Question | Year 2030: what are they hiding?

Banta said:

To clarify, I wasn’t accusing him of pushing back a date from 2012, simply drawing a comparison between those doomsday soothsayers and his prediction of 2040 being a key date (as opposed to 2030). Mostly being snarky and as you note, perhaps unfairly as I never really dove into his body of work. However, when your texts are paywalled and the videos lengthy, well… doesn’t excuse me, but doesn’t exactly inspire me either.

I just have a few rather critical stumbling blocks here. I mean, as soon as the video loads, I see a CGI ball earth that fades into a chart that starts with 5239 BC (not 5240 or 5238). That’s some major precision there which I simply have a hard time believing is going to be justified. Even your statement “ancient texts”… I’m not sure how one determines which ones are truly ancient, given, as stated above, the complete lack of original primary documents prior to the 10th century (being generous there again). I do know how such documents (or etchings or structures or what have you) are alleged to be dated and I find it all to be circular at best, usually operating off of some other “known” chronological event(s) and making comparisons.

Based on my experience and perusal of this gentlemen’s catalogue, he seems like a professional dot connector… in the couple minutes I skipped to in the video, I already hear Sitchin being referenced who was a similar ilk. Basically, they work off the dates assembled by the academic mainstream except in instances where it doesn’t quite suit their narrative, then they’ll cite alternative/new theories. Basically they use accepted chronology as a foundational element of their work, conceding that it’s largely accurate but perhaps needs some tweaks. I do not share such faith in the modern narrative. Hell, I’m somewhat reluctant at times to even say “prior to the 10th century” because I’m not sure of the veracity of anything at any point (especially beyond the last 100 years). I see history being falsified in damn near real time, and it’s my guess that this has a compounding effect. Meaning my degree in confidence of events in the 19th century is higher than the 14th, but there’s asterisks around all of this. You take me back to BC and I’m going have a real hard time here, even if you cite “changing calendars.”

All that being said, I don’t like to throw the baby out with the bathwater and I have no doubt there is some interesting information in his research. Though I am skeptical that I’d get anything more out of it than going directly to the sources he’s citing. You mentioning the “dates and numbers repeating” could be notable even if the dates are not historically accurate… perhaps it could lead to some clarity on why certain numbers were selected, almost some sort of code, though I’m also skeptical that historical fraud has that sort of uniform organization. I will try to listen to this all the way through with an open mind. And if I don’t, I promise I’ll at least stop sniping his work from the cheap seats

edit: and one minute in and I’m getting literacy rates and average distance traveled for a person in the early 15th century. I may not survive… (stop snarking, Banta, you promised!)

edit edit: I probably won’t listen to all of this. I’m sorry, more power to you and maybe I’m just too ignorant to understand, but this is absolutely what I suspected it was. A grab bag of standard chronology, combined with a fusion of every alternative idea under the sun (exploding planet hypothesis, Nibiru, etc) all framed in heliocentrism. This is about the polar opposite of what I find interesting about this research and this site in particular. I feel like more truth is found with detailed study into specific events rather than trying to assemble the whole of history into a handy chart (or the whole of the earth and heavens into a handy cosmological model).

I will apologize for casting aspersions on Mr. Beshears motivations though, I generally don’t do that and I definitely shouldn’t have. It’s very possible that he’s genuine in his claims, I just don’t agree with the methodology. I think he’s somewhat naive at best, but that’s okay. God knows I don’t have much figured out.

Click to expand...

trust me I was very weary as well, and the long videos are normally difficult for me to stay tuned into. But I find it easier with Jason;s work. I am only 6-7 videos in and I have a lot more to listen too. I just wanted to share some of his findings cuz I recently came across this same subject matter of 2030. Thank you for replying and explaining your point.

Edit: He does mention Sitchen cuz he was one of the original researches of Sumerian tablets, but he explains that Sitchen got a lot things wrong. He didnt criticize him just feels he misinterpreted some data. Out of all the videos I highly recommend the last one I posted as he runs through all the cataclysms that have been recorded through diff civilizations. Some of the dates and coincidences are unreal.

Nekro said:

Some of the dates and coincidences are unreal.

Click to expand...

That's exactly my problem though, who is validating these dates? Here's a passage at 27:15 that sort of illustrates my problem:

So this chart right here, you can see Nemesis cataclysm, Earth, Luna, Phoenix, Nemesis, Nemesis X object dark satellite are catapulted towards Sol in 5239 BC. It takes 600 years for earth to adopt its orbit right here in 4639 BC. It takes another 600 years for the moon to appear right here, it takes another 600 years for Nemesis X object to appear right here. You have to understand this precision is unnatural but you cannot claim that I made up these dates, this 3439 BC date, I've already shown in many other videos other chronologists come up with these dates. I'm talking about precisely this date so this wasn't me.

Click to expand...

To me, the one of the most important parts of any of this research is sharing how we arrive at certain dates. There's no shortage of articles on this website and others showing how most accepted dating methods are highly suspect and lacking empiricism. But in his analysis, these critical details are the ones that are glossed over in favor of appealing to group consensus (at best, sometimes just the findings of other fringe researchers). Without being able to prove the premise, everything that follows is suspect. And he rapid fires a number of unproven premises in a row and tries to tie them all together. Again, this style of research is not unique, but I don't think it's much more than fan fiction honestly.

And as such, it's fun to entertain (for some, it makes me sort of queasy at this point in my life). But I don't have the foggiest idea how you would even begin to validate something like this (from his comment section on this video):

The Archaix premise is simple, but it gets complicated to those unfamiliar with this idea. First: the Simulacrum we exist within is a confinement filed wherein simulated biospheres and historical periods are run, stopped, reset and edited periodically. INSIDE here it's all false, simulated. But this is all a COPY of a real system outside this domed vault where OUR REAL IDENTITIES are safe from the perceived threats that happen in this artificial construct.

Click to expand...

Seems like he's working real hard to synthesize every speculation out there (incorporating elements of "flat earth cosmology" and New Age spirituality, along with matrix theory) into his heliocentrically based system. Like this is all a puzzle to be solved. And perhaps it is, but perhaps some of the pieces aren't pieces at all. It's almost impossible to solve a puzzle unless you know what the final product looks like, so many take a guess and then work backwards. Again, I think this is antithetical to conducting actual objective research and a large reason why our history and understanding of the physical realm is so distorted. Presumptions based on presumptions, some with different flavors, but at the end of the day, false precision based on earlier false precision. This is where my cynicism kicks in too, because such techniques have been used by people who certainly don't have "truth" as their primary motivation. And it works because if you throw in enough different concepts, you're going to appeal to a wide variety of people who have entertained/believed in them at some point. Then you offer a way to organize all of them into a worldview... and well, I suspect that's how religions are born. Again, not to say that is what he's doing intentionally for nefarious purposes, I think it's a human condition to want to organize reality into a structured narrative. My experience however informs me that is mostly folly.

I think I've exhausted what I have to say about this topic now. Apologies for the diatribe, I guess I'm just excited that KD is posting again!

You guys got me interested in this gentleman's research, so, to be objective, I listened through the entire video. A few minutes in it became a struggle due to my mind developing multiple questions. He clearly put years into researching this, so I do not want to be disrespectful, but this is definitely not my cup of research tea. The approach to data collecting is definitely not in line with mine. Jason separated himself from researchers like Graham Hancock, yet the substance of the material presented reminded me of David Childress and Erich von Daniken. As @Banta eloquently put it, "dot connecting" looks impressive. I always have one question though:

• What are the sources of data used to connect the dots?

At 34:33 Jason referred to "Toltec records". Is there even such a thing? When were these records discovered, and where are they kept?

At 55:50 Jason mentions a book by Herodotus. Are there any books by Herodotus? Where is this particular book being kept? When was it located? What does it look like? Is this another one of those copies of the copies of the copies conveniently discovered after 1400 AD?

The above two are just an example of multiple mentioned sources that, in my opinion, need to be scrutinized. Don't even want to talk about Annunaki references, and the Egyptian pyramid being built some 2k BC.

At 13:15 Jason says "...it is south of the Solar system". This is probably where I need some education. How do we determine what's south of the solar system. Is there even such a direction?

At 40:40 Jason says the following, "In 1849 BC Sodom and Gomorrah, ... Mohenjo-daro... they are destroyed in massive fallout". Well, I'm not so sure this dating approach is 100% correct.

• Sodom and Gomorrah are at the bottom of the Dead Sea
• 1459: Fort Mehrangarh, Jodhpur and the Indus River
  • This here was one of the most interesting things to research. The original location of the Indus river was not disclosed by the PTB.
  • Mohenjo-daro was located on the original Indus river, and it was no ~3,800+ years ago.
  • I’m not saying that my research is correct, but I would like to see where mistakes were made.

Every historical claim has to be substantiated by some sort of a source. Reliability of such sources is not something we can always measure. For me, reading our contemporary interpretation of historical events, especially based on the Scaligerian chronology is not enough.

Working backwards from today, is something more "tangible" for me. 19th century alone is hard to understand. I am not even sure it lasted 100 years. When we start talking about 7k -1k years ago, I simply do not know where the information comes from, when all our known sources were not discovered/created prior to 1400 AD. I am not saying that people did not live, let's say, 10k years ago. I just do not understand where details of some 5k old events can be obtained from.

KorbenDallas said:

You guys got me interested in this gentleman's research, so, to be objective, I listened through the entire video. A few minutes in it became a struggle due to my mind developing multiple questions. He clearly put years into researching this, so I do not want to be disrespectful, but this is definitely not my cup of research tea. The approach to data collecting is definitely not in line with mine. Jason separated himself from researchers like Graham Hancock, yet the substance of the material presented reminded me of David Childress and Erich von Daniken. As @Banta eloquently put it, "dot connecting" looks impressive. I always have one question though:

• What are the sources of data used to connect the dots?

At 34:33 Jason referred to "Toltec records". Is there even such a thing? When were these records discovered, and where are they kept?

At 55:50 Jason mentions a book by Herodotus. Are there any books by Herodotus? Where is this particular book being kept? When was it located? What does it look like? Is this another one of those copies of the copies of the copies conveniently discovered after 1400 AD?

The above two are just an example of multiple mentioned sources that, in my opinion, need to be scrutinized. Don't even want to talk about Annunaki references, and the Egyptian pyramid being built some 2k BC.

At 13:15 Jason says "...it is south of the Solar system". This is probably where I need some education. How do we determine what's south of the solar system. Is there even such a direction?

At 40:40 Jason says the following, "In 1849 BC Sodom and Gomorrah, ... Mohenjo-daro... they are destroyed in massive fallout". Well, I'm not so sure this dating approach is 100% correct.

• Sodom and Gomorrah are at the bottom of the Dead Sea
• 1459: Fort Mehrangarh, Jodhpur and the Indus River
  • This here was one of the most interesting things to research. The original location of the Indus river was not disclosed by the PTB.
  • Mohenjo-daro was located on the original Indus river, and it was no ~3,800+ years ago.
  • I’m not saying that my research is correct, but I would like to see where mistakes were made.

Every historical claim has to be substantiated by some sort of a source. Reliability of such sources is not something we can always measure. For me, reading our contemporary interpretation of historical events, especially based on the Scaligerian chronology is not enough.

Working backwards from today, is something more "tangible" for me. 19th century alone is hard to understand. I am not even sure it lasted 100 years. When we start talking about 7k -1k years ago, I simply do not know where the information comes from, when all our known sources were not discovered/created prior to 1400 AD. I am not saying that people did not live, let's say, 10k years ago. I just do not understand where details of some 5k old events can be obtained from.

Click to expand...

I copied yours and Bana's questions and sent an email to Jason to clarify. I am to new to this to even begin to try to answer anything you guys stated. I have all the respect in the world for you guys here. You all do excellent research and ask great questions. Thank you.

Jason was in prison from age 17 till 40 I think. Where he spent years in solitary. His only reading material was from a publisher that had books from 400-500 years ago. That is what started him on this journey.

Here is Jason's email back to me....

Thanks, but I'm unsure where you're going with all this. If anyone wants to critique my chronological data, I'm all for that. In fact, if any group of people want to provide an analysis of the data and conclusions of the Archaix world chronology I will fairly post it on my own channel in the form of a video for all to review. Then I will provide answer in my own video. I am 100% confident my thesis will stand to scrutiny. So far those who were critical and assessed all the data came around.

Opining of one's merits because of a video of a globular earth is pedantic- my entire premise is that this is a simulated world. This simulation seeks to have us believe in a heliocentric model by the way the entire stellasphere arcs across the sky every night, the path of the sun and moon, the phases of the moon, all indicate a intended deception.

there is no need to provide more chronological data, though I can. My videos already demonstrate more than enough. You can have the following attached materials.

..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Nekro said:

Jason was in prison from age 17 till 40 I think. Where he spent years in solitary. His only reading material was from a publisher that had books from 400-500 years ago. That is what started him on this journey.

Click to expand...

Damn, what a synchronicity, I was in prison between 17 and 21 years of age, before I got there I was pretty much illiterate, i quickly found that my only escape was in books of the library, I started with fiction and quickly moved to sci fi and then onto Von Daniken, Stichen and Graham Hancock, by the end of my time I had read almost all of the small library and started to teach others to read by saying things phonetically and those that could not read i used to read the letter they received to them, enough about me.

I have come across Jason before and felt he was just rehashing the Von Daniken/Hancock/Stictin stuff so put it to one side, I had previously bought into it to the degree of booking a trip to Machu Piccu to take some ayahausca to witness the end of the world from the best seat in the house but it never came to pass.

I don't know what i am trying to say here but i am now a firm believer that we are in some kind of monitored sim, kind of like the Nexus described in the star trek films and that our individual desires and ambitions will be for filled.

Right Arm said:

Damn, what a synchronicity, I was in prison between 17 and 21 years of age, before I got there I was pretty much illiterate, i quickly found that my only escape was in books of the library, I started with fiction and quickly moved to sci fi and then onto Von Daniken, Stichen and Graham Hancock, by the end of my time I had read almost all of the small library and started to teach others to read by saying things phonetically and those that could not read i used to read the letter they received to them, enough about me.

I have come across Jason before and felt he was just rehashing the Von Daniken/Hancock/Stictin stuff so put it to one side, I had previously bought into it to the degree of booking a trip to Machu Piccu to take some ayahausca to witness the end of the world from the best seat in the house but it never came to pass.

I don't know what i am trying to say here but i am now a firm believer that we are in some kind of monitored sim, kind of like the Nexus described in the star trek films and that our individual desires and ambitions will be for filled.

Click to expand...

I too was inside for illegal possession of a firearm when I was about 24 yrs old.

Nekro said:

Thanks, but I'm unsure where you're going with all this. If anyone wants to critique my chronological data, I'm all for that.

Click to expand...

I appreciate your interest in furthering this discussion, but I’m not really sure this is going to go anywhere. I’ve found that a lot of people like to debate specifics in a range of topics and are unsure how to handle a criticism of the overall premise. And certainly, that makes sense to a degree as I would not want to outright say that every date he cites is incorrect. You can see KD’s post in this thread (or just look at any number of articles here) for a couple examples of where the circumstantial evidence raises serious questions about the accepted chronology.

So, this isn’t an easy conversation to have to begin with, as the scope is so large that drifting from event to event seems inevitable (and one of the reasons why I don’t really care for this “unified theory” type of research). If I had to nail my major criticism down to one question it’s “how do you validate dates for events when we have no primary, original documents from earlier than a millennia ago at best?” And again, that’s not a simple discussion either because then we’re getting into a number of various dating techniques. None of them fill me with any confidence and I and others have written on the issues with them on this site before and there’s plenty of critiques available on the internet in general.

There are accepted standards for provenance but even “best practices” are subject to fraud. It’s very hard for human beings to accept that certainty in most issues is impossible. Even the so-called original, primary source documents often come down to believing a story, that this book was in the possession of some noble family for generations… how do you actually validate the legitimacy? The same markers you would use to collaborate authenticity could be used by forgers. But again, I’m talking generally and don’t want my comments to be misconstrued that every alleged historical document is a fraud. However, I think the potential for fraud is greater than the ones evaluating such information would usually admit and we can’t dismiss the obvious profit/power/prestige motives in “validating genuine” documents.

So my position, though I believe it to be more accurate and “honest”, is a hard one to defend because I’m not making a positive claim. I feel most would rather argue “I say the Great Pyramid was built in 5,500 BC not 2,500 BC” and then list their reasons for why their date is more accurate. Saying “I’m not really sure that anyone can even know when the Great Pyramid was built” (much like saying “I’m not really sure what the Earth is”) is always going to be less convincing to most because we crave answers. And especially when you’ve constructed an elaborate year-by-year history of civilization spanning 7,000 years, I’d imagine the last thing you’d want to consider is that your entire chronology is based on unverifiable information of dubious origin.

Again, as I type all that, it sort of sounds like I’m saying “you can’t do it because everything is suspect so why bother?” and I admit that I go through times that I really feel like that. However, I think there is value in hyperspecific investigations (which makes up the bulk of the content on this site) and also in evaluating recurrent trends. I may not be able to put a date to a “reset” event or even completely describe what it involves, but I can see the case for it and maybe as long as I keep my mind completely open and don’t start inventing my own stories (as tempting as that is), I can slowly drill down to a more detailed and specific understanding.

Bottomline is, I’m still looking for answers. I believe Mr. Beshears already has his, on history and the nature of reality. And that’s okay and I feel no need to debate it. I will always point out though when foundational elements are missing because I have a pet peeve for matters of faith being misrepresented (often not deliberately) as empirical fact. It especially irritates me in “alternative” communities, because I can’t understand how easily some seem to see the issues with the mainstream narrative but can’t see the issues in their own. Human nature, I suppose.

Nekro said:

I am 100% confident my thesis will stand to scrutiny.

Click to expand...

I'm ready to start with these here:

• At 34:33 Jason referred to "Toltec records". Is there even such a thing? When were these records discovered, and where are they kept? What language were these records written in?

I can even help out here with this 1919 book mentioning Toltec Records. I simply want to see what those look like and where they are kept at. It's not too hard to write a similar piece when noone inquires into sources of the data.

• At 13:15 Jason says "...it is south of the Solar system". This is probably where I need some education. How do we determine what's south of the solar system. Is there even such a direction? Where is that?

KorbenDallas said:

I'm ready to start with these here:

• At 34:33 Jason referred to "Toltec records". Is there even such a thing? When were these records discovered, and where are they kept? What language were these records written in?

I can even help out here with this 1919 book mentioning Toltec Records. I simply want to see what those look like and where they are kept at. It's not too hard to write a similar piece when noone inquires into sources of the data.

• At 13:15 Jason says "...it is south of the Solar system". This is probably where I need some education. How do we determine what's south of the solar system. Is there even such a direction? Where is that?

Click to expand...

I will find out for you once Jason replies.

Just wondering what our own simple web search of Toltec records and directions south of the Solar system would produce.

Banta said:

I appreciate your interest in furthering this discussion, but I’m not really sure this is going to go anywhere. I’ve found that a lot of people like to debate specifics in a range of topics and are unsure how to handle a criticism of the overall premise. And certainly, that makes sense to a degree as I would not want to outright say that every date he cites is incorrect. You can see KD’s post in this thread (or just look at any number of articles here) for a couple examples of where the circumstantial evidence raises serious questions about the accepted chronology.

So, this isn’t an easy conversation to have to begin with, as the scope is so large that drifting from event to event seems inevitable (and one of the reasons why I don’t really care for this “unified theory” type of research). If I had to nail my major criticism down to one question it’s “how do you validate dates for events when we have no primary, original documents from earlier than a millennia ago at best?” And again, that’s not a simple discussion either because then we’re getting into a number of various dating techniques. None of them fill me with any confidence and I and others have written on the issues with them on this site before and there’s plenty of critiques available on the internet in general.

There are accepted standards for provenance but even “best practices” are subject to fraud. It’s very hard for human beings to accept that certainty in most issues is impossible. Even the so-called original, primary source documents often come down to believing a story, that this book was in the possession of some noble family for generations… how do you actually validate the legitimacy? The same markers you would use to collaborate authenticity could be used by forgers. But again, I’m talking generally and don’t want my comments to be misconstrued that every alleged historical document is a fraud. However, I think the potential for fraud is greater than the ones evaluating such information would usually admit and we can’t dismiss the obvious profit/power/prestige motives in “validating genuine” documents.

So my position, though I believe it to be more accurate and “honest”, is a hard one to defend because I’m not making a positive claim. I feel most would rather argue “I say the Great Pyramid was built in 5,500 BC not 2,500 BC” and then list their reasons for why their date is more accurate. Saying “I’m not really sure that anyone can even know when the Great Pyramid was built” (much like saying “I’m not really sure what the Earth is”) is always going to be less convincing to most because we crave answers. And especially when you’ve constructed an elaborate year-by-year history of civilization spanning 7,000 years, I’d imagine the last thing you’d want to consider is that your entire chronology is based on unverifiable information of dubious origin.

Again, as I type all that, it sort of sounds like I’m saying “you can’t do it because everything is suspect so why bother?” and I admit that I go through times that I really feel like that. However, I think there is value in hyperspecific investigations (which makes up the bulk of the content on this site) and also in evaluating recurrent trends. I may not be able to put a date to a “reset” event or even completely describe what it involves, but I can see the case for it and maybe as long as I keep my mind completely open and don’t start inventing my own stories (as tempting as that is), I can slowly drill down to a more detailed and specific understanding.

Bottomline is, I’m still looking for answers. I believe Mr. Beshears already has his, on history and the nature of reality. And that’s okay and I feel no need to debate it. I will always point out though when foundational elements are missing because I have a pet peeve for matters of faith being misrepresented (often not deliberately) as empirical fact. It especially irritates me in “alternative” communities, because I can’t understand how easily some seem to see the issues with the mainstream narrative but can’t see the issues in their own. Human nature, I suppose.

Click to expand...

I respect your opinion. I guess I misunderstood what you were saying originally. Jason also used to be Methodist Baptist and he mentioned in videos how hard it was for him to break out of that programming. He said for years all he was doing was defending and trying to confirm scripture with history. But in the end there were to many missing pieces to the KJ version bible. All manipulated for a control agenda. This is one area I already had the same opinion well before I came across Jason's work. I grew up in the protestant church.

KorbenDallas said:

Just wondering what our own simple web search of Toltec records and directions south of the Solar system would produce.

Click to expand...

Jason emailed me late last night with this reply. I will add here if I had watched more of his videos prior I could have possibly answered some questions along the way.

Jason says :

The so-called Aztec Stone of the Fifth Sun is not Aztec at all, but Toltec, and is packed with data. South of the system is merely me describing that it is far below our ecliptic, where nothing in our system is located.

The challenge is simple- anyone wants to review the data in the uploads they are welcome to write a critique or do a video. But I will give answer. Further, that video does NOT HAVE SOURCES, it's a summary of over a 100 video presentations where the data points and data sets are provided. So anyone critiquing that video is wasting time.

Nekro said:

The so-called Aztec Stone of the Fifth Sun is not Aztec at all, but Toltec

Click to expand...

Is that an opinion, or there is a source for that?

Curious, what publications located prior to 1400s AD is he using to cover ~5,000 BC to ~1,000 AD. I do not mean "dated to".

Nekro said:

South of the system is merely me describing that it is far below our ecliptic, where nothing in our system is located.

Click to expand...

In reality or in our artificial isolated system? Or both, I suppose, because it’s a copy?

Nekro said:

The challenge is simple- anyone wants to review the data in the uploads they are welcome to write a critique or do a video. But I will give answer. Further, that video does NOT HAVE SOURCES, it's a summary of over a 100 video presentations where the data points and data sets are provided. So anyone critiquing that video is wasting time.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with his last statement there anyway.

I asked earlier how many books and videos I’d have to consume to get the point. And yes, I’ve been probably too dismissive and snarky throughout, but here’s the thing. Everyone can make a claim, what is going to get me to take someone’s research more seriously is seeing how they arrived at the conclusions they arrived at by reviewing their sources. You don’t have to show your work, but in my experience, the higher quality the work is the more transparent it is. And the more one appeals to how self-apparent something is but is unwilling to provide a single, specific example, the more I’m going to think that they themselves didn’t really review the claim personally prior to adopting it. I could be wrong there, but it’s the impression that I get.

And I don’t think it’s insulting to be skeptical of data these days that are provided without context. Graphs and charts are fine to show how you’ve correlated data, but where did the data come from? I don’t think it’s unreasonable to put an asterisk next to every date on a timeline, especially prior to 1000 AD and say what source tells of that event. I’m not even saying that I expect a study on the “historical quality” of that source, just a name. Even if it’s just Wikipedia. That’s at least something I can then collaborate. Issuing a challenge to debunk something without that is needle in a haystack territory.

Maybe the books have great bibliographies/works cited. Again though, and very genuinely this time, I don’t know where to start, he has a massive catalogue.

Basically, I would just like an answer to KD’s question (“what publications located prior to 1400s AD is he using to cover ~5,000 BC to ~1,000 AD”). I think I’ve explained why asking isn’t intentionally insulting or trying to start a fight or attempting to debunk his work. I have no interest in challenges, I just would like to understand his methodology and how much credence he gives to “ancient” sources that mysteriously disappeared for a millennia or more.

KorbenDallas said:

I've been gone for a while and I still am. One of the main reasons for me not being present is the lack of motivation due to family issues. It's one of those things when the darkness has no end in sight. Hopefully one day I'll be back, for deep inside I miss certain things.

For right now, I wanted to ask you guys about your thoughts on the year 2030 and all the hype attributed to this date. The PTB clearly puts a certain meaning to this "2030" date. As far as we know they keep on talking about the so-called "Climate Change" formerly known as the "Global Warming." The importance of the date appears to be relevant. It's either that (the importance of the date), or they just picked a date to achieve their "world management" goals. Could there be more to this date than we are being allowed to know?

• Ask a Scientist: 2030 or Bust? What is the Importance of the Year 2030 Climatewise?
• Only 11 Years Left to Prevent Irreversible Damage from Climate Change
• We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN
• The world has less than 10 years to avert climate change catastrophe, report finds
• What the 2030 Climate Deadline Really Means

World civilization cycles are one of the topics that I've been pondering on for a while now. Industrial revolutions appear to be convenient enough for re-introducing older technologies into the newly developing, post-apocalypse spins of the world civilization. From this perspective, the infatuation of the elites (imho, some of them do know what's up) with "2030" could be rather interesting. Additionally, we are obviously dealing with certain depopulation related agendas. I am no expert, but it does appear that our planet can sustain way more than whatever our current population is.

• When could population numbers become really important?
  • This is just a speculation of mine, but I'd say at the time when people compete for food and resources in the absence of infrastructure and governance.
• When could we possibly experience the absence of infrastructure and governance?
  • Methinks, under these conditions we could.

What events could result in something similar to what we see here and here?

• Wars?
• Urban Fires?
• Natural disasters?

The Three Events​

As far as I understand, the official chronology can not be trusted. With that in mind, I think we could have one 19th century USA event broken into three separate events. Chances are there are more than three such events, but these three definitely stand out.

1811-1812: New Madrid Earthquakes​

The New Madrid Earthquakes took place between December 1811 and April 1812 along an active fault line that extends roughly from Marked Tree (Poinsett County) in a northeasterly direction, crossing several states for about 150 miles. The earthquakes and aftershocks caused extensive damage throughout northeast Arkansas and southeast Missouri, altering the landscape, affecting settlement of the area, and leaving noticeable reminders that another huge earthquake could happen at any time.

• Thirty miles south, in the river town of what is today Caruthersville, Missouri, all twenty houses were destroyed, and the surrounding land was rendered almost unrecognizable. ​
• The ground rolled in several-foot-high waves until they burst, hurling up geysers of water, sand, and a charcoal-like substance. ​
• Giant fissures swallowed buildings, along with anyone inside. ​
• Some land rose, and other land sank to become inundated with water as rivers changed their course to fill the hollows. Huge chunks of riverbank collapsed into the Mississippi, and an island rose, blocking the current from running downstream. ​
• As fissures opened in the riverbed and the banks collapsed, the water was forced to run backward, or upstream, until the temporary island was washed away. ​
• Most accounts said it lasted a few minutes, while others said it lasted up to three days.​
• New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1812​

View attachment 12374
1912 Source

1833: The Leonid Meteor Storm​

The Leonid meteor storm was seen across the United States in the night and early morning of November 12th and 13th, 1833. Those who were awake to witness the storm were in awe as between 50,000 and 150,000 meteors fell each hour.

• The 1833 Leonid Meteor Storm
• To me, the above article sounded like an attempt to justify why just about every newspaper in the United States was publishing the exact same, or almost exact same text. Could it be that this is how historical narratives get introduced?

On a separate note, if these were not meteors, what could they be?

View attachment 12376
Source

1859: The Carrington Event​

The Carrington Event was the most intense geomagnetic storm in recorded history, peaking from 1 to 2 September 1859 during solar cycle 10. It created strong auroral displays that were reported globally and caused sparking and even fires in multiple telegraph stations. The geomagnetic storm was most likely the result of a coronal mass ejection (CME) from the Sun colliding with Earth's magnetosphere.

• The 1859 Carrington Event

View attachment 12379
Source​

I am not so sure there was "nothing much" to damage in those days. What about an allegedly "non-existent" at the time electrical grid?

• An electrical grid is an interconnected network for electricity delivery from producers to consumers. Electrical grids vary in size and can cover whole countries or continents. It consists of:
  • Electrical grid - Wikipedia
  • power stations: often located near energy and away from heavily populated areas
  • electrical substations to step voltage up or down
  • electric power transmission to carry power long distances
  • electric power distribution to individual customers, where voltage is stepped down again to the required service voltage(s).

View attachment 12390
​

The horse-drawn tram (horsecar) was an early form of public rail transport, which developed out of industrial haulage routes that had long been in existence, and from the omnibus routes that first ran on public streets in the 1820s, using the newly improved iron or steel rail or 'tramway'.

• In the United States the very first streetcar appeared in New Orleans in 1832, operated by the Pontchartrain Railroad Company, followed by those in 1832 on the New York and Harlem Railroad in New York City.
• Horsecar - Wikipedia

For whatever (historical) reason, the above contraption is claimed to be the original design. They manufactured rails, laid train tracks, built cars... for what exactly? For horses to pull them rigs?

• Something does not add up here.
• Do these technologies match, or people were forced to use horses for obvious reasons?

Who knows, may be in some remote year 2095, historians will claim the below designs were original as well. Will they claim that the Carrington event 2.0 of 2030 did not damage much because there was "nothing much" to damage?

View attachment 12392

Power Grid Cyber Attack​

Another thing to consider is the constant "threat" of an imminent cyber attack. The MSM and WEF are pounding it down our throats. They even went as far as calling it a Cyber Pandemic.

• Preparing for the Next Global Crisis - A Cyber Pandemic​
• The World is not Prepared for a Cyber Pandemic​
• WEF annual Global Risks Report echoes warnings of a looming Cyber Pandemic.​
• New Imminent Threats to The Power Grid​
• Sophisticated hackers could crash the US power grid​

Wondering, what would be the difference between a Power Grid Cyber Attack and some (known to some) "Carrington Event 2.0"?

---

KD Question: Prophets have been popping up left and right recently. Them climate changes, pandemics, cyber attacks, upcoming famine, etc. There is always someone out there to predict their occurrences, and somehow their "prophesies" become our reality.

• Could it be that some people (or other entities) know what's coming around 2030, and govern the world society according to the pre-determined conservation plan?

View attachment 12393
Source
​

This particular guideline does not appear to match our currently claimed world population of 7.9 bil. But what if this guideline shows how many people can be adequately governed and controlled to start a new civilizational cycle after a "world ending" event? Could it be that more than 500 mil. people existing under the conditions lacking infrastructure and governance would jeopardize the ability of the future Robber Barons to re-start the world?

• After all, who needs extra millions of hungry individuals competing for food and resources when there are none?

Per our official history, humans of our kind and thinking ability exist for over 50,000 years. Yet, 200 years ago in 1820-30s (what would this date be without railroad locomotives?) people still used animal power for transportation. A couple industrial revolutions and one Nikola Tesla later, and we fly, drive, claim space travel and explore the metaverse.

Meanwhile, we have loads of evidence that this world was eviscerated (may be more than once). Dates differ, but plenty of this evidence points towards the first half of the 19th century being the most recent occurrence.

Here is the main question I guess: could it be that the projected "climate change" events of 2030 are a well disguised inevitable cyclical occurrence known to the select few?

• If there is no climate change danger, and TPTB are not merely reorganizing the financial/governance structure of the planet... what could the significance of the year 2030 be?

I have all but two thoughts on the matter:

1. We have no idea of the structure of the environment (what is our planet Earth?) we live in.
   • The Earth system could have some sort of a built-in fail-safe feature that under specific conditions triggers pre-programed events.
2. Under specific conditions, we get attacked from the outside of our known geography.
   • These attacks are being presented as urban fires, meteor showers, Carrington events, years without summer and various New Madrid earthquakes.

Click to expand...

“I've been gone for a while and I still am.”

This is a profoundly lonesome statement.

Thanks KD and everyone for posting on this subject. All the questions KD proposes have been nagging me since Safranek introduced Jason to us in February, 2021. I alluded to them above.

What pleases me even more is that Jason responded to this thread last night.

Why? Because it is important discussion. That Jason is learned goes without saying; the evidence assembled on these pages begs a grand theory. I want very much to see one emerge. And it will only emerge via discussions such as this.

His most fundamental point: the elites retreat underground and take their libraries. When they reemerge, some (or all?) of their documents come with them. There are lesser points. I wasn't entirely satisfied with his explanation, but it is a start.

Is his thesis absurd? Not according to the speculations that have occurred on this forum. Many times, people speculate on the possibility of information being inserted into the hologram/reality. How else do we explain people figuring out how to run the trains, left in abandoned stations across the west? (No photographs of the trains-in-station that I recall, but we have lots of evidence of various stations and locomotives-- including some smashed to pieces for fun and others pulled by horses (see above), their handlers as clueless as the beasts). A few years later, the trains were running across the country and through every city. Later they were replaced by more advanced (or simply appropriate) technologies.

I will try to come up with a more sustained response, later.

Sonofabor said:

What pleases me even more is that Jason responded to this thread last night.

Click to expand...

This is starting to give me some heartburn and I’m running out of ways to say I simply don’t agree with this methodology. It’s sloppy and selective. He keeps talking about these 138 year cycles for releasing technology but also says he’s looking for examples from 1901-1903. So it’s precise cycles, but only sort of.

He acknowledges in this video that there’s basically no chain of custody for ancient documents. But it doesn’t matter! They’re forgeries and genuine! And this is not a paradox!

For what it’s worth, I agree that there’s something to repeating numbers that imply artificiality (or an inherent underlying order of reality). I also agree that the answers may not be found with “2D thinking.” Additionally, he’s saying that we shouldn’t view “the elites” as monolithic evil, which I feel like I’ve repeated enough times throughout the years that it’s almost my mantra.

But at the same time, he seamlessly moves from a few generalities that I agree with to saying that some of us are getting bogged down in the details. Basically, we shouldn’t worry about the legitimacy of a source, they’re all fake but they contain truth or at least a piece of the puzzle. Which, on its face, I again sort of agree with. Although if this really is in response to this thread, he’s definitely oversimplifying our criticisms. I’m not suggesting that all of history is a lie, mostly because and I think this is the key difference: I am not asserting anything at all about history in totality! I may have a clue about certain things that may have happened at some point but there’s so much noise in the data, I would never consider trying to sum it up. Maybe someday. He’s obviously well read and feels like he can take a stab at it and again, good for him. But I feel like in order to do so, you have to select certain lenses to view things and then your results are mostly confirmation bias (which ironically is what he’s accusing his detractors of doing).

We all have a strong tendency to do this because our very ability to perceive reality and live life is based on creating order out of the innumerable stimuli that we are presented with (or create ourselves, as there’s no way for us to discern whether our environment is actually “out there” or created by “consciousness”, this is a base philosophical quandary that has been probably debated as long as humans have existed). I think concepts like rationalism and logic try to mitigate the impact of that, though in reality, those are only specific lenses as well. But some things we take for granted in almost any context, such as the forward flow of time. You don’t have to, but then you will also not being able to prove it empirically because the concepts are mutually exclusive. And once you do, you might as well say “your guess is as good as mine.”

I’m having a hard time articulating what I’m saying to say here because he moves so quickly from topic to topic when I feel like most of his statements could be discussed in major detail. For instance, a major point of this video is that the texts are all forgeries but they’re based on genuine information. I have no clue how anyone can be certain of that or even want to talk about all documents in such a sweeping manner. Do none exist that are outright fabrications that benefitted some long deceased party for a specific goal at some point far in the past untied to some worldwide, long lasting disinformation campaign (or enlightenment campaign I suppose)? But again, at the same time, I sort of agree with him about the importance of certain themes or events recurring across several sources… I just don’t know how you then arrive at a chronology so specific that you can give me a year by year breakdown from 5239 BC onward.

If you’re going to make a thesis that relies on specific dates to derive patterns from, I’m going to want to know how you validated those specific dates. And if you tell me that it doesn’t matter, that it’s just getting bogged down in the details, I’m gonna wholeheartedly disagree.

When you try to fuse consistent, rational concepts like mathematics with leaps of logic, all you have left is a story. And hell, it could be true! But since I was young, I’ve always liked the thought experiment, “what if the entire world was created one second ago with everyone’s memories in tact?” It’s something that can’t be debunked (and according to quantum mechanics, it’s not even a particularly unreasonable possibility). Without deciding whether the proposition is true or false, I think it better illustrates our limited ability to ascertain “truth” from within our current system of reality.

So to me, few things are completely implausible and I don’t think I have blinders on when I want to dig into the details behind his grand claims. I’m not dismissing anything out of hand but I think the best I’m ever going to have is “degrees of confidence” in various things. And to me, it is not rational to acknowledge that all ancient texts are fraudulent, but the timeline that was in large part derived from them is genuine.

To which Mr. Beshears might likely say that’s “2D thinking” and he’d be right. But if that’s so, then all of this is just arguing over a belief and there’s nothing about his grand thesis that’s truly empirical. It has elements of empiricism, but no inherent consistency aside from when it’s useful and matches up to a particular point. Like every religion ever created. To be clear, I’m not now accusing him of trying to start a cult or something, but it’s definitely religious thinking.

Basically, I have no problem with anyone creating their own narrative to help frame reality. We all do. But for something to be debunkable, it has to have a consistent internal logic or else it’s not debunkable (or verifiable) at all. You can wax poetic about reality not caring about your rationalism and philosophically, I might agree, but I don’t know how then you can assert your opinion as some sort of fact. It’s at best like describing how a warp drive works in Star Trek based on the current scientific consensus. And in this case, it all seems particularly circular to me, “these dates prove the cycles and the cycles prove the dates.”

All these grand unified theories have to cement some part of the shifting sands of time and reality in order to build their house. Something has to be taken for granted and you’re going to end up becoming really protective of the house and missing other pieces out in the desert. Then the focus shifts from searching for “the truth” (nebulous as that is) to proving that you’re right. I’ve seen this too many times to count. And as I said at the start, it just all sort of gives me heartburn at this point.

I hope I’ve exhausted everything I have to say on this and I wish Mr. Beshears well but I don’t think I need to consume anymore of his content. It’s been an interesting discussion on the philosophy behind research techniques and reality as a whole, but I’d rather just continue to peruse old documents and historical accounts myself and find useful nuggets on a case by case basis. Maybe I’ll end up agreeing with him more as time goes on… or maybe I’ll just realize everything was actually created a second ago. You never know.

KorbenDallas said:

I've been gone for a while and I still am. One of the main reasons for me not being present is the lack of motivation due to family issues. It's one of those things when the darkness has no end in sight. Hopefully one day I'll be back, for deep inside I miss certain things.

For right now, I wanted to ask you guys about your thoughts on the year 2030 and all the hype attributed to this date. The PTB clearly puts a certain meaning to this "2030" date. As far as we know they keep on talking about the so-called "Climate Change" formerly known as the "Global Warming." The importance of the date appears to be relevant. It's either that (the importance of the date), or they just picked a date to achieve their "world management" goals. Could there be more to this date than we are being allowed to know?

• Ask a Scientist: 2030 or Bust? What is the Importance of the Year 2030 Climatewise?
• Only 11 Years Left to Prevent Irreversible Damage from Climate Change
• We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN
• The world has less than 10 years to avert climate change catastrophe, report finds
• What the 2030 Climate Deadline Really Means

World civilization cycles are one of the topics that I've been pondering on for a while now. Industrial revolutions appear to be convenient enough for re-introducing older technologies into the newly developing, post-apocalypse spins of the world civilization. From this perspective, the infatuation of the elites (imho, some of them do know what's up) with "2030" could be rather interesting. Additionally, we are obviously dealing with certain depopulation related agendas. I am no expert, but it does appear that our planet can sustain way more than whatever our current population is.

• When could population numbers become really important?
  • This is just a speculation of mine, but I'd say at the time when people compete for food and resources in the absence of infrastructure and governance.
• When could we possibly experience the absence of infrastructure and governance?
  • Methinks, under these conditions we could.

What events could result in something similar to what we see here and here?

• Wars?
• Urban Fires?
• Natural disasters?

The Three Events​

As far as I understand, the official chronology can not be trusted. With that in mind, I think we could have one 19th century USA event broken into three separate events. Chances are there are more than three such events, but these three definitely stand out.

1811-1812: New Madrid Earthquakes​

The New Madrid Earthquakes took place between December 1811 and April 1812 along an active fault line that extends roughly from Marked Tree (Poinsett County) in a northeasterly direction, crossing several states for about 150 miles. The earthquakes and aftershocks caused extensive damage throughout northeast Arkansas and southeast Missouri, altering the landscape, affecting settlement of the area, and leaving noticeable reminders that another huge earthquake could happen at any time.

• Thirty miles south, in the river town of what is today Caruthersville, Missouri, all twenty houses were destroyed, and the surrounding land was rendered almost unrecognizable. ​
• The ground rolled in several-foot-high waves until they burst, hurling up geysers of water, sand, and a charcoal-like substance. ​
• Giant fissures swallowed buildings, along with anyone inside. ​
• Some land rose, and other land sank to become inundated with water as rivers changed their course to fill the hollows. Huge chunks of riverbank collapsed into the Mississippi, and an island rose, blocking the current from running downstream. ​
• As fissures opened in the riverbed and the banks collapsed, the water was forced to run backward, or upstream, until the temporary island was washed away. ​
• Most accounts said it lasted a few minutes, while others said it lasted up to three days.​
• New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1812​

View attachment 12374
1912 Source

1833: The Leonid Meteor Storm​

The Leonid meteor storm was seen across the United States in the night and early morning of November 12th and 13th, 1833. Those who were awake to witness the storm were in awe as between 50,000 and 150,000 meteors fell each hour.

• The 1833 Leonid Meteor Storm
• To me, the above article sounded like an attempt to justify why just about every newspaper in the United States was publishing the exact same, or almost exact same text. Could it be that this is how historical narratives get introduced?

On a separate note, if these were not meteors, what could they be?

View attachment 12376
Source

1859: The Carrington Event​

The Carrington Event was the most intense geomagnetic storm in recorded history, peaking from 1 to 2 September 1859 during solar cycle 10. It created strong auroral displays that were reported globally and caused sparking and even fires in multiple telegraph stations. The geomagnetic storm was most likely the result of a coronal mass ejection (CME) from the Sun colliding with Earth's magnetosphere.

• The 1859 Carrington Event

View attachment 12379
Source​

I am not so sure there was "nothing much" to damage in those days. What about an allegedly "non-existent" at the time electrical grid?

• An electrical grid is an interconnected network for electricity delivery from producers to consumers. Electrical grids vary in size and can cover whole countries or continents. It consists of:
  • Electrical grid - Wikipedia
  • power stations: often located near energy and away from heavily populated areas
  • electrical substations to step voltage up or down
  • electric power transmission to carry power long distances
  • electric power distribution to individual customers, where voltage is stepped down again to the required service voltage(s).

View attachment 12390
​

The horse-drawn tram (horsecar) was an early form of public rail transport, which developed out of industrial haulage routes that had long been in existence, and from the omnibus routes that first ran on public streets in the 1820s, using the newly improved iron or steel rail or 'tramway'.

• In the United States the very first streetcar appeared in New Orleans in 1832, operated by the Pontchartrain Railroad Company, followed by those in 1832 on the New York and Harlem Railroad in New York City.
• Horsecar - Wikipedia

For whatever (historical) reason, the above contraption is claimed to be the original design. They manufactured rails, laid train tracks, built cars... for what exactly? For horses to pull them rigs?

• Something does not add up here.
• Do these technologies match, or people were forced to use horses for obvious reasons?

Who knows, may be in some remote year 2095, historians will claim the below designs were original as well. Will they claim that the Carrington event 2.0 of 2030 did not damage much because there was "nothing much" to damage?

View attachment 12392

Power Grid Cyber Attack​

Another thing to consider is the constant "threat" of an imminent cyber attack. The MSM and WEF are pounding it down our throats. They even went as far as calling it a Cyber Pandemic.

• Preparing for the Next Global Crisis - A Cyber Pandemic​
• The World is not Prepared for a Cyber Pandemic​
• WEF annual Global Risks Report echoes warnings of a looming Cyber Pandemic.​
• New Imminent Threats to The Power Grid​
• Sophisticated hackers could crash the US power grid​

Wondering, what would be the difference between a Power Grid Cyber Attack and some (known to some) "Carrington Event 2.0"?

---

KD Question: Prophets have been popping up left and right recently. Them climate changes, pandemics, cyber attacks, upcoming famine, etc. There is always someone out there to predict their occurrences, and somehow their "prophesies" become our reality.

• Could it be that some people (or other entities) know what's coming around 2030, and govern the world society according to the pre-determined conservation plan?

View attachment 12393
Source
​

This particular guideline does not appear to match our currently claimed world population of 7.9 bil. But what if this guideline shows how many people can be adequately governed and controlled to start a new civilizational cycle after a "world ending" event? Could it be that more than 500 mil. people existing under the conditions lacking infrastructure and governance would jeopardize the ability of the future Robber Barons to re-start the world?

• After all, who needs extra millions of hungry individuals competing for food and resources when there are none?

Per our official history, humans of our kind and thinking ability exist for over 50,000 years. Yet, 200 years ago in 1820-30s (what would this date be without railroad locomotives?) people still used animal power for transportation. A couple industrial revolutions and one Nikola Tesla later, and we fly, drive, claim space travel and explore the metaverse.

Meanwhile, we have loads of evidence that this world was eviscerated (may be more than once). Dates differ, but plenty of this evidence points towards the first half of the 19th century being the most recent occurrence.

Here is the main question I guess: could it be that the projected "climate change" events of 2030 are a well disguised inevitable cyclical occurrence known to the select few?

• If there is no climate change danger, and TPTB are not merely reorganizing the financial/governance structure of the planet... what could the significance of the year 2030 be?

I have all but two thoughts on the matter:

1. We have no idea of the structure of the environment (what is our planet Earth?) we live in.
   • The Earth system could have some sort of a built-in fail-safe feature that under specific conditions triggers pre-programed events.
2. Under specific conditions, we get attacked from the outside of our known geography.
   • These attacks are being presented as urban fires, meteor showers, Carrington events, years without summer and various New Madrid earthquakes.

Click to expand...

Crystal balls don't work. Predictions don't work. Neat idea that spawns hundreds if not thousands of theorists who spread their words in bloody YouTube videos but honestly its all bullshit.

All we have is our self and we don't know what or where it is or if its anywhere and truth be told this induces a feeling that scales from uncomfortable to terrifying.
We tell ourselves we need to know, that something is lacking in us because we don't know and when we cannot imagine what it is we descend, yes descend, into bullshit theories promulgated by other people.

Quite sad really as we all have imagination a working imagination but so many seem hell bent on dragging others into their theory box, presumably to give the theory credence, it dampens the imagination within us.
Not a one of these theories have ever left the realm of theory and got into reality and for good reason. When theorising about any record of any event which is said to have happened prior to our individual birth it is all imaginary as are the names, the artifacts, the structures etc.

I recall Agenda 21 and the emergence of Agenda 2030. Agenda 41 will be along shortly and Agenda 2030 will be as much a memory as Agenda 21 is today.

As for this reality I experience through the bodies senses and the minds imaginings I have no clue what it is, why it is, where it is. I experience as does everything else. I am not a part of it or in it I am it as is everything else.
Chronology is in the bullshit department with religion and hierarchical authority. Chronology presumes a begining and an end when every second of my existence shows me reality is motion. I cannot conceive comprehend or begin to understand why my hair grows yet it alone shows me motion is all that is.

I'm not on the simulation bus either. The Sim idea is as product of the computer age. I can say that as I was born long before computers were in use, simulation theory wasn't ever mentioned.
The amount of crises I have seen come and go over my time reveals them all to be utter bullshit. Lies told by serial liars and promulgated by folks who like to make a buck, like a splash of fame, like to control oithers, want to feel superior, don't want to stand out, scared of thinking for themselves!

I feel but cannot prove that this geographical reality is way, way bigger , maybe without limit, than our indoctrination tells us it is. We are prevented from exploring not by states, nations, military force, legal mumbo jumbo but by our own compliance with the idea we are sat on a finite spinning ball hurtling through a space vacuum so cannot ever leave until the checkout day, which we all know is coming but none of us know when, so best we can do is tick tock along and make the most of it.

As far as I can tell the reason why we feel stuck as in disengaged from the reality of motion is every bugger else is. Authority is used to make it appears someone has a handle on things well I reckon none have a handle on things so shit gets made up to make it appear someone does.
Once there is a paper on it it then gets spun out to theorists, opinion pushers, speculators and then once packed is passed off as reality.
Lies built on lies to keep us from imagining and exploring sums it up as best I can.

Banta said:

All these grand unified theories have to cement some part of the shifting sands of time and reality in order to build their house. Something has to be taken for granted and you’re going to end up becoming really protective of the house and missing other pieces out in the desert. Then the focus shifts from searching for “the truth” (nebulous as that is) to proving that you’re right. I’ve seen this too many times to count. And as I said at the start, it just all sort of gives me heartburn at this point.

Click to expand...

Some thoughts:

1. Breshears was in prison while stuff like this (blog) was emerging.

2.

jd755 said:

Crystal balls don't work. Predictions don't work. Neat idea that spawns hundreds if not thousands of theorists who spread their words in bloody YouTube videos but honestly its all bullshit.

Click to expand...

Maybe so. But, when one perceives a pattern of control and destruction, is not the person honor-bound to report it?

3. Breshears misses 1644 and 1776, for two recent examples of monumental global reset years. 1902? I don't see it. But, I had a brilliant professor, a scholar of Japanese history and culture; she told me frankly, "Something changed around the entire world around 1900." At that time, I thought she the smartest, most profound person I'd ever known. She still might be.

4. Breshears brushes off Fomenko. So what? To my point of view, Fomenko is 1. a fantastic critic but 2. his attempt to rebuild chronology strikes me as a failure.

5. Upshot: Fomenko is a brilliant critic, but his attempt to redesign history runs into many problems-- problems that can be reconsidered and understood as understandable in the holographic model that Breshears presents.

For example, I think a Chinese scholar could come to the same critical conclusions as Fomenko but write the Chinese empires into the driving force of world cultural/historical change. Both would be right and wrong, following a holographic model.

6. The problem of grand theory. The interesting thing to me, as an "outsider" to alt-history, is that grand theories do influence the empirical research. That is, while the buildings speak and photographs defy standard historiography, all the questions posed in alt-history have been proposed and tackled prior to the Internet's emergence. Breshears looked these writers and their theories straight in the face, used their information and logic, and cut them down to size. He does the same with the Bible.

Easy pickings, you say? But the point is: his method is rigorous. He reads the Bible and all texts on their own terms and in terms of the predecessor texts.

Now I'm in agreement: These predecessor texts may all be creations/publications of the 15-16th centuries. So what? Has anyone read Aristotle? His works are brilliant and applicable. Is it possible that his writings emerged from deep storage underground? A benefactor assist, like Nag Hammadi? I think so. The Dead Sea scrolls-- he claims they were not benefactor texts. Who knows? What is known is that immediately after WWII, at the birth of the CIA and the post-war prison-planet, the dry-clay earth provided both misdirection and answers. The holographic model, that includes a war of the Gods, provides a more satisfying reading than does the mere extreme improbabilities of chance.

7. Jason isn't trying to establish a cult. His message repeatedly is simple and profoundly Christian (although not accepted by the Bible-thumping zombies who go by that name):

The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? ​

John 10:33–34

​

Sonofabor said:

Easy pickings, you say?

Click to expand...

Heh, it’s exactly that which caused me to try and really carefully select my words. To get a model the size of his, I have no doubt at all that it involved countless hours of research. And a lot of it sounds accurate too. I’m sure there’s a lot of value there, but to me it’s just like a color commenter on a game I’m actively watching.

Fomenko is not a dissimilar style researcher, but he very clearly lays out his chronological corrections with specific dynamics in play for each particular case. And he’s mostly sticking to the matter of timelining, which is complicated enough without bringing in the nature of reality as a factor. Which, I mean, I’m just of the opinion that these are not matters to be adjudicated easily (if ever). I’m totally with jd on this one, to my eye the people who bluff knowing something outnumber and outrank those who actually have a clue by orders of magnitude.

Fomenko’s greatest value in my opinion is highlighting how little makes up the foundation of accepted chronology, not his specific educated guesses. His critiques for that stand to be addressed for anyone who fancies themselves a historian. At least if you care about assembling a chronology that relies in part on the generally accepted figures.

As for holographic reality goes, it just has always seemed like adding on an unnecessary layer if it’s meant as anything more than a metaphor. Doesn’t preclude it, but it’s the certainty that gives me pause. Because whereas I do believe this is possible:

Sonofabor said:

Jason isn't trying to establish a cult.

Click to expand...

…sometimes it just happens anyway.

But that’s my general sense of these sorts of things, NOT specifically Mr. Beshears or any of you guys, of course.

@jd755 i don’t mean to single out your comment about the simulation theory, but after catching up on this thread, it’s probably the thing I feel most compelled to react to.

you’re right, the name and current iteration of the simulation theory is a product of the technology of today… but what would we have called it before we had the technology to define it? Perhaps a dream.

solipsism dates back to BC era and supposes that nothing exists outside of the mind. Now that we enjoy supercomputers and virtual reality, it’s easy to append the theories with modern technology, but the idea that this isn’t “real” is truly an ancient one.