With dismantling department of education, giving education back to States, giving back choice, then controlling narrative like fake science and fake history will be impossible
Long term. I can say from experience once you go flat and you can never go back. That's because that's how real knowledge works.
The entire world begins to learn that we aren't really on a planet then we're all fuct.
Why don't you lay out all your evidence at c/FlatEarth, which allows all legal moral speech? I certainly hope the present disclosure kick will allow some Antarctica, moon, and Mars digging.
No thanks, that's just a place for you retards to catalog in your minds what youre really just not ready or can't handle. Testing the theory the earth is a globe. Ya. Good luck.
It's also a pathetic attempt to confused and manipulate users here to believe that the topic of flat earth deviates the real shit here. Retarded. programed. fools.
No one wants to fight your stubborn asses. You think flat earth is a theory, but I remind you I don't have a theory. I just test them. And globe didn't pass. If you knew how to use math, logic, scientific method, you'd see it's true. Why do you think millions of people not educated by USA don't believe the Globe and solor system crap. We are a laughing stock
My alt is a flat earther. That is, I'm of two minds about it, depending on the math today. The forum is for all views and all testing and does not predispose anyone to any issue. No fighting intended fren.
Really? It's so obvious the earth can't be a globe. Simple math and common sense. There are dozens of ways to see the earth can't be a globe and that space cannot be a vacuum. It's so obvious. What r u stuck on still?
I'm not stuck, I believe both models, that's why I have an alt so that I don't look schizo. Both flatties and globies are bad at math though.
a) Entire cannot learn; only a fragment within entire can learn by adapting to it.
b) The way you view the world as were one can begin to shape an entirety implies tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together) aka a judaized mind.
Bringing together consent and suggestion implies an artificial inversion of reality...entire (all perceivable) setting apart fragments (ones perception), which only then allows increments aka increase of mental discernment; awareness; sentience.
Reality permits fiction, hence permitting one (reality) to believe in we (fiction) or establish a conflict of reason (plane vs planet) about a fictitious shape within a moving reality.
Shape implies formed within flow, hence malleability. Few tempt many to hold onto beliefs, which makes shaping inflexible.
De-part-ment implies the division of each partial mind, which is how nature gives each being within the space to express outwards.
State implies circumstantial position of given being; surrounded by others beings, within a nature that takes back (inception towards death) each being (life).
Giving to a state implies giving self to others, while being taken by nature. As the given state within a taking nature...one needs to resist the wanted temptation to take what is given into possession.
Whatever the temporary living "take" from the ongoing process of dying...takes possession of their potential.
Choice cannot be given away...only ignored. The state of being implies choice (life) within balance (inception/death). It's the suggested choices by others which tempt ones choice to imbalance itself by inclining, and thence clinging towards a side.
Science/scio - "to know" implies ones perception within all perceivable reality. Ones consent to suggested scientism implies fiction.
Nature reveals all (perceivable) through each one (perception)...it cannot be stored. HE-BREW HIS-STORY to tempt JEW (phonetic you) to store suggested information within your consenting mind/memory.
Dude you know I'm right. Speaking in superlatives but message is still the same I'm doing it just for dramatic effect but you get the point, right?? Instead of always diagnosing things in a controversial or disagreeing manner You should bolster the comment by doing the same analysis.
When you agree with something are you like it then use your system to admire and support.
Not that you take sides. But it always is kind of negative
Taking a side shapes ones view to position (positive) looking at negation (negative). You took a position (positive)...anything left for me is to negate (negative) your taken position by trying to describe how "taking" contradicts being (life) in-between given (inception) and taken (death).
If one resists taking a side, then one notices more of all given, which in return sustains ones position (positive) within.
...then you bind yourself to a disagreement, hence into a conflict of reason (agree v disagree). In reality...hunger doesn't care if one agrees or disagrees. It forces adaptation nonetheless.
Right vs wrong (plane vs planet) contradicts knowledge aka all perceivable moving through each ones perception.
The suggested con-firm-ation you seek from others contradicts flow (perceivable) setting form (perception) apart from one another.
The transfer of message (all perceivable) through recipient (ones perception) is neither still (but moving); nor the same (but differentiating).
It's ones consent to a suggested message, which instills it within ones mind/memory, while shaping many alike (consensus), which tricking each to view mass consensus as the same.
If there's mass consensus, then any real messenger is being viewed as antagonistic to it, hence many trying to "shoot the messenger".
You are trying to amass a consensus about a plane-shape, while trying to destroy the mass consensus about a planet-shape...both sides of which view me as antagonistic for describing that a shape cannot be held onto without ignoring the motion, within which matter is shaped.
Drama (inception towards death) implies the forwarding cause of comedic (life) effects. Comedy implies together (com) middle/medium (medy)...which further implies each middle (choice) ones struggle with the temptation to permit others to mediate (suggest) for one.
Right vs wrong imbalances choice, while point (death) implies end of sentence (life)...no matter how often I try to get it right or wrong...I can't get no satisfaction; cause I try; and I try, and I try...
From a different perspective...making a point about a shape; ignores shaping sentences during motion.
Ask yourself...has any conflict of reason among gentiles ever established a point which a jew didn't cross? If each gentile agrees about a point, then each jew still wields the free will of choice to disagree with that "end of sentence" and continue to jew, right?
Making a temporary point during an ongoing line implies what?
Dia (two) contradicts gnosis (knowledge aka all perceivable moving through each ones perception) aka everything moving through each thing.
"The Thing" was about different shapes of the same thing taking over and mimicking different people aka shape-shifting ONE thing. A jew utilized carpentry (carpenter) to scare gentiles about becoming "the thing", which in return tempts them to ignore that coming into being implies as each thing within everything.
Each being exists within "The Thing"...hence being able to freely shape, mimic; transfer among, and take over each others thoughts. Gentiles are afraid of the thing, and fear is the mind-killer...
Analysis/analyein - "set free"...solution (inception towards death) analyses problems (life) by setting each one free from one another as free will of choice.
Should vs shouldn't binds ones free will of choice...if one consents to a suggested side.