I think we don't even start with rabbit holes, really. Just enter them and find out something. All things you mentioned could easily be just a reception on the rabbit hole entrance.
Things that seems to be completely unanswered - who is really behind all that cults/elites/whatever? Who stopped humanity progress in 1970 and why? What is the real source of all that agendas and other shit?
The more we know, the more question arise. And they are not so easy to answer.
Perhaps there are beings that know this is going to happen soon and order society accordingly
Perhaps. But who exactly that beings? Where they come from? How exactly they contact with Earth elites? What language they speak? How they look like? And so on.
It is easy to make wide assumptions about reptiloids, aliens, daemons, whatever. We have a lot of them around for a long time. More complex thing is to find details, dots that could be connected.
Its like with elites - first you find out there is somebody behind politicians, then you began to collect the dots - all that corporations, clubs, families and so on. Then you connect the dots - this is corporation that owns half of world assets, here is their accounts, here they have a contracts with those institution, here they pay MSM to hide something, this man is a head of something, and that man is in charge of that and so on. That is how you get a whole picture about thing you guessed at the beginning.
Same should be done again, but with upper level. Everything from previous dots that looks unnecessary on previous level should be collected, systematised and studied. This will be the next group of dots for next level. And so on.
It is hard to prove evil supernatural beings exist if they don't want to be caught. However, though that challenge is great, I ultimately agree with you. We need to try to prove they exist or do not, once and for all.
It is hard to prove evil supernatural beings exist if they don't want to be caught.
There are a lot of things that invisible and unsensible that actually not hard to proof at all. Electricity, radiation, atoms, whatever. It is just a question of willing to find and detect them. Another option is to continue to tell fortunes about "supernatural beings".
There is no magic or supernatural. Only technology we are not aware of yet. And "supernatural beings" are not supernatural, just unstudied and unresearched.
We need to try to prove they exist or do not, once and for all.
There could be a lot of things that could help.
Technologies appeared from nowhere, without preceeding techs
things that elites routinely do that looks completely senseless
elites reactions to some things or events that looks totally unimportant
chains of relations between elite members that goes into nowhere
and so on.
I think 1 and 4 are very promising approaches. If we are alone with elites, then that things will be totally in closed loop, there could not be gaps or loose ends. all circles will be closed and everything will be sequential. If there is gaps, loose ends and all that stuff, then it is a basic proof of third-party presence.
a) does being imply "complete" or partial (perceiving) within whole (perceivable)?
b) what if suggested questions seeking suggested answers tempts one to ignore perceivable solution?
c) to be implies "towards being", while being (life) implies within towards (inception towards death)...can you discern the difference?
just a reception on...entrance.
What among all perceivable (whole) did the perceiving one (partial) not receive on entrance (inception)? What's missing within what's already available?
who is behind
a) does BE (being) imply HIND (backward; pertaining to the part which follows) or does being (living) imply resisting being progressed (process of dying)?
b) what if questioning "who is be..." implies lacking self discernment about "being"? Why would a being put "who" before "be"? Who could be more important than being oneself?
Sleight of hand: WHO runs the world? The WHO! Another sleight of hand: Horton hears a WHO, from HORTON (Latin hortatio, from hortor, to exhort) - "giving advice; to encourage; to embolden, to cheer).
stopped humanity progress
Can life being moved from inception towards death be stopped? How can any suggested progressivism be considered over perceptibly being processed?
What is the real source
All that "was" perceivable before one can shape a suggestion about what it "is"...
The more we know, the more question arise
a) knowledge implies perceivable (inspiration); questions and answers represent suggested (information).
b) being able to perceive perceivable implies being problem (living) within solution (process of dying)...questions and answers tempt one to ignore that.
I think we don't even start with rabbit holes, really. Just enter them and find out something. All things you mentioned could easily be just a reception on the rabbit hole entrance.
Things that seems to be completely unanswered - who is really behind all that cults/elites/whatever? Who stopped humanity progress in 1970 and why? What is the real source of all that agendas and other shit?
The more we know, the more question arise. And they are not so easy to answer.
Perhaps. But who exactly that beings? Where they come from? How exactly they contact with Earth elites? What language they speak? How they look like? And so on.
It is easy to make wide assumptions about reptiloids, aliens, daemons, whatever. We have a lot of them around for a long time. More complex thing is to find details, dots that could be connected.
Its like with elites - first you find out there is somebody behind politicians, then you began to collect the dots - all that corporations, clubs, families and so on. Then you connect the dots - this is corporation that owns half of world assets, here is their accounts, here they have a contracts with those institution, here they pay MSM to hide something, this man is a head of something, and that man is in charge of that and so on. That is how you get a whole picture about thing you guessed at the beginning.
Same should be done again, but with upper level. Everything from previous dots that looks unnecessary on previous level should be collected, systematised and studied. This will be the next group of dots for next level. And so on.
It is hard to prove evil supernatural beings exist if they don't want to be caught. However, though that challenge is great, I ultimately agree with you. We need to try to prove they exist or do not, once and for all.
There are a lot of things that invisible and unsensible that actually not hard to proof at all. Electricity, radiation, atoms, whatever. It is just a question of willing to find and detect them. Another option is to continue to tell fortunes about "supernatural beings".
There is no magic or supernatural. Only technology we are not aware of yet. And "supernatural beings" are not supernatural, just unstudied and unresearched.
There could be a lot of things that could help.
and so on.
I think 1 and 4 are very promising approaches. If we are alone with elites, then that things will be totally in closed loop, there could not be gaps or loose ends. all circles will be closed and everything will be sequential. If there is gaps, loose ends and all that stuff, then it is a basic proof of third-party presence.
a) does being imply "complete" or partial (perceiving) within whole (perceivable)?
b) what if suggested questions seeking suggested answers tempts one to ignore perceivable solution?
c) to be implies "towards being", while being (life) implies within towards (inception towards death)...can you discern the difference?
What among all perceivable (whole) did the perceiving one (partial) not receive on entrance (inception)? What's missing within what's already available?
a) does BE (being) imply HIND (backward; pertaining to the part which follows) or does being (living) imply resisting being progressed (process of dying)?
b) what if questioning "who is be..." implies lacking self discernment about "being"? Why would a being put "who" before "be"? Who could be more important than being oneself?
Sleight of hand: WHO runs the world? The WHO! Another sleight of hand: Horton hears a WHO, from HORTON (Latin hortatio, from hortor, to exhort) - "giving advice; to encourage; to embolden, to cheer).
Can life being moved from inception towards death be stopped? How can any suggested progressivism be considered over perceptibly being processed?
All that "was" perceivable before one can shape a suggestion about what it "is"...
a) knowledge implies perceivable (inspiration); questions and answers represent suggested (information).
b) being able to perceive perceivable implies being problem (living) within solution (process of dying)...questions and answers tempt one to ignore that.