I think robots or animlectronics disney was obsessed with making them life like back in the day and he worked with the cia. my thought is certain mews anchors and random celebs are robots and they are peppering them into the entertainment industry

theres something about news anchors too, they all look so similar like they pinpointed the kind of look needed to be able to relay information and have you just accept it as truth.

TIL my Uncle is a robot.

who is your supposed uncle?

News reporter for local news.

proof? even if you have none im sure he will tell you he reads from a script.

Of course he reads from a script wtf?
He's not famous and I'd rather have my anonymity intacy

exactly, they all read from scripts, word for word they are told what to say. he may not be a robot but he is surely a puppet.

This one freaks me out

But he's not the one acting weird in that video, the other reporters are!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jjIDWfWuPE&feature=youtu.be

This proves that he's a replicant.

This is what they do on TV. It ain't sinister. It's just a protocol of dos and don'ts. If you're clever or work in TV you may get it. Others clearly do not, and fall for the simplest of manipulations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jjIDWfWuPE&feature=youtu.be

That's scary

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jjIDWfWuPE&feature=youtu.be

Right after the lady says "holy ghost" it's like it triggers him.. crazy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jjIDWfWuPE&feature=youtu.be

Don't the other reporters notice? Or do they pretend not to notice?

I dont know if it shows it in this video or if it was another version of this video I watched but it looked like Lauer was signalling something to the cameraman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jjIDWfWuPE&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jjIDWfWuPE&feature=youtu.be

It's explained here: https://youtu.be/4jjIDWfWuPE

By that logic most autists are robots.

Ha ha. You are such a moron.

You really showed him and debunked the theory.

You really showed him and debunked the theory.

Haha I love you.

I was ridiculing him for using the names Hawkins and Hawking interchangeably.

You didn't say so. All you said was "haha. you are moron" and that's it. How are we supposed to guess you are ridiculing him for misspelling?¨

Now, fuck off.

Ow, that hurt!

Actually, I thought is was obvious. Ordinarily I would not reply, but you make it so much fun to bait people like you.

It's not obvious with all the shills around here. Besides I believe you are unemployed and miserable person if you really think it's fun to spend your time pretending to be retarded in the internet which you call "baiting".

Very interesting. I didn't know that about ALS and if what you say is true re life expectancy I think you may well be right +1

It's really a horrible disease. Life expectancy past 20 years is a measly 5%. Thankfully it usually takes effect at 50+ years so many have had a life they lived.

It's also amazing how they come up with ways to speak. Stephan Hawking uses cheek movements. Steve Wells, Canada's longest ALS patient at 38 years past diagnosis uses eye movements translated by computer.

It's also amazing how they come up with ways to speak. Stephan Hawking uses cheek movements.

Yep, he writes entire books using only his cheeks.

And the retarded masses don't even bat an eye-lid.

It truly is amazing how far and beyond he is above the stupid masses. The wonders of technology. They use chips to detect preferred muscle movement to control tablets and devices. While others use optic scanners and use movement to do the same.

Amazingly ALS survivors say it's pretty simple and intuitive to use. I can't wait for the marvels of the future.

Tssss.

He hasn't solo written a book sinec 1998

It's really just a matter of keeping your lungs breathing and your heart pumping. I have no idea how they keep the digestion portions working, unless you get all your nutrients through IV

Yeah respiratory failure is the likely cause of death. Malnutrition is a problem but like you said IV takes care of that. What matters most is age of onset. There are 4 main different strains of ALS. The quick killing 3 happen mostly past 50. Meanwhile Juvenile onset is the slowest progressing and has the longest lifespan prediction. So the death percentage for all varients is a bit skewed. Most of the 5% that live over 20 years with ALS are juvenile onset.

ye bro

Cool, learn something everyday. Had a friend diagnosed at 44 and dead at 46. He lost his CPAP mask one night and didn't survive the night.

Sorry for your loss, hopefully he lived well.

Sometimes people with having trouble with swallowing, be it ALS or MS for example, can have a tube inserted from belly to stomach. You can give the nutrients and medicine in liquid form this way. It's called Peg tube.

Stephen Hawking is mentioned nowhere on the ALS official website, not once.

Because they know he died in 1985, as one does shortly after being diagnosed when ALS.

Yep, he is long gone

All this shit they can do and we are largely in the dark about it except for the evidence we find ourselves:

-weather modification -overriding car functions as a means to assassinate -cloning prominent people -switching out planes mid flight without ATC noticing -using the adrenal glands of frightened children to get high

what else?

Voice-to-skull

they can use TV to create an army of 7 billion zombies

youre on reddit

-using the adrenal glands of frightened children to get high

That's the first time I heard about this. Do you have a link? There are a few episodes of Torchwood where aliens kidnapped children to get high.

Like far too much stuff posted here it comes from a movie, "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas."

Someone did the math.

this is what the elites do with the kids they steal. Maddie McCann for instance.

Now this is the crazy shit I expect on here. No more political shit or pedo-pizza crap.

Now this is the crazy

shit I expect on here. No more

political shit or pedo-pizza crap.

^-haiku_bot

pedo-pizza crap.

...

Which website is that? Is it alsa.org?

Right. If he is mentioned there, I haven't seen it. And if he were really a celebrity miracle ALS survivor, you would think it would be prominently displayed.

yeah, does Hawking do ALS benefits or whatever?

something definitely sketchy about Hawking endorsing BDS

(((they))) use hawking to mock the goy

He does stupid car commercials. Not something you would expect the "world's smartest man" who knows the secrets of the universe to participate in willingly.

You're right. The only articles with any mention of him are opinion piecea from people hoping to "survive" ALS like he did. There's 0 dedicated pages to him at all.

There's 0 pages dedicated to Lou Gehrig. Your point?

http://www.alsa.org/about-als/what-is-als.html

Second name on list after Lou Gehrig

I'm editing my original comment to include that it was an incorrect claim, with the proviso that it doesn't change the fact that Hawking is still dead.

he is the second most mentioned on the website besides Lou Gehrig, which the disease is named after

ok I won the argument nice

Which begs the question, who REALLY wrote A Brief History of Time

He is mentioned on the Motor Neurone Disease association website numerous times. https://www.mndassociation.org/?s=Hawking#

.http://www.alsa.org/about-als/what-is-als.html

Fail.

They probably don't want to give false hope to other ALS sufferers who might conclude that they also might survive for 52 years.

Precisely, and we are to be stupid enough to believe that the reason Hawking survived so long, as he stated, was his love for science. What a joke!

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/how-stephen-hawking-is-still-alive-defying-als-and-the-worst-expectations-10074974.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2eiv5b/eli5_how_has_stephen_hawking_lived_so_long_with/

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

There are several cases of ALS sufferers surviving for decades

Stephen Hawking is mentioned nowhere on the ALS official website, not once.

Outright fabrication:

• Notable individuals who have been diagnosed with ALS include baseball great Lou Gehrig, theoretical physicist, cosmologist and author Stephen Hawking

http://www.alsa.org/about-als/what-is-als.html

Oh well, in a later comment I said if he's mentioned on there I haven't seen it. Funny that four different users should show up over 24 hours late to that thread just to "correct the record."

Doesn't change the fact that Hawking is dead and being played by an impostor.

Oh well, in a later comment I said if he's mentioned on there I haven't seen it. Funny that four different users should show up over 24 hours late to that thread and reply to me within four hours of each other just to "correct the record."

Yes, people are correcting the fact that you made an outright incorrect claim, you also misspelled his name in the OP.

Right, my claim was incorrect, as I said it may be.

Doesn't change the fact that Hawking is dead, and I'm not OP.

Who is orchestrating this pretend Stephen Hawking sham?

I'm gonna double down for fun and ask again, who is orchestrating this pretend Stephen Hawking sham? I can't imagine asserting something like that without the ability to defend it rationally and with proof. Let's give it the old who, what, where and why. C'mon now. Not being able to argue it might mean that you're the moron you know you are.

A person walking in on a crime scene doesn't have to be able to identify the culprit to know a crime has been committed by someone.

I want you to know that I say this sincerely and from the bottom of my heart. That was the most idiotic attempt at an analogy that you could have possibly presented. Not shockingly, it does less to further your argument and reaffirms the belief among almost every rational human being reading this that you are somehow and someway as utterly fucking stupid as you appear to be. I had previously considered that impossible. I fully realize that simply calling you out for your world class stupidity will only reinforce your beliefs and embolden you in the future but I just can't help but let you know that people more intelligent than yourself, that being almost everyone, consider you the punchline to a very depressing joke. You're going to live your entire life thinking you know something that other don't while never having the self awareness to recognize the fundamental flaws in your character that lead you to believe in absolute nonsense. You won't because you can't but I still hope that you consider what I just said.

Why do you lie?

I didn't lie, since I later said "if it's on there I haven't seen it" and have spent time clicking around and looking at it. But interestingly it says nothing about Hawking surviving, just mentions him along with Lou Gehrig -- two dead people.

Because this was just cross posted

the guy has the disease for several standard deviations older than anyone else. his teeth aren't the same from pic to pic. he speaks through an electronic box. his name hawking harkens to horus, the hawk king. so yeah. suspend your disbelief.

Why would his name matter if he had it before ALS?

Some users here have a numerology obsession and try and work it into every piece of information they take in.

Or at least they assume some kind of significance in the names of things.   The most compelling piece of evidence for it being relevant to anything are the Shakespeare numerology relations.  Someone found a bunch of physics constants that no one should have known at the time hidden in his works.   Pretty wild stuff.

Some guy was trying to tell me how sept 11th was planned through colours

That sounds straight out of a Grant Morrison story and I still find it more plausible than the official narrative.

Yep same people also look through Company logos, city plans etc. to find random mytholic symbols.

Best one was the woman who tried to prove that the Monster energy drink was a product of satan to rule the free world and this strange pizzagate map that made a Pentagramm. (only that it was Bullocks and like 2 or 3 of the places where just random places.)

The monster energy logo symbolism is real though.

Frighteningly so. A lot.

Way too many standard deviations. I kinda miss stats but not really.

Don't dismiss statistics. It's a powerful way of perceiving and organizing the world. It's not the only way, but it one good one.

This thread is a good example of how it can be used.

Well 'they' manipulate what the public perceives as statistics, in the form of upvotes erry single day. So id agree its a very powerful form of social control.

If you study statistics in depth, or any of its related fields (e.g. epidemiology), you will see that the concept of bias is given a lot of attention, i.e. how data sources represent or mis-represent the true nature of the system being studied. If you go deep enough, you'll get to epistemology, i.e. how do we "know" the things we claim to "know".

Point being that the discipline itself entails a great many concepts that are useful for parsing the world. Yes, math is boring, but if you go deeper than the math, there's some gold there.

The evidence in this paper is overwhelming. It is clear to anyone with eyes to see and a brain to think with that Hawking was replaced by a look-alike who doesn't really even look that much like him. For me the important takeaway of this paper is that all the scientists who knew him personally before this happened have to be in on it, since they would see it's not him. This shows that academic science (or physics at least) is tightly controlled at the highest levels and scientists actively involved in misdirection and public hoaxes. And the fact that this switch has never been noticed or reported on by any newspaper or media outlet anywhere is yet another indication of just how controlled the media is.

Very well put.

thanks!

So it's more plausible that stephen hawking has been replaced by a lookalike that has ALS, that survived longer than a normal ALS victim, and has successfully fooled his entire family, friends, professors, people who have attended his conferences, celebrities, University professors and students who have listened to him, any new source in the world since 1963, the United Kingdom government, than he is the longest ALS survivor in the world?

It doesn't have anything to do with plausibility or how long he's had ALS. You can look at the pictures of Stephen Hawking in the paper and clearly see that these are two different people. The evidence is literally staring you in the face, and to deny it one would have to be either blind, stupid or hired to do so.

We don't know if his look-alike really has ALS or is just pretending. He could also have some other ailment that resembles ALS in certain ways. You will see that in some of the pictures in the paper, the Hawking replacement's real hands are hidden and instead we see what are obviously plastic or rubber hands sitting on his lap. Perhaps the replacement had tremors in his real hands, so they had to hide them. I don't know.

Again, the fact that this is the case has nothing to do with plausibility. It's as plain as the nose on my face. This being true, then it follows that at least his family, friends, and others who have known or worked with the original Hawking closely and in person know what has happened and have remained silent. That includes any news source. I don't know that anyone who had ever seen him in the past would recognize him is a different person, since people are often not good at recognizing others or don't pay close attention.

As difficult as that is to accept, it is the natural conclusion in light of the evidence.

I will add one other point: we are often sold biographies of people that have turned out to be more or less fabricated either in part or in whole. And as much as we're told a history of Stephen Hawking, we don't really know how much of it is true, do we? What if his bio is more or less a sham? In that case, there won't be very many, if any, genuine people who knew him, other than those hired or paid or cajoled into saying that they did. And yes, that includes some big names in science. And of course the press. But that already narrows down the number of people who would have come in contact with Hawking version 1.0.

Are you really basing this entirely on the look different? Steohen hawking suffers from ALS. Of course he looks fucking different. The most common young hawking photo was from the 80s. That was that's almost 40 years ago. Name a guy who doesn't look different in 40 years

Nope, sorry. You obviously didn't read the paper or you are misdirecting on purpose. It's not about ageing. In fact he looks a lot younger as he gets younger. The shape of his face changes. He went from having grounded-down teeth in the early 80s to having four huge ugly-looking teeth later on. If he was going to have dentures, fine, but those teeth aren't dentures. Did he just grow them spontaneously. Anyway, there's no point having this debate with you, since you are clearly in no way interested in the truth.

There is no debate. You are putting forth an absolutely ludicrous conspiracy theory with no evidence outside of "He looks kind of different guyz!"

No, you're completely misrepresenting the evidence. It's not that he "looks kind of different." It's that these are clearly and unambiguously two different people. There is nothing even remotely "kind of" about it.

Now at this point it's clear that nobody could be as stupid or as blind as you are, so I have to assume you are misrepresenting this on purpose in an asinine and frankly pointless attempt to cover over this issue in a think layer of fog and confusion. But I can assure you it won't work in this case. You've already lost. The evidence is simply too clear and unambiguous. Just give up and move on to something else, like trying to convince people the CIA is out to get Trump or that the Earth is flat or some other bullshit like that.

The evidence is simply too clear and unambiguous

Yet somehow has fooled everyone on earth except for you few lunatics

The only lunacy hear is you folks who are unwilling to acknowledge evidence that makes you feel uncomfortable and challenges your complacency. You're all a bunch of credulous idiots who will simply deny anything that isn't received wisdom from on high. You probably still believe the story the government spoon fed you about 9/11. What was it that Mark Twain said? "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled." That's especially true when you're dealing with fools like you who vastly overestimate their own intelligence.

By the way, Hawking wasn't very famous back in the early 80s. His face wasn't plastered all over TV. So it's not very surprising that they've been able to fool just about everyone, since very few people were very familiar with what the old Hawking looked like, so the substitution wasn't very tricky. As I said above, the switch does implicate high-level physicists who knew Hawking personally and the media. But they never had to be fooled. They're in on the con.

You probably still believe the story the government spoon fed you about 9/11

I believe the story based on science and facts. What story do you believe? Or did you go to ground zero and run your own investigation somehow?

By the way, Hawking wasn't very famous back in the early 80s.

When exactly are you proposing he was switch out and why?

When exactly are you proposing he was switch out and why?

Ha! Are you serious? You've been busting my balls for days, telling me I'm crazy, but you haven't even bothered to read the paper, which answers your questions. You are a joke.

Apparently you gave just as much time bothering to studying 9/11, meaning zero. Because if you had spent even a few minutes looking into it, you'd know that the science and facts show clearly and unambiguously that the buildings were not brought down by planes. See for example building 7's freefall and Newton's third law.

Anyway, I'm not going to let you waste any more of my time. You've shown your true colors. I won't be answering any more of your comments.

Ha! Are you serious? You've been busting my balls for days, telling me I'm crazy, but you haven't even bothered to read the paper, which answers your questions. You are a joke.

I wasn't going to, but I want you to realize how insane you are. You're actually trying to say that he was switched out BEFORE he published A Brief History of Time? WHY? WHAT WAS THE MOTIVATION?

Apparently you gave just as much time bothering to studying 9/11, meaning zero. Because if you had spent even a few minutes looking into it, you'd know that the science and facts show clearly and unambiguously that the buildings were not brought down by planes. See for example building 7's freefall and Newton's third law.

Huh, you're think the thousands of scientists and engineers that have studied the collapse would have pointed this out by now

You are very clearly suffering from mental illness and you need to seek help

Huh, you're (sic) think the thousands of scientists and engineers that have studied the collapse would have pointed this out by now

They have been pointing it out. You clearly haven't heard of the nearly 3,000 (and counting) architects and engineers who have signed a petition for a new Congressional inquiry into 9/11, because they have examined the evidence came to the conclusion that the towers were not brought down the way we were told. They're not the only scientists who have spoken out about it.

And then there's the project by the civil engineering department at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. The preliminary report was just released 2 weeks ago.

Link to University's project summary: http://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/

The research team studied the building’s response using two finite element programs, ABAQUS and SAP2000 version 18. At the micro level, three types of evaluations were performed. In plan-view, the research team evaluated: 1) the planar response of the structural elements to the fire(s) using wire elements; 2) the building’s response using the NIST’s approach with solid elements; and 3) the validity of NIST’s findings using solid elements. At the macro-level, progressive collapse, i.e., the structural system’s response to local failures, is being studied using SAP2000 with wire elements, as well as with ABAQUS, and it is near completion. The findings thus far are that fire did not bring down this building. Building failure simulations show that, to match observation, the entire inner core of this building failed nearly simultaneously.

The part highlighted in bold contradicts the findings of NIST, which is the government scientific body charged with studying the collapse of WTC 7, which was not hit by planes that day but nevertheless suffered a total collapse at free fall speed. We might be able to figure out what they did wrong or at least why their results differ from this newer one, but they won't release their methodology. So very scientific.

Do you ever think before opening your mouth, or is everything you say just mental diarrhea? You are very clearly suffering from a delusion that you think you know how the world works. But guess what? You don't need to seek help. You can simply help yourself by taking your head out of your ass.

They have been pointing it out. You clearly haven't heard of the nearly 3,000 (and counting) architects and engineers who have signed a petition for a new Congressional inquiry into 9/11, because they have examined the evidence came to the conclusion that the towers were not brought down the way we were told. They're not the only scientists who have spoken out about it.

Not a single one of them has provided any sort of definitive proof supporting their beliefs. If you read the bios of the people that started the group you can see they all basically just fell for the bogus conspiracy propaganda.

And then there's the project by the civil engineering department at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. The preliminary report was just released 2 weeks ago.

You mean the one that is backed by the same group of "truthers" and hasn't been subjected to peer review? You're surprised I don't consider that a valid source? Why don't you tell me in your own words why the UAF report is more convincing than the NIST report?

You are living in your own little bubble where you already know the answers and only listen to new things that confirm your bias. You need to seek help before you fall farther into your paranoid personality disorder

Not a single one of them has provided any sort of definitive proof supporting their beliefs.

Once again, you show your deep ignorance.

You mean the one that is backed by the same group of "truthers" and hasn't been subjected to peer review? You're surprised I don't consider that a valid source? Why don't you tell me in your own words why the UAF report is more convincing than the NIST report?

https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2006/09/nists-world-trade-center-investigation
https://www.nist.gov/engineering-laboratory/final-reports-nist-world-trade-center-disaster-investigation
https://www.nist.gov/el/faqs-nist-wtc-towers-investigation

What exactly are you saying is missing from these reports? They build their findings through peer review. They brought in outside experts from every related field. They held public meetings and opened each report to comments before it was released. I don't know what else you want

You know what? I'm really enjoying this. I could go back-and-forth like this forever. Every time you respond to my comment you find new ways to show how ignorant, ill-informed, naive, and credulous you are. I have to imagine that every time you press the save button to send another missive, you smile and congratulate yourself, believing that you've landed a punch or made a good point, while being completely and astonishingly unaware that with every response you only make yourself look more ridiculous, undercut yourself further and dig yourself in deeper. Your complete and utter lack of self-awareness about just how stupid you are, how unable you are to mount an argument or lay down a proper insult is really quite hilarious.

Have you ever taken a good, long look in the mirror? Or do you prefer to take a brief glance to check your hair and then quickly look away, embarrassed and disgusted at the site of your own craven, venal, worthless existence? Oh wait, I forgot, you're completely unaware of how pathetic you are. But you do have one redeeming quality: you are very entertaining. Sort of like a walking embodiment of fail army videos. As much as I'm enjoying this, I have allowed you to waste far too much of my precious time. So this is my final response to you. After this I will not engage with you further, no matter what you write.

Anyway, back to the matter at hand: how is it that we are having a discussion about WTC 7 and you send me links to NIST's reports on WTC 1 and 2? It's a non sequitur. NIST's failure to release key features of its computer model and other important details of its analysis of WTC 7's collapse is well known. Here is a copy of their response to a FOIA request for the information: http://cryptome.org/nist070709.pdf

Here is a 30 minute documentary featuring Peter Ketcham and is the best overview of the NIST fraud controversy: https://youtu.be/GvAv-114bwM

Mr. Ketcham was a member of NIST's High Performance Systems and Services Division. A few years later he was moved into the Mathematical and Computational Sciences Division. He was the chair of NIST's Applied Mathematic Seminar Series and hosted it for several years. He is on record as saying that:

If NIST truly believes in the veracity of its WTC investigation, then it should openly share all evidence, data, models, computations, and other relevant information unless specific and compelling reasons are otherwise provided.

Here are videos of some of the experts involved in backing the University of Alaska Fairbanks study:

David Topete, MSCE, S.E., Structural Engineer

Mr. Topete discusses how WTC Building 7's column 79's failure could not have caused the symmetrical and simultaneous global collapse at free fall acceleration.

Kamal Obeid, C.E., S.E. – Civil/Structural Engineer

Mr. Obeid, a 30-year structural engineer explains how NIST's analysis actually disproves it's own theories on how WTC Building 7 collapsed, thereby confirming the use of controlled demolition.

Tom Sullivan - Former Explosives Loader for Controlled Demolition, Inc.

Tom discusses the complex process of preparing a building for controlled demolition and explains the reasons why WTC Building 7 was a textbook controlled demolition.

WTC Chief Electrical Design Engineer, Richard Huemenn P.E.

"An international commission should be formed to look at this in an unbiased manner."

And finally, a link to an article in Euro Physics News dissecting the NIST fraud.

Now please, go find someone else to entertain.

There's that confirmation bias again. God damn you're retarded. I hope you get the help you so desperately need

Nope, sorry, you're stupid. You're completely wrong and very, very stupid. Sorry - too bad 😊

Seriously? That's the best you got? You sound like a kindergartner on the playground. No scratch that. I've heard much sicker burns from kindergartners. You sound retarded.

I did actually. It was the hilarious rantings of a mental case. You're a fucking moron.

OK Dick Dickerson if you're going to go with childish taunts, try this on for size: i am like rubber and you are like glue; whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you... infinity times infinity times infinity nyahnyahnyahnyahyahnyahnyah.

And you're a retard who thinks Stephen Hawking was replaced. Lol.

Great, thanks for letting me win the argument.

Nope. I won, you lose. Too bad retard.

Nice catch with the "Hawk King" reference.

Names are important. I am convinced the only reason Miley Cyrus was propped up by the powers that be is because of her name. It is how they manipulate our conscious reality. She is named after an Annunaki god. By making her an idol the powers that be ensure the old gods are still worshiped by modern society.

When the woke community has not caught wind to this trick yet.

Seth Rich (Egyptian god) Ammon Bundy (Egyptian god) Apep/Kek/Pepe (Egyptian god)

Hello controlled opposition. Every time people say their names they are giving their power away.

when you are able to parse names it's almost like you're reading a book and you can pick out the characters because of the author's foreshadowing

Omg that means lol in WoW going to kek is Illuminati, as well are rare pepes. The veil has been lifted.

The_Donald has basically turned into the cult of Pepe. Even Egyptian peasants from 3000 years ago balked at the idea of worshiping Pepe because he represented chaos.

https://i.imgur.com/mvCDFQ3.png (Even the meme Egyptian)

this is awful. what about the billion people that have "king" in their name.

.the guy has ALS for several standard deviations longer than anyone else has had it

At some point someone is going to be the longest survivor

.. his teeth aren't the same from pic to pic.

Uhhh wut

.he speaks through an electronic box.

And?

.>his name hawking harkens to horus, the hawk king. so yeah. suspend your disbelief.

Lol

There are several cases of ALS sufferers surviving for decades so I'd like to know where you get your information from.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=oldest+living+als

Thank you very much for proving my point.

From alsa.org:

While the average survival time is 3 years, about twenty percent of people with ALS live five years, 10 percent will survive ten years and five percent will live 20 years or more.

30 years https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/good-news/steve-wells-canada-longest-living-als-survivor-201142850.html

Obviously an impostor

/s

Not to mention he's probably had the best treatment/PT available. Like tens of millions of dollar experimental treatments that most health insurance doesn't offer type shit. Which in his case I'm fine with but if you want a real conspiracy how about how Dick Cheney is still alive? Some people just get that level of treatment because they genocide their way to extreme wealth.

Or maybe he's the same guy, just chemically lobotomized, sitting helpless as his life's work is trampled, used as a puppet by the khakistocracy.

Oh! I'm interested in this angle if it pans out.

Imagine the irony and media power of making a near-braindead, living zombie one of the top geniuses of our culture!

It makes sense.

They "Create" Technology for him to be able to speak, but it's really just a glorified walkie-talkie. Throw in enough science jargon, and if anybody has the idea to question his credibility, well they can just refute it by saying "He's leagues ahead of you in intelligence, your tiny mind can't wrap around his concepts."

Seems like a perfect cover-up. The stuff he spews isn't supposed to make sense because it doesn't but we're told we don't have the brain power to comprehend what is being said.

Why would (((((((((((((((they))))))))))))))) want this? Because anything stephen hawking says or does is irrelevant in daily life

He's still a popular figure, and if they have the power to make him appear to communicate ideas they want accepted, they could have him speak on it.

Maybe?

I'm convinced that he died a long time ago, and that his 'science' is pure disinformation bullshit.

Absolutely is. All these guys are heralded as geniuses yet they're just spouting make believe.

Who are "these guys" that you're referring to, and what can you show me that discredits them?

well, Hawking's wikipedia page reads like satire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking

what kind of student would get away with NOT showing their work, and instead get to tell the teacher that "they would rather be right than rigorous"

or refuse to take a test that requires actual knowledge, and instead insist on answering questions of a theoretical nature.

then there NDT, whose argument for the moon landing is literally,

"where else would the rocket go?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aHCVipQn8k

then there NDT

huh?

Neil Degrass Tyson

Moon landing denier and anti sciencer? Colored me surprised.

i wrote these 24 questions about the math and physics of the Moon Landing. you can find my name in the top right corner.

https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6hvagj/apollo_moon_landing_story_problems_for_math_and/

I'm going to go ahead and predict that you aren't even smart enough to comprehend the questions, much less to paraphrase them into your own words.

Have you not read the comments on your post?

yes, i and replied to them.

as you can see, my work has stood up to harsh criticisms, as opposed to the kid gloves rubber stamp peer reviews that some works get

You are either a very dedicated troll or patient zero with some as-of-yet-unidentified syndrome that funnels all of your mental energy into confirmation bias.

Hawkins, Tyson, Nye, Kaku - they are all full of shit. Any public scientist that advocates creationist garbage like the Big Bang Theory and the preposterous notion that Redshift = Expansion or other gravity centric models of the Universe are full of it. The way they rub from Plasma Cosmology and Electric Universe advocates proves they are gatekeeper shills

preposterous notion that Redshift = Expansion

lol. You don't even know what that means.

Redshift being cause of expansion has been disproven so many times, and very recently yet another nail in the coffin was firmly driven from my university: : http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem.aspx?ItemId=176934&CultureCode=en

Oh cute, someone else who doesn't understand what proves mean.

Expansion being the cause of redshift has been disproven so many times,

No, it hasn't. Not at all.

and very recently yet another nail in the coffin was firmly driven from my university

Uhhhh. Did you even read your link?

”Since our work is theoretical and computational it must be still verified experimentally,"

So...not proven. Not only that, but after looking at the paper, there is absolutely nothing in that theory that would explain why you would have a larger red shift and longer distances.

I should also point out that redshift isn't the only evidence used for expansion of the universe.

https://phys.org/news/2017-09-supernova-analysis-reframes-dark-energy.html

How many indications do you want? There are literally tens of models that are more credible than creationism expansion.

LOL, it requires you to read a bit more than the headline, and actually understand it.

Good thing I downloaded the paper and looked through it then. Something you didn't do with the paper you linked. Since you think that paper disproves the big bang. It doesn't and the authors of the paper never even make that claim. They even make references to the universe expanding, just not accelerating in expansion. Because all their new model would change is that that expansion of the universe is not accelerating.

It means that the red shifting of light has nothing to do with the Doppler effect or recessional motion - any theory utilizing this axiom of fake science is a failure right from the start

Lol, so you are saying the doppler effect doesnt exist?

The Doppler Effect exists with sound waves and other waves of that type. Light is not a phenomenon to which the Doppler Effect can even be applied.

Red Shift applies to dark lines that appear on a Spectrum. It is generated with ever pulse of light. Doppler Effect is a time dependent phenomenon that is stretched out over time. It is a temporal 4 dimensional effect. The Red Shift of Spectral Lines is not something you observe in time, it is an image that is captured in an instant.

Anyone in this day and age who is still tricked by the "Doppler Redshift Theory" is an idiot.

Light is not a phenomenon to which the Doppler Effect can even be applied.

What? No. This is so wrong. Even if you don't believe red shift is caused by the Doppler effect (which it is), light is absolutely affected by a Doppler shift. The Doppler effect is how police speed detectors work and how radar determines the velocity of objects.

Doppler Effect is a time dependent phenomenon that is stretched out over time. It is a temporal 4 dimensional effect. The Red Shift of Spectral Lines is not something you observe in time, it is an image that is captured in an instant.

I'm sorry, but this shows you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how Doppler works.

Anyone in this day and age who is still tricked by the "Doppler Redshift Theory" is an idiot.

Lol. No comment.

It isn't wrong. You're wrong.

Police speed detectors do not work on the basis of Spectral Analysis. The Red Shift of Spectral Lines can be determined from a SINGLE picture of a spectrum. Analyzing a time-based diagram for 10 seconds has nothing to do with the Red Shift of spectral lines.

Let me put your ignorance into another light:

How many seconds does it take to take a spectrum of light?

Radar-graphs of speed are artificial constructs created on a time-based variables.

The Redshift of Spectral Lines is a completely different phenomenon.

Man, you literally have no idea what you are talking about. It's pretty clear you have never taken a physics course.

How many seconds does it take to take a spectrum of light?

This question is actually nonsense. There is no "time" to get a spectrum. It's not like you count to 10 and have a full spectrum, but if you only count to 5 you get half a spectrum. The detector is able to get any wavelength in its range and count it. You could get a photon corresponding to every possible wavelength in the visible light spectrum all at once, or none at all. The ONLY way time plays into it is to get better counting statstics (i.e. 1 photon vs 100 or 10,000).

Police speed detectors do not work on the basis of Spectral Analysis. The Red Shift of Spectral Lines can be determined from a SINGLE picture of a spectrum.

Thats true...but they do work on the doppler effect....Which you claimed up above does not work in light. Police detectors are only using a single wavelength because more isnt really necessary, but they still work on doppler.

Listen up chump, because you in fact do not know what you are talking about.

You do not know how a radar gun works, and you do not know how to take atomic spectra.

A radar gun works by sending and receiving a packet light and measuring the time between sending and receiving the reflection back against the vibrations of a high frequency time keeping device. This data can be plotted on a graph, and the speed calculation can be done by measuring the number of vibrations of a high frequency count between the sent and received instances.

Red Shifting of spectrum is the observation of absorption lines in the reading of a spectrum of atomic substance measured against the same absorption lines of the same atomic substance here on Earth. It is this "shift" in the spectrum that is used by creationist con-artists to create the myth of expansion and big bang.

The two phenomenon are NOTHING alike and only a completely lobotomized retard would believe that they are.

If you were going to make a measurement of spectrum as a function of time, you would need multiple spectral images with which to determine any change in the red-shifting variable "z". Do Radar Guns work by taking multiple spectrum and then measuring Δz? They most certainly do not.

The Doppler Effect as measured on Radar Guns is a completely computer created artificial construct. The "Light" is not experiencing any doppler effect whatsoever. It is the "wave" that is being generated as a time-based variable, by the onboard computer that is doppler shifted. Doppler shift is a time-dependent phenomenon, it isn't the "Light" that is experiencing the doppler effect, it is the "graph of the light" that you are creating.

This is simple graphing of data points of a coordinate system. There is no doppler effect occurring, whoever told you that was a second-rate teacher relying on a false analogy.

The radar gun IS NOT taking the spectrum. It isn't taking multiple images of the spectrum to compare an initial vs a final state of the spectrum. Therefore, it can not be compared to a device measuring Δz as YOU most certainly tried to claim.

Its amazing that someone who thinks himself so smart can be so dumb as to be fooled by such creationist garbage.

Light is a quantized event. Unlike the Doppler Phenomenon which is not an event but rather... a series of events. Light is not the manifestation of multiple events throughout time. Your monitor, like all light emitting phenomenon emits light in a binary fashion, the light emitter is either emitting light or it isn't. Light is a quantized phenomenon.

The interstellar medium is akin to a giant charge electron -- it is the electron plasma of the interstellar medium that creates the redshifting of spectral lines as any scientist worth their salt knows. And only "public" #fakescience retarded followers of creationist phonies would ever say otherwise.

time between sending and receiving the reflection back against the vibrations of a high frequency time keeping device.

No. It sends out a specific frequency, and determines the speed based on the change in reflected frequency. Don't believe me? Look at the wikipedia page for a radar gun.

A radar speed gun is a Doppler radar unit that may be hand-held, vehicle-mounted or static. It measures the speed of the objects at which it is pointed by detecting a change in frequency of the returned radar signal caused by the Doppler effect, whereby the frequency of the returned signal is increased in proportion to the object's speed of approach if the object is approaching, and lowered if the object is receding.

The whole point of the doppler effect is that an object moving away returns a higher frequency if the object is moving towards you and a lower frequency if the object is moving away.

Red Shifting of spectrum is the observation of absorption lines in the reading of a spectrum of atomic substance measured against the same absorption lines of the same atomic substance here on Earth. It is this "shift" in the spectrum that is used by creationist con-artists to create the myth of expansion and big bang. The two phenomenon are NOTHING alike and only a completely lobotomized retard would believe that they are.

Except that the reason for the shift in absorption lines is because all of the light you are detecting from said galaxy is at a lower wavelength due to it moving away (the doppler effect!)

Light is a quantized event.

Yes, but as EVERY physicist knows, light is both a particle and a wave. The doppler effect works on that wavelength.

Unlike the Doppler Phenomenon which is not an event but rather... a series of events.

No, the doppler effect happens when a photon is reflected. The actual wavelength of the photon is changed.

it is the electron plasma of the interstellar medium that creates the redshifting of spectral lines as any scientist worth their salt knows.

Funny, every astronomer I know (which is quite a few) would say that is completely wrong. But finally to my favorite part:

There is no doppler effect occurring, whoever told you that was a second-rate teacher relying on a false analogy.......Its amazing that someone who thinks himself so smart can be so dumb as to be fooled by such creationist garbage.

Trying to attack me personally is kind of funny. But you are still wrong.

Source: I am an actual physicist.

I am also an actual physicist. You obviously ignoring the wave particle duality of light and don't know what you are taking about. You are treating the emission of light as an analog rope, when in reality light is digital and multiple photon packets are sent in the fashion of Plane Waves and compared against the frequency of the light emitter to generate the time dependent wave function. You are a second rate physicist if you do not know that much.

There is a huge difference between the examination of time independent individual plane wave fragments and time dependent collections.

One instance collected in series and has a time component. The other is collected as a snapshot. You are comparing a movie to a picture and fail to comprehend the difference. It is a simple misunderstanding that many people brainwashed by the creationism catering system fall to, but I will leave you to figure out yourself and feel free to message me again when you realize I am correct and have decided to abandon your #fakescience.

The Plasma Redshift Theory of Dr. Ari Brynjolfson is without dispute the best model of the redshift phenomenon. As the military, government, and UN no longer keep his research classified, you have no reason to remain ignorant.

/sigh

You are obviously ignoring the wave particle duality of light

When I even said:

Yes, but as EVERY physicist knows, light is both a particle and a wave.

Then you claim:

You are treating the emission of light as an analog rope,

Nope, dont make the analogy at all.

At this point, not only is it clear to me you are not even reading my posts, but also from:

I am also an actual physicist. It is a simple misunderstanding that many people brainwashed by the creationism catering system fall to. #fakescience.

that you are one of those "actual physicists" not "brainwashed" by an actual education. No point in discussing it further then. I'm out.

There is no point in conversing with someone who has built their understanding of physics on false axioms and it no doubt that you try to save face and run upon mentioning Dr. Ari Brynjolfsson.

It's quite simple, a wave is a time dependent phenomenon created via a temporal continuum. It doesn't take 10 seconds or any time at all to record a spectral image of celestial atomic spectra. Therefore, a temporal phenomenon can not be compared to a single discrete unit of time.

Your interpretation of every phenomenon has been grossly incorrect. Light is emitted in discrete temporal packets dependent upon the discrete light emitting units and each light emission carries its own discrete spectral dataset.

The axiom that you have created makes dataset z-final dependent on the spectral dataset z-initial. This is ludicrous and does not in any way reflect reality. The Spectral Dataset of a discrete light emission from t=5 is in no way connected to the discrete photon emission of t=0. Light is emitted at the high vibrational emission rate of the emitting object, one could say that a light bulb vibrates a million times per second and that thousand photonics plane waves radiate from the emitter, however, each discrete photon plane wave packet contains the unique spectrum from the moment of emission. The attempted to tie one spectral data set at one point of emission to another spectral dataset at another moment would imply the Analog Emission of Light - which is ridiculous because all light emission is digital and dependent upon the vibrational frequency of the emitter.

Quit thinking that you know - you don't know. You are being schooled and are simply too proud to recognize the faults in your eduction - the only thing you should learn - is that you must unlearn the garbage you have learned.

Yeah that's not accurate. Hawkins is a legitimate theoretical physicist who is highly regarded in the field. Kaku has done legitimate work forwarding the field as well. NDT and Bill Nye aren't as regarded by the scientific community but play a part in popularizing science to encourage people to study it.

I'm not sure what your issue with the BBT, gravity centric models of the universe or EM wave shifting is - these are all phenomena that have been exhaustively experimentally tested and upheld.

Hawkings has never written a damn thing about real science - his achievement rest of theoretical models of black holes which have all been debunked

Yeah that's not true, he's written a lot of things about science. Please link to this debunking of black holes though, that's quite a breakthrough.

Hawkins has written "about" black hole theory and has even confessed all of his theories are wrong. He's nothing more than a popularizer of science.

Not sure what "about" means in quotations, but his actual claim to theoretical physics fame is spontaneous particle creation from black holes (Hawking Radiation) and other advancements in general and special relativity.

He's never confessed anything like you're describing but I'd welcome you to cite that. Advancements in the fields he worked in are just that, advancements. Newton wasn't wrong writing his three laws because he didn't know they didn't work at velocities approaching c.

I see /r/conspiracy is being infested by more #fakescience gatekeepers pushing the preposterous science fiction of black holes.

Why would these people like about black holes? What do they have to gain? Is everything fake because it's scientific?

Because black hole science fiction sells magazines and brings in sci fi viewers. It is marketing, it is not science. It is also easier to explain black holes than plasma dynamics.

That's an extremely ironic statement.

.Hawkings

*Hawking

.has never written a damn thing about real science

He's published lots.

.his achievement rest of theoretical models of black holes

So you've read all of his papers?

.black holes which have all been debunked and black hole objects which do not exist

Source?

exhaustively experimentally tested and upheld

How sure are you of that?

In the case of physical research...very? Experiments, and conclusions drawn from them, aren't considered legitimate unless repeated by other independent researchers.

So what's your explanation for the pages of anomalies that don't comply with the standard cosmological theories?

Can I get a link?

You want me to chase down and link you dozens of cosmological anomalies? Look into it yourself! Or don't and just assume that science already has it all covered and keep calling people stupid for looking into things we aren't certain about. Because that's how science totally works, right? That's the core concept, shout down those who postulate that maybe our theories aren't as solid as we think they are.

Wow, no need for hostility, it shouldn't be an issue for you to link a single thing.... In general anomalies could be anything. Current scientific understanding isn't complete, no one ever claims that. Things anomalous now might very well be explained in the future. That's how research works. It requires evidence to make claims. If it's discovered that the standard model is incorrect then...it's incorrect and a better explanation is now known. Progress! Yay!

Link one. Just one by a man who is of the same scientific stature as Stephen hawking s

Quasars.

You seem to be confused about how science works. It's not about proving things--that's not something that's actually possible in the physical world. Instead it's about inventing, testing and refining predictive models. That's it. We didn't call Newtonian gravity bullshit because it couldn't accurately predict Mercury's precession. It simply got replaced by a better model.

Yes, and in the mean time people like you spent decades calling anyone else who looked into an alternative theory idiots.

I didn't call you an idiot. I just suggested you're confused about how science works.

I'm suggesting the same thing. Tell me, what are your perspectives on hollow earth theory, electric universe, and cataclysmic geology?

Well I'm not familiar with any of these, so let's take this in digestible pieces starting with "hollow earth theory," which makes the claim that a substantial part of our planet is hollow:

1. What is the evidence that supports this?
2. Why does scientific consensus reject this?
3. What can hollow earth theory predict more accurately than accepted planetary models?
4. What forces prevent the planet from gravitationally collapsing in upon (presumably) gigantic cavities?

I tell you what, if you really want to know and aren't just being an asshole I'll write up some stuff to answer your questions. But it's going to take time because you just asked for a run down of the alternative theory to seismology. When I get a spare hour or so in the next few days I'll hit you up. How does that sound?

Sounds good. I promise to soberly review what you write with an open mind. In turn, please accept any skepticism/criticism as earnest and not some attack on the model being alternative or whatever.

You folks sure are afraid of literate individuals

creationist garbage like the Big Bang Theory

Bill Nye (largely discredited himself in his most recent iteration of his show, as well as never really crediting himself in the first place)

Neil DeGrasse Tyson, who is more like a grown-up A-student who can recite the entire textbook without ever asking why

Stephen Hawkins, who is everything from a tasteless inside-joke to a puppet-gate-keeper of science.

Albert Einstein, who discovered proof of an ether, but decided to ignore it because it didn't fit his preconceived notions of the Universe.

If you'd ask me, I would say they are used to or encouraged to keep the public from finding out about the true nature of the cosmos, namely that it is holographic in nature, meaning that everything is intrinsically connected with everything else, which comes with such a profound change in worldview if properly understood, that it would endanger the status quo too much if people realised that there is no difference beyond the superficial between themselves and a giraffe or an Alpha Centaurian or even their neighbours. It's a dangerous idea to them, to say that we're all different iterations of one and the same godly aspects of life.

Albert Einstein, who discovered proof of an ether, but decided to ignore it

Or Einstein's paper on Brownian motion that missed the apparent fact that Brownian motion is nonrandom (PDF warning).

Just wondering, what's the difference between that and the debate between free will and predestination? A simulated reality would give us free will and predestined events wouldn't it?

When I say the universe is a hologram, I don't necessarily mean that it's a simulation. To me, the idea of the cosmos being a "simulation" like a video game is just another avenue through which existential nihilism and moral relativism is being injected into our collective societies.

Simulation conjures up images of experimentation, trial and error, non-playable characters and generally just feelings of meaninglessness, when the truth is the very opposite. Everything means something, and in fact everything means everything. That's what I mean by holographic. Every electron carries with it information about every other electron in the universe.

Everything is real and here and happening right now, and we can interact with it. Free will is not a given but a choice. Very few people actually utilize theirs on a regular basis.

That, to me is the crux of the grand conspiracy. Some people want everyone to start using their free will for the best outcomes all things considered, while others want only free will for themselves so they can have the best outcome for themselves.

OK that makes sense. Thanks.

1) Bill Nye isn't actually a scientist, he's an engineer.

2) He's a bit of a dick, but does that discredit his mathematical ability or scientific contributions?

3) Don't know a thing about Dr. Hawking.

4) Are you saying Einstein's biggest mistake discredits all his other scientific contributions? I'd like to see you disprove his theory of relativity. Care to explain why his corrections actualy don't make GPS accurate ?

that his 'science' is pure disinformation bullshit.

Well, don't ever get on an airplane, sweetie, those also use the same "disinformation" principles of physics that Stephen Hawking regularly uses.

I'm going to guess that you don't know the first thing about what the theory of gravity is based on, or how gravity works in the first place. So your condescending attitude is amusing in the same way it is listening to Americans talk about freedom.

How does gravity work. Please do explain

We don't know. Google it and you'll get explanations from relatively which are in direct contradiction to Newtonian gravity. The human species doesn't know how gravity works, only that it does.

No. You don't know how gravity works. Stephen Hawking does as he has a phD in theoretical physics and mathematics

Stephen Hawking is dead.

oh ok i didnt know

Yeah, because Newtonian gravity is a less accurate model than GR. That's how scientific theories work.

"Who" replaced him, and "who" controls his replacement? The replacement joined BDS. Why would his controllers have him do that? Could his replacement be controlled by the House of Windsor?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/world/middleeast/stephen-hawking-joins-boycott-against-israel.html?mcubz=1

i think his "endorsement" of BDS was (((them))) laughing at us for believing in Hawking and/or BDS

his controllers would have him do that because BDS is controlled opposition

how so?

Well, once you've read enough of Mathis's stuff, you come to the realization that all social movements of any degree of notoriety or influence are almost certainly controlled. I also wrote a few papers he published, including ones exposing Gandhi and Smedley Butler as controlled opposition.

But in the case of BDS specifically, see my blog post here on the Mavi Marmara incident of 2010. I analyze two sets of footage of the raid: the IDF footage and the BDS footage. I show in what I think is an incontrovertible way that they are not footage of the same event: either one of them is fake or they both are.

And yet, back when the event happened, there was (IIRC) only controversy over the details of the event. When the BDS footage came out, the BDS people never said: "you see, the IDF totally faked their footage of the event." No, what you had were two competing narratives of "who attacked who first." And each of those narratives were supported by the two sides (and the footage they were showing). But neither side ever stepped forward and called the other one out on showing fake footage.

So that's a huge clue that BDS is controlled opposition. Otherwise they would have been jumping up and down shouting about the IDF's fake footage. I offer other evidence there that BDS is controlled, including the participation of Ken O'Keefe and Haneen Zoabi.

I'm not sure but are their noses slightly different?

my burning question with this cloning shit is 'Why?' - why replace hawkins? What is the objective behind it and surely that is a lot of effort to go to if the plan is to use him as a means of disseminating dissinfo/missinfo, etc?

Likewise for other celebs ive heard cloning, who the fuck would waste this incredible technology on celebrities? I guess the obvious reason is pushing influence.. though some of the claims i've heard, read, etc, are just absurd. Like Nicki Minaj? Seriously? Eminem? :/

Whilst i'm not doubting the possibility that cloning could exist, i'm interested to know what you honestly think the purpose of it, especially in Hawkins instance is?

No resistance from the person, easily controlled. Hawking especially can't even speak for himself.

no resistance toward WHAT exactly? What would cloning him or anyone else achieve? Exerting influence? over what? :/

Our understanding of physics? I don't think that hawking has has enough sway for this to really be feasible but the ALS raises eyebrows.

Ahh yes. Controlling the most advanced form of astrophysics for what purpose exactly?

I'm speculating possibility not telling you facts.

Maybe our current physics model is nothing more than a useful approximation? Maybe the nature of the atom, the universe, and space itself is different than what we can observe with our current limits.

Science has been rewritten 1000 times before. It would be foolish to assume it won't ever happen again.

--And controlling scientific news has its benefits. It's no secret that if gasoline were to become obsolete that the world power structure would be turned on it's head. I think it's safe to assume that tptb are taking steps to assure this doesn't happen. I can't imagine what else there would be to gain from this hypothetical scenario though.

I have no idea. He always chimes in with random shit, and it's always about how we CAN'T do something. He's a gatekeeper.

so youre saying we can do what and what do we have proof of

I'm not talking about anything specifically. I remember recently, about long distance space travel, he said something about how "the best we can imagine is small 1 inch squares propelled by a laser with a small camera attached"

I'm other words he's saying it's not possible. The best we can imagine?

I'm not saying I believe fully in cloning but I could see why they do it.

Hawkins for example is probably 'the voice' in science to the masses, he's like your wise old grandpa and whatever he says people will just listen. His reputation as this genius is invaluable and if (((they))) do control him they could push any kind of crap and people just lap it up, would they want to lose that power?

Same for people like Kanye,huge following, huge influence. Different audience but same effect.

fucking anti semite

theres a million eminem clones

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9jXnZS3ouU

I don't think they would have cloned him. If he was replaced then the perpetrators would have just found some random incapable guy who looks like hawking and maybe done some surgery to make him look like the real hawking. The reason I could think that someone would do it specifically for hawking is because he is mute. He would be really easy to control and he has influence in the science community, although probably not that much with real scientists, as well as influence with the public. Even if he is still alive it is almost impossible to actually verify anything that he says as we do not actually know if it's him or a puppet master talking due to his lack of communication abilities. For all we know he could be a vegetable sitting in a chair. He really seems to be well liked and trusted by the public, and people seem to take him seriously.

If you read the linked article, you would know that Hawking was not replaced by a clone. He was replaced by someone who looks somewhat roughly similar, though the differences between them are immediately apparent. So there is no evidence here of cloning technology.

As to why they would replace him with a look-alike, here is what it says in the paper:

But why? Well, we have seen all sorts of weirdness afoot in physics and other science since then [1985]. I haven't made up this weirdness, you know, I just circle it and comment on it. See my paper on Hawking's Brave New World, if you haven't already. See my paper on Yuri Milner and the Fundamental Physics Prize. See my paper on the Higgs Boson announcement, which I show was faked from the ground up. See my paper on Alan Guth and the faked gravity wave research and promotion which preceded his 2014 Kavli Prize. Well, the reason for all this weirdness is the reason for all the other weirdnesses in the Modern world: money. Physics has become a giant cash cow, milked straight from the various national treasuries by the usual suspects. Hundreds of billions of dollars are siphoned from the people of Europe, China, Russia, and the Americas via these fake programs. And Hawking was an important PR personality in the early 1980's, one they didn't want to lose. He was a top salesman of their various boondoggles, and he became an even better salesman once he was replaced by an impostor. Once he was replaced, his puppeteers had complete control over the product they were creating, with no fear that the real Hawking might develop scruples.

Remember, this is exactly what they did in art in the 20th century. They got rid of all the real artists and replaced them with impostors. The scheme was slightly different, in that they didn't replace Rodin and Monet and Whistler with look-alikes in 1900. Instead, they just replaced the entire field with their own manufactured mannequins over a generation or two. But the Modern artists have been impostors one way or the other. They certainly aren't artists by the old definitions, since they can't create anything beautiful or interesting. They are just PR personalities, the faces that front the fakery.

In the very same way, physics has been taken over. Just as the Modern artists are incapable of real art, the Modern physicists are incapable of real physics. So instead they manufacture some huge pile of equations that seems (to some gullible people) to resemble physics or math, and then sell it to Congress or Parliament as cutting-edge. The important thing is not that any physics or art gets done, but that money flows from the treasury. It is all a colossal scam, of earth-shattering proportions. And I mean that literally. All the societies of this Earth are being shattered by this rampant fakery. They are coming apart at the seams. Not only are they being milked dry of all revenues—revenues that could and should be going to real programs—but they are being milked dry of all inspiration, all creativity, all good will, and all belief in humanity. Human potential is shriveling up like a spider on a hot sidewalk under a magnifying glass, and these rich families are the magnifying glass.

But the Modern artists have been impostors one way or the other. They certainly aren't artists by the old definitions, since they can't create anything beautiful or interesting.

Even back in the '80s, I thought it very strange that I could walk through an important urban art museum and see a painting on the wall--supposedly a masterpiece--that had the entire canvas painted dark blue except for one strip of light blue. Literally a housepainter could do it. And all the dumb sheep will ooh and aaah about the genius behind it.

Back in the 90s I went with my girlfriend to a modern art museum in a Swiss town. She was in thrall, but I thought everything was crap, and I said so. We went through painting by painting, and every one I said, "that's crap." She was starting to get mighty impatient with me. Then we went upstairs, turned the corner, and there on a piece of astroturf on top of a pedestal was some plastic dog shit. I turned to her and said, "now that really is crap." She couldn't disagree, could she?

Our fascists overlords want to destroy everything that is beautiful, inspiring and transcendant. So real art, music and literature had to go. Instead we get books like The Catcher in the Rye, music from Katy Perry and Beyonce, and "paintings" that could be done by a blind man and a roller.

Very well put.

Why single out Catcher in the Rye? In my opinion it's one of the more genuine novels of the last hundred years. Something like Gravity's Rainbow would have been a much better example of garbage modern literature marketed as "important" and "genius".

Cause it totally sucked and is made a nihilistic loser out out to be the hero.

I wouldn't say he's nihilistic, he's an angry kid who can't cope with the phony world around him. I also don't think it sucks at all but to each their own. If you want to read something that truly sucks balls, read Gravity's Rainbow.

If you want to read something that truly sucks balls

Don't even have time to read the good stuff.

Most of the "oohing and aaahing" is coming from people who are paid to promote that art. If you talk to most regular people on the street they have no use whatsoever for the majority of modern/post-modern art.

Just like Bin Laden? Supposedly died on initial airtstrikes but kept 'alive' to keep the war narrative going till Syria.

I thought he died shortly after 9/11 of kidney failure because he didn't get dialysis?

How the fuck do you think this

I'm on mobile right now but here's what I could find:

http://edition.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/21/gupta.otsc/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jan/19/afghanistan.oliverburkeman

http://edition.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/21/gupta.otsc/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1366508/US-casts-doubt-on-bin-Ladens-latest-message.html

http://edition.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/21/gupta.otsc/

Alternate theory that he's drugged and near braindead:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egHsaS6Uh1I

Counter idea, could he have been 'modified'? He's hooked up to all these machines and a robot is speaking for him. The way his body has warped and you can't get a good look at it anymore? He could be literal corpse rolling and being controlled through the chair.

The craziedt thing I've found about the current Hawkins is he occasionally visit a swingers club in San Bernardino. True story

Nope. I knew no one would believe me so I present yoou the article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/28/stephen-hawking-said-to-frequent-sex-club_n_1307625.html

The More You Know....

Everytime you hear that robot voiced freak, you are going to think about what his dirty talk must sound like.

You're Welcome

This is the source http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/02/stephen-hawking-sex-clubs-physicist-freedom-acres/
Learn to factcheck

This is the source http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/02/stephen-hawking-sex-clubs-physicist-freedom-acres/
Learn to factcheck

My thoughts. We know the wealthy and talented are afforded medical allowances that are beyond the financial grasp of us commoners. People have successfully cured cancer and AIDS. Is it impossible that his intellect and prowess in physics afforded him the respect and compassion of many followers and fans. If people can crowd fund the most inane ideas, why couldn't Hawking have been kept alive by state of the art practices? Do NOT forget that the vested interest of most Western medicine is a blind treatment approach. They take money indefinitely by keeping people coming in for treatments, and killer disease and disability keep population down ever so slightly. This is the kind of rationale that tptb would likely adhere to. But hey, now I'll click your link and see what we have :) Cheers!

He has no intellect or prowess, Hawking is a house of cards in physics. His papers on black holes are built on fantasy and bullshit.

I look forward to reading your theses then.

dispute this mr mathematics https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.07702

He is a silicon sex doll essentially

man, the cat is out of the bag on this one.

i discovered that Hawking is a fraud, quite by accident, and it seems others have as well

https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/search?q=hawking&restrict_sr=on

It heard this theory before, but wouldn't him dying be better for him in an Einstein kind of way so that no one could argue with him and his status would be elevated? Kind of like the way famous people who are dicks, die, then all of a sudden they're heralded as great people.. Even though they're just dead dicks now.

No. Probably not.

Y'a the new Hawkins has the classic "politician straight bottom teeth" that seems so prevalent amongst the political class.

He's also been to Epsteins Island which is hilariously depressing.

But ya clones or assumed identities are a thing. Look at Dave Chappelle or Gucci mane for other examples.

Every day it becomes MORE possible too. Nobody survives ALS that long

that makes no sense.

The longer he stays "alive", the longer it becomes more unlikely and more ridiculous. This is basic statistics.

Who the fuck is Steven Hawkins?Your old English teacher?

Who the fuck is Steven Hawkins?Your old English teacher?

Crazy. He definitely died and was replaced.

It's Stephen Hawking. Good god. Can't even get his name right, wants to argue that he's been "replaced."

Muh credentialism

Miles Mathis also believes that John Lennon is still alive and working as a Lennon impersonator who writes his own songs.

interesting =/= real

TMoR alert.

This is probably the dumbest theory after the flat Earth theory. The proof you provide is some pictures of Hawking.

Have you ever heard of picture manipulation? Like using lamps for lighting, post-processing the picture on computer etc? Or just simply make-up? They really can do wonders on the appeal, and almost every single photo shoot uses all of these features.

You obviously have no clue about ALS disease or how it affects people. I can say that as a nurse who has treated an ALS patient that has been suffering from the disease longer than 20 years.

Hey guys, Dawkins is almost exactly the same age as Hawking. Coincidence, I don't think so.

Why would his name matter if he had it before ALS?

Way too many standard deviations. I kinda miss stats but not really.

The evidence in this paper is overwhelming. It is clear to anyone with eyes to see and a brain to think with that Hawking was replaced by a look-alike who doesn't really even look that much like him. For me the important takeaway of this paper is that all the scientists who knew him personally before this happened have to be in on it, since they would see it's not him. This shows that academic science (or physics at least) is tightly controlled at the highest levels and scientists actively involved in misdirection and public hoaxes. And the fact that this switch has never been noticed or reported on by any newspaper or media outlet anywhere is yet another indication of just how controlled the media is.

The monster energy logo symbolism is real though.

When I say the universe is a hologram, I don't necessarily mean that it's a simulation. To me, the idea of the cosmos being a "simulation" like a video game is just another avenue through which existential nihilism and moral relativism is being injected into our collective societies.

Simulation conjures up images of experimentation, trial and error, non-playable characters and generally just feelings of meaninglessness, when the truth is the very opposite. Everything means something, and in fact everything means everything. That's what I mean by holographic. Every electron carries with it information about every other electron in the universe.

Everything is real and here and happening right now, and we can interact with it. Free will is not a given but a choice. Very few people actually utilize theirs on a regular basis.

That, to me is the crux of the grand conspiracy. Some people want everyone to start using their free will for the best outcomes all things considered, while others want only free will for themselves so they can have the best outcome for themselves.

Nice catch with the "Hawk King" reference.

Names are important. I am convinced the only reason Miley Cyrus was propped up by the powers that be is because of her name. It is how they manipulate our conscious reality. She is named after an Annunaki god. By making her an idol the powers that be ensure the old gods are still worshiped by modern society.

When the woke community has not caught wind to this trick yet.

Seth Rich (Egyptian god) Ammon Bundy (Egyptian god) Apep/Kek/Pepe (Egyptian god)

Hello controlled opposition. Every time people say their names they are giving their power away.

Well 'they' manipulate what the public perceives as statistics, in the form of upvotes erry single day. So id agree its a very powerful form of social control.

.the guy has ALS for several standard deviations longer than anyone else has had it

At some point someone is going to be the longest survivor

.. his teeth aren't the same from pic to pic.

Uhhh wut

.he speaks through an electronic box.

And?

.>his name hawking harkens to horus, the hawk king. so yeah. suspend your disbelief.

Lol

So what's your explanation for the pages of anomalies that don't comply with the standard cosmological theories?

There are several cases of ALS sufferers surviving for decades so I'd like to know where you get your information from.