Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Community Meta
Introductions & Welcomes
Yeats
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="dimension-1hacker" data-source="post: 197888" data-attributes="member: 11791"><p>Do you judge posts by how many times the poster questions their opinion, displays bias, fake news, only posts about scientific theories, what is your criteria? Most people have different criteria but most people that are 100% convinced of their correctness and have a few bias statements that they do not bother to back up, are proven by many scientific studies to be 100% incorrect, a quick google search would prove that if you think google is accurate.</p><p></p><p>can you prove that the sum of your first post is accurate, prove that you are not a tin foil hat and your thinking is not magical. I am here to find out of the box thinkers not propagators of theories that I have not seen proven, for example you QPN, label, instein, sinister thinker, and so on. sinister think, QPN, and YEATS, popped up almost on the same day right after I started posting again..</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="dimension-1hacker, post: 197888, member: 11791"] Do you judge posts by how many times the poster questions their opinion, displays bias, fake news, only posts about scientific theories, what is your criteria? Most people have different criteria but most people that are 100% convinced of their correctness and have a few bias statements that they do not bother to back up, are proven by many scientific studies to be 100% incorrect, a quick google search would prove that if you think google is accurate. can you prove that the sum of your first post is accurate, prove that you are not a tin foil hat and your thinking is not magical. I am here to find out of the box thinkers not propagators of theories that I have not seen proven, for example you QPN, label, instein, sinister thinker, and so on. sinister think, QPN, and YEATS, popped up almost on the same day right after I started posting again.. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Community Meta
Introductions & Welcomes
Yeats
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top