Watch for them. Some are even here on G/A:
Theres a feeling in the air like many top right wing Influencers/Pundits/Journalists/Politicians etc, are gearing up to Turn on President Trump. Alex Jones was the indicator.
They will use the Pandemic as their "in" while conviently forgetting that Trump didnt thrust this upon us, his enemies did (see Event201) And sometimes during crisis there are no right answers, only mitigating damage...
Whoever turns on Trump will reveal themselves as a deep state plant.
We've watched them reveal themselves in waves. Each year there's a new group who've clearly gotten their orders to blow their cover and try and sway as many of their followers as possible.
The final wave is coming. With some of the biggest names in the business. They have no choice. The fact that they held Alex Jones back for this long means they didn't want to burn these assets. But we've grown regardless. It's their only hope. Don't fall for it.
t.me/realjust_human/8886
I’m sure you’ll get around to it, given the significance of being the first to prove life exists on other planets.
You are really invested in being right on this aren't you? I will post something for you next week... but what has convinced you so that the human species is the only species in all the universes (or even just ours)? I just don't get your logic here. If a creator exist, why would a creator create all this space and property in a universe and in-turn choose to only place a species on this one little speck called earth? Or by contrast, if everything was created by natural evolution and other planets exist that are billions of years older and younger that only earth managed to evolve and manifest one species here on earth? Without posting any math formulas, what are the odds of either of these happening? Which leeds me back to my question, what logic have you used to be so adament that your conclusion is correct? Again, this isn't an attack on you. Just an effort to understand you logic here.
I have a few reasons for thinking this way. One involves some (minor) degree of knowledge of comms, and particularly how outer space is used in comms. Secondarily is the lack of evidence, and also how the government occasionally stirs up interest in aliens and topics such as this while: sending comms, distracting from other events / pricing the population with entertainment, and asserting with certainty the things claimed as “proven by Science(R) and Math(R)” despite the lack of any actual data. The Science(R) provided in this particular field is much as what you have cited - nonsense articles with “formulas” occasionally asserted that are illogical (no explanation why or how a simple series of multiplication of data points answers an Elusive Question of the Ages) and where the data to plug into the formula is: not provided, not known, and / or - best yet, not knowable (but random assertions of fantastical data points can be thrown out in other articles to pretend more is known than is true and to contribute to comms / messaging). Please also don’t forget that even the “big” data points change - x IS A PLANET!, actually found to not be a planet but an asteroid, just realized x is a moon and not a planet or asteroid. Actually - we discovered the first PlAsteroid! (Note disputes over things suggested as Knowable and Known such as the number of planets in our solar system has changed multiple times in our lifetime and at best that data today could be Known only through Consensus Science(patent pending).
With that said, I’m happy to stay grounded and within the bounds of the one simple article you sent, and the Math(R) referenced therein, so I’ll keep an open mind in reading your future post and spreadsheet on this.
You appear intelligent. I hope you will digest my next post. Fair enough.
You may also be intelligent as well, which is why I’ve engaged to this point.
A good measure of intelligence is directly related to one’s ability to learn new things, particularly when novel information comes into conflict with that which was previously Known (e.g., reactions to cognitive dissonance).
Here’s to learning new things.