For something like this, "shutting down the Internet" is temporary at best (and likely impossible without help; DARPA designed the internet such that the backbone would resist nuclear armageddon). Everyone has their own files and can put them back up within days of communications being restored (and it's not like that's even very difficult; I could link everyone in a 50 unit building with wifi routers myself, and I haven't worked with computers in years).
I wonder if part of this "pandemic" would be some kind of worm that wipes everyone's files from their own storage? Considering how many operating systems (and versions of them) are in use today, it would be ambitious, to say the least. Or will they cheap out and just wipe the cloud backups?
Either way, they can't corrupt disc backups.
Here's how it will play out.
Either it's highly deadly, in which case it will quickly die out due to lack of transmission, or it's barely deadly, in which case it doesn't matter how far it spreads. Regardless, it's not a problem.
Where you get honest to God Black Death plagues is when everyone literally shits on top of each other and lives in the mess.
I don't live in San Francisco or Vancouver, so I'm not worried.
"You know, I've tried every tincture and tonic, but all I really needed was the blood of a young boy"
-Henry Kissinger
WPWW; even street shitters be ridin' with Hitler.
Is she held responsible for shrinkage? If so, I bet she'd have a much easier time covering up a little excursion than a bikeful of stolen items.
Dude with the doorbell cam:
I watched it live on my Ring camera while I was at work and could not believe that I was watching it unfold in my driveway. The more I watched the video, the funnier it got,' he said.
Legend
How terrible...that he survived
Or announce general strategies that people can implement individually.
Even if you get busted for "incitement", they can't link you to anything directly and no one goes down with you.
You can always write from prison.
Love her touching her mask that she's wearing in the car, lol
See, I am far more likely to entertain the moon landing hoax than something like FE, and this post is a big part of the reason why.
It's not the unhinged ramblings of a youtube schitzo, it's not claiming I'm a "sheep" or a "shill" for not going along with it, it's just presenting facts (from an unfriendly source, no less) which don't add up.
Sure, it's possible that we just flung ship after the ship at the moon back in the 60s and finally got lucky. And it's possible that the handful of times we actually sent humans, everything went perfectly, even though there were catastrophes, before and after, trying much simpler maneuvers. It's even possible that modern companies, with much better echnology and at least as solid an understanding of moon conditions as NASA had 60 years ago, are incapable of recreating that success.
It's just not much more likely than the whole thing being faked on a sound stage.
I like Kim Dotcoms:
You're the neck version of Pinocchio.
Musk said the WEF was Satanic, he never said he opposed them...
Agreed.
The only way I could trust online voting is if there were a way for me to verify my own vote after the fact but, even then, it's trivially easy to make a screen say one thing while the vote tallies say another.
I think the biggest vulnerability is the remote voting, which should be just scrapped; if you can't get yourself down to the polling station, why should we care about your opinion?
"Otherwise, when you have your name in one state that’s not an ERIC state and your name in an ERIC state, well, it just so happens that you can vote twice.” And so, I was hoping to capture that information on my phone. I actually looked at my phone to make sure that I was recording and oh my goodness, you have to check it like every 15/20 minutes, make sure it’s running. My equipment didn’t quite make it because I have a million photos on my phone. It just didn’t happen.
Not really a bombshell; we've only got her word (admittedly biased) and, even if it's true, it's just an endorsement of ERIC? Like, if you confronted this guy in public he could simply say "This wouldn't be a problem if all states used ERIC."
It's a hole to fix, certainly, but this isn't going to swing elections very far if the only people that can abuse it have to move states.
Science is born out of Christian principals of Good and Truth.
Scientism is a direct result of atheists pretending to be scientists, not the failure of science itself.
You're way overthinking this.
We can't explain the observable movement of stars in the Earth-centric model; the closest we ever came involved something like 13 independent spheres circling the earth and it still needed adjusting every year.
This guy is simply talking out of his ass.
I have no problem admitting that a model that needs 99% of existence to be made up of invisible matter and energy is not a good model...but it's not as though the existance of "space" is predicated on it; it's one of many competing models for the creation of space and it could well be incomplete or simply wrong.
That doesn't equate to "space doesn't exist".
Revelation, nothing. The entire Bible is basically God telling the Israelites to stop worshipping Moloch and fucking their sisters, and they fucking them up when they ignore him. I basically read the New Testament as God throwing up His hands and saying "I'm sick of you fucktards, literally any other people are acceptable to me so long as they're not actively disgusting".
The best evidence in support of the Holocaust happening is that it's totally something God would do to the jews for being terrible.
I also want to briefly address the "so what?" factor.
Imagine if FE were true. That would mean that someone is actually able to manipulate reality across the planet to make the sun appear to act as though it were hundreds of times bigger and as though we were orbitting it. They would also be manipulating the stars, which also behave as though the earth is a globe. Not to mention stuff like AM/FM transmission which, on FE, should be able to reach anywhere on earth but somehow doesn't. Or satelite phones. Or GPS.
On top of that, they are able to manipulate every astronomer, pilot, and sailor in history to pretend the earth is centered around the north pole, with dimensions radically different than they should be and completely erase any credible source espousing contrary information.
Contrast this to a known global conspiracy like Covid. They were completely unable to supress information for even a few months.
So, if FE is real and globe earth is a deception: what does it matter? The powers that be would have to be so omnipotent to manipulate reality in this way that there isn't any conceivable difference anyone or everyone could make. What's the point of waking people up to this "fact" if there is literally nothing they could conceivably do about it?
Again, contrast with Covid. It was important to spread the truth because people were volunteering to lockdown and take experimental gene therapies because they were being deceived. Everyone who knew the truth could protect themselves and, when enough of us learned the truth, we got them to lift the lion's share of the restrictions. At the end of the day, we are on the same playing field and our actions have consequences.
Is the point of FE simply demoralization? To get people to give up and live as though their lives are the playthings of hidden, malevolent, beings with powers beyond our comprehension? If not, then what are you actually trying to acheive?
It's basically impossible to prove anything is true, outside of pure math. All you can do is find a model that fits more observable facts than any other, which is heliocentric globe earth.
On the other hand, it's quite possible to disprove something, which is why FE is so dumb.
If the earth was flat, the observable movement of the sun would be impossible.
Either the sun crosses the "disc" at sunrise and sunset, in which case it would rise and set in places it has never, anywhere been observed to do, or it just sort of goes in circles above us.
This is an extremely stupid hypothesis, even if we accept the idea that a body can move in a circle for thousands of years, at least, with no discernable mechanism.
First, if that were the case, we could see it at any time of the day or night. Spare me the "spotlight" BS; you would still see a massive glow on the horizon like you get from cites (which we don't) and we would also see small amounts of light refracting of particles in the atmosphere (which we also don't). You would also see a "crescent" sun as it moved away from you where the spotlight material blocked the light.
Second, according to the dimensions suggested by this theory, the sun could never physically go below around 13° from the earth's surface under optimal conditions, according to grade-9-level trig. If you were on the equator, it can't go below 30°. (The minimum angle is much higher if we go with the "spotlight" cope but, as we've already seen, that's stupid.) I'll also note that this lowest angle would be in the middle of the night, when you supposedly can't even see it, so the real minimum angle at sunrise/set is somewhat higher.
So if you ever observe the sun getting within 10° of the horizon, that concrete evidence that FE is not real.
Until you tweak the "theory" again...
I find FE tends to come from two places.
One is complete opposition to orthodoxy. Not to say questioning orthodoxy, but rather assuming everything considered orthodox is false, and that they have been granted special knowledge that ordinary people don't have access to (unless they can go on youtube, which is full of videos "exposing" the truth that never seem to get taken down or blocked in any way). This is basically the same as the people who believe everthing they are told by the powers that be, but in reverse. This is why you can't convince either of them of anything; there is no thought involved.
The second is a complete lack of knowledge or the science and math fundamental to astronomy. I'm not talking about quantum mechanics or black hole physics, either. I'm talking high school trigonometry amd geometry. Take a tennis ball and a soccer ball and hold one in front of the other. Does one look less curved? It isn't, it's just a different size. Now imagine a ball about a billion times bigger; is it possible that it would look less curved to the point that the human eye couldn't detect a curve at all? Hmmm...
Flatheads will literally watch tens of hours of schitzo youtube video talking about flight plans but won't take 30 minutes to learn how light refraction works.
So yeah, no one is censoring you (and I actually argued against it, btw), we've just considered your points and found them empty. But you just keep trying to bump the discussion, which is annoying, especially when you bring absolutely nothing new. At least when you tweak the theory to account for the latest debunking there's some kind of challenge in working though why you're wrong this time, but usually it's hard to even get you to explain what you think is true without "EdUcAtE yOuRsElF, hErE's A lInK", which basically just proves that you can't explain it.
I'll put these essays up occassionally, in the hopes that you might be arguing in good faith but the usual response is dismissal of my points without refutation and accusations of being a shill, at which point I just fall back to mockery which, luckily, is quite easy.
Flathead: Prove the earth is round without usong pictures.
User: I can see the sun set below the horizon.
Flathead: THAT'S NOT PROOF! YOUR EYES ARE ACTUALLY LYING! LOOK FOR THE GREEN FLASH AT SUNSET!
Stage 1: Go off your meds and make a series of rambling youtube videos that provide no evidence, no logic, don't even actually layout your model for criticism, but are full of emotional rhetoric and persecution fantasies.
Didn't they just buy a bunch of stock from both Fox and Budweiser recently?
Looks like they're consolidating...
I know you think you heard me say masks work, and you think I told businesses they'd be fined if they let you in without a mask, but you're not an expert, are you sweetie?
I love how they can't find even one person to say something at least neutral about the program; I'm pretty sure that's just a paraphrasing from DiAngelo.