Biden spoke more clear, and with higher energy than he's usually capable of. He still sounded like an old man yelling at a cloud, but very early on in the SOTU address I felt like confused as how this old bag of bones was able to yell so loudly. Then today in PA talking to the press he can barely form full sentences.
The eyes seem deeper in the eyelids than I normally see in real people, including the elderly. This could be an indicator of extra thickness due to a full facial mask.
No "normie argument." I am personal testimony to the effect. My eyes are more deeply seated than Biden's. All you can see of my eyelids are the lashes. What do I have to do? Appear before you in person before you accept what I say? Why don't you just make your fantasy complete and declare I am a liar?
No, I don't even remotely have arguments "against basically everything going on." I wouldn't have time in the day to breathe, if that were true. I have arguments against poor thinking and fantasy (which, for you, might seem like everything going on). I frequent this site to get news and insight I would get nowhere else. I pitch in to clear out the wooly thinking that contaminates the good thinking. And sometimes I have specific expertise or experience to pit against appalling ignorance. According to Socrates, I should take pride in the number of debates that end with my critic calling me names.
I have no idea how "shills" behave and you are just deflecting with name-calling again. In fact, considering no "shill" has ever been exposed and identified, I wonder whether you have only picked the term to derogate those you cannot stand.
Hah! The people who anoint themselves with being "awakened" and how they refer to the sleeping "normies." You don't see the irony in your objection.
I'm not the only one who denounces the crazy manhunt for bedbugs that sometimes emerges here.
I'm willing to wager you could still see pinkish conjunctival tissue on the inside of the eye nearest the nose. I don't care how deep set your eyes are, that will always be visible. Unless it's covered up by...a mask.
But here's the thing. You are not really trained as an expert in physiology, facial or otherwise, dermatology, etc. It COULD be an indicator... or it might not be. What concrete percentage of reliability can you put on either case?
Do you have any real knowledge or training or even direct experience in the field of mask creation, mask application, for deception or intel purposes, either?
We are having weather here that is almost 200% outside the average for this time of year. I could speculate WHY this is. It might be X. or Y. But it's not really fruitful speculation, is it.
This is one of the big issues I have with the line of reasoning people go with in these narratives. For some reasons, they seem to think that they have all become experts at identifying things that they are not experts in.
Ask questions, sure. Even speculate. But recognize on what sort of basis you are doing it, and give it weight accordingly. (Generic you, not you personally.)
We are having weather here that is almost 200% outside the average for this time of year.
There it is what the Fake News put in your head.
I have lived in the same state for over 60 plus years. I remember extremely heavy winters and winters many times with no snow. Weather is cyclical. Nothing is over that average never has and never will be.
Cannot comment about where you live, but I'm in the southern hemisphere. The average temperature for this month is 24 Celsius (75F). For the past 3 days, we've been having 39 Celsius (102 F), 37 Celsius and 38 Celsius. That's pretty uncommon for right now.
All I'm saying is that I might speculate on why the weather is what it is, but I don't have any concrete knowledge of meteorology, so...
PS. I have not listened or watched the Fake news for 9+ years. Have not watched a TV or tuned into MSM via the net for 7+. Fake news told me nothing. I'm just wondering why you leapt to that assumption.....
We (my friends, community) know the climate in our city, and the current weather is very much out of the norm. That's just a fact.
If I saw a discussion by a credible sauce, i.e. someone who has actually worked in the field of mask deployment with intel agencies, etc, or who has developed this technology, and them offering their professional opinion re: some of the topics, I'd take that a lot more seriously.
Nothing wrong with anons theorizing and speculating, but it seems that in this particular area, a lot of stuff tips over into pseudo-religious belief rather than reasoned, balanced theorizing.
You can't tell by this photo. These irises are in shadow and the color of irises depends a lot on the light in which they are viewed. They both look like they could be blue.
Eye color depends a lot on lighting. Are my eyes green or grey? I have never been able to tell. These photos credit blue, but some parts of the shaded iris look brown. They may look blue in white light, and brown in yellowish light. Which photos are the "correct" ones?
Ever had loss of full control of your hand, and had to default to the other? A lot of people are ambidextrous---enough so that we have a word for it. I once taught myself to write legibly with my left hand. But it's not like right-handed people have no use for their left hand. Plenty of things to do with the left hand that do not require dexterity.
Nice try but you didn't answer the question why Biden has soooooo many differences but Trump doesn't.
He NEVER used his left hand it was almost instantaneously. Go back and look at him as VP writing. He isn't ambidextrous. If he was he would have bragged about it like he does everything else.
You didn't answer the question that i asked. How come "lightning" never changed Trump's eye color?
So..... you think that a) the white hats switched out Biden, and put in some guy with a left handed habit ignoring that Biden was left handed, because, they just are kinda stupid and lazy? Or b) the black hats switched out Biden and put in some guy with a left handed habit ignoring that Biden was left handed, because, they just are kinda stupid and lazy?
if the best, most superior intelligence operation (aka the White Hats) just goes "oh, oops, our new Biden actor is left handed... who was meant to check that? was it you, Norberg? Scott? oh, what the heck! No one will notice.... <fingers crossed> , I mean, seriously?
I suppose you perhaps think that they are doing it intentionally? You know, to wake up people....
Myself, I don't subscribe. But I'd suggest you reflect at the level of emotional and animus you are bringing to the discussion. Why is that?
I've spent my entire adult life heavily involved in faith communities, issues of faith, including multiple religious faiths and interfaith activities. I've seen the powerful side of faith and belief, and the limiting, unproductive and unhealthy side of faith and belief. Approaches to doctrine and doctrinal thought included.
What stands out for me a mile is the character of the attachment to the "This Biden is Not Real" narratives. In my view, they exhibit far more characteristics of the unreasoned adherence to belief and doctrine than they do to critical thinking OR reason-based faith supported by real life practice.
Just saying.
If people were really applying critical thinking and Q-based approaches to this whole set of narratives (none of which are directly confirmed by the Q drops, but which rather rely on specific interpretations of the Q drops that are by no means definitive, but very much open to debate, if people were willing), then there would be empirical studies, clinical studies (aka comparative reviews and studies that present a fact based case offer explanations for all the things that do NOT support the narratives). But there aren't.
If anyone has real bona fide expertise in any area or practice, then they KNOW the difference between conjecture based on limited evidence, uninformed biases and ideas on one hand, and expert, knowledge-based, definitive evaluation on the other.
I'm still waiting for the latter when it comes to Biden Man Not Biden Man narratives (of which there are many). They aren't there, or else, they are hiding somewhere.
Instead, all we get is: "Look!!! See!!! It's obvious!!!" and "Gee, that looks like X to me...." etc.
I'll admit, there is a modicum of reasoning, for example, attempts to compare older images with new images, and to put together a collection of evidence, but in my view, those attempts I have seen never reach the level of serious clinical expertise that should be possible if the truth upheld the ideas.
For me, that's a tell. And, it's one feature of the tendency towards personal or collective doctrinal thinking rather than free-thinking as Q put it:
"Free thought" is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.
I do think the narratives should be discussed, but so far, I find them far too unreasonable. Not simply the photographic evidence for example, but other aspects, of the HOW, the WHY, etc. For example, how many other premises are required to even make the BMNBM narratives work? Mass deception by the white hats? How is the ethically acceptable? No one around the individual knows? Or are they all silenced? Or are they ALSO all replaced?
Whereas the black hats only have restrictions in terms of their own self interest, and anything aside from that goes for them, the white hats have restrictions and limits. That's what law and order are.
If the White hats were simply conducting a massive deception program in order to get us back from the black Hats rule, then how are they different?
So again, another element (and not the only one) that is needed to buy into the BMNBM narratives is a whole world view that posits mass deception (oh, for our own good), including non-verifiable facts that one has to just believe in, etc.
Another is practicality. Let's jsut say that Biden was not Biden (even though you can NEVER prove it, but you still want to believe it because it seems that way to you), how does this have any real-world impact on the Great Awakening, except perhaps simply for indoctrinating others in those beliefs?
From a multi-dimensional perspective, there are plenty of holes in the BMNBM narratives, even though many prefer to simply dismiss them. As such, do those narratives really warrant the "All -in" attitude that many ..... 'true believers' adopt?
(Somewhat) sadly, not in my view.
PS. Thought experiment: Take photos of DJT, and other evidence around DJT, and apply the exact same standards, objectively, to the idea that the DJT we see now is NOT the original DJT. Can you do this objectively? Or try it with anyone else on 'our' side. Litmus test. hmmm....
What do you think about Trump's repeated mentions that "he's shot!" referring to Joe Biden? And the salute corresponding to a funeral after the ostensible inauguration of Biden?
I don't think it's possible to prove anything with internet photos, either way. They could all be doctored. And yet there's nothing wrong with using circumstantial evidence to form a belief. So I believe it's an actor in a mask, even if it can't be proven to your, or anyone else's, satisfaction. Based on a lot of circumstantial evidence, despite the lack of absolute proof that I'd like to have. At some point, there's enough to form an opinion.
Simple questions. Trump is almost the same age. Why are there not photos of his eyes changing color or sinking? Why isn't his face and skull changed? Why hasn't he he changed from a right hander to a left?
There are millions of photos of Trump out there. Show me these inconsistencies that are from aging.
Trump never drinks alcohol, nor smokes, has lived a very virtuous life dedicated to noble purpose and love of country. His whole life.
Biden is a degenerate, and has been his whole life.
Such things make a LOT of difference, imo.
Oh, and Biden isn't Trump.
Your argument is myopic, and defensive. Expand your view. Keep your opinions and conclusions (aka beliefs) but for Pete's sake, remember why we are here. (Well, most of us...)
I know why I am here but not sure what you are implying by that comment.
I am not saying a mask but something is off. I have been around a many people who aged over time. Nothing like what I have seen on Biden happened to them.
I have had friends who where chain smokers and drug addicts in their day. I know people who lead alcohol lives and some evil to the core and worse.
When they aged I never saw these physical changes I any of them.
So maybe take time and expand your view ad you stated.
Never said it was just you. There are a lot of folks who buy into all sorts of wacky theories and speculations about Biden, some more reasonable, some less.
Thank you for a thoughtful response. Much appreciated.
You mention Trump's "repeated mentions" that 'he's shot'. Firstly, as it pertains to my viewpoint on this, I'm mention that I'm a trained linguist (aka have diplomas / degrees in lingustics) and have professional worked in language all my life. So, when i hear something, my first focus is to examine it from a variety of angles, and pin down the exact meaning, if it exists, or any ambiguities, if they exist. (Ambiguities simply mean there may be multiple possible interpretations.)
To be physically, mentally, or emotionally exhausted. :
After two hours in the gym and another hour swimming, I was shot by the time I got home.
I'm already pretty shot from writing essays, and I still have another one to write for tomorrow.
To be in a bad condition or totally destroyed. :
I wish I could have the repairs finished sooner, but I'm afraid your engine's shot.
Between dealing with mounting debt, my four children, and my recent divorce, my nerves are pretty shot at the moment.
To be filmed. :
The surprise independent hit was shot on a budget of less than $100,000.
Of resources, money, etc., to be wasted, spent, or used up. :
I can't believe my entire budget for a week in Las Vegas was shot in the first day!
"is shot" is actually a very common idiom and has been in use for a long time:
So Trump's statement is perfectly explainable in the context it is used. In fact, it makes a LOT of sense in the context it is used.
One might argue "ooh, double meanings - he's secretly telling us. you know, comms", but it's certainly NOT required in order to accept his statement simply as it is. One might say it's ambiguous, but ONLY if Trump is ALSO saying Biden has been shot by firing squad.
So then, there are other questions. WHY would Trump say this i.e. "comms"? For what purpose? During the Q operation, comms had a very clear purpose, and they weren't just for anons. "Comms" is part of how the underbelly of the intel word communicates. But it always has a purpose and reason. So that really requires a clear answer, imo. IF trump is smuggling in some secret message to.... who? Anons? Then WHY? What for? What is the outcome?
I think it's clear that secret comms and hidden meanings are very attractive to some of us. And some of it is real, but not all of it, imo.
Also, you say "repeated" but I only know of one time, possibly two. Do you know of more? I don't follow DJT's speeches all that closely, but even if he said it 5 times,in the absence of any clear reason why I should not, I would interpret him as simply saying, "Joe Biden is kaput! Done. Joe Biden has lost his utility."
Salute corresponding to a funeral:
if Biden was dead, was he then executed just prior to the Jan 20 inauguration, so that he was given a state funeral? WHY would Joe Biden be given a state funeral? Would the WH's let him actually be elected, and then take him out, because "the election was stolen"? Could the ceremony have any other meaning? Symbolic meaning? I don't have clear answers, and I think its interdasting, but so far, it's not something I count as a being clear.
And yet there's nothing wrong with using circumstantial evidence to form a belief.
100% agree. No, 200% agree. But this is really close to my point. If pedes would acknowledge that its a belief, and then approach it as a belief, and recognize it as a belief, then I think, that's OK. But pretending that "my belief is correct and infallible, and obvious" I dunno. I feel like too many pedes don't reflect on what they believe and recognize WHY they believe it. Often, it's for emotionally driven reasons, imo. Not purely logical or empirical.
Also, to be frank, I'm vary wary of disinfo operations targeted at anons and awake people. I see them all around the place, and think they do a lot of damage. When I see people place emotional attachment into certain beliefs, I wonder, what is the benefit? Belief should be tempered and balanced with acknowledged fallibility. "I believe this, but of course I might be wrong" is a good starting point.
I also see a certain 'frenzy" around some narratives, where (in my view,) some people attach to them very strongly, but without a lot of those checks and balances.
Based on a lot of circumstantial evidence, despite the lack of absolute proof that I'd like to have. At some point, there's enough to form an opinion.
Yes, I agree with you here, too.
However, I think it's really important to NOT lose sight of the fact that belief is not equivalent to fact, and opinion is not equivalent to fact, and that as much as possible, we should be open to questioning our choices in belief and opinion, debating them, listening to other arguments, etc.
One example comes to mind: Human driven climate change. There are real, bonafide experts, specialists who know their stuff through and through who present their view on CC and offer a fact-based, evidence based, rigorously developed case why HDCC is a load of bunk. It includes not only the science, but also tangible and reasonable arguments for the WHY and the HOW, too.
So far, I've not see that vis-a-vis the Biden Not Biden arguments. Lots more too it all, obviously. I appreciate the thoughtful reply, and I'm certainly open to hearing WHY you believe what you believe or why you have the opinion you have. That's how we draw closer to truth: listening.
I'm not trying to convince you. But here are a couple bits of info on the mix. There are better and longer compilations of the "he's shot" repetitions, but this is first one I found.
Either way, there's a lot of truth that is purposely absent from MSM. Here on GAW we try to suss out the truth from the incomplete pictures we're shown. Pinning down the reasons for deception is an extra level, requiring more study, beyond just seeing through the lie.
I agree with you about how many anons mistake opinion for fact, but the anons here are generally better at it than YT influencers that make their living with flashy headlines that often lack substance. I personally haven't been bothered by the fake-Biden-advocates' reason-denying extremes, but that might be because I agree with their position anyway.
Not a fan of the conjecture that vp Joe Biden has been executed by firing squad and that the person in the white house (or the white house set) is a fake impostor.
The crowds NOT at the inauguration are easily explained due to Covid. They deliberately changed from previous inaugurations (remember, everyone on Earth was going to die if they got together... sarc)
I don't know about the 21 gun salute.
It seems pretty clear that there were weird things happening, and a lot of evidence pointing towards some form of devolution (which does not mean, however that DJT is CIC. IN fact, if the office of president is devolved, then likewise the authority of CIC is likely to be devolved to. Devolution does NOT necessarily mean DJT is potus or CIC.)
But none of those things I find inspire me to the theory that Joe Biden is dead and an impostor is where he is. I find other more convincing (to me) explanations. Perhaps another point I think of is Real Raw News and how there are clear and obvious disinfo operations pushing the "everyone is executed or at gitmo, and the whole world of public figures are clones/fakes" narratives.
It's strange times, and we may never find out the actual truth. Maybe in 50 years? I think it's important to be OK with not knowing a lot of stuff, for that matter. It takes a based sense of security to recognize that I cannot or do not know everything, and to still be Ok with that. (whereas one core trait of normie cognitive dissonance is a rejection of the idea that what the media tells us isn't the truth, aka that I really don't know the truth.)
I love the compilation of DJT saying he's shot, but then, like I wrote previously, I don't see anything in this other than him saying what he is on the surface, aka that Biden is kaput and has lost his utility. Aka regular and normal meaning of "he is shot".
(In fact, if it were otherwise, he'd really have to say "he's been shot". That would be a whole different kettle of fish.
Also, the oddities. Well, for me, I don't see anything in this to make me go, wow. The quality of the video, the lighting, etc, the angles, there are a LOT of variables there, for me. But perhaps my own biases influence what I see. That's just as possible for me as for others, I guess. Goose and gander and all that.
I find the idea that some public figures got 'fake shots' to be totally plausible, however. I.e. footage and stuff as if they were getting shots, because that's pretty much standard for slimy public figures: Drama put on for the media.
Ah, curious comparison with YT influencers. To my mind, they do not even come close (there is no comparison with most of our GAW pedes.)
I'll tuck the salute inauguration threads away for a closer look later. But yeah, no need to try to convince each other (although I must admit, I try to convince anons to review HOW they look at things, rather than to convince them of MY own conclusions or beliefs. That's pretty useless.
In the meantime, thanks for the thoughtful res, and I'm keep to keep my eyes open.
I expect that DJT has at least one double as well. And, like you, there are plenty of things that I'm perfectly comfortable not knowing. And likely much that I've gotten wrong, even without counting my 100% incorrect record in the datefag category. I hope that most will be revealed publicly with proof, but I'm sure lots won't be.
I think there's a point of convergence in our thinking here. I think it is entirely plausible for a president to hire a body double or two for specific cases,i.e. when assassination might be a danger, and travel or other activity needs to be kept clandestine, etc.
Or that C_A might use masks for a sting operation, where the subject is in contact with the targets for a few hours, or a few times, etc.
But I don't think it is plausible that an actor could be impersonating the President of the USA (or person in that position) all the time, all day, all week, year after year.
Gaetz referred to his adopted as "his helper"? (obvious could never do this in real life, right?)
Gaetz who lost weight is.... magically ... doesn't look like the same person?
Spooky vibe music?
Internet trolls are evidence?
so many red flags on this, I just couldn't listen seriously past 1:50.
<Break>
But because it's from you, I sucked up my gut and listened to the end.
Oh, wait? Very soon we're going to find out....!!!???! People we thought we trusted?
I'm pretty sure Q has been talking about the civic leaders, political, business and media leaders who are part of the swamp and who have taught us all our (normie) lives that they are serving us are exposed to be .. .not serving us. Aka people who are normies waking up to realize, dayum, the two parties are ... actually a unaparty! for example.
Not that bingo, hey, Matt Gaetz was executed and the person we see now is a double!!!!
No, this video reeks to high heaven with so many red flags that I give it 0 credence. So many other far better explanations for what is presented (including opinions) than that this is over the target. With apologies, its late and also, To discuss all of those red flags in detail would take a LONG write up.
But maybe that's just me.
I do appreciate the dialog we're having, though. (And apologies about the sarcasm. Sadly, I would categorize this guy's video take as junk, and I have a strong prejudice against junk data, like I do against junk food, and less and less time for it these days. Too much real information out there. )
I realize that the word "shot" can mean, in this instance, he's just not up to the job. Q told us everything has meaning. We were given strong clues that McNoname was executed. Do you think it was one and done? OK they executed McNoname but then stopped. Uh, no. Q was giving us a peek into what was happening behind the scenes. I have no proof, but then, you have no proof they are still alive.
.....you mean apart from their continued presence and action as human beings, viewed via media etc?
With that reasoning, Angel, we have no proof that Q is real, that we aren't being ruled by Aliens and lizard people, and that we aren't living in the Matrix like the movie matrix, or that everything we do NOT see directly in person is even happening, and that we aren't living in the Truman Show.
To say that people right in front of is is "no proof that they are alive" is.... it's silly, sorry. Just plain silly.
We were given strong clues that McNoname was executed.
Exactly. That was solid information given by Q.
Q never said anyone else was executed.
"Do you think it was one and done?" No. But now you are stepping into theorizing and conjecture, building conjecture on conjecture, on conjecture.
Do I have proof perfect that Joe Biden is Joe Biden, or that Elon Musk is Elon Musk, or that Michael Flynn is Michael Flynn? No. But I have a LOT more evidence that they are who they say they are than otherwise.
Hey, choose your beliefs! It's your prerogative. But don't try and pass your belief of as if its fact. Also, interpreting "everything has meaning" to mean "you can just pick and choose whatever fact or thing you like and make your OWN meaning out of it".... I don't think that is what Q was saying.
And how do you tell the difference? At what point does a "detached" earlobe become an "attached" earlobe? Does it ever occur to you that the human body has a remarkable range of presentation? Maybe it is only your problem in trying to categorize an earlobe that is at the boundary of what you imagine to be the two cases.
You are correct. We don’t know a lot of things, and can be black hats narrative just to make us believe that a lot of people are not the same person, it is a good tactic to distract us from the real problems we are facing right now. God bless you for explaining us.
A) yes, are these narratives simply distractions? How do they help? There are real, verifiable, and important problems we face, including waking people up to the DS itself, their methods of control that have been going on for decades and for centuries, the use of psychological warfare via the corporate and state media, etc. These things are much more important to grasp than whether or not the man known as Joe Biden is Joe Biden. IMO.
B) Whatever the narratives, what's really important is HOW we approach them, what kind of thinking (or non-thinking) we use, and what drives our formulation of beliefs, ideas and understanding. That's the important thing here, imo.
You are one of the people here that open more my eyes in 2020 and I really thank you for that. God gives a lot of wisdom and we are lucky to have you here in GA. God bless you friend.
Simple questions. Trump is almost the same age. Why are there not photos of his eyes changing color or sinking? Why isn't his face and skull changed? Why hasn't he he changed from a right hander to a left? Why are there no pictures of Trump having detached ears then attched ears? Why are there no pictures of Trump having detached ears then attched ears?
There are millions of photos of Trump out there. Show me these inconsistencies that are from aging.
There's a lot of words in this thread. But I'm reminded of the old adage that goes something like, "a picture is worth a thousand words". So here's the picture:
During the SOTU speech, he pulled his neck at the right and towards the rear. It didn’t look like normal turgor. It stretched and almost snapped into place. It was not normal.
IT could be the shadows, I'm completely on the fence of whether this is a mask or not. IT's so weird, how his eyes look so sunken in. and what, he doesn't have a single eyelash?
The original Biden you're right, but the VP version had blue eyes, now this version seems to almost have black beady eyes like a braindead shark. There's even fact checks out there from the parasites like Reuters claiming Biden's eyes are "still blue"
The comments about masks are getting ridiculous. You can tell a mask if you are close to someone. Even the best masks out there are not THAT good. Biden was surrounded by people last night. There is no way that every one of them, Dem and Rep alike, would not have noticed.
I said in another post that in order to appear somewhat human under bright television lights, they have to apply a heavy make-up base to the face, Otherwise the lights make the face look unnatural. Which is why his face would have a smooth appearance to it in photographs.
Oh, bother. My eyes are that far back. You have to consider that the eye is cushioned by a layer of fat behind it. If the fat is shrunk or depleted with age, the eye will recede.
The iris is not black; it is blue. But it is in shadow. The pupil will always be black and when it is enlarged due to low light level, or dilated by drugs, it will make the pupil-iris combination look black.
I agree with you that the whole mask thing is hard to swallow, but did you look at these pictures. What happened to Biden's eyelashes? Why are eyes so sunk in looking.
I definitely don't think that Biden is always an actor in a mask, but I really am leaning towards that character from last night was an actor in a mask to put out SOTU speech, because they know Biden is completely incapable of even speaking in complete sentences normally. How does Biden speak mostly coherently last night, and not really fumble much at all compared to how he usually talks.
I looked at the juanita broderick pick. I his left hairline you can see numbers and letters. Using the burn tool It showed up. I can't post for some reason but will keep trying.
The photograph referenced above has poor resolution. With good resolution, the individual hairs in his eyebrows would be discernible. As it is, they are all blurred together. This means that any skin pores would also be blurred together with smooth skin. You need to account for the quality of the photograph before drawing conclusions about it.
Robert Barron has made silicone masks for CIA operatives for 15 years. Barron uses silicone that is tinted to look like skin.
Barron's masks are designed to pass close scrutiny from six to 12 inches away.
Biden spoke more clear, and with higher energy than he's usually capable of. He still sounded like an old man yelling at a cloud, but very early on in the SOTU address I felt like confused as how this old bag of bones was able to yell so loudly. Then today in PA talking to the press he can barely form full sentences.
Drugs.
Or just follow the script.
Hes hopped up on adderall. Adderall brings focus and energy but also uncontrollable anger.
Steroids and cocaine in high doses
Biden has been dead for some years now it’s an actor playing him wearing a mask
Agreed 💯🎯
The eyes seem deeper in the eyelids than I normally see in real people, including the elderly. This could be an indicator of extra thickness due to a full facial mask.
Or getting old if the skull has deep sockets and the skin above the lid has grown out and covers the upper lid. I have this going on with my eyes.
Dehydration as well
No "normie argument." I am personal testimony to the effect. My eyes are more deeply seated than Biden's. All you can see of my eyelids are the lashes. What do I have to do? Appear before you in person before you accept what I say? Why don't you just make your fantasy complete and declare I am a liar?
No, I don't even remotely have arguments "against basically everything going on." I wouldn't have time in the day to breathe, if that were true. I have arguments against poor thinking and fantasy (which, for you, might seem like everything going on). I frequent this site to get news and insight I would get nowhere else. I pitch in to clear out the wooly thinking that contaminates the good thinking. And sometimes I have specific expertise or experience to pit against appalling ignorance. According to Socrates, I should take pride in the number of debates that end with my critic calling me names.
I have no idea how "shills" behave and you are just deflecting with name-calling again. In fact, considering no "shill" has ever been exposed and identified, I wonder whether you have only picked the term to derogate those you cannot stand.
Hah! The people who anoint themselves with being "awakened" and how they refer to the sleeping "normies." You don't see the irony in your objection.
I'm not the only one who denounces the crazy manhunt for bedbugs that sometimes emerges here.
Age, illness and genetics change the depth of your eyes.
Some people have bug eyes, some people have eyes more recessed.
When you are sickly and old, you can easily have eyes sunken this deep.
Hell, like 80% of facial changes can straight up happen with Alzheimer's even.
Yes, I talked to an old lady at the store just yesterday whose eyes were just like this.
I'm willing to wager you could still see pinkish conjunctival tissue on the inside of the eye nearest the nose. I don't care how deep set your eyes are, that will always be visible. Unless it's covered up by...a mask.
But here's the thing. You are not really trained as an expert in physiology, facial or otherwise, dermatology, etc. It COULD be an indicator... or it might not be. What concrete percentage of reliability can you put on either case?
Do you have any real knowledge or training or even direct experience in the field of mask creation, mask application, for deception or intel purposes, either?
We are having weather here that is almost 200% outside the average for this time of year. I could speculate WHY this is. It might be X. or Y. But it's not really fruitful speculation, is it.
This is one of the big issues I have with the line of reasoning people go with in these narratives. For some reasons, they seem to think that they have all become experts at identifying things that they are not experts in.
Ask questions, sure. Even speculate. But recognize on what sort of basis you are doing it, and give it weight accordingly. (Generic you, not you personally.)
There it is what the Fake News put in your head.
I have lived in the same state for over 60 plus years. I remember extremely heavy winters and winters many times with no snow. Weather is cyclical. Nothing is over that average never has and never will be.
Cannot comment about where you live, but I'm in the southern hemisphere. The average temperature for this month is 24 Celsius (75F). For the past 3 days, we've been having 39 Celsius (102 F), 37 Celsius and 38 Celsius. That's pretty uncommon for right now.
All I'm saying is that I might speculate on why the weather is what it is, but I don't have any concrete knowledge of meteorology, so...
PS. I have not listened or watched the Fake news for 9+ years. Have not watched a TV or tuned into MSM via the net for 7+. Fake news told me nothing. I'm just wondering why you leapt to that assumption.....
We (my friends, community) know the climate in our city, and the current weather is very much out of the norm. That's just a fact.
I live in western PA all my life.
I am over 60 and I saw very mild winters as a child and years later brutal winters.
Nothing is abnormal. It is cyclical and I have seen it repeat over the years.
There is a meteorologist Joe Bastardi, who explains how this occurs.
You should read what he says about weather.
Hey maybe you can expand your view.
I worked in MI between 78 & 82. Our abilities were not that good then. You make some valid points.
If I saw a discussion by a credible sauce, i.e. someone who has actually worked in the field of mask deployment with intel agencies, etc, or who has developed this technology, and them offering their professional opinion re: some of the topics, I'd take that a lot more seriously.
Nothing wrong with anons theorizing and speculating, but it seems that in this particular area, a lot of stuff tips over into pseudo-religious belief rather than reasoned, balanced theorizing.
“He’s shot” “He’s a completely different person”
As much as I hate to say it, I think its the real Biden. Its pretty hard to find an actor to play that stupid, that long, that well.
How do you explain his eye color? Joe Biden has bright blue eyes.
You can't tell by this photo. These irises are in shadow and the color of irises depends a lot on the light in which they are viewed. They both look like they could be blue.
There are an abundance of photos with his eyes brown not blue.
Explain he was right handed now left handed.
I guess with age that changes too.
SMH.
Eye color depends a lot on lighting. Are my eyes green or grey? I have never been able to tell. These photos credit blue, but some parts of the shaded iris look brown. They may look blue in white light, and brown in yellowish light. Which photos are the "correct" ones?
Ever had loss of full control of your hand, and had to default to the other? A lot of people are ambidextrous---enough so that we have a word for it. I once taught myself to write legibly with my left hand. But it's not like right-handed people have no use for their left hand. Plenty of things to do with the left hand that do not require dexterity.
Nice try but you didn't answer the question why Biden has soooooo many differences but Trump doesn't.
He NEVER used his left hand it was almost instantaneously. Go back and look at him as VP writing. He isn't ambidextrous. If he was he would have bragged about it like he does everything else.
You didn't answer the question that i asked. How come "lightning" never changed Trump's eye color?
Show me pictures of Trump like I stated.
So..... you think that a) the white hats switched out Biden, and put in some guy with a left handed habit ignoring that Biden was left handed, because, they just are kinda stupid and lazy? Or b) the black hats switched out Biden and put in some guy with a left handed habit ignoring that Biden was left handed, because, they just are kinda stupid and lazy?
if the best, most superior intelligence operation (aka the White Hats) just goes "oh, oops, our new Biden actor is left handed... who was meant to check that? was it you, Norberg? Scott? oh, what the heck! No one will notice.... <fingers crossed> , I mean, seriously?
I suppose you perhaps think that they are doing it intentionally? You know, to wake up people....
Myself, I don't subscribe. But I'd suggest you reflect at the level of emotional and animus you are bringing to the discussion. Why is that?
See my other comment.
I never said what you implied.
Such an ignorant reply.
The one on the left (his right) reads as grey or blue for sure, they are definitely a light eye color.
He doesn't even look like the old Biden. Check out the real Biden around 2017 or so. You'll see it.
Too many mask fuckups to say he’s the real Bidden. Every week seems something is wrong with his mask.
Real Biden, in a mask to hide the black eye…
JK
…and drugs…
MK Ultra slave maybe?
I've spent my entire adult life heavily involved in faith communities, issues of faith, including multiple religious faiths and interfaith activities. I've seen the powerful side of faith and belief, and the limiting, unproductive and unhealthy side of faith and belief. Approaches to doctrine and doctrinal thought included.
What stands out for me a mile is the character of the attachment to the "This Biden is Not Real" narratives. In my view, they exhibit far more characteristics of the unreasoned adherence to belief and doctrine than they do to critical thinking OR reason-based faith supported by real life practice.
Just saying.
If people were really applying critical thinking and Q-based approaches to this whole set of narratives (none of which are directly confirmed by the Q drops, but which rather rely on specific interpretations of the Q drops that are by no means definitive, but very much open to debate, if people were willing), then there would be empirical studies, clinical studies (aka comparative reviews and studies that present a fact based case offer explanations for all the things that do NOT support the narratives). But there aren't.
If anyone has real bona fide expertise in any area or practice, then they KNOW the difference between conjecture based on limited evidence, uninformed biases and ideas on one hand, and expert, knowledge-based, definitive evaluation on the other.
I'm still waiting for the latter when it comes to Biden Man Not Biden Man narratives (of which there are many). They aren't there, or else, they are hiding somewhere.
Instead, all we get is: "Look!!! See!!! It's obvious!!!" and "Gee, that looks like X to me...." etc.
I'll admit, there is a modicum of reasoning, for example, attempts to compare older images with new images, and to put together a collection of evidence, but in my view, those attempts I have seen never reach the level of serious clinical expertise that should be possible if the truth upheld the ideas.
For me, that's a tell. And, it's one feature of the tendency towards personal or collective doctrinal thinking rather than free-thinking as Q put it:
I do think the narratives should be discussed, but so far, I find them far too unreasonable. Not simply the photographic evidence for example, but other aspects, of the HOW, the WHY, etc. For example, how many other premises are required to even make the BMNBM narratives work? Mass deception by the white hats? How is the ethically acceptable? No one around the individual knows? Or are they all silenced? Or are they ALSO all replaced?
Whereas the black hats only have restrictions in terms of their own self interest, and anything aside from that goes for them, the white hats have restrictions and limits. That's what law and order are.
If the White hats were simply conducting a massive deception program in order to get us back from the black Hats rule, then how are they different?
So again, another element (and not the only one) that is needed to buy into the BMNBM narratives is a whole world view that posits mass deception (oh, for our own good), including non-verifiable facts that one has to just believe in, etc.
Another is practicality. Let's jsut say that Biden was not Biden (even though you can NEVER prove it, but you still want to believe it because it seems that way to you), how does this have any real-world impact on the Great Awakening, except perhaps simply for indoctrinating others in those beliefs?
From a multi-dimensional perspective, there are plenty of holes in the BMNBM narratives, even though many prefer to simply dismiss them. As such, do those narratives really warrant the "All -in" attitude that many ..... 'true believers' adopt?
(Somewhat) sadly, not in my view.
PS. Thought experiment: Take photos of DJT, and other evidence around DJT, and apply the exact same standards, objectively, to the idea that the DJT we see now is NOT the original DJT. Can you do this objectively? Or try it with anyone else on 'our' side. Litmus test. hmmm....
What do you think about Trump's repeated mentions that "he's shot!" referring to Joe Biden? And the salute corresponding to a funeral after the ostensible inauguration of Biden?
I don't think it's possible to prove anything with internet photos, either way. They could all be doctored. And yet there's nothing wrong with using circumstantial evidence to form a belief. So I believe it's an actor in a mask, even if it can't be proven to your, or anyone else's, satisfaction. Based on a lot of circumstantial evidence, despite the lack of absolute proof that I'd like to have. At some point, there's enough to form an opinion.
Simple questions. Trump is almost the same age. Why are there not photos of his eyes changing color or sinking? Why isn't his face and skull changed? Why hasn't he he changed from a right hander to a left?
There are millions of photos of Trump out there. Show me these inconsistencies that are from aging.
Trump never drinks alcohol, nor smokes, has lived a very virtuous life dedicated to noble purpose and love of country. His whole life.
Biden is a degenerate, and has been his whole life.
Such things make a LOT of difference, imo.
Oh, and Biden isn't Trump.
Your argument is myopic, and defensive. Expand your view. Keep your opinions and conclusions (aka beliefs) but for Pete's sake, remember why we are here. (Well, most of us...)
I know why I am here but not sure what you are implying by that comment.
I am not saying a mask but something is off. I have been around a many people who aged over time. Nothing like what I have seen on Biden happened to them.
I have had friends who where chain smokers and drug addicts in their day. I know people who lead alcohol lives and some evil to the core and worse.
When they aged I never saw these physical changes I any of them.
So maybe take time and expand your view ad you stated.
Yet another.
CQVFEFE 15 minutes ago +2 / -0 Amazing, isn't it?
His face looks totally different → he's had plastic surgery
His chin keeps changing from day to day → no it doesn't
His teeth used to be huge, ultra white and perfect → he went to the dentist and had them replaced with normal-looking teeth, as is commonly done
He writes with the other hand → he's ambidextrous
He talks and sounds nothing like Senator Biden → people age
His face looks like a silicone mask → no it doesn't
People keep saying he looks different and presenting visual confirmation → they're all crazy conspiracy theorists
He's been adjudged incompetent to stand trial for his many crimes → still competent to be president of the United States of America
Hmmmmm.
Not just me.
https://greatawakening.win/p/17si0dleyG/all-of-these-things-are-not-like/c/
Never said it was just you. There are a lot of folks who buy into all sorts of wacky theories and speculations about Biden, some more reasonable, some less.
Thank you for a thoughtful response. Much appreciated.
You mention Trump's "repeated mentions" that 'he's shot'. Firstly, as it pertains to my viewpoint on this, I'm mention that I'm a trained linguist (aka have diplomas / degrees in lingustics) and have professional worked in language all my life. So, when i hear something, my first focus is to examine it from a variety of angles, and pin down the exact meaning, if it exists, or any ambiguities, if they exist. (Ambiguities simply mean there may be multiple possible interpretations.)
So, for example: https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/is+shot
"is shot" is actually a very common idiom and has been in use for a long time:
So Trump's statement is perfectly explainable in the context it is used. In fact, it makes a LOT of sense in the context it is used.
One might argue "ooh, double meanings - he's secretly telling us. you know, comms", but it's certainly NOT required in order to accept his statement simply as it is. One might say it's ambiguous, but ONLY if Trump is ALSO saying Biden has been shot by firing squad.
So then, there are other questions. WHY would Trump say this i.e. "comms"? For what purpose? During the Q operation, comms had a very clear purpose, and they weren't just for anons. "Comms" is part of how the underbelly of the intel word communicates. But it always has a purpose and reason. So that really requires a clear answer, imo. IF trump is smuggling in some secret message to.... who? Anons? Then WHY? What for? What is the outcome?
I think it's clear that secret comms and hidden meanings are very attractive to some of us. And some of it is real, but not all of it, imo.
Also, you say "repeated" but I only know of one time, possibly two. Do you know of more? I don't follow DJT's speeches all that closely, but even if he said it 5 times,in the absence of any clear reason why I should not, I would interpret him as simply saying, "Joe Biden is kaput! Done. Joe Biden has lost his utility."
if Biden was dead, was he then executed just prior to the Jan 20 inauguration, so that he was given a state funeral? WHY would Joe Biden be given a state funeral? Would the WH's let him actually be elected, and then take him out, because "the election was stolen"? Could the ceremony have any other meaning? Symbolic meaning? I don't have clear answers, and I think its interdasting, but so far, it's not something I count as a being clear.
100% agree. No, 200% agree. But this is really close to my point. If pedes would acknowledge that its a belief, and then approach it as a belief, and recognize it as a belief, then I think, that's OK. But pretending that "my belief is correct and infallible, and obvious" I dunno. I feel like too many pedes don't reflect on what they believe and recognize WHY they believe it. Often, it's for emotionally driven reasons, imo. Not purely logical or empirical.
Also, to be frank, I'm vary wary of disinfo operations targeted at anons and awake people. I see them all around the place, and think they do a lot of damage. When I see people place emotional attachment into certain beliefs, I wonder, what is the benefit? Belief should be tempered and balanced with acknowledged fallibility. "I believe this, but of course I might be wrong" is a good starting point.
I also see a certain 'frenzy" around some narratives, where (in my view,) some people attach to them very strongly, but without a lot of those checks and balances.
Yes, I agree with you here, too.
However, I think it's really important to NOT lose sight of the fact that belief is not equivalent to fact, and opinion is not equivalent to fact, and that as much as possible, we should be open to questioning our choices in belief and opinion, debating them, listening to other arguments, etc.
One example comes to mind: Human driven climate change. There are real, bonafide experts, specialists who know their stuff through and through who present their view on CC and offer a fact-based, evidence based, rigorously developed case why HDCC is a load of bunk. It includes not only the science, but also tangible and reasonable arguments for the WHY and the HOW, too.
So far, I've not see that vis-a-vis the Biden Not Biden arguments. Lots more too it all, obviously. I appreciate the thoughtful reply, and I'm certainly open to hearing WHY you believe what you believe or why you have the opinion you have. That's how we draw closer to truth: listening.
I'm not trying to convince you. But here are a couple bits of info on the mix. There are better and longer compilations of the "he's shot" repetitions, but this is first one I found.
https://truthsocial.com/@QBeliever3/110988758486573034
https://greatawakening.win/p/17r9bDJ8BF/the-oddities-of-joe-bidens-arm--/c/
Here are two threads on the salute and the inauguration.
Https://greatawakening.win/p/16aTLs6FLL/derek-johnson-explained-how-bide/
https://greatawakening.win/p/141EwRJETX/the-21gun-salute-president-donal/c/
Either way, there's a lot of truth that is purposely absent from MSM. Here on GAW we try to suss out the truth from the incomplete pictures we're shown. Pinning down the reasons for deception is an extra level, requiring more study, beyond just seeing through the lie.
I agree with you about how many anons mistake opinion for fact, but the anons here are generally better at it than YT influencers that make their living with flashy headlines that often lack substance. I personally haven't been bothered by the fake-Biden-advocates' reason-denying extremes, but that might be because I agree with their position anyway.
RE: The salute and inauguration
Not a fan of the conjecture that vp Joe Biden has been executed by firing squad and that the person in the white house (or the white house set) is a fake impostor.
The crowds NOT at the inauguration are easily explained due to Covid. They deliberately changed from previous inaugurations (remember, everyone on Earth was going to die if they got together... sarc)
I don't know about the 21 gun salute.
It seems pretty clear that there were weird things happening, and a lot of evidence pointing towards some form of devolution (which does not mean, however that DJT is CIC. IN fact, if the office of president is devolved, then likewise the authority of CIC is likely to be devolved to. Devolution does NOT necessarily mean DJT is potus or CIC.)
But none of those things I find inspire me to the theory that Joe Biden is dead and an impostor is where he is. I find other more convincing (to me) explanations. Perhaps another point I think of is Real Raw News and how there are clear and obvious disinfo operations pushing the "everyone is executed or at gitmo, and the whole world of public figures are clones/fakes" narratives.
It's strange times, and we may never find out the actual truth. Maybe in 50 years? I think it's important to be OK with not knowing a lot of stuff, for that matter. It takes a based sense of security to recognize that I cannot or do not know everything, and to still be Ok with that. (whereas one core trait of normie cognitive dissonance is a rejection of the idea that what the media tells us isn't the truth, aka that I really don't know the truth.)
Thanks again for the top value reply.
I love the compilation of DJT saying he's shot, but then, like I wrote previously, I don't see anything in this other than him saying what he is on the surface, aka that Biden is kaput and has lost his utility. Aka regular and normal meaning of "he is shot".
(In fact, if it were otherwise, he'd really have to say "he's been shot". That would be a whole different kettle of fish.
Also, the oddities. Well, for me, I don't see anything in this to make me go, wow. The quality of the video, the lighting, etc, the angles, there are a LOT of variables there, for me. But perhaps my own biases influence what I see. That's just as possible for me as for others, I guess. Goose and gander and all that.
I find the idea that some public figures got 'fake shots' to be totally plausible, however. I.e. footage and stuff as if they were getting shots, because that's pretty much standard for slimy public figures: Drama put on for the media.
Ah, curious comparison with YT influencers. To my mind, they do not even come close (there is no comparison with most of our GAW pedes.)
I'll tuck the salute inauguration threads away for a closer look later. But yeah, no need to try to convince each other (although I must admit, I try to convince anons to review HOW they look at things, rather than to convince them of MY own conclusions or beliefs. That's pretty useless.
In the meantime, thanks for the thoughtful res, and I'm keep to keep my eyes open.
Here's another one to think about. Very low stakes by comparison. Easier to research independently; less disinfo traps.
https://rumble.com/v4byiu0-fake-maga-matt-gaetz.html
I expect that DJT has at least one double as well. And, like you, there are plenty of things that I'm perfectly comfortable not knowing. And likely much that I've gotten wrong, even without counting my 100% incorrect record in the datefag category. I hope that most will be revealed publicly with proof, but I'm sure lots won't be.
I think there's a point of convergence in our thinking here. I think it is entirely plausible for a president to hire a body double or two for specific cases,i.e. when assassination might be a danger, and travel or other activity needs to be kept clandestine, etc.
Or that C_A might use masks for a sting operation, where the subject is in contact with the targets for a few hours, or a few times, etc.
But I don't think it is plausible that an actor could be impersonating the President of the USA (or person in that position) all the time, all day, all week, year after year.
Sorry. I couldn't get past 1:50.
Dead (Not Dead) John Mcafee telling us?
Gaetz referred to his adopted as "his helper"? (obvious could never do this in real life, right?)
Gaetz who lost weight is.... magically ... doesn't look like the same person?
Spooky vibe music?
Internet trolls are evidence?
so many red flags on this, I just couldn't listen seriously past 1:50.
<Break>
But because it's from you, I sucked up my gut and listened to the end.
Oh, wait? Very soon we're going to find out....!!!???! People we thought we trusted?
I'm pretty sure Q has been talking about the civic leaders, political, business and media leaders who are part of the swamp and who have taught us all our (normie) lives that they are serving us are exposed to be .. .not serving us. Aka people who are normies waking up to realize, dayum, the two parties are ... actually a unaparty! for example.
Not that bingo, hey, Matt Gaetz was executed and the person we see now is a double!!!!
No, this video reeks to high heaven with so many red flags that I give it 0 credence. So many other far better explanations for what is presented (including opinions) than that this is over the target. With apologies, its late and also, To discuss all of those red flags in detail would take a LONG write up.
But maybe that's just me.
I do appreciate the dialog we're having, though. (And apologies about the sarcasm. Sadly, I would categorize this guy's video take as junk, and I have a strong prejudice against junk data, like I do against junk food, and less and less time for it these days. Too much real information out there. )
Fair enough. WWG1WGA. Cheers and blessings, fren.
I realize that the word "shot" can mean, in this instance, he's just not up to the job. Q told us everything has meaning. We were given strong clues that McNoname was executed. Do you think it was one and done? OK they executed McNoname but then stopped. Uh, no. Q was giving us a peek into what was happening behind the scenes. I have no proof, but then, you have no proof they are still alive.
.....you mean apart from their continued presence and action as human beings, viewed via media etc?
With that reasoning, Angel, we have no proof that Q is real, that we aren't being ruled by Aliens and lizard people, and that we aren't living in the Matrix like the movie matrix, or that everything we do NOT see directly in person is even happening, and that we aren't living in the Truman Show.
To say that people right in front of is is "no proof that they are alive" is.... it's silly, sorry. Just plain silly.
Exactly. That was solid information given by Q.
Q never said anyone else was executed.
"Do you think it was one and done?" No. But now you are stepping into theorizing and conjecture, building conjecture on conjecture, on conjecture.
Do I have proof perfect that Joe Biden is Joe Biden, or that Elon Musk is Elon Musk, or that Michael Flynn is Michael Flynn? No. But I have a LOT more evidence that they are who they say they are than otherwise.
Hey, choose your beliefs! It's your prerogative. But don't try and pass your belief of as if its fact. Also, interpreting "everything has meaning" to mean "you can just pick and choose whatever fact or thing you like and make your OWN meaning out of it".... I don't think that is what Q was saying.
But that's my opinion.
Good for you. I've spent a lifetime looking at my own face in the mirror, and it changes...it changes.
Is it possible for detached earlobes to be “attached” its been a real head scratcher. Referring to images of Vice Joe vs Pres Joe
And how do you tell the difference? At what point does a "detached" earlobe become an "attached" earlobe? Does it ever occur to you that the human body has a remarkable range of presentation? Maybe it is only your problem in trying to categorize an earlobe that is at the boundary of what you imagine to be the two cases.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
You are correct. We don’t know a lot of things, and can be black hats narrative just to make us believe that a lot of people are not the same person, it is a good tactic to distract us from the real problems we are facing right now. God bless you for explaining us.
A) yes, are these narratives simply distractions? How do they help? There are real, verifiable, and important problems we face, including waking people up to the DS itself, their methods of control that have been going on for decades and for centuries, the use of psychological warfare via the corporate and state media, etc. These things are much more important to grasp than whether or not the man known as Joe Biden is Joe Biden. IMO.
B) Whatever the narratives, what's really important is HOW we approach them, what kind of thinking (or non-thinking) we use, and what drives our formulation of beliefs, ideas and understanding. That's the important thing here, imo.
You are one of the people here that open more my eyes in 2020 and I really thank you for that. God gives a lot of wisdom and we are lucky to have you here in GA. God bless you friend.
Superb and sophisticated analysis, fren.
It’s all too obvious. There are just too many questionable pictures that point to a mask being worn.
As posted before as a reply to someone.
Simple questions. Trump is almost the same age. Why are there not photos of his eyes changing color or sinking? Why isn't his face and skull changed? Why hasn't he he changed from a right hander to a left? Why are there no pictures of Trump having detached ears then attched ears? Why are there no pictures of Trump having detached ears then attched ears?
There are millions of photos of Trump out there. Show me these inconsistencies that are from aging.
Good points.
Thank you
It is true though. Several comments on here justifying these changes.
If what they are saying is true to old age then you should able to see this in comparing Trump photos
There's a lot of words in this thread. But I'm reminded of the old adage that goes something like, "a picture is worth a thousand words". So here's the picture:
https://files.catbox.moe/bamw9k.jpg
The clean perfect cut in its right eye where the tear duct should be is odd
Earlobe check?
During the SOTU speech, he pulled his neck at the right and towards the rear. It didn’t look like normal turgor. It stretched and almost snapped into place. It was not normal.
Eye lashes MIA?
Making a realistic mask of an old man is easier than a young man. Its the wrinkles and shading.
Could be the picture quality but the pores of the skin don't look deep enough.
One of the actors playing the 'Biden' role....
https://twitter.com/Prolotario1/status/1766026774851228036
I don't see double eyelids.
I see sunken eyes and shadows that could easily create an illusion of double eyelids.
IT could be the shadows, I'm completely on the fence of whether this is a mask or not. IT's so weird, how his eyes look so sunken in. and what, he doesn't have a single eyelash?
Eyelashes are definitely weird and a valid question.
Unsure what would explain that.
As someone who is getting older and has a pronounced brow, my eyelashes can be hidden at times. Not that I don't think it's a mask. Pretty sure I do.
My personal opinion is he is a plastic meat sack filled with a demonic alien.
Accurate.
The real Biden has brown eyes, I'm pretty sure. This guy has blue eyes.
The original Biden you're right, but the VP version had blue eyes, now this version seems to almost have black beady eyes like a braindead shark. There's even fact checks out there from the parasites like Reuters claiming Biden's eyes are "still blue"
He just has cushings disease
Not a real person face
I thought biden’s eyes were blue?
The comments about masks are getting ridiculous. You can tell a mask if you are close to someone. Even the best masks out there are not THAT good. Biden was surrounded by people last night. There is no way that every one of them, Dem and Rep alike, would not have noticed. I said in another post that in order to appear somewhat human under bright television lights, they have to apply a heavy make-up base to the face, Otherwise the lights make the face look unnatural. Which is why his face would have a smooth appearance to it in photographs.
Look this eyelid, normal eyes don't look like that. https://twitter.com/revelator71/status/1766268466971996365/photo/1
Ya, his eyes are always black...super creepy and not really human looking. 😦
The lack of any moisture (perspiration) on the 'skin' also lends creedence to this being a mask. (as long as this photo isn't photoshopped)
Oh, bother. My eyes are that far back. You have to consider that the eye is cushioned by a layer of fat behind it. If the fat is shrunk or depleted with age, the eye will recede.
The iris is not black; it is blue. But it is in shadow. The pupil will always be black and when it is enlarged due to low light level, or dilated by drugs, it will make the pupil-iris combination look black.
I think if you zoom in on the eye in the right of the picture and look just under his eye, you can see a line where the mask is.
I’m pretty convinced more than just he was wearing a mask too.
I agree with you that the whole mask thing is hard to swallow, but did you look at these pictures. What happened to Biden's eyelashes? Why are eyes so sunk in looking.
I definitely don't think that Biden is always an actor in a mask, but I really am leaning towards that character from last night was an actor in a mask to put out SOTU speech, because they know Biden is completely incapable of even speaking in complete sentences normally. How does Biden speak mostly coherently last night, and not really fumble much at all compared to how he usually talks.
I looked at the juanita broderick pick. I his left hairline you can see numbers and letters. Using the burn tool It showed up. I can't post for some reason but will keep trying.
The photograph referenced above has poor resolution. With good resolution, the individual hairs in his eyebrows would be discernible. As it is, they are all blurred together. This means that any skin pores would also be blurred together with smooth skin. You need to account for the quality of the photograph before drawing conclusions about it.
It’s the new “no planes” on 9/11 theory.
There were planes, but I believe they had no markings and were flown by remote control. No pilots and no passengers.
The group Pilots for 9/11 truth was very clear on the remote control aspect.
Robert Barron has made silicone masks for CIA operatives for 15 years. Barron uses silicone that is tinted to look like skin. Barron's masks are designed to pass close scrutiny from six to 12 inches away.