to piece history back together by whatever they find. Or start a new history all together.

Now if an ELE were to happen and someone could take advantage, maybe they would.
No matter how many dedicated threads are started to discuss religion as a whole, any time it comes it up seems to dominate threads. That’s really unfortunate, as the devout v. the atheistic is the greatest pissing contest known to man.

I think that one of the main/primary mistakes we make is looking at the printing press (and the proliferation of print) as an advancement of our society. Similar to the adage “history is written by the victors”, I think it’s important to consider that “history was written by those who had the printing means”. Whomever had access to a printing press had the first shot at solidifying any narrative they chose. Books could be disseminated throughout the world, passed on to descendants, etc with a much more concrete matter-of-fact than oral tradition. Just as the personal computer was once unaffordable and unattainable by the masses due to limited supply and outwordly cost, I would imagine that only the elite had initial access to printing. I would imagine the elite were just as nefarious then as now, so I could imagine either A) the process sped up exponentially or B) the process began with the printing press.

How many books have you encountered in your life that were available in First Edition, Second Edition, So&So’s revision, etc? Why? I’ve grown up with that, so I’ve never given it a second thought, but what of these revisions and editions? I’m watching the narrative change before my very eyes: statues torn down, our founding fathers reduced to bigoted slave owners and womanizers, Shakespeare and Disney revised…

The actual feat of doing this isn’t so amazing after all maybe? It’s been happening our whole lives, slowly and incrementally, generationally. Perhaps the global (hah) scale of it is impressive, but it’s really so easy.

I remember when Kia and Hyundai cars first came to the states. They were incredibly low budget economy cars. Not sporty, certainly not fancy… kind of entry level. I have watched them evolve as brands, increase in quality, and gain market share… though I can only see them as I once knew them. I asked my boys (14 and 17) what they thought of Kia and Hyundai, and they proceeded to tell me which ones they thought were the coolest and which ones the nicest… they grew up with a different Kia and Hyundai than I did, and they view them thusly.

Kind of an odd parallel, but I believe it illustrates my point.
For me the question is not only that of technological change but a battle of deliriums. The deliriums are our pantheon.

People believe in different gods. And those gods are probably real because people believe in them. (Chicken or egg?). In their beliefs they create bubbles of consciousness, which are usually self-absorbed and usually tied to the system. Culture is one word for it. They all look strange from the outside. But we're all insiders now. Trapped, a final-solution announced, we should realize there is no going forward in the current model any more and that we are the insider secret society.

Do people become gods? Lots of people try that through the system. But most get shot down. Its pretty tight up there in the spiritual firmament. (It may manifest as material). Or, like some story-time hour, the gods control "special powers" and can zap and reduce any individual at will. Or it is simply the case that all the proposed perfections are phony and impossible to reconcile with reality?

Maybe different moments of change occur when people ascend. But what is that? The only thing I can imagine is a complete consciousness change among the people. Then the material world will transform. If we don't do it easily and intelligently together, our world will be destroyed. Lots of evidence for that.

The other hope is that this world is some kind of individual trial and when you realize its fake, you have enough knowledge to get out-- a permanent pass but to where? The next-technology is always the permanent promise pass here in the realm of the deliriums.

People even worship the technologies of their convenience and fancy and domination. In the old days the Roman Republic gods ruled. One could write a history of micro-technological changes over the past 125 years. All the changes, big and small, have changed us. But aren't we creating these gods? Of course.

Why don't we refuse the deliriums and make our world our own? I really don't know. I ask many people. They all say the same: people are this and that, basically lost. Maybe just disappearing.. again.

And from where will the new gods emerge? Like the gods of old, from mountain and sea, silicon. The consciousness of people, having been uploaded into the matrix, Silicon is now prepared to emerge and spread his seed. Who is excited for that? You name the group; it will have protected status in our society. They are also the first offering to the new beast.

Maybe the greatest seduction has been the impossible exchange of truth about the world for the upload of our consciousness. This was microsoft's promise in the early 90s: knowledge. OK, we got it. Lots of knowledge and even more questions, and they got everything about us in the realm of mind. In this condition are we in any condition to ascend? Or to give the deliriums a cease and desist order? They'll never cease or desist. They can't be killed, but they can be forgotten, mocked; but even then they don't really go away. We dig up there traces in history and anthropology. I believe only a we-the-people god can force them out. Frankly, I think that god is Jesus-- the son of man. It could be a pretty nice world if we were all, in everything we do, as Christ-like as possible.

The system (or the temple) will still need to come down. That’s where the deliriums reside. Can people survive the death of their gods? Most can't already and fight like mad to preserve them, even though they are powerless to help them over the long run. However, with some humility, awe and creativity all sorts of new arrangements can be made. But everyone tells me it would be messy first. But if Christ-like consciousness prevails, all things will be much easier amongst people. The deliriums would no longer rule.
Last edited:
A few days ago re-watched the Thirteenth Floor. The occurrence of the Second Industrial Revolution came to mind.

Without some metaphysical explanation, is there a way the Second Industrial Revolution could have taken place?
  • Where did all the educated people who invented just about everything we have today come from?
Where did all the educated people who invented just about everything we have today come from?
I have thought about this at length myself.

Many “brilliant minds” of the past were uneducated allegedly? Did we have greater intellectual capacity in the past? Were volumes of knowledge opened to select few? Or maybe these folks were fabricated to give semi-recent origins to this technology?

I think that Edward Leedskalnin is an excellent example, as he did some inexplicable things, but he’s not so popular that mainstream narratives have engulfed him.
I think that Edward Leedskalnin is an excellent example, as he did some inexplicable things, but he’s not so popular that mainstream narratives have engulfed him.
He sure did, but... did he come up with his technique on his own, or read some book we are not aware of?
did he come up with his technique on his own, or read some book we are not aware of?
And that is the million dollar question.

Though, in all fairness, it’s worth qualifying what constitutes “coming up with it on your own”.

Whomever enjoys credit the for the dovetail join in woodworking… they took an existing subject of joinery and innovated a new technique, rather than pioneering wood joinery itself.

With that in mind, did EDL rediscover a storied technique? Or did he innovate a new version of an old technique? Or perhaps he simply followed instructions passed on to him with no innovation or ingenuity required.

This query is easily extended to the “Industrial Revolution” if such a thing even transpired. Admittedly, there’s likely no one-size-fits-all/umbrella explanation; it’s probably an unidentifiable mix of options A and B.

The premise of a regular simpleton excelling to these extents is pretty unimaginable to me. We’re fed these stories of our modern day “rags to riches” geniuses, but they’re certifiably horse hockey.

Here is a fantastical article on the matter: Rags To Riches Billionaires

It paints a lovely picture of Bill Gates (jr) being a dropout who succeeded against all odds… with no mention of his wealthy and influential parents.

I see no reason that these rags-to-riches stories are a modern phenomenon. I see more reason that it’s a tried and true method of inserting people (and their product) into society with an inspiring and feel-good story to keep the questions at bay.
Where did all the educated people who invented just about everything we have today come from?
Playing gods in our simulation? Most who play them are frauds. They need to be shut down. The negative energeries they create are the spells of the deliriums. The force fields around their followers are certainly electro-chemical.

When I look at mystery history, I feel like Douglas (in the Thirteenth Floor) when he drives to the edge and sees the matrix. I've always wanted to wake up people from their dreams. But maybe they're simply simulations, and dreams are all they have.

Maybe we, who see the edge of the matrix, really have a job to do. What is it?
As KD has shown in his first video, the question of the shape of the earth is very important to this entire puzzle. It may very well be that this plane extends out beyond what we can imagine or easily know. I haven't pursued the concave earth theory, but I have looked at "crater earth"-- primarily because one of its chief proponents, godgevlamste, makes such interesting connections about the gods, time, the hive mind and history. (His best argument for the crater is that the space shuttle and other such vehicles head off parallel after blasting off; for they are literally, according to him, seeking out other craters or other worlds. His material argument falls apart for me when he shows his maps; for I've flown many, many times over Japan from Taiwan and China on route to the Pacific Northwest).

In any case, there appear to be correlations between what you describe above, godgevlamste and, even, Christian 21-- insofar as the basic idea that others access our current space, which I consider to be something of a terrarium. Parasites, lizards, demons, aliens...all seem possible, and it seems to me there is evidence for all of them.

I come at the subject of stolen history primarily as a type of poet (though I rarely write it) and as a person trained in philosophy and anthropology. We live in a world that, as @Recognition has recently shown, feels far from our own. We are at home but somehow strangers to it. On the other hand, science fiction writer and prophet, Philip K Dick, wrote that we're the "Divine Invasion" of this realm. Frankly, I don't know. But I'm leaning to the idea that, if we're a divine invasion, the rulers of this world have learned how to circumvent our capacities by sending us through an "amnesia vortex" after our earthly deaths, wiping our memories, and birthing us again in, probably, genetically altered clones. The continual resets of the physical reality are part of their on-going efforts to stave off our invasion, and they seem to find sustenance from us in this deeply damaged condition. Because we've been so wiped and our world so altered, those of us with any lingering memory or objective capacities, experience this world in a most estranged, uncanny, fashion.
The Dark City paradigm?
The Dark City paradigm?
Great original question here about this meta-physical/physical realm we in-habit.

KD and the pencil's his-story shows so clearly, IF we keep looking closely at this mundane everyday world we're inside... we see stuff for sure.
No pre-digested input if possible, pre-conceived etc by TPTB cronies + operatives

Mountain of truth : the counterculture begins, Ascona, 1900-1920 by Green, Martin Burgess, I used to think certain things began to happen back in late 50s and the 60s. I simply had no idea though ...
The Dark City paradigm?
Of all the movies about contemporary culture and technocracy which I showed my students, none left them with a greater sense of Wow! than Dark City (1998). Of course, this was before "smart phones" when students became, well, a litter dumber. But for those who could see prior to that turning point, Dark City created the strongest uncanny sensibility. The uncanny is to experience the unheimlich, to be both at home and not at home. To study stolen history is to go repeatedly to the edge of the dream and see the nostalgia of home has been manufactured, a phantasm.
Mountain of truth : the counterculture begins, Ascona, 1900-1920 by Green, Martin Burgess, I used to think certain things began to happen back in late 50s and the 60s. I simply had no idea though ...
As for the creation of the counter-culture, what most interests me is how these movements were weaponized. If they were utopian from the start, they've been made dystopian.
Last edited:
the devout v. the atheistic is the greatest pissing contest
science has set boundaries for our minds
Thinking as objectively as possible about my subjective experience, I engage in social/technological/historical analysis-- i.e., analysis of the deliriums and their enabling technologies. For example (and for purposes of scientific repeatability), I listened to Billings, MT radio news reports from the 1950s one night last week. The radio signal must have been very keen in those days. A whole generation of people tuned to that particular frequency-- coded, as it were, with lies and hints and general manipulation. Although the TV signal came on shortly thereafter, distorting the picture, that signal still reverberates through the population and certainly me. Print produces a different human being altogether (a medium that once formed the boundaries of thought/culture in the universities).

Star Trek appeared on black white TV everyday-- in syndication in 1970-- precisely when I started redbrickschool (built: year unknown). I learned to stand in line, stare at skirts, and not chew my pencil. That supposed "science" but fiction (in that medium) "set the boundaries for "my mind"-- but it was also an antidote, perhaps a poison/cure (φάρμακον - Wiktionary).

Sad as it may seem, the questions posed in that show are nearly the same as I ask myself everyday. So I'll ask a question that Star Trek didn't pose in the first three seasons, but may have been asked and answered many times since: Did Star Trek set the boundaries or was it (the show and its ideas) a collective expression of all of us who were already ill at ease within the stark redbrickschools? Or worse, just controlled opposition. If that, where does it leave us? Free, I suppose, if one can ignore both sides. But culture (shard consciousness under the rulership of competing gods or deliriums) does not leave us alone. It pesters us and more. But we really have no choice but gradually ignore the deliriums.
Last edited:
To circle back to the original question a little bit… I just had an interesting thought:

We are all attempting to reconcile history, with a noble purpose in the pursuit of knowledge. We have numerous tools at our disposal.

As previously suggested, what if there was an ELE which nearly extinguished civilization and recorded history with it? What if, in the noble pursuit of knowledge, our ancient scholars attempted to piece together history as well as they could, with their far more limited means?

I guess the bush that I’m beating around is maybe this isn’t as nefarious as it seems; it’s just a poorly done job due to limited means and an inordinate amount of speculation?

That being said, there are some definitely nefarious factors at play. Maybe the ignorance of academia was co-opted by those who knew better and capitalized on the opportunity?
(Circling) on the subject of metaphysics and historical change:

What if... Years after the Revolution of 1776 was forgotten— people (who were presumably not going properly along) were locked up in the mansions of the past ("Stay there!" they were told) and treated by mean nurses under the orders of bearded systems freaks, who ate suffering like sandwiches; these dudes returned home daily, jolly winners they were, and spread their systems freak seeds. 3, 4, 5 generations later, their offspring are being mutilated and rendered infertile. Maybe this is the curse of those 19th century inmates. Maybe we're living through this now.
Maybe the ignorance of academia was co-opted

I watched a video of philosopher Bertrand Russell-- cousin of my county's patron saint, Charles M. Russell. Ol' Bertrand was the quintessential academic idiot (often parodied by Monty Python). (Yet, who amongst us would not like to live like that?) In the interview he claims his (and Charlie's) uncle met Napoleon on Elba; and Russell talks of meeting that greatest of all Karens, Lenin. Of course, the interview is laced with polite references to "peace" and "progress" and "equality" and "overpopulation" (read: eugenics). He is so clueless, at least in his affable, pipe-smoking public persona about anything other than the dead end (he himself thought so) of philosophy from the ancients (according to Fomenko, school boy stories mass produced during the fraud called the Renaissance). The weird thing is: I believe he really believed the narratives given. Another victory for the deliriums, perhaps. Nowadays, even the avuncular charm of "Lord" Russell is nearly completely absent from academic life. Hasn't it now become a Karen-production facility? The howls and curses of the past have been techno-logically transmuted into a self-destruct protocol.
Last edited:
Hah. I’ve read it posited before: toe the line or enjoy the sanitarium. So strange how we apparently needed so many insane asylums when our population was supposedly much smaller… but they’re all abandoned, repurposed, or demolished. I look around and see more insane people than ever.