After coming to learn something of the central importance of Phoenicia in world history and down to current events, I've come to notice what seems to be a deliberate effort to mentally separate Phoenicia from the Israelites and other societies in the region.
In reality, of course, there was little separation One example is from the Hebrew alphabet itself:
An example of related early Semitic inscriptions from the area include the tenth-century Gezer calendar over which scholars are divided as to whether its language is Hebrew or Phoenician and whether the script is Proto-Canaanite or paleo-Hebrew.
But how many people ever mention this? Few to none. My "conspiritorial" point here is that this should draw our attention even more strongly towards Phoenicia.
Great points - the common language, writing script, currency and other cultural elements show a strong link - I think this “artificial separation” might have something to do with wanting to keep distinct the modern day jews from all other people who might fall under the umbrella of “semite”.
I had heard vague rumors about things like “the Phoenicians reached the Americas many centuries before Columbus or even the Vikings” but this group, “the Phoenicians” seemed to exist in this isolated bubble where they had no precedents or antecedents. It wasn’t until I stumbled upon the guy who tweeted the OP that I started to see them as a node on a far larger web (one which included Tyre, and Carthage, and Jerusalem and more)
The more you pay attention, the more you notice They don't want us paying attention. There's a "blind spot" firmly affixed over Phoenicia.
From a totally different direction, there's another example from what you might consider a suspicious organization: the Freemasons. They have as a central figure "Hiram Abiff" that helped build Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem, but they take great pains to tell us this fictional character has absolutely no relation to the historical King Hiram I of Tyre that helped build Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem.
Don't they want the cred that Abiff was a real historical person, and not just made up like the rest of their nonsense? Very strange indeed! Well, there is some indication of what I think They don't want us looking into.
Hiram's predecessor was Abibaal ("my father is Baal") and his successor was Baal-Eser I ("Baal is foremost"). Seeing a theme here? Is it striking a chord?
So if I was one of Them, I wouldn't want anyone putting this together either.
Huh, hadn’t heard that about Hiram, though I don’t know much about the masons - some interesting tangents which you make me think of though are:
Solomon’s Seal - a signet ring stamped with one of the earliest known appearances of the pentagram. Stated to give its bearer the ability to command the labors of demons, which is supposedly how the Temple was constructed so rapidly:
It is often depicted in the shape of either a pentagram or a hexagram. In religious lore, the ring is variously described as having given Solomon the power to command the supernatural, including shedim and jinn, and also the ability to speak with animals. Due to the proverbial wisdom of Solomon, it came to be seen as an amulet or talisman, or a symbol or character in medieval magic and Renaissance magic, occultism, and alchemy.
The seal is the predecessor to the Star of David, a Jewish symbol, and in modern vexillology, it features on the Flag of Israel.
The Codex Gigas - a MASSIVE, ornate, and intricately detailed medieval Bible. Not only does the legend claim it was written in a single night by a single monk who made a deal with the devil, but typographic/literary analysis in the present day supports these claims (at least, the claims of “single” authorship and uninterrupted, continuous work until completion)
Albert Pike, grand master Freemason of America seemed to write in his “morals and dogmas” the ultimate revelation of freemasonry:
We shall unleash the nihilists and the atheists and we shall provoke a great social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to all nations the effect of absolute atheism; the origins of savagery and of most bloody turmoil.
Then everywhere, the people will be forced to defend themselves against the world minority of the world revolutionaries and will exterminate those destroyers of civilization and the multitudes disillusioned with Christianity whose spirits will be from that moment without direction and leadership and anxious for an ideal, but without knowledge where to send its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer brought finally out into public view. A manifestation which will result from a general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and Atheism; both conquered and exterminated at the same time.
There definitely seems to be a common thread between the subjects which “they” “don’t” “want” “us to know” - I use the air quotes prolifically because ironically, it seems that (partially) revealing themselves to their victims is (a necessary) part of the trick... something about free will
As to the last thing you mentioned, free will, I think that's a crucial aspect of what's going on but not in the sense everyone seems to think. Rather than being something to do with some "cosmic" or "karmic" sense of it, I think it's much more concrete. That is, I think a deal was put in place a long time ago and has been playing out since then, and here is the clearest description I've found of it:
Because of his arrogance, Allah banished Iblis from heaven and condemned him to hell. Iblis accepted his fate, but asked that he might be spared until Judgement Day so that he could tempt humans from the path of righteousness and lead them to the same fate that would eventually befall him. Allah granted this, but did not give Iblis power over humans. Instead, if they were to be led from the righteous path, it would have to be because of their own temptations and transgressions.
So do I think it's about supernatural beings from some divine realm? Not at all. I think very real events took place on very real Earth in the very real past, but the evidence of them has been mythologized, fractured, rewritten, misinterpreted, smeared together, hidden, destroyed, etc, etc., but the tiny pieces remain that we have to try to put together.
So we can start to form explanations for things we find. Did Pike, out of nowhere, think serving a non-existent Lucifer was a great idea and that fooling people into it over decades was the best way to go? No, he was just a player in a much bigger game to be played according to certain rules that would be enforced at the end.
And how about demons, or aliens, or breakaway Elites with advanced technology: If they're so powerful, why don't they just put the zap on all of us sheep? Either they're not powerful or it's not allowed, and they're afraid of forfeiting or being punished at the end. Which, of course, entail the existence of an enforcer.
But the big picture, as I see it, is that the best way for your opponent to beat you at a game is prevent you from even knowing you're playing one at all.
It’s some short pieces of “fiction”, but (like you, it sounds) I’m always struck by what seems like Truth buried under the labels like “fiction” and “myth” and “legend”
It's all over my head, really. The thrust of my research seems to have turned out to be just giving an account of the available evidence to some level of satisfaction. Just trying to make all the pieces fit together in a sensible way. That's deep enough, as you might imagine.
I just wandered my way in to it all, but the account I ended up with is beyond strange, way past anything the vast majority of people could even imagine to be true, let alone entertain the evidence for. Although it's a satisfying level of knowledge, it's quite lonely.
But as far as fiction, myth and legend, I've found a tremendous amount of truth buried and ignored there, completely passed by. As an example (and a central one), I found that the Bible, particularly the OT, was an account of the interactions of some humans with the powerful aliens that created us. As strange as that sounds, it connects up with and is expanded by what the much more ancient Sumerians wrote about their interactions with their "gods".
And as strange as that all sounds, it was confirmed by subtle but unmistakable clues and references planted in Season 1 of "Westworld". Can you even imagine that? Almost no one can, which is why they can put these signals out so freely.
I couldn't make any of this up if I tried for a century.
Over your head? I doubt that, but maybe the total lack of context threw you off, but it’s almost anthropomorphizing Yin/Yang dynamics or “the force” from Star Wars. Gardener = Light = “good” / Winnower = Darkness = “bad” with many more layers thrown in for good measure.
This one always gets me, and it works with basically no context needed:
Thank you for making room in your life for another talking ball. Let me ask you a question.
In the three billion base pairs of your root species' genome, there is a single gene that codes for a protein called p53. The name is a mistake. The protein weighs only as much as 47,000 protons, not 53,000. If you were a cell, you would think p53 was a mistake too. It has several coercive functions: To delay the cell's growth. To sterilize the cell when it is old. And to force the cell into self-destruction if it becomes too independent.
Would you tolerate a bomb in your body, waiting to detonate if you deviated from the needs of society?
However, without p53 as an enforcer, the body's utopian surplus of energy becomes a paradise for cancer. Cells cannot resist the temptation to steal from that surplus.
Their genetic morality degrades as tumor suppressor genes fail. The only way to stop them is by punishment.
You now confront the basic problem of morality. It is the alignment of individual incentives with the global needs of the structure.
Patterns will participate in a structure only if participation benefits their ability to go on existing. The more successful the structure grows, the more temptation accrues to cheat. And the greater the advantage the cheaters gain over their honest neighbors. And the greater the ability they develop to capture the very laws that should prevent their selfishness. To prevent this, the structure must punish cheaters with a violence that grows in proportion to its own success.
My question follows.
Is p53 an agent of the Darkness, or the Light?
I found that the Bible, particularly the OT, was an account of the interactions of some humans with the powerful aliens that created us.
Have you seen the work of the former Vatican official translator Mauro Biglino? It speaks directly to this, and some of the things he brings up I had never seen mentioned or considered before - unfortunately almost all of his output is in Italian (often translated in subtitles) - I often recommend a short video series he did:
Mauro Biglino - the Naked Bible / the Literal Bible (6 videos, ~15m each)
And regarding Westworld, despite being a big fan of Michael Criton, I’ve not yet read the book, seen the movie, nor the show. Maybe I’ll have to check out that first season soon.
quite lonely
Cheers brother, the irony is you aren’t alone in that feeling
a) if language represents the articulation of sound; then that implies sound to represent the natural. Could others utilize artifice (suggestion) to distract from natural (perception)?
b) what if suggested "common" (belonging to more than one) tempts one to ignore that ONE cannot be more than ONE? What if counting represents suggested collectivism tempting one to ignore that nature sets itself apart from whole into each partial unit (Latin unus; one)?
c) what if suggested THE-ism implies ones consent to submit to the authority of another one?
artificial separation
Try to explain natural separation? If one, then separated from other ones. Where does separation originate? SEPARO (to part) -TION (through action) implies into partial reactions...
fall under the umbrella
a) an umbrella is designed to shelter those under it from what's falling from above...why does the suggested rhetoric "fall under the umbrella" invert that?
b) UMBREL'LA, noun ( Latin umbra, shade)...shade shelters from light. What if ones consent to suggested (shade) shelters one from perceivable (light)? What if others suggest umbrellas (-isms) to tempt one to shade (ignore) from enlightenment (comprehension)?
the umbrella of “semite”.
SEM'I - "in composition, signifies half"
H'ALF - "one equal part of a thing which is divided into two parts"
Could ONEs consent to the suggestion of another DIVIDE one into reasoning over suggested from two sides? Could that represent an internal division of ONE into half a units potential?
a) an umbrella is designed to shelter those under it from what's falling from above...why does the suggested rhetoric "fall under the umbrella" invert that?
You’ve got me thinking - but perhaps those distinct Ones who are most alike (Family) share a common umbrella for common protection.
Though admittedly the phrase “fall under the umbrella” does seem oxymoronic on its face - perhaps “gather” is more fitting than “fall”
Could ONEs consent to the suggestion of another DIVIDE one into reasoning over suggested from two sides?
Do you believe one can consider an idea without consenting to it? Or does the act of the ideas admittance to our mind imply a consent? I suppose it does in some sense
perhaps those distinct Ones who are most alike (Family) share a common umbrella for common protection
a) suggested "perhaps" (by chance aka effect of an unknown cause) tempts one to ignore being effect (life) within known cause (inception towards death) with knowledge representing perceivable input.
b) alike represents choice for different (life) within same (inception toward death). Being different (partial) within same (wholeness) implies ones struggle for apartheid, while resisting togetherness...hence intercourse with another one leading to "OFF-spring".
c) share implies "portion; partial"...being implies share (partials) within save (whole). Save implies "to deliver".
d) family (Latin famulus - "servant")...aka serving that which delivers as a channel for birth.
e) suggested common aka common-ism (communism) tempts one believe in "equal belonging", while ignoring BE (being within) LONG (length of direction) aka being short (life) within long (inception towards death) and also different (partials) within equal (whole).
It's on oneself to differentiate between suggested definition and discerning perceivable when hearing "belong". In this example "be" implies being, hence oneself...can others define oneself or does one need to discern self? Having grown that discernment allows one then to put self within "long/length/duration/path/motion etc.
f) fall of men (inception towards death) generates umbrella (life)...resistance represents shelter within velocity unless ignored.
Resisting grows resistance; temptation tempts ignorance of resistance. Temptations tempt one to "fall" for...
perhaps “gather” is more fitting than “fall”
a) fall segregates (inception to life); gather aggregates (life to death)...
b) each partial fits into whole, hence FIT, adjective - "becoming" aka coming to be...reasoning (more vs less) tempts one to ignore that.
Do you believe one can consider an idea without consenting to it?
a) to believe represents ones consent to the suggestion of another, hence religion (Latin religio; to bind) aka binding oneself willingly to the will of another.
b) IDEA - "that which is seen" implies perceivable, even when ignored for suggested idealism aka oneself viewing perceivable through the lens of suggested, hence "those with eyes to see and those watching through the looking glass".
c) suggested "without" tempts one to ignore being (life) within (inception towards death).
In short...need (letting go) or want (holding onto) aka adaptation (choice) to motion (balance) or consent vs denial conflict (imbalance)...free will of choice.
Suggested water and wine tempt ones consent; perceivable thirst forces ones adaptation.
Or does the act of the ideas admittance to our mind imply a consent?
a) consent here was given to suggested idealism and activism, hence tempting one to ignore seeing perceivable (idea) and re-acting to it.
b) ADMIT', verb (Latin admitto, to send) - "to suffer to enter"...entering (inception) implies ones (life) suffering (towards death). Motion implies admission for those within.
Being implies RE (response to) JECT (ejected by; cast forth) within admission (motion).
In short...letting perceivable inspiration go through ones mind/memory, while resisting to hold onto suggested information represents resistance within temptation.
What does sound (phonics) draw towards? Consider a description from Dune: "Spannungsbogen; which is the self-imposed delay between desire for a thing and the act of reaching out to grasp that thing"...
What if sound impresses into itself for expression (resonance) or repression (dissonance) by instruments within?
central importance of Phoenicia
a) the suggested word "Phoenicia" was brought into (import) and from (export) where?
b) if sound is imported from outside, then how does it represent center, when it implies surrounding (hence surround sound)?
how many people ever mention this? Few to none.
MEN'TION, noun (Latin mentio, ment; mind) - "to put in mind; to suggest"...can one suggest (words) without doing it within perceivable (sound)?
Does perceivable sound require the suggested word "sound" for one to discern; to be aware of; to sense; to be conscious about it?
A recent study by academics at Oxford and elsewhere has concluded that grisly stories of ancient Phoenician child sacrifice were true:
"Children – both male and female, and mostly a few weeks old – were sacrificed by the Carthaginians at locations known as tophets. The practice was also carried out by their neighbours at other Phoenician colonies in Sicily, Sardinia and Malta. Dedications from the children’s parents."
It seems like a lot of the suppression around these kinds of subjects could be because anything which “confirms” things reported in the Bible are treated with extreme hesitancy by the academic community. We heard all about the bronze bulls of the canaanites right? But to “prove” such “notions” was “a waste of time” and potentially even “dangerous”! It seems to me at least
great article. Keeweenaw is a neat place to visit if you get the chance. weird/different energy, like alot of the areas around Lake Superior, northern WI and the UP, but more so on Keeweenaw. not in a bad way.
After coming to learn something of the central importance of Phoenicia in world history and down to current events, I've come to notice what seems to be a deliberate effort to mentally separate Phoenicia from the Israelites and other societies in the region.
In reality, of course, there was little separation One example is from the Hebrew alphabet itself:
But how many people ever mention this? Few to none. My "conspiritorial" point here is that this should draw our attention even more strongly towards Phoenicia.
Great points - the common language, writing script, currency and other cultural elements show a strong link - I think this “artificial separation” might have something to do with wanting to keep distinct the modern day jews from all other people who might fall under the umbrella of “semite”.
I had heard vague rumors about things like “the Phoenicians reached the Americas many centuries before Columbus or even the Vikings” but this group, “the Phoenicians” seemed to exist in this isolated bubble where they had no precedents or antecedents. It wasn’t until I stumbled upon the guy who tweeted the OP that I started to see them as a node on a far larger web (one which included Tyre, and Carthage, and Jerusalem and more)
The more you pay attention, the more you notice They don't want us paying attention. There's a "blind spot" firmly affixed over Phoenicia.
From a totally different direction, there's another example from what you might consider a suspicious organization: the Freemasons. They have as a central figure "Hiram Abiff" that helped build Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem, but they take great pains to tell us this fictional character has absolutely no relation to the historical King Hiram I of Tyre that helped build Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem.
Don't they want the cred that Abiff was a real historical person, and not just made up like the rest of their nonsense? Very strange indeed! Well, there is some indication of what I think They don't want us looking into.
Hiram's predecessor was Abibaal ("my father is Baal") and his successor was Baal-Eser I ("Baal is foremost"). Seeing a theme here? Is it striking a chord?
So if I was one of Them, I wouldn't want anyone putting this together either.
Huh, hadn’t heard that about Hiram, though I don’t know much about the masons - some interesting tangents which you make me think of though are:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seal_of_Solomon
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Gigas
There definitely seems to be a common thread between the subjects which “they” “don’t” “want” “us to know” - I use the air quotes prolifically because ironically, it seems that (partially) revealing themselves to their victims is (a necessary) part of the trick... something about free will
As to the last thing you mentioned, free will, I think that's a crucial aspect of what's going on but not in the sense everyone seems to think. Rather than being something to do with some "cosmic" or "karmic" sense of it, I think it's much more concrete. That is, I think a deal was put in place a long time ago and has been playing out since then, and here is the clearest description I've found of it:
Allah Fights the Jinn
So do I think it's about supernatural beings from some divine realm? Not at all. I think very real events took place on very real Earth in the very real past, but the evidence of them has been mythologized, fractured, rewritten, misinterpreted, smeared together, hidden, destroyed, etc, etc., but the tiny pieces remain that we have to try to put together.
So we can start to form explanations for things we find. Did Pike, out of nowhere, think serving a non-existent Lucifer was a great idea and that fooling people into it over decades was the best way to go? No, he was just a player in a much bigger game to be played according to certain rules that would be enforced at the end.
And how about demons, or aliens, or breakaway Elites with advanced technology: If they're so powerful, why don't they just put the zap on all of us sheep? Either they're not powerful or it's not allowed, and they're afraid of forfeiting or being punished at the end. Which, of course, entail the existence of an enforcer.
But the big picture, as I see it, is that the best way for your opponent to beat you at a game is prevent you from even knowing you're playing one at all.
I’d be interested in your thoughts on this:
https://communities.win/c/Manna/p/16birKnN57/the-game-of-life--is-a-game-that/c
It’s some short pieces of “fiction”, but (like you, it sounds) I’m always struck by what seems like Truth buried under the labels like “fiction” and “myth” and “legend”
It's all over my head, really. The thrust of my research seems to have turned out to be just giving an account of the available evidence to some level of satisfaction. Just trying to make all the pieces fit together in a sensible way. That's deep enough, as you might imagine.
I just wandered my way in to it all, but the account I ended up with is beyond strange, way past anything the vast majority of people could even imagine to be true, let alone entertain the evidence for. Although it's a satisfying level of knowledge, it's quite lonely.
But as far as fiction, myth and legend, I've found a tremendous amount of truth buried and ignored there, completely passed by. As an example (and a central one), I found that the Bible, particularly the OT, was an account of the interactions of some humans with the powerful aliens that created us. As strange as that sounds, it connects up with and is expanded by what the much more ancient Sumerians wrote about their interactions with their "gods".
And as strange as that all sounds, it was confirmed by subtle but unmistakable clues and references planted in Season 1 of "Westworld". Can you even imagine that? Almost no one can, which is why they can put these signals out so freely.
I couldn't make any of this up if I tried for a century.
Over your head? I doubt that, but maybe the total lack of context threw you off, but it’s almost anthropomorphizing Yin/Yang dynamics or “the force” from Star Wars. Gardener = Light = “good” / Winnower = Darkness = “bad” with many more layers thrown in for good measure.
This one always gets me, and it works with basically no context needed:
Have you seen the work of the former Vatican official translator Mauro Biglino? It speaks directly to this, and some of the things he brings up I had never seen mentioned or considered before - unfortunately almost all of his output is in Italian (often translated in subtitles) - I often recommend a short video series he did:
Mauro Biglino - the Naked Bible / the Literal Bible (6 videos, ~15m each)
https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL87B03D75BCE4870A
And regarding Westworld, despite being a big fan of Michael Criton, I’ve not yet read the book, seen the movie, nor the show. Maybe I’ll have to check out that first season soon.
Cheers brother, the irony is you aren’t alone in that feeling
a) if language represents the articulation of sound; then that implies sound to represent the natural. Could others utilize artifice (suggestion) to distract from natural (perception)?
b) what if suggested "common" (belonging to more than one) tempts one to ignore that ONE cannot be more than ONE? What if counting represents suggested collectivism tempting one to ignore that nature sets itself apart from whole into each partial unit (Latin unus; one)?
c) what if suggested THE-ism implies ones consent to submit to the authority of another one?
Try to explain natural separation? If one, then separated from other ones. Where does separation originate? SEPARO (to part) -TION (through action) implies into partial reactions...
a) an umbrella is designed to shelter those under it from what's falling from above...why does the suggested rhetoric "fall under the umbrella" invert that?
b) UMBREL'LA, noun ( Latin umbra, shade)...shade shelters from light. What if ones consent to suggested (shade) shelters one from perceivable (light)? What if others suggest umbrellas (-isms) to tempt one to shade (ignore) from enlightenment (comprehension)?
Could ONEs consent to the suggestion of another DIVIDE one into reasoning over suggested from two sides? Could that represent an internal division of ONE into half a units potential?
You’ve got me thinking - but perhaps those distinct Ones who are most alike (Family) share a common umbrella for common protection.
Though admittedly the phrase “fall under the umbrella” does seem oxymoronic on its face - perhaps “gather” is more fitting than “fall”
Do you believe one can consider an idea without consenting to it? Or does the act of the ideas admittance to our mind imply a consent? I suppose it does in some sense
a) suggested "perhaps" (by chance aka effect of an unknown cause) tempts one to ignore being effect (life) within known cause (inception towards death) with knowledge representing perceivable input.
b) alike represents choice for different (life) within same (inception toward death). Being different (partial) within same (wholeness) implies ones struggle for apartheid, while resisting togetherness...hence intercourse with another one leading to "OFF-spring".
c) share implies "portion; partial"...being implies share (partials) within save (whole). Save implies "to deliver".
d) family (Latin famulus - "servant")...aka serving that which delivers as a channel for birth.
e) suggested common aka common-ism (communism) tempts one believe in "equal belonging", while ignoring BE (being within) LONG (length of direction) aka being short (life) within long (inception towards death) and also different (partials) within equal (whole).
It's on oneself to differentiate between suggested definition and discerning perceivable when hearing "belong". In this example "be" implies being, hence oneself...can others define oneself or does one need to discern self? Having grown that discernment allows one then to put self within "long/length/duration/path/motion etc.
f) fall of men (inception towards death) generates umbrella (life)...resistance represents shelter within velocity unless ignored.
Resisting grows resistance; temptation tempts ignorance of resistance. Temptations tempt one to "fall" for...
a) fall segregates (inception to life); gather aggregates (life to death)...
b) each partial fits into whole, hence FIT, adjective - "becoming" aka coming to be...reasoning (more vs less) tempts one to ignore that.
a) to believe represents ones consent to the suggestion of another, hence religion (Latin religio; to bind) aka binding oneself willingly to the will of another.
b) IDEA - "that which is seen" implies perceivable, even when ignored for suggested idealism aka oneself viewing perceivable through the lens of suggested, hence "those with eyes to see and those watching through the looking glass".
c) suggested "without" tempts one to ignore being (life) within (inception towards death).
In short...need (letting go) or want (holding onto) aka adaptation (choice) to motion (balance) or consent vs denial conflict (imbalance)...free will of choice.
Suggested water and wine tempt ones consent; perceivable thirst forces ones adaptation.
a) consent here was given to suggested idealism and activism, hence tempting one to ignore seeing perceivable (idea) and re-acting to it.
b) ADMIT', verb (Latin admitto, to send) - "to suffer to enter"...entering (inception) implies ones (life) suffering (towards death). Motion implies admission for those within.
Being implies RE (response to) JECT (ejected by; cast forth) within admission (motion).
In short...letting perceivable inspiration go through ones mind/memory, while resisting to hold onto suggested information represents resistance within temptation.
What does sound (phonics) draw towards? Consider a description from Dune: "Spannungsbogen; which is the self-imposed delay between desire for a thing and the act of reaching out to grasp that thing"...
What if sound impresses into itself for expression (resonance) or repression (dissonance) by instruments within?
a) the suggested word "Phoenicia" was brought into (import) and from (export) where?
b) if sound is imported from outside, then how does it represent center, when it implies surrounding (hence surround sound)?
MEN'TION, noun (Latin mentio, ment; mind) - "to put in mind; to suggest"...can one suggest (words) without doing it within perceivable (sound)?
Does perceivable sound require the suggested word "sound" for one to discern; to be aware of; to sense; to be conscious about it?
A recent study by academics at Oxford and elsewhere has concluded that grisly stories of ancient Phoenician child sacrifice were true:
"Children – both male and female, and mostly a few weeks old – were sacrificed by the Carthaginians at locations known as tophets. The practice was also carried out by their neighbours at other Phoenician colonies in Sicily, Sardinia and Malta. Dedications from the children’s parents."
It seems like a lot of the suppression around these kinds of subjects could be because anything which “confirms” things reported in the Bible are treated with extreme hesitancy by the academic community. We heard all about the bronze bulls of the canaanites right? But to “prove” such “notions” was “a waste of time” and potentially even “dangerous”! It seems to me at least
Michigan copper in the Mediterranean:
https://grahamhancock.com/wakefieldjs1/
great article. Keeweenaw is a neat place to visit if you get the chance. weird/different energy, like alot of the areas around Lake Superior, northern WI and the UP, but more so on Keeweenaw. not in a bad way.
100% worth road tripping up there.
Not sure how much you've looked into fake history. I'm currently at "the whole world had matching European buildings part."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceQrsPm_Md8
Check out the Mormons in Utah when they first settled. Check out the bath house on salt lake before they destroyed it.
Why build a half window at ground level that will flood.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrOf_hsHXPU
Why are there windows underneath some of the stairs all boarded up or blocked off :o?
https://youtu.be/xINhJQIlgmM