“I believe in evidence. I believe in observation, measurement, and reasoning, confirmed by independent observers. I’ll believe anything, no matter how wild and ridiculous, if there is evidence for it… Isaac Asimov
I’m not sure why I’m doing this, given that so few people seem able or willing to actually think critically about this (or anything). ‘Evidence’ has nothing to do with what 99% of what people believe. And as I first showed in Water Time, no one ever changes his/her mind about anything. So why do I bother? I hardly break even on this blog; I don’t monetize anything.
I guess I’m doing this as a way to think out loud. Yes, that must be it.
I’ll try to make clear (to myself) what I mean by ‘how things would work.’ Note: For newbies, this post refers to my video found here.
NWO Reporter wrote:
As far as actors saying the ‘wrong’ thing…they are actors. They say what they’re paid to say. Maybe their job was covert promotion of the ME. There’s nothing supernatural about actors saying anything.
Okay, let’s say the actors in The Newsroom scene were just told to say ‘in the City’, i.e., it was in the script, and Sorkin was aware of the psy op (this is completely plausible, as I’ve said about Sorkin being a puppet of the PTB). Now we have to ask Who else in the show knew/knows about the psy op? Could it be only Sorkin and maybe a confidant or two? Yes, possible, which would mean that several people who read the script likely mentioned the ‘mistake’ and he said, ‘Don’t worry about it. Just do it my way.’ Possible, sure.
Thought I’d do visual breaks with the stupider comments from last time.
What happens here — and please think about this as a way of looking at these things — is that we have to think about how this went from the get-go. I can tell you one thing about Sorkin: no one told him to stick in a whole subplot about Sex in/and the City’ in the HIS show. (Right: Not IMPOSSIBLE. Just very very unlikely.) It is possible that Sorkin came up with the idea himself — via the spooks, word to the ‘in crowd’ was that they want to fuck with us with the title of that show — he’s known about this for years, maybe — and he did it on his own, or maybe got it okayed from the spooks. (At this level, the bus-prop becomes unimportant.)
So that would pretty much explain this one show. People think along these lines and go, ‘See, that explains this ME bullshit.’ This is what I mean by cherry-picking. They figure ALL the examples of people saying ‘in the city’ can be explained this way. This is shallow thinking and this particular show is a good example of why, since there are so many ‘residuals’, i.e., other people getting it ‘wrong’, people who are reading their own scripts (the awards shows) and doing so over the years.
…but looking them over I realized it’s only a couple or three morons….
But is it POSSIBLE that the awards announcers and so forth were likewise told to read it that way, with no explanation as to why? Very unlikely, but possible. (Maybe the script did read ‘Sex ‘n the City’.)
But the capper is the fact that literally everyone involved with the show ‘Sex in/and the City’ would have to be completely in on it, and sworn to secrecy. I’m talking everyone, from the stars to the gaffers to the Teamsters who drive the stars to the carpenters and so on and so forth. Do I really have to explain why this is the case? I hope not. (From the comments it’s obvious that I should explain this but since it would do no good anyway I’ll not bother.)
In this case we have a conspiracy that would get out, and pretty quickly. By now there’d be Youtubers figuring to go viral with an exec producer or whatever (maybe someone with a grudge), etc. etc. blowing the whistle. Everyone see that? (Doesn’t matter: No one changes their mind about anything. Ever. This is the problem with our species.)
And here’s the thing. If you are going this route you pretty much have to agree that the other major MEs, like in Star Wars and Forrest Gump (ones with evidence), say, are also real (part of the op), so you have to allow that everyone on those productions are in on it. (The spooks figure correctly that people will ‘run away’ with this, ‘seeing’ MEs everywhere, which is great. But they would do ones like Gump and, especially, Star Wars and the Luke’s father line, to get the op rolling.
Look at all these deluded people who did searches with the wrong title, pre-2010. Strange, no?
So wouldn’t it get out? Almost certainly. I say ‘almost’ because it’s not against the laws of physics that everyone would keep silent. Hey, look at all the crisis actors that have participated in stuff like the Boston bombing and other false flag terrorism. None of them have come forward (there may be exceptions here). Good point, right? No, that’s a bit different, since crisis actors are carefully screened and read the riot act about what happens to them if they talk. You can’t do that with showbiz people who are already successful.
…most of the comments are just not well-thought out… not actually stupid… and some are fairly smart. A couple, anyway.
But there is a show stopper. I haven’t done this myself so this is second hand, but what about all the VHS tapes (etc) with the true, original ‘Luke, I am your father’ on them? To go this route we’d have to agree with ‘Miles Mathis’ (yes, that psy op) that the spooks are sneaking into houses and yard sales surreptitiously replacing old tapes with doctored ones. I say this because not one YT vid has come out with an example of Vader saying ‘Luke, I am your father’. (An even better example maybe is the ‘Dolly’s Braces’ one from Moonraker. That one has whole websites devoted to it.)
So that’s that with all of the above. We have to rule out a run of the mill spook psy op (with no ‘high strangeness’) — which I hate to do, believe me. If we wanna pooh-pooh the ME then we’re back to bad memories by millions of people (including me). Then we have to explain the ‘residuals’ that cannot be denied – which is why I chose Sex in/and the City; it has so many, and they span several years. (Ditto Mister Rogers, with all the skits.)
The other reason the ME cannot be a psy op is indirect but robust: The media/alt media doesn’t go near it. (If there are exceptions, help me out.) Look at the YT references to it. They are all small timers/individuals like me. (Keep in mind that the alt media – the slick/successful ones, are virtually all state moles/psy ops/Limited hangouts.) See, if, in spite of everything I’ve explained here, the ME is a psy op, it has to be a huge one, with major resources devoted to keeping it a secret and so forth. So why keep it so low key? Hey, why not do a 60 Minutes/whatever, and make fun of it but in a way that gets attention? If this were a psy op, that’s what they’d do. But they haven’t.
… so to the rest of you I apologize, if you thought I was referring to you.
So what’s going on here? I don’t know but I’ll make an educated guess. Here it is: The ME was a psy op, but it got out of control and so had to be cancelled. Why do I say that?
Yes, as many of you (who don’t think it through) have said, the PTB want to get us to distrust our own senses, so they came up with the ME, a regular psy op, using the Net the way they always do…. Wait… that can’t be, as I have shown. No, the psy op was using the Net plus whatever they have unearthed at CERN or with quantum computing. (Do your own research, maybe starting with ‘CERN + the occult’.)
And I have news: We can’t in point of fact trust our own senses. The PTB forgot that they too are ‘human,’ and subject to the same effects as the rest of us.
Addendum: When I say we can’t trust our own senses, do any of you doubt me on this? Hah! I can hear the moronic yelling over the howling onshore wind here at the beach, right now. You think I’m nuts for saying this? If so, you are a joke, the joke. One example: Lately, you’ve watched rockets back down from space and land on a rolling barge at sea and accepted that this really happened. Others have seen two rockets do the same onto land, simultaneously. I have heard from people who say they were there when this happened, as proof that it did happen.
What a joke!
This guy, The GOAT or whatever. Does he even read what he wrote? Or is he a defective bot?
I have ceased to disbelief in the powers of the occult; I’m agnostic on the subject. That there is Evil in this world and that it has begun to run amok with ‘reality’ as we seem to experience it, appears to be the case. (If you need proof, read the comments from my last post: Stupidity equaling evil after a certain point.) I believe that the PTB, the human/flesh beings who figure they are in control have somehow gone too far (a sort of modern Tower of Babel) and can no longer control whatever they have unleashed.
So what started as a psy op is now… something else. Something to worry about. That’s my educated guess.
#
The Bible. I mention the Bible and the shit flies, doesn’t matter that I explain I don’t believe it was ‘divinely inspired’ or not, and I’m only interested in evidence. I get shit from people who just need to vent their stupidity, one way or the other, and I seem to be a good target. I don’t care. (Some moron who calls himself ‘drud’ makes a complete fool of himself claiming I’m a Christian, then rambling on. Doesn’t matter what I say. Another insists I’m a Jew (as if that would mean something), ‘Goat’-something is his handle. I’m starting to think these people can’t be that stupid — they have to be paid to write their crapola. Good to know I need discrediting.)
Having made that ‘clear’ (as if I’ve done anything of the sort): It does not matter whether or not what you believe about the Christian Bible. The PTB are practising occultists and take the Bible very seriously, as they do the Christian doctrines behind it, and, indeed, all religions. Now, my educated guess coupled with this occult-observation implies that the Bible itself, and discrediting it, would be of great interest to these ‘people,’ given their satanic proclivities.
Therefore, this Mandela Effect – this black op that maybe has gotten out of control – should manifest itself in the Bible. And indeed, it appears so. ‘The lion’ used to ‘lie with the lamb’; now it does not. How am I sure of this, aside from my own memory? (Please look carefully at the inserted screen grabs from here on. They are important. I mean if you’re not a moron.)
This is a direct quote from the KJV. No searches for the ‘wolf’ version.
With the miracle of the Net, one thing we can do is see what other people are ‘searching’ for, via the feature called ‘Google Trends.’ With a little rational thought, you can get a pretty good picture of what people believe over time.
According to many who have studied the Bible (nuts/fanatics though they may be), ‘the lion laying with the lamb’ was/is/should be in the Book of Isaiah, Chapter 11, verse 6. When we go there now, we get ‘The wolf shall also dwell with the lamb,’ okay? (I’m reading this from a hard copy KJV I found at a rest stop.)
Correct or not, be it wolf or lion, Isaiah 11:6 is a well-known passage. So what I did was put in a search on Google Trends to see how many people have looked for the wolf version. Guess what? ‘No data’ comes up. This means that, basically, no one has had any interest in the wolf passage. None whatsoever. And I tried all kinds of combinations of ‘dwelling with’ or ‘lying with’ or ‘shall lie with’ or ‘also shall’ and on and on with bible-lingo, in case the Thumpers out there just got a word wrong or something when they did their search. Nope. No one in the goddamn world had done a search for it. (I’m showing you the ‘United States’ results but the same ‘No data’ comes up in a Worldwide search.)
If this passage doesn’t exist, why all the searches? And notice all the searches BEFORE the ME was ‘outed.’ Please explain.
So I tried ‘The lion shall lay with the lamb’ and guess what? A bunch of folks had done searches for that. And I did variations as I did with the wolf version and even more folks came up (so we have to add the numbers in the different phrasings). Any combination of ‘lion laying or lying or dwelling’ and so forth told me that still more people had done searches.
And yet the passage now does not exist! (Not in the KJV and not in any of the scores of other translations.)
With all my Google Trend searches I mainly paid attention to the years before 2010, which was about when ‘The Mandela Effect’ first reared its nasty-named head. That way the results weren’t skewed by the Effect itself.
You have to add these searches to the previous ones; with different wording, they are separate.
What the Lion/Wolf issue implies is pretty important, though, if you think about it. Although the Trends don’t go back before 2004, that no one between 2004 and today tried to find the wolf-version of the passage means that this ‘change’ is very recent. I mean, right? Every KJV Bible on the planet now says the wolf sacked out with the lamb; if that were the case since 2004 surely someone would have done a search by now, the clear implication being that the change is very recent, within the last couple years at most.
Does anyone see what I mean or are you too busy making up bullshit to think about what I’m showing you?
Allan
Any comments, be they dumb-ass or well-thought out, should start by explaining these screen grabs. How it would really have to work for them to be as they are. Implications (what they mean) are welcome. This is my interest.
This is a direct quote from the KJV. No searches.
Added Note: I thought to check the Youtube video dates that mention ‘Mandela Effect + lion/wolf’ and it was no surprise that the oldest one was from ‘2 years ago,’ which is further evidence that the change took place about then (2016).
I do keep forgetting how lacking critical thought most people are so let me repeat the obvious: Statistically, no one has done any Google searches for a Bible passage involving a wolf and a lamb from 2004 to the present. If such a passage existed in the Bible for all those years (a dozen years) people (statistically speaking) would have done searches — if you plug any ‘important’ Bible passages in to Google Trends you get results. This means that the wolf/lamb version was somehow added, around 2016, and it was added to already-existing Bibles. Strange, yes, but that is what this evidence implies.
If you have a rational explanation for why the above is incorrect, I am all ears.
courtesy of a very sweet and wise fellow in England, Martin Geddes:
“The evil that is enabled to spread and fester by #FakeNews is to be taken very seriously indeed. What if your acts of public resistance against this abuse have 10x the impact you imagine, yet you’re only doing 10% of what you could? If you went “all in”, what might that entail?”
Ken Follet wrote a bestseller in the eighties called Lie Down With Lions. Everyone understood he was referring to the bible passage.
That book title still exists.
Good point (I recall the book). A great source of ‘residues’ are old books that for one reason or another quote Bible passages. I have seen a few examples of Isaiah 11:6 referred to (the ‘lion’ version); I’ll try to find them. This would be a good line of inquiry for anyone who wants to look into this further. Find Bible-related books and see if they are on pdf or online and do some creative search-word work. Let me know how you do.
my wife was watching reruns of Sex AND the City on “E” network…DirecTV info has it the same…Sex AND the city…
Is it Sex on the beach or Sex and the bitch…
Hi Allan. First time commenting but I’ve been appreciating your mind, research and lens of life for many years now. Glad to see you talking about ME. It’s something I’ve looked at for a couple years but you’re the first to bring the Bible changes to my attention. Like you suggest, from what I have gathered the ME phenomenon seems supernatural, which to me means beyond our ability to understand at this time. I’m curious…do you have any thoughts/ideas that the ME could possibly be interrelated with what is commonly called chemtrails? I don’t use the word chemtrails anymore myself simply because it usually closes people off to the discussion. But that is another phenomenon that I’ve observed with my own eyes for a good 10 years now. And it’s my opinion based on my research that it has nothing to do with climate change as reported, and instead is more about controlling through the use of specific frequencies. And knowing that the human experience of sight and sound is linked to frequency, I’ve started to wonder if there’s any link between the two. Memory is also something that we experience as sight or sound too, just internally. So…just curious if you’ve ever had similar thoughts or perhaps have even researched something that might reveal a link between the two. As always, thanks for your work and continuing to fight the good fight.
I would guess that the two may be related, and for the reason you suggest, i.e., ‘mind’ and ‘memory’ are affected by RF radiation (radio waves), and the chemtrails are likely there to boost the effect. Among other reasons — that their poisoning us with heavy metals, for one.
I’m mostly interested in the evidence right now — for ex, I spent yesterday on the phone trying to find a Braille reader to ‘read’ the ‘lion/wolf’ passage. ‘they’ might have neglected to change Braille Bibles. If it reads the lion version in Braille, we’d have a major smoking gun.
Look forward to hearing the results of the Braille research. Might be able to check on that some myself due to some connections with the local deaf/blind community. Will see what I can find.
It is my belief that chemtrails also infect us with nano tech. I believe this simply because I can now see the bots when they float in front of my optic nerve. And please don’t anyone tell me its floaters. I am well aware of those. These are tiny luminous spheres with a black center. and they come in droves. I don’t see then at all times but far to often, and they are very distinct. There is more but I will keep that to my self for now.
Yes, there is other evidence of that, some of it pretty horrific….
Seems we’re still a bit behind the times here in NZ – today 28th Feb 2019, in the news -“Waikato wine producer Invivo has teamed up with Sex in the City star Sarah Jessica Parker to develop Sauvignon Blanc and Rosé wines.” Repeated a few times in the article – Sex IN the City. Matches my vague ole memory from when it was on telly. Phew… but Dolly without braces!?! Far too odd.
If you have the energy/curiosity, as the marketing develops keep an eye on it, especially If Ms Parker shows up to promote it. Be interesting if the ‘in’ version actually is on the bottles. Also, you might hold on to any hard copy of the ad or press relief, to see if it changes over time. Nuts as this sounds, why not give it a look?
Well, we have the link and this wine company gives the name Sex in the City, which is interesting, given the bit of conflict over the title and official name being different. Seems unlikely they got the name ‘wrong’, given the biz contracts, etc.. It’s also odd given that the ‘in’ version (the awards shows, etc.) were from 15 years ago. I mean, why haven’t they straightened it out? Does Ms Parker currently have the name of the show wrong?
Apparently, when the show was on in NZ, the title was ‘in’, which is odd (to say the least) given that the credit sequence is not going to be different in NZ. Those who still think this is people contracting ‘and’ to ‘in’ have some re-thinking to do. Or will they come up with still more ad hockery? Probably the latter.
Anyway, here’s the link: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12207753
Be interesting if it changes. I did a screen shot, which, if THAT changes… that would be that, wouldn’t it?
No One Dare Bite The Hand That Feeds Them… Simple as that.
Have a Blessed day Alan and Community
Cheers Allan, sorry i didn’t give link, thought perhaps not of interest really; will just add that all i have asked (with no ME reference or knowledge of) remember Sex IN the City here in NZ, not that i or my frenz were avid watchers – but it was briefly quite “daring” & thus popular & so remembered. Will keep eyes open for further references.
I think I found the NZ article. However, It’s only mentioned twice: 1) in the picture description and 2) in the text of the article.
h ttps://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12207753
The CURRENT title is slightly different, “New Zealand wine company Invivo teams up with actress Sarah Jessica Parker”
Google cache HOWEVER has the OLD title as you state, but when you click it, it’s broken:
The requested URL /search?q=cache:3usZ-HL23MUJ:https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business-services/news/article.cfm%3Fc_id%3D25%26objectid%3D12207753%26ref%3Drss+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us was not found on this server.
It will be interesting to see how this tracks over time.
‘Michael’ left this comment for my approval, which I did but I don’t see it yet. I will paste it:
(I want to ask Michael when was the last time he was at the Christmas Eve church meeting? Would he be willing to contact others in the church and ask about this?)
URL:
Comment:
Allan, I actually want to thank you for bringing all this to my attention! The Isaiah Lion-Wolf swap, the bible changes in general really, is far and away the clearest case I’ve seen of a ME being due to actual changes to reality. The first part of Isaiah 11 is a standard reading in my church’s Christmas Eve service, which I’ve attended most years of my life, even into adulthood though I haven’t been a believer since my early teens. I can hardly describe how dissonant and completely unfamiliar “the wolf shall dwell” sounds to my ears.
I see evidence too that what we’re looking at is more complicated than, say, parts of Reality B replacing Reality A. Because I distinctly remember “The lion shall lie down with the lamb / the leopard shall lie down with the kid.” as a couplet, along with other parts of the “extended version” which it seems are new to most people reporting this.
The only other thing I can think of to account for something this disjunct in a passage many people, even I, savor(ed) is some sort of mass hypnosis. But, that’s quite extraordinary itself! Because what sort of hypnotic technique can make masses of people completely mis-perceive so specifically, so durably across a lifetime, across centuries, and no matter how one first comes to read a particular quote… and yet the spell is broken as soon as it’s pointed out? So, no on that.
For everyone’s information: Yes, I will definitely be contacting folks to see what they recall (this information is very new to me).
I’m in my early 30s, and I’ve attended that service 1991 onwards, only missing 2016 and I think one other year in the teens. I did attend the past two years, but unfortunately those were not very happy times for me (understatement) and I was barely there mentally. Mary’s donkey could probably have been swapped with a camel and I wouldn’t have noticed. It’s rather embarrassing but I might as well be honest. I would add though that it’s because I was *too* curious and serious about spirituality that I moved away from Christianity. I paid close attention. Besides all the structured religious education I got I’ve also read the bulk of the bible on my own a couple times in the course of my life, even comparing translations. So those services were not my only exposure to Isaiah 11 and many other of these changed passages which I would corroborate.
Thanks for the details. The way it looks is that the change was made (to that passage) in 2016. This might come in handy when you talk to folks. Keep in mind that some will just deny that anything is different. Don’t let that bother you. It’s human nature. Like in Orwell’s 1984 when the official ‘enemy’ switched to East Asia in the middle of a public speech and the orator didn’t miss a beat; he just kept going, inserting the new name of the enemy wherever applicable.
Georgie O surely nailed human nature. For those who haven’t seen it, my interview with a famous photog is another example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ04UjoErP4&t=86s
Agreed Faith and Religion are two different things and it seems they are making a run at faith in the moment by trying to destabilize reality… Spirit is more Powerful than D-Wave Computers and A.I even though the last decade the Human race has give the Digital beast a lot to chew on and formulate a offensive against mankind… there will be nowhere to run, and we did it too ourselves…Aloha
Allan, I actually want to thank you for bringing all this to my attention! The Isaiah Lion-Wolf swap, the bible changes in general really, is far and away the clearest case I’ve seen of a ME being due to actual changes to reality. The first part of Isaiah 11 is a standard reading in my church’s Christmas Eve service, which I’ve attended most years of my life, even into adulthood though I haven’t been a believer since my early teens. I can hardly describe how dissonant and completely unfamiliar “the wolf shall dwell” sounds to my ears.
I see evidence too that what we’re looking at is more complicated than, say, parts of Reality B replacing Reality A. Because I distinctly remember “The lion shall lie down with the lamb / the leopard shall lie down with the kid.” as a couplet, along with other parts of the “extended version” which it seems are new to most people reporting this.
The only other thing I can think of to account for something this disjunct in a passage many people, even I, savor(ed) is some sort of mass hypnosis. But, that’s quite extraordinary itself! Because what sort of hypnotic technique can make masses of people completely mis-perceive so specifically, so durably across a lifetime, across centuries, and no matter how one first comes to read a particular quote… and yet the spell is broken as soon as it’s pointed out? So, no on that.
I don’t know how Google trends searches work; could someone have “scrubbed” all wolf/lamb queries from before 2016? It doesn’t really sound like something a psyop planner would have thought to have taken care of, though, and *nobody* wondering, “Hey where in the Bible is that quote about the wolf and the lamb lemme google it” is bizarre if that really was the verse.
I’ve recently moved. Got a family bible from the 1970s somewhere in all the boxes. If/when it ever surfaces again, I am so going to have a look at Isaiah 11:6.