Part 1

https://searchvoat.co/forum/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=5243

2021-11-27 antiliberalsociety forum/viewtopic.php?p=16709#p16709

The Rabbit Hole of Antarctica

It started with this thread posted a few days ago viewtopic.php?p=16698#p16698

The focal point was on the beautiful scenery of South Africa. A very large plane took off from Cape Town and landed on a glacier in Antarctica. The biggest plane ever to do so.
\

[video] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBRX3QJJ0Jg

However, this tripped my memory alarm as something much bigger. I recalled seeing posts years ago in regards to Epstein's plane going to Antarctica. It was all over /pol/ around the time of Epstein's "death" and people were claiming it made a flight to Antarctica from the US. I saw it as a slide tactic but it was confirmed via a plane tracking website. There's no physical way it could have flown there from the US, however in the original thread I explained this: \

antiliberalsociety wrote: ↑Sat Nov 27, 2021 3:07 pm

antiliberalsociety wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:29 pm

CognitiveDissident5 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:09 pm There's a nice little video in this link with some aerial views of Cape Town, the most beautiful city in the world.

https://www.businessinsider.co.za/first ... 40-2021-11

Didn't they once track Epstein's plane as flying to Antartica? I remember seeing the screenshots of the flight tracker but I couldn't verify it's authenticity.

Found it. The plane pinged in Antarctica after a US flight. At the time it was implied that it travelled that distance from the US which I knew to be impossible. However, I've had this happen on multiple devices. When I drag my boat to another lake, and I turn on the Sonar/GPS, it thinks for a moment before the GPS signal locks on, that it's still in it's previous location. When it locks on, it creates a straight line (over land) to its current location. It doesn't do it every time, but once in a while when it's taking a bit to get a new lock on, it does this.

Image

Which would mean, Epstein's plane WAS in Antarctica at some point before the flight, perhaps turned off for the majority of the trip. All it would have taken is the pilot turning it on for a second to lock onto its location, creating the coordinate memory.

This opened up a new rabbit hole on Antarctica, and I'll have to make it its own post.

And here I am. This post really got me wondering as it plays into my current movie project. What I found was mind fucking. It's one of the biggest conspiracy theories I've ever seen yet there's a lot of evidence backing it. I never just blindly believe a story, I'm a "believe it when I see it" type. But when I do see it and know it's legit, I dig deeper. Where there's smoke, there's fire. It's kind of like pizzagate where you have all the evidence that paints the picture, yet you don't have the actual acts being committed. So continuing on, I had to question the story she posted. \

CognitiveDissident5 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 27, 2021 4:16 pmIsn't Antarctica meant to be the entry point to the hidden hyperspace kingdoms of the so-called elite?

antiliberalsociety wrote:That's what I remembered reading. Even in your own article, the story doesn't add up. \

HiFly had been mum on the operation

Why? They fucking made history not once, but twice.

Image

They even fucking filmed it
\

[video] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBRX3QJJ0Jg

Why was it mum until only after it got out via a plane tracking website?

On another story they linked to https://simpleflying.com/hi-fly-airbus-a340-antarctica/\

Simple Flying recently had the opportunity to speak with White Desert CEO Patrick Woodhead about his company’s missions to Antarctica. This company uses a Gulfstream G550 for luxury expeditions.

Funny, Epstein's plane was a bigger model of Gulfstream. Wouldn't that have made it the largest plane to land there up until that point? It had 3 tailmounted engines.

What struck me as odd was the size. I've seen an A340 before and it's one step down from a Boeing 747. It's fucking HUGE. WHAT IN GOD'S NAME do they need something that big for? Have they not been using supplies up until this point? The story tries to insinuate its for tourism. They even threw in massive prices for an 8 day trip to the South Pole. Still, why would they need a plane that big especially with COVID restrictions reducing travel?

And where were any passengers on that video? That's what struck me as odd. All that footage and not one shot of the alleged passengers or cargo? That was the focal point of the story, wasn't it? They had a shot from the cabin right behind the wing, yet no conversation was heard. Not one interview with a tourist.

Then - not trying to get too deep yet, but it's new observations - when you look at the cost of tickets to fly down there, it doesn't cover the cost of operations. Who's funding it? That looked like a skeleton crew, not a plane full of paying customers. And why fly it in, wouldn't it be more cost effective to ship in higher bulk "cargoes"?

In addition to my previous comment, I noticed they twice referred to it as a "mission". Well, if it's for tourists, what's the mission? Feeding homeless penguins? Trying to convert them? I've never seen a cruise ship refer to a trip as a mission, nor have they been "mum" on their expeditions. If it's for tourism, why not advertise? Why would they keep it secret twice? What was the cargo? Why did they suddenly need so much? What were they using before?

The story talks about a Gulf Stream G550 which is a run of the mill private jet. Seems a bit odd to suddenly jump to a fucking A340. Plus, the runway. That fucker is huge. They not only were expecting a plane of that size, but they also had the equipment to pave and smoothen the runway.

I've been an aviation geek for many years, this is no small task. You need bulldozers and road graters to smoothen it out to within about 5 degrees end to end. It's a glacier which means it moves over time. This would have had to have been done within a few weeks prior to landing. The equipment needed can't exactly be flown in, it has to arrive by ship. A plane is fragile as fuck when it comes to solid objects. It's aviation sheet metal and the landing gear can easily fold if it's too hard a landing or hits bumps. That's why if they have to land on grass, they belly land and leave the gear up. If the gear tears off it can rip a hole in the fuel tanks. I once rolled a 4wheeler on a frozen lake by hitting a snow drift at 30mph. Trust me, it is not naturally smooth.

So who's funding it and why? Tourism cannot be the sole reason. They say scientists and for research, but what the fuck is down there to research? Ice & rocks? The fact this was an A340 is alarming. The cost to operate is $14,000 per hour. Yet they showed no tourists. Then there's the cost of the equipment to clear & maintain the runway, the cost to maintain the equipment, the cost of labor to run it, and for what?

It almost looks like the fact their secret was blown via an aviation tracking website triggered a rush cover story to be produced. Too many people were asking questions. That's where the rabbit hole begins...

In my quest to find that first picture of the Epstein plane track, I stumbled down a rabbit hole as deep as the one that triggered my movie project in the first place. Antarctica was discovered in the 1600s.

Image

In the 1950's it was stated that the explorers found massive amounts of resources on Antarctica, like Coal, enough to supply the world indefinitely. They could very easily support civilization on the continent. General Richard Byrnes explains:
\

[video] https://youtube.com/watch?v=PrdSal9uH28

You mean that thing supported by Eastern European Christian countries? 🤔