There are no forests on earth

Oh jeez they shut down the other thread! And right in the middle of my posting to.

But ya! On the topic, and only really watch 30 min of that second vid, bookmarked it for latter. But if mesas are really the remains of silicon trees. Well a few hundred million years ago is a lot to say anything on. And well! I suppose that if frogs can turn into princes in some stories, then they can also turn into stone in other stories. Also under the right conditions.

Its all magic right.

But seriously, don't think that in that jungle were our 200 feet bushes we like to call giant trees. Humans can survive in a carbon environment without some major work over countless generations, and those 200 or so foot bushes are mostly carbon. Being carbon lifeforms and all, don't think we would have had it so easy or magical as that lady in the second vid likes to dream of her magical silicon forests.

Because in a carbon garden its doable, and life-able after much and quite literally untold generations of strife. But in a silicon garden, well us carbon lifeforms would not do to well, kind of how fire does not do to well in the middle of the ocean surrounded by water. But hey its all speculating here.

But even if a fraction of that has any ring of truth and these giant silicon trees and silicon lifeforms actually existed and mesas are what remains of hundreds of millions of years after there deaths. Oh boy does science have some explaining to do.

Compared to a clear cut or even a selective cut, our northern temperate old growth forests are diversity poor. The native Americans used to clear and burn the forests where I live to encourage the spread of tall grass prairies that are now extremely endangered due to Pioneer farming and a lack of wildfires.

The greater prairie chicken was common in the great lakes region back then, the last one was known to disappear in my area in the early 1980s.

As far as carbon sequestering goes, a grassland holds just about the same as an old growth forest does.

It's way more than half got out of the video if they even watched the whole thing. Being placed in LOL forum says it all and not for it's meaning...

I watched this two nights ago and looked for it on ATS only to find it in this section, shocked for a conspiracy site!!!!!!

People should watch this doc, i have seen the Giants Causeway when i was a child and the story didn't make sense then but after watching this doc it is now clearer what the giants causeway actually is.
Yes we still have forests on the planet, we walk in them, we can see them and man still cuts them down but not like the trees we once had, watch the doc, it just might open your eyes.

I wish someone could change the title of the doc, maybe then it would get more views here

originally posted by: Redback
it just might open your eyes.

I wish someone could change the title of the doc, maybe then it would get more views here

mods put it here just for that reason..

a reply to: Corruptedstructure

How sad is that



They obviously didn't watch it before LOLing it

"And we do worship the ancient and holy religion,
Which was instituted at the Creation,
Which was on the earth in the time of the Great Trees;
The holy religion of the Creator,
The resplendent and the glorious,
Revealed unto our Father Enoch."

-Essene Gospel of Peace Book 3

"Long ago, before the Great Flood, the Great Ones walked the earth, and the giant trees, even those which now are no more than legend, were their home and their kingdom. They lived many score of generations, for they ate from the table of the Earthly Mother, and slept in the arms of the Heavenly Father, and they knew not disease, old age, nor death. To the Sons of Men did they bequeath all the glory of their kingdoms, even the hidden knowledge of the Tree of Life which stands in the middle of the Eternal Sea. "

-Essene Gospel of Peace Book 4

Notice how even in their time (around 50 AD), the giant trees were deemed legendary... These writings of the Essenes were found in the vaults of the Vatican

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: verschickter

It has a half smart title but it does present a heck of a lot more than just this concept it also talks about past mining on earth and many other things and does some interesting lateral thinking so here is your rule of thumb if you are a lateral thinker you will enjoy it if you are a staunch defender of official science and official history it will probably give you an anneurysm.

I have watched a good portion of this video and would like to finish it sometime soon. I just wish it had a different title. Many people are not even watching it because they can't get past this nonsense title. The way it is worded, is just a big turn off. Is not accurate. Could have been done a lot better. Is confusing to most. This confustion leads to frustration and rejection of the material, and it sort of decreases ones willingness to even watch it. I had to force myself to, out of sheer curiousity, but was glad I did watch it.

I just really wish it had a better title, because then we could have had an interesting discussion (part of which, I hate to say because I like you, is also because of a lack of a sufficient/proper/informative summary) instead of a bunch of people only reading the title and then posting: "Ummmm...yeah, there is a forest in my backyard. Duh... there are lots of forests." Plus, it seems this versio of the video which you posted is titled "...no GIANT forests..." and your thread title is the more extreme "no forests" PERIOD. AT ALL. which is only increasing people's confusion>frustration>rejection.

But I thought... (I probably just misremembered...? *shrugs*)the version I watched, with a robotic voice that was supposed to be "easier to understand than the original's Russian accent (although, I have not seen the original, I would think a Russian accent would be easier, for me personally, to decipher, than the robotic voice with a very odd cadence and flow, with no consideration or understanding of commas, question marks, etc...) was titled the same as your thread (i.e. "NO forests" vs. "no GIANT forests")



Anyway, I cannot really comment on much more, since I have only watched probably less than half of it. But, from my understanding, he is claiming that these gigantic trees/forests of the past, were actually silicon based, rather than carbon based life? A special kind of silicon wood?

I very much enjoyed the images of petrified logs that appeared to have been made partially out of semiprecious gemstones. Very pretty. I would like to see that place in person, as well as the "gigantic stump" nearby!

Anyway, other than that... As always, thanks for sharing bud!

a reply to: 3n19m470

i had no issues with the original. actually was the only one at the time. Maybe I am attuned to many accents due to being around so many at once where i use to live. Anyway, like I have mentioned in other site conversations. I don't buy into every little perspective of his but can wrap my mind around at least 90% of it and reseach off of it independently. here is a decent follow up video or anyone interested. www.youtube.com... oh, and for those that over looked it. LOL on this site stands for "LIES on lIne" not " laugh out loud"..

It really is very interesting... the question being why is it covered up and why were they cut down? a reply to: James1982