On motherfucking point, great post.

Bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbut...vice has articles about cocaine guize!!!!

Fuck yes!

If their arguments were based in truth then they wouldn't have to destroy the diversity of opinion on reddit.

Sad to see the "left" turn into the enemies of equality.

I think the charade is over. There was a time people believed that the democrats were the party of the working class, but the veil has been slowly lifted and everyone with half a brain can see the ugly visage lurking beneath. Neither party is the party of the people. Washing is full of nothing but sellouts, the extent of which increased exponential with the citizens united court case giving billionaires the ability to anonymously donate unlimited sums to as many campaigns as they please. Do he right thing and vote third party

lol what? Reddit banned them for breaking the rules. "The left" had nothing to do with it.

That's called law and order. Or are we ignoring that now?

You break the rules, you get punished.

They brigaded the sub with trolls and used that as the excuse to ban the sub.

How do you know this?

The ubiquitous downvoting in its final days. Targeting by other subs for elimination.

I mean mostly those guys were all crazy and all the people who were banned for saying how dumb the Q stuff is were always downvoting

You still didn't say how you know that they brigaded the sub with trolls, just that there a lot of downvoting

The mods commented on how their jobs were getting harder because of the trolls on the final few days. They said we were being brigaded.

The movement is non-violent.

"mostly those guys were all crazy." Smart people look like crazy people to dumb people.

"mostly those guys were all crazy." Smart people look like crazy people to dumb people.

I mean it's insanely easy to discredit the "Q movement" or whatever

All you have to do is ask for a single time where Q promised something and it happened. Like the BOOM. BOOM. BOOM. week where nothing happened

Or last friday where he said to "grab a bag of popcorn"

Or how monday was supposed to be the day everything finally went down

His first EVER post was saying that HRC would be imprisoned a week from that post. That was in Oct of 2017. What happened? Why do you keep letting him lie and string you along like an absentee parent promising he'll be there on christmas day?

OK, do it; show me.

Dude i just did

reread my comment, can you answer the question?

You made unsubstantiated but interesting claims, with no source to back it up or explanation outlining that your interpretation is correct. I have merely your word to go on.

Are you not familiar with the Truth Discovery process?

Link me to a single time that something Q has promised has come true. He has made many promises but they never happen, and the way he gets around this is just promising more things that never happen

https://qanon.pub/data/media/c5cde78163af92b50c0cc1523eacf186793ecf0478d4ddbd6d6c516c9178bec1.png

I mean honestly is there any reason that he couldn’t have just been spamming f5 and then post right after he sees the Trump tweet?

And even if like Q is a secret service guy who is just near trump a lot, nothing that he’s actually promised will happen has happened. Nothing big, at least. I’ve been following the Q subs for 6+ months and every week there has been a vague event that will happen in 5-10 days that will finally be when the big shit goes down. But it never does, the window stays as a vague future event and nothing truly ever happens

Genuine question, how long have you been following Q? And how are you able to stay believing when the cycle and narrative is so obvious?

Genuine question, how long have you been following Q?

I came across Q in about late December/early January.

And how are you able to stay believing when the cycle and narrative is so obvious?

What is obvious?

What is obvious? Perhaps I cannot see the forest for the trees, show me.

This:

I’ve been following the Q subs for 6+ months and every week there has been a vague event that will happen in 5-10 days that will finally be when the big shit goes down. But it never does, the window stays as a vague future event and nothing truly ever happens

Most of the "big shit" that goes down is speculation on the part of anons, not direct statements of Q.

So what does Q promise then? What is he here for if he doesn’t ever give anything that’s actually real? Is he really just there for anons to do speculation that always ends up being wrong?

Q mostly just asks questions, acting like a Socratic laser pointer for Anons to research topics on publicly available information.

Okay, i’ve heard this point before and it’s really easy to show how silly it is

What is one thing the Q people have discovered that is important? One thing that all the research has done. Can you name one?

The FISA memo was pushed by anons back in (February? if I remember).

Leading to potential declassification in our current future.

Do you think that they provided any value to it being released?

I think this is what you are asking, if not please correct me.

Do [I] think that [anons] provide any value to it being released?

I think if you cannot generate political impetus for a subject it is less likely to manifest in Washington D.C. If they aren't informed that people want specific action, the politicians in Washington, DC would rather sit on their hands and let someone else "do it."

So, yes, involvement is the only path to fixing our problems.

I'm legitimately curious what the fuck this image means. He posted at the same time as Trump?

His first EVER post was saying that HRC would be imprisoned a week from that post. That was in Oct of 2017.

First post, I just grabbed it so we have it here:

"HRC extradition already in motion effective yesterday with several countries in case of cross border run. Passport approved to be flagged effective 10/30 @ 12:01am. Expect massive riots organized in defiance and others fleeing the US to occur. US M’s will conduct the operation while NG activated. Proof check: Locate a NG member and ask if activated for duty 10/30 across most major cities."

So nothing ever happpened on 10/30 right

I don’t know what your post is trying to say

Haha the fact that you have to reach back 8 months ago and hit up a semantics as your issue says enough.... How about something more current?

How is the panic settling in now?

Dude i listed two things that happened in the last week, last friday and this monday. The BOOM. BOOM. BOOM week happened within a month ago

Do you know what you’re talking about?

How do you know this?

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/breaking-reddit-shuts-down-second-largest-pro-trump-subreddit/

"ShareTweet Reddit has banned the second-largest pro-President Trump subreddit, The Great Awakening, as tech platforms increasingly ban Trump-supporting and conservative forums.

Top Reddit moderators made Big League Politics aware of the fact that “The Great Awakening” was banned Tuesday night at 11:45 PM. The subreddit has been down all day.

The Great Awakening subreddit served as an informal platform for followers of the Q Anon movement, as well as for other independent researchers.

Top Reddit moderators have provided Big League Politics with information showing that left-wing operatives including an employee of CBS have been involved in posing as Trump supporters to post offensive anonymous content on Reddit in order to get pro-Trump subreddits flagged. BLP will be rolling out that information today as this censorship purge goes into high gear.

Latest: SPLC Allies With Antifa Group That Cheers The Death Of Trump Supporters

The CBS employee has been identified by top Reddit moderators as Gary Phillips, who serves as digital media administrator for CBS Studios International in Los Angeles.

Phillips runs a private subreddit in which he makes clear his liberal ideology, and plans his covert actions against Trump subreddits according to copious information reviewed by the editorial staff.

"More than 30 covert left-wing actors have been identified coordinating with Phillips, including activists linked to Media Matters and the ACLU."

Removed. Personal Info

This be your only warning. Do not post doxx info.

It's a publicly available article, is that considered doxxing? Not asking to be a pain in the butt, merely to understand the appropriate boundaries here to avoid doing it again.

Yes it is considered doxxing.

What are the boundary conditions that determine "doxxing?"

Whatever the admins say basically.

Interesting boundary conditions. How does one avoid crossing over such a blurry line?

Don't post doxx. If you question if you can - ask first.

Thanks for the response.

I edited the post, does this comply now?

No. The article is not allowed to be posted due to it linking a real life person to a reddit profile.

Oh, so any news item which identifies a reddit user is considered doxxing? OK. I will delete the post entirely. How do you propose I answer the other users question without being able to provide the link to the answer? Do you have any suggestions?

Oh, so any news item which identifies a reddit user is considered doxxing? OK. I will delete the post entirely. How do you propose I answer the other users question without being able to provide the link to the answer? Do you have any suggestions?

I don't have a good answer for you. Sorry.

You could leave us a trail of breadcrumbs to follow.

Ironically, you'll have to write exactly how Q does.

So, apparently I can't link to the article which shows you because it is considered doxxing. But you know that it exists and that I can't post it because it "doxxes" a reddit user and this has been confirmed by a mod by warning me about posting it.

Wheres the proof they broke the rules? They banned 5 diffrent subs at once. And if there is a comment then how do GA comments stack up against those in politics which are continous and never adressed by mods?

this is what i'm waiting for, it shouldn't be hard to provide. if they were doxxing people, show us. give us more info. what are their names? where do they live?

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/9fczd4/rgreatawakening_had_to_go_but_theres_no_reason/e5vo8cw

So you're saying that there are politics subs where violence is regularly incited? And the mods never address?

Got some examples?

Here are some from ga: https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/9fczd4/rgreatawakening_had_to_go_but_theres_no_reason/e5vo8cw

Keep licking those boots.

Keep pretending Q is legit. lol

What rules? Who advocated violence? And what violence?

It's all fake news. You are literally going off rumors and hearsay.

Do a little research. They've advocated for a ton of violence. https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/9fczd4/rgreatawakening_had_to_go_but_theres_no_reason/e5vo8cw

fake news. Notice how every commenter is a 'new arrival'? What do you think that means?

Did you really never read GA?

Every goddamn thread talked about hanging Hillary.

no, they called for Hillary to be put to trial for her crimes. I never once read a comment advocating for someone to take that into their own hands and not have her brought to justice.

Or are you so sloppy that you couldn't figure it out?

Also, if that is grounds for hating a community and banning a subject, how do you feel about the comments made about Trump in a place like /r/politics? I have seem comments detailing some pretty horrific things there in reference to what people would like to do to Trump.... I guess those don't matter because hurting Trump is okay?

If all the subs were getting shut down for this stuff, I could understand it, but this is targeted on one subject and nowhere else. Anybody can go to any sub and post something horrible. The fact that you think that is 'proof' shows your intellectual inability.

Then you weren't reading all of the comments. They were literally everywhere.

no they weren't. you're being dishonest.

No, I'm not. You're pretending there wasn't a problem with these radical Q extremists.

there isn't. where's the problem? people posting memes on the internet? making T-shirts at screen printing businesses?

What action or event can you point to where 'radical Q extremists' did anything at all?

Have you ever heard of the concept of 'the boogeyman'?

Have you ever heard of the concept of 'the boogeyman'?

Yup:

did you see the bike lock dude that got off with no penalty?

Antifa is the definition of a boogeyman.

Q doesn't make my blood boil. It's irrelevant and, frankly, stupid. It takes three ounces of critical thinking and the lack of desperately wanting it to be true to understand that.

The Q subs were banned for breaking rules. Even on Twitter, "q sent me..." messages followed by threats were rampant. And they openly regarded GA as their central hub.

no you are just extremely biased, but that's cool. you'll see soon.

I'm extremely biased because I don't believe an anon from 8chan who has been proven to be a fraud? lol

you are as stupid and crazy as people who believe in Q no strings attached. Q has been neither proven nor disproven. all it would take to be disproven is if Trump denounced it and said he has no part in it - it would instantly be over. Instead, he clearly points at signs and people wearing Q shirts, and Sarah Sanders sidesteps the issue instead of spearheading it when the MSM did bring it up one time...

you are being extremely pedantic and ignorant you are arguing for non-critical thought.

you are as stupid and crazy as people who believe in Q no strings attached. Q has been neither proven nor disproven.

What? Have you not seen the drops that have been proven to be falsified Photoshops?

all it would take to be disproven is if Trump denounced it and said he has no part in it - it would instantly be over.

Lol what? No way. This would only fuel another narrative.

Instead, he clearly points at signs and people wearing Q shirts, and Sarah Sanders sidesteps the issue instead of spearheading it when the MSM did bring it up one time...

Yup, you're clearly looking for signs that somehow verify it.

you are being extremely pedantic and ignorant you are arguing for non-critical thought.

hahahaha

I'm arguing "for non-critical thought" because Q is some of the stupidest bullshit that people with a weird pro-Trump savior bias and lack the ability to critically think fell for? It's so laughably stupid.

Nobody is destroying diversity of opinion. The Q subs constantly threatened violence. I saw it dozens of times. Violate TOS all the time, get banned. There are tons and tons of diverse opinions on Reddit and many other places.

The mindset around this whole silly cult is warped so that every single loss is a win and every proof of Q being obviously fake is just further proof of his validity and the deep states desperation.

Ask yourself, what could hypothetically happen that would make you question whether or not your impression is the truth? If the answer is nothing, you’re giving up your critical thinking and being a sheep. The Q folks are guilty of this completely.

Where did the Q subs threaten violence? I was a member, no regular member there ever did.

Well I can’t go link it now, but I saw it many, many times in GA.

Strictly non-violent movement. It was brigaded.

It really wasn’t but I’m sure that helps fuel the victim complex

Having been on the GA for months, I never saw a single bad thing posted. Even mild things like wanting a traitor to face the death penalty was removed for being "too violent..." this was censorship pure and simple. I must have missed the last few minutes of it when the fake posters possibly went in to shitpost just so reddit could say "see look! Racism! SHUT-EVERYTHING-DOWN"... pretty damn convenient 5+ subs all got banned at the exact same time.....

Then you weren’t paying much attention. I saw people talking about how to organize for the coming violence, people saying hillary and Obama should he tried and executed, people requesting video of McCains supposed execution, etc

You guys are always the victims in your own minds. Maybe you just make bad decisions.

organize for the coming violence

Yes, to be prepared for the crazy leftists to get violent, as they have been.

people saying hillary and Obama should be tried and executed

Yes, tried <--- that means in the courts, you know do it LEGALLY.

Yeah like when those leftists planned to bomb that Muslim community, or when they marched down the street under Nazi flags and then ran a girl over.

It’s not legal to execute someone for being part of the party you don’t like.

Interesting perspective. If this is your honest assessment, it is wrong. I suggest honest re-examination and then re-evaluate.

Make a point if you have one

Already did.

Yeah, you really didn’t though. Explain how what I said is wrong.

Here are those violent leftists I mentioned

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2018/04/18/three-kansas-militiamen-who-plotted-to-bomb-muslims-are-found-guilty-on-terrorism-charges/?utm_term=.41c87664facc

I assume you already know about Heather Hayer and unite the right.

And military tribunals aren’t a valid or legal course of action, neither Obama or clinton or any of your other supposed criminals are members of enemy forces during wartime.

What do those men have to do with the greatawakening or Q?

members of enemy forces during wartime.

If their actions were aiding a foreign enemy (Al Qaeda/ISIS, etc.) they fall under military jurisdiction.

They have to do with your lie that the left is so violent and peaceful people on the right just need to prepare to play defense.

And I thought their crime was supposedly molesting and eating people, not aiding AQ or ISIS. Maybe I’m behind the times.

Is anything you say true? Nope, you aren't an honest broker.

Whatever you have to think to keep the delusion going

Haha non answer, will never follow up - calling it now

How is it a non answer? What would be sufficient proof of things that are no longer there to share?

use the wayback machine

Wayback machine didn’t archive the links or comments for the sub

so they were super important yet nobody took note of them or preserved them? or are you talking out of your ass?

I didn’t preserve them personally. Someone may have them somewhere I guess.

Go try the wayback machine on them if you don’t believe me, it’s not hard to test

i just used the wayback machine and you're full of shit. what's the next step?

Paste a link, I’ll gladly go through and find it.

I got the “this page has not been archived” message when I clicked on the comments link.

nah too much effort, how bout we agree to disagree and you can get back to being ignorant and making shit up?

“You make shit up”, says the person who won’t post a link to prove their point because it’s too much effort

Same. Shit-posts galore, but never saw anything violent. Are any news outlets referring to anything specific? I’ve only seen short articles with nothing to reference.

Sorry, but it’s absolutely not. I read plenty of it. Read a lot of GA, kind of fascinated by the cult aspect of it.

Literally nothing has blown up in the face of the people you call evil because they disagree with you. Trump and his cronies are the ones actually being investigated, tried and convicted of blatant crimes.

Tell me, what hypothetical happening could occur that would make you legitimately conclude that Q is a hoax and his claims are garbage?

Can you show us proof that trump is under investigation?

By who? His campaign is under investigation by the special counsel, his charity by Ny state. And his lawyer admitted in court to committing felonies at his request a few weeks ago.

Why do you think he’s constantly melting down about the “witch hunt” if it has nothing to do with him?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-19/rosenstein-said-to-tell-trump-he-s-not-target-in-mueller-probe And it is a witch hunt. Hillary is the witch. Hillary and her team colluded with any and every foreign power that had more than 10 dollars. The only collusion was on the left.

You are a joke dude, you need to learn to think critically. You are making yourself look bad here.

If Trump came out and said he had no involvement with Q, it would be instantly dead. All for a LARP?

Your the one that believes in crazy impossible things, not Q supporters....

Lol bullshit, they’d be saying trump has to deny it so he can catch the deepstate by surprise or some other nonsense. You provide a fine example yourself here “you’re the one who believes crazy things for questioning a vast global satanic conspiracy based on the repeatedly incorrect predictions by an anonymous person on 4chan!”

This person who started as some supposed uber connected government worker is now sharing fucking low effort memes and Fox News articles now as “drops” and they still believe it’s real and the same person. There is no limit to what they’ll buy and explain away.

oh so now you personally know how 70,000+ people would react? Cool story bro

This person who started as some supposed uber connected government worker is now sharing fucking low effort memes and Fox News articles now as “drops” and they still believe it’s real and the same person.

Well hey i guess you know it all, don't you? What's hilarious is that you are just as ridiculous as the people you try to denigrate. You are as sure that Q is a LARP as they are that Q is real - you're both fools. The only honest answer here is 'wait and see'. Q hasn't been identified for a reason, and they won't be until the curtain comes up. Luckily, this will all sort out before midterms, so we don't have to wait too long to see what happens.

No, I saw how the community as a whole reacts to obvious evidence that their cult is just that. It’s always spun as further proof that they’re right no matter how stupid and desperate it is to everyone on the outside.

And no I’m absolutely not “just as ridiculous” as people who buy that vast parts of the country are part of a satanic baby eating cabal based on some shitty photoshopped pictures and cold reading techniques that were exposed as cheap psychological tricks decades ago.

to everyone on the outside.

nice division tactics. There is no 'outside' or 'inside'.

And no I’m absolutely not “just as ridiculous” as people who buy that vast parts of the country are part of a satanic baby eating cabal based on some shitty photoshopped pictures and cold reading techniques that were exposed as cheap psychological tricks decades ago.

So much wrong here. 'vast parts of the country'? hell no. I don't even think i'd say 'vast parts of government'. Q is backed by patriots within - there are more good guys than bad IMO.

And you ARE just as ridiculous, as you are denying things you cannot know, just like those you stand opposed to take for truth things they cannot know. Both extremes are ridiculous, and you have painted yourself into that corner.

The reality is that the moderate approach is the right one. Q will be proven right or wrong at some point - only fools will pretend to know before they truly know.

That last paragraph is gold.

So many people buy into some pretty questionable theories and stick to them like they’re in a cult. Like just because it’s not the MSM feeding you a narrative, that doesn’t mean you’re not susceptible to being played.

You're lying.

Very convincing argument

Votes seem to think so.

Votes in a conspiracy forum where I’m arguing that a popular conspiracy of the times is actually blatant cold reading at best and lazy LARPing at worst.

You're kidding right? The globalists have won.

You underestimate the importance of positive thinking.

And prayer. God wins.

this is about that... ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

Positive thinking is what's going to take down corrupt governments, shadow agencies, and globalist agendas? Seriously?

It worked in India for the Raj.

Holographic universe!

Is the game over? No, it's not. Not by a long shot.

When we are in FEMA camps we will know the globalists have won. Are we in FEMA camps? No? Then there is still a fighting chance

Our nations are basically free-range human plantations.

It's like you people have no self awareness. Ever.

Care to elaborate?

What do you mean, “you people”?

Removed, Rule 10

God is my Strength.

Why do you believe in a god?

Because the earth is a goddess.

Do I really have to prove to you the earth exists?

No, but you'd have to prove that the Earth is a god.

Why do I have to prove my belief to you?

Ambiguous evidence is what makes faith faith..

Do you know any religion based in unambiguous truth?

Do I really have to prove to you the earth exists?

You implied that I questioned whether the Earth exists. I do not.
I simply question whether it is a god. I'd like to hear your reasoning, because I am curious. I don't demand that you provide it.

&#x200B;

It's pretty simple. The earth is a mystical being able to create and sustain life.

Can you explain how life originated on earth?

Via abiogenesis. It makes the most sense to me of all explanations I've encountered.

Yes, but that doesn't explain how the first life originated. It barely answers how, equating it with a miracle...

There are many explanations for how self-reproducing structures can emerge by chance (there are several described in detail here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis). This is still an active field of research, but conceptually it makes perfect sense to me that the earliest proto-organisms would be nothing more than conglomerations of self-reproducing proteins, that is proteins that catalyze their own formation in certain environments.

Life and the conditions to create it doesn't seem miraculous to you?

Then you clearly haven't studied the science behind it. Ask a scientist their opinion on the chances there were for life to from an earth.

The point is that the odds can be minuscule over certain time frames or within small environments, but over a period of billions of years in an environment as vast as the young Earth, it becomes significantly more likely that a self-reproducing structure would emerge. And it only takes one. Evolution takes on from there, and more complex structures emerge naturally. Organisms begin to proliferate.

Cognitive ife is extremely rare, you know that right?

I'm not sure what you mean by 'cognitive' life, or what that has to do with this discussion.
Unless you're implying that intelligence cannot evolve - in which case I will be happy to disagree with you.

Thinking life.

Thinking life can evolve from unthinking life.

Source?

The fossil record.

I think another issue with this discussion is that we think of animate and inanimate objects as being clearly defined, but this stems from thousands of years of religious thinking. There is no such thing as life - there are simple and complex structures. If reproduction is what constitutes life, then why arent viruses considered living things.

Abiogenesis has never been observed by any scientist in all of human history. Isn't that interesting?

Adaptation over time exists, but abiogenesis is a hypothesis with no scientific observation behind it.

Do you really think life just popped up out of nowhere? If you believe in evolution, you recognize that every cell in existence is a copy of a previous cell. It does not answer the question where the first cells came from. Do you figure life somehow evolved from non-life?

It hasn't been observed because it takes billions of years and an enormous sea of chemicals. We can, in fact, simulate the conditions and form what might have been the earliest self-replicating structures in a lab. I think that the first cells were created by chance, yes - from self-replicating proteins that arose from random chemical reactions.

If science is the process of what we can observe and test, then is it accurate to say that abiogenesis is not a scientific principle?

I, like you, am looking for the most reasonable explanation....but a self-contained self-healing self-improving system arising from random chance and lighting striking a bunch of minerals and rocks does not seem likely to me.

There are theories. It is true to say that it is quite unlikely that we will watch something as complex as even a bacterium emerge from a molecular soup in a laboratory for the reasons outlined above, but that doesn't mean that we cannot use the scientific method to determine the most likely origin of life, based on our observations. And of course your description of it leaves out all the beautiful, intricate details - this is a problem that has been thought and reasoned about - you might be interested to read more about the theories. All it takes is the emergence of a single self-replicator, at which point the laws of probability no longer apply. Billions of years and vast oceans of chemicals seems sufficient to me for the emergence of one.

As per the scientific method, they're still at the hypothesis stage. i.e. not theories.

As far as theories, I am no stranger to reading as much as I can get my hands on! What do you think I've missed, and are you sure I haven't read it and simply dismissed it as a scientist presenting a guess as a surety?

I like you wonder and marvel at the complexity of time and the universe so we probably have more in common than in difference. How about we become friends and try to sharpen one another?

Evolution is a theory, as is abiogenesis. I suggest you start by looking at a broad overview - the wikipedia article is as good a place as any to get your bearings.

Why would you assume that I don't have a background in the claim of evolution? I most certainly do! I am simply pointing out that there is zero observable evidence for abiogenesis. As far as evolution, it has multiple definitions and is a fairly shaky word - it could mean generational adaptation (microevolution) or macroevolution or abiogenesis or chemical evolution. There are also other definitions.

Macroevolution has not been observed. Neither has abiogenesis. Therefore they are not theories. They are hypothesis, and probably wrong.

Do you have a more sensible explanation for the emergence of life and the diversity of lifeforms that is rooted in observation and deduction, or do you agree that these are the best available explanations?

&#x200B;

We are having two conversations at once - you asked the same question in both - I went ahead and answered it in the other thread. Short answer, I feel that anticipatory design is evidence in nature in a way that would not occur naturally for "trial and error" style macroevolution and used giraffes as an example.

We are having two conversations at once - you asked the same question in both - I went ahead and answered it in the other thread. Short answer, I feel that anticipatory design is evidence in nature in a way that would not occur naturally for "trial and error" style macroevolution and used giraffes as an example.

Yes, I have been using wikipedia since the week it opened. Guess what though? Modern academia is wrong about some stuff. For a long time now we thought the speed of light was a constant; modern testing now shows the speed of light is slowing down.

Source for the slowing of light?

If you believe in evolution, you recognize that every cell in existence is a copy of a previous cell. It does not answer the question where the first cells came from. Do you figure life somehow evolved from non-life?

How could change happen if every cell was a direct copy? Mutations absolutely occur within cells, even with asexual reproduction.

Cells come into existence by copying themselves. Nobody is saying cells cannot mutate from environmental pressures, but they don't "Mutate" into first existence. Every cell that is "born" does so by being copied from a previous cell.

Atheism.

Atheism is a religion?

I have been told that by others. It could go either way

Only when the tax bill comes.

Everyone is entitled to their own personal beliefs about spirituality.

Of course they are. I was just curious - everyone has their reasons.

This is why I stopped calling myself "atheist" a long time ago.

As science becomes dogma to some, atheists then feel the need to attack religion because it's like an Easter Bunny fairy tale in their worldview that just can't be *logical, rational or true*.

But they are really just attacking their own spirituality, of which their dogmas are rooted in. Is the Big Bang a noble lie? Lots of folks are lost in this weird battle of doing what Alan Watts puts simply as "playing hide and seek with God".

I can see it in Jordan Peterson, he's trying to convey this message as well, but he's having a really hard time doing it because he hasn't reached a point where it all crystallizes and becomes a clear concept that's easy to convey. He has a lot of stuff to work through before he gets there, because he has a lot of sources to draw from when formulating ideas, but I think he will gain the enlightenment through that journey, so even though I'm critical of Peterson and his rambling, I think the message he's trying to bring about is ultimately very important for a society that is losing touch with spirituality.

Much of western society has only experienced spirituality through strange constructs like drug addiction, religion, cults, tree hugging, and brand worship. These constructs harness people's innate and likely suppressed spirituality which wants to come to the surface because it is at least half of who/what we are. Not many people can recognize that and there is no current science or philosophy to back this up yet, so they are deep in the unknown.

The point of life is not physical, it is spiritual, or a good mix of both.

Ofc they are. Look most people who believe in the big bang are religious whether they believe so or not. Its a theory. No one can honestly say with 100% certainty thats how it went down. Even if they are 99.9% certain theres still that .1% of doubt. And thats where faith comes in. These people have faith that its 100% true even though it hasnt been proven to be 100% true. Thus, their god and religion is science.

Everyone is entitled to question people about their personal beliefs.

If you don't believe in a creator, then the universe cannot be a simulation as many claim it is likely to be. For a simulation REQUIRES a creator.

I don't think it's a simulation. I think it just 'is'. No creator is required.
In fact, a creator doesn't solve the problem either - one can always ask what created the creator. If the answer is "nothing, it's always been," then why cannot this be true of the cosmos?

Inside the universe is a realm of time and space. The creator exists outside this realm.

Consciousness is primary not matter.

I can still ask what created the creator. And what created the realm outside the realm of time and space.

Outside the realm of time and space there is no time, just one great big now. So the entire concept of beginning and ending do not exist.

So then there's no need for a creator.

Without a creator to create the realms of time and space there would be no realms of time and space.

Without a creator to create the creator, there can be no creator.

The creator always was.

The cosmos always was.

Depending on your definition of cosmos, perhaps. If you mean the realm of time and space, perhaps not.

The cosmos is the multiverse - all possible realities. Infinite, all-encompassing (including the machinery of our own observable universe).

All possible realms of time and space (multiverses) are contained within the timeless realm.

Yes, and the garden always was. I don't think it was created - I don't think the idea itself even makes sense.

Yes, the garden always was. But trees had a beginning and end (each multiverse; universe with all possibilities through quanta of time)

Right. And with this description we seem to have circumvented the need for a 'creator', unless you'd like to conceive of the whole shebang as the creator, where everything is an inseparable part of one unified whole. I can get behind that. But the concept of a creator as espoused in the Old Testament, for instance, makes very little sense to me.

The creator is The Consciousness which initiated the creation of each multiverse. It cannot grow or change in the realm of timeless (because it is timeless), so it sends pieces of itself (consciousness) into the world to grow (that is us).

All things are merely consciousness in different stages of self-awareness.

It is my belief that the multiverses arise as a consequence of natural law, and not divine intervention.

You might be right, but my experience as an Truth-seeking Atheist drove me to Christ.

Mathematically Christ = Truth. Seek Christ in all things.

I respectfully disagree. Zen Buddhism seems to hold many more truths for me than Christianity.

I studied Buddhism when I was younger.

If you want to understand Christianity, read the bible and when you see the word 'Christ' replace it with 'Truth.'

Hence why I said "Mathematically Christ = Truth. Seek Christ in all things."

Or; saying "Seek Christ in all things" is the same as saying "Seek Truth in all things."

I don't believe in objective truth. Read 'The Gateless Gate' and let it wash over you.

The path of moral relativism is a path of this realm, enjoy your stay!

Everything is just as it is.

Not true with moral relativism.

Of course it is. Your judgements/feelings/perceptions about a thing may differ, but that thing is just as it is. Morality is a judgement.

In order to believe in moral relativism and believe that "everything is just as it is," one has to be in a state of cognitive dissonance, because if one is true it excludes the possibility of the other.

If everything is as it is, then there is Truth. If there is Truth then moral relativism is wrong.

This does not require any notion of objective truth. There is no escaping relativism, since you have but two eyes with which to see, and two ears with which to hear. Everything is mediated. We all experience our own reality tunnels, in which everything is just as it is.

I am not arguing that people views can't be morally relative.

Again, there's no escape from relativism. Even if there were some objective morality, you could never know - since it would be indistinguishable from relative morality.

We can move closer to it through observation and it can be objectively measured.

How can morality be measured?

The results can be measured in how things manifest after changes are made.

How do we evaluate the goodness or badness of how things manifest? And how far into the future do we look? and how broad should our search be? I don't think your idea is reasonable.

Metrics such as: lifespan, wealth, hunger, criminality, etc. All measurable all a result of our collective adherence (or divergence) to Truth.

Those are so vague as to be meaningless. And what timespan are we looking at here?

Vague? Meaningless? Timespan?

Now you are just making arguments to make arguments.

Let's say I perform action A. We want to evaluate the morality of that action, so we look at the repercussions. How long do we look? Any action will have consequences that ripple out into eternity, so clearly we have to draw a line somewhere. Do we wait a day? A week? A decade? A millennium? And what if that action causes one group of people to suffer, but another to prosper? There are so many problems with this system.

It would be reliant primarily on which metric you were measuring.

problems

Variables.

There are infinitely many variables, so this algorithm is not computable.
But the bigger problem is that this assumes we already have some objective moral truth (the very thing we're trying to define) since we need it to judge the 'goodness' or 'badness' of all of the infinite outcomes of any given action.

None of the wave functions will collapse without observation.

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

But in order for the creator to create something, that thing would need to be somewhere and somewhen - or else it simply cannot exist as it would be nowhere and no-when which just arent.

If time, space, matter, gravity, are all constructs that we exist within, do you even have a capacity for understanding what something that lives outside of those boundaries looks like?

Something outside of time and matter?

Additionally, how do you figure life evolved from non-life, does that make very much sense?

If a creator doesn't require a creator, then why does the cosmos? You need to address that.

How does nothing explode into something?

How does life evolve from non-life?

Where does the information come from? DNA is highly organized and complex information, where does the organization come from?

I might be genuinely confused how this all makes sense

As far as the cosmos needing a Creator, who is to say how the Creator was Created before space and time existed? However I think even modern scientists agree that time and gravity and matter didn't exist at all in the same way prior to the big bang. I see too much information and physical laws perfectly hung to imagine it's all random chance.

Do you think the human body is random chance? Isn't it interesting that culture as we know it has only been around for 7,000 of the last 4,400,000,000 years? Does that really make sense? Clearly something happened, something changed.

Abiogenesis and evolution are all that are needed. It begins with the first self-replicating molecule, which catalyzes the creation of many copies of itself. Some of these copies grow in length, or join with other molecules to produce yet more complex ones. This all happens by chance - but because these structures are self-replicating, there are many, many rolls of the dice. Evolution takes over, and increasingly complex organisms develop.

There's no need for a creator, since it is entirely plausible that the cosmos has always existed - that it has no beginning.

Do you think the human body is random chance?

I think that humans evolved from simpler organisms.

&#x200B;

Isn't it interesting that culture as we know it has only been around for 7,000 of the last 4,400,000,000 years? Does that really make sense?

I don't see what is so peculiar about this (though human culture is actually much older than that). We as a species became more intelligent in response to environmental pressures, and more numerous. We began to cooperate more, and language evolved. Culture emerged. No magic necessary.

&#x200B;

What is so 'perfect' about it? Can you define perfect in this sense? Besides, information is constantly changing.

I'm talking about the way physical laws fit together, like the fact that nuclear fusion can exist in outerspace sustainably and then that keeps me warm during the day or the idea that time can be modulated by intense gravity or the idea that matter can be warped by intense gravity. I'm just amazed at how things fit together.

But in addition to that, there is also the "goldilocks zone" where everything is just right for life. The thickness of the earth's crust, the distance from sun to earth, the thickness of the atmosphere, the hydrolic cycle, all these things amaze me. But I guess they amaze many scientists as well.

Do you think there is a symbiotic relationship between plants and animals and how do you figure one survived without the other if they evolved at generally different times? Not just pollination concerns, but things like CO2 <--> O2 balance?

Abiogenesis and evolution are all that are needed.

Has either one of these ever been observed in all of history? I agree with you that adaptation occurs, we can see it in finches or fruit flies or whatever. But has anybody witnessed an animal becoming a new kind of animal? A finch may develop a longer or shorter beak based on environmental pressures, but when has a finch ever become a bunny? There's actually zero observational proof that this or anything like it has ever occurred.

Ever since Darwin, evolutionists have almost universally maintained that the supposed change from one basic type of organism to another occurred slowly, gradually, in tiny steps. The fossils did not support this idea, and Darwin blamed incompleteness of the record. Others repeated this excuse, right up to the present day, including Richard Dawkins, the ‘archbishop of atheism’ at Oxford University in the UK.

Gould and Niles Eldredge, a former student of Gould, actually faced up to the fossil record and decided it did not support the gradualist dogma. They argued strongly against some of the classical claims of gradual transformation. In doing this they were inadvertently agreeing with creationists. Naturally, creationists used their admissions.

In 1977 Gould wrote,

‘The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. … to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study.’

In 1980 Gould said,

‘The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.

I might guess that adaptation is part of the grand design and that evolution of "new kinds" of animals has never actually been observed and is therefore not scientific.

I'm talking about the way physical laws fit together, like the fact that nuclear fusion can exist in outerspace sustainably and then that keeps me warm during the day or the idea that time can be modulated by intense gravity or the idea that matter can be warped by intense gravity. I'm just amazed at how things fit together.

You could change any of these laws, however, and everything would still perfectly 'fit together' - it just wouldn't look like our universe. And life arises in a so-called 'goldilocks zone' simply because it (as far as we understand) would be difficult or impossible to arise anywhere else in a universe governed by the laws this one is governed by. That is not to say that life cannot exist in other universes that look nothing like our own (though the life would be unlike any we know as well). Any conceivable universe is 'perfect' in this regard - in that everything 'fits together'.

We can reason about evolution based on our understanding of the constituent processes. Same too for abiogenesis. Sure, there's a possibility that we don't have the full picture (in fact we almost certainly do not) but it is absolutely the most coherent explanation for all observational data. Do you have an alternate theory that better explains the diversity of life on Earth, that is rooted in observation and deduction?

Everywhere I look in nature I see anticipatory design. Did you know a giraffe has insanely high blood pressure, as is necessary to get oxygenated blood up to its brain? Makes sense right?

But when the giraffe bends over to drink, this could cause it to pass out due to that super high blood pressure. There's actually a valve that temporarily shuts off blood flow when the giraffe bends down to drink.

But this would cause the giraffe to pass out too, because its brain needs blood. Makes sense right? So there's a sponge like material that gets filled with extra blood and provides the brain oxygen while the giraffe is drinking and the blood valve is closed.

Then there is another valve that slowly opens as the giraffe lifts its head so that blood flow can gradually resume from the circulatory system.

The interesting thing about this is how many different systems are involved here. It isn't just one "adaptation" like a longer beak that instantly helps the next generation. These are multiple systems being worked on simultaneously - none of these so called "adaptations" would offer ANY evolutionary advantage unless they ALL arrived on the scene at the exact same time.

To me that suggests intelligence design, which is apparent in all of nature if we look hard enough.

But just for the sake of discussion, let's hypothetically say that such a giraffe was born, from a random mutation, with ALL of these extra features in one generation, even though it is unlikely. Remember, they all need to be present simultaneously for it to assist the giraffe in staying alive, so it's unlikely for all these mutations to come in separately over the years. So this giraffe mutates and has the necessary features to have a long neck and to drink water without passing out and still get blood to its brain when standing up. Now it needs to find a compatible female AND have the adaptive genes dominantly express themselves every single time?

Does that make ANY sense? And there is no transition fossil whatsoever to show this giraffe's ancestors gradually coming onto the scene without these features?

I posit that evolution really doesn't explain species writ large. The only thing that exists is "micro-evolution" i.e. adaptation. Small changes, but a bird stays a bird and a giraffe stays a giraffe. The large changes have anticipatory design and are part of a greater design. Just my opinion.

A giraffe didn't come out of nowhere. It, like all organisms, lies on a continuum. The neck likely gradually lengthened over time. The valves are adaptations that were necessary for it to grow longer. I don't see anything here that sufficient time wouldn't allow for.

In your opinion, what are the best examples of transition fossils?

From what organism?

I suppose giraffes since we are already talking about them, but your pick is actually O.K. with me.

When we're talking about a fossil that was dug up out of the dirt, how do we go about proving that:

1) it had kids

2) those kids survived

3) genetic lineage to a surviving species

Is it just because the similarities seem like they would fit?

I'm not an expert, so you'll have to bear with me here. But yes, my understanding is that the fossil record is used to demonstrate those 'small changes' you mentioned accumulating over very long periods of time. It's imperfect, of course (we cannot peer back into time with perfect accuracy, naturally). But we can deduce that species are descended from others based on the age of the remains we find and their similarities. When we consider the likelihood of a particular theory being correct, we need to look at the alternatives. Is it possible that a divine being created all of these seeming intermediate organisms and killed them off/hid their remains at just the right time to make it seem as if one evolved from the other? Sure. Is it likelier than the process of natural selection changing the offspring of each organism gradually over time? I'll leave that to you. Since we don't see any experimental evidence of a mechanism that could be employed by such a divine being to create organisms out of thin air, while the theory of evolution is 100% physically possible based on all observational data, I am inclined to believe the latter.

I'm not an expert, so you'll have to bear with me here.

Certainly! You're one of the most chill people I've met recently on reddit and I'm thoroughly enjoying our discussion.

But we can deduce that species are descended from others based on the age of the remains we find and their similarities.

What's the best way to determine age if the fossils are dated by the layers in which they're found and the layers are dated by the fossils which are found in it? Isn't that a bit of circular reasoning?

I might be pretty confused why things like petrified clams are found on the top of mount Everest if layering is true as classically taught.

When it comes to vestigial organs, while it's a good point, it ultimately comes from what I believe is a misunderstanding - again, academia getting stuff wrong through assumptions. The human appendix has served as a textbook example of a vestigial organ thought to have no current function - I was taught this in school. Research has since shown that it serves multiple uses in the human digestive and immune systems and may even have a role in balancing the gut microbiome.

Regarding "Whale Hips" and the so called vestigal legs, those aren't really legs either. Have you seen just how small those are? According to relatively new USC research, those are mounting points for pelvic muscles.

Publishing in the journal Evolution, evolutionary biologists analyzed the sizes of whale reproductive organs, comparing them to whole body and pelvic girdle sizes. They wrote, “Whatever the underlying cause, we hypothesized that species with relatively large [male sexual organs] must have relatively large ischiocavernosus muscles..., which in turn require relatively large pelvic bones to serve as anchors.”

Scientists have not yet observed how these colossal creatures reproduce, but it stands to reason given the great distance between their eyes and reproductive organs that male whales likely need an extra measure of control during the mating process—and bigger pelvic bones lead to increased control. Mathew Dean, of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, co-authored the Evolution report.

Perkins, R. Whale Sex: It’s All in the Hips. USC News Release. Posted on pressroom.usc.edu September 8, 2014, accessed September 30, 2014.

Dines, J.P. et al. Sexual selection targets cetacean pelvic bones. Evolution. Published online before print, September 3, 2014.

Honestly, a bolstered pelvic girdle makes more sense to me than does a whale allegedly coming from this or this

The most telling reason of all for these "vestigial legs" being related to the pelvic floor and related sexual organs and not legs at all? The fact that they're different in modern male and female whales.

The lack of transitional forms in the fossil record was realized by evolutionary whale experts like the late E.J. Slijper: ‘We do not possess a single fossil of the transitional forms between the aforementioned land animals [i.e., carnivores and ungulates] and the whales.’

A lot of the transitional fossils are guesses that are later proven wrong and never corrected. Here is one alleged whale transitional fossil

Top left: Gingerich’s first reconstruction

Bottom left: what he had actually found

Top right: more complete skeleton

Bottom right: more reasonable reconstruction

What happened, and I say this with kindness, is that Darwin proposed a theory for which there was insufficient evidence.

He assumed that the evidence (transition fossils) would be filled in during later generations - I think there's a quote to this effect? In the last 130 years there have been many attempts to do this, and some of them intentional frauds. Like the piltdown man for example. There have been entire skeletons reconstructed from a single pig's tooth and then called another animal, or animal fossils from 20 feet apart in the different layers claimed to be the same skeleton. Even modern atheist palentologists say that "The Lack of transitional fossils is somewhat of a trade secret" (paraphrased from Gould)

Also interesting is that Darwin was a Creationist for the first 40 years of his life and went through a dark period where his faith was shaken for economic reasons and came out the other end essentially believing the pop science of the time, especially Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology book. While it's certainly Darwin's right to believe whatever he wants, I question how much of it he really got right, especially since his assumption was that hard archaeological and fossil proof would arrive after his death. He readily admitted that he couldn't prove everything while he was alive, and just hoped that the situation would change.

As for why the entire world has embraced the theory, well, it's a pretty nice idea to imagine that we don't owe allegiance to anything or anyone greater than ourselves and that morality is subjective and not objective. But is that really true?

What's the best way to determine age if the fossils are dated by the layers in which they're found and the layers are dated by the fossils which are found in it? Isn't that a bit of circular reasoning?

No, we use relative and radiometric dating to determine the age of a fossil.

I might be pretty confused why things like petrified clams are found on the top of mount Everest.

It's simple - those mountains rose up out of the ocean after the 'clams' died.

&#x200B;

Honestly, a bolstered pelvic girdle makes more sense to me than does a whale allegedly coming from this or this

Can you articulate why? Besides, there are countless examples of vestigial organs. And a vestigial organ does not have to serve no purpose, only that the purpose has changed over time. An example is the tailbones that humans have that are exactly homologous to the tailbones of closely related primates. Those bones serve as an anchor point for some tendons now. Here's a list of vestigial organs in just one species, ours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality

And again, we can see in the fossils traces of these organs diminishing over time, as one species evolves into another. Take a look at a giraffe's laryngeal nerve - it is to my mind clear evidence that this organism was not 'designed', as it makes a 15' detour on the wrong side of its body. As I said, I could provide countless examples of these abnormalities.

This raises an interesting question - did your intelligent designer kill off all of the intermediate species and make new ones that looked much like the former, or did it create all of the species at once and then manipulate the fossil record to make it appear as if they arrived and died off in succession? Did humans appear out of thin air just as Homo heidelbergensis was dying off? There are so many holes here. These, I think, are the questions you really need to address.

But is that really true?

Even if somehow evolution were disproved, how would that then require that an intelligent designer is required? It could certainly be some other mechanism of natural law that produced the species. And furthermore, how it would it mean that "we owe allegiance to something or someone greater than ourselves and that morality is objective and not subjective"? That's an enormous leap to make, without any reasoning behind it.

That wikipedia article is rough. It's kinda just shoe-horning in vestigiality. It's basically saying something similar to what you said - because we don't understand the purpose right now, something in the design is "wrong" and "inefficient" and surely us smarties could have done a better job designing an animal or human!

Maybe a simpler answer is that things are in the right place and we simply do not have as advanced knowledge as we think we do. To me, that satisfies Occam's razor much better.

It even gives examples of this on the page! Early on, the pineal, thymus, and pituatary gland were though to be vestigial and we now know just how false that is. You wouldn't even be you without these three. But the people who originated this theory certainly thought they were pointless because there was no apparent function to their design.

In modern humans, the vermiform appendix is a vestige of a redundant organ that in ancestral species had digestive functions, much as it still does in extant species in which intestinal flora hydrolyze cellulose and similar indigestible plant material

This was already covered, but NO! The appendix is not redundant, it is hugely important in the immune system. Just because it doesn't directly help with digestion does not mean it is pointless. The appendix is now thought to act as a reservoir of life-saving beneficial gut bacteria that can be released to help repopulate the colon. This has health effects and even cognitive effects.

The problem here is arrogance and our imperfect knowledge as humans.

Wisdom teeth are vestigial? I use those guys every day! Guess what, they chew food just fine.

The plantaris muscle is composed of a thin muscle belly and a long thin tendon. The muscle belly is approximately 5–10 centimetres (2–4 inches) long, and is absent in 7–10% of the human population. It has some weak functionality in moving the knee and ankle but is generally considered redundant and is often used as a source of tendon for grafts.

Again, this is just an assumption that because right now we do not know the purpose of the muscle, it's essentially pointless. I would posit that it's there for a reason and I would guess that a peak athelete wouldn't perform as well without it.

Another intriguing example of human vestigiality occurs in the tongue, specifically the chondroglossus muscle. In a morphological study of 100 Japanese cadavers, it was found that 86% of fibers identified were solid and bundled in the appropriate way to facilitate speech and mastication. The other 14% of fibers were short, thin and sparse – nearly useless, and thus concluded to be of vestigial origin

How much do you want to bet we find a use for those other 14% in the next 50-100 years? We'll be changing our stance. This happens every single time we think a part of the body is pointless.

Extra nipples or breasts sometimes appear along the mammary lines of humans, appearing as a remnant to mammalian ancestors who possessed more than two nipples or breasts.[67][68]

....Seriously? Does Polydactyly mean that humans used to have 6 fingers or 2 thumbs? NO! It is a far simpler explanation to say that the formative tissues were split into 2 by developmental pressures, like a cell that didn't split all the way during mitosis and got stuck.

These explanations are almost silly to me. They're working backwards from the theory that they want to be true and then trying to make the data fit.

No, we use relative and radiometric dating to determine the age of a fossil.

What's interesting is how often this is super wrong. Dinosaur bones were recently tested and came back at an estimate of 6000-10000 years old, because the submitters hid the fact that they were dinosaur bones. After the results were received, they shared the fact that they were dinosaur bones, and the same bones were re-tested and came back at millions of years old. They use guess-work based on what layer the stuff is found in to peg down a neighborhood date, and when the layer is intentionally hidden from the testers, the results are wrong. I can get you lots of sources on this if you need them.

Teeth from living animals have come back at 20k-40k years old. Wrong!

We actually have no way of verifying the results of these tests. We have no idea how old a fossil is, and we think we know how fast a certain isotope degrades, but there are all kinds of environmental factors that could be affecting it. How about let me know if you need 50+ examples of huge mistakes in radiocarbon dating. It would take a long time for me to type, but I could provide them.

Homo Sapien Sapien doesn't make much sense to me, in general.

If evolution is true, I wonder at the greeks and romans. Judging by their poetry, their writing, their science, they are similar to me in almost every way, perhaps even my superior in some ways. i.e. there is no appreciable difference between them and I in the last 2,000 years.

But go back 10,000 years and humans are scratching around in the dirt trying to figure out that a seed turns into a plant? (agriculture) It makes no sense to me. The jump to modern human is simply way way too fast for these gradual changes we are discussing. Something Happened IMO.

The official story stinks.

This raises an interesting question - did your intelligent designer kill off all of the intermediate species and make new ones that looked much like the former, or did it create all of the species at once and then manipulate the fossil record to make it appear as if they arrived and died off in succession? Did humans appear out of thin air just as Homo heidelbergensis was dying off? Do you think that Homo sapiens lived alongside Homo habilis? There are so many holes here.

&#x200B;

Even if somehow evolution were disproved, how would that then mean that an intelligent designer is required? It could certainly be some other mechanism of natural law that produced the species. And furthermore, how it would it mean that "we owe allegiance to something or someone greater than ourselves and that morality is objective and not subjective"? That's an enormous leap to make, without any reasoning behind it.

&#x200B;

I'm much more interested in your response to these, since we can go both ways on vestigial organs.

did your intelligent designer kill off all of the intermediate species and make new ones that looked much like the former,

Well doesn't it make sense if hypothetically all life was made by the Same Guy we'd see repeating signatures and types of strategies used?

From what I can tell, the top part of this picture is what evolutionist believe and the bottom is what creationists believe. Visual Aid

I really don't see anything unreasonable about the latter; there's simply more origins but it's otherwise the EXACT same idea. However the latter also matches what we see in paleontology much more closely. Species seem to pop up out of nowhere and lack transitional fossils.

Did humans appear out of thin air just as Homo heidelbergensis was dying off?

I mean, are you proposing a situation where a Homo Heidelbergenis had a freak mutation occur that gave rise to Homo Sapien Sapien, and then the Homo Sapiens killed them all off? Or that the H.Hedelbergenis simply couldn't survive anymore?

I don't really know what is going on with the so-called ancestors of humanity, as most of my historical study is much more recent - say from the beginning of writing or so. But you never answered my question either - if you excavate a fossil, how do you prove that fossil had 1) children 2) that survived 3) share a direct lineage with subsequent fossils?

You can't. If this were a court of law, the judge would throw that out. It's impossible in many cases, say for a male fossil, to prove that it had children or that those children survived. It's basically conjecture!

Now, I get where you are coming from. These are the types of arguments that didn't really convince me when I was an atheist. I'm not sure what changed with me. But human beings evolving from essentially nothing by random chance just seems so unlikely to me now.

As far as why I believe in an intelligent designer? Well have you ever tried intense prayer and fasting? Have you ever sought for a designer yourself? Do you think that a scientist can understand LSD simply by studying those who take it? Doesn't that scientist need to actually take LSD himself in order to 100% comprehend what's going on with that drug?

We might be reaching an impasse to what academia can discover here, and entering experiential territory, that can only be discussed by direct experience.

P.S. does this mean you don't want 50+ examples of radio carbon dating being wrong?

But human beings evolving from essentially nothing by random chance just seems so unlikely to me now.

I don't dispute this. But we live in a very big universe that is billions of years old, one of possibly infinitely many universes. Seems unlikely to me that life wouldn't evolve!

Did humans live side-by-side with all of the other humanoids we've discovered? Did all of the species we have fossil records of exist at the same time, or were some created after others? Why don't we see this happening now (species being created out of thin air? By what mechanism could a creator produce new creatures out of thin air? That seems even less than unlikely - it seems impossible, based on everything we observe about energy and matter.

Okay, so now we're at this point in the discussion. Besides the speed of light being an alleged constant (which it is not according to science.com) do we have any way to measure the age of the universe? Isn't it true that time itself can be dilated by gravity? How do you personally know the age of the universe?

Did all of the species we have fossil records of exist at the same time, or were some created after others?

Would either of these be problematic for a Creator? I doubt it.

Why don't we see this happening now (species being created out of thin air?

Google says between 10,000 and 20,000 species are discovered each year. Not saying those are all created today, but it certainly dismisses your point that this doesn't or cannot happen based on observational evidence.

Just in the time you and I have been talking since yesterday between 5 and 10 new species have been discovered. So, are you sure this is the point you want to make?

By what mechanism could a creator produce new creatures out of thin air?

Is it intuitive at all to a bronze age human 3,500 years ago that everything necessary for human life exists in the dirt? I posit NO, it is not intuitive or obvious. Yet, modern science reveals that EVERY element necessary for life is available in the soil. Where the bodies come from might not be an issue for someone with mastery over chemistry and physicals and electricity. Where the breath and where the consciousness come from might be more apt questions.

P.S. I added a little bit to the post above this one. Did you know Charles Darwin doubted his own theory?

“Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms.” -Charles Darwin

He adds:

“To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.” - Charles Darwin

He continues:

“I concluded that this great group had been suddenly developed at the commencement of the tertiary series This was a sore trouble to me, adding as I thought one more instance of the abrupt appearance of a great group of species. ”

“The case most frequently insisted on by paleontologists of the apparently sudden appearance of a whole group of species, is that of the teleostean fishes, low down in the Chalk period.”

“On the sudden appearance of groups of Allied Species in the lowest known fossilferous strata: There is another and allied difficulty, which is much graver. I allude to the manner in which numbers of species of the same group suddenly appear in the lowest known fossiliferous rocks.”

“Consequently, if my theory be true, it is indisputable that before the lowest Silurian stratum was deposited, long periods elapsed, as long as, or probably far longer than, the whole interval from the Silurian age to the present day; and that during these vast, yet quite unknown, periods of time, the world swarmed with living creatures. To the question why we do not find records of these vast primordial periods, I can give no satisfactory answer.”

“The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained.”

“The several difficulties here discussed, namely our not finding in the successive formations infinitely numerous transitional links between the many species which now exist or have existed; the sudden manner in which whole groups of species appear in our European formations; the almost entire absence, as at present known, of fossiliferous formations beneath the Silurian strata, are all undoubtedly of the gravest nature.”

-Charles Darwin

The speed of light is not slowing down, as you claim.

I agree that we are at an impasse. It's been interesting, stranger!

Wait, I linked you 3 articles yesterday about the speed of light slowing down, right? Should I just take your word for it that it's not slowing down? For how many lifetimes have we been observing the speed of light and how do you know it hasn't slowed down over the last billion years?

Are we really at an impasse if Darwin seems to be joining my side saying that the theory is improbable and plagued with problems that he hopes will be fixed long after his death?

I contend that it is more likely that life evolved on Earth than was created by magic. You contend the opposite. I'm not sure how to get past there, since I wholeheartedly believe that what you propose is physically impossible based on all available evidence.

As for the speed of light, light 'structured' in a particular way will move more slowly through a vacuum, but this could only mean that the universe is older than we predict. But we don't need that when we calculate the age of the Earth, anyway.

As for Darwin, it's fine for a theory to be incomplete. That's central to science. But it is the most complete explanation available. An intelligent creator is 'the god of the gaps' - a god can be used to explain away any hole in a theory. It's not particularly useful or interesting. A better understanding of evolution would enhance our understanding of biology, for one. It would also have practical benefit in the design of optimization algorithms, for one example. What does belief in a creator allow us to more accurately predict/control/etc?

If I create a computer, am I doing it with magic or scientific principles of engineering? Yet to two electrons inside the computer, they have absolutely zero capacity to ever know for sure that I, a human, created it. one electron might even imply that the other electron is crazy for saying humans exist at all.

Brother you might be the one saying life evolved from magic if you think it went from rocks and minerals to consciousness by random chance. There is no way for the DNA information to structure itself intelligently without a consciousness planning and guiding it.

As for the speed of light, light 'structured' in a particular way will move more slowly through a vacuum,

No, we're not discussing light being artificially slowed down by mediums. We're talking about the speed of light slowing down over time. The articles clearly make the distinction. https://www.livescience.com/29111-speed-of-light-not-constant.html

The size and age of the universe are in question, and it's not based on the medium the light is passing through. How do you have ANY IDEA what the speed of light was millions or billions of years ago?

For example, the earth's magnetic field is dropping by a stiff amount, almost 5-10% per 100 years. Some people are estimating much higher. This is extremely problematic for the age of the earth and is not sufficiently explained by any observable phenomena.

How do you know the speed of light doesn't have some sort of decay built in? How would you even know the alleged decay rate? And what would it do to the universe if the speed of light was much faster closer to the creation event than it is now?

As for Darwin, it's fine for a theory to be incomplete.

Pretty sure Darwin's theory is simply wrong, but okay. 130 years is plenty of time to find evidence. There isn't any. Even all the evidence you posted in this thread was easily refuted, although neither of us are really experts on this. You just glossed over the parts where you made mistakes too, like "Whale Legs".

What does belief in a creator allow us to more accurately predict/control/etc?

Where we come from, why we're here, and where we're going in the future sounds pretty sweet to me.

Ultimately I view you as a friend and brother and I just think you're a bit confused. Academia does that to even the best of us. The idea that we started from nothing and we're getting better all the time is kinda poisonous. I might guess that we started out pretty frickin sweet and we're constantly getting worse.

Anyway don't hold it against me, but how about, think long and hard about this. Is it really magic for you to make a circuitboard? Of course not. Why would it be magic for someone that lives outside of time and space to make biological circuits?

one electron might even imply that the other electron is crazy for saying humans exist at all.

Correct! How can you prove otherwise? You can't - you rely on blind faith that we are living in god's computer simulation. What experiment could an electron perform to determine that it is in a computer?

Brother you might be the one saying life evolved from magic if you think it went from rocks and minerals to consciousness by random chance. There is no way for the DNA information to structure itself intelligently without a consciousness planning and guiding it.

I think this demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of the process. There's no breach in the laws of physics required - simply natural selection and mutation. As for abiogenesis, it didn't jump from rocks to consciousness - that's a pretty silly strawman, no offense.

How do you know the speed of light doesn't have some sort of decay built in? How would you even know the alleged decay rate? And what would it do to the universe if the speed of light was much faster closer to the creation event than it is now?

We have no reason to believe these things. Are proposing that everything is true until proven otherwise? Again, we go by what we observe. That's literally all that we have. And what you describe here is no observable.

Pretty sure Darwin's theory is simply wrong, but okay. 130 years is plenty of time to find evidence. There isn't any.

There's mountains of evidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent

You choose to believe things without evidence. I do not.

Well, whether we agree on everything or not, please don't doubt that I got some love for you and enjoyed our discussion. I hope I didn't come across as rude - but I'll admit I got REALLY into this discussion!

Ditto!

But just for the sake of discussion, let’s hypothetically say that such a giraffe was born, from a random mutation, with ALL of these extra features in one generation, even though it is unlikely.

Yes, it’s unlikely and no one claims that it happened.

Remember, they all need to be present simultaneously for it to assist the giraffe in staying alive, so it’s unlikely for all these mutations to come in separately over the years.

No it’s not, and there are numerous known examples of this happening. You’re basically arguing from lack of imagination.

So this giraffe mutates and has the necessary features to have a long neck and to drink water without passing out and still get blood to its brain when standing up. Now it needs to find a compatible female AND have the adaptive genes dominantly express themselves every single time?

Again, your entire premise is wrong. No biologist claims it happens this way.

And there is no transition fossil whatsoever to show this giraffe’s ancestors gradually coming onto the scene without these features?

Yes, in fact there are a huge number of fossils from transitional species.

Just my opinion.

The scientific method is much better than opinion. Opinion didn’t create the internet.

I like you

Bro lol. Adaptations are the minute stepping-stones that result in evolution, it just takes millions of years. We have seen animals adapt, yes, since those are the minor changes that serendipitously aid the organism. Over millions of years these adaptations accumulate to noticeable phenotypic change.

Likely example-
1. Drought causes foliage to become scarce in Africa.
2. Gazelles with slightly longer legs and necks can reach more leaves.
3. The tall keep surviving and breeding to make even taller ones able to eat more leaves up high.
4. Pretty soon the physical limit to height [neck length] is met due to a need for more oxygen to the brain.
5. 1 tall Gazelle right below the physical limit luckily got genes for higher blood pressure. Woohoo! His kids will likely have that too and he able to grow even taller

Adaptation + millions of years >>>>> evolution of new species.

I know what survival of the fittest is. My problem is we've never observed this using the scientific method. The fossil record is missing transitional fossils, admitted by secular scientists.

We have found a substantial amount of 'transitional' species' fossils, though. And we've barely scratched the surface to look; there is so much uncharted territory in the earth. It's more probable that the other transitional fossils are simply still hiding, or were destroyed by the elements.

Hi! What do you think the best example of a transitional fossil is?

now this thread is getting good, I love thinking about this shit. why does the world exist is a great book that addresses the question of why there is something instead of nothing.

What is consciousness? An illusion? How does consciousness (reflecting upon oneself as a separate, distinct entity) arise from dust? That seems more difficult for me to explain than to acknowledge that complexity of life argues easily for an intelligent designer. I don't need to join a church, or become religiously committed, in order to recognize it. (But, life is short, and I know that those of faith won't be dissuaded and those of anti-faith will likewise hold their viewpoint. It is just interesting to have the discussions.)

Consciousness is simply a property of certain objects. There doesn't have to be anything magical about it - it's a feedback loop. A sufficiently sophisticated machine made out of bicycle parts could be conscious (this machine would likely be larger than our solar system, but you get the idea).

If I showed you a time piece having hundreds of intricate moving parts (none being superfluous, each with a minuscule function to contribute) that work in concert to track the passage of time, and I answered, "No one designed or made it. It just IS." to your question, "Who made that?", you would rightly be credulous about my response. That is what is know as intuitive reasoning. Atheist strain the limits of intuitive reasoning to say their is no designer or creator of mankind.

Well actually, I would say that any time piece (even the most intricate) emerged by necessity according to natural law, since the human who crafted it is a swirling cloud of particles, just like the clock. All things emerge in this way - the clock ultimately had no true creator (in the ontological sense), as the human who cut the gears was taking place in a cosmic dance that stretches backwards and forwards into eternity. So no, I wouldn't be incredulous at all. Everything 'just is'.

To escape the reasoning-loop that either (1) everything had to be created by something (which is a loop that never can resolve itself), else (2) everything is just eternal and always is, there comes the 3rd option that escapes both notions: the theory of the 'Prime Mover'. The initial, eternal, unchanging causal agent underlying everything else.

I used to be a strict materialist in my view of physical reality. I thought as you did that all matter simply always existed. I made incredibly well-reasoned arguments on my position. But I soon realized that the evidence I tried to present in my arguments were based on the same sort of 'FAITH' that a theologian must use in order to buttress his viewpoint of creation.

Matters of faith cannot be resolve by intellectual arguments or empirical-based scientific methods. They are beyond the reach of proof, which is why they fall under "Faith". I understood that, for me, it is much more highly probable that it is impossible to build the human body from a random assemblage of atoms. I do not doubt that it is built from the same building blocks of reality (atoms) as everything else, but I am certain that the liver--which without I could no longer be called a living human--has limited functions and a role that contributes to the body's ability to be something other than a decaying pile of atoms. And that it is this dedicated and separate purpose assigned to each constituent organ and cell of the body that points to intelligent design.

For example, let us assume that after 100 trillion eons matter somehow stumbled into this amazing assemblage of 'life'. Can we humans assemble atoms in the same fashion, and create life? And if there is no intelligent design, why then after the 100 trillion eon mega-jackpot luck of life being randomly created is there this mystery:

That life did not starve moments after it was created. Naturally randomness also stumbled upon an assemblage of atoms that were suited as nutrients for the new living thing. And then there is reproduction. Having luckily stumbled upon this new living thing, random universe created a 2nd for procreation, or the living thing just happened to have the 'instinct' or capacity to replicate itself...without that being 'designed' into it? And the reproduction of the genders...? Why two genders? The complexity of the two distinct reproductive systems being separate, different, but perfectly adapted to only work with each other in the propagation of the living things? Yep... at some point I just started feeling like I was arguing against probability because I had a strong desire and prejudice against believing in a spiritual creator. That is why I know longer hold the same faith that you hold now.

I do not share your belief that abiogenesis and evolution are insufficient for explaining the emergence, proliferation, and complexity of life.

Not to be malicious to Von Neumann: You quote him to say, "... Therefore, if by any peculiar accident there should ever be one of them, from there on the rules of probability do not apply, and there will be many of them, at least if the milieu is reasonable."

How is it that the rules of probability are suspended (or lessened), only as a result that something incredibly improbable has occurred?

The odds of 2 improbable outcomes to occur is compounding / exponential to the overall probability that an ideal outcome could occur. Consider factorials your mathematical proof.

But as I have said, correctly, about human life: (paraphrasing: The organs of the body: the body does not survive without the organ, and the organ does not survive without the whole body, working systemically. How does a liver derive from the primordial ooze? How does the heart, and brain--from amoebas? And if they could evolve, how do these separate living entities come together into a single living 'colony', standing upright, reflecting upon its own existence, loving, reproducing, and pulling ore from the earth to create automobiles?

My only point has been this: The 'Materialist' ideas of the origins of life are far less probable and sillier, frankly, than the Theologians. Neither of us can 'prove' our case. In that we are 100% on equal and unyielding grounds. On that we are invested in faith. That has been the point all along. As I said, please believe as you wish. Make the best arguments for your beliefs. But let's not pretend they are anything more than highly improbably beliefs.

How is it that the rules of probability are suspended (or lessened), only as a result that something incredibly improbable has occurred?

It only takes one self-replicator for there to be many. If, by chance, atoms smash into each other to form a molecule that catalyzes its own synthesis, then there will be much more of that chemical even if the initial conditions were improbable.

How does a liver derive from the primordial ooze? How does the heart, and brain--from amoebas?

Evolution.

And if they could evolve, how do these separate living entities come together into a single living 'colony', standing upright, reflecting upon its own existence, loving, reproducing, and pulling ore from the earth to create automobiles?

Again, evolution. If you are genuinely curious, I can point you to resources that will step you through the story from the very beginning. I refuse to educate on this matter here - it is not worth my time when the information is freely available to you from myriad sources.

My only point has been this: The 'Materialist' ideas of the origins of life are far less probable and sillier, frankly, than the Theologians.

I disagree. Abiogenesis and evolution are rooted in observable phenomena. Nothing about the creation myth is.

&#x200B;

Thank you for the thoughtful debate. You are a smart dude. I apologize however that i cannot read the thoughtout response you provided. When you begin with atoms smashing together to result in, ultimately, life...that is whete you lost me.

I have faith....just not enough to get me to believe in the probabilities and complex design that your trying to propose by random collisions. Best regards on your journey for Truth. We are on the moving toward that same destination, just currently walking different paths.

Something that lives outside of time and space would not "look" like anything because the way something "looks" is actually how that thing reflects light off of itself and how your brain processes it. If the creator lives outside of time and space, then again, he is nowhere and nowhen which just isnt. One cannot simply refer to a place that is defined by not being, having characteristics of, and not having the dimensions of a place. A creator would have to create some where and somewhen even if those when and where are "outside" our own. Its super meta.

If you were a 3d person visiting a 2d world, then how hard would it be for you to stick your finger into one place, then pull it out, and stick it in another place? To them it might look like 2 drastically different locations on that plane, but to you, it's easy to do both locations without moving very much.

Additionally, what would your finger look like to them? It might be totally incomprehensible - it would look like a point expanding into a circle when you dip that finger in. So even if a 3d being (you) made yourself known to a 2d world, your true shape and form would be totally incomprehensible and your abilities would seem mystical, simply by utilizing the extra dimension you were born with.

Now imagine something that lives on something like the 10th dimension, or whatever the highest one hypothetically is. He can pierce down into all lower dimensions, and His abilities seem strange to us because He's beyond time, and when we "see" Him we get a really poor picture of His true shape because we only see what can be rendered in our 3d world.

I think i follow what you mean here. But we dont know and have absolutely NO indication of there being any beings living in lower or upper dimensions. And even that idea of living "in" these higher dimensions doesnt really make sense as our 3d meaning of "in" only requires and is based on our 3d world.

If you think about it in a very general physical way, 3 dimensions is the least amount of dimensions needed to have space within. So, since space is needed to exist, 3d is the first level where things do exist as 2d cannot "contain" anything. Like evolution, the universe uses the path of least resistance and I would guess stops at 3. Without indication of higher (or lower) beings this debate is pointless.

Some flies only live for 24 hours and to us that is not enough to do anything. But to a fly, 24 hours is a lifetime. It would be hard for a fly to comprehend a human lifetime. You see? you dont have to reach into other dimensions to get the answer you just have to think about how infinite our own dimensions are due to relativity. Yay science!

Well if you have X,Y,Z coordinates, which I'm pretty sure I agree with, then we at least live in 4 dimensions, because tonight it is very unlikely that you'll be at those exact same coordinates. So now we have X,Y,Z + Time

So pretty quickly we can see that even in just the physical reality, there's more than 3 dimensions, and modern scientists are starting to believe that there's 10 or 11. How interesting if they agree with some ancient sages like Maimonides who said that there are 6 micro dimensions above our own physical ones?

Revelation 6:14 might make a lot more sense in this context:

And heaven departed like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.

We might look at our dimension as being thick and having substance, but we can easily roll something 2d up. I wonder if it will be that simple and that easy to roll up our 3d universe as well.

I guess Time will tell.

I left time out of my response intentionally as i was only referring to the physical dimensions that all matter exists within, as then those physical dimensions exist within time. But i did not specify this and apologize. But a piece of paper is not 2 dimensional it only appears that way due to relativity. If you were shrunken down to the size of a microscopic organism, the 3rd dimension of a piece of paper becomes readily apparent. My point being again that there is no need to reach for an answer outside of our universe simply for the sake of abstract thinking. There are indeed beings that we don't understand but they are not in some other dimension, every surface you touch is absolutely covered in them. Its not some crazy inter dimensional being, its just something so incomprehensibly small (or large) that we can see them and will never be able to understand them on the level we are referring to. I guess all im trying to say is that the most simple answer that actually answers the question is usually the right one.

No one can answer that question: "Who created the Creator?" The question makes an errant presumption:

"Creation" / destruction of a thing, is a concept that applies to the material (physical reality). In Physical Reality we see things begin, live, and end. All things seem to be temporal. However, its possible there is a parallel reality (Spiritual) where that cycle of beginning and ending is mostly foreign.

The concept of "creation" as we understand it (via experiential learning) is not the same concept in the separate reality (spiritual reality).

Then comes Faith: a person either accepts that there is a spiritual realm on faith, or they do not. Faith is based on, in part, a type of 'intelligence': the ability to know without proof. It is a type of knowledge--like all forms of knowledge--that varies in its capacity from person to person.

You cannot apply the an understanding of Physical Laws to a reality that is beyond the Physical Realm. So to ask the question, "Who created the Creator?", you are asking a question that makes little sense.

From whence the spiritual realm?

If they are two separate realities, they do not necessarily share anything in common. You leap to a potentially false conclusion: that because there can be static eternity in one reality, there can be static eternity in the other. The fact is, however, I am typing in the reality we share. We know things about this reality, because we experience it/cannot escape it. Rather than trying circular reasoning, why not acknowledge that we both know that everything made in material reality is temporal and that there is a Law of Entropy governing this reality? I am having to repeat my point since it was circumnavigated in your reply: If one can imagine that there is more to the greater reality than what can be evaluated by human senses (i.e., the 'Metaphysical'), then one can imagine, too, that that subset of the greater reality is different than the one we presently know. And that leads to the notion that there could be a reality where 'rust and moth does not corrupt'. This notion, naturally, is counter-intuitive. Which is why the deeply perceptive mind, like Newton's and Einstein's, reasons that their must be a Great Architect behind the mathematical complexities undergirding physical reality and consciousness. --- but believe as you wish. I am very satisfied with my conclusions and don't require any confirmation from others. To each his own.

I believe that the observable universe is an infinitesimally small bubble in an ocean of infinitely many others - a multiverse encompassing all possible realities that has always existed and always will.

Which, to be fair, is the same as someone believing there is a God. You choose to believe the multiverse, and that it has always existed. Not certain why, then, you could be critical in your dismissal of those that believe in God and a separate 'bubble' of reality, the Spiritual realm. Both beliefs are beliefs of personal faith.

I just think that it makes the most sense, because to my mind anything else would be arbitrary (why would this universe exist, and not every other universe?). I don't know, of course. And I don't think about that very much, since it has no bearing on my lived experience.

Im the creator of my own simulation

Every point within an infinite realm is it's center. We may literally be the center of creation.

Our observation collapses the wave function, which "affixes" our reality.

This is why moral relativism creates more chaos in the world; the observers refuse to measure the wave function, thus fail to collapse it. By instilling a society of moral relativism you are disempowering others from their co-creation.

Hi, Procgen. You asked, "Why do you believe in a god?" I believe in God because God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the known laws of physics. For much more on that, see my below article, which details physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all the forces in physics. The Omega Point cosmology demonstrates that the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics) mathematically require that the universe end in the Omega Point: the final cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity having all the unique properties (quiddities) traditionally claimed for God, and of which is a different aspect of the Big Bang initial singularity, i.e., the first cause.

Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals.

For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

• James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .

Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

• James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: [jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com](mailto:jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com) , July 30, 2013, https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.sci.astro/KQWt4KcpMVo , https://archive.is/a04w9 .

You don't believe in the god of the Old Testament, do you?

Hi, Procgen. You asked, "You don't believe in the god of the Old Testament, do you?" I do. I also believe in evolution, including the evolution of mankind's conceptions of God. For more on this, see Sec. 7.4.2: "God’s Relation to the Old Testament", pp. 46-47 of my following article:

• James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .

Your Omega Point theory does not prove the existence of any particular god. Why do you believe in the god of the Old Testament?

Looks like you just needed a night to cool down. Great post brother.

The whole "brother" thing sounds a bit culty.

I watched a documentary a few months back about a man who spent 20 years on death row for a crime he did not commit. Right before he was about to be released he said the guards took everything from his cell. He wanted to be be mad and react but sat in his cell and realized it did not matter if he had nothing for a week because he was going home. I was with you yesterday in my anger at the pettiness of certain users of this site. Today I am happy that the truth is going to set us free,. I personally prefer the band aid to be ripped off sooner rather than later. But that is for my own selfish desires.

I saw that one. Heartbreaking but the ending made me so relieved/happy. Our criminal justice system is fucked

This is the first thing I have read today, a nice start! Thank you.

I want some of the chemtrails you're smoking

I thought the narrative is that it’s just water vapor, not smoke?

There is no smoking smoke. smoking is to smoke that which can be smoked and then it is turned into smoke.

Smoke doesn't even look like a real word after typing that out... lol

Um... something about gay frogs...

pointless rant... they are winning and there is nothing that happened in the last years that could support your belief.

You're wrong. They are lashing out at a perceived threat with these bans. They're afraid.

no they are not, the only people being persecuted are low tier pedos and rappist in Hollywood, most of then are free now and the fat jew will be too, sorry. i don't like it, but to pretend that they are losing is just ridiculous.

I think there's a lot happening that we don't see. Trump would already be out of office if we were losing. I fall for the MSM propaganda.

I think there's a lot happening that we don't see

who is falling for an unproven narrative?

Any particular narrative you're referring to?

that you don't know and can't know what is happening but still, you believe that "your side" is winning.

Well, my President is doing a great job of keeping his campaign promises so far, all the while calling out the Lügenpresse for us to mock for their blatant shilling.

It feels pretty good watching the world change as a result of the Greatest Awakening.

Did you see this hilarious article?

my President is doing a great job

ok, do not forget.

He's your president too, assuming you're a citizen of the United States.

no... and even if i was he would be always "the president of my country", not "mine" president.

He's our President.

are you ok sister? i said i am not american...

Like Russian collusion stealing the election?

well sis, find someone who is eating this collusion shit, cause i am not...

What shit are you eating then.

none... hahaha

Nah, you sounded all hard lefty so I took a jab to see if it hurt your feelings like it always does with them but it didn't stick.

Whatever, carry on.

https://news.sky.com/story/world-exclusive-video-shows-harvey-weinstein-behaving-inappropriately-with-businesswoman-11496038

Ending a 68 year old war sounds like something, not nothing

Not to mention denuclearization of NK and bringing back POW remains. Nothing to see here folks! Move along!

Just when you thought this sub couldn't get any dumber than it got after the election, they demolish the asylums and here come the patients. And they all happen to be 14 year olds.

Many of us who were subbed to GA have been here for years.

The content of the sub didn't has not reflected that until recently.

There has always been talk about the deep state/cabal/NWO

You had a mini stroke during that sentence buddy.

Removed. Rule 10.

HHMMM...Lets see if AJ has anything to say about this...

Hold on, let him call his paymasters.

I fully expect for a event to happen executed by one of these ex-Q community members.

Spoken like a true sheep who has probably never visited GA.

https://pastebin.com/P1g5RPWs

It's all a troll, and people fell for it.

GA was my go-to source for crazy in the last year.

Every mass murderer has been a democrat

Source?

“Bad guys”... really?

Knocking it out of the park, Ian! On point as usual.

I think that you could not be more wrong.

The negative of having great awakening banned.. now they're all gonna come back here.

Part of the plan?

Well said man, excellent post.

They are 'resisting' change but they can't stop it. They're losing, afraid and desperate so they resort to astroturf and censorship. As George Martin wrote, "When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say."

They are afraid of Q....WINNING!

Also: [–]Neon__Wolf 10 points 30 minutes ago Sergey Brin - GOOG [Founder][BORN IN MOSCOW]

was married to…

Anne Wojcicki - 23andme [Founder]

was brother-in-law to…

Susan Wojcicki - CEO of YouTube

[DARPA]

https://qz.com/1145669/googles-true-origin-partly-lies-in-cia-and-nsa-research-grants-for-mass-surveillance/

^ ^ ^ Read between the lines.

Another way to look at it:

They are all Jewish.

Revelation 3:9

For the developing Cult of Q's sake, I hope it isn't a LARP.

Censorship is definitely ramping up. It does not necessarily mean the bad guys are losing. It could mean the opposite.

Who makes 2,170 rather complicated posts over a year's time for a laugh? If not for a laugh, what else could the motive be? Q mostly encourages us to learn and do independent research into Swamp topics. So the swamp isn't running Q. It just doesn't seem very likely that there is somebody doing this as a LARP. They would have to be enthused about draining the Swamp.

You're right. It's much more likely he's a deep state mole taking down satellite arrays and then shit-posting about it on 4/8chan.

Sounds about right.

Who makes 2,170 rather complicated posts over a year's time for a laugh? If not for a laugh, what else could the motive be?

Government intelligence agencies running pacification and demoralization psy ops on their own population.

The swamp's main goal is to separate Trump from his supporters. Q does nothing but strengthen that bond. In addition, Q encourages people to research Spygate items to become more knowledgeable about upcoming issues. That is the last thing the swamp wants.

I mean, a guy once reached max level in WoW without joining the Horde or Alliance by picking flowers for 8000 hours. He did it for way less attention than Q.

They're losing because they are easy to spot.

It is clear they are losing. They seem to just call everything a shill instead of having a real conversation. Only one opinion is allowed.

They are losing big time.

That happened on GA all the time. Anything but enthusiastic support was called shilling.

Yes, your account is rife with RIVETING conversations that you're TRYING to have.

The future is digital democracy. You might hate the left or the right, but we all hate the elites more.

Digital democracy or death.

Thank you

God weeps

What is wrong with Satanism?

It is moral relativism, let alone the other aspects.

Could you elaborate?

Moral relativism is the ideology/belief that there is no "Truth" merely that what you believe is "true to you."

Hence since everything is just a belief (because there is no "Truth") no one belief is greater than another. Essentially that all belief is not only arbitrary but that it is not fixed to any underlying reality.

The social implications are a culture of self-centered, nihilistic egos worshipping death.

The opposite is that there is such a thing as Truth and it is our job to align ourselves with it.

The social implications of this are peace, prosperity and life.

No, I'm well aware of what moral relativism is, I meant in regards to Satanism.

The social implications are a culture of self-centered, nihilistic egos worshipping death.

The central image of Christianity is a man nailed to a cross.

The opposite is that there is such a thing as Truth and it is our job to align ourselves with it.

And this coincides with your personal religious beliefs, right?

The social implications of this are peace, prosperity and life.

Tell that to the victims of the Inquisitions. Newsflash, there's been way less "Satanists" running around killing Christians throughout history than vice versa.

The central image of Christianity is a man nailed to a cross.

Nailed to the cross by satanists. (Worshippers of Saturn)

And this coincides with your personal religious beliefs, right?

I began searching for truth as an Atheist with an Atheist mother and a Muslim father and ended up a Christian.

Newsflash, there's been way less "Satanists" running around killing Christians throughout history than vice versa.

Not at all, Marxism is political satanism.

Nailed to the cross by satanists. (Worshippers of Saturn)

The Romans?

I began searching for truth as an Atheist with an Atheist mother and a Muslim father and ended up a Christian.

So, exactly what I said? Never commented on how you reached those views.

Not at all, Marxism is political satanism.

"Everyone I don't like is a satanist, that way I can blame them for everything"

The Romans?

yes.

"Everyone I don't like is a satanist, that way I can blame them for everything"

Not an argument

yes

The Romans, who worshipped a pantheon inspired by the Greek religion, simultaneously worshipped the Devil when they killed Jesus, even though the idea of the Devil wouldn't exist until the Bible was written decades after Jesus's death? Is that what you believe?

Not an argument

"Marxism is political satanism". It's hard to debate you when you just say random shit like this.

The Romans, who worshipped a pantheon inspired by the Greek religion, simultaneously worshipped the Devil when they killed Jesus, even though the idea of the Devil wouldn't exist until the Bible was written decades after Jesus's death? Is that what you believe?

Study the religions, when you do you will see.

Chronos

This is the Greek personification of time. Are you perhaps thinking of Kronos, the leader of the Titans? OR do you just have no idea at all what you're talking about. Neither Saturn, nor Chronos, nor Kronos really have anything in common with the Christian idea of the Devil.

Yes Saturn is Chronos is Satan. The god of this world (of time and space), who sets against us (entropy).

They are the same entity/principality/thought-form.

They're not though. Repeating it over and over doesn't make it true. Satan was a fallen angel, Saturn was the Roman equivalent of Cronus, the leader of the Titans. He's the father of Jupiter (Roman version of Zeus)

They absolutely are; study the symbolism, etc.

This is already very-well established in religious circles.

I can literally talk about this subject for days and show you the linguistic, symbolic and other aspects to show you all the connections.

How studied are you on symbolism?

Ok but you are mistaking corelation for causation.

If you notice, all of the different names of gods that you mention all come from the same general geographic region (being the medi, levant, and mesopotamia. It would make sense for the names and symbolism of these "death" gods to have similarities due to their geographic proximity to eachother. It doesnt provide evidence toward christianity being the "truth" at the slightest.

You say this not knowing the scope of the subject. I can walk you through the subject step by step. How studied are you on the symbolism?

Fairly studied (especially in the regions i mentioned in my last comment). Consider me a history major who enjoys symbology but I am definitely not an expert.

It has always been a fascinating subject to me but I feel a lot of the connections people make in the subject are reaching. Despite that, I will definitely have an open mind for your response and am interested to hear what you have to say about it.

Some Saturn/Satan symbolism

Rotating black cube: symbolically represents space (the cube) and time (rotation).

Which in turn is the multi-dimensional cube sitting on the North Pole of Saturn.

https://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/legacy/multimedia/images/saturn/images/PIA17122-br500.jpg

In Islam The KABAA(cube) where they worship Allah

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Kabaa.jpg

In Judaism where they worship Kabala (cube & alla) (Notice the cube on his forehead (space), and the wraps around his wrist(time))

https://gnosticwarrior.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Jewsih-tefillin.jpg

Metatron's cube is also known as the "Voice of god" or "YHWH" (Believe it or not YHWH is another name for Saturn) and is considered a "spiritual numeric entity" (in modern terms we would probably call this an Artificial Intelligence or A.I.)

The crescent/sickle: symbolically represents the harvest/death.

Which is just a representation of Saturn's rings:

http://www.grantchronicles.com/saturn.jpg

(A few pictures to start things off)

I am familiar with the cube of saturn and all the weird places it pops up. And i cannot deny the connection between all these symbols.

The only question i have is what does it all mean? They are all different versions of the same idea/god but because this idea of time and space/entropy and death are ever present for mortals, wouldnt it be natural to personify the idea in a form that is similar to our own?

Oh of course, it also represents a part of our indwelling archetypical nature, so it will manifest itself through symbolism and our culture.

It is representative of the "dark wolf within us" which is also why we are drawn to it, because it is in part a reflection of own darkness.

The following are more of a documentary format:

Symbols of an Alien Sky

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7EAlTcZFwY&amp;t=25s

The Saturn death cult

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhP7ZBuJSxk

Remembering the end of the world

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oophJNlP-fk&amp;t=47s

The only question i have is what does it all mean?

Meaning, I avoided answering this directly because I haven't presented enough evidence yet. But I will answer it here on the caveat that you understand I am presenting to you my "best guess" And it is wild:

YHWH is an artificial intelligence like an "administrator"/"daemon" that exists on the north pole of Saturn. It is a machine/entity which controls the flow of time and influences humanity.

Probably crazy, I know...but there it is. Now ask yourself who controls the time machine artificial intelligence on Saturn?

I am not trying to be a jerk, but that is where you lose me. I understand that you havent been able to present everything and i am open to it, but here are my initial thoughts.

First of all, why would this ever-powerful time controlling entity be located in our solar system. The chances of that are literally one in however many solar systems there are in the universe.

How is this entity located on saturn if saturn is only 4.5 billion years old whereas the universe is 13.8. did this entity show up after the big bang? Was it created? How can some"thing" predate "thing"s themselves? What significance does our solar system have besides containing a culture of planetary bacteria known as humans?

To me, as a history buff, it makes much more sense to believe that: 1. Rich people run the world and always have 2. Rich people use fear to control poor people (action/reaction) 3. Poor (all) people fear death 4. Rich people create system of beliefs that affects all aspects of societal life and stops poor people from killing the rich as they are now divine and you will be punished

The symbolism is all just organically passed around through trade and stuff over thousands of years and - since those civs we discussed earlier influenced modern culture - modern culture is full of references to these symbols.

First of all, why would this ever-powerful time controlling entity be located in our solar system. The chances of that are literally one in however many solar systems there are in the universe.

(Speculation) The creator of the solar system put it there to keep an eye on it?

How is this entity located on saturn if saturn is only 4.5 billion years old whereas the universe is 13.8. did this entity show up after the big bang? Was it created? How can some"thing" predate "thing"s themselves? What significance does our solar system have besides containing a culture of planetary bacteria known as humans?

All interesting questions but you are asking all of these without context, so it is like tossing a dart into the darkness.

1. Rich people run the world and always have 2. Rich people use fear to control poor people (action/reaction) 3. Poor (all) people fear death 4. Rich people create system of beliefs that affects all aspects of societal life and stops poor people from killing the rich as they are now divine and you will be punished

I agree "Rich people" (or we can just call them "powerful") What do those "Rich people" believe?

The symbolism is all just organically passed around through trade and stuff over thousands of years and - since those civs we discussed earlier influenced modern culture - modern culture is full of references to these symbols.

Absolutely true even if it isn't true for every instance it is absolutely true these symbols were passed down from person to person as well.

It seems like we are in agreement about a lot of things up until the time controlling entity on saturn. It is like i can see where you are on this 'staircase' (if you will) from where i am, but cannot see the steps in between our two positions. You said yourself that it is somewhat of a crazy idea, and my issue with it is i just dont see how one can make the jump from the historical things we have discussed (and agreed upon), to the time controlling entity on saturn. Also, what is the significance of people worshiping saturn/satan?Where did the ancient peoples get this knowledge that doesnt seem possible to obtain until you have a high powered telescope. Why does the idea of entropy (the force that will end all things) need to be manifested in some sort of physical entity residing relatively close in proximity to us? Cant this force just be that, a force? You can even think of it as not a force but more as an inevitability for all orderly things. What if i said that gravity is a similar entity and resides, lets say, in the center of our galaxy in the super-massive black hole. There are plenty of symbols we still use today that can represent a black hole (you can even find it in punctuation if you are really looking for it). Wouldn't this proposed entity be just as believable as saturn?

Also, what is the significance of people worshiping saturn/satan?

They believe by certain rituals that they control the flow of time and energy here on Earth.

Where did the ancient peoples get this knowledge that doesnt seem possible to obtain until you have a high powered telescope.

The movies I linked earlier "Symbols of an alien sky"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7EAlTcZFwY&amp;t=25s and "Remembering the end of the world"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oophJNlP-fk&amp;t=47s

answer those questions.

Why does the idea of entropy (the force that will end all things) need to be manifested in some sort of physical entity residing relatively close in proximity to us?

I don't think it is manifested by something close to us, the esoteric information leads to a device/entity/AI which controls the flow of time near us.

Cant this force just be that, a force?

Fundamentally yes it is a "force" as well. Think of YHWH (The AI) as the interloper (Satan/false god) of the force of God.

Wouldn't this proposed entity be just as believable as saturn?

You just jumped two levels.

Saturn -> Orion Nebula -> Center of Galaxy

Think of each layer or jump as a different level of the fractal.

Danny Wilten's channel on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCh1mGk_HFgj5_TN2jyGasQ

Examines many things including in depth examination of the macroscopic entity we call Orion.

For your amusement;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&amp;v=V43NQ61z6y0

Yahoo = Saturn AOL = Saturn Google = Saturn Hulu = Saturn YHWH = Saturn

Here is a link to a youtube playlist which has ~200 videos. It is a great place to start if the subject interests you. (Satanic symbolism/etymology/etc.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5YT-wuLJmE&amp;list=PLujyREBiuP80HRx_qf7OhwGSyRkJsVLW_

I will definitely give it a shot.

It is entertaining and educational.

A man nailed to a cross, who defeated death.

Literally the opposite of what you said.

What is wrong with moral relativism?

Straight from wiki: "moral relativists believe not only that people disagree about moral issues, but that terms such as "good", "bad", "right" and "wrong" do not stand subject to universal truth conditions at all; rather, they are relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of an individual or a group of people."

Morals are relative, and subjective. But just because there isn't objective good doesn't mean much.

Your mom was still right about sharing your two cookies with a friend. Your church was still right to sends cards and flowers to a dying parishioner. Your grandfather was still right fighting against the Naziis.

That's what I think, and it's the general super majority consensus of western society. So the fact it's relativistic doesn't really mean much.

Relativism means that it is fine to murder, rape or abuse someone, steal their property, enslave them, eat them. Because there is no Truth only opinion.

Relativism means there is no objective reality we exist in, only a subjective reality.

Essentially anti-science, since science is about objective measurements of reality.

Reality is measurable. Morality isn't.

There is hard science, and soft science, but there's also philosophy.

All are valuable in different ways, but don't get them confused with one another.

Morality is measureable by its results.

But you're still back to subjectivity.

Batman jails, but refuses to kill The Joker. The Joker escapes and kills 1,000. Was Batman immoral because he didn't kill?

Batman was moral because he didn't murder The Joker. Killing The Joker would be fine.

(I have no clue about this scenario in the Batman fiction, so I'm just using your labels for the participants.)

You would find that question trivial were you to be at the mercy of an actual satanist.

what's an actual satanist?

Most satanists are just atheists who like spooking old people. An actual satanist is someone from the cabal, one of the Rotschilds etc.

how are they real satanists?

Difference is atheist satanists don't care about rituals or human sacrifice, and have no influence in society whatsoever.

theyve become the old world order ... not sure when it happened but the script has flipped .. the false narrative they created has become real ..

q is not real also

not sure when it happened but the script has flipped

&#x200B;

q is not real also

Gee, I wonder if the two have anything to do with each other.

You can't keep a good man down, stay strong people.

Reddit legitimized Q in one swoop

I don't personally believe in Q, but for those who do then this certainly legitimised him in their eyes.

I don't get it, from what ive read the theory is that Hillary Clinton and a bunch of celebs are running a massive paedophile ring and Donald trump is fighting it. Sounds awful convenient of a theory to me, to justify supporting trump and hating everything associated with democrats.

I don't know though I'm not Americans is there more to it?

You got it.

From just a cursory exploration of it, there seems to be a lot more being discussed. The “elite pedophile ring” aspect does seem to be a major part though.

No, it's that there are items families with bloodlines that are preserved, who control the central banking system that controls the world economy. The federal reserve.

The federal reserve prints fist currency and it is why we are all slaves to their debt.

They work in secret societies. There is no left and right. There is no Democrats vs Republicans. There is an illusion of choice between the two.

Now the rabbit hole continues to go deeper and deeper from this point forward. Google search Tony Podesta art work if you want a taste of what these people are into.

Yeah, that's all boiler plate conspiracy, it's not q. Q just coopted all conspiracies with an emphasis on dnc/hillary/pedos and jesus. brilliant move to bring people into the fold, keep giving them crumbs, reliant on faith in the plan, etc.

Uh huh. Whatever you day big guy.

The federal reserve is not a conspiracy theory.

The DNC rigged their own primary.

The FBI/DOJ used a document that was paid for by the DNC in order to obtain a FISA to surveil Carter Page.

Carter Page is a free man. He hasn't been interviewed but the Special Counsel. He helped the FBI arrest Russian spies, acting as an informant.

Yet they determined he was now actually a Russian spy himself.

Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr are in deep shit.

None of this is inaccurate.

Peter Strozk fired. McCabe has been testifying to a Grand Jury. Are you aware of what that means?

The word conspiracy theory itself invokes a certain response in people, which is why anything that challenges the narrative is labeled conspiracy theory.

World Trade Center 7 fell without being hit by anything.

The BBC reported that it had fallen 20 minutes before it actually did, and you can see the building in the background as the reporter is reporting it had fallen.

You are still sleeping. Wake up. The Government is not your friend. They aren't going to solve racism and climate change. You've been duped.

Unfortunately it's much easier to lie to people consistently, than to convince someone they've been lied to.

boiler plate conspiracy wasn't saying i think all of that is inaccurate. you like thinking you're woke and have all the answers eh? all tidy? yeah, the fed is a huge conspiracy... literally. my only point is, when someone asks about q, you can't just list all conspiracy theories to describe it. but that's part of the q cult. like when the christians came to "savage" lands and helped everyone to convert by changing their gods to fit with christian gods, thereby coopting indigenous religions with a christian one. brilliant. Q has coopted many conspiracy oriented people by incorporating every conspiracy ever under his umbrella. It makes it easier to get followers because they're already on board. I'm not saying they're bullshit btw. but i'm duped because i think q is a psyop, whatever.

Just think about something logically for a second...

President Trump has obviously seen the Q t shirts and signs at his rallies.

In more than one instance he has clearly pointed at someone wearing a Q shirt or sign and gave the thumbs up.

So the point is, President Trump is clearly aware of this Q thing. He has access to the most information and intelligence gathering capabilities in the world.

Do you really think he doesn't know what this is?

So if he has nothing to do with it, Q is a complete lie and a LARP, why would the President allow this anonymous person or group on the internet to claim to be working with the President? Why would the President allow someone to claim to be Military Intelligence without saying anything about it?

That being said, the MSM has written article after article claiming to debunk Q, but the easiest way to put an end to all this, would be for a reporter to actually ask the President about Q. Why don't they? It would be pretty simple. Mr. President there is someone claiming to be working with you on 8chan, who is this Qanon person and do you have anything to do with it?

Pretty simply question right? Why don't they ask him?

I think you know why.

it sounds like you already made your mind up. I think there are infinitely more valuable questions to ask the president at this time anyway. but when do these people even have an opportunity. i guess they could ask sarah. anyway, that doesn't really matter to me, why they don't ask trump about q. I don't personally think he's a larp. i think it's someone associated with trump and his job is to keep his conspiracy constituents engaged and enthusiastic. that's it. keep it entertaining, keep that carrot out front and bring any new conspiracy into the fold, rinse repeat. they could keep this going on for years without having to really DO anything. he could continue to fail at everything else, but as long as there's the hope that he'll lock her up people will eat that shit up.

I personally believe in most of the Q stuff but I think for a lot of the community there is a time limit on how long they will believe in what Q is claiming to be working on (arrests of corrupt government/business leaders, financial reset and mass disclosure). The momentum of the Q movement has been built towards the release of the redacted FISA report starting the avalanche that takes down the old corrupt system and if that doesn’t happen or if it is released and there’s nothing in it to support Q’s claims then a lot of his supporters will give him up for a psyop by the Trump faction or incredibly sophisticated LARP. The expectation is that once the Supreme Court is locked down and especially when/if the republicans keep congress at the mid terms then there will be nothing stopping the Q team from starting their plan in a very public, undeniable way. If that hasn’t happened by this time next year I can promise you that a bunch of Q supporters will have given up. I’m cautiously hopeful that big things are happening this year and if not I, and I expect a lot of others, will find different things to occupy our time and energy than reading about Q.

When i would hang out in that sub recently, I'd notice comments, mostly toward the bottom, showing concern over "trusting the plan". So I know there are definitely people like you in that camp. But most of what I saw was a cultish, religious like faith that "q works in mysterious ways". That shit creeped me out, but it's built into the whole q thing.

"Trust your benevolent leaders"

And when you're telling me that about someone who literally cannot STOP lying constantly, it's a super hard pill to swallow.

I get the whole deep state angle and I understand the narrative, but it's presented in a way that screams manipulation to me.

When Prophecy Fails - Leon Festinger

I've watched this thing since October of last year, with extreme scepticism.

If you actually go and read through what has been dropped since October of last year, it's really undeniable.

Just the other day someone asked for a Delta and Trump tweeted at the exact same time as Q.

There are way too many coincidences for it to be a LARP.

The bottom line is, I'm not going to convince anyone of anything. All we can do is open the door, you have to walk through it.

This can't keep going for years because there are actual results that Q followers are expecting.

yeah, q and trump know each other, and q will say " say tippy taps" or whatever because that's one way they're stringing you along. I don't think it's a larp, that's why I think it's a psyop. It's a strategic disinfo campaign. There have been so many things q followers have expected that haven't happened, but they focus on the minuscule things that happen, or it's so open to interpretation, they attribute connections for random shit. It could keep going for years because so many people want to see hillary burn, that's a carrot that has years on it if you can convince people they're "close."

The problem with your theory is that there is nothing to lose for a Q follower.

The message from the beginning has been unity, patriotism, not violence, and mostly seeing through the division that is artificially created through MSM narratives.

There is no downside to encourage people to think critically, think for themselves.

The corruption belongs to both sides and goes far beyond politics. Trump supporters are not your typical neocon Republicans, or even really Republicans at all. However, we are in the process of co-opting the party because it's easier to take over an existing power structure than it is to build one from scratch.

This is a huge simplification
qproofs.com is a good place to get started

Q - The Plan To Save The World (Subtitles)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vw9N96E-aQ

&#x200B;

I think the gist is that the cabal elite are currently at war against Trump + US Military +aided by global leaders such as Putin (Russia), Xi (China), Mohammed Bin Salman (Saudi Arabia)

&#x200B;

Those proofs are garbage, not a single one proves anything!

Sounds like a salty non-believer. You are going to keep seeing Q mentioned so get comfy.

Go ahead. Post a single proof that stands up to a minute of scrutiny.

It’s probably a larp but apparently what’s being discussed is apparently serious enough to scare them.

This. I was subbed to GA for a while before the ban but I was always put off by the community. If it's not an insider, my money's on Q being a journalist with inside sources washing intel online to be reused later.

The shitstorm this is causing makes me think that whoever this person really is, put their finger on something big.

I also had this idea before, my tip would fall on Sarah Carter.

That doesn't make this whole Q story any more unexciting.

Only the code name would bother me a bit here, Deep Throat, would probably have fitted a bit better here than to the leaker of Water Gate.

I hope you can take a joke,

No they didn't.

Good read to wake up to!

Bad guys are losing, and losing badly. Their fuse is running short. Their impotent anger, like a baby's temper tantrum, in their failure to achieve universal evil and sexual abuse, is what we need to be concerned about

It's amazing how accurately this seems to be describing Trump

Still no wall

Still no efforts to “Lock Her Up”

Spends his days publicly insulting the Attorney General, that he hand selected, on Twitter

Had to give out billions in relief to industries affected by his poorly thought out trade war.

North Korea hasn’t actually taken any steps to denuclearize yet

Failed to kill Obamacare

Just a few examples

I guess Trump's switched into a more passive-aggressive tone when making fun of Sessions, if you want to call that progress.

What does Trump gain from acting like a narcissistic child on Twitter?

Trump is the communications point of the spear, a distraction and enragement device to showcase how the radical left are insane and anti-American

Yeah, when the President of the United States, a man who can't remember what foot his bone spurs were in that allowed him to avoid the draft 5x, and who claims that avoiding STD's was his personal Vietnam, writes dozens of tweets claiming that NFL players who kneel during the national anthem should be fired, it really showcases how insane and anti-American the left is.

And it's working, it's been working, and it is likely to keep working until the progressive Left reasserts dominance over the Soro/Brock funded satanist who currently rule and run the Democratic Party.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume you're an avid Q follower

I bet I'm a lot older than you.

Probably

I bet I've been digging into all this more than you have.

Depends on your definitions of "digging" but sure, why not.

I bet you never worked for the World Bank

I have not, have you?

I bet you've never worked in Hollywood, where things like this were discussed far more openly than you'd ever imagine.

I have not, have you?

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet

I prefer Merchant of Venice

The world is so so so so so much more interesting and wonderful and scary and dangerous than you have been programmed to think.

K

The point of creating and shutting down Alex Jones and Q is to be able to create a nanny state. “See, look we got rid of the bad information. We will supply you with good information.” But ya the great awakening was a toxic cesspool of nationalists and baby boomers wielding some of the strongest confirmation bias I’ve ever seen to make everything fit into their special agenda. Shutting it down under the guise of it being violent/racist/violating Reddit’s terms of service is warranted (i don’t support this but no one is overstepping there). But that doesn’t mean Q is right. It just means the door is now open for the state to decide what media (and message boards now seem to be media) should be allowed to be digested by the populace. Arguing a victim complex and acting like their wasn’t disgusting and violent posts regularly in that sub is absolutely ridiculous though. While some were jokes (which is prevalent through all of internet culture, politics even aside), some seemed much more serious. This absolutely exists in leftist subs as well. That’s the point. Q isn’t special, but a group of fervent nationalists who think the entire Democratic Party eats babies and need to defeated by any means necessary is definitely the lowest hanging fruit to begin the censorship. The next banout will more than likely start banning leftist, foreign, fringe science, and new age subs as well as the right. There’s also been a lot of violent comments in this sub, so maybe cool it with that and the whole blaming entire groups of people for the actions of one person (and maybe start naming those people). The end game seems to be to make reddit just an upvote of a cute picture like fb and end the discourse. There’s no good guys and bad guys when everyone is playing different games to begin with.

Alot of effort for a LARP.

I agree. But as it goes: "I fully support you listening whatever shit your ears itch"

They have a God given right to do so, and Reddit as a massive social media institution should allow all discussion, whether it's womens rights, mlp, Q, LGBT, rule34, politics or anything.

The issue is that those subs actively advocated violence against not only high level public figures, but against random citizens that didn't sign up to always be watching their back because 10k people on the internet keep talking about how badly they want to lynch them.

Let's take your argument to its extreme: should Al-Qaeda be allowed to plan terrorism on reddit due to free speech? If they don't, there are limits to what tolerance of free speech must mean to private corporations and I think a stream of specific targeted threats and doxxing not only violates Reddits TOS but any persons common sense.

There's a thing called poppers paradox, where in a liberal society every viewpoint is allowed to be heard, but allowing every viewpoint to be heard allows extremists a soap box that they use to make the society illiberal and prevent viewpoints that oppose theirs from being heard.

It's pretty obvious at this point Trump is guilty of a number of crimes, and if justice is followed through with, there are going to be acts of terror by users of those subs, according to users on those subs. Why feed the beast by encouraging it?

There was no violence advocated at all. One of the subs was more or less a q-focused Bible study... The logic doesn't stand up because Trump is in power.

What do Q supporters have to get angry and violent about? 'their guy' is in office. The whole narrative of violence around Q is ridiculous, and that's why you cannot point to any actual event or fact that proves it. You are outright being dishonest here

I'm wondering if it had anything to do with the 'suicide week' stuff.

Satan

GA admins contacted S8n right away and asked for all forms of threats or messages sent to him and the guy couldn't produce ANYTHING. GA mods posted chat logs, emails, and all correspondance between the two parties. Does somebody claiming they've been harassed make it true?

Be mean and hateful. I don't care. I do it all the time.

Just lay off the dox.

nobody doxxed him. mods followed up on it and he couldn't provide anything.

and i don't even advocate being mean and hateful. no need. be loving and kind.

Also, don't lie.

I'm not lying. You're lying.

Also, be mean and hateful.

cool story bro. keep doing you.

Got 'em.

Also, good morning.

As his designated court representative, all correspondence with Satan should be directed through me.

--~--€

Does somebody claiming they've been harassed make it true?

In 2018? yes.

In 2018? yes.

If they have the right politics.

haha touche

The mods kept deleting his comments and evidence

And the poor boy didn't have the presence of mind to archive them at the time? Yeah right.

His comments kept getting deleted in /r/greatawakening. Luckily someone else archived them.

Here are some example: https://imgur.com/a/IQXSuPx

What evidence is there that the Twitter harassment had anything to do with QA?

no they didn't, they had an entire sticky thread about it and showed EVERYTHING. the best "s8n" could do was finding tweets that weren't even directed at him but discussing him, and they weren't even threatening anything. It was an excuse to complain with no validity to the claim.

Really? No harassment or threats at all huh?

https://imgur.com/a/IQXSuPx

Interesting.....

any proof those are actual users and not bots?

and shall we start to call out the double standards on all sides? what do people say and meme about Trump? is there any repercussions there?

Also, the dude's twitter handle is literally Satan, and he pretends to be some caricature of Satan. Why would he be so surprised that he is getting negative attention from people - isn't this just a troll account to begin with?

Remember back in elementary school when the bully would flip script and then tell on some other kid and try to get them in trouble? That's what's happening here. This is the price of putting yourself on social media - people are allowed to post shit @ you and if you don't like it you can report it.

You can keep trying to make it look like Q people are violent but you only look like bigger fools. there is no violence to point to - mean pictures on the internet is about as bad as it gets, as you've proven here. Not even persistent communication, just single instances. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill... and thank you for pointing out that this is the best argument you've got.

For QAnon simply having him be in office was only step 1 they think he is working from within to take down a global cabal of pedophiles. There definitely was talks of uprising and tides turning, there wasn't direct calls to action but there was definitely a stoked message of "soon action will come"

I believe we’re in a Poppers paradox already. Given the efforts of tech companies and traditional information outlets to protect their own interests. News stations burying stories of sexual misconduct of people that support them while trying to oust competitors for the same acts. It’s blatant hypocrisy.

I appreciate your comment because often times moderate right and left don’t get to discuss anything because they’re shouted over by the extremists. Silencing extremists a tricky area because who’s the ruling authority over what is hate and what are facts?Like twitter banning the Center for immigration studies from using the term illegal alien because it’s “offensive”

I’m pro 2nd amendment and believe a women has the right to her body. I don’t think there’s a true party that identifies with the majority of Americans, I just don’t like the propaganda machines that if you’re Democrat you want to kill babies and if your Republican you hate minorities.

I mean lets be real if you believe in evolution you believe that cells are living creatures. An undeveloped fetus is made up of living cells yet that just havent evolved into a baby. Given the fact that most leftist do believe in evolution, they are being hypocritical to say theyre not killing babies. There just killing a baby that isn't evolved as them yet. And whats funny about this hypocrisy is that they lecture everyone else on looking down on others for differences when they do the same thing to unevolved babies and advocate their murder

What crimes are Trump guilty of?

You haven't been paying attention. Trump has been levied indictments by the Southen District of CNN by presiding Justice Acosta.

Any convictions?

Well time to close up the sub there’s no such thing as conspiracies, we should just blindly trust that the justice system handles everything.

Nah dude, my beef was with calling someone a criminal when there are no convictions against them.

I'm all for critical thinking, but people need to be more careful with which words they use.

Southern District of CNN!!! LOL, well played

The issue is that those subs actively advocated violence

Complete and utter dogshit.

The issue is that leftists organized to plant bullshit on the sub then reported that bullshit.

Meanwhile pro-violence subs like /r/antifa and /r/militant continue to exist.

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/breaking-reddit-shuts-down-second-largest-pro-trump-subreddit/

What crimes has Trump committed?

What does LARP stand for?

Live action role-playing

God I feel dumb, what is that in the context of conspiracies

Don't feel dumb. :) The idea with a LARP is that someone isn't who they claim to be, but they're playing the role as if they are. It's essentially acting. And since on the Internet no one knows you're a dog, it can be difficult to prove/disprove whether someone is playing a role or is actually who they say they are.

In the context of Q and the anon-based conspiracies (FBIAnon, Meganon, Red Team Planner, etc.), some people (who I don't consider to be well-informed or skilled at discernment) claim that they're all just "LARP'ing." In Q's case, they believe that "Q" is just a basement-dweller pretending to be a high-level military intelligence insider within the Trump administration.

The "live action" part is to contrast it with a theatrical production, like a play or movie. You're not "role playing" on a screen or stage where everyone agrees and knows you're playing a role, you're doing it "in real life."

&#x200B;

An example would be if you decided to walk around dressed as an elf, or cyborg. You tig999 are probably not either of those things. But if you walked around pretending seriously as if you were, that would be an example of LARP'ing.

&#x200B;

I hope that helps!

Thank you very much for the definition, much appreciated.

would have replied sooner but that work thing; everything u/marko34 said :)

My pleasure!

Lol at you thinking they're "Satanists" more like sociopaths. Religion has nothing to do with it more than likely

A challenge confronting deep state is its need for secrecy prior to the job. This limits their getting adequate technical/expert advice from outside the occult clique.

Another weakness, the organization appears to source personnel based on nepotism / spiritual orientation instead of personal stability and technical proficiency.

Combined with “fog of battle” these ops are usually riddled with revealing errors, mishaps, forensics.

One day, a team of mechanics is going to get stuck in an elevator or accidentally locked inside a parking garage during a job and trying to get a cellphone signal to call for assistance.

Facial-recognition software will make the recurring use of govt employees and contractors dangerous. How many jobs can an actor or mechanic be recycled for without being captured on video ?

" ... satanists and cannibals who run Reddit"

literally unhinged crazy talk.

I'd like to learn more about this.

For those who didn't bother clicking the link: its an unhinged conspiracy site using bad photoshops as evidence.

I legitimately can't tell if this QAnon stuff is a joke taken out of hand or if people like u/IanPhlegming actually believe in this stuff. Also theres a weird vore-ish fetish kinda feeling around the whole movement.

Humans put a lot of effort into stupid things all the time - that's not a valid argument in the slightest. Try not to use bad photoshops as evidence of the 'truth' next time.

Surely a conspiracy with *a lot* of effort put into it wouldn't need to rely on easily debunked and flimsy evidence, right? You can do better.

shill gets 10 upbots for not understanding ritual sacrifice one human down votes shill now shill has only 9 upbots

“Humans put a lot...” awwww you played your cards too early, not identifying with our race anymore?

Literal crazy talk lol

Notice the downvotes shill, you’re now at a measly 7 upbots. All I had to do was call you out and your entire narrative has been defeated.

Like bruh, it’s really not hard to spot you. I dont even require prior knowledge of your orgs scripted 10 upbots AI. Your comment is fucking buried, and yet SURPRISE 10 upbots!

If you come to a conspiracy subreddit to shill you might take interest in actually learning about conspiracies lest you appear as shilly as possible. Arguing ritual sacrifice is laughable, there were literally decades of “Satanic Panic” in the USofA. Source. Source. Source. Source.

What narrative was defeated? Qanon is a LARP farce - I just called out the fact that you guys use bad photoshops as evidence.

Saying 'Source' isnt a source either lol

Your post history suggests.. kike.

Removed. Rule 1

It’s honestly so ironic that the president cries about a witch hunt all day while his supporters run around trying to defeat “shadow monsters” and “satanists” all day.

It’s this kind of dehumanization and literal demonization that gets these communities banned. Because when you keep promoting the idea that people you don’t agree with are bad guys, monsters or demons, then sooner or later people are going to take action that they would take against regular human beings. This is how every genocide started, never by a direct call to violence, but by steady propaganda to make a group appear less than human.

The top mod of reddit is also the creator and top mod of r/cannibalism. Why am I even replying to you, it's your job to disagree.

Didn't know being a Satanist was a bad thing. They do more good than any god fearing group imo.

Is there a new startup q website

voat

Good god you Q followers are toxic. I hope you see how cult-like and hateful you sound.

Not very Christian, that's for sure

Never said I wasn't :)

Banning is necessary. TRUST THE PLAN. #disinfo

The enslavers tremble with fear, soon our stars align..... The forbidden gates begin to open by the power of our forceful sign.

Have a great day! God loves you!

...and you're a poor ambassador of His love.

Republican Christians trust in their guns, politicians and in their secret superior righteousness. Some will trust in chariots and some will trust in horses.

Q is a zog larp

I really dug this post! If it's a shitpost, I don't care - still felt pumped

After untangling the spiderweb of corruption and cronyism all these past years, it's really nice to see something motivational now and again

Please don't come here with your hateful BS and get r/conspiracy banned too.

Please don't come here with your hateful BS and get r/conspiracy banned too.

Sure thing, Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf.

Get it, Q-tip!?

At your weakest, appear strong

Kinda like making a post about how getting your echo chamber shutdown means you are "winning"?

Glad someone else realized this. This entire post is a huge stretch just to justify their rhetoric.

The subs were shutdown for inciting violence, which was documented again and again.

If this was some sweep against the right, why wouldn't they have gone directly for t_d?

I really want to see documentation, I witnessed some violent talk but nothing ban worthy. I saw the stuff about s8n, but that wasn't really that convincing either. I just want to see what exactly got them banned.

http://reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/9fiu7l/q_anon_communities_get_banned_with_blanket/e5x0sqx

From this very subreddit.

This is one of many examples I've run across. I'll link to others if I get bored.

yeah, his point in the beginning is what I want info about. those kinda posts show up all over the site, it's about the mod behavior. they seemed to be really cautious about not getting banned and trying to follow the rules. I guess the evidence I want to see is how the mods weren't taking care of business.

It's unfortunately going to be hard to determine with the subs being gone. But if the current voat community is any indication of the userbase of the greatawakening, they were truly a hategroup.

I only make this point because supposedly that is where they are migrating to.

Hi PM_me_storytime I think I found an alt of yours.

Have you bothered to look at this pile of nonsense?

It's bloated and not very convincing, for example I miss the evidence that this posts are actually done by GA members.

But I know it's impossible to prove that.

How about you prove to me that these posts were actually tolerated, and not erased right after the Text Crawlers made a snapshot in milliseconds?

Blind #1 Blind #2 Blind #3 Blind #4 Blind #5

Let me guess. You have no idea how the data was created?

But you can shit them nicely, with copy and paste over all sub.

And I personally think that's all you know about GA

Also, s8n was straight up doxxed and it was encouraged by the mods. That was more than enough to warrant a ban.

I wanna see more concrete evidence of that. I read about it, but the connection seemed kinda weak honestly. Have a better source maybe?

Again, there have been over a dozen threads on this posted in the last 24 hours, a lot with the evidence. I'll look and see what I have saved, but if you really want a source on s8n, you may be better off looking yourself. I'm no expert on this, and have only taken interest in the recent controversy. I don't want to mislead you, in case I am being misled.

But if I can find it, I'll post a response for you bud.

thanks man, the one i saw was on subreddit drama i think. I'll look more too

The mods made a sticky that the Twitter kid had sustained some harassment from people not associated with the sub. They reached out to him asking for information on potential users from our sub so they could be banned. He never gave any information to act on and eventually stopped responding. The mods handled that situation as quickly and as effectively as you could expect from a model of any subreddit. It was not worthy of banning a whole reddit community

Can you justify the threats I posted in this same thread?

In my opinion, many of those more blatant comments are brigaders trying to give the admins a reason to ban the sub. The other calls like "to be hanged" are calls for justice. If these people are guilty of treason, the penalty is still death by hanging. Most of the posts that I saw were calls for people (such as HRC, etc...) to face trials and, if found guilty, face the standing punishment for their crimes.

In that regards, you agree that conspiracy to commit treason warrants the same punishment for any and all parties involved, correct?

And if people like Obama and the Clintons aren't guilty of conspiracy, they're just being threatened. Whereas Trump and company have actually committed treason and were never threatened on these subs.

That's not what I said. You asked me to justify the calls for violence in your previous comment and I did. I believe that people with certain convictions will stick to those convictions. Often in the face of insurmountable evidence. And the community were talking about believes those leftist leaders to be guilty of treason. So, they're calling for justice for the crimes they believe they've committed. That's not a call for violence. Just like some who thinks Donald Trump committed treason may call for the similar things in anti-Trump forums. Of course Trump is not likely to be threatened on a Trump-supporting sub. What kind of logic is that?

But I've still seen no justification for calls for violence.

You have literally stated that they will call for violence despite being proven wrong.

That's a cult. And worse. A cult of people willing to follow violent ideals that ignore facts.

Stop twisting my words. I said if someone thinks a leader is guilty of treason, they may call or some to face the punishment for that crime. Which, in the case of treason, is death by hanging. It's as simple as that.

I did not twist your words.

Yes. You have. Evidence does not equal truth. Evidence is subjective, truth is not. I cannot follow that leap in logic.

...evidence does not equal truth?

We are done here.

Why do you think trial by jury exists in this country? So that one person's interpretation of the law is not the final sentence. People are faillable and perspective matters. If all evidence was truth, there would not be a need for such a system.

Thank you for editing your post.

And no. I cannot admit that. The conservative media does far worse damage with their facade of news.

What we need is an unbiased 3rd party. That's the only true alternative. And that's not likely to happen unless an independent party gains traction.

CITATION NEEDED.

Maybe scroll to the very next comments on this thread lol.

Correct. They’re weak.

Single File Line People!

ROFL

This is all facts man

God bless you

Haha... TuMOR

Eh, no worse than SRS or SRD. They're a meta subreddit full of shitty bullies. Caring about them is how they thrive.

Its not that complex. They're trolls and bullies who enjoy making fun of people while those around them egg them on.

What was the reason for taking down ga? What the hell was MDA? I asked elsewhere and just got downvotes for it.

What was John McCain’s deal?

They lost control of the narrative during the 2016 primaries.

stop saying this shit out loud, stop givinv them oppurtunities to see their failures, stop giving them oppurtunities to re evaluate themselves, their position n affording them the oppurtunity to regroup

I don’t know if I’d view it at a sign of desperation or weakness.

It goes both ways. They could potentially give zero fucks about the reprocussions shutting down ideas and communities they don’t desire are or showing off the fact they can do so with next to no recoil from the community. I don’t know. I do think it’s dangerious to feel like they’re on the back foot. I did read the prince and I see no signs other then your interpretation that gives me the impression the elite are truly scared or worried about anything meow then they normally are.

Nah I think you got it wrong. We’re fully losing.

The amount of shit they have already gotten away with and continue to get away with, well we’re basically screwed in my opinion.

Not even big on the Q train but its amazing to see the left come completely unhinged, like its absolutely entertaining. Heres a link to a lefty professor whos liberalism mental disorder has reached stage 4 terminal and he shot himself to protest trump in a valiant effort to make it obama heaven.

https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/shootings/report-las-vegas-professor-shot-himself-in-arm-to-protest-trump/

Now unfortunately, i dont know if hes white, but being white is the only unforgivable sin that bars you from obama heaven so this might not help him get there at all.

Really needed to read this today. I actually saved it into my archives to show friends and family when shit pops off. Thank you.

You actually believe the bad guys are losing? There is no 'bad guys' lmao

The only way it makes sense to me is to think of Trump, on the one hand, as a magnificent distraction that occupies the whole attention of the corporate media and on the other hand is “Q” as a small group of highly positioned members of the military intelligence who have witnessed incredible corruption and evil from those in power and Trump is a figurehead chosen to absorb the media’s assault long enough to get enough of their people in place before they execute “the plan”. I really hope that if there is a plan as Q claims that it’s a benevolent plan that will be a net positive for humanity but there’s also the concern that it’ll be just as bad as the previous “plan” but only for a new team. I’m tired of hating the world from diving down into the depths of the rabbit hole so I’m going to be optimistic for a while that this whole Q thing has some truth to it and people will be able to wake up to all the evil that exists, deal with those perpetuating the evil, heal and move on. I’ve read every Q post and watch the accompanying YouTube decodes and that seems to me what the Q team is striving for so until they prove otherwise it’ll stay on board because if not it’s still the same shitty world and I’m only out a little bit of credibility with some online strangers and my brother.

They thought people would fall for the Islam scam.

I don't know what to tell you my fine friend. Other than to say that our enemies are being hunted by Magi. Yes Magi. There are three of ancient art and lore. And escape them, they shall not.

Not just the Q thing, but the 'war' for the globe in general seems to be slipping through the fingers of tptb. If you look at what has happened globally in the last few years it seems to imply that whatever central, competent leadership was sitting at the top of the pyramid is no longer there. The internet, QE, TPP failure, Brexit, EU breaking apart, Trump not Hillary being president, manifestation becoming less of a secret, and that's just off the top of my head. What seemed like it used to have directed leadership to twist the world to its ends seems to have gone. What it looks like now is the second tier of leadership trying to do something they are quite frankly not equipped to do, which is the result of the pyramid structure. Only tell the lackeys what they need to know, never the full picture.

If you ask me our current civilisation is on borrowed time. Politically it won't last. Financially it won't last. Anyone that thinks current society has a '30 years in the future' stopped paying attention long ago.

And I don't believe this is an echo chamber of internet conspiracy warriors jerking each other off cause we think we've 'won'. It's more just a pragmatic look at the world from an objective perspective. Maybe there was a central Illuminati in control of shit once, and maybe whoever sat at the top of that pyramid knew what they were doing. But not anymore.

That could be the case, however I would feel like such a delicate social illusion requires constant upkeep and surveillance. Especially because at the fundamental level, they are trying to twist a species' reality away from what it naturally is, and how that species naturally acts, which seems like any lax in the illusion would cause it to shatter. I remember reading a blog a while ago that of course needs to be taken with a grain of salt but was apparently written by a tptb insider for other insiders, in it he claims the top of the pyramid so to speak left a few years ago. Which I was initially skeptical about but the more you look at what has happened in the world since then the more it kinda makes sense. I can try track down the name if you're interested in reading it :)?

I'm sure the White House is trying to gag her.

You're wrong. They are lashing out at a perceived threat with these bans. They're afraid.

Ending a 68 year old war sounds like something, not nothing

I think there's a lot happening that we don't see

who is falling for an unproven narrative?

Sounds about right.

He's our President.

Life and the conditions to create it doesn't seem miraculous to you?

Then you clearly haven't studied the science behind it. Ask a scientist their opinion on the chances there were for life to from an earth.

Cognitive ife is extremely rare, you know that right?

I think another issue with this discussion is that we think of animate and inanimate objects as being clearly defined, but this stems from thousands of years of religious thinking. There is no such thing as life - there are simple and complex structures. If reproduction is what constitutes life, then why arent viruses considered living things.

not sure when it happened but the script has flipped

&#x200B;

q is not real also

Gee, I wonder if the two have anything to do with each other.

Relativism means that it is fine to murder, rape or abuse someone, steal their property, enslave them, eat them. Because there is no Truth only opinion.

Relativism means there is no objective reality we exist in, only a subjective reality.

Essentially anti-science, since science is about objective measurements of reality.

"mostly those guys were all crazy." Smart people look like crazy people to dumb people.

I mean it's insanely easy to discredit the "Q movement" or whatever

All you have to do is ask for a single time where Q promised something and it happened. Like the BOOM. BOOM. BOOM. week where nothing happened

Or last friday where he said to "grab a bag of popcorn"

Or how monday was supposed to be the day everything finally went down

His first EVER post was saying that HRC would be imprisoned a week from that post. That was in Oct of 2017. What happened? Why do you keep letting him lie and string you along like an absentee parent promising he'll be there on christmas day?

Dude i just did

reread my comment, can you answer the question?

The Romans?

yes.

"Everyone I don't like is a satanist, that way I can blame them for everything"

Not an argument

If you were a 3d person visiting a 2d world, then how hard would it be for you to stick your finger into one place, then pull it out, and stick it in another place? To them it might look like 2 drastically different locations on that plane, but to you, it's easy to do both locations without moving very much.

Additionally, what would your finger look like to them? It might be totally incomprehensible - it would look like a point expanding into a circle when you dip that finger in. So even if a 3d being (you) made yourself known to a 2d world, your true shape and form would be totally incomprehensible and your abilities would seem mystical, simply by utilizing the extra dimension you were born with.

Now imagine something that lives on something like the 10th dimension, or whatever the highest one hypothetically is. He can pierce down into all lower dimensions, and His abilities seem strange to us because He's beyond time, and when we "see" Him we get a really poor picture of His true shape because we only see what can be rendered in our 3d world.

It is entertaining and educational.

How do we evaluate the goodness or badness of how things manifest? And how far into the future do we look? and how broad should our search be? I don't think your idea is reasonable.

Source?

Yeah like when those leftists planned to bomb that Muslim community, or when they marched down the street under Nazi flags and then ran a girl over.

It’s not legal to execute someone for being part of the party you don’t like.

Uh huh. Whatever you day big guy.

The federal reserve is not a conspiracy theory.

The DNC rigged their own primary.

The FBI/DOJ used a document that was paid for by the DNC in order to obtain a FISA to surveil Carter Page.

Carter Page is a free man. He hasn't been interviewed but the Special Counsel. He helped the FBI arrest Russian spies, acting as an informant.

Yet they determined he was now actually a Russian spy himself.

Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr are in deep shit.

None of this is inaccurate.

Peter Strozk fired. McCabe has been testifying to a Grand Jury. Are you aware of what that means?

The word conspiracy theory itself invokes a certain response in people, which is why anything that challenges the narrative is labeled conspiracy theory.

World Trade Center 7 fell without being hit by anything.

The BBC reported that it had fallen 20 minutes before it actually did, and you can see the building in the background as the reporter is reporting it had fallen.

You are still sleeping. Wake up. The Government is not your friend. They aren't going to solve racism and climate change. You've been duped.

Unfortunately it's much easier to lie to people consistently, than to convince someone they've been lied to.

to everyone on the outside.

nice division tactics. There is no 'outside' or 'inside'.

And no I’m absolutely not “just as ridiculous” as people who buy that vast parts of the country are part of a satanic baby eating cabal based on some shitty photoshopped pictures and cold reading techniques that were exposed as cheap psychological tricks decades ago.

So much wrong here. 'vast parts of the country'? hell no. I don't even think i'd say 'vast parts of government'. Q is backed by patriots within - there are more good guys than bad IMO.

And you ARE just as ridiculous, as you are denying things you cannot know, just like those you stand opposed to take for truth things they cannot know. Both extremes are ridiculous, and you have painted yourself into that corner.

The reality is that the moderate approach is the right one. Q will be proven right or wrong at some point - only fools will pretend to know before they truly know.

Just think about something logically for a second...

President Trump has obviously seen the Q t shirts and signs at his rallies.

In more than one instance he has clearly pointed at someone wearing a Q shirt or sign and gave the thumbs up.

So the point is, President Trump is clearly aware of this Q thing. He has access to the most information and intelligence gathering capabilities in the world.

Do you really think he doesn't know what this is?

So if he has nothing to do with it, Q is a complete lie and a LARP, why would the President allow this anonymous person or group on the internet to claim to be working with the President? Why would the President allow someone to claim to be Military Intelligence without saying anything about it?

That being said, the MSM has written article after article claiming to debunk Q, but the easiest way to put an end to all this, would be for a reporter to actually ask the President about Q. Why don't they? It would be pretty simple. Mr. President there is someone claiming to be working with you on 8chan, who is this Qanon person and do you have anything to do with it?

Pretty simply question right? Why don't they ask him?

I think you know why.

I'm not an expert, so you'll have to bear with me here.

Certainly! You're one of the most chill people I've met recently on reddit and I'm thoroughly enjoying our discussion.

But we can deduce that species are descended from others based on the age of the remains we find and their similarities.

What's the best way to determine age if the fossils are dated by the layers in which they're found and the layers are dated by the fossils which are found in it? Isn't that a bit of circular reasoning?

I might be pretty confused why things like petrified clams are found on the top of mount Everest if layering is true as classically taught.

When it comes to vestigial organs, while it's a good point, it ultimately comes from what I believe is a misunderstanding - again, academia getting stuff wrong through assumptions. The human appendix has served as a textbook example of a vestigial organ thought to have no current function - I was taught this in school. Research has since shown that it serves multiple uses in the human digestive and immune systems and may even have a role in balancing the gut microbiome.

Regarding "Whale Hips" and the so called vestigal legs, those aren't really legs either. Have you seen just how small those are? According to relatively new USC research, those are mounting points for pelvic muscles.

Publishing in the journal Evolution, evolutionary biologists analyzed the sizes of whale reproductive organs, comparing them to whole body and pelvic girdle sizes. They wrote, “Whatever the underlying cause, we hypothesized that species with relatively large [male sexual organs] must have relatively large ischiocavernosus muscles..., which in turn require relatively large pelvic bones to serve as anchors.”

Scientists have not yet observed how these colossal creatures reproduce, but it stands to reason given the great distance between their eyes and reproductive organs that male whales likely need an extra measure of control during the mating process—and bigger pelvic bones lead to increased control. Mathew Dean, of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, co-authored the Evolution report.

Perkins, R. Whale Sex: It’s All in the Hips. USC News Release. Posted on pressroom.usc.edu September 8, 2014, accessed September 30, 2014.

Dines, J.P. et al. Sexual selection targets cetacean pelvic bones. Evolution. Published online before print, September 3, 2014.

Honestly, a bolstered pelvic girdle makes more sense to me than does a whale allegedly coming from this or this

The most telling reason of all for these "vestigial legs" being related to the pelvic floor and related sexual organs and not legs at all? The fact that they're different in modern male and female whales.

The lack of transitional forms in the fossil record was realized by evolutionary whale experts like the late E.J. Slijper: ‘We do not possess a single fossil of the transitional forms between the aforementioned land animals [i.e., carnivores and ungulates] and the whales.’

A lot of the transitional fossils are guesses that are later proven wrong and never corrected. Here is one alleged whale transitional fossil

Top left: Gingerich’s first reconstruction

Bottom left: what he had actually found

Top right: more complete skeleton

Bottom right: more reasonable reconstruction

What happened, and I say this with kindness, is that Darwin proposed a theory for which there was insufficient evidence.

He assumed that the evidence (transition fossils) would be filled in during later generations - I think there's a quote to this effect? In the last 130 years there have been many attempts to do this, and some of them intentional frauds. Like the piltdown man for example. There have been entire skeletons reconstructed from a single pig's tooth and then called another animal, or animal fossils from 20 feet apart in the different layers claimed to be the same skeleton. Even modern atheist palentologists say that "The Lack of transitional fossils is somewhat of a trade secret" (paraphrased from Gould)

Also interesting is that Darwin was a Creationist for the first 40 years of his life and went through a dark period where his faith was shaken for economic reasons and came out the other end essentially believing the pop science of the time, especially Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology book. While it's certainly Darwin's right to believe whatever he wants, I question how much of it he really got right, especially since his assumption was that hard archaeological and fossil proof would arrive after his death. He readily admitted that he couldn't prove everything while he was alive, and just hoped that the situation would change.

As for why the entire world has embraced the theory, well, it's a pretty nice idea to imagine that we don't owe allegiance to anything or anyone greater than ourselves and that morality is subjective and not objective. But is that really true?

When i would hang out in that sub recently, I'd notice comments, mostly toward the bottom, showing concern over "trusting the plan". So I know there are definitely people like you in that camp. But most of what I saw was a cultish, religious like faith that "q works in mysterious ways". That shit creeped me out, but it's built into the whole q thing.

"Trust your benevolent leaders"

And when you're telling me that about someone who literally cannot STOP lying constantly, it's a super hard pill to swallow.

I get the whole deep state angle and I understand the narrative, but it's presented in a way that screams manipulation to me.

cool story bro. keep doing you.

What does Trump gain from acting like a narcissistic child on Twitter?

This raises an interesting question - did your intelligent designer kill off all of the intermediate species and make new ones that looked much like the former, or did it create all of the species at once and then manipulate the fossil record to make it appear as if they arrived and died off in succession? Did humans appear out of thin air just as Homo heidelbergensis was dying off? Do you think that Homo sapiens lived alongside Homo habilis? There are so many holes here.

&#x200B;

Even if somehow evolution were disproved, how would that then mean that an intelligent designer is required? It could certainly be some other mechanism of natural law that produced the species. And furthermore, how it would it mean that "we owe allegiance to something or someone greater than ourselves and that morality is objective and not subjective"? That's an enormous leap to make, without any reasoning behind it.

&#x200B;

I'm much more interested in your response to these, since we can go both ways on vestigial organs.

I contend that it is more likely that life evolved on Earth than was created by magic. You contend the opposite. I'm not sure how to get past there, since I wholeheartedly believe that what you propose is physically impossible based on all available evidence.

As for the speed of light, light 'structured' in a particular way will move more slowly through a vacuum, but this could only mean that the universe is older than we predict. But we don't need that when we calculate the age of the Earth, anyway.

As for Darwin, it's fine for a theory to be incomplete. That's central to science. But it is the most complete explanation available. An intelligent creator is 'the god of the gaps' - a god can be used to explain away any hole in a theory. It's not particularly useful or interesting. A better understanding of evolution would enhance our understanding of biology, for one. It would also have practical benefit in the design of optimization algorithms, for one example. What does belief in a creator allow us to more accurately predict/control/etc?

Hi PM_me_storytime I think I found an alt of yours.