Illuminati End Game Started --- effects on BTC

[katafrag]

the moon is a hoax because the departure from the moon was filmed, so the cameraman stayed on the moon

[Ultros]

I'm sorry but the moon is not just an hoax, it is also a gigantic spacecraft made by the lizard-race to manipulate the collective human-mind by warping our perception of reality...and stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1w2dMekIJLw

Convincing.

Also...

[Paashaas]

We (as in one of our cells) use 100.000 times the energy of our sun, compared to our (it's) mass. We are products of evolution. There is no order, just chaos. This make us invent religion and try to make sense out of it all. This is futile. Reality is scary, deal with it. Death is the natural end of life. Death scares people. This fear is a forceful tool for us when it comes to creating "meaning". Illuminati my ass.

But what if youre wrong...



Ore what does the All-Seeing-Eye doing on the Bitcoin logo from the Illuminatie?

[Hyena]

Ore what does the All-Seeing-Eye doing on the Bitcoin logo from the Illuminatie?

Good point. Someone made a bad joke.

[Biodom]

Let me guess, you also think the moonlanding is a hoax?

The moonlanding may or may not have been a hoax. What is a hoax is the videos and photo footage they showed to the public about the moonlanding.

I agree, this pic offers what I think is the best evidence.. The sky is blacked out, and the image of the Earth looks like a double exposure. The Earth should be larger, not the same size as the Moon when we look at it from Earth.

au contraire

nothing is blacked out. the earth is so much brighter than stars in the background, so you don't see them in this exposure.
Also, earth is much, much bigger on this picture than Moon ever is, apart from the time it's size is exaggerated by being close to horizon, but it is the effect of the atmosphere; there is no atmosphere on the Mooon, hence no "magnifying" effect when close to horizon.

[Hyena]

nothing is blacked out. the earth is so much brighter than stars in the background, so you don't see them in this exposure.
Also, earth is much, much bigger on this picture than Moon ever is, apart from the time it's size is exaggerated by being close to horizon, but it is the effect of the atmosphere; there is no atmosphere on the Mooon, hence no "magnifying" effect when close to horizon.

oh please, you didn't just try to explain that picture, it has been proven to be a hoax so many times... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmnMJoFQHk0

[Harmonica]

nothing is blacked out. the earth is so much brighter than stars in the background, so you don't see them in this exposure.
Also, earth is much, much bigger on this picture than Moon ever is, apart from the time it's size is exaggerated by being close to horizon, but it is the effect of the atmosphere; there is no atmosphere on the Mooon, hence no "magnifying" effect when close to horizon.

oh please, you didn't just try to explain that picture, it has been proven to be a hoax so many times... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmnMJoFQHk0

Hyena, a poster boy for a generic conspiracy nutjob.

[dragonseer]

nothing is blacked out. the earth is so much brighter than stars in the background, so you don't see them in this exposure.
Also, earth is much, much bigger on this picture than Moon ever is, apart from the time it's size is exaggerated by being close to horizon, but it is the effect of the atmosphere; there is no atmosphere on the Mooon, hence no "magnifying" effect when close to horizon.

oh please, you didn't just try to explain that picture, it has been proven to be a hoax so many times...  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmnMJoFQHk0

Hyena, a poster boy for a generic conspiracy nutjob.

Maybe you aren't clever enough to evaluate the evidence yourself, so using insults is the only way you can contribute.

If you look at the linked video, you will see how they took the photo of the Earth used in the composite.

It won't be long before these faked images are acknowledged within a historical timeline of American Politics.

In 1963, John F Kennedy was assassinated in a political coup. This was covered up, and still is to this day. There is credible evidence that KKK members were among the conspirators involved.

A year before the moon landings, Martin Luther King was assassinated, as he tried to stand up for racial rights.

In 1969, the Moon Landings were propaganda used by a corrupt nation state to establish a sense of 'National Unity', in the middle of the Vietnam war.

In 2001, the 9/11 attacks occurred, this was a 'false flag' event used by this same corrupt nation state to justify more wars.

Now it's 2015, and the same tricks are still being used, however, we can use the internet and study history and prove ourselves smarter than that.

Now while you think about this, ask yourself why there haven't been any more manned missions to the moon since 1972.

[Tstar]

What about this video (from CBS ) that explains how the U.S. supported the radical Islamist groups in Syria and Iraq that eventually merged into ISIS.

Look for yourself

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1aDciHCejA

[suda123]

nothing is blacked out. the earth is so much brighter than stars in the background, so you don't see them in this exposure.
Also, earth is much, much bigger on this picture than Moon ever is, apart from the time it's size is exaggerated by being close to horizon, but it is the effect of the atmosphere; there is no atmosphere on the Mooon, hence no "magnifying" effect when close to horizon.

oh please, you didn't just try to explain that picture, it has been proven to be a hoax so many times... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmnMJoFQHk0

Hyena, a poster boy for a generic conspiracy nutjob.

Bitcoin itself is a conspiracy, the markets react the opposite all the time compared to bullish news. Stocks are beyond conspiracy.

[GitBit]

Sigh...
This thread contains many examples of why scientific literacy is so important.
I don't know that there's much hope for Hyena in terms of readjusting their thought processes.
Given that his/her posts are riddled with absolutes, they don't appear to realize that this undermines their credibility, regardless of the topic.
This displays a fundamental lack of knowledge regarding what our science has discovered about the nature of reality since the mid-1900's.

More importantly, it suggests Hyena lacks (our chooses to abandon) rigor in examining their beliefs using evidence-based practices.  The tendency towards hyperbole and superstition is a hallmark of intellectual laziness.  This extends to full-blown willfull ignorance, considering the vast availability of quality resources that are only a few keystrokes away.

I am not being dismissive of Hyena or their beliefs, I am however, highly skeptical and would encourage that they reexamine some fundamentals and consider amending the way that they present their ideas; if not completely abandon some of them.

I believe that everyone should routinely do a "system check" on themselves by attempting to be as objective as possible while assessing their own thoughts and behavior.

If one truly believes that "hyper-dimensional lizards" control our world or refuses to evolve any other beliefs that do not hold up against scientific scrutiny, then I'm sorry to have suggested an alternative approach to your world-view.
To be clear, I'm not sorry to you but sorry for you.  This includes anyone who finds themselves in the unfortunate position of your audience.  Where "audience" is referring to those who politely tolerate any verbal equivalents of the aforementioned beliefs.  I realize continuing to read posts is voluntary, being a captive audience isn't always so voluntary.

For those who want to review or expose themselves to great minds who use the power of doubt and diligence, I would humbly suggest simply watching a few YouTube videos featuring any of the enthralling individuals listed below:

Carl Sagan
Richard Feynman
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Richard Dawkins

There are many more, however, I personally find these few to be honest, skeptical and excellent speakers.  YouTube is a start if you find scientific thought interesting. Books and peer-reviewed publications offer much more rich information.

Be cautious of various "quotes" assigned to renowned individuals that tend to be ubiquitous on the internet.

Context is very important.

There are also issues with translation between languages and time-periods (colloquial speech, mathematical concepts to informal language, etc.)
Einstein is often mischaracterized amongst those who are not fluent in German. (He used English at times, however many famous quotes are translations that lack the necessary context.)

[readysalted89]

Now while you think about this, ask yourself why there haven't been any more manned missions to the moon since 1972.

Because there's nothing there but rocks, and the journey costs a fortune, and people have to risk their lives to make it. There are discussions about a martian colony, but it's similar to the moon in that there's nothing there but rocks. Who's going to want to spend the rest of their lives living somewhere with nothing but piles of rocks everywhere?

[jaredboice]

Let me guess, you also think the moonlanding is a hoax?

The moonlanding may or may not have been a hoax. What is a hoax is the videos and photo footage they showed to the public about the moonlanding.

I agree, this pic offers what I think is the best evidence.. The sky is blacked out, and the image of the Earth looks like a double exposure. The Earth should be larger, not the same size as the Moon when we look at it from Earth.

au contraire

nothing is blacked out. the earth is so much brighter than stars in the background, so you don't see them in this exposure.
Also, earth is much, much bigger on this picture than Moon ever is, apart from the time it's size is exaggerated by being close to horizon, but it is the effect of the atmosphere; there is no atmosphere on the Mooon, hence no "magnifying" effect when close to horizon.

That undisturbed lunar surface beneath the Lunar Module's Rockets tho!

The Lem looks awfully clean for all that rocket thrust that should have been firing lunar dust all over the place.  Looks like it was placed there.  Also that side of the Lem that's facing away from the sun looks pretty bright for a subject on the opposite side of the only light source, on a surface where there is no atmosphere...why do hollywood film productions need expensive lighting arrangements again?

[Ultros]

[readysalted89]

Now while you think about this, ask yourself why there haven't been any more manned missions to the moon since 1972.

Because there's nothing there but rocks <snip>

How is a giant star made entirely out of Gouda cheese "rocks," exactly?  Just how naive do you think we are?

You are incredibly naive if you seriously think the moon is a giant star made entirely out of Gouda cheese. It's been scientifically proven to be a big chunk of rock covered in boring little piles of smaller rocks. There's nothing to see there because the lizard men live deep underground and never venture onto the surface. There's absolutely no reason for earthlings to visit the moon again.

[jaredboice]

One of the signature trolling strategies: "Ignore the evidence by making a joke of it"

Only logic will satisfy, thanks

[hdbuck]

A population bubble  

A correction  

You're aware that not everything is a market?

not markets.. cycles.

[Cconvert2G36]

A population bubble  

A correction  

You're aware that not everything is a market?

not markets.. cycles.

[dragonseer]

Now while you think about this, ask yourself why there haven't been any more manned missions to the moon since 1972.

Because there's nothing there but rocks, and the journey costs a fortune, and people have to risk their lives to make it. There are discussions about a martian colony, but it's similar to the moon in that there's nothing there but rocks. Who's going to want to spend the rest of their lives living somewhere with nothing but piles of rocks everywhere?

I would say that rocket technology may be able to get you to the moon, but it isn't going to get you back again.  Look at all the energy required to leave Earth's orbit, and all the fuel tanks that break off in the process. Now look at those pathetic little thrusters on the lander. Do you think it would be able to lift off the moon? I would say not.

[Ultros]

http://www.revisionism.nl/Moon/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm