Discussion in 'Conspiracy Theories' started by Chuck, Jun 25, 2013.
That may well be true, but that does not say that this stuff is not happening.
Wisdom is what you start accumulating after you know it all.
And none of you know it all.
My point is, this case has NOT been debunked. You say it is purely speculation, prove it.
Pick a point in it and let us work on it.
But you won't do that since YOU know more than we do.
Your own words from the PM to me, (after you were rude).
Have you ever run a business? Hired and fired folks? Paid taxes other an income tax? Bought or owned a house? Signed a contract? Sat on a jury? Had to pay for your own health insurance, and car insurance?
Studied the history of any period or country not covered in a textbook? Had to work with others on a cooperative project? Bought a stock or bond? Studied how a corporation works and why they developed?
We have done all those things and more, and we have learned. Made mistakes and had to get our rears out of the problem we created.
We are willing to DISCUSS points that can be verified with you.
That wasn't the point of the post that I said "so what?" to - your post said "none of you can prove it isn't happening now" - or words to that effect.
To which I say - so what?- how does that change anything about what he document actually is??
Nope - You prove your claim.
It's debunked as far as I am concerned - there is a wealth of evidence showing that the document is rather old and exactly what it is.....whereas you have....um....some urge to think otherwise backed up by essentially nothing.
But the point is that there is no evidence that it is happening.
Why would you believe in something without evidence?
Could you clarify why what you think is a fake document, is evidence that the things talked about in the document are real and happening now? It's confusing.
If the document is real, then that is the evidence, I found something else on the file to show tampering. On the logo itself, one part of the red bit, has a changed colour, there are lots of points towards the NASA logo, they would never have a fault with their own logo. All of these simple points that you simply dismiss do SHOW tampering. Whether the file as originally differently worded or what, I have no idea, but the file has been tampered with.
No, the stuff is happening regardless of this document. If the file is real, then it gives more evidence to what the government is doing behind closed doors. If you don't want to believe it, don't, but this stuff is happening. Do you know about ObamaCare and the RFID chips?
You are saying the file is fake. Have you approached the author or NASA to verify its authenticity? From my understanding NASA are very approachable. You could put in an FOI request.
opps Double post
It doesn't change anything about the document itself, but the stuff that is going on, relates to the document. If the document is real, then it could link to their plans a lot more than you think.
No, my proof is the editting dates and the logos. The full length version is not the real follow up, the logos are pixellated and the quality is poor. In the short length document there are also signs of tampering, the logo has an out of place smudge of colour and the dates show signs of the file being saved - by the page that you linked me to. That shows that they opened the file, could well have changed something, and then resaved it.
I have sent an email yes, but as of yet I have no reply.
If the file is in fact real, which it probably is, it has been tampered with in some way. Now I don't know how it has been editted, but it has.
But surely the important thing is the content. If NASA authenticate that it is real. Did you send an FOI request for the document?
That is true, but they must authenticate that the specific document in question is correct in it's entirety.
I haven't, though I will do. Hasn't anyone on this site done that themselves? This is afterall a debunking site.
Do any of you know about ObamaCare and RFID chips??
All of my points are being discussed now and will require a FOIA request for an answer.
The first paragraph of those things are irrelevant to me at my age, how could you ever expect that? I may not have done it yet but I could very well. I have done a business course at college, I am not unfamiliar with these things.
I've studied the history of MANY periods and countries and history is one of my biggest interests, along with science, astronomy, physics, computing, politics and everything to do with helping the world progress. If you knew me you would be astounded at what I know at my age.
I have made a lot of mistakes to learn from too, but I also learn from other peoples mistakes. I pay very high attention to everything in the world so I can see where people go wrong and how to do it right myself.
Well that does not disprove them.. It simply says the wording has been changed or removed in the legislation. They could be doing this secretly for all you know, whenever you go for an injection, you could be receiving an RFID chip. For all you know you may already have one in your body. The chips ARE real, so why deny the possibility of them being used?
You seem to be doing a good job of that.
Pretty sure I would notice them trying to inject me with a 12 gauge needle.
I meant how to do it right myself.
You've never heard of nanotechnology I'm guessing?
What would this secretly implanted nano rfid chip do exactly?
If they are using nanotechnology and it is put in a normal injection would the boby not metabolize it and excrete it?
Please take RFID discussion to:
Have you not read up about the chips capabilities? Medical records, police records, your whole identity on one chip. Then other things such as GPS tracking and a lethal dose of cyanide which can be released at any time (said to be for terrorists and prisoners who escape). Hmm I wonder.. Mass genocide possibly? Of certain races/religions? Who knows?? They would have their plans locked down, no-one will know until it happens.
Sorry I made that comment before I knew of that.
Maybe you're right, I'm not saying it has been done, I'm simply saying they could trick people into having it that way.
none of that is actually "proof" of the document being "fake" - just of crappy copying.
Of course there are signs of tampering - IT HAS BEEN EDITED!!
This is my mother
Hell I've read through this thread and thought you know I'll make an account and discuss too, hell she's probably crazy and maybe there is huge speculation over this. I'm not saying this is real and I'm not saying it isn't real, I'm neutral here, now I'm sure you are all mature enough to understand what I am saying. A lot of countries have done crazy things in the past such as human experimentation global warfare and nearly the extinction of an entire race (Nazism) there have been wars and such and we've never known what has happened. Stalin starved his country and let millions die to achieve his goals http://history1900s.about.com/od/people/ss/Stalin_6.htm which you can research for yourself simply by typing it in to google and such. What I am saying is the people at the time knew nothing of it and continued with their lives, governments have lied on several ocassions to their people. https://www.google.co.uk/#safe=off&...r.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=pv.xjs.s.en_US.seW1cfrvSKg.O just another example about what most people do not know, you're probably going to say that I'm crazy but then again if this were a thousand years ago and you told someone we could fly they would think you were crazy too but here we are. Once again I'm not saying this is true (I hope it isn't) but then again I'm not denying the possibility of it to be true, it does make sense after all, I mean say in the next 20 years if nothing happens and the population continues to grow, wouldn't that mean that people dying from starvation would also increase. That fact is undeniale in itself, millions still die from starvation even now. All I'm saying is that we will never know until it does happen, if it does then theorists can simply say we told you so, if it doesn't then they can still say "Well there is no harm in being prepared for the worst outcome my good sir." at least give them the chance to speak and not ridicule them. I mean this is similar to telling someone that god is not real, to a religious believer that would be highly offensive to them and you would be hurting their feelings, much like if you tell someone they were crazy for explaining their theory on this, at least hear them out and maybe just think about the possibility of it, this is all I am asking.
I also think this statement is highly unfair, how would you like it say if you were a religious believer and someone said that to you? You simply don't say that to a person, it's morally wrong. I'd be done for rascism for saying that to a religious believer. It's just not right, especially since the theory is possible at the very least whether or not it is true is a completely different story but you shouldn't criticise someone for believing in something which is quite possible.
There's a difference between science and religion. Religion is quite specifically based on faith. Belief without evidence. The bible quite clearly says this is okay, and even encourages it. http://biblehub.com/john/20-29.htm
Science is very different. It is based on evidence, and finding explanations that best fit that evidence. Not about believing things based purely on faith.
Why shouldn't anybody ,
...because it's not true yet.
It's much more logical to criticize something that does not hold enough evidence....until there there is (enough evidence). Then it is much much harder to criticize.
Claiming that something is "quite possible", opens a question, but does not answer anything, either.
It's like a statement half finished.
..."I believe the planet is made of solid iron because...................."
And say there is a scientific explanation to religion, what would you say to that, if and I mean IF there is an explanation through science then there is no difference, I don't see the difference because in our lifetimes we will probably never know maybe someday we will meet god (if there is one, not saying there is or is not a god) and maybe he will explain everything to us and provide you a scientific explanation to everything. After all science is putting pieces together, take Carbon and Oxygen and put them together to get Water. I was only saying that it's not nice to be criticised on this and was only using it as an example.
as for this, I never said it is true and even if it's not true all I said that there is still a possibility, and I don't think a person should be criticized for their opinion on this possibility, this is a mature site and I think that criticizing a person on this is not very mature and the reason I used religion is is that it is the closet thing to compare to. People shouldn't be criticized for their opinions or beliefs and I think it is wrong to do so.
And furthermore your statement suggests that you would criticize someone for their belief in something, I do not mean to offend you but I think that is quite ignorant of you to do so, just because there is little or no proof does not mean you criticize them over it. Unless you would actually go to a religious believer and simply say to them that "it is not true, there is no god" I don't think you're a very nice person.
Then this is probably not the site for you. This site is about debunking, which is about finding things that are wrong, and exposing and correcting them. If you take that as criticism, then that is unfortunate, because it it simply pointing out facts.
But you have no evidence either yet you criticize them for having no evidence
So if one were to point out the fact that water is hydrogen and oxygen, would you take offense?
The maturity of this site is it's title.....and it's intent. Stating "possibilities" leaves nothing to speak about, other than hunches and opinion. I understand where you are coming from. But when someone says "I think this" or "I believe that", you will be asked "why ?", and "based on what evidence ?"
I don't believe anyone has suggested you are not free to have opinions or beliefs (everybody has those)....but we are concerned with what facts there are to support these opinions and beliefs. Speak of facts and we can discuss those. Speak of opinions and beliefs....and there's not really much to discuss.
I don't mean to narrow it down to two pennies......Maybe there are facts that led you to an opinion, so those things must be settled first.
Separate names with a comma.