A ‘Tink Tank’?

Regarding this nuclear hoax issue I woke up this morning wondering, What’s Next? It would take some serious research to come to any conclusion above 50 – 50, other than in the negative, meaning ‘No hoax,’ which could be proven, for example, if cities started blowing up under mushroom clouds, that sort of thing. Or there may be a simpler and less drastic smoking gun.

I watched a bunch of YT Manhattan Project films yesterday and really have problems with the idea that all those scientists would know it was a hoax and not say anything, ever. They aren’t the types to do that. (Although some of the lower tier people could have been compartmentalized and unaware of the hoax, at least a half dozen would had to have known, and this is aside from the engineers and so forth who were at the Trinity test.) And there are no weird deaths among them, if you get my drift.

It is conceivable that the gamma and x-rays from the bombs fogged the film completely so they faked the imagery for the public, etc. The other stuff that is obviously faked is the houses, etc., disintegrating. Fake. Fake. Fake. All done at the Laurel Canyon Studio that Dave McGowan and others describe. These are good subjects to look into….

It occurs to me that there are some smart people that keep track of this blog. Plus I know there are others out there who don’t chime in with comments but who are interested in getting to the truth behind certain subjects; maybe we can goose them into action too.

Addendum: The other morning ‘Horst’ sent a link that for some reason didn’t appear in the Comments. Included was a link to an old Defense Department film called ‘A Tale of Two Cities.’ It’s priceless, for it’s… attitude and for what appears to be some ‘slip ups’: About eight minutes in a priest who was at Hiroshima and witnessed the blast says that ‘right after’ the explosion people were back on the streets with ‘no ill effects.’ Later, regarding Nagasaki, the narrator says the same, i.e., people returned to the ground zero area and suffered no harm. 

This is a great example of what we can come up with! 

This nuclear hoax issue could be the first subject wherein we do a sort of ‘crowd research’. But maybe not. It’s pretty much up to you guys. My thought is that on any given subject, we would divide up the areas to look into, depending on expertise and interest. For example, on this nuclear hoax issue, some of you might be interested in the physics, others in the politics and motives, still others in the ‘implications’ that make a hoax unlikely. There would be ‘assignments’, books to read and so forth.

William Engdahl just wrote me saying he follows the blog closely. Although he’s probably too busy to start a research line on this or another subject, his knowledge base is so profound that it’s likely he’d be able to contribute via information he already has.

But as I say, the nuke issue might not be of greatest group interest. A while back I did a post titled ‘My List So Far,‘

that sketched out some of the subjects I’m most interested in. Looking back on it now, it’s a bit sloppy and wordy so I’ll give a very brief description of my current list (in no particular order):

The Mandela Effect. This is on my mind right now because I just viewed a clip of Philip K. Dick saying that ‘We are living in a computer-programmed reality and the only clue to this is when some variable is changed and some alteration in our reality occurs.’ This is about 3:40 in; a bit later he goes on: ‘[this] is a clue that at some past time point a variable was changed – reprogrammed as it were – and that because of this an alternative world branched off.’

Have you ever heard a better description/explanation of the Mandela Effect? Me either. (If you’re going to say that the ME is total bullshit, you better check out my past posts and videos on the subject. Some issues just are not explicable via psy opery or ‘mass hallucinations’.)

I’m not sure when the above lecture is from, but since Dick died in 1982 we know it was way before any mention of the Mandela Effect. If you’ve read Dick or know much about him, you know he has to be taken seriously.

What happens when we die? I’ve read a few books on Near Death Experiences (NDE) and — maybe given that I don’t have a whole lot longer to go — find the subject of death and the nature of consciousness to be fascinating, to say the least.

There are a slew of related subjects to this, some but not all in the ‘science’ arena. Anyone out there particularly interested in what happens post-dirt nap?

How about a short, visual break? This is how it went around my campfire last night:

Science. Some of the most profound lies are those regarding the subject that should represent the profoundest of truths. There are many sub-groups to this one, such as…

Cosmology. The evidence for a big bang and expanding space is virtually all bogus nonsense, which means that almost all the ‘lower’ sciences are in some sense bogus nonsense as well.

Addendum: ‘Cui bono’ is a possible area of research, for this subject or any of the others. Why do the PTB want us to believe in the big bang (which they surely do)? It’s not a simple issue. 

The evidence that Einstein’s relativity theories are (in some sense) bogus is overwhelming. Anyone who doubts this should study the ‘Space News’ series from Thunderbolts.info and the Sky Scholar channel. (A simple question: If Einstein and his theories are correct (and so profound), how come our sources of energy and locomotion are the same as before him?)

The implications of the physics/cosmological lies, as I like to say, are staggering.

Star visibility. This is one of my favorites. You’ve all likely seen this video of mine, plus there are many others.

Evolution and the origins of mankind. ‘Evolution,’ in the sense of change over time and even of common descent, is pretty much inarguable, but the idea that the change came about via random mutations/natural selection is more bogus nonsense. This subject is likewise rich in sub-subjects, like the possibility of ‘intervention’, i.e., genetic engineering, in our past, the 23 vs. 24 pairs of chromosomes (humans vs. great apes, respectively) being a major clue that no one in the mainstream talks about.

I’ve already done several posts on this subject, but there is plenty more to think about.

‘Intelligent Design.’ Since we should be able to agree that the naturalism/reductionism view is incorrect (and is another psy op), the question remains: Who/what is behind this mess we call reality? I.D. of some sort is a likely explanation for HTWRW but there are others… of are there?

(I use the term Intelligent Design to refer to more than the origins and evolution of life. I’m referring to the whole magilla here. As I’ve said in past posts, the implications of the information (the numbers) in the book Who Built the Moon by Butler and Knight implies very directly (and inarguably) that there is some sort of intelligence behind the ‘world as we know it’, i.e., the physical solar system, consciousness being a different matter (or maybe not).

Hey! The above argument for an intelligence behind (at the very least) the solar system is really important! Although I have problems with Butler/Knight, their other book, Civilization One; The World Is Not What You Thought It Was, is also very important, and relates to other subjects, like What happens when we die, for one.

Simulation theory. See the above on the Mandela Effect. This is one of those questions that’s interesting as all get out but is unlikely to be answered in any sort of definite way. In fact, it’s unlikely that it can be proven false, given that no matter what evidence you come up with (to falsify it), that evidence could be ‘simulated.’ So we have to look for ‘glitches’ to prove the thesis true, along the lines of Philip K. Dick’s lecture.

Satanism/the occult and the PTB. I’ve done a few posts on this and also recommend the limited hangout book, The Most Dangerous Book in the World; 9/11 as Mass Ritual if you haven’t already looked into the subject. Again, this one runs very very deep.

The nuclear weapons hoax. If you’re new, see my last couple of posts.

Addendum (a few hours after posting): I’m listening to a another Feynman lecture and cannot picture him as a part of a major hoax (maybe a less drastic one, like faking Trinity and Japan, knowing they would eventually crack the problem and make the bomb). I’m going to dive into this one.

I’d like to find one of you who would be willing to parse the Miles Mathis essays on the subject and find where he’s lying, and what he’s left out; with a limited hangout this is a good way of digging out some truth. 

Chemtrails. What reminded me of this one was a look outside and upward, at the checkerboard white streaks.

Psychic phenomena. This one is actually a sub-issue under Science and What happens when we die since (IMO) psychic phenomena are as ‘natural’ as gravity or any other aspect of… ‘reality’ (whatever that means). There is no doubt whatsoever that this is a real aspect of consciousness, therefore, ipso facto, the ‘naturalist/reductionist view’ is out the window. (Unless Gus is fast asleep, I can get her to turn her head and look at me just by thinking the words, ‘You wanna go for a walk?’ For me, this is all the proof I need.)

The implications of this are likewise staggering.

UFOs. This subject is closely related to psychic phenomena and, of course, science/physics/cosmology.

Psy ops/mind control. Another doozy, and related to several other subjects.

The media. An aspect of the above, obviously, and there are many other related subjects, but the exposure of specific media lies is one of my favorite pastimes. How about you? I especially enjoy it when the media gets wind of something I say and scramble to ‘fix’ the problem.

This happened when I went public about the Sikh temple shooting, asking why no one dealt with how the ‘lone shooter’ got to the temple. Two days later NBC (I think it was) did a quick and sloppy piece saying, ‘Oh, by the way, he got their by taxi.’ They failed to look into what taxi driver dropped him off, where he picked him up, and so forth. A joke. (Aside from a video I did, I had called the NBC news department asking the pertinent question. They hung up on me then went out and did the piece.)

One more thing. In searching YT for the above video (to give you the URL), I plugged into the search box ‘the sikh temple shooting was staged ac weisbecker’ and guess what? Even though my video got more views than most (and has 47 thumbs up to 11 thumbs down) and in spite of the search being for the exact title of the video (plus who made it), I had to go halfway down the second page to find it. Get my drift? Yeah, if YT ‘doesn’t like’ a video, it’s hard to find it.

#

I dunno, but I’m running out of steam on this list, plus you’re probably getting bored. But think about this, please. How about you pitch in and help expose HTWRW?

It’s pretty fun, actually!

Allan

9/11. Christ, how can I forget that one?