• MH370 speculation has become excessive recently. Metabunk is not a forum for creating theories by speculation. It's a forum for examining claims, and seeing if they hold up. Please respect this and keep threads on-topic. There are many other forums where speculation is welcome.

Debunked: Exploration company "Georesonance" believes it may have found MH370

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Awesome, then they can prove their science to the world.
 

David Coulter

Senior Member.
In the press release they pull the old trick of citing a legitimate source that is irrelevant to (and in fact provides contradictory evidence to) their claims.

This blog has nothing to do with Georesonance, just a lot of experiments for different in flight tracking approaches - nothing about seeing a plane underwater. Interestingly, Prof Steel's tracking calculations for a northerly flight don't put 370 anywhere near the GR location. GR has a great PR department, they cite an external source that refutes their claims.
 
GeoResonance has been informed by sources quoting the Malaysian and Australian Governments that the precise location identified by GeoResonance in the Bay of Bengal, contrary to reports, has not been searched by the Bangladesh Navy

"sources quoting the Malaysian and Australian Governments" Uh huh. Sure. Right... What's a cubit?
 

RobertNC

New Member
The arrogance displayed by the people at GeoResonance continues to infuriate me. As expected, they are blaming the Australian and Malaysian authorities and Bangladesh Navy for not finding anything at the Bay of Bengal location. This perfectly keeps their "claim" in play and extends their window of opportunity to exploit this tragedy. I am concerned that their next move will be to try to go after the desperate MH370 families for funding one of their "special projects" to mount a for-profit search. Free advertising may not be good enough for these guys.

I continue to hope that there is some legal recourse that would shut down their intentional interference with a criminal investigation before they do more harm.
 

bume

Member
The arrogance displayed by the people at GeoResonance continues to infuriate me. As expected, they are blaming the Australian and Malaysian authorities and Bangladesh Navy for not finding anything at the Bay of Bengal location.

But have you seen any news saying it loud and clear that they have checked that exact position?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
But have you seen any news saying it loud and clear that they have checked that exact position?

Why on earth should anyone check that position? You might as well ask an astrologer where to look, and then then go check there.
 

bume

Member
Why on earth should anyone check that position? You might as well ask an astrologer where to look, and then then go check there.

I'm not expecting they would actually find anything there but the point is that GeoResonance might be right in their claim that nobody actually checked the location. Or at least nobody has clearly stated they have.

One way or another Bangladesh navy messed up. First there were news that they are going to check it, which was sort of an indication that they are taking GeoResonance seriously to some extent, or at least they were incapable of saying that there's no point in going there. Then it seems they were either incapable of following simple instructions for checking the exact coordinates (they were said to be 'scouring' around somewhere) or incapable of saying it loud and clear that they checked just that. Either way, I'm blaming them for keeping these claims still alive.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I'm not expecting they would actually find anything there but the point is that GeoResonance might be right in their claim that nobody actually checked the location. Or at least nobody has clearly stated they have.

One way or another Bangladesh navy messed up. First there were news that they are going to check it, which was sort of an indication that they are taking GeoResonance seriously to some extent, or at least they were incapable of saying that there's no point in going there. Then it seems they were either incapable of following simple instructions for checking the exact coordinates (they were said to be 'scouring' around somewhere) or incapable of saying it loud and clear that they checked just that. Either way, I'm blaming them for keeping these claims still alive.

Can you quote what the Bangladesh navy said?
 

bume

Member
Can you quote what the Bangladesh navy said?

All the news I have seen have been like this:

http://bdnews24.com/bangladesh/2014...ngal-again-for-mh370-after-georesonance-claim

Then there was some vague news that they haven't found anything yet but continued searching. If they actually went there to check the claims, how hard is it to just check that exact location and clearly say that they have checked that and there's nothing in there?
 
If you were given an exact location within 50 meters, would you just steam all the way out there, check that spot and, upon finding nothing, turn right around and go back? No, you wouldn't, you would check that spot and then "scour" the surrounding area just to be sure that GeoScammers had not been slightly off in their calculations. If they HAD simply gone to that spot and turned around, you can be sure that GeoScammers would have instead suggested that they should have scoured the area just in case they (the navy, that is) were a bit off on their navigation... that the plane really is where they say it is but the Bangladeshi Navy is using an older model, wooden sextant, an inaccurate hourglass and dull grappling hooks.

They are simply tearing a page from the same play book as with the Armenia... it's where they say it is, it's just that in the nine years since they "found" it, it seems that folks either cannot find their way precisely to that location or detect the ship once there... but it's there, all right.
 

David Coulter

Senior Member.
But have you seen any news saying it loud and clear that they have checked that exact position?

Nobody in an official position would make a statement like that; it would lend credibility to the entire Georesonance scam. The next press release would read: "The Bangladesh Navy has shown official support for the Georesonance Remote Sensing technology by sending multiple vessels to sea. No country would commit this level resources and expenses without being fully convinced that Georesonance Remote Sensing was a proven and accurate technology."

I would never expect anything more than, "the navy returned to scour the Bay of Bengal based on a report of possible wreckage".
 

bume

Member
Nobody in an official position would make a statement like that; it would lend credibility to the entire Georesonance scam. The next press release would read: "The Bangladesh Navy has shown official support for the Georesonance Remote Sensing technology by sending multiple vessels to sea. No country would commit this level resources and expenses without being fully convinced that Georesonance Remote Sensing was a proven and accurate technology."

I would never expect anything more than, "the navy returned to scour the Bay of Bengal based on a report of possible wreckage".

But they already gave exactly such credibility. It's made pretty clear officially that they were doing that based on what GeoResonance said:

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/02/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/

And Malaysian transport minister actually made the situation worse by stating that they are also considering sending a ship there. Which is like saying they take GeoResonance seriously enough (even though he said it's unlikely the plane is there) but also that they do not really trust Bangladesh is capable of getting the job done. And the lack of clear information about the outcome certainly doesn't help to shed such suspicions.
 

bume

Member
If you were given an exact location within 50 meters, would you just steam all the way out there, check that spot and, upon finding nothing, turn right around and go back? No, you wouldn't, you would check that spot and then "scour" the surrounding area just to be sure that GeoScammers had not been slightly off in their calculations.

The location wasn't based on inexact calculations like with Inmarsat but an actual picture from the location. Or even better, a friggin kirlian picture! ;)

Having a go with the sonar at that exact position should already give a pretty good safety margin as the depth was 1 km or so and of course they could check the surrounding area a bit as well but the most important information everybody expected was that was there anything in that exact location or not. As officially there wasn't really any reason to search anywhere else in that region anymore.
 

RobertNC

New Member
The location wasn't based on inexact calculations like with Inmarsat but an actual picture from the location. Or even better, a friggin kirlian picture! ;)

Having a go with the sonar at that exact position should already give a pretty good safety margin as the depth was 1 km or so and of course they could check the surrounding area a bit as well but the most important information everybody expected was that was there anything in that exact location or not. As officially there wasn't really any reason to search anywhere else in that region anymore.

If GeoResonance is SO CONFIDENT that there is a 777 aircraft on the sea floor in the Bay of Bengal, how about they tap into their "vast resources" and simply go up there to the "exact location" and pull up one of the engines !!!!! This would prove to the world that their technology works and they would be wealthy beyond all imagination. The cost to GeoResonance would be insignificant compared to the good will and future business this success would generate.

Of course, they have not done this (and never will) because they know there is nothing there. They are getting far more benefit from the free publicity they are getting by exploiting this tragedy.
 
Last edited:

bume

Member
If GeoResonance is SO CONFIDENT that there is a 777 aircraft on the sea floor in the Bay of Bengal, how about they tap into their "vast resources" and simply go up there to the "exact location" and pull up one of the engines !!!!! This would prove to the world that their technology works and they would be wealthy beyond all imagination. The cost to GeoResonance would be insignificant compared to the good will and future business this success would generate.

Of course, they have not done this (and never will) because they know there is nothing there. They are getting far more benefit from the free publicity they are getting by exploiting this tragedy.

Knowing the situation in (what used to be) Ukraine, their resources may not be available at the moment... And I would guess the best they could do would be some sort of sonar scanning, or more of this fancy remote sensing...

It's impossible to know what they believe or believed themselves, but as said before, I'm having a hard time believing they would take such a gamble if they knew there is nothing in there and that their science is junk.

At the moment their pr might still be working to some extent as they haven't been properly debunked publicly in the media, but I don't think they could have anticipated the outcome so far with any certainty, so that it would have been worth the risk. For example, if the plane had been already found elsewhere, the Bangladesh navy would have told it clearly that the location is empty, or their science would have exposed in the media in detail, they would already be pretty much a laughing stock.

Hence it's easier for me to believe they actually thought the plane has a very good chance in being there, or at least that their methods are sound and solid. After all, at least some of them have said they are not scientists, so they might have just trusted the Ukrainians. And now that they have heard the various critical views of their tech, it maybe that they do not have such faith anymore, but their necks are already so deep in this that their only option really is to try to defend their business.
 

scombrid

Senior Member.
If GeoResonance is SO CONFIDENT that there is a 777 aircraft on the sea floor in the Bay of Bengal, how about they tap into their "vast resources" and simply go up there to the "exact location" and pull up one of the engines !!!!! This would prove to the world that their technology works and they would be wealthy beyond all imagination. The cost to GeoResonance would be insignificant compared to the good will and future business this success would generate.

Of course, they have not done this (and never will) because they know there is nothing there. They are getting far more benefit from the free publicity they are getting by exploiting this tragedy.

Fundraising strategy. "Hey believers, the government won't go look in our spot. Send us money and we'll go look. Oh damn, waited too long to go look and it must have moved. Send us more money so we can fire up the reactor and do another scan."
 
The bottom line, Bume, is that GeoScammers can fabricate excuses even faster than you can make apologies for them... the plane is not where they say it is. Do you not find it curious how they have not made the precise coordinates public so Ballard or others with the time and money can go take a look? Anyway, it won't make any difference whether you send the Bangladeshi Navy, the United States Navy, Robert Ballard or Captain Nemo out there; 1) the plane will not be found there, 2) GeoScammers will have some excuse that involves the non-performance of somebody other than themselves, and 3) you will be telling us to give them another chance.
 

bume

Member
The bottom line, Bume, is that GeoScammers can fabricate excuses even faster than you can make apologies for them... the plane is not where they say it is. Do you not find it curious how they have not made the precise coordinates public so Ballard or others with the time and money can go take a look? Anyway, it won't make any difference whether you send the Bangladeshi Navy, the United States Navy, Robert Ballard or Captain Nemo out there; 1) the plane will not be found there, 2) GeoScammers will have some excuse that involves the non-performance of somebody other than themselves, and 3) you will be telling us to give them another chance.

I'm not saying we should give them another chance, you have misunderstood me. All I'm saying is that so far there's no clear evidence they scammed on purpose. Their latest press releases however have started to show a pattern of dishonesty with the silt and all, so yes it's definitely possible that they are not believing what they are saying themselves.

Edit: And additionally I'm saying that they are not the only ones who have made mistakes, wasted resources, and likely lied, as there's plenty of fishy aspects on the official side of things as well.
 
I think the safest thing to do is only pay attention to what the Aussies, Yanks and Brits are saying and doing, because at the end it will be they who find it. As to whether GeoScammers actually believes their own BS and therefore are not "intentionally" scamming and wasting peoples time and money, I consider the point irrelevant, there is no way we can know in any event and I am not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. There are many who believe in and promote financial pyramid schemes despite the mathematical impossibility of them generating more winners than losers, and just because they believe in or profit from them does not mean the schemes themselves are not fraudulent... if GeoScammers believes in their junk science it does not mean their science is not junk or that it should be taken seriously and acted upon by others, even others who are incompetent or unreliable such as the Malaysians.
 

Vittel

New Member
The arrogance displayed by the people at GeoResonance continues to infuriate me. As expected, they are blaming the Australian and Malaysian authorities and Bangladesh Navy for not finding anything at the Bay of Bengal location. This perfectly keeps their "claim" in play and extends their window of opportunity to exploit this tragedy. I am concerned that their next move will be to try to go after the desperate MH370 families for funding one of their "special projects" to mount a for-profit search. Free advertising may not be good enough for these guys.

I continue to hope that there is some legal recourse that would shut down their intentional interference with a criminal investigation before they do more harm.


I am afraid that might already be happening
https://www.facebook.com/findingphilipwood370

Capture d’écran 2014-05-22 à 23.27.00.png
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Would it really be such a complicated operation only available to military powers as that post claims?
All you need is a fishing boat and sonar over the location don't you?
 

Vittel

New Member
I do not know, however Sarah Hamil Bajc is the partner of one of the passengers so apparently GR is in contact with relatives
 

bume

Member
Would it really be such a complicated operation only available to military powers as that post claims?
All you need is a fishing boat and sonar over the location don't you?

I would guess that a fishing sonar wouldn't really have the capabilities to go deep enough and even if it does, have sufficient detail for detection that deep (~1km). Those depths are not really of interest for fishing anyway.
 

RobertNC

New Member
I am afraid that might already be happening
https://www.facebook.com/findingphilipwood370
https://www.facebook.com/findingphilipwood370

Vittel, I can see from the Facebook page you posted that some of the families of the MH370 passengers are clinging to every word coming out of the GeoResonance PR team. This is so heartbreaking.

If GeoResonance had provided 1 single shred of evidence that they can do what they claim, I "might" be willing to accept that they actually had good intentions but maybe are just misguided (I personally believe they know exactly how malicious their claims are). For example, a controlled/documented experiment where they would image a stationary B777 on the tarmac at Boeing Field or image the USS Arizona hull at Pearl Harbour. This should be blindingly simple for them if they can do what they claim. They haven't done this of course because it would expose their deception.

Sorry, I need to calm down.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

David Coulter

Senior Member.
I'm not saying we should give them another chance, you have misunderstood me. All I'm saying is that so far there's no clear evidence they scammed on purpose. Their latest press releases however have started to show a pattern of dishonesty with the silt and all, so yes it's definitely possible that they are not believing what they are saying themselves.

Edit: And additionally I'm saying that they are not the only ones who have made mistakes, wasted resources, and likely lied, as there's plenty of fishy aspects on the official side of things as well.

"Ignorance of the Law is no excuse". In this case it is the Laws of Physics. Go back to Pete Tar's external quote on page 11 of the thread to see the details of the propagation of optical wavelength light. How is it possible that the "47 scientists and nuclear physicists, including 5 professors and 12 PhDs" didn't figure out what one can find in the literature or should have learned while pursuing a Ph.D. in physics or geophysics?
 

David Coulter

Senior Member.
I do not know, however Sarah Hamil Bajc is the partner of one of the passengers so apparently GR is in contact with relatives

I contacted one of the "supporting" scientific authorities cited in a GR press release to inform him he was being cited by a charlatan company. He told me they have been trying to contact him and thought it was bizarre since he had dismissed their claims as unscientific in his blog. (He also said I was being kind by using the word "charlatan" as there are more appropriate words.)
 

bume

Member
"Ignorance of the Law is no excuse". In this case it is the Laws of Physics. Go back to Pete Tar's external quote on page 11 of the thread to see the details of the propagation of optical wavelength light. How is it possible that the "47 scientists and nuclear physicists, including 5 professors and 12 PhDs" didn't figure out what one can find in the literature or should have learned while pursuing a Ph.D. in physics or geophysics?

We know how popular kirlian photography for example has been in scientific circles around there some decades ago and there have been various documents showing support for their methods by some institutions, professors etc. We have also seen some pictures of those older guys at work in Sevastopol and it seems their academic credentials might be from that time period when such methods were widely accepted. So I'm guessing we are talking about a group that has stuck to the ideas of those days.
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
We know how popular kirlian photography for example has been in scientific circles around there some decades ago and there have been various documents showing support for their methods by some institutions, professors etc. We have also seen some pictures of those older guys at work in Sevastopol and it seems their academic credentials might be from that time period when such methods were widely accepted. So I'm guessing we are talking about a group that has stuck to the ideas of those days.
I kind of abandoned this conversation a while back, so pardon me if I'm not up to speed...but this comment (above) just seemed forced to me. So, I ask:

Has there been any scientific source--that anyone here would consider professional--that has reported
anything that involves Kirlian photography being used in any way scientifically in the last 30 years?
 

David Coulter

Senior Member.
We know how popular kirlian photography for example has been in scientific circles around there some decades ago and there have been various documents showing support for their methods by some institutions, professors etc. We have also seen some pictures of those older guys at work in Sevastopol and it seems their academic credentials might be from that time period when such methods were widely accepted. So I'm guessing we are talking about a group that has stuck to the ideas of those days.

Kirlian photography was never popular in western scientific circles, even in the 70's. It certainly was not presented or discussed in any of my science classes. All I remember about it was that Edmund's catalog offered a "Kirlian generator" about that time.
 

David Coulter

Senior Member.
I kind of abandoned this conversation a while back, so pardon me if I'm not up to speed...but this comment (above) just seemed forced to me. So, I ask:

Has there been any scientific source--that anyone here would consider professional--that has reported
anything that involves Kirlian photography being used in any way scientifically in the last 30 years?

No, even in the 70's it was only considered a curiosity, not science.
 

bume

Member
Kirlian photography was never popular in western scientific circles, even in the 70's. It certainly was not presented or discussed in any of my science classes. All I remember about it was that Edmund's catalog offered a "Kirlian generator" about that time.

But Sevastopol is not in western circles. And now it's more like Putin's circles...
 

bume

Member
No, even in the 70's it was only considered a curiosity, not science.

Depends on your definition of science and scientists. If that excludes people who believe that, then obviously not. But if we define it as somebody who has academic credentials and publishes stuff that at least follows the format of scientific publications, then yes. See for example this guy (search for kirlian on that page):

http://www.medicalbiophysics.dir.bg/en/ignat_ignatov.html
 

David Coulter

Senior Member.
But Sevastopol is not in western circles. And now it's more like Putin's circles...

Doesn't matter. I worked in a small applied research group and we had one Russian speaker that monitored the Soviet literature. The "47 scientists and nuclear physicists, including 5 professors and 12 PhDs" didn't/don't have one single person that follows western science?
 
By Bume's definition a "science" can be legitimized simply if some "academician" studies or practices it, thus excusing any others who believe, practice or leverage it to the disadvantage of others as well. As to Western vs Eastern "science", all one has to do is ask which one got the Russians into space, got them nuclear power or television sets. GeoScammers has no "scientists" of any cardinal disposition, including northern or southern, they are just a bunch of confidence operators leveraging the nonsensical byproduct of alleged scientific minds suffering from an unfortunate combination of too little sanity and too much subsidy.
 

bume

Member
By Bume's definition a "science" can be legitimized simply if some "academician" studies or practices it, thus excusing any others who believe, practice or leverage it to the disadvantage of others as well. As to Western vs Eastern "science", all one has to do is ask which one got the Russians into space, got them nuclear power or television sets. GeoScammers has no "scientists" of any cardinal disposition, including northern or southern, they are just a bunch of confidence operators leveraging the nonsensical byproduct of alleged scientific minds suffering from an unfortunate combination of too little sanity and too much subsidy.

This is sidetracking pretty badly... but obviously pretty much all definitions are problematic. If we consider for example the alleged 14000 state-sponsored scientists working with kirlian photography in Romania in the 70s, at least most of them likely had scientific background, academic titles, they were being paid to do "science" or "research", they created some "scientific" papers about it and so on. How can you define them something else than scientists doing science (in the context of the time and place) except by a very subjective definition or one that basically defines that if a scientist turns out to be wrong later, he wasn't actually doing science?

As for how it could be possible that a large group of some sort of "scientists" would still be working on and believing to something that doesn't really make much sense for most of us and the scientific community in general, I don't see that as so hard to believe. Obviously people believe stupid things even in large groups, and are generally unwilling to change any opinions and views they have held for long. And "scientists" are people like the rest of us. Also there might have been many in that group who have actually changed their mind and left it behind, or decided to just shut up and continue to collect the paychecks. If there were that kind of numbers believing to things like that in the 70s, it's no wonder if there's enough of them stuck on those days still.

It also seems this is one of those cases where the science is so bad that it's not even wrong, as the saying goes. There's for example that magical kirlian moment where a blob is created and somehow interpreted to show auras or souls or planes in this instance. There's not much theory to explain how a picture can show one of those things, especially as the very existence of most of them is more than questionable. So how do you actually prove them wrong? You can of course say that it doesn't make any sense but it's not the same as actually being able to prove it wrong, like you can do with some erroneous calculation or a violation of the laws of physics. Consequently it's much easier for believers to keep their faith as it can't be properly disproved, and they can say and actually believe that the opponent just doesn't understand it, or there's some alternate physics involved or whatever.

In this case it's possible that those guys at Sevastopol haven't even been properly challenged, especially if their work was classified before, and now they are working behind the facade of these marketing firms. After all, most scientists who could really challenge that tech do not know there's kirlian and stuff involved. Heck, they don't even know all this originates from Sevastopol.

I see this being a very similar situation to that global consciousness nonsense in Princeton to which I have made a lot of comparisons. It's also so bad that it's not even wrong. There's no sensible theory to get from random numbers to some magical global consciousness. And as a result, nobody has been able to prove them wrong or make them to lose their faith after all these years. And those believers include people with credentials like "a former dean of Princeton’s engineering school and an emeritus professor". So are those people scientists doing science (as they still do the same stuff)? And if such people in the west believe to such junk, why is it so hard to believe some group in Ukraine would believe to something that's similarly questionable?
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
But what 'science' is even possible to do with kirlian photography? It's more like arts and crafts.
Also I don't think there is such a distinction as 'western' science and 'eastern' science, it's just science.
 

David Coulter

Senior Member.
Bume is trying to be fair and balanced. But that is not what we do in science. We don't give a fair and balanced hearing of Genesis creation or creation science or extra terrestrial creationism, simply because they conflict with all the observations and measurements we make as scientists. If one wants to argue that our observations and measurements are accurate but are wrong because of a mysterious factor that only a handful of "scientists" in Sevastopol understand, then they should move to Sevastopol and join the anointed clan.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
It also seems this is one of those cases where the science is so bad that it's not even wrong, as the saying goes. There's for example that magical kirlian moment where a blob is created and somehow interpreted to show auras or souls or planes in this instance. There's not much theory to explain how a picture can show one of those things, especially as the very existence of most of them is more than questionable. So how do you actually prove them wrong? You can of course say that it doesn't make any sense but it's not the same as actually being able to prove it wrong, like you can do with some erroneous calculation or a violation of the laws of physics. Consequently it's much easier for believers to keep their faith as it can't be properly disproved, and they can say and actually believe that the opponent just doesn't understand it, or there's some alternate physics involved or whatever.

But georesonance are not even using this supposed technology. Their images are obviously fake.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
P Debunked: UN hidden camera: the first UFO contact happened [Deep Fake] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 2
Mick West Debunked: 94% of Fulton County Ballots Manually Adjudicated [It's a Process all Batches go Through] Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: "Missile Strike" caused Nashville Explosion General Discussion 3
Mick West Debunked: Nashville Explosion was "Across the Street" from the RV General Discussion 0
Mick West Debunked: "Error rate of 68.5% Allowable is .0008%" [Neither is True] Election 2020 4
Mick West Debunked: Claim that the Electoral College Count On Jan 6 will Change the Election Election 2020 136
Rory Debunked: Einstein wrote "blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth" Quotes Debunked 12
Mick West Debunked: Navid Keshavarz-Nia's Claims of "A Sudden Rise in Slope" as Election Fraud Evidence Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Trump's Claim of "1,126,940 votes created out of thin air" in PA Election 2020 8
Mick West Debunked: Crowder's "Fraud Week" Title Graphic (and Why it Matters) Election 2020 1
JFDee Debunked: Democratic senators complained about 'vote switching' by Dominion voting machines in 2019 Election 2020 2
Mendel Debunked: The Democrats are trying to take away freedom of religion Election 2020 6
H Debunked: Dr. Shiva's Scatterplot Analysis of Michigan Precincts Election 2020 43
Mick West Debunked: Suspicious "Biden Only" Ballots in Georgia Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: "Nancy Pelosi's long time Chief of Staff is a key executive at Dominion Voting" Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: Wisconsin Turnout 89% Impossible High [Actually 72%] Election 2020 1
Mick West Debunked: Video of Poll Worker "Filling In" Ballots. Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: Pentagon has Evidence of "Off-World Vehicles Not Made on this Earth" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 14
derrick06 Debunked: United Nations creates a "NWO" website Conspiracy Theories 2
N Debunked: Google Mail icon shows linkage to Freemasons Conspiracy Theories 4
Mendel Debunked: The WHO did not take the Taiwan CDC seriously Coronavirus COVID-19 0
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mendel Debunked: Radar Waves Affect Clouds General Discussion 0
Pumpernickel Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 16
M Ufos arrive to the central zone of Chile. (Debunked). Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Jesse3959 FE Debunked with water tube level - 187 foot building 21.2 miles away below eye level Flat Earth 0
H Debunked: Cadillac Mountain from 220 miles Flat Earth 7
Jesse3959 FE Claim Debunked: JTolan Epic Gravity Experiment - Flat earther disproves Perspective! (or his instruments.) Flat Earth 0
Mick West Debunked: DoD prepares for martial law in CONUS: Conspiracy Theories 0
Oystein Debunked: AE911T: CNBC Anchor Ron Insana claims Building 7 a Controlled Implosion 9/11 13
A Debunked: NASA tampered with the original television audio of the Apollo 11 moon landing Conspiracy Theories 1
Greylandra Debunked: media headline "Judea declares war on Germany" [boycott] Conspiracy Theories 20
Mick West Discovery Channel's "Contact: Declassified Breakthrough" was debunked 2.5 years ago UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 8
Joe Hill Debunked: "The North Face of Building 7 Was Pulled Inward" 9/11 66
A Debunked : Fake Set Moon Landing with TV Camera and Stairs Conspiracy Theories 3
Mick West Debunked: Photo with Sun Rays at Odd Angles Flat Earth 0
Staffan Debunked: Wikileaks releases unused footage of moon landing (Capricorn One movie scenes) Conspiracy Theories 2
Mick West Debunked: Neil deGrasse Tyson : "That Stuff is Flat" Flat Earth 10
Mendel Debunked: Air Map of the World 1945 is a flat Earth map Flat Earth 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Trees being cut down "because they block 5G" (tree replacement in Belgium) 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 44
deirdre Debunked: Exemption from military service doc proves Jews had foreknowledge of WW2 (fake leaflet) General Discussion 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Obama called Michelle "Michael" in a speech. (Referring to Michael Mullen Jr) Quotes Debunked 0
Rory Debunked: 120-mile shot of San Jacinto proves flat earth Flat Earth 39
Rory Debunked: The Lunar Cycle affects birth rates Health and Quackery 26
Rory Debunked: Study shows link between menstrual cycle and the moon Health and Quackery 30
novatron Debunked: California Wildfires Match the Exactly Path of the Proposed Rail System Wildfires 3
Rory Debunked: "You must love yourself before you love another" - fake Buddha quote Quotes Debunked 7
W Debunked: Qanon claims there have been 51k sealed indictments filed this year. Current Events 11
K Debunked: Audio of David Rockefeller "leaked" speech in 1991 [Audio Simulation] General Discussion 2
tadaaa Debunked: Fake photos-Novichok attack Russian 'agents' (side by side gates) General Discussion 34
Related Articles


















































Election 2020

Related Articles

Top