Got boundaries? Here's a list of things that are not Q related:
(media.greatawakening.win)
✝️ Scripture 🕊️
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (213)
sorted by:
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 think a signal or detection could be determinative. But largely, I’m in agreement.
I disagree. A signal can be faked. If I had infinite resources (as the PTB) I could easily fake a signal. Even so, scientists only ever say "the evidence supports", or "the evidence suggests" unless the evidence is absolute proof (or rather, beyond a reasonable doubt). That is why the explicit and definitive nature of the statement is so powerful. The evidence must be absolutely beyond a reasonable doubt, if we assume Q as a truthsayer.
Its humanly impossible to fake a deep space signal.
I doubt Q would've added/emphasized "highest classification" if we were all alone... almost wouldn't make as a sensible statement?
Revisiting this drop, and this particular wording, makes me want to place it along side the infamous Q916 "chronologically"...
"We are saving Israel for last. Very specific reason not mentioned a single time. Q"
Also makes me think of owls for some reason. 🤔
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?
Q did say NO when asked if the earth is flat. I believe it was his shortest post and most succinct ever. I don't think he was lying. As for Van Allen my family member who was with nasa 35 years easily explained that