Well I was walking down the street just a-having a think When a snake of a guy gave me an evil wink He shook-a me up, he took me by surprise He had a pickup truck, and the devil's eyes He stared at me and I felt a change Time meant nothing, never would again
Rocky Horror Picture Show Richard O'Brien
Let's Do The Time Warp Again
by Geri Roberts
As I was starting to write about the murder of Pope John Paul I, I realized there was a problem. A big problem. A problem at the core of ALL conspiracy study, or, as I prefer to call it, The Search for Truth. It is the problem of TIME. My observations about the behavior of the Papacy rely on the history of the Vatican, which rests on the shifting sands of false time because our conception of the history of the City of Rome is fallacious because it is dependent upon the totally incorrect dating of the Crucifixion and an historical Christ figure and the inception of Christianity and the whole-cloth invention of "ancient civilizations". There is an enormous, smelly pachyderm sitting in our living rooms called CHRONOLOGY.
I first heard of Anatoly Fomenko's work about three years ago while listening to the Crrow777 podcast. Anatoly Fomenko ( b. 1935 in Russia), according to the back cover of his book uses statistical analysis, computer programs and astronomy to prove that our consensual history of what happened in the world before the 16th Century is a cunningly wrought "magic fabric" of lies. You see, the chronology of our entire civilization hangs upon the backbone of "Ancient Rome." EVERYTHING in archeology is dated from that timeline. Only there is no ancient Rome. But that is just the first of the poisoned wells of history we have all been drinking from.. The control methods perfected by the parasitic Nefarious Elite are based upon this fraudulent chronology .and used to drive us into ideological cattle chutes. I once said that the JFK assassination was the mothership of conspiracy theories and that all roads in Conspiracy Land lead to Kennedy. Maybe it would be more precise to say that all roads in Conspiracy Land lead to Rome.
Why has this been done to us? See below:
"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past."
I've tried to squeeze the basics of Fomenko into a tiny nutshell. A clumsy effort, so bear with me:: A thousand years has been added to our history. This time-that-never-happened is filled in with accounts of "Dark Ages" in Europe and manufactured "ancient civilizations" of Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece and Rome. The Bible was written circa the 15th century and described recent events. The historic Christ. figure was born in the Crimea 1152 A.D. and crucified in 1185 A.D. Whether or not he was actually the son of God is outside my scope of interest. Modern religions were manufactured out of this event that occurred about eight hundred years ago, not two thousand years ago. Our history has been shifted backwards and made to seem a thousand years older than it really is.
Fomenko's work identifies two chronological architects responsible for this deception: Josephus Iustus Scaliger ( 1540-1609) and Dionysius Petavius (1583-1652). Both have links to the Jesuit orders. No surprise there! Unquestioningly using an "ecclesiastical tradition" and Biblical dating from the theologians of the Middle Ages they laid out the dates of ancient history without reference to any primary sources at all. This chronology was created under the paradigm of the Catholic Church of Western Europe and in later centuries would be foisted upon us as "scientific." It's not.
There is not a single source or artifact that can be reliably traced back in history any earlier than the 11th Century. And that is pushing it. Many people claim the earliest definite sources exist no earlier than the 15th Century.
I must point out that Fomenko has been described as an asset of Soviet/Russian intelligence. No doubt he is. EVERYBODY in academe, especially in the sciences and most especially in Russia, is controlled by tentacles of the Deep State. Research and information are a valuable resource that must be controlled and weaponized. That doesn't mean that it is not real. Disinformation is an artform that could make us discount valuable information simply by linking it to " intelligence."
I was still a newcomer to Conspiracy Land when I heard the Crrow podcast and was incredulous. I reacted to the news with measured, calm curiosity. "WHAAAAAT THE FUUUUUCK?" I howled. I ordered the first book although it was expensive. I had to have it. I was sure it would provide material for my comedy writing. Back then I thought this conspiracy stuff I was starting to read was terribly amusing. I did not yet understand that I had it all backwards, that the "mainstream" version of history was ridiculous and not the "new chronology" version.
Fomenko's first book, History: Fiction or Science Chronology 1 ran over me like an express train. I had to know more. Eventually I had all his books (on history, that is. He has written many on mathematics). I could not stop reading the things. My brain told me they were truthful, but my inner nerd who deeply loves the mainstream fairy tale of history sobbed "NO, NO, NO."
Why did I accept this seemingly crazy uber-conspiracy theory that 99.9% of the population of Earth probably will never hear of, let alone believe in?
I have to admit that I do not have the background, or the brain power, to completely understand the particulars of Fomenko's astronomical and statistical research and proofs. The only reason I am not still sitting in my high school algebra class is because the teacher simply could not bear to look at me for another semester. He told me I had failed AGAIN but gave me a D instead of an F so I wouldn't come back any more. Yes, i did deserve the F because I spent most of his class reading Georgette Heyer novels hidden inside the textbook. Since the first grade I had been tortured with the hellish workings of mathematics and was never able to comprehend any of it. I knew that I could sit in that algebra classroom until the suns of the galaxies died and I still would not understand anything that man said. So I decided I might as well get some reading done.
But I do comprehend the general outlines, I think, of Fomenko's researches in astronomy.. His astronomical observations are based on the sky clock,. Crrow777's dictum that the stars are the only truly accurate time keeping available to us humans greatly impressed me. Think about how The Nefarious Elite try to hide from us the importance of the positions and movements of the stars and planets and their true nature. This is why NASA was created; not to study the firmament but to conceal it.
Statistics are as incomprehensible to me as algebra but they are an infernal art used as a key tool of every field of science, it seems. So why shouldn't Fomenko apply them to chronology?: :"The new concept of chronology is based primarily on applying methods of modern statistics to the analysis of historical sources and extensive cybernetic computation." (History: Fiction or Science Chronology 1 page xxiii)
For me, the ring of truth of the New Chronology lies in the myriad puzzles and riddles that litter mainstream history. There are little holes of nonsense that catch your eye but historians are trained to explain them away. That is what historians do. They patch the fabric of our history with theories and narratives based upon pure conjecture. We are conditioned to believe anything an academic says rather than looking for our own answers.. I find lots of clues to the true nature of the past in these inconsistencies.
For example, why did "Renaissance" artists (by the way, the "Renaissance" never happened) paint people in Biblical scenes wearing contemporary garb?. Historians make up the silliest reasons because they simply can't explain it and will never state the obvious: THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE WORE WHEN THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN. They dressed like medieval people because that is what they were. The cities and houses and furnishings in these paintings are consistent with those of the middle ages.
This is just a quick summary of the massive reworking of chronology that is still ongoing. It's frightening but also exhilarating. We might be getting a glimpse behind the curtain of our reality. We are discovering that we actually know nothing about our past before the 11th century. It is being hidden from us. Exactly what is being hidden? And why?. Thanks to Fomenko and other chronology researchers we might have a better idea of what questions to ask.
I've tried, very badly I'm afraid, to give a quick summary of why it is so difficult to write about the Papacy and the Vatican, especially in regard to the assassination of John Paul I.. You see, the Vatican and the Pope are not what people think they are. Vatican is the administrative center for a parasitic global control system. Proof? Before the 15th century papal history was very vague. As if nothing much was happening in Rome. Well nothing was happening because Rome wasn't there. At that time the Seven Hills of Rome were home to nothing but a few goats and trees. There were no Popes, no Colosseum, no Pantheon.. All these things appeared in the Middle Ages. The City of Rome was built in the 15th Century to house the new center of the new "religion." It is not ancient and the Vatican, or the Holy See, is not Christian.
Reasons the Roman Empire never existed
Note: This investigation is **a work in progress**. Check back soon for more updates!
- Romulus kills Remus, because they were fighting over where to put “Rome”. So Romulus gets to pick the place and name it after himself.
- There are no real people named Romulus and Remus, it’s just a myth.
- Then they steal the whole Greek pantheon and rename them all to “Roman” names. But “Roman” isn’t a language...
- You got Latins which already existed and the Etruscan people.
- We know there were no “Romans” because there is no origin to “Romans” where did they come from even?
- If Romulus and Remus are a myth, you can’t trace any bloodline or anything.
- Everywhere that was “conquered” by “Romans” ... they just killed all the people there, took over the cities and temples,
- assimilated whoever was leftover and then claimed their stuff as “Roman”.
- Then when you trace the Caesars, their ancestry is always something else.
- And then after the so called “Roman Civilization” started collapsing
- OSTS story is that they had spread out too much and couldn’t maintain their territories
- It’s more like they just ransacked everything and said “hey, you’re Roman now” and the people said, “okay, whatever just don’t kill us anymore”...
- then after they are done looting, pillaging, raping and destroying everything in sight, the Romans leave.
- The people pick up he pieces and go about their normal lives again except that they now pay taxes and have to change their names to
- “Roman” names in order to have Roman “citizenship”. So it’s like the mafia.
- The soldiers are all Mithras worshippers and hate women, so if you become a citizen you have to switch to a patriarchal system
- and only men can do anything important, like own land.
- Then “Roman Civilization” supposedly collapses (even though it never really was) because they stretch themselves to thin...
- then “Germany” becomes “Roman” but they call the leaders Kaisers instead of Caesars.
But who were “they” really? Where did “they” come from? Does anybody know? It’s just a multicultural assimilation, political ideology or something.
Roman Jesus Narrative
- why in the F would Pilate free the 'insurrectionary' Barabbas feared by the Roman Empire? This really unravels the narrative.
- decrypts into a Zodiac story
The crescent moon with a star is an old symbol used throughout the Russian Horidan Empire with the star of Bethlehem and solar eclipse represented with the Nativity of Christ and the crucifixion of Andronicus Christ.
by Geri Roberts
“If she knew me as I really am she would despise me, and certainly not aid or abet my evil designs. To veil their vices from the sight of the good is the only resource of those who are not blind and know themselves to be vicious.'
It is much too easy for us humans to end up like a group of dogs chasing their tails. (Or tales.) We are discovering that there is no such thing as history the way we have been taught in school or that is described in books. I was a history nerd and spent years and years of my life studying history, making maps and timelines and writing articles. I knew far more about the Emperors of Ancient Rome and the Plantagenet dynasty of England than I do about my own parents' families. I had to swallow a bitter pill with the realization that there was no ancient history, or even Medieval history, the way I had believed. That just about every fact I had crammed into my head was false. And that it was no accident; it had been done on purpose. .How depressing.
And it gets more depressing. The lies continue and are everywhere. How many prominent and beloved books in our culture were not written by the person we are told wrote them? Does it matter who wrote a brilliant play or a popular bestseller? Yes, it does. And not just for monetary reasons. I am not talking about simple plagiarism, or theft, here.
This is all about a subversive agenda; having an underlying social or political agenda that must be hidden from the reader and might be revealed if your identity was known to them. It is about deceit and betrayal of trust. Making up a false identity or stealing somebody else's.
We love the idea that the Shakespearean plays were written by a poor, unknown common person named William Shakespeare who just happened to be a superbly educated and well traveled poet, trained scholar and historian, and experienced playwright. Just like an unemployed, almost homeless secretary writing a bestselling book about a little boy named Harry Potter on her skirt and pantyhose. Yup, happens all the time!
We do understand that any plays authored by political creatures such as Christopher Marlowe or Francis Bacon, for example, would have been given a much different reception by the powder keg world of late Elizabethan London. The Shakespeare vortex continues to suck in historians, linguists, paleographers and everybody else and will rage until the end of time without being settled.
Now, here is an important question to think about. Did the iconic Helen Keller write everything she is supposed to have written? Books written by the normal daughter of a well-to-do Southern farming family would not have been regarded as nearly so interesting as those written by a blind and deaf girl.
In 1892 when Helen was eleven years of age, her teacher Annie Sullivan (AKA "handler") was accused of allowing/encouraging her pupil to plagiarize a story titled "The Frost King." There was a strong inference from Helen's other teachers that her remarkable abilities were fraudulent. Keller was acquitted by one vote at an informal trial at her school but questions about her true capabilities regularly surface.
An entire industry and structure for the life and education of the handicapped grew out of the Helen Keller phenomenon. Both she and her teacher Annie Sullivan, who came from an extremely deprived background, became rich and famous. Aside from that one incident in 1892, I haven't found one other definite suspicion that Helen Keller's literary abilities were any kind of hoax. That incident could have arisen out of the jealousy of Sullivan's colleagues over her pupil's success. Or maybe Sullivan just became much more careful and cautious.
The problem is that we readers want to read about miracles and we might be stuck with fake ones if we are not willing to dig into them. Or at least give them a bit of critical thought.
Was "The Diary of a Young Girl" actually written by a young girl named Anne Frank?. No.. No way. There is solid forensic evidence that it is a fraud. And the fact that any meaningful investigation is prevented by cries of "antisemitism", "Neo-Nazi Hate Speech" or threats of criminal prosecution should tell us something.
Anne Frank's Diary is the mere tip of a very ugly iceberg. The Holocaust Lie is a vast political and money making machine of such immensity that it has overtaken Western culture like an evil parasite creeping inside every human brain. I won't begin to discuss it here as there are excellent articles elsewhere. And more and more are appearing as the cracks in the worm eaten facade of the "Holohoax" continue to widen. The Anne Frank invention is a prime example of how the name of an author can be appropriated to serve a very dishonest agenda.
Next we examine the Frankenstein Hoax. At first it doesn't seem THAT awful. The book was published in 1818 so we can't imagine anybody caring who wrote the thing, especially since it seems that nobody has ever even read it. But it matters a great deal now that we see all around us the first horrible blossoms of the seeds that this book planted. Seeds of what? you ask.
Here are some clues:
What is the birthplace of Adam Weishaupt's Illuminati? Inglostadt Castle.
Where did Victor Frankenstein build his monster? Inglostadt Castle.
Here's another clue:
What is the whole title of the book "Frankenstein"? Frankenstein; or, the Modern Prometheus.
Okay, you've got it now: The seeds are those of transhumanism.
Hollywood has, as usual, muddied the waters for us. With a few notable exceptions the film versions of Frankenstein portray the monster as a green, lumbering monstrosity with bolts in its neck and the story diverging further and further from the original. When I was an innocent, I thought that Hollywood did things like this to make the story BETTER (What can I say? I was a stupid child). I now understand that they didn't want their movie associated with the book. Because back in the early days of the movies people were still reading books and might have drawn some conclusions about what was going on.
I think I always smelled something of the rat about Mary Shelley but I was a Lord Byron fan and never cared enough about her, her husband Percy Bysshe Shelley or Frankenstein to investigate. But I recently stumbled across the book "Shelley Unbound: Discovering Frankenstein's True Creator" by Scott Douglas DeHart. I had bought it several months back and it sat neglected in the towering book heap next to my bed until I was getting ready to write about my favorite topic, the Nefarious Elite and Hollywood, when I spied the title and decided to take a look. And the light dawned.
Percy Bysshe Shelley was not a sweet faced gentleman poet who sat around sniffing flowers all day. He was a hard eyed, determined revolutionary and elitist who wished to transform humanity into free and noble men. Not ALL humanity, of course. There would be the superior and the inferior humanity. There always has to be some inferior humanity around. Who else would take out the trash and scrub the floors? And guess who would be the superior humanity? As George Carlin said "It's a big club and you ain't in it."
The book "Frankenstein" was first published anonymously. There was a lot of smirking going on because everybody in the know knew who had written it. Percy was in the habit of writing anonymously or under an alias, which was understandable because he liked to write about atheism and how people must be freed from the lies of the clergy and organized religion. I can sympathize with these topics but the problem was that Percy continued to lie to everybody about what he wrote and liked to trick people into writing to him when they thought they were writing to somebody else. Then he would get them into trouble. And here you thought all Regency gentlemen were like Mr. Knightley in Jane Austen's "Emma".
Even when "Frankenstein" was published under Mary's name, people knew who really wrote it. The manuscript was in Mary's handwriting because she regularly transcribed Percy's writings but corrections were in his hand. Just coincidence. And people of that day were well aware that no woman was capable of writing about topics such as electrifying dead frogs for a simple reason: No woman, even a common streetwalker, would be admitted to classrooms or lecture halls to see such things. In later days it would be said that Mary overheard her husband talking about science and electricity and dead frogs to other men, but COME ON!
Mary did write a novel once but it was so dreadful it was downright embarrassing. She would say "Frankenstein" was just from a dream or the ghost story contest but COME ON!
The problem now is that Mary Shelley has been taken under the wing of "Women Studies" which means that all those bitchy women with tenure and royalty checks from their books about women writers will never even admit there might be a question of Mary's authorship.
So today we find ourselves in a world run by people like Ray Kurzweil who wants to hook everybody up to machines to download their consciousness into machines so they can live forever. If we had paid more attention to Percy Shelley and his alter ego Victor Frankenstein we might not be as taken unawares. But I won't worry. I know I won't be among the lucky elite chosen to accompany Mr. Kurzweil into this Cyber Heaven. Somebody will have to stay behind to take out the trash and scrub the floors and it might as well be me. It is what I do all day anyway.. And if I accidently trip over a wire and pull the plug on that big computer in the corner and the lights go out--oh well!
Galileo was called to Bellarmine's residence and ordered, to abstain completely from teaching or defending this doctrine and opinion or from discussing it... to abandon completely... the opinion that the sun stands still at the center of the world and the earth moves, and henceforth not to hold, teach, or defend it in any way whatever, either orally or in writing.
Throughout history, the Jews (those most loyal to the church's authority) and Israelites (those acting in defiance of the church's authority) were often on opposite sides of military and religious conflicts.
It has been suggested that the entirety of the Tartaria conspiracy myth can be blamed on conspiracists looking at historical maps and getting confused because of their ignorance of certain aspects of history. In truth, there appears to be something far more insidious behind this conspiracy myth than simple misunderstanding and well-meant speculation.
Even the supporters of the traditional version admit that the Maid of Orleans began to be called Joan of Arc only from the second half of the xvi century. But this implies that in the duration of more than a century the heroine was called something else. The question is, what? According to our results she was called Deborah. Under this name she entered the Book of Judges. Then in view of the growing interest towards Joan, her other names and nicknames also fell into common use. And later, in the XVII-XVIII cc. the former name Deborah was gradually extruded from the story of Joan. The fact that Joan and Deborah is the same person was slowly forgotten. The 'biblical events' were pushed into the past, two thousand six hundred years back! The following generations of historians began to sincerely perceive Joan of Arc and the biblical Deborah as two different characters. In our reconstruction Deborah = Joan of Arc lived in the epoch of the Ottoman conquest in the world of the XV-XVI cc. That is why the original geography of the events connected to her campaigns was much wider than the modern version.