Korben wrote;
We’ve been tinkering with this for a long time, and we are not an inch closer to getting this stuff figured out. here Segovia Aqueduct
Thus putting into written words what I've been feeling for a few weeks now.
What follows is my take on the situation I am facing. It might resonate within you it might not. Seems harsh to say I don't care either way but there it is I don't care either way.
Most who visit this site, with a few exceptions, are here because they feel something is not right about the mainstream, official history that we are sold. I chose the word sold over told as it fits better with the feeling I have.
Earth shape chatter/theory/opinion is just that earth shape nonsense and a sinkhole of unfathomable depth to distract. Reason for feeling this to be the case is our senses are not equipped to determine the shape of the earth. Visually we see a projection of a reality the brain serves up nothing more. The eyes may well 'see everything' but it is the brain that appears to decide what we see.
The eyes/brain serve up a vanishing point beyond which things we know are there because we can walk to them disappear from site. The perspective is cone shaped to the vanishing point in each eye/projection so everything we 'see' is contained within the cone hence a line of streetlamps all the exact same height appear to get smaller as we go down the line and they get further away from where we are stood.
With vision like this there is no way to determine visually the shape of the earth.
Quite what other senses could determine the shape I don't know.
It's quite simple for me in that as far as my senses can tell the thing I wander about on is not spinning ergo I have no sensation of spinning and water of whatever volume always finds its own level.
I feel 'the earth' is all in water. The sky is water vapour, land is full of liquid water and ice, oceans are liquid and frozen water etc It is the pressure of the water vapour or rather the weight of it that keeps the liquid water where it is and creates the illusion of gravity.
I also feel mudflood is a distraction action sold to us. All I see is pictures of evidence and page after page of opinion. Nowhere has anyone made an effort to figure out what the process is that could bury glass, timber, brick etc without destroying them leaving them intact to be dug out in subsequent years, never completely it seems, and put back into use.
Equally there are no 'modern' as in photographic era, not that we know how long ago that began, examples of this process in action. One would think with the numbers of eyes and cameras said to be on the earth today it wouldn't be missed.
Same with the reset theory. Fundamental flaw in the reset theory is who would know they if they had been reset. A selective reset doesn't fly for me neither does the reset theory itself.
Coming to the digital pictures/photographs they really are piss poor examples no matter how big the file is of the real thing and trying to analyse and seek as we do is not good enough quite frankly. Once digitisd any image can be altered by any number of software programs, known and unknown, for any number of reasons. Evidence of this for me is watching the original Italian job at the end when the coach is going up the mountain no chemtrails. Viewing a 2007 dated dvd there are chemtrails in the scene.
The chances of finding anything remotely arguable as 'evidence' of a stolen history in an official source is extremely low. Much more likely to find such evidence in modern pictures of things as they are today. Evidence of this is the bricks near the waterline of the Corinth Canal in the the picture of the little girl on the yacht. All of the 'official pictures' don't show them because they are selling a story whereas the lady who took the photo of her little girl isn't. The difference is literally a world apart.
There is nothing absolutely nothing outside of this life that is dateable. Organic or inorganic any 'dating' really is just guesswork. Documents, images, physical artifacts etc they all get dated.
Everyone me included seems to swallow the 'calendar tales' we get sold from childhood without ever stopping to wonder IF there was a different calendar or calendar in use, or none at all for that matter, when the physical artifacts were constructed. True we get chatter of different calendars in different cultures but they are all linked in the selling to the so named Gregorian and 'its predecessor' the Julian.
Add into the mix we live in a technological era where individual and collective skill has been all but erased from memory and use and replaced with electronic machinery we have next to no comprehension of how things were done before computers. Well most of us. I'm old enough to recall the time before computers and a flavour of how things were done but it's only a flavour. So when something like a marine beam engine seems to have had a life of 60 odd years in NY harbour steamships it appears unreal to those in world where the latest phone is obsolete as soon as it hits the market.
We are still riding horses only they have wheels not hooves. Anyone who doesn't get this I feel a little sorry for as to me it is so bloody obvious its unreal and not only that but that engine that powers the horseless car well it is essentially the exact same machine as the one that powered the first ever car. How's that for long life hiding in plain sight.
How does anyone know where to look when they don't know what they are looking for?
For me it starts on the doorstep so too speak. Just walking out from where I woke up and looking at the so named 'built environment' both its exterior and its interior. Looking at the materials, the oddities, the out of place stuff, the inexplicable. Then look at the surroundings. When a road is dug up or foundations are going in take a few minutes to see what is in the ground. Look at the hills specifically the still green hills not the built over/graded/topped off/flattened hills and realise or imagine the number of trees that would cover the thing. Then look at the built over hills. That one is really scary for me.
In other words it should be personal experience that is the start point not the theoretical/official/mainstream shit we get sold. Go touch an old building. Decide for yourself if you are touching stone, cast stone, geopolymer, render, faux finish over concrete. Go to a museum and get as close as you are able to the statuary and artifacts and get your head round how they were made if they were made from the material the museum says they were made from.
Just recently someone, whose avatar escapes me, sorry, did this at Delphi.
Sit and lose yourself in an old master or indeed any painting and feel how the eyes and brain that created the image did it and what were they really looking at or imagining.
Trismigestus did this I seem to recall and it floored him.
Seek out books, photographs, artifacts 'in the flesh' so too speak and do the same with them. I did this with a 1742 book said to be by Voltaire about Charles XII of Sweden and it reads exactly the same as a historical novel as in the characters are imaginary. Anotherlayer did this if memory serves.
If I am telling you how to suck eggs then pay me no heed.
We are looking in the wrong place at the wrong things for the wrong things.
For example;
Old maps used to interest me for their content. Now I am far more interested in who commissioned the map. I seek out all I can about 'the client' to get a handle on why they were produced. Most if not all of these maps are of the slightest use to navigate by so they were made for another reason.
The power behind the throne so to speak.
Anyway enough from me.
Should anyone have their own take on where we should be looking and we aren't then feel free to add into to this thread. It matters not where it wanders and I won't be adding anything more in unless I get a eureka moment!
PS
The best thing about this place is the sharing so please those who have experience of things and are reluctant to share please reconsider your position as we need to kick the engine and the daftest thing will likely be the biggest kick.
We’ve been tinkering with this for a long time, and we are not an inch closer to getting this stuff figured out. here Segovia Aqueduct
Thus putting into written words what I've been feeling for a few weeks now.
What follows is my take on the situation I am facing. It might resonate within you it might not. Seems harsh to say I don't care either way but there it is I don't care either way.
Most who visit this site, with a few exceptions, are here because they feel something is not right about the mainstream, official history that we are sold. I chose the word sold over told as it fits better with the feeling I have.
Earth shape chatter/theory/opinion is just that earth shape nonsense and a sinkhole of unfathomable depth to distract. Reason for feeling this to be the case is our senses are not equipped to determine the shape of the earth. Visually we see a projection of a reality the brain serves up nothing more. The eyes may well 'see everything' but it is the brain that appears to decide what we see.
The eyes/brain serve up a vanishing point beyond which things we know are there because we can walk to them disappear from site. The perspective is cone shaped to the vanishing point in each eye/projection so everything we 'see' is contained within the cone hence a line of streetlamps all the exact same height appear to get smaller as we go down the line and they get further away from where we are stood.
With vision like this there is no way to determine visually the shape of the earth.
Quite what other senses could determine the shape I don't know.
It's quite simple for me in that as far as my senses can tell the thing I wander about on is not spinning ergo I have no sensation of spinning and water of whatever volume always finds its own level.
I feel 'the earth' is all in water. The sky is water vapour, land is full of liquid water and ice, oceans are liquid and frozen water etc It is the pressure of the water vapour or rather the weight of it that keeps the liquid water where it is and creates the illusion of gravity.
I also feel mudflood is a distraction action sold to us. All I see is pictures of evidence and page after page of opinion. Nowhere has anyone made an effort to figure out what the process is that could bury glass, timber, brick etc without destroying them leaving them intact to be dug out in subsequent years, never completely it seems, and put back into use.
Equally there are no 'modern' as in photographic era, not that we know how long ago that began, examples of this process in action. One would think with the numbers of eyes and cameras said to be on the earth today it wouldn't be missed.
Same with the reset theory. Fundamental flaw in the reset theory is who would know they if they had been reset. A selective reset doesn't fly for me neither does the reset theory itself.
Coming to the digital pictures/photographs they really are piss poor examples no matter how big the file is of the real thing and trying to analyse and seek as we do is not good enough quite frankly. Once digitisd any image can be altered by any number of software programs, known and unknown, for any number of reasons. Evidence of this for me is watching the original Italian job at the end when the coach is going up the mountain no chemtrails. Viewing a 2007 dated dvd there are chemtrails in the scene.
The chances of finding anything remotely arguable as 'evidence' of a stolen history in an official source is extremely low. Much more likely to find such evidence in modern pictures of things as they are today. Evidence of this is the bricks near the waterline of the Corinth Canal in the the picture of the little girl on the yacht. All of the 'official pictures' don't show them because they are selling a story whereas the lady who took the photo of her little girl isn't. The difference is literally a world apart.
There is nothing absolutely nothing outside of this life that is dateable. Organic or inorganic any 'dating' really is just guesswork. Documents, images, physical artifacts etc they all get dated.
Everyone me included seems to swallow the 'calendar tales' we get sold from childhood without ever stopping to wonder IF there was a different calendar or calendar in use, or none at all for that matter, when the physical artifacts were constructed. True we get chatter of different calendars in different cultures but they are all linked in the selling to the so named Gregorian and 'its predecessor' the Julian.
Add into the mix we live in a technological era where individual and collective skill has been all but erased from memory and use and replaced with electronic machinery we have next to no comprehension of how things were done before computers. Well most of us. I'm old enough to recall the time before computers and a flavour of how things were done but it's only a flavour. So when something like a marine beam engine seems to have had a life of 60 odd years in NY harbour steamships it appears unreal to those in world where the latest phone is obsolete as soon as it hits the market.
We are still riding horses only they have wheels not hooves. Anyone who doesn't get this I feel a little sorry for as to me it is so bloody obvious its unreal and not only that but that engine that powers the horseless car well it is essentially the exact same machine as the one that powered the first ever car. How's that for long life hiding in plain sight.
How does anyone know where to look when they don't know what they are looking for?
For me it starts on the doorstep so too speak. Just walking out from where I woke up and looking at the so named 'built environment' both its exterior and its interior. Looking at the materials, the oddities, the out of place stuff, the inexplicable. Then look at the surroundings. When a road is dug up or foundations are going in take a few minutes to see what is in the ground. Look at the hills specifically the still green hills not the built over/graded/topped off/flattened hills and realise or imagine the number of trees that would cover the thing. Then look at the built over hills. That one is really scary for me.
In other words it should be personal experience that is the start point not the theoretical/official/mainstream shit we get sold. Go touch an old building. Decide for yourself if you are touching stone, cast stone, geopolymer, render, faux finish over concrete. Go to a museum and get as close as you are able to the statuary and artifacts and get your head round how they were made if they were made from the material the museum says they were made from.
Just recently someone, whose avatar escapes me, sorry, did this at Delphi.
Sit and lose yourself in an old master or indeed any painting and feel how the eyes and brain that created the image did it and what were they really looking at or imagining.
Trismigestus did this I seem to recall and it floored him.
Seek out books, photographs, artifacts 'in the flesh' so too speak and do the same with them. I did this with a 1742 book said to be by Voltaire about Charles XII of Sweden and it reads exactly the same as a historical novel as in the characters are imaginary. Anotherlayer did this if memory serves.
If I am telling you how to suck eggs then pay me no heed.
We are looking in the wrong place at the wrong things for the wrong things.
For example;
Old maps used to interest me for their content. Now I am far more interested in who commissioned the map. I seek out all I can about 'the client' to get a handle on why they were produced. Most if not all of these maps are of the slightest use to navigate by so they were made for another reason.
The power behind the throne so to speak.
Anyway enough from me.
Should anyone have their own take on where we should be looking and we aren't then feel free to add into to this thread. It matters not where it wanders and I won't be adding anything more in unless I get a eureka moment!
PS
The best thing about this place is the sharing so please those who have experience of things and are reluctant to share please reconsider your position as we need to kick the engine and the daftest thing will likely be the biggest kick.
