James Corbett comes close but his time is primarily allocated to zoomed-out big-picture research, so there's many important pieces that barely even make it onto his radar.
There's gotta be at least one other person out there somewhere with similar abilities but more time (eg, someone retired, financially secure and no wife & kids to deal with).
no, no one person has put it all together yet. People should leave books for the future, because this seems like generational war.
Speaking of the future. covid worries me. Not the fake virus of course but how history will spin it for the coming generations
Of course. Look at all the other lies as well. History is all a lie.
They'll say that Christianity made Europe prosperous for 1,000 years after it took over Rome. What they actually did was to blast Europe back to the stone age and took over the useless serfs with Fedualism while parading their sugar-coated Blood God religion around as "truth". And when people call of their shit they infiltrated the secularist Renaissance-era movement and rebranded themselves as "Communists" and "Revolutionaries" while parroting none the less the same religious agenda. Even now there are people who believe in and defend this bullshit.
Now we're seeing a rehash of the entire thing around the corner with gender, racial and sexual equality.
a) If there's more than history, then it can't be ALL.
b) What if ones consent to HIS suggested STORY makes it true for self? What if HE BREW HIS STORY to temp one to hold onto something from another one, while ignoring that all moves?
If all moves and one within chooses to look/lock onto anything, then one ignores being (life) moved (inception towards death).
A suggested book/bind/bond/bondage tempts ones consent in-between covers, while focusing on spell-craft by others...this tricks the reader to bind self to that which was; covering self from that which is, while waiting for that which comes to be.
What happened to the Library of Alexandria is happening under the disguise of "kindle fire"...and yet the readers only ever want more books to consume.
Generation (inception towards death) establishes reaction (life)...war implies a conflict among reactions aka a conflict of reason. You chose to react by opening your comment with NO, which implies a conflict of reason (yes vs no) against other. That's war.
How would one perceive the future without another suggesting speeches about it? Does ones origin speak aka does nature shape words to tell anyone being within about whats gonna happen next?
Can life discern its own death? Can life perceive its own death?
What if generation implies origin for each generated being coming to be within? What if suggested pluralism contradicts singular generation? What if you as singular could be tricked with suggested pluralism to believe in more than generation aka more than perceivable origin is offering?
What if ones will turning/spinning towards "his story" implies turning away from nature/origin/all?
This guy really knows how to smear shit all over a comment section
What will really bake your noodle is when you block him and still see his posts. I think "he" is a bot that the mods won't allow you to block.
Have blocked. Will check noodles later, thank you