Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Hitler was a Catholic honored with a Catholic funeral and six priests officiating.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jon in the Nati:
And neither was Stalin a Jesuit. Stalin was not even Catholic; at least you got that part right about Hitler's upbringing.

I don't suppose you have cites for either of these propositions?

---

I can find them. Not instantly, but within a day.

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jon in the Nati:
And neither was Stalin a Jesuit. Stalin was not even Catholic; at least you got that part right about Hitler's upbringing.

I don't suppose you have cites for either of these propositions?

---

I can find them. Not instantly, but within a day.

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jahlove:
Why is emily ignoring my crochet-related questions? Is it because the crochet-hook is a symbol of alien ZOG-Lizard repression?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:


>>>Stalin was a Jesuit; Hitler was a Catholic honored with a Catholic funeral and six priests officiating.

It's not ours to know, why turncoats turn their coats.

---

quote:

---

Remember, I'm a Christian, and I do not buy into the Annunaki cosmology, because "manifesting one's reality" here in 3rd Density Physical Reality doesn't work for me.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jon in the Nati:
And neither was Stalin a Jesuit. Stalin was not even Catholic; at least you got that part right about Hitler's upbringing.

I don't suppose you have cites for either of these propositions?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Stalin is not mentioned once on that page, by the way. Why is it even in this list?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

mousethief: The Jesuits operate hundreds of schools as shown in this link.

---

I have taught at a Jesuit school

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

mousethief: The Jesuits operate hundreds of schools as shown in this link.

---

I have taught at a Jesuit school

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

mousethief: YOU'RE STALIN? WHO KNEW!

---

To be honest, it comes as a surprise to me too

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Emily:

I'm astonished that you actually use stuff found out by googling to support your theories.

Despite their 'Do No Evil' clap-trap monicker Google could be described as a secretive, hegemonous global network which has spent the past n years amassing shedloads of data on men, women and children who only wish to use their computers to produce homework or keep in touch with relatives.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
On the topic of proof:
The planet Nibiru has been visible to some since 2003 (when Nancy Lieder began her odyssey). I've been archiving photos since about 2009 that I didn't know how to interpret.

The the images I finally re-rendered into ultra-violet (because Nibiru is a black-light planet with a black-light sun Nemesis) are here:

http://www.scienfree.org/Elenin_Files/

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
On the topic of proof:

Somebody asked me for this in the Hell thread, but it didn't seem appropriate there, to talk about THIS. So, here it is.

I put up the Annunaki page I have on Facebook, yesterday; but here it is again.

https://www.facebook.com/AnnunakiFromOrion#

And the Album

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.309061465893604.1073741827.175354842597601&type=1#

The planet Nibiru has been visible to some since 2003 (when Nancy Lieder began her odyssey). I've been archiving photos since about 2009 that I didn't know how to interpret.

The the images I finally re-rendered into ultra-violet (because Nibiru is a black-light planet with a black-light sun Nemesis) are here:

http://www.scienfree.org/Elenin_Files/

Sumerian writings that discuss the Annunaki culture are here:

http://www.enkispeaks.com

This is like trying to take a drink from a firehose.

Does this Forum have the capability to put up just one photo image at a time, so I can bring exceptionally clear images here?

So, if these links do not constitute PROOF to you that the Annunaki and Planet Nibiru are REAL, what would constitute such proof?

Please advise.

Emily

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

mousethief: The Jesuits operate hundreds of schools as shown in this link.

---

I have taught at a Jesuit school

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Is this the same Nibiru where Kirk and Spock save the indigenous people from a volcano but violate the Prime Directive when rescuing Spock, or a different Nibiru?

---

Apparently this one is toroidal, and so has a different number oif axes of rotational symettry than ordinary boring spherical planets, which is supposed to be important. For some reason. According to that Facebook page.

I can prove the n-colour problem on a torus. Well, I can if you give me twenty minutes with the right textbook, or else the notes I made last time I did any graph theory. Isn't that amazing

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:


>>>Stalin was a Jesuit; Hitler was a Catholic honored with a Catholic funeral and six priests officiating.

It's not ours to know, why turncoats turn their coats.

---

Hitler didn't persecute Catholics as a hard and fast rule, not like the Jews. And what historical evidence is there that he had a Catholic funeral? He committed suicide (a mortal sin) and was buried by the Russians (who were definitely NOT RC).

quote:

---

Remember, I'm a Christian, and I do not buy into the Annunaki cosmology, because "manifesting one's reality" here in 3rd Density Physical Reality doesn't work for me.

---

Yeah, but what does the New Age crap have to do with Pope Francis, or any other Christian leader of note?

---

This is all so pithy and ripe for a food fight photo.

The "Hitler" they found in the bunker was one of his doppelgangers; the real one got away to South America (or Antarctica or the Moon) is how the conspiracy nuts tell it. I have a photo image of that guy too, deceased, that was claimed to be the deceased Hitler. In Germany, after the war, he was honored at a full Catholic funeral, is another story I found.

So, as a matter of FACT, I do not know nor can I testify to what actually happened to Hitler.

YOU said: Stalin may have been brought up by the Jesuits, but I've seen nothing that says that they kept him in their fold.

Well, he knew exactly what ideas, concepts, doctrines and dogmas he was opposing, didn't he? He was well schooled in the cynicism of the Bolsheviks who said, "There'll be pie in the sky when we die, by and by!" Those Bolsheviks KNEW religious doctrine.

[/qb][/QUOTE]Yeah, but what does the New Age crap have to do with Pope Francis, or any other Christian leader of note? [/QB][/QUOTE]

Everything. New Age and Occult doctrine teach deliberate and insinuated COMPLACENCY, non-activism, non-interventionism.

"It's all good," "All is One," "As Above, so Below," "Like Attracts Like," Reality is an Illusion, "There's no such thing as Trying," and "Astrology" --these doctrines NAIL THE IDEA, There's nothing to do about Injustice in the world. Just think about something else.

Christians don't talk about the negative influence of New Age and Occult beliefs, nearly often enough.

Em

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Christians don't talk about the negative influence of New Age and Occult beliefs, nearly often enough.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Christians don't talk about the negative influence of New Age and Occult beliefs, nearly often enough.

---

You're hanging with the wrong kind of Christians, then. When I were an Evangelical, it was a perennial topic of flagellation.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeteC:
It's Hell. Deal.

Stop reading and close the link, already.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Christians don't talk about the negative influence of New Age and Occult beliefs, nearly often enough.

---

You're hanging with the wrong kind of Christians, then. When I were an Evangelical, it was a perennial topic of flagellation.

---

Love, I live in the forest where there are NO Christians, nobody to even talk to.

And near local Hot Springs where New Age Hippies congretgate, all I hear is their dogma: All One; As above, so below; Reality is illusion; No such thing as Trying; Like attracts like; Astrology, etc.

That's why I come here, for christian encouragement. I used to go, from 2005-2011, to BBC's Religion Forums. That was a wonderful place til they shut it down in favor of secular materialistic blah blah blah.

Emily

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeteC:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeteC:
It's Hell. Deal.

Stop reading and close the link, already.

---

Oops, it is so not Hell. Apologies.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg

Quite banal, eh?

And a masters degree confers upon one the authority to judge social agencies and consequences, does it?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

L'organist: The Tavistock is a registered charity which is engaged in the field of research in the field of organisational behaviour.

---

That's what they said about the Second Foundation...

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:

quote:

---

posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg

Quite banal, eh?

And a masters degree confers upon one the authority to judge social agencies and consequences, does it?

---

May I suggest that Crazy Cat Lady, being resident in the UK, is likely to have a better idea of the bona fides of the Tavistock Institute than a non-resident?

The Tavistock is a registered charity which is engaged in the field of research in the field of organisational behaviour.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
Okay so Pete thinks this is a Hell thread, now I think it's Circus.

---

I agree with you.

Nobody serious intends to sit still here.

Em

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:
Hi Emily, I’ve followed your posts with interest and would like to ask you a few questions if I may.

Firstly, you say that you came to your conclusions purely on the basis of many thousands of astronomy photographs which you have worked on and re-rendered.

Yet much of your ideas appear historical/ archaeological rather than pictorially originated. If your conclusions came directly from your experience of these astronomical images where did such matters as Sumarian writings, British Royal Families, and Templars (for instance) come from? You wouldn’t have seen such ideas in your NASA images directly, however well re-rendered. So where did you get your ideas from if not your own direct experience. Have you taken these ideas from another source? Perhaps someone else’s work? If so, how do you know to trust their work if it is not your direct experience?

...MY WORK IS MY OWN PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE. I was digital imaging technician and corporate trainer for Xerox corporation in the 1970s. That's where I learned how digital images work; how they work with pixels and colors.

Secondly, I would question whether your approach to evidence is purely objective. It is always possible, I am sure you would agree, that we can read our own imaginings and presuppositions into the evidence in front of us. We are of course very imaginative creatures, and we have all done this at some point. What is important, for everyone therefore, is to make sure that what we think we see, in our subjective mind, is what is objectively really there. I checked out your facebook album but unfortunately could not see what you claimed the images showed. The first photo was a black and white grainy image of a sky above an observatory. In your caption you claimed to see many figures walking around in the sky in the image. I’m afraid to tell you that I cannot see any figures at all. In all of your images, I had the same issue. I would suggest to you, is it possible that you are seeing what you expect to see, and these things are not objectively present? It is a common phenomenon, which is why it is so important to check one’s own experiences with others.

MY APPROACH--since I presume that I know nothing and have no hypothesis--is PHENOMENOLOGICAL, after the method of Idhe and Hussrl.

Thirdly, I would ask about your approach to other secondary and tertiary sources. I appreciate your interest is astronomy and so, like all of us, you read other people to understand other subjects. But you must be aware of how important it is to check out your sources, to ensure that the person you are reading is an expert in their field. There are many people posting on the internet, some of which are genuinely mistaken, others outright deceiving, others just writing imaginative fiction. How do you discern which is true from which is to be discarded. You have posted above, as an example of irrefutable evidence for your theories, a very long, very rambling webpage written by a man called William Henry. Posted on a website written solely by a lady called Sasha Lessin. Who are these people that you appear to trust without question? Are they experts in historical, archeological, and astronomical analysis? Or are they deluded, or fiction writers? How do you decide? William Henry’s website calls himself a author, and an ‘investigative mythologist’. This is an invented title that he has awarded himself. He makes money from selling his opinions via book and radio. Do you not see that he can, and likely is, extremely biased?

DUE TO THE VERY FACT THAT PHOTOSHOPPED IMAGES PREDOMINATE ON THE NET, I view every image as potentially faulty at the outset. Only when an image falls within the limits and boundaries of a large body of OTHER IMAGES do I claim or infer that that image has some salience to what I believe.

And finally, what constitutes proof to you? You say that your links above are proof of the Annunaki and Nabiru. Yet to everyone else on this thread, they are not. They contain suggestions, conjectures, and forced pattern making between unconnected things. They are opinion, not evidence. The images you have posted contain nothing more than what you have made them contain. You have manipulated them yourself into showing odd coloured effects in the sky. The effects appear random, showing bands of colour in one image, and other effects in another. None of the images show anything resembling a planet. The catalogue of images you have posted on Facebook is equally random. Some containing images of relief drawings, but showing no understanding of where they are from, who took the picture, or what the context of the drawings is. You include among them an artistic drawing of a flying saucer. You are aware this is not a real photograph? The captions attached to the images have no relation to the image itself, neither explaining what the image shows, or what has led to the conclusions in your caption. You have an image which you say is an aerial map of Cobb mountain. You say it shows faces all over it. I’m afraid that I cannot see a single face in that photo. Again, this is not evidence, this is your personal opinion.

... I believe in the Holy Spirit of Truth; I believe in the "RING OF TRUTH." By government classification I QUALIFY as a "remote viewer." I am classified ON THE RED LIST BECAUSE I reveal information that the USGovt doesn't want revealed, so I must be doing something right.

So please, explain to us, why do you believe that these random images show irrefutable proof of a specific alien race called Annunaki and their planet-ship 'Nabiru'. What has convinced you of this rather than one of the other many, many possible interpretations of these images?

WHY DO I BELIEVE??? On any day of the week, I can take webcam images from several observatories and SHOW YOU what is on the surface of Nibiru. I can SHOW YOU what surfaces and conformations are on the landmass of Nibiru AS IT STRETCHES OUT BEHIND THE ARTIFICIAL SUN Wormwood. This is NOT BELIEF.

Regarding your question, what would constitute proof? I would say if you showed us any image you hadn’t manipulated, which anyone could see showed another planet in the sky. Perhaps a translation by a Sumarian scholar of an actual Sumarian text, with appropriate source citing, which describes alien visitors, or an alien planet. Not an opinion piece on a random webpage, but the pure historical text, translated into English. These things constitute proof. Everything you have linked to so far shows nothing but your own imagination, and the imaginations of others.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:
Hi Emily, I’ve followed your posts with interest and would like to ask you a few questions if I may.

Firstly, you say that you came to your conclusions purely on the basis of many thousands of astronomy photographs which you have worked on and re-rendered.

Yet much of your ideas appear historical/ archaeological rather than pictorially originated. If your conclusions came directly from your experience of these astronomical images where did such matters as Sumarian writings, British Royal Families, and Templars (for instance) come from? You wouldn’t have seen such ideas in your NASA images directly, however well re-rendered. So where did you get your ideas from if not your own direct experience. Have you taken these ideas from another source? Perhaps someone else’s work? If so, how do you know to trust their work if it is not your direct experience?

...MY WORK IS MY OWN PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE. I was digital imaging technician and corporate trainer for Xerox corporation in the 1970s. That's where I learned how digital images work; how they work with pixels and colors.

Secondly, I would question whether your approach to evidence is purely objective. It is always possible, I am sure you would agree, that we can read our own imaginings and presuppositions into the evidence in front of us. We are of course very imaginative creatures, and we have all done this at some point. What is important, for everyone therefore, is to make sure that what we think we see, in our subjective mind, is what is objectively really there. I checked out your facebook album but unfortunately could not see what you claimed the images showed. The first photo was a black and white grainy image of a sky above an observatory. In your caption you claimed to see many figures walking around in the sky in the image. I’m afraid to tell you that I cannot see any figures at all. In all of your images, I had the same issue. I would suggest to you, is it possible that you are seeing what you expect to see, and these things are not objectively present? It is a common phenomenon, which is why it is so important to check one’s own experiences with others.

MY APPROACH--since I presume that I know nothing and have no hypothesis--is PHENOMENOLOGICAL, after the method of Idhe and Hussrl.

Thirdly, I would ask about your approach to other secondary and tertiary sources. I appreciate your interest is astronomy and so, like all of us, you read other people to understand other subjects. But you must be aware of how important it is to check out your sources, to ensure that the person you are reading is an expert in their field. There are many people posting on the internet, some of which are genuinely mistaken, others outright deceiving, others just writing imaginative fiction. How do you discern which is true from which is to be discarded. You have posted above, as an example of irrefutable evidence for your theories, a very long, very rambling webpage written by a man called William Henry. Posted on a website written solely by a lady called Sasha Lessin. Who are these people that you appear to trust without question? Are they experts in historical, archeological, and astronomical analysis? Or are they deluded, or fiction writers? How do you decide? William Henry’s website calls himself a author, and an ‘investigative mythologist’. This is an invented title that he has awarded himself. He makes money from selling his opinions via book and radio. Do you not see that he can, and likely is, extremely biased?

DUE TO THE VERY FACT THAT PHOTOSHOPPED IMAGES PREDOMINATE ON THE NET, I view every image as potentially faulty at the outset. Only when an image falls within the limits and boundaries of a large body of OTHER IMAGES do I claim or infer that that image has some salience to what I believe.

And finally, what constitutes proof to you? You say that your links above are proof of the Annunaki and Nabiru. Yet to everyone else on this thread, they are not. They contain suggestions, conjectures, and forced pattern making between unconnected things. They are opinion, not evidence. The images you have posted contain nothing more than what you have made them contain. You have manipulated them yourself into showing odd coloured effects in the sky. The effects appear random, showing bands of colour in one image, and other effects in another. None of the images show anything resembling a planet. The catalogue of images you have posted on Facebook is equally random. Some containing images of relief drawings, but showing no understanding of where they are from, who took the picture, or what the context of the drawings is. You include among them an artistic drawing of a flying saucer. You are aware this is not a real photograph? The captions attached to the images have no relation to the image itself, neither explaining what the image shows, or what has led to the conclusions in your caption. You have an image which you say is an aerial map of Cobb mountain. You say it shows faces all over it. I’m afraid that I cannot see a single face in that photo. Again, this is not evidence, this is your personal opinion.

... I believe in the Holy Spirit of Truth; I believe in the "RING OF TRUTH." By government classification I QUALIFY as a "remote viewer." I am classified ON THE RED LIST BECAUSE I reveal information that the USGovt doesn't want revealed, so I must be doing something right.

So please, explain to us, why do you believe that these random images show irrefutable proof of a specific alien race called Annunaki and their planet-ship 'Nabiru'. What has convinced you of this rather than one of the other many, many possible interpretations of these images?

WHY DO I BELIEVE??? On any day of the week, I can take webcam images from several observatories and SHOW YOU what is on the surface of Nibiru. I can SHOW YOU what surfaces and conformations are on the landmass of Nibiru AS IT STRETCHES OUT BEHIND THE ARTIFICIAL SUN Wormwood. This is NOT BELIEF.

Regarding your question, what would constitute proof? I would say if you showed us any image you hadn’t manipulated, which anyone could see showed another planet in the sky. Perhaps a translation by a Sumarian scholar of an actual Sumarian text, with appropriate source citing, which describes alien visitors, or an alien planet. Not an opinion piece on a random webpage, but the pure historical text, translated into English. These things constitute proof. Everything you have linked to so far shows nothing but your own imagination, and the imaginations of others.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
On any day of the week, I can take webcam images from several observatories and SHOW YOU what is on the surface of Nibiru. I can SHOW YOU what surfaces and conformations are on the landmass of Nibiru AS IT STRETCHES OUT BEHIND THE ARTIFICIAL SUN Wormwood. This is NOT BELIEF.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Christians don't talk about the negative influence of New Age and Occult beliefs, nearly often enough.

---

You're hanging with the wrong kind of Christians, then. When I were an Evangelical, it was a perennial topic of flagellation.

---

Love, I live in the forest where there are NO Christians, nobody to even talk to.

And near local Hot Springs where New Age Hippies congretgate, all I hear is their dogma: All One; As above, so below; Reality is illusion; No such thing as Trying; Like attracts like; Astrology, etc.

That's why I come here, for christian encouragement. I used to go, from 2005-2011, to BBC's Religion Forums. That was a wonderful place til they shut it down in favor of secular materialistic blah blah blah.

Emily

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:

Hitler didn't persecute Catholics as a hard and fast rule, not like the Jews.

---

Tell that to the priests and bishops of Poland

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:

Hitler didn't persecute Catholics as a hard and fast rule, not like the Jews.

---

Tell that to the priests and bishops of Poland

---