I have grown increasingly amazed at the inability of so many to see trends that are so clear and obvious to us here.
I'm definitely claiming any kind of superior intelligence--I was a steady B- student throughout all of college. I agree 100% with the statement "I can't be smart enough for there to be so many people dumber than me!" (I can't remember who said that).
Yet, we have been brought to a new understanding of our reality in the past 2 years-- that the vast majority of people get their beliefs and understanding of the truths based on what they are told--not by what they see.
We have seen a number of mysterious vaccine deaths and injuries. Of course the vaxxed have seen and experienced it even more. Instead of gaining an immediate sense of concern and suspicion, they just consider what they've seen around them as a coincidence or bad luck until they hear CNN say otherwise.
The "believe what you are told, not what you see" group tends to lean left, but there is certainly no shortage of those on the right also--just look at Patriot.win.
How many "q proofs" convinced you Q was real?
After seeing one q proof, I thought "whatever". After 2 Q proofs I thought "interesting!" After seeing my third Q proof I thought "Wait a minute...is something going here? I'm going to pay close attention from now on to determine if these are just coincidences or if POTUS and the military are nodding "yes, it is real! yes, it is real." Sure enough, in a month of careful observation, I was 100% convinced it was real.
Yet, we all know other conservatives that have been exposed to dozens and dozens of q proofs, and it never intrigues their interest in the least.
Any how, this is my rant for the day. Anyone else feel the same?
Complete explanation of cause and process is in Dianetics. All that you’ve observed are symptoms.
You mean the Dianetics by L. Ron Hubbard, the scam artist of Scientology fame? No thanks
You sound like a leftist who has been recommended to listen to a Trump speech. You must have very low confidence in your own mind to be so afraid to read a book because of the supposed reputation of the author.
Supposed reputation of the author???
He admitted he made up everything (Dianetics, Scientology) to drain the gullible of money. His own son called him a satanist, drug user and pedophile. He was partners with Jack Parsons and joined the American faction of Alester Crowley’s (satanist) cult in 1938.
So ya, maybe you btfo and do some research before insulting.
To add to that: According to the Guinness Book of World Records website,
“The most published works by one author is 1,084 by L. Ron Hubbard (USA) whose first work was published in February 1934 and the last in March 2006.”
Imagine all those “true believers” that couldn’t even see through 1,084 patterns of bullsh*t.”
I’m quite familiar with him, let me assure you. So both you and I are familiar with the author, but only I am familiar with the book. Yet you feel so confident telling me the book is bad. You think you actually ‘know’ the book is bad. As I said, you’re like a leftist who won’t watch a Trump speech. The funny thing is, it’s the very content of the book that would address that problem. But please don’t think I’m trying to persuade you to read it. I only want you to recognise one thing: that your refusal to read it is analogous to a leftist refusing to look at a Trump speech. You ‘know’ it’s bad without honestly knowing anything about it.