This is a KJV with ‘study notes’ at the bottom. (See next image.) Note that here it uses ‘bottles,’ not ‘wineskins.’
Note: The first three images are from this video.
In sussing out the goddamn Mandela Effect (just calling it that has the ring of a psy op, with satisfied, smirking spooks nodding at our predictable stupidity) and as I say, I believe the ME is/was a psy op or possibly a beta test… wait… I hadn’t thought of this until just now…
…’beta test’ rolled out of my head without aforethought… whence does it come?… lemme think… after having found the best single chunk of evidence that some very high strangeness is indeed afoot (last night) and having slept on a close study of said evidence…
I’ll explain the evidence in a minute; the beta test concept deserves immediate scrutiny. The psy op angle is based on the cui bono notion that getting us to doubt our own senses would be — indeed has been — an obvious PTB agenda, right? I’ve recently found myself thumbing through my mammoth ‘collector’s’ edition of 1984 (a gift from one of you)…
Whoever wrote these study notes was thinking of ‘wineskins,’ not ‘bottles.’ This is classic ‘residue’ not dealt with in the ‘change.’
‘It was as though some huge force were pressing down upon you – something that penetrated inside your skull, battering against your brain, frightening you out of your beliefs, persuading you, almost, to deny the evidence of your senses. In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable…what then?’ [end quote]
In the same book as above, in the index if you look for ‘wine’ you get Matthew 9:17, and it says… ‘wineskins,’ whereas the KJV text (same book!) says ‘bottles.’ Clear cut case of residue, IMO.
Right out of the ME, no? But do online searches, and Youtube is the best for this, and see if you can find any alt media outlets that really cover it, or even mention it. I know, I know, I keep saying this, but don’t you see how important it is, in sussing cui bono? The evidence I came across was inspired by the best Isaiah 11:6 (lion/wolf) compilation of residue I’ve found and you know how many hits it has? 411. It’s been there for over six months, and has so few hits…
if the ME is a psy op? Why are all the ‘exposures’ from rank amateurs?
So I’ve been thinking the ME is a psy op that got out of hand, but what’s gotten out of hand about it? We’re doing what we should be doing, doubting the evidence of our eyes and hears, right?
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth’s centre. With the feeling that he was speaking to O’Brien, and also that he was setting forth an important axiom 1984, (1.7.29-30)
First published in 2010, before the ‘Mandela Effect’ was talked about, and, presumably, before it ‘kicked in.’
The emphasis is what this passage reminds me of: the fight against the trolls (who comment) and moles (the alt media) who use lies and misdirection, mostly the latter, to confuse the issues, dilute the evidences. You can see it clearly in some of the comments to this blog. The guy who wasted my time by making me think I had to answer his misdirection; I feared some of you would think he’d made valid points. Or any points.
And Joe Atwill types. Atwill debated rings around me (unless you were paying close attention) in our face-off about Salinger and Kesey; a master of misdirection, this guy. I linked to Atwill’s partner’s answer to my latest Spacex video. I don’t know why Atwill-the-spook hangs in with this guy, he is so obviously on the payroll. His logic/reasoning is totally based on misdirection but most people get lost and end up nodding and forgetting the actual issue raised.
Truisms are true, hold on to that!
But back to this evidence I came across. About 13 minutes into the above video there’s a guy with his shaky little vid cam showing us a book titled Decoding Space-Time; The Mathematics of Faith, by Eric J. Carlson; it would be easy to let this section of the video slip right by you, but I found myself going ‘Whoa, what’s this?!’
Note the boxed passage. Carlson was meticulous.
I went to Amazon and bought the book in Kindle. Carlson does a good job as a quasi-scientific apologist for truths contained in the Bible; I was up half the night reading the goddamn thing. I’ll not get into that here, except to say that he quotes scripture on every page (yes, annoying!), and has an obviously firm (but misleading) handle on the current findings of physics and cosmology. In two places he brings up Isaiah 11:6, our favorite biblical ME. For Eric J. Carlson it was the lion and the lamb.
The book was first published in 2010.
Up front, under the title, Carlson tells us that his scripture quotes are from the NIV, the New International Version. He tells us that he got permission to use the quotes — I doubt that this was necessary, but he wanted us to know he’s meticulous.
I took the time to check his quotes with Biblegateway.com, NIV, and every quote was right on the money accurate, and there are some long ones. And anyone as annoyed with the Bible as I am, is aware of how they screw around with language — I mean aside from possible MEs; ‘shall’ and ‘will’ seem to be randomly interchangeable, ditto ‘dwell with’ and ‘lie (or ‘lay) by’, and so forth. Not to mention the archaic meanings.
Point being that Carlson having gotten (as far as I checked) all his quotes dead on, and given his point of telling us which translation he is using… it all adds up to this: Carlson had his Bible open in front of him when he wrote this book; he quoted each passage verbatim because he was reading them. Also, where he directly quotes Isaiah he writes, ‘Isaiah 11:6-8’, to show us precisely what he was reading — most writers just refer to the passage as ‘Isaiah 11`:6…
Note how exact Carlson is with his attribution. He had to have been reading from his NIV, as he was with the scores of other quotes he got exactly right.
Out of the scores of biblical quotes Carlson uses in Decoding Space-Time; The Mathematics of Faith, the only got one wrong, and he got it completely wrong. Isaiah 11:6.
There is no doubt in my mind that when Carlson wrote his book (2010), Isaiah 11:6 had the lion with the lamb, not the wolf.
#
…I went for a bike ride with Gus to think about this and about a mile down the bayou (I’m on a lake whose name I can’t pronounce and I love the way the folks here drawl their syllables) I stopped and wrote this on my notepad: “They don’t want us to doubt our senses – they want to actually change history!’ Under that I wrote ‘Face Like The Sun is dirty’.
Here’s the first part of the Isaiah quote from the previous image.
This might be important stuff. See, my point is that the ME is an op all right but it’s way bigger than just fucking with our heads… What greater power could there be than power over history itself? Makes Orwell seem an amateur.
If you wanted to change history to your own advantage, how would it go? First, you’d be very careful, for reasons that come up in every fiction story about time travel. Right: the old ‘Grandfather paradox’. You go back in time and kill your grandfather… how would that work? You’d go ‘poof’! But then how could you come back to…
Although the ME has ‘paradox problems’ like this one, I’m quite sure the mechanism is not time travel. But let’s think about mechanism later and ask ourselves if I’m right in principle. The ME is an attempt to have control over history itself, not what is perceived about history (as in Orwell and as in fakery like NASA/Spacex). In their beta testing, they are keeping the changes subtle and irrelevant, aside from the Biblical ones, which are under the heading of ‘The occult pricks just couldn’t resist.’ Their A.I. is meanwhile keeping a close eye on the ‘effects,’ on us and on ‘history.’
This explains the alt media/mainstream media’s silence, which has been bugging my ass severely….
‘Face like the sun is dirty’? What’s with that? Face Like The Sun is a Youtube channel I’ve been keeping track of. The guy, Gonzo Shimura, analyzes CERN and is a devout Christian, along the lines of Anthony Patch, with whom he works. His vids are very slick and he has a quarter million subscribers. As with Anthony Patch, at first I really liked him, notwithstanding the Christian slant. Very smart and science-literate.
But if you search his vids for his take on the Mandela Effect, wham! boy is he sure it’s bullshit! Normally mellow of tone almost to a fault, suddenly he barely stops shy of calling you a moron if you believe it. Meanwhile his evidence is obvious in its misdirection and lies by omission (which he doesn’t normally do). Plus he ‘debunks’ it by always linking the ME to CERN, saying ‘CERN couldn’t do that’ or the like, as if he had a clue about what CERN really is. How could he be so sure? And he apparently doesn’t understand that linking these two subjects (CERN and ME) and debunking one, does not debunk the other. This is straw man bullshit, which is unlike him.
Why isn’t he at least agnostic on this subject, given the evidence?
Here is Isaiah 11:6 as it is now in the NIV. How could Carlson have gotten it THIS wrong, given his meticulousness? Answer: He didn’t.
When someone’s logic breaks down, as it has here, I have to ask myself What’s up? Is this guy under orders to belittle the ME and anyone who believes it?
Let me sum up my points and please give the embedded images a serious look. Here are my thoughts right now:
The ‘Mandela Effect’ is ‘real’ in the sense of real changes that cannot be explained by the sort of causality we are used to.
Whether he was warning us with 1984 or doing some predictive programming, I have no idea. I prefer the former though.
It is a PTB attempt to manipulate history to their advantage, not a psy op meant to further confuse us. Hence they do not want us to be aware of it. We are meant to just accept historical changes without thinking. A sort of Orwellian reality, but raised to an exponential power. Recall this classic moment in 1984, when a party leader was giving a hate speech excoriating their ultimate enemy, Eurasia:
The speech had been proceeding for perhaps twenty minutes when a messenger hurried on to the platform and a scrap of paper was slipped into the speaker’s hand. He unrolled and read it without pausing in his speech. Nothing altered in his voice or manner, or in the content of what he was saying, but suddenly the names were different. Without words said, a wave of understanding rippled through the crowd. Oceania was at war with Eastasia!
The next moment there was a tremendous commotion. The banners and posters with which the square was decorated were all wrong! Quite half of them had the wrong faces on them. It was sabotage! The agents of Goldstein had been at work!… The Hate continued exactly as before, except that the target had been changed.
Imagine the above but with the posters and other propagandistic paraphernalia changing…. automatically… along with the memories of all attending. All at the will of the PTB.
Is this where the ME is heading? And are they being very careful at first, seeing what ‘the effect’ does, both to ‘history’ and to… us? Are they being careful because they don’t really know what this could lead to?
George’s hand writing… more or less…
Nut’s? Absolutely, at least in the world as we think we know it. But I’ll tell you, given ‘the moon numbers’ revelation and given that the Mandela Effect is inexplicable by ‘world as we know it’ standards…
Do you have a better explanation for the data? Remember to include an answer to the question of Why they don’t want us to believe something strange is going on. You have to explain that, if ‘a psy op to confuse us’ is the whole of your answer.
If you’re going to comment without reading my other posts on this subject, be advised that I might delete you. And please don’t treat my blog like a private email service. If only one other person is potentially interested in your comment, I’ll delete it.
Allan
“Our imagination is stretched to the utmost,” the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman noted, “not, as in fiction, to imagine things which are not really there, but just to comprehend those things which are there.”
53 comments for “‘Truisms are true. Hold onto that!’”