[ a / b / cf / cy / g / lain / un / pollitx ] [ wired / meta ] [ home / information / affiliates ] [ mebious ]

/pollitx/ - Occultism

Past and modern, /pol/ / lit/ /x/
Password (For file deletion.)

Mebious now up and running! Access the wired.


How much of this is true? Is it actually possible?


File: 1625272365639.jpg (161.03 KB, 1280x720, afghanistan-banner.jpg)

>So he starts a war with Iraq, their number one threat
This refers to the (First) Gulf War, where Iraq invaded Kuwait and the US, Saudi Arabia and others piled on the Iraqis to repel them. But they didn't achieve regime change in Iraq. That would have to wait until later.

>Then one steals the election for the other

Jeb Bush was governor of Florida during the 2000 election, when the winner of the presidency depended on which way Florida swung. George Bush won Florida by 537 votes in the end, but, as usual in fucked up USA, voter suppression meant that many people who should have been able to vote could not. Listen to this:
>The felons list was put together by a private company, Database Technologies (DBT), which has conceded that it was riddled with mistakes but says it warned the Florida authorities to check it before using it.
>in counties where the list was used, many voters with clean records found themselves barred from voting because they shared a name with a convict.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/jun/06/uselections2000.usa

>We all know the rest

Watch the documentary The Power of Nightmares if you don't know the rest. It's one film-maker's view, but it gives a very different picture of 9/11. As I remember, the perpetrators of 9/11 were mainly Saudis who had been in contact with Osama bin Laden, but (according to the doc) did not take direct orders from him. Effectively, bin Laden was used as a face on which to pin every evil committed by Islamist terrorists of all stripes. Somehow (I still don't understand this) the big boom in the big Apple also became an excuse to finish the job on Saddam. Iraq has been a complete mess since.


Everything that does not go against the laws of our universe, like the laws of physics will happen somewhere if a universe is infinite, yes.
But I doubt that there is a single theory that our universe is infinite. Hypothesis yes, theory unlikely. A theory is something proven or at least provable.


that guy used to be funny


Good news, he still is!


>A theory is something proven or at least provable
Getting off-topic here, but that's not right. Unlike mathematical truths, scientific theories are not provable beyond all doubt. For example, Isaac Newton's theory of gravitation was very, very good and it was used successfully for hundreds of years. But, although there was lots of evidence in favour of the theory, it was never proven, because Einstein came along and pointed out that the gravitational force between two objects does not exactly follow Newton's formula.

A theory is actually just a set of assertions. Flat earth is a theory - it's false, and provably so (beyond reasonable doubt). Quantum mechanics is a theory - it's very useful but even physicists would admit that it has not been 'proven'. Some more complete, more correct Grand Unified Theory might come and replace it.



I think you got that wrong.
Provable or proven does not necessarily mean correct. See flat earth is a theory because you can in some ways make your proves that the earth is flat. The proves are all bullshit because the theory is wrong.
Hypothethis = scientific thought/reason based on a seen pattern
Theory = hypothethis that has been proven in some way.

Also Isaac Newton's theory is a theory becaues it was proven. He made forecasts based on his equations that actually happened = prove.
And I'm pretty sure that Newton's theory was only wrong in the speed of gravitational force which he said was instantanious and einstein prove that it was at the speed of light.
Einsteins gravitational theory isn't really changing newton's equation's it's just giving the reason for why gravitation exists, which is the bending and curving of spacetime.

I mean we're obviously just discussing the exact definitions, but I've learned that the scientific hierarchy is:

Individual Observation -> Pattern -> Hypothethis -prove-by-not-being-able-to-flasificate-> Theory

Maybe I got this wrong, but in the end we mean the same.


My pals have gotten something up at https://fatchan.org/sci/index.html http://cimixezweeq64g42vl6tyhk4becxhi4ldwqq6w43u53qhwsd3s4c3lyd.onion/sci/index.html , I have got a lot of problems with confusing "research" with "science" and that's all the mainstream does. With research you don't have to understand anything, you just have to observe, analyze, calculate, etc. but with science you have to say something about the world to kill the magic. Bill Gaede is a guy you should definitely look into.


Yes, anything you can possibly imagine exists merely because there are an infinite number of ways to arrange information, in our universe that would be something similar to atoms. As the other anons have correctly noted, however, it is not possible to prove.

If you were to use an occult model, you could say that every time a person conceives of a reality, object, being etc… it's not something new per se but merely the divine revealing itself to you and itself.

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ a / b / cf / cy / g / lain / un / pollitx ] [ wired / meta ] [ home / information / affiliates ] [ mebious ]