TRUE END TIMES BIBLE PROPHECY - Monarch Briefing

[john4564]

As with everything you say we should agree to disagree.Im just killing time til my flight takes off.(Aeroplane not flying saucer).

I do accept that someone disagrees with me...as far as one contributes with specific valid (counter) arguments. I don't see any from you. So, how can we agree to disagree, that's the question. By the way, have a good flight.

 

[Shadowprophet]

Does anyone remember a guy called Gnostic Bishop? John kind of reminds me of him a little.
I wonder whatever happened to that guy.

 

[Standingstones]

I find the ignore button works well for such individuals.

 

[john4564]

@John,

Though accurate at the time, It's no longer being updated. It says nowhere that's it's inaccurate. John, in fact, it says it was accurate and is no longer being updated, that's a completely different thing. and it was stated by NASA.
And for the record John, I don't care what you think about weakness or strength.

Just because someone has the humility to show that they aren't an asshole, doesn't make them weak. I've given you a lot of evidence of The existence of Dark matter, More evidence then you can muster about any claim you have ever made.

The only thing you have managed to prove is someone can repeatedly pelt you with truth and facts and you have an innate ability to remain Idioioically oblivious to those things throughout.
If this information about Dark matter was ever accurate At what point did it become inaccurate? Isn't calling someone weak a personal attack? You are a conundrum, George, I once Taught Autistic Children in a class George, The thing about Autistic children is, They are incredibly reluctant to change or new ideologies. Yet these children could learn.

You don't seem to possess that ability, No matter how much information no matter how much peer review, No matter how many facts someone puts at your door sept.

You are a strange man John.

You certainly missed my point when I say that the 'NASA article' (not from NASA actually) doesn't provide ANY evidence to definitively confirm the dark matter and dark energy theory, since, in that case, this question would be closed today. But it is not, as proved by your own links to a video and a wikipedia page.

That is why there are ALWAYS challenging theories in 2019, this one for example:

https://phys.org/news/2019-01-dark-alternative-theory.html

From NASA (therefore contradicting the word 'evidence' you talked about in your NASA link, mine being far more recent, i.e. 2019):

Dark Energy, Dark Matter | Science Mission Directorate

Eventually theorists came up with three sorts of explanations. Maybe it was a result of a long-discarded version of Einstein's theory of gravity, one that contained what was called a "cosmological constant." Maybe there was some strange kind of energy-fluid that filled space. Maybe there is something wrong with Einstein's theory of gravity and a new theory could include some kind of field that creates this cosmic acceleration. Theorists still don't know what the correct explanation is, but they have given the solution a name. It is called dark energy.

If theorists don't know (SIC!) it means that it is NOT proved...in 2019, yet!

You see here that the root of the problem is not a single name. What is called 'dark energy' (like a bin where you can put any kind of theory related to energy, what the fractal time is per se) from which one (some people) infers the 'dark matter', can be of a very different nature than what most of people believe it to be (dark matter). That is even why the galaxy NGC1052-DF2 doesn't match the dark matter theory:

Galaxy without dark matter challenges scientific theories

and that some scientists try to save it with fallacious arguments:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/12/27/the-galaxy-that-challenged-dark-matter-and-failed/

This video gives more inputs:



Now, if you want to know more about the Absolute Relativity, and it correlative fractal time, you can read my book for free here:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...-Pm-29-9-Meg&usg=AOvVaw1N4aCbLgu8IyYaeJSORnAT

 

[Shadowprophet]

You certainly missed my point when I say that the 'NASA article' (not from NASA actually) doesn't provide ANY evidence to definitively confirm the dark matter and dark energy theory, since, in that case, this question would be closed today. But it is not, as proved by your own links to a video and a wikipedia page.

That is why there are ALWAYS challenging theories in 2019, this one for example:

https://phys.org/news/2019-01-dark-alternative-theory.html

From NASA (therefore contradicting the word 'evidence' you talked about in your NASA link, mine being far more recent, i.e. 2019):

Dark Energy, Dark Matter | Science Mission Directorate

Eventually theorists came up with three sorts of explanations. Maybe it was a result of a long-discarded version of Einstein's theory of gravity, one that contained what was called a "cosmological constant." Maybe there was some strange kind of energy-fluid that filled space. Maybe there is something wrong with Einstein's theory of gravity and a new theory could include some kind of field that creates this cosmic acceleration. Theorists still don't know what the correct explanation is, but they have given the solution a name. It is called dark energy.

If theorists don't know (SIC!) it means that it is NOT proved...in 2019, yet!

You see here that the root of the problem is not a single name. What is called 'dark energy' (like a bin where you can put any kind of theory related to energy, what the fractal time is per se) from which one (some people) infers the 'dark matter', can be of a very different nature than what most of people believe it to be (dark matter). That is even why the galaxy NGC1052-DF2 doesn't match the dark matter theory:

Galaxy without dark matter challenges scientific theories

and that some scientists try to save it with fallacious arguments:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/12/27/the-galaxy-that-challenged-dark-matter-and-failed/

This video gives more inputs:



Now, if you want to know more about the Absolute Relativity, and it correlative fractal time, you can read my book for free here:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjEjcie2onjAhU9AWMBHdwWDEkQFjAFegQIAxAB&url=https://fr.scribd.com/doc/73858664/The-Science-of-Extraterrestrials-PDF-October-19-2010-8-46-Pm-29-9-Meg&usg=AOvVaN4aCbLgu8IyYaeJSORnAT

The article is hosted on Nasa's web page. They preserve it for posterity. It's a NASA article? Am I wrong here? It can be sourced to Nasa. I tend to agree with Pepe, You are doing your best to pigeon hole this, And that's fine that's your perspective.

We disagree on dark matter, That's fine, We also disagree on fractile time, I searched and couldn't find any peer-reviewed articles about the issue. Ultimately, You can believe anything you want, your claims speak as much.

I will agree that Dark matter isn't "Confirmed" But in that same breadth, Neither is relativity, And we accept that "Theory" Neither is Entropy, Yet we use half-life for microdoses of medications, With relativity being a theory, Spacetime would be a theory, Yet we use the principals of time dilation to allow for the curvature of space-time to be calculated in sending and receiving data from satellites. None of these theories are "Proven beyond doubt, Yet we use them as if they were scientific fact. The boon to this is, Those theories work, Both mathematically in practical application. Thus does Dark matter also calculates accurately.

You are debating all the way into the philosophical, The factual principal remains, When you touch something with your hand, your hand doesn't actually touch it. There is a very fine electromagnetic field that prevents you from actually truly touching atoms together.
Yet, we perceive that we touch things. No one can factually prove that you can't touch things in a pragmatic context.

Dark matter and dark energy are real, Weather it literally factually interactions with the cosmos or not, I assert, That the Principal and mathematics are intact for these theories and function as described. Therefore, Even Though I fully buy into Dark matter, It can not be said that Dark matter is fictional, As these principals are at play, and those theories mathematically sound, I'm going to flip the scrips John,

Disprove Dark matter. You have all eternity to accomplish this.

 

[Ron67]

I find the ignore button works well for such individuals.

But his mental gymnastics are fascinating.

 

[Double Nought Spy]

The Farce is strong in this one.

 

[Ron67]

I do accept that someone disagrees with me...as far as one contributes with specific valid (counter) arguments. I don't see any from you. So, how can we agree to disagree, that's the question. By the way, have a good flight.

Short flight to London was very pleasant thank you.

 

[The shadow]

Thank you to make me laugh, Rikki. My contacts are demonic but yours are not, of course. When it is about science, one uses insults to hide one's own ignorance or misundertanding. When it is about aliens, one uses the 'demons' card to hide one's own fear or ignorance.

Our visions and contacts are also of personal nature but are directly linked to the end times prophecies, and we are FAR from sharing all of them, more than 200. We have had time and opportunities to distinguish between the various sorts of creatures / species.

Don't be concerned for me. Be concerned for you when you judge the others. You will be judged the same way, even if you 'bless' them.

Who is your husband, supposedly challenging me, among the posters?

I am her husband

 

[Shadowprophet]

Is this thread not the most entertaining thing going right now.

 

[john4564]

The article is hosted on Nasa's web page. They preserve it for posterity. It's a NASA article? Am I wrong here? It can be sourced to Nasa. I tend to agree with Pepe, You are doing your best to pigeon hole this, And that's fine that's your perspective.

You can make a distinction between articles from NASA and from people working with NASA. The article you provided is signed by:

Erica Hupp
Headquarters, Washington

Steve Roy
Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala.

Megan Watzke
Chandra X-ray Center, Cambridge, Mass.

The article I provided in my post above is an OFFICIAL 'mission statement' in the tab called 'WHAT WE STUDY'. It is not contextual, about a specific observation, but generalities about what NASA endorses.

We disagree on dark matter, That's fine, We also disagree on fractile time, I searched and couldn't find any peer-reviewed articles about the issue. Ultimately, You can believe anything you want, your claims speak as much.

No, we do not disagree on dark matter. You were wrong, I was right. Dark matter IS NOT PROVED, unlike what you contantly said it. Honesty is the very first virtue of a true Christian, what you repeatedly say you were. So, you failed being a true Christian.

You didn't find any specific peer-reviewed articles on the fractal time because it is not the words scientists use to speak about it without naming it. NAMING IT, and DEFINING IT, is what I brought to science. I won't provide you with articles that you couldn't understand the math.

I will agree that Dark matter isn't "Confirmed" But in that same breadth, Neither is relativity, And we accept that "Theory" Neither is Entropy, Yet we use half-life for microdoses of medications, With relativity being a theory, Spacetime would be a theory, Yet we use the principals of time dilation to allow for the curvature of space-time to be calculated in sending and receiving data from satellites. None of these theories are "Proven beyond doubt, Yet we use them as if they were scientific fact. The boon to this is, Those theories work, Both mathematically in practical application. Thus does Dark matter also calculates accurately.

You are confusing many things here, blatantly showing your lacks in science. Relativity is confirmed because measured. Entropy is confirmed because measured. Both are scientific concepts with precise definitions. They are proven beyond doubt since they are defined beyond doubt.

The question is to what extent do we understand them and are measurable.

The dark matter case is the very opposite: NO ONE HAS EVER MEASURED IT. One only observes measurable effects that are SUPPOSED to be due to dark matter. BUT THERE IS NO MATERIAL DARK MATTER EVER MEASURED AND IDENTIFIED. Dark matter, unlike relativity and entropy, is not clearly defined (since not discovered yet, if ever found one day).

Again, you confuse effect and cause. There could be several causes (theories) for one single effect (measured observation). The measurement is NOT the theory. Other theories could explain the said effect. The fractal time is the best one, of the alternate explanations, until now since it doesn't only explain the gravitational lensing, but many other anomalies in the macrocosme and the microcosme. This is a unique concept the applications of which cover everything, including UFOs and paranormal (what the dark matter don't).

You are debating all the way into the philosophical, The factual principal remains, When you touch something with your hand, your hand doesn't actually touch it. There is a very fine electromagnetic field that prevents you from actually truly touching atoms together.
Yet, we perceive that we touch things. No one can factually prove that you can't touch things in a pragmatic context.

This is the other way around. You lose yourself into ramblings while I stick to the facts and assumptions (I separate them). Your example has nothing to do with the topic of dark matter and is perfectly explained due to scales changes of observations. Very different concepts.

Dark matter and dark energy are real, Weather it literally factually interactions with the cosmos or not, I assert, That the Principal and mathematics are intact for these theories and function as described. Therefore, Even Though I fully buy into Dark matter, It can not be said that Dark matter is fictional, As these principals are at play, and those theories mathematically sound, I'm going to flip the scrips John,

Disprove Dark matter. You have all eternity to accomplish this.

So, now, to avoid to be wrong, you come back with your 'dark matter is real' when even NASA (nor ESA or other space agencies) doesn't dare to confirm or state this. You're just a believer in dark matter, like I already said in the first hand. It's your right to believe. But none has the least proof that dark matter, if any, exist, or is the only explanation on the shelve.

I have already disproved dark matter with a far better explanation, covering more in science than dark matter alone. But one needs true scientific education, and a high IQ level, to know and understand why. I provided a link to my book. But if you don't want to compare (if capable of), that's YOUR problem (that I really don't care about). Not those of the truth. Those who don't love the truth won't be saved...

2 Thessalonians 2:9-10 The coming of the lawless one will be accompanied by the working of Satan, with every kind of power, sign, and false wonder, and with every wicked deception directed against those who are perishing, because they refused the love of the truth that would have saved them.

 

[Shadowprophet]

You can make a distinction between articles from NASA and from people working with NASA. The article you provided is signed by:

Erica Hupp
Headquarters, Washington

Steve Roy
Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala.

Megan Watzke
Chandra X-ray Center, Cambridge, Mass.

The article I provided in my post above is an OFFICIAL 'mission statement' in the tab called 'WHAT WE STUDY'. It is not contextual, about a specific observation, but generalities about what NASA endorses.


No, we do not disagree on dark matter. You were wrong, I was right. Dark matter IS NOT PROVED, unlike what you contantly said it. Honesty is the very first virtue of a true Christian, what you repeatedly say you were. So, you failed being a true Christian.

You didn't find any specific peer-reviewed articles on the fractal time because it is not the words scientists use to speak about it without naming it. NAMING IT, and DEFINING IT, is what I brought to science. I won't provide you with articles that you couldn't understand the math.


You are confusing many things here, blatantly showing your lacks in science. Relativity is confirmed because measured. Entropy is confirmed because measured. Both are scientific concepts with precise definitions. They are proven beyond doubt since they are defined beyond doubt.

The question is to what extent do we understand them and are measurable.

The dark matter case is the very opposite: NO ONE HAS EVER MEASURED IT. One only observes measurable effects that are SUPPOSED to be due to dark matter. BUT THERE IS NO MATERIAL DARK MATTER EVER MEASURED AND IDENTIFIED. Dark matter, unlike relativity and entropy, is not clearly defined (since not discovered yet, if ever found one day).

Again, you confuse effect and cause. There could be several causes (theories) for one single effect (measured observation). The measurement is NOT the theory. Other theories could explain the said effect. The fractal time is the best one, of the alternate explanations, until now since it doesn't only explain the gravitational lensing, but many other anomalies in the macrocosme and the microcosme. This is a unique concept the applications of which cover everything, including UFOs and paranormal (what the dark matter don't).


This is the other way around. You lose yourself into ramblings while I stick to the facts and assumptions (I separate them). Your example has nothing to do with the topic of dark matter and is perfectly explained due to scales changes of observations. Very different concepts.


So, now, to avoid to be wrong, you come back with your 'dark matter is real' when even NASA (nor ESA or other space agencies) doesn't dare to confirm or state this. You're just a believer in dark matter, like I already said in the first hand. It's your right to believe. But none has the least proof that dark matter, if any, exist, or is the only explanation on the shelve.

I have already disproved dark matter with a far better explanation, covering more in science than dark matter alone. But one needs true scientific education, and a high IQ level, to know and understand why. I provided a link to my book. But if you don't want to compare (if capable of), that's YOUR problem (that I really don't care about). Not those of the truth. Those who don't love the truth won't be saved...

2 Thessalonians 2:9-10 The coming of the lawless one will be accompanied by the working of Satan, with every kind of power, sign, and false wonder, and with every wicked deception directed against those who are perishing, because they refused the love of the truth that would have saved them.

I'm currently in a phone call, I will be back to this in about 45 minutes. Oh nevermind, When it's called the fact of relativity, We will continue this conversation.

 

[Shadowprophet]

I'm currently in a phone call, I will be back to this in about 45 minutes. Oh nevermind, When it's called the fact of relativity, We will continue this conversation.

You can accuse people of being a shitty Christian, if you want, At least I'm not a shitty person John.

 

[john4564]

I am her husband

ALL WRIT!

 

[Shadowprophet]

ALL WRIT!

Entropy is not fully understood John, This is also a fact.

 

[The shadow]

hate to break it to you but the 4 beast of Daniel have nothing to do with the British royals.
The 4 Beasts of Daniel and Revelation » Christian Truth Center
let us discuss the 2nd beast the one you think is Henry the 8th.
he did have a large girth I will grant you.
Henry has the blood of TWO of his 6 wives on his hands the 3rd died in childbirth. let me ask how did you come to interpret the prophecy of 4 kingdoms to be of the royal family?
please don't say "the bible says." I want to know the process from beginning to end on how you came to the interpretation.

 

[john4564]

Entropy is not fully understood John, This is also a fact.

Reread what I wrote:

Relativity is confirmed because measured. Entropy is confirmed because measured. Both are scientific concepts with precise definitions. They are proven beyond doubt since they are defined beyond doubt.

The question is to what extent do we understand them and are measurable.

 

[john4564]

hate to break it to you but the 4 beast of Daniel have nothing to do with the British royals.
The 4 Beasts of Daniel and Revelation » Christian Truth Center
let us discuss the 2nd beast the one you think is Henry the 8th.
he did have a large girth I will grant you.
Henry has the blood of TWO of his 6 wives on his hands the 3rd died in childbirth. let me ask how did you come to interpret the prophecy of 4 kingdoms to be of the royal family?
please don't say "the bible says." I want to know the process from beginning to end on how you came to the interpretation.

THANKS to get back to the topic Shadow!

I will reply later. Quite busy right now.

 

[Shadowprophet]

Reread what I wrote:

Relativity is confirmed because measured. Entropy is confirmed because measured. Both are scientific concepts with precise definitions. They are proven beyond doubt since they are defined beyond doubt.

The question is to what extent do we understand them and are measurable.

In fairness, I'm kind of busy this morning on the phone with doctors appointments and such., This is an interesting conversation, But I will give you that point. You earned that one.

It's a hard point to argue because I do agree with relativity and entropy. I use them as examples, but, Relativity is still called a theory. No one calls it the fact of relativity. Even though we accept it as a fact. The reason for this was back in times past, as people learned more they had to change labels like hypothesis/theory/fact so many times, It's become a tradition to still refer to them as theory, Even though they are considered a fact.

 

[The shadow]

about Henry the 8th:
he was a slim athletic man. found of jousting and hunting.
Henry had a jousting accident

As he grew older, particularly once he entered middle age, Henry put on a massive amount of weight. Suits of armor showed that his waistline, which had measured 32 inches in 1512, grew to 54 inches; Henry weighed nearly 400 pounds when he died in 1547. In his later years, the king also suffered from painful ulcers on his legs and had trouble standing and walking.
don't sound much like a bear!