Forum Replies Created
whooaa, why havent I ever heard anything like this before? Interesting poem, youve got me thinking thats for sure. More should read this.
Hitler’s vision allowed for only one kind of victory. Complete dominance, total submission, and a world remade in his image. When that became impossible, he chose ruin.
He refused to negotiate. He ignored military advice. He diverted military resources to continue the Holocaust even as the Red Army approached. When the war could still have been shortened, he made it longer. When civilians could have been protected, he placed them in the path of fire.
He issued the Nero Decree to destroy German infrastructure as punishment. He declared that if Germany could not win, it did not deserve to survive. These are not the actions of a rational leader. They are the words of a man who defined his existence through domination, and when he could no longer dominate, he welcomed collapse.
He did not go down fighting. He went down dragging the world with him. That is not the legacy of a strategist. It is the legacy of a fanatic who confused death with destiny.
Hitler’s vision was not built on order. It was built on destruction. His speeches made it clear. He did not seek peace through strength. He wanted purification through violence. His obsession with race was not a side note. It was the center of everything. He was not building a future. He was erasing a past. At the end of the war, when defeat was certain, he ordered Germany’s destruction. He told Albert Speer to destroy infrastructure. He said the German people had failed and no longer deserved to exist. He refused to retreat. He refused to spare civilians. That is not strategy. That is collapse by design. The Eastern Front was never about land alone. It was about annihilation. From the beginning, the war in the East targeted entire populations. This was not conquest. It was extermination. Hitler was not a general. He was a zealot. His mind was not wired for survival. It was wired for punishment. In the end, he punished everyone, his enemies, his followers, and himself.
Between 1939 and 1941, Hitler’s Third Reich was unstoppable. France fell in weeks. Britain stood alone. The Soviet Union was unprepared. Japan joined the Axis. From a military standpoint, Hitler was winning. His mistakes were significant, but they were made in the pursuit of expansion, not in a desire to collapse. Declaring war on the United States after Pearl Harbor was reckless, but it aimed to unify Axis power and preempt American influence. Invading the Soviet Union followed long-standing German ambitions. These were high-risk moves, not suicidal ones. Many forget how close he came to changing the world. If Moscow had fallen, if Britain had been starved into surrender, if Allied codes had remained unbroken, history could have taken a darker turn. None of this happened by accident. Hitler did not want to burn the world. He wanted to shape it. And for a time, he did.
To call Hitler’s war effort a path of destruction is to ignore how methodically he built power. He rearmed Germany while Europe hesitated. He forged alliances. He annexed territory without firing a shot. His military victories in Poland, France, and the early Eastern Front were not accidents. They were calculated. Blitzkrieg was not chaos. It was military innovation.
Operation Barbarossa remains the largest military invasion in history. It was not launched by a man bent on self-destruction. It was designed to secure living space in the East. This was not improvisation. It was laid out in his early writings. The goal was a racially purified empire stretching from the Atlantic to the Urals.
Even the most horrific aspects of the regime were executed with structure. The Final Solution was not spontaneous. It was implemented through bureaucracy, meetings, and logistical coordination. That is not the behavior of a man trying to destroy everything. It is the behavior of someone attempting to build a twisted version of civilization.
Yes, his ideology was warped. But the mechanics behind it were systematic. You do not nearly conquer a continent without planning. Strategy, not self-destruction, drove his rise. His fall came only after the plan failed, not because it was never real.
Reincarnation sounds profound because it meets emotional needs. But that does not make it true. There is no known mechanism by which consciousness could transfer between bodies. No scientific model has explained how memory or identity could survive the death of the brain.
Studies that claim evidence for reincarnation are built on interviews and anecdotes. These are not experiments. They are stories. And stories are vulnerable to suggestion, leading questions, and human error.
Dr Stevenson’s work is often cited, but his methodology has been widely criticized. Many cases rely on information that could have been learned through overheard conversations, community knowledge, or parental coaching. And how many of his investigations led nowhere or contradicted themselves.
We must ask hard questions. Why is it that only certain cultures produce children who remember past lives If reincarnation were universal, should it not appear everywhere equally.
The belief in reincarnation fills a psychological gap. It softens the fear of death. But comfort is not the same as truth. Until we can test and repeat these claims under controlled conditions, reincarnation remains a beautiful idea, not a proven reality…
There are documented cases of young children recalling detailed memories of lives they have never lived. Names, places, even causes of death. Dr. Ian Stevenson from the University of Virginia investigated over two thousand such cases, many with verifiable facts that the child could not have known. These are not vague dreams or feelings. They are vivid, specific memories confirmed by living witnesses and official records. In cultures where reincarnation is accepted, children are encouraged to speak freely about these memories. The results are astonishing. They describe homes they never visited, speak dialects they never heard, and identify relatives of a former life by name. Investigators follow up and often confirm these details. Skeptics label this coincidence or coaching, but most of these children are too young to fabricate such intricate detail. And these cases happen in families that gain nothing from it. There is no profit. No book deal. Just a mystery no one can explain. If even one of these cases is real, it breaks the idea that memory is stuck in the brain. It opens the door to the possibility that something within us survives death and returns. Reincarnation may not be measurable yet, but we do not dismiss gravity because we cannot touch it. We observe its effects. And the effects of past life memory are very real.
The belief in reincarnation is not about fantasy or denial. It is about evolution on a moral and spiritual level. One life is not enough to learn everything or to correct every wrong. The soul returns to continue what it has not yet completed. We see signs of this all around us. Children born with astonishing skills, people drawn to cultures or languages they have never encountered, unexplained fears that mirror traumatic past-life deaths. These are not coincidences. They are residues. Echoes of a journey too big for a single body. Karma is often misunderstood. It is not punishment. It is momentum. You act in one life and the energy carries forward. That is not mysticism. It is cosmic accountability. Yes, reincarnation offers comfort. But it also demands responsibility. Every action, every word, every choice comes back to you. That is not escapism. That is ownership across centuries. And it makes far more sense than the idea that we are born once, randomly, and disappear forever.
The globe model says Earth curves downward at about 8 inches per mile squared. That means distant objects should drop out of view quickly. But again and again, people observe things they’re not supposed to see. Cities, mountains, lighthouses, all visible from distances that defy the math.
There are well documented sightings across Lake Michigan of the Chicago skyline, over 60 miles away. That skyline should be hidden behind the curve, yet photographers regularly capture the full view from the opposite shore. Mainstream science claims it’s a “superior mirage.” But how often do mirages produce consistent, crisp outlines of buildings? That’s not a glitch. That’s a broken model.
If Earth really curved, we wouldn’t see that far. And yet we do. All the time. From beaches. From high rise buildings. From long highways. The globe defenders tell you to ignore what you see with your own eyes. Flat Earth says no. Believe the evidence you can verify, not the theory you’re told is unshakable.
Every time you ascend, in a plane, in a hot air balloon, with a camera on a drone, the horizon rises with you. It stays at eye level. On a ball Earth, that shouldn’t happen. The higher you go, the lower the horizon should drop beneath you as the curve becomes apparent. But it doesn’t. It stays flat.
That’s not just something you’re told to believe, it’s something you can observe. Flat Earth researchers have released hundreds of hours of high altitude footage. No curvature. No drop. Just a flat line from left to right, edge to edge. You can say “lens distortion” all you want, but you can’t explain away why amateur balloon launches consistently show a flat horizon unless the Earth is actually flat.
Architects and engineers do not build for curvature. Bridges, canals, railways, they’re designed as if the Earth is a plane. The London Birmingham canal spans over 130 kilometers. That’s 8 meters of expected drop, yet it’s perfectly level. The longest bridges in China stretch over 100 miles. If curvature were real, adjustments would be built in. They’re not.
Don’t trust me. Don’t trust YouTube. Trust your eyes. Trust your instincts. If the world looked curved, we wouldn’t have to be arguing this. The fact that we are tells you the evidence for curvature is theoretical, not experiential.
One of the best arguments for the globe Earth is that you don’t need to trust scientists to prove it. You can run the experiments yourself. Go to a large body of water. Observe a ship disappearing hull-first over the horizon. Use a telescope. You won’t bring the hull back into view. Why? Because it’s gone beyond the curve.
Try the Bedford Level experiment, the original test flat Earthers love to cite. When done with modern optics and control for refraction, the curve is visible. The original result was flawed due to atmospheric distortion, which we now understand and can account for. When redone properly, the curvature appears right where the math says it should.
You can use a drone to film the shadow of a stick at solar noon in two locations. It recreates Eratosthenes’ 2,000-year-old experiment showing Earth’s curve. He didn’t have satellites or CGI. He had geometry. And it worked.
Belief in the globe Earth doesn’t rest on authority. It rests on repeatability. That’s science. If your model only works when you distrust all other evidence, maybe it’s not a model, it’s a belief system.
You don’t need to trust NASA to believe the Earth is a globe. You just need to use anything that relies on modern physics: GPS, weather prediction, satellite TV, commercial aviation, even your smartphone. These things work because they’re built on a model where Earth is spherical and rotating. Let’s talk planes. Flights from Chile to Australia are only possible on great circle routes, which cross the southern hemisphere in paths that only make sense on a globe. On a flat Earth, those routes would require absurd distances, extra fuel, and impossible travel times. But these flights happen every day. They land on time. Their routes are trackable. Weather modeling is another blow to the flat Earth narrative. Hurricanes rotate in different directions depending on the hemisphere due to the Coriolis effect, a result of Earth’s rotation. We predict weather globally using this knowledge. It doesn’t break down. It doesn’t glitch. It aligns with what we expect from a rotating sphere with atmospheric fluid dynamics. You don’t have to trust institutions blindly. But the fact remains: the globe Earth model is not a conspiracy, it’s the foundation of every working piece of technology and science that touches your life. If the Earth were flat, everything from long-range missiles to meteorology would fail. They don’t. The model works because it reflects reality.
One of the strongest observations flat Earth proponents point to is the behavior of the stars. In the Northern Hemisphere, the stars rotate around Polaris. But in the Southern Hemisphere, they seem to rotate around another point. On a globe that makes sense, but it also makes sense on the flat Earth model with a firmament or dome where the stars are rotating above us, not millions of light years away, but fixed in a rotating sky. Here’s the key detail, most people have never personally observed the southern skies. Flat Earthers argue that time-lapse footage is manipulated and that southern star trails can be explained as optical effects due to perspective and angular distortion from a dome. Why do stars return to the exact same position at the same time each night if we’re hurdling through the galaxy at millions of miles per hour Shouldn’t the sky change over time The firmament model offers stability, it says the stars are part of a fixed system, not an infinite vacuum. Mainstream science waves these questions away, but never actually tests them with the transparency we deserve. The flat model might sound insane, until you realize how many of your assumptions come from people you’ve never met, doing math you’ve never checked.
Is this a poem or a prophecy I don’t even know what I just read but I feel it in my spine.