@seamus66
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Impressive data collection (and dispersion!), Gumshoguy!
Where in Michigan do you reside?
I love Michigan; I want to move there, have a farm…Dreamers dream.
Wouldn’t there need to be blood flowing into those brains to keep them alive? I’m wondering if that is an AI image….But a horrifying thought, nonetheless. No, thank you–feed my brains to the vultures, please.
Here is one of those articles detailing sudden collapses and deaths post-jab, I posted it on my blog: https://derjim.blogspot.com/2026/05/as-young-as-13-years-old-long-list-of.html [cut and past–Sorry, I have yet to figure out how to successfully post links to this forum]
Yeah, I had heard that, Wolf–but not with such specifics…No Ace-2 receptors?! I didn’t now that was possible for humans. Has anyone done a study on jab side-effects in Israel? I wonder if biostatistician Jessica Rose has publicized any such studies–she actually lives in Israel. There are plenty of ingredients in that jab that could cause grave side effects, aside from the part that interacts with Ace-2. There are no less than 9 novel ingredients in that cocktail, including a genetic segment from the AIDS virus, sequences that resemble human genetic sequences, free floating bacterial DNA (plasmids), polyethylene glycol, the lipid nanoparticles–and the overall toxic spike protein itself, which will coopt the cells to make more of itself, with no off switch, for Ashkenazi or any other group.
It’s entirely plausible that P & G, in addition to capturing footage of an actual sasquatch, also had made a promotional film (or did a dry run) using a dude in a monkey suit. The same sort of thing may have happened with the moon landing (the flag on “the moon” flapping in an impossible breeze).
Also, wasn’t there another guy, besides Bob H., who claimed to have been “they guy in the suit”? They can’t both have been right, but both sure could have been wrong.
The acid test for the validity of the P-G film is Thinker Thunker’s analysis of limb length and joint placement. And you can see Patty’s muscles moving under the hair. You can’t fake that shit. And humans have tried to duplicate that gait without success.
Is there a way to copy-and-paste images to a forum comment?
Sounds like Meldrum didn’t think the pressure ridges of Laetoli Australopithicenes were too far forward to be due to midtarsal break. It’s just that the Laetoli pics had the ridge further forward than I expected (compare them to the illustrations of sasquatch prints in Meldrum’s article) and I wondered if they hadn’t been caused by the balls of the feet, instead.
Alas, Dr. Meldrum is no longer with us to respond to such questions. RIP the ballsy scientist.
This all has me wondering if the midtarsal break doesn’t give the sasquatch some advantage in leverage that would go partway toward explaining how such a heavy animal can run so bloody fast on two legs. Being so heavy, at least the midtarsal break would seem to make walking/running easier (requiring less leverage), since the ankle bone doesn’t have to bear all of the stress, as it does in us humans. Body weight can be raised up & forward over 3 weight-bearing joints: ankle, then midtarsal break, then ball of foot. Whereas we humans have to move our weight over two joints only: ankle, then ball of foot; at one point, the entire weight of the body is borne by the straight, rigid section of foot between the ball and the heel. To lift and push forward thus requires more leverage, which, if humans weighed 800 lbs, might be a problem causing strain in the structures of foot, ankle and calf. Certainly, the 3-joint distribution of weight over the foot might partly explain the smooth gait of the ‘squatch…But does it help them run faster?
Sex magic is a way for two humans to use the body to merge with the divine……is that what you are trying to say? More or less. Part of the point, though, is that sexual contact can be part of religious ritual. The union of Masculine and Feminine is powerful, symbolically speaking, and sex is, of course, a natural way of expressing (and ritualizing) that union. Of course, like any religion, ritual, or dogma–it can be misused. Perversions are not rituals, but rather ritualistic; they contain elements of religious ritual (repetition, passion), but reinforce debilitating dynamics rather than strengthening the participants (in other words, they ‘sanctify’ dysfunction).
Sex magic is a way to harness spiritual forces (typically divided into feminine and masculine types of forces). Tantric sex is a form of yoga, and kundalini energy can be harnessed using certain types of sexual activity. All of these practices are ways of connecting human sexuality with the Divine, which is a beautiful thing, IMHO. There’s nothing wrong with it, in and of itself. Rituals that involve power and domination, whether they involve sex or not, are not something I agree with. Rituals that reinforce dysfunctional dynamics and destructive social arrangements, the same.
I agree that everything is being weaponized. Our entire society and culture has been overrun by monopoly corporations. They are now global in size, controlled by a very few, and are hoovering all resources and control into themselves, at the expense of the rest of us, as well as at risk of the survival of the biosphere we all need to survive. They do their best to control the information stream, food supply lines, and every resource they can get their hands on. They twist religion to their own ends, making of it something that resembles very little what it was intended to be.
And yet, “clean” versions of all of the above do exist, including religious practices, food production methods, etc, etc. I humbly submit that there’s a happy medium between demonizing a legit, empowering ritual/religion, and coopting religion in order to keep the obscenely rich in control of us all. It requires effort, study, and humility to figure out what’s what–and courage to proceed accordingly.
The game plan of our so-called ‘elites’ has always been to flood the job market with immigrants, to dilute the bargaining power of workers and keep wages low. To destroy the political economy of different countries works for them, because then they can steal those countries’ resources, and the displaced citizens of those countries, as I said, immigrate and drive wages down, which also works for the Epstein class. The bullshit about plugging the border has always been bullshit–business owners need those undocumented workers, because they work cheap and they’re willing to do the shit work. If they had REALLY wanted to get rid of undocumented immigrants, all they would have had to do is raid and prosecute the bosses and owners of a few high-profile companies, and the rest of the country’s bosses and owners would get the message. But, of course, they are never going to do that, because that would be too effective, and because it would target the pampered and protected Wall-Street class, which is never supposed to happen.
All true, ISTM.
Traditionally, having a surplus population has been good for the monopoly class–it means extra competition for labor jobs, wages stay down, troublemakers and unionizer can be easily replaced, workers end up fighting each other over the crumbs rather than resisting the warmongers and wealth hoarders.
I wonder at what point our ‘economic elites’ decided to kill most of us off. I guess it was when they figured out that AI and robots would soon be able to replace most of us, and that the gross disparity between the obscene wealth of the owner class and the extreme poverty of the lower classes became so great as to make revolution a probability. Not wanting to make any economic or political concessions whatsoever to the working class, their plan is now to kill off 7B or so people and run the world using tech.
If I am right…when did they make that decision, when did the returns from hosting a working class diminish to the point where they decided to cull the population using overt and covert genocide? I have no idea, but I have always assumed that turn of philosophy (from surplus workers are good to surplus workers are bad) was relatively recent…Then again, almost everything I learned thru HS and college was horseshit, a complete misrepresentation, so it’s likely my assumptions are still skewed.
I’m not sure where your point of confusion is, exactly, and I don’t know too much more about the subject. My understanding is that gay African men do some kind of shamanic rituals together, in order to “hold the world together” (hold the Masculine and the Feminine together, perhaps?). I said “rituals, not orgies” in case anybody misunderstood or took the idea of gay men doing rituals together in a lurid way.
OH.
Color me confused, and excuse my ignorance. I’m trying to understand.
“When a sasquatch walks it lifts the heal first, leaving the ball of the foot on the ground which pushes back soil or mud causing a raised area in the center of the footprint.”
..Doesn’t this describe the action of a human foot? The length of the foot from heel to ball is rigid, like a solid lever, and it’s the balls of the feet push backwards against the substrate, sometimes. Nothing between ankle and ball of the foot bends significantly. Also, in the article linked below, Meldrum says that it is precisely the “transverse tarsal joint” (a synonym for the “talonavicular-calcaneocuboid joint”), which causes the midtarsal break, because, unlike in human feet, it flexes. He says the midtarsal ridge in a sasquatch footprint appears in the middle of the foot because the heel bone in BF is elongated, placing that joint farther forward in the foot than it is in humans. I assume that, if a human had a midtarsal break at that joint, The Australopithicine trackway, thus, to me looks more like a human one, because the ridge appears just behind where the balls of the feet would be. I refer you to the illustrations in the article, pp. 4, 5 & 7….Did he change his mind on all that, at some point?
Yeah, I defer to your expertise. I’ve never even seen a sasquatch print, much less made a cast of one. You have, and you have seen an actual sasquatch; I haven’t seen the creature, either, although I continue to be fascinated by the topic. So I’m not understanding what you’re saying.(BTW, which episode of SC is your encounter? I’d like to listen to that one again.)
That one article (study) says the midtarsal joint is the talonavicular-calcaneocuboid joint, which is the next one to the front of the ankle–in other words, pretty far back from the balls of the feet. The “ridge” in the footprint would presumably form just behind this joint, as it bends (in the non-human foot)? That’s why the ridges in the picture look too far forward to me, as if made by toes. But doubtless there is something here that I don’t understand about the actual movement of an Australopithicene foot, and the way it interacts with substrate (soil).
It seems to make sense that an inline gait is an adaptation to slipping between trees. Interestingly, dogs have a wider gait than wolves or foxes, perhaps because they typically accompany plains-and-meadow-dwelling Homo sapiens? Or is it simply that dogs have been bred to be broader than wolves (pit bulls, mastiffs, etc.–and perhaps dogs in general with the exception of sight hounds)…? Perhaps we have bred them to look a bit more like us–we (primates) are deeper from side to side than from back to front, which is the opposite of most mammals.
