Before wading into the tumultuous sea that is the Earth Shape Debate, you should know: It isn’t just about the shape of the Earth. It’s about so much more.
Whether you think the Earth is round, or flat, or resting on a turtle’s back, each Earth Shape Theory necessitates a total shift in worldview upon being accepted. Each Theory comes along with its own host of presuppositions that both influence and indicate one’s perception of reality.
Here’s what I mean by that:
For the Earth to be Round, you would need to accept that
Earth is moving
the Sun, our source of Life, is 91.7 million miles away from us and too dangerous to approach anyway
the Sun is the center of reality, Earth is secondary, and the Moon is tertiary
the Moon is 400 times smaller than the Sun
the core of our home planet is made of molten metals, and is inaccessible + too hostile to explore
we are kept earthbound by gravity, which is a result of the Earth’s size
space is a vast, unknown void of dark matter, completely uninhabitable except by technological means
religious accounts of the creation of the Earth are all false, and we are an entropic accident
Conversely, for the Earth to be Flat, you would need to accept that
Earth is still
the Sun and Moon are both inside of our atmosphere, and are equal in size
the Earth is the center of reality, and the Sun and Moon are equal compliments to it
there is no molten core of the Earth, but rather, an “underworld” that is potentially accessible and habitable
“space” is water (the waters above the firmament), not dark matter, and is therefore similar to our own oceans
we are earthbound by density, not gravity, which entails more mobility than gravity theory does
our public education system either doesn’t know this, or does know and is actively hiding this from us — which would make religion more trustworthy than public education
I could go on, but these examples are sufficient to make my point.
Notice how every belief outlined here has MAJOR PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES.
For instance: if our Earth is Round, and therefore the Sun is WAY bigger than the Moon, is very far away, and is too hot to get close to…
…and we associate the Sun with masculinity…
…then consider what is being suggested about men in relation to women by this Heliocentric model of reality.
It’s not just about the Sun being bigger than the Moon. It’s about men being central to reality and women being totally dependent on them. It’s about men being horrifyingly powerful — powerful enough to kill us from millions of miles away! — while all women can do is ~make ripples.~
In Heliocentrism, the Sun/Man is a fierce light, while the Moon/Woman can only reflect some of that light, because we “don’t have our own light.” This belief casts women as symbolically deceptive, helpless and unimportant.
Heliocentrism is quintessentially patriarchal, minimizing the Moon and, by consequence, womankind.
Meanwhile, Flat Earth posits that both the Sun and the Moon (which are men and women, symbolically) are equally important because they are equal in size. They are opposites, but they compliment each other.
Also, Flat Earth posits that the Sun and the Moon each make their own light, but the light just has different (and equally functional) qualities.
Now let’s consider what is being subconsciously suggested by framing the Earth as having a molten core:
If we subconsciously identify ourselves with the Earth because “we are Nature,” and the core of the Earth can’t be accessed because it would melt us to even try, what might that belief cause us to feel towards our own core — our Inner World?
Is it any wonder that many people do not remember their dreams at night, don’t have mental pictures, and don’t meditate?
Could it be, that we’ve been psychologically primed by Globe Earth Theory to subconsciously fear the contents of our own core, and thus remain “surface level” in relation to ourselves?
And then consider the movement of the Earth. If Earth is still, we are stable. But if the Earth is hurtling through the Void like this, then what are we?
I could go on. The point is: as it pertains to the shape of our home planet Earth, every single parameter affects us psychologically and spiritually — from its structure, to its relationship with the luminaries, to the contents of its core, to its position in space…
It’s all symbolic… of us.
That said, here’s my personal Earth Shape Theory:
I believe Earth is all the shapes.
In other words, I believe Earth is hyperdimensional.
So within the Earth’s hyperdimensional structure, there are dimensions of Earth that are round, dimensions of it that are flat, dimensions of it that are toroidal, dimensions of it that rest on a Turtle’s back…
…and all of these different dimensions of Earth are accessible through the perceptual gateway of the person observing Earth.
In my observations, it seems that people “progress” from being Globe Earthers, to Flat Earthers, to Inner Earthers… and this progression is contingent upon their spiritual state and relationship to (being) Light.
So, the average person sees the Sun as being very far away, right? What might that suggest, about their relationship (or lack thereof) with their own Light?
Then some people begin to “wake up” to Flat Earth and see the Sun as being close — close enough to pass by in an airplane. This suggests that their relationship to Light is more “open access,” but still limited in some ways.
The "next stage” of this progression is to re-cognize the Light — the Sun — as being already within oneself, not a separate physical far-away thing that you need technology to get close to — but something you already have and therefore don’t “need.” This is the stage where accessing Inner Earth by way of inward meditation —or just conceiving of Inner Earth — becomes possible.
This, I think, is why Inner Earth is said to be accessible only by spiritual means like astral travel or meditation. It takes a deep knowing — true Gnosis — of the physical world as an illusion, in order to completely fold physical reality in on itself enough to see the Earth within oneself.
At that point, what vehicle could even take you to the Center, the Truth, the Light?
Before anybody comes at me: I meant to say that in Globe Earth Theory, gravity is a result of earth's MASS, not size. I'm on my phone so I can't edit the article 😛
I love this because (to me) the point wasn't really what one "believes" about the earth's shape, etc. Rather, yer compelling us to think more metaphorically, symbolically, and esoterically.
Let's talk about this concept on a podcast very soon! 🙂