Two Seans, One Question

Addendum: I posted this a little while ago and have noticed that Sean is still plugging away at the last post. I am not looking at it as of now and neither should any of you. What is the takeaway from that one? If you are interested in cosmology/physics, you should now know to look deeply into the truth about relativity and ‘the big bang universe’, with which the mainstream continues to hammer you. If you’ve been paying attention at all you know by now that anything this important to them is somehow (if not totally) a lie. The other takeaway is the effort to misdirect you, as shown by ‘Sean’ and those like him.

The upside is how important it is to the PTB that you believe the lies. Proof of this is ‘Sean’ himself. Look at the effort he has put into his bull shit. Who would go to this trouble if he wasn’t being paid to do so? 

Every lie you don’t believe is a victory for the good guys.  

The commenter who calls himself ‘Sean’ is not the usual ‘government troll’ (which I define as an actual person – as opposed to an A.I. bot – whose job is to misdirect and otherwise obfuscate HTWRW, via comments on various social media and videos). ‘Sean’ is a ‘specialty’ troll, a troll with some formal education, aside from the training seminar state trolls get before going ‘live’. It’s sort of uplifting that the PTB would go to this length on our little blog, isn’t it? I mean all that money and energy just for us?

I assume Sean is human… let me rephrase… I assume Sean is made of meat, although it’s possible ‘he’ is an advanced A.I. entity. If you saw the Spike Jonze film Her, think of the OS System called Samantha; now think of ‘her’ when we realize that she had over 8,000 other ‘clients’ (aside from Theodore), 600 or so of which she is likewise ‘in love with.’ I don’t doubt for a moment that spook A.I. algorithms (is there any other kind?) have reached the level of sophistication depicted in Her. So it is possible that (in my last post’s comments) we have been arguing with an algorithm. Not as uplifting…

A.I. Gatekeepers (mainstreamers like Max Tegmark, Nick Bostrom, Musk, etc.) like to point out (as evidence of advancement) the Deep Mind chess and alpha go victories but the one that got my attention was the Jeopardy! win, which showed just how sophisticated an ‘artificial intelligence’ they are admitting to, let alone what they have hidden who knows where. (‘Hidden in plain site’ is more like it: By now their predictive behavior/culture creation A.I. likely uses the Net itself as its ‘neuro-network’….)

Anyway, ‘Sean’ may or may not be ‘real’ in the sense that most of you are real, but – as I hope you all know by now — ‘his’ (I’ll now quit with the scare quotes) job is to fuck with our notions of reality, for reasons I assume are common knowledge around here. If you doubt me on this, think about his output, i.e., the time and effort this apparently very intelligent and (according to Sean himself) very busy entity expends on my little blog (there are no more than a couple hundred who pay attention to it): over the last few days Sean has written over 2,000 words, all in defense of Einstein’s Relativity theories. This is a guy who has claimed to be a student of… what was it? And he’s writing a paper on… what was it? And his other claimed… jobs??? Whatever. And recall he was the first to comment on my post – it was almost instantaneous, well before notifications were sent out.

So he either constantly checks to see if I have a new post, or has a software feature that notifies him when one appears (no doubt the latter). Either way: What is with that? And of course all his comments are in line with the PTB and what it wants us to think. Do you need more evidence? I didn’t think so.

But why expend my own energy on a lowlife like this guy (assuming he’s human and a guy). Know thine enemy. Right, Sun Tzu, The Art of War. And we most certainly are at war with Sean and his ilk.

And in this case, it is a war of words. I write, Sean parries, mostly to misdirect, for our time wasted is a big part of his strategy. And Sean is most definitely outgunned here, for it matters not at all how ‘smart’ he is, since I have obvious truths on my side (as in the matter of black holes), and I have continually warned you to be on the lookout for misdirection, which is Sean’s only defense. Misdirection ain’t easy when folks are on the alert for it.

I’ll give you an example. In my last post, I made several points, the main one of which was regarding flat earth. But Sean, knowing that FE is a PTB black op that is to be defended, did all he could to re-direct the conversation… to an aside I made about Einstein. So be it. Sean did well – notice how the comments were directed away from the topic of the FE psy op and what it means. We ended up yelling back and forth about… Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Good for you, Sean! And Sean was even able (more or less) to re-direct the Einstein conversation into the arena of obscure mathematics – as opposed to logic/critical thinking — the lingo of which appears to be his specialty. (So Sean pulled off a bit of double misdirection!)

For example, Steve Crothers rightly points out that it is pure nonsense to claim that black hole singularities are real when they are defined as ‘points of infinite density and infinite or near infinite hotness.’ See, a ‘point’ is a mathematical construct that has no volume by definition, so…. that this is nonsense is not arguable, and neither is it arguable that the proponents of black holes make these claims. (See Steve’s video here.)

So Sean’s only (desperate) defense is to say that we’re all too dense (speaking of density) to understand the underlying mathematics, which, if we were to understand it (as he does), explains how a volume-less point actually can contain infinite hotness and density.

So Sean has a hard row to hoe, especially given that we know (or ought to) that he is an agent of misdirection to begin with. Wow.

But my current interest in Sean is to herein give him a platform to defend one of his physics heroes, whom I also mentioned in my last post. I’m talking about Sean Carroll, another devotee of black holes/big bang nonsense. Notice his ‘photograph’ called ‘The Pale Blue Dot’ and how there is nothing depicted in it other than the tiny smudge that Sean claims is ‘earth.’

Since the Voyager satellite camera that supposedly shot the image was some 4 billion miles away – close to the planet Neptune – and earth was being illuminated by reflected sunlight, it would be among the faintest celestial objects seen from the camera’s position.

Sean, I need you to defend your colleague in his implied assertion that the photo is genuine. Where are the background stars?

Remember that the usual nonsense about camera exposures being unable to pick up stars will not work here, since the camera is picking up the earth: The camera’s position is near Neptune and Neptune is not visible from earth, not on the clearest of nights, so how could earth be visible from Neptune, but not the heavens themselves (the star field)?

Addendum: Do not claim that the problem is ‘angle of view’, since the image contains about a hundred earth diameters. It’s a very wide view and should include several constellation-size groups of stars.

And remember, Sean, that if your namesake is clearly misinforming us (telling us something he clearly should know is false)… well, what does that say about his favorite theory, General Relativity?

Good luck, Sean, and please stick to the one question about why no stars.

Allan

I have to repeat myself on something. The reason for agents like Sean who pound away unceasingly, and for movies like Interstellar (and on and on), and for academia being the way it is… is all because of the transparency of the lies. It’s only a small step less severe than the flat earth psy op. Just think about the premise of the big bang. Everything  – all that would be the universe, all the matter and energy – was crammed into a point smaller than the nucleus of an atom. That’s what they are saying. You want to talk about mind control?