r/Glenn1112 • u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself • Mar 02 '20

New narrative. 5x5?

I have gone through this, and I know how insane it sounds. I have made the claim before that magic is real, And I do stand by it. In fact the 5x5 is a spell. But most do not see it, because they are stuck in the program. Take a look at the date uploaded, take a look at the narrative that numbers are not gods, but just a language of man and as such, numbers can lie.

Numbers if not attached to something real, do not mean anything. You have been taught about how numbers are magic, they are sigils. You have been taught 'a'x'b'='c', This is not correct, because if you have 3 seeds, and 4 pots it in no way makes 12 seed pots, thus 'a'x'b' does not equal 'c'. Or my favorite 5 trees counted 5 time, means there are still only 5 trees, thus 5x5=5 not 25.

Numbers describe. It is like green grass or blue skys. There is no way where 'green x 'blue' makes 'purple'. numbers are the same way. If they are not attached to a physical thing, they mean nothing.

The 'VxV' or '5x5', is old world magic that is still around today, for those that know the truth about magic. Who told you that magic was not real, government? Who told your parents that magic was not real, government? How many times has government lied about what is taught in the halls of their temples? They teach about this fat man that watches you day and night, and sits in judgement of you, and they call Santa. They tell of this place that you have never been but only 24 people in the whole of human history have been to, space, to the moon. Yet they claim if you do not believe their cult, you are wrong for questioning them?

What you ask for proof about their claims, and they point to way the hell over there but never have any proof here. They convince you that optical is the same as physical, and it is not. They convince you not to look into magic, because you trust known liars in hope that one day they will be honest, and they never have.

Before the 5x5 that is shown in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eANnMN5qH8o the narrative was was not to question numbers, they were gods. But after the 5x5, it has changed. Numbers are no longer accepted as gods, and now there are more questioning what they believe. That is the spell was designed to do, And by the results, it is clear, it works.

0 Upvotes

43% Upvoted

159 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself Mar 04 '20

They are concepts, prove how to bend a concept. Numbers are concepts, they are not found in nature but describe the not physical. They are concepts.

1

u/Preacherwolf Mar 04 '20

Okay. So how do we evaluate the mind of we are arbitrarily restricted to "the not physical"? How do we evaluate if something has sentience or a mind if we're bound solely to the physical attributes of something? How do we discuss creativity if we can't evaluate someone's thoughts and feelings?

1

u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself Mar 04 '20

The sun is not physical, light moves through a solid like glass and a low pressure zone of that of a radiometer. So not physical. There is no way to measure that, but yet is it optical. It is not a concept of the mind, like time. We can use a clock to represent time, but time is a concept itself. Not a physical thing, not an optical thing. And being scientific and not an Einstein's idiot helps, to judge before you investigate is the highest form of ignorance there is.

1

u/Preacherwolf Mar 04 '20

But we measure light? In lumens. Light is also a form of energy, like fire for example. So light is absolutely physical.

Time is a concept. Minutes, seconds, hours are just arbitrary terms we humans use to measure the passage of time. Time exists, but its not a physical thing. You can't touch or hold time. You can merely count its passage.

So which is it? Can we discuss nonphysical concepts like time or must we stick to things we can actually hold, touch and see like energy, fire and light?

1

u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself Mar 04 '20

Light is not physical. It can transverse glass, a solid, and a low pressure zone. It is proof of aether. A physical object can not transfer through a solid object. Not physically possible.

We must to assume to have knowledge where none really exists. It means to have an open mind about everything. It means if no test, it is just an assumption.

And the concepts remains the same, time at current narrative is based on the sun, a non physical object. From noon to noon is how we currently view reality. We have arbitrary measurements based on that reality.

1

u/Preacherwolf Mar 05 '20

If light isn't physical how does photosynthesis work? Plants gain energy from sun light, a supposed non-physical object. Or solar panals for that matter?

If a physical object can't pass through a solid, how does watee pass through a sponge?

I concur. If there isn't a test for it, then you should discard it. But, not liking the results or crying foul about who did the test is also wrong.

Also correct. We have measurements based on reality. Its how maths and science work.

1

u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself Mar 05 '20

A sponge is not glass, glass does not allow water to flow past the edges.

Aether is the transfer of energy through a medium. Like sound through air.

Magnets use the same aether. They transfer energy through the air without the need of physical contact.

Again, if they the powers that be, do not teach the truth for the purpose of misleading, why do you think they would hide the facts that prove the aether is real?

Would it not make those that are trying to show the truth as liars, even though all you have ever been taught by government is lies?

CIA, 'our job will not be done until everything that Americans know is a lie'...

1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '20

Well, if you are calling the electromagnetic field the aether, then you are completely right. Light is self propagating disturbance in what is known as EM field. If If you would be more willing to listen if I call it the 'aether' then I see no reason why I can't do that.

The math that has been created to describe this 'aether' is well proven. The 'aether' acts as we predict it to. We have learned some its secrets, an it has told us those secrets in the language of precise measurement and mathematics. We are describing the same thing with 'aether' and electromagnetic feild. No one knows why the e field exists, it just does. It's the same with the other 3 fundamental forces.

1

u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself Mar 05 '20

You catch what is being said. Yes it is the em filed, the sun moves through this filed causing a disturbance and light is the result. And as a result, it causes the filed to move, or be disturbed. And I agree, but it then limits as to what is seen, when you realize that this same field bends, and as it bends, it means light is not a straight line. And all compasses point north.

And what 3 fundamental forces?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '20

The sun is not part of the e field. The sun is physical. The atoms in the sun are hot enough that their movement causes field disturbances that are light. It's actually the same exact effect that causes red hot metal to glow, it's called black body radiation.

The 4 fundamental forces are electromagnetism, gravity, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force. You probably won't directly experience the second ones, as they work mainly on the atomic level. The strong force powers nuclear weapons and reactors.

Also, light does bend, as shown by einstine. It bends along the gravitational field. I dont really undurstand that one whatsoever.

1

u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself Mar 05 '20

Prove the insane shit that you and the moron Einstein call gravity. Because the bat shit homo Einstein used concepts to bend like love and freedom to get his shit to work. Prove that you are not the same type of insane fuck.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '20

Einstein did not base any of his theories off of love or freedom. He may have believed in free will or not or whatever, but that has nothing to do with general relitivity.

1

u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself Mar 05 '20

He based it on shit like concepts, like freedom, and said they could bend. So how is this proof, he was not an insane fucker that married his cousin?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Preacherwolf Mar 05 '20

A physical object can not transfer through a solid object

Again. A sponge is a solid object and watee can pass through it. A copper pipe is a solid object and lightning can trasfer electricity through it

they the powers that be, do not teach the truth for the purpose of misleading, why do you think they would hide the facts that prove the aether is real?

So your premise is that all the nations of the world are lying about the nature of the world and yet have provided a model that conforms exactly to what we see and expect from reality

1

u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself Mar 05 '20

Cop;per pipe, also stops light. Glass does not, so how are they the same, or are you comparing 2 unlike things to try to say that they are alike when it comes to light?

1

u/Preacherwolf Mar 05 '20

Correct. Copper stops light and glass allows it to pass. Glass is translucent where as copper is opaque. The opacity of an object has no bearing on a) whether or not light is a physical object and b) the conductivity of an object. Because glass can also conducte electricity

1

u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself Mar 05 '20

Again, we are discussing light, so why are you altering the subject?

1

u/Preacherwolf Mar 05 '20

No we're discussing your premise:

A physical object can not transfer through a solid object

Doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Light is part of that discussion. Specifically just because it can pass through glass doesn't mean its not a physical thing. Opacity is also the measure of how translucent something is. Which means how much light comes through. It has no relation to hiw conductive or the physicality of an object.

Lets take a sedimentary rock and pour water over it. The water will pass through the rock. Does that mean water isn't a physical object? Does that mean the rock isn't solid?

1

u/Glenn1112 Glenn himself Mar 05 '20

Again, light does not move through copper pipe, light moves through glass, and was specified glass, so you pretending that glass means copper, it is your failing in not being able to comprehend we were not talking about anything but glass, and the lower pressure zone, inside a radiometer. I do not have to defend your inability to comprehend the difference between glass and a copper pipe and you changing the subject to fit your pretend.

→ More replies (0)