Just look what was on Hunters Laptop. We didn't see it before it came out but now we have.
That doesn't validate the existence of something else entirely. A drug addict fucking prostitutes is a far cry from a former politician skinning the face of a child. Logically you can prove the existence of anything if your only criteria is that you can't prove it doesn't exist.
With your logic, Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster, and aliens who live inside the moon also exist beause you cannot prove to me that they don't.
It's not worth considering if that's the only criteria.
I used a double negative. I didn't mean too, fren. My fault.
What I was trying to say is that just because I didn't see it, doesn't mean it isn't real. Which is logically true, while still not proving that it exists.
You haven't seen my house, but here I sit typing to you in my house.
just because I didn't see it, doesn't mean it isn't real. Which is logically true, while still not proving that it exists.
Right but this logic also applies to monsters under the bed, bigfoot, elves that steal socks out of the dryer, and santa claus. Just because you haven't seen them doesn't mean they're not real right?
It's silly to use that as the foundation for believing something might be out there.
Trust me I'm smart enough to know that because I haven't seen something, it doesn't make it real, but on the other hand it doesn't mean because I haven't seen something it isn't real.
By throwing out monsters and Bigfoot you are gaslighting me. I don't blame you because of how I formed my 1st statement.
Do you understand what I'm saying my "logically true"? I just left off the fact that I'm saying it doesn't disprove it.
I think these fuckers in the Deep State are evil as fuck! We know Epstein was a Pedo and the Clintons were on the island. What do you think they did with the 100,000s of kids that are trafficked each year? You think they rape them and let them go? Fuck no, they kill them.
If they are raping and killing that number of kids, then nothing is off the table.
Do you understand what I'm saying my "logically true"?
To be honest, no. Because when you assume something to be true, you have to then assume logical next steps, and build from there. Events don't happen in a vacuum, they have consequences, reactions.
For example, let's take your figure of 100,000s+ kids trafficked each year. That's a SIGNIFICANT figure. I believe you are getting this number from the figure that gets posted on the number of reported missing children each year, yes? Where we hit totals close to half a million.
However, these totals come from any instance of a call for a missing child. That includes a kid who ran away from home, then came back 2 hours later. If they run away next week, and the police are informed, then now the number is 2. But, it's the same kid, and both times the kid is returned to the home. So, now, we have a total of two missing children in the US, both being the same kid, both times having just hid down the street. This is a hypothetical situation but that is how the system tally works.
You can't run away with the 100,000s figure without being familiar with how the tally actually is calculated.
That doesn't validate the existence of something else entirely. A drug addict fucking prostitutes is a far cry from a former politician skinning the face of a child. Logically you can prove the existence of anything if your only criteria is that you can't prove it doesn't exist.
With your logic, Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster, and aliens who live inside the moon also exist beause you cannot prove to me that they don't.
It's not worth considering if that's the only criteria.
I used a double negative. I didn't mean too, fren. My fault.
What I was trying to say is that just because I didn't see it, doesn't mean it isn't real. Which is logically true, while still not proving that it exists.
You haven't seen my house, but here I sit typing to you in my house.
Right but this logic also applies to monsters under the bed, bigfoot, elves that steal socks out of the dryer, and santa claus. Just because you haven't seen them doesn't mean they're not real right?
It's silly to use that as the foundation for believing something might be out there.
It doesn't prove or disprove it.
Trust me I'm smart enough to know that because I haven't seen something, it doesn't make it real, but on the other hand it doesn't mean because I haven't seen something it isn't real.
By throwing out monsters and Bigfoot you are gaslighting me. I don't blame you because of how I formed my 1st statement.
Do you understand what I'm saying my "logically true"? I just left off the fact that I'm saying it doesn't disprove it.
I think these fuckers in the Deep State are evil as fuck! We know Epstein was a Pedo and the Clintons were on the island. What do you think they did with the 100,000s of kids that are trafficked each year? You think they rape them and let them go? Fuck no, they kill them.
If they are raping and killing that number of kids, then nothing is off the table.
That is all I was trying to say.
To be honest, no. Because when you assume something to be true, you have to then assume logical next steps, and build from there. Events don't happen in a vacuum, they have consequences, reactions.
For example, let's take your figure of 100,000s+ kids trafficked each year. That's a SIGNIFICANT figure. I believe you are getting this number from the figure that gets posted on the number of reported missing children each year, yes? Where we hit totals close to half a million.
However, these totals come from any instance of a call for a missing child. That includes a kid who ran away from home, then came back 2 hours later. If they run away next week, and the police are informed, then now the number is 2. But, it's the same kid, and both times the kid is returned to the home. So, now, we have a total of two missing children in the US, both being the same kid, both times having just hid down the street. This is a hypothetical situation but that is how the system tally works.
You can't run away with the 100,000s figure without being familiar with how the tally actually is calculated.