Right? This makes me feel like the mods are compromised. Your second hand knowledge is clearly much more true than the second hand knowledge 1MarkSeeker was mentioning. Neither of you know, and you never will. You're not privy to the experience of that situation first hand, and that makes the information suspect to any free thinking person following the scientific method. Anything else is blind faith, and in this case that blind faith is placed in well known masons. This place is becoming Reddit.
Exactly! We have never held any anon accountable for spewing out retarded q maps that once time had passed to verify their predictions, were absolutely wrong. If you believe the earth is round good for you if you believe it’s flat good for you. If you can’t talk about ideas that’s bad for everyone. Just because a mod gets triggered, and flexes mod privileges, that is wrong and bad for truth. Let truth come out naturally. Not through a mods eyes. Anons have been free to be wrong or right for a majority of the time I’ve been on here. If that changes then this site will die. We are all smart enough to see an overreach by this point in the game.
The comment is not Q material. And anyone who seriously thinks that it is "iMpOsSiBle" to fly past the Van Allen Radiation belts is either a commie loon, or a retard, and simply needs to GTFO of whatever space they are occupying.
Not so agreed that there really has been space travel, if we are acknowledging the radiation levels of the belt then there needs to be some form of shielding.
I would be willing to accept some tech that's beyond what is publicly known, but things aren't that cut and dried.
Dangerous space radiation is short wavelength, which is quite easy to shield against. For example, thin aluminum plates alone can stop a significant portion of it. Radiation shielding for space flight is really more about the costs associated with adding weight, and bulk to space craft, rather than any technological limitations.
Fair, engineers would look to the solution in that, and luckily 30 million eV, beyond that it's on the EM spectrum tells me little without adding guesswork.
Not looking to debate further either, the main point I'm trying to raise that the FE topic was one that I had damn near the same reaction, until I was challenged to hear out the actual argument and consider presented evidence.
That said, I tend to agree that qresearch doesn't mesh with that discussion, if only for the reason that it's a huge way for normies to reject looking deeper.
The Van Allen Belts were discovered by Explorer I, which was NOT shielded because no one knew of the belts beforehand. But the belts did not destroy Explorer I. Even the fuselage of the Apollo capsule counts as shielding---provided you zip through the belts at a speed of ~10 km/second. Multiple visits to the Moon. No particular problem with the belts. The Big Insight is that you don't just stop and loiter in them, like it's some kind of sauna. That would be idiotic. (Do we all take dental X-rays? Yes? Nobody is dead? Same thing.)
I'm a bit torn on this; for the sake of not turning off the newly red-pilled and because it's a topic that can so easily be used as a smear, I would reluctantly agree that the Q forum is not the appropriate place for the topic.
OTOH; there is much more legitimacy to the topic when you come to terms with how much of what is known is dependent on NASA (and a bit less on Chinese or Russian space agencies); that the science is constantly being adjusted to make the observations fit the theory (for example; general relativity has been long debunked by the observable universe, but rather than saying Einstein got it wrong, they add dark matter to the equation but even that doesn't cut it so then they need dark energy).
If you had asked me even 2 months ago, I would have argued that it's self-evident and the proponents are clearly shills... I don't believe the answer to be so simple anymore.
No, "they" haven't lied about space. A lot of people are very ignorant about space, but being ignorant doesn't mean you have been lied to. Of course, stupid pride will make some people cling to their ignorance all the harder.
Prove any of it. I was in the profession for 40-years---launch vehicles and satellites---and you are talking through your hat. Give me a single false statement and where it came from, and why you think it is false. (Thinking so doesn't make it so. You could simply be ignorant.)
I doubt very much that there are any edited images. Most of the complaints I have heard pertain to images that were not understood for what they were, or an attempt to make sense out of a vague image (Rorschach blot effect).
I don't know what Buzz Aldrin said and it makes no difference. There was supposed to be a Face on Mars, until it turned out to be a photo artifact. You don't know any better, do you? Why don't you just chalk it up to Who Knows? instead of jumping to a conspiracy explanation.
Close enough to the field to design systems and work with those who lit the match or put things in orbit. With 3 degrees in aerospace engineering and classification clearance up to TS and SCI, I was not a grunt and I can't tell you what I was told. But I will bet you don't know anything yourself. Always the sweeping ("I know the inside story") claims...and no sauce.
I like how everything revered on GAW is theory, be it political theories/conspiracies, or otherwise. Once someone finds their way here, it's expected that some degree of cognitive dissonance will need to be overcome in order to make sense of the things discussed here.
Q has given us clues, bread crumbs to follow, that point us in a general direction and give us things to look for. Some of these clues and events are reality-shattering.
Q has reminded us several times to "expand our thinking" on a variety of topics, and that lots of things will come to light. We have every reason to believe that these things coming to light will be even more reality-shattering. Mass riots? Martial law? Elections stolen? Depopulation? Just to name a few of the things we deal with here regularly.
More: a real Cabal? Real timeless Evil? Lizard people? A real God? Prophecies? What?? 🤔🤔🤔
Let's all just be honest about the fact that we pass around the weirdest/strangest concepts as potential realities without blinking.
Q says that there are no coincidences. DC is called the District of Columbia for a reason (who is Columbia?). That city is a living monument to ancient religions for a reason. Freemasons and Jesuits are woven throughout the world's history for a reason.
Jussayin': if Q is right, there are many many things that we know nothing about outside of what we've been taught by schools, colleges, news, and government (to include NASA, etc), all of which are gatekeepers.
Eyes and minds open, frens. Eyes and minds open...
Let's all just be honest about the fact that we pass around the weirdest/strangest concepts as potential realities without blinking.
Yup. But even we have our limits. And "flat earf teory," and "muh space isn't real" theory is simply too much, even for the very open minded Q community.
The Earth-Sun L2 Lagrange point is not "behind the Moon." It is on the line from the Sun to the Earth, but another 1.5 million km farther than the Earth. Probably perpetually in Earth's shadow (which makes sense, operationally). The Moon has an orbit at a much closer distance and moves around the Earth. They will line up during lunar eclipses.
I get the sentiment, but I don’t agree with the burn. Space is very much a Q topic. While we may not believe it, some people think the earth is flat…. Hell, supposedly the entire world believed this until not long ago. There are plenty of anomalies that factually exist that allow for a cogent argument against government released evidence of our space programs.
Nonsense. People understood the Earth to be round by 300 BC, and made some pretty accurate estimates of its diameter. It was firm enough to justify Columbus's voyage of discovery. The proof was conclusive with Magellan's circumnavigation 500 years ago. And doubly so with Gagarin's orbit in 1961. There are no anomalies, just ignorance about what is true.
Ummmm... the middle pyramid (Khafre) has the diameter of the Earth encoded into it, accurate down to 391 feet. People that actually take Egypt seriously (I just got back from living there for 9 months) believe that the pyramid is over 36,000 years old.
It would be 2300 years ago, which takes in essentially the great majority of history and knowledge. That is NOT "not long ago." You are aware that the accumulation of knowledge was a gradual process? But this was one of the earlier discoveries. All the more reason to accept it. Our knowledge on this point greatly precedes the existence of NASA, so you need to stop with the "NASA lies about space" nonsense. (I will agree they do lie about "climate," but that is based on catching them repeatedly in lies based on their own data. It is an example of political corruption of the scientific process.)
“They only lie about one thing and nothing else you nooooob”….. yea that sounds completely sane. Jesus just read my original comment. Some of y’all act like you have all the answers. I’ll bet you my life savings you don’t. Don’t discount a belief just because it’s not your own.
Well, I've got answers about space. I don't discount beliefs just because they are not my own. I discount them when they conflict with facts I am aware of and stem from ignorance and paranoia. And for you, don't maintain a belief just because you can't stand the idea that it could be mistaken.
It's worse than that, Einstein conceded that there would be no earthly experiment that could prove the shape and motion of the earth because there is no difference between a moving planet around a sun or a moving sun around a stationary planet.
Primarily, the moving earth is preferred for merely philosophical reasons.
Give me the quotation, because he surely knew better. Cartography is enough to prove the shape of the Earth. And there is a difference between heliocentrism and geocentrism: we can determine the Earth moves by trigonometric measurements of the star positions (parallax). The Earth moves...because it does. We send probes to other planets by virtue of the heliocentric theory. It would be impossible with a geocentric theory. So, we use the moving Earth for purely practical reasons (it works and is true).
IDK.... Astronomy used to be one of my favorite hobbies. Then I realized they are lazy and reuse photos they have been pushing on us for decades. Don't believe me? Go to a public library and open up old astronomy books, then open up new ones. LAZY. Go to the Chicago Science and Industry Museum for space tech. That shit hasn't been updated since the mid 1980s; think Challenger incident. I'm not going to say I know, but I can say what I do not know. Btw, searching for hidden tech lead me to this larger community many years ago. The questions I had then are still unanswered.
They do it for safety. After a few bad images of earth were generated showing different % of ocean coverage that couldn't be explained, they limit inconsistencies by not generating new stuff unless there's a real need from a new storyline....
Try looking at a globe of the Earth from a distance of 3 inches, and then a distance of 12 feet, and reconcile the % of ocean coverage. The discrepancy comes from the fact that the closer you are to the Earth, the less of the globe you can see, so an ocean will look larger in proportion to what is seen. (Different satellite altitudes.) This is called geometry.
Holy cow. yeah, you USED to be "into" astronomy. This is unbelievably retarded. They're not re-using pictures. They're taking photos of the same stellar objects/areas that measure change very slowly.
These areas are changing, however. Look at how the Horse's Head Nebula has changed just since Hubble started. In 30 years, it might not even exist.
Look cats, I don't really care about the NASA stuff, but since you posted it, I did remember seeing something the NASA guys were saying about not leaving LEO - Low Earth Orbit.
Does it need to be deleted? We should expect the average anon has enough discernment to decide whether it's something worth looking into or not.
Right? This makes me feel like the mods are compromised. Your second hand knowledge is clearly much more true than the second hand knowledge 1MarkSeeker was mentioning. Neither of you know, and you never will. You're not privy to the experience of that situation first hand, and that makes the information suspect to any free thinking person following the scientific method. Anything else is blind faith, and in this case that blind faith is placed in well known masons. This place is becoming Reddit.
Exactly! We have never held any anon accountable for spewing out retarded q maps that once time had passed to verify their predictions, were absolutely wrong. If you believe the earth is round good for you if you believe it’s flat good for you. If you can’t talk about ideas that’s bad for everyone. Just because a mod gets triggered, and flexes mod privileges, that is wrong and bad for truth. Let truth come out naturally. Not through a mods eyes. Anons have been free to be wrong or right for a majority of the time I’ve been on here. If that changes then this site will die. We are all smart enough to see an overreach by this point in the game.
THIS USER HAS NO POSTS
Who are you to criticize other posters when you have no posts, yourself?!?
That's because this is a heavily curated Q-focused WIN. If you don't prefer this, there are other .WINs out there which may better suit your style.
The comment is not Q material. And anyone who seriously thinks that it is "iMpOsSiBle" to fly past the Van Allen Radiation belts is either a commie loon, or a retard, and simply needs to GTFO of whatever space they are occupying.
Agreed, not Q material.
Not so agreed that there really has been space travel, if we are acknowledging the radiation levels of the belt then there needs to be some form of shielding.
I would be willing to accept some tech that's beyond what is publicly known, but things aren't that cut and dried.
Dangerous space radiation is short wavelength, which is quite easy to shield against. For example, thin aluminum plates alone can stop a significant portion of it. Radiation shielding for space flight is really more about the costs associated with adding weight, and bulk to space craft, rather than any technological limitations.
Fair, engineers would look to the solution in that, and luckily 30 million eV, beyond that it's on the EM spectrum tells me little without adding guesswork.
Not looking to debate further either, the main point I'm trying to raise that the FE topic was one that I had damn near the same reaction, until I was challenged to hear out the actual argument and consider presented evidence.
That said, I tend to agree that qresearch doesn't mesh with that discussion, if only for the reason that it's a huge way for normies to reject looking deeper.
The Van Allen Belts were discovered by Explorer I, which was NOT shielded because no one knew of the belts beforehand. But the belts did not destroy Explorer I. Even the fuselage of the Apollo capsule counts as shielding---provided you zip through the belts at a speed of ~10 km/second. Multiple visits to the Moon. No particular problem with the belts. The Big Insight is that you don't just stop and loiter in them, like it's some kind of sauna. That would be idiotic. (Do we all take dental X-rays? Yes? Nobody is dead? Same thing.)
fuck yea delete that shit
Again:
JWST
is 1,000,000 miles
past the moon
at LaGrange point L2
Did you know that NASA is the #1 consumer of helium?
Dude, are you serious? I was reporting 10 misinfo posts a day and they were all left up.
Why are you so worried about this ONE tiny thing that doesn't even affect life on this planet?
That shouldn't be. Legit. Keep deporting.
I'm a bit torn on this; for the sake of not turning off the newly red-pilled and because it's a topic that can so easily be used as a smear, I would reluctantly agree that the Q forum is not the appropriate place for the topic.
OTOH; there is much more legitimacy to the topic when you come to terms with how much of what is known is dependent on NASA (and a bit less on Chinese or Russian space agencies); that the science is constantly being adjusted to make the observations fit the theory (for example; general relativity has been long debunked by the observable universe, but rather than saying Einstein got it wrong, they add dark matter to the equation but even that doesn't cut it so then they need dark energy).
If you had asked me even 2 months ago, I would have argued that it's self-evident and the proponents are clearly shills... I don't believe the answer to be so simple anymore.
The Electric Universe: Symbols of an Alien Sky, Episode 2: The Lightning-Scarred Planet Mars
I stumbled into that a while ago.
Wild shit. Makes sense to me, but I ain't no sciencer so...
They'll lie about the jab but not space. That's just mean.
No, "they" haven't lied about space. A lot of people are very ignorant about space, but being ignorant doesn't mean you have been lied to. Of course, stupid pride will make some people cling to their ignorance all the harder.
Prove any of it. I was in the profession for 40-years---launch vehicles and satellites---and you are talking through your hat. Give me a single false statement and where it came from, and why you think it is false. (Thinking so doesn't make it so. You could simply be ignorant.)
I doubt very much that there are any edited images. Most of the complaints I have heard pertain to images that were not understood for what they were, or an attempt to make sense out of a vague image (Rorschach blot effect).
I don't know what Buzz Aldrin said and it makes no difference. There was supposed to be a Face on Mars, until it turned out to be a photo artifact. You don't know any better, do you? Why don't you just chalk it up to Who Knows? instead of jumping to a conspiracy explanation.
Close enough to the field to design systems and work with those who lit the match or put things in orbit. With 3 degrees in aerospace engineering and classification clearance up to TS and SCI, I was not a grunt and I can't tell you what I was told. But I will bet you don't know anything yourself. Always the sweeping ("I know the inside story") claims...and no sauce.
I like how everything revered on GAW is theory, be it political theories/conspiracies, or otherwise. Once someone finds their way here, it's expected that some degree of cognitive dissonance will need to be overcome in order to make sense of the things discussed here.
Q has given us clues, bread crumbs to follow, that point us in a general direction and give us things to look for. Some of these clues and events are reality-shattering.
Q has reminded us several times to "expand our thinking" on a variety of topics, and that lots of things will come to light. We have every reason to believe that these things coming to light will be even more reality-shattering. Mass riots? Martial law? Elections stolen? Depopulation? Just to name a few of the things we deal with here regularly.
More: a real Cabal? Real timeless Evil? Lizard people? A real God? Prophecies? What?? 🤔🤔🤔
Let's all just be honest about the fact that we pass around the weirdest/strangest concepts as potential realities without blinking.
Q says that there are no coincidences. DC is called the District of Columbia for a reason (who is Columbia?). That city is a living monument to ancient religions for a reason. Freemasons and Jesuits are woven throughout the world's history for a reason.
Jussayin': if Q is right, there are many many things that we know nothing about outside of what we've been taught by schools, colleges, news, and government (to include NASA, etc), all of which are gatekeepers.
Eyes and minds open, frens. Eyes and minds open...
"Columbia" signifies "land of Columbus." No ancient religion need apply.
Yup. But even we have our limits. And "flat earf teory," and "muh space isn't real" theory is simply too much, even for the very open minded Q community.
The Earth-Sun L2 Lagrange point is not "behind the Moon." It is on the line from the Sun to the Earth, but another 1.5 million km farther than the Earth. Probably perpetually in Earth's shadow (which makes sense, operationally). The Moon has an orbit at a much closer distance and moves around the Earth. They will line up during lunar eclipses.
Correct, I could maybe have said it better. L2 isn't slaved to the moon's position, you are right.
It's a confusion. There is a Sun-Earth L2 and an Earth-Moon L2. It would be easy to get them mixed up.
I get the sentiment, but I don’t agree with the burn. Space is very much a Q topic. While we may not believe it, some people think the earth is flat…. Hell, supposedly the entire world believed this until not long ago. There are plenty of anomalies that factually exist that allow for a cogent argument against government released evidence of our space programs.
Nonsense. People understood the Earth to be round by 300 BC, and made some pretty accurate estimates of its diameter. It was firm enough to justify Columbus's voyage of discovery. The proof was conclusive with Magellan's circumnavigation 500 years ago. And doubly so with Gagarin's orbit in 1961. There are no anomalies, just ignorance about what is true.
Yes……… 2000 years is not long ago mah dude. Not sure what you’re disagreeing with.
Ummmm... the middle pyramid (Khafre) has the diameter of the Earth encoded into it, accurate down to 391 feet. People that actually take Egypt seriously (I just got back from living there for 9 months) believe that the pyramid is over 36,000 years old.
The information encoded into the pyramids is insane.
It would be 2300 years ago, which takes in essentially the great majority of history and knowledge. That is NOT "not long ago." You are aware that the accumulation of knowledge was a gradual process? But this was one of the earlier discoveries. All the more reason to accept it. Our knowledge on this point greatly precedes the existence of NASA, so you need to stop with the "NASA lies about space" nonsense. (I will agree they do lie about "climate," but that is based on catching them repeatedly in lies based on their own data. It is an example of political corruption of the scientific process.)
“They only lie about one thing and nothing else you nooooob”….. yea that sounds completely sane. Jesus just read my original comment. Some of y’all act like you have all the answers. I’ll bet you my life savings you don’t. Don’t discount a belief just because it’s not your own.
Well, I've got answers about space. I don't discount beliefs just because they are not my own. I discount them when they conflict with facts I am aware of and stem from ignorance and paranoia. And for you, don't maintain a belief just because you can't stand the idea that it could be mistaken.
It's worse than that, Einstein conceded that there would be no earthly experiment that could prove the shape and motion of the earth because there is no difference between a moving planet around a sun or a moving sun around a stationary planet.
Primarily, the moving earth is preferred for merely philosophical reasons.
Give me the quotation, because he surely knew better. Cartography is enough to prove the shape of the Earth. And there is a difference between heliocentrism and geocentrism: we can determine the Earth moves by trigonometric measurements of the star positions (parallax). The Earth moves...because it does. We send probes to other planets by virtue of the heliocentric theory. It would be impossible with a geocentric theory. So, we use the moving Earth for purely practical reasons (it works and is true).
IDK.... Astronomy used to be one of my favorite hobbies. Then I realized they are lazy and reuse photos they have been pushing on us for decades. Don't believe me? Go to a public library and open up old astronomy books, then open up new ones. LAZY. Go to the Chicago Science and Industry Museum for space tech. That shit hasn't been updated since the mid 1980s; think Challenger incident. I'm not going to say I know, but I can say what I do not know. Btw, searching for hidden tech lead me to this larger community many years ago. The questions I had then are still unanswered.
They do it for safety. After a few bad images of earth were generated showing different % of ocean coverage that couldn't be explained, they limit inconsistencies by not generating new stuff unless there's a real need from a new storyline....
Try looking at a globe of the Earth from a distance of 3 inches, and then a distance of 12 feet, and reconcile the % of ocean coverage. The discrepancy comes from the fact that the closer you are to the Earth, the less of the globe you can see, so an ocean will look larger in proportion to what is seen. (Different satellite altitudes.) This is called geometry.
Holy cow. yeah, you USED to be "into" astronomy. This is unbelievably retarded. They're not re-using pictures. They're taking photos of the same stellar objects/areas that measure change very slowly.
These areas are changing, however. Look at how the Horse's Head Nebula has changed just since Hubble started. In 30 years, it might not even exist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pobxRfktJuw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwOoTfjqv34
Look cats, I don't really care about the NASA stuff, but since you posted it, I did remember seeing something the NASA guys were saying about not leaving LEO - Low Earth Orbit.
Am I misunderstanding what this guy is saying? https://youtu.be/LFKM9LmUdMs
THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THEIR ROCKETS
After the Saturn V was retired, NASA is correct in saying that they no longer had the ability to go past LEO.
That is why perma-bans are running RAMPANT over this moronic BS.