Your browser is probably outdated or have bad settings, update it or swich to another browser, and yeah, if you have an issue just tell someone, they might have the solution for you!
I'm using brave browser to never see a single ad. I would rather use your workaround than switch to another browser. Again, thank you for that! And yes, I have been saying this in posts where I can't access the video and you're literally the first person in years, who finally provided a solution. Thanks again!
I saved the documentary, I'm already researching evolution and creation and other alternatives, I do not beleive or trust any of these things, honestly no one knows how things started, evolution has holes and the creation hypothsis have them as well
Then I'm glad you saved it, it will clear a lot of those questions for you.
The problem with evolution is for example we have big empty intervals where humans made a significant jump and developped a lot out of nowhere
I would rather you just watch the documentary... There are more parts available if you like this one that go really deep into the holes in evolution. I would rather not explain them in a comment, when a perfect documentary already exist. Technically, it's a lecture but I use "documetary" broadly.
With creation, we have the problem of finding more primtive humanoids like Neaderthals, Denisovans, Cromagnons etc
There are explanations for these tho - just modified skeletons through erosion, weight, termal conditions, etc., etc. Again - the lecture is full of examples.
These are not modern humans and not apes either, they are way developped than apes, we do have thier skeletons also, why do they exist if the current humans are here since the beginning? and why they went extinct? outdated version? just like your browser? no more needed? initial prototypes?
Same reply as above. The lecture is pretty funny too, I'm sure you'll enjoy watching it.
For now I think the truth lies somehwere in between the two hypotheses of creation and evolution, I think it's a guided evolution, someone is guiding it, but it has some "automatic" proceeses to it, so it gives the illusion of the classical ecolution we all know of
Perfect! Watch the lecture with an open mind and let me know what you think.
So, whatever caused humans, it could be the cause behind other sentient races like reptilians as well, it's not about evolution or creation, I don't think this is the main point, the point is: we are not alone
Honestly, that's why I sent you those documentaries... I could explain this case for hours, but you would save both of us a lot of time, if you check those videos and THEN we discuss those topics.
But if you want my persoanl opinion about this after years of investigation,
I would really prefer your years + 3-4 hours of watching those videos that I sent you. I have a lot to say on the topics you raised, and we'll have a wonderful discussions, but these comments are getting bigger and bigger and at some point they will be unreadable...
btw reptilians are very old in folklore, they are not a modern thought, you can find stories about them with mayan and african tribes, they even have instruction on how to deal with them!
That's also in the videos that I sent... How is the devil called in the Bible - That red dragon... And how many other races are in the Bible - satyrs, for example... I will provide you on a lot of information, but you'll help me out if you watch the videos first.
Also, if you have a vision of a dragon/reptilian, how would you know if that's real or a vision? How do we know that we're awake or still dreaming? We can't make that difference really, only when we wake up we realize it...
check out the neurophone of Patrick Flangnan
Quote from the link you sent me:
"To use this technology, you place the sensors on the forehead under a headband."
Sounds like a receiver to me...
So...
But the advanced applications that can be done with this tech are fore more than just the deaf hearing.
I would really like to discuss that with you, but I currently know that they use nanotechnological receiver that is self-assembling tech that requires EM waves to work, hense the 5G towers...
Can you please check if the quote from the link you sent me and review if that's indeed a receiver? Because so far I believe it is, but I want us to review this before we move forward.
I told you my claims would take hours of long comments, while you watching the documentaries I shared freely with you that answer more than half of your questions, will drastically reduce that.
It's efficient, and I told you that many of your current questions are already answered there. If you don't want to watch videos that contain visual proofs, then can you explain why a comment would do a better job in convincing you?
Never said malnutrition btw. I meant that skulls and skeletons can be deformed due to the many years of tons of dirt, or water, being on top of them. In contrast, do you mean to tell me that what you believe is that over millions of years not a single of the neanderthal skeletal examples was never deformed due to the enormous weight over it?
In short:
My claim: hundreds of years can deform a human skull/skeleton. Rock is harder than bones. Even water can deform them through weight, or even petrify them. That's why they are not actual skulls or skeletons, but fossils.
Your claim: Millions of years cannot deform a human skull/skeleton.
I hope now my claims are well-presented rather than just void.
They're just malnourished genus Homo. They have the same interfertility and DNA barcode as Homo sapiens and should be counted as one kind with them except that von Linne was abused after his death. They went extinct just like other subspecies go extinct in favor of dominant versions. Happy to talk about it more.
There is no missing link between Pan and Homo or any other interfertile kinds. The entire fusion from the 48 of Pan is a completely undocumented narrative inference (imagination) based on evolutionary theory. The key to this is that since fine-tuning mathematically proves that the first abiogenesis is impossible in this universe, but it happened, then it's just as impossible for abiogenesis to have happened say 10,000 times, each for a different species. So both evolution and creation are equally impossible, or equally inexplicable. It's equally crazy for Homo to evolve from Pan as it is for Homo to arise from nonlife. But in creation we have a credible, coherent theory the universe is not just a closed system.
The classic link in the now-debunked 1965 "March of Progress" graphic was between Australopithecus and Homo erectus, a completely different link proposal than your site has, because scientists are constantly arguing with each other over it. All such links have been mathematically shown to involve absurd probabilities due both to the exacting science of DNA comparison and the physical features (notably the cranial size gap).
Now, as the moderator of c/Reptilians (quiet but at least u/LightBringerFlex cited your video), I'm taking your words cautiously because I see a possible path toward them; I'll need more time to be able to verbalize it in detail. But it's a basic inference to sentient cryptids in general and would require some refinement of theory to explain the human appearance and any phenomenon of glitching that is not an artifact of repeated digital compression.
whatever caused humans, it could be the cause behind other sentient races like reptilians as well ... we are not alone .... I think there are all kinds of entities out there, both material like us and "immaterial"
Good! Working on it.
One thing to keep in mind is that much of the cultural data used to support reptilians are really just about dragons, which include fire-breathing tyrannosaurs, and herbivore apatosaurs, for the most significant. The modern Icke phenomenon ("MIB" being the distraction version), tying reptilians to human form, is really just "scalies in reverse" (subcategory of furries). So the reality behind this phenomenon has a lot of ground to cover and also wise distinction to be made.
I've looked at quite a few skeleton schematics as a complete amateur, they all meet this criterion. Denisovans are interesting, like pygmies are interesting.
I'd love postings anywhere about ancient evidence of humanoid reptilians.
I've discovered that believing in divine creation means actually explaining nothing by divine creation. Rather, it means knowing that everything has an explanation, and receiving those explanations when needed, and knowing (unlike the scientists) that there is always more to the unexplained. Scientists who pretend to being close to explaining everything belie themselves about their theories always containing some unexplained element. So the theist who is frank about all science containing an unexplained element should not get heat for it. Especially when he is willing to say an explanation for anything can be found in time (which doesn't contradict there always being an unexplained remainder). Rather than guess which details you're referring to, I'll let you ask if there is something you think I'm leaving unexplained to you.
Looking forward to your thoughts, as I intended to supplement and not to oppose.
I'm using brave browser to never see a single ad. I would rather use your workaround than switch to another browser. Again, thank you for that! And yes, I have been saying this in posts where I can't access the video and you're literally the first person in years, who finally provided a solution. Thanks again!
Then I'm glad you saved it, it will clear a lot of those questions for you.
I would rather you just watch the documentary... There are more parts available if you like this one that go really deep into the holes in evolution. I would rather not explain them in a comment, when a perfect documentary already exist. Technically, it's a lecture but I use "documetary" broadly.
There are explanations for these tho - just modified skeletons through erosion, weight, termal conditions, etc., etc. Again - the lecture is full of examples.
Same reply as above. The lecture is pretty funny too, I'm sure you'll enjoy watching it.
Perfect! Watch the lecture with an open mind and let me know what you think.
Honestly, that's why I sent you those documentaries... I could explain this case for hours, but you would save both of us a lot of time, if you check those videos and THEN we discuss those topics.
I would really prefer your years + 3-4 hours of watching those videos that I sent you. I have a lot to say on the topics you raised, and we'll have a wonderful discussions, but these comments are getting bigger and bigger and at some point they will be unreadable...
That's also in the videos that I sent... How is the devil called in the Bible - That red dragon... And how many other races are in the Bible - satyrs, for example... I will provide you on a lot of information, but you'll help me out if you watch the videos first.
Also, if you have a vision of a dragon/reptilian, how would you know if that's real or a vision? How do we know that we're awake or still dreaming? We can't make that difference really, only when we wake up we realize it...
Quote from the link you sent me:
Sounds like a receiver to me...
So...
I would really like to discuss that with you, but I currently know that they use nanotechnological receiver that is self-assembling tech that requires EM waves to work, hense the 5G towers...
Can you please check if the quote from the link you sent me and review if that's indeed a receiver? Because so far I believe it is, but I want us to review this before we move forward.
I told you my claims would take hours of long comments, while you watching the documentaries I shared freely with you that answer more than half of your questions, will drastically reduce that.
It's efficient, and I told you that many of your current questions are already answered there. If you don't want to watch videos that contain visual proofs, then can you explain why a comment would do a better job in convincing you?
Never said malnutrition btw. I meant that skulls and skeletons can be deformed due to the many years of tons of dirt, or water, being on top of them. In contrast, do you mean to tell me that what you believe is that over millions of years not a single of the neanderthal skeletal examples was never deformed due to the enormous weight over it?
In short:
My claim: hundreds of years can deform a human skull/skeleton. Rock is harder than bones. Even water can deform them through weight, or even petrify them. That's why they are not actual skulls or skeletons, but fossils.
Your claim: Millions of years cannot deform a human skull/skeleton.
I hope now my claims are well-presented rather than just void.
Good question!
They're just malnourished genus Homo. They have the same interfertility and DNA barcode as Homo sapiens and should be counted as one kind with them except that von Linne was abused after his death. They went extinct just like other subspecies go extinct in favor of dominant versions. Happy to talk about it more.
There is no missing link between Pan and Homo or any other interfertile kinds. The entire fusion from the 48 of Pan is a completely undocumented narrative inference (imagination) based on evolutionary theory. The key to this is that since fine-tuning mathematically proves that the first abiogenesis is impossible in this universe, but it happened, then it's just as impossible for abiogenesis to have happened say 10,000 times, each for a different species. So both evolution and creation are equally impossible, or equally inexplicable. It's equally crazy for Homo to evolve from Pan as it is for Homo to arise from nonlife. But in creation we have a credible, coherent theory the universe is not just a closed system.
The classic link in the now-debunked 1965 "March of Progress" graphic was between Australopithecus and Homo erectus, a completely different link proposal than your site has, because scientists are constantly arguing with each other over it. All such links have been mathematically shown to involve absurd probabilities due both to the exacting science of DNA comparison and the physical features (notably the cranial size gap).
Now, as the moderator of c/Reptilians (quiet but at least u/LightBringerFlex cited your video), I'm taking your words cautiously because I see a possible path toward them; I'll need more time to be able to verbalize it in detail. But it's a basic inference to sentient cryptids in general and would require some refinement of theory to explain the human appearance and any phenomenon of glitching that is not an artifact of repeated digital compression.
Good! Working on it.
One thing to keep in mind is that much of the cultural data used to support reptilians are really just about dragons, which include fire-breathing tyrannosaurs, and herbivore apatosaurs, for the most significant. The modern Icke phenomenon ("MIB" being the distraction version), tying reptilians to human form, is really just "scalies in reverse" (subcategory of furries). So the reality behind this phenomenon has a lot of ground to cover and also wise distinction to be made.
I've looked at quite a few skeleton schematics as a complete amateur, they all meet this criterion. Denisovans are interesting, like pygmies are interesting.
I'd love postings anywhere about ancient evidence of humanoid reptilians.
I've discovered that believing in divine creation means actually explaining nothing by divine creation. Rather, it means knowing that everything has an explanation, and receiving those explanations when needed, and knowing (unlike the scientists) that there is always more to the unexplained. Scientists who pretend to being close to explaining everything belie themselves about their theories always containing some unexplained element. So the theist who is frank about all science containing an unexplained element should not get heat for it. Especially when he is willing to say an explanation for anything can be found in time (which doesn't contradict there always being an unexplained remainder). Rather than guess which details you're referring to, I'll let you ask if there is something you think I'm leaving unexplained to you.
Looking forward to your thoughts, as I intended to supplement and not to oppose.