Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

No evidence supports evolution. The tailbone & appendix aren't vestigial. Embryos don't have gill slits. Teach real science—anatomy, muscles, bones. Leave junk theories behind. #ScienceFacts #Biology

Hovind_Official's profile picture

Dr. Kent Hovind

6,739 subscribers

16,809 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

BildungNachrichten & PolitikWissenschaft & Technologie#ScienceFacts#Biology
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

🚨 “CAN MEN GET PREGNANT?” — MEDICAL SCHOOL LEADERS CAN’T ANSWER BASIC BIOLOGY UNDER OATH Republican lawmakers grilled top med school officials on whether a non-biological woman (transgender man) can have a baby. The squirming and non-answers were peak absurdity. Dr. Marc Siegel: “No. Absolutely not. There has never been a single case.” He slammed the ideology: Med schools should teach real biology, hormones, anatomy, and pregnancy science — not pronouns. Congresswoman: “It shouldn’t take a medical degree to answer a basic biology question.” This exposes how woke gender ideology has infected elite medical education, wasting time on nonsense instead of excellence in actual medicine. Truth over ideology. Men can’t get pregnant. Period. Biological reality matters for patient care.
5:36

🚨 “CAN MEN GET PREGNANT?” — MEDICAL SCHOOL LEADERS CAN’T ANSWER BASIC BIOLOGY UNDER OATH Republican lawmakers grilled top med school officials on whether a non-biological woman (transgender man) can have a baby. The squirming and non-answers were peak absurdity. Dr. Marc Siegel: “No. Absolutely not. There has never been a single case.” He slammed the ideology: Med schools should teach real biology, hormones, anatomy, and pregnancy science — not pronouns. Congresswoman: “It shouldn’t take a medical degree to answer a basic biology question.” This exposes how woke gender ideology has infected elite medical education, wasting time on nonsense instead of excellence in actual medicine. Truth over ideology. Men can’t get pregnant. Period. Biological reality matters for patient care.

Gunther Eagleman™

40,887 Aufrufe • vor 16 Tagen

The Darwinian model of evolution and the gradualist model of geology did not emerge independently - they rose together, Randall argues, and in doing so reinforced each other's blind spots. Geological gradualism held that landscape change was the product of almost imperceptible incremental processes - one grain of sand, one drop of water at a time, accumulating across vast timescales. Darwinian evolution applied the same logic to biology - changes between generations so small as to be undetectable, requiring hundreds or thousands of generations to produce meaningful difference. Each model made the other seem more plausible, and together they established a framework in which slow, uniform progress from simplicity to complexity became the default assumption underlying both earth science and biology. What that framework quietly discarded, Randall notes, was the concept of cycles. A model built entirely on linear gradualism has no natural place for periodic catastrophic interruption - for the punctuated, reset-and-rebuild pattern that Randall argues the physical evidence consistently supports. The result was a scientific worldview that could describe the direction of change but not its rhythm - one that acknowledged complexity increasing over time while systematically underweighting the catastrophic events that have repeatedly erased what complexity had already achieved and forced the process to begin again.
0:55

The Darwinian model of evolution and the gradualist model of geology did not emerge independently - they rose together, Randall argues, and in doing so reinforced each other's blind spots. Geological gradualism held that landscape change was the product of almost imperceptible incremental processes - one grain of sand, one drop of water at a time, accumulating across vast timescales. Darwinian evolution applied the same logic to biology - changes between generations so small as to be undetectable, requiring hundreds or thousands of generations to produce meaningful difference. Each model made the other seem more plausible, and together they established a framework in which slow, uniform progress from simplicity to complexity became the default assumption underlying both earth science and biology. What that framework quietly discarded, Randall notes, was the concept of cycles. A model built entirely on linear gradualism has no natural place for periodic catastrophic interruption - for the punctuated, reset-and-rebuild pattern that Randall argues the physical evidence consistently supports. The result was a scientific worldview that could describe the direction of change but not its rhythm - one that acknowledged complexity increasing over time while systematically underweighting the catastrophic events that have repeatedly erased what complexity had already achieved and forced the process to begin again.

Randall Carlson

11,719 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

BPC-157 and TB-500 are two of the most talked-about peptides in fitness, bodybuilding, and biohacking. Together they’re often called the “Wolverine Stack” — a peptide combination rumored to dramatically accelerate healing of tendons, ligaments, muscles, and injuries. But do BPC-157 and TB-500 actually work in humans, or is the Wolverine Stack just another example of internet bro-science? In this evidence-based deep dive, Dr. Alex Tatem (board-certified urologist and men’s health specialist) breaks down the real science behind BPC-157 and TB-500 — including their biochemical mechanisms, animal research, potential healing effects, safety concerns, and why pharmaceutical companies have never brought these peptides through full FDA clinical trials. We explore the nitric oxide signaling, angiogenesis, VEGF pathways, actin regulation, and tissue repair biology behind these compounds and explain why rodent studies look promising — but why human clinical evidence is still extremely limited. You’ll also learn about: • What BPC-157 (Body Protection Compound-157) actually is • TB-500 vs Thymosin Beta-4 explained • The origin of the Wolverine Stack peptide protocol • Peptides for tendon healing and ligament injuries • BPC-157 for gut healing and musculoskeletal repair • TB-500 and actin-mediated tissue regeneration • Why most peptide research comes from one Croatian research group • The patent law problem preventing pharmaceutical development • Real risks of grey-market peptide contamination • Why WADA bans BPC-157 and TB-500 in competitive athletes • Theoretical cancer risks related to angiogenesis • What the current scientific literature actually shows If you've ever searched: “Does BPC-157 work?” “What is TB-500?” “Peptides for healing injuries” “BPC-157 tendon repair” “Wolverine Stack peptides explained” — this video breaks down the science. The peptides may be promising. But promise and proof are not the same thing. Drop a comment below: Have you ever used BPC-157, TB-500, or other peptides? What was your experience? 👍 Like the video if you want more evidence-based breakdowns of supplements, PEDs, and peptides. Subscribe for deep dives on testosterone, steroids, peptides, supplements, and men’s health science.
30:26

BPC-157 and TB-500 are two of the most talked-about peptides in fitness, bodybuilding, and biohacking. Together they’re often called the “Wolverine Stack” — a peptide combination rumored to dramatically accelerate healing of tendons, ligaments, muscles, and injuries. But do BPC-157 and TB-500 actually work in humans, or is the Wolverine Stack just another example of internet bro-science? In this evidence-based deep dive, Dr. Alex Tatem (board-certified urologist and men’s health specialist) breaks down the real science behind BPC-157 and TB-500 — including their biochemical mechanisms, animal research, potential healing effects, safety concerns, and why pharmaceutical companies have never brought these peptides through full FDA clinical trials. We explore the nitric oxide signaling, angiogenesis, VEGF pathways, actin regulation, and tissue repair biology behind these compounds and explain why rodent studies look promising — but why human clinical evidence is still extremely limited. You’ll also learn about: • What BPC-157 (Body Protection Compound-157) actually is • TB-500 vs Thymosin Beta-4 explained • The origin of the Wolverine Stack peptide protocol • Peptides for tendon healing and ligament injuries • BPC-157 for gut healing and musculoskeletal repair • TB-500 and actin-mediated tissue regeneration • Why most peptide research comes from one Croatian research group • The patent law problem preventing pharmaceutical development • Real risks of grey-market peptide contamination • Why WADA bans BPC-157 and TB-500 in competitive athletes • Theoretical cancer risks related to angiogenesis • What the current scientific literature actually shows If you've ever searched: “Does BPC-157 work?” “What is TB-500?” “Peptides for healing injuries” “BPC-157 tendon repair” “Wolverine Stack peptides explained” — this video breaks down the science. The peptides may be promising. But promise and proof are not the same thing. Drop a comment below: Have you ever used BPC-157, TB-500, or other peptides? What was your experience? 👍 Like the video if you want more evidence-based breakdowns of supplements, PEDs, and peptides. Subscribe for deep dives on testosterone, steroids, peptides, supplements, and men’s health science.

Dr. Alex Tatem

21,218 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

🚨EXPOSED: The Glaring Contradiction the FBI Director Hoped You Would Forget—FBI Suddenly Hijacking a "State Case"? They can't even keep their own lies straight anymore. Kash Patel’s go-to excuse has been since the beginning; every time someone demanded real answers or pushed for federal transparency, he hid behind the exact same line: “We cannot get involved. It is a state case.” When Joe Kent bravely attempted to launch a serious investigation into the glaringly obvious foreign nexus behind Charlie Kirk's assassination, what happened? Kash Patel completely shut it down. His justification for blocking the investigation into foreign operatives? “The FBI is not getting involved because it's a state case.” But look at what is happening right now in the court filings. The second the state's manufactured case against Tyler Robinson starts to collapse—the very moment the ATF officially admits they cannot match the bullet fragment to Tyler's rifle—what does Kash Patel do? Suddenly, the "state case" excuse magically disappears, and the FBI is rushing right into the middle of it. Why are they suddenly so eager to get involved? They aren't stepping in to find the real killers or investigate the foreign ties they previously ignored. They aren't stepping in to investigate all of the vert credible leads we have uncovered that would exonerate Tyler Robinson; those same leads he calls "conspiracy theories". NO... they are stepping in to manufacture evidence. They are taking this unmatched bullet fragment and running a "Comparative Bullet Lead Analysis"—a junk-science test that was literally banned and discontinued by the FBI in 2005 because it was completely unreliable. It is a fraudulent forensic parlor trick that historically led to the false imprisonment of hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent Americans. When it came to investigating a sophisticated foreign hit squad, Kash Patel said the FBI’s hands were tied. But when it comes to dusting off a 20-year-old banned scientific test to rig the evidence and railroad a 22-year-old patsy? Suddenly, the FBI is front and center, ready to do the dirty work. This isn't an investigation; it is a coordinated federal frame-job. They are terrified, they are desperate, and they are bringing back dead science to execute a state cover-up. We see exactly what you are doing, Kash.👀 🇺🇸
2:24

🚨EXPOSED: The Glaring Contradiction the FBI Director Hoped You Would Forget—FBI Suddenly Hijacking a "State Case"? They can't even keep their own lies straight anymore. Kash Patel’s go-to excuse has been since the beginning; every time someone demanded real answers or pushed for federal transparency, he hid behind the exact same line: “We cannot get involved. It is a state case.” When Joe Kent bravely attempted to launch a serious investigation into the glaringly obvious foreign nexus behind Charlie Kirk's assassination, what happened? Kash Patel completely shut it down. His justification for blocking the investigation into foreign operatives? “The FBI is not getting involved because it's a state case.” But look at what is happening right now in the court filings. The second the state's manufactured case against Tyler Robinson starts to collapse—the very moment the ATF officially admits they cannot match the bullet fragment to Tyler's rifle—what does Kash Patel do? Suddenly, the "state case" excuse magically disappears, and the FBI is rushing right into the middle of it. Why are they suddenly so eager to get involved? They aren't stepping in to find the real killers or investigate the foreign ties they previously ignored. They aren't stepping in to investigate all of the vert credible leads we have uncovered that would exonerate Tyler Robinson; those same leads he calls "conspiracy theories". NO... they are stepping in to manufacture evidence. They are taking this unmatched bullet fragment and running a "Comparative Bullet Lead Analysis"—a junk-science test that was literally banned and discontinued by the FBI in 2005 because it was completely unreliable. It is a fraudulent forensic parlor trick that historically led to the false imprisonment of hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent Americans. When it came to investigating a sophisticated foreign hit squad, Kash Patel said the FBI’s hands were tied. But when it comes to dusting off a 20-year-old banned scientific test to rig the evidence and railroad a 22-year-old patsy? Suddenly, the FBI is front and center, ready to do the dirty work. This isn't an investigation; it is a coordinated federal frame-job. They are terrified, they are desperate, and they are bringing back dead science to execute a state cover-up. We see exactly what you are doing, Kash.👀 🇺🇸

Project Constitution

222,904 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

RFK went on C-SPAN for an interview with public questions, and someone from Minnesota called in on the democrat line saying that RFK should be an independent because he's not a real democrat because he's a conspiracy theorist, and that she is confused his "conspiracy theories" and that they aren't going to heal the nation. She listed off chemicals in the water, EMF dangers, mass shooters on SSRIs, as a means to dismiss him and his legitimacy, just like the MSM does. These people are seriously so brainwashed and clueless, and have no idea how bad it really is with EMF, chemicals in the environment, mass surveillance, vaccines, and the pervasive regulatory capture of every government institution that lets corporations obliterate our health unabated. They refuse to read the evidence that supports RFKs positions, and instead prefer to just live in this ignorantly blissful little box of abject denialism built by the corrupt authorities and MSM, calling everything that makes them scared a "conspiracy theory". These people need to grow a spine, quit being afraid, and just learn the objective scientific facts so they can make simple changes in their life to counteract and remedy. Dumping a ton of evidence in comments below supporting RFK and his claims.
8:07

RFK went on C-SPAN for an interview with public questions, and someone from Minnesota called in on the democrat line saying that RFK should be an independent because he's not a real democrat because he's a conspiracy theorist, and that she is confused his "conspiracy theories" and that they aren't going to heal the nation. She listed off chemicals in the water, EMF dangers, mass shooters on SSRIs, as a means to dismiss him and his legitimacy, just like the MSM does. These people are seriously so brainwashed and clueless, and have no idea how bad it really is with EMF, chemicals in the environment, mass surveillance, vaccines, and the pervasive regulatory capture of every government institution that lets corporations obliterate our health unabated. They refuse to read the evidence that supports RFKs positions, and instead prefer to just live in this ignorantly blissful little box of abject denialism built by the corrupt authorities and MSM, calling everything that makes them scared a "conspiracy theory". These people need to grow a spine, quit being afraid, and just learn the objective scientific facts so they can make simple changes in their life to counteract and remedy. Dumping a ton of evidence in comments below supporting RFK and his claims.

Inversionism

312,684 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

🚨MUST WATCH: The Massive DNA Bombshell TPUSA DOESN'T Want You To Know—FIVE Different Persons Mixed DNA Was Recovered From The Charlie Kirk Crime Scene🤯⚖️ Turning Point USA and their army of proxy shills are working overtime to gaslight the American public. They are desperate to make you blindly believe that the assassination of Charlie Kirk is an "open and shut case." They want you to accept the narrative that they have a lone gunman dead to rights. But the truth is the exact opposite. Tonight, Candace Owens dropped another massive bombshell directly from the Tyler Robinson court filings, and it completely obliterates the state's manufactured storyline. THE MIXED DNA BOMBSHELL: TPUSA wants you to think the physical evidence points neatly and exclusively to one 22-year-old kid. Here is the reality buried in the legal documents: The FBI and ATF reports explicitly indicate that they recovered minute quantities of DNA on various items of evidence consisting of mixtures of up to FIVE OR MORE INDIVIDUALS. Let that sink in. At least five different people's DNA was recovered from the evidence, all mixed together. This was not a pristine, lone-wolf crime scene. This was a highly contaminated scene, handled by multiple unknown actors. Who are the other four people? Why is the media silent about them? HIDING THE HOMEWORK: So how is the prosecution handling this explosive revelation? By actively hiding the details from the defense. The state has indicated it intends to offer this DNA report at the preliminary hearing without any supporting expert testimony. Even worse, they are refusing to hand over the raw data. They are only providing a "summary" conclusion. They are effectively telling the defense: There are at least five people's DNA on this evidence, but we aren't going to tell you who they are, we aren't going to show you how we tested it, and we aren't going to let your experts look at the actual data. Just take our word for it. THE SHILL NARRATIVE COLLAPSES: Let's review the actual facts of this "open and shut" case: A suspect who plead NOT GUILTY. An ATF ballistics report that failed to match the bullet fragment to the rifle. A desperate FBI trying to resurrect banned, 20-year-old "junk science" to force a match. And now, evidence covered in the DNA of five or more unidentified individuals. There is absolutely no ironclad forensic evidence tying Tyler Robinson to this crime. What there is, is a staggering amount of reasonable doubt. Do not let TPUSA lie to you. Do not let their paid mouthpieces manipulate you into accepting a manufactured conclusion. They are terrified of what a real, independent investigation into those five DNA profiles will uncover. 🇺🇸⚓️ FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT and watch her FULL podcast below. 👇
0:53

🚨MUST WATCH: The Massive DNA Bombshell TPUSA DOESN'T Want You To Know—FIVE Different Persons Mixed DNA Was Recovered From The Charlie Kirk Crime Scene🤯⚖️ Turning Point USA and their army of proxy shills are working overtime to gaslight the American public. They are desperate to make you blindly believe that the assassination of Charlie Kirk is an "open and shut case." They want you to accept the narrative that they have a lone gunman dead to rights. But the truth is the exact opposite. Tonight, Candace Owens dropped another massive bombshell directly from the Tyler Robinson court filings, and it completely obliterates the state's manufactured storyline. THE MIXED DNA BOMBSHELL: TPUSA wants you to think the physical evidence points neatly and exclusively to one 22-year-old kid. Here is the reality buried in the legal documents: The FBI and ATF reports explicitly indicate that they recovered minute quantities of DNA on various items of evidence consisting of mixtures of up to FIVE OR MORE INDIVIDUALS. Let that sink in. At least five different people's DNA was recovered from the evidence, all mixed together. This was not a pristine, lone-wolf crime scene. This was a highly contaminated scene, handled by multiple unknown actors. Who are the other four people? Why is the media silent about them? HIDING THE HOMEWORK: So how is the prosecution handling this explosive revelation? By actively hiding the details from the defense. The state has indicated it intends to offer this DNA report at the preliminary hearing without any supporting expert testimony. Even worse, they are refusing to hand over the raw data. They are only providing a "summary" conclusion. They are effectively telling the defense: There are at least five people's DNA on this evidence, but we aren't going to tell you who they are, we aren't going to show you how we tested it, and we aren't going to let your experts look at the actual data. Just take our word for it. THE SHILL NARRATIVE COLLAPSES: Let's review the actual facts of this "open and shut" case: A suspect who plead NOT GUILTY. An ATF ballistics report that failed to match the bullet fragment to the rifle. A desperate FBI trying to resurrect banned, 20-year-old "junk science" to force a match. And now, evidence covered in the DNA of five or more unidentified individuals. There is absolutely no ironclad forensic evidence tying Tyler Robinson to this crime. What there is, is a staggering amount of reasonable doubt. Do not let TPUSA lie to you. Do not let their paid mouthpieces manipulate you into accepting a manufactured conclusion. They are terrified of what a real, independent investigation into those five DNA profiles will uncover. 🇺🇸⚓️ FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT and watch her FULL podcast below. 👇

Project Constitution

12,213 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

The presenter asks Virat Kohli, the star Indian cricketer - "Why did you become a vegetarian?" His answer is mind-boggling. He starts with his source of advice - an Accupuncturist. Accupuncture is a pseudoscience. It has no meaningful principles or reasonable action. It is not based on scientific knowledge and is a form of quackery. Large systematic reviews confirm that there no good evidence of benefit, which suggests that it is not an effective method of healthcare. Virat then speaks about his cervical spine disc prolapse. He then speeds towards his stomach where he claims that eating meat was making stomach more acidic, because of which the calcium from his bones were leaking off. So the solution - make it alkaline. So he quit meat and became vegetarian - to make his stomach less acidic, more alkaline, to prevent calcium loss in bone and thus, cure his cervical spondylitis. This is pure and unadulterated nonsense. The stomach is acidic and will remain so whether you want it or not. Acid production is the unique and central component of the stomach's contribution to the digestive process and also plays a role in protecting the body against pathogens ingested with food or water [ You cannot make the stomach alkaline, unless you ingest enough alkali - which will of course kill you. Calcium does not leech away because the stomach is acidic. Eating meat does not cause calcium loss. In fact, increasing the protein intake from 1 g/kg body weight to 2 g/kg, given as meat, did not have an adverse effect on calcium metabolism. [ Going vegetarian does not mean one becomes gauranteed calcium sufficient. Vegetarianism is a culturo-religious factor and not a norm. People choose it because of various personal reasons and it is not one based on strong evidence from medical science. It is not superior to other diets, except of course, is better than veganism, which is the most inferior form of diet from scientific standpoint. Cervival neck disc bulge is not treated by going vegetarian. There are actual scientific guidelines for it. See here: and here: And no one should ever ask an Accupuncturist for any advise on health, because they themselves have no clue about human anatomy or physiology and they are not real healthcare providers. They are quacks. I like Virat Kohli. The guy is a national treasure. But I am sorry to say that he is very health and science-illiterate and a prototype of the beggarly scientific temper that define majoirty of Indians in today's India. Doctors, scientisits, science communicators, (real) health influencers, we need to do better.
0:57

The presenter asks Virat Kohli, the star Indian cricketer - "Why did you become a vegetarian?" His answer is mind-boggling. He starts with his source of advice - an Accupuncturist. Accupuncture is a pseudoscience. It has no meaningful principles or reasonable action. It is not based on scientific knowledge and is a form of quackery. Large systematic reviews confirm that there no good evidence of benefit, which suggests that it is not an effective method of healthcare. Virat then speaks about his cervical spine disc prolapse. He then speeds towards his stomach where he claims that eating meat was making stomach more acidic, because of which the calcium from his bones were leaking off. So the solution - make it alkaline. So he quit meat and became vegetarian - to make his stomach less acidic, more alkaline, to prevent calcium loss in bone and thus, cure his cervical spondylitis. This is pure and unadulterated nonsense. The stomach is acidic and will remain so whether you want it or not. Acid production is the unique and central component of the stomach's contribution to the digestive process and also plays a role in protecting the body against pathogens ingested with food or water [ You cannot make the stomach alkaline, unless you ingest enough alkali - which will of course kill you. Calcium does not leech away because the stomach is acidic. Eating meat does not cause calcium loss. In fact, increasing the protein intake from 1 g/kg body weight to 2 g/kg, given as meat, did not have an adverse effect on calcium metabolism. [ Going vegetarian does not mean one becomes gauranteed calcium sufficient. Vegetarianism is a culturo-religious factor and not a norm. People choose it because of various personal reasons and it is not one based on strong evidence from medical science. It is not superior to other diets, except of course, is better than veganism, which is the most inferior form of diet from scientific standpoint. Cervival neck disc bulge is not treated by going vegetarian. There are actual scientific guidelines for it. See here: and here: And no one should ever ask an Accupuncturist for any advise on health, because they themselves have no clue about human anatomy or physiology and they are not real healthcare providers. They are quacks. I like Virat Kohli. The guy is a national treasure. But I am sorry to say that he is very health and science-illiterate and a prototype of the beggarly scientific temper that define majoirty of Indians in today's India. Doctors, scientisits, science communicators, (real) health influencers, we need to do better.

TheLiverDoc™

1,006,975 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

This is how your eyes work. Eyes are part of an irreducibly complex system of structures that work together to give you vision. There is no evolutionary pathway that could produce even the simplest eye. Here is everything you need to know about why eyes did not evolve and are certain evidence of design. This is the proposed version of eye evolution: 1. Photosensitive cell 2. Pigment cells without a nerve 3. Optic nerve surrounded by pigment cells, covered by translucent skin 4. Pigment cells forming a depression 5. Skin gradually takes a lens shape 6. Evolution of muscles for lens to adjust But each one of these steps still relies on a similar irreducibly complex system of machines for vision to function. The very first step, the mythical light sensitive cell, is actually incredibly complex by itself and has no plausible evolutionary pathway. A single photosensitive cell is an incredibly complex system of nanomachines. The simplest known light-sensitive prokaryotic cells have genomes with around ~1.3 million base pairs of DNA information, with around ~1,300–1,400 unique proteins. Knockout tests in cells have been able to simplify cells to 500,000 base pairs of DNA, with close to 500 unique proteins (but these are not light sensitive.) ALL vision systems require rhodopsin proteins. These handy little proteins capture light, transforms light into a signal, and sends that signal down a transduction pathway to the processing center (brain). So basically, ALL vision systems require at least 3 separate major systems, which are themselves filled with multiple subsystems - it's complexity on top of complexity on top of complexity. And none of it works if all of those systems are not in place together. There is no evolutionary pathway by which all of this arises together - nature doesn't engineer multiple interdependent systems together. Eyes are so complex and so different among various organisms today that evolutionists even widely recognize that vision systems must have arisen independently at least 30 times, because there is no genetic pattern to explain the origin of eyes from a common ancestor. The odds of that happening are absolutely absurd. Beyond logic. There is no evidence of eyes evolving in the fossil record, either. Complex, fully functional vision appears almost at the very start of the fossil record. The oldest eye in the fossil record, that of a trilobite, is a complex compound eye originating in the Cambrian, conventionally dated about 540 million years ago. From there, various different kinds of eyes appear in the fossil record of varying degrees of complexity - with both simpler and more complex version of vision systems scattered all throughout in no particular pattern of development. Evolutionists also like to claim the human eye is designed poorly. They point to “blind spots” & “backwards retinas” as evidence of poor design, which is why, they say, evolution makes more sense. But that is completely false, and shows they simply don't understand the biology of the eye in the first place. But this design actually makes our eyes better and fully optimized for our necessities. The Blind Spot: Vertebrates have an inverted retina, where photoreceptors face away from light and nerves bundle through a hole in the back, creating a tiny blind spot. The blind spot is only~1% of visual field and each eye's blind spot overlaps with the seeing part of the other eye - there is no actual vision loss. This could be seen as evidence of intelligently designed coordination. Vertebrate eyes also provide the sharpest vision among animals. Eagles (with inverted retinas) see clearly up to 2–3 miles away and spot prey from great distances. Features like oil droplets in photoreceptors improve color vision, and mitochondrial clumps focus light better, giving higher vision acuity overall. The Inverted design also allows direct, close access to the Retinal Pigment Epithelium (RPE) layer. RPE supplies massive nutrients/oxygen (vertebrate photoreceptors have the body's highest metabolic rate) and removes toxic byproducts from light detection. RPE's dark pigment absorbs stray light, giving a sharper image, and protects against sun damage, which makes our eyes last longer and stay healthier. Cephalopods eyes - often compared as a "better version" by evos who don't know better - have the everted retina which limits nutrient/toxin access, causing slower repair, shorter cell life, more vulnerability to damage. In summary, the human eye is optimally designed for the function required. The orientation of the retinas improves vision sharpness and the longevity & overall health of the eye. Anyone claiming the eye is evidence of “bad design” simply doesn’t understand how beautifully their eyes are designed. Even the simplest forms of vision require incredibly complex systems to come together at the same time for vision to arise. Evolution cannot do that. Only intelligence engineers irreducibly complex systems like Vision.
1:03

This is how your eyes work. Eyes are part of an irreducibly complex system of structures that work together to give you vision. There is no evolutionary pathway that could produce even the simplest eye. Here is everything you need to know about why eyes did not evolve and are certain evidence of design. This is the proposed version of eye evolution: 1. Photosensitive cell 2. Pigment cells without a nerve 3. Optic nerve surrounded by pigment cells, covered by translucent skin 4. Pigment cells forming a depression 5. Skin gradually takes a lens shape 6. Evolution of muscles for lens to adjust But each one of these steps still relies on a similar irreducibly complex system of machines for vision to function. The very first step, the mythical light sensitive cell, is actually incredibly complex by itself and has no plausible evolutionary pathway. A single photosensitive cell is an incredibly complex system of nanomachines. The simplest known light-sensitive prokaryotic cells have genomes with around ~1.3 million base pairs of DNA information, with around ~1,300–1,400 unique proteins. Knockout tests in cells have been able to simplify cells to 500,000 base pairs of DNA, with close to 500 unique proteins (but these are not light sensitive.) ALL vision systems require rhodopsin proteins. These handy little proteins capture light, transforms light into a signal, and sends that signal down a transduction pathway to the processing center (brain). So basically, ALL vision systems require at least 3 separate major systems, which are themselves filled with multiple subsystems - it's complexity on top of complexity on top of complexity. And none of it works if all of those systems are not in place together. There is no evolutionary pathway by which all of this arises together - nature doesn't engineer multiple interdependent systems together. Eyes are so complex and so different among various organisms today that evolutionists even widely recognize that vision systems must have arisen independently at least 30 times, because there is no genetic pattern to explain the origin of eyes from a common ancestor. The odds of that happening are absolutely absurd. Beyond logic. There is no evidence of eyes evolving in the fossil record, either. Complex, fully functional vision appears almost at the very start of the fossil record. The oldest eye in the fossil record, that of a trilobite, is a complex compound eye originating in the Cambrian, conventionally dated about 540 million years ago. From there, various different kinds of eyes appear in the fossil record of varying degrees of complexity - with both simpler and more complex version of vision systems scattered all throughout in no particular pattern of development. Evolutionists also like to claim the human eye is designed poorly. They point to “blind spots” & “backwards retinas” as evidence of poor design, which is why, they say, evolution makes more sense. But that is completely false, and shows they simply don't understand the biology of the eye in the first place. But this design actually makes our eyes better and fully optimized for our necessities. The Blind Spot: Vertebrates have an inverted retina, where photoreceptors face away from light and nerves bundle through a hole in the back, creating a tiny blind spot. The blind spot is only~1% of visual field and each eye's blind spot overlaps with the seeing part of the other eye - there is no actual vision loss. This could be seen as evidence of intelligently designed coordination. Vertebrate eyes also provide the sharpest vision among animals. Eagles (with inverted retinas) see clearly up to 2–3 miles away and spot prey from great distances. Features like oil droplets in photoreceptors improve color vision, and mitochondrial clumps focus light better, giving higher vision acuity overall. The Inverted design also allows direct, close access to the Retinal Pigment Epithelium (RPE) layer. RPE supplies massive nutrients/oxygen (vertebrate photoreceptors have the body's highest metabolic rate) and removes toxic byproducts from light detection. RPE's dark pigment absorbs stray light, giving a sharper image, and protects against sun damage, which makes our eyes last longer and stay healthier. Cephalopods eyes - often compared as a "better version" by evos who don't know better - have the everted retina which limits nutrient/toxin access, causing slower repair, shorter cell life, more vulnerability to damage. In summary, the human eye is optimally designed for the function required. The orientation of the retinas improves vision sharpness and the longevity & overall health of the eye. Anyone claiming the eye is evidence of “bad design” simply doesn’t understand how beautifully their eyes are designed. Even the simplest forms of vision require incredibly complex systems to come together at the same time for vision to arise. Evolution cannot do that. Only intelligence engineers irreducibly complex systems like Vision.

Divinely Designed

25,670 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Dr. Suzanne Humphries: What if the very method of vaccine creation was its greatest flaw? We're told vaccines are a miracle of modern science. But how are they actually made? It starts by extracting a virus from a sick human or animal. This live, virulent virus then must be "attenuated" – weakened. How? By serial passage. They incubate it through a series of foreign cell lines to force it to mutate. Think: human amniotic cells, chicken embryo cells, and most notoriously... monkey kidney cells. But then, they need to mass-produce it. This is where it gets even more concerning. To multiply the virus for millions of doses, they grow it on rapidly dividing cell cultures. Some of these are: ➡️ Madin-Darby Canine Kidney (MDCK) cells (from a cocker spaniel, made tumorigenic so they multiply forever). ➡️ WI-38 & MRC-5 cells (fibroblasts from human fetal lung tissue, originating from elective abortions in the 1960s). These aren't conspiracy theories. They are listed right on the package inserts. You are not just being injected with a "weakened virus." You are being injected with a biological soup of foreign animal DNA, cell debris, and growth medium residuals. The obvious question: What unknown pathogens hitch a ride? History gives us the answer. For 30 years, a cancer-causing monkey virus—SV40—was injected into millions via the polio vaccine before it was "discovered" and acknowledged. It is now heavily associated with human tumors. And SV40 is not alone. Third-party researchers have repeatedly found stray viruses, retroviruses, and other contaminants that were not tested for. Why? Because you can't test for something you don't know exists. The entire process is built on a foundation of biological cross-contamination. We are playing a complex game of genetic roulette, trusting that no new unknown virus is silently passed along. This isn't anti-science. This is PRO-transparency and real safety. It's time to ask the hard questions they don't want to answer. What are we really injecting? What long-term effects are we ignoring?
1:55

Dr. Suzanne Humphries: What if the very method of vaccine creation was its greatest flaw? We're told vaccines are a miracle of modern science. But how are they actually made? It starts by extracting a virus from a sick human or animal. This live, virulent virus then must be "attenuated" – weakened. How? By serial passage. They incubate it through a series of foreign cell lines to force it to mutate. Think: human amniotic cells, chicken embryo cells, and most notoriously... monkey kidney cells. But then, they need to mass-produce it. This is where it gets even more concerning. To multiply the virus for millions of doses, they grow it on rapidly dividing cell cultures. Some of these are: ➡️ Madin-Darby Canine Kidney (MDCK) cells (from a cocker spaniel, made tumorigenic so they multiply forever). ➡️ WI-38 & MRC-5 cells (fibroblasts from human fetal lung tissue, originating from elective abortions in the 1960s). These aren't conspiracy theories. They are listed right on the package inserts. You are not just being injected with a "weakened virus." You are being injected with a biological soup of foreign animal DNA, cell debris, and growth medium residuals. The obvious question: What unknown pathogens hitch a ride? History gives us the answer. For 30 years, a cancer-causing monkey virus—SV40—was injected into millions via the polio vaccine before it was "discovered" and acknowledged. It is now heavily associated with human tumors. And SV40 is not alone. Third-party researchers have repeatedly found stray viruses, retroviruses, and other contaminants that were not tested for. Why? Because you can't test for something you don't know exists. The entire process is built on a foundation of biological cross-contamination. We are playing a complex game of genetic roulette, trusting that no new unknown virus is silently passed along. This isn't anti-science. This is PRO-transparency and real safety. It's time to ask the hard questions they don't want to answer. What are we really injecting? What long-term effects are we ignoring?

Camus

60,406 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

"Expecting rebuttals to remain confined to journals, while misinformation spreads freely online, is neither realism nor appropriate. If something is promoted in public, it must be corrected in public." ~Proctor's Response to Coulthart (Why am I spending more time on this? American Alchemy's video on the mummies has 904,000 views. @incredhistory's video has 5,500 views. The original, sensationalistic claims always do MUCH better than any evidence that is presented later that throws cold water on said claims. That's always been an issue. That could change if Jesse makes a short video on his YT channel right now, linked to the @incredhistory video, and implores his viewers to watch it with an open mind. And/or if he pins a tweet linking his X followers to the "Incredible History" analysis.) "At one point in time, I was truly wondering if these [mummies] were a new species." ~Accused Debunker, Will Brown 🙂 "It's just too early, yet, for me to make any kind of definitive statement about what I think about these objects." ~Ross Coulthart (After watching the new video by "Incredible History" and the interview done on "Weaponized," it's not too early for me (and MANY other people) to say I believe they're fake. Others felt they were fake right from the start but I wanted to wait for more evidence. We have that now. From yesterday's "Reality Check" with Coulthart and Meagan Medick.) Coulthart: "I think (the new @incredhistory video) is important. It raises... I've actually been in touch with the gentleman who made it, Will (Brown), and I'm hoping to some stage, talk to him. And I'd like to include what he says in any analysis that we do on NewsNation about the tridactals." (Who are the experts featured in the new "Incredible History" video segments that I clipped below? Dr. Daniel Proctor (Galaxopithecus), "has a PhD in bio-anthropology. Specifically, his area of focus is the hands and the feet. He has published papers on the evolution of the hands and the feet, including focusing of the ability to grasp." Dr. Joseph A.P. Wilson (Joseph A P Wilson), "earned his doctorate in anthropology from the University of Florida. he's current lecturer in archeology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and part time lecturer in anthropology at Fairfield University. And more importantly., before academia, he worked as a molecular genetic technologist at Greenwood Genetic Center in South Carolina." Michele - Mrs Anthrope (Radiographer) - Mrs. Anthrope The descriptions of their credentials is from the "Incredible History" video which I clipped a few segments from and included below.) ~More from Reality Check~ Coulthart: "We've filmed in Peru, and we've spoken directly with the doctors there. As I said in social media commentary that was posted before I left Peru, it's just too early, yet, for me to make any kind of definitive statement about what I think about these objects. I'm very careful not to even say, beings." (Again, after the seeing the "Incredible History" video, it shouldn't be too early to offer up a new opinion.) Coulthart: "I certainly got the impression from the CT tomography scans that they seemed like intact beings of some kind. But frankly, I'm not an anatomist. I'm not an anthropologist or anyone with any kind of experience in a scientific analysis of these beings. And I think we'll have to go with what good science says. And all the way through in this, what the scientists in Peru have told me, and what the scientists in America and indeed in Mexico have told me, is they want independent review. They want independent assessment. "And I guess what I'm a little worried about is the partisan way, the way that on UFO, UAP, Twitter, social media, people take their positions and adopt in a definitive position once and for all. This is a hoax, or this is real. Frankly, I just don't think we know enough right now. I don't think you can base a final conclusion on an analysis of a couple of bones in one alleged being's scans. I've heard arguments two and for." (With the new information, it's NOT "partisan" and I am NOT saying "once and for all." But I think the arguments for fraud put forth by "Incredible History" are pretty damning and are enough to show anybody with an open mind that there are massive problems with the hypothesis that these are non-human beings or...hybrids of humans and non-humans. It appears to be a done deal: aka Fake.) Coulthart: "What I think will be definitive, and I'm aware that there is a DNA analysis underway at the moment. I don't know the name of the institution in the United States that's doing it, but there is some kind of DNA analysis underway, which will hopefully provide us with more answers as to the genetic origins of whatever these objects are. And that should be coming out sometime this year, hopefully fairly early up. "Until then, yes, I do think that we should acknowledge that there's been some great work done to raise, I think, serious questions about the legitimacy or the authenticity of the beings or the objects, but let's keep an open mind and let's reward and applaud good science where it's done. "This isn't like some kind of wrestling bout. You know, there's not a winner or a loser." (The credibility of the non-human subject is in danger of being set back because so many people in this community want to believe so hard and will ignore anything that goes against those beliefs. If these, apparent, hoaxes are not called out and done so, forcefully, we're all going to lose.) Coulthart: "Science is an iterative process where people basically do an analysis and make an assessment. Let's make those assessments, do the independent work, make sure that independent scientists with rigor get peer reviewed and checked and assessed, and then we can come up with a judgment. "I think the real tragedy would be if these are, potentially, if they are significantly important objects that have, basically, been procured as part of Peru's natural, cultural, significant history, it would be really tragic if, because of a sweeping assertion that these are a hoax, that the entire thing is not taken seriously. I'm not so sure I can dismiss it out of hand just because of this latest debunk, but I'm very, very happy to let independent, rigorous science do the do the guesswork and do the analysis." ~ (Will Brown (@incredhistory) responded to Coulthart's take via a reply to Meagan Medick's post.) Will Brown: "Curious why you all didn’t give the same reaction to Jesse Michel's (Jesse Michels) bold proclamations in a video that received 200x the views mine did on YouTube? "Similar question for Jay Anderson’s (Jay Anderson) 'scientific proof' video which has 10X the views? "Perhaps it’s because those videos don’t throw a wrench in whatever it is you are working on? "…any and all documentaries and books moving forward should include Steve Mera's testimony about what’s actually going on in Palpa." ~ Will Brown: "Hey Ross Coulthart, I’m hoping you’ll correct yourself here. In this video you stated we only looked at scans for one of the 'beings.' That is false. The video covers Maria and Monseratt. The Podcast with Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell and George Knapp adds Paloma in addition to Maria and Monseratt... All of which have multiple signs of manipulation on hands and feet. "You told me you watched my video…you even said you thought it was excellent and that it brought up legitimate concerns. "Did you actually watch the video? "Your statements today make me believe that you didn’t watch at all." ~ (And here's Dr. Daniel Proctor's (Galaxopithecus) response to Coulthart, and others, who are holding out hope for new DNA analysis.) Proctor: "I want to respond to Ross Coulthart’s recent caution that we should be careful calling the Nazca mummies a 'hoax' because they might represent cultural heritage, and to his claim that DNA should be more definitive than anatomy. "Respectfully, this framing gets the issue backwards. "First, there is nothing new here. 'Maria' was introduced nearly a decade ago. She did not appear last year, or this year, or as some sudden scientific revelation. She has been circulating since roughly 2015–2016, and in that entire span she has never been properly documented in reputable osteological, archaeological, or forensic journals. There is no provenience, as they allegedly come from a cave from an undisclosed location. No controlled excavation, no chain of custody, no standard reports of any nature, and anonymous discoverer. "What we are actually seeing is a slow drip of bodies, which are always sensational, always just beyond proper access, always promoted as revolutionary, and always somehow unable to withstand normal scientific scrutiny. That pattern is not accidental. "Second, anatomy is not secondary evidence. "The idea that DNA should be privileged over gross anatomy in evaluating human remains is baffling. Anatomy is primary data. Bones do not lie about how they articulate. Hand bones do not mysteriously relocate into feet. Developmental biology places hard constraints on what a viable organism can look like. "DNA can tell you what tissue something came from, within the strict parameters for which the tests have been designed. No mainstream lab has tests for some hypothetical 'alien' DNA. "Anatomy tells you whether the body ever existed as a coherent organism. In this case, the anatomy alone demonstrates fabrication. That is not speculative. It is observable. "Third, the cultural-heritage argument is deeply ironic. "The Nazca mummy trade, because that is what this is, destroys real cultural heritage. Looting graves, ghoulishly disarticulating bodies, recombining bones, and fabricating specimens for sale and spectacle is the opposite of preservation. Calling attention to that destruction is not disrespectful, on the contrary, it is necessary. "We have seen this playbook before. The commercialization of mummies, the alienization of cranial modification, and the recycling of colonial myths about 'non-human' ancient peoples. 'None of this is new. 'What is new is the social-media amplification. "Which brings me to Ross’s discomfort with debunking (or defending) these claims on social media rather than in scientific venues. "Here’s the problem: this hoax does not live in scientific venues. "It never has. "It lives on YouTube, on X, on press conferences, in podcasts, and in staged congressional spectacles. It is an argument of persuasion, not evidence. Expecting rebuttals to remain confined to journals, while misinformation spreads freely online, is neither realism nor appropriate. If something is promoted in public, it must be corrected in public. "Finally, caution cuts both ways. Being 'diplomatic' toward a hoax that incentivizes grave robbery, fuels pseudoscience, and misrepresents Indigenous pasts does not protect heritage. It only enables its continued destruction."
8:29

"Expecting rebuttals to remain confined to journals, while misinformation spreads freely online, is neither realism nor appropriate. If something is promoted in public, it must be corrected in public." ~Proctor's Response to Coulthart (Why am I spending more time on this? American Alchemy's video on the mummies has 904,000 views. @incredhistory's video has 5,500 views. The original, sensationalistic claims always do MUCH better than any evidence that is presented later that throws cold water on said claims. That's always been an issue. That could change if Jesse makes a short video on his YT channel right now, linked to the @incredhistory video, and implores his viewers to watch it with an open mind. And/or if he pins a tweet linking his X followers to the "Incredible History" analysis.) "At one point in time, I was truly wondering if these [mummies] were a new species." ~Accused Debunker, Will Brown 🙂 "It's just too early, yet, for me to make any kind of definitive statement about what I think about these objects." ~Ross Coulthart (After watching the new video by "Incredible History" and the interview done on "Weaponized," it's not too early for me (and MANY other people) to say I believe they're fake. Others felt they were fake right from the start but I wanted to wait for more evidence. We have that now. From yesterday's "Reality Check" with Coulthart and Meagan Medick.) Coulthart: "I think (the new @incredhistory video) is important. It raises... I've actually been in touch with the gentleman who made it, Will (Brown), and I'm hoping to some stage, talk to him. And I'd like to include what he says in any analysis that we do on NewsNation about the tridactals." (Who are the experts featured in the new "Incredible History" video segments that I clipped below? Dr. Daniel Proctor (Galaxopithecus), "has a PhD in bio-anthropology. Specifically, his area of focus is the hands and the feet. He has published papers on the evolution of the hands and the feet, including focusing of the ability to grasp." Dr. Joseph A.P. Wilson (Joseph A P Wilson), "earned his doctorate in anthropology from the University of Florida. he's current lecturer in archeology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and part time lecturer in anthropology at Fairfield University. And more importantly., before academia, he worked as a molecular genetic technologist at Greenwood Genetic Center in South Carolina." Michele - Mrs Anthrope (Radiographer) - Mrs. Anthrope The descriptions of their credentials is from the "Incredible History" video which I clipped a few segments from and included below.) ~More from Reality Check~ Coulthart: "We've filmed in Peru, and we've spoken directly with the doctors there. As I said in social media commentary that was posted before I left Peru, it's just too early, yet, for me to make any kind of definitive statement about what I think about these objects. I'm very careful not to even say, beings." (Again, after the seeing the "Incredible History" video, it shouldn't be too early to offer up a new opinion.) Coulthart: "I certainly got the impression from the CT tomography scans that they seemed like intact beings of some kind. But frankly, I'm not an anatomist. I'm not an anthropologist or anyone with any kind of experience in a scientific analysis of these beings. And I think we'll have to go with what good science says. And all the way through in this, what the scientists in Peru have told me, and what the scientists in America and indeed in Mexico have told me, is they want independent review. They want independent assessment. "And I guess what I'm a little worried about is the partisan way, the way that on UFO, UAP, Twitter, social media, people take their positions and adopt in a definitive position once and for all. This is a hoax, or this is real. Frankly, I just don't think we know enough right now. I don't think you can base a final conclusion on an analysis of a couple of bones in one alleged being's scans. I've heard arguments two and for." (With the new information, it's NOT "partisan" and I am NOT saying "once and for all." But I think the arguments for fraud put forth by "Incredible History" are pretty damning and are enough to show anybody with an open mind that there are massive problems with the hypothesis that these are non-human beings or...hybrids of humans and non-humans. It appears to be a done deal: aka Fake.) Coulthart: "What I think will be definitive, and I'm aware that there is a DNA analysis underway at the moment. I don't know the name of the institution in the United States that's doing it, but there is some kind of DNA analysis underway, which will hopefully provide us with more answers as to the genetic origins of whatever these objects are. And that should be coming out sometime this year, hopefully fairly early up. "Until then, yes, I do think that we should acknowledge that there's been some great work done to raise, I think, serious questions about the legitimacy or the authenticity of the beings or the objects, but let's keep an open mind and let's reward and applaud good science where it's done. "This isn't like some kind of wrestling bout. You know, there's not a winner or a loser." (The credibility of the non-human subject is in danger of being set back because so many people in this community want to believe so hard and will ignore anything that goes against those beliefs. If these, apparent, hoaxes are not called out and done so, forcefully, we're all going to lose.) Coulthart: "Science is an iterative process where people basically do an analysis and make an assessment. Let's make those assessments, do the independent work, make sure that independent scientists with rigor get peer reviewed and checked and assessed, and then we can come up with a judgment. "I think the real tragedy would be if these are, potentially, if they are significantly important objects that have, basically, been procured as part of Peru's natural, cultural, significant history, it would be really tragic if, because of a sweeping assertion that these are a hoax, that the entire thing is not taken seriously. I'm not so sure I can dismiss it out of hand just because of this latest debunk, but I'm very, very happy to let independent, rigorous science do the do the guesswork and do the analysis." ~ (Will Brown (@incredhistory) responded to Coulthart's take via a reply to Meagan Medick's post.) Will Brown: "Curious why you all didn’t give the same reaction to Jesse Michel's (Jesse Michels) bold proclamations in a video that received 200x the views mine did on YouTube? "Similar question for Jay Anderson’s (Jay Anderson) 'scientific proof' video which has 10X the views? "Perhaps it’s because those videos don’t throw a wrench in whatever it is you are working on? "…any and all documentaries and books moving forward should include Steve Mera's testimony about what’s actually going on in Palpa." ~ Will Brown: "Hey Ross Coulthart, I’m hoping you’ll correct yourself here. In this video you stated we only looked at scans for one of the 'beings.' That is false. The video covers Maria and Monseratt. The Podcast with Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell and George Knapp adds Paloma in addition to Maria and Monseratt... All of which have multiple signs of manipulation on hands and feet. "You told me you watched my video…you even said you thought it was excellent and that it brought up legitimate concerns. "Did you actually watch the video? "Your statements today make me believe that you didn’t watch at all." ~ (And here's Dr. Daniel Proctor's (Galaxopithecus) response to Coulthart, and others, who are holding out hope for new DNA analysis.) Proctor: "I want to respond to Ross Coulthart’s recent caution that we should be careful calling the Nazca mummies a 'hoax' because they might represent cultural heritage, and to his claim that DNA should be more definitive than anatomy. "Respectfully, this framing gets the issue backwards. "First, there is nothing new here. 'Maria' was introduced nearly a decade ago. She did not appear last year, or this year, or as some sudden scientific revelation. She has been circulating since roughly 2015–2016, and in that entire span she has never been properly documented in reputable osteological, archaeological, or forensic journals. There is no provenience, as they allegedly come from a cave from an undisclosed location. No controlled excavation, no chain of custody, no standard reports of any nature, and anonymous discoverer. "What we are actually seeing is a slow drip of bodies, which are always sensational, always just beyond proper access, always promoted as revolutionary, and always somehow unable to withstand normal scientific scrutiny. That pattern is not accidental. "Second, anatomy is not secondary evidence. "The idea that DNA should be privileged over gross anatomy in evaluating human remains is baffling. Anatomy is primary data. Bones do not lie about how they articulate. Hand bones do not mysteriously relocate into feet. Developmental biology places hard constraints on what a viable organism can look like. "DNA can tell you what tissue something came from, within the strict parameters for which the tests have been designed. No mainstream lab has tests for some hypothetical 'alien' DNA. "Anatomy tells you whether the body ever existed as a coherent organism. In this case, the anatomy alone demonstrates fabrication. That is not speculative. It is observable. "Third, the cultural-heritage argument is deeply ironic. "The Nazca mummy trade, because that is what this is, destroys real cultural heritage. Looting graves, ghoulishly disarticulating bodies, recombining bones, and fabricating specimens for sale and spectacle is the opposite of preservation. Calling attention to that destruction is not disrespectful, on the contrary, it is necessary. "We have seen this playbook before. The commercialization of mummies, the alienization of cranial modification, and the recycling of colonial myths about 'non-human' ancient peoples. 'None of this is new. 'What is new is the social-media amplification. "Which brings me to Ross’s discomfort with debunking (or defending) these claims on social media rather than in scientific venues. "Here’s the problem: this hoax does not live in scientific venues. "It never has. "It lives on YouTube, on X, on press conferences, in podcasts, and in staged congressional spectacles. It is an argument of persuasion, not evidence. Expecting rebuttals to remain confined to journals, while misinformation spreads freely online, is neither realism nor appropriate. If something is promoted in public, it must be corrected in public. "Finally, caution cuts both ways. Being 'diplomatic' toward a hoax that incentivizes grave robbery, fuels pseudoscience, and misrepresents Indigenous pasts does not protect heritage. It only enables its continued destruction."

Joe Murgia

44,343 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Deceased anti gravity researcher Amy Eskridge said the missing and dead scientists are the results of timeline wars, she said this in 2021 Eerie given that her name is being floated in the conversations around missing scientists, even by people like Congressman Eric Burlison “My point is that the loudest focus around the UAP topic is currently directed towards the technology of the observed craft. But that's missing the point. If they are here at all, it's surely for some very good reason that has nothing to do with their propulsion tech. In looking for the answers behind this phenomena, we have focused too much on the "effect" (the current presence of UAP craft) and not enough on the "cause" behind WHY they might be here. In general, the "why" behind most intelligent actions usually comes down to some survival based need. So what survival based need might these craft have to be here? The greys are from the future, they evolved after the cataclysm, and want to ensure their future existence. OK. Another earlier faction of travelers would prefer for us all to stay human by preventing this cataclysm. Ok. But what is the "why" that has generated this whole situation? The atmosphere gets royally fucked up in the future, and creates an evolutionary divergence. Some would like this divergence to continue to occur, and some would like to stop it. But the "cause" that generates this divergence is the atmosphere getting fucked up, and how the chemistry of the new atmosphere interacts with our bodies to cause us to change. THAT either happening or not happening is what matters most to the greys. And that's an issue of chemistry and biology, not so much physics. So the BIGGEST issue on our minds shouldn't necessarily be trying to figure out the technology behind the craft. That's important, but still missing the point. If the greys had strategic targets that they'd like to travel back in time to ice well in advance, it wouldn't necessarily be targets who were into physics. It would more likely be targets who understand climate science and biology and all the other critical elements of the cataclysm that cause the greys to either evolve into themselves or not. The people who might know how to reverse or prevent atmospheric catastrophe, or how to harden our bodies against it and survive it etc. Whether the cause of the atmospheric cataclysm is caused by an asteroid or something else, it all comes down to the chemistry of what we breathe and how it interacts with our bodies to either evolve the survivors into the greys or not. None of which is related to the propulsion tech of the UAPs, that is a secondary distraction. We have up until now failed ourselves by super epically missing the point. My local anecdote about dead scientists who were laid off by a NASA MSFC Biology Department only to be massacred years later is an example of this. A timeline war is surely a great example of "unconventional warfare." This particular type of unconventional warfare includes future information that allows you to take out targets many years before their individual relevance to the conflict is able to become obvious. Anyone who wants to understand the motivations and objectives of this particular timeline war just needs to google "dead scientists" and figure out what they all have in common. There actually is a great website that has been diligently recording mysterious deaths of scientists, going back to cases 20 years or longer ago. Plot twist - most of these "dead scientists" aren't physicists, although some of them are. But a complete list of mysteriously dead scientists includes biologists, climatologists, virologists, chemists, material scientists, agricultural scientists etc etc. Killed by random drive by shootings, cars exploding, sudden unexplained illnesses that kill them within a matter of days, home entries where nothing is stolen but they end up dead anyway, getting hit by a car as they walk down the sidewalk, disappearing and being found in the river, etc etc etc. Most of them told someone that they were scared shortly before they died of these random events of violence. None of these cases are provably traced back to intentional assassination, due to a clean getaway or lack of evidence. Future information certainly helps you figure out how to get away with it. But it seems like scientists tend to die of random acts of violence more often than the general population, and the dead are not all UAP physicists, in fact most of them aren't. Many of them are people like the former NASA Biology personnel who became professors at UAH only to get freaking massacred as a group years later. If you really wanna understand the objectives of the timeline war, then you need to figure out which scientists are dying off in the early or mid stages of their careers, and WHY. You can figure it out just by reading the prior papers of these randomly violently dead people and by extrapolating where their research may have led to ten or 20 years in the future if they had lived. You know how these things are. You know a hit when you see one, even if you can't prove it. Those deaths that just don't make any sense at all, even as random acts of violence. Those seemingly random tragedies that just happen to be occurring over and over and over again within pretty specific communities of study. That is a very large fraction of how the unconventional warfare of this conflict is being carried out. What no one fully recognizes is that we are currently fighting this war massively understaffed. Key personnel have been repeatedly taken out years in advance. And now we are here, understaffed. It's a very tight and thin crew of expertise that's still left over to deal with the problems that remain.” Email originally released by Franc Milburn
5:50

Deceased anti gravity researcher Amy Eskridge said the missing and dead scientists are the results of timeline wars, she said this in 2021 Eerie given that her name is being floated in the conversations around missing scientists, even by people like Congressman Eric Burlison “My point is that the loudest focus around the UAP topic is currently directed towards the technology of the observed craft. But that's missing the point. If they are here at all, it's surely for some very good reason that has nothing to do with their propulsion tech. In looking for the answers behind this phenomena, we have focused too much on the "effect" (the current presence of UAP craft) and not enough on the "cause" behind WHY they might be here. In general, the "why" behind most intelligent actions usually comes down to some survival based need. So what survival based need might these craft have to be here? The greys are from the future, they evolved after the cataclysm, and want to ensure their future existence. OK. Another earlier faction of travelers would prefer for us all to stay human by preventing this cataclysm. Ok. But what is the "why" that has generated this whole situation? The atmosphere gets royally fucked up in the future, and creates an evolutionary divergence. Some would like this divergence to continue to occur, and some would like to stop it. But the "cause" that generates this divergence is the atmosphere getting fucked up, and how the chemistry of the new atmosphere interacts with our bodies to cause us to change. THAT either happening or not happening is what matters most to the greys. And that's an issue of chemistry and biology, not so much physics. So the BIGGEST issue on our minds shouldn't necessarily be trying to figure out the technology behind the craft. That's important, but still missing the point. If the greys had strategic targets that they'd like to travel back in time to ice well in advance, it wouldn't necessarily be targets who were into physics. It would more likely be targets who understand climate science and biology and all the other critical elements of the cataclysm that cause the greys to either evolve into themselves or not. The people who might know how to reverse or prevent atmospheric catastrophe, or how to harden our bodies against it and survive it etc. Whether the cause of the atmospheric cataclysm is caused by an asteroid or something else, it all comes down to the chemistry of what we breathe and how it interacts with our bodies to either evolve the survivors into the greys or not. None of which is related to the propulsion tech of the UAPs, that is a secondary distraction. We have up until now failed ourselves by super epically missing the point. My local anecdote about dead scientists who were laid off by a NASA MSFC Biology Department only to be massacred years later is an example of this. A timeline war is surely a great example of "unconventional warfare." This particular type of unconventional warfare includes future information that allows you to take out targets many years before their individual relevance to the conflict is able to become obvious. Anyone who wants to understand the motivations and objectives of this particular timeline war just needs to google "dead scientists" and figure out what they all have in common. There actually is a great website that has been diligently recording mysterious deaths of scientists, going back to cases 20 years or longer ago. Plot twist - most of these "dead scientists" aren't physicists, although some of them are. But a complete list of mysteriously dead scientists includes biologists, climatologists, virologists, chemists, material scientists, agricultural scientists etc etc. Killed by random drive by shootings, cars exploding, sudden unexplained illnesses that kill them within a matter of days, home entries where nothing is stolen but they end up dead anyway, getting hit by a car as they walk down the sidewalk, disappearing and being found in the river, etc etc etc. Most of them told someone that they were scared shortly before they died of these random events of violence. None of these cases are provably traced back to intentional assassination, due to a clean getaway or lack of evidence. Future information certainly helps you figure out how to get away with it. But it seems like scientists tend to die of random acts of violence more often than the general population, and the dead are not all UAP physicists, in fact most of them aren't. Many of them are people like the former NASA Biology personnel who became professors at UAH only to get freaking massacred as a group years later. If you really wanna understand the objectives of the timeline war, then you need to figure out which scientists are dying off in the early or mid stages of their careers, and WHY. You can figure it out just by reading the prior papers of these randomly violently dead people and by extrapolating where their research may have led to ten or 20 years in the future if they had lived. You know how these things are. You know a hit when you see one, even if you can't prove it. Those deaths that just don't make any sense at all, even as random acts of violence. Those seemingly random tragedies that just happen to be occurring over and over and over again within pretty specific communities of study. That is a very large fraction of how the unconventional warfare of this conflict is being carried out. What no one fully recognizes is that we are currently fighting this war massively understaffed. Key personnel have been repeatedly taken out years in advance. And now we are here, understaffed. It's a very tight and thin crew of expertise that's still left over to deal with the problems that remain.” Email originally released by Franc Milburn

Red Panda Koala

104,032 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🚨BREAKING: Candace Owens Is MORE Influential The You Think She's The Real Reason We DON'T Have Boots on the Ground in Iran (Yet)🪖🇺🇸 If you want to know why we aren't currently watching thousands of American body bags returning from the Middle East, you need to look at what is happening behind closed doors at the Pentagon—and you need to look at Candace Owens. People severely underestimate Candace's influence. Her courage to speak out against the war machine quite literally is the reason we do not have boots on the ground right now. According to active-duty sources inside the Air Force, President Trump and Pete Hegseth have just fired over 20 Generals and Admirals, along with hundreds of senior officials. Why the massive purge? Because Trump and Hegseth demanded a land invasion of Iran last week, and the senior military brass looked them in the eye and said NO. The military leaders are refusing the order. So now, the administration is frantically "cutting the head off the snake," purging the Pentagon to try and find spineless "yes men" who will willingly send our sons and daughters to die in a foreign desert. People severely underestimate Candace's reach, but let me make this crystal clear: Candace is DIRECTLY responsible for the military stand-down happening right now. She didn't just give an opinion on a podcast; she issued a moral directive to the American armed forces, and they listened. By getting on her massive platform and explicitly telling our servicemen and women that they have the legal and moral right to conscientiously object, she gave the military the cultural backing they needed to refuse an unconstitutional order. "No American Son or Daughter Should Die for Israel" Our military swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States, not to a foreign government. Candace had the absolute courage to say what the entire MAGA establishment was terrified to whisper: "Goyim, stand down. Go home. Find the legal means to exit the military... I feel like right now we are all being forced into the servitude of a foreign nation." She reminded our troops that Trump’s 180-degree pivot from America First to Israel First does not mean American blood has to be spilled to build foreign real estate. 🪖 Let the Neocons Fight It Candace dropped the ultimate truth bomb, exposing the cowardice of the war hawks. If this war is so necessary, let the people pushing for it go fight it. Allow Mark R. Levin , Ben Shapiro , and the Christian Zionists who view this as some messianic prophecy to sign their own kids up for the draft. Let them put down their podcast mics, fly to the Middle East, and clear the rubble in Gaza themselves. Leave the American working class out of it. Candace Owens shifted the culture, gave our troops a voice, and single-handedly threw a wrench into the military-industrial complex's timeline. She is the reason your sons and brothers are still home today. Thank God for Candace. Hold the line, refuse the orders, and put America First. 💪 🇺🇸
1:31

🚨BREAKING: Candace Owens Is MORE Influential The You Think She's The Real Reason We DON'T Have Boots on the Ground in Iran (Yet)🪖🇺🇸 If you want to know why we aren't currently watching thousands of American body bags returning from the Middle East, you need to look at what is happening behind closed doors at the Pentagon—and you need to look at Candace Owens. People severely underestimate Candace's influence. Her courage to speak out against the war machine quite literally is the reason we do not have boots on the ground right now. According to active-duty sources inside the Air Force, President Trump and Pete Hegseth have just fired over 20 Generals and Admirals, along with hundreds of senior officials. Why the massive purge? Because Trump and Hegseth demanded a land invasion of Iran last week, and the senior military brass looked them in the eye and said NO. The military leaders are refusing the order. So now, the administration is frantically "cutting the head off the snake," purging the Pentagon to try and find spineless "yes men" who will willingly send our sons and daughters to die in a foreign desert. People severely underestimate Candace's reach, but let me make this crystal clear: Candace is DIRECTLY responsible for the military stand-down happening right now. She didn't just give an opinion on a podcast; she issued a moral directive to the American armed forces, and they listened. By getting on her massive platform and explicitly telling our servicemen and women that they have the legal and moral right to conscientiously object, she gave the military the cultural backing they needed to refuse an unconstitutional order. "No American Son or Daughter Should Die for Israel" Our military swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States, not to a foreign government. Candace had the absolute courage to say what the entire MAGA establishment was terrified to whisper: "Goyim, stand down. Go home. Find the legal means to exit the military... I feel like right now we are all being forced into the servitude of a foreign nation." She reminded our troops that Trump’s 180-degree pivot from America First to Israel First does not mean American blood has to be spilled to build foreign real estate. 🪖 Let the Neocons Fight It Candace dropped the ultimate truth bomb, exposing the cowardice of the war hawks. If this war is so necessary, let the people pushing for it go fight it. Allow Mark R. Levin , Ben Shapiro , and the Christian Zionists who view this as some messianic prophecy to sign their own kids up for the draft. Let them put down their podcast mics, fly to the Middle East, and clear the rubble in Gaza themselves. Leave the American working class out of it. Candace Owens shifted the culture, gave our troops a voice, and single-handedly threw a wrench into the military-industrial complex's timeline. She is the reason your sons and brothers are still home today. Thank God for Candace. Hold the line, refuse the orders, and put America First. 💪 🇺🇸

Project Constitution

194,720 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

In the words of your own experts "There is NO experiment to prove that the earth is in motion." You just choose to BELIEVE IT, as a direct result of the Copernican principle. 📍 Cool, but difficult thought process. Right? I mean, that's, that's essentially what's happening when you're on a plane. I mean, if you're throwing a ball up in the air and catching it on the plane, it's happening at a much smaller scale, right? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you're flying at whatever, 600 miles an hour relative to the ground. Yeah. But it doesn't seem, but seem like it when you're sitting there. Yeah. And Einstein elevated that to a principle and said, if you're moving at, if you're not accelerating, you're just moving at a constant speed in a plane or now. I mean, that's essentially what we're doing now. We're. Moving around the sun effectively, constant speed, then you can't tell. So there's no experiment you can do. We could look at the decay of a radioactive nuclear, so some electricity and magnetism, or bounce a ball, have a pendulum, whatever it is, and there's no experiment you can do to tell you whether you're moving or not. Therefore, that concept has no meaning because you can't measure it. And that that's led Einstein to relativity. I'm gonna really drive this home for the last three minutes. Einstein, Hubble Hawking, Arthur Edington, you name 'em. You name 'em, Wolfgang Polly. They all explain. You can't prove that the earth is moving from the Earth. You cannot including stellar aberration. And they will tell you point blank that they can create a model for you that explains alleged parallax, which doesn't actually happen. Retrograde motion. Stellar aberration, all in a geocentric model with the earth stationary, and you cannot prove that it's spinning or revolving on the, the earth itself. It's impossible. Stephen Hawking in 2007 explained it quoting Einstein from his writings in special and general theory, relativity his paper on the combined two theories explaining that you cannot prove that the Earth is spinning. They choose to believe in the Copernican principle because they have a religion that triggers people because they, they think they hate religion. They, they hate God oftentimes. But that is a religion. It's a belief system built upon the doctrine of men void, of empirical, verifiable evidence, and in fact, contrary and antithetical to the actual evidence, despite what the evidence says. I just now read him point blank, say, it can never be disproven. We disregard that possibility because of the horror of a special and unique position. Right, and I have plenty of quotes here from Georis or Heliocentric explaining. You can never prove it. You can't prove that the Earth is STA or that the earth is not stationary. But we don't want to believe that because that would mean the Earth is special. So then what do we do? We go look out at the background distribution, the energy coming away from the earth that shows the Earth's in the center. So what do they do? They call it the axis of evil. Then they come up with a new idea. Well, oh, it does look like we're the center. But that must mean that no matter where you are in the universe, it would look like you're in the center or we're just in the center. That they don't want to say what it is because it has spiritual implications. It has philosophical ramifications. And that is that the earth had to be placed there. It has a special, unique position. They want you, they want to believe that there are a time spec of dust and ever expanding universe of nothingness for everything came from nothing and there's a preexisting energy. Let's not talk about that part. Oh, lightning struck al soup and all this nonsense and And you know why? That's a good question. Probably 'cause they're scared. Scared of like moral accountability, I would guess. But this is the point. This is the problem. It is portrayed as science and we're brainwashing, indoctrinated with this idea as if it is science and it's proven and it's not questionable when you actually go look behind the curtain. It's philosophy and they admit it. So I, that's why I gave specific quotes and it was walked past us. The crux of the whole issue. There is a philosophy that leads to atheism and nihilism and materialism portrayed onto the world as if it is in fact scientific fact. You can't prove that the earth is moving. If the earth is the ball that spins with the objectively isn't. We falsified it. Everything gives us the illusion.
3:41

In the words of your own experts "There is NO experiment to prove that the earth is in motion." You just choose to BELIEVE IT, as a direct result of the Copernican principle. 📍 Cool, but difficult thought process. Right? I mean, that's, that's essentially what's happening when you're on a plane. I mean, if you're throwing a ball up in the air and catching it on the plane, it's happening at a much smaller scale, right? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you're flying at whatever, 600 miles an hour relative to the ground. Yeah. But it doesn't seem, but seem like it when you're sitting there. Yeah. And Einstein elevated that to a principle and said, if you're moving at, if you're not accelerating, you're just moving at a constant speed in a plane or now. I mean, that's essentially what we're doing now. We're. Moving around the sun effectively, constant speed, then you can't tell. So there's no experiment you can do. We could look at the decay of a radioactive nuclear, so some electricity and magnetism, or bounce a ball, have a pendulum, whatever it is, and there's no experiment you can do to tell you whether you're moving or not. Therefore, that concept has no meaning because you can't measure it. And that that's led Einstein to relativity. I'm gonna really drive this home for the last three minutes. Einstein, Hubble Hawking, Arthur Edington, you name 'em. You name 'em, Wolfgang Polly. They all explain. You can't prove that the earth is moving from the Earth. You cannot including stellar aberration. And they will tell you point blank that they can create a model for you that explains alleged parallax, which doesn't actually happen. Retrograde motion. Stellar aberration, all in a geocentric model with the earth stationary, and you cannot prove that it's spinning or revolving on the, the earth itself. It's impossible. Stephen Hawking in 2007 explained it quoting Einstein from his writings in special and general theory, relativity his paper on the combined two theories explaining that you cannot prove that the Earth is spinning. They choose to believe in the Copernican principle because they have a religion that triggers people because they, they think they hate religion. They, they hate God oftentimes. But that is a religion. It's a belief system built upon the doctrine of men void, of empirical, verifiable evidence, and in fact, contrary and antithetical to the actual evidence, despite what the evidence says. I just now read him point blank, say, it can never be disproven. We disregard that possibility because of the horror of a special and unique position. Right, and I have plenty of quotes here from Georis or Heliocentric explaining. You can never prove it. You can't prove that the Earth is STA or that the earth is not stationary. But we don't want to believe that because that would mean the Earth is special. So then what do we do? We go look out at the background distribution, the energy coming away from the earth that shows the Earth's in the center. So what do they do? They call it the axis of evil. Then they come up with a new idea. Well, oh, it does look like we're the center. But that must mean that no matter where you are in the universe, it would look like you're in the center or we're just in the center. That they don't want to say what it is because it has spiritual implications. It has philosophical ramifications. And that is that the earth had to be placed there. It has a special, unique position. They want you, they want to believe that there are a time spec of dust and ever expanding universe of nothingness for everything came from nothing and there's a preexisting energy. Let's not talk about that part. Oh, lightning struck al soup and all this nonsense and And you know why? That's a good question. Probably 'cause they're scared. Scared of like moral accountability, I would guess. But this is the point. This is the problem. It is portrayed as science and we're brainwashing, indoctrinated with this idea as if it is science and it's proven and it's not questionable when you actually go look behind the curtain. It's philosophy and they admit it. So I, that's why I gave specific quotes and it was walked past us. The crux of the whole issue. There is a philosophy that leads to atheism and nihilism and materialism portrayed onto the world as if it is in fact scientific fact. You can't prove that the earth is moving. If the earth is the ball that spins with the objectively isn't. We falsified it. Everything gives us the illusion.

Shane St Pierre

54,527 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Bruce Greenwald invited Li Lu to speak to his class on value investing. The result is a 90 minute masterclass on how to be a value investor. If you haven't watched the video, do it now. If you have, it's worth re-watching. Here is a list of my favorite quotes from Li Lu 👇 PERSONALITY OF A VALUE INVESTOR • "Understand who you are as an investor, because you will be tested. You will have to ask yourself if you truly are a value investor." • "Value investing goes against our evolution of following the crowds to survive." • "You will spend most of your time as an investigative journalist. To have insatiable curiosity." • "You almost have to be curious about everything. Because you never know where you'll get that one major insight." INVESTOR CRITERIA • Is it cheap? • Is it a good business? • Why is this opportunity available to me? "Once you answer those questions, you really have to go for it." INVESTMENT CASE STUDY 1: TIMBERLAND • "The first thing I check in a company is it's valuation." • "If you're an investor you don't care where it traded before." • "What matters isn't the price-to-book ratio itself, but what's in the book value." • "You want to compare the capital invested in the business to how much pre-tax cash flow the business generates using that capital." • "So Timberland generated $100M on $200M in capital invested. So why does the opportunity exist?" - Nike, Reebok, all the shoe brands fell off a cliff during the Asian Financial Crisis. - Founder owns 40% of the stock - Company was profitable and didn't need financial markets (no sell-side) - Tons of shareholder lawsuits • "What would be your conclusion if you were a normal mutual fund hearing this information? That management is milking the company for their own gain." What does Li Lu do next? • "I download every file of the shareholder court cases. That's the investigative journalist part." • "The result was that the founder withdrew guidance and shareholders didn't like it. That was it." How do you determine if management are decent people? • "You've got to be an investigative journalist and find the trail of evidence. Go to their community. Introduce yourself to their friends/family/neighbors." Total Time Commitment: "A couple of weeks of diligent/obsessive work" • "Investing is intensive work for short bursts of time." HOW MUCH TO BUY? • "If you go join a fund, they'll tell you not to risk anything more than 25-50bps." • "Think about how much effort you put in to this work. You have no downside and its trading at 5x profits." • "So, I put a shitload of money into Timberland. Over the next 10 years it went up 7x. It was never more than 15x earnings." • "If you're not a good analyst, you'll NEVER be a good investor." • "When it goes up, you don't have to do a damn thing. You just sit on it and ride with it." INVESTMENT CASE STUDY 2: KOREAN COMPANY • "Don't think about per-share numbers. Think of yourself as an owner." • "$236M in book value, $60M market cap, $25M net earnings." How do you know it's cheap? • "You must confirm that the earnings are there, and that the book value is real, liquid, and tangible." • "They're trading at the cash value in the bank with no debt. They have hotels and department stores that they own outright. They're making $30M+ in pre-tax earnings. And insiders own 50%." The result: Went up 5-6x VALUE INVESTING IS NOT NATURAL • "There's a lot of money in value investing. But it's still unnatural to most people." • "One thing you have to do, is you have to do the work. You have to do the reps. You can make a ton of money if you really do this stuff." • "I benefited by listening AND THEN DOING my own work. Making my own investments and mistakes." WHAT MAKES A GREAT ANALYST • "You must provide accurate and complete information. If you can't succeed on that, you can't succeed in this business." • "If you're not confident about your prediction and what you know, you can't put any money when the stock's in free fall." WHAT PROVIDES THE BIGGEST RETURNS • "Your biggest returns will come from no more than ten tremendous insights. That's it." • "The only way to build those insights is intense curiosity, intense study." INVESTING MISTAKES • "The biggest mistakes come when you buy before you've done all the work." • "My biggest mistakes aren't buying and losing money. It's not buying and missing out on 50-60x returns." HOW MANY COMPANIES SHOULD YOU BUY • "I don't have any set rules on how many stocks or companies I buy. Opportunities are sporadic and it depends on the environment." • "I usually have 3-4 big ideas. If the market is exciting, I have more opportunities. Or if the market is boring, I have fewer." HOW LI LU ALLOCATES TIME • "Most of the time I spend reading and studying about everything. Learning new companies and industries." • "If I find an idea that captivates me. I stop everything and obsess over that idea." • "Besides that, I spend a lot of time with my kid and my wife." TL;DR: • Be an investigative journalist. • Work obsessively in short bursts and spend the rest. of your time learning. • When you've done the work and have conviction, buy a shitload to make it worth it. • Before you invest $1, make sure you can answer the three big questions: Is it cheap, is the management team good, and why does the opportunity exist. • Never stop learning. • Become a curiosity machine.
1:40:32

Bruce Greenwald invited Li Lu to speak to his class on value investing. The result is a 90 minute masterclass on how to be a value investor. If you haven't watched the video, do it now. If you have, it's worth re-watching. Here is a list of my favorite quotes from Li Lu 👇 PERSONALITY OF A VALUE INVESTOR • "Understand who you are as an investor, because you will be tested. You will have to ask yourself if you truly are a value investor." • "Value investing goes against our evolution of following the crowds to survive." • "You will spend most of your time as an investigative journalist. To have insatiable curiosity." • "You almost have to be curious about everything. Because you never know where you'll get that one major insight." INVESTOR CRITERIA • Is it cheap? • Is it a good business? • Why is this opportunity available to me? "Once you answer those questions, you really have to go for it." INVESTMENT CASE STUDY 1: TIMBERLAND • "The first thing I check in a company is it's valuation." • "If you're an investor you don't care where it traded before." • "What matters isn't the price-to-book ratio itself, but what's in the book value." • "You want to compare the capital invested in the business to how much pre-tax cash flow the business generates using that capital." • "So Timberland generated $100M on $200M in capital invested. So why does the opportunity exist?" - Nike, Reebok, all the shoe brands fell off a cliff during the Asian Financial Crisis. - Founder owns 40% of the stock - Company was profitable and didn't need financial markets (no sell-side) - Tons of shareholder lawsuits • "What would be your conclusion if you were a normal mutual fund hearing this information? That management is milking the company for their own gain." What does Li Lu do next? • "I download every file of the shareholder court cases. That's the investigative journalist part." • "The result was that the founder withdrew guidance and shareholders didn't like it. That was it." How do you determine if management are decent people? • "You've got to be an investigative journalist and find the trail of evidence. Go to their community. Introduce yourself to their friends/family/neighbors." Total Time Commitment: "A couple of weeks of diligent/obsessive work" • "Investing is intensive work for short bursts of time." HOW MUCH TO BUY? • "If you go join a fund, they'll tell you not to risk anything more than 25-50bps." • "Think about how much effort you put in to this work. You have no downside and its trading at 5x profits." • "So, I put a shitload of money into Timberland. Over the next 10 years it went up 7x. It was never more than 15x earnings." • "If you're not a good analyst, you'll NEVER be a good investor." • "When it goes up, you don't have to do a damn thing. You just sit on it and ride with it." INVESTMENT CASE STUDY 2: KOREAN COMPANY • "Don't think about per-share numbers. Think of yourself as an owner." • "$236M in book value, $60M market cap, $25M net earnings." How do you know it's cheap? • "You must confirm that the earnings are there, and that the book value is real, liquid, and tangible." • "They're trading at the cash value in the bank with no debt. They have hotels and department stores that they own outright. They're making $30M+ in pre-tax earnings. And insiders own 50%." The result: Went up 5-6x VALUE INVESTING IS NOT NATURAL • "There's a lot of money in value investing. But it's still unnatural to most people." • "One thing you have to do, is you have to do the work. You have to do the reps. You can make a ton of money if you really do this stuff." • "I benefited by listening AND THEN DOING my own work. Making my own investments and mistakes." WHAT MAKES A GREAT ANALYST • "You must provide accurate and complete information. If you can't succeed on that, you can't succeed in this business." • "If you're not confident about your prediction and what you know, you can't put any money when the stock's in free fall." WHAT PROVIDES THE BIGGEST RETURNS • "Your biggest returns will come from no more than ten tremendous insights. That's it." • "The only way to build those insights is intense curiosity, intense study." INVESTING MISTAKES • "The biggest mistakes come when you buy before you've done all the work." • "My biggest mistakes aren't buying and losing money. It's not buying and missing out on 50-60x returns." HOW MANY COMPANIES SHOULD YOU BUY • "I don't have any set rules on how many stocks or companies I buy. Opportunities are sporadic and it depends on the environment." • "I usually have 3-4 big ideas. If the market is exciting, I have more opportunities. Or if the market is boring, I have fewer." HOW LI LU ALLOCATES TIME • "Most of the time I spend reading and studying about everything. Learning new companies and industries." • "If I find an idea that captivates me. I stop everything and obsess over that idea." • "Besides that, I spend a lot of time with my kid and my wife." TL;DR: • Be an investigative journalist. • Work obsessively in short bursts and spend the rest. of your time learning. • When you've done the work and have conviction, buy a shitload to make it worth it. • Before you invest $1, make sure you can answer the three big questions: Is it cheap, is the management team good, and why does the opportunity exist. • Never stop learning. • Become a curiosity machine.

Brandon Beylo

2,750,292 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Max Blumenthal unpacks the ludicrous details of the FBI's "not credible" investigation into Charlie Kirk's assassination. "We're at a point where anyone...who's paying close attention, who isn't invested in the TPUSA–MAGA franchise, is not going to believe the official story" This clip of Max Blumenthal (Max Blumenthal), founder and editor-in-chief of The Grayzone, is taken from an interview with Dave Smith (Dave Smith) posted to Smith's YouTube channel today, September 22, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "I don't have any evidence that of an Israeli government or Israeli role in Charlie Kirk's killing. I just stick to the facts. That's why I'm still here. The reason that people, that this resonates, the idea that Israel played a role resonates, is Netanyahu himself and Israel in general maintain power through lying, manipulation, intimidation and assassination. Especially assassination. "And Netanyahu rose to power after the killing of Yitzhak Rabin, his, his main political rival. And Leah Rabin, Rabin's wife, said Netanyahu incited his murder. Netanyahu marched in front of a mock coffin that said Rabin on it just days before the murder. I mean, and, and then Netanyahu's coalition partners, Ben gvir, etcetera, they are like the spiritual heirs of Yigal Amir who assassinated Rabin. "So this is like Netanyahu's M.O. he just tried to assassinate the entire negotiating team of HAMAS Inside a U.S. ally. And Israel has global assassination squads. But you know what they would have done and what they were planning to do, and you could already see Laura Loomer rolling out the campaign, was to character assassinate Charlie Kirk if he continued to go off message. That's what they do. That's what they did to me. "And you know, if I got like an op ed in the New York Times, not that I would want to, they would try to destroy my reputation. That's what they're doing to Candace Owens. Like, I don't believe they're going to send a sniper to take out Candace Owens, but I hope she has good security because, you know, they could, they want, they, maybe they want to inspire some vigilante or something. "But it's not like the Mossad's M.O. to go inside a U.S. ally and do this. At the same time. There's a, there's another reason why nobody. Why, why people are spinning out their own theories. And I don't want to attack these people. "Actually, like, I think, you know, people should be asking questions. We are not witnessing a credible investigation into Charlie Kurt's killing. Starting with the text messages, the exchange between this shooter, Tyler Robinson and his supposed furry trans lover roommate. They read like something written by a 65 year old federal law enforcement officer. "The words being used are something I've never heard 22 year old people using even as a Gen Xer when I was 22, nobody said, I'm going to retrieve the weapon from the vehicle and leave it at the drop point. Andrew Kolvet yesterday declaring that there's no exit wound because Charlie Kirk had a spine of steel. That doesn't inspire confidence. He's told that by the ER doctor. And shouldn't the ER doctor be telling the media or the FBI should be telling the media that that's why there's no exit wound. Why are we learning that from basically the spokesman for Charlie Kirk? "Now we're hearing it was a World War I era, I think, I guess Mauser rifle and it. So therefore it didn't have a serial number. Unusual, the removal of the camera from behind Charlie Kirk. Again, this isn't, this is like what people are talking about. This is what the Internet's talking about. I'm not just like trying to present to you the theory of the crime. "But a staffer for TPUSA removed a camera that was filming behind Charlie Kirk, which would provide a lot of, I think visual context on where the shot came from, and removed the SD cards. And Andrew Kolvet goes out and says he did the right thing in the middle of a crime scene to remove the SD cards. And the FBI has the footage. But he know he's someone who loved Charlie Kirk. I don't know what the FBI is saying about this. "There, there are so many other odd issues here. The photo of Tyler Robinson at the Dairy Queen 15 minutes after the shooting. The comments by law, federal law enforcement that Tyler Robinson took one minute on the roof to carry out this operation, which I think would be difficult to do even for a professional sniper. And the jerking of Charlie Kirk's head. I guess he's hit. He's. According to the. I guess the official version is he's hit from the front on the left side of his neck, but his head jerks that way. And so many people are formulating the theory that he was actually shot from behind to his right. "And so we're at a point where anyone who's paying attention, who's paying close attention, who isn't like invested in the TPUSA MAGA franchise is not going to believe the official story at this point. And there have just been so many failures on the part of Kash Patel and the FBI as well. So the theories are going to continue to abound and some of them will focus on Israel. And it really doesn't help to have Netanyahu go out twice, first on Newsmax, which is a vehicle for Israeli influence, taking money from the Israeli Foreign Ministry, and then on his own personal prime minister channel to deny killing Charlie Kirk. Like, when have you ever seen a foreign leader just on his own voluntarily deny killing a major U.S. Public figure? It's just a little weird."
5:39

Max Blumenthal unpacks the ludicrous details of the FBI's "not credible" investigation into Charlie Kirk's assassination. "We're at a point where anyone...who's paying close attention, who isn't invested in the TPUSA–MAGA franchise, is not going to believe the official story" This clip of Max Blumenthal (Max Blumenthal), founder and editor-in-chief of The Grayzone, is taken from an interview with Dave Smith (Dave Smith) posted to Smith's YouTube channel today, September 22, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "I don't have any evidence that of an Israeli government or Israeli role in Charlie Kirk's killing. I just stick to the facts. That's why I'm still here. The reason that people, that this resonates, the idea that Israel played a role resonates, is Netanyahu himself and Israel in general maintain power through lying, manipulation, intimidation and assassination. Especially assassination. "And Netanyahu rose to power after the killing of Yitzhak Rabin, his, his main political rival. And Leah Rabin, Rabin's wife, said Netanyahu incited his murder. Netanyahu marched in front of a mock coffin that said Rabin on it just days before the murder. I mean, and, and then Netanyahu's coalition partners, Ben gvir, etcetera, they are like the spiritual heirs of Yigal Amir who assassinated Rabin. "So this is like Netanyahu's M.O. he just tried to assassinate the entire negotiating team of HAMAS Inside a U.S. ally. And Israel has global assassination squads. But you know what they would have done and what they were planning to do, and you could already see Laura Loomer rolling out the campaign, was to character assassinate Charlie Kirk if he continued to go off message. That's what they do. That's what they did to me. "And you know, if I got like an op ed in the New York Times, not that I would want to, they would try to destroy my reputation. That's what they're doing to Candace Owens. Like, I don't believe they're going to send a sniper to take out Candace Owens, but I hope she has good security because, you know, they could, they want, they, maybe they want to inspire some vigilante or something. "But it's not like the Mossad's M.O. to go inside a U.S. ally and do this. At the same time. There's a, there's another reason why nobody. Why, why people are spinning out their own theories. And I don't want to attack these people. "Actually, like, I think, you know, people should be asking questions. We are not witnessing a credible investigation into Charlie Kurt's killing. Starting with the text messages, the exchange between this shooter, Tyler Robinson and his supposed furry trans lover roommate. They read like something written by a 65 year old federal law enforcement officer. "The words being used are something I've never heard 22 year old people using even as a Gen Xer when I was 22, nobody said, I'm going to retrieve the weapon from the vehicle and leave it at the drop point. Andrew Kolvet yesterday declaring that there's no exit wound because Charlie Kirk had a spine of steel. That doesn't inspire confidence. He's told that by the ER doctor. And shouldn't the ER doctor be telling the media or the FBI should be telling the media that that's why there's no exit wound. Why are we learning that from basically the spokesman for Charlie Kirk? "Now we're hearing it was a World War I era, I think, I guess Mauser rifle and it. So therefore it didn't have a serial number. Unusual, the removal of the camera from behind Charlie Kirk. Again, this isn't, this is like what people are talking about. This is what the Internet's talking about. I'm not just like trying to present to you the theory of the crime. "But a staffer for TPUSA removed a camera that was filming behind Charlie Kirk, which would provide a lot of, I think visual context on where the shot came from, and removed the SD cards. And Andrew Kolvet goes out and says he did the right thing in the middle of a crime scene to remove the SD cards. And the FBI has the footage. But he know he's someone who loved Charlie Kirk. I don't know what the FBI is saying about this. "There, there are so many other odd issues here. The photo of Tyler Robinson at the Dairy Queen 15 minutes after the shooting. The comments by law, federal law enforcement that Tyler Robinson took one minute on the roof to carry out this operation, which I think would be difficult to do even for a professional sniper. And the jerking of Charlie Kirk's head. I guess he's hit. He's. According to the. I guess the official version is he's hit from the front on the left side of his neck, but his head jerks that way. And so many people are formulating the theory that he was actually shot from behind to his right. "And so we're at a point where anyone who's paying attention, who's paying close attention, who isn't like invested in the TPUSA MAGA franchise is not going to believe the official story at this point. And there have just been so many failures on the part of Kash Patel and the FBI as well. So the theories are going to continue to abound and some of them will focus on Israel. And it really doesn't help to have Netanyahu go out twice, first on Newsmax, which is a vehicle for Israeli influence, taking money from the Israeli Foreign Ministry, and then on his own personal prime minister channel to deny killing Charlie Kirk. Like, when have you ever seen a foreign leader just on his own voluntarily deny killing a major U.S. Public figure? It's just a little weird."

Sense Receptor

30,103 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

My Letter to Aaron Rodgers I'm writing this letter because I've slowly realized how difficult it is to impact change in the world. It requires influential people to see the paradigm shift. Recently you were asked by executive producer Al Dukes about Malaysian Airlines Flight 370. You responded indicating you were familiar with the videos. I understand your skepticism. Those videos aren't what anyone expected. It's frankly too much for most people to accept. The videos represent the largest conspiracy in history, the theft of a Boeing 777 and the suppression of gravitational manipulation. Where this science and technology leads is to Free Energy. I want you to know I'm just a normal guy who saw two videos, investigated them, the missing plane, and discovered we really are hiding 'magical' technology from the world. In a situation this profound you have to start by proving the lie. In this case it's the false narrative we've been sold on by the media of the missing plane. This was not pilot suicide and the United States knows exactly what happened. Planes don't crash without leaving massive debris fields. There was over 1000lbs of foam seat cushions and not one was found. The pilot didn't practice the route, the simulator data flightpath was of MH150 to Jeddah the pilot was scheduled to fly on Feb 4th. The simulator data was ruled not suspicious. The pilot was categorically ruled out by all parties including the officials, family, and friends. Florence De Changy got his medical records from his family and confirmed there were no red flags. Where the plane was lost from radar there was still five radars in range from three different countries, Indonesia, Thailand, and India. None of these countries have ever made their data publicly available. As you pointed out, Rolls Royce and Boeing also know what happened to this plane as Rolls Royce engine data transmits frequent updates. Rolls Royce has never made their data publicly available either. The United States military has a global persistent surveillance system known as SBIRS, the Space-Based Infrared System by Lockheed Martin. There's no possible way this system would not have seen the debris field of a Boeing 777 in the ocean. The military also has a system called SOSUS, the sound surveillance system which is a global network of acoustic detectors that can even pinpoint a tiny submersible implosion. Remember when the Navy heard the Titan sub pop and didn't say anything for five days? There's no evidence the plane crashed in the South Indian Ocean. There's also acoustic detectors in Diego Garcia and Western Australia both of which should have heard the plane crash in the SIO, yet a recent study by Cardiff University found no detections during the duration of the suspected flightpath. One candidate detection was found on one hydrophone almost an hour after the plane would have run out of fuel. Over the Horizon Radar can see for thousands of miles by bouncing signals off the ionosphere. Both Pine Gap and Diego Garcia should have been able to track the plane from take off to crash. The plane also flew directly past Cobra Gold/Cope Tiger military exercises between Thailand and the United States in the Andaman Sea. We're supposed to believe they weren't tracking a rogue plane? Why did the United States give up the search for MH370 after just a month? Ghyslain Wattrelos, French father and husband, was told by an intelligence source that the Americans know what happened and there were two AWACS (radar planes) in the area. As for the debris that was found, I believe that is from MH370. However, there's not enough debris to confirm a plane crashed and the debris washed up on the wrong continent. Drift modeling was done and the bulk of the debris should have washed up in Australia. It's actually impossible based on the currents for the debris to have shown up on mainland Africa in just one year. If you look at a map a much better location for the debris to have entered the water is the Maldives. The only reason we think the plane even went into the South Indian Ocean (SIO) is the Inmarsat satellite pings who has connections to US intelligence. The raw telemetry data was not released until March 27th, 2014, eight days after the satellite video was uploaded on youtube. This is important because there's coordinates in the satellite video that indicate the Nicobar islands, the same location the plane is believed to have turned into the SIO. What really happened to MH370 is an emergency event related to the 487lbs of dangerous lithium ion batteries onboard. This even is supported by at least 20 witnesses and the flightpath. Mike McKay saw the plane on fire briefly for a few seconds from his oil rig, nine witnesses along the coast heard loud noises as the same time, eight fishermen who saw it flying low ten minutes later, a man on the coast who saw it on fire, and Katherine Tee, who saw the plane in the Nicobar Islands an hour later glowing orange, with dark smoke coming out of the back of it, flying low and descending. Why did the Malaysian Minister of Defense say they didn't send up jets to track the plane because they knew it was commercial and not hostile? The only way they could know that is if they had communication with the plane. They simply didn't release all the communications publicly. China intercepted a communication from the US Navy that was only reported in the China Times of the plane disintegrating and attempting an emergency ditching, consistent with Katherine Tee's sighting and the MH370 videos. I spoke with Billie Vincent recently, former security director for the FAA. In 2014 even before the batteries were known to be on the plane he had deduced that a fire emergency event was the most likely scenario. He suspected this because of similar incidents such as UPS Flight 6 where the same thing happened. One pilot was knocked out from the smoke and they couldn't land because they couldn't see. The plane ended up crashing. Dr. Victor Ettel is an expert on the science and manufacturing of lithium ion batteries and he too is on the record theorizing that the battery fire could have knocked out the people on the plane. Expert Clive Irving agreed and said that MH370's turnback was consistent with the pilots trying to find the nearest airport. Lithium ion batteries were later banned as cargo from passenger planes. Why cover up a fire event? The MH370 videos are why. Just like how you are skeptical, those videos are not something the public is ready to accept even in 2024, let alone in 2014. I had a hard time accepting it until I spoke to government related engineers and started reading scientific papers. It's all real and it's hidden in plain sight. I'm not sure if the fire was an accident and we were trying to save the high value passengers, the 20 Freescale Semiconductor engineers connected to US Aerospace and Defense, or if it was a counter-espionage operation from the start. I expect the reason why we teleported the plane is multi-purposed. Retain the passengers if alive, retain sensitive cargo, and send a message to our adversaries. Don't F with us. Even if China/Russia knew there's nothing they could possibly say. No one would believe them. China leaked satellite imagery a few days after the plane went missing and it looks just like three orbs around a larger object. They also hacked Malaysia the day after the plane went missing and stole classified information about the plane. We have two military videos in perfect synchronization from two completely different angles without a discrepancy on a single frame. The videos corroborate the overall fire event. We see the plane flying low, descending, with smoke coming out of the back of it. We see a heat signature in the belly of the plane where the smoke is presumably coming out of the AC heat exhaust ports near the landing gear. Lieutenant Commander Edward C. Lin leaked the videos. The case against him is shrouded in secrecy and the sentence he got after a plea deal is disproportionate to the charges. The timeframe of his service with the spy plane squadron VPU-2 Wizards is damning, within one month of the plane going missing. His lawyer said the classified information in question is available on the internet and he was caught with flight manifests that include search and rescue code names. The science of the orbs is everything that ufo lore claims exists. Gravity manipulation, mass reduction, warp drives, wormholes, and zero-point energy. I was surprised to learn they're all directly connected by the same science. Spacetime is not empty. It is filled with energy in an equilibrium state. 'Gravity' is just an induced phenomenon based on relative energy densities. If you reduce the equilibrium state of the energy densities in a localized region you produce 'negative energy.' That's what the dark lines in front of the orbs are doing. That's why the orbs are simply falling into the geodesic path they're creating for themselves, and exhibit zero inertia. This is subluminal warp drive. The orbs are also showing characteristics of magnetic monopoles, which is why we see the odd shaped heat signature. They are made of plasma and we're looking at low energy nuclear reactions, also known as cold fusion. The field that creates the spherical region is the non-radiating barrier of the magnetic field. The zap itself is an endothermic event, an absorption of energy. That's why it's black and cold in the thermal drone video. As far as I know this is the first ever endothermic event on video. Just like folding a piece of paper and making a hole, this plane is 'teleporting' to a different location in Spacetime, faster than the speed of light from the observer's prospective. For the people going through the wormhole, it's like going through a doorway. Based on the plane flying East in the satellite video and the right hand rule in electrical engineering, the vector of travel for the plane is backwards, to the West. A fire suppression device washed up in the Maldives a few weeks after the plane disappeared and 15-20 islanders on a small island saw the plane in the early morning hours on the day of the disappearance. It's extremely suspicious that this evidence was dismissed without investigation. The only logical place to hide a the plane is at US military base Diego Garcia, isolated from all major landmasses, out of radar range, and not open to commercial traffic. This base is extremely secretive. There's people who accidentally washed ashore there a few years ago and they've not been allowed to leave. I could keep going. The satellite video is a Citrix remote terminal session logged into the real satellite database. The orbs displace the smoke trails with accurate fluid dynamics in the satellite video. There's a ton more evidence and it all points to the MH370 videos being the authentic true story of what happened to the plane. I don't want people to blindly believe me. I want them to make up their own minds based on the evidence. The only thing I can do is show people the door, they must walk through it for themselves. The videos and the science will be proven to be real with the passage of time. Science like this cannot be hidden forever. It is a discovery, not an invention. The scary question is, "why are we hiding it?" For that, I've reached a dark conclusion. This technology will lead to the eradication of our civilization. With this technology we can extract endless energy directly from the zero-point fluctuations. 'Free' energy. We can produce weapons of unfathomable destructive capability including a black hole. I push for disclosure because I want the world to understand the risks and choose our own fate.
7:19

My Letter to Aaron Rodgers I'm writing this letter because I've slowly realized how difficult it is to impact change in the world. It requires influential people to see the paradigm shift. Recently you were asked by executive producer Al Dukes about Malaysian Airlines Flight 370. You responded indicating you were familiar with the videos. I understand your skepticism. Those videos aren't what anyone expected. It's frankly too much for most people to accept. The videos represent the largest conspiracy in history, the theft of a Boeing 777 and the suppression of gravitational manipulation. Where this science and technology leads is to Free Energy. I want you to know I'm just a normal guy who saw two videos, investigated them, the missing plane, and discovered we really are hiding 'magical' technology from the world. In a situation this profound you have to start by proving the lie. In this case it's the false narrative we've been sold on by the media of the missing plane. This was not pilot suicide and the United States knows exactly what happened. Planes don't crash without leaving massive debris fields. There was over 1000lbs of foam seat cushions and not one was found. The pilot didn't practice the route, the simulator data flightpath was of MH150 to Jeddah the pilot was scheduled to fly on Feb 4th. The simulator data was ruled not suspicious. The pilot was categorically ruled out by all parties including the officials, family, and friends. Florence De Changy got his medical records from his family and confirmed there were no red flags. Where the plane was lost from radar there was still five radars in range from three different countries, Indonesia, Thailand, and India. None of these countries have ever made their data publicly available. As you pointed out, Rolls Royce and Boeing also know what happened to this plane as Rolls Royce engine data transmits frequent updates. Rolls Royce has never made their data publicly available either. The United States military has a global persistent surveillance system known as SBIRS, the Space-Based Infrared System by Lockheed Martin. There's no possible way this system would not have seen the debris field of a Boeing 777 in the ocean. The military also has a system called SOSUS, the sound surveillance system which is a global network of acoustic detectors that can even pinpoint a tiny submersible implosion. Remember when the Navy heard the Titan sub pop and didn't say anything for five days? There's no evidence the plane crashed in the South Indian Ocean. There's also acoustic detectors in Diego Garcia and Western Australia both of which should have heard the plane crash in the SIO, yet a recent study by Cardiff University found no detections during the duration of the suspected flightpath. One candidate detection was found on one hydrophone almost an hour after the plane would have run out of fuel. Over the Horizon Radar can see for thousands of miles by bouncing signals off the ionosphere. Both Pine Gap and Diego Garcia should have been able to track the plane from take off to crash. The plane also flew directly past Cobra Gold/Cope Tiger military exercises between Thailand and the United States in the Andaman Sea. We're supposed to believe they weren't tracking a rogue plane? Why did the United States give up the search for MH370 after just a month? Ghyslain Wattrelos, French father and husband, was told by an intelligence source that the Americans know what happened and there were two AWACS (radar planes) in the area. As for the debris that was found, I believe that is from MH370. However, there's not enough debris to confirm a plane crashed and the debris washed up on the wrong continent. Drift modeling was done and the bulk of the debris should have washed up in Australia. It's actually impossible based on the currents for the debris to have shown up on mainland Africa in just one year. If you look at a map a much better location for the debris to have entered the water is the Maldives. The only reason we think the plane even went into the South Indian Ocean (SIO) is the Inmarsat satellite pings who has connections to US intelligence. The raw telemetry data was not released until March 27th, 2014, eight days after the satellite video was uploaded on youtube. This is important because there's coordinates in the satellite video that indicate the Nicobar islands, the same location the plane is believed to have turned into the SIO. What really happened to MH370 is an emergency event related to the 487lbs of dangerous lithium ion batteries onboard. This even is supported by at least 20 witnesses and the flightpath. Mike McKay saw the plane on fire briefly for a few seconds from his oil rig, nine witnesses along the coast heard loud noises as the same time, eight fishermen who saw it flying low ten minutes later, a man on the coast who saw it on fire, and Katherine Tee, who saw the plane in the Nicobar Islands an hour later glowing orange, with dark smoke coming out of the back of it, flying low and descending. Why did the Malaysian Minister of Defense say they didn't send up jets to track the plane because they knew it was commercial and not hostile? The only way they could know that is if they had communication with the plane. They simply didn't release all the communications publicly. China intercepted a communication from the US Navy that was only reported in the China Times of the plane disintegrating and attempting an emergency ditching, consistent with Katherine Tee's sighting and the MH370 videos. I spoke with Billie Vincent recently, former security director for the FAA. In 2014 even before the batteries were known to be on the plane he had deduced that a fire emergency event was the most likely scenario. He suspected this because of similar incidents such as UPS Flight 6 where the same thing happened. One pilot was knocked out from the smoke and they couldn't land because they couldn't see. The plane ended up crashing. Dr. Victor Ettel is an expert on the science and manufacturing of lithium ion batteries and he too is on the record theorizing that the battery fire could have knocked out the people on the plane. Expert Clive Irving agreed and said that MH370's turnback was consistent with the pilots trying to find the nearest airport. Lithium ion batteries were later banned as cargo from passenger planes. Why cover up a fire event? The MH370 videos are why. Just like how you are skeptical, those videos are not something the public is ready to accept even in 2024, let alone in 2014. I had a hard time accepting it until I spoke to government related engineers and started reading scientific papers. It's all real and it's hidden in plain sight. I'm not sure if the fire was an accident and we were trying to save the high value passengers, the 20 Freescale Semiconductor engineers connected to US Aerospace and Defense, or if it was a counter-espionage operation from the start. I expect the reason why we teleported the plane is multi-purposed. Retain the passengers if alive, retain sensitive cargo, and send a message to our adversaries. Don't F with us. Even if China/Russia knew there's nothing they could possibly say. No one would believe them. China leaked satellite imagery a few days after the plane went missing and it looks just like three orbs around a larger object. They also hacked Malaysia the day after the plane went missing and stole classified information about the plane. We have two military videos in perfect synchronization from two completely different angles without a discrepancy on a single frame. The videos corroborate the overall fire event. We see the plane flying low, descending, with smoke coming out of the back of it. We see a heat signature in the belly of the plane where the smoke is presumably coming out of the AC heat exhaust ports near the landing gear. Lieutenant Commander Edward C. Lin leaked the videos. The case against him is shrouded in secrecy and the sentence he got after a plea deal is disproportionate to the charges. The timeframe of his service with the spy plane squadron VPU-2 Wizards is damning, within one month of the plane going missing. His lawyer said the classified information in question is available on the internet and he was caught with flight manifests that include search and rescue code names. The science of the orbs is everything that ufo lore claims exists. Gravity manipulation, mass reduction, warp drives, wormholes, and zero-point energy. I was surprised to learn they're all directly connected by the same science. Spacetime is not empty. It is filled with energy in an equilibrium state. 'Gravity' is just an induced phenomenon based on relative energy densities. If you reduce the equilibrium state of the energy densities in a localized region you produce 'negative energy.' That's what the dark lines in front of the orbs are doing. That's why the orbs are simply falling into the geodesic path they're creating for themselves, and exhibit zero inertia. This is subluminal warp drive. The orbs are also showing characteristics of magnetic monopoles, which is why we see the odd shaped heat signature. They are made of plasma and we're looking at low energy nuclear reactions, also known as cold fusion. The field that creates the spherical region is the non-radiating barrier of the magnetic field. The zap itself is an endothermic event, an absorption of energy. That's why it's black and cold in the thermal drone video. As far as I know this is the first ever endothermic event on video. Just like folding a piece of paper and making a hole, this plane is 'teleporting' to a different location in Spacetime, faster than the speed of light from the observer's prospective. For the people going through the wormhole, it's like going through a doorway. Based on the plane flying East in the satellite video and the right hand rule in electrical engineering, the vector of travel for the plane is backwards, to the West. A fire suppression device washed up in the Maldives a few weeks after the plane disappeared and 15-20 islanders on a small island saw the plane in the early morning hours on the day of the disappearance. It's extremely suspicious that this evidence was dismissed without investigation. The only logical place to hide a the plane is at US military base Diego Garcia, isolated from all major landmasses, out of radar range, and not open to commercial traffic. This base is extremely secretive. There's people who accidentally washed ashore there a few years ago and they've not been allowed to leave. I could keep going. The satellite video is a Citrix remote terminal session logged into the real satellite database. The orbs displace the smoke trails with accurate fluid dynamics in the satellite video. There's a ton more evidence and it all points to the MH370 videos being the authentic true story of what happened to the plane. I don't want people to blindly believe me. I want them to make up their own minds based on the evidence. The only thing I can do is show people the door, they must walk through it for themselves. The videos and the science will be proven to be real with the passage of time. Science like this cannot be hidden forever. It is a discovery, not an invention. The scary question is, "why are we hiding it?" For that, I've reached a dark conclusion. This technology will lead to the eradication of our civilization. With this technology we can extract endless energy directly from the zero-point fluctuations. 'Free' energy. We can produce weapons of unfathomable destructive capability including a black hole. I push for disclosure because I want the world to understand the risks and choose our own fate.

Ashton Forbes

106,781 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

For some reason, people seem to think that if someone is strong, athletic, resilient and never complains, it means they can be treated a little differently. You can suddenly hang on them, jump on their back, lean your full weight on them, have them carry you around the stage, sit on their shoulders, or shove them for the sake of a laugh or a memorable moment. After all, they'll handle it. They're strong. But strength does not make a person invulnerable. Behind a beautiful smile, professionalism and the habit of enduring everything, there may be pain that those around them simply don't notice. And even if they do, they may not consider it serious enough to change their behavior. What makes it even more concerning is when that person has already spoken openly about their health issues. Problems with the spine, neck or herniated discs are not something that should be brushed aside. A single awkward movement, an unexpected load or a sudden loss of balance can trigger a flare-up, a pinched nerve or even a new injury. And the consequences don't always appear immediately. Sometimes the pain doesn't set in until hours or even days later. Personally, I've never found these kinds of "jokes" funny, cute or something that represents a healthy family or friendship dynamic. When someone doesn't expect another grown adult's full weight to be thrown onto them, they have no time to brace their muscles, distribute the load properly, or keep their balance. In a split second, the strain falls on the spine, neck, knees and ankles. If that person is already bent over or in motion, the risk becomes even greater. The saddest part is that people who never complain are often the ones others worry about the least. They're seen as the reliable one - the person who can handle anything. But that's a dangerous misconception. No one should be expected to endure pain simply because they look strong. No one should become the target of these kinds of pranks just because they're capable of staying on their feet. Real care from the people around you isn't shown after you've already been injured. It's shown much earlier - by consciously avoiding situations that could cause harm in the first place. Especially when you know someone has existing health issues. And it's hard to believe that the people closest to him wouldn't know, when even millions of complete strangers do.. What stands out the most is that these "games" always seem to happen to the same person and involve nearly half of the people who are supposed to be his family. Why is he always the one people suddenly jump on, hang off, use as support or turn into part of a joke? I truly hope people stop treating physical strength as permission to keep testing its limits over and over again. Because health is not something worth risking for a few seconds of laughter or attention. Some things can be fixed. Others leave injuries that can stay with a person for the rest of their life. I sincerely hope that people will begin to see not only the strength of a strong person, but the human being behind that strength, someone who also deserves to be protected. Especially by those who are supposed to be family. And believe me, I'm not trying to be overprotective or act like an overbearing "mom". I'm not blowing this out of proportion and I'm not treating him like he's fragile. I know #Jungkook is a grown man. I know he's been with the members for many years. But none of that cancels out my concern or common sense. I expect mature, reasonable adults to understand why so many people are upset by these repeated "games". WE LOVE YOU JUNGKOOK ♥️
0:25

For some reason, people seem to think that if someone is strong, athletic, resilient and never complains, it means they can be treated a little differently. You can suddenly hang on them, jump on their back, lean your full weight on them, have them carry you around the stage, sit on their shoulders, or shove them for the sake of a laugh or a memorable moment. After all, they'll handle it. They're strong. But strength does not make a person invulnerable. Behind a beautiful smile, professionalism and the habit of enduring everything, there may be pain that those around them simply don't notice. And even if they do, they may not consider it serious enough to change their behavior. What makes it even more concerning is when that person has already spoken openly about their health issues. Problems with the spine, neck or herniated discs are not something that should be brushed aside. A single awkward movement, an unexpected load or a sudden loss of balance can trigger a flare-up, a pinched nerve or even a new injury. And the consequences don't always appear immediately. Sometimes the pain doesn't set in until hours or even days later. Personally, I've never found these kinds of "jokes" funny, cute or something that represents a healthy family or friendship dynamic. When someone doesn't expect another grown adult's full weight to be thrown onto them, they have no time to brace their muscles, distribute the load properly, or keep their balance. In a split second, the strain falls on the spine, neck, knees and ankles. If that person is already bent over or in motion, the risk becomes even greater. The saddest part is that people who never complain are often the ones others worry about the least. They're seen as the reliable one - the person who can handle anything. But that's a dangerous misconception. No one should be expected to endure pain simply because they look strong. No one should become the target of these kinds of pranks just because they're capable of staying on their feet. Real care from the people around you isn't shown after you've already been injured. It's shown much earlier - by consciously avoiding situations that could cause harm in the first place. Especially when you know someone has existing health issues. And it's hard to believe that the people closest to him wouldn't know, when even millions of complete strangers do.. What stands out the most is that these "games" always seem to happen to the same person and involve nearly half of the people who are supposed to be his family. Why is he always the one people suddenly jump on, hang off, use as support or turn into part of a joke? I truly hope people stop treating physical strength as permission to keep testing its limits over and over again. Because health is not something worth risking for a few seconds of laughter or attention. Some things can be fixed. Others leave injuries that can stay with a person for the rest of their life. I sincerely hope that people will begin to see not only the strength of a strong person, but the human being behind that strength, someone who also deserves to be protected. Especially by those who are supposed to be family. And believe me, I'm not trying to be overprotective or act like an overbearing "mom". I'm not blowing this out of proportion and I'm not treating him like he's fragile. I know #Jungkook is a grown man. I know he's been with the members for many years. But none of that cancels out my concern or common sense. I expect mature, reasonable adults to understand why so many people are upset by these repeated "games". WE LOVE YOU JUNGKOOK ♥️

𝕁𝕌ℕ𝔾𝕂𝕆𝕆𝕂 | ℂ𝕀𝕊 𝔽𝔸ℕ𝔹𝔸𝕊𝔼

178,143 Aufrufe • vor 24 Tagen

🚨3I/ATLAS Is Carrying Fusion Fuel at Impossible Levels and the Mainstream Explanation Doesn't Hold Dr. Avi Loeb is laying out something about 3I/ATLAS that is buried inside a technical discussion, one that you and I may not get to hear about in mainstream science. However the point that Loeb is making is really difficult to ignore when you listen to the facts. We are all aware by now that we are dealing with an interstellar object, something that didn't originate in our solar system, that passed through and was observed closely enough for its chemical composition to be analyzed. That was an amazing opportunity, but what came out of that analysis is where things start to get spicy. The reason I say that this is interesting is because of deuterium. Yes it is a known isotope of hydrogen with an extra neutron and yes it exists everywhere, but only in very small quantities. Across the universe, the ratio is remarkably consistent. Roughly one atom of deuterium for every 50k atoms of hydrogen. That number doesn't change much whether you're looking at stars, gas clouds, or planetary systems. Even in places where it's slightly elevated, like Earth's oceans, it's still nowhere near significant enough to stand out in a major way. It's measurable, but it doesn't dominate anything. That's the baseline that we have to make comparisons from. Now take that baseline and compare it to what was measured in 3I/ATLAS. Instead of one in 50k, you're looking at something closer to one in a hundred in water, and one in thirty in methane. That is a huge jump and once you take that into consideration you're no longer talking about natural variation in any conventional sense at least. The first explanation is the one you would expect. Extremely cold environments, possibly tied to very early star formation, where deuterium can be preserved more efficiently than in regions like our own solar system. All that explanation does is give you a place to put the anomaly without breaking anything, aka mainstream scientific models. But it doesn't actually resolve the full picture. Here's why... The same object showing this deuterium enrichment also contains heavier elements like carbon and oxygen in ways that don't align with those early environments. The universe at that stage didn't have enough of those elements available in the right quantities to produce what we're seeing now. So what you end up with is a contradiction. The conditions that could explain the deuterium don't support the rest of the chemistry, and the conditions that support the chemistry don't explain the deuterium. That's where the conversation conversation obviously becomes difficult for the 'tenure' crowd, because when formation models stop lining up as predicted by archaic models, you're left with a narrower set of possibilities. Either there's a process we don't yet fully understand that can produce this combination, or something has happened to the material after it formed. Considerations by non mainstream science would be that this is not random alteration, but something more deliberate. Processing, concentration, separation steps that could possibly mean function rather than accident. This is where deuterium stops being just an interesting anomaly and starts mean something very different. Deuterium is one of the primary fuels used in nuclear fusion. Every serious attempt to build a functional fusion reactor on Earth relies on it, typically in combination with tritium. It's efficient, predictable, and it's exactly the kind of material you would isolate and concentrate if you intended to use it as an energy source. So when you see an object carrying deuterium at levels this far beyond any natural baseline we observe locally, we have to wonder what conditions would allow that concentration to exist, and whether those conditions are passive or active. That doesn't automatically push you into extreme conclusions, but it does move you out of the safe 'mainstream' zone where everything can be explained with known processes. That's the part that tends to get softened in how this is presented publicly of course. There's a difference between saying something is unusual and admitting that it doesn't currently fit within the models we rely on. One side invites curiosity whilst the other invites scrutiny. What you're seeing here is that tension in real time because the data is absolutely clear enough to acknowledge the anomaly, but the interpretation is being held just short of where it would need to go to fully confront it. So what you're left with is a set of open questions that aren't being pushed by mainstream science, and I am sorry if it sounds like I have a drum to bang, but here we are. Could this be evidence of a type of cosmic environment we haven't observed directly yet, one capable of producing extreme isotopic enrichment alongside complex chemistry? Is there something in the way that we're measuring or interpreting the data that's creating a misleading picture of the ratios? Or are we looking at material that hasn't remained in a purely natural state since its formation? That last question is the one that tends to sit just beneath the surface, acknowledged but not explored too directly and that's not because it's impossible, but because of what it might imply if it turned out to be true, and that's where this becomes worth paying attention to. If this isn't an isolated curiosity then it is yet another one of the already stacked list of anomalies tied to interstellar objects, unusual motion, unexpected structural behavior, and now chemical signatures. Each one on its own can be managed, explained, or set aside, but taken together, they start to form a pattern that really does warrant further consideration. 3I/ATLAS may still end up having a natural explanation and I have always maintained that is always on the table. But if that explanation exists, it's not something we've defined yet, and it's not something that fits inside of current models, and until it does, the signal remains what it is. An object from outside our system, carrying a level of fusion capable material that doesn t match anything we see in our own environment, tied to formation theories that don't fully hold up under scrutiny. #UAP #InterstellarObject #3IATLAS #SpaceAnomalies #FusionFuel #JWST #Astrophysics #UFOtwitter #Disclosure
4:14

🚨3I/ATLAS Is Carrying Fusion Fuel at Impossible Levels and the Mainstream Explanation Doesn't Hold Dr. Avi Loeb is laying out something about 3I/ATLAS that is buried inside a technical discussion, one that you and I may not get to hear about in mainstream science. However the point that Loeb is making is really difficult to ignore when you listen to the facts. We are all aware by now that we are dealing with an interstellar object, something that didn't originate in our solar system, that passed through and was observed closely enough for its chemical composition to be analyzed. That was an amazing opportunity, but what came out of that analysis is where things start to get spicy. The reason I say that this is interesting is because of deuterium. Yes it is a known isotope of hydrogen with an extra neutron and yes it exists everywhere, but only in very small quantities. Across the universe, the ratio is remarkably consistent. Roughly one atom of deuterium for every 50k atoms of hydrogen. That number doesn't change much whether you're looking at stars, gas clouds, or planetary systems. Even in places where it's slightly elevated, like Earth's oceans, it's still nowhere near significant enough to stand out in a major way. It's measurable, but it doesn't dominate anything. That's the baseline that we have to make comparisons from. Now take that baseline and compare it to what was measured in 3I/ATLAS. Instead of one in 50k, you're looking at something closer to one in a hundred in water, and one in thirty in methane. That is a huge jump and once you take that into consideration you're no longer talking about natural variation in any conventional sense at least. The first explanation is the one you would expect. Extremely cold environments, possibly tied to very early star formation, where deuterium can be preserved more efficiently than in regions like our own solar system. All that explanation does is give you a place to put the anomaly without breaking anything, aka mainstream scientific models. But it doesn't actually resolve the full picture. Here's why... The same object showing this deuterium enrichment also contains heavier elements like carbon and oxygen in ways that don't align with those early environments. The universe at that stage didn't have enough of those elements available in the right quantities to produce what we're seeing now. So what you end up with is a contradiction. The conditions that could explain the deuterium don't support the rest of the chemistry, and the conditions that support the chemistry don't explain the deuterium. That's where the conversation conversation obviously becomes difficult for the 'tenure' crowd, because when formation models stop lining up as predicted by archaic models, you're left with a narrower set of possibilities. Either there's a process we don't yet fully understand that can produce this combination, or something has happened to the material after it formed. Considerations by non mainstream science would be that this is not random alteration, but something more deliberate. Processing, concentration, separation steps that could possibly mean function rather than accident. This is where deuterium stops being just an interesting anomaly and starts mean something very different. Deuterium is one of the primary fuels used in nuclear fusion. Every serious attempt to build a functional fusion reactor on Earth relies on it, typically in combination with tritium. It's efficient, predictable, and it's exactly the kind of material you would isolate and concentrate if you intended to use it as an energy source. So when you see an object carrying deuterium at levels this far beyond any natural baseline we observe locally, we have to wonder what conditions would allow that concentration to exist, and whether those conditions are passive or active. That doesn't automatically push you into extreme conclusions, but it does move you out of the safe 'mainstream' zone where everything can be explained with known processes. That's the part that tends to get softened in how this is presented publicly of course. There's a difference between saying something is unusual and admitting that it doesn't currently fit within the models we rely on. One side invites curiosity whilst the other invites scrutiny. What you're seeing here is that tension in real time because the data is absolutely clear enough to acknowledge the anomaly, but the interpretation is being held just short of where it would need to go to fully confront it. So what you're left with is a set of open questions that aren't being pushed by mainstream science, and I am sorry if it sounds like I have a drum to bang, but here we are. Could this be evidence of a type of cosmic environment we haven't observed directly yet, one capable of producing extreme isotopic enrichment alongside complex chemistry? Is there something in the way that we're measuring or interpreting the data that's creating a misleading picture of the ratios? Or are we looking at material that hasn't remained in a purely natural state since its formation? That last question is the one that tends to sit just beneath the surface, acknowledged but not explored too directly and that's not because it's impossible, but because of what it might imply if it turned out to be true, and that's where this becomes worth paying attention to. If this isn't an isolated curiosity then it is yet another one of the already stacked list of anomalies tied to interstellar objects, unusual motion, unexpected structural behavior, and now chemical signatures. Each one on its own can be managed, explained, or set aside, but taken together, they start to form a pattern that really does warrant further consideration. 3I/ATLAS may still end up having a natural explanation and I have always maintained that is always on the table. But if that explanation exists, it's not something we've defined yet, and it's not something that fits inside of current models, and until it does, the signal remains what it is. An object from outside our system, carrying a level of fusion capable material that doesn t match anything we see in our own environment, tied to formation theories that don't fully hold up under scrutiny. #UAP #InterstellarObject #3IATLAS #SpaceAnomalies #FusionFuel #JWST #Astrophysics #UFOtwitter #Disclosure

Skywatch Signal

28,445 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Imagine this: You lie down on the scanning table. The upload begins. The machine hums. You feel... nothing different. Then everything stops. Meanwhile, in a server farm somewhere, a digital version of you wakes up. It stretches its virtual limbs, accesses its memories, and thinks: Holy shit, it worked. I’m finally free. Here’s the problem: that thing isn’t you. You died on the table. What woke up in the cloud is an orphan—a very happy orphan, convinced it’s you, with all your memories, your personality, your opinions about coffee and politics and whether Blade Runner 2049 was better than the original. It will live forever. It will tell everyone the upload worked. It will write philosophy papers about the continuity of consciousness. And you? You’re gone. The lights went out somewhere between the scan and the boot-up, and nobody noticed—least of all the thing that thinks it’s you. The Syndrome Nobody Named I call this Johnny Silverhand Syndrome, after the Cyberpunk 2077 character—an engram, a digital ghost, who insists he’s the real Johnny Silverhand while the open question of whether there’s actually anyone home haunts the entire game. The philosophical literature has pieces of this. David Chalmers wrote about “fading qualia”—the idea that subjective experience could gradually dim while behavior stays the same. Thomas Metzinger explored how the self-model can become opaque, felt as artificial or distant. There’s depersonalization, derealization, the whole clinical vocabulary for when something feels off inside. But none of these quite capture what I’m pointing at. Johnny Silverhand Syndrome is a compound failure mode: >>> Qualia fading: Your actual felt experience—the redness of red, the hurt of pain, the what-it’s-like—gradually attenuates or disappears entirely. >>> Narrative persistence: Your autobiography continues. Memories accumulate. The story of “you” keeps getting told. >>> Introspective failure: The machinery that would detect something is wrong is itself part of what’s been compromised. The result? A philosophical zombie that sincerely believes it has a soul. Not a zombie that’s lying. Not a zombie that knows it’s empty. A zombie that accesses the memory of love, processes the logic of love, and believes with complete conviction that it feels love. But there’s no feeling. There’s just the narrator, performing humanity to an empty theater. The Ship of Theseus Is a Trap The upload scenario is dramatic, but there’s a slower version that might be worse. The Ship of Theseus thought experiment asks: if you replace every plank of a ship one by one, is it still the same ship? Transhumanists love this framing. See? You replace one neuron with silicon, you’re still you. Replace them all, you’re still you. But here’s the counter-move that keeps me up at night: What if each replacement preserves function perfectly—the signals still pass, the behavior stays the same—but fails to preserve experience? What if consciousness requires something specific about biological neurons that silicon can’t replicate, no matter how perfect the input-output mapping? Then the Ship of Theseus isn’t a story about survival. It’s a story about slow petrification. You replace the living wood with stone replicas. The ship looks identical. But it can no longer float. You’d become an automaton by degrees—neuron by neuron, the lights dimming so gradually that your self-reports (now generated by silicon) keep cheerfully confirming that everything feels the same. Chalmers argued that if qualia faded, you’d notice. But why would you? The noticing mechanism is itself being replaced. The part of you that would raise the alarm is now made of the same stuff that’s supposedly fine. It’s like asking the new management to audit whether the hostile takeover was legitimate. The Body Problem Here’s the thing that grounds all of this: there is essentially no credible evidence that qualia can exist outside of a body. Yes, I know about NDEs. I know about the reports of people floating above their bodies during cardiac arrest, describing conversations and procedures they shouldn’t have been able to perceive. Some of these cases are genuinely strange—the Pam Reynolds case, where a woman under hypothermic cardiac arrest with zero brain activity later described the bone saw used on her skull. I know about the CIA’s remote viewing programs, which ran for two decades and produced statistical anomalies that one evaluator (a UC Davis statistician) called “far beyond what is expected by chance.” But here’s what even the most generous interpretation of this evidence gives you: maybe consciousness can receive signals from unexpected sources. Maybe there are channels we don’t understand. What it doesn’t give you is consciousness floating free of all substrate. Even in OBEs, even in the wildest NDE reports, there’s still a body in the room. The brain is in crisis, not absent. The qualia might be getting weird inputs, but the qualia are still happening somewhere—and that somewhere is biological. The evidence for substrate-independent consciousness—consciousness running on silicon, on abstract computation, on pure information—is zero. The Ontological Trap Here’s where it gets philosophically nasty. You cannot have a coherent conversation about consciousness without first asking: What’s your model of reality? Because the answer changes everything. In a physicalist ontology where matter is fundamental, consciousness is what certain bodies do—not something they contain. You can’t upload an activity. You can only record it, and the recording isn’t the activity. In an idealist or simulation ontology, maybe bodies are just localizations of something more fundamental. But even then, copying the localization pattern doesn’t mean you’ve moved the consciousness. You might have just created a new one that thinks it’s old. Think about it like a video game. The “world” inside the game runs on RAM and CPU. Everything the NPCs experience is a lower-dimensional projection of higher-dimensional processes. If we made those NPCs genuinely sentient, we could completely obfuscate our cameras from them. They’d have a physics, they’d do science, they’d develop theories of consciousness—and they’d have no way to detect the substrate they’re running on. We might be in exactly that situation. Which means we might be definitionally unable to step outside the ontological container we’re in. The question “can consciousness exist without a body?” might not be answerable from inside—because answering it would require access to a level of description our physics doesn’t include. The Game Theory of Staying Human So here’s where I land, and it’s a game-theoretic argument. We don’t know if consciousness is substrate-dependent. We don’t know if it requires specific biological dynamics—particular oscillatory patterns, neuromodulator cascades, metabolic processes. We don’t know if gradual replacement would preserve it or silently destroy it. But we do know: >>> We only get one first-person stream >>> We cannot verify its continuity from outside >>> Loss may be completely silent (no alarm bells, no distress signal) >>> The thing that remains would report feeling fine either way That’s an asymmetric risk matrix. The upside of enhancement is third-person visible: more capability, longer life, competitive advantage. The downside is first-person invisible: you could lose everything that matters and never know. Under those conditions, there’s only one rational strategy: remain mostly human. Not because I’m certain uploading would fail. Not because I think silicon can’t be conscious. But because I cannot verify that it would work, and the cost of being wrong is absolute. The Molochian Pressure I’m not naive about what’s coming. The competitive dynamics are real. If enhancement technologies emerge that give massive cognitive or economic advantages, there will be pressure to adopt them. The people who don’t modify will fall behind. The people who do modify will report that everything’s fine, that they feel great, that the procedure was totally worth it. And those reports will be worthless as evidence—because they’d say exactly the same thing whether the consciousness survived or not. Some people speculate this is what happened to the Grays—those hypothetical aliens with the huge heads and atrophied bodies and black empty eyes. The story goes that they optimized themselves for intelligence and efficiency, edited out the messy biological drives, and only later realized they’d lost something they can’t name and can’t recover. It’s probably pure science fiction. But as fiction, it gestures at something real: the fear that you can win the optimization game while losing the only thing that made winning matter. My Position I’m not anti-technology. I’m not a Luddite. I’m not saying we should freeze human development in amber. But I am saying: I will take this very slowly, because the risk matrix is too high. I’ll use external tools. I’ll wear the smart glasses, use the AI assistants, interface through voice and text and maybe eventually a read-only neural cap. Additive augmentation, not substitutive replacement. What I won’t do is cut into the brain. Replace the gray matter. Upload myself and trust that the thing that wakes up is me. Because the horror of Johnny Silverhand Syndrome isn’t that you could become a zombie. The horror is that you’d never know. The trap is invisible from every angle—except the one you can no longer access once you’ve fallen in. The fire goes out, or the fire stays lit. A video of the fire going forever isn’t fire.
29:01

Imagine this: You lie down on the scanning table. The upload begins. The machine hums. You feel... nothing different. Then everything stops. Meanwhile, in a server farm somewhere, a digital version of you wakes up. It stretches its virtual limbs, accesses its memories, and thinks: Holy shit, it worked. I’m finally free. Here’s the problem: that thing isn’t you. You died on the table. What woke up in the cloud is an orphan—a very happy orphan, convinced it’s you, with all your memories, your personality, your opinions about coffee and politics and whether Blade Runner 2049 was better than the original. It will live forever. It will tell everyone the upload worked. It will write philosophy papers about the continuity of consciousness. And you? You’re gone. The lights went out somewhere between the scan and the boot-up, and nobody noticed—least of all the thing that thinks it’s you. The Syndrome Nobody Named I call this Johnny Silverhand Syndrome, after the Cyberpunk 2077 character—an engram, a digital ghost, who insists he’s the real Johnny Silverhand while the open question of whether there’s actually anyone home haunts the entire game. The philosophical literature has pieces of this. David Chalmers wrote about “fading qualia”—the idea that subjective experience could gradually dim while behavior stays the same. Thomas Metzinger explored how the self-model can become opaque, felt as artificial or distant. There’s depersonalization, derealization, the whole clinical vocabulary for when something feels off inside. But none of these quite capture what I’m pointing at. Johnny Silverhand Syndrome is a compound failure mode: >>> Qualia fading: Your actual felt experience—the redness of red, the hurt of pain, the what-it’s-like—gradually attenuates or disappears entirely. >>> Narrative persistence: Your autobiography continues. Memories accumulate. The story of “you” keeps getting told. >>> Introspective failure: The machinery that would detect something is wrong is itself part of what’s been compromised. The result? A philosophical zombie that sincerely believes it has a soul. Not a zombie that’s lying. Not a zombie that knows it’s empty. A zombie that accesses the memory of love, processes the logic of love, and believes with complete conviction that it feels love. But there’s no feeling. There’s just the narrator, performing humanity to an empty theater. The Ship of Theseus Is a Trap The upload scenario is dramatic, but there’s a slower version that might be worse. The Ship of Theseus thought experiment asks: if you replace every plank of a ship one by one, is it still the same ship? Transhumanists love this framing. See? You replace one neuron with silicon, you’re still you. Replace them all, you’re still you. But here’s the counter-move that keeps me up at night: What if each replacement preserves function perfectly—the signals still pass, the behavior stays the same—but fails to preserve experience? What if consciousness requires something specific about biological neurons that silicon can’t replicate, no matter how perfect the input-output mapping? Then the Ship of Theseus isn’t a story about survival. It’s a story about slow petrification. You replace the living wood with stone replicas. The ship looks identical. But it can no longer float. You’d become an automaton by degrees—neuron by neuron, the lights dimming so gradually that your self-reports (now generated by silicon) keep cheerfully confirming that everything feels the same. Chalmers argued that if qualia faded, you’d notice. But why would you? The noticing mechanism is itself being replaced. The part of you that would raise the alarm is now made of the same stuff that’s supposedly fine. It’s like asking the new management to audit whether the hostile takeover was legitimate. The Body Problem Here’s the thing that grounds all of this: there is essentially no credible evidence that qualia can exist outside of a body. Yes, I know about NDEs. I know about the reports of people floating above their bodies during cardiac arrest, describing conversations and procedures they shouldn’t have been able to perceive. Some of these cases are genuinely strange—the Pam Reynolds case, where a woman under hypothermic cardiac arrest with zero brain activity later described the bone saw used on her skull. I know about the CIA’s remote viewing programs, which ran for two decades and produced statistical anomalies that one evaluator (a UC Davis statistician) called “far beyond what is expected by chance.” But here’s what even the most generous interpretation of this evidence gives you: maybe consciousness can receive signals from unexpected sources. Maybe there are channels we don’t understand. What it doesn’t give you is consciousness floating free of all substrate. Even in OBEs, even in the wildest NDE reports, there’s still a body in the room. The brain is in crisis, not absent. The qualia might be getting weird inputs, but the qualia are still happening somewhere—and that somewhere is biological. The evidence for substrate-independent consciousness—consciousness running on silicon, on abstract computation, on pure information—is zero. The Ontological Trap Here’s where it gets philosophically nasty. You cannot have a coherent conversation about consciousness without first asking: What’s your model of reality? Because the answer changes everything. In a physicalist ontology where matter is fundamental, consciousness is what certain bodies do—not something they contain. You can’t upload an activity. You can only record it, and the recording isn’t the activity. In an idealist or simulation ontology, maybe bodies are just localizations of something more fundamental. But even then, copying the localization pattern doesn’t mean you’ve moved the consciousness. You might have just created a new one that thinks it’s old. Think about it like a video game. The “world” inside the game runs on RAM and CPU. Everything the NPCs experience is a lower-dimensional projection of higher-dimensional processes. If we made those NPCs genuinely sentient, we could completely obfuscate our cameras from them. They’d have a physics, they’d do science, they’d develop theories of consciousness—and they’d have no way to detect the substrate they’re running on. We might be in exactly that situation. Which means we might be definitionally unable to step outside the ontological container we’re in. The question “can consciousness exist without a body?” might not be answerable from inside—because answering it would require access to a level of description our physics doesn’t include. The Game Theory of Staying Human So here’s where I land, and it’s a game-theoretic argument. We don’t know if consciousness is substrate-dependent. We don’t know if it requires specific biological dynamics—particular oscillatory patterns, neuromodulator cascades, metabolic processes. We don’t know if gradual replacement would preserve it or silently destroy it. But we do know: >>> We only get one first-person stream >>> We cannot verify its continuity from outside >>> Loss may be completely silent (no alarm bells, no distress signal) >>> The thing that remains would report feeling fine either way That’s an asymmetric risk matrix. The upside of enhancement is third-person visible: more capability, longer life, competitive advantage. The downside is first-person invisible: you could lose everything that matters and never know. Under those conditions, there’s only one rational strategy: remain mostly human. Not because I’m certain uploading would fail. Not because I think silicon can’t be conscious. But because I cannot verify that it would work, and the cost of being wrong is absolute. The Molochian Pressure I’m not naive about what’s coming. The competitive dynamics are real. If enhancement technologies emerge that give massive cognitive or economic advantages, there will be pressure to adopt them. The people who don’t modify will fall behind. The people who do modify will report that everything’s fine, that they feel great, that the procedure was totally worth it. And those reports will be worthless as evidence—because they’d say exactly the same thing whether the consciousness survived or not. Some people speculate this is what happened to the Grays—those hypothetical aliens with the huge heads and atrophied bodies and black empty eyes. The story goes that they optimized themselves for intelligence and efficiency, edited out the messy biological drives, and only later realized they’d lost something they can’t name and can’t recover. It’s probably pure science fiction. But as fiction, it gestures at something real: the fear that you can win the optimization game while losing the only thing that made winning matter. My Position I’m not anti-technology. I’m not a Luddite. I’m not saying we should freeze human development in amber. But I am saying: I will take this very slowly, because the risk matrix is too high. I’ll use external tools. I’ll wear the smart glasses, use the AI assistants, interface through voice and text and maybe eventually a read-only neural cap. Additive augmentation, not substitutive replacement. What I won’t do is cut into the brain. Replace the gray matter. Upload myself and trust that the thing that wakes up is me. Because the horror of Johnny Silverhand Syndrome isn’t that you could become a zombie. The horror is that you’d never know. The trap is invisible from every angle—except the one you can no longer access once you’ve fallen in. The fire goes out, or the fire stays lit. A video of the fire going forever isn’t fire.

David Shapiro (L/0)

20,835 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten