It does seem scientifically improbable that we're the only planet in the entire universe that has developed life, even intelligent life. It's not a conspiracy theory to believe in aliens in general.
Whether aliens have been here or Roswell was what the government says can be debated, but I don't think anyone who understands how truly enormous the universe (or even this one tiny galaxy) actually are would argue against the sheer mathematical probability that multiple other bodies are likely to have met the conditions under which life can flourish.
While I agree with you, and prior to recently that was my canned response, Q says something quite different.
Q says explicitly we are not alone. That's not a guess. That's not a "well the universe is really big, so most likely". Q makes a statement, "we are not alone."
Assuming Q is a truthsayer (and I have yet to see any evidence that Q is not, despite looking for a very long time), the only way Q could make that statement is if there was evidence to support it, and it would have to be incontrovertible evidence. Aliens having actually been here (or still here, or always here, etc.) is really the only incontrovertible evidence I can see where one could make that statement.
An interesting take, and a thought I have been having lately as well. I have been seeing quite a bit of evidence lately that The Matrix isn't just about our government, our history, or even our world, but our entire concept of Reality.
This list is not in any way a statement of what is true. This list is a statement of what Q talked about. Q did not talk about any of the things on this list, except "aliens". The OP is wrong that Q did not talk about aliens. On the contrary, Q made an explicit statement that aliens are real.
Again, the list has nothing to do with Truth, only with what Q talked about.
I read it as, “Are we along [in the universe]?”. “Are we alone [here]”, makes no sense.
What I find interesting is, Q said “highest classification”. That seems to say they have detected something that makes them believe there are other’s out there.
Now, because of the vastness of space and the way time/space works, anything we’ve detected is so old that it may no longer exist and we’ll have supernova’d long before we could ever reach anywhere significant and get back to report it.
Agreed that that was not the context of the question, but the answer doesn't exclude such a conclusion either. In fact aliens being here right now (or fossil evidence from the past) could be exactly the incontrovertible evidence required to make such a definitive statement. Its not clear, but it is a reasonable conclusion given the scant evidence provided.
What I find interesting is, Q said “highest classification”. That seems to say they have detected something that makes them believe there are other’s out there.
I disagree with the use of your word "detected". It suggests "a signal" that was detected. That is insufficient to make such a clear statement. The only way to make such a statement as "we are not alone" requires incontrovertible evidence.
The idea of merely a signal from somewhere else being the evidence would not be sufficient to make such a definitive statement. If I was writing up a paper on such evidence as a "detected signal" I would say, "the evidence suggests we are not alone." For me to say unequivocally, "we are not alone." would require absolute proof, not "a signal."
You don't believe we will be able to travel the stars in a reasonable amount of time? No faster than light travel not in normal space? No getting passed the supposed Van Allen Belt?
I personally don't assume anyone is being truthful on the mere assumption that they wouldn't say things without evidence, regardless of how much I like them. It's not a particularly empirical research practice. "We are not alone" is a term used by believers in extraterrestrial life that FAR predates Q's arrival.
I have seen zero evidence that Q is not truthful. Since I have looked every day for a very long time for such evidence and have seen zero evidence it is, imo, unreasonable to doubt that Q is telling the truth on this as well.
That doesn't mean I trust Q. I most certainly do not trust Q. I trust exactly zero entities, but in court, in science, in all of our endeavors into Truth we have standards for "proof." The highest standard for proof in court is beyond a reasonable doubt. Since I have seen zero reason to doubt Q's truthfulness despite spending a great deal of my life looking in earnest for untruthfulness, it becomes unreasonable to doubt Q's truthfulness.
Again, trust is not the same thing as thinking someone is telling you the truth. I am always on the lookout for Q lies. I will remain ever vigilant, but until I find a single one, I will not doubt the truthfulness of Q, since Q has been the most truthful source of information I have ever found.
That is, fyi, exactly "empirical research practice." Any assumption of "not truthful" with both an "in depth search" and without finding a single "reason to doubt" the truthfulness would be not empirical but emotional.
Regardless however, this is about what Q said. Q said, unequivically, that aliens are real. The only way that Q can be both telling the truth (an assumption) and telling us aliens are real is if aliens have been here or are still here or have always been here. I see no other way for both of those things to be true. This is not my desire this is an application of logic to the assumption and the statement.
Q said NO when asked if the earth was flat. His shortest and most succinct post ever. Freemasons are also the same elites trying to get to space as fast as humanly possible...so I'm not sure if that is accurate either.
I also had a nasa family member who was there 35 years and not affiliated with any masonry. He could easily explain any flat earth "proof" I ever asked him in a scientific and logical way. It would be easier for the earth to be flat than it would be for everything nasa touched for the past 60 years to be made up...I agree with poster below, we likely have visited other areas secretly or at the least have secret launches that are testing out more advanced tech
There was a question to Q about Aliens and JFKjr, that was as far as that went.
I remember that the Pleadian(?) group were on the "we don't trust Q" when Q came up with them a year or so ago now. (I don't even remember the ladies name but, yes.. I was watching them, found their story of "the truth" well thought out.. am a fantasy/sci fi lover in literature and film.)
Op is correct, all those other theories, ponderings and what ifs are not Q, they are each a "separate entity" of knowledge seeking uh.. sometimes full of themselves, stories. I find them fun, personally but that is it.. I mean, I would love to go do one of those Squatch spotting missions up in some mountains one day.. just to do it lol.
Body doubles are used by many people in Movies and for protection sometimes, Clones and robots on the other hand.. kind of off the edge but, that goes with the Pleadian group, or Nersa/g?? pretty sure they speak of them, not a Q thing.
It is actually scientifically impossible for life to create itself out of nothing. Something does not come from nothing. Gen 1:1 In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth.
Evolution is a mathematical impossibility (read Darwin's Black Box by Dr. Michael Behe. Believing in evolution requires more faith than believing in a God who created everything. I don't have enough faith to believe in evolution.
I don't know if aliens exist or not... but the idea that someone moar intelligent than us would want to come to a planet that has purple haired libtarded dudes cutting their dicks off so they can win sporting events and suck other dudes dicks is pretty fuckin' out there....
Kinda like me thinkin' not walking around a big fucking ant hill while walkin' to the hay barn.
There are "aliens", but they angelic/demonic(fallen) entities, international beings,etc. But no, there are no extra" terrestrial" beings. I love sci-fi, it's the best fiction there is.
Yep. There is a high statistical probability that life, even sentient life, exists out there.
Beyond that, consider this for proof of shenanigans: I began my deep dive into the possibility of life elsewhere over 30 years ago. (Yes, I am an older anon.) This was well before I found other anons/pedes/autists/etc., so I was really whistling into the void at the time.
One of the things that struck me as bizarre - and completely against the scientific method - was the rabid attacks directed at anyone attempting to make a reasonable, rational scientific investigation into the possibility of extraterrestrial life. Those attacks still happen to this day, by the way.
The canned response to any line of inquiry was "No! No other life exists! Period! End of story! Stop this crazy pursuit of knowledge now or you may just lose your career!" And there would be very real professional consequences to anyone who continued.
That sounds bat poop insane doesn't it?
I mean, seriously, what true scientist would say extraterrestrial life is flat out impossible rather than saying we simply don't have enough evidence to draw a well-considered conclusion yet?
Well, consider what I've written above through the lens of the Covid pandemic. How much outrageously illogical behavior have we seen from supposed experts in that arena?
Starting to make sense yet? When the DS rallies HARD to redirect our attention and hide knowledge, I pretty much assume we are on the right track. So rather than even-keeled scientific research on the question of aliens, we get emotional denigration for even considering the possibility.
Based on that evidence alone, I am prone to accept the very high probability of extraterrestrial life AND that the DS/governments know about it and are covering it up.
Within the context of the question, the answer is clear. Any other interpretation requires a removal of context, which is what the Fake News Media does, exactly what Q tells us is the worst sort of thing to do. Assuming Q is doing that here would be very anti-Q.
Right, I can't. But I do recall when he was directly asked Are we alone, he replied "No. Consider the size of the universe." IIRC that's a word for word quote.
Anyway, old geezers now on their deathbeds who worked on govt UFO programs, sworn to secrecy, are coming out one after another and admitting the govt has indeed captured aliens and examined them. They are described in the exact same rich detail by multiple witnesses. According to one, the CIA conducted medical tests on one that were so extreme, they killed it.
According to one, the CIA conducted medical tests on one that were so extreme, they killed it.
Yes, I saw those testimonies, though .none were entirely credible, or rather, they did not all jive. They did have elements in common though, so there is likely something there.
Since I've begun looking at the evidence in earnest, I've come to think it is entirely likely that not only have aliens visited us, but they may have been here for a long time (or were here in the past also and were instrumental in our history). They may not have been the same aliens. Nothing is entirely clear, except the Q post.
Q states, with no ambiguity, that there are aliens (the outerspace variety), and we know about it with 100% certainty. That doesn't mean that Q is telling the truth, but I've never seen Q lie (ambiguous yes, lie no, with in this case no ambiguity)
u/#q2222
Just so we are clear.
It does seem scientifically improbable that we're the only planet in the entire universe that has developed life, even intelligent life. It's not a conspiracy theory to believe in aliens in general.
Whether aliens have been here or Roswell was what the government says can be debated, but I don't think anyone who understands how truly enormous the universe (or even this one tiny galaxy) actually are would argue against the sheer mathematical probability that multiple other bodies are likely to have met the conditions under which life can flourish.
While I agree with you, and prior to recently that was my canned response, Q says something quite different.
Q says explicitly we are not alone. That's not a guess. That's not a "well the universe is really big, so most likely". Q makes a statement, "we are not alone."
Assuming Q is a truthsayer (and I have yet to see any evidence that Q is not, despite looking for a very long time), the only way Q could make that statement is if there was evidence to support it, and it would have to be incontrovertible evidence. Aliens having actually been here (or still here, or always here, etc.) is really the only incontrovertible evidence I can see where one could make that statement.
We're NOT alone bc Q said WWG1WGA
...and I'm pretty, pretty, pretteee sure Q meant ALL 👽
An interesting take, and a thought I have been having lately as well. I have been seeing quite a bit of evidence lately that The Matrix isn't just about our government, our history, or even our world, but our entire concept of Reality.
This list is not in any way a statement of what is true. This list is a statement of what Q talked about. Q did not talk about any of the things on this list, except "aliens". The OP is wrong that Q did not talk about aliens. On the contrary, Q made an explicit statement that aliens are real.
Again, the list has nothing to do with Truth, only with what Q talked about.
I read it as, “Are we along [in the universe]?”. “Are we alone [here]”, makes no sense.
What I find interesting is, Q said “highest classification”. That seems to say they have detected something that makes them believe there are other’s out there.
Now, because of the vastness of space and the way time/space works, anything we’ve detected is so old that it may no longer exist and we’ll have supernova’d long before we could ever reach anywhere significant and get back to report it.
Agreed. That is the context.
Agreed that that was not the context of the question, but the answer doesn't exclude such a conclusion either. In fact aliens being here right now (or fossil evidence from the past) could be exactly the incontrovertible evidence required to make such a definitive statement. Its not clear, but it is a reasonable conclusion given the scant evidence provided.
I disagree with the use of your word "detected". It suggests "a signal" that was detected. That is insufficient to make such a clear statement. The only way to make such a statement as "we are not alone" requires incontrovertible evidence.
The idea of merely a signal from somewhere else being the evidence would not be sufficient to make such a definitive statement. If I was writing up a paper on such evidence as a "detected signal" I would say, "the evidence suggests we are not alone." For me to say unequivocally, "we are not alone." would require absolute proof, not "a signal."
I doubt Q would've added/emphasized "highest classification" if we were all alone... almost wouldn't make as a sensible statement?
You don't believe we will be able to travel the stars in a reasonable amount of time? No faster than light travel not in normal space? No getting passed the supposed Van Allen Belt?
I believe them to be Nephelim
I don't think they have been here in the (relatively) recent past, but I believe we have known about them at least since the late 19th century.
I personally don't assume anyone is being truthful on the mere assumption that they wouldn't say things without evidence, regardless of how much I like them. It's not a particularly empirical research practice. "We are not alone" is a term used by believers in extraterrestrial life that FAR predates Q's arrival.
I have seen zero evidence that Q is not truthful. Since I have looked every day for a very long time for such evidence and have seen zero evidence it is, imo, unreasonable to doubt that Q is telling the truth on this as well.
That doesn't mean I trust Q. I most certainly do not trust Q. I trust exactly zero entities, but in court, in science, in all of our endeavors into Truth we have standards for "proof." The highest standard for proof in court is beyond a reasonable doubt. Since I have seen zero reason to doubt Q's truthfulness despite spending a great deal of my life looking in earnest for untruthfulness, it becomes unreasonable to doubt Q's truthfulness.
Again, trust is not the same thing as thinking someone is telling you the truth. I am always on the lookout for Q lies. I will remain ever vigilant, but until I find a single one, I will not doubt the truthfulness of Q, since Q has been the most truthful source of information I have ever found.
That is, fyi, exactly "empirical research practice." Any assumption of "not truthful" with both an "in depth search" and without finding a single "reason to doubt" the truthfulness would be not empirical but emotional.
Regardless however, this is about what Q said. Q said, unequivically, that aliens are real. The only way that Q can be both telling the truth (an assumption) and telling us aliens are real is if aliens have been here or are still here or have always been here. I see no other way for both of those things to be true. This is not my desire this is an application of logic to the assumption and the statement.
Q said NO when asked if the earth was flat. His shortest and most succinct post ever. Freemasons are also the same elites trying to get to space as fast as humanly possible...so I'm not sure if that is accurate either.
I also had a nasa family member who was there 35 years and not affiliated with any masonry. He could easily explain any flat earth "proof" I ever asked him in a scientific and logical way. It would be easier for the earth to be flat than it would be for everything nasa touched for the past 60 years to be made up...I agree with poster below, we likely have visited other areas secretly or at the least have secret launches that are testing out more advanced tech
intelligent life? Are you sure about that? after the plandemic I would say a big NO that earth got intelligent life.
There was a question to Q about Aliens and JFKjr, that was as far as that went. I remember that the Pleadian(?) group were on the "we don't trust Q" when Q came up with them a year or so ago now. (I don't even remember the ladies name but, yes.. I was watching them, found their story of "the truth" well thought out.. am a fantasy/sci fi lover in literature and film.)
Op is correct, all those other theories, ponderings and what ifs are not Q, they are each a "separate entity" of knowledge seeking uh.. sometimes full of themselves, stories. I find them fun, personally but that is it.. I mean, I would love to go do one of those Squatch spotting missions up in some mountains one day.. just to do it lol. Body doubles are used by many people in Movies and for protection sometimes, Clones and robots on the other hand.. kind of off the edge but, that goes with the Pleadian group, or Nersa/g?? pretty sure they speak of them, not a Q thing.
Definitely not alone, Genesis 6:1-6
I’ve personally met them and it was the most terrifying moment of my life. Those beings are pure evil.
It is actually scientifically impossible for life to create itself out of nothing. Something does not come from nothing. Gen 1:1 In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth.
Evolution is a mathematical impossibility (read Darwin's Black Box by Dr. Michael Behe. Believing in evolution requires more faith than believing in a God who created everything. I don't have enough faith to believe in evolution.
I don't know if aliens exist or not... but the idea that someone moar intelligent than us would want to come to a planet that has purple haired libtarded dudes cutting their dicks off so they can win sporting events and suck other dudes dicks is pretty fuckin' out there....
Kinda like me thinkin' not walking around a big fucking ant hill while walkin' to the hay barn.
There are "aliens", but they angelic/demonic(fallen) entities, international beings,etc. But no, there are no extra" terrestrial" beings. I love sci-fi, it's the best fiction there is.
Bruh, look into the Emery Smith, Jason Rice, Corey Goode, David Adair and the secret space program (SSP).
We're not alone and as a matter of fact, have been to many other planets and back already. All due to alien tech we've acquired from various means.
Yep. There is a high statistical probability that life, even sentient life, exists out there.
Beyond that, consider this for proof of shenanigans: I began my deep dive into the possibility of life elsewhere over 30 years ago. (Yes, I am an older anon.) This was well before I found other anons/pedes/autists/etc., so I was really whistling into the void at the time.
One of the things that struck me as bizarre - and completely against the scientific method - was the rabid attacks directed at anyone attempting to make a reasonable, rational scientific investigation into the possibility of extraterrestrial life. Those attacks still happen to this day, by the way.
The canned response to any line of inquiry was "No! No other life exists! Period! End of story! Stop this crazy pursuit of knowledge now or you may just lose your career!" And there would be very real professional consequences to anyone who continued.
That sounds bat poop insane doesn't it?
I mean, seriously, what true scientist would say extraterrestrial life is flat out impossible rather than saying we simply don't have enough evidence to draw a well-considered conclusion yet?
Well, consider what I've written above through the lens of the Covid pandemic. How much outrageously illogical behavior have we seen from supposed experts in that arena?
Starting to make sense yet? When the DS rallies HARD to redirect our attention and hide knowledge, I pretty much assume we are on the right track. So rather than even-keeled scientific research on the question of aliens, we get emotional denigration for even considering the possibility.
Based on that evidence alone, I am prone to accept the very high probability of extraterrestrial life AND that the DS/governments know about it and are covering it up.
ETA: grammatical correction.
Arguably that post says the opposite..... You are taking it to mean Aliens..... even at face value though the term isn’t used....
If the Anon question had started with... .... Roswell? ..... and then.... Are we alone? you might be more certain with that claim.....
WWG1WGA
Within the context of the question, the answer is clear. Any other interpretation requires a removal of context, which is what the Fake News Media does, exactly what Q tells us is the worst sort of thing to do. Assuming Q is doing that here would be very anti-Q.
Thank you
u/#q376
Just so we are clear.
The OP says Aliens are not something Q talks about.
I am showing quite clearly that Aliens are something that Q has made explicit statements about, and not just the "illegal" kind.
Maybe you can't see the embedded qpost?
Right, I can't. But I do recall when he was directly asked Are we alone, he replied "No. Consider the size of the universe." IIRC that's a word for word quote.
Anyway, old geezers now on their deathbeds who worked on govt UFO programs, sworn to secrecy, are coming out one after another and admitting the govt has indeed captured aliens and examined them. They are described in the exact same rich detail by multiple witnesses. According to one, the CIA conducted medical tests on one that were so extreme, they killed it.
Yes, I saw those testimonies, though .none were entirely credible, or rather, they did not all jive. They did have elements in common though, so there is likely something there.
Since I've begun looking at the evidence in earnest, I've come to think it is entirely likely that not only have aliens visited us, but they may have been here for a long time (or were here in the past also and were instrumental in our history). They may not have been the same aliens. Nothing is entirely clear, except the Q post.
Q states, with no ambiguity, that there are aliens (the outerspace variety), and we know about it with 100% certainty. That doesn't mean that Q is telling the truth, but I've never seen Q lie (ambiguous yes, lie no, with in this case no ambiguity)