I created another analysis of this video below in case my previous one wasn't clear enough. Please, if anyone here can refute these findings please say so, and provide us with an explanation.
Ah, now i understand. The adams apple equals "banana".
Well, like I pointed out, the size of the adam's apple varies in men and women.
Attention Whore: "A derogatory term for someone who seeks attention in desperate, obvious, or inappropriate ways. Although it is gender neutral, it is more often used against women." (source)
" An individual that routinely solicits attention through inappropriate tactics and provocation." (source)
"Attention seeking behavior is to act in a way that is likely to elicit attention. Attention seeking behavior is defined in the as "engaging in behavior designed to attract notice and to make oneself the focus of others' attention and admiration" (Source: Wikipedia)
I've only wished to direct your attention to details such as the poor and faked Michelle Obama proofs. And again (I apologize if I'm being repetititive) The NASA thread I started to direct your attention to how dishonestly the NASA video by The People's Voice was made.
I've never wished to direct your attention to me. If there are tell-tale signs of that or that I have used inappropriate and desperate tactics please let me know (and show me). Thank you.
Worth noting of course is that Gilbert says:-
Was Michelle born a man, and did she have a sex change operation in 2008?
As an investigative documentary reporter, I have to go where the facts lead me. The answer is emphatically no! Michelle was born female. Her voter registration as a male was likely a clerical error of some sort made when Michelle completed her 1994 voter registration form. She must have only noticed it in 2008 and corrected it appropriately.
Thought experiment for anyone reading:-
-
A person (just an example person, not Michelle Obama) dances and this persons lose pants give the appearance of something swinging at the crotch.
-
A person has some masculine features.
Now, how many such details is needed for you to judge that this person is thus a male, and how certain are you?
If it were you would you like for people to do this assessment of you based on these details?
Politicians are fair game...she probably has blood on her/his hands just like her husband. I make no apology. Good chance it will become President too. I have only voted once in my life that was 40 years ago, and once too many times. Politicians are scum. So no, there is no chance it would be me.
Yeah, she/he should hang as a war criminal. Probably only the tip of the iceberg of the criminality, with the rumoured "hot-dog" parties at the WH.
Whilst looking into the Bush / Scherff / Skorzeny claim/theory (referenced here) I came across the book "The Bush Connection" Written by flat-earther Erik Orion aka Erik Berman. I believe the Bush / Scherff claim originated from him.
This is his website:-
Here's what he claims:-
Every U.S. President was or is an LGBT Freemason "faggot" with an ugly Communist LGBT Freemason man-tranny "faggot" for a wife to control him. Every God damn one. This is the sad reality Americans have to live with every day. The Freemason LGBT Presidents & their ugly Communist Freemason LGBT man-wives' have always had a Communist, gay, transgender, anti-gun, WOKE agenda for America. I say f you to you & your Communist, gay, WOKE, anti-gun agenda.
So it's not only Michelle Obama? See website for more... I recommend his flat-earth section...
His website archived in 2018 isn't that bad either. (it doesn't make any sense) (I'm looking into how much his site(s) changed over the years....
Another source for the Bush / Scherff claim, someone named Don Nicoloff:-
https://www.proliberty.com/observer/20070405.htm
EDIT:
Don's article has Berman as the source:-
"According to Skorzeny, (Adolph Hitler’s former bodyguard) in a deathbed confession to Eric “Orion” (Eric Berman) in S. Miami, Florida, Tesla, “hated the younger Scherff.” In fact, according to Skorzeny, the “Curious George ” book and movie were inspired by Tesla’ s ...
..."Skorzeny, producing a shoe box full of 60-years worth of his personal photographs, showed them to Berman, describing each one in great detail. "
...suggestion."
Do you agree with Nancy? Crass and rude? Wrong demeanor?
Do you believe I’ve lacked self control and not thought before speaking or doing here in DG?
If so, please show me where so I can learn.
Something that seems to be missing in these discussions (which should be discussions rather than arguments) is that humans AND photos can and do LIE.
How would any of us know which photos are the "original" ones and which ones have been photoshopped in a world filled with confusion?
The evidence that we have, which is IRREFUTABLE (2 Pet. 1:19), is that the abomination of homosexuality is spreading like a plague during these end-times, exactly as prophesied.
Luke 17:24-36
17:24 For as the lightening, that lighteneth out of the one [part] under heaven, shineth unto the other [part] under heaven; so shall also the Son of Man be in his day.
17:25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.
17:26 And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of Man.
17:27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
17:28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
17:29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed [them] all.
17:30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.
17:31 In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.
17:32 Remember Lot's wife.
17:33 Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.
17:34 I tell you, in that night there SHALL be two [men] in one bedroom; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.
17:35 Two [women] SHALL be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
17:36 Two [men] shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
There is no doubt that the abomination of homosexuality is being pushed as a political agenda, along with transgenderism, the intentional mutilation of body parts via surgery, drugs and hormones to try to change the physical gender of humans, and that people are so confused they no longer able to tell whether they are male or female anymore by looking down their own underpants.
There is no doubt that those who are used as tools to push political agendas on the people, to intentionally confuse them, are politicians and legislators, with all of their made-up rules and pretended authority to do whatever they want.
Likewise, there is no doubt that ALL politicians are guilty of capital crimes and, if they aren't openly speaking out against the abomination of homosexuality, then they are complicit in those capital crimes too. Homosexuality IS a capital crime (Lev. 20:13), just as being a politician, legislator or priest, etc. is likewise a capital crime (Deut. 4:2; 17:11-13).
Don't let these habitual, career criminals drown you in their sea of disinformation. Focus instead on what's important: getting rid of ALL of the abominations, so they don't turn an entire country into an Obamination. And that focus obviously needs to be turned inward FIRST (Matt. 6:33).
On these things we can hopefully all agree.
2 Likes
Further, here in Babylon/Rome, it's important to remember that WHEN IN ROME, DO NOT DO AS THE ROMANS DO.
Romans 1:15-32
1:15 So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.
1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all unGodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the Truth as unrighteousness;
1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest to them; for God hath showed [it] unto them.
1:20 For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [Him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations (Gen. 6:5), and their foolish heart was darkened.
1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
1:25 Who changed the Truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, Who is blessed for ever. Amen.
1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet (AIDS).
1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a mind void of Judgement, to do those things which are not convenient;
1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
1:31 Without Understanding, Covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
1:32 Who knowing the Judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
Do you really believe that it's not possible to know which one of the following images is the original?
There are methods and tell-tale signs to determine which photo is the original and which one has been photoshopped.
Today* one undeniable detail to look at is quality and resolution.
If image A is 300x600 pixels large and highly compressed and image B 3000x6000 and not visibly compressed then even with all the confusion in the world the most likely image to be the original one is B, the 3000x6000 pixel one.
To deny this, I believe is to spread confusion.
- However, with modern AI upscaling technologies this is changing and soon it might be hard to know exactly what we are looking it.
Examples: (1) [2] + many more in this thread that all conform to what I've explained above.
Yes, thank you.
Thank-you @deleted.
A few questions, if you please.
Should we assume that either of these photos are actually an original?
Should we assume that our only choice in this matter is to choose between one of these two photos?
Are the two assumptions above not setting the stage for a false dichotomy?
Are the use of logical fallacies not trademark mind control tactics, designed to induce a state referred to as "cognitive dissonance" (i.e. double-mindedness - James 1:8)?
We know that the churches, governments and the so-called intelligence gathering agencies that sprung from them all use these types of tactics, where both sides of every issue are funded and controlled to mask the otherwise obvious divide and conquer tactics employed by satan.
There are photos of Lee Harvey Oswald that were very obviously manipulated, and that was 60 years ago. How much more can photos, and even moving video, be manipulated today? Most people can do so in the comfort of their own home on personal computers, so how much more can the organized crime syndicate of church and state do so with virtually unlimited resources?
Who is to say that the higher resolution photo you've shared is actually the original, i.e. that the there isn't a third photo (or many other photos)? High resolution photo manipulation is possible today.
If someone was in the disinformation business, would t.h.e.y. not release a mixture of photos in varying resolutions, ALL of which were manipulated, to ensure that whatever "side" the public chose still required belief in their disinformation program?
From the resolution/quality we can determine that the larger/sharper one without the obvious photoshopping is most probably the more original one.
If you don't understand the explanation about resolution/quality here is an example:-
This can be compared to two photos of a cake. In one of the photos we see the whole cake. In the other photo 1/3 of the pieces are gone. I believe we can, using common sense, safely assume which one of the photos is the more original / earlier one.
As for the question if they both are fakes, sure, we can theorize that, but there's no indication of that being the case and there are indications that one of them is genuine.
If the accusations that Michelle Obama is a male stems from only a handful of images and videos then I believe that it is those that can be studied to determine if that is true.
Also, the photos (that I claim are the real ones) match the appearance of Michelle Obama that we have seen in live video footage and other video footage for well over a decade. For Michelle to actually look like the other more manly person, it would mean all of that live footage was faked with technology exceeding currently available deep fake/CGI. CGI actors in movies of more recent years don't look completely real, yet Michelle Obama has looked real in all her live appearances since 2008?
If we say that both sets of images are fakes and that fake photorealistic and indistinguishable from reality images can be produced then this argument of course advocates for both sides of the argument (Michelle is male/not male).
It's also becoming clearer that disinformation business exists today - conspiracy business, whereby people plug intoxicating wow theories to sell their books, or bring people to their websites and video channels for ad money. And of course the state sponsored disinformation designed to divide and conquer.
Very obviously? I don't believe that is the case.
What does this mean? That it is possible to manipulate photos of high resolution? That has been possible for a long time but what exactly do you mean with the word manipulate? rotate the image, make it darker, lighter, add a photorealistic pink dolphin so that it is impossible to distinguish if the image is real? To take a smudgy, low resolution image and turn it into a clear high-resolution one isn't possible but is becoming, with a few caveats.
I'm not quite sure I understand you if we are talking about the Michelle Obama photos.
So they would release both these manipulated images where she looks like a man featured in this thread, and also manipulated images where she doesn't look like a man but looks the same she does in all videos/photos of her.... What did they then manipulate in those photos? She looks the same as in the rest of them?
What are the sides then? What is the disinformation program?
The disinformation program is to get everyone to focus on and argue about things THAT DO NOT MATTER, while the criminals are busy making as much legislation as fast as they can, to try to circumvent Father's Law and completely demoralize and enslave society.
Isaiah 3:12 [As for] My people, children [are] their oppressors, and women rule over them. O My people, they which lead thee cause [thee] to err, and lead thee astray, TO THY DESTRUCTION.
One reason this question interests me is because JAH claims Michelle Obama is male.
And of course he is right again just like with the non-existent moon landings. Perhaps you should try listening to him for a change, just a thought. Work on your intuition instead of wanting physical/material evidence all the time.
My question to that type of statement from people is - So what?
From personal experience and working with TM it is known, that in the overwhelming number of instances TM usually gets it correct.
But TM too come to conclusions based on the information that is given. I think people should just stop with the projecting of their own immature expectations onto others, including but not limited to, TM.
So whether TM has come to the correct conclusion about it at this time, or not, what does it matter? It makes no difference, either way.
TWHOFTF
8:64 Even Jesus was not perfect, whilst he was in this world, and he said so openly (Matt. 19:17 & Luke 18:19).
8:65 It is not possible to be absolutely perfect, whilst wearing a human-animal-body, with all the temptation of this world.
8:66 The fact, that even Jesus was not perfect, should give everyone more encouragement, to strive harder, to be like him.
He never said to anyone "be perfect and infallible like me", ever. If that's what people think then they should really stop it.
This is what TM/Christ has said to people:
Matthew
5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven IS perfect.
He never said that he knows everything and can instantly come to the absolute correct conclusions about absolutely everything. If that's what people think then I think they may need to "grow up".
We should LOVE and RESPECT TM for who he is and because Father has sent him. We can all do better.
We could do better to look to our own "selves".
If/when new and more accurate information does come along, then I've known TM to say ok, since we now know that, it's most likely like this way, and not the other way.
For us it's important to remember our state. Information should be presented in a respectful way (and not in a "self" seeking and arrogant way). If not, it may just be rightfully ignored. He has many important things to think about and do I think people tend to forget it.
Who cares if Obama is this or that? It's an opinion based on presented information. We should strive for truth, and I've given some of my personal opinions about it here. If others think different, then that's ok and it's everyone's right. I may not be able to see what others see, but that's no reason to make a big deal about it.
There are far more important things going on and to focus on, and people getting into endless arguments about things that do not really matter, and stoop to name calling is STUPID.
I'm sure we can all find better things to do, than have petty arguments because different people can have different opinions. Why do people want to make others think the same way as them?
Only Father KNOWS.
TM usually gets it correct.
What if (in an unusual case) TM didn't happen to. Then, so what? How many things have we each had, that we didn't get right? It would make no difference whatsoever.
John 5:23
I believe we can do better than this. Please, lets see if we can do it? This is in reply to Cybe, but it's really meant as a general reply.
3 Likes
Thank you, yes, those are TWH/Scripture quotes that has come to mind when I've pondered upon this.
There are however some aspects of the argumentation that make them not completely petty/trivial that I've hoped would be insightful and this has been acknowledged and discussed once or twice...
You're welcome. Agreed. I think what also needs to be done is differentiating in ourselves, between what is really an opinion and what is actually, truly and really known to be facts. Opinions, are just that. Opinions are not facts. Not until it can be proven to be as such. So we should probably learn not speak of opinions as if they were something other than that. The internet is full of people who write articles that put forth their opinions as if they were facts, but perhaps we can learn to be better in avoiding it by not doing likewise.
One of my personal favorite comebacks these days, is becoming the phrase "I don't know" lol
'The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.' - Charles Bukowski