Gary Wayne Genesis 6 Conspiracy.

[Paul357]

Does anybody else think Gary Wayne knows the Bible better than your Pastor? Humanity’s Secret Masters: Gary Wayne Exposes the Nephilim Bloodlines Behind World Control






_________________________________


Starting a New Thread ?

Please refrain from creating minimal posts to initiate your new thread.
If you feel inclined to make the board aware of news, current events, 
or important information from other sites:
please post one or two paragraphs,
a link to the entire story,
AND your opinion, twist or take on the news item,
as a means to inspire discussion or collaborative research on your subject.


And, as always:
Please do NOT reply to this message.

[andy06shake]

Does anybody else think Gary Wayne knows the Bible better than your Pastor? Humanity’s Secret Masters: Gary Wayne Exposes the Nephilim Bloodlines Behind World Control

As far as i can establish Mr Wayne isn't considered a mainstream biblical scholar or theologian.

So in academic or church circles, many would indeed view his ideas as speculative or fringe.

He seems to be about combining biblical studies with alternative history and numerology.

[Paul357]

Bible Scholar Gary Wayne has never cited Numerology and the Bible is classed as Alternative History by anybody that subscribes to Civilian Science Belief as Gospel.

[andy06shake]

Bible Scholar Gary Wayne has never cited Numerology and the Bible is classed as Alternative History by anybody that subscribes to Civilian Science Belief as Gospel.

"Alternative history" isn't a real academic field.

It starts with conclusions and works backward, rather than following evidence.

The Bible isn't "alternative history", scholars treat it as a "ancient Near Eastern text" not a rival historical theory.

Can you explain what you mean by "Civilian Science"?

[Paul357]

If you reply with another Logical Fallacy or abuse its the last time Ill respond to you.
All Mainstream Scientists are Civilians with limited information. Military Scientists are subject to National Security and Defence Acts so cant talk about their Research to Civilians. The Public is left to to rely on Military Whistle-blowers, Dissident Scientists, Psychics etc to learn anything beyond Civilian Science Beliefs.

[Oldcarpy2]

If you reply with another Logical Fallacy or abuse its the last time Ill respond to you.
All Mainstream Scientists are Civilians with limited information. Military Scientists are subject to National Security and Defence Acts so cant talk about their Research to Civilians. The Public is left to to rely on Military Whistle-blowers, Dissident Scientists, Psychics etc to learn anything beyond Civilian Science Beliefs.

What "abuse'?  Not seeing any.

[quintessentone]

"Alternative history" isn't a real academic field.

It starts with conclusions and works backward, rather than following evidence.

The Bible isn't "alternative history", scholars treat it as a "ancient Near Eastern text" not a rival historical theory.

Can you explain what you mean by "Civilian Science"?

Isn't history written from the victor's POV?

[andy06shake]

Isn't history written from the victor's POV?

Not entirely, that's a little its a bit of a myth.

The victors often influence dominant narratives, but history tends to be shaped by multiple sources.

[quintessentone]

Not entirely, that's a little its a bit of a myth.

The victors often influence dominant narratives, but history tends to be shaped by multiple sources.

Yes, there is a debate going on about that and it is complex.

"Contextual Understanding: Understanding the context in which historical events occurred is crucial for interpreting them accurately. However, the victors’ narrative may not provide a complete or unbiased account of this context, leading to misinterpretations and distortions. Building ontologies and semantic models that provide contextual information relating to people, places, events, and technologies can help remedy data sparsity and augment our understanding of history.

Continuous Revision: History is not a static entity but rather an ongoing process of interpretation and revision. New evidence, perspectives, and analytical techniques can challenge existing narratives and lead to a more nuanced understanding of the past. By leveraging data mining, advanced AI, and collaborative online platforms, new connections and patterns in the historical record can emerge."

"The digital age presents both challenges and opportunities for preserving and analyzing historical information. On the one hand, the proliferation of digital media and online platforms has made it easier to disseminate diverse perspectives and challenge dominant narratives. On the other hand, the rise of social media, artificial intelligence, and algorithmic content curation also creates new avenues for manipulating historical information and controlling public discourse."

Is history written by the victors? - California Learning Resource Network

The warning signs are there.

[andy06shake]

If you reply with another Logical Fallacy or abuse its the last time Ill respond to you.
All Mainstream Scientists are Civilians with limited information. Military Scientists are subject to National Security and Defence Acts so cant talk about their Research to Civilians. The Public is left to to rely on Military Whistle-blowers, Dissident Scientists, Psychics etc to learn anything beyond Civilian Science Beliefs.

Ile reply to you exactly how i please within the TnC.

Something i think you may find very useful to read.

Once again, your claims rely on false assumptions.

Mainstream scientists aren't excluded from advanced knowledge.

Civilian universities, national labs, and private research institutions conduct most cutting-edge science, often with government funding and oversight.

Classified military research exists, but it tends to concern defense applications, not hidden fundamental truths about physics.

Science advances through open methods, reproducibility, and global collaboration.

If military science discovered new laws of nature, those findings would rapidly surface through technology.

Can you present any of these military science discoveries?

Do you wish for an actual discussion and debate?

Or do you simply wish to say as you please, and expect everyone else to take your nonsensical claims at face value?

You are the only person dishing out abuse here Paul.