For the life of me, I can not imagine why a sane person would commit as much effort as you have into discussing "science" that is more-than-obviously above your head.
Rookie move, insulting the intelligence of someone who challenges you.
Fella, you have no idea what's above my head any more than I know what's above yours. One of us is demonstrating a pretty low threshold for comprehension however.
If you want to debate me over my points and questions like a human being, that's why I'm here. Your community claims to have a truth that the general populace doesn't. Yet when people come in here looking for more information and discussion on what is a pretty novel way of thinking given history and conventional science- we meet you. Defensive to the point of being offensive, positively nil for constructive contribution of a discussion, and seemingly as high-strung as an Irish Setter on NoDoz.
Your community has a forum called "Flat Earth Debate" I came in to debate a flat earth by asking questions. Rather than provide answers, you get cultishly defensive, dismissive, and make such a rudimentary attempt at being insulting that I not only feel ashamed for you, but for your entire forum for not only having to expend the effort to spread their word and possibly have their science accepted as truth, but also now have to expend even MORE effort to slough off the mantle of lunacy that you're wrapping around you like a well-worn blankie.
Moving on, and coming back to the point at hand:
The idea that the conspiracy isn't as wide as I'm making it out to be is an interesting one, and needs to be addressed.
Some maintain that the people who control scientific education- the release of information to the world- are responsible for the protection of the secret, and would thus narrow the scope of such a conspiracy. IF this is it, then heads of state and governmental agencies aren't involved in the secret, since they themselves would have been shammed.
This is done through the suppression of 'new' or 'alternative' scientific publications, bullying and threats at the 'do you want to lose your job and career?' level, which is all effective, to a point.
Where it comes unglued though, is at the same place that the idea of a massive conspiracy does. Human Nature.
Whereas a gigantic cover-up wouldn't work because someone of status somewhere, would leak the information and blow the whole thing open, a smaller scale operation would be blown open because someone of status somewhere WOULD make the decision to lose a career, job, or possibly life to expose the truth- especially if it were a truth this size.
Look at the Milgram Experiment in psychology. 65% of participants in his first set of experimentation administered the maximum shock to the subjects in his study. The other 35% would not. Which says to me that there could be upwards of 35% of people who ARE involved in this conspiracy, regardless of how large it is- are going to want to do 'what is right.' Who are going to in some way, challenge the established secret society which seeks to hide such a secret.
And as the years go on, that 35% is going to find a way to crack the dam.
One could argue that YOU are the crack in the dam, but without some sort of established, reputable backing of someone who claims to have been 'in the know' I can't give this theory any merit.
Human psychology breaks a conspiracy theory at a massive level because someone, somewhere will leak.
It also breaks a conspiracy theory at a small level, because of the scope of the secret you'd be dealing with. Someone, somewhere will leak.