What if we are being used ?

a reply to: ClovenSky

What is so wrong with teaching critical thought anymore?

Glad to see you liked my use of the term.

It's important to separate critical thinking from fabrication, however. Like fabricating planets that swoop through the inner Solar System every 3,600 years.

a reply to: Phage

Ah, to use your own methods then....do you have proof that it doesn't?

I can see this is the beginning of a beautiful relationship sir. giggiddy giggiddy

Once again, what exactly to you conspiracy on? Maybe something that actually goes against mainstream theory?

I wonder in the formula of denying ignorance and the realm of conspiracy, which one has been used against mankind for longer? Sure there could be a few snake oil salesmen out there that profits off of individuals for chump change, but the mainstream academia along with their government benefactors have produced much more harm, imo. Like a mountain of corruption next to molehill of small crooks.

Does the mainstream echo chambers out there provide no entertainment at all being a mass circle jerk? Is there more sport and game in places like this?

I realize I am being an ass here, but don't people like you already control the majority of academia? Are the remaining pockets of free thought such a danger? Or are you simply donning the cape trimmed in purple to save us from our lowly nonthinking selves? You know, for the good of humanity?

......

remember that one thread you made that was from the view of a conservative a while ago? No one could understand what was wrong with you and people were actually concerned that you were feeling well. Was that for pure satire or was there some other hidden motive that you would be willing to share?

a reply to: ClovenSky

Ah, to use your own methods then....do you have proof that it doesn't?

Critical thinking doesn't really attempt to prove negatives. Can you prove unicorns don't exist? But the fact that the inner planets have quite circular orbits is a very good indicator that Nibiru does not exist. Critical thinking.

I suggest you stop talking about me though. I'm not the topic.

a reply to: Phage

Well, I am sure these conversations could be nuked in the blink of an eye, with no detrimental impact on this thread at all.

I would love to go for the ball, but everytime I try to go for it, there you are kicking out of bounds, out of the stadium and into another realm that is bordered and protected by safe scientific, peer reviewed, mainstream sanctioned bs rules.

Again I will ask a question which you have never answered. What popular mainstream scientific theory do you actually go against?

a reply to: ClovenSky

Well, I am sure these conversations could be nuked in the blink of an eye, with no detrimental impact on this thread at all.

Yeah. The mods seem to be either overwhelmed or not so interested as they used to be.

I would love to go for the ball, but everytime I try to go for it, there you are kicking out of bounds, out of the stadium and into another realm that is bordered and protected by safe scientific, peer reviewed, mainstream sanctioned bs rules

You can kick the ball where ever you wish but don't think I'll stop commenting. Present arguments back at me. Support your position. It's good for the critical thinking process. You might learn something. I have.

Just don't gish gallop. Present one rational point at a time.

a reply to: Phage

The Gish gallop is a technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments

Very interesting. You may see it as spamming multiple unrelated questions in the attempt to dissuade meaningful conversation, but from my point of view, they are all related. They are all trying asking the same underlying question with slightly different angles in hopes to get an honest answer. Not a mainstream answer but a subjective one..I am probably just too hardheaded in believing there are separate answers there.

It is a very interesting clash. The search for answers that I believe are intentionally hidden due to agenda and other's protection of mainstream that they fully believe in. Mainstream that has been built up over many many years. Surely mainstream is right, how could so many people and so many resources produce false results? Certainly those who question the official tails must have some type of behavior issue or possible brain abnormality.

The battle and dislike of the establishment versus the battle and dislike against perceived quacks. The asking of data that is only acceptable if it comes from 'qualified' sources versus trying to think outside of the box, with the box being the establishment. Kind of a dead end.

Much respect and frustration sir. I just wish I could bring you over to the dark side. I will still ask personal questions, because in discovering channels of communication with you, which also includes beliefs, understanding of the whole is in those responses somewhere.

There is just a fear in a quote that I heard recently, something along the lines of people really don't change their minds past a certain age and overall systematic change only happens when new generations take over the helm.

a reply to: ClovenSky

Having multiple points to argue is good. Presenting one at a time encourages rational discussion. Throwing up a pile of them, all at once, does not.


"Go away old man. You don't know what you're talking about."

Got it. But, no. I'll comment on your foul balls. I might even comment when you get something right.

originally posted by: Harte


Some of us ARE being used - as cash cows for lying snake oil salesmen making up fantasies of the past out of thin air.
Like mountain tops being "scraped clean."

Harte

a reply to: Phage

Oh phage, I hate agreeing with you, but on this one I must.

But the fact that the inner planets have quite circular orbits is a very good indicator that Nibiru does not exist. Critical thinking.

Agreed, planets are held to their orbits. Period! No roaming planets are possible in nature. But, something else is.

Constructs can, and most likely if viewed by a ignorant and ill informed populace could be misidentified, as a planet.
Especially if that population was tricked into believing it.

Some people demand proof. PROOF, I WANT PROOF! Sorry, just a bunch of circumstantial evidence, by design, I suspect. But in that lies the truth, Proof. You cant see something that isn't there, until, it is. Unicorns or otherwise.

Fact, Cuniform tablets have been discovered, and translated. Granted, some translations are debatable. Especially concerning the word Nibiru. The new translation is "watery area of crossing". A history that has been said to be older than the great flood. Oh my. Modern science would have you believe its all a myth, and, un provable. But the circumstantial evidence keeps piling up. Critical thinking says, someone is lying about something.

What we have here, is a major failure to communicate. Planet X may have many names from more than one source, for more than one reason. Plus on top of that there is no reason that history does not involve certain bits of disinformation.

Phage, you are wrong about this thread being about you, it is. This thread is a indictment against the very same institution you promote and believe in so deeply. Your the one who demands proof. Your the one who refuses to look at circumstantial evidence with an open mind and consider other possibilities. It is you who represent that version of Science. You, are its representative. And in that way, anything that isn't main stream science, you will either not look, call it absurd, or ignore it completely. Regardless if the puzzle piece fits another spot, or is called another name. Sad.

The fact of the matter is, we actually do live in a fabricated fantasy. I know that as a personal fact. I know that does you no good, Phage. At least, maybe their is some way for you to consider that in your next bit of critical thinking. Not all of us are crack pots, and fruit cakes.

originally posted by: Gargoyle91

originally posted by: Harte


Some of us ARE being used - as cash cows for lying snake oil salesmen making up fantasies of the past out of thin air.
Like mountain tops being "scraped clean."

Harte

As can be seen in this video, the area is an eroded plateau.
Plateaus are naturally flat.
link to vid

No mountains were shaved down or otherwise harmed in the making of that video (or of the geoglyphs.)

Harte

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: Harte

Hmmm, so as long as they are not trying to sell anything, it should be kosher?

What happens if they are just trying to wrestle our corrupted history out of the hands of the true manipulators, the mainstream adherents. Or is anything that goes against mainstream evil in your eyes?

Do you even consider the possibility that mainstream is wrong? That those textbooks you teach from are wrong? That you may actually be corrupting the youth by teaching them memorization and regurgitation instead of showing them both sides of a story and letting the students decide? What is so wrong with teaching critical thought anymore? Is the mainstream story on such shaky ground that any questions must be immediately decried else they corrode the entire theoretical story of mainstream history?

Never considered it at all, given that I teach Geometry.
Wanna argue about Mathematics with me?

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Not at all uncommon.
en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
I was thinking of the old myth of how we were created as slaves to basically mine what our overlords needed / wanted , But what if it's much bigger then that and we are still doing their bidding by continued mining bringing metals and minerals to the surface of the planet ? We as a race have consistently mined the planet in all recorded history and still have not depleted or unearthed all the Planets resources .

So...let's look at this one from a science standpoint.

We're somewhat advanced technologically -- and if you might recall, we mine for minerals using machinery. The reason we use machinery is:

• You don't have to pay machines
  
• You don't have to feed machines
  
• You don't have to deal with worker strikes or wage strikes
  
• Machines don't go on strike
  
• Machines don't have 'sick days'
  
• Machines can work for months or years, every day, without pause
  
• You don't have to spend 10-18 years 'growing' a machine before it's ready to work. Machines are ready to work the minute they come off the factory floor.
  
• Machines can be retooled to do something and they will do it perfectly (unlike retraining humans)
  
• Machines can work in poisonous atmospheres, no atmosphere, under the water, in boiling hot temperatures
  
• Machines aren't harmed by radiation in mining uranium
  
• Machines don't go blind or develop lung disease from pollutants
  
• Machines don't make mistakes when they're tired
  
• Machines' strength doesn't decrease throughout the day
  

So... can you list any reason why someone would want to use humans?

What if this is what our creators do create races on other planets that are materialistic in nature so that all their life time they search out for the shinny things and useful materials of their planet . All along this is what we have been guided towards with the advancement of technology .

We can bash elements together and form new elements. Why couldn't a technological species just whack two common elements together and make whatever they wanted..."Star Trek" fabricators with any element you ever wanted.

. Look at Nazca were entire mountain tops have been scraped clean .. Just a thought I have not seen this angle talked about .

That was done by glaciers.

a reply to: Byrd

I don't know about glaciers. Nazca is in the tropics and the elevation is not that great.

Mesas are generally formed when a plateau (or other flat formation) undergoes water erosion. Valleys are cut, leaving level higher ground in between.

But they're not even very flat.
14°33'52.30"S , 75°11'32.34"W


Why put a runway up on a ridge when there are wide open (and flat) areas very nearby?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Byrd

I don't know about glaciers. Nazca is in the tropics and the elevation is not that great.

Mesas are generally formed when a plateau (or other flat formation) undergoes water erosion. Valleys are cut, leaving level higher ground in between.

But they're not even very flat.
14°33'52.30"S , 75°11'32.34"W

Why put a runway up on a ridge when there are wide open (and flat) areas very nearby?

I stand corrected. I looked it up...result of subduction.