|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 17:05:22 GMT
My ancestors weren't just Hell's Angels in Boats, y'know. They were masterful sailors, navigators, and shipbuilders, and they may have had a better understanding of how the world works than our so-called science. And all of this was more than a thousand years before the Industrial Revolution. It happens at intervals, and we are experiencing one of these intervals now, but the Luciferians want us to believe we brought it on ourselves with overpopulation and macroeconomics. Enjoy. I think our ancestors were a lot cleverer than we give them credit for, and that they knew a lot more than we think they did. Indeed. I've been taking a more serious look at alchemy these days. It may have more credibility than what we were told, and it is still practiced in some parts of the world if I'm not mistaken.
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jan 11, 2020 17:59:26 GMT
Funny, I was wondering about Dr. Jackson Crawford.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 18:09:57 GMT
I'll say one thing for the Vikings - they were the first to discover North America - around 1000 AD! They beat Columbus by 500 years. But the Siberians beat both by 13,000 years. Some believe there was a race of red-haired and white-skinned giants living in North America before then, and the newcomers from Asia polished them off. You've mentioned the Nephilim before, but it's hard to tell if you think there's anything to it, or just your idea of comedy.
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jan 11, 2020 18:40:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 18:57:39 GMT
Some believe there was a race of red-haired and white-skinned giants living in North America before then, and the newcomers from Asia polished them off. You've mentioned the Nephilim before, but it's hard to tell if you think there's anything to it, or just your idea of comedy. It’s possible, though not “giants.” If there any were any pre-Clovis people in NA, it’s doubtful they would have been wiped out from warfare with incoming Siberians. The population of either would be minuscule and the continent was still as big as it is now. The Younger Dryas most likely got any pre-Clovis people if they were here 20,000 years ago. Back when people were still allowed to do a Google News Archives search I spent many hours reading articles like this one.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 19:21:45 GMT
they may have had a better understanding of how the world works than our so-called science.
What is “so-called” about science? Or do you think science is just a form of magic? I think the data and the conclusions can be easily rigged for political purposes. Data says the Atlantic Ocean is two degrees warmer than it was a century ago. Conclusion: We're killing our beautiful green planet with "global warming."
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jan 11, 2020 19:25:58 GMT
WHATEVER.....
It is still not an excuse to pollute our planet.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 22:01:28 GMT
I think the data and the conclusions can be easily rigged for political purposes. Data says the Atlantic Ocean is two degrees warmer than it was a century ago. Conclusion: We're killing our beautiful green planet with "global warming." I think the data and the conclusions can be easily rigged for political purposes.That’s more hard to do than you think. Any scientific claims must be peer reviewed and producible independently. The reason the “cold fusion” claim from 30 years ago failed, despite being cited as a tremendous discovery, is because no one could reproduce it. That said, of course science can be used for political purposes, not by the scientists and researchers themselves, but by others in whose interests any science might serve. I don’t expect RJ Reynolds to admit to their product causing cancer, so any of their private researchers’ claims are automatically suspect. That suspicion does not automatically mean their findings are wrong, but it does mean their research claims must be rigorously, independently verified. When direct political interests intervene, it’s usually because, as in the example, tobacco growing states and cigarette manufacturers don’t want anything out that will contradict RJR’s original claims. Therefore science is not the culprit, but the outside interests that use it as a tool. Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water. And I get why you guys don’t like science: it’s often a killjoy. I would love the myths and legends of gods or space brothers in the heavens intervening to help humankind, but there’s no evidence to prove it and every reason to think these are narratives humans create to make sense of their existence. Hitler proved the Germans were the Master Race with "peer-reviewed" science. It doesn't carry much weight with me, but if you like it you can have it.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 22:13:18 GMT
Hitler proved the Germans were the Master Race with "peer-reviewed" science. It doesn't carry much weight with me, but if you like it you can have it. Hitler proved the Germans were the Master Race with "peer-reviewed" science.Using Nazi-biased scientists, if indeed any scientists of merit were left in Germany by the late 1930s. And what scientists outside of them verified this Master Race “science?” The number is probably near zero. And here you’re confusing science with pseudoscience. Watch that baby. Actually there are some scientists calling BS on the "global warming" narrative, but they are ostracized for it, baby.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 22:28:15 GMT
Actually there are some scientists calling BS on the "global warming" narrative, but they are ostracized for it, baby. If there are 3% of scientists saying this global warming is a hoax and 97% who say it is real, which group is mostly likely to be correct? And at this point, the affects and effects of global warming are easily observable by laymen. The 3% who aren't bought and paid for by the globalists. Next question.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 22:53:33 GMT
The 3% who aren't bought and paid for by the globalists. Next question. Now, you’ve just made an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary proof: If the other 97% are bought and for: 1) who is paying for it? 2) what is their motive to lie? 3) what science can you produce to refute the 97% are wrong and 3% are right? 4) how do you account for observable evidence that backs up global warming as manmade? 1) The Illuminati. 2) World domination. 3) No science is needed to call liars what they are. 4) There is no observable evidence that backs up global warming as manmade. I said next question, and you asked four of them. How cute.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 23:16:28 GMT
1) The Illuminati. 2) World domination. 3) No science is needed to call liars what they are. 4) There is no observable evidence that backs up global warming as manmade. I said next question, and you asked four of them. How cute. 1) prove they exist and are paying for fake science. 2) the world is already dominated by capitalist interests who are openly fighting against climate science, but I see no evidence the Illuminati exist, therefore I can’t say what the motives are. 3) to say they lie is not proof they are. 4) there is ample evidence the planet is warming based on recorded temperature going back to the early 18th century. Plus natural records in tree rings and ice cores say the same. I know, I’m a killjoy. An old wet-blanket. Prove your claim that manmade global warming is real. It's your claim. The burden is on you to prove it. And in case you haven't learned by now, the old 97% of scientists peer-review thing isn't proof.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 23:50:37 GMT
Can't you get it through your head? I don't trust these establishment sources anymore. I subscribed to National Geographic and Smithsonian for many years, but no more of it. Every time one of you posts a link from NASA or Scientific American or something like that, I can't help laughing. It's as if you think you're Perry Mason in the last few minutes of the episode with that indisputable piece of evidence, and all you did was copy a link from one of your "respected" sources that I no longer have any use for.
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jan 11, 2020 23:55:02 GMT
DON'T YOU FIND IT AMAZING THAT THIS BOARD IS FILLED WITH SELF PROFESSED EXPERTS.
I DO NOT WANT TO HEAR THAT goz CRAP. I HAVE NEVER LIED ABOUT MY EDUCATION. WHY SHOULD I?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 11, 2020 23:57:43 GMT
Can't you get it through your head? I don't trust these establishment sources anymore. I subscribed to National Geographic and Smithsonian for many years, but no more of it. Every time one of you posts a link from NASA or Scientific American or something like that, I can't help laughing. It's as if you think you're Perry Mason in the last few minutes of the episode with that indisputable piece of evidence, and all you did was copy a link for one of your "respected" sources that I no longer have any use for. Not trusting establishment sources does not mean the unestablished are credible. Actually, whenever I've found something that is not credible in the alt media, I've posted it here. Admiral Byrd's Operation High Jump in Antarctica is one example that comes immediately to mind, but there were others.
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Jan 12, 2020 0:47:15 GMT
That's why I believe the Age of Exploration and Colonization was the Ride of the First Horseman. It was foretold to happen and it happened. And if no one wants to agree with me, that's cool. The diseases that wiped out America had already ravaged East, West, and everything between. I believe it was Constantinople where 10,000/month were dying, faster than they could bury the bodies. And everyone who tried to help the sick, got sick, and most died. Some of this happened during localized climate change which meant they were also going hungry. China was hit so hard by disease they closed their borders for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 12, 2020 0:55:12 GMT
That's why I believe the Age of Exploration and Colonization was the Ride of the First Horseman. It was foretold to happen and it happened. And if no one wants to agree with me, that's cool. The diseases that wiped out America had already ravaged East, West, and everything between. I believe it was Constantinople where 10,000/month were dying, faster than they could bury the bodies. And everyone who tried to help the sick, got sick, and most died. Some of this happened during localized climate change which meant they were also going hungry. China was hit so hard by disease they closed their borders for a long time. Thanks. The point I wanted to drive home with this thread is that radical climate change is nothing new, and it has happened in times before carbon dioxide from industry could possibly be blamed.
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Jan 12, 2020 0:57:40 GMT
As for science, Francis Arnold recently retracted a paper and apologized because the results couldn't be replicated. That's how science works. In science the worst thing isn't being wrong, the worst thing is being a fraud. The people who fear being wrong are politicians, journalists, propagandists, religion, and capitalists; if you're going to trust someone, trust someone who values truth.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 12, 2020 2:07:25 GMT
As for science, Francis Arnold recently retracted a paper and apologized because the results couldn't be replicated. That's how science works. In science the worst thing isn't being wrong, the worst thing is being a fraud. The people who fear being wrong are politicians, journalists, propagandists, religion, and capitalists; if you're going to trust someone, trust someone who values truth. the worst thing is being a fraudOr letting a bias control the research. And there are those who will try to pull a fast one, but usually replication by separate and independent researchers can catch it. It doesn't take an independent researcher to know that the Arctic icecap didn't completely melt in 2014 as Al Gore wanted everyone to believe. It has receded, perhaps making the Northwest Passage that explorers spent four centuries searching for possible someday, but it isn't gone yet.
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Jan 12, 2020 3:10:35 GMT
doesn't take an independent researcher to know that the Arctic icecap didn't completely melt in 2014 as Al Gore wanted everyone to believe. It has receded, perhaps making the Northwest Passage that explorers spent four centuries searching for possible someday, but it isn't gone yet. Is Al Gore a scientist or a politician? What did I say about politicians? (I have no idea what Al Gore may have said) Cheating in science is like cheating in basketball, you can try but there are so many people watching that you aren't going to get away with it for long. Climate science isn't some backwater research, it's front and center. Everything those scientists do is double and triple and quadruple checked by other scientists who can boost their career by proving them wrong.
|
|