Unveiling the Edges: A conversation with Dr. Avi Rosenberg

 

By Luke Masters, Editor at WeAlwaysKnew.com

​

In today's feature, I had the distinct honor of speaking with Dr. Avi Rosenberg, a respected scientist who for years has made waves in both the scientific community and public discourse with his bold assertion: the Earth is a flat disc. His research, which challenges centuries of scientific consensus, has garnered both acclaim and controversy. Here, Dr. Rosenberg shares insights into his groundbreaking findings.

​

Luke Masters: Dr. Rosenberg, your recent work has been both groundbreaking and controversial. Could you summarize your key findings for our readers?

 

Dr. Avi Rosenberg: Thank you, Luke. My research, conducted over several years, suggests that the Earth is not a spherical body but a flat disc. This conclusion comes from a variety of observations, including anomalies in gravitational measurements and unique atmospheric phenomena that contradict the established understanding of a spherical Earth.

​

LM: Fascinating. You've also mentioned an 'ice wall' in your studies. Could you elaborate on that?

​

AR: Certainly. The 'ice wall' refers to a massive ice barrier surrounding the outer edges of the Earth's disc. Our expeditions and analyses indicate that this wall may act as a boundary, beyond which the nature of our world—perhaps even the nature of reality—changes dramatically. The ice belt is perhaps one of the most fascinating aspects of my research. Its formation, I believe, is tied to the very history of our Earth. According to my hypothesis, the ice belt formed over millennia, as the Earth's oceans gradually froze at the edges of the disc. This process was possibly accelerated by unique environmental conditions that exist only at the outermost regions of the Earth.

​

LM: That's quite a theory! What kind of environmental conditions are we talking about?

​

AR: The conditions are extreme and unlike anything we experience in our known world. The temperatures at the edge of the disc drop drastically, far below what we consider the freezing point. Moreover, there are electromagnetic anomalies present, which I speculate could be a result of the Earth's disc shape interacting with solar and cosmic radiation in a unique way. These anomalies could contribute to the formation and maintenance of the ice belt.

 

LM: So, what you're suggesting is that the ice belt is not just a static wall of ice but a dynamic and unique feature of our planet?

​

AR: Precisely. The ice belt is not just a physical barrier; it's a complex and dynamic system. It's constantly evolving, shaped by the unique environmental factors at play. Its vastness and the extreme conditions make it difficult to study in detail, but our preliminary findings suggest that it could be key to understanding the Earth's climate and even the fundamental laws of physics as they apply to our world. The million-dollar question, is if there might be more beyond the ice belt. The nature of the ice belt and what lies beyond it are areas of my ongoing research. There are theories – ranging from it being a boundary to other unknown lands, to the edge of a vast and unexplored ocean, or even a gateway to realms beyond our current understanding. As of now, we can only hypothesize, but the possibilities are as endless as they are fascinating.

​

LM: Dr. Rosenberg, moving beyond the ice belt, let's discuss the broader picture. Your theory posits a flat Earth, which is a radical departure from conventional astronomical models. Can you explain the scientific and geological basis for how a flat planet forms in the universe?

AR: Certainly, Luke. The formation of a flat planet, according to my hypothesis, challenges our current understanding of planetary formation. Traditionally, planets are thought to form from the accretion of dust and gas in a protoplanetary disk, which inherently leads to a spherical shape due to gravity. However, in the case of a flat Earth, the process would be markedly different.

LM: How so?

AR: In a flat Earth model, the formation process could involve a different kind of celestial mechanics. One possibility is that the Earth formed in a unique region of the universe where gravitational and electromagnetic forces interact differently than in the rest of the cosmos. This unique interaction could lead to the accretion of matter in a disc-like shape rather than a sphere.

LM: That's a significant deviation from current astrophysical theories. How does this model account for the geological features we observe on Earth?

AR: That's a good question. In a flat Earth scenario, geological features such as mountains, valleys, and tectonic plates would arise from processes different from those on a spherical Earth. For example, tectonic activity could be driven not by the movement of spherical plates but rather by the interaction of flat, circular segments. Volcanism and mountain formation could result from localized hot spots or rifts in the Earth's crust, which would be fundamentally different in structure and behavior from those on a spherical planet.

LM: And what about the Earth's core and magnetic field?

AR: In a flat Earth model, the core would not be spherical. Instead, it might be a series of layered rings, each composed of different materials, generating the magnetic field through their rotation and interaction. This structure could give rise to a magnetic field that differs in strength and orientation from what would be expected on a spherical Earth.

LM: This is truly a revolutionary way of thinking about our planet. What do you see as the next steps in researching and validating this model?

AR: The next steps would involve extensive observational and experimental research. We need to gather more empirical data, particularly from the edges of the Earth and the purported ice belt. Additionally, advanced simulations and theoretical models must be developed to further understand the dynamics of a flat Earth and its place in the universe.

​

LM: Your work has received a mixed response from the scientific community. How do you address the skepticism?

​

AR: Science, by its nature, should be open to questioning and reevaluation. My findings, while controversial, are based on rigorous research and empirical evidence. I encourage the scientific community to examine my work with an open mind and engage in constructive dialogue.

​

LM: Indeed, your research has inspired many, including our community at WeAlwaysKnew.com. What do you think your findings mean for the average person?

​

AR: My research invites people to question and explore the very nature of our world. It's not just about the shape of the Earth; it's about encouraging critical thinking and a willingness to explore beyond accepted truths. In this era of information, questioning and seeking truth is more important than ever.

​

LM: Thank you, Dr. Rosenberg, for your insights. Your work certainly opens up new realms of thought and exploration.

​

​