I thought I would make a thread on this channel's videos, as he seems to have a unique cosmology (I think he proposes a holographic universe). He's identified that the Moon has a "reflection" of the earth on it's surface.

Slow this down to .75 speed, the text goes by fast. One cool takeaway is that Saturn's rings may be aetherial imprints of Jupiter's satellites, as well as Jupiter's red spot being an aetherial imprint of Mars and its satellites.

This fellow does indeed have a unique cosmology. Only had time to view a few of the videos so far. Interesting that he thinks that Saturn's rings may be aetherial imprints Jupiter's satellites. In any case, it offers an explanation as to why Saturn's rings are crooked, in that they conform to the shape of the dome (if I understand it correctly).

Yeah, it certainly is unique. One of the other things he points out is that the various "Antarctic bases" may in fact be on the numerous outlying "continents" in his moon-based map.

That's an interesting and lengthy video. It shows a theory that the moon's surface is actually a flat earth map, like a reflection of a flat earth on the surface of the moon. While it's quite bizarre, it does sort of work, except that North America is quite small in comparison to the other contintents (which is shown at around the 7:20 minute mark).

Right, I don't believe the image on the Moon is supposed to be a 1:1 representation, as obviously the shape of Africa and others are off or distorted. But it does, to me, give insight into how the earth may in fact be bigger than we are led to believe. Especially when you recall what Admiral Byrd had to say about those places in Antarctica. 

The electromagnetic nature of the sun reacts with the noble gases in the atmosphere, creating daylight and the colors commonly associated with daylight.

Thanks.  This is indeed fascinating.  While some stuff appears a BIT off, which one would expect if this is a reflection of some kind, the coincidence would be just statistically impossible, that the moon image is THAT darn close to what a Flat Earth map would look like.  I don't buy extreme coincidences, such as that the sun is 400x larger than the moon and exactly 400x farther away, or that the moon rotates at the exact same rate as it revolves around the earth so that the same face always appears.  Even if it were a second off per day, over the years, and decades, and centuries, the face of the moon would have changed significantly.

Here's another clue about why the Flat Earth map is probably correct.

Take a look at these two Azimuthal Equidistant Projection Maps, the first from the North Pole and the second from the South.  Which of these most closely resembles a map that most people today could recognize?

From North Pole



Now from South Pole:


Why is the second one nearly unrecognizable while the first looks very much like the typical projection maps that are presented in schools?  Anyone could identify with the first map but not with the second.

That is an indication of the fact that the first one is much closer to reality.

On the North Pole Azimuthal Equidistant map, the Southern Hemisphere continents look bigger than we're used to, but not THAT MUCH bigger.  In fact, Gall-Peters asserts that its continent sizes are accurate.  And it too has the Southern Hemisphere continents look bigger, not out of line with the North Pole Azimuthal Equidistant map.  But look at how horrilbly disroted the Northern Hemisphere looks on the South Pole Azimuthal Equidistant map!

The Moon is a projection of the "sun below" on the Firmament, hence why it has an imprint of of the earth’s land masses on it.