Jump to content

Silent Bob

Members
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

26 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

68 profile views
  1. Silent Bob

    Softening Stone with Plant Extracts

    It was the pyramids that got me looking into all this, after it was suggested that the pyramid blocks were cast into place. Makes sense to be, much easier to make a wooden cast for a block than to mine and drag huge blocks long distances. Also explains the perfectly sealed joints between blocks if they were cast into place. This 4 min video shows a team of geologists recreating these blocks from materials available locally, they even dress like Egyptians whilst they do it.... Also have a look into coral castle, a guy built it on his own in 1923 and claimed to know the secret of the pyramids.
  2. Silent Bob

    Softening Stone with Plant Extracts

    You might find the 'New Earth' lady interesting, she has made a few videos about stones being molded whilst soft. Here's a couple to have a look at, let me know what you think. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFGCWTlEwXI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKW82MCQfvA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-lHOExdxgk There are several theories about how they are softened, including the use of sound, perhaps at the rock's resonant frequency. Funnily enough I got into the new earth lady after Max Igan recomended her on his radio show. Also this is fun, a mountain in China which lays stone eggs, just like in my favourite program as a child - Monkey!
  3. Silent Bob

    The Apollo landings - explain this

    I wonder what planet this was filmed on, can't possibly be earth the science tells us so! Look at the physics of their movements, no way they could do that in earth gravity. Special effects don't exist remember. I wonder which planet david bowie is on here, can't possible be earth look at the black sky!!! So, not only have we been to the moon we've been to all sort of planets, I just proved it with my videos which are a genuine reflection of what took place and involve no special effects or wires as you can plainly see.
  4. Silent Bob

    The Apollo landings - explain this

    How can a video prove anything at all? Just because they tell you this is actual footage from the moon doesn't mean it is, how can you be so naive? There is no proof that it is fake, but no proof that it is real either just like every video ever made. Unless you filmed it yourself or was present whilst it was being filmed then you just can't know. If you do insist on these videos proving anything then look at this video - it has a bridge in space at the edge of their world, clear evidence of a flat realm which must have been filmed on Asgard, can't possibly have been filmed on earth as there are no bridges into space on earth. Also proves earth is flat as we actually see them travelling down in s straight line, the path is always directly up or down, this is impossible on a round earth. The last 2 videos are still just videos which may or may not be genuine, so the science involved may be right but doesn't neccesarily prove anything. If they were going to fake video scenes of being on the moon then they're going to do it right and make sure it agrees with conventional wisdom. What has maths got to do with your rocks not being from earth? Maths is just a tool to process data according to a theory, but does not in itself validate a theory.
  5. Silent Bob

    The Apollo landings - explain this

    To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if we did go to the moon or if it was faked, I've seen plenty of evidence to support both sides. That's the problem with most topics, plenty of evidence to support each side, so I accept that I don't know with most things and probably never will. Still, it's always worth pondering on these things, it's fun if nothing else. The main reason I voted hoax on the forum was because I knew it would wind you up, couldn't resist ;) Overall I still feel that going to the moon the way we claimed we did would be such an extraordinary and astonishing achievement that extraordinary evidence is required to prove it. You post plenty of supporting evidence, but none of it is conclusive in my opinion (I know you disagree!). I was going to look more into the geology thing, but I just couldn't be bothered in the end. It is much easier to just claim that geology isn't a real science. As an aside there is a guy called Robert Gentry that claims he has cast iron geological proof that the earth in only 5000 years old. The point is that if you want to prove a theory you will find evidence to back it up. Sometimes evidence can support 2 rival theories, like cosmic microwave background which is always held up as evidence in support of the big bang theory, whilst the steady state theory actually predicted this more accurately so really it supports steady state more. It's often said that you can't prove a negative so we can't prove we didn't go to the moon, anymore than we can prove the non existence of the flying spaghetti monster. I have seen plenty of evidence suggesting we might not have gone but no proof. For me your rocks are evidence in support of us going, but not proof on their own. Assumptions will have had to be made to reach the conclusions stated, some of those assumptions could later prove to be erroneous as is often the case in science, we're always learning. I suppose the only evidence that would definately convince me is seeing with my own eyes, if it was possible for instance to look through a telescope and see the astronauts waving at me. But even then I could claim is was a hologram if I wanted to hold on to a belief that we didn't go...... :) I suppose what this all comes down to is whether we believe what the establishment tells us or not. If we do, then the moon landing is definately real if we don't then it didn't happen, all the evidence and arguments we have are just detail. Overall I feel that we have been lied to about so many things that I now question everything, and to be fair this is a normal reaction to being repeatedly lied to by anyone. It also means that I will doubt them when they tell the truth, again a natural reaction to serial liars. You obviously know that the reason you are in the minority on these forums is because you are one of the few who still believes what the establishment tells you. Outside of this forum you are in the majority, so I guess you come on here for the challenge rather than speak to people who agree with you which would just be like an echo chamber. I do change my mind about things when presented with new, compelling evidence but your rocks haven't swung me. I still accept we may have gone, but it still seems too far fetched for me to believe right now.
  6. Silent Bob

    Mud floods, Tartaria, Ancient technology

    This is a nice quick intro to mudfloods and tartaria https://www.stolenhistory.org/threads/mud-flood-dirt-rain-and-the-story-of-the-buried-buildings.25/ https://www.stolenhistory.org/threads/tartary-an-empire-hidden-in-history-it-was-bigger-than-russia-once.40/
  7. Silent Bob

    Mud floods, Tartaria, Ancient technology

    The yugas theory makes sense of why our tech has gone backwards in many aspects, from using clean free energy to burning stuff and causing pollution. What surprises me most from the stuff i've seen recently is how short the possible time scale is, the possible addition of 1000 years into our timeline and the fact the last reset could have been so recent. I feel the next 'reset' event is close, people seem to constantly expect a cataclism to occur almost as if this is imprinted into our collective memories.
  8. Silent Bob

    ever changed your mind based upon a web board?

    Yes, changed my mind many times over the years based on a good point I hadn't thought of before or new information. The first time I remember this on an internet thread was when I was researching golden rice for a project about GM food I was doing at uni. I started off full of confidence in our ability to genetically modify food and thought that Golden rice was the best thing ever. So I started out with a bias in favour and initially focussed on facts that agreed with my view. I think I went onto a forum to debunk those who said golden rice was not going to work and that GM was dangerous, in typical TG/Rupert style. However when I actually looked at the evidence they presented me with I eventually and reluctantly began to change my view point. It's hard to do, you have to accept you were wrong before even though you'd felt so certain about it. Today I consider GM to be dangerous, I really don't think we're clever enough to pull it off without unintended and perhaps irreversible consequences. I used to mock those who bought organic as being mugs, now I buy organic whenever possible. When I look at where golden rice is today I feel quite naive and foolish for falling for it in the first place!
  9. I feel that these topics all overlap and are connected, Max Igan gives a nice summary in his latest show posted below. I see mud flood building all over the place now, especially where I live. To summarise for those new to this topic, it appears as though a repeated cataclysm keeps 'resetting' civilisation on a fairly regular basis. It seems as though the most ancient building were constructed with better technology than we have today, along with many statues and sculpures. After each reset the old cities seem to be repopulated with orphans, who just seem to appear out of nowhere. The reset most recent seems to be some kind of mud flood that has partially buried the buildings that predate it, once you notice them you see that they are everywhere, right across the world. There also appears to be a global empire called Tartaria just a few hundred years ago, it can be seen on all the old maps but no mention in history. It could be they were the 'old world order' before the latest lot took over just a few hundred years ago. This is important as most people accept the world we live in as it has always been this way, where as if it had only been this way for the last 200 hundred years we would think very differently. This is especially so our history prior to this was happier than suggested, perhaps with free energy in use for the common good. I realise this all sounds very far out, but the more you look into it the more it makes sense. For additional info on this topic the following are great sources: The 'New Earth' lady - great series called survivors of atlantis for an alternative historical time line, Tartaria, ancient technology, atmospheric electricity and star forts. https://www.youtube.com/user/everhungriescatgang Jon Levi - fantastic video compilations of photos of mud flood buildings. Worlds fairs videos are very good! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5vXBfxN7rxKeJHJxS8dNDw barnabas nagy - similiar to John Levi, some awesome pics - be sure to check out the Spanish hotel built in 53 days, and then demolished shortly after as it was only meant to be temporary! https://www.youtube.com/user/axureland/videos The original mud flood guy Phillipp Druzhinin, great pics https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIZoTgebXiFVoyqnXyS7GoA/videos This one is has a good link on the foundling orphan trains https://www.youtube.com/user/gzpg6b/videos So, what do you think about all of this? Anyone out there been looking into it?
  10. Silent Bob

    The Apollo landings - explain this

    I watched the first two videos, but the last one I couldn't due to that annoying mechanical voice - in my experience videos with these voices are never worth watching. I'm not sure what you think the first two videos are showing me? I still see a round window which is filled with an image of earth in low orbit, I thought it was clear the video shows this especially when the arm gets in the way and we turn the lights on and see the whole damn set up. I didn't expect you to deny what we clearly see with own eyes here, I thought you'd have some other explanation for it. I definately can't see any rotation in the 2nd video, but to be fair I wouldn't expect to. If we start with 24 hours for 1 rotation of around 25k miles, so for 10 mins divide by 24 then 6 to get around 170 miles movement in the centre. Would you really expect to see this? Higher up where that land mass is visible the movement would be less due to smaller circumference there. It just looks to me that the camera itself shifts slightly between takes, which we see in the video. Firstly, please tell me why you believe what is said in the video? I ask this because it is mainly appalling observation, deception and lies. I can prove this if you can spare 10 or so minutes. I don't necessarily believe what is said, I'm more interested in what I see. To start with the film maker Bart Sibrel claims that they have "ingeniously" moved the camera back in the cabin to get the whole Earth in the window. That is so dumb it deserves a cream pie in the face. You wouldn't even get England in the window in low Earth orbit. That isn't what he's saying, it's not the whole earth just part of it in low orbit. Thats exactly what it looks like to me. Scale is hard to determine, I can only see one land mass, just right of centre towards the top. Otherwise mostly over water, who knows where over the earth. Next, he claims all the movements at the camera edge are arms. A lie. They are provably the edge of the window. It's clearly an arm, not sure what else to say..... He claims that the footage was leaked to him somehow. A lie. It was part of a consumer video package you can buy in the shops! Not really, he suspects he was sent it in error due to the implications he believes it has. Seems a reasonable assumption, didn't NASA accidently record over loads of their original moon footage videos once? He claims they were faking being half way to the Moon. They did 3 transmissions, 2 live TV rehearsals to test the equipment, one to do the live TV. How is this proven? He later changed his story to a window transparency. Easily disproven. What?
  11. Silent Bob

    The Apollo landings - explain this

    I find this video fascinating, what's your take on it? Don't get distracted by the title, it's what we actually see in the clip that's interesting and I have yet to hear a decent explanation for why they would do this. To save time I already know that I'm a complete moron, no grasp of physics, the video is stupid, flat earther idiot etc... etc... but that aside just humour me and try to explain why they would need to fake an image of the earth from low orbit. To be clear I am not saying this video is proof of anything other than they faked this particular shot, the reasons why they did it are open to speculation.
  12. Silent Bob

    Tommy Robinson deleted from Facebook

    Has anyone on this thread told you that you can't talk about Muslims or tried to censor you? I must have missed it if they have. Some disagree with you sure, that's the whole point of debate isn't it? Of course you're free to express whatever opinion you wish about Islam and we're free to disagree. If I say the same stuff you quote about non-muslims in their book is just as bad as other religions with respect to non believers I'm not saying you're wrong to discuss it, just wrong to single them out as being different from other religions in that respect. They are all the same, as you know all abrahamic religions are based on Saturn worship anyway - one happy saturnic family! Just want to announce my favourite thing about Islam which doesn't get discussed enough - they oppose usury. Of course all religions did at one time, was it the 15th century when Christianity first allowed usury? God must have had a change of heart on this one, update the bible chaps I said usury was wrong but I made a mistake, it's fine really..... I suspect this is why Islam is being demonised to an extent (in my opinion I know you disagree!) as it is the single biggest threat to bankers/ruling elite. Can you imagine if we all adopted that and took it seriously, no more interest payments as from today? Maybe we should focus on one simple point like this, which everyone must surely agree on if nothing else.
  13. Silent Bob

    Tommy Robinson deleted from Facebook

    I think you're both right (MrA and muir), your points of view aren't exclusive. The main point I'd pick on from MrA is the conflation between zionism and Islam as if they're comparable. I would say Zionism is to Jews what ISIS is to Muslims, the ordinary people that is. In all religions I think most people are nice enough, just like the rest of us. A minority in each religion are extreme, but they aren't really true members of any religion. It's a bit like those firms that used to arrange football violence between teams. Most people go to football to enjoy the game, they're the genuine supporters. Then there's those that go just for violence, the game doesn't matter it's just an excuse to be violent against the 'others'. Same applies to religous extremists, the religion doesn't matter to them just an excuse to be tribal and violent like the football hooligans, same mentality. All religions seem to preach peace as no.1 priority, so the second you become violent you can't seriously claim to follow any religion. Sure, all religous books contain some dodgy stuff, which most ordinary people ignore or filter out. Hypocritical maybe, but normal human reaction to ignore the stuff we don't like and focus on the stuff we do. About the Rotherham thing, they were allowed to get away with it due to polital correctness, no doubt. Paedos are the scum of the earth regardless of which imaginary friend they have chosen to talk to. I would argue that the only religion they could possibly be a part of in truth is satanism, they only pretend to be part of one of the other religions. How could it be otherwise? It makes sense that they fund both left and right, David Icke has talked about this for years. There is no left or right, just like there is no spoon. There are ideas that are good for people and ideas that aren't, any other label is irrevelant. As Max Igan keeps saying, unless you factor in the fact that the planet is currently run by a criminal gang of psychopaths then any genuinely good idea is doomed to failure.
  14. Silent Bob

    Let's talk about 9/11 in a MATURE manner

    So some people make rubbish documentaries, debunking them doesn't mean the official story is true. This is the best summary, nice and quick just 5 mins.
×