I thought the same thing, keep watching. There is no other explanation. Mountains are melted structures. The truth is painfully obvious once you see it. Plus your response was basically school taught you the truth 
1 Like
It should bother everyone. If the true nature of things is hidden from you on purpose then those people can you use it against you to your disadvantage. Im not saying I know the truth of everything. Im just saying you are sovereign human spirit and no one has the right to keep you ignorant and take advantage of the situation.
2 Likes
Look at the pockets of survival he shows. You can see the âmeltâ. Research mudfloods, tartaria, orphan trains as well. History is a fiction.
1 Like
Go to the 17:10 mark of the video. No one hundreds of years ago is going to build that structure into a mountain.
1 Like
Every single picture in this âdocumentaryâ has a natural explanation (and some are even poorly photo-shopped lol).
This is one of the most stupid videos on the internet.
It is created by idiots.
People should read books lol.
Again this is clearly done by people who have ZERO understanding of geology, rock formation and mineral chemistry and Earth history in general.
I come from a family of scientists. My father has a diploma in geology, we have discussed stuff like this when I was 10. I am telling you, this is even more stupid than people who make Flat Earth videos.
If you believe the theory in this âdocumentaryâ, you are simply extremely uneducated.
Please do yourself a favor and grab yourself a general book on rock formation and geology.
There is nothing secret or extraordinnairy there. Just a moron with no education creating explanations in his own head. The guy in the video who is commenting on these pictures is a complete moron who probably left school when he was 11.
2 Likes
âAnother impossible to build buildingâ
People have built far more complicated things Thousands of years ago.
This is Cringe TV.
1 Like
Again, you are just saying you have been indoctrinated. You also are upset and your ego is starting to call people names trying to protect itself. We will have to agree to disagree. For the record I have a degree. My brother inlaw who has a phd in biology works for a big gmo company. He only eats gmo food because he believes its healthier/safer. His IQ is thru the roof high. Hes still obviously wrong.
2 Likes
Please do yourself a favor and grab yourself a general book on rock formation and geology.
1 Like
Can anybody please explain that why almost All countries of the world have signed an International Treaty in the 1950âs that Outlaws the Exploration of the Continent of Antarctica in Private Capacity ?
One can only visit Antarctica through Govt channels and international permits.
Also, one must Submit all the relevant IDâs and permits for verification on a designated based in Antarctica before starting their expedition. And even then people are only allowed to go on a set of Pre-Determined Routes and they are not allowed to go Off-Course and explore other Areas on Antarctica.
All this SECRECY makes one wonder that what exactly are the Globalists trying to Hide about the TRUE Nature of the Continent of Antarctica ?
3 Likes
I came across this questions a few years ago when I had my âAntarctica Research Phaseâ.
I probably cannot answer this to your full satisfaction, but here are the reasons for why I think this is the way it is:
-
Having signed the treaty the governments make sure to control their own citizens and prevent them from entering this protected natural environment with their dirty clothes and poor touristy behavior. This is for the protectial and preservation of the nature there. Even if you are wealthy and can finance your own ships and planes, the government would somehow need to make sure that you will not leave a trace of dirty oil when you are gonna fly with your plane over Antarctica.
-
It also very much unexplored in terms of potential threats like unknown and ancient frozen bacteria under the ice. Governments are eager to not only protect the environment there, but also make sure that no tourist accidently opens up one of those ancient frozen lakes and contaminates it or becomes contaminated with some ancient bacteria themselves.
-
Antarctica is a very harsh environment. If you are not a trained expert and if you do something wrong, come with the wrong equipment, climb the wrong rock, step on the wrong piece of snow and fall into a chasm, encounter a Whiteout etc. you are pretty much guaranteed to die. Rescue missions are almost impossible to conduct and extremely expensive with a very slim chance of success. It is for the protection of the tourists themselves. Most tourists would simply die if left by themselves.
-
We have tourists dying in the Grand Canyon who are making selfies by steping on the wrong rocks and we have tourists dying by getting lost in the Taiga forest just 20km outside of the next city. It is very obvious that most tourists do not prepare themselves enough for harsh natural environments. The modern human (the tourist) has very poor natural survival skills because surviving in nature is no longer part of our regular training as humans since we are now all living within technology-assisted societies. Now in order to prepare for Antarctica, besides the very special ice desert survival skills, one also needs extre gear and the cost of the equipement that is needed would also be far beyond what the average tourist is able to afford.
-
And also, have you seen The Thing?
(This last one is a joke)
1 Like
It is still possible to go to the South Pole as a tourist, costs around 63k $ per person:
1 Like
You guys think the flat earth theory,that universe it self is water above and water below water it self ,that exist 7 heaven /earths,but to reach those lands and other earth one must pass the firmament, that theres 3 sun ,1 black sun that appears as ah eclipse,the moon /plasma map and firmament with the astros above ,is fake
?
1 Like
I see somewhere that antartica is a point to realize that we live in a flat earth that is sorrounded by large ice wall/barrier,
3 Likes
OK, guysâŚ
I have a slightly different view on this topic.
I think that most history is true, BUT each country or extreme political party or social movement or religious group has its own unique view or take on any single event, thus any event in history has countless Points Of Views.
What parts of History are lies, if you believe itâs made up of lies, in small part or most part?
For example, we can all agree that Napoleon existed, no?
(there are people who think he was an invention)
Medieval History of Europe and The Middle East?
Different sources agree on the vast majority of things, wars, migrations, etc.
Ancient History?
It gets a little bit foggy, but there is still Scientific Data, including Archeological discoveries, which are happening all the time.
New Data Comes In, The Narrative is Slightly Changed.
Also, as @DR_MANHATTAN said, each generation (from any country) gets a certain unique narrative, according to the regime which is in power, according to the societal values, religious views, etc.
So, can you guys be more specific?
Which parts do you believe are lies?
For example, I have seen people deny Rome or pretty much anything, but lets be honest, the Arabs and the Turks and the Chinese mention their Empire and Civilization.
Or do you believe that certain elites made it all up?
If you go that rabbit hole, then you can believe any other crazy theory.
If a big Science is manipulated, it means All Science isâŚ
Thus, why do you trust anything you hear or learn from any scientific background etc.?
Anyway, back to the pointâŚ
Which lies do you believe are sold as the truth?
Also, if youâre going to mention certain recent historical events, better not do it, i know some people deny that certain events happened and you know, thatâs very dangerous to say, if you live in Europe, for example.
Better leave anything too sensible out.
4 Likes
Most facts are truthful, any conjectures from them are easily not. Propaganda sells lies in most of the countries by omitting facts rather and giving a lot of bluff to remaining.
Basic examples are all around. Closer than Rome and much more. Take mongolian invasion, people all around think about them as purely relying on cavalry or own forces, but actually they literally conscripted men from subjugated populations to carry out infantry role even in internal conflicts. There are records of it happening, not just some ideas, of course those records may not be true as well, but amount of evidence from multiple sources and places from China to Rus is quite substantial.
Ancient history is definitely harder, but sources can be reconciled to an extent.
1 Like
If I gave you lord of the rings and accurately described each character but wrote a completely different story and told you it was the original, how much of the story you read was a lie?
The stories in history are the important bits. Who and where are probably generally truthful. But what, when, why, and how are at least partial or complete fabrications. What being less likely a complete lie and more likely a misdirect or lie by omission.
2 Likes
Actually that would be just a regular screenplay for a movie inspired by history 
1 Like
Usually even the when (s) are accurate. But further context (why? How? Any details? MotivesâŚ) is usually relative to each party.
Your point stands, no problem. You are right.
Change things, even slightly, and you have a different narrative.
Change things more
âŚ
Also, Throughout history, countless times, any party said awful things about their enemies, in ward, in peace time, etc.
Basically painting the enemy as bad, the party presenting the narrative as goodâŚetc.
1 Like