Dude, you're just reinforcing my point - technology has improved drastically in every aspect and everything is a hundred times cheaper and easier to make than back in the 60's and yet there's no mission to the moon. Explain that. I never made the argument the Saturn V tinfoil duct taped junk was the only method to get there so what you're saying makes no sense. What Don Pettit said was they've lost the technology to go to the moon, not the technology to make a Saturn V. Are you telling me Space X doesn't have the technology to go 400 000 km and back when they're preparing for a manned mission to Mars which is 192.87 million km away?
This is a valid argument but you're deflecting because you know there's no good counter to it. The only hole you pointed out is the bottomless pit between your shoulders.
They never went back because as Don Pettit said "we've lost the technology". Even if NASA can't do it due to financial reasons, Musk wanted to go there but congress barred him. Imagine how many people would be willing to pay for a live feed from the moon - it's a great business model. It makes zero sense not to have missions to the moon for the past 50 years but people believe in ridiculous things especially when they are conditioned since they were little kids. Did you go to space camp?
Women didn't want the vote. The suffragettes were a minority of degenerate spinsters backed up by Abby Rockefeller and the jewish cabal. In fact the anti-suffragette movement was very active but it has been memory holed.
This is why women shouldn't vote.
Even Jung is right sometimes. This world is fallen, of course it's not right.
Lots of the jew rap music of the 90's promoted materialism, drugs, sex, objectification of women, gang activity, drug hustling and selling, stealing, stand offs with cops, etc. Probably not all of it. But the stuff the jews liked to promote did.
They did an it was all by design: https://www.hiphopisread.com/2012/04/secret-meeting-that-changed-rap-music.html
Dr. Day talked about it way back in 1969 if you are familiar with the Day tapes.
They may want to throw him under the bus but I think it's more of a Jeffry Epstein thing - he was running a sex op compromising famous people in the industry. A lot of pop stars and media shills will be destroyed if he talks. He's going to get suicided and I'd bet money on it.
There's nothing here supporting the Immaculate conception dogma. Of course we believe Mary was a virgin and was a saint and that's what the Church fathers reiterate. Immaculate conception refers to her being conceived outside of sin but only Christ is free from the sin of Adam by virtue of His miracle conception. The sin of Adam is part of human nature and Mary was human. Christ cannot be subject to the effects of the original sin because He shares both human and divine nature and His divine nature precludes the possibility of any sin.
The older feast of the Conception of Mary (Conception of St. Anne), which originated in the monasteries of Palestine at least as early as the seventh century, and the modern feast of the Immaculate Conception are not identical in their object.
Originally the Church celebrated only the Feast of the Conception of Mary, as she kept the Feast of St. John's conception, not discussing the sinlessness. This feast in the course of centuries became the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, as dogmatical argumentation brought about precise and correct ideas, and as the thesis of the theological schools regarding the preservation of Mary from all stain of original sin gained strength.
It became the feast of the Immaculate conception but was not the same feast initially. Can you read, fren?
Lol research early Church History. The Easterns were always putting the Emperor before the Pope. Easterns considered the Emperor head of the Church, not the Pope.
Research what symphonia is. The head of the Church was always Christ and both Orthodox and Catholics agree.
Easterns put ethnos before Church, which is why all Eastern "Orthodox" Churches are ethno-centric.
Why, because the liturgy is held in different languages? The Orthodox Church acknowledges the differences of different people and affirms that what matters is the profession of the true faith in accordance to Church tradition, dogma and sacraments. It's not a centralized structure but is synodal and every patriarch has equal authority over their diocese. This is how the Early Church was structured and not after the supreme authority of Rome which is a later development in the west.
You have no Emperor now. You have no unity. You have no universalism. You have constant schism. The only debatable 2 of the 4 marks of the Church you have are Holy and Apostolic. There is no "One" or "Catholic/universal" marks in your church.
Enjoy your universalist ecumenism - sharing the same God as muslims and hindus. This is what Vatican II says. This is what your pope says. Isn't it bizarre you have popes who embrace Islam straight up contradicting the Catholic Church tradition which used to call crusades against those guys? Even a century back you have a pope who condemned Islam as a satanic heresy and now you have popes praying in mosques, kissing the Quran and teaching Islam is as valid as Christianity.
Again, the problems you have with heretical popes collapse the whole system because according to your dogma the Roman pontiff cannot be a heretic and apostatize. This is not the case in Orthodoxy as I pointed out with Athanasius so even if both Kirill and Bartholomew are heretics that doesn't render Orthodoxy false. You can't reconcile that and if you think you can I'd love to see you go on Jay Dyer's debate streams on jewtube and try.
Filioque, papal supremacy and absolute divine simplicity are all true. Only heretics dissent to that. The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary are true too.
Says who? Where was the Immaculate conception or the Sacred heart found in the Church tradition prior to the schism?
What's not true is being able to get divorced and married for up to 3 times, even though Jesus Christ said no to divorce.
Idk where this comes from but I've heard Church fathers saying a third marriage is not blessed, meaning you get one divorce (and that's for good reasons). What happens when a spouse commits adultery? This breaks the holy union of the marriage and a divorce is warranted and this is exactly what Jesus says but you conveniently left that out.
Go ask your Byzantine Emperor to settle your disputes, since you always assent to him rather than the Roman Pope.
There's no Emperor and the Church has always been separate from the worldly affairs of the political realm. I know it's hard for Catholics to understand since for the past thousand years the Papacy had a state, a powerful bank and even a standing army - you don't get more worldly than that. Dostoyevsky nailed it in his The Great Inquisitor chapter of Brother Karamazov. I won't even go to recent times with operation Gladio and the Vatican's involvement in crime, psy ops and terrorism along with Propaganda Due (freemasons), NATO and the CIA - there's a whole book on the topic.
and now the Eastern "Orthodox" Church is full of constant bickering, and even the Patriarchs, like the Greek and Russian ones especially, fight for power and excommunicate each other. So much for "unity" and "universalism" in your "church"...
Sure, the Church may even split and I acknowledged that. The difference is there have always been heretical patriarchs and schismatics in the one true Church. They were even a majority at times like the case with the Arian crisis and Athanasius (Athanasius contra mundum). What this proves is the true faith is not upheld by the ecclesiastical structure or, one specific patriarch or the majority of patriarch - the true faith is passed on in the tradition of the Church where the Holy Spirit resides.
Btw if a split in the Church is somehow a proof that it's false what that means for the Western Church when you had the protestants seceding and in recent times SSPX trad cats who after Vatican II?
What is a "misinformation expert" and how does one become one? Why all the fancy terms when we have clear cut ones like propagandists? This is Ministry of Truth speak and the idiot right goes along with it instead of calling out the smuggling of meaningless terms.
NASA is fake and gay. I'm still waiting for the live feed from the moon but they can't even get there.
You mean you dislike organized traditional forms of religion, which arised organically and built civilizations, but prefer the new age flavor of "spiritual non-religios" - a confused mess of contradictory and unjustified beliefs about reality taken from different religions and ideologies, paired with worship of the self as the source of gnosis - a modern-day creation of the elite cultists and the social engineers of the transhumanist NWO.
No, that's uniatism and is not going to happen. The only way to heal the schism and unite the church is for the Western and Oriental to revert back to the Early Church tradition and rebuke all the heretical teachings they hold (like the filioque, papal supremacy and absolute divine simplicity by the RC and nestorianism by the Orientals). This has been acknowledge by Rome which holds that the Orthodox Church has preserved the dogmas and sacraments of the first 1000 years Church.
It is the Catholics who started going wild with their teachings and doctrines after the schism and we see the fruits in the many contradictions made apparent after Vatican II and the last three Popes who prayed in mosques towards Mecca (John Paul II even kissed the Quran). And now Francis surrendered the faith by doubling down that every religion is equally valid and a path to salvation because they all worship some form of a generic God, contradicting Christ Himself (this is not Francis's idea though, it is present in Vatican II's Nostra Aetate and Lumen Gentium 16).
Seriously, the amount of mental gymnastics it takes to continue being Catholic these days is astounding (and I acknowledge there are problem in Orthodoxy too, but even if we have heretical patriarchs like Bartholomew, it's not destructive to the position because our Church doesn't hinge on one guy).
At this point I consider the Catholic Church and certain heretics in the Orthodox Church to be pushing towards a one world religion of the Antichrist. This is orchestrated by Rockefeller and the World Council of Churches which is the ultimate ecumenist organization.
Yep, it's the heresy of ecumenism.
Nice, the video fits perfectly. Is this all England?
Yeah, because everyone knows the NY Times is definitely not an establishment propaganda arm.
Wow, that's a banger! Is that you OP?
That's why you don't take the mark of the beast when you're "invited".
We cant do this through violence, but it cant happen with elections either.
What it will take is every single one of us walking up to the steps of every taxpayer owned property and locking all these criminals up and throwing them in jail.
What the fuck, how the fuck are we going to do that when the rich are just fucking mind controlling people to hate each other.
That's the crux of it - they have monopoly on violence and run a covert police state. They use social engineering and mind control to influence people's beliefs and behavior which ultimately subverts the democratic process. This means both violent and non-violent opposition is not a threat to the status quo.
Maybe it's too late, maybe we're already in what Huxley called the Final revolution where there's no coming back. But then again Huxley was a shill for the NWO too. Even if they managed to build a 1984 totalitarian state it would still fall eventually.
Yes, I believe the American frontiersmen were decent, honest, hard-working and courageous people. There are still Americans like that and that's exactly what bugs me when I see them worshipping the founding freemasons. There were decent presidents and politicians like Andrew Jackson and James Garfield who were not part of the cabal too.
I mean I get why people downvote me for exposing the FF - they've been indoctrinated into the constitutionalist cult, equating patriotism with those fluffed up enlightenment ideas and probably I would have been too if I were from the US. There's a reason why masonic symbolism is everywhere and is practically institutionalized. The US was the first successfully created masonic state. The Constitution has good sides but my point was it's not grounded on anything meaningful and the claims it makes aren't justified. It may have worked out when people shared a common worldview (which is Christian) and lived in tight-knit communities but it's all dissolving now and we see the fruits of the experiment.
Everyone at that level is in those circles. There's no way to get selected if you're outside of the system. He may have not approved of it but he was part of it.
The Constitution was written by a bunch of degenerate revolutionary enlightenment freemasons and illuminists. It's not sacred and the whole appeal to self-evident truth and natural rights is retarded and should be discarded. Both the right and left appeal to those. It's a cult and it's pathetic. Almost as bad as the French being proud of their revolutionary degenerates who were more on the commie side.
True conservatives appeal to God for morality, know that life is a gift and not an entitlement, that there are duties instead of rights and that so called rights are privileges ultimately handed out and suspended by the thread of force which the government has monopoly over. Your constitutional rights get suspended every time there is an "emergency" like fake terrorism or fake viruses out there. Do you still think you have "inaliable rights"? The Enlightenment thinkers were naive and to be frank dumb as hell compared to philosophers before them, to think their little libtard experiment could work out. This is what happens when you think you can take God out of the equation (deists mention god because a deity presents a convenient justification for their New Order of the Ages paradigm) - secular humanist idiocy leading to absolute degeneracy.
I mean, mainstream space is fake and gay but here's how they did it: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=431098908889282
The expert said he's almost certain she did it so I guess this now passes in court.
Here comes the sperg idiot to the rescue.
You have poor comprehension skills. I asked why there was no manned mission to the moon since 1972 and deboonked the stupid excuses given by NASA and their normie fanboys which are 1) we've lost the technology and 2) due to financial reasons.
Really? Where was the last time people went to the moon?
That's a rhetorical question - I'm pointing out the contradiction in believing we've lost the technology to go there while there are companies like Space X and while Musk initially wanted to go to the moon but was turned down by congress for no apparent reason.
Sure. But I want real and verifiable footage and not some CGI or Kubrick shit.