Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 23,382
Hmm. That does sound suspicious. Why would the MSM act like an era was unscripted just because it pre-dated writing by several millennia?
Hmm. That does sound suspicious. Why would the MSM act like an era was unscripted just because it pre-dated writing by several millennia?
Jrrarglblarg
Unregistered
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2010
- Messages
- 12,673
Yeah, no. There's no evidence of a vast network of tunnels all over the planet. You read from the fiction side of the Internet, apparently.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Caves exist, and man did not make them. Tunnels exist within those caves, and man did not make them. Karst plateaus, limestone, lava - all of these tend to be chock full of caves with intricate connections and tunnels. In the case of limestone, that's due to water erosion. In the case of lava, it's lava tubes. There are all sorts of similar structures all over the globe, and yes, they're ancient.
But they were made by natural forces, weather and such, not by man. There is no ancient technology building networks of underground tunnels for some fancifully imagined scenario. That's not a thing.
Last edited:
Cosmic Yak
Philosopher
The Vatican does indeed have a telescope. I take my hat off to you, Malbec: fro once you are correct.
http://http://www.vovatt.org/
Of course, it's entirely possible to visit it, which you have no doubt done as part of your 'no stone unturned' approach to research....
I am puzzled, though, as to why controlling a telescope is useful in concealing the existence of a network of tunnels.
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
- Joined
- May 9, 2006
- Messages
- 29,691
I am puzzled, though, as to why controlling a telescope is useful in concealing the existence of a network of tunnels.
Get everybody looking up at the stars, and none of them will look down at the ground!
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
"Unscripted"?? Difficult to script anything without a written language
Love you too.
created by natural processes such as erosion and minerals dissolving in running water....
I will stand corrected when you provide evidence that the tunnels were not natural AND date to 12 millenia ago.
Any specific caves you care to have us start with. Your bestest evidence?
I too am a bit at a loss to understand how controlling a telescope prevents anyone from noticing what's happening with caves and tunnels. I am also at a loss to understand how controlling ONE telescope prevents discoveries made at a myriad of other, some better, telescopes.
Cosmic Yak
Philosopher
I am puzzled, though, as to why controlling a telescope is useful in concealing the existence of a network of tunnels.
Fine, I get that, but why then do you need to control the telescope? Surely making it free and advertising it all over the place would be far more effective?
Could have sworn I just said that.
The Vatican does indeed have a telescope. I take my hat off to you, Malbec: fro once you are correct.
http://http://www.vovatt.org/
Of course, it's entirely possible to visit it, which you have no doubt done as part of your 'no stone unturned' approach to research....
I am puzzled, though, as to why controlling a telescope is useful in concealing the existence of a network of tunnels.
IIRC nervous corrupt vatican men in skirts build telescopes and watch skies for return of somebody from wormwood who will kick their corrupt butts deep down into ancient tunnels which feature melted rock walls, and then seal the entrances forever.
Whats not to like ?
Praying it is true cannot hurt IMO.
.
Last edited:
(bolding, emphasis added)
( assuming you are satirizing faith in "the news" )
Well yah, except Operation Mockingbird applied to the OP hypothetical since it is set in here and now (see below)
Yah & yah to both quotes....and yes, sure However One cannot know if those perceptions and opinions are systematically superceded ie censored by an institutionalized news (mind) control program such as Operation Mockingbird or whatever they call it these days.
(the CIA has assured America they stopped manipulating perception via Mockingbird)
Since the irrefutable fact remains that we dont know what we dont know, I wouldn't be so confident about knowing that kind of stuff, lest I seem naive, gullible, etc.
.
Axxman300
Philosopher
Okay I'll play...
If I'm the President, and I'm told that there was an encounter, or a series of encounters between an aircraft carrier battle group, and an unidentified craft of extraterrestrial origin the first thing I want is telemetry and video footage to see for myself.
I then initiate a series of meetings where I brief selected Congress and Senate members, bring in psychologists, sociologists,psychiatrists, and a variety of clergy. The military briefings would be separate, as would the NASA discussions. At some point I would conduct a week-long discussion out at Camp David with representatives from these other meetings to develop a course of action.
In this scenario, the encounters seem to be a one-time event. The easy call in this case is to keep it secret. Reason being that the craft came and went, there was no overt threat. The problem with disclosure would be knee-jerk panic. The US would have to suspend night time civil aviation out of fear that some idiot with an AK-47 might shoot down a Cessna thinking it's ET. The hospitals would be clogged with people suffering from all kinds of panic-induced mailities, and a few people would die from heart attacks.
There would be no reason to disclose the event until we had better information to give the American people and the world.
Think about it, what would be the response if the US Government told the world UFOs have been dropping in from time to time, but we really don't know anything about them?
People automatically distrust the government and a mess would ensue.
If I'm the President, and I'm told that there was an encounter, or a series of encounters between an aircraft carrier battle group, and an unidentified craft of extraterrestrial origin the first thing I want is telemetry and video footage to see for myself.
I then initiate a series of meetings where I brief selected Congress and Senate members, bring in psychologists, sociologists,psychiatrists, and a variety of clergy. The military briefings would be separate, as would the NASA discussions. At some point I would conduct a week-long discussion out at Camp David with representatives from these other meetings to develop a course of action.
In this scenario, the encounters seem to be a one-time event. The easy call in this case is to keep it secret. Reason being that the craft came and went, there was no overt threat. The problem with disclosure would be knee-jerk panic. The US would have to suspend night time civil aviation out of fear that some idiot with an AK-47 might shoot down a Cessna thinking it's ET. The hospitals would be clogged with people suffering from all kinds of panic-induced mailities, and a few people would die from heart attacks.
There would be no reason to disclose the event until we had better information to give the American people and the world.
Think about it, what would be the response if the US Government told the world UFOs have been dropping in from time to time, but we really don't know anything about them?
People automatically distrust the government and a mess would ensue.
That was included to support/certify the "You have determined that earth is being visited by intelligent beings.."
Suppose visitors ramp up sightings to general public as if to make it obvious like 'Yup, we intelligent ET beings in spacecraft are visiting your skies.'
However no direct contact is initiated, but the cat is out of the bag.
Rising public clamor increases pressure on leaders (you) to address it openly.
Now how to proceed?
.
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
- Joined
- May 9, 2006
- Messages
- 29,691
So, then, why don't you apply that to the people who are claiming that there are alien spacecraft zipping about our planet, making all these physics-defying maneuvers?
If you're so afraid of appearing "naive, gullible, etc.", then agnosticism should be your default state. Simply refuse to come down on any side of the issue until there's virtually irrefutable proof one way or the other*.
Or, you could actually try to apply some real skepticism to the various claims, and then arrive at a reasonable provisional conclusion. We have claims that UFOs are real, and claims that they are not. One position requires me to accept, as I pointed out in my original response, that just about everything we think we know about science in completely wrong. The other position requires me to believe that the human beings making these reports are some combination of mistaken, drunk or drugged, insane, or con men trying to make a buck off the previous three groups.
I have ample evidence that our science works - just take a look around you at the technology we've developed based on that science. If we've gotten the science that far wrong, it's a simply massive coincidence that we've gotten all the technology to work properly just by accident. So the conclusion that "UFOs are real" seems entirely unreasonable to me. It could still be true, but would require a mass of good evidence sufficient to overcome the weight of literally centuries of scientific and technological development.
I also have ample evidence that large numbers of people are one or more of mistaken, drunk or drugged, insane, or con men trying to make a buck. Arriving at the conclusion that UFOs are fake simply requires me to notice that lots of people will swear blind that homeopathy, psychics, Bigfoot, and good episodes of Season Three Star Trek are all real things. They clearly are not, and so coming to the conclusion that UFOs are not real is entirely reasonable.
*This is of course complicated by the fact that you can't prove a negative. There will never be "conclusive proof" of the non-existence of any of these claims, which means you'll never make a decision. As a pragmatic matter, at some point you'll have to make such a choice, at least for some things. When you're dying of cancer, will you do nothing, or make a choice about what kind of treatment to use?
John Nowak
Graduate Poster
I was slightly involved in a project to dig up old, unused tunnels from the NY Subway system and move them to Boston. Unfortunately, every time a section of tunnel was dug up, it vanished. Don't know if they ever solved that.
That inches the narrative nearer to its roots . Because the type of back history I am going to suggest is itself so " Alien " to the MSM , I make no up- front apologies . However , I do suggest that the several most boring people here desist from their schoolboy style of attempted ridicule and variations on pointless wise cracks to show everybody else how clever they simply are not .If you think it nonsense , just jog on by . Something happened about 12000 BC , plus or minus , and this planet was devastated .Popularly , the Great Flood occurred and the legend/narrative is spread right across the planet -- different names but same basic story line .Before that , the land mass was just one continent and there was simply sea and land , but no oceans as we now have --- just as interesting books like the Bible say . An interesting small support to this idea is the distribution of engineered pyramids we now realise exists across the planet with more and more found on the ocean floors thanks to Google . But along with finding a huge increase of engineered pyramids, there is also an increasing number of skeletons which carbon date prior to this date ( Flood ) which are human but of bipeds that stand up to 15 feet tall . Giants .Darwin does not allow that , so policy up to now is to avoid the facts and cover up the evidence -- the '04 Giant of Khandahar is a good recent example .I judge it best to stop here because more non MSM data might induce serious health conditions with the more intellectually fragile among us . However , you do not need much nudging to see that all over the planet there are narratives detailing the existence of Giants and our Bible is no exception with Genesis 6 ,1-4 ,clearly spelling out details of the Nephilim . Which then leads to our race intermingling with o the Giants who themselves might possibly have emanated from off planet .The interesting point about all of this is the colossal amount of research that exists and available documentation . It has not bothered the Roman Catholic Church who separately can be shown to be guardians of these truths in many parts of the world but guard the so termed mysteries with very tight fists indeed .Until recently .Don't miss next week's episode coming with a free fifteen foot , blow -up , red haired Nephilim .
What you really mean is that you have never seen the matter even outlined in the MSM . The subject is well documented but it very difficult to "get by " the RC authorities in South America and virtually impossible to break into the network of tunnels right across North America -- the military complex are very shy . However , there are so many researchers available who were part of discovering historical tunnels across the planet and whistleblowers who worked on the recently completed tunnels , sometimes for many years .The latter group primarily worked on tunnel complexes for the Deep State ( Military Complex , if you prefer ) , though existing tunnels hundreds of miles long were utilised . The most reported centre on Edwards Base , Dulce and Los Alamos .But once again I expect you want to dismiss testimony as though it is not a valid form of evidence .
Cosmic Yak
Philosopher
It's probably too much to ask for citations, evidence etc. but I will anyway:
Citations and evidence please.
Malbec, another question: are you a Christian or a Jew? You seem to have a lot of faith in the Bible as a literal and accurate historical document.
There are "narratives " (some might say fairy stories) all over the planet for all sorts of things. Unicorns, sea monsters, ghosts, demons, water spirits etc. Do you believe in all of them? If so, do you have any modern, scientific evidence for their existence? If not, by what process do you separate those you accept from those you reject?
It's all very well putting up sneering, superior, condescending posts, but in the complete absence of evidence, what do you hope to accomplish? Is sneering and condescension part of your method of separating fact from fiction? Do you imagine that those who read your posts will be swayed by your (utterly unfounded IMHO) air of superiority? Why can't you just post the evidence and amaze us all? I for one would be quite happy to accept the existence of a race of extinct giants. I can't see it would shake my world to the core. I have no vested interest in rejecting the previous existence of giants, just as I have not rejected the existence of homo floresiensis.
And for the love of the FSM, sort your punctuation out.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Yes, I dismiss out of hand those crackpot websites you're undoubtedly using as sources. The "vast network of tunnels" conspiracy theory has been around for decades and, like the UFO movement, is no closer to providing evidence now than it was then. I've worked at two of the three installations you cite above, and there's no evidence of the vast network of tunnels you claim. Have you been to any of them yourself? Or are you just trusting the word of people who know they can say all sorts of outrageous rubbish and get an audience if they only characterize it as something the mainstream media doesn't talk about. It's very easy to contrast those claims by which these fringe panderers lead you around by the nose, with stuff like the Greenbrier bunker. The difference is that in the latter case there's evidence that leads somewhere in a short amount of time. You're telling me the same tall tales I had people tell me in college, with no better reason now to believe it than then.