Lol...such a long response! However, I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to give me your perspective and helping me tweak my own.
I have to wholeheartedly agree with you that it is a slippery slope here on GAW in that after a while we assume consensus equals fact. I know I often fall into that. With that being said, most of the conclusions we anons come to are derived from a bit of info here a comm there, Q drop here and comment from DJT there. We don't really have the luxury of cold, hard facts very often to back up our speculations. I get what you're saying about making the leap from speculation to assuming it's a proven fact. I see that that is exactly what I have done with the fake Biden senario. However, in my defense I really don't see how anyone can look at the original Biden and think this current Biden looks the same.
With that said, I really have to eat humble pie in my tendency to become smug and obnoxious about my own convictions and allow for other points of view. Otherwise, we have no room for discussion.
I am sincerely grateful to you for reminding me that if not fact then it is conjecture and if conjecture don't assume anything about anyone. As we know assuming makes an ass out of me.
Thank you for making me your fren and helping me be a better anon. Checks and balances are always welcome. It is a privilege to serve here with you FractalizingIron. 🙏
What a great reply, and so well articulated. It's a pleasure to read things like this.
Because I've been in and out of the Fake Biden thing so often (most of us have), AND because, these days, it very often feels like some people have arrived at their position and are no longer interested in questioning their conclusions, I'm hesitant to even approach the discussion. Which is why, with the current post, I decided to take a different tack, and talk about the HOW to engage with the topic rather than the WHAT.
But, you've raised a point that I think I can address and it might open up some territory for further discussion or at least thought.
However, in my defense I really don't see how anyone can look at the original Biden and think this current Biden looks the same.
OK. Here we are getting to the nitty gritty.
think this current Biden looks the same
Here's the real nib, the real tip of the blade. Folks like me or who disagree with the "Fake Joe Biden" theory do not think he "looks the same". Its very clear he does not look the same.
But where the thinking diverges here is how we interpret that information. Lots of folks look at the pictures or footage and go, he doesn't look the same. When they ask themselves why, they conclude (very quickly and directly it seems) the only thing that can account for that is that this one is a different person altogether.
Others look at the footage and pictures and go, he doesn't look the same. What might account for that? Age? Natural processes? Surgery? Lighting and angles? All of the above?
And for me, this is what I notice. I have never come across any analysis from someone trained in geriatric (old person) or other anatomy, or forensic biology, that explains, with facts, evidence and rigorous empirical-based reasoning, WHY the person we see in the images now could NOT be the one we saw in previous images or footage.
The absence of such rigorous and scientifically grounded analysis and approach is a glaring vacuum for me. Because IF in fact there was an actual scientifically grounded (based in the sciences of anatomy, biology, and geriatrics, etc,) foundation for arguing that Biden A is not or could not be Biden B, then I think those analyses would be out there.
The fact that they are not, and I mean studies or analysis performed by people trained in those fields, at a minimum means there is an absence of evidence.
Here is another approach that might actually lend academic (i.e. disciplined) evidence for the argument. Take a study of 20 different people who have lived in the public sphere, and do a point by point comparison with them over the same period that people are comparing with Biden.
Not all people age the same, so there will be some discrepancies, but a rigorous compare and contrast exercise would lend strength to any argument. For lack of a better comparison, the other subjects of such an analysis would perform the role of a 'control' which one needs when doing experiments.
But we don't have that. No one seems to think it worth the time and effort to actually develop grounded foundations for the arguments. All we have are pictures of "Joe Biden", in which "Joe Biden" appears different, and the conclusions are leapt to: It MUST be a different person! No control, no exhaustive or even moderate comparison with other subjects.
I'm older than I used to be (kek), and I look different. Man, compare photos of me 20 years ago and now, and well, Do I look the same?
Over a period of 20 years I spent a lot of time with my father and mother in the elderly stages of their lives, when my dad moved from being an energetic 70 year old to a much slower 88 year old. In the case of my mother, I was in constant interaction with her as she went through the same period of her life.
The physical differences were apparent and clear.
I don't think all the differences we can see in the images can be explained merely by aging alone, but I personally think many can. (That's an opinion, but not a professionally trained one! Only based on personal observation of changes in my parents as an example.)
Add to that modern techniques of surgery, plastic surgery, and everything else, for someone who is both loaded (elite criminal) and more in the public arena than 99.9% of human beings, and perhaps there are other possible explanations for perceived differences in appearance.
So that's just the area of 'physical appearance'. There are of course many other factors. But I hope I've outlined how persons like myself do not necessarily think that "Biden A looks the same as Biden B". Rather, the difference in perspective - the conclusions drawn or line of thinking - comes from different ways that information is interpreted.
Maybe that helps. I agree with you. Biden of "60 years of age" (for example) does NOT look like Biden of "80 years of age". Although I admit, in some cases, Fake Joe Biden proponents may not simply be looking at different appearances over time, but different appearances on the same time (Biden at 75 vs Biden at 75) but that's another topic.
I think there is a lot of evidence that Biden 2021-24 is somehow cooperating or at least indirectly helping the Patriots and the Awakening, and for me that's a strong argument for this being the OG Biden. Why? Because I find morally unacceptable the proposition that any 'White Hats' could perpetrate a deception on the American people of the magnitude of having a fake and fraudulent puppet who is not even the person placed and controlled in the White House.
Evil has been doing that, putting puppets in place and controlling the People via deception. I personally find it a morally unacceptable proposition that any 'white hats' seeking to restore law and order and freedom and honesty, etc, could use such a method.
That's another factor that I slip in to my "How to consider the idea of a Fake Joe Biden" quiver.
EDIT: I think that Bubble has a different view here, that the Cabal actually switched out Biden but then the replacement got compromised and now controlled by white hats. That's potentially morally acceptable, because the one perpetrating the fraud are not the white hats but the cabal. But anyway....
I'll admit: I work with what I've got. I think that others may see things differently and consider other aspects re: the morality of directly putting a fraudulent puppet in place, etc, and have different reasoning around that. That's OK. I don't need to feel reconciled to how others view the matter. I only need to feel reconciled within myself, that the conclusions or positions I draw make sense to me in the overall scheme of things.
And, I expect that in most cases, it's the same for others. BUT at the end of the day, I think we HAVE to admit that we do not know, and it is wise to be open to consider other views that may actually enhance or increase our field of view.
In any case, thanks a bunch for the great reply. I'm glad you are there at GAW.
Plus, I personally don't think it's immoral for the whitehats to replace the original Biden with an actor. If the whitehats are controlling whoever this is does it really matter if it's the real guy or an actor?
But, you are right at the end of the day we really don't know and may never know. The important thing is to understand the comms and be open minded to many possibilities. My overall conviction is that the Patriots are in control to the degree they can be and that we will win the war against the satanic cabal.
Thanks, again for taking the time to dialogue we me. I so appreciate your generosity. 🐸🧡
Lol...such a long response! However, I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to give me your perspective and helping me tweak my own.
I have to wholeheartedly agree with you that it is a slippery slope here on GAW in that after a while we assume consensus equals fact. I know I often fall into that. With that being said, most of the conclusions we anons come to are derived from a bit of info here a comm there, Q drop here and comment from DJT there. We don't really have the luxury of cold, hard facts very often to back up our speculations. I get what you're saying about making the leap from speculation to assuming it's a proven fact. I see that that is exactly what I have done with the fake Biden senario. However, in my defense I really don't see how anyone can look at the original Biden and think this current Biden looks the same.
With that said, I really have to eat humble pie in my tendency to become smug and obnoxious about my own convictions and allow for other points of view. Otherwise, we have no room for discussion.
I am sincerely grateful to you for reminding me that if not fact then it is conjecture and if conjecture don't assume anything about anyone. As we know assuming makes an ass out of me.
Thank you for making me your fren and helping me be a better anon. Checks and balances are always welcome. It is a privilege to serve here with you FractalizingIron. 🙏
Thank you damn. Damn, you ARE good!
What a great reply, and so well articulated. It's a pleasure to read things like this.
Because I've been in and out of the Fake Biden thing so often (most of us have), AND because, these days, it very often feels like some people have arrived at their position and are no longer interested in questioning their conclusions, I'm hesitant to even approach the discussion. Which is why, with the current post, I decided to take a different tack, and talk about the HOW to engage with the topic rather than the WHAT.
But, you've raised a point that I think I can address and it might open up some territory for further discussion or at least thought.
OK. Here we are getting to the nitty gritty.
Here's the real nib, the real tip of the blade. Folks like me or who disagree with the "Fake Joe Biden" theory do not think he "looks the same". Its very clear he does not look the same.
But where the thinking diverges here is how we interpret that information. Lots of folks look at the pictures or footage and go, he doesn't look the same. When they ask themselves why, they conclude (very quickly and directly it seems) the only thing that can account for that is that this one is a different person altogether.
Others look at the footage and pictures and go, he doesn't look the same. What might account for that? Age? Natural processes? Surgery? Lighting and angles? All of the above?
And for me, this is what I notice. I have never come across any analysis from someone trained in geriatric (old person) or other anatomy, or forensic biology, that explains, with facts, evidence and rigorous empirical-based reasoning, WHY the person we see in the images now could NOT be the one we saw in previous images or footage.
The absence of such rigorous and scientifically grounded analysis and approach is a glaring vacuum for me. Because IF in fact there was an actual scientifically grounded (based in the sciences of anatomy, biology, and geriatrics, etc,) foundation for arguing that Biden A is not or could not be Biden B, then I think those analyses would be out there.
The fact that they are not, and I mean studies or analysis performed by people trained in those fields, at a minimum means there is an absence of evidence.
Here is another approach that might actually lend academic (i.e. disciplined) evidence for the argument. Take a study of 20 different people who have lived in the public sphere, and do a point by point comparison with them over the same period that people are comparing with Biden.
Not all people age the same, so there will be some discrepancies, but a rigorous compare and contrast exercise would lend strength to any argument. For lack of a better comparison, the other subjects of such an analysis would perform the role of a 'control' which one needs when doing experiments.
But we don't have that. No one seems to think it worth the time and effort to actually develop grounded foundations for the arguments. All we have are pictures of "Joe Biden", in which "Joe Biden" appears different, and the conclusions are leapt to: It MUST be a different person! No control, no exhaustive or even moderate comparison with other subjects.
I'm older than I used to be (kek), and I look different. Man, compare photos of me 20 years ago and now, and well, Do I look the same?
Over a period of 20 years I spent a lot of time with my father and mother in the elderly stages of their lives, when my dad moved from being an energetic 70 year old to a much slower 88 year old. In the case of my mother, I was in constant interaction with her as she went through the same period of her life.
The physical differences were apparent and clear.
I don't think all the differences we can see in the images can be explained merely by aging alone, but I personally think many can. (That's an opinion, but not a professionally trained one! Only based on personal observation of changes in my parents as an example.)
Add to that modern techniques of surgery, plastic surgery, and everything else, for someone who is both loaded (elite criminal) and more in the public arena than 99.9% of human beings, and perhaps there are other possible explanations for perceived differences in appearance.
So that's just the area of 'physical appearance'. There are of course many other factors. But I hope I've outlined how persons like myself do not necessarily think that "Biden A looks the same as Biden B". Rather, the difference in perspective - the conclusions drawn or line of thinking - comes from different ways that information is interpreted.
Maybe that helps. I agree with you. Biden of "60 years of age" (for example) does NOT look like Biden of "80 years of age". Although I admit, in some cases, Fake Joe Biden proponents may not simply be looking at different appearances over time, but different appearances on the same time (Biden at 75 vs Biden at 75) but that's another topic.
I think there is a lot of evidence that Biden 2021-24 is somehow cooperating or at least indirectly helping the Patriots and the Awakening, and for me that's a strong argument for this being the OG Biden. Why? Because I find morally unacceptable the proposition that any 'White Hats' could perpetrate a deception on the American people of the magnitude of having a fake and fraudulent puppet who is not even the person placed and controlled in the White House.
Evil has been doing that, putting puppets in place and controlling the People via deception. I personally find it a morally unacceptable proposition that any 'white hats' seeking to restore law and order and freedom and honesty, etc, could use such a method.
That's another factor that I slip in to my "How to consider the idea of a Fake Joe Biden" quiver.
EDIT: I think that Bubble has a different view here, that the Cabal actually switched out Biden but then the replacement got compromised and now controlled by white hats. That's potentially morally acceptable, because the one perpetrating the fraud are not the white hats but the cabal. But anyway....
I'll admit: I work with what I've got. I think that others may see things differently and consider other aspects re: the morality of directly putting a fraudulent puppet in place, etc, and have different reasoning around that. That's OK. I don't need to feel reconciled to how others view the matter. I only need to feel reconciled within myself, that the conclusions or positions I draw make sense to me in the overall scheme of things.
And, I expect that in most cases, it's the same for others. BUT at the end of the day, I think we HAVE to admit that we do not know, and it is wise to be open to consider other views that may actually enhance or increase our field of view.
In any case, thanks a bunch for the great reply. I'm glad you are there at GAW.
Be well, fren.
Some thoughts. I think there have been people giving as much proof as may be available at this time that there is a replacement Joe. One example;
https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/1802449247973048496
Plus, I personally don't think it's immoral for the whitehats to replace the original Biden with an actor. If the whitehats are controlling whoever this is does it really matter if it's the real guy or an actor?
But, you are right at the end of the day we really don't know and may never know. The important thing is to understand the comms and be open minded to many possibilities. My overall conviction is that the Patriots are in control to the degree they can be and that we will win the war against the satanic cabal.
Thanks, again for taking the time to dialogue we me. I so appreciate your generosity. 🐸🧡