Why does anything exist?

Why does anything exist? Why is there something rather than nothing? Wouldn’t nothing have been so much easier?

This question has awed and mystified people throughout time.

The first question which we have a right to ask will be, “Why is there something rather than nothing?”

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in “The Principles of Nature and Grace, Based on Reason” (1714)

Not how the world is, is the mystical, but that it is.

Ludwig Wittgenstein in “Treatise on Logic and Philosophy” (1921)

No question is more sublime than why there is a Universe: why there is something rather than nothing.

Derek Parfit in “Why Anything? Why This?” (2008)

Martin Heidegger called this question the “fundamental question of metaphysics.” But it might as well be the fundamental question for any being — our existence poses a mystery that demands an answer.

Something, rather than nothing. Where does it all come from? Why is there anything at all?
Something, rather than nothing. Where does it all come from? Why is there anything at all?

Every society in every time has wrestled with this dilemma. It’s our most enduring question. For we all seek to know: why we are here?

Lacking an answer, we are like a ship adrift. Our ignorance on this question makes us like an amnesiac who awakens in a dark and strange place — knowing neither where we are, nor how we got here.

Some say without an answer to this question, we can’t know anything:

It is possible to think that one cannot answer any question if one cannot answer the question of why there is something rather than nothing. How can we know why something is (or should be) a certain way if we don’t know why there is anything at all? Surely this is the first philosophical question that has to be answered.

Robert Nozick in “Philosophical Explanations” (1981)

With an answer to this question we could orientate ourselves. We would know our place in reality, and understand the reason behind it all. An answer to this question would tell us not only why we exist, but also what else exists, both within the universe we see and beyond.

But can this question even be answered?

Some have suggested the answer is unknowable.

Who knows truly? Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this creation? The gods are subsequent to the creation of this. Who, then, knows whence it has come into being? Whence this creation has come into being; whether it was made or not; he in the highest heaven is its surveyor. Surely he knows, or perhaps he knows not.

The Hymn of Creation in “Rig Veda” (c. 1500 B.C.)

For most of history, the question remained beyond the possibility of being answered. But we live in a most-exciting point in time: one where this question has fallen to the progress of human knowledge.

In the past decades, results from physics, cosmology, mathematics, and computer science, have coordinated at last to solve this timeless question. We can now say, with some confidence, why we exist.

The answer we have is more than an idle philosophical speculation — it can be observationally tested and thereby be confirmed or falsified.

So far, observations are in agreement with this answer.

Let us retrace humanity’s steps in finding this answer, and see what this answer reveals about the nature of reality and our place in it.


Two Paths to Existence

One reason we find “Why does anything exist?” so difficult is that there are only two possible answers — both are repugnant to our intuition as each contradicts our commonsense understanding of the world.

Given something exists, either:

  1. Something emerged from nothing, or
  2. There are self-existent things
Did something come from nothing, or are there self-existent things?
Did something come from nothing, or are there self-existent things?

The idea that something came out of nothing is contrary to reason. How can nothingness do, nevermind create, anything?

The idea that there exist self-existent things, is contrary to experience. Everything we know appears to have a preceding cause. How could anything create itself, or exist without some creative act?

And yet, that one of these answers must be right seems inescapable. There’s no other way to reach “something exists” without either starting with something at the beginning, or starting with nothing and having something emerge from nothing.

If we seek an answer to this question we have to be willing to accept an idea contrary to our commonsense understanding of the world.

But which of these paths leads to the correct answer?

Something from Nothing?

The first of the two answers is that something emerged from nothing. But how is this possible? Does it even make sense logically?

For at least 2,500 years, humans have debated whether anything can come from nothing. The Greek philosopher Parmenides made the earliest recorded argument that “nothing comes from nothing.”

I will not permit thee to say or to think that [being] came from not-being; for it is impossible to think or to say that not-being is. What would then have stirred it into activity that [being] should arise from not-being later rather than earlier? So it is necessary that being either is absolutely or is not.

Parmenides in “The Way of the Truth” (c. 475 B.C.)

To decide whether existence emerging from nothingness is even logically possible, we need a precise definition of nothing. For instance, by ‘nothing’ do we mean no things, or do we mean absolute nothingness: no laws, structures, properties, or principles?

Defining Nothing

It might have been true that nothing ever existed: no living beings, no stars, no atoms, not even space or time. When we think about this possibility it can seem astonishing that anything exists.

Derek Parfit in “Why Anything? Why This?” (2008)

What is nothing? It seems like a straightforward question. Just keep removing things until there is nothing left.

Start with the universe as it is. Wipe away all the matter and energy. Take away all the quantum fields of the vacuum, and any virtual particles popping in and out of existence. And voilà: nothingness.

Nothingness: reality after we delete every thing out of existence.

But wait, there’s still space. It still has dimensionality, and curvature. There is still time and physical law, even if there are no particles or fields left to be governed by them. Let us delete those too.

Let’s erase the volume of space, erase time, and erase physical law.

When we say out of nothingness we do not mean out of the vacuum of physics. The vacuum of physics is loaded with geometrical structure and vacuum fluctuations and virtual pairs of particles. The Universe is already in existence when we have such a vacuum.

No, when we speak of nothingness we mean nothingness: neither structure, nor law, nor plan.

John Archibald Wheeler in “Law Without Law” (1983)

What are we left with? If we eliminate all the dimensions of space and time, we’re left with a zero-dimensional, changeless point.

But a point is still a thing. Can we delete that too?

Kinds of Nothing

So long as we operate from a theory of geometry, we can’t define nothingness as anything less than a space of zero-dimensionality.

This leaves us with a point.

If we want to eliminate the point, we need to define nothingness not as a space of zero dimensionality, but as something non-geometric. For this, we must define nothingness in terms of some other theory.

But any theory we might choose has its own notion of nothing. In other words, nothingness is theory-dependent.

TheoryNotion of Nothing
PhysicsNo energy: the vacuum
GeometryNo dimensionality: a point
Set theoryNo elements: the empty set
ArithmeticNo magnitude: zero
Information theoryNo information: zero bits

There is an unlimited number of possible theoretical systems. Does this mean there are also unlimited conceptions of nothing?

Nothing is simple. Not even Nothing.

Bruno Marchal

Might there be a true nothing — one with no laws, principles, nor any theory behind it? Or might every conception of nothing require a theory of things in order to declare that there are none of them?

Rules for Nothing

Wheeler called for absolute nothingness: “neither structure, nor law, nor plan.” But is this kind of absolute nothing achievable?

For instance, the law of identity holds that for any A, “A = A“. Without such a rule, there would be nothing to ensure that nothing stayed nothing, and didn’t later become equal to something.

For nothingness to persist, the rules of logic must apply. Further, if nothingness is the state where “zero things exist”, then the rules of arithmetic must also hold to ensure that “0 = 0” rather than “0 = 1”.

For there to remain no things requires some minimum set of laws. There might be no things as such, but the idea of no laws seems incompatible with there being and remaining no things.

In the beginning, there was only truth, logic and their relation. No possible reality can do without them.

C. W. Rietdijk in “Four-dimensional reality continued” (2018)

If there were no logic, what logic or reason ensures that nothing comes from nothing? If there were no laws, what law or principle would prohibit the spontaneous emergence of a universe?

The Trouble with Nothing

Can we define nothing in a way that suppresses all forms of existence?

That is, to not only have no things, but an absolute nothingness — a nothingness of no objects, neither abstract nor concrete, no properties, no laws, no principles, and no information content?

Or is this a fool’s errand? One that leads to a logical inconsistency and thus an impossibility? Might nothingness be, in some sense, unstable?

Perhaps nothingness, by its own nature, is am untenable situation. Image Credit: Wikimedia
Perhaps nothingness, by its own nature, is untenable. Image Credit: Wikimedia

If absolute nothingness can be shown to be an impossible dream, it will advance us on our path to discover the reason for existence. It might even reveal some self-existent or necessarily-existent thing.

Properties of Nothing

Any time we delete something from reality, we leave something else in its place. When we deleted matter, we created a vacuum. When we eliminated light, we created darkness. When we removed heat we created cold. When we deleted space, we created a point.

The idea of nothingness has not one jot more meaning than a square circle. The absence of one thing always being the presence of another — which we prefer to leave aside because it is not the thing that interests us or the thing we were expecting — suppression is never anything more than substitution, a two-sided operation which we agree to look at from one side only: so that the idea of the absolution of everything is self-destructive, inconceivable; it is a pseudo-idea, a mirage conjured by our own imagination.

Henri Bergson in “The Two Sources of Morality and Religion” (1935)

If every deletion is a substitution for something else, then a pure nothing, devoid of any properties whatever, is impossible.

Whac-A-Mole CHAMP!!!
Eliminating every thing and property from reality might be like a game of Whac-A-Mole — where each time we remove one property or thing, another pops up in its place.

So while we might succeed in removing all material things from reality, we could not remove all properties from reality.

The existence of properties appears inescapable.

Nothingness, of any kind will always have some description and properties, even when it’s just a cold, dark, empty, vacuum.

But how far can we go in eliminating properties?

For instance, if we define nothingness as the empty set from set theory, what properties would remain? Temperature has no meaning for a set.

Would any properties remain for such a nothing?

Properties of Zero

Every conception and definition of nothing contains at its heart: zero. For any conception of a thing, nothing will always be zero of them.

The vacuum: zero energy. Geometry: zero dimensionality. The empty set: zero elements. Arithmetic: zero magnitude. Information theory: zero bits.

If zero is a universal property of nothing, we must ask: what are the properties of zero? What does zero bring to the table of reality?

Zero has many properties. It’s even, it’s the additive identity, it’s the only number that’s neither positive nor negative. It’s the number of elements in the empty set and the number of even primes greater than two.

In fact, zero has more properties than we could list if we recruited all the atoms in the observable universe to serve as paper and ink. This effort is doomed because zero’s properties are infinite in number.

The universe is a very big place – these are galaxies billions of light years away.
A small patch of the observable universe. There are more properties of zero than there are atoms within all the galaxies visible in this picture (around 7.74 \times 10^{72} atoms.)

Zero’s factors couldn’t be listed, as zero has infinitely many of them. Every number evenly divides zero and hence is one of zero’s factors.

Aside from zero’s factors, we could list infinite trivial properties of zero: zero is “the difference between 1 and 1” and it’s “the difference between 2 and 2” and it’s “the difference between 3 and 3” and so on.

But there are also an infinite number of non-trivial properties of zero. Some are even beyond the understanding of today’s mathematicians. As an example, mathematicians have for centuries wondered:

are there even numbers >2 that aren’t the sum of two primes?

This question is known as Goldbach’s conjecture after Christian Goldbach who posed it in 1742. Nearly three centuries later, it remains unsolved.

Between 2000 and 2002, a $1,000,000 prize was offered to anyone who could answer this question. All this money to settle a question about a property of zero. To decide: is zero the number of exceptions to Goldbach’s rule?

We now see why “Nothing is simple. Not even nothing.” All definitions of nothing include the concept of zero. Far from being simple, zero is an object of unlimited complexity.

An Explosion of Entities

Can zero exist in isolation — completely alone from other numbers? Or do relationships between numbers make them inseparable?

Zero’s properties reference other numbers. And each of these numbers carries its own set of properties and relations to the other numbers.

Are the properties of one any less real than the properties of zero? Perhaps in a reality having no things, ‘one’ is meaningless.

In a reality containing nothing, there are no things as such — at least no material things. But in such a nothing, there is an abstract thing: zero.

Zero reflects the number of material things to count. But how many abstract things are there to count? There is at least one. The one number that exists to define the number of material things is zero.

But if we have one number and it is one thing to count, now another number exists: one. We then have zero and one together as the only numbers. But now we have two numbers. Now two exists…

This is how numbers are defined in set theory. Within set theory, each number is formed as the set of all previous sets. The process starts with the empty set (represented by { } or ∅) which contains zero things.

  • 0 = { } = ∅
  • 1 = { 0 } = {∅}
  • 2 = { 0, 1 } = { ∅, {∅} }
  • 3 = { 0, 1, 2 } = { ∅, {∅} , {∅, {∅}} }
  • 4 = { 0, 1, 2, 3 } = { ∅, {∅}, {∅, {∅}}, {∅, {∅}, {∅, {∅}}} }

It seems once a single abstract number is admitted, each next number comes to life as the count of the abstract numbers that preceded it. Is there any way to stop the proliferation of infinite abstract entities?

Once the number zero exists, the rest follow.
Once the abstract entity zero exists, do all the other numbers inevitably follow?

If zero exists by virtue of there being zero things to count, then on that basis, shouldn’t every number have the same right to exist by virtue of being the number of preceding numbers there are to count?

The existence of any number, in virtue of its properties, entails the existence of all the others i.e. a system of mathematics couldn’t exist bereft only of the number, say, 42; and the existence of any number, in virtue of the full set of its properties/structural relationships, entails the existence of every other number.

David Pearce in “Why Does Anything Exist?” (1995)

Set theory and building up numbers from the empty set are modern ideas — they appeared around the turn of the 20th century. Yet the idea of numbers giving rise to themselves goes back much farther.

The Tao gives birth to One.
One gives birth to Two.
Two gives birth to Three.
Three gives birth to all things.

Laozi in chapter 42 of “Tao Te Ching” (c. 600 B.C.)

A True Nothing

Whenever we specify or define nothing, we invoke theories and concepts which, in turn, lead to properties and abstract entities.

But what if we forgo even specifying nothing? Might this be a path to achieve absolute nothingness? A true nothing, having:

  • No things, no objects
  • No definitions, no properties
  • No abstract entities, no concepts
  • No sets, no numbers
  • No set theory, no mathematics
  • No specifications, No information

Avoiding all this we have no theories of any kind. We are left with a plain and simple, pure, unadulterated nothing at all.

But again this leads to trouble. There’s a problem with this kind of nothing — a nothing of no information is identical to everything.

We note that the collection of all possible descriptions has zero complexity, or information content. This is a consequence of algorithmic information theory, the fundamental theory of computer science. There is a mathematical equivalence between the Everything, as represented by this collection of all possible descriptions and Nothing, a state of no information.

Russell Standish in “Theory of Nothing” (2006)

At first this sounds counter-intuitive, if not outright wrong. Yet this consequence is something we intuitively understand in other contexts.

Let’s review three such cases: Unsculpted Marble, an Unsent E-mail, and the Library of Babel. Each demonstrates an equivalence between the nothing of no specification, and the everything of all possibilities.

Unsculpted Marble

Before marked by a sculptor’s chisel, a block of marble contains every figure — or at least every figure fitting the dimensions of the block.

On the left: blocks of Marble from a quarry in Carrara. On the right: Michelangelo’s Pietà

Michelangelo’s Pietà was in the block before he uncovered it. It was there with all the other figures. To bring forth the Pietà alone, required the addition of information. Michelangelo had to uniquely specify the Pietà from among the set of all possibilities.

There is a beautiful angel in that block of marble, and I am going to find it? All I have to do is to knock off the outside pieces of marble, and be very careful not to cut into the angel with my chisel. In a month or so you will see how beautiful it is.

George F. Pentecost in “The Angel in the Marble” (1883)

This specification requires adding information to the block, by way of chisel marks. It is only in the absence of this information — in the absence of any chisel marks — that all possible figures remain.

In this sense, information is subtractive rather than additive. When information specifies, it eliminates from the preexisting infinite set of possibilities. Absent such information, all possibilities remain.

An Unsent E-mail

You are at your desk, awaiting an important e-mail from your boss.

Before this message arrives you know nothing about the contents of this e-mail — you are in a state of having no information.

But there is one thing you know before the e-mail arrives: the e-mail will be one message from among the infinite set of possible e-mails.

Only after the e-mail arrives in your inbox do you learn which from among the infinite set of messages the boss chose to send you.

But consider the case where instead of sending a single e-mail, the boss sent you every possible e-mail. Would you be able to learn anything from these infinite messages about what your boss wants?

The lack of specification in the infinite set of messages is equal to the lack of specification that existed prior to receiving anything. Both states are equivalently unspecified. Therefore, both represent states of complete ignorance and a state of having zero information.

Having every message is as informative as having no message.

The Library of Babel

One of the best illustrations of the uselessness of all information comes from Jorge Luis Borges’s concept of a ‘Total Library’, described in his short story The Library of Babel.

This library is described as follows:

The universe (which others call the Library) is composed of an indefinite and perhaps infinite number of hexagonal galleries, with vast air shafts between, surrounded by very low railings. From any of the hexagons one can see, interminably, the upper and lower floors. […]

There are five shelves for each of the hexagon’s walls; each shelf contains thirty-five books of uniform format; each book is of four hundred and ten pages; each page, of forty lines, each line, of some eighty letters which are black in color. […]

This thinker observed that all the books, no matter how diverse they might be, are made up of the same elements: the space, the period, the comma, the twenty-two letters of the alphabet. He also alleged a fact which travelers have confirmed: In the vast Library there are no two identical books. From these two incontrovertible premises he deduced that the Library is total and that its shelves register all the possible combinations of the twenty-odd orthographical symbols.

Jorge Luis Borges in “The Library of Babel” (1941)

From the provided information, we can calculate the number of books in this library. This total library contains every possible 410-page book, representing every possible arrangement of 25 characters.

Each page, with 40 lines and 80 characters, contains 3,200 characters. Each book, with 410 pages, contains 410 \times \text{3,200} = \text{1,312,000} characters. With an alphabet of 25 characters, this gives 25^{\text{1,312,000}} possible books.

This number is 25 multiplied by itself over a million times. To put its magnitude in context, the number of atoms in the observable universe is only 25^{57} or 25 multiplied by itself 57 times.

The Library of Babel, containing every 410-page book, seems to go on forever.
Image Source: The Long Room pf The Old Library at Trinity College
The Library of Babel, containing every 410-page book, seems to go on forever.
Image Source: The Long Room in The Old Library at Trinity College

This library is a great treasure. For in this library we can find every book, article, poem, and novel ever written, or that could be written.

We’ll find descriptions of every scientific theory: from Newton’s Principia, to Einstein’s Relativity, to the presently unknown theory of quantum gravity. We’ll find blueprints to world-changing technologies not yet invented based on principles not yet discovered.

This library possesses the greatest works of literature: the complete works of Shakespeare, Dickens, and Tolstoy. It also has every work yet to be written: the completed Game of Thrones series, as well as the unfinished works of Tolkien, Hemingway, and Twain.

The library has the untold histories of every civilization, including civilizations now lost to time. It has the contents of every scroll burned in the fire of Alexandria. The library has biographies of every person who’s ever lived — and even biographies of those yet to be born.

What could be more valuable than this boundless trove of information, with its complete knowledge, its answers to every mystery, and its articulated solutions to every problem?

This is where the equivalence between all information and no information rears its ugly head. It renders the library worthless.

There are issues with this library. To start, for every valid theory, technology, history, and biography in the library, there are countless others that are subtly wrong, inaccurate, or utterly bogus.

Worse, finding any book with more than a few grammatically sensible words is next to impossible. Most books are pure gibberish (or babble) — indistinguishable from random sequences of characters.

A typical page from a book in the Library of Babel is pure gibberish. Here, English-sounding words are highlighted, but are no more frequent than random chance predicts.
A typical page from a book in the Library of Babel. Here, English-sounding words are highlighted, but these are no more frequent than random chance predicts.

Perhaps all hope is not lost. Since this library contains every possible book, surely this library contains books that serve as indexes to find all the other meaningful and sensible books in the library.

But this dream is also impossible.

Given the number of books, it’s impossible to uniquely reference any other book with a descriptor shorter than the length of the book. Thus it takes all 410 pages to reference a specific book in this library.

Due to its completeness, the library itself is the most compact catalog of all the books in the library. In other words, a card-catalog of the library would be the library itself.
Due to its completeness, the library itself is the most compact catalog of all the books in the library. In other words, a card-catalog of the library would be the library itself.

What if we organize the books somehow, such as by sorting them in alphabetical order? Then finding any particular book would be easy.

This too suffers from a pathological breakdown.

While this makes it easy to find any particular book, the difficulty shifts from finding the book to deciding which book we want to find.

This is a consequence of the library having every possible book. As one seeks a book of interest, one is faced with 25 choices: to choose which of the 25 characters is next in the content of the book we seek.

During the search, the seeker must choose each next letter, and must do this for all 1,312,000 characters in the book. Thus, finding a book in this library is as difficult as writing the book in the first place!

In a way, we already have access to this library — as we are already free to put down any sequence of characters we want, and thus “find” a book that is already present somewhere in this total library.

Thus, this library provides no new knowledge or information. Its set of all books is as helpful to us as if it had no books. And so a total library offers nothing. It’s equivalent to having no information at all.

You can explore this frustrating enigma of the Library of Babel. Jonathan Basile created an online version at libraryofbabel.info.

Everything From Nothing?

Information theory reveals the equivalence between the totality of all information and the nothingness of zero information. Both lack any specification. Both are completely uninformative. Both contain within them the complete and infinite set of every possibility.

We’ve seen this equivalence first-hand. We saw it in the unsculpted block of marble, in the unsent e-mail, and in the Library of Babel.

So is a nothing of no specification, a nothing or an everything?

Less Information, More Reality

How much information is in the Library of Babel?

To determine this, we need only consider what is the shortest description that can generate the content of the library.

For instance:

A library containing one of each possible 410-page book with 3,200 characters per page and a fixed alphabet of 25 characters.

The preceding description for the library is 125 characters long. There could be shorter descriptions, but this sets an upper-bound for the information content of the Library of Babel.

It takes next to no information to describe the vast Library of Babel. Paradoxically, there’s more information in a single page from a single book in the Library, than in the entire library itself!

How could this be? How can there be less information in the library as a whole than there is in a single book or page from the library?

This is a consequence of algorithmic information theory, which includes the science of data compression. It reveals that it is simpler (in terms of needing a shorter description) to generate every book in the library than it is to generate only a single book, or a single page of a book in the library.

A shorter, less specific, and more general description casts a wider net:

Thing SpecifiedRequired Information
A single book1,312,000 characters
The Library of Babel125 characters
“All possible books”18 characters

The description “All possible books” needs fewer characters than the description of the Library of Babel, but it defines a much larger set of books, in fact, it defines an infinite set of books, of all possible lengths and character sets. The Library of Babel, though vast, was still finite.

Might the same apply to our universe and reality?

To describe one universe like ours requires a vast amount of information. It requires specifying not only the physical laws, but also the position, direction, and speed of every particle in the universe.

This is estimated to require on the order of 10^{90} bits.

Yet to specify every possible universe of our kind — a multiverse of every possible arrangement of particles ruled by our laws of physics — needs much less information.

Such a multiverse requires only the information to define the physical laws, particle types, fundamental forces and constants of nature.

This can be done in just a few pages of equations.

The great equations of physics which define the rules of our universe fit on a few pages.
Image Credit: Max Tegmark

Describing our specific universe is like describing a specific book from the Library of Babel. It needs more information than the library itself.

In theories such as the string theory landscape, the constants of nature are not specified by the theory, leading to an even greater multiverse consisting of every possible universe having every set of possible values for the constants of nature (e.g. different values for things like the electron mass and the strength of electromagnetism).

There are reasons to suspect this, or something like it is true. For one, it explains why laws of physics and constants of nature appear fine-tuned for the emergence of life. (See: “Was the universe made for life?“)

This description of a “string theory landscape” needs less information. It might save a page by not having to include the 30 some odd constants of nature. And yet, it describes a vastly larger multiverse.

Thing SpecifiedRequired Information
Observable Universe
Particle velocities
Physical constants
Physical equations
10^{90} bits
~10^{85} pages
Quantum Multiverse
Physical constants
Physical equations
\approx \text{144,000} bits
~6 pages
String Theory Landscape
Physical equations
\approx \text{120,000} bits
~5 pages
All physical possibility?0 bits

What happens when the length of reality’s description goes to zero?

This would leave the equations themselves unspecified — implying an even greater multiverse. This multiverse includes universes not just of every arrangement of matter, nor universes of every set of constants, but universes ruled by every kind of physical equations.

If all possible string vacua, space-time geometries, masses of elementary particles and interaction strengths, and (by)laws of physics are realized, then all possible descriptions are satisfied. This is equivalent to zero information.

David Pearce in “Why Does Anything Exist?” (1995)

Thus, to specify all possible physical laws, all possible physical constants, for all possible universes, needs no information at all.

Might we inhabit such a nothing?

This is the thesis of Russell Standish’s 2006 book Theory of Nothing.

Standish believes our universe, with its seemingly vast quantity of information, is something like a book in the Library of Babel. We would then be denizens of nothing, occupying a place within a total reality which altogether amounts to zero information.

Such a reality — one of zero information — is the simplest state of existence. It’s simpler than an empty vacuum or a geometrical point, as these both need a non-zero amount of information to describe.

Necessary Existence

We’ve attempted but frustratingly failed to define a true nothing.

When we tried to specify a nothing, whether as a vacuum, a point, or an empty set, we inevitably invoke properties, abstract entities, the number zero and the infinitude of numbers and their relationships.

Furthermore, this specification is not an absolute nothing as it requires reality to have a nonzero amount of information to specify it.

Alternatively, if we attempt a nothing of zero information and zero specification we get a total reality containing all possibility. Neither approach succeeds in bringing about absolute nothingness.

Moreover, these approaches rely upon and assume the validity of logical principles and consistency. No reality, not even a nothing, appears possible without laws and principles of logic.

And so the goal of the philosopher’s nothing, the “neither structure, nor law, nor plan” kind of true nothing at all, seems an impossible dream.

The nothings we attempt break down and lead to somethings.

  • With no structure, there are zero structures, this introduces zero and with it the structure of all numbers and their interrelations.
  • With no law, there are no restrictions on what can or cannot exist nor any law to prevent things spontaneously popping into existence.
  • With no plan, there is no information, which is equivalent to a totality.
Inspired by his discovery of binary numbers, Leibniz wrote to the Duke of Brunswick in 1679 suggesting a design for a coin. He titled it “Imago Creationis” (The Image of Creation).

The motto reads:

“Omnibus ex nihil ducendis sufficit unum”
For producing everything out of nothing, one principal is enough.

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in “letter to Duke” (1679)

If a true and absolute nothing is impossible or unstable, does this mean there must be self-creating or self-existent things? Can a thing exist out of logical necessity, because its absence is impossible?

What might the nature of such things be?

A Self-Existent Thing?

If something did not emerge out of nothing, then there’s only one other possibility: that there is something that has always existed.

In other words, nothingness is not the default state of reality.

It is extraordinary that there should exist anything at all. Surely the most natural state of affairs is simply nothing: no universe, no God, nothing. But there is something.

Richard Swinburne in “Is There a God?” (1996)

Given that something exists, it either came from nothing or else something has existed from the beginning. The existence of this thing is somehow necessary. It existed without any preceding cause.

This, we also find contrary to intuition. It’s strange because everything we are familiar with can trace its existence to some earlier cause:

Manufactured things are made by people, or by machines that were made by people. Life comes from other life. Things not created by humans or other life, like rivers and mountains are created by natural forces acting on matter. It seems to defy reason for a thing to exist without a cause. And yet, we know the universe exists.

The universe either came from some preceding cause, or else the universe has always existed, is self-existent, or self-creating.

There is no third option. If the universe is not the end of this causal chain, then something else is. Therefore we must accept some things are self-creating (come out of nothing) or are self-existent.

Let’s call such a thing causeless.

Existing without Cause

Take anything that exists: the chair you’re sitting in, your conscious thoughts, the Eiffel tower. For the purposes of the reasoning, it doesn’t matter what thing we start with.

Given that this thing exists, there are two possibilities: either that thing was caused or it was not caused. If a thing has no cause, then it is causeless. Otherwise, the thing has a cause and its existence is owed to some other thing. If we follow the chain of causality back towards an ultimate root cause, there are three possibilities:

  1. First Cause: The chain of causality comes to an end in a ‘first cause
  2. Infinite Regression: The chain of causality continues forever
  3. Causal Loop: The chain of causality forms a closed cycle, or a loop

These represent all possibilities. The trace either ends (a first cause) or it continues forever. If it continues forever it forms an infinite chain that’s either open (an infinite regression) or closed (a causal loop).

In all three cases we find something that has always existed: either the first cause, the infinite chain itself, or the causal loop itself. This thing, which has always existed, we can describe as causeless.

First Cause

If when tracing back through the series of causes we happen upon something causeless, then our existence results from a first cause.

According to some models, the Big Bang may represent a first cause.

Leading cosmological theories, such as the big bang and cosmic inflation posit that the universe is not infinitely old, but rather underwent an abrupt event where it came into existence.

That our universe has a point that may be marked as a beginning leaves open the possibility that there is a preceding cause for our universe. Another possibility is that the universe is its own cause, emerging as a random quantum fluctuation allowed by laws of physics.

 Michelangelo’sThe Creation of Adam” (1512)

Many religions speak of the first cause as a divine act of creation. In such a case God would be the first cause. Yet some other non-theistic object could as well be responsible for our existence.

If the universe is not eternal, we should look for some reason for the sudden appearance of the universe: to explain how it could arise by itself, be self-existent, or be the product of some prior cause.

Infinite Regression

If our universe has an eternal history, or if it belongs to a reality having an eternal history, then we exist due to an infinite regression.

Before the Big Bang 7: An Eternal Cyclic Universe, CCC revisited & Twistor Theory
According to conformal cyclic cosmology, the big bang is one among an infinite succession.

A number of scientific theories propose that our universe is eternal.

Prior to wide acceptance of the big bang, the steady-state model was popular. It proposed that the universe is eternally expanding with new matter perpetually created to fill the void in the newly made space.

Since the acceptance of the big bang, various new models suppose that the big bang is itself part of an eternal succession of big bangs.

Roger Penrose’s conformal cyclic cosmology supposes that the heat death of our universe could appear as a new big bang in the next ‘aeon’.

Lee Smolin proposed cosmological natural selection wherein a new universe spawns every time a black hole forms. Accordingly, if the laws mutate, he suggests that universes might even ‘evolve’ towards having laws that maximize the production of black holes.

Sean Carroll notes that the equations of quantum mechanics, unlike those of general relativity, permit physicists to calculate eternally into the past or future. With a theory of quantum gravity, we could in principle predict backwards to times preceding the big bang.

The Schrödinger equation has an immediate, profound consequence: almost all quantum states evolve eternally toward both the past and the future. Unlike classical models such as spacetime in general relativity, which can hit singularities beyond which evolution cannot be extended, quantum evolution is very simple. […] If this setup describes the real world, there is no beginning nor end to time.

Sean Carroll in “Why Is There Something, Rather Than Nothing?” (2018)
According to ancient legends, the world rests on the back of a Cosmic Turtle. When asked what the Cosmic Turtle rests on, a common response is, “It is turtles all the way down” — an infinite regression.

If an infinite regression is true, there is no ultimate cause. However, we might still look for an ultimate explanation for the chain of causes.

Causal Loop

It might be that our existence is part of an infinite series, but one that repeats forever. If true, we are stuck in a never ending causal loop.

The hypothesized Big Bounce is an example of a cyclic cosmology.

In 1922, Alexander Friedmann applied Einstein’s equations of general relativity to the universe as a whole. He found that for certain values of the density of the universe and the cosmological constant, the universe will expand for a period of time, slow down, and eventually recollapse.

In his 1923 book, The World as Space and Time, Friedmann speculates that the collapse (or Big Crunch) could rebound (in a Big Bounce), causing a new Big Bang. The process could repeat forever.

The idea of a cyclic cosmology has appealed to many scientists, including Georges Lemaître, Richard Tolman, George Gamow, William Bonnor, Herman Zanstra and Robert Dicke, among others.

We can now ask ourselves two important questions: why was our universe in such a highly compressed state, and why did it start expanding? The simplest and mathematically most consistent, way of answering these questions would be to say that the Big Squeeze which took place in the early history of our universe was the result of a collapse which took place at a still earlier era, and that the present expansion is simply an “elastic” rebound which started as soon as the maximum permissible squeezing density was reached.

George Gamow in “The Creation of the Universe” (1952)

Cyclical cosmologies can be found in many religions. For example, there is the concept of the Wheel of Time in the Dharmic religions.

The Nataraja depicts cycles of creation and destruction. Image Credit: Wikipedia

The most elegant and sublime of these is a representation of the creation of the universe at the beginning of each cosmic cycle, a motif known as the cosmic dance of Shiva.

The god, called in this manifestation Nataraja, the Dance King, has four hands. In the upper right hand is a drum whose sound is the sound of creation. In the upper left hand is a tongue of flame, a reminder that the universe, now newly created, will billions of years from now be utterly destroyed.

Carl Sagan in “Cosmos” (1980)

But cyclic models, lacking observational evidence and theoretical support, remained on the periphery of cosmology.

In 1998, observations revealed the expansion of the universe was not slowing, but accelerating. This seems to rule out a future collapse.

The driver of this acceleration, dark energy, remains little understood. If it is constant, the expansion will continue forever. But in some theories, it varies with time and so a later collapse may be possible.

Cyclic models have seen a revival. In 2001, Justin Khoury, Burt Ovrut, Paul Steinhard and Neil Turok proposed the ekpyrotic universe.

This idea marries string theory and cosmology to give a model where periodic brane collisions trigger cycles of Big Bangs and Big Crunches.

If our universe is part of a causal loop, no beginning or end is identifiable. But what got it started? Did one of the succession of states spring forth out of nothing, or might the loop have always existed?

The Nature of Uncaused Things

Given that reality exists, we know there must be an entity that is causeless. What is it about causeless entities that makes them existent?

If a first cause, how did it bring itself into existence? If an infinite regression or causal loop, how did it come into being?

Might it exist out of logical necessity? Or is it a result of chance? Or might it exist simply because it can exist, and nothing forbids it?

Tracing causes backwards can tell us where the previous state came from, but it won’t answer where the chain or loop itself came from.

Some believe that, if all events were caused by earlier events, everything would be explained. That, however, is not so. Even an infinite series of events cannot explain itself. We could ask why this series occurred, rather than some other series, or no series.

Derek Parfit in “Why Anything? Why This?” (2008)

What we are looking for is not a cause, but a reason — an explanation.

For in the cases of the loops or infinite regression, we can always find an earlier cause, but may never reach a satisfactory reason.

For the question to be properly, fully answered, we need a sufficient reason that has no need of any further reason—a ‘Because’ that doesn’t throw up a further ‘Why?’—and this must lie outside the series of contingent things, and must be found in a substance which is the cause of the entire series. It must be something that exists necessarily, carrying the reason for its existence within itself; only that can give us a sufficient reason at which we can stop, having no further Why?-question taking us from this being to something else.

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in “The Principles of Nature and Grace, Based on Reason” (1714)

If we seek a final ‘Because’ that puts an end to any further ‘Whys’, we must find something that we can show must exist. Not only must this thing exist, but we must also show how this thing can account for the reality we experience — only then will we have succeeded in our quest.

Candidates for Self-Existence

Throughout history, philosophers, scientists and religions have suggested candidates for self-existence.

These causeless entities generally fall into one of seven categories:

  1. Logic
  2. Truth
  3. Numbers
  4. Possibility
  5. The Universe
  6. A Higher Plane
  7. Consciousness

Let’s review each candidate and its merits for self-existence. Afterwards, we will consider whether that entity could further serve as an ultimate explanation: a self-existent starting point from which the rest of reality emerges as a direct consequence of that thing.


Is logic self-existent? Can logic explain why does anything exist?

Some suppose rational principles, like the laws of logic, are self-existent. Unlike physical laws, logical laws have an air of inevitability to them.

These are laws such as:

These are laws that seem inevitable, and necessary in any reality, as it’s hard to imagine any reality where logical laws would not hold.

If logical laws apply in all universes and all possible realities, they represent universal laws, applying everywhere and to everything.

If we can say laws of physics exist because all matter in our universe adheres to physical laws, then could we say laws of logic exist, because all things in all possible realities adhere to these logical laws?

If so, then laws of logic are self-existent. They are necessary even in a reality of no things, as logical laws ensure “nothing = nothing”.

If I ask myself why bodies or minds exist rather than nothing, I find no answer; but that a logical principle, such as A = A, should have the power of creating itself, triumphing over the nought throughout eternity, seems to be natural.

Henri Bergson in “Creative Evolution” (1907)

This idea, that logical law and rational principles have eternally existed predates modern philosophers. It’s a cornerstone belief in Taoism.

There was something formless and perfect before the universe was born. It is serene. Empty. Solitary. Unchanging. Infinite. Eternally present. It is the mother of the universe.

For lack of a better name, I call it the Tao.

Laozi in chapter 25 of “Tao Te Ching” (c. 600 B.C.)

Tao translates as “the way”, “principles”, and “natural order”. A similar sentiment is expressed in Christianity. The Gospel of John begins:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Gospel of Johnchapter 1 verse 1 (100 A.D.)

The term Word is a translation of verbum in Latin, which is a translation of logos (λόγος) in Greek. Logos has a deep and rich meaning. Aside from “word” logos also means, “reason”, “principles”, and “rational law”.

Logos is the root from which we get the word logic. It is also the origin of the suffix -logy (as in biology, geology and psychology). Where it means the principles, explanation, and story thereof.

If however he be admitted to exist apart from Matter in virtue of his character as a principle and a rational law [logos], God will be bodiless, the Creative Power bodiless.

Plotinus in “The Enneads VI.1.26” (270 A.D.)

In Chinese bibles, Logos has been translated as Tao. In this way, Both Taoist and Christian ideas suppose that the Tao/Logos (order, reason, principles, logic, rational law) exists prior to the material universe.


Is truth self-existent? Can truth explain why does anything exist?

Some believe that truth is causeless.

There seems to be some essential difference between “zero is even” and “zero is odd” — only one of them is true. Did anything make it so?

When did this statement become true? Did it require a human mind to conceive of it as being true, or has it always been true? Might this property of truth have an independent and necessary existence?

If logical laws apply universally, then any well-formed statement is either true or false. The law of noncontradiction says a statement can’t be both true and false. The law of excluded middle says a statement must be either true or false — there is no middle ground.

Thus, if logical laws apply to everything, they apply to all statements, forcing on them the objective property of being either ‘true’ or ‘false’. As Derek Parfit said, “Some truth is logically necessary when its denial leads to a contradiction.”

Accordingly, the truth that “zero is even” would exist before humans proved it. It would be true before it was first spoken. Presumably, it would be true absent a universe of things, for even in the case zero things exist, it remains true that “an even number of things exist.”

When we imagine how things would have been if nothing had ever existed, what we should imagine away are such things as living beings, stars and atoms. There would still have been various truths, such as the truth that there were no stars or atoms, or that 9 is divisible by 3. We can ask why these things would have been true. And such questions may have answers. Thus we can explain why, even if nothing had ever existed, 9 would still have been divisible by 3. There is no conceivable alternative.

Derek Parfit in “Why Anything? Why This?” (2008)

Ultimately, nothing is responsible for creating this truth. Truth exists out of its own necessity. It has always existed and could never not exist.

The idea of the primacy of truth is very old. It can be found in many religions, some of which draw an equivalence between God and Truth.

In the 3,000 year old religion of Zoroastrianism, it is said that Asha (meaning truth and order) is the divine law behind all things.

Iran, as India, presents us with a term which has had to signify first of all ‘true statement’; that this statement, because it was true, had to correspond to an objective, material reality; and that, as the discourse did, this reality must embrace all things; and, finally that one recognized in it a great cosmic principle since all things happen according to it.

Jacques Duchesne-Guillemin in “Heraclitus and Iran” (1963)

In the book of Psalms 31:5, God is called the “God of truth.” In the Qur’an, Al-Ḥaqq (meaning The Truth), is one of the 99 Names of God.

Similar ideas are found in Dharmic religions.

The Mūl Mantar (or root mantra), is the most important verse of the Sikh religion. It begins: “There is one creator, whose name is truth” and is described as timeless, beyond birth or death, and self-existent.

In the Brahma Saṁhitā, a Hindu prayer book, the primeval Lord Govinda is described as the “indivisible, infinite, limitless, truth.”

If it is possible for the human tongue to give the fullest description of God, I have come to the conclusion that God is Truth.

Mahatma Gandhi in “All Men Are Brothers” (1953)


Are numbers self-existent? Can numbers explain why does anything exist?

Some speculate that numbers, or their relationships, are self-existent.

If truth has an independent existence, this truth includes the infinite truths describing all true relationships between the numbers.

These include arithmetical statements, such as:

  • 2 is even
  • 7 is prime
  • 1 is greater than 0
  • 2 + 2 = 4
  • n × 0 = 0
  • the square root of 9 = 3

Truths concerning the numbers are boundless.

Might this infinite truth, provide a scaffolding and structure to all the numbers? And if there is nothing more to numbers than their properties and relations, then might numbers — in some sense — really exist?

It’s been said, “math is the science we could still do if we woke up tomorrow and there was no universe.” The idea that math holds some claim to reality is known as mathematical realism, or Platonism. It’s believed by many, if not most, mathematicians.

It is an idea that many mathematicians are comfortable with. In this scheme, the truths that mathematicians seek are, in a clear sense, already “there”, and mathematical research can be compared with archaeology; the mathematicians’ job is to seek out these truths as a task of discovery rather than one of invention.

Roger Penrose in “The Big Questions: What is reality?” (2006)

But can number relations have any reality in the absence of things?

If zero things exist, it would have to be true that “0 not equal 1”, and also that “0 not equal 2”, and true that zero not equal any other number.

So even with no things, an infinite number of arithmetical relations are needed to avoid contradiction and preserve a nothing of zero things.

If all things were absent, would Two And Two Make Four be a non-reality, remaining like that until at least four things had come to exist? Presumably the answer must be No.

John A. Leslie and Robert Lawrence Kuhn in “The Mystery of Existence” (2013)

This idea that numbers have an independent existence is ancient. It can be traced to some of the earliest records of human thought. It was taught by ancient philosophers and is found in the oldest religious texts.

Taoism, for instance, sets the existence of numbers as prior to things.

The Tao gives birth to One.
One gives birth to Two.
Two gives birth to Three.
Three gives birth to all things.

Laozi in chapter 42 of “Tao Te Ching” (c. 600 B.C.)

The Greek mathematician Pythagoras taught “All things are number.

Pythagoreans applied themselves to mathematics, and were the first to develop this science; and through studying it they came to believe that its principles are the principles of everything.

Aristotle in “Metaphysics 1.985b” (c. 350 BC)

Pythagoras was the first to propose that the motions of the planets are governed by mathematical equations, which he called the harmony of the spheres. When Newton discovered his law of universal gravitation some 2,000 years later, he credited Pythagoras for the discovery.

Across times, mathematicians have described a seemingly divine connection between mathematics and reality:

Geometry, which before the origin of things was coeternal with the divine mind and is God himself (for what could there be in God which would not be God himself?), supplied God with patterns for the creation of the world, and passed over to Man along with the image of God.

Johannes Kepler in “The Harmony of the World” (1619)

From these considerations it is now wonderfully evident how a certain divine mathematics or metaphysical mechanics is employed in the very origination of things.

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in “On the Ultimate Origination of Things” (1697)

To all of us who hold the Christian belief that God is truth, anything that is true is a fact about God, and mathematics is a branch of theology. […]

An old Greek, a French child, and a self-taught Indian, each finds for himself the same theory of geometrical conics. The simplest and therefore the most scientific way of describing this, is that they have discovered, not created, a geometry that exists by itself eternally, the same for all, the same for teacher as for taught, the same for man as for God. The truth that is the same for man as for God is pure mathematics.

Hilda P. Hudson in “Mathematics and Eternity” (1925)


Are possible objects self-existent? Can possible objects explain why does anything exist?

Some speculate that simply not being impossible, is sufficient for being actual. If true, then every possible object, structure, and entity exists.

What then is impossible?

At a minimum, we can say self-contradictory things. For example: square circles, married bachelors, triangles with five sides, and so on. We might also include things proven to not exist: odd numbers evenly divisible by two, a largest prime number, a sixth platonic solid.

If consistency and provability are the requirements for possibility, then possible existence is mathematical existence. As David Hilbert said, “Mathematical existence is merely freedom from contradiction.”

The idea that all possible things exist has enjoyed many names:

In 1936, Arthur Lovejoy dubbed it the principle of plenitude. In 1981, Robert Nozick named it the principle of fecundity. David Lewis, in 1986, developed it as a theory he called modal realism. In Max Tegmark’s 1998 model of multiverses, he called it the mathematical universe hypothesis. Most recently, in 2008, Derek Parfit coined the all worlds hypothesis.

If all possible objects are actual, then our universe is just one such possible structure among an infinite, and total, set of all possible structures. Anything that could happen, happens somewhere.

There are so many other worlds, in fact, that absolutely every way that a world could possibly be is a way that some world is. And as with worlds, so it is with parts of worlds. There are ever so many ways that a part of a world could be; and so many and so varied are the other worlds that absolutely every way that a part of a world could possibly be is a way that some part of some world is.

David Lewis in “On the Plurality of Worlds” (1986)

If the universe is inherently mathematical, then why was only one of the many mathematical structures singled out to describe a universe? A fundamental asymmetry appears to be built into the heart of reality.

As a way out of this conundrum, I have suggested that complete mathematical symmetry holds: that all mathematical structures exist physically as well. Every mathematical structure corresponds to a parallel universe.

Max Tegmark in “Parallel Universes” (2003)

The idea that possibility is sufficient for actuality is not new.

Arthur Lovejoy, who wrote about the history of this idea, traced it to 360 B.C. beginning with Plato’s theory of forms. Plato hypothesized a realm containing all possible forms (eternal, perfect, idealizations).

We find this idea expressed in a variety of ways throughout history.

The One is all things and not a single one of them. […] It is because there is nothing in it that all things come from it: in order that being may exist, the One is not being, but the generator of being.

Plotinus in “The Enneads V.2.1” (270 A.D.)

But to explain more distinctly how from eternal or essential metaphysical truths there arise temporal, contingent or physical truths, we must first observe that, from the very fact that there exists something rather than nothing, it follows that in possible things, or in possibility or essence itself, there is a certain need of existence, or so to speak, a claim to exist, in a word, that essence of itself tends to existence.

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in “On the Ultimate Origination of Things” (1697)

Others have linked God’s infinite nature to an infinite creation.

From God’s supreme power, or infinite nature, an infinite number of things—that is, all things have necessarily flowed forth in an infinite number of ways, or always flow from the same necessity; in the same way as from the nature of a triangle it follows from eternity and for eternity, that its three interior angles are equal to two right angles.

Baruch Spinoza in “Ethics” (1677)

Know thou of a truth that the worlds of God are countless in their number, and infinite in their range. None can reckon or comprehend them except God, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.

Baháʼu’lláh in “Tablet to Vafá” (circa 1885)

It makes sense that an infinitely creative deity would create other universes, not just our own. […] For the theist, the existence of multiple universes would simply support the view that creation reflects the infinite creativity of the creator.

Robin A. Collins in “Spiritual Information” (2005)

The Universe

Is the universe self-existent? Can we explain why the universe exists?

Some say that the universe, or the physical law that enabled it to come into existence, has always existed and so is self-existent.

The reasoning is simple. If we know at least one thing is causeless, why not just presume this causeless thing is the universe itself?

I should say that the universe is just there, and that’s all.

Bertrand Russell in “Russell-Copleston debate” (1948)

Perhaps there is no reason. It simply is, and has no explanation.

Given the universe exists, we know the universe is possible. Perhaps it exists because it is possible, and nothing forbade it from existing.

But there are other tracks to follow. Perhaps we can demonstrate that the universe is self-creating. Or that it exists due to some higher law.

Modern cosmology made progress along these directions.

The theory of cosmic inflation uses general relativity to explain how a tiny quantum fluctuation can inflate into the huge universe we now see.

Inflation is radically at odds with the old dictum of Democritus and Lucretius, “Nothing can be created from nothing.” If inflation is right, everything can be created from nothing, or at least from very little. If inflation is right, the universe can properly be called the ultimate free lunch.

Alan Guth in “Inflation and the New Era of High-Precision Cosmology” (2002)

According to the laws of quantum mechanics, the quantum fluctuation that seeded our universe appeared because it was possible, emerging out of nothing but the physical laws themselves.

Is there any bound to how small the initial universe could be? […] To my surprise, I found that the tunneling probability did not vanish as the initial size approached zero. I also noticed that my calculations were greatly simplified when I allowed the initial radius of the universe to vanish. This was really crazy: what I had was a mathematical description of a universe tunneling from a zero size — from nothing! […]

And yet, the state of “nothing” cannot be identified with absolute nothingness. The tunneling is described by the laws of quantum mechanics, and thus “nothing” should be subjected to these laws. The laws of physics must have existed, even though there was no universe.

Alexander Vilenkin in “Many Worlds in One” (2006)

General relativity and quantum mechanics are the two cornerstone theories of modern physics. From them alone we can explain a self-emerging universe. Quantum mechanics shows how possible fluctuations spontaneously pop into existence. General relativity explains how such a fluctuation could expand exponentially to reach an unfathomable size. (See: “What caused the big bang?”)

But we must wonder, why these laws? What, if anything, is special about them? Who or what anointed these equations with existence?

What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe? The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?

Stephen Hawking in “A Brief History of Time” (1988)

The idea that the universe is uncreated, or exists due to some laws, predates the successes of modern physics and cosmology.

The ancient Greeks and Romans believed that the material of the universe has always existed, since nothing comes from nothing.

The first principle is that nothing can be created from the non-existent: for otherwise anything would be formed from anything without the need of seed.

Epicurus in “Letter to Herodotus” (c. 300 B.C.)

This matter was originally in a state of disorder (or kháos).

Before the ocean and the earth appeared — before the skies had overspread them all — the face of Nature in a vast expanse was naught but Chaos uniformly waste.

Ovid in “Metamorphoses” (8 A.D.)

It was not until a divine craftsman imposed mathematical order on this chaos that the ordered universe — the kosmos — appeared.

In religions with past-eternal cosmologies, the universe is believed to be causeless. Jainism explicitly says the universe was not created.

The doctrine that the world was created is ill advised and should be rejected. If God created the world, where was he before the creation? If you say he was transcendent then and needed no support, where is he now? How could God have made this world without any raw material? If you say that he made this first, and then the world, you are faced with an endless regression. If you declare that this raw material arose naturally you fall into another fallacy, For the whole universe might thus have been its own creator, and have arisen quite naturally.

Jinasena in “Mahapurana” (898 A.D.)

A Higher Plane

Is a higher plane self-existent? Can a higher plane explain why anything exists?

Some suppose our universe exists on account of a higher plane and that this higher plane, rather than the universe, is self-existent.

There are many conceptions of what this higher plane of reality is.

Some describe this plane as a cause of being, be it God, a creator, divine will, a first cause, or an unmoved mover. Others describe it as a source of being, the Mind of God, The One, or the Tao. Still others describe it as a ground of being, The Absolute, The All, or what Hindus call Brahman.

Not all theories of higher planes of existence need be supernatural. There are also naturalistic descriptions of higher realities.

In multiverse theories, a higher reality contains our universe among others. In brane cosmology, our universe is caused by collisions in a literal ‘higher dimension’. In the simulation hypothesis, our universe is the result of computations occurring in a more fundamental reality. (See: “Are we living in a computer simulation?”)

Though these theories deal with phenomena that are beyond the nature of our universe, and hence supernatural, evidence is accumulating for some of these higher realms.

Every experiment that brings better credence to inflationary theory brings us much closer to hints that the multiverse is real.

Andrei Linde in interview (2014)

Various theories imply that various types of parallel universes exist, so that by modus ponens, if we take any of these theories seriously, we’re forced to take seriously also some parallel universes. […] Parallel universes aren’t a theory, but predictions of certain theories.

Max Tegmark in “Are Parallel Universes Unscientific Nonsense?” (2014)

The idea of a preexistent cause, source, or ground of being, one that’s external to and beyond our universe, is as old as religion itself.

By means of the Higher Knowledge the wise behold everywhere Brahman, which otherwise cannot be seen or seized, which has no root or attributes, no eyes or ears, no hands or feet; which is eternal and omnipresent, all-pervading and extremely subtle; which is imperishable and the source of all beings.

Mundaka Upanishad I.6 (c. 800 B.C.)

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Genesis 1:1 (c. 600 B.C.)


Is consciousness self-existent? Can consciousness explain why does anything exist?

Some posit that consciousness is self-existent. If true, consciousness could be the cause of a universe that exists only in appearance.

The idea seems strange, but we must admit all knowledge of existence comes to us through experiences that exist in our conscious minds.

This fact hasn’t escaped the attention of scientists.

It is difficult for the matter-of-fact physicist to accept the view that the substratum of everything is of mental character. But no one can deny that mind is the first and most direct thing in our experience, and all else is remote inference.

Arthur Eddington in “The Nature of the Physical World” (1927)

I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.

Max Planck in “Interviews with Great Scientists” (1931)

The relation between mind and matter perplexes scientists to this day.

It leads to philosophical conundrums like brains in a vat, Boltzmann brains, and the simulation argument. All of which suppose that perceived reality is an illusion — a byproduct of a deluded mind.

It’s also led physicists to propose theories where conscious minds play a fundamental role in shaping reality as we see it. Physics, after all, is fundamentally about experiences. Physics is the science of predicting future observations from prior observations.

In 1970, Heinz-Dieter Zeh proposed the many-minds interpretation of quantum mechanics, which proposes that differentiation of an infinity of observer mind states explains quantum phenomena.

A many minds theory, like a many worlds theory, supposes that, associated with a sentient being at any given time, there is a multiplicity of distinct conscious points of view. But a many minds theory holds that it is these conscious points of view or ‘minds,’ rather than ‘worlds’, that are to be conceived as literally dividing or differentiating over time.

Michael Lockwood in “‘Many Minds’. Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics” (1995)

The mysterious link between consciousness and reality inspired John Wheeler’s idea of a participatory universe. As Martin Redfern described, “Many don’t agree with John Wheeler, but if he’s right then we and presumably other conscious observers throughout the universe, are the creators — or at least the minds that make the universe manifest.”

The idea that consciousness precedes the material world has a rich history. It is found across philosophies and religious traditions. Where physical reality is seen as a dream or construct of a mind or soul.

For it is the same thing that can be thought and that can be.

Parmenides in “fragment 3” (c. 475 B.C.)

A few millennia later, the philosopher George Berkeley echoed Parmenides, concluding that “to be is to be perceived.”

It is indeed widely believed that all perceptible objects — houses, mountains, rivers, and so on — really exist independently of being perceived by the understanding. But however widely and confidently this belief may be held, anyone who has the courage to challenge it will — if I’m not mistaken — see that it involves an obvious contradiction. For what are houses, mountains, rivers etc. but things we perceive by sense?

George Berkeley in “The Principles of Human Knowledge” (1710)

Hindus believe the universal mind, or world soul Atman, became the universe. Accordingly, the universe is not real, but the dream of a God under the spell of māyā — a temporary ignorance of the true reality.

Buddhists believe that the mind underlies and forms everything.

All the phenomena of existence have mind as their precursor, mind as their supreme leader, and of mind are they made.

Gautama Buddha in “The Dhammapada” (c. 500 B.C.)

The Taoist philosopher Zhuang Zhou said the world is a dream.

While he is dreaming he does not know it is a dream, and in his dream he may even try to interpret a dream. Only after he wakes does he know it was a dream. And someday there will be a great awakening when we know that this is all a great dream.

Zhuang Zhou in “Zhuangzi” (c. 300 B.C.)

Reviewing Answers

We’ve considered seven proposals for self-existent things:

  1. Logic
  2. Truth
  3. Numbers
  4. Possibility
  5. The Universe
  6. A Higher Plane
  7. Consciousness

Yet so far, none of these is satisfactory as an ultimate explanation. None stands out as a final Because that doesn’t throw up a further Why.

Abstract Entities: Logic, Truth, Numbers

First, we have abstract entities: logic, truth, and numbers. But though these things are plausibly causeless, how could they cause anything?

These things are eternal and unchanging, not to mention abstract. How can they cause anything like the huge dynamic universe we see?

So the cause of the universe must (at least causally prior to the universe’s existence) transcend space and time and therefore cannot be physical or material. But there are only two kinds of things that could fall under such a description: either an abstract object (like a number) or else a mind (a soul, a self). But abstract objects don’t stand in causal relations. This is part of what it means to be abstract. The number 7, for example, doesn’t cause anything.

William Lane Craig in “Reasonable Faith” (1994)

Possibility: Mathematical Consistency

What about all possibility? If all possible things exist, then our universe would be counted among those possible things.

But why should possible things be actual? As J. J. C. Smart remarked, “That anything should exist at all does seem to me a matter for the deepest awe.” Existence is what we seek to explain.

And there is another issue: why is our universe so simple and ordered compared to all else that exists in the space of all possibility?

Tegmark’s proposal, however, faces a formidable problem. The number of mathematical structures increases with increasing complexity, suggesting that “typical” structures should be horrendously large and cumbersome. This seems to be in conflict with the simplicity and beauty of the theories describing our world.

Alexander Vilenkin in “Many Worlds in One” (2006)

The Physical: The Universe, Physical Law

If the universe alone exists, it explains exactly what we see.

But there would be lingering questions. Why does consciousness exist? Are abstract entities real? And perhaps the biggest mystery of all: “Why should this universe, or its laws, be the only real ones?

As Lee Smolin asked, “Why do these laws, and not others, hold in our universe?” Does the existence of laws require some higher principle?

Although science may solve the problem of how the universe began, it can not answer the question: Why does the universe bother to exist? Maybe only God can answer that.

Stephen Hawking in interview (1988)

Higher Planes: God, Multiverse, Simulation

We might appeal to a higher cause to explain the universe we see.

But as J. J. C. Smart reminds us, “If we postulate God in addition to the created universe we increase the complexity of our hypothesis. We have all the complexity of the universe itself, and we have in addition the at least equal complexity of God.”

This seems true for any higher principle.

For example, if we presume our universe is the result of a simulation in a higher reality, what’s responsible for that higher reality?

Whatever our final theory of physics, we will be left facing an irreducible mystery. For perhaps there could have been nothing at all. Not even empty space, but just absolutely nothing […] If you believe God is the creator, well, why is God that way? The religious person is left with a mystery which is no less than the mystery with which science leaves us.

Steven Weinberg in “Closer to Truth: Cosmos, Consciousness, God” (2008, 2009)

The Mental: Mind, Soul, Consciousness

If consciousness is causeless, it could explain why perceptions exist.

But if reality is only a dream or illusion, why do our perceptions appear to follow along with a universe adhering to physical laws?

If it’s all an illusion, what’s the source of this illusion?

Even if everything in this universe were an illusion, there would still have to be something outside this universe that generates the illusion.

John A. Leslie and Robert Lawrence Kuhn in “The Mystery of Existence” (2013)

A Causeless Cause

What we seek, and have so far have failed to identify, is a causeless cause.

This is, something that not only has a plausibly self-existent and causeless nature, but also plausibly accounts for the reality we see.

We’ve found things that appear to be causeless: logic, truth, and numbers — but these things also appear incapable of being a cause.

Conversely, we’ve found things that could be a cause: the universe, a higher plane, and consciousness — but they don’t seem causeless.

Then there is possibility, for which we have reason to question whether it is causeless and whether it causes what we see.

The UniverseDoubtfulPlausible
A Higher PlaneDoubtfulPlausible

We find an almost inverse relation: The more plausibly something is causeless, the less plausible it seems to be the cause for what we see.

A causeless cause would provide us with a complete explanation.

It would explain both itself and the properties of observed reality. It would describe the relation between the mental and material. It would tell us why the universe exists and why it has simple, ordered laws.

To progress we need to find the connecting glue — the missing piece of the puzzle that shows either how a causeless thing accounts for the reality we see, or alternatively, why the reality we see is causeless.

Three Modes of Existence

In reviewing the seven categories of possibly causeless things, we encountered three modes of existence. Loosely speaking they are:

  • Mathematical Existence
  • Material Existence
  • Mental Existence

Mathematical existence includes: abstract entities, logic, truth, numbers, math, properties, forms, equations, relations, possibility, structures, laws, and principles. This mode might include religious concepts of divine law/will/order (Tao/Logos), the infinite indivisible truth (Asha/Govinda), and divine mathematics.

Material existence includes: matter, energy, the vacuum, spacetime, physical law, the universe, the multiverse, particles, forces, fields, and physical systems. This mode might include what religions refer to as creation, kosmos, the material plane, and māyā/illusion.

Mental existence includes: mind, consciousness, observations, perceptions, ideas, and dreams. This mode might include religious concepts of the mind of god, world soul, Atman, and souls or spirits.

What exists most fundamentally? Math, Matter, or Mind?
What is the relation between the three modes of existence: math, matter, and mind?

My viewpoint allows for three different kinds of reality: the physical, the mental and the Platonic-mathematical, with something (as yet) profoundly mysterious in the relations between the three.

Roger Penrose in “The Big Questions: What is reality?” (2006)

Math, Matter, Mind

Of the three modes of existence, does any stand out as being more fundamental than any of the others? What is their relation?

If one of these modes of existence can be shown as primary, while the others are derivative, then we might close in on a causeless cause.

A common view of physicists is that matter produces mind, and mind produces math. But even among physicists, this view isn’t universal.

The triangle suggests the circularity of the widespread view that math arises from the mind, the mind arises out of matter, and that matter can be explained in terms of math. Non-physicists should be wary of any claim that modern physics leads us to any particular resolution of this circularity, since even the sample of three theoretical physicists writing this paper hold three divergent views.

Piet Hut, Mark Alford, and Max Tegmark in “On Math, Matter, and Mind” (2006)

What is the reality of these modes of existence? Are all on equal footing? Or is one more fundamental while the others are derivative?

Materialism: Matter is Primary

Materialism is the view that matter is fundamental.

It assumes mental states are the byproduct of particular material arrangements (e.g. brains) and that mathematical objects, if they exist at all outside of minds, have no bearing on the material world.

Materialism is a popular, if not conventional, view among physicists.

Materialism can explain why our perceptions follow the patterns of physical law, but it has difficulty explaining why matter gives rise to mental states — this is the so-called hard-problem of consciousness.

Materialism also hits an explanatory dead-end trying to answer why matter exists and why it follows simple physical laws.

If eager to know the world’s structure, ask the scientists. Science, however, seems unable to answer some key questions concerning the structure. For start, why is the structure an orderly one? Why do events so often develop in fairly simple and familiar ways, leading us to talk of causal laws? […]

Then there is what can seem the biggest question of all. Science investigates the world’s structure, but why is there anything at all to be structured? Why is there a cosmos, not a blank? Why is there something rather than nothing? Science cannot answer this.

John Leslie in “A Cosmos Existing through Ethical Necessity” (2009)

Idealism: Mind is Primary

Idealism is the view that mind is fundamental.

It assumes mental states are the basis of reality, and that the matter that seems to exist, exists only as thoughts and perceptions in minds.

Idealism is expressed by Eastern religions, theologians, and mystics. But increasingly, physicists recognize they can’t so easily do away with the observer. It seems the observer plays a necessary, if not fundamental, role in any description of reality.

Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else.

Erwin Schrödinger in interview (1931)

But idealism doesn’t answer everything. It doesn’t explain why minds are bound up with the patterns of matter in a material world.

We find that our perceptions obey some laws, which can be most conveniently formulated if we assume that there is some underlying reality beyond our perceptions. This model of a material world obeying laws of physics is so successful that soon we forget about our starting point and say that matter is the only reality, and perceptions are nothing but a useful tool for the description of matter. This assumption is almost as natural (and maybe as false) as our previous assumption that space is only a mathematical tool for the description of matter. We are substituting reality of our feelings by the successfully working theory of an independently existing material world. And the theory is so successful that we almost never think about its possible limitations.

Andrei Linde in “Inflation, Quantum Cosmology, and the Anthropic Principle” (2002)

Platonism: Math is Primary

Platonism is the idea that math is fundamental.

It assumes abstract objects are the most real, and that everything we see and perceive is somehow derivative from this higher existence.

Platonism is popular among philosophers and mathematicians, whose job is to study the objective properties of abstract things.

If mathematical objects form the basis of reality, it might explain why the material world is so mathematical in its form.

In a famous 1959 lecture, physicist Eugine P. Wigner argued that “the enormous usefulness of mathematics in the natural sciences is something bordering on the mysterious.” Conversely, mathematical structures have an eerily real feel to them. They satisfy a central criterion of objective existence: they are the same no matter who studies them. A theorem is true regardless of whether it is proved by a human, a computer or an intelligent dolphin. Contemplative alien civilizations would find the same mathematical structures as we have. Accordingly mathematicians commonly say that they discover mathematical structures rather than create them.

Max Tegmark in “Parallel Universes” (2003)

Where Platonism falls short is in explaining how abstract objects lead to material or mental existence. According to Leibniz, the difficulty is explaining, “how from eternal or essential metaphysical truths there arise temporal, contingent or physical truths.”

What Came First?

For each of the three modes of existence, there is an ancient school of thought holding that mode of existence as most fundamental.

The Mathematical: Plato believed that abstract entities were the most real and that the material world was derivative.

The Material: Plato’s foremost student Aristotle, disagreed, saying material substances were more real than abstract forms.

The Mental: Several centuries later, Plotinus argued that mind was more real than the material reality it perceives.

Today’s scientists, mathematicians, and philosophers seem no closer to an answer on whether math, matter, or mind came first.

  • Does mind give rise to math, or does math give rise to mind?
  • Does matter give rise to mind, or does mind give rise to matter?
  • Does math give rise to matter, or does matter give rise to math?

To unravel the mystery of existence requires that we understand the relationship between these modes of existence. Only then do we have any hope of identifying an ultimate explanation: a causeless cause.

To address the nature of reality we need to understand its connection to consciousness and mathematics.

Roger Penrose in “The Big Questions: What is reality?” (2006)

Are They One?

Various thinkers have suspected the three modes of existence to be connected and perhaps are all aspects of one ultimate reality.

Mind and Matter as One?

Modern physical experiments have revealed something inseparable between the mind and the observed physical reality.

As we penetrate into matter, nature does not show us any isolated ‘basic building blocks’, but rather appears as a complicated web of relations between the various parts of the whole. These relations always include the observer in an essential way. The human observer constitutes the final link in the chain of observational processes, and the properties of any atomic object can only be understood in terms of interaction with the observer. This means that the classical ideal of an objective description of nature is no longer valid. The Cartesian partition between the I and the world, between the observer and the observed, cannot be made when dealing with atomic matter. In atomic physics, we can never speak about nature without, at the same time, speaking about ourselves.

Fritjof Capra in “The Tao of Physics” (1975)

Aren’t we mistaken in making this separation between ‘the universe’ and ‘life and mind’? Shouldn’t we seek ways to think of them as one?

John Archibald Wheeler quoted in “Trespassing on Einstein’s Lawn” (2014)

Math and Matter as One?

Likewise, mathematicians and scientists cannot help but notice a mysterious link connecting mathematics and the physical world.

There exists, unless I am mistaken, an entire world consisting of the totality of mathematical truths, which is accessible to us only through our intelligence, just as there exists the world of physical realities; each one is independent of us, both of them divinely created and appear different only because of the weakness of our mind; but, for a more powerful intelligence, they are one and the same thing, whose synthesis is partially revealed in that marvelous correspondence between abstract mathematics on the one hand and astronomy and all branches of physics on the other.

Charles Hermite in “Eloges Académiques et Discours” (translation p. 323) (1912)

Maybe the relationships are all that exist. Maybe the world is made of math. At first that sounded nuts, but when I thought about it I had to wonder, what exactly is the other option? That the world is made of “things”? What the hell is a “thing”? It was one of those concepts that fold under the slightest interrogation. Look closely at any object and you find it’s an amalgamation of particles. But look closely at the particles and you find that they are irreducible representations of the Poincaré symmetry group―whatever that meant. The point is, particles, at bottom, look a lot like math.

Amanda Gefter in “Trespassing on Einstein’s Lawn” (2014)

All as One?

If matter and mind are two aspects of one reality, and if math and matter are likewise two aspects of one reality, then all three must be connected — all would be reflections of one underlying reality.

So how do the elements of the trinity fit together: the “phenomenological” world, the “physical” world, and the “mathematical” world? On the unargued assumption that the principle underlying ultimate reality is radically simple, it will here be conjectured that these three realms are one-and-the-same under different descriptions.

David Pearce in “Why Does Anything Exist?” (1995)

A Path to Reality

For millennia, philosophers have debated the relation between math, matter, and mind. For millennia, they’ve sought a causeless cause.

Raphael's masterpiece The School of Athens depicts philosophers at Plato's Academy (1511)
 Raphael’s masterpiece The School of Athens depicts philosophers at Plato’s Academy (1511)

Despite this, philosophy has not yielded any definitive answers.

Perhaps science can shed new light on this question. Science allows us to test and decide among competing theories. Science provides opportunities to discover the missing piece of the puzzle and explain how and why a causeless thing gives rise to the reality we see.

As it happens, discoveries in the field of mathematics in the 20th century found this missing puzzle piece. We now know a viable link between “eternal or essential metaphysical truths” and “temporal, contingent or physical truths.” We can explain how reality can emerge from self-existent, causeless truth concerning numbers and their relations.

But without hard science and observational evidence to back it up, how can we ever know if this explanation is right? How can we ever escape from the morass of inconclusive philosophy?

Fortunately, discoveries in the fields of physics and cosmology — also occurring in the 20th century — provide exactly this support. We not only have found a plausible path to reality, we have evidence for it.

20th Century Mathematics

Many consider the field of mathematics to be mostly uneventful — unchanged since Euclid defined the laws of geometry 2,300 years ago.

But at the turn of the 20th century, the field of mathematics was in a state of crisis. The field was shaken to its foundation. Math was broken, and it had to be rebuilt from scratch. During this reformation, monumental discoveries shocked and dismayed mathematicians.

In the first half of the 20th century, logicians and mathematicians discovered a provably self-existent thing. In the second half of the 20th century, they showed how — under certain assumptions — this self-existent thing could account for the reality we see.

Might this thing be our causeless cause?

Let’s see what mathematicians found, and how they came to find it.

The Foundational Crisis

At the turn of the 20th century, math was in trouble. It was undergoing what came to be called the foundational crisis of mathematics.

At the time, set theory had come to serve as the foundation of mathematics. All mathematical proofs ultimately relied on it.

But in 1899, Ernst Zermelo noticed this set theory had a fatal flaw. Zermelo told other math professors at the University of Göttingen about it, including David Hilbert, but Zermelo didn’t publish it.

In 1901, Bertrand Russell also noticed this flaw. But Russell didn’t stay quiet. He wrote a letter in 1902 to Gottlob Frege, just as his second volume on set theory was going off to the publisher.

Frege had spent decades laying the foundation of set theory. It was his life’s work. But one letter, showing one flaw, brought it all down.

Russell showed Frege’s set theory allows two contradictory statements to both be proved. This flaw is known as Russell’s paradox.

One flaw might not sound so bad, but in math it is fatal. For if in math, just one falsehood can be proved, then any falsehood can be proved.

This is known as the principle of explosion.

For example, assume mathematics had a flaw that allowed you to prove that “2 + 2 = 5”. You could use this false proof to prove anything. You could prove that the $1 in your bank account equals $1,000,000.

   2 + 2 = 5                      & \text{(given)} \\ \hline
   0 = 1                            & \text{(subtract 4 from both sides)} \\ \hline
   0 = \text{999,999}     & \text{(multiply both sides by 999,999)} \\ \hline
   1 = \text{1,000,000}  & \text{(add 1 to both sides)} \\ 

If math allowed proofs of false statements, then contracts, commerce — even society as we know it — couldn’t function. This was the state of mathematics in 1900 — it’s no wonder it was considered a crisis.

Math was broken. It had to be fixed. It needed a rallying cry.

A Call to Action

In 1900, mathematicians from around the world gathered in Paris for the International Congress of Mathematicians.

Mathematicians from around the globe gathered in Paris in 1900.
Mathematicians from around the globe gathered in Paris in 1900.

David Hilbert, considered the greatest mathematician of his time, was invited to speak. He used the opportunity to present what he considered to be the 23 most significant open problems in mathematics.

The second of Hilbert’s problems called for a proof that the foundational rules of mathematics were free of contradictions.

This would, once and for all, put math on a solid foundation. Never again would mathematicians need worry that a new contradiction might one day surface and torpedo the whole of mathematics.

New Foundations

The collapse of Frege’s set theory and Hilbert’s call for a provably solid foundation for math served as an inspiration.

Under Hilbert’s direction, Zermelo, began work on fixing set theory.

Similarly, Bertrand Russell began work with his supervisor, Alfred North Whitehead, on a solution. Their aim was to lay a new foundation for mathematics based on a precise logic, and produce a set theory rid of paradoxes and contradictions.

It was a massive undertaking that took over a decade. It culminated in the three volume tome Principia Mathematica, published in 1910, 1912, and 1913. It was so detailed, that it famously required several hundred pages to work up to the point where it proved ‘1 + 1 = 2’.

The three volume set of Principia Mathematica, (The Principles of Mathematics), took Russell and Whitehead over a decade to write. Image Credit: Lars Tyge Nielsen
The three volume set of Principia Mathematica, (The Principles of Mathematics), took Russell and Whitehead over a decade to write. Image Credit: Lars Tyge Nielsen

Owing to its complexity and unique notation, Principia Mathematica never gained much popularity with mathematicians.

It also had a competitor.

By 1908, Zermelo developed a new set theory, consisting of just eight rules. And in 1921, it was further improved by Abraham Fraenkel. Their combined result is called Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. It became the default foundation of mathematics, and remains so to this day.

Hilbert’s Program

Although no one had discovered contradictions in either Russell’s or Zermelo’s new foundational systems, no one had been able to prove they were free of contradictions either.

Mathematics still rested on a foundation of uncertain stability.

This led Hilbert, in 1921, to push for finding a mathematical theory that was provably consistent. And not only did he want this theory to be provably consistent, he wanted it to be provably complete.

A complete system of mathematics means any true statement can be proven within that theory. There would never be a need to add to this complete theory, as it would cover everything that mathematicians might think up in the future. It would be a final theory and the last theory any mathematician would ever need.

It was the mathematician’s equivalent of a theory of everything — where all of mathematics is derivable from one rock-solid foundation.

The effort to find this theory became known as Hilbert’s Program.

It was a noble goal. But less than a decade after launching his program, Hilbert’s dream of a final theory was shattered.

In 1930, at a conference in Königsberg, Hilbert remained confident in the eventual success of his program, proclaiming: “Wir müssen wissen. Wir werden wissen.” — “We must know. We will know.”

David Hilbert's tombstone in Göttingen. The inscription reads: "Wir mussen wissen. Wir werden wissen." Meaning "We must know. We will know." Image Credit: Wikimedia
The phrase would later be Hilbert’s epitaph. His tombstone in Göttingen is inscribed: “Wir müssen wissen. Wir werden wissen.” Image Credit: Wikimedia

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems

Unknown to Hilbert, his dream had already been crushed. The day before, at the very same conference, the 24-year-old Kurt Gödel presented his PhD thesis. It proved Hilbert’s dream is impossible.

At the conference Gödel presented his First Incompleteness Theorem. It showed that in any finite mathematical foundation, there will be true statements that can’t be proved in that theory.

Thus Hilbert’s dream of completeness is impossible.

The most comprehensive current formal systems are the system of Principia Mathematica (PM) on the one hand, the Zermelo-Fraenkelian axiom-system of set theory on the other hand. These two systems are so far developed that you can formalize in them all proof methods that are currently in use in mathematics, i.e. you can reduce these proof methods to a few axioms and deduction rules. Therefore, the conclusion seems plausible that these deduction rules are sufficient to decide all mathematical questions expressible in those systems. We will show that this is not true.

Kurt Gödel in “On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems I” (1931)

Gödel’s first incompleteness theorem showed there could never be a final theory that would serve mathematicians for all time.

Gödel wasn’t finished.

Shortly thereafter, he published his Second Incompleteness Theorem. This proved that no consistent theory of mathematics can ever prove itself to be consistent. The 2nd of Hilbert’s 23 problems was impossible.

This explained the failure of Zermelo in proving the consistency of his set theory. It was actually a good sign that he was unable to — had he been able to prove it consistent, it would imply that it was not.

So now, not only was completeness impossible, but it was also impossible for a theory to prove its own consistency.

This was a double whammy to Hilbert. Hilbert lived another 12 years but he never publicly acknowledged Gödel’s result. Privately, he was crushed — he didn’t want mathematics to be this way.

But others greatly admired Gödel and his achievement.

When Harvard gave Gödel an honorary degree, he was introduced as “The discoverer of the most significant mathematical truth in the century.” Some called Gödel “the greatest logician since Aristotle.” Edward Nelson called Aristotle “the greatest logician before Gödel.”

John von Neumann said, “Gödel is absolutely irreplaceable; he is the only mathematician alive about whom I would dare make this statement.”

Einstein and Gödel both worked at the Institute for Advanced Study. Near the end of his life, Einstein confided to Oskar Morgenstern that his "own work no longer meant much, that he came to the Institute merely to have the privilege of walking home with Gödel."
Einstein and Gödel both worked at the Institute for Advanced Study. Near the end of his life, Einstein confided to Oskar Morgenstern that his “own work no longer meant much, that he came to the Institute merely to have the privilege of walking home with Gödel.”


In 1673, Leibniz invented and later built the first digital calculator. He declared, “It is beneath the dignity of excellent men to waste their time in calculation when any peasant could do the work just as accurately with the aid of a machine.”

After he built the device, Leibniz began to wonder about the limits of what machines can calculate: was it possible to build a machine that could answer any mathematical question?

Several centuries later, David Hilbert together with Wilhelm Ackermann refined Leibniz’s question. At a conference in Berlin in 1928, they defined the Entscheidungsproblem (or decision problem).

The decision problem asks: is it possible to build a machine that can decide whether or not any mathematical question can be proved in some mathematical system?

Gödel showed that not every true statement was provable, but was there a way to decide whether or not a statement was provable?

It was an important question.

Such a method would be most useful to mathematicians. It would tell them when they ought to give up, and thereby save them from wasting their lives searching for proofs that don’t exist.

Alonzo Church got the first result on the Entscheidungsproblem. He defined a programming language, and proved certain questions about it are undecidable.

It follows that the Entscheidungsproblem is unsolvable in the case of any system of symbolic logic which is [consistent] in the sense of Gödel.

Alonzo Church in “An Unsolvable Problem of Elementary Number Theory” (1935)

The next year, Church’s student, Alan Turing, published another example of an undecidable problem — the halting problem.

Gödel has shown that there are propositions U such that neither U nor [not U] is provable. […] On the other hand, I shall show that there is no general method which tells whether a given formula U is provable.

Alan Turing in “On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem” (1936)

It was in this paper that Turing introduced the concept of a general purpose programmable computer, birthing the digital age.

The code breaking Bombe computer was devised by Alan Turing to break German codes.
The code breaking Bombe computer was devised by Alan Turing to break German codes.

Hilbert never got the answers he hoped for. We can’t prove the consistency of a mathematical foundation. We can’t prove everything that is true, and given undecidability, we can’t even be sure whether a statement has a proof or not.

And yet, despite not getting the answers he hoped for, Hilbert knew the right questions to ask. The answers produced great discoveries.

I’d like to make the outrageous claim, that has a little bit of truth, that actually all of this that’s happening now with the computer taking over the world, the digitalization of our society, of information in human society, you could say in a way is the result of a philosophical question that was raised by David Hilbert at the beginning of the century.

Gregory Chaitin in “A Century of Controversy Over the Foundations of Mathematics” (2000)

Hilbert’s 10th Problem

Of Hilbert’s 23 problems, his 10th problem asked for a general method to solve Diophantine equations. These are equations that allow only whole numbers, (no decimals or fractions), which are named after Diophantus who studied them in the 3rd century.

Given a Diophantine equation with any number of unknown quantities and with rational integral numerical coefficients: To devise a process according to which it can be determined in a finite number of operations whether the equation is solvable in rational integers.

David Hilbert in “Mathematical problems” (1902)

Deceptively simple Diophantine equations were often notoriously difficult. A famous example is the Diophantine equation:

a^n = b^n + c^n

This equation is easy when n = 1, or when n = 2. Millennia ago Pythagoras proved there were infinite solutions when n = 2.

And yet, no one had found even one solution for n \ge 3. No one knew of a cube number (a^{3}) that was the sum of two other cube numbers.

In 1673, Pierre de Fermat wrote in his notes that he had a proof that there were no solutions when n \ge 3. But no one had ever found it, nor was anyone able to rediscover a proof.

The missing proof became known as Fermat’s last theorem.

The problem went unsolved for 321 years. Until in 1994, after seven years of work, Andrew Wiles completed a 129-page proof that no whole number solutions exist when n \ge 3.

If mathematicians had a procedure to solve Diophantine equations, Andrew Wiles wouldn’t have had to spend seven years working on this problem. Instead, he could program a computer to follow the procedure and the computer would crank out a solution.

In 1970, Hilbert’s 10th problem was solved.

Solving it required 21 years of work by four mathematicians: Martin Davis, Julia Robinson, Hilary Putnam and Yuri Matijasevič.

Their proof, called the MRDP-Theorem (after their initials), gave a negative result. They proved there is no general procedure for solving Diophantine equations — and they proved it in a shocking way.

They showed an equivalence between solutions to Diophantine equations and what is computable. In other words, for any imaginable computer program, there is a Diophantine equation whose solutions equal all the outputs of that computer program.

This was so surprising that many mathematicians had difficulty believing it. It meant there is a Diophantine equation that picks chess moves like Deep Blue, and there’s a Diophantine equation that does your taxes like TurboTax, and there’s yet another Diophantine equation that does spellchecking like Microsoft Word.

For anything a computer can compute, there’s a Diophantine equation that gives the exact same answers.

But despite how surprising their result was, it was true.

And this is why there can be no general method for solving Diophantine equations: because the question of whether or not a program finishes (Turing’s halting problem) is equivalent to asking whether or not some Diophantine equation has solutions.

Since the halting problem is not generally solvable, the equivalence between Diophantine equations and computers meant Diophantine equations weren’t generally solvable either.

Yet again, what Hilbert asked for couldn’t be provided.

Hilbert’s questions probed at the heart of consistency, provability, decidability, and computability. They didn’t lead where he expected, but they did reveal deep truths about the nature of mathematics.

Universal Equations

In 1978, the mathematician James P. Jones went a step further. Just as it is possible to make a computer program that runs all other computer programs, it is also possible to make a Diophantine equation that includes all other Diophantine equations.

Matijasevič’s Theorem implies also the existence of particular undecidable diophantine equations. In fact there must exist universal diophantine equations, polynomial analogues of the universal Turing machine.

James P. Jones in “Undecidable Diophantine Equations” (1980)

Such Diophantine equations are general purpose computers: plug in the ‘program’ as one of the variables to the equation, and the solutions to the equation will be the outputs of that program.

Jones provided an example of such an equation. It is complex, but the truths concerning this single equation include all truths concerning the executions and outputs of all computer programs.

\text{In order that } x \in W_{v} \text{ it is necessary and sufficient that the} \\ \text{following equation has a solution in positive integers:}
\\ \text{}
(v - (((zuy)^2 + u)^2 + y))^2 + (elg^2 + \alpha - (b - xy)q^2)^2 + \\
(q - b^{5^{60}})^2 + (\lambda + q^4 - (1 +\lambda b^5))^2 + \\
(\theta + 2z - b^5)^2 + (l - (u + t \theta))^2 + (e - (y + m \theta))^2 + \\
(n - q^{16})^2 + (r - ([g + eq^3 + lq^5 + (2(e - z \lambda)(1 + xb^5 + g)^4 + \\
\lambda b^5 + \lambda b^5 q^4)q^4][n^2 - n]+ [q^3 -bl + l + \theta \lambda q^3 + \\
(b^5 - 2)q^5][n^2 - 1]))^2 +  (p - 2ws^2 r^2 n^2)^2 + \\
(p^2k^2 - k^2 + 1 - \tau^2)^2 + (4(c - ksn^2)^2 + \eta - k^2)^2 + \\
(k - (r + 1 + hp - h))^2 + (a - (wn^2 + 1)rsn^2)^2 + \\
(c - (2r + 1 + \varphi))^2 + (d - (bw + ca -2c + 4\alpha \gamma - 5 \gamma))^2 + \\
(d^2 - ((a^2 -1)c^2 + 1))^2 + (f^2 - ((a^2 - 1)i^2 c^4 + 1))^2 + \\
((d + of)^2 - (((a + f^2(d^2 - a))^2 - 1)(2r + 1 + jc)^2 + 1))^2 = 0

As [v] varies through the positive integers, the [equation] defines every recursively enumerable set. This is, to our mind, the attraction of the universal equations. At once, [this equation defines] primes, Fibonacci numbers, Lucas numbers, perfect numbers, theorems of ZF, or indeed theorems of any other axiomatizable theory.

James P. Jones in “Three Universal Representations of Recursively Enumerable Sets” (1978)

We might consider such universal equations as ‘God Equations‘ — equations whose solutions contain and include all the others.

In his 1987 book Algorithmic Information Theory, Gregory Chaitin describes one such equation: the “Exponential Diophantine Equation Computer.” It has 20,000 variables and is two hundred pages long.

This equation perfectly replicates the behavior of the LISP programming language. He describes the equation as follows:

If the LISP expression k has no value, then this equation will have no solution. If the LISP expression k has a value, then this equation will have exactly one solution. In this unique solution, n = the value of the expression k.

Gregory Chaitin in “META MATH! The Quest for Omega” (2004)

Chaitin showed that even modern day computers and programming languages have counterparts in the form of Diophantine equations.

Universal Diophantine equations are remarkable. They exist in pure arithmetic. The arithmetical relations they encode represent every program that can be computed along with all of their outputs.

Among these solutions we can find the valid proofs of every theorem in every mathematical system, every way of playing every computer game that has or will ever be invented, and simulations of every galaxy in the observable universe down to the atomic level.

Universal Diophantine equations contain in their solutions everything computable. Since known physical laws are computable, quantum-detailed simulations of every particle in the observable universe are counted among these solutions. Image Credit: Wikipedia
Universal Diophantine equations contain in their solutions everything computable. Since known physical laws are computable, quantum-detailed histories of every particle interaction in the observable universe are counted among these solutions. Image Credit: Wikipedia

Jones’s discovery of universal Diophantine equations inspired him to quote chapter 11, verse 7 of the Bhagavad Gita: “Whatever you wish can be seen all at once right here. This universal form can show you all that you now desire. Everything is here completely.”

Given that such equations include everything computable, including all physical laws and systems as well as simulations of any observer’s mind and brain — could these equations be the glue connecting eternal mathematical truths with contingent physical truths?

The Universal Dovetailer

In 1991, Bruno Marchal wrote a program he called the Universal Dovetailer — a program that generates and runs all programs.

In order to run every program without getting stuck on a program that never ends, the Universal Dovetailer interleaves, or dovetails, on the processing, doing a little bit of work on each program at a time.

The program is simple. The full program is quite short, consisting of about 300 lines of LISP code. Its pseudocode is even simpler:

for k from 0 to ∞:
    for j from 0 to k:
        for i from 0 to j:
            // Compute k steps of program i on input j

This program sequentially generates every program and runs it for every input. The longer the Universal Dovetailer runs, the more programs it generates and the more steps of each program it performs. If allowed to run forever, it runs every program there is.

The Universal Dovetailer, like a fractal, is itself simple and yet it generates infinite complexity. “For that which generates is always simpler than that which is generated.” — Plotinus in “The Enneads III.8.9” (270 A.D.)

This program, like universal Diophantine equations, contains all.

While studying the consequences of the existence of all computations, Marchal made an incredible discovery: what he describes as the “many-histories interpretation of elementary arithmetic.”

The discovery served as the basis of his 1998 PhD thesis, Computability, Physics and Cognition. This paper explains how we can explain the appearance of a multiverse given two assumptions:

  1. All computations exist
  2. Computation supports cognition

We will explain that once we adopt the computationalist hypothesis, which is a form of mechanist assumption, we have to derive from it how our belief in the physical laws can emerge from only arithmetic and classical computer science.

Bruno Marchal in “The computationalist reformulation of the mind-body problem” (2013)

Given there exist universal Diophantine equations, all computations exist as a consequence of arithmetical truth concerning them.

While there is no physical realization of the perpetual execution of the Universal Dovetailer, its complete execution exists in number theory as a consequence of arithmetical truth. There are, for instance, Diophantine equations whose solutions exactly equal all the sequentially generated states reached by the Universal Dovetailer.

So if we accept the self-existent truth of ‘2 + 2 = 4’, we must also accept truths concerning universal Diophantine equations — truths that concern all computational histories and all simulated realities.

To be sure, the existence of the UD is a logical consequence of elementary arithmetic with Church’s thesis or Turing’s thesis.

Bruno Marchal in discussion list (2019)

It therefore becomes a purely mathematical question to prove whether some Diophantine equation contains in its solutions a computational state equivalent to some person’s physical brain state.

We would then exist for the same reason that ‘2 + 2 = 4’ — as an inevitable consequence of mathematical truth. The question “Why is there anything at all?” is reduced to “Why does 2 + 2 = 4?”

A Story of Creation

We have arrived at a plausible story of creation.

We can now connect the causeless abstract entities: logic, truth, and numbers, with a viable cause for our perceptions of a physical reality.

Why does anything exist?

Because necessity requires logical laws; logical laws imply incontrovertible truth; such truth includes mathematical truth; mathematical truth defines numbers; numbers possess number relations; number relations imply equations; equations define computable relations; computable relations define all computations; all computations include algorithmically generated observers; and these observers experience apparent physical realities.

Ancient Anticipations

This account of how eternal mathematical truths could give rise to contingent physical truths depended on recent discoveries.

It required a deep understanding of modern ideas: universal equations, computers, computation, virtual reality, and simulation.

Only a century ago, we didn’t even have words for these concepts. Despite this, a few ancient thinkers gave theories for existence that are eerily similar to this modern creation story.

They postulated something primal and simple that gave rise to the numbers, and from numbers arose beings, consciousness, and matter.

2,600 years ago, Laozi wrote that numbers proceed from The Tao and that from numbers that all things are born:

The Tao gives birth to One.
One gives birth to Two.
Two gives birth to Three.
Three gives birth to all things.

Laozi in chapter 42 of “Tao Te Ching” (c. 600 B.C.)

Diogenes Laërtius was a biographer of eminent philosophers. The following is his account of 2,500-year-old Pythaogrean beliefs:

That the monad (one) was the beginning of everything. From the monad proceeds an indefinite duad (two), which is subordinate to the monad as to its cause. That from the monad and the indefinite duad proceed numbers. And from numbers signs. And from these last, lines of which plane figures consist. And from plane figures are derived solid bodies. And from solid bodies sensible bodies.

Diogenes Laërtius in “The Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers” (c. 225 A.D.)

1,750 years ago, Plotinus developed neoplatonism — a rich theory concerning the relations between various levels of being.

Wikipedia describes Plotinus’s chain of being as a series of emanations: “The first emanation is Nous (Divine Mind, Logos, Order, Thought, Reason) […] From Nous proceeds the World Soul. […] From the world soul proceeds individual human souls, and finally, matter, at the lowest level of being and thus the least perfected level of the cosmos.”

The One is not a Being but the generator of Being. [V.2.1]

The greatest, later than the [One], must be the [Intellectual-Principle], and it must be the second of all existence. [V.1.6] For what emanates from the Intellectual-Principle is a Reason-Principle, a Logos. [III.2.2]

And as soon as there is differentiation, number exists. [V.1.5]
Thus Number, the primal and true, is Principle and source of actuality to the Beings. [VI.6.15]

[The Soul’s] substantial-existence comes from the Intellectual-Principle. [V.1.3] The Soul, itself a Divine Thought and possessing the Divine Thoughts, or Ideas, of all things, contains all things concentred within it. [III.6.18]

This gives the degree in which the kosmos is ensouled, not by a soul belonging to it, but by one present to it; it is mastered not master; not possessor but possessed. [IV.3.9] This one universe is all bound together in shared experience. [IV.4.32] So matter is actually a phantasm. [II.5.5]

Plotinus in “The Enneads” (270 A.D.)

1,570 years ago, Proclus wrote that mathematical existence occupies a middle ground. He said mathematical being sits between the simple reality that’s grounded in itself and the things that move about in matter.

Mathematical being necessarily belongs neither among the first nor among the last and least simple of the kinds of being, but occupies the middle ground between the partless realities—simple, incomposite, and indivisible—and divisible things characterized by every variety of composition and differentiation. The unchangeable, stable, and incontrovertible character of the propositions about it shows that it is superior to the kinds of things that move about in matter. But the discursiveness of [mathematical] procedure, in dealing with its subjects as extended, and its setting up of different prior principles for different objects—these give to mathematical being a rank below that indivisible nature that is completely grounded in itself.

Proclus in “A Commentary on the First Book of Euclid’s Elements” (c. 450 A.D.)

The Causeless Cause Found?

Could this be the answer? Could things be so simple?

In order for this explanation of existence to be correct, mathematical truth must be causeless. Mathematical existence must depend on neither human minds, nor on physical or material things.

In addition, mathematical truth must be something capable of generating observers — observers who consciously perceive their environment and which they consider as existing physically.

Ideally, this causeless cause will illuminate the relation between the mental and material, and explain why the universe obeys simple laws.

Can the theory achieve this?

Is it Causeless?

For mathematical truth to serve as a causeless cause, it must exist causelessly. Math must depend on neither minds nor matter.

Independent of Minds

Do numbers and their properties exist beyond the minds of mathematicians and their scribblings on blackboards?

Does math only exist as a product of human minds?
Does math only exist as a product of human minds?

Had Hilbert’s program succeeded, and given a mathematical theory capable of proving all true statements, then arguably, mathematics might only be that which follows from this theory. Math would then be an invention of the human mind.

But the failure of Hilbert’s program, and Gödel’s proof of the impossibility for any finite theory to define all mathematical truth, meant that mathematical truth is infinite and beyond description, and therefore cannot be a product of human minds.

[The existence of] absolutely undecidable mathematical propositions, seems to disprove the view that mathematics is only our own creation; for the creator necessarily knows all properties of his creatures, because they can’t have any others except those he has given to them. So this alternative seems to imply that mathematical objects and facts (or at least something in them) exist objectively and independently of our mental acts and decisions, that is to say, [it seems to imply] some form or other of Platonism or ‘realism’ as to the mathematical objects.

Kurt Gödel in “Some basic theorems on the foundations of mathematics and their implications p. 311″ (1951)

(See: “Is math invented or discovered?“)

Independent of Matter

The infinite nature of mathematical truth also implies an independence from matter. Our observable universe has an information capacity of 10^{120} bits. This number is large, but finite.

An artist's representation of the finite observable universe. Image Credit: Wikimedia
An artist’s representation of the finite observable universe. Image Credit: Wikimedia

Nowhere in physics, is there room to store, represent, or hold the infinite true statements of mathematics. If there are infinite primes, infinite factors of zero, infinite digits of \pi, they don’t exist physically.

If these infinite properties don’t and can’t depend on physical processes operating within a material universe, it follows that mathematical properties must exist independently of matter.

It is our firm belief that the Pythagorean theorem needs not be created, nor the fact that the circumference of a circle is 3.14… times the diameter; the laws of nature and the collection of truths, values and their interrelations are primordial and have always existed.

C. W. Rietdijk in “Four-dimensional reality continued” (2018)

Is it the Cause?

For this story to work, abstract objects: truth, numbers, equations, and so on, must play a causal role in generating reality and perceptions.

The default position of philosophers has been that abstract objects have no effects — they cause and do nothing. But we must admit that this has always been an assumption, it’s never been proven.

Although philosophers deny that abstract objects can have causal effects on concrete objects (abstract objects are often defined as causally inert), their potential, say as a collective, to be an explanatory source of ultimate reality cannot be logically excluded.

John A. Leslie and Robert Lawrence Kuhn in “The Mystery of Existence” (2013)

Recent advances in mathematics give us pause. The discovery that all computations exist as a consequence of mathematical truth, makes us wonder whether abstract mathematics is really so ineffectual.

But can mind or matter really be created by math?

The Cause of Minds

Consciousness remains one of humanity’s last great mysteries. While science has not settled the question of what consciousness is, it has progressed by developing a testable theory of consciousness.

In the 1600s, thinkers such as René Descartes and Thomas Hobbes advanced the idea of mechanism — the theory that our brains and bodies are machines that operate according to mechanical rules.

In 1936, the discovery of universal machines (or computers) led to the Church-Turing thesis, which says the behavior of any finite machine can be perfectly replicated by an appropriately programmed computer.

This is their special power. It is what makes computers so useful.

Without changing your computer's hardware, it is able to run any one of the millions of applications available to it, including applications not yet developed or conceived of. Each new application provides the computer with new functionality and behaviors.
Without changing your computer’s hardware, it is able to run any one of the millions of applications available to it, including applications not yet developed or conceived of. Each new application provides the computer with new functionality and behaviors.

Some were quick to recognize the implications of the Church-Turing thesis for theories of minds, brains, and consciousness.

The two fathers of computing, Alan Turing and John von Neumann, noticed parallels between computers and the mind. In 1948, Turing wrote the first chess playing program and in his 1950 paper Computing Machinery and Intelligence, Turing asked, “Can machines think?”

The last work of John von Neumann was a lecture series: The Computer and the Brain, published posthumously in 1958. In it von Neumann explains that it is not that the brain acts like a computer, but that computers are so varied in what they can do, that they can be set up to imitate any machine — presumably even the human brain.

The important result of Turing’s is that in this way the first [universal] machine can be caused to imitate the behavior of any other machine.

John von Neumann in “The Computer and the Brain” (1958)

In the 1960s and 1970s, philosophers of mind including Hilary Putnam and his student Jerry Fodor developed what they called functionalism. In its digital form, functionalism is known as the Computational Theory of Mind (or computationalism). This is the idea that function, or computation, is the foundation of consciousness.

The computational theory of mind remains as the most popular theory for consciousness among scientists and philosophers.

Computationalism, or digital mechanism, or simply mechanism, is [a] hypothesis in the cognitive science according to which we can be emulated by a computer without changing our private subjective feeling.

Bruno Marchal in “The computationalist reformulation of the mind-body problem” (2013)

If the computational theory of mind is true, then mathematics can explain where observers come from. Observers would be found among the infinite computational histories within arithmetical truth. (See: “What is consciousness?” and “Can a machine be conscious?“)

Recent discoveries in physics lend support to computationalism.

In 1981, Jacob Bekenstein discovered a physical limit now known as the Bekenstein bound. This bound says that a physical system of finite mass and volume can contain, at most, a finite amount of information. This applies to any finite physical system: a brain, the Earth, the Solar System, our galaxy, or the observable universe.

Given that the observable universe has a finite mass and volume, it follows by the Bekenstein bound that it has a finite description.

Given that it has a finite description, it follows by the Church-Turing thesis that the evolution of the observable universe is something that is perfectly replicated by a certain computer program.

This program contains a version of you, me, the Earth and everyone and everything present in our universe. Our shared histories and memories would be identical. But the question remains: are these computational doppelgängers conscious like we are?

If we inspected the contents of this computer program, we would find analogues of all the objects of our own universe. We would find the same books, articles, and movies. Among these we would even find many works on the mysterious nature of consciousness.

Here are books on consciousness found in our observable universe. These same books will also appear in a purely computational version of our universe – written by computational authors – who apparently are just as baffled by their conscious experiences as we are.
Here are books on consciousness found in our observable universe. These same books will also appear in a purely computational version of our universe — written by computational authors — who apparently are just as baffled by their conscious experiences as we are.

If these purely computational versions of us are not conscious, what drives them to write and read books about consciousness?

If, on the other hand, they are just as conscious as we are, then the idea of a separately existing physical reality becomes redundant. In that case, for all we know, we are these computational versions!

We would then exist as pure computations. We would inhabit the computational histories of simulated realities that exist only as a consequence of mathematical truth concerning universal equations.

Every imaginable computation is realized in arithmetic as true relations about these universal equations. This includes the computations that describe you, your environment, and even the evolving state of your brain as it processes this very sentence.

If computationalism is right, this is who we are.

We’ll explore the fascinating relations between computation, mathematics, physics and mind, and explore a crazy-sounding belief of mine that our physical world not only is described by mathematics, but that it is mathematics, making us self-aware parts of a giant mathematical object.

Max Tegmark in “Our Mathematical Universe” (2014)
The Cause of Matter

Can mathematical truth, with its inherent infinite collection of computational histories, explain matter, physical laws and universes?

Concretely existing things. Bricks, stones, houses, matter, planets, universes.
Concretely existing things. Bricks, stones, houses, matter, planets, universes.

How can abstract things, like truth, numbers, computations, give rise to concrete things like chairs, bricks, and houses?

What’s the difference between abstract existence vs. concrete existence?

Some say the difference is only a matter of perspective. To a being who inhabits an abstract object, (be it an abstract mathematical object or abstractly existing computation), it seems concrete to them.

This equivalence between physical and mathematical existence means that if a mathematical structure contains a [self-aware substructure], it will perceive itself as existing in a physically real world, just as we do.

Max Tegmark in “The Mathematical Universe” (2007)

The relative aspect of concrete existence, is explicit in Markus Müller’s definition of physical existence:

Given two objects A and B, we say that they [physically exist] for each other if and only if, under certain auxiliary conditions, modifying the state of A will affect the state of B, and vice versa.

Markus Müller in “Could the physical world be emergent instead of fundamental, and why should we ask?” (2017)

Whenever a conscious observer experiences or interacts with another object, that object appears concrete to that observer — even if, from another point of view, both that observer and object seem abstract.

Of the modes of existence, this understanding implies mind over matter.

Math produces an infinity of conscious minds, and the perceptions of these minds include experiences of material realities.

It is not matter that produces mind and mind that produces math, but the reverse.

Computationalism, together with the mathematical existence of all computations, leads to a causal reversal between mind and matter.

What results is not a primitive matter with consciousness emerging from its organisation but the reverse: consciousness is now the more primitive and matter, or rather the appearance of material organisation, emerges from all the possible experiences of all the possible consciousnesses.

Bruno Marchal in “The Amoeba’s Secret” (2014)

Matter is then, as Plotinus supposed, a phantasm.

Is This Testable?

This is a big pill to swallow. Are we to take as serious the idea that we live inside an equation? And this equation somehow produces all computations by virtue of its solutions? And that the whole physical universe is just some kind of shared hallucination?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Unless there is a way to test and either confirm or falsify this theory, we are not operating in the realm of science, but fantasy.

Fortunately, there is a way to test this theory.

Due to the fact that not all programs appear with equal frequency, a particular bias should appear in the resulting computational histories.

We can then check for this bias by comparing our observations of the character of physical law and the properties of our universe against the predictions made by the theory.

Not all predictions of a theory are necessarily testable, but the more predictions of a theory we test and confirm, the more our confidence in that theory grows.

If our observations match the predictions, we gain evidence in support of the theory. If they don’t match, we rule the theory out.

This is how all theories are tested.

Algorithmic Information Theory

The reason not all programs occur with equal frequency is due to a consequence of algorithmic information theory (or AIT).

This field was developed by Ray Solomonoff, Andrey Kolmogorov and Gregory Chaitin, starting in the 1960s.

Chaitin says, “AIT is the result of putting Shannon’s information theory and Turing’s computability theory into a cocktail shaker and shaking vigorously. The basic idea is to measure the complexity of an object by the size in bits of the smallest program for computing it.”

Across the infinite programs executed by universal equations, some programs exhibit identical behavior. This is because the program’s code may instruct it to read only a fraction of its total available code.

Above we see bit-strings representing programs executed by universal equations. The bold digits represent bits read by the program. Highlighted in blue, are two different bit strings, which nonetheless result in identical program behavior, since the bits read are identical.

Programs that complete are naturally self-delimiting. They define their own length by virtue of reading only a finite number of bits.

Above we see two equivalent programs highlighted in blue, both of these programs are defined by the same 9-bit prefix.

Given that this program length is 9 bits, we can calculate that this program should appear once every 2^{9} (or 512) bit strings. Self-delimited 10-bit programs would be half as common, appearing once every 2^{10} (or 1,024) programs. Conversely, 8-bit programs are twice as common as 9-bit ones.

We can use this consequence of algorithmic information theory to make several predictions about the character of physical law.

The main point is that the derivation is constructive, and it provides the technical means to derive physics from arithmetic, and this will make the computationalist hypothesis empirically testable, and thus scientific in the Popperian analysis of science.

Bruno Marchal in “The computationalist reformulation of the mind-body problem” (2013)

Confirming Evidence

Could such a bold theory be true?

For now, let’s neither accept nor reject this theory. To do either before weighing the evidence would be premature.

So let us not believe anything and maintain an open mind. For the time, we will only play with the idea and see where it leads.

As with any theory, the only path forward is to see what this theory predicts and then to compare the predictions with our observations.

If we find it leads in a fruitful direction, by making predictions we can confirm and by not making predictions we can refute, then we will have cause to tentatively accept this theory.

Predictions of the Theory

Does the reality we see fit predictions of a reality generated by the infinite computations inherent to causeless arithmetical truth?

For that matter, what are the predictions?

At first blush, it seems impossible to get any useful predictions from a theory that includes all computations and all observations. For if they all exist, any observation is compatible with the theory. As Victor Stenger noted, “Theories that explain everything explain nothing.”

Fortunately, there is a catch: not all observations are equally likely.

If our conscious states result from the existence of all computations, then they are subject to the rules of algorithmic information theory.

This enables us to make testable predictions, and thereby tie it back to hard science, observation, and measurement.

Some of the predictions of this theory provide clues to otherwise unsolvable questions in physics and cosmogeny. These predictions offer answers to such fundamental mysteries as:

These results are the work of pioneers in the theory, who include Bruno Marchal, Max Tegmark, Russell Standish, and Markus Müller.

Using the tools of computer science, math, information theory, and algorithmic information theory, they revealed how these traits of the universe result from our mind states being computationally-generated.

The appearance of a universe, or even universes, must be explained by the geometry of possible computations.

Bruno Marchal in “The Amoeba’s Secret” (2014)

Let’s review the evidence for this most speculative of theories, which is presently at the forefront of mathematics and physics.

Why Laws?

We take for granted that our universe obeys laws. But why should it?

What’s the source of these laws? Why are they so simple? Why aren’t they ever violated? Why these laws and not others?

All these questions are mysteries left unaddressed by science.

In the orthodox view, the laws of physics are floating in an explanatory void. Ironically, the essence of the scientific method is rationality and logic: we suppose that things are the way they are for a reason. Yet when it comes to the laws of physics themselves, well, we are asked to accept that they exist “reasonlessly”.

Paul Davies in “The flexi-laws of physics” (2007)

With the equations, when they are not too complicated, we can predict phenomena. But in truth, the equation doesn’t explain anything. It compresses, certainly, in a very ingenious way, the description of the physical world, but it does not explain the nature of bodies nor why these bodies obey laws, nor from where these laws come.

Bruno Marchal in “The Amoeba’s Secret” (2014)

That laws are never violated, on its face, seems highly improbable. For in the space of possibility, for each way there is for the universe to obey the laws, there are infinite ways it might deviate from them.

For each law-governed world, there are countless variants that would fail in different ways to be wholly law-governed.

Derek Parfit in “Why Anything? Why This?” (2008)

Why the laws hold is unknown to science. And yet, this feature of reality is the very basis that allows us to do science.

Without consistent laws, experimental outcomes can't be reproduced or predicted.
Without consistent laws, experimental outcomes can’t be reproduced or predicted.

A lawful universe is the basis of empiricism. It is why we can repeat experiments, and make predictions about the future based on past observations. But why does this work, and why should it work?

Marchal explains the emergence of laws as a consequence of the computational reality. He says the laws are the ‘consistent extensions’ of programs that produce the observer’s mind state.

Arithmetic contains or executes all computations. Your first person is distributed on all computations going through your current first person state. To make any prediction on the future of your possible inputs, you need to take all the computations into account, and the laws of physics is what is invariant in all consistent extensions.

Bruno Marchal in discussion list (2019)

Müller goes further, and gives a mathematical proof that shows why, given algorithmic information theory, observers will, with high probability, observe a ‘persistence of regularities‘ (i.e. laws).

That is, computable regularities that were holding in the past tend to persist in the future. […]

Intuitively, highly compressible histories are those that contain regularities which can be used to generate shorter descriptions.

Markus Müller in “Law without law: from observer states to physics via algorithmic information theory” (2020)

Because most programs are simple, and simple programs tend to keep doing what they have been doing, this gives the appearance of a fixed set of laws that holds into the future as the program unfolds.

So in a sense, the laws of physics are the rules of the programs that instantiate us, as seen by those of us inside those programs.

Why the Laws are Mathematical

It has long been recognized that mathematics is “unreasonably effective” in describing the physical laws. In 1623, Galileo wrote, “[The universe] is written in the language of mathematics.”

This connection between math and physics still puzzles scientists.

The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future research and that it will extend, for better or for worse, to our pleasure, even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches of learning.

Eugene Wigner in “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences (1960)
Mathematical patterns appear everywhere in nature.
Mathematical patterns appear everywhere in nature.

But why should physics be so mathematical? Tegmark offers a simple explanation: because physical theories result from our perceptions of what are ultimately mathematical structures.

The various approximations that constitute our current physics theories are successful because simple mathematical structures can provide good approximations of how a [self-aware substructure] will perceive more complex mathematical structures. In other words, our successful theories are not mathematics approximating physics, but mathematics approximating mathematics!

Max Tegmark in “Is ‘the theory of everything’ merely the ultimate ensemble theory?” (1998)
Why the Laws are Simple

In the 2nd century, Ptolemy wrote, “We consider it a good principle to explain the phenomena by the simplest hypothesis possible.”

This rule of thumb is called the law of parsimony or Occam’s razor.

It is the idea that in science, the simplest answer that fits the facts is usually right. Occam’s razor is no doubt a useful and effective rule, but until recently no one understood why it works.

A few of the great equations in physics. What is striking is their simplicity.
A few of the great equations in physics. What is striking is their simplicity.

Deep truths of nature can be expressed by short formulas, like F = ma and E = mc2. Physical equations rarely involve more than a few terms, rather than dozens or hundreds.

Physicists are awestruck by this simplicity. Einstein remarked, “The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility.”

Given there are far more ways for these formulas to be more complex, it’s especially odd that they should be so simple.

Compared with simple laws, there is a far greater range of complicated laws. […] We would have some reason to believe that there are at least two partial Selectors: being law-governed and having simple laws.

Derek Parfit in “Why Anything? Why This?” (2008)

But the lesson is that at present the idea that the ultimate laws are as simple as possible is a hope, not something suggested by the evidence. Moreover, the prospect still faces the challenge of explanatory regression, as one would [be] left to explain why the underlying laws should be so simple.

Sean Carroll in “Why Is There Something, Rather Than Nothing?” (2018)

The mystery of simple comprehensible laws can now be answered.

We have found a selector that preferentially selects universes with simple laws. Algorithmic information theory tells us that for each bit saved in a program’s description, its occurrences double.

This adds up fast. A program that’s 30 bits shorter, say 120-bits vs. 150-bits occurs 2^{30}or over 1 billion — times more often.

Ray Solomonoff, the father of algorithmic information theory, was the first to draw a connection between AIT and Occam’s razor.

On a direct intuitive level, the high a priori probability assigned to a sequence with a short description corresponds to one possible interpretation of “Occam’s Razor.”

Ray Solomonoff in “A Formal Theory of Inductive Inference” (1964)

When Müller applied algorithmic information theory to observer states, he found that it led to the prediction of simple physical laws.

Observers will, with high probability, see an external world that is governed by simple, computable, probabilistic laws.

Markus Müller in “Law without law: from observer states to physics via algorithmic information theory” (2020)
Why the Laws are Life-Friendly

One of the most surprising discoveries in physics of the past 50 years was the discovery that the laws of physics and constants of nature appear specially selected to allow complexity and life to arise.

Wheeler wrote, “A life-giving factor lies at the centre of the whole machinery and design of the world.”

Why are the laws of physics suited to the emergence of complexity and life?
Why are the laws of physics suited to the emergence of complexity and life?

That the constants of nature, the strengths of the forces, the particle masses, etc., are just right to permit complex structures to arise is mysterious. Why are the laws this way? Why are they life friendly?

Physicists ask, why does the universe appear fine-tuned?

As we look out into the universe and identify the many accidents of physics and astronomy that have worked together to our benefit, it almost seems as if the universe must in some sense have known we were coming.

Freeman Dyson in “Energy in the Universe” (1971)

The fine tunings, how fine-tuned are they? Most of them are 1% sort of things. In other words, if things are 1% different, everything gets bad. And the physicist could say maybe those are just luck. On the other hand, this cosmological constant is tuned to one part in 10^{120} — a hundred and twenty decimal places. Nobody thinks that’s accidental. That is not a reasonable idea — that something is tuned to 120 decimal places just by accident. That’s the most extreme example of fine-tuning.

Leonard Susskind in “What We Still Don’t Know: Are We Real?” (2004)

The first step in explaining fine-tuning is to recognize that for any universe to be perceived, requires that it be populated with conscious observers. This reasoning is known as the anthropic principle.

The next step is to explain why any universe exists that supports conscious observers. Typical answers are that the universe was either designed or it is just one among a vast set of mostly dead universes.

We imagine our universe to be unique, but it is one of an immense number—perhaps an infinite number—of equally valid, equally independent, equally isolated universes. There will be life in some, and not in others.

Carl Sagan in “Pale Blue Dot” (1994)

The existence of infinite computational histories, guarantees that some will be of a type that can support life. Moreover, algorithmic information theory tells us the resulting physics should be maximally simple while respecting the constraint of being life-friendly.

In this paper I show why, in an ensemble theory of the universe, we should be inhabiting one of the elements of that ensemble with least information content that satisfies the anthropic principle. This explains the effectiveness of aesthetic principles such as Occam’s razor in predicting usefulness of scientific theories.

Russell Standish in “Why Occam’s Razor” (2004)

And indeed, this is what we find when we examine our physics:

A very interesting question to me is: is the universe more complicated than it needs to be to have us here? In other words, is there anything in the universe which is just here to amuse physicists?

It’s happened again and again that there was something which seemed like it was just a frivolity like that, where later we’ve realized that in fact, “No, if it weren’t for that little thing we wouldn’t be here.”

I’m not convinced actually that we have anything in this universe which is completely unnecessary to life.

Max Tegmark in “What We Still Don’t Know: Why Are We Here” (2004)

(See: “Is the universe fine-tuned?“)

Why Quantum Mechanics?

Quantum mechanics is a cornerstone theory of modern physics. It’s among the most thoroughly tested of all theories in science, and it’s given us the most accurate predictions in all of physics.

But quantum mechanics is incredibly strange.

It suggests the existence of many (infinite) histories (i.e. many-worlds or many-minds). Observation or measurement appears to cause the infinite set of possibilities to “collapse” to just one of the possibilities, and the selected result is absolutely unpredictable.

According to quantum mechanics, no one can predict whether a photon will be reflected by or transmitted through a piece of glass, not even in principle. It's fundamentally random.
According to quantum mechanics, no one can predict whether a photon will be reflected by or transmitted through a piece of glass, not even in principle. It’s fundamentally random. Image Credit: Wikipedia

Quantum mechanics includes apparent absurdities, like unobserved cats being simultaneously alive and dead, non-local faster-than-light influences, and unlimited computation underlying physical reality.

I have never been able to let go of questions like: How come existence? How come the quantum?

John Archibald Wheeler in “Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam” (1998)

Of the mysteries in physics, “How come the quantum?“, ranks highly:

Niels Bohr said, “Those who are not shocked when they first come across quantum theory cannot possibly have understood it.” Werner Heisenberg admits, “I repeated to myself again and again the question: Can nature possibly be so absurd as it seemed to us in these atomic experiments?” And Richard Feynman said, “I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.”

Wheeler thought if an ultimate theory could explain quantum mechanics, it would be a sure sign the theory was on the right track.

The most important test is whether it gives anything like quantum mechanics. If it does, we have a go-ahead sign, if not, we have to revise our thinking.

John Archibald Wheeler quoted in “Trespassing on Einstein’s Lawn” (2014)

Marchal’s 1998 thesis, Computability, Physics and Cognition, gave the first hints that features of quantum mechanics, such as indeterminism, the many parallel histories, the non-clonability of matter, and quantum logic, could be explained as a consequence of computationalism.

As in quantum mechanics, computationalism highlights a strong indeterminism, as well as a form of non-locality. […] Computationalism entails the existence of a phenomenology of many-worlds or parallel states.

Bruno Marchal translated from “Computability, Physics and Cognition” (1998)

Marchal writes, “The quantum empirical clues happen to be serious hints that the physical emerges from an internally defined statistics on the numbers dreams or computations seen from inside.”

Standish went further. In a 2004 paper and in his 2006 book, he showed one could derive the basic rules, or postulates, of quantum mechanics, including the Schrödinger equation, purely from basic assumptions about observation within an infinite set of possibilities.

The explanation of quantum mechanics as describing the process of observation within a plenitude of possibilities is for me the pinnacle of achievement of the paradigm discussed in this book. I can now say that I understand quantum mechanics. […]

So when I say I understand quantum mechanics, I mean that I know that the first three postulates are directly consequences of us being observers. Quantum mechanics is simply a theory of observation!

Russell Standish in “Theory of Nothing” (2006)
Irreducible Randomness

One of the strangest features of quantum mechanics is the presence of irreducible randomness that creates absolute unpredictability.

Compounding this strangeness is the fact that the equations of quantum mechanics are entirely deterministic. And yet, when a measurement is made, it seems the universe momentarily stops following these equations to randomly select one possibility to make real, from among the many possibilities present in the equations.

This was a pill too hard for Einstein to swallow. He declared, “God doesn’t play dice with the world.” And in the end he never accepted it.

In the single-electron double-slit experiment, an electron is put into a superposition — where the electron exists in multiple locations at once.

Then it’s location is measured.

But when we measure the electron’s location, it will appear in only one location, seemingly at random. Before measurement, it’s impossible, even in theory, to predict where the electron will be.

If we inhabit a computational reality why do we see any randomness or unpredictability? Computations are perfectly predictable. Might this observation of randomness give us cause to doubt or rule out our being in a computational reality?

The opposite is true. The existence of an infinite computational reality explains why we encounter absolute unpredictability.

If only one computational history existed, observing randomness would be cause to dismiss the theory. But here there are infinite computational histories. Some of these histories will be similar to each other, some, so similar as to be almost indistinguishable.

Since there are infinite computational histories, each observer’s mind state can be found within infinite parallel computational histories.

In a 1988 conference and in a 1991 paper, Mechanism and Personal Identity, Marchal explained how the appearance of randomness emerges from multiple instantiations of a single observer’s mind.

He calls the phenomenon first-person indeterminacy.

To predict the first person observable outcome of any physical experiment, you have to assume that your current computational state will not be obtained in some other part of the universe, or the multiverse, with different output for your experience.

Bruno Marchal in “The computationalist reformulation of the mind-body problem” (2013)

In summary: no brain that belongs to multiple distinct universes, or computational histories, can ever be sure what it will see next.

Multiple parallel histories contain identical instances of the same observer's mind state (or brain). A fundamental unpredictability and randomness will result from the observer's inability to determine which universe she's a part of, as she exists in all of them.
Multiple parallel histories contain identical instances of the same observer’s mind state (or brain). A fundamental unpredictability and randomness will result from the observer’s inability to determine which universe she’s a part of, as she exists in all of them.

It is impossible for any observer to deduce with certainty on the basis of her observations and memory which world she is a part of. That is, there are always many different worlds for which being contained in them is compatible with everything she knows, but which imply different predictions for future observations.

Markus Müller in “Could the physical world be emergent instead of fundamental, and why should we ask?” (2017)

So even in a fully deterministic reality, the existence of infinite histories makes the appearance of randomness inevitable.

The physicist shining a photon at a piece of glass is in an infinity of histories where the photon will reflect, and is in an infinity of histories where the photon will pass through. The physicist can’t tell which until after the experiment is performed and she learns the result.

Ultimately, randomness stems from our inability to self-locate within the infinite sea of indistinguishable computational histories.

Tegmark notes how randomness appears in deterministic processes:

It gradually hit me that this illusion of randomness business really wasn’t specific to quantum mechanics at all. Suppose that some future technology allows you to be cloned while you’re sleeping, and that your two copies are placed in rooms numbered 0 and 1. When they wake up, they’ll both feel that the room number they read is completely unpredictable and random.

Max Tegmark in “Our Mathematical Universe” (2014)

Einstein is vindicated. God doesn’t play dice with the world. But perhaps, not even God can predict what universe you will find yourself in once you perform a measurement that splits yourself.

(See: “Does everything that can happen, actually happen?“)

Infinite Complexity

In 1948, Richard Feynman developed the path integral formulation, which provided a new way to understand quantum mechanics.

Feynman showed that you get the same results quantum mechanics predicts by taking into account and adding up every one of the infinite combinations of possible particle paths and interactions.

It was bizarre, but it worked. And this new formulation provided key insights that helped develop quantum electrodynamics (or QED). In 1965, Feynman, together with Sin-Itiro Tomonaga and Julian Schwinger shared the 1965 Nobel Prize in physics for developing QED.

But why adding up all of these infinite possibilities gave the right answers presented a great puzzle, which bothered Feynman.

It always bothers me that, according to the laws as we understand them today, it takes a computing machine an infinite number of logical operations to figure out what goes on in no matter how tiny a region of space, and no matter how tiny a region of time. How can all that be going on in that tiny space? Why should it take an infinite amount of logic to figure out what one tiny piece of space/time is going to do?

Richard Feynman in “The Character of Physical Law” (1965)
Under quantum mechanics, an infinite number of things happen behind the scenes. The smaller the scales you look, the more seems to be happening, with no bottom in sight.

The appearance of infinite happenings, infinite computations and infinite logical operations underlying physical reality is mysterious.

Perhaps the simplest answer for why reality appears this way is, “It appears this way because that is the way reality is.”

If infinite computational histories form the foundation of reality, then infinities in physics might just be a reflection of this reality.

In short, within each universe all observable quantities are discrete, but the multiverse as a whole is a continuum. When the equations of quantum theory describe a continuous but not-directly-observable transition between two values of a discrete quantity, what they are telling us is that the transition does not take place entirely within one universe. So perhaps the price of continuous motion is not an infinity of consecutive actions, but an infinity of concurrent actions taking place across the multiverse.

David Deutsch in “The Discrete and the Continuous” (2001)

Matter is only what seems to emerge at infinity from a first person plural point of view (defined by sharing the computations which are infinitely multiplied in the [Universal Dovetailer’s] work) when persons look at themselves and their environment below their substitution level. The non-cloning results from the fact that such a matter emerges only from an infinity of distinct computations.

Bruno Marchal in “The computationalist reformulation of the mind-body problem” (2013)
Quantum Computers

Richard Feynman and David Deutsch are the two fathers of the quantum computer. Feynman proposed their possibility in 1982 and in 1985, Deutsch described how to build one.

These computers exploit the unlimited complexity inherent in quantum mechanics to build computers of incredible power.

How quantum computers do what they do is puzzling.

Each qubit added to a quantum computer doubles its power. A quantum computer with 300 qubits can simultaneously process 2^{300} states. This number of states exceeds the 2^{265} atoms in the observable universe.

How could a tabletop device process more states than there are atoms? How could it solve problems that no conventional computer could solve in the lifetime of the universe, even if all matter and energy in the observable universe were recruited for that purpose?

Some found the abilities of these computers so incredible, they concluded quantum computers simply weren’t possible. After all, where exactly would all that computation be occurring?

Deutsch and Tegmark offer some answers.

Since the Universe as we see it lacks the computational resources to do the calculations, where are they being done? It can only be in other universes. Quantum computers share information with huge numbers of versions of themselves throughout the multiverse.

David Deutsch in “Taming the Multiverse” (2001)

Given engineering challenges, for decades quantum computers remained only theoretical. Today, quantum computers are a reality.

In 2019, engineers at Google reported that their 53-qubit quantum computer solved in 200 seconds a problem that would take the world’s most powerful supercomputer 10,000 years.

Quantum computers speed up computations by exploiting the parallelism of the multiverse. Image Credit: IBM Research
Quantum computers speed up computations by exploiting the parallelism of the multiverse. Image Credit: IBM Research

Today, anyone can sign up for free to program and use IBM’s quantum computers over the internet.

What makes quantum computers difficult to build, is that to work, they must be completely isolated from the environment — such that they are not measured by anyone or anything until it finishes its work.

By isolating the quantum computer from the environment, observers temporarily make their existence compatible with all the possible states the quantum computer might simultaneously be in.

The parallel computations performed by quantum computers can then be explained by the work of parallel computational histories.

If current efforts to build quantum computers succeed, they will provide further evidence for [the quantum multiverse], as they would, in essence, be exploiting the parallelism of the [quantum] multiverse for parallel computation.

Max Tegmark in “Parallel Universes” (2003)

(See: “How do quantum computers work?“)

Why Time?

The universe, our lives, and even our thoughts are inextricably linked with the march of time. Few things are as familiar to us as time, and yet time remains little understood. (See: “What is time?“)

2,500 years ago, Heraclitus recognized change to be the only constant in life, saying, “All entities move and nothing remains still.” But it doesn’t seem logically necessary for a universe to have time.

Mathematical structures are eternal and unchanging: they don’t exist in space and time—rather, space and time exist in (some of) them. If cosmic history were a movie, then the mathematical structure would be the entire DVD.

Max Tegmark in “Our Mathematical Universe” (2014)

Why should our universe have a property like time?

The mystery of time captures our imaginations. Here Salvador Dalí depicts clocks melting in "The Persistence of Memory" (1931)
The mysterious nature of time captures our imaginations. Salvador Dalí depicts clocks melting in “The Persistence of Memory” (1931)

All computers process information in an ordered sequence of steps. This ordering defines a notion of time that exists for any computation.

A Turing machine requires time to separate the sequence of states it occupies as it performs a computation.

Russell Standish in “Why Occam’s Razor” (2004)

Müller further showed that with algorithmic information theory, we can predict the appearance of a universe that evolves in time.

Our theory predicts that observers should indeed expect to see two facts which are features of our physics as we know it: first, the fact that the observer seems to be part of an external world that evolves in time (a ‘universe’), and second, that this external world seems to have had an absolute beginning in the past (the ‘Big Bang’).

Markus Müller in “Could the physical world be emergent instead of fundamental, and why should we ask?” (2017)

Assuming we are part of an unfolding computation, then we should expect to find ourselves in a universe with time.

A Beginning in Time

Current evidence suggests our universe has a beginning.

But why should it?

Until the middle of the 20th century, most scientists believed the universe was infinitely old, without a beginning. They considered theories of an abrupt creation event to be inelegant.

Accordingly, scientists resisted the idea of a beginning until overwhelming evidence came out in its favor. It wasn’t until we could actually see the afterglow of the big bang, in the form of microwaves, that scientists were convinced the universe began a finite time ago.

The history of the universe, as presently understood. Image Credit: NASA.
The history of the universe began some 13.8 billion years ago. Image Credit: NASA.

We call this point the beginning because in tracing the history of the universe backwards, we hit a point where predicting earlier states breaks down and further backwards tracing becomes impossible.

The physics either stops providing sensible answers, or we run into an explosion of possibilities and can’t tell which of them is real.

The theory of cosmic inflation, gives an account of what caused the hot, dense, early phase of the universe. (See: “What caused the big bang?“)

But inflation makes further backwards prediction (or retrodiction) impossible. It wipes its footprints with a set of infinite prehistories.

Since our own pocket universe would be equally likely to lie anywhere on the infinite tree of universes produced by eternal inflation, we would expect to find ourselves arbitrarily far from the beginning. The infinite inflating network would presumably approach some kind of a steady state, losing all memory of how it started, so the statistical predictions for our universe would be determined by the properties of this steady state configuration, independent of hypotheses about the ultimate beginning.

Alan Guth in “Eternal Inflation: Implications” (2013)

Müller shows that algorithmic information theory predicts most observers will find themselves in a universe with simple initial conditions and an absolute beginning in time.

He explains this reasoning for a hypothetical observer named Abby:

If she continues computing backwards to retrodict earlier and earlier states of her universe, she will typically find simpler and more “compact” states, with measures of entropy or algorithmic complexity decreasing — simply because she is looking at earlier and earlier stages of an unfolding computation.

At some point, Abby will necessarily arrive at the state that corresponds to the initial state of the graph machine’s computation, where simplicity and compactness are maximal. At this point, two cases are possible: either Abby’s method of computing backwards will cease to work; or Abby will retrodict a fictitious sequence of ‘states before the initial state’, typically with increasing complexity backwards in time.

Markus Müller in “Law without law: from observer states to physics via algorithmic information theory” (2018)

This mirrors what cosmic inflation does for our universe.

In an alternate history where humans developed algorithmic information theory before microwave telescopes, we might have predicted a beginning of the universe before telescopic evidence came in.

Information as Fundamental

Physicists are increasingly recognizing that information plays a fundamental role in physics.

Scientists have long understood that matter and energy can be neither created nor destroyed. They are, in all interactions, conserved.

But only recently have physicists realized the same is true for information. Physical information can neither be copied nor deleted. There is an equivalent law for the conservation of information.

This discovery stemmed from the black hole information paradox.

The supermassive black hole at the center of Galaxy M87. Image Credit: Event Horizon Telescope
The supermassive black hole at the center of Galaxy M87. Image Credit: Event Horizon Telescope

According to general relativity, dropping something into a black hole destroys its information, like an ultimate furnace. But according to quantum mechanics, information can’t be destroyed. At best, a black hole can only rearrange information, like an ultimate shredder.

In 1981, this paradox sparked the “black hole war” — waged by two camps of physicists. After decades of debate, the black hole war settled in favor of quantum mechanics.

Information can’t be destroyed, not even by a black hole. Physicists now understand a kind of mass-energy-information equivalence.

There is also an equivalence between entropy in thermodynamics and entropy in information theory. And constants of nature are closely linked to the ultimate physical limits of computational speed, efficiency and storage density. (See: “How good can technology get?“)

Why is the link between physics and information so tight?

Wheeler dedicated his life to the pursuit of fundamental questions. Ultimately, he reached the conclusion that everything is information.

It from bit symbolizes the idea that every item of the physical world has at bottom — a very deep bottom, in most instances — an immaterial source and explanation; that which we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of yes-no questions and the registering of equipment-evoked responses; in short, that all things physical are information-theoretic in origin.

John Archibald Wheeler in “Information, Physics, Quantum: The Search for Links” (1989)

Now I am in the grip of a new vision, that Everything is Information. The more I have pondered the mystery of the quantum and our strange ability to comprehend this world in which we live, the more I see possible fundamental roles for logic and information as the bedrock of physical theory.

John Archibald Wheeler in “Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam” (1998)
Does information somehow form the bedrock of reality?
Does information somehow form the bedrock of reality?

Why is information fundamental? The answer is easy if reality is computational. Information lies at the heart of computation.

In the end, all that computers do is process information. So to say, “computation is the foundation of reality,” is another way of saying, “information processing is the foundation of reality.”

The burgeoning field of computer science has shifted our view of the physical world from that of a collection of interacting material particles to one of a seething network of information.

Paul Davies in “The flexi-laws of physics” (2007)

What we can learn from these reconstructions is that a few simple and intuitive constraints on encoding and processing of information will automatically lead to (aspects of) the Hilbert space formalism of quantum theory.

Markus Müller in “Law without law: from observer states to physics via algorithmic information theory” (2019)

Observation as Fundamental

Observation also appears to have a fundamental role in reality.

The universe and the observer exist as a pair. […] The moment you say that the universe exists without any observers, I cannot make any sense out of that. You need an observer who looks at the universe. In the absence of observers, our universe is dead.

Andre Linde in “Does the Universe Exist if We’re Not Looking?” (2002)

Quantum mechanics revealed that observation somehow forces reality to choose from among many possibilities.

More recently, physicists have speculated that the observer’s power to force reality’s hand applies not only to the here and now, but perhaps all the way back to the beginning of the universe.

We are participators in bringing into being not only the near and here but the far away and long ago. We are in this sense, participators in bringing about something of the universe in the distant past.

John Archibald Wheeler in “The anthropic universe” (2006)

The top down approach we have described leads to a profoundly different view of cosmology, and the relation between cause and effect. Top down cosmology is a framework in which one essentially traces the histories backwards, from a spacelike surface at the present time. The no boundary histories of the universe thus depend on what is being observed, contrary to the usual idea that the universe has a unique, observer independent history. In some sense no boundary initial conditions represent a sum over all possible initial states.

Stephen Hawking and Thomas Hertog in “Populating the landscape: A top-down approach” (2006)

The observer might even, in some sense, choose the laws of physics.

It is an attempt to explain the Goldilocks factor by appealing to cosmic self-consistency: the bio-friendly universe explains life even as life explains the bio-friendly universe. […] Cosmic bio-friendliness is therefore the result of a sort of quantum post-selection effect extended to the very laws of physics themselves.

Paul Davies in “The flexi-laws of physics” (2007)
Can there be a universe if there is no one to call it home? Do observations themselves somehow define the histories and laws of the universes containing them?

Observation and its relation to observed reality is an enigma.

Wheeler believed the relation between them was our best clue to finding an answer to why there is something rather than nothing.

« Omnibus ex nihil ducendis sufficit unum », Leibniz told us; for producing everything out of nothing one principle is enough. Of all principles that might meet this requirement of Leibniz nothing stands out more strikingly in this era of the quantum than the necessity to draw a line between the observer-participator and the system under view. […] The necessity for that line of separation is the most mysterious feature of the quantum. We take that demarcation as being, if not the central principle, the clue to the central principle in constructing out of nothing everything.

John Archibald Wheeler in “Quantum Theory and Measurement” (1983)

In the view that all computational histories exist, observation does play a role in selecting both histories and physical laws.

It is a tautology that observers only find themselves in computational histories capable of producing their observations.

Since every imaginable program exists, implementing every imaginable set of laws, then in a very real sense, the observer does force reality to select both the laws and history they observe.

To derive the effective laws of physics, one needs to do statistics over the ensemble of identical observers. This involves performing summations over the multiverse, but these summations are with a constraint that says that some given observer is present.

Saibal Mitra in discussion list (2018)

It’s curious that Buddhist thinkers reached similar conclusions about observers well ahead of modern physicists.

The Buddhist does not believe in an independent or separately existing external world, into whose dynamic forces he could insert himself. The external world and his inner world are for him only two sides of the same fabric, in which the threads of all forces and of all events, of all forms of consciousness and their objects, are woven into an inseparable net of endless, mutually conditioned relations.

Anagarika Govinda in “Foundations of Tibetan Mysticism” (1969)

Reviewing the Evidence

We have found evidence in support of this theory. The existence of infinite computational histories predicts many features of reality.

It predicts a universe of inviolable, but simple, mathematical, and life-friendly laws. It predicts a multiverse of parallel histories, infinite computational complexity, and a fundamental unpredictability, as we find in quantum mechanics.

The theory predicts a universe that evolves in time, has simple initial conditions, and a point that we can’t retrodict beyond: a beginning. Further, it predicts information and observation are fundamental.

So far, all of these predictions are confirmed by current physical and cosmological observations. For the first time in history, humanity has an answer to why we exist that is backed by physical evidence.


Given the observational evidence, we have reason to suspect that this theory, or something close to it, is correct.

It implies: We live within the total set of all computations.

Moreover, we have traced the existence of this set to something that’s a strong candidate for having necessary existence: self-existent truths concerning numbers and their relations.

One option, following Leibniz and others, is that we reach a level at which further explanation is not required, because something is necessarily true.

Sean Carroll in “Why Is There Something, Rather Than Nothing?” (2018)

This truth not only seems causeless, but because from it we can deduce much of physics, it is also a candidate for being the cause.

The supreme task of the physicist is the discovery of the most general elementary laws from which the world-picture can be deduced logically.

Max Planck in “Where is science going?” (1932)

Under this theory, the most general laws from which we can deduce the world-picture become the laws of arithmetic. Thus, arithmetic, as a theory of arithmetical truth, becomes a theory of everything.

This brings a whole new meaning to Leopold Kronecker’s edict: “God made the integers, all else is the work of man.”

This is why, with Church’s thesis, and the quantum confirmation of mechanism, intuitive arithmetic, a.k.a. number theory and its intensional variants, may well be the simplest and richest “theory of everything” that we can have at our disposal.

Bruno Marchal translated from “Computability, Physics and Cognition” (1998)

This theory — arithmetic — has been under our noses the whole time!

Behind it all is surely an idea so simple, so beautiful, so compelling, that when—in a decade, a century, or a millennium—we grasp it, we will all say to each other, how could it have been otherwise? How could we have been so stupid for so long?

John Archibald Wheeler in “How Come the Quantum?” (1986)

The Journey Here

It’s been a long road to reach the point where humanity can scientifically address the question: “Why does anything exist?”

Humans have walked the earth for some 500,000 years. But only in the last 1% of that time, or the past 5,000 years, have we had writing. Only in the last 0.1% of that time, or the past 500 years, have we had the scientific method. And only in the past 0.01% of that time, or the past 50 years, has humanity known about universal equations.

To get an answer to our question, required that humans discover numbers, equations, computation, and wrestle with topics at the foundation of mathematics, including consistency, completeness, and decidability. In the end, this led to our discovery of universal equations that define all computation.

To find evidence linking this computational reality to physics, humans had to discover the expanding universe and gather evidence of the big bang. We also had to probe the smallest scales and through careful study of particles, discover the quantum nature of reality.

A century ago, we had none of this understanding.

A Strange Answer

We can’t help but notice how strange this answer is.

But perhaps we should have expected this. Would we expect that the final answer to the greatest mystery of the cosmos would be ordinary?

Now, my own suspicion is that the universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose.

J. B. S. Haldane in “Possible Worlds and Other Essays” (1927)

Whatever may be the truth about the universe, it is bound to be astonishing.

Bertrand Russell

We will first understand how simple the universe is when we recognize how strange it is.

John Archibald Wheeler in “Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam” (1998)

Tegmark cautions against rejecting theories just for being weird. And admits he would be disappointed if the answer weren’t a bit weird.

It’s very important for us physicists to not dismiss ideas just because they are weird, because if we did we would have already dismissed atoms, black holes, and all sorts of other marvelous things. And actually, you know when you ask a basic question about the nature of reality, you know, don’t you expect an answer which is a bit weird? I think anything but weird would be a big letdown.

Max Tegmark in “What We Still Don’t Know: Are We Real?” (2004)

A Triumph of Human Reason

I believe when the history of science is written, then what’s being discovered about our universe in the last decade or two will be one of the most exciting chapters.

Martin Rees in “What We Still Don’t Know: Are We Real?” (2004)

We now have viable answers to great questions of existence:

  • Leibniz’s question: Why is there something rather than nothing?
  • Einstein’s question: Why is the universe so comprehensible?
  • Wigner’s question: Why is the universe so mathematical?
  • Wheeler’s question: How come the quantum?
  • Smolin’s question: Why these laws and not others?
  • Feynman’s question: Why does infinite logic underlie physics?
  • Hawking’s question: What breathes fire into the equations?

It required us to assume math, rather than matter, is fundamental. Given the evidence supporting this view, we might consider the 2,400-year-old debate between Plato and Aristotle as settled.

If we do discover a complete theory, it should in time be understandable in broad principle by everyone, not just a few scientists. Then we shall all, philosophers, scientists, and just ordinary people, be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason — for then we should know the mind of God.

Stephen Hawking in “A Brief History of Time” (1988)

Hawking believed if we could discover what breathes fire into the equations, then we should know the mind of God.

But do we? By postulating infinite, eternal, mathematical truth as the ultimate explanation, and the cause and source of reality, have we succeeded in explaining God, or have we explained God away?

Open Questions

While this theory provides answers to many questions, it does not answer everything, and much additional work is required.

Room for God

This theory provides a purely natural and rational account for why anything exists. Is there any room for God in this picture?

We now have a view of reality where everything emerges from absolute truth. This infinite truth embodies all knowledge. Being a container of all knowledge, as well as all minds and things, can we compare this infinite set of truth to an omniscient mind?

This truth is infinite and incomprehensible, eternal and indestructible, without a beginning or end. It is uncreated and self-existent. It is transcendent, immaterial, immanent, and indivisible. It’s the reason and cause behind all things. It serves as the creator, source, and ground of being, supporting us and the material universe.

Does this infinite truth or ‘omniscient mind‘ lead to the existence of God? Might it even be God? It’s not a simple question.

But knowing why anything exists, leaves us in a better position to answer questions about what exists and what doesn’t.

(See: “Does God Exist?“)

Deriving Physical Law

How much of physical law can we derive from the assumption of all computations together with the requirement of life-friendliness?

Can we predict things like types of particles and forces, or the dimensionality of spacetime? Might we even be able to predict values of constants like particle masses and force strengths?

What really interests me is whether God could have created the world any differently; in other words, whether the requirement of logical simplicity admits a margin of freedom.

Albert Einstein

It remains to be seen how much of physical law is universal (applying to all observers in all computational histories), and how much is geographical (depending on which histories an observer belongs to.

As a theoretical physicist, I would like to see us able to make precise predictions, not vague statements that certain constants have to be in a range that is more or less favorable to life. I hope that string theory really will provide a basis for a final theory and that this theory will turn out to have enough predictive power to be able to prescribe values for all the constants of nature including the cosmological constant. We shall see.

Steven Weinberg in “Dreams of a Final Theory” (1992)

But this hope, of deriving every aspect of physics, is waning.

Max Tegmark recounts, “as recently as 1997, the famous string theorist Ed Witten told me that he thought string theory would one day predict how many times lighter an electron is than a proton. Yet when I last saw him at Andrei Linde’s sixtieth birthday party [in 2008], he confessed after some wine that he’d given up on ever predicting all the constants of nature.”


If all computations exist, and if those computations explain our observed reality, it leads to many surprising implications.

The Universe is a Dream

The theory lends support to the ancient idea, expressed by Taoist, Greek, and Christian philosophers, and a tenet of Hindu and Buddhist belief: that the material universe is a kind of dream or illusion.

It implies that the material and physical are byproducts of mind.

Collective karmic impressions, accumulated individually, are at the origin of the creation of a world. […] The outside world appears as a result of the acts of sentient beings who use this world. […] The “creator of the world,” basically is the mind.

The 14th Dalai Lama in “Beyond Dogma” (1994)

For the things which one thinks are most real, are the least real.

Plotinus in “The Enneads V.5.11” (270 A.D.)

Only recently have modern scientists begun to embrace this view, with a few even doubting the “realness” of physical existence.

Neils Bohr said, “Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real.” In an interview, Marvin Minsky admitted, “We don’t know that we exist because […] maybe we’re just what a program would do if the computer were turned on and it’s not even running.”

Marvin Minsky - Are There Things Not Material?

We Live in a Simulation

The simulation hypothesis and simulation argument raise the question of whether or not we inhabit a vast computer simulation.

Cypher enjoys a simulated meal in The Matrix (1999)
Cypher enjoys a simulated meal in The Matrix (1999)

If we exist as a consequence of mathematical truth, the simulation hypothesis is made true by default. For we would then find ourselves living within the infinite set of computationally generated histories.

This blurs the distinction between virtual reality and real reality.

In the beginning was the code: Juergen Schmidhuber at TEDxUHasselt
Juergen Schmidhuber presents what he calls the Algorithmic Theory of Everything: the idea that this universe, and all others, are contained in a short computer program.

It remains an open question: is anyone in control of the simulation we happen to be in? (See: “Are we living in a computer simulation?”)

Our Place in Reality

With an answer to why anything exists, we can orientate ourselves in reality. We now understand our position and place in it.

Mathematical truth implies the existence of all computations. The existence of all computations implies the existence of all observers. The existence of all observers leads to a quantum mechanical reality populated with all possibilities and ruled by simple laws.

So what exists? Almost everything.

Reality becomes so big and so comprehensive that it includes everything and everyone that can be. Every thought that can be had and every experience. Every story and scenario plays out, eventually and somewhere. Actually, they all recur an infinite number of times.

Indeed, in this view, reality is so large that it guarantees the existence of an afterlife. See (“Is there life after death?“)

Mahā-Viṣhṇu dreaming in the great Causal Ocean. Image Credit: Krishna.com

Confession: if I love [this theory], it is because it entails the existence of many things not “physically present”, notably those incredible deep universal dreamers which keep [losing] themselves in an incredible labyrinth of partially sharable dreams, meeting ladders and ladders of surprises, self-multiplying and self-fusing, and which are partially terrestrial and partially divine creatures.

Bruno Marchal in discussion list (2011)

Reasoned study of the mysteries of existence has brought us to a coherent theory of why there is something rather than nothing.

The best evidence suggests our universe is one among an infinite number of possible realms, with the full extent of reality being unbounded. The source of this reality is logical necessity, via infinite mathematical truths which are independent of any material universe.

We can count ourselves among the first generation of humans able to reason logically, with the support of observational evidence, to arrive at answers for why our universe has the laws it does, why we are here, and why there is something rather than nothing.

Related articles:

112 Replies to “Why does anything exist?”

  1. Thursday, May 5, 2022
    HOW THE US BUILT A CUSTOM LEFT * Frances Stonor Saunders / Mission Truth

    Frances Stoner Saunders

    made an in-depth investigation in which he unravels the CIA and US threads in the formation of a left compatible with their imperialism.

    To oppose the Soviet Union, socialism and communism, the US government has largely resorted to covert ideological weapons, funding a “healthy” left to safeguard the interests of capitalism in the world.

    A well-documented theme that was recently addressed by journalist Benjamin Norton to highlight that Washington’s intervention has been a key issue in the divisions of the western left, which has caused groups supposedly affiliated with the original ideas of socialism to oppose anti-imperialism or openly support imperial policies.


    In the first half of the 20th century, after the two world wars and after the success of the Russian Revolution and the achievements of building socialism in the Soviet Union became evident, many American and European intellectuals leaned towards Marx’s socialist theories and communism, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, and the influence of right liberalism was waning. This situation caused alarm in the power groups in Western countries that steered the course of capitalism, especially in the United States.

    After World War II, views were turned towards communism as the West’s number one enemy and the Cold War began. The US government and intelligence agencies realized that the best way to fight the communists was to recruit people who were unhappy with the project but still professed affinity with leftist ideals. This allowed to give the image that the opposition to communism was not only expressed by reactionaries.


    Second Conference of the Congress for Cultural Freedom in Berlin, June 1960 (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

    The strategy of counting on “non-communist leftists” became a fundamental device of anti-communist political operations in the second half of the 20th century.


    Ben Norton mentions specific and highly influential cases that resulted from Washington’s covert operations to undermine the development of a bloc that faced capitalism. Among them was Herbert Marcuse, a French intellectual who earned the title of “godfather of the new left”, who was not a threat to corporations and their international plans.

    The reason Marcuse became famous is because he worked for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), which is the organization that preceded the CIA. The author was originally hired by US intelligence services to investigate Nazism in Germany, but after World War II he continued to work for them on investigations against the Soviet Union. According to Norton’s investigation, his “criticism” of Soviet policies was funded by the US government. In fact, one of Marcuse’s best-known books, Soviet Marxism, was based on research funded by the OSS and the State Department.

    Norton also mentions Carl Gershman as another figure exposing the US government’s intervention in the divisions of the western left. Gershman was the leader of the Social Democrats, USA (SDUSA), a party that was born out of the split from the Socialist Party of America (SPA), and later led the presidency of the NED from its founding until 2021.

    Between April 25 and 29, 1966, The New York Times published a series of articles revealing that, for more than 15 years, the CIA funded dozens of cultural magazines around the world, creating a powerful network of influence on the left. At the center of this work was the so-called Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), founded in 1950.

    The system created by the CIA made it possible to finance a large number of secret projects. At its height, the Congress for Cultural Freedom had bases in 35 countries, all European capitals, as well as Japan, Latin America, India, Australia, the Philippines, among others.

    In her book The CIA and the Cultural Cold War (1999), British historian Frances Stonor Saunders notes that “there were very few writers, poets, artists, historians, scholars or critics in post-war Europe whose names were not listed in some way with this secret company”.

    The “culture war” unleashed by the CIA had one large-scale objective: to alienate European intellectuals from sympathy for the Soviet Union and impose American cultural values ​​on the world. The main theorists of this movement, James Burnham and Irving Kristol , later worked on the formation of neoconservatism, a political strand supported by American politicians who advocate war for the solution of international conflicts, based on the supremacist ideology that America is an “indispensable nation”. “. .”

    The foundational forum of the Congress, held in West Berlin in 1950, assisted the main writers, philosophers, critics and historians of the West in the period after the world wars: Karl Jaspers, John Dewey, Bertrand Russell, Benedetto Croce and Arthur Schlesinger Jr. , to name a few.


    The CCF’s successful work in creating and sponsoring prestigious literary and political journals made the CIA a key player in the ideological formation of the people. Among them were The New Leader (USA), Partisan Review (USA), Paris Review (France), Der Monat (Germany), Mundo Nuevo (Latin America) and many other publications that were considered references of opinion and criticism of the western left.

    Exactly the same methods are currently used by the same politicians and money orders to achieve similar results in promoting a useful left, whether internationally, with intellectuals conveniently becoming “anti-war” when it comes to Russia’s denazification operation. in Ukraine and calls China’s “authoritarianism” as it takes steps to protect itself amid proven threats from bioweapons; or at the level of the Latin American region, with groups of “disillusioned” governments in countries such as Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela, which end up
    collaborating, consciously or not, with US-led imperialism.

    However, the ideological component is what has prevailed over time, when money is not needed to buy consciences. It is clear, as in the case of the Spanish left , that it is not necessary to spend large sums of money to put intellectuals and creators at the mercy of the NATO agenda. For also the banality and intellectual atomization in the field of ideas, training and information, as well as psychological operations on a large scale, have hit the target of the positions of many that justify the Anglo-imperial will on the formation of a multipolar world and dignity. https://pcrtbrasil.blogspot.com/2022/05/como-os-eua-formaram-uma-esquerda-sob.html

    Friday, May 6, 2022


    Russia is a capitalist country, surrounded by the US because its government defends its political and economic independence (like Venezuela, Iran, Gaddafi’s Libya, Nicaragua). Russia is not part of any imperialist clique that threatens the world.

    I know that Russia is an imperialist world power, a country in conflict with the imperialist superpower of the United States. Russia was characterized in this way both during the period of the Soviet Union and after its collapse with the formation of separate states. It has been said that Russia is imperialist both when it was a socialist state and now that it is a capitalist state.

    Russia is also said to be a non-imperial capitalist state, still struggling to recover from the crisis of the Soviet collapse and Yeltsin’s two-year political and economic catastrophe, when the country became a quasi-neocolonial client plundered by the United States.

    Lenin explained that modern capitalism “is everywhere transforming into monopoly capitalism” 2 and therefore “capitalism has become a world system of colonial oppression and “financial strangulation of the stigmatizing majority of the world population”. countries.3

    This domination of the world by some imperialist powers is not only a major barrier to the economic and social progress of two less developed countries, but also to the solution of two pressing problems that afflict humanity as a whole now or on its own planet.

    Lenin defined modern capitalist imperialism without outlining the conditional and relative value of all definitions in general, that we can never embrace all the concatenations of a phenomenon in its full development.

    A definition of imperialism, according to Lenin, must consider the following five basic characteristics:

    (a) The concentration of production and capital has developed to such an extent that it has created monopolies that play a decisive role in economic life; (b) the merger of bank capital with industrial capital and the creation, on the basis of “finance capital”, of a financial oligarchy; (c) the export of capital, unlike the export of goods, acquires exceptional importance; (d) the formation of international monopoly capitalist associations that divide the world among themselves, and (e) the territorial division of the entire world between the great capitalist powers is completed. Either imperialism or capitalism is at the stage of development where two monopolies and finance capital are established or dominated; in which the export of capital acquired greater importance. 4

    We then discuss the role that Russian capitalist monopolies play in the world imperialist system, the nature of Russia’s export trade, the export of Russian capital, or the global role played by Russian finance capital and, ultimately, Russian military power. 5

    1. Russia’s strength among international capitalist monopolies

    Russia’s role in the “formation of international monopoly capitalist associations that divide the world among themselves” can be measured by the position of the country’s corporations among the 2,000 largest international corporations. 4

    Listed by Forbes as the 2000 largest corporations in the world based on non-total sales, profits, assets and market value. There are 10 largest companies, 5 Chinese and 5 American. China is out 291 companies, the US leads with 560, or Canada has 50, Australia 39, India 58.

    Russia had only 4 out of the top 100, ranked 43rd, 47th, 73rd and 98th. They are just 6 of the top 500 and 25 of the top 2000. Its total corporate share shows a small remnant, with an upward trend (only not Period 2008 -2013 Russian Corporations Russia entered the Global 2000 list).

    The 2,000 companies on this list represent $39.1 trillion in sales, $3.2 trillion in profits, $189 trillion in assets and $56.8 trillion in market value. Sales of the 25 Russian companies total US$ 568 billion, just 1.45% of the total. Their collective assets soared to $1,757.3 billion, representing just under 1% of the total. Among international monopolies, Russia is a much smaller player.

    Russia’s labor productivity compared to the European Union and the US

    The prospect of a significant change in these numbers is belied by the problem of low productivity in the Russian workforce. Labor productivity, measured here by gross domestic product measured in US dollars divided by the total number of hours worked by the country’s workforce, stood at 25.4 in 2016 for Russia.

    This is the lowest rate among all European countries, so low that it is less than half the EU average rate of 53.4. Russia’s labor productivity is 36% of the US level. Russia remains mired in the level of productivity of a backward country, far from being able to compete with advanced capitalist centers.

    The World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report, based on a combination of twelve factors, ranks Russia 38th on its list, ahead of several Eastern European countries. The report’s ranking improved Russia’s position from 67th in 2012-13 to 38th in 2017-18. 6

    Output of Russian manufacture

    The role that Russia plays in the world economic system can be better understood by comparing industrial production by country in dollar terms. In 2015, China ranked first with $2.01 billion in manufactured goods, 20% of world output, and the US ranked second with $1.867 billion, 18%. Russia ranked 15th, behind India, Taiwan, Mexico and Brazil, with an output of US$139 billion in manufactured goods, again a marginal player, producing just 1% of global output.

    2. Russian exports of raw materials versus high-tech goods

    In their export trade, the imperialist countries show a marked tendency to sell sophisticated and high-value finished products; knowledge-intensive technical services; and also financial services. Nations oppressed by imperialism are generally restricted to the export of raw materials at prices determined by the imperialist market and the production of finished goods by imperialist-owned corporate subsidiaries located in their countries.

    In 2017, of the top exporting countries in the world, Russia ranked 17th, after Mexico, the United Arab Emirates and Singapore. China ranked first with $2.263 billion in exports, the United States second with $1,547, Germany third with $1,448, and Russia is significantly above 2016 but still exports $353 billion. in goods.

    The World Bank reported that in 2017 oil and gas accounted for 58% of Russia’s exports, metals 11%, food raw materials 6%, wood and pulp and paper 3%, and 4% in precious metals, stones and other minerals. More than 82% of Russia’s exports are raw materials, while finished technological products (including military) account for only 8% of exports. 7

    The top 10 items exported and imported by Russia (in 2017) reveal that machinery goods accounted for US$12.8 billion of its exports compared to US$106.2 billion of imports.

    Russian exports (and imports) do not fit the pattern of an imperialist state, but rather a semi-developed Third World state, mainly exporting raw materials and relying on foreign imports of advanced goods.

    Russian ranking in the export of high-tech goods (8)

    Imperial powers are the leading exporters of high-tech goods. In the world ranking for the export of these goods, China once again occupies the first place, with US$ 496 billion in high technology exports, with the United States in third (after Germany), exporting US$ 153.2 billion. Mexico exported US$ 46.8 billion. Russia ranked 31st in exports of high-tech goods, with just a total of $6.64 billion in exports. These figures also show that Russia is far from becoming an imperial actor on the world stage.

    3. Russia’s role in international finance and banking capital

    In Lenin’s list of characteristics of imperialist countries, the big banks are the most important organizations of finance capital. Therefore, an imperialist state must have the main world banks.

    Of the 100 largest banks in the world, ranked by total assets, China has 5 of the 10 largest. USA The USA has 6 of the top 40. Of the 100 largest banks, 20 are Chinese, 10 American, 9 Japanese, 6 French, 6 German, 6 British, 5 Canadian, 5 South Korean, 5 Brazilian, 4 Australian, 3 Swedish, 3 Italian, 3 Spanish, 3 Dutch, 2 from Singapore and 2 from Switzerland. Russia has one, ranked 66th.

    Lenin stated that in the imperialist epoch there was “the division of the world between international trusts”. The way the world in the imperialist era is divided between these trusts changes as imperialist states rise and fall. In the current world division among these trusts, we find Russia as a much smaller player, 4 corporations in the top 100, 25 in the top 2000 with 1.45% of the world market share, no company in the top 100 in terms of foreign assets, and a bank among the 100 largest international banks.

    Russian capital export

    Lenin stated that “the export of capital, unlike the export of goods, has acquired exceptional importance”. Russia has a substantial export of capital, but this occurs as capital flight, to tax havens such as Cyprus and the British Virgin Islands.

    Russia’s Central Bank put the country’s net capital flight in 2014 at $154.1 billion, and the total from Putin took office in 1999 to 2014 at about $550 billion. The actual total by 2014 could be more than $1 trillion. The Central Bank estimated Russian capital flight in 2018 at 66 billion dollars.

    Foreign assets of Russian multinationals

    A World Bank study lists the 100 largest non-financial multinational corporations ranked by their assets abroad, their investments in other countries. This study is fundamental to understand the export of financial capital: 20 of these corporations are American, 14 are British, 12 French, 11 German, 11 Japanese, 5 Swiss, 5 Chinese (including Hong Kong). There is no Russian company in the list of the 100 largest companies with investments abroad.

    The 10 largest Russian non-financial multinationals hold US$188.3 billion in total foreign assets. The total Russian corporate foreign assets are also not on the list of the 100 largest non-financial multinationals in the world. 9

    Russian finance capital holdings compared to imperialist states

    Credit Suisse annually produces another measure of the financial capital holdings of countries around the world. Its 2018 Global Wealth Data Book maps national financial wealth (stocks, bonds, money market funds and bank accounts) by dividing national financial wealth by the adult population of each country.

    The top group, with average wealth per adult of over $100,000, consists of countries in Western Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand, Japan, Israel, Singapore and Taiwan. The United States ($336,528) ranks second after Switzerland ($372,336). All countries in this group are imperialist countries, or key satellites of the imperial center: the United States.

    The average global financial wealth per adult is $38,110; Sacked Greece increased to $33,969. China is far behind at $19,862. Russia sits much lower at $8,843, which equates to 2.6% of the average adult financial wealth compared to the US.

    As the data show, Russia is far from having the financial wealth of an imperialist country. In world financial wealth and non-financial wealth, the US has a 31% share, China is the only country that exceeds 10%, with 16.4%: Russia barely reaches 0.7%.

    Lenin wrote “Imperialism is the epoch of finance capital and monopolies… an epoch in which the export of capital has acquired central importance” 10. Again, as the data show: in the area of ​​export of finance capital by Russian multinationals, Russia is a much smaller player.

    4. Russian World Military Weight

    Finally, Lenin refers to the “territorial division of the entire world between the great capitalist powers” ​​(5). Fundamental to mastering the global economic structures of imperialist countries is their role in policing and maintaining the world order they impose on us. The main imperialist powers have important arms industries and participate as sellers in the world arms trade.

    Russian military exports

    Only by military weight does Russia show its power, but that alone does not make it imperialist according to Lenin. Nor does it make Russia imperialist, not even in the pre-capitalist imperialist manner of ancient Rome, which required military expansion and slave labor.

    While Russia’s significant military power, especially its nuclear arsenal, makes it difficult for the imperialists to press on, Russia does not invade or bomb countries like the United States, or even like second-rate imperial powers like Britain and France.

    Furthermore, unlike these other imperial military powers, today’s capitalist Russia has not developed its own military force, the truth is that it has inherited its military might and its war industries from the USSR. Russia is also the only country of the former Soviet socialist bloc that remains surrounded and threatened by military attack by the imperialist West.

    However, Russia is one of the world’s leading arms exporters. No branch of Russian manufacturing is competitive on the international market except the arms industry. Global arms exports in 2016 totaled US$32.262 billion and US$31.106 billion in 2017.

    The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute lists Russia’s arms exports at US$6.148 billion in 2017, below

    US$6.937 billion in 2016. The largest arms exporter in the world is the United States, with US$10.304 billion in 2016 and US$12.394 billion in 2017. The US has 34% of global sales and Russia has 22%.

    US arms exports are a little more than double those of Russia. Here, Russia is lagging behind: while US arms exports grew by 25% in 2013-17 compared to 2008-12, Russian exports dropped by 7.1% over the same period.

    Russian corporations among weapons producers

    According to SIPRI, the world’s top 100 weapons producers made $398.2 billion in sales in 2017 (Defense News offers different numbers). Half of that amount was raised by the top 10 producers, five of which are American companies, while only one is Russian. Of the top 100 arms producers, 42 are American corporations, while 10 are Russian.

    Russian Foreign Military Bases and Military Budget

    Russia has 15 military bases in 9 foreign countries. Only two of them are outside the former Soviet Union, in Vietnam and Syria. China has a base outside China, in Djbuti. The United States has more than 800 bases abroad.

    Compared to the US military budget (which SIPRI has estimated at $610 billion), the increase in the Pentagon’s budget this year alone is larger than the entire Russian military budget, which was $66 billion in 2017, fourth after the China and Saudi Arabia.

    Russian Interventions in Other Countries

    Russia has intervened in other countries (Yugoslavia, Georgia, Ukraine, Syria), but not in the manner of imperialist countries, which are motivated to appropriate natural resources and wealth. Russian intervention is also far from the interventions of secondary imperial powers such as France or Great Britain. Russia also did not plan coups in other countries, as imperialist countries constantly do.

    Russia was involved with very limited intervention in the former Yugoslavia (in the mid-1990s) when Russian forces acted as police. Russia fought over pro-Russian South Ossetia with Georgia in 2008, which was backed by the US.

    The conflict in Ukraine has a direct responsibility, the United States. When Washington provoked the anti-Russian right-wing coup in 2014, people in eastern Ukraine, which is predominantly Russian-speaking, rose up demanding political and economic autonomy. Despite the war, Moscow has shown no interest in absorbing eastern Ukraine, as it did with Crimea after the referendum there.

    Russia’s direct military involvement in 2015 in the Syria war is similar to Ukraine’s: its purpose? prevent the ongoing regime change organized by the US and NATO. Russia has been invited by the Syrian government to help defeat armed rebel groups funded by the US, NATO countries and Saudi Arabia.

    Unlike the United States, Britain and France, in none of these cases did Russia intervene militarily to overthrow a government in order to protect its economic interests abroad.

    NATO Enlargement 1949-2018

    Russia’s increasing siege by the United States and NATO is a continuation of its earlier policy of subjugating and recolonizing the Soviet Union.

    Image source: North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

    5. Russia and imperialism today

    Referring to Lenin’s statement on imperialism, Russia is not an actor in the domain of monopolies and finance capital, nor does it play an important role in the export of capital (except for the negative effect of flight of capital in progress). ), nor Russia. trusts play any essential role in the division of the world’s resources.

    Russia can be ranked as one of the two most powerful states in the world based on its military strength alone. Economically, it shares the characteristics of an advanced capitalist state, rather than a semiperiphery capitalist country. It plays a very small role in exporting capital to the periphery and extracting profits from labor and two resources in two developing countries. Russia’s finance capital is small, its exports are predominantly raw materials, its industry is failing, its multinational corporations are smaller, its economy still has low labor productivity.

    Either imperialism remains the main danger to life and we will be two peoples of the world. Our problems, humanity’s problems, are rooted in the imperialist domination of our nations and lives. Specifically, it means the great imperialist patron of the United States, accompanied by the secondary imperial powers: Western Europe, Japan, Canada and Australia.

    Russia is a capitalist country, surrounded by the US because its government defends its political and economic independence (like Venezuela, Iran, Gaddafi’s Libya, Nicaragua). Russia is not part of a small imperialist clique that threatens the world.

    Instead, world powers like Russia and China must respond in a timely manner to the imperialism that has conspired to subordinate their independence. Their resistance must provide opportunities for a few others and countries to assert their own national sovereignty.


    In 1998, or an investment of almost 80%, real wages for the target of cattle and dairy herds were 75%. Those living below the poverty line in the former Soviet republics will increase from 14,000 in 1989 to 147,000. This produced more orphans than over 20 million Russian casualties during the war, cholera and typhus epidemics re-emerged, millions of children suffered from malnutrition and expected adult life expectancy.

    Lenin: An impending catastrophe and how to fight it, Collected Works, Volume 25, p. 339.

    Lenin: Imperialism: higher stage of capitalism. CW, 22, p.191.

    Lenin; Imperialism, CW 22, p.266-267.

    Two useful articles are: Renfrey Clarke and Roger Annis, “The Myth of ‘Russian Imperialism’” and Sam Williams, “Is Russia Imperialist? ”

    Detailed information about Russia on pages 248-249 of the report.

    World Bank Group, “Modest Growth Ahead, Russia Economic Report 39, May 2018 pv

    Definition: High-tech exports are R&D-intensive products such as aerospace, information technology, pharmaceuticals, scientific instruments, and electrical machinery.

    This information on the flight of Russian capital and foreign assets is fully consistent with data from an earlier study of Russian global investment, used, ironically, to claim that Russia is imperialist. https://pcrtbrasil.blogspot.com/2022/05/a-russia-e-um-pais-imperialista.html

    Friday, May 6, 2022
    Russia puts its finger on Jewish-Israeli Nazism * Rolando Prudencio Briancob – Bolivia
    Russia puts its finger on Jewish-Israeli Nazism

    Just like more than two months ago, unprecedented unrest has been raised in the US and the West by the fact that Russia is carrying out a Special Military Operation aimed at denazifying Ukraine; the same has just provoked the statements of Russian Chancellor Sergei Lavrov, who assured that: “Hitler had Jewish blood”.

    He said that the Russian Military Operation caused so much turmoil in the West and the US; insofar as Washington did not hesitate to force all UN member countries to condemn the Russian operation.

    And it was to be expected that there were other reasons that would justify Washington ordering this global condemnation against Russia, due to the discoveries in Ukrainian territory that the Russian Army came across, precisely finding the laboratories where the Biological Weapons were being produced, and which also were funded by Joe Biden’s own son: Hunter Biden.

    Thus, Israel’s recent reaction, summoning the Russian ambassador due to Lavrov’s statements; as well as the condemnation of Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, calling it “serious statements” about Hitler’s Jewish origins, further noting that Lavrov’s comments are: “an unforgivable statement as well as a terrible historical error”; they only confirm that history is repeating itself – to paraphrase Marx – this time as a “farce”.

    And it is from Lapip’s own pathetic words that it is concluded that it is a comedy to refer to the fact that: “The lowest level of racism against Jews is to accuse the Jews themselves of anti-Semitism”; when it is the Jews of the State of Israel who commit the racist barbarity of systematically exterminating the Palestinians; just as they have been doing for decades; and who are also a Semitic people of the Levantine Mediterranean.

    It is in this sense that Lapid’s words about: “To say that Hitler was a Jew is like saying that the Jews killed themselves. The Nazis persecuted the Jews. Only the Nazis were Nazis and only the Nazis applied a policy of systematic annihilation”; In any case, they reinforce the idea that: yesterday’s victims are today’s perpetrators.

    It is, therefore, this declaration that not only exposes a double standard of the State of Israel; but the criminal action it carries out against the Palestinians based on extermination policies against this people. Palestinians should disappear along with their homes, where these snakes (the children of Palestinians) were raised. ”

    In response to Shaked’s remarks, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that: “Israel’s policy in Gaza is no different from Hitler’s mindset.” And she is a member of the Israeli parliament. What’s the difference between that mentality and Hitler’s then?” he asked himself.

    It is this obvious evidence that shows that the Russian Chancellor, Sergei Lavrov, is not far from the truth, regarding the fact that Hitler has Jewish blood; or rather: that Israeli Jews are tributaries of the heritage of Hitler’s Nazism, and that they take pride in the deepest part of their being for Hitler’s ideas and practices; and that their martyr poses are pure nonsense, when they put their finger on the wound

    Rolando Prudencio Briancon


    Side by side, navel to navel: the umbilical relationship between Jews and Nazis

    We are reaching such an extreme of the unimaginable that mixing water with oil for opinion will be easier than drinking a glass of water.

    And is that the recent Kremlin denunciation that Israeli mercenaries operate on the battlefield side by side with the far-right paramilitary unit Azov in Ukraine is the sign that the world is upside down.

    It was the spokeswoman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, Maria Zajarov, who in an interview published on Tuesday, assured that: “in Ukraine, Israeli mercenaries are really side by side with the Azov militiamen”. That is, the Israeli mercenaries are working together with the militia that have neo-Nazi ties and that fight against Russian forces. The spokeswoman stressed that Israel cannot claim not to be aware of this matter and added that she herself saw a video and content about it.

    Faced with this communication, the Russian government warned the Israeli regime to respond “in agreement” if it offers military aid to Ukraine to support Kiev in its war against Russia.

    On February 26, Hebrew media reported that Ukraine’s ambassador to the occupied Palestinian territory, Yevgen Korniychuk, urged those who would like to participate in the war against Russia to send an email with their personal information, including any “military specialties”. . can develop.

    On March 25, the Hebrew daily Yedioth Ahronoth revealed that an Israeli-led unit specializing in providing military training is currently active in Ukrainian territory to train the European country’s soldiers and nationalist forces in their fight against the Russian army.

    Meanwhile, Russia guarantees that Israel supports neo-Nazis in Ukraine and has warned this regime to respond “in agreement” if it offers military aid to Ukraine against the special operation that Russia has been developing since February 24 for “demilitarization” and “denazification”. . from the neighboring country.

    And is that the duplicity of criteria with which the State of Israel historically acted against the Palestinians cannot be less paradoxically pathological, since just as the Nazis acted committing genocidal crimes against the Jews more than 77 years ago; Today, the Ukrainian Nazi battalion drl Azov similarly acts against the Russian minority populations of Luganstk and Donestk, opposing the denazification of Ukraine, and this is the leitmotiv of Russian Military Operation Spice.

    That is why the State of Israel suffers from a pathological and unhealthy masochism that does not shy away from allying itself with its executioners; or as in this case side by side, navel to navel with the Ukrainian neo-Nazis.

    With quotes from the news portal: Hispantv.

    Rolando Prudencio Briancon / Lawyer / Bolivia https://pcrtbrasil.blogspot.com/2022/05/a-russia-poe-o-dedo-no-nazismo-judaico.html

  2. “I am feeling very well now and I can understand the Anunnaki and the gods right now. As a dialectical materialist and as an agnostic, I do not “believe” in the Anunnaki nor in the gods, but I know the Anunnaki and the gods are right here and right now and everywhere. I can feel them, experience them and see them everywhere and right here and right now. There’s no need to actually “believe” in them, but rather understand that they are right here and right now and feel them, experience them and see them everywhere and right here and right now. It is so simple and so easy. I can’t really understand why people make it so difficult and so hard, mainly to difficult and hard to understand and to experience that, mainly people like most religious out there, most spiritual out there, most agnostics out there, most atheists out there, most “skeptics” out there, most materialists out there, and all neopositivists out there. It is all a matter of feeling, experiencing, seeing, thinking, outlook and perspective. It is the same for religious things, spiritual things, esoteric things, metaphysics, extraphysics, afterlife, spiritual experiences, mystical things, hermetic things, psychic things, and related. And I do not need to write a lot about that because it is already possible to see it by just reading my previous essays, comments and writings, and understanding what I write, and also understand the Anunnaki and the gods.””Estou me sentindo muito bem agora e posso entender os Anunnaki e os deuses agora. Como materialista dialético e agnóstico, não “acredito” nos Anunnaki nem nos deuses, mas conheço os Anunnaki e os deuses estão aqui e agora e em todos os lugares. Eu posso senti-los, experimentá-los e vê-los em todos os lugares e aqui e agora. Não há necessidade de realmente “acreditar” neles, mas sim entender que eles estão aqui e agora e senti-los, experimentá-los e vê-los em todos os lugares e aqui e agora. É tão simples e tão fácil. Eu realmente não consigo entender por que as pessoas tornam isso tão difícil e tão difícil, principalmente difícil e difícil de entender e experimentar que, principalmente as pessoas gostam da maioria dos religiosos por aí, mais espirituais por aí, a maioria dos agnósticos por aí, a maioria dos ateus por aí, a maioria dos “céticos” por aí, a maioria dos materialistas por aí, e todos os neopositivistas por aí. , experimentando, vendo, pensando, encarando um ª perspectiva. É o mesmo para coisas religiosas, coisas espirituais, coisas esotéricas, metafísicas, extrafísicas, vida após a morte, experiências espirituais, coisas místicas, coisas herméticas, coisas psíquicas e afins. E não preciso escrever muito sobre isso porque já é possível ver isso apenas lendo meus ensaios, comentários e escritos anteriores, e entendendo o que escrevo, e também entendendo os Anunnaki e os deuses.””Me siento muy bien ahora y puedo entender a los Anunnaki y a los dioses en este momento. Como materialista dialéctico y como agnóstico, no “creo” en los Anunnaki ni en los dioses, pero conozco a los Anunnaki y a los dioses. están aquí y ahora y en todas partes. Puedo sentirlos, experimentarlos y verlos en todas partes y aquí y ahora. No hay necesidad de “creer” en ellos, sino entender que están aquí y ahora y siéntelos, experiméntalos y míralos en todas partes y aquí y ahora. Es tan simple y tan fácil. Realmente no puedo entender por qué la gente lo hace tan difícil y tan difícil, principalmente tan difícil y difícil de entender y experimentar. eso, principalmente a la gente como la mayoría de los religiosos, los más espirituales, los agnósticos, los ateos, los “escépticos”, los materialistas y los neopositivistas. Todo es cuestión de sentimientos. , experimentando, viendo, pensando, perspectiva a y perspectiva. Es lo mismo para las cosas religiosas, las cosas espirituales, las cosas esotéricas, la metafísica, la extrafísica, el más allá, las experiencias espirituales, las cosas místicas, las cosas herméticas, las cosas psíquicas y afines. Y no necesito escribir mucho sobre eso porque ya es posible verlo simplemente leyendo mis ensayos, comentarios y escritos anteriores, y entendiendo lo que escribo, y también entendiendo a los Anunnaki y a los dioses”.”Je me sens très bien maintenant et je peux comprendre les Anunnaki et les dieux en ce moment. En tant que matérialiste dialectique et en tant qu’agnostique, je ne “crois” pas aux Anunnaki ni aux dieux, mais je connais les Anunnaki et les dieux sont ici et maintenant et partout. Je peux les sentir, les expérimenter et les voir partout et ici et maintenant. Il n’est pas nécessaire de “croire” en eux, mais plutôt de comprendre qu’ils sont ici et maintenant et les sentir, les expérimenter et les voir partout et ici et maintenant. C’est si simple et si facile. Je ne comprends pas vraiment pourquoi les gens rendent cela si difficile et si difficile, principalement à difficile et difficile à comprendre et à expérimenter que, principalement des gens comme la plupart des religieux, des spirituels, des agnostiques, des athées, des « sceptiques », des matérialistes et tous les néopositivistes. , éprouver, voir, penser, envisager un e perspective. Il en est de même pour les choses religieuses, les choses spirituelles, les choses ésotériques, la métaphysique, l’extraphysique, l’au-delà, les expériences spirituelles, les choses mystiques, les choses hermétiques, les choses psychiques et apparentées. Et je n’ai pas besoin d’écrire beaucoup à ce sujet car il est déjà possible de le voir en lisant simplement mes essais, commentaires et écrits précédents, et en comprenant ce que j’écris, et aussi en comprenant les Anunnaki et les dieux.”„Ich fühle mich jetzt sehr gut und kann die Anunnaki und die Götter jetzt verstehen. Als dialektischer Materialist und als Agnostiker „glaube“ ich weder an die Anunnaki noch an die Götter, aber ich kenne die Anunnaki und die Götter sind genau hier und jetzt und überall. Ich kann sie fühlen, erleben und sehen sie überall und genau hier und jetzt. Ich muss nicht wirklich an sie “glauben”, sondern vielmehr verstehen, dass sie genau hier und jetzt und sind fühle sie, erlebe sie und sehe sie überall und genau hier und jetzt. Es ist so einfach und so leicht. Ich kann nicht wirklich verstehen, warum die Leute es so schwierig und so schwer machen, hauptsächlich zu schwer und schwer zu verstehen und zu erleben das, hauptsächlich Menschen wie die meisten Religiösen da draußen, die meisten Spirituellen da draußen, die meisten Agnostiker da draußen, die meisten Atheisten da draußen, die meisten “Skeptiker” da draußen, die meisten Materialisten da draußen und alle Neopositivisten da draußen. Es ist alles eine Frage des Gefühls , Erleben, Sehen, Denken, Ausblick a Perspektive. Dasselbe gilt für religiöse Dinge, spirituelle Dinge, esoterische Dinge, Metaphysik, Außerphysik, Leben nach dem Tod, spirituelle Erfahrungen, mystische Dinge, hermetische Dinge, psychische Dinge und ähnliches. Und ich brauche nicht viel darüber zu schreiben, denn es ist bereits möglich, es zu sehen, indem man einfach meine vorherigen Essays, Kommentare und Schriften liest und versteht, was ich schreibe, und auch die Anunnaki und die Götter versteht.””Ik voel me nu heel goed en ik kan de Anunnaki en de goden nu begrijpen. Als dialectisch materialist en als agnost ‘geloof’ ik niet in de Anunnaki noch in de goden, maar ik ken de Anunnaki en de goden zijn hier en nu en overal. Ik kan ze voelen, ervaren en zie ze overal en hier en nu. Het is niet nodig om er echt in te “geloven”, maar begrijp liever dat ze hier en nu zijn en voel ze, ervaar ze en zie ze overal en hier en nu. Het is zo eenvoudig en zo gemakkelijk. Ik kan niet echt begrijpen waarom mensen het zo moeilijk en zo moeilijk maken, vooral te moeilijk en moeilijk te begrijpen en te ervaren dat voornamelijk mensen zoals de meeste religieuzen, de meest spirituele daar, de meeste agnosten daar, de meeste atheïsten daar, de meeste “sceptici” daarbuiten, de meeste materialisten die er zijn, en alle neopositivisten die er zijn. Het is allemaal een kwestie van gevoel , ervaren, zien, denken, vooruitzichten a en perspectief. Het is hetzelfde voor religieuze dingen, spirituele dingen, esoterische dingen, metafysica, extrafysica, hiernamaals, spirituele ervaringen, mystieke dingen, hermetische dingen, psychische dingen en aanverwante zaken. En ik hoef daar niet veel over te schrijven, want het is al mogelijk om het te zien door gewoon mijn eerdere essays, opmerkingen en geschriften te lezen, en te begrijpen wat ik schrijf, en ook de Anunnaki en de goden te begrijpen.””Mi sento molto bene ora e posso capire gli Anunnaki e gli dei in questo momento. Come materialista dialettico e come agnostico, non “credo” negli Anunnaki né negli dei, ma conosco gli Anunnaki e gli dei sono proprio qui e proprio ora e ovunque. Posso sentirli, sperimentarli e vederli ovunque e proprio qui e proprio ora. Non c’è bisogno di “credere” davvero in loro, ma piuttosto di capire che sono proprio qui e proprio ora e sentili, sperimentali e vederli ovunque e proprio qui e in questo momento. È così semplice e così facile. Non riesco davvero a capire perché le persone lo rendano così difficile e così difficile, principalmente difficile e difficile da capire e da sperimentare che, principalmente alla gente piace la maggior parte dei religiosi là fuori, la maggior parte degli spirituali là fuori, la maggior parte degli agnostici là fuori, la maggior parte degli atei là fuori, la maggior parte degli “scettici” là fuori, la maggior parte dei materialisti là fuori e tutti i neopositivisti là fuori. È tutta una questione di sentimenti , sperimentare, vedere, pensare, prospettiva a e prospettiva. È lo stesso per le cose religiose, le cose spirituali, le cose esoteriche, la metafisica, l’extrafisica, l’aldilà, le esperienze spirituali, le cose mistiche, le cose ermetiche, le cose psichiche e affini. E non ho bisogno di scrivere molto su questo perché è già possibile vederlo semplicemente leggendo i miei precedenti saggi, commenti e scritti, e comprendendo ciò che scrivo, e comprendendo anche gli Anunnaki e gli dei”.«Сейчас я чувствую себя очень хорошо и могу понять ануннаков и богов прямо сейчас. Как диалектический материалист и как агностик я не «верю» ни в аннунаков, ни в богов, но я знаю ануннаков и богов. прямо здесь и сейчас и везде Я могу чувствовать их, переживать их и видеть их везде и прямо здесь и сейчас Не надо в них “верить” на самом деле, а нужно понимать, что они прямо здесь и сейчас и чувствовать их, переживать их и видеть их везде и прямо здесь и сейчас. Это так просто и так легко. Я не могу понять, почему люди делают это так сложно и так сложно, в основном, чтобы было трудно и трудно понять и пережить что, в основном, такие люди, как самые религиозные, самые духовные, большинство агностиков, большинство атеистов, большинство «скептиков», большинство материалистов и все неопозитивисты. , переживание, видение, мышление, мировоззрение И перспектива. То же самое относится к религиозным вещам, духовным вещам, эзотерическим вещам, метафизике, экстрафизике, загробной жизни, духовным переживаниям, мистическим вещам, герметическим вещам, психическим вещам и тому подобному. И мне не нужно много писать об этом, потому что это уже можно увидеть, просто прочитав мои предыдущие очерки, комментарии и сочинения, и понять, что я пишу, а также понять ануннаков и богов».«Зараз я почуваюся дуже добре, і я можу зрозуміти аннунаків і богів прямо зараз. Як діалектичний матеріаліст і як агностик, я не «вірю» ні в ануннаків, ні в богів, але я знаю аннунаків і богів є прямо тут, зараз і скрізь. Я можу відчувати їх, відчувати і бачити їх скрізь і прямо тут і зараз. Немає потреби насправді “вірити” в них, а краще розуміти, що вони тут і прямо зараз і відчувати їх, відчувати і бачити їх скрізь і прямо тут і зараз. Це так просто і так легко. Я не можу зрозуміти, чому люди роблять це таким важким і таким важким, головним чином, важко зрозуміти і пережити що в основному людям подобається більшість релігійних, більшість духовних, більшість агностиків, більшість атеїстів, більшість «скептиків», більшість матеріалістів і всі неопозитивісти. Все це питання почуття , переживання, бачення, мислення, погляд а й перспектива. Те саме стосується релігійних речей, духовних речей, езотеричних речей, метафізики, екстрафізики, загробного життя, духовних переживань, містичних речей, герметичних речей, психічних речей тощо. І мені не потрібно багато писати про це, тому що це вже можна побачити, просто читаючи мої попередні есе, коментарі та писання, і розуміючи те, що я пишу, а також розуміючи ануннаків і богів».“我现在感觉很好,我现在可以理解 Anunnaki 和众神。作为辩证唯物主义者和不可知论者,我不“相信” Anunnaki 或众神,但我了解 Anunnaki 和众神 就在这里,此时此刻,无处不在。我能感觉到它们,体验它们,看到它们无处不在,就在此时此地。没有必要真正“相信”它们,而是了解它们就在此时此地, 感受它们,体验它们,到处看到它们,就在此时此地。它是如此简单,如此容易。我真的不明白为什么人们让它如此困难和如此艰难,主要是为了难以理解和体验 那,主要是人们喜欢那里最虔诚的人,最精神的人,最不可知论者,大多数无神论者,大多数“怀疑论者”,大多数唯物主义者,以及所有新实证主义者。这都是感觉的问题 , 体验, 看到, 思考, 展望 nd 视角。 宗教的东西,精神的东西,深奥的东西,形而上学,超自然的东西,来世,精神体验,神秘的东西,密封的东西,通灵的东西,以及相关的东西都是一样的。 我不需要为此写太多,因为只要阅读我以前的文章、评论和著作,了解我写的内容,了解阿努纳奇和众神,就已经可以看到它。”「私は今とても気分が良く、今はアヌンナキと神々を理解することができます。唯物弁証法と不可知論者として、私はアヌンナキも神々も「信じ」ませんが、アヌンナキと神々を知っています。 私はそれらを感じ、体験し、どこでも、そして今ここでそれらを見ることができます。実際にそれらを「信じる」必要はありませんが、むしろそれらが今ここにあり、 それらを感じ、体験し、今ここで、そして今、どこでもそれらを見ることができます。それはとてもシンプルでとても簡単です。なぜ人々がそれをとても難しく、とても難しくするのか、主に難しくて理解しにくく、体験するのが難しいのか、私にはよくわかりません。 それは、主に、そこにある最も宗教的なもの、そこにある最も精神的なもの、そこにあるほとんどの不可知論者、そこにあるほとんどの「懐疑論者」、そこにあるほとんどの唯物論者、そしてそこにあるすべての新ポジティビストのような人々です。それはすべて感情の問題です 、経験する、見る、考える、見通しする ndパースペクティブ。 それは、宗教的なもの、精神的なもの、秘教的なもの、形而上学、異物理学、来世、精神的な経験、神秘的なもの、気密なもの、精神的なもの、および関連するものについても同じです。 以前のエッセイ、コメント、文章を読んだり、書いたものを理解したり、アヌンナキや神々を理解したりするだけで、すでにそれを見ることができるので、それについて多くを書く必要はありません。」”أشعر أنني بحالة جيدة الآن ويمكنني أن أفهم الأنوناكي والآلهة في الوقت الحالي. وبصفتي ماديًا ديالكتيكيًا وملحدًا ، لا” أؤمن “بالأنوناكي ولا بالآلهة ، لكنني أعرف الأنوناكي والآلهة موجودون هنا وفي الوقت الحالي وفي كل مكان. يمكنني الشعور بهم وتجربتهم ورؤيتهم في كل مكان وفي الوقت الحالي. ليست هناك حاجة إلى “الإيمان” بهم فعليًا ، بل فهم أنهم موجودون هنا والآن أشعر بها ، جربها ، وشاهدها في كل مكان وفي هذا المكان وفي الوقت الحالي. الأمر بسيط جدًا وسهل جدًا. لا أستطيع حقًا أن أفهم لماذا يجعل الناس الأمر صعبًا جدًا وصعبًا للغاية ، خاصة صعوبة الفهم والتجربة هذا ، بشكل أساسي الأشخاص مثل معظم المتدينين ، ومعظم الروحانيين هناك ، ومعظم اللاأدريين هناك ، ومعظم الملحدين هناك ، ومعظم “المشككين” هناك ، ومعظم الماديين الموجودين هناك ، وجميع الوضعيين الجدد هناك. الأمر كله يتعلق بالشعور ، تجربة ، رؤية ، تفكير ، نظرة مستقبلية المنظور الثاني. إنه نفس الشيء بالنسبة للأشياء الدينية ، والأشياء الروحية ، والأشياء الباطنية ، والميتافيزيقا ، والفيزياء الخارجية ، والحياة الآخرة ، والتجارب الروحية ، والأشياء الصوفية ، والأشياء المحكم ، والأشياء النفسية ، وما إلى ذلك. ولست بحاجة إلى أن أكتب كثيرًا عن ذلك لأنه من الممكن بالفعل رؤيته بمجرد قراءة مقالاتي السابقة وتعليقاتي وكتاباتي وفهم ما أكتبه ، وكذلك فهم الأنوناكي والآلهة “.„Mă simt foarte bine acum și pot să-i înțeleg pe Anunnaki și pe zei chiar acum. Ca materialist dialectic și ca agnostic, nu „cred” în Anunnaki și nici în zei, dar îi cunosc pe Anunnaki și pe zei. sunt chiar aici și chiar acum și peste tot. Pot să le simt, să le experimentez și să le văd peste tot și chiar aici și chiar acum. Nu este nevoie să „cred” cu adevărat în ele, ci mai degrabă să înțeleg că sunt chiar aici și chiar acum și simțiți-le, experimentați-le și vedeți-le peste tot și chiar aici și chiar acum. Este atât de simplu și atât de ușor. Nu pot înțelege cu adevărat de ce oamenii le fac atât de dificil și atât de greu, în principal până la greu și greu de înțeles și de experimentat că, în principal oamenilor le plac cei mai mulți religioși de acolo, cei mai spirituali de acolo, cei mai mulți agnostici de acolo, cei mai mulți atei de acolo, cei mai mulți „sceptici” de acolo, cei mai mulți materialiști de acolo și toți neopozitiviștii de acolo. Totul este o chestiune de sentiment. , a experimenta, a vedea, a gândi, a perspectivă nd perspectiva. Este același lucru pentru lucruri religioase, lucruri spirituale, lucruri ezoterice, metafizică, extrafizică, viața de apoi, experiențe spirituale, lucruri mistice, lucruri ermetice, lucruri psihice și înrudite. Și nu trebuie să scriu prea multe despre asta, deoarece este deja posibil să-l văd doar citind eseurile, comentariile și scrierile mele anterioare și înțelegând ceea ce scriu și, de asemenea, înțelegând Anunnaki și zeii.””Αισθάνομαι πολύ καλά τώρα και μπορώ να καταλάβω τους Anunnaki και τους θεούς αυτή τη στιγμή. Ως διαλεκτικός υλιστής και ως αγνωστικιστής, δεν “πιστεύω” στους Anunnaki ούτε στους θεούς, αλλά ξέρω τους Anunnaki και τους θεούς είναι εδώ και αυτή τη στιγμή και παντού. Μπορώ να τα νιώσω, να τα βιώσω και να τα δω παντού και εδώ και τώρα. Δεν χρειάζεται να “πιστεύω” σε αυτά, αλλά μάλλον να καταλαβαίνω ότι είναι ακριβώς εδώ και αυτή τη στιγμή και νιώστε τα, ζήστε τα και δείτε τα παντού, εδώ και τώρα. Είναι τόσο απλό και τόσο εύκολο. Δεν μπορώ πραγματικά να καταλάβω γιατί οι άνθρωποι το κάνουν τόσο δύσκολο και τόσο δύσκολο, κυρίως στο δύσκολο και δύσκολο στην κατανόηση και την εμπειρία ότι, κυρίως στους ανθρώπους αρέσουν οι περισσότεροι θρησκευόμενοι εκεί έξω, οι πιο πνευματικοί εκεί έξω, οι πιο αγνωστικιστές εκεί έξω, οι περισσότεροι άθεοι εκεί έξω, οι πιο «σκεπτικιστές» εκεί έξω, οι περισσότεροι υλιστές εκεί έξω και όλοι οι νεοθετικιστές εκεί έξω. Είναι όλα θέμα συναισθημάτων , βίωμα, βλέποντας, σκέψη, προοπτική α η προοπτική. Είναι το ίδιο για τα θρησκευτικά πράγματα, τα πνευματικά πράγματα, τα εσωτερικά πράγματα, τη μεταφυσική, την εξωφυσική, τη μεταθανάτια ζωή, τις πνευματικές εμπειρίες, τα μυστικιστικά πράγματα, τα ερμητικά πράγματα, τα ψυχικά πράγματα και τα σχετικά. Και δεν χρειάζεται να γράψω πολλά γι’ αυτό γιατί είναι ήδη δυνατό να το δεις διαβάζοντας απλώς τα προηγούμενα δοκίμια, τα σχόλια και τα γραπτά μου, και κατανοώντας τι γράφω, καθώς και κατανοώντας τους Ανουνάκι και τους θεούς».”Şu anda kendimi çok iyi hissediyorum ve şu anda Anunnaki’yi ve tanrıları anlayabiliyorum. Diyalektik bir materyalist ve bir agnostik olarak Anunnaki’ye veya tanrılara “inanmıyorum” ama Anunnaki’yi ve tanrıları tanıyorum tam burada ve şu anda ve her yerdeler. onları hissedebiliyorum, deneyimleyebiliyorum ve onları her yerde ve tam burada ve şu anda görebiliyorum. onlara gerçekten “inanmaya” gerek yok, aksine onların tam burada ve şu anda olduklarını anlayın ve onları hisset, deneyimle ve her yerde ve tam burada ve şu anda gör.Bu çok basit ve çok kolay.İnsanların neden bu kadar zor ve zor hale getirdiğini gerçekten anlayamıyorum, esas olarak zor ve anlaşılması zor ve deneyimleme esas olarak insanların çoğu dindar, dışarıdaki en ruhani, dışarıdaki en agnostik, dışarıdaki çoğu ateist, dışarıdaki en “şüpheci”, dışarıdaki çoğu materyalist ve dışarıdaki tüm neopozitivistler gibi. , deneyimlemek, görmek, düşünmek, bakış açısı bakış açısı. Dini şeyler, manevi şeyler, ezoterik şeyler, metafizik, ekstrafizik, ahiret, manevi deneyimler, mistik şeyler, hermetik şeyler, psişik şeyler ve ilgili şeyler için aynıdır. Ve bunun hakkında çok fazla yazmama gerek yok çünkü sadece önceki denemelerimi, yorumlarımı ve yazılarımı okuyarak ve yazdıklarımı anlayarak bunu görmek ve ayrıca Anunnaki’yi ve tanrıları anlamak zaten mümkün.””मैं अब बहुत अच्छा महसूस कर रहा हूं और मैं अभी अनुनाकी और देवताओं को समझ सकता हूं। एक द्वंद्वात्मक भौतिकवादी और एक अज्ञेय के रूप में, मैं अनुनाकी में और न ही देवताओं में “विश्वास” नहीं करता, लेकिन मैं अनुनाकी और देवताओं को जानता हूं यहीं और अभी और हर जगह हैं। मैं उन्हें महसूस कर सकता हूं, उनका अनुभव कर सकता हूं और उन्हें हर जगह और यहीं और अभी देख सकता हूं। वास्तव में उन पर “विश्वास” करने की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है, बल्कि यह समझें कि वे यहीं और अभी हैं और उन्हें महसूस करें, उनका अनुभव करें और उन्हें हर जगह और यहीं और अभी देखें। यह इतना सरल और इतना आसान है। मैं वास्तव में समझ नहीं पा रहा हूं कि लोग इसे इतना कठिन और इतना कठिन क्यों बनाते हैं, मुख्य रूप से कठिन और कठिन समझने और अनुभव करने के लिए। कि, मुख्य रूप से लोग सबसे अधिक धार्मिक, वहां सबसे अधिक आध्यात्मिक, वहां अधिकांश अज्ञेयवादी, वहां अधिकांश नास्तिक, वहां अधिकांश “संदेहवादी”, वहां अधिकांश भौतिकवादी, और वहां सभी नवपोषीवादी पसंद करते हैं। यह सब महसूस करने की बात है , अनुभव करना, देखना, सोचना, दृष्टिकोण a एन डी परिप्रेक्ष्य। यह धार्मिक चीजों, आध्यात्मिक चीजों, गूढ़ चीजों, तत्वमीमांसा, एक्स्ट्राफिजिक्स, बाद के जीवन, आध्यात्मिक अनुभवों, रहस्यमय चीजों, हर्मेटिक चीजों, मानसिक चीजों और संबंधित चीजों के लिए समान है। और मुझे इसके बारे में बहुत कुछ लिखने की आवश्यकता नहीं है क्योंकि यह पहले से ही मेरे पिछले निबंधों, टिप्पणियों और लेखों को पढ़कर और जो मैं लिखता हूं उसे समझने से और अनुनाकी और देवताओं को समझने से पहले से ही संभव है।””من اکنون احساس بسیار خوبی دارم و می توانم آنوناکی و خدایان را درک کنم. به عنوان یک ماتریالیست دیالکتیکی و به عنوان یک آگنوستیک، نه به آنوناکی و نه به خدایان “باور” دارم، اما آنوناکی ها و خدایان را می شناسم. اینجا و همین الان و در همه جا هستند. من می توانم آنها را حس کنم، تجربه کنم و آنها را در همه جا و همین جا و همین الان ببینم. نیازی نیست که واقعاً به آنها “باور” داشته باشم، بلکه درک کنم که آنها دقیقاً اینجا و همین الان هستند. آنها را احساس کنید، آنها را تجربه کنید و آنها را در همه جا و همین جا و همین الان ببینید. این خیلی ساده و به همین راحتی است. واقعاً نمی توانم درک کنم که چرا مردم آن را اینقدر سخت و سخت می کنند، عمدتاً به سختی و سختی درک و تجربه کردن. که، عمدتاً افرادی که بیشتر مذهبی‌ها را دوست دارند، بیشتر روحانی‌های بیرونی، اکثر آگنوستیک‌ها، اکثر آتئیست‌ها، بیشتر «شک‌گرایان» بیرون، بیشتر ماتریالیست‌ها، و همه نئوپوزیتیویست‌های بیرون آن‌جا. , تجربه کردن , دیدن , اندیشیدن , نگرش الف دیدگاه دوم در امور دینی، معنوی، باطنی، مابعدالطبیعه، ماوراء الطبیعه، اخروی، تجربیات معنوی، عرفانی، هرمسی، نفسانی و امثال آن نیز همین گونه است. و من نیازی به نوشتن زیاد در مورد آن ندارم زیرا می توان آن را فقط با خواندن مقالات، نظرات و نوشته های قبلی من و فهمیدن آنچه می نویسم، و همچنین آنوناکی ها و خدایان را درک کرد.””אני מרגיש טוב מאוד עכשיו ואני יכול להבין את האנונאקי ואת האלים כרגע. כחומרא דיאלקטי וכאגנוסטי, אני לא “מאמין” באנונאקי וגם לא באלים, אבל אני מכיר את האנונאקי והאלים נמצאים ממש כאן וממש עכשיו ובכל מקום. אני יכול להרגיש אותם, לחוות אותם ולראות אותם בכל מקום וממש כאן ועכשיו. אין צורך בעצם “להאמין” בהם, אלא להבין שהם נמצאים ממש כאן ועכשיו ו להרגיש אותם, לחוות אותם ולראות אותם בכל מקום וממש כאן ועכשיו. זה כל כך פשוט וכל כך קל. אני לא באמת יכול להבין למה אנשים עושים את זה כל כך קשה וכל כך קשה, בעיקר לקשה וקשה להבין ולחוות שבעיקר אנשים אוהבים את רוב הדתיים בחוץ, הכי רוחניים בחוץ, הכי אגנוסטים שם בחוץ, רוב אתאיסטים שם בחוץ, רוב “ספקנים” שם בחוץ, רוב מטריאליסטים בחוץ וכל ניאופוזיטטיביסטים שם בחוץ. הכל עניין של תחושה , חווה, רואה, חושב, השקפה א פרספקטיבה נוספת. זה אותו דבר לגבי דברים דתיים, דברים רוחניים, דברים אזוטריים, מטפיזיקה, חוץ-פיזיקה, חיים שלאחר המוות, חוויות רוחניות, דברים מיסטיים, דברים הרמטיים, דברים נפשיים וכאלה הקשורים אליהם. ואני לא צריך לכתוב הרבה על זה כי כבר אפשר לראות את זה רק על ידי קריאת החיבורים, ההערות והכתבים הקודמים שלי, והבנת מה שאני כותב, וגם להבין את האנונאקי והאלים.””Saya merasa sangat baik sekarang dan saya dapat memahami Anunnaki dan para dewa sekarang. Sebagai seorang materialis dialektis dan sebagai seorang agnostik, saya tidak “percaya” pada Anunnaki atau para dewa, tetapi saya mengenal Anunnaki dan para dewa ada di sini dan saat ini dan di mana-mana. Saya dapat merasakannya, mengalaminya, dan melihatnya di mana-mana dan di sini dan saat ini. Tidak perlu benar-benar “percaya” pada mereka, melainkan memahami bahwa mereka ada di sini dan saat ini dan rasakan, alami dan lihat di mana-mana dan di sini dan saat ini. Ini sangat sederhana dan sangat mudah. ​​Saya tidak dapat benar-benar mengerti mengapa orang membuatnya begitu sulit dan sangat sulit, terutama menjadi sulit dan sulit untuk dipahami dan dialami bahwa, kebanyakan orang seperti kebanyakan religius di luar sana, paling spiritual di luar sana, kebanyakan agnostik di luar sana, kebanyakan ateis di luar sana, kebanyakan “skeptis” di luar sana, kebanyakan materialis di luar sana, dan semua neopositivis di luar sana. , mengalami, melihat, berpikir, pandangan a n perspektif. Demikian pula halnya dengan hal-hal keagamaan, hal-hal spiritual, hal-hal esoteris, hal-hal metafisika, hal-hal ekstrafisika, akhirat, pengalaman spiritual, hal-hal mistik, hal-hal hermetis, hal-hal psikis, dan terkait. Dan saya tidak perlu menulis banyak tentang itu karena sudah mungkin untuk melihatnya hanya dengan membaca esai, komentar dan tulisan saya sebelumnya, dan memahami apa yang saya tulis, dan juga memahami Anunnaki dan para dewa.”“ตอนนี้ฉันรู้สึกดีมากและฉันสามารถเข้าใจ Anunnaki และเหล่าทวยเทพได้ในขณะนี้ ในฐานะที่เป็นวัตถุนิยมวิภาษและเป็นผู้ไม่เชื่อเรื่องพระเจ้า ฉันไม่ “เชื่อ” ใน Anunnaki หรือในพระเจ้า แต่ฉันรู้จัก Anunnaki และเหล่าทวยเทพ อยู่ที่นี่และตอนนี้และทุกที่ ฉันสามารถสัมผัสได้ สัมผัสและเห็นพวกเขาทุกที่และที่นี่และตอนนี้ จริงๆ แล้วไม่จำเป็นต้อง “เชื่อ” ในพวกเขา แต่ให้เข้าใจว่าพวกเขาอยู่ที่นี่และตอนนี้และ สัมผัสได้ สัมผัสได้ และเห็นได้ทุกที่ที่นี่และตอนนี้ เรียบง่ายและง่ายมาก ไม่เข้าใจจริงๆ ว่าทำไมคนถึงทำให้มันยากและยากนัก ส่วนใหญ่ยากและยากต่อการเข้าใจและประสบ คนส่วนใหญ่ชอบศาสนาส่วนใหญ่ที่นั่น มีจิตวิญญาณมากที่สุด นอกรีตส่วนใหญ่ ไม่เชื่อในพระเจ้า ส่วนใหญ่ “คลางแคลงใจ” ส่วนใหญ่ วัตถุส่วนใหญ่ออกไปที่นั่น และ neopositivists ทั้งหมดออกมี มันเป็นเรื่องของความรู้สึก , ประสบ, เห็น, คิด, ทัศนคติ a และมุมมอง เรื่องศาสนา สิ่งฝ่ายวิญญาณ สิ่งลึกลับ อภิปรัชญา ฟิสิกส์นอกระบบ ชีวิตหลังความตาย ประสบการณ์ทางจิตวิญญาณ สิ่งลึกลับ สิ่งลึกลับ สิ่งลึกลับ สิ่งลึกลับ สิ่งลึกลับ สิ่งที่เกี่ยวข้องกับจิตใจ ก็เช่นเดียวกัน และฉันไม่จำเป็นต้องเขียนอะไรมากเกี่ยวกับเรื่องนั้น เพราะมันเป็นไปได้ที่จะเห็นมันแล้วโดยเพียงแค่อ่านเรียงความ ความเห็นและงานเขียนก่อนหน้าของฉัน และทำความเข้าใจในสิ่งที่ฉันเขียน รวมทั้งเข้าใจ Anunnaki และเหล่าทวยเทพด้วย”„Czuję się teraz bardzo dobrze i mogę teraz zrozumieć Anunnaki i bogów. Jako dialektyczny materialista i jako agnostyk nie „wierzę” w Anunnaki ani w bogów, ale znam Anunnaki i bogów są tu i teraz i wszędzie. Czuję je, doświadczam i widzę je wszędzie i właśnie tu i teraz. Nie ma potrzeby, aby faktycznie w nie „wierzyć”, ale raczej zrozumieć, że są właśnie tu i teraz i czuć je, doświadczać i widzieć wszędzie i tu i teraz. To takie proste i takie łatwe. Naprawdę nie mogę zrozumieć, dlaczego ludzie czynią to tak trudnym i trudnym, głównie trudnym i trudnym do zrozumienia i doświadczenia że, głównie ludzie lubią większość religijnych, najbardziej uduchowionych, większość agnostyków, większość ateistów, większość „sceptyków”, większość materialistów i wszyscy neopozytywiści. To wszystko jest kwestią uczuć , doświadczanie, widzenie, myślenie, perspektywy a i perspektywa. To samo dotyczy rzeczy religijnych, rzeczy duchowych, rzeczy ezoterycznych, metafizyki, pozafizyki, życia pozagrobowego, doświadczeń duchowych, rzeczy mistycznych, rzeczy hermetycznych, rzeczy psychicznych i pokrewnych. I nie muszę dużo o tym pisać, ponieważ już można to zobaczyć, po prostu czytając moje poprzednie eseje, komentarze i pisma, i rozumiejąc, co piszę, a także rozumiejąc Anunnaki i bogów.”میں ابھی بہت اچھا محسوس کر رہا ہوں اور میں اس وقت انوناکی اور دیوتاؤں کو سمجھ سکتا ہوں۔ ایک جدلیاتی مادیت پسند اور ایک اگنوسٹک کے طور پر، میں انوناکی اور نہ ہی دیوتاؤں میں “یقین رکھتا ہوں” لیکن میں انوناکی اور دیوتاؤں کو جانتا ہوں۔ یہیں اور ابھی اور ہر جگہ ہیں۔ میں انہیں محسوس کر سکتا ہوں، ان کا تجربہ کر سکتا ہوں اور انہیں ہر جگہ اور یہیں اور ابھی دیکھ سکتا ہوں۔ ان پر حقیقت میں “یقین” کرنے کی ضرورت نہیں ہے، بلکہ یہ سمجھیں کہ وہ یہاں اور اس وقت ٹھیک ہیں۔ انہیں محسوس کریں، ان کا تجربہ کریں اور انہیں ہر جگہ دیکھیں اور یہیں اور ابھی دیکھیں۔ یہ بہت آسان اور آسان ہے۔ میں واقعی میں سمجھ نہیں سکتا کہ لوگ اسے اتنا مشکل اور اتنا مشکل کیوں بناتے ہیں، بنیادی طور پر مشکل اور مشکل سے سمجھنا اور تجربہ کرنا۔ کہ، بنیادی طور پر لوگ وہاں کے سب سے زیادہ مذہبی، وہاں کے سب سے زیادہ روحانی، وہاں کے سب سے زیادہ اجناس پسند، وہاں کے سب سے زیادہ ملحد، وہاں کے سب سے زیادہ “شک پرست”، وہاں کے سب سے زیادہ مادہ پرست، اور وہاں کے تمام نیوپازٹیوسٹ پسند کرتے ہیں۔ یہ سب احساس کی بات ہے۔ ، تجربہ کرنا، دیکھنا، سوچنا، نقطہ نظر a nd نقطہ نظر. یہ مذہبی چیزوں، روحانی چیزوں، باطنی چیزوں، مابعد الطبیعیات، ماورائے طبیعیات، بعد کی زندگی، روحانی تجربات، صوفیانہ چیزوں، ہرمیٹک چیزوں، نفسیاتی چیزوں اور متعلقہ چیزوں کے لیے یکساں ہے۔ اور مجھے اس کے بارے میں زیادہ لکھنے کی ضرورت نہیں ہے کیونکہ یہ صرف میرے پچھلے مضامین، تبصروں اور تحریروں کو پڑھ کر، اور جو کچھ میں لکھتا ہوں اسے سمجھ کر، اور انوناکی اور دیوتاؤں کو سمجھ کر اسے دیکھنا ممکن ہے۔””আমি এখন খুব ভালো বোধ করছি এবং আমি এখনই অনুন্নাকি এবং দেবতাদের বুঝতে পারছি। একজন দ্বান্দ্বিক বস্তুবাদী এবং একজন অজ্ঞেয়বাদী হিসাবে, আমি আনুন্নাকি বা দেবতাদের মধ্যে “বিশ্বাস করি না”, তবে আমি আনুন্নাকি এবং দেবতাদের জানি। এখানে এবং এই মুহুর্তে এবং সর্বত্র। আমি তাদের অনুভব করতে পারি, তাদের অনুভব করতে পারি এবং তাদের সর্বত্র এবং এই মুহূর্তে এবং এই মুহূর্তে দেখতে পারি। তাদের আসলে “বিশ্বাস” করার কোন প্রয়োজন নেই, বরং বুঝতে পারি যে তারা এখানে এবং এই মুহূর্তে ঠিক আছে এবং তাদের অনুভব করুন, তাদের অনুভব করুন এবং তাদের সর্বত্র এবং এখানে এবং এই মুহুর্তে দেখুন৷ এটি এত সহজ এবং এত সহজ৷ আমি সত্যিই বুঝতে পারি না কেন লোকেরা এটিকে এত কঠিন এবং এত কঠিন করে তোলে, প্রধানত কঠিন এবং বোঝা এবং অভিজ্ঞতা করা কঠিন যে, প্রধানত লোকেরা সেখানে সবচেয়ে বেশি ধর্মীয় পছন্দ করে, সেখানে সবচেয়ে আধ্যাত্মিক, সেখানে সবচেয়ে অজ্ঞেয়বাদী, সেখানে সবচেয়ে নাস্তিক, বেশিরভাগ “সন্দেহবাদী” সেখানে, বেশিরভাগ বস্তুবাদী এবং সেখানকার সমস্ত নিওপজিটিভিস্ট। এটি সবই অনুভূতির বিষয়। , অভিজ্ঞতা, দেখা, চিন্তা, দৃষ্টিভঙ্গি a nd দৃষ্টিকোণ। এটা ধর্মীয় জিনিস, আধ্যাত্মিক জিনিস, রহস্যময় জিনিস, অধিবিদ্যা, বহির্পদার্থবিদ্যা, পরকাল, আধ্যাত্মিক অভিজ্ঞতা, রহস্যময় জিনিস, হারমেটিক জিনিস, মনস্তাত্ত্বিক জিনিস এবং সম্পর্কিত জন্য একই। এবং এটি সম্পর্কে আমার খুব বেশি কিছু লেখার দরকার নেই কারণ এটি কেবল আমার পূর্ববর্তী প্রবন্ধ, মন্তব্য এবং লেখাগুলি পড়ে এবং আমি যা লিখি তা বুঝতে এবং অনুনাকি এবং দেবতাদের বোঝার মাধ্যমে এটি ইতিমধ্যেই দেখা সম্ভব।”

    1. “나는 지금 매우 기분이 좋고 지금 아눈나키와 신들을 이해할 수 있다. 변증법적 유물론자이자 불가지론자로서 나는 아눈나키나 신을 “믿지” 않지만, 나는 아눈나키와 신들을 알고 있다 바로 여기 그리고 바로 지금 그리고 어디에나 있습니다. 나는 그것들을 느낄 수 있고, 경험할 수 있고, 어디에서나 바로 여기 그리고 바로 지금 볼 수 있습니다. 실제로 그것들을 “믿을” 필요는 없습니다. 오히려 그것들이 바로 지금 여기 있고, 느끼고, 경험하고, 어디에서나 바로 지금 여기에서 봅니다. 너무 간단하고 쉽습니다. 사람들이 왜 그토록 어렵고 어렵게 만드는지, 주로 이해하고 경험하기 어려운 것으로 만드는지 이해할 수 없습니다. 주로 대부분의 종교인, 가장 영적인 사람, 대부분의 불가지론자, 대부분의 무신론자, 대부분의 “회의론자”, 대부분의 물질주의자, 그리고 모든 신실증주의자와 같은 사람들입니다. 그것은 모두 감정의 문제입니다. , 경험하다, 보다, 생각하다, 전망하다 nd 관점. 종교적인 것, 영적인 것, 밀교적인 것, 형이상학, ​​물리학 외, 내세, 영적 경험, 신비로운 것, 신비한 것, 심령적인 것, 그리고 이와 관련된 것들도 마찬가지입니다. 그리고 그것에 대해 많이 쓸 필요가 없습니다. 제 이전 에세이, 댓글, 글을 읽고 제가 쓴 내용을 이해하는 것만으로도 이미 볼 수 있고, 아눈나키와 신들도 이해할 수 있기 때문입니다.””Jag mår väldigt bra nu och jag kan förstå Anunnaki och gudarna just nu. Som dialektisk materialist och som agnostiker “tror” jag inte på Anunnaki och inte heller på gudarna, men jag känner Anunnaki och gudarna finns här och just nu och överallt. Jag kan känna dem, uppleva dem och se dem överallt och just här och just nu. Det finns ingen anledning att faktiskt “tro” på dem, utan snarare förstå att de är just här och just nu och känna dem, uppleva dem och se dem överallt och just här och just nu. Det är så enkelt och så lätt. Jag kan inte riktigt förstå varför människor gör det så svårt och så svårt, främst till svårt och svårt att förstå och uppleva att, främst folk gillar de flesta religiösa där ute, mest andliga där ute, de flesta agnostiker där ute, de flesta ateister där ute, de flesta “skeptiker” där ute, de flesta materialister där ute och alla neopositivister där ute. Allt är en fråga om känsla , uppleva, se, tänka, se en nd perspektiv. Det är samma sak för religiösa ting, andliga ting, esoteriska ting, metafysik, extrafysik, livet efter detta, andliga upplevelser, mystiska saker, hermetiska ting, psykiska saker och relaterade saker. Och jag behöver inte skriva så mycket om det för det är redan möjligt att se det genom att bara läsa mina tidigare essäer, kommentarer och skrifter, och förstå vad jag skriver, och även förstå Anunnaki och gudarna.””Minulla on nyt erittäin hyvä olo ja ymmärrän Anunnakeja ja jumalia juuri nyt. Dialektisena materialistina ja agnostikkona en “usko” anunnakeihin enkä jumaliin, mutta tunnen anunnakit ja jumalat. ovat juuri tässä ja juuri nyt ja kaikkialla. Voin tuntea ne, kokea ja nähdä ne kaikkialla ja juuri tässä ja juuri nyt. Ei tarvitse oikeasti “uskoa” niihin, vaan pikemminkin ymmärtää, että he ovat tässä ja juuri nyt ja tuntea ne, kokea ja nähdä ne kaikkialla ja juuri tässä ja juuri nyt. Se on niin yksinkertaista ja niin helppoa. En oikein ymmärrä miksi ihmiset tekevät siitä niin vaikeaa ja niin vaikeaa, pääasiassa vaikeaksi ja vaikeaksi ymmärtää ja kokea että pääasiassa ihmiset pitävät useimmista uskonnollisista, useimmista hengellisistä, useimmista agnostikoista, useimmista ateisteista, useimmista “skeptikoista”, useimmista materialisteista ja kaikista uuspositivisteista. Kaikki on tunteista kiinni. , kokeminen, näkeminen, ajattelu, näkemys a nd perspektiivi. Sama koskee uskonnollisia asioita, henkisiä asioita, esoteerisia asioita, metafysiikkaa, ekstrafysiikkaa, kuolemanjälkeistä elämää, henkisiä kokemuksia, mystisiä asioita, hermeettisiä asioita, psyykkisiä asioita ja vastaavia. Ja minun ei tarvitse kirjoittaa siitä paljon, koska se on jo mahdollista nähdä lukemalla aiempia esseitäni, kommenttejani ja kirjoituksiani ja ymmärtämällä, mitä kirjoitan, ja myös ymmärtämällä Anunnakit ja jumalat.””Jeg har det meget godt nu, og jeg kan forstå Anunnaki og guderne lige nu. Som dialektisk materialist og som agnostiker “tror” jeg ikke på Anunnaki og heller ikke på guderne, men jeg kender Anunnaki og guderne er lige her og lige nu og alle vegne. Jeg kan mærke dem, opleve dem og se dem overalt og lige her og lige nu. Der er ingen grund til faktisk at “tro” på dem, men snarere forstå, at de er lige her og lige nu og mærk dem, oplev dem og se dem overalt og lige her og lige nu. Det er så enkelt og så nemt. Jeg kan ikke rigtig forstå, hvorfor folk gør det så svært og så svært, primært til svært og svært at forstå og opleve det, hovedsageligt folk kan lide de fleste religiøse derude, mest spirituelle derude, de fleste agnostikere derude, de fleste ateister derude, de fleste “skeptikere” derude, de fleste materialister derude og alle neopositivister derude. Det hele er et spørgsmål om følelse , opleve, se, tænke, udsigter a nd perspektiv. Det er det samme for religiøse ting, spirituelle ting, esoteriske ting, metafysik, ekstrafysik, efterlivet, åndelige oplevelser, mystiske ting, hermetiske ting, psykiske ting og relaterede ting. Og det behøver jeg ikke at skrive meget om, for det er allerede muligt at se det ved blot at læse mine tidligere essays, kommentarer og skrifter, og forstå, hvad jeg skriver, og også forstå Anunnaki og guderne.””Jeg har det veldig bra nå, og jeg kan forstå Anunnaki og gudene akkurat nå. Som dialektisk materialist og som agnostiker “tror” jeg ikke på Anunnaki og heller ikke på gudene, men jeg kjenner Anunnaki og gudene er akkurat her og akkurat nå og overalt. Jeg kan føle dem, oppleve dem og se dem overalt og akkurat her og akkurat nå. Det er ikke nødvendig å faktisk “tro” på dem, men heller forstå at de er akkurat her og akkurat nå og føl dem, opplev dem og se dem overalt og akkurat her og akkurat nå. Det er så enkelt og så lett. Jeg kan egentlig ikke forstå hvorfor folk gjør det så vanskelig og så vanskelig, hovedsakelig til vanskelig og vanskelig å forstå og oppleve det, hovedsakelig folk liker de fleste religiøse der ute, mest åndelige der ute, de fleste agnostikere der ute, de fleste ateister der ute, de fleste “skeptikere” der ute, de fleste materialister der ute, og alle neopositivister der ute. Alt er et spørsmål om følelse , opplever, ser, tenker, utsikter en nd perspektiv. Det er det samme for religiøse ting, åndelige ting, esoteriske ting, metafysikk, ekstrafysikk, etterlivet, åndelige opplevelser, mystiske ting, hermetiske ting, psykiske ting og relaterte ting. Og jeg trenger ikke å skrive mye om det fordi det allerede er mulig å se det ved å bare lese mine tidligere essays, kommentarer og skrifter, og forstå hva jeg skriver, og også forstå Anunnaki og gudene.””Qed inħossni tajjeb ħafna issa u nista’ nifhem l-Anunnaki u l-allat bħalissa. Bħala materjalist dijalettiku u bħala agnostic, ma “nemmen” fl-Anunnaki u lanqas fl-allat, imma naf lill-Anunnaki u lill-allat. huma propju hawn u issa u kullimkien. Nista’ nħosshom, nesperjenzahom u narahom kullimkien u propju hawn u issa. M’hemmx għalfejn fil-fatt “jemmnu” fihom, iżda pjuttost nifhem li huma propju hawn u issa u tħosshom, esperjenzahom u arahom kullimkien u proprju hawn u issa. Huwa daqshekk sempliċi u daqshekk faċli. Ma nistax nifhem tassew għaliex in-nies jagħmluha daqshekk diffiċli u daqshekk diffiċli, prinċipalment diffiċli u diffiċli biex tifhimha u tesperjenza li, prinċipalment nies bħall-aktar reliġjużi hemmhekk, l-aktar spiritwali hemmhekk, l-aktar agnostics hemmhekk, il-biċċa l-kbira tal-atei hemmhekk, il-biċċa l-kbira ta ‘”xettiċi” hemmhekk, il-biċċa l-kbira tal-materjalisti hemmhekk, u n-neopositivisti kollha hemmhekk. Hija kollha kwistjoni ta’ tħossok , tesperjenza, tara, taħseb, ħarsa a nd perspettiva. Huwa l-istess għal affarijiet reliġjużi, affarijiet spiritwali, affarijiet esoteriċi, metafiżika, extraphysics, wara l-ħajja, esperjenzi spiritwali, affarijiet mistiċi, affarijiet ermetiċi, affarijiet psikiċi, u relatati. U m’għandix għalfejn nikteb ħafna dwar dan għaliex diġà huwa possibbli li narah billi naqra biss l-esejs, il-kummenti u l-kitbiet preċedenti tiegħi, u nifhem dak li nikteb, u nifhem ukoll l-Anunnaki u l-allat.””Tôi đang cảm thấy rất khỏe và tôi có thể hiểu Anunnaki và các vị thần ngay bây giờ. Là một nhà duy vật biện chứng và là một người theo thuyết bất khả tri, tôi không” tin “vào Anunnaki cũng như vào các vị thần, nhưng tôi biết Anunnaki và các vị thần.” ở ngay đây, ngay bây giờ và ở khắp mọi nơi. Tôi có thể cảm nhận được chúng, trải nghiệm chúng và nhìn thấy chúng ở mọi nơi, ngay tại đây và ngay bây giờ. Không cần thực sự “tin tưởng” vào chúng, mà hãy hiểu rằng chúng đang ở ngay đây, ngay bây giờ và cảm nhận chúng, trải nghiệm chúng và nhìn thấy chúng ở mọi nơi, ngay tại đây và ngay bây giờ. Nó quá đơn giản và quá dễ dàng. Tôi thực sự không thể hiểu tại sao mọi người lại làm cho nó khó và khó đến vậy, chủ yếu là khó và khó để hiểu và trải nghiệm rằng, chủ yếu là những người thích hầu hết các tôn giáo ngoài kia, hầu hết tâm linh ngoài kia, hầu hết những người theo thuyết trọng nông ngoài kia, hầu hết những người vô thần ngoài kia, hầu hết những người “hoài nghi” ngoài kia, hầu hết những người theo chủ nghĩa duy vật ngoài kia và tất cả những người theo chủ nghĩa tân sinh học. Tất cả chỉ là vấn đề của cảm giác. , trải nghiệm, nhìn thấy, suy nghĩ, triển vọng một góc nhìn thứ n. Điều tương tự đối với những điều tôn giáo, những điều tâm linh, những điều bí truyền, siêu hình, ngoại vật, thế giới bên kia, những trải nghiệm tâm linh, những điều huyền bí, những điều ẩn giấu, những điều tâm linh và những thứ liên quan. Và tôi không cần phải viết nhiều về điều đó vì chỉ cần đọc các bài luận, bình luận và bài viết trước đây của tôi là có thể thấy được điều đó và hiểu những gì tôi viết, đồng thời cũng hiểu được Anunnaki và các vị thần. “„Сега се чувствам много добре и мога да разбера анунаките и боговете в момента. Като диалектичен материалист и като агностик, не „вярвам“ в анунаките, нито в боговете, но познавам анунаките и боговете са точно тук и точно сега и навсякъде. Мога да ги усетя, да ги изживея и да ги видя навсякъде и точно тук и точно сега. Няма нужда всъщност да “вярвам” в тях, а по-скоро да разбирам, че те са точно тук и точно сега и почувствайте ги, изживейте ги и ги виждайте навсякъде и точно тук и точно сега. Толкова е просто и толкова лесно. Не мога наистина да разбера защо хората го правят толкова трудно и толкова трудно, главно до трудно и трудно за разбиране и преживяване че предимно хора харесват повечето религиозни там, повечето духовни там, повечето агностици там, повечето атеисти там, повечето “скептици” там, повечето материалисти там и всички неопозитивисти там. Всичко е въпрос на усещане , преживяване, виждане, мислене, възглед а и перспектива. Същото е за религиозни неща, духовни неща, езотерични неща, метафизика, екстрафизика, отвъдния живот, духовни преживявания, мистични неща, херметични неща, психически неща и други свързани. И не е нужно да пиша много за това, защото вече е възможно да го видите, като просто прочетете предишните ми есета, коментари и писания и разберете какво пиша, както и да разберете анунаките и боговете.””Most nagyon jól érzem magam, és meg tudom érteni az anunnakikat és az isteneket. Dialektikus materialistaként és agnosztikusként nem “hiszek” sem az anunnakikban, sem az istenekben, de ismerem az anunnakikat és az isteneket. itt és most és mindenhol. Érzem őket, tapasztalom és látom őket mindenhol és itt és most. Nem kell valójában „hinni” bennük, inkább megérteni, hogy itt és most vannak, és érezd, tapasztald és lásd őket mindenhol és itt és most. Olyan egyszerű és olyan könnyű. Nem igazán értem, miért teszik az emberek ennyire nehezsé és olyan nehézzé, főleg nehézzé és nehezen érthetővé és átélhetővé hogy főleg az emberek szeretik a legtöbb vallásost, a legtöbb spirituálist, a legtöbb agnosztikust, a legtöbb ateista, a legtöbb “szkeptikust”, a legtöbb materialistát és az összes neopozitivista odakint. Minden érzés kérdése. , tapasztalás, látás, gondolkodás, kitekintés a nd perspektíva. Ugyanez vonatkozik a vallási dolgokra, spirituális dolgokra, ezoterikus dolgokra, metafizikára, extrafizikára, túlvilágra, spirituális élményekre, misztikus dolgokra, hermetikus dolgokra, pszichés dolgokra és hasonlókra. És erről nem kell sokat írnom, mert ezt már csak az előző esszéimet, megjegyzéseimet és írásaimat elolvasva látni, és megérteni, amit írok, és megérteni az Anunnakikat és az isteneket is.””Cítím se nyní velmi dobře a právě teď rozumím Anunnaki a bohům. Jako dialektický materialista a jako agnostik “nevěřím” v Anunnaki ani v bohy, ale znám Anunnaki a bohy jsou právě tady a právě teď a všude. Cítím je, prožívám je a vidím je všude a právě tady a právě teď. Není potřeba v ně vlastně “věřit”, ale spíše pochopit, že jsou právě tady a právě teď a cítit je, zažít je a vidět je všude a právě tady a právě teď. Je to tak jednoduché a tak snadné. Opravdu nechápu, proč to lidé činí tak těžkým a tak těžkým, hlavně aby to bylo těžké a těžké pochopit a zažít že hlavně lidé jako většina věřících, většina duchovních venku, většina agnostiků, většina ateistů, většina „skeptiků“, většina materialistů a všichni neopozitivisté. Všechno je to věc pocitu , prožívání, vidění, myšlení, výhled a perspektiva. Je to stejné pro náboženské věci, duchovní věci, esoterické věci, metafyziku, extrafyziku, posmrtný život, duchovní zážitky, mystické věci, hermetické věci, psychické věci a příbuzné věci. A nemusím o tom moc psát, protože je to již možné vidět pouhým přečtením mých předchozích esejů, komentářů a spisů a pochopením toho, co píšu, a také pochopením Anunnaki a bohů.”„Сада се осећам веома добро и тренутно могу да разумем Анунакије и богове. Као дијалектички материјалиста и као агностик, не „верујем“ у Анунаке нити у богове, али познајем Анунакије и богове су управо овде и сада и свуда. Могу да их осетим, доживим и видим свуда и управо овде и сада. Нема потребе да заправо “верујем” у њих, већ разумем да су управо овде и сада и осетити их, доживети их и видети их свуда и управо овде и сада. То је тако једноставно и тако лако. Не могу баш да разумем зашто људи то чине тако тешким и тешким, углавном тешким и тешким за разумевање и доживљавање да, углавном људи воле већину религиозних напољу, већину духовних, већину агностика тамо, већину атеиста, већину “скептика” тамо, већину материјалиста и све неопозитивисте. Све је ствар осећања , доживљавање, виђење, размишљање, поглед а нд перспективе. Исто је за религиозне ствари, духовне ствари, езотеричне ствари, метафизику, екстрафизику, загробни живот, духовна искуства, мистичне ствари, херметичке ствари, психичке ствари и слично. И не морам много да пишем о томе, јер је то већ могуће видети читајући моје претходне есеје, коментаре и списе, и разумевајући шта пишем, а такође и разумети Анунакије и богове.””Unë ndihem shumë mirë tani dhe mund t’i kuptoj Anunnaki dhe perënditë tani. Si materialist dialektik dhe si agnostik, nuk “besoj” në Anunnaki dhe as në perënditë, por i njoh Anunnaki dhe perënditë. janë pikërisht këtu dhe tani dhe kudo. Unë mund t’i ndjej, t’i përjetoj dhe t’i shoh kudo dhe pikërisht këtu dhe tani. Nuk ka nevojë të “besosh” në to, por të kuptoj se ata janë pikërisht këtu dhe tani dhe ndjejini ato, përjetojini dhe shikojini kudo dhe pikërisht këtu dhe tani. Është kaq e thjeshtë dhe kaq e lehtë. Nuk mund ta kuptoj pse njerëzit e bëjnë kaq të vështirë dhe kaq të vështirë, kryesisht në të vështirë dhe të vështirë për t’u kuptuar dhe përjetuar se, kryesisht njerëzit i pëlqejnë shumë fetarët atje, shumica shpirtërore atje, shumica agnostikët atje, shumica ateistë atje, më “skeptikët” atje, shumica materialistët dhe të gjithë neopozitivistët atje jashtë. Është e gjitha çështje ndjenjash. , përjetimi, shikimi, të menduarit, këndvështrimi a perspektiva e dytë. Është e njëjta gjë për gjërat fetare, gjërat shpirtërore, gjërat ezoterike, metafizikën, ekstrafizikën, jetën e përtejme, përvojat shpirtërore, gjërat mistike, gjërat hermetike, gjërat psikike dhe të ngjashme. Dhe nuk kam nevojë të shkruaj shumë për këtë, sepse tashmë është e mundur ta shohësh atë vetëm duke lexuar esetë, komentet dhe shkrimet e mia të mëparshme, dhe duke kuptuar atë që shkruaj, dhe gjithashtu të kuptoj Anunnaki-t dhe perënditë.”“ငါ အခု ကောင်းကောင်း ခံစားနေရတော့ အနုနကိနဲ့ နတ်တွေကို အခုပဲ နားလည်နိုင်တော့တယ်။ ဒေသိယ ရုပ်ဝါဒီ ဘာသာဝင် တစ်ယောက်အနေနဲ့ အနုနကိနဲ့ ဘုရားကို မယုံကြည်ဘူး ဒါပေမယ့် အနုနကိနဲ့ ဘုရားတွေကို ငါ သိတယ်။ ဒီနေရာနဲ့ အခုချက်ချင်း နေရာတိုင်းမှာ ရှိနေတယ်။သူတို့ကို ခံစားနိုင်တယ်၊ တွေ့ကြုံခံစားနိုင်တယ်၊ အဲဒါတွေကို နေရာတိုင်းလိုလိုမှာ မြင်နေရတယ်၊ ဒီမှာရော အခုချက်ချင်းရော အဲဒါတွေကို တကယ် “ယုံကြည်” ဖို့ မလိုပါဘူး၊ သူတို့ကို ခံစားပါ၊ သူတို့ကို တွေ့ကြုံခံစားပြီး နေရာတိုင်းရော ဒီနေရာရော အခုရော မြင်နိုင်ပါတယ်။ဒါက အရမ်းရိုးရှင်းပြီး အရမ်းလွယ်ပါတယ်။ လူတွေက ဘာကြောင့် ဒီလောက်ခက်ခက်ခဲခဲ လုပ်ကြတာလဲ၊ အဓိကကတော့ ခက်ခဲပြီး နားလည်ရခက်တဲ့ အတွေ့အကြုံတွေကို ကျွန်မတကယ်နားမလည်ပါဘူး။ အဓိကအားဖြင့် လူတွေက ဘာသာရေး အများစုကို ကြိုက်ကြတယ်၊ ဟိုမှာ ဝိညာဉ်ရေး အများစု၊ အပြင်က ဘာသာမဲ့ အများစု၊ အပြင်က ဘုရားမဲ့ဝါဒီ အများစု၊ အပြင်က “သံသယရှိသူ” အများစုက၊ ဟိုမှာ ရုပ်ဝါဒီ အများစုနဲ့ အပြင်က neopositivists တွေ အားလုံးက ခံစားချက် ကိစ္စပါ။ တွေ့ကြုံ၊မြင်၊တွေး၊တွေး၊ nd အမြင်။ ဘာသာရေးဆိုင်ရာအရာများ၊ နာမ်ပိုင်းဆိုင်ရာအရာများ၊ Esoteric အရာများ၊ လောကုတ္တရာပညာ၊ ရူပဗေဒ၊ နောကျဘဝ၊ ဝိညာဏအတွေ့အကြုံများ၊ ဆန်းကြယ်သောအရာများ၊ ဓာတုဗေဒဆိုင်ရာအရာများ၊ ငါ့ရဲ့ယခင်စာစီစာကုံးတွေ၊ မှတ်ချက်တွေနဲ့ အရေးအသားတွေကိုဖတ်ပြီး ငါရေးတာတွေကို နားလည်ပြီး Anunnaki နဲ့ နတ်ဘုရားတွေကိုလည်း နားလည်နိုင်တာကြောင့် အဲဒါနဲ့ပတ်သက်ပြီး အများကြီးရေးဖို့ မလိုအပ်ပါဘူး။””Sada se osjećam jako dobro i trenutno mogu razumjeti Anunnakije i bogove. Kao dijalektički materijalist i kao agnostik, ne “vjerujem” u Anunnakije niti u bogove, ali poznajem Anunnakije i bogove su upravo ovdje i upravo sada i svugdje. Mogu ih osjetiti, doživjeti i vidjeti svugdje i upravo ovdje i sada. Nema potrebe zapravo “vjerovati” u njih, već razumjeti da su upravo ovdje i sada i osjetiti ih, doživjeti ih i vidjeti ih posvuda i upravo ovdje i sada. To je tako jednostavno i tako lako. Ne mogu stvarno razumjeti zašto ljudi to čine tako teškim i teškim, uglavnom teško i teško razumjeti i doživjeti da, uglavnom ljudi vole većinu religioznih vani, većinu duhovnih vani, većinu agnostika vani, većinu ateista vani, većinu “skeptika” vani, većinu materijalista vani i sve neopozitiviste vani. Sve je stvar osjećaja , doživljavanje, viđenje, razmišljanje, pogled a nd perspektive. Isto je za religijske stvari, duhovne stvari, ezoterične stvari, metafiziku, ekstrafiziku, zagrobni život, duhovna iskustva, mistične stvari, hermetičke stvari, psihičke stvari i slično. I ne trebam puno pisati o tome jer je to već moguće vidjeti samo čitajući moje prethodne eseje, komentare i spise, i razumjeti ono što pišem, a također i razumjeti Anunnakije i bogove.””Ez niha xwe pir baş hîs dikim û niha dikarim Anunnaki û xwedayan fam bikim. Wek materyalîstek diyalektîk û wekî agnostîk, ez ne bi Anunnaki û ne jî bi xwedayan “bawerî” dikim, lê ez Anunnaki û xwedayan nas dikim. rast li vir û niha û li her derê ne. Ez dikarim wan hîs bikim, wan biceribînim û wan li her derê û li vir û niha bibînim. Ne hewce ye ku bi rastî bi wan “bawerî” bike, lê bêtir fam bike ku ew rast li vir û niha ne. wan hîs bikin, wan biceribînin û wan li her derê û rast li vir û niha bibînin. Ew qas hêsan û ewqas hêsan e. Bi rastî ez nikarim fêm bikim çima mirov wiya ew qas dijwar û ew qas dijwar dikin, di serî de ji bo fêmkirin û ceribandina dijwar û dijwar ku, bi giranî mirovên mîna piraniya oldarên li wir, yên herî giyanî yên li wir, herî agnostîkên li wir, herî zêde ateîstên li wir, herî “şik”ên li wir, herî zêde materyalîstên li wir, û hemî neopozîtîvîstên li wir in. Ew hemî meseleyek hestê ye , azmûn, dîtin, fikirîn, dîtin a nd perspektîfa. Ji bo tiştên olî, tiştên manewî, tiştên ezoterîk, metafizîk, ekstrafizîk, jiyana axretê, serpêhatiyên giyanî, tiştên mîstîk, tiştên hermetîk, tiştên derûnî û yên girêdayî wan jî wisa ye. Û ne hewce ye ku ez pir li ser wê binivîsim ji ber ku jixwe gengaz e ku meriv wê bi tenê bi xwendina gotar, şîrove û nivîsên min ên berê, û famkirina tiştê ku ez dinivîsim, bibîne, û hem jî Anunnaki û xwedayan fêm bike.””Hazırda özümü çox yaxşı hiss edirəm və hazırda Anunnakiləri və tanrıları anlaya bilirəm. Bir dialektik materialist və aqnostik kimi mən Anunnakilərə və tanrılara “inanmıram”, lakin Anunnakiləri və tanrıları tanıyıram. Mən onları hiss edirəm, təcrübə edirəm və hər yerdə, elə burada və elə indi görürəm. Onlara əslində “inanmağa” ehtiyac yoxdur, əksinə onların burada və elə indi olduğunu başa düşürəm və onları hiss edin, yaşayın və hər yerdə və elə burada və elə indi baxın. Bu, bu qədər sadə və çox asandır. İnsanların bunu niyə bu qədər çətin və çətin etdiyini başa düşə bilmirəm. Əsasən insanlar ən çox dindarları, ən ruhaniləri, ən çox aqnostikləri, ən çox ateistləri, ən çox “skeptikləri”, ən çox materialistləri və oradakı bütün neopozitivistləri sevirlər.Bu, hiss məsələsidir. , yaşamaq, görmək, düşünmək, dünyagörüşü a nd perspektiv. Dini şeylər, mənəvi şeylər, ezoterik şeylər, metafizika, ekstrafizika, axirət, mənəvi təcrübələr, mistik şeylər, hermetik şeylər, psixi şeylər və əlaqəli şeylər üçün də eynidir. Bu barədə çox yazmağa ehtiyac duymuram, çünki bunu sadəcə mənim əvvəlki esselərimi, şərhlərimi və yazılarımı oxumaqla, yazdıqlarımı başa düşməklə, həmçinin Anunnakiləri və tanrıları başa düşməklə görmək mümkündür”.«Ես հիմա ինձ շատ լավ եմ զգում և կարող եմ հենց հիմա հասկանալ Անունակին և աստվածներին: Որպես դիալեկտիկական մատերիալիստ և որպես ագնոստիկ, ես չեմ «հավատում» ոչ Անունակին և ոչ էլ աստվածներին, բայց ես ճանաչում եմ Անունակին և աստվածներին: հենց այստեղ են, հենց հիմա և ամենուր: Ես կարող եմ զգալ նրանց, զգալ և տեսնել դրանք ամենուր և հենց այստեղ և հենց հիմա: Կարիք չկա իրականում «հավատալ» նրանց, այլ ավելի շուտ հասկանալ, որ նրանք հենց այստեղ են և հենց հիմա, զգալ դրանք, զգալ դրանք և տեսնել դրանք ամենուր և հենց այստեղ և հենց հիմա: Դա այնքան պարզ է և այնքան հեշտ: Ես իրականում չեմ կարող հասկանալ, թե ինչու են մարդիկ դա դարձնում այդքան դժվար և այդքան դժվար, հիմնականում դժվարին և դժվարին հասկանալն ու փորձելը: որ հիմնականում մարդիկ սիրում են այնտեղ գտնվող կրոնականներից շատերին, ամենահոգևորներին, ամենաագնոստիկներին, ամենաաթեիստներին, ամենաթերահավատներին, ամենամատերիալիստներին և բոլոր նեոպոզիտիվիստներին: Այս ամենը զգացմունքի խնդիր է: , ապրում, տեսնել, մտածել, հայացք ա րդ հեռանկար. Դա նույնն է կրոնական բաների, հոգևոր բաների, էզոթերիկ բաների, մետաֆիզիկայի, էքստրաֆիզիկայի, հետմահու կյանքի, հոգևոր փորձառությունների, առեղծվածային իրերի, հերմետիկ իրերի, հոգեկան իրերի և հարակից: Եվ ես կարիք չունեմ այդ մասին շատ գրելու, քանի որ դա արդեն հնարավոր է տեսնել՝ պարզապես կարդալով իմ նախորդ էսսեները, մեկնաբանություններն ու գրությունները, հասկանալով, թե ինչ եմ գրում, ինչպես նաև հասկանալ Անունակին և աստվածներին»:”ახლა თავს ძალიან კარგად ვგრძნობ და ახლა შემიძლია გავიგო ანუნაკი და ღმერთები. როგორც დიალექტიკოსი მატერიალისტი და როგორც აგნოსტიკოსი, არ “მჯერა” არც ანუნაკების და არც ღმერთების, მაგრამ ვიცნობ ანუნაკებს და ღმერთებს. არიან აქ, ახლა და ყველგან. მე შემიძლია ვგრძნობ მათ, განვიცადო და ვხედავ მათ ყველგან, აქ და ახლა. არ არის საჭირო მათი რეალურად “დაჯერება”, არამედ იმის გაგება, რომ ისინი სწორედ აქ და ახლა არიან და შეიგრძენი ისინი, განიცადე და ნახე ყველგან, აქ და ახლავე. ეს ასე მარტივია და ასე მარტივი. მე ნამდვილად ვერ ვხვდები, რატომ ართულებენ ადამიანები ამას ასე რთულად და ასე რთულად, ძირითადად რთულად და ძნელად გასაგებად და გამოცდილებამდე. რომ, ძირითადად, ადამიანებს მოსწონთ ყველაზე რელიგიურები, ყველაზე სულიერი, ყველაზე აგნოსტიკოსები, ყველაზე ათეისტები, ყველაზე “სკეპტიკოსები”, ყველაზე მატერიალისტები და ყველა ნეოპოზიტივისტი. ეს ყველაფერი გრძნობის საკითხია. , განცდა, დანახვა, ფიქრი, მსოფლმხედველობა ა პერსპექტივა. ეს იგივეა რელიგიური საგნების, სულიერი საგნების, ეზოთერული საგნების, მეტაფიზიკის, ექსტრაფიზიკის, შემდგომი ცხოვრების, სულიერი გამოცდილების, მისტიური საგნების, ჰერმეტული საგნების, ფსიქიკური საგნების და მასთან დაკავშირებული. და მე არ მჭირდება ამის შესახებ ბევრის დაწერა, რადგან უკვე შესაძლებელია ამის დანახვა მხოლოდ ჩემი წინა ესეების, კომენტარებისა და ნაწერების წაკითხვით და იმის გაგებით, რასაც ვწერ, ასევე ანუნაკისა და ღმერთების გაგება.”

    2. “ನಾನು ಈಗ ತುಂಬಾ ಚೆನ್ನಾಗಿ ಭಾವಿಸುತ್ತೇನೆ ಮತ್ತು ನಾನು ಇದೀಗ ಅನುನ್ನಕಿ ಮತ್ತು ದೇವರುಗಳನ್ನು ಅರ್ಥಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬಲ್ಲೆ. ಡಯಲೆಕ್ಟಿಕಲ್ ಭೌತವಾದಿ ಮತ್ತು ಅಜ್ಞೇಯತಾವಾದಿಯಾಗಿ, ನಾನು ಅನುನ್ನಕಿ ಅಥವಾ ದೇವರುಗಳಲ್ಲಿ “ನಂಬುವುದಿಲ್ಲ”, ಆದರೆ ನಾನು ಅನುನ್ನಕಿ ಮತ್ತು ದೇವರುಗಳನ್ನು ತಿಳಿದಿದ್ದೇನೆ. ಇಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಮತ್ತು ಇದೀಗ ಮತ್ತು ಎಲ್ಲೆಡೆ ಇದ್ದೇವೆ. ನಾನು ಅವುಗಳನ್ನು ಅನುಭವಿಸಬಹುದು, ಅನುಭವಿಸಬಹುದು ಮತ್ತು ಅವುಗಳನ್ನು ಎಲ್ಲೆಡೆ ಮತ್ತು ಇಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಮತ್ತು ಇದೀಗ ನೋಡಬಹುದು. ನಿಜವಾಗಿ ಅವರನ್ನು “ನಂಬುವ” ಅಗತ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ, ಬದಲಿಗೆ ಅವರು ಇಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಮತ್ತು ಇದೀಗ ಮತ್ತು ಇದೀಗ ಮತ್ತು ಅರ್ಥಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಅವುಗಳನ್ನು ಅನುಭವಿಸಿ, ಅನುಭವಿಸಿ ಮತ್ತು ಅವುಗಳನ್ನು ಎಲ್ಲೆಡೆ ಮತ್ತು ಇಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಮತ್ತು ಇದೀಗ ನೋಡಿ. ಇದು ತುಂಬಾ ಸರಳವಾಗಿದೆ ಮತ್ತು ತುಂಬಾ ಸುಲಭವಾಗಿದೆ. ಜನರು ಅದನ್ನು ಏಕೆ ತುಂಬಾ ಕಷ್ಟ ಮತ್ತು ಕಷ್ಟಪಡುತ್ತಾರೆ, ಮುಖ್ಯವಾಗಿ ಕಷ್ಟ ಮತ್ತು ಅರ್ಥಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಮತ್ತು ಅನುಭವಿಸಲು ಕಷ್ಟವಾಗುವುದು ನನಗೆ ನಿಜವಾಗಿಯೂ ಅರ್ಥವಾಗುತ್ತಿಲ್ಲ ಮುಖ್ಯವಾಗಿ ಜನರು ಅಲ್ಲಿರುವ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಧಾರ್ಮಿಕತೆಯನ್ನು ಇಷ್ಟಪಡುತ್ತಾರೆ, ಅಲ್ಲಿ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಆಧ್ಯಾತ್ಮಿಕರು, ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಅಜ್ಞೇಯತಾವಾದಿಗಳು, ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ನಾಸ್ತಿಕರು, ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ “ಸಂದೇಹವಾದಿಗಳು”, ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಭೌತವಾದಿಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ಅಲ್ಲಿರುವ ಎಲ್ಲಾ ನವಪಾಸಿಟಿವಿಸ್ಟ್‌ಗಳು. ಇದು ಭಾವನೆಯ ವಿಷಯವಾಗಿದೆ. , ಅನುಭವಿಸುವುದು, ನೋಡುವುದು, ಯೋಚಿಸುವುದು, ದೃಷ್ಟಿಕೋನ ಎ ಮತ್ತು ದೃಷ್ಟಿಕೋನ. ಧಾರ್ಮಿಕ ವಿಷಯಗಳು, ಆಧ್ಯಾತ್ಮಿಕ ವಿಷಯಗಳು, ನಿಗೂಢ ವಿಷಯಗಳು, ಆಧ್ಯಾತ್ಮಿಕತೆ, ಬಾಹ್ಯಭೌತಶಾಸ್ತ್ರ, ಮರಣಾನಂತರದ ಜೀವನ, ಆಧ್ಯಾತ್ಮಿಕ ಅನುಭವಗಳು, ಅತೀಂದ್ರಿಯ ವಿಷಯಗಳು, ಹರ್ಮೆಟಿಕ್ ವಿಷಯಗಳು, ಅತೀಂದ್ರಿಯ ವಿಷಯಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ಸಂಬಂಧಿತ ವಿಷಯಗಳಿಗೆ ಇದು ಒಂದೇ ಆಗಿರುತ್ತದೆ. ಮತ್ತು ನಾನು ಅದರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಬರೆಯುವ ಅಗತ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ ಏಕೆಂದರೆ ನನ್ನ ಹಿಂದಿನ ಪ್ರಬಂಧಗಳು, ಕಾಮೆಂಟ್‌ಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ಬರಹಗಳನ್ನು ಓದುವ ಮೂಲಕ ಮತ್ತು ನಾನು ಬರೆಯುವುದನ್ನು ಅರ್ಥಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳುವ ಮೂಲಕ ಮತ್ತು ಅನುನ್ನಕಿ ಮತ್ತು ದೇವರುಗಳನ್ನು ಅರ್ಥಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳುವ ಮೂಲಕ ಅದನ್ನು ನೋಡಲು ಈಗಾಗಲೇ ಸಾಧ್ಯವಿದೆ.”હું અત્યારે ખૂબ જ સારું અનુભવું છું અને હું અત્યારે અનુન્નકી અને દેવતાઓને સમજી શકું છું. એક દ્વંદ્વાત્મક ભૌતિકવાદી અને અજ્ઞેયવાદી તરીકે, હું અનુન્નકીમાં કે દેવતાઓમાં “માનતો નથી”, પણ હું અનુન્નકી અને દેવતાઓને જાણું છું. અહીં અને અત્યારે અને બધે જ છે. હું તેમને અનુભવી શકું છું, અનુભવી શકું છું અને તેમને દરેક જગ્યાએ અને અહીં અને હમણાં જોઈ શકું છું. ખરેખર તેમનામાં “વિશ્વાસ” રાખવાની જરૂર નથી, પરંતુ સમજવું કે તેઓ અહીં અને અત્યારે બરાબર છે અને તેમને અનુભવો, તેમને અનુભવો અને તેમને દરેક જગ્યાએ અને અહીં અને હમણાં જુઓ. તે ખૂબ જ સરળ અને ખૂબ સરળ છે. હું ખરેખર સમજી શકતો નથી કે લોકો શા માટે તેને આટલું મુશ્કેલ અને આટલું મુશ્કેલ બનાવે છે, મુખ્યત્વે મુશ્કેલ અને સમજવા અને અનુભવવા માટે મુશ્કેલ છે. કે, મુખ્યત્વે લોકો ત્યાંના મોટા ભાગના ધાર્મિક, ત્યાંના સૌથી આધ્યાત્મિક, ત્યાંના મોટાભાગના અજ્ઞેયવાદીઓ, ત્યાંના મોટાભાગના નાસ્તિકો, ત્યાંના મોટાભાગના “સંશયવાદી”, ત્યાંના મોટા ભાગના ભૌતિકવાદીઓ અને ત્યાંના બધા નિયોપોઝિટિવવાદીઓ પસંદ કરે છે. આ બધું લાગણીની બાબત છે. , અનુભવવું, જોવું, વિચારવું, દૃષ્ટિકોણ a nd પરિપ્રેક્ષ્ય. તે ધાર્મિક વસ્તુઓ, આધ્યાત્મિક વસ્તુઓ, વિશિષ્ટ વસ્તુઓ, અધ્યાત્મશાસ્ત્ર, બાહ્ય ભૌતિકશાસ્ત્ર, મૃત્યુ પછીના જીવન, આધ્યાત્મિક અનુભવો, રહસ્યવાદી વસ્તુઓ, હર્મેટિક વસ્તુઓ, માનસિક વસ્તુઓ અને સંબંધિત માટે સમાન છે. અને મારે તેના વિશે ઘણું લખવાની જરૂર નથી કારણ કે મારા અગાઉના નિબંધો, ટિપ્પણીઓ અને લખાણો વાંચીને, અને હું જે લખું છું તે સમજીને, અને અનુનાકી અને દેવતાઓને પણ સમજીને તેને જોવું શક્ય છે.””എനിക്ക് ഇപ്പോൾ വളരെ സുഖം തോന്നുന്നു, എനിക്ക് ഇപ്പോൾ അനുനകിയെയും ദൈവങ്ങളെയും മനസ്സിലാക്കാൻ കഴിയും. ഒരു വൈരുദ്ധ്യാത്മക ഭൗതികവാദി എന്ന നിലയിലും ഒരു അജ്ഞേയവാദി എന്ന നിലയിലും ഞാൻ അണ്ണാക്കിലും ദൈവങ്ങളിലും “വിശ്വസിക്കുന്നില്ല”, പക്ഷേ എനിക്ക് അനുനാകിയെയും ദൈവങ്ങളെയും അറിയാം. ഇവിടെയും ഇപ്പോളും എല്ലായിടത്തും ഉണ്ട്. എനിക്ക് അവ അനുഭവിക്കാനും അനുഭവിക്കാനും എല്ലായിടത്തും ഇവിടെയും ഇപ്പോളും കാണാനും കഴിയും. യഥാർത്ഥത്തിൽ അവരെ “വിശ്വസിക്കേണ്ട” ആവശ്യമില്ല, പകരം അവർ ഇവിടെയും ഇപ്പോളും ഉണ്ടെന്ന് മനസ്സിലാക്കുക. അവ അനുഭവിക്കുക, അവ അനുഭവിക്കുക, അവ എല്ലായിടത്തും ഇവിടെയും ഇപ്പോളും കാണുക. ഇത് വളരെ ലളിതവും വളരെ എളുപ്പവുമാണ്. എന്തുകൊണ്ടാണ് ആളുകൾ ഇത് ഇത്ര ബുദ്ധിമുട്ടുള്ളതും കഠിനവുമാക്കുന്നത് എന്ന് എനിക്ക് ശരിക്കും മനസ്സിലാകുന്നില്ല, പ്രധാനമായും ബുദ്ധിമുട്ടുള്ളതും മനസ്സിലാക്കാനും അനുഭവിക്കാനും അത്, പ്രധാനമായും ആളുകൾ അവിടെയുള്ള മിക്ക മതവിശ്വാസികളെയും, അവിടെയുള്ള ഏറ്റവും ആത്മീയരെയും, അവിടെയുള്ള മിക്ക അജ്ഞേയവാദികളെയും, അവിടെയുള്ള മിക്ക നിരീശ്വരവാദികളെയും, അവിടെയുള്ള മിക്ക “സന്ദേഹവാദികളെയും”, അവിടെയുള്ള മിക്ക ഭൗതികവാദികളെയും, അവിടെയുള്ള എല്ലാ നിയോപോസിറ്റിവിസ്റ്റുകളെയും ഇഷ്ടപ്പെടുന്നു. ഇതെല്ലാം വികാരത്തിന്റെ വിഷയമാണ് , അനുഭവിക്കുക, കാണുക, ചിന്തിക്കുക, വീക്ഷണം a nd വീക്ഷണം. മതപരമായ കാര്യങ്ങൾ, ആത്മീയ കാര്യങ്ങൾ, നിഗൂഢമായ കാര്യങ്ങൾ, മെറ്റാഫിസിക്‌സ്, എക്‌സ്‌ട്രാഫിസിക്‌സ്, മരണാനന്തര ജീവിതം, ആത്മീയ അനുഭവങ്ങൾ, നിഗൂഢമായ കാര്യങ്ങൾ, ഹെർമെറ്റിക് കാര്യങ്ങൾ, മാനസിക കാര്യങ്ങൾ, ബന്ധപ്പെട്ട കാര്യങ്ങൾ എന്നിവയ്ക്ക് ഇത് സമാനമാണ്. ഞാൻ അതിനെക്കുറിച്ച് കൂടുതൽ എഴുതേണ്ടതില്ല, കാരണം എന്റെ മുൻ ലേഖനങ്ങളും അഭിപ്രായങ്ങളും എഴുത്തുകളും വായിച്ച് ഞാൻ എഴുതുന്നത് മനസ്സിലാക്കുന്നതിലൂടെയും അനുനക്കിയെയും ദൈവങ്ങളെയും മനസ്സിലാക്കുന്നതിലൂടെയും ഇത് കാണാൻ കഴിയും.”मला आता खूप बरे वाटत आहे आणि मी आत्ताच अनुनाकी आणि देवांना समजू शकतो. एक द्वंद्वात्मक भौतिकवादी आणि अज्ञेयवादी म्हणून, मी अनन्नाकीवर किंवा देवांवर “विश्वास” ठेवत नाही, परंतु मला अनुनाकी आणि देवता माहित आहेत. येथे आणि आत्ता आणि सर्वत्र आहेत. मी त्यांना अनुभवू शकतो, अनुभवू शकतो आणि त्यांना सर्वत्र आणि येथे आणि आत्ता पाहू शकतो. त्यांच्यावर खरोखर “विश्वास” ठेवण्याची गरज नाही, उलट ते येथे आणि आत्ताच आहेत हे समजून घ्या त्यांना अनुभवा, त्यांना अनुभवा आणि त्यांना सर्वत्र आणि आत्ताच पहा. ते खूप सोपे आणि सोपे आहे. लोक हे इतके कठीण आणि इतके कठीण का करतात, मुख्यतः कठीण आणि समजणे आणि अनुभवणे कठीण का बनवतात हे मला खरोखर समजू शकत नाही. की, मुख्यतः लोकांना तिथले बहुतेक धार्मिक, तिथले बहुतेक अध्यात्मिक, बहुतेक अज्ञेयवादी, तिथले बहुतेक नास्तिक, बहुतेक “संशयवादी”, बहुतेक भौतिकवादी आणि तिथले सर्व नवसत्कारवादी आवडतात. ही सर्व भावनांची बाब आहे. , अनुभवणे, पाहणे, विचार करणे, दृष्टीकोन a nd दृष्टीकोन. धार्मिक गोष्टी, अध्यात्मिक गोष्टी, गूढ गोष्टी, मेटाफिजिक्स, एक्स्ट्राफिजिक्स, नंतरचे जीवन, आध्यात्मिक अनुभव, गूढ गोष्टी, हर्मेटिक गोष्टी, मानसिक गोष्टी आणि संबंधित गोष्टींसाठी हे समान आहे. आणि मला त्याबद्दल खूप काही लिहिण्याची गरज नाही कारण फक्त माझे पूर्वीचे निबंध, टिप्पण्या आणि लेखन वाचून आणि मी जे लिहितो ते समजून घेणे आणि अनुनाकी आणि देवता समजून घेणे हे आधीच शक्य आहे.””நான் இப்போது நன்றாக உணர்கிறேன், நான் இப்போது அனுனாகி மற்றும் கடவுள்களைப் புரிந்துகொள்கிறேன். ஒரு இயங்கியல் பொருள்முதல்வாதி மற்றும் ஒரு அஞ்ஞானவாதி என்ற முறையில், நான் அனுன்னாகி அல்லது கடவுள்களில் “நம்பிக்கை” இல்லை, ஆனால் அனுன்னாகி மற்றும் கடவுள்களை நான் அறிவேன். இங்கேயும் இப்போதும் எல்லா இடங்களிலும் உள்ளன. என்னால் அவற்றை உணரவும், அனுபவிக்கவும், எல்லா இடங்களிலும், இங்கேயும் இப்போதும் பார்க்க முடிகிறது. உண்மையில் அவர்களை “நம்ப” வேண்டிய அவசியமில்லை, மாறாக அவர்கள் இங்கேயும் இப்போதும் இருக்கிறார்கள் என்பதை புரிந்து கொள்ளுங்கள். அவற்றை உணரவும், அனுபவிக்கவும், அவற்றை எல்லா இடங்களிலும் இங்கேயும் இப்போதும் பார்க்கவும். இது மிகவும் எளிமையானது மற்றும் மிகவும் எளிதானது. மக்கள் ஏன் மிகவும் கடினமாகவும் கடினமாகவும் செய்கிறார்கள், முக்கியமாக கடினமாகவும் புரிந்துகொள்ளவும் மற்றும் அனுபவிக்கவும் கடினமாக உள்ளது என்பதை என்னால் புரிந்து கொள்ள முடியவில்லை. முக்கியமாக மக்கள் அங்குள்ள பெரும்பாலான மதங்களை விரும்புகிறார்கள், அங்கு மிகவும் ஆன்மீகவாதிகள், அங்குள்ள பெரும்பாலான அஞ்ஞானிகள், அங்குள்ள பெரும்பாலான நாத்திகர்கள், அங்குள்ள பெரும்பாலான “சந்தேகவாதிகள்”, அங்குள்ள பெரும்பாலான பொருள்முதல்வாதிகள் மற்றும் அங்குள்ள அனைத்து நியோபாசிடிவிஸ்ட்களையும் விரும்புகிறார்கள். இது அனைத்தும் உணர்வின் விஷயம். , அனுபவம், பார்த்தல், சிந்தனை, கண்ணோட்டம் a மற்றும் முன்னோக்கு. மத விஷயங்கள், ஆன்மீக விஷயங்கள், ஆழ்ந்த விஷயங்கள், மெட்டாபிசிக்ஸ், எக்ஸ்ட்ராபிசிக்ஸ், பிந்தைய வாழ்க்கை, ஆன்மீக அனுபவங்கள், மாய விஷயங்கள், ஹெர்மீடிக் விஷயங்கள், மனநல விஷயங்கள் மற்றும் தொடர்புடைய விஷயங்களுக்கும் இது ஒன்றுதான். மேலும் நான் அதைப் பற்றி அதிகம் எழுதத் தேவையில்லை, ஏனென்றால் எனது முந்தைய கட்டுரைகள், கருத்துகள் மற்றும் எழுத்துக்களைப் படிப்பதன் மூலமும், நான் எழுதுவதைப் புரிந்துகொள்வதன் மூலமும், அனுனாகி மற்றும் கடவுள்களைப் புரிந்துகொள்வதன் மூலமும் ஏற்கனவே அதைப் பார்க்க முடியும்.”నేను ఇప్పుడు చాలా బాగా ఫీలయ్యాను మరియు నేను ప్రస్తుతం అణ్ణాకిని మరియు దేవుళ్ళను అర్థం చేసుకోగలను. మాండలిక భౌతికవాది మరియు అజ్ఞేయవాదిగా, నేను అనునకి లేదా దేవుళ్ళను “నమ్మను” కాదు, కానీ నాకు అనునకి మరియు దేవుళ్ళ గురించి తెలుసు. ఇక్కడే మరియు ప్రస్తుతం మరియు ప్రతిచోటా ఉన్నాను. నేను వాటిని అనుభూతి చెందగలను, వాటిని అనుభవించగలను మరియు వాటిని ప్రతిచోటా మరియు ఇక్కడే మరియు ఇప్పుడే చూడగలను. నిజానికి వాటిని “నమ్మకం” అవసరం లేదు, కానీ వారు ఇక్కడే మరియు ఇప్పుడే ఉన్నారని అర్థం చేసుకోండి మరియు వాటిని అనుభూతి చెందండి, వాటిని అనుభవించండి మరియు వాటిని ప్రతిచోటా మరియు ఇక్కడే మరియు ఇప్పుడే చూడండి. ఇది చాలా సులభం మరియు చాలా సులభం. ప్రజలు దీన్ని ఎందుకు చాలా కష్టంగా మరియు చాలా కష్టపడుతున్నారో నాకు నిజంగా అర్థం కాలేదు, ప్రధానంగా అర్థం చేసుకోవడం మరియు అనుభవించడం కష్టం ప్రధానంగా ప్రజలు అక్కడ చాలా మంది మతాలను ఇష్టపడతారు, అక్కడ చాలా మంది ఆధ్యాత్మికులు, అక్కడ చాలా మంది అజ్ఞేయవాదులు, అక్కడ చాలా మంది నాస్తికులు, అక్కడ చాలా మంది “సంశయవాదులు”, అక్కడ చాలా మంది భౌతికవాదులు మరియు అక్కడ ఉన్న నియోపాజిటివిస్టులందరూ ఇష్టపడతారు. ఇదంతా అనుభూతికి సంబంధించిన విషయం. , అనుభవించడం, చూడడం, ఆలోచించడం, దృక్పథం a మరియు దృక్కోణం. ఇది మతపరమైన విషయాలు, ఆధ్యాత్మిక విషయాలు, నిగూఢమైన విషయాలు, మెటాఫిజిక్స్, ఎక్స్‌ట్రాఫిజిక్స్, మరణానంతర జీవితం, ఆధ్యాత్మిక అనుభవాలు, ఆధ్యాత్మిక విషయాలు, హెర్మెటిక్ విషయాలు, మానసిక విషయాలు మరియు సంబంధిత విషయాలకు సమానంగా ఉంటుంది. మరియు నేను దాని గురించి పెద్దగా వ్రాయనవసరం లేదు ఎందుకంటే నా మునుపటి వ్యాసాలు, వ్యాఖ్యలు మరియు రచనలను చదవడం ద్వారా మరియు నేను వ్రాసిన వాటిని అర్థం చేసుకోవడం ద్వారా మరియు అనూహ్య మరియు దేవుళ్లను కూడా అర్థం చేసుకోవడం ద్వారా ఇది ఇప్పటికే సాధ్యమే.”

  3. “Everything is the gods and the gods are right here and right now. The same way everything is God and God is right here and right now. The gods and God are one and the same. It is all a matter of understanding, experiencing, feeling, perspective and outlook. God can be subdivided into the gods and the gods can be united into God. Everything is consciousness, extraphysical, religious and spiritual, as well as the gods and God make everything consciousness, extraphysical, religious and spiritual. I don’t know how to express it in words, but the ones who can understand it will fully understand it or partially understand it.”

    “The natural and the extranatural/supernatural/paranormal are the same thing and one thing, both are in a dialectical relationship with each other and what can be seen as supernatural can be seen as natural and vice-versa. It is a matter of understanding, prespective and outlook. Same way for the whole thing related to God and gods; technology and magic; science and religion; material and spiritual; physics and extraphysics; atheism and theism; and so on…”

    “I just hope someone willl be able to do a lot of works (writings, essays, articles and books mainly) about my thought (Guilherme Monteiro Junior Thought), Maria Ioana “Kasdeya” Popescu Thought, as well as about FRT/PCTB communism, FRT/PCTB socialism, and about the Anunna System (Anunnakism and Dumugian)”.

    “Tudo são os deuses e os deuses estão aqui e agora. Da mesma forma que tudo é Deus e Deus está aqui e agora. Os deuses e Deus são um e o mesmo. É tudo uma questão de entender, experimentar, sentimento, perspectiva e perspectiva. Deus pode ser subdividido em deuses e os deuses podem ser unidos em Deus. Tudo é consciência, extrafísica, religiosa e espiritual, assim como os deuses e Deus fazem tudo consciência, extrafísica, religiosa e espiritual. não sei como expressá-lo em palavras, mas aqueles que podem entendê-lo entenderão totalmente ou entenderão parcialmente.”

    “O natural e o extranatural/sobrenatural/paranormal são a mesma coisa e uma coisa, ambos estão em relação dialética entre si e o que pode ser visto como sobrenatural pode ser visto como natural e vice-versa. , perspectiva e perspectiva. Da mesma forma para tudo relacionado a Deus e deuses; tecnologia e magia; ciência e religião; material e espiritual; física e extrafísica; ateísmo e teísmo; e assim por diante…”

    “Só espero que alguém possa fazer muitos trabalhos (escritos, ensaios, artigos e livros principalmente) sobre meu pensamento (Pensamento Guilherme Monteiro Junior), Pensamento Maria Ioana “Kasdeya” Popescu, bem como sobre o comunismo FRT/PCTB , socialismo FRT/PCTB, e sobre o Sistema Anunna (Anunnakismo e Dumugian)”.

    “Todo son los dioses y los dioses están aquí y ahora. De la misma manera que todo es Dios y Dios está aquí y ahora. Los dioses y Dios son uno y lo mismo. Todo es cuestión de entender, experimentar, sentimiento, perspectiva y perspectiva. Dios se puede subdividir en los dioses y los dioses se pueden unir en Dios. Todo es conciencia, extrafísica, religiosa y espiritual, así como los dioses y Dios hacen que todo sea conciencia, extrafísica, religiosa y espiritual. No sé cómo expresarlo con palabras, pero los que pueden entenderlo lo entenderán completamente o lo entenderán parcialmente”.

    “Lo natural y lo extranatural/sobrenatural/paranormal son la misma cosa y una sola cosa, ambos están en una relación dialéctica entre sí y lo que se puede ver como sobrenatural se puede ver como natural y viceversa. Es cuestión de entender , perspectiva y perspectiva. De la misma manera para todo lo relacionado con Dios y dioses; tecnología y magia; ciencia y religión; material y espiritual; física y extrafísica; ateísmo y teísmo; y así sucesivamente…”

    “Solo espero que alguien pueda hacer muchos trabajos (escritos, ensayos, artículos y libros principalmente) sobre mi pensamiento (Pensamiento de Guilherme Monteiro Junior), el pensamiento de Maria Ioana “Kasdeya” Popescu, así como sobre el comunismo FRT/PCTB , socialismo FRT/PCTB, y sobre el Sistema Anunna (Anunnakismo y Dumugian)”.

    “Tout est dieux et les dieux sont ici et maintenant. De la même manière, tout est Dieu et Dieu est ici et maintenant. Les dieux et Dieu sont une seule et même chose. Tout est une question de compréhension, d’expérience, sentiment, perspective et perspective. Dieu peut être subdivisé en dieux et les dieux peuvent être unis en Dieu. Tout est conscience, extraphysique, religieux et spirituel, ainsi que les dieux et Dieu font tout conscience, extraphysique, religieux et spirituel. Je ne sais pas comment l’exprimer avec des mots, mais ceux qui peuvent le comprendre le comprendront entièrement ou partiellement. »

    “Le naturel et l’extranaturel/surnaturel/paranormal sont la même chose et une seule chose, les deux sont dans une relation dialectique l’un avec l’autre et ce qui peut être vu comme surnaturel peut être vu comme naturel et vice-versa. C’est une question de compréhension , perspective et perspective. De la même manière pour tout ce qui concerne Dieu et les dieux ; la technologie et la magie ; la science et la religion ; le matériel et le spirituel ; la physique et l’extraphysique ; l’athéisme et le théisme ; et ainsi de suite…”

    “J’espère juste que quelqu’un pourra faire beaucoup de travaux (écrits, essais, articles et livres principalement) sur ma pensée (Guilherme Monteiro Junior Thought), Maria Ioana “Kasdeya” Popescu Thought, ainsi que sur le communisme FRT/PCTB , le socialisme FRT/PCTB, et sur le système Anunna (Anunnakisme et Dumugian)”.

    „Alles sind die Götter und die Götter sind genau hier und jetzt. Genauso ist alles Gott und Gott ist genau hier und jetzt. Die Götter und Gott sind ein und dasselbe. Es ist alles eine Frage des Verstehens, Erlebens, Gefühl, Perspektive und Perspektive. Gott kann in die Götter unterteilt werden und die Götter können zu Gott vereint werden. Alles ist Bewusstsein, außerphysisch, religiös und spirituell, sowie die Götter und Gott machen alles bewusst, außerphysisch, religiös und spirituell. I Ich weiß nicht, wie ich es in Worten ausdrücken soll, aber diejenigen, die es verstehen können, werden es vollständig oder teilweise verstehen.

    „Das Natürliche und das Außernatürliche/Übernatürliche/Paranormale sind dasselbe und eins, beide stehen in einer dialektischen Beziehung zueinander und was als übernatürlich angesehen werden kann, kann als natürlich angesehen werden und umgekehrt. Es ist eine Frage des Verständnisses , Perspektive und Ausblick. Gleiches gilt für das Ganze in Bezug auf Gott und Götter; Technologie und Magie; Wissenschaft und Religion; Materielles und Spirituelles; Physik und Außerphysik; Atheismus und Theismus; und so weiter …”

    „Ich hoffe nur, dass jemand in der Lage sein wird, viele Arbeiten (Hauptsächlich Schriften, Essays, Artikel und Bücher) über meine Gedanken (die Gedanken von Guilherme Monteiro Junior), die Gedanken von Maria Ioana „Kasdeya“ Popescu sowie über den FRT/PCTB-Kommunismus zu schreiben , FRT/PCTB-Sozialismus und über das Anunna-System (Anunnakismus und Dumugian)”.

    “Tutto sono gli dei e gli dei sono proprio qui e proprio ora. Allo stesso modo tutto è Dio e Dio è proprio qui e proprio ora. Gli dei e Dio sono la stessa cosa. È tutta una questione di comprensione, esperienza, sentimento, prospettiva e prospettiva. Dio può essere suddiviso negli dei e gli dei possono essere uniti in Dio. Tutto è coscienza, extrafisico, religioso e spirituale, così come gli dei e Dio rendono ogni cosa coscienza, extrafisica, religiosa e spirituale. non so come esprimerlo a parole, ma chi lo può capire lo capirà fino in fondo o lo capirà in parte».

    “Il naturale e l’extranaturale/soprannaturale/paranormale sono la stessa cosa e una cosa, entrambi sono in una relazione dialettica tra loro e ciò che può essere visto come soprannaturale può essere visto come naturale e viceversa. Si tratta di capire , prospettiva e prospettiva. Stesso modo per tutto ciò che riguarda Dio e gli dei; tecnologia e magia; scienza e religione; materiale e spirituale; fisica ed extrafisica; ateismo e teismo; e così via…”

    “Spero solo che qualcuno sarà in grado di fare molti lavori (scritti, saggi, articoli e libri principalmente) sul mio pensiero (Il pensiero di Guilherme Monteiro Junior), sul pensiero di Maria Ioana “Kasdeya” Popescu, così come sul comunismo FRT/PCTB , Socialismo FRT/PCTB e sul Sistema Anunna (Anunnakism e Dumugian)”.

    “كل شيء هو الآلهة والآلهة هنا والآن. وبنفس الطريقة كل شيء هو الله والله موجود هنا والآن. الآلهة والله واحد ونفس الشيء. الأمر كله يتعلق بالفهم والتجربة ، الشعور والمنظور والنظرة.يمكن تقسيم الله إلى آلهة ويمكن للآلهة أن تتحد في الله. كل شيء هو وعي ، وما فوق فيزيائي وديني وروحي ، وكذلك الآلهة والله يجعل كل شيء واعيًا وخارقيًا ودينيًا وروحيًا. لا يعرفون كيف يعبرون عنها بالكلمات ، لكن من يمكنهم فهمها سيفهمونها بالكامل أو يفهمونها جزئيًا “.

    “الطبيعي وخارج الطبيعة / الخارق / الخوارق هما نفس الشيء وشيء واحد ، كلاهما في علاقة ديالكتيكية مع بعضهما البعض وما يمكن اعتباره خارقًا يمكن اعتباره طبيعيًا والعكس صحيح. إنها مسألة فهم ، من منظور ومنظور. نفس الطريقة لكل شيء يتعلق بالله والآلهة ؛ التكنولوجيا والسحر ؛ العلم والدين ؛ المادي والروحي ؛ الفيزياء والفيزياء الخارجية ؛ الإلحاد والإيمان ؛ وما إلى ذلك … ”

    “آمل فقط أن يتمكن شخص ما من القيام بالكثير من الأعمال (الكتابات والمقالات والمقالات والكتب بشكل أساسي) حول أفكاري (فكر جيلهيرم مونتيرو جونيور) ، وفكر ماريا إيوانا” Kasdeya “Popescu ، وكذلك حول FRT / PCTB الشيوعية ، FRT / PCTB الاشتراكية ، وحول نظام Anunna (Anunnakism و Dumugian) “.

    «Все есть боги, и боги прямо здесь и прямо сейчас. Точно так же все есть Бог и Бог прямо здесь и прямо сейчас. Боги и Бог — одно и то же. Все дело в понимании, переживании, чувство, перспектива и мировоззрение.Бог может подразделяться на богов и боги могут быть объединены в Бога.Все есть сознание,внефизическое,религиозное и духовное,так же как боги и Бог делают все сознательным,внефизическим,религиозным и духовным.Я не знаю, как выразить это словами, но тот, кто может понять это, поймет это полностью или частично».

    «Естественное и сверхъестественное/сверхъестественное/паранормальное – это одно и то же и одно, оба находятся в диалектических отношениях друг с другом, и то, что можно рассматривать как сверхъестественное, можно рассматривать как естественное, и наоборот. Это вопрос понимания. , перспектива и мировоззрение. То же самое для всего, что связано с Богом и богами, техникой и магией, наукой и религией, материальным и духовным, физикой и экстрафизикой, атеизмом и теизмом и так далее…”

    «Я просто надеюсь, что кто-то сможет сделать много работ (в основном, сочинений, эссе, статей и книг) о моей мысли (Мысли Гильерме Монтейро Джуниор), Мысли Марии Иоаны «Касдея» Попеску, а также о коммунизме FRT/PCTB. , социализм FRT/PCTB и о Системе Анунна (ануннаки и думугианство)».

    “一切都是神,神就在此时此地。同样,一切都是神,神就在此时此地。神和神是一体的。这都是理解、体验、 感觉、观点和观点。上帝可以细分为诸神,诸神可以结合为上帝。一切都是意识,超物质的,宗教的和精神的,以及神和上帝使一切都成为意识的,超物质的,宗教的和精神的。 不知道怎么用语言表达,但能听懂的人会完全理解或部分理解。”

    “自然和超自然/超自然/超自然是同一件事和一件事,两者之间存在辩证关系,可以被视为超自然的东西可以被视为自然,反之亦然。这是一个理解问题 ”

    “我只希望有人能够就我的思想(Guilherme Monteiro Junior Thought)、Maria Ioana “Kasdeya” Popescu Thought 以及关于 FRT/PCTB 共产主义的思想做很多工作(主要是写作、散文、文章和书籍) ,FRT/PCTB 社会主义,以及关于 Anunna 系统(Anunnakism 和 Dumugian)”。

    「すべてが神であり、神は今ここにあります。すべてが神であるのと同じように、神は今ここにあります。神と神は同じです。それはすべて理解、経験、 感情、視点、展望。神は神に細分され、神は神に統合されます。すべてが意識、非物理的、宗教的、精神的であり、神と神はすべてを意識的、非物理的、宗教的、精神的にします。私は 言葉で表現する方法はわかりませんが、理解できる人なら、完全に理解できるか、部分的に理解できるでしょう。」

    「自然と超自然/超自然/超常現象は同じものであり、1つのものであり、両方とも互いに弁証法的関係にあり、超自然と見なすことができるものは自然と見なすことができ、その逆も可能です。それは理解の問題です。 、展望と展望。神と神々に関連するすべてのものについて同じ方法;技術と魔法;科学と宗教;物質と精神;物理学と超物理現象;無神論と有神論など…」

    「誰かが私の考え(ギレルメモンテイロジュニア思想)、マリアイオアナ「カスデヤ」ポペスク思想、そしてFRT / PCTB共産主義について多くの仕事(主に執筆、エッセイ、記事、本)をしてくれることを願っています 、FRT / PCTB社会主義、およびアヌンナキシステム(アヌンナキと共産主義)について」。

    «Все — це боги, і боги — тут і зараз. Так само все — це Бог і Бог — тут і зараз. Боги й Бог — одне й те саме. Все це питання розуміння, переживання, почуття, перспектива і світогляд. Бога можна розділити на богів, а богів можна об’єднати в Бога. Все є свідомістю, позафізичним, релігійним і духовним, а також боги і Бог все роблять свідомістю, позафізичним, релігійним і духовним. Я не знаю, як це висловити словами, але ті, хто це зрозуміють, зрозуміють це повністю або частково».

    «Природне та позаприродне/надприродне/паранормальне – це одне й те саме й одне, обидва знаходяться в діалектичних відносинах один з одним, і те, що можна розглядати як надприродне, можна розглядати як природне і навпаки. Це питання розуміння , перспектива і світогляд. Так само для всього, що стосується Бога і богів, техніки і магії, науки і релігії, матеріального і духовного, фізики і екстрафізики, атеїзму і теїзму, і так далі…”

    «Я просто сподіваюся, що хтось зможе написати багато робіт (переважно статей, есе, статей і книг) про мою думку (Думка Гільєрме Монтейро-молодшого), Думку Марії Іоани «Касдея» Попеску, а також про комунізм FRT/PCTB , FRT/PCTB соціалізм, а також про систему Анунна (Ануннакізм і Думугіан)».

    „Totul sunt zeii și zeii sunt chiar aici și chiar acum. În același mod, totul este Dumnezeu și Dumnezeu este chiar aici și chiar acum. Zeii și Dumnezeu sunt una și aceeași. Totul este o chestiune de înțelegere, experiență, sentiment, perspectivă și perspectivă.Dumnezeu poate fi subdivizat în zei și zeii pot fi uniți în Dumnezeu.Totul este conștiință, extrafizic, religios și spiritual, precum și zeii și Dumnezeu fac totul conștiință, extrafizic, religios și spiritual. nu știu cum să o exprime în cuvinte, dar cei care o pot înțelege o vor înțelege pe deplin sau o vor înțelege parțial.”

    „Firul și extranaturalul/supranaturalul/paranormalul sunt același lucru și un lucru, ambele sunt într-o relație dialectică unul cu celălalt și ceea ce poate fi văzut ca supranatural poate fi văzut ca natural și invers. Este o chestiune de înțelegere. , perspectivă și perspectivă. Același mod pentru tot ceea ce este legat de Dumnezeu și zei; tehnologie și magie; știință și religie; material și spiritual; fizică și extrafizică; ateism și teism; și așa mai departe…”

    „Sper doar că cineva va putea face o mulțime de lucrări (scrisuri, eseuri, articole și cărți în principal) despre gândirea mea (Gândirea Guilherme Monteiro Junior), Gândirea Maria Ioana „Kasdeya” Popescu, precum și despre comunismul FRT/PCTB. , socialismul FRT/PCTB și despre sistemul Anunna (Anunnakism și Dumugian)”.

    “همه چیز خدایان هستند و خدایان همین جا و همین الان هستند. به همین ترتیب همه چیز خداست و خدا همین جا و همین الان است. خدایان و خدا یکی هستند. همه چیز درک، تجربه است. احساس، دیدگاه و دیدگاه خدا را می توان به خدایان تقسیم کرد و خدایان را می توان به خدا متحد کرد. نمی‌دانم چگونه آن را با کلمات بیان کنم، اما کسانی که می‌توانند آن را درک کنند، آن را کاملاً یا تا حدی درک خواهند کرد.»

    «طبیعی و فراطبیعی/ فراطبیعی/ ماوراء الطبیعه یک چیز و یک چیز است، هر دو در یک رابطه دیالکتیکی با یکدیگر هستند و آنچه را که ماوراءالطبیعه دیده می شود طبیعی می توان دید و بالعکس. برای کل چیزهای مربوط به خدا و خدایان، تکنولوژی و جادو، علم و دین، مادی و معنوی، فیزیک و برون‌فیزیک، بی‌خدایی و خداباوری و غیره، همین‌طور است.

    من فقط امیدوارم کسی بتواند کارهای زیادی (نوشته‌ها، مقاله‌ها، مقالات و کتاب‌ها) در مورد افکار من (اندیشه جوانی Guilherme Monteiro)، اندیشه ماریا یوانا “Kasdeya” Popescu، و همچنین درباره کمونیسم FRT/PCTB انجام دهد. ، سوسیالیسم FRT/PCTB و در مورد سیستم آنونا (آنوناکیسم و ​​دوموگیان)”.

    “सब कुछ देवता है और देवता यहीं और अभी हैं। उसी तरह सब कुछ भगवान है और भगवान यहीं और अभी हैं। देवता और भगवान एक ही हैं। यह सब समझने, अनुभव करने की बात है, भावना, परिप्रेक्ष्य और दृष्टिकोण। भगवान को देवताओं में विभाजित किया जा सकता है और देवताओं को भगवान में जोड़ा जा सकता है। सब कुछ चेतना, अलौकिक, धार्मिक और आध्यात्मिक है, साथ ही देवता और भगवान सब कुछ चेतना, अलौकिक, धार्मिक और आध्यात्मिक बनाते हैं। मैं यह नहीं जानते कि इसे शब्दों में कैसे व्यक्त किया जाए, लेकिन जो इसे समझ सकते हैं वे इसे पूरी तरह समझेंगे या आंशिक रूप से समझेंगे।”

    “प्राकृतिक और अलौकिक/अलौकिक/अपसामान्य एक ही बात है और एक बात, दोनों एक दूसरे के साथ एक द्वंद्वात्मक संबंध में हैं और जो अलौकिक के रूप में देखा जा सकता है उसे प्राकृतिक और इसके विपरीत देखा जा सकता है। यह समझने की बात है। , क्रमशः और दृष्टिकोण। भगवान और देवताओं से संबंधित पूरी चीज के लिए उसी तरह; प्रौद्योगिकी और जादू; विज्ञान और धर्म; भौतिक और आध्यात्मिक; भौतिकी और एक्स्ट्राफिजिक्स; नास्तिकता और आस्तिक; और इसी तरह …”

    “मुझे उम्मीद है कि कोई मेरे विचार (गुइलहर्मे मोंटेरो जूनियर थॉट), मारिया इओना” कसदेया “पोपेस्कु थॉट के साथ-साथ एफआरटी/पीसीटीबी साम्यवाद के बारे में बहुत सारे काम (लेखन, निबंध, लेख और किताबें मुख्य रूप से) करने में सक्षम होगा। , FRT/PCTB समाजवाद, और अनुना प्रणाली के बारे में (Anunnakism and Dumugian)”।

    “Τα πάντα είναι οι θεοί και οι θεοί είναι ακριβώς εδώ και τώρα. Με τον ίδιο τρόπο είναι ο Θεός και ο Θεός είναι ακριβώς εδώ και τώρα. Οι θεοί και ο Θεός είναι ένα και το αυτό. Όλα είναι θέμα κατανόησης, εμπειρίας, συναίσθημα, προοπτική και προοπτική. Ο Θεός μπορεί να υποδιαιρεθεί στους θεούς και οι θεοί μπορούν να ενωθούν σε Θεό. Δεν ξέρω πώς να το εκφράσω με λόγια, αλλά αυτοί που μπορούν να το καταλάβουν θα το καταλάβουν πλήρως ή εν μέρει».

    «Το φυσικό και το εξωφυσικό/υπερφυσικό/παραφυσικό είναι το ίδιο πράγμα και ένα πράγμα, και τα δύο βρίσκονται σε διαλεκτική σχέση μεταξύ τους και ό,τι μπορεί να θεωρηθεί υπερφυσικό μπορεί να θεωρηθεί φυσικό και το αντίστροφο. Είναι θέμα κατανόησης , προοπτική και προοπτική. Με τον ίδιο τρόπο για το όλο θέμα που σχετίζεται με τον Θεό και τους θεούς, την τεχνολογία και τη μαγεία, την επιστήμη και τη θρησκεία, το υλικό και το πνευματικό, τη φυσική και την εξωφυσική, τον αθεϊσμό και τον θεϊσμό, και ούτω καθεξής…”

    «Ελπίζω απλώς κάποιος να μπορέσει να κάνει πολλά έργα (γραφές, δοκίμια, άρθρα και βιβλία κυρίως) για τη σκέψη μου (Guilherme Monteiro Junior Thought), τη Maria Ioana “Kasdeya” Popescu Thought, καθώς και για τον κομμουνισμό FRT/PCTB , FRT/PCTB σοσιαλισμός, και για το σύστημα Anunna (Anunnakism and Dumugian)».

  4. “O neopositivismo, quando aplicado na política e na sociedade, consegue ser ainda pior que o fundamentalismo religioso do Estado Islâmico e do Emirado Islâmico do Afeganistão (Talibã). E não é difícil de ver isso, de perceber isso, sentir isso e de entender isso.”

    “Não devo ter medo do futuro. E sim lutar por um futuro diferente ou mesmo por um futuro melhor.”

    “O materialismo dialético e o agnosticismo me aproximaram dos deuses, dos Anunnaki e de Deus mais que a própria religião e espiritualidade. Mas claro, não nego a ajuda da religião e da espiritualidade nesse meio e a base que elas deram e ainda dão para mim.”

    “As ciências espirituais podem ajudar muito o materialismo dialético, agnosticismo etc. E é isso que eu faço hoje em dia e que os influenciados por mim farão no futuro.”

    “E se o fundamentalismo ateu, o fundamentalismo científico, o fundamentalismo “cético”, o fundamentalismo evidencialista, o fundamentalismo materialista, fundamentalismo niilista, fundamentalismo antiteísta, fundamentalismo reducionista, fundamentalismo racionalista, fundamentalismo empirista, fundamentalismo digital, fundamentalismo tecnológico, fundamentalismo capitalista, fundamentalismo neoliberal, fundamentalismo direitista, fundamentalismo centrista, fundamentalismo kratosista, fundamentalismo deicidista, fundamentalismo misoteísta, fundamentalismo de cultura popular, fundamentalismo de “livre pensamento”, fundamentalismo de “pensamento crítico”, fundamentalismo de QI, e o fundamentalismo neopositivista fossem estudados e criticados igual como que o fundamentalismo religioso é “estudado” e “criticado”?”

    “Neopositivism, when applied to politics and society, can be even worse than the religious fundamentalism of the Islamic State and the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (Taliban). this.”

    “I shouldn’t be afraid of the future. I should fight for a different future or even a better future.”

    “Dialectical materialism and agnosticism brought me closer to the gods, the Anunnaki and God more than religion and spirituality itself. But of course, I do not deny the help of religion and spirituality in this environment and the basis they gave and still give to me. .”

    “The spiritual sciences can help a lot dialectical materialism, agnosticism, etc. And that’s what I do today and what those influenced by me will do in the future.”

    “What if atheistic fundamentalism, scientific fundamentalism, “skeptical” fundamentalism, evidentialist fundamentalism, materialist fundamentalism, nihilistic fundamentalism, antitheistic fundamentalism, reductionist fundamentalism, rationalist fundamentalism, empiricist fundamentalism, digital fundamentalism, technological fundamentalism, capitalist fundamentalism, fundamentalism neoliberal fundamentalism, rightist fundamentalism, centrist fundamentalism, kratosist fundamentalism, deicist fundamentalism, misotheistic fundamentalism, popular culture fundamentalism, “free thinking” fundamentalism, “critical thinking” fundamentalism, IQ fundamentalism, and neopositivist fundamentalism were studied and criticized equally as that religious fundamentalism is “studied” and “criticized”?””O neopositivismo, quando aplicado na política e na sociedade, consegue ser ainda pior que o fundamentalismo religioso do Estado Islâmico e do Emirado Islâmico do Afeganistão (Talibã). E não é difícil de ver isso, de perceber isso, sentir isso e de entender eso.”

    “No debería tener miedo del futuro. Debo luchar por un futuro diferente o incluso por un futuro mejor”.

    “El materialismo dialéctico y el agnosticismo me acercaron a los dioses, a los Anunnaki y a Dios más que a la religión y la espiritualidad en sí. Pero claro, no niego la ayuda de la religión y la espiritualidad en este ambiente y la base que me dieron y me siguen dando. . . ”

    “Las ciencias espirituales pueden ayudar mucho al materialismo dialéctico, al agnosticismo, etc. Y eso es lo que hago hoy y lo que harán en el futuro aquellos que estén influenciados por mí”.

    ¿Qué pasa si el fundamentalismo ateo, el fundamentalismo científico, el fundamentalismo “escéptico”, el fundamentalismo evidencialista, el fundamentalismo materialista, el fundamentalismo nihilista, el fundamentalismo antiteísta, el fundamentalismo reduccionista, el fundamentalismo racionalista, el fundamentalismo empirista, el fundamentalismo digital, el fundamentalismo tecnológico, el fundamentalismo capitalista, el fundamentalismo, el fundamentalismo neoliberal, el fundamentalismo de derecha? , el fundamentalismo centrista, el fundamentalismo kratosistista, el fundamentalismo deicista, el fundamentalismo misoteísta, el fundamentalismo de la cultura popular, el fundamentalismo del “pensamiento libre”, el fundamentalismo del “pensamiento crítico”, el fundamentalismo del IQ y el fundamentalismo neopositivista fueron estudiados y criticados por igual que el fundamentalismo religioso es “estudiado” y ” criticado”?””Le néopositivisme, lorsqu’il est appliqué à la politique et à la société, peut être encore pire que le fondamentalisme religieux de l’État islamique et de l’émirat islamique d’Afghanistan (talibans). ceci.”

    “Je ne devrais pas avoir peur de l’avenir. Je devrais me battre pour un avenir différent ou même un avenir meilleur.”

    « Le matérialisme dialectique et l’agnosticisme m’ont rapproché des dieux, des Anunnaki et de Dieu plus que la religion et la spiritualité elles-mêmes. . .”

    “Les sciences spirituelles peuvent beaucoup aider le matérialisme dialectique, l’agnosticisme, etc. Et c’est ce que je fais aujourd’hui et ce que feront ceux que j’ai influencés à l’avenir.”

    “Et si le fondamentalisme athée, le fondamentalisme scientifique, le fondamentalisme “sceptique”, le fondamentalisme évidentialiste, le fondamentalisme matérialiste, le fondamentalisme nihiliste, le fondamentalisme antithéiste, le fondamentalisme réductionniste, le fondamentalisme rationaliste, le fondamentalisme empiriste, le fondamentalisme numérique, le fondamentalisme technologique, le fondamentalisme capitaliste, le fondamentalisme le fondamentalisme néolibéral, le fondamentalisme de droite , le fondamentalisme centriste, le fondamentalisme kratosiste, le fondamentalisme déiciste, le fondamentalisme misothéiste, le fondamentalisme de la culture populaire, le fondamentalisme de la “libre pensée”, le fondamentalisme de la “pensée critique”, le fondamentalisme du QI et le fondamentalisme néopositiviste ont été étudiés et critiqués de la même manière que le fondamentalisme religieux est “étudié” et ” critiqué “?”„Neopositivismus, angewandt auf Politik und Gesellschaft, kann noch schlimmer sein als der religiöse Fundamentalismus des Islamischen Staates und des Islamischen Emirats Afghanistan (Taliban).“

    “Ich sollte keine Angst vor der Zukunft haben. Ich sollte für eine andere Zukunft oder sogar eine bessere Zukunft kämpfen.”

    „Dialektischer Materialismus und Agnostizismus brachten mich den Göttern, den Anunnaki und Gott mehr näher als Religion und Spiritualität selbst. Aber natürlich leugne ich nicht die Hilfe von Religion und Spiritualität in diesem Umfeld und die Grundlage, die sie mir gaben und immer noch geben . .”

    “Die Geisteswissenschaften können dem dialektischen Materialismus, dem Agnostizismus usw. viel helfen. Und das ist, was ich heute tue und was die von mir Beeinflussten in Zukunft tun werden.”

    „Was wäre, wenn atheistischer Fundamentalismus, wissenschaftlicher Fundamentalismus, „skeptischer“ Fundamentalismus, evidentialistischer Fundamentalismus, materialistischer Fundamentalismus, nihilistischer Fundamentalismus, antitheistischer Fundamentalismus, reduktionistischer Fundamentalismus, rationalistischer Fundamentalismus, empiristischer Fundamentalismus, digitaler Fundamentalismus, technologischer Fundamentalismus, kapitalistischer Fundamentalismus, neoliberaler Fundamentalismus, rechter Fundamentalismus , zentristischer Fundamentalismus, kratosistischer Fundamentalismus, deizistischer Fundamentalismus, misotheistischer Fundamentalismus, Populärkultur-Fundamentalismus, „frei denkender“ Fundamentalismus, „kritisch denkender“ Fundamentalismus, IQ-Fundamentalismus und neopositivistischer Fundamentalismus wurden ebenso untersucht und kritisiert wie religiöser Fundamentalismus „studiert“ und „ kritisiert“?”Il neopositivismo, quando applicato alla politica e alla società, può essere anche peggio del fondamentalismo religioso dello Stato islamico e dell’Emirato islamico dell’Afghanistan (talebano). questo”.

    “Non dovrei avere paura del futuro. Dovrei lottare per un futuro diverso o anche migliore”.

    “Il materialismo dialettico e l’agnosticismo mi hanno avvicinato agli dei, agli Anunnaki e a Dio più della religione e della spiritualità stessa. Ma ovviamente non nego l’aiuto della religione e della spiritualità in questo ambiente e le basi che mi hanno dato e mi danno tuttora . . ”

    “Le scienze spirituali possono aiutare molto il materialismo dialettico, l’agnosticismo, ecc. Ed è quello che faccio oggi e quello che faranno in futuro coloro che sono influenzati da me”.

    “E se fondamentalismo ateo, fondamentalismo scientifico, fondamentalismo “scettico”, fondamentalismo probatorista, fondamentalismo materialista, fondamentalismo nichilista, fondamentalismo antiteista, fondamentalismo riduzionista, fondamentalismo razionalista, fondamentalismo empirista, fondamentalismo digitale, fondamentalismo tecnologico, fondamentalismo capitalista, fondamentalismo fondamentalismo neoliberista, fondamentalismo di destra , fondamentalismo centrista, fondamentalismo kratosista, fondamentalismo deicista, fondamentalismo misoteista, fondamentalismo della cultura popolare, fondamentalismo del “pensiero libero”, fondamentalismo del “pensiero critico”, fondamentalismo del QI e fondamentalismo neopositivista sono stati studiati e criticati allo stesso modo in quanto il fondamentalismo religioso è “studiato” e ” criticato”?”«Неопозитивизм в применении к политике и обществу может быть даже хуже, чем религиозный фундаментализм Исламского государства и Исламского Эмирата Афганистан (Талибан)».

    «Я не должен бояться будущего. Я должен бороться за другое будущее или даже за лучшее будущее».

    “Диалектический материализм и агностицизм приблизили меня к богам, аннунакам и Богу больше, чем сама религия и духовность. Но я, конечно, не отрицаю помощи религии и духовности в этой среде и той основы, которую они давали и дают мне до сих пор. . . ”

    «Духовные науки могут во многом помочь диалектическому материализму, агностицизму и т. д. И это то, что я делаю сегодня и что те, на кого я повлияю, будут делать в будущем».

    «Что, если атеистический фундаментализм, научный фундаментализм, «скептический» фундаментализм, эвиденциалистский фундаментализм, материалистический фундаментализм, нигилистический фундаментализм, антитеистический фундаментализм, редукционистский фундаментализм, рационалистический фундаментализм, эмпирический фундаментализм, цифровой фундаментализм, технологический фундаментализм, капиталистический фундаментализм, фундаментализм, неолиберальный фундаментализм, правый фундаментализм , центристский фундаментализм, кратосистский фундаментализм, деицистский фундаментализм, мизотеистический фундаментализм, фундаментализм популярной культуры, фундаментализм «свободомыслия», фундаментализм «критического мышления», фундаментализм IQ и неопозитивистский фундаментализм изучались и критиковались в равной степени, как и религиозный фундаментализм. критиковал”?”“当应用于政治和社会时,新实证主义可能比伊斯兰国和阿富汗伊斯兰酋长国(塔利班)的宗教原教旨主义更糟糕。这个。”




    “如果无神原教旨主义、科学原教旨主义、“怀疑”原教旨主义、证据主义原教旨主义、唯物原教旨主义、虚无原教旨主义、反神原教旨主义、还原主义原教旨主义、理性原教旨主义、经验原教旨主义、数字原教旨主义、技术原教旨主义、资本主义原教旨主义、原教旨主义、新自由主义原教旨主义、右翼原教旨主义怎么办? ,中间派原教旨主义,kratosist原教旨主义,神学原教旨主义,异神原教旨主义,流行文化原教旨主义,“自由思想”原教旨主义,“批判性思维”原教旨主义,智商原教旨主义和新实证主义原教旨主义被同等研究和批评,因为宗教原教旨主义被“研究”和“批评“?””الوضعية الجديدة ، عند تطبيقها على السياسة والمجتمع ، يمكن أن تكون أسوأ من الأصولية الدينية للدولة الإسلامية وإمارة أفغانستان الإسلامية (طالبان). هذا”.

    “لا يجب أن أخاف من المستقبل. يجب أن أقاتل من أجل مستقبل مختلف أو حتى مستقبل أفضل.”

    “المادية الجدلية واللاأدرية قرّبتني من الآلهة والأنوناكي والله أكثر من الدين والروحانية نفسها. لكنني بالطبع لا أنكر مساعدة الدين والروحانية في هذه البيئة والأساس الذي قدموه وما زالوا يعطونني .. ”

    “يمكن للعلوم الروحية أن تساعد كثيرًا في المادية الديالكتيكية ، واللاأدرية ، وما إلى ذلك. وهذا ما أفعله اليوم وما سيفعله أولئك الذين تأثروا بي في المستقبل.”

    “ماذا لو الأصولية الملحدة ، الأصولية العلمية ، الأصولية” المتشككة “، الأصولية الإثباتية ، الأصولية المادية ، الأصولية العدمية ، الأصولية المناهضة للإلحاد ، الأصولية الاختزالية ، الأصولية العقلانية ، الأصولية التجريبية ، الأصولية الرقمية ، الأصولية التكنولوجية ، الأصولية الرأسمالية ، الأصولية الأصولية النيوليبرالية ، الأصولية اليمينية ، الأصولية الوسطية ، الأصولية الكراتوسية ، الأصولية الربوبية ، الأصولية الكارهة ، أصولية الثقافة الشعبية ، الأصولية “التفكير الحر” ، الأصولية “التفكير النقدي” ، أصولية الذكاء ، الأصولية الوضعية ، تمت دراستها وانتقادها بالتساوي حيث تمت دراسة الأصولية الدينية و ” انتقد “؟””नियोपोसिटिविज्म, जब राजनीति और समाज पर लागू होता है, तो इस्लामिक स्टेट और इस्लामिक अमीरात ऑफ अफगानिस्तान (तालिबान) के धार्मिक कट्टरवाद से भी बदतर हो सकता है। यह।”

    “मुझे भविष्य से डरना नहीं चाहिए। मुझे एक अलग भविष्य या बेहतर भविष्य के लिए लड़ना चाहिए।”

    “द्वंद्वात्मक भौतिकवाद और अज्ञेयवाद ने मुझे धर्म और आध्यात्मिकता से अधिक देवताओं, अनुनाकी और ईश्वर के करीब लाया। लेकिन निश्चित रूप से, मैं इस माहौल में धर्म और आध्यात्मिकता की मदद से इनकार नहीं करता और उन्होंने जो आधार दिया और अभी भी मुझे दिया है …”

    “आध्यात्मिक विज्ञान द्वन्द्वात्मक भौतिकवाद, अज्ञेयवाद आदि में बहुत मदद कर सकता है और यही मैं आज करता हूं और जो मुझसे प्रभावित हैं वे भविष्य में करेंगे।”

    “क्या होगा यदि नास्तिक कट्टरवाद, वैज्ञानिक कट्टरवाद, “संदेहवादी” कट्टरवाद, साक्ष्यवादी कट्टरवाद, भौतिकवादी कट्टरवाद, शून्यवादी कट्टरवाद, विरोधीवादी कट्टरवाद, न्यूनतावादी कट्टरवाद, तर्कवादी कट्टरवाद, अनुभववादी कट्टरवाद, डिजिटल कट्टरवाद, तकनीकी कट्टरवाद, पूंजीवादी कट्टरवाद, कट्टरवाद नवउदारवाद, दक्षिणपंथी कट्टरवाद , मध्यमार्गी कट्टरवाद, क्रैटोसिस्ट कट्टरवाद, देववादी कट्टरवाद, मिथ्यावादी कट्टरवाद, लोकप्रिय संस्कृति कट्टरवाद, “मुक्त सोच” कट्टरवाद, “महत्वपूर्ण सोच” कट्टरवाद, आईक्यू कट्टरवाद, और नवपोषीवादी कट्टरवाद का अध्ययन और आलोचना समान रूप से की गई थी क्योंकि धार्मिक कट्टरवाद का “अध्ययन” और ” आलोचना”?”「ネオポジティビズムは、政治や社会に適用されると、イスラム国やアフガニスタンイスラム首長国(タリバン)の宗教的原理主義よりもさらに悪化する可能性があります。これは」


    「唯物弁証法と不可知論は、宗教と精神性そのものよりも、神々、アヌンナキと神に私を近づけました。しかし、もちろん、私はこの環境における宗教と精神性の助けと、彼らが私に与え、今も与えている基盤を否定しません。 。。」


    「もし無神論的原理主義、科学的原理主義、「懐疑的」原理主義、証拠主義的原理主義、物質主義的原理主義、虚無主義的原理主義、反理論的原理主義、還元主義的原理主義、合理主義的原理主義、経験主義的原理主義、デジタル原理主義、技術的原理主義、資本主義原理主義、原理主義新自由主義原理主義、右派原理主義、セントリスト原理主義、クラトシスト原理主義、デイシスト原理主義、ミソセイスティック原理主義、大衆文化原理主義、「自由思考」原理主義、「批判的思考」原理主義、IQ原理主義、ネオポジティビスト原理主義は、宗教的原理主義が「研究」され、「批判された」?」«Неопозитивізм у застосуванні до політики та суспільства може бути навіть гіршим, ніж релігійний фундаменталізм Ісламської Держави та Ісламського Емірату Афганістан (Талібан).

    «Я не повинен боятися майбутнього. Я повинен боротися за інше майбутнє або навіть краще майбутнє».

    «Діалектичний матеріалізм і агностицизм наблизили мене до богів, ануннаків і Бога більше, ніж сама релігія та духовність. Але, звичайно, я не заперечую допомоги релігії та духовності в цьому середовищі та основи, яку вони дали і дають мені. …”

    «Духовні науки можуть дуже допомогти діалектичному матеріалізму, агностицизму тощо. І це те, що я роблю сьогодні, і що ті, на кого я впливаю, будуть робити в майбутньому».

    «Що, якщо атеїстичний фундаменталізм, науковий фундаменталізм, «скептичний» фундаменталізм, доказовий фундаменталізм, матеріалістичний фундаменталізм, нігілістичний фундаменталізм, антитеїстичний фундаменталізм, редукціоністський фундаменталізм, раціоналістичний фундаменталізм, емпіричний фундаменталізм, цифровий фундаменталізм, технологічний фундаменталізм, капіталістичний фундаменталізм, фундаменталізм, неоліберальний фундаменталізм, правий фундаменталізм? , центристський фундаменталізм, кратосистський фундаменталізм, дейцистський фундаменталізм, мізотеїстичний фундаменталізм, фундаменталізм популярної культури, фундаменталізм «вільного мислення», фундаменталізм «критичного мислення», фундаменталізм IQ і неопозитивістський фундаменталізм вивчалися і критикувалися так само, як і релігійний фундаменталізм «вивчається» і « критикували”?”„Neopozitivismul, atunci când este aplicat politicii și societății, poate fi chiar mai rău decât fundamentalismul religios al Statului Islamic și al Emiratului Islamic al Afganistanului (taliban).

    “Nu ar trebui să-mi fie frică de viitor. Ar trebui să lupt pentru un viitor diferit sau chiar pentru un viitor mai bun.”

    „Materialismul dialectic și agnosticismul m-au apropiat de zei, de anunnaki și de Dumnezeu mai mult decât de religia și spiritualitatea în sine. Dar, bineînțeles, nu neg ajutorul religiei și spiritualității în acest mediu și baza pe care mi le-au dat și mi-au dat în continuare. . .”

    „Științele spirituale pot ajuta foarte mult materialismul dialectic, agnosticismul etc. Și asta fac eu astăzi și ceea ce vor face cei influențați de mine în viitor”.

    „Ce-ar fi dacă fundamentalismul ateist, fundamentalismul științific, fundamentalismul „sceptic”, fundamentalismul evidentialist, fundamentalismul materialist, fundamentalismul nihilist, fundamentalismul antiteist, fundamentalismul reducționist, fundamentalismul raționalist, fundamentalismul empiric, fundamentalismul digital, fundamentalismul tehnologic, fundamentalismul capitalist, fundamentalismul neoliberal, fundamentalismul dreptei , fundamentalismul centrist, fundamentalismul kratosist, fundamentalismul deicist, fundamentalismul misoteist, fundamentalismul culturii populare, fundamentalismul „gândirii libere”, fundamentalismul „gândirii critice”, fundamentalismul IQ și fundamentalismul neopozitivist au fost studiate și criticate la fel ca fundamentalismul religios este „studiat” și „ criticat”?”«Ο νεοθετικισμός, όταν εφαρμόζεται στην πολιτική και την κοινωνία, μπορεί να είναι ακόμη χειρότερος από τον θρησκευτικό φονταμενταλισμό του Ισλαμικού Κράτους και του Ισλαμικού Εμιράτου του Αφγανιστάν (Ταλιμπάν).

    “Δεν πρέπει να φοβάμαι το μέλλον. Πρέπει να παλέψω για ένα διαφορετικό μέλλον ή ακόμα και ένα καλύτερο”.

    «Ο διαλεκτικός υλισμός και ο αγνωστικισμός με έφεραν πιο κοντά στους θεούς, τους Ανουνάκι και τον Θεό περισσότερο από τη θρησκεία και την πνευματικότητα. Αλλά φυσικά, δεν αρνούμαι τη βοήθεια της θρησκείας και της πνευματικότητας σε αυτό το περιβάλλον και τη βάση που μου έδωσαν και μου δίνουν. …”

    «Οι πνευματικές επιστήμες μπορούν να βοηθήσουν πολύ τον διαλεκτικό υλισμό, τον αγνωστικισμό κτλ. Και αυτό κάνω σήμερα και αυτό θα κάνουν στο μέλλον όσοι επηρεάζονται από εμένα».

    Τι κι αν αθεϊστικός φονταμενταλισμός, επιστημονικός φονταμενταλισμός, «σκεπτικιστής» φονταμενταλισμός, αποδεικτικός φονταμενταλισμός, υλιστικός φονταμενταλισμός, μηδενιστικός φονταμενταλισμός, αντιθεϊστικός φονταμενταλισμός, αναγωγικός φονταμενταλισμός, ορθολογιστικός φονταμενταλισμός, εμπειρικός φονταμενταλισμός, ψηφιακός φονταμενταλισμός, τεχνολογικός φονταμενταλισμός, καπιταλιστικός φονταμενταλισμός, φονταμενταλισμός νεοφιλελεύθερος φονταμενταλισμός, δεξιός φονταμενταλισμός , κεντρώος φονταμενταλισμός, κρατωσιστικός φονταμενταλισμός, δεϊτσιστικός φονταμενταλισμός, μισοθεϊστικός φονταμενταλισμός, φονταμενταλισμός λαϊκής κουλτούρας, φονταμενταλισμός “ελεύθερης σκέψης”, φονταμενταλισμός “κριτικής σκέψης”, φονταμενταλισμός IQ και νεοθετικιστικός φονταμενταλισμός μελετήθηκαν και επικρίθηκαν εξίσου με τον θρησκευτικό φονταμενταλισμό “μελετηθεί” και ” επικρίθηκε”;”نئوپوزیتیویسم، زمانی که در سیاست و جامعه اعمال شود، می تواند حتی بدتر از بنیادگرایی مذهبی دولت اسلامی و امارت اسلامی افغانستان (طالبان) باشد.

    “من نباید از آینده بترسم. باید برای آینده ای متفاوت یا حتی آینده ای بهتر بجنگم.”

    “ماتریالیسم دیالکتیکی و ادم گرایی بیش از خود دین و معنویت مرا به خدایان، آنوناکی ها و خدا نزدیکتر کرد. اما البته من منکر کمک دین و معنویت در این محیط و مبنایی که به من دادند و می دهند نیستم. . .

    “علوم معنوی می تواند کمک زیادی به ماتریالیسم دیالکتیکی، ادم گرایی و غیره کند. و این همان کاری است که من امروز انجام می دهم و کسانی که تحت تأثیر من هستند در آینده انجام خواهند داد.”

    چه می‌شود اگر بنیادگرایی الحادی، بنیادگرایی علمی، بنیادگرایی «شک‌گرا»، بنیادگرایی اثبات‌گرا، بنیادگرایی ماتریالیست، بنیادگرایی نیهیلیستی، بنیادگرایی ضد خدا، بنیادگرایی تقلیل‌گرا، بنیادگرایی خردگرا، بنیادگرایی تجربه‌گرا، بنیادگرایی دیجیتال، بنیادگرایی تکنولوژیک، بنیادگرایی سرمایه‌داری، بنیادگرایی نئولیبرال بنیادگرایی، بنیادگرایی راست‌گرا. بنیادگرایی میانه‌رو، بنیادگرایی کراتوزیست، بنیادگرایی دئیستی، بنیادگرایی بدخداپرستی، بنیادگرایی فرهنگ عامه، بنیادگرایی «آزاد اندیشی»، بنیادگرایی «اندیشه انتقادی»، بنیادگرایی بهره هوشی و بنیادگرایی نئوپوزیتیویستی به همان اندازه مورد بررسی و نقد قرار گرفتند که بنیادگرایی دینی «مطالعه» و «مطالعه» است. انتقاد کرد”؟

  5. [–]AutoModerator[M] [score hidden] 1 day ago – stickied comment
    Report the post if it breaks any rule.
    Side note: Join the official r/Antitheistcheesecake discord server.
    Link: https://discord.gg/wq2TsRY7Xb
    I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]HerbringerMuslim Brother from the Caucasus 44 points 23 hours ago
    So he us an adult who is addicted to Porn and don’t believe that porn addiction exist? what the fuck
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]SolotociusAverage Quran Enjoyer 26 points 17 hours ago
    Denial (a stage of grief)
    permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive awardreply
    [–]WolfamongtheflowersSunni Muslim 43 points 23 hours ago
    “iT’s NOt aN AdDIcTiOn” Yet how they would suffer if the could not watch it for a single day.
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]train2000c 6 points 9 hours ago
    Someone on heroin: it’s not an addiction, I can stop any time
    permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive awardreply
    [–]Pootis_but_coolerSunni Muslim 28 points 23 hours ago
    this is a perfect exemple of cognitive dissonance this is like a guy who is smoking and talk about him being healthy and is speaking non sense because he don’t want to change
    porn addiction is something that you don’t want because it make you act like a creep and even if they say that masturbating doesn’t affect your body it do like it affect your testosterone (even if not by much that still significant) and you’re likely to have erectile dysfonction even if you’re not religious you can’t say it just don’t exist
    and they all respond with the same studies that say “porn is gud for you cuz less bad canser” but that kind of studies is often financed by porn related media so they aren’t relevent
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]Choice-Ad-4188Catholic Christian 15 points 20 hours ago
    We’re upset at this guy, right, ’cause there are a metric ton of atheists against porn.
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]Unique_Revenue_5771 14 points 19 hours ago
    Hes in denial it seems
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]xXAnimeGirlLover69Xx 20 points 23 hours ago
    Is that a zoophile sub?
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]Unique_Revenue_5771 6 points 12 hours ago
    Funnily enough reddit allows that iirc
    permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive awardreply
    [–]train2000c 3 points 9 hours ago
    I’m pretty sure that’s animal abuse.
    permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive awardreply
    [–]Professional_Dress32 9 points 12 hours ago
    ‘Crack addiction is not a real thing, it’s a stigma brought about by “healthy” people because they can’t take it when others are enjoying themselves..’
    Damn what dissonance
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]Nupps3Catholic Christian 10 points 11 hours ago
    I only agree with science when it’s on my side

    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]Soul_of_greenAnti-Antitheist 8 points 17 hours ago
    There does seem to be a bit of debate as to whether it is an addiction or not but for some reason people hear that and then go “well it must make it ok with absolutely no side effects”.
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]FM79SG 8 points 14 hours ago
    Medical News Today begs to differ:
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]GaziOrhan 13 points 23 hours ago
    No surprise that someone with that exact profile picture would comment something like that
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]train2000c 4 points 9 hours ago
    Why are the upvote and downvotes paws?
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]miko81Catholic Christian 4 points 8 hours ago
    shiiiit he just made the whole r/nofap obsolete!
    Love how they make shit up to justify not trying to be a better person…
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply
    [–]ZealousidealCell11Sunni Muslim 6 points 16 hours ago
    O show you have a lgbt pfp? Opinion rejected Btw I don’t really hate the lgbt community I just hate the ppl who shove down other ppls throats
    permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply

    [–]Imperial_Truth 60 points 5 hours ago
    But according to their own logic, Mary made a choice and kept her pregnancy, so if they wanted her to have an abortion, then they would be taking her choice from her. Also, do these people honestly think no other religion or even non religious group would not have any issue or view counter to them?
    [–]KattosTheWarlord 42 points 6 hours ago
    Atheists moment
    [–]Business-Engine911 41 points 6 hours ago
    [–]BazzemBoiBased Mozlim 36 points 5 hours ago
    Indeed, we would have been in worse mess.
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 15 points 5 hours ago
    If eve had been an abortion we wouldn’t be in this mess
    [–]MarbleandMarble 34 points 5 hours ago
    im pretty sure God banned child sacrifice before Jesus was born
    [–]nekopara-nugget -9 points 4 hours ago
    Isn’t it a big too far fetched to call abortion child sacrifice?
    [–]Mister6307Catholic Christian 22 points 3 hours ago
    you could consider it sacrificing your baby for monetary gain or mental satisfaction (aka not having to deal with raising a child).
    it is a bit of a stretch though
    [–]ryry117Catholic Christian 7 points 2 hours ago
    No, considering the church of Lucifer is trying to argue abortion is a religious practice so they can keep it legal under religious freedom laws.
    [–]ReidWHProtestant Christian 7 points 2 hours ago
    Well, no. Sure, you’re not doing it because you want the favor of a God, but you’re doing it for gain. The Canaanites sacrificed children to Moloch for Prosperity, the Mayans sacrificed their children for a good harvest, modern Liberals sacrifice their children for opportunity.
    [–]MarbleandMarble 10 points 3 hours ago
    its killing a child for personal gain.
    therefore child sacrifice
    [–]Tomi_934_HRCatholic Christian 57 points 6 hours ago
    Thank God Mary chose life we all would be lost without her Yes.
    [–]Moist-Ad-4288Catholic Christian 23 points 5 hours ago
    I mean, Mary was immaculate and full of grace, so…
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 27 points 5 hours ago
    Immaculate heart of Mary try to sin challenge (impossible)
    [–]Tomi_934_HRCatholic Christian 4 points 4 hours ago
    True but God respected her free will and didn’t force her like Antitheists always claim.
    [–]Commie-LyncherOrthodox Christian 25 points 5 hours ago
    Doesn’t even make sense. Being against killing kids existed before the birth of Jesus.
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 14 points 5 hours ago
    Moloch moment
    [–]HereForA2CBased Quran Follower 1 point 3 minutes ago
    I mean it used to be common sense. Key word used to 😬
    [–]SnoeeeyyyGnostic 27 points 6 hours ago
    Woman moment
    [–]NWAHU_AKBARGnostic 12 points 3 hours ago
    I have never seen an attractive woman protesting in favor of abortion “rights.”
    [–]insanechickengirlCatholic Christian 10 points 3 hours ago
    Having neon colored hair is a job requirement
    [–]SnoeeeyyyGnostic 3 points 3 hours ago
    [–]Tumama787Deist 15 points 5 hours ago
    I don’t necessarily believe demons walk with us in a literal sense.
    [–]BaconWobbuffet 8 points 4 hours ago
    Cringe Moment. Take the Christ-pill
    [–]ResidentsEnjoyerProtestant Christian 7 points 5 hours ago
    Is the one on the right a man?
    [–]NWAHU_AKBARGnostic 9 points 3 hours ago
    SHE is a beautiful and brave TRANS WOMAN, you bigot 😤😤😤
    [–]insanechickengirlCatholic Christian 5 points 3 hours ago
    [–]babatuundeMuslim 3 points 5 hours ago
    Yes, he has cool sunglasses
    [–]BrianW1983 6 points 3 hours ago
    I bet at least 1 out of 2 of those women are on anti-depressants. At least. 🙂
    [–]morontriesCathodox Unity✝️☦ 3 points 2 hours ago
    Brother in Christ, i need your wisdom, for i do not know who is the woman in the pic
    [–]XBirbVibesXNo Virgins? 5 points 3 hours ago
    Why does everyone who supports abortion look like they were drawn by a 5 year old
    [–]morontriesCathodox Unity✝️☦ 2 points 2 hours ago
    Wnell you see……they express their 5 year old mind with different things that arent drawing…..
    [–]SixthRidiculousGHalal Gaming 2 points 2 hours ago
    I can’t say what I want to say without being suspended
    [–]20captainx12Protestant Christian 2 points an hour ago
    Wasn’t it the Jews though who made the “mess” and it was Jesus who actually taught love, etc? Any educated person would realise that Jesus as he is depicted was a great guy

    [–]bjihusCatholic Christian 67 points 9 hours ago
    ⠟⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠛⢻⣿ ⡆⠊⠈⣿⢿⡟⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣎⠈⠻ ⣷⣠⠁⢀⠰⠀⣰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠋⠛⠛⠿⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⢹⣿⡑⠐⢰ ⣿⣿⠀⠁⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⡩⠐⠀⠀⠀⠀⢐⠠⠈⠊⣿⣿⣿⡇⠘⠁⢀⠆⢀ ⣿⣿⣆⠀⠀⢤⣿⣿⡿⠃⠈⠀⣠⣶⣿⣿⣷⣦⡀⠀⠀⠈⢿⣿⣇⡆⠀⠀⣠⣾ ⣿⣿⣿⣧⣦⣿⣿⣿⡏⠀⠀⣰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⠀⠀⠐⣿⣿⣷⣦⣷⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⠀⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡄⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⠀⣾⣿⣿⠋⠁⠀⠉⠻⣿⣿⣧⠀⠠⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⣿⡿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⢿⣿⠀⣺⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⣠⣂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣁⢠⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣶⣄⣤⣤⣔⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
    [–]TheBlindSalesman 37 points 7 hours ago
    POV: You just told a leftist they couldn’t slaughter their own child
    [–]maxskill26Orthodox Christian 64 points 8 hours ago
    Religion is when American politics
    [–]JawndyBoplins -19 points 6 hours ago*
    HB813 in Louisiana includes the phrase “Acknowledging the sanctity of innocent human life, created in the image of God,”
    That’s a blatant disregard for the separation of church and state, and frankly, adds nothing to the (otherwise poorly written) bill.
    Anti-theists don’t just manifest for no reason—keep religion out of law, and you’ll see fewer anti-theists. You can’t freely practice your religion without letting me be free of it as well.
    Edit: in case any of you thought I was bullshitting:
    [–]KOMRADE_ANDREY 18 points 6 hours ago
    People like you make me think that we could really go for a reddit tourism industry
    [–]JawndyBoplins -4 points 6 hours ago
    Not even sure what that means, or how it’s relevant to what I said at all
    [–]KOMRADE_ANDREY 11 points 5 hours ago
    Ita relevant to the fact that you’re a tourist
    continue this thread
    [–]aimofrii 5 points 5 hours ago
    How does that disregard separation of church and state? Separation of church and state doesn’t mean people can’t have a religion.
    [–]JawndyBoplins 2 points 4 hours ago*
    I never claimed that it means people can’t have religion. I claimed that pushing a particular interpretation of God in law, is neither lawful, nor helpful to the actual content of the law.
    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
    Edit: Someone else pointed out that this only applies to the federal government, as if that makes it okay. I reiterate that you don’t get freedom of religion unless you have freedom from religion.
    HB813 is a bill to be put into law, which has a part that explicitly identifies a specific kind of God. The kind who made man in his image. That is obviously a case of a lawmaker respecting a specific establishment of religion, within law.
    That verbage is absolutely not compatible with secularism, and isn’t even compatible with several brands of theism, which don’t believe man was “made in god’s image.”
    [–]revolverandy1 4 points 4 hours ago
    1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    The Establishment Clause deals with the Federal Government, not state government.
    [–]JawndyBoplins -1 points 4 hours ago
    Sure. I don’t care. You’d excuse 50 theocracies with only federal prohibition of exclusionary language if those theocracies happened to be your religion.
    If you can tell me what that mention of God even adds to that bill I’m happy to hear you out, but what I see is a completely unnecessary addition to a bill that is otherwise unrelated to religion.
    Would you be okay with a bill that had a sentence acknowledging our debt to Prometheus the fire bringer?
    [–]revolverandy1 3 points 4 hours ago
    I feel as if you are exaggerating a lot by saying this is a disregard of the separation of church and state (State means federal government by the way, not literally a state of the US). They could just remove that part of the sentence and everything would be ok with you, correct? Also, adding “created in the image of God” is nowhere near a theocracy. The Pledge of Allegiance has the phrase, “one nation, under God” and The U.S. motto is, “In God We Trust” but the US is not a theocracy, is it?
    continue this thread
    [–]MarbleandMarble 2 points 4 hours ago
    That’s a blatant disregard for the separation of church and state
    [–]JawndyBoplins 0 points 4 hours ago
    You don’t have freedom of religion if you don’t also have freedom from religion. I really shouldn’t have to explain that.
    [–]MarbleandMarble 1 point 3 hours ago
    continue this thread
    [–]Till_KurksOrthodox Christian 58 points 8 hours ago
    religion needs to die
    Communists tried that,didn’t work. China is state atheist and Christianity is growing in the millions anually there.
    we’re here to stay 😎
    [–]insanechickengirlCatholic Christian 29 points 7 hours ago
    Almost like theres… say… a powerful force of sorts allowing it to stay alive despite the non-stop attempts to eradicate it… hmmmmmmmmmm
    [–]DaMh_1Sunni Muslim 13 points 7 hours ago
    haha good point!
    [–]MarbleandMarble 3 points 4 hours ago
    and likewise, its almost like there is a powerful force of sorts trying really hard to destroy it 🤔
    [–]Dreamerz21[S] 2 points 3 hours ago
    [–]Emperor_QuintanaProtestant Christian 3 points 2 hours ago
    And if Madman Marx wants to label religion as “the opiate for the masses”, then I’d like a hit per day. And they said that “religion wouldn’t let me do muh heroin because drugs bad.”
    Checkmate, cheesecakes.
    [–]The_Monarchist_18Catholic Christian 37 points 9 hours ago
    Oh no, whatever will we do!!! 😱😱
    [–]Dreamerz21[S] 41 points 9 hours ago
    I don’t know. I’m scared of sex please help
    [–]54_xXenon_Sunni Muslim 8 points 6 hours ago
    Don’t say the S-word!!11
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 3 points 6 hours ago
    😈 does s*x to you
    [–]FM79SG 20 points 8 hours ago
    I need 50cc of Copium, stat!
    [–]insanechickengirlCatholic Christian 18 points 7 hours ago
    Religion = bad cuz no agree with me opinionz
    [–]KattosTheWarlord 11 points 8 hours ago
    How about you do something about it instead of complaining about it on the internet? all of them are just bark and no bite
    [–]bartholomewjohnson 11 points 7 hours ago
    Pure copium
    [–]TheArowanaDude 11 points 6 hours ago
    Different religious traditions have differing opinions on abortion. Islam is generally pro-life but it allows abortion in various extenuating circumstances such as rape, mother’s life being threatened, etc. R/ atheism is 0 IQ as usual.
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 6 points 6 hours ago
    I actually agree, I learnt about how the supreme court works like yesterday and it is so ridiculous. Rulings like roe v wade and obergfel v Hobbes are massive over reach of their power. Agree or disagree that those things should be legal, that should be legislators, not unelected technocrats
    [–]CourseDangerous2583Catholic Christian 5 points 4 hours ago
    He turned twelve
    [–]Tomi_934_HRCatholic Christian 4 points 3 hours ago
    One Day this Guy will die and Religion will still exist.
    [–]Ahmed_D_GreatSunni Muslim 2 points 6 hours ago
    Mashallah, imagine a Western European country with a Muslim Majority…
    [–]highpowerpixel 7 points 5 hours ago
    France already exists, Ahmed
    [–]Ahmed_D_GreatSunni Muslim 3 points 5 hours ago
    Wait wha…?
    [–]SixthRidiculousGHalal Gaming 2 points 2 hours ago
    Not enough

    [–]Mutated_dustHalal Gaming 57 points 3 days ago
    “was it worth it ?”
    Absolutely , I’ll gladly cut my own arm and stab myself in the heart 60 times if that mean I’ll be promised heaven
    [–]LouisBenedictLeoCatholic Christian [S] 32 points 3 days ago
    I know, right?
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 3 points 1 day ago
    It is better to lose one member than for your whole body to be cast into a lake of fire
    [–]I-Antichrist -29 points 3 days ago
    And yall call us crazy
    [–]UnregularOnlineUser 28 points 3 days ago
    Eternal life in heaven is worth way more than a bit of pain on Earth
    [–]I-Antichrist -23 points 3 days ago
    I guess you’re serious. My bad. As-salamu alaykum.
    [–]playstation43Catholic Christian 23 points 3 days ago
    Ffs, they found this sub
    [–]I-Antichrist -15 points 3 days ago
    We are all fellow homo sapiens after all.
    [–]tardeurCatholic Christian 13 points 3 days ago
    You are the descendant of monkeys😳
    continue this thread
    [–]TheDraconianOne 11 points 3 days ago
    Antichrist in name? Crazy yeah
    [–]tardeurCatholic Christian 16 points 3 days ago
    Antichrist isnt much of a scary name nowadays. It gets abused by edgy atheists
    [–]DarthT15Hellenist 3 points 2 days ago
    Just like Satan, it’s become cringe.
    [–]bartholomewjohnson 1 point 1 day ago
    Pain is temporary, Heaven is eternal
    [–]PeterZweifler 33 points 3 days ago
    “Was it worth it?”
    [–]Massive_Booty_8255Orthodox Christian 22 points 3 days ago
    But remember guys, we’re the ones who can’t stop bringing up religion!
    [–]CaucasianImamateFan 20 points 3 days ago
    Sees Christian persecuted for being Christian: “Hey Christian, was it worth dying for your right to religious freedom? You deserved it!”
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 1 point 1 day ago
    Crowds at the cross energy
    [–]Moist-Ad-4288Catholic Christian 10 points 3 days ago
    St. Sebastian, pray for us!
    [–]ForkKnifeStabberSunni Muslim 6 points 3 days ago
    Can I ask who’s that guy?
    [–]playstation43Catholic Christian 13 points 3 days ago
    St Sebastian
    “ St. Sebastian was ordered to be killed by arrows for converting his fellow Roman soldiers to Christianity. He was left for dead by the archers but was rehabilitated by a pious widow. Following his recovery, he presented himself to Diocletian and was subsequently beaten to death.”
    [–]shikiiiryougiHalal Gaming 13 points 3 days ago
    An then they say “ReLiGiOn WaS cReAtED tO cOnVeNiEnTlY cOnTrOl ThE mAsSeS” and don’t understand that it was brutally opposed by the powers of their times. Just because the powers afterwards abused it for their benefits when it became mainstream does not mean religion is bad.
    [–]Pale-Cold-QuiveringCatholic Christian 8 points 3 days ago
    That Diocletian sure has blood on his hands
    [–]Jukeboxhero40 4 points 3 days ago
    Sebastian to Diocletian, “don’t hit me with your purse this time.”
    [–]Top-Jicama-4527 3 points 2 days ago
    I was informed by a gay friend back in 2014 St. Sebastian was a gay idol because of the way he is portrayed (stretched out… sexily? I guess?)
    [–]LouisBenedictLeoCatholic Christian [S] 2 points 2 days ago
    [–]Top-Jicama-4527 3 points 2 days ago
    I believe in remaining friends with people of all beliefs as an opportunity to be a witness to them.
    She was from a gay affirming Episcopalian congregation but to this day is very devoted to Mary. So pray for her.
    [–]DEEZterminationCatholic Christian 0 points 1 day ago
    Gays be seeing a man shot to death for His Faith in the One True God and be like: “OmG , he is a twink like us”

    Considering they also love Ernesto Guevara , who shot up Homosexuals in concentration camps , the Gays are wrong in the head .
    [–]DEEZterminationCatholic Christian 1 point 1 day ago
    Atheists have nothing to live for or die for , therefore they fear Death of the body far more than anything else .Dying in the most extreme agony in the name of Jesus Christ , to spread His Divine Name and proclaim Him as King and God Most High , is the greatest Triumph , Glory and Victory imaginable .
    [–]bartholomewjohnson 1 point 1 day ago
    Yes, I would go through a lot if I was promised Heaven

    [–]KaiTsar1 4 points 2 days ago
    Question from someone curious, and I also need some summer readings, but are there any translations in English? Thanks in advance.
    [–]Random_DumbPersonSunni Muslim [S] 8 points 2 days ago
    Even though Sami Ameri’s books are important like:
    “The Archaeological evidence for the existence of Prophets”
    “The Problem of Evil and the existence of God”
    Most of them aren’t translated to other languages as far as I know.
    [–]GxK1999 3 points 2 days ago
    Translation of this book?


    [–]lskwkdnwk 156 points 4 days ago
    Bro he probably felt really smart too typing that out 😭
    [–]I-Antichrist -10 points 3 days ago
    God gave him cancer, so you should not play god yourself by treating it.
    [–][deleted] 3 days ago
    [–]I-Antichrist -7 points 3 days ago
    Jokes aside, im honestly curious. If everything is gods plan, isn’t diseases also part of that?
    [–]Rock1589based anti-theist atheist ☮ 17 points 3 days ago
    But what if getting rid of the cancer is part of God’s plan?
    continue this thread
    [–]cumdaddy6942O 1 point 3 days ago
    what makes getting them cured not part of his plan too?
    continue this thread
    [–]SolotociusAverage Quran Enjoyer 136 points 4 days ago
    “Basic human rights don’t apply to those whom I disagree with”
    [–]1proudshiaAnti-Antitheist 27 points 3 days ago
    I thought that was a religious people thing 😞
    [–]Hush_AyriSunni Muslim 92 points 4 days ago
    Idk why but he must have thought Muslims know their own future or something.
    [–]MeadOfPoetryyJesusGamingTTV 17 points 3 days ago
    you don’t?
    [–]Hush_AyriSunni Muslim 35 points 3 days ago
    We do but idk how he found out.
    [–]SAMITHEGREAT996Halal Gaming 12 points 3 days ago
    Underrated comment
    [–]melodic8362muzlem 73 points 4 days ago
    Their Islamphobia isn’t even nuanced anymore…
    [–]RaccoonFickle6575 2 points 1 day ago
    [–]sneedsformerlychucksCatholic Christian 70 points 4 days ago
    Reminds me of this parable that goes
    There was a man that lived by the river. He heard a radio report that the river was going to rush up and flood the town. And that all the residents should evacuate their homes. But the man said, “I’m religious. I pray. God loves me. God will save me.” The waters rose up. A guy in a row boat came along and he shouted, “Hey, hey you! You in there. The town is flooding. Let me take you to safety.” But the man shouted back, “I’m religious. I pray. God loves me. God will save me.” A helicopter was hovering overhead. And a guy with a megaphone shouted, “Hey you, you down there. The town is flooding. Let me drop this ladder and I’ll take you to safety.” But the man shouted back that he was religious, that he prayed, that God loved him and that God will take him to safety. Well… the man drowned. And standing at the gates of St. Peter, he demanded an audience with God. “Lord,” he said, “I’m a religious man, I pray. I thought you loved me. Why did this happen?” God said, “I sent you a radio report, a helicopter, and a guy in a rowboat. What the hell are you doing here?”
    [–]Ahmed_D_GreatSunni Muslim [S] 23 points 3 days ago
    Nah that’s funny asf😭
    [–]ElzectorSunni Muslim 13 points 3 days ago
    [–]SAMITHEGREAT996Halal Gaming 5 points 3 days ago
    [–]This-Reply 51 points 4 days ago
    Tell me you know thing about Islam. Without telling me you know nothing about Islam.
    [–]sneedsformerlychucksCatholic Christian 33 points 4 days ago
    It really butchers what predestination means in general.
    [–]SolidVaultResurgedHalal Gaming 30 points 4 days ago
    Someone please tell them that God has given us a brain and common sense and ya know free will. Also just because someone gets cancer ≠ predetermined death.
    [–]CSsharpGOHalal Gaming 19 points 4 days ago
    This guy should listen to and contemplate his own thoughts before posting it on Reddit.
    [–]MarbleandMarble 27 points 4 days ago
    i mean im ok with that.
    if God wants me alive then i guess ill live
    [–]Disastrous-Wheel-941Halal Gaming 19 points 4 days ago
    if i recall correctly my teacher told me you should seek treatment to continue to pray to allah and you also must take care of your body as its not your own but rather its a property of allah and you should take care of it for you must return it on judgement day
    im a muslim btw
    [–]DavutPapiSunni Muslim 13 points 3 days ago
    You are right because your actions do affect your future. So Allah knows you will die in let’s say 2 years, but he also knows that if you don’t get the treatment you will die in 1 year. Because he knew that you were gonna get the treatment your fate says 2 years. So you always have to act in a rational way and try all worldly things to be healthy and then trust in Allah and pray. Because fate is not something that causes your actions, but because Allah is all knowing he knew what you were gonna do and made your fate according to that.
    [–]JonyNemonicPredicNFT 14 points 3 days ago
    So what if it was written that the person will survive thanks to the treatment.
    [–]1proudshiaAnti-Antitheist 11 points 3 days ago
    LOve iS thEiR rEliGION!!😤
    [–]suleiman_36Sunni Muslim 6 points 3 days ago
    Stupid arguments as that are why I stopped debating on religion
    [–]dauzleeSunni Muslim 6 points 3 days ago
    At least he got ratio’d
    [–]Somekindalurker 3 points 3 days ago
    What if God wants you to get the treatment?
    [–]RoadRunner49Sunni Muslim 2 points 3 days ago
    When ur predestined to get chemo and live 😎
    [–]throw-account100Protestant Christian 2 points 3 days ago
    A fellow was stuck on his rooftop in a flood. He was praying to God for help.
    Soon a man in a rowboat came by and the fellow shouted to the man on the roof, “Jump in, I can save you.”
    The stranded fellow shouted back, “No, it’s OK, I’m praying to God and he is going to save me.”
    So the rowboat went on.
    Then a motorboat came by. “The fellow in the motorboat shouted, “Jump in, I can save you.”
    To this the stranded man said, “No thanks, I’m praying to God and he is going to save me. I have faith.”
    So the motorboat went on.
    Then a helicopter came by and the pilot shouted down, “Grab this rope and I will lift you to safety.”
    To this the stranded man again replied, “No thanks, I’m praying to God and he is going to save me. I have faith.”
    So the helicopter reluctantly flew away.
    Soon the water rose above the rooftop and the man drowned. He went to Heaven. He finally got his chance to discuss this whole situation with God, at which point he exclaimed, “I had faith in you but you didn’t save me, you let me drown. I don’t understand why!”
    To this God replied, “I sent you a rowboat and a motorboat and a helicopter, what more did you expect?”
    [–]SAMITHEGREAT996Halal Gaming 2 points 3 days ago
    W-What? No, that’s not how it works. You going to treatment can be God’s way of saving you. Does he think everything God does is magical?
    [–]WilhelmsCamelSecond French Empire Islamic Shariastate 2 points 3 days ago
    If death is pre-determined why does he not just open his window and superman out of it?
    [–]BazzemBoiBased Mozlim 2 points 3 days ago
    “Guys there is no need to get cured since we will all die one day”
    – Said no Muslim ever.
    [–]Ilminist_GigachadAnti-Antitheist 2 points 3 days ago
    Most coherent atheist argument in r /debatereligion
    [–]Scribbler_797 -60 points 4 days ago
    It’s hilarious that Muslims are so easily triggered. I thought you were submitting to god rather than your tender feelings. “They insult my god and his prophet. Please make them stop being mean to us.” 🤣
    [–]Ahmed_D_GreatSunni Muslim [S] 30 points 4 days ago
    Hol up, I recognize you from somewhere. Ain’t you that one dude where I said a minute passes in Africa?
    [–]Scribbler_797 -25 points 4 days ago
    That’s me.
    [–]Disastrous-Wheel-941Halal Gaming 17 points 4 days ago
    alright but what are you doing on religious subs if you are an athiest and you also hate religion from what i have seen on your post history
    so what are you doing here?
    [–]Scribbler_797 -22 points 4 days ago
    Ask the OP. He’s the one who got all butthurt over my post and started this shitshow. He mocks me, I mock back. It seems only fair.
    continue this thread
    [–]sneedsformerlychucksCatholic Christian 20 points 4 days ago
    I’m not even Muslim, but people who mock things they clearly hate more than they understand are always annoying.
    [–]Scribbler_797 -10 points 4 days ago
    That assumes much. It assumes I hate Islam, and that I hate it more than I understand it, but you’ve no idea as to what I understand; I mock it because I do understand it, not out of hate, but anger fueled by fear. Which you won’t understand, so you call it hate.
    Islam is incompatible with democracy, with human rights, and with human dignity. And this scorn is not limited to Islam; I’ve plenty for Christianity as well, and for the same reasons, especially the murderous church to which you belong.
    Christianity claims that God is love, and Muslims claim the Islam is a religion of peace. These are lies revealed in your own scriptures, in your histories, and by the actions of your respective believers.
    [–]GxK1999 22 points 4 days ago
    It’s hilarious that Muslims are so easily triggered. I thought you were submitting to god rather than your tender feelings

    not out of hate, but anger fueled by fear

    [–]Scribbler_797 -2 points 4 days ago
    I know that you don’t understand that religion is dangerous, and if someone disagrees with you, it much be hate. Not triggered, but wary. You give good reason.
    continue this thread
    [–]sneedsformerlychucksCatholic Christian 12 points 4 days ago*
    Uh huh. Well, I’m not going to debate that with you, but this particular post is stupid because it doesn’t understand how predestination works. The “Puritan work ethic” was a thing for a reason. Even the most devout hyper-Calvinists didn’t just sit around and wait for God to do things for them. They believed that God’s plan includes them working hard to get the things they want and seeing doctors when they get sick. In fact, I’m pretty sure they believed that hard work was obeying God and therefore a sign that they were one of the elect that God had chosen to go to heaven.
    And in regards to Islam I’m not an expert but iirc Muslims aren’t as strict about predestination as the Puritans were. They believe that God (Allah is just “God” in Arabic) can see the future and writes people’s preserved destiny on a tablet according to what he sees, but that humans still have complete agency. I know the concept of free will is very important to Muslims.
    [–]Scribbler_797 -2 points 4 days ago
    Predestination is not a real thing; along with your god, it doesn’t exist.
    And I’m glad that you’re not going debate me on this. 🙄
    continue this thread
    [–]_Masterc_ 6 points 3 days ago
    so out of hate lmao?
    [–]hjgsfdbh_oof2Sunni Muslim 14 points 3 days ago
    Why shouldn’t we be angry when someone insults our god, our prophet, or our religion?
    [–]Ahmed_D_GreatSunni Muslim [S] 14 points 3 days ago
    And cancer patients.
    [–]Scribbler_797 -6 points 3 days ago
    Be as angry as you like, but please notice what you solve by it. Being angry at me is like taking poison and expecting me to die.
    The other problem is that you expect me to respect your beliefs, but I don’t, I can’t. Religion causes too much harm to be respected.
    [–]Gruene_KatzeCatholic Christian 14 points 3 days ago
    Everyone gets triggered. If I made fun of your veterans PTSD you’d go apeshit, have a panic attack, and die in the hospital because Americas healthcare is shit. Everyone has sacred things of their identity. It’s different for everyone, religion, sexuality, nationality, family, etc. Idk about you, but saying “Muslims with cancer should die” will offend people. Just like if you said “Black people with cancer should die” Your original point doesn’t even make since. No where in Islam does it say people cant get treated for cancer. The Qur’an even says “anything to save a life”. Your assuming Islam works just like Christianity, when they are different. Which reveals a white-supremacist euro-centric mindset.
    [–]Scribbler_797 -2 points 3 days ago
    Everyone gets triggered. If I made fun of your veterans PTSD you’d go apeshit, have a panic attack, and die in the hospital because Americas healthcare is shit.
    Well, no, because the VA makes sure that I have meds that prevent that.
    “Muslims with cancer should die” will offend people.
    That wasn’t my post, but the OP came onto my post about the uselessness of prayer, and I’m here returning the favor. Petty of me, I know, but I don’t want anyone to die from cancer.
    Your* assuming Islam works just like Christianity, when they are different. Which reveals a white-supremacist euro-centric mindset.
    I assumed no such thing, though I do assume that both are equally evil.
    [–]CSsharpGOHalal Gaming 12 points 4 days ago
    [–]ElzectorSunni Muslim 9 points 3 days ago
    Yeah, you’re the type of guy to insult and mock someone because they believe in God or gods.
    [–]Scribbler_797 1 point 3 days ago
    How do you feel about people who still believe in Isis and Osiris?
    [–]ElzectorSunni Muslim 7 points 3 days ago
    They’re fine..? They’re free to do whatever, in fact, I find Egyptian mythology very interesting. What’s your point?
    [–]Scribbler_797 0 points 3 days ago
    My point is that you don’t believe that Isis and Osiris, or Zeus, or Thor, or Quetzalcoatl , are real, but that Allah is.
    continue this thread
    [–]MedoLY1Sunni Muslim 8 points 3 days ago
    Lmao cope
    [–]HornkneeFakIslamic Technocrat 🔬🧪🔭🤝☪️🕌 7 points 3 days ago
    And when we say Homosexuals dont deserve Camcer Treatment, you’ll get Triggered, rightttt?
    [–]Scribbler_797 1 point 3 days ago
    That wasn’t my post, but I do get triggered by Muslims executing homosexuals. Such a peaceful religion.
    [–]HornkneeFakIslamic Technocrat 🔬🧪🔭🤝☪️🕌 6 points 3 days ago
    Ok then. I hvae nothing else to say so…
    [–]Scribbler_797 1 point 3 days ago
    OK then.
    [–]HornkneeFakIslamic Technocrat 🔬🧪🔭🤝☪️🕌 4 points 3 days ago
    Wait, isnt it the same thing? I just replaced Muslims with Homosexuals?
    [–]Scribbler_797 1 point 3 days ago
    I don’t want to execute anyone.
    continue this thread
    [–]BontotKecilAqilliesSunni Muslim 6 points 3 days ago
    It’s hilarious that Antitheist are so easily triggered. I thought you were submitting to “science” rather than your tender feelings. “They insult my “science” and homo. Please make them stop being mean to us.” 🤣
    [–]Scribbler_797 0 points 3 days ago
    How does one insult science?
    continue this thread
    [–]mr_potato4565Editable Flair 4 points 3 days ago*
    “They insult my god and his prophet. Please make them stop being mean to us.”
    What a nice strawman right there
    It’s hilarious that Muslims are so easily triggered
    What a nice strawman right there
    I thought you were submitting to god rather than your tender feelings
    We do submit to god but we don’t accept insults toward our beliefs
    And we don’t say “stop being mean to us”
    [–]JustForTheFunOfIt7Catholic Christian 1 point 3 days ago
    It’s not just the cruelty, he’s not even making any kind of sense.
    [–]miko81Catholic Christian 1 point 3 days ago
    Imma be banned for that, don’t care though, fuck this website anyways, but watch me create a post saying “[TRANSSEXUALS] Transsexual people who have cancer shouldn’t get treatment cause they have 40% chance to kill themselves anyways”. Imagine the outrage.
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 1 point 1 day ago
    I wouldn’t get treatment for cancer but that’s not why. I’d just make meth instead


    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 13 points 4 hours ago
    The first one is accurate
    [–]DaMh_1Sunni Muslim 9 points 3 hours ago
    yes. look at western media outlets on the death of the palestinian reporter now.
    [–]LiberalToryDeist 2 points 2 hours ago
    I’ll need a source.
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 6 points 2 hours ago
    My source is I made it the flip up
    [–]Upside_Down-Bot 5 points 2 hours ago
    „dn dılɟ ǝɥʇ ʇı ǝpɐɯ I sı ǝɔɹnos ʎW„
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 3 points 2 hours ago
    [–]that_one_guy-17Sunni Muslim 3 points 2 hours ago*
    got shot by sniper in the head while wearing a vest labelled ‘PRESS’
    western media: Al Jazeera claims that Israel killed their journalist, but the IDF has stated that it was actually the Palestinians
    [–]ReidWHProtestant Christian 2 points 32 minutes ago
    [–]RepublicRadioCatholic Christian 11 points 4 hours ago
    They prob blaim the war on Ukraine on religion too lmao
    [–]Tomi_934_HRCatholic Christian 11 points 4 hours ago
    They also blamed Religion for the Holocaust and what not.
    [–]Neat-Tadpole9630 4 points 3 hours ago
    I don’t understand the first one, Jews are against freedom of speech?
    [–]MarbleandMarble 5 points 2 hours ago
    Is the typical “le ebil juice control le media” stereotype.
    Which is dumb because the media doesn’t actually have as much power as people think. People react based off intuition and upbringing not what some stranger on the newspaper or TV says
    [–]Neat-Tadpole9630 3 points 2 hours ago
    Jews are people like other people, different Jewish individuals have different world-views I mean most American Jews are highly liberal and secular (lots of atheist Jews) how could they have the same agenda as an orthodox rabbi ?
    [–]MarbleandMarble 2 points 2 hours ago
    exactly, most people who discuss the issue have a very limited understanding of Judaism.
    [–]KryppoOrthodox Christian 4 points an hour ago
    And they call us antisemetic when they make shit like the first pic. also only 7% of wars were for religious purposes the rest were for money or power or both
    [–]Ahmad_PathanSunni Muslim 1 point 32 minutes ago
    Studies show less than 6% of recorded wars to be fought due to religion. What about the other 94%?
    [–]tardeurCatholic Christian [S] 0 points 29 minutes ago
    I personally believe it could go even lower than 6%. People didnt have much of a nation identity back then. If you asked an english from 1200 if was english he would probably say “how can I be a language ? Sir, i am a catholic man who speaks english, it would be silly if I was an english speaking english, innit?”


    [–]MalakaCat 29 points 18 hours ago
    What does hes bisexuality have to do with this?
    [–]RedDawnStuffConsider Islam 18 points 17 hours ago
    They’re being even more oppressed. Not just oppressed
    [–]GodOfRice7Secular Christian 3 points 11 hours ago
    Nothing, it’s his personality
    [–]ZealousidealState214 19 points 17 hours ago
    Genuinely curious what country would have a Muslim north ans Christian south.
    [–]atdreamvisionCatholic Christian 19 points 17 hours ago
    He said somewhere in the comments it was Nigeria.
    [–]Random_DumbPersonSunni Muslim 10 points 13 hours ago
    [–]Neat-Tadpole9630 13 points 17 hours ago
    I have some symphony, it’s not right to kill people for blasphemy
    [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 12 points 14 hours ago
    Lmao your musical talent is such that it allows you to feel sorry for people
    [–]beef64Sky daddy follower 😎 6 points 14 hours ago
    [–]Neat-Tadpole9630 3 points 11 hours ago
    Damn autocorrect
    [–]AshAmbiolbeebAtheist 5 points 14 hours ago
    What I thought lmao
    [–]Fresh_Sign6555 11 points 18 hours ago
    Usual atheist coomer
    [–]dispel_everything 9 points 18 hours ago
    cope and mald
    [–]MarbleandMarble 5 points 18 hours ago
    cope, seethe, dilate
    [–]Ahmed_D_GreatSunni Muslim 3 points 12 hours ago
    Potential copypasta😳
    [–]PerceyLovesRedheadsSky daddy moment 3 points 10 hours ago
    A Nigerian, an Atheist and a Bisexual, damn what a combo lol
    [–]Mcroherd 2 points 9 hours ago
    where’s his dad tho
    [–]y_polar 1 point 2 hours ago
    people been always burning and killing each other for whatever reason they have weather atheist or muslim, christian etc. ignorant humans just love chaos, it’s in our nature. no where in the quran or hadeeth is there anything remotely close telling people to burn each other for blasphemy. it doesn’t define muslims as it also doesn’t define atheists, it’s just the human condition


    1. [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 13 points 4 hours ago
      The first one is accurate
      [–]DaMh_1Sunni Muslim 9 points 3 hours ago
      yes. look at western media outlets on the death of the palestinian reporter now.
      [–]LiberalToryDeist 2 points 2 hours ago
      I’ll need a source.
      [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 6 points 2 hours ago
      My source is I made it the flip up
      [–]Upside_Down-Bot 5 points 2 hours ago
      „dn dılɟ ǝɥʇ ʇı ǝpɐɯ I sı ǝɔɹnos ʎW„
      [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 3 points 2 hours ago
      [–]that_one_guy-17Sunni Muslim 3 points 2 hours ago*
      got shot by sniper in the head while wearing a vest labelled ‘PRESS’
      western media: Al Jazeera claims that Israel killed their journalist, but the IDF has stated that it was actually the Palestinians
      [–]ReidWHProtestant Christian 2 points 32 minutes ago
      [–]RepublicRadioCatholic Christian 11 points 4 hours ago
      They prob blaim the war on Ukraine on religion too lmao
      [–]Tomi_934_HRCatholic Christian 11 points 4 hours ago
      They also blamed Religion for the Holocaust and what not.
      [–]Neat-Tadpole9630 4 points 3 hours ago
      I don’t understand the first one, Jews are against freedom of speech?
      [–]MarbleandMarble 5 points 2 hours ago
      Is the typical “le ebil juice control le media” stereotype.
      Which is dumb because the media doesn’t actually have as much power as people think. People react based off intuition and upbringing not what some stranger on the newspaper or TV says
      [–]Neat-Tadpole9630 3 points 2 hours ago
      Jews are people like other people, different Jewish individuals have different world-views I mean most American Jews are highly liberal and secular (lots of atheist Jews) how could they have the same agenda as an orthodox rabbi ?
      [–]MarbleandMarble 2 points 2 hours ago
      exactly, most people who discuss the issue have a very limited understanding of Judaism.
      [–]KryppoOrthodox Christian 4 points an hour ago
      And they call us antisemetic when they make shit like the first pic. also only 7% of wars were for religious purposes the rest were for money or power or both
      [–]Ahmad_PathanSunni Muslim 1 point 32 minutes ago
      Studies show less than 6% of recorded wars to be fought due to religion. What about the other 94%?
      [–]tardeurCatholic Christian [S] 0 points 29 minutes ago
      I personally believe it could go even lower than 6%. People didnt have much of a nation identity back then. If you asked an english from 1200 if was english he would probably say “how can I be a language ? Sir, i am a catholic man who speaks english, it would be silly if I was an english speaking english, innit?”
      permalinkembedsaveparentreportreply https://archive.is/M0D2t#selection-1987.0-3955.5

      Catholic Christian [S] 94 points 3 days ago
      Christian movies and music are bad = God debooonked
      [–]monsuir_bruhCharlemagne Enjoyer 89 points 3 days ago
      Prince of Egypt: “Am I a joke to you”
      [–]tardeurCatholic Christian [S] 42 points 3 days ago
      What about tolkien?
      [–]beef64Sky daddy follower 😎 44 points 3 days ago*
      Tolkein was a closeted atheist smh that’s common knowledge
      Edit: /s
      [–]tardeurCatholic Christian [S] 19 points 3 days ago
      [–]beef64Sky daddy follower 😎 18 points 3 days ago
      I should have added /s
      continue this thread
      [–]train2000cCatholic Christian 10 points 3 days ago
      Isn’t the phrase supposed to be “Tolkien was a closeted pagan”?
      [–]beef64Sky daddy follower 😎 9 points 3 days ago
      I don’t think so
      [–]insanechickengirlCatholic Christian 7 points 3 days ago
      Haven’t seen Father Stu yet but I’ve heard that’s a great one too
      [–]RuairiLehane123Catholic Christian 44 points 3 days ago
      One of my all time favourite movie soundtracks. “Deliver us”: chef kiss 🤌
      [–]playstation43Catholic Christian 19 points 3 days ago
      Passion of the Christ doesn’t exist anymore as well
      [–]enderpotato0012Protestant Christian 6 points 3 days ago
      Or Ten Commandments
      [–]starbucks_red_cupSunni Muslim 3 points 2 days ago
      One of my favorite movies.
      [–]JETRANG 40 points 3 days ago
      … who is this guy???
      [–]tardeurCatholic Christian [S] 52 points 3 days ago
      The atheist voice. He is one of the guys that tweeted about banning bibles in florida. He still has a podcast called “how many atheists are in prison” with more than 300 episodes
      [–]JETRANG 28 points 3 days ago
      What the actual fuck 😐
      [–]Successful_Picture94 20 points 3 days ago
      What is the podcast about?
      [–]tardeurCatholic Christian [S] 29 points 3 days ago
      About atheist morals. He started it off from a dumbass christian take like “atheists have no morals” and is still milking it in 2022
      [–]MahknoSimpProtestant Christian 30 points 3 days ago
      I wouldn’t call atheists have no morals a dumb take, it’s not that atheism is inherently immoral, many/most atheists are good, it’s just they have no philosophical justification as to why moral things are moral
      continue this thread
      [–]George_2004Orthodox Christian 32 points 3 days ago
      Christian/religious media not being your cup of tea is fine (same applies to any genre),but this doesn’t mean it can be used as a counter-arguement against religion.
      This part feels as if he ran out of ideas and couldn’t find something more solid to use as a point for his video.
      [–]Neat-Tadpole9630 24 points 3 days ago
      How about Mozart, Bach, Handel ???? Are they terrible? He doesn’t know anything about the classics
      [–]Timur_PashaSunni-Sufi 20 points 3 days ago
      Actually, all of them are closet atheists. Source, trust me, bro.
      [–]Clayton-Of-ClamsValentinian Christian✝️🔆 6 points 3 days ago
      If you don’t mind me asking, how does one be a Sunni and a Sufi at the same time? And aren’t Sufi like considered unorthodox by Muslims?
      [–]Timur_PashaSunni-Sufi 7 points 3 days ago
      Sufism is not a school of thought or a sectarian so you can be both Sunni/Shia and Sufi at the same time for example, Turkey and Chechnya is majority Hanafi sunni but many people also practicing Sufism.
      (Further answer will be in DM to avoid breaking sub rule)
      [–]Clayton-Of-ClamsValentinian Christian✝️🔆 6 points 3 days ago
      Sure, let’s go to the dm
      [–]SolotociusAverage Quran Enjoyer 20 points 3 days ago
      Some can be cheesy, but imo some of them are the greatest bops ever
      [–]CSsharpGOHalal Gaming 8 points 3 days ago
      I remember playing Hallelujah in a mandatory music class and it was pretty good ngl
      [–]SolotociusAverage Quran Enjoyer 6 points 3 days ago
      Fun fact: Hallelujah was first meant to be a song about drugs and sex, but was then changed halfway through production
      [–]bulletspamingpatriotAnti-Antitheist 18 points 3 days ago
      [–]bulletspamingpatriotAnti-Antitheist 9 points 3 days ago
      His point is now null
      [–]RussianSkeletonRobotChristian 9 points 3 days ago
      “Allow us to introduce ourselves..”
      [–]Minstrel-of-Shadow 13 points 3 days ago
      This guy’s channel is SO bad
      [–]train2000cCatholic Christian 10 points 3 days ago
      Prince of Egypt? Passion of the Christ?
      [–]Commie-LyncherOrthodox Christian 11 points 3 days ago
      Ben-Hur? The Ten Commandments?
      [–]ZookeepergameNo7172 10 points 3 days ago
      Almost all of the great music, literature, and art to come out of Europe for over 1000 years was all about glorifying God, but that’s all invalidated because he doesn’t like Kirk Cameron.
      [–]wailinghamster 9 points 3 days ago
      Look movies I’ll credit. We’ve had 1 or 2 good ones but that’s about it. But songs!? Hymns, Gregorian Chants, Christmas Carol’s, Gospel music, Mozart….
      [–][deleted] 3 days ago
      [–]tardeurCatholic Christian [S] 6 points 3 days ago
      He isnt agaisnt the glory of God but he directly uses it to state he doesnt exist
      [–]pheonix1723Catholic Christian 9 points 3 days ago
      Just ignore all of baroque art
      [–]Tumama787Deist 16 points 3 days ago
      He has a point albeit stupid to think it debunks God.
      Movies like God’s Not Dead are just so forced and cheesy. Why can’t we have movies like Prince of Egypt?
      [–]wailinghamster 23 points 3 days ago
      We have a movie like Prince of Egypt. It’s called Prince of Egypt.
      [–]Electronic-Excuse-20 6 points 3 days ago
      Our Jihad Nasheeds are superior to your songs of immorality and debauchery.
      [–]Kaiser-MattCatholic Christian 7 points 3 days ago
      Don’t hate on my boys in skillet
      [–]Boxer_puppies 4 points 3 days ago
      I mean there are definitely some real stinkers on the list, but that’s not a fucking argument lmao
      [–]kingpizza100 5 points 3 days ago
      because vivaldi and classical medieval music is just terrible? Im sure that this guy could to better totally pfffh
      [–]LisleIgfriedProtestant Christian 4 points 3 days ago
      Clearly never listened to theocracy
      [–]Ahmed_D_GreatSunni Muslim 3 points 3 days ago
      I legit thought this was Cake Boss for a second
      [–]KattosTheWarlord 3 points 3 days ago*
      Sami yusuf,scott stapp,mahir Zayn,yuzar seef,mozart
      [–]Jukeboxhero40 3 points 3 days ago
      This guy must have never seen any of the Bible epics from thr 50’s with Charlton Heston
      [–]Soul_of_greenAnti-Antitheist 2 points 2 days ago
      This guy is a fucking joke.
      I watched one of his videos about eastern religions. He had obviously done fuck all research into them and just went off pop culture explainations. What really did it for me though was the crux of his argument is basically “X doesn’t exist because OBVIOUSLY it doesn’t”
      [–]DEEZterminationCatholic Christian 2 points 1 day ago
      After hearing 24 straight hours of Gregorian Chants , I can tell you that Atheists have never produced any art of value .
      [–]bartholomewjohnson 2 points 1 day ago
      So, do Prince of Egypt and Passion of the Christ just not exist?
      [–]nevermock -13 points 3 days ago
      I’ll be fair, I really loathe Christian music. It’s all so cheesy and lame I wish it the worst.
      [–]ParadosiakosOrthodox Christian (Mod) 15 points 3 days ago
      Bruh look up Byzantine or Gregorian chants. Thats original Christian music.
      [–]The_Monarchist_18Catholic Christian 16 points 3 days ago
      Someone whose obviously never listened to proper Christian hymns but spent his time hearing Protestant pop-rock music.
      [–]TotalitariPalpatineCatholic Christian 9 points 3 days ago
      DEUS VULT!!!
      [–]TotalitariPalpatineCatholic Christian 11 points 3 days ago
      O felix Roma, o felix Roma nobilis…
      [–]train2000cCatholic Christian 4 points 3 days ago
      Catholic and Orthodox hymns > prot music
      [–]TotalitariPalpatineCatholic Christian 2 points 3 days ago
      I found this: https://youtu.be/TMGX6183Acs
      Orthodox chants in English.
      [–]ThiccRoastBeefBased Halalman 1 point 2 days ago
      Checkmate theists
      [–]kid-with-a-beard 1 point 1 day ago
      “The movies and music that honor God are just awful” 🤓
      [–]BroadDragonfruit4206 1 point 13 hours ago
      thats the dumbest argument ive ever heard


      [–]Tau_GruntProtestant Christian 20 points 2 days ago
      They hate religion yet it’s constantly on their minds, sad
      [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 1 point 1 day ago
      God lives rent free in everyone’s head, religious or atheist
      [–]Tau_GruntProtestant Christian 3 points 1 day ago
      God lives rent free in my heart, not just my head
      [–]HLEnjoyerCatholic Christian 1 point 1 day ago
      Their insecurity is appaling !
      [–]Till_KurksOrthodox Christian 9 points 2 days ago
      why do they still think god is in the sky… nobody believes that
      [–]TeteTrancheeCatholic Christian 1 point 13 hours ago
      They interpret things literally then they say we are the ones doing it.
      [–]SolidVaultResurgedHalal Gaming 14 points 2 days ago
      What a BASED response bro!!
      [–]raulsjl12[S] 4 points 2 days ago
      Well, let’s say that my comment got brigaded A LOT after that and I’ll admit that it was very annoying, they downvoted me like hell, the guy I answered to at first sort of tried debating what the point of my comment was (yes, those hundreds of angry atheists there really didn’t understand what I menat with my response), they accused me of being drunk, there was name-calling etc. Frankly, the behavior of these people can cause me to get very tired of the world sometimes.
      [–]bartholomewjohnson 1 point 1 day ago
      The complexities of chemistry, physics, and biology could not have existed without a designer. Just look at DNA. It’s basically code, and code cannot exist without a programmer


      [–]monsuir_bruhCharlemagne Enjoyer 25 points 19 hours ago
      Ah yes, the good old “morality is not real, but the Bible is immoral” line
      [–]The_Monarchist_18Catholic Christian 16 points 20 hours ago
      It’s a bit sad that anti-Theists, with their degenerate takes, think about Religion more often than some Theists do.
      [–]One-Cap1778The Man Of Cringe 16 points 15 hours ago
      Christianity it literally the reason why crucifixion stopped
      [–]tardeurCatholic Christian 6 points 8 hours ago
      And also the gladiator games. Saint Telemachus got stoned by the audience for intervening
      [–]Moist-Ad-4288Catholic Christian 5 points 7 hours ago
      Don’t forget infanticide and human sacrifice.
      [–]KafkaesqueFlask0_0 10 points 13 hours ago
      “If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago 1918–1956
      My go to quote to shut up those nonsensical ramblings by those cognitive challenged individuals. Somebody out there should program an AI to spam those people with this Quote.
      [–]MarbleandMarble 2 points 3 hours ago
      That and “the road to hell is paved in good intentions” are great quotes
      [–]Tomi_934_HRCatholic Christian 6 points 12 hours ago
      So no Religion=no Countries??? What the hell is this guy talking?
      Also Racism is a Sin, Christ died for everyone regardless of Skin Colour so you can’t exclude people for their skin colour. But sure some Atheist teenager will think he knows it better.
      And do Atheists really think a World without Religion would be better? Even Richard Dawkins thinks that’s a bad idea.
      [–]tardeurCatholic Christian 1 point 8 hours ago
      Didnt Prophet Moses’s sister also get punished for being racist towards his wife?
      [–]NWAHU_AKBARGnostic 5 points 10 hours ago
      >Evil is not a real thing
      How can anyone be this retarded? Yeah, Joseph Stalin wasn’t evil; I just call him that because I need to justify not liking him. 🤡
      [–]MahknoSimpProtestant Christian 3 points 12 hours ago
      Scapegoating all the world’s problems on one source, is the root of political extremism, and that’s completely ignoring the absolute ridiculousness of this claim
      [–]tardeurCatholic Christian 2 points 8 hours ago
      Also the last comment:
      Bible is immoral
      Evil doesnt exist
      I do not need to explain whats wrong here.The last comment op probably never went to school. If he did he was the annoying kid
      [–]DinoDude_YEETOrthodox Christian 2 points 3 hours ago
      “In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessings. But because, I am enlightened by my intelligence.”

      ― Random ass neckbeard
      [–]MarbleandMarble 1 point 3 hours ago
      Racism didn’t exist until Charles Darwin went around calling people monkeys


      [–]IBreakCellPhones 5 points 4 hours ago
      Still bad. It’s wrong to kill innocent people. The child is not ordinarily a threat, and so should not be killed.
      [–]Bbyskysky -3 points an hour ago
      You realize the Bible glorifies the murder of babies in battle, right? Psalms 137:9
      [–]IBreakCellPhones 4 points an hour ago
      Today’s word is “imprecatory.”
      It was written in specific circumstances (while being ground under the thumb of the Babylonians) and the killing of children was done in a very limited context, dependent on revelation from a prophet. That psalm was not written within that context. It was an expression of anger and frustration at their then-current situation.
      A similar prayer might be “Lord, make my enemies ridiculous to proclaim their folly to the world.”
      [–]Bbyskysky -1 points 50 minutes ago
      Oh, I see, so killing babies is ok as long as the parents were big enough assholes, is that what you’re driving at?
      [–]IBreakCellPhones 3 points 43 minutes ago
      Only if you receive direct revelation from God for children that are not threatening anyone.
      continue this thread
      [–]Elegant_Implement878 1 point 4 hours ago
      We don’t know when sentences starts but I think it’s during the development of the brain. With this being said Europe has the right idea about it.
      [–]fbmluas 1 point 51 minutes ago
      Sentences start with a capital letter.


      há 2 dias
      Orthodox Christian
      Oh ma science!!!! Jesus is literally a copy paste of Asmongold 😡😡😡😤😤😤!!!!!!1!!! Relimgion debunked 😎😎😎



      Avatar do usuário
      nível 2
      há 2 dias
      Catholic Christian
      This isnt far from his videos. First thing i saw in one is him using english for ancient languages



      Continuar lendo

      Avatar do usuário
      nível 1
      há 2 dias
      SUN = SON

      Yes because ancients spoke English and not latin, greek and aramaic or hebrew where this wordplay does not work at all….

      My theory is that Jesus was a very suspicious character because I played Among Us and Jesus contains the word SUS

      Christianity debunked.



      Avatar do usuário
      nível 2
      há 1 dia
      Orthodox Christian



      Avatar do usuário
      nível 1
      há 2 dias
      The Man Of Cringe
      the guys who think Allah is a moon god just discovered Christianity




      Avatar do usuário
      nível 2
      há 2 dias
      Wait till they learn of Horus, they will be in so much trouble. Or Apollo, Or Sol, Or Indra. Let’s hope Artemis is in a good mood.



      Avatar do usuário
      nível 1
      há 2 dias
      Orthodox Christian
      Americans try to speak Greek words in actual Greek challenge (impossible)



      Avatar do usuário
      nível 1
      há 2 dias
      Orthodox Christian (Mod)
      Χυριος (Chyrios)? Whats that supposed to be? Its Κυριος (Kyrios) with “Κ”. And yes it means Lord. What does this have to do with the sun now though? Sun in Greek is Ηλιος (Ilios /Helios).

      I am confused.



  6. “From: Dumugian To: Godmitsuru “You are a psychopath, get help! And that is a shame that Tellonym is so much Quora-like to a level reports do literally nothing and harmful content like your profile, Godmitsuru, are still on it. Someone really should carve your fucking liver out and fucking rip your flesh apart for you being such pedophile, narcissist, god complex, psychopath, sociopath, clinically insane, criminally insane, delusional, psychotic, bipolar, schizophrenic, antitheist, atheist, fascist, nazi, nazifascist, genocidal, maniac and mentally ill as you are. Go to get help and get into a fucking psychiatric hospital or into a forensic psychiatric hospital. It is such a shame that the USA is also the Country of Impunity, no different than Brazil, and you are the proof of that. You shouldn’t even be abllowed to use social media and even do not be allowed to use the Internet, personal computers, smartphones and eletronics as a whole. You are insane and you are a waste of life and you are doomed forever for what you are and what you always were, psychotic maniac. Someone really should end your life as you are wanting to end the life of others, as in “I prefer carving your fucking liver out” and “The only one who will be feeling anything here is you when I fucking rip your flesh apart”. And Lylo is your partner in crime and you both are equally clinically insane and criminally insane.” “I also can’t believe a pedo like you isn’t behind bars… It only shows how much the USA is just like Brazil on that… You, Godmitsuru, is even worse than those thiefs and criminals from Brazil that are showed in programs like Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… You are one of the sickiest persons who I have even met and saw before on the Internet. And it makes me conclude that it is not just Brazil that suffers from this problem about impunity, despite I seriously think you’re an inimputable person, since you features all the characteristics for inimputability and you’re criminally insane. That is what you are. And how I would like if the USA had more people like Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… Instead of those shit people from Fox News Channel, MSNBC, and CNN. Godmitsuru, please, ask to your parents to pay you a visit to a psychiatrist and start doing some therapy and taking some meds, it will be good for you. And also, you are the example that how much impunity we have nowadays, mainly in the USA and on Global North countries…””
    “De: Dumugian Para: Godmitsuru “Você é um psicopata, peça ajuda! E é uma pena que Tellonym seja tão parecido com o Quora para um nível de relatórios não fazer literalmente nada e conteúdo prejudicial como seu perfil, Godmitsuru, ainda está nele. Alguém realmente deveria esculpir sua porra de fígado e rasgar sua carne em pedaços por você ser tão pedófilo, narcisista, complexo de deus, psicopata, sociopata, clinicamente insano, criminalmente insano, delirante, psicótico, bipolar, esquizofrênico, antiteísta, ateu, fascista, nazista, nazifascista, genocida, maníaco e doente mental como você é. Vá buscar ajuda e entre em um maldito hospital psiquiátrico ou em um hospital psiquiátrico forense. É uma pena que os EUA também sejam o País da Impunidade, não diferente do Brasil, e você é a prova disso. Você não deveria nem ser autorizado a usar as redes sociais e nem mesmo ter permissão para usar a Internet, computadores pessoais, smartphones e eletrônicos como um todo. Você é louco e é um desperdício de vida e você estão condenados para sempre pelo que você é e pelo que sempre foi, maníaco psicótico. Alguém realmente deveria acabar com a sua vida como você está querendo acabar com a vida dos outros, como em “Eu prefiro esculpir a porra do seu fígado” e “O único que vai sentir alguma coisa aqui é você quando eu rasgar sua carne”. E Lylo é seu parceiro no crime e vocês dois são igualmente clinicamente insanos e criminalmente insanos.” “Eu também não posso acreditar que um pedófilo como você não está atrás das grades… isso… Você, Godmitsuru, é ainda pior do que esses ladrões e criminosos do Brasil que aparecem em programas como Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… Você é uma das pessoas mais doentias que eu já conheci e vi antes na Internet. E isso me faz concluir que não é só o Brasil que sofre com esse problema da impunidade, apesar de eu pensar seriamente que você é uma pessoa inimputável, já que você tem todas as características de inimputabilidade e é um criminoso insano. Isso é o que você é. E como eu gostaria que os EUA tivessem mais gente como Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… Ao invés daquelas merdas da Fox News Channel, MSNBC e CNN. Godmitsuru, por favor, peça aos seus pais para fazer uma visita a um psiquiatra e começar a fazer terapia e tomar alguns remédios, vai ser bom para você. E também, você é o exemplo de quanta impunidade temos hoje, principalmente nos EUA e nos países do Norte Global…””
    “De: Dumugian Para: Godmitsuru “¡Eres un psicópata, busca ayuda! Y es una pena que Tellonym se parezca tanto a Quora hasta cierto punto, los informes no hacen literalmente nada y el contenido dañino como tu perfil, Godmitsuru, todavía está en él. Alguien realmente deberías sacarte el maldito hígado y destrozarte la carne por ser tan pedófilo, narcisista, con complejo de Dios, psicópata, sociópata, clínicamente loco, criminalmente loco, delirante, psicótico, bipolar, esquizofrénico, antiteísta, ateo, fascista, nazi, Nazifascista, genocida, maníaco y enfermo mental como eres. Ve a buscar ayuda y métete en un maldito hospital psiquiátrico o en un hospital psiquiátrico forense. Es una pena que los EE. UU. también sean el País de la Impunidad, no es diferente a Brasil, y tú eres la prueba de eso. Ni siquiera deberían permitirte usar las redes sociales e incluso no deberían permitirte usar Internet, computadoras personales, teléfonos inteligentes y dispositivos electrónicos en general. Estás loco y eres un desperdicio de vida. y usted Estás condenado para siempre por lo que eres y lo que siempre fuiste, maníaco psicótico. Alguien realmente debería acabar con tu vida como tú quieres acabar con la vida de los demás, como en “Prefiero cortarte el maldito hígado” y “El único que sentirá algo aquí eres tú cuando te desgarre la carne”. Y Lylo es tu socio en el crimen y ambos están igualmente clínicamente locos y criminalmente locos”. que… Tú, Godmitsuru, eres aún peor que esos ladrones y delincuentes de Brasil que se muestran en programas como Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… Eres una de las personas más enfermizas que he conocido y visto antes en Internet. Y me hace concluir que no es sólo Brasil el que sufre este problema de la impunidad, a pesar de que creo seriamente que usted es una persona inimputable, ya que reúne todas las características de inimputabilidad y es un demente criminal. Eso es lo que eres. Y cómo me gustaría que EE.UU. tuviera más gente como Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… En lugar de esa gente de mierda de Fox News Channel, MSNBC y CNN. Godmitsuru, por favor, pídeles a tus padres que te visiten con un psiquiatra y comiences a hacer terapia y a tomar algunos medicamentos, será bueno para ti. Y también, eres el ejemplo de cuánta impunidad tenemos hoy en día, principalmente en los Estados Unidos y en los países del Norte Global…””
    “De : Dumugian À : Godmitsuru “Vous êtes un psychopathe, demandez de l’aide ! Et c’est dommage que Tellonym ressemble tellement à Quora au point que les rapports ne font littéralement rien et que des contenus nuisibles comme votre profil, Godmitsuru, y sont toujours. Quelqu’un devrait vraiment tailler votre putain de foie et déchirer votre putain de chair pour que vous soyez un tel pédophile, narcissique, complexe de Dieu, psychopathe, sociopathe, cliniquement fou, criminel fou, délirant, psychotique, bipolaire, schizophrène, antithéiste, athée, fasciste, nazi, nazifasciste, génocidaire, maniaque et malade mental que vous êtes. Allez chercher de l’aide et entrez dans un putain d’hôpital psychiatrique ou dans un hôpital psychiatrique médico-légal. C’est tellement dommage que les États-Unis soient aussi le pays de l’impunité, pas différent du Brésil, et vous en êtes la preuve. Vous ne devriez même pas être autorisé à utiliser les médias sociaux et même pas être autorisé à utiliser Internet, les ordinateurs personnels, les smartphones et l’électronique dans son ensemble. Vous êtes fou et vous êtes une perte de vie et toi êtes condamné à jamais pour ce que vous êtes et ce que vous avez toujours été, maniaque psychotique. Quelqu’un devrait vraiment mettre fin à votre vie comme vous voulez mettre fin à la vie des autres, comme dans “Je préfère te tailler le putain de foie” et “Le seul qui ressentira quelque chose ici, c’est toi quand je te déchirerai la chair”. Et Lylo est votre partenaire dans le crime et vous êtes tous les deux cliniquement fous et criminellement fous.” “Je ne peux pas non plus croire qu’un pédo comme vous ne soit pas derrière les barreaux… que… Toi, Godmitsuru, tu es encore pire que ces voleurs et criminels du Brésil qui sont montrés dans des programmes comme Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… Tu es l’une des personnes les plus malades que j’aie jamais rencontrées et vues auparavant sur Internet. Et cela me fait conclure que ce n’est pas seulement le Brésil qui souffre de ce problème d’impunité, même si je pense sérieusement que vous êtes une personne inimputable, puisque vous présentez toutes les caractéristiques de l’inimputabilité et que vous êtes criminellement fou. Voilà ce que vous êtes. Et comme j’aimerais que les États-Unis aient plus de gens comme Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… Au lieu de ces merdes de Fox News Channel, MSNBC et CNN. Godmitsuru, s’il vous plaît, demandez à vos parents de vous rendre visite à un psychiatre et de commencer à faire une thérapie et à prendre des médicaments, ce sera bon pour vous. Et aussi, vous êtes l’exemple de l’impunité dont nous jouissons aujourd’hui, principalement aux USA et dans les pays du Nord…””
    “Von: Dumugian An: Godmitsuru „Du bist ein Psychopath, hol dir Hilfe! Und das ist eine Schande, dass Tellonym so Quora-ähnlich ist, dass Berichte buchstäblich nichts bewirken und schädliche Inhalte wie dein Profil, Godmitsuru, immer noch darauf sind. Jemand sollte dir wirklich deine verdammte Leber herausschneiden und dein verdammtes Fleisch auseinander reißen, weil du so ein Pädophiler, Narzisst, Gottkomplex, Psychopath, Soziopath, klinisch verrückt, kriminell verrückt, wahnhaft, psychotisch, bipolar, schizophren, Antitheist, Atheist, Faschist, Nazi bist, Nazifaschist, Völkermörder, Wahnsinniger und Geisteskranker wie du bist. Hol dir Hilfe und geh in eine verdammte Psychiatrie oder in eine forensische Psychiatrie. Es ist so schade, dass die USA auch das Land der Straflosigkeit sind, nicht anders als Brasilien, und du bist der Beweis dafür. Es sollte dir nicht einmal erlaubt sein, soziale Medien zu benutzen und sogar das Internet, PCs, Smartphones und Elektronik als Ganzes nicht zu benutzen. Du bist verrückt und du bist eine Verschwendung von Leben Und Sie bist für immer verdammt für das, was du bist und was du immer warst, ein psychotischer Wahnsinniger. Jemand sollte wirklich dein Leben beenden, so wie du das Leben anderer beenden willst, wie in „Ich ziehe es vor, dir deine verdammte Leber herauszuschneiden“ und „Der einzige, der hier etwas fühlen wird, bist du, wenn ich dein verdammtes Fleisch auseinanderreiße“. Und Lylo ist Ihr Partner in Crime und Sie sind beide gleichermaßen klinisch verrückt und kriminell verrückt.“ „Ich kann auch nicht glauben, dass ein Pädo wie Sie nicht hinter Gittern sitzt… Es zeigt nur, wie sehr die USA Brasilien ähnlich sind das… Du, Godmitsuru, bist noch schlimmer als diese Diebe und Verbrecher aus Brasilien, die in Sendungen wie Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci gezeigt werden… Du bist eine der kränksten Personen, die ich je getroffen und gesehen habe vorher im Internet. Und das lässt mich zu dem Schluss kommen, dass nicht nur Brasilien unter diesem Problem der Straflosigkeit leidet, obwohl ich ernsthaft glaube, dass Sie eine unberechenbare Person sind, da Sie alle Merkmale für eine unberechenbare Person aufweisen und kriminell verrückt sind. Das ist was du bist. Und wie fände ich es, wenn die USA mehr Leute wie Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci hätten… Anstelle dieser beschissenen Leute von Fox News Channel, MSNBC und CNN. Godmitsuru, bitte bitte deine Eltern, dir einen Besuch bei einem Psychiater abzustatten und eine Therapie zu machen und ein paar Medikamente zu nehmen, das wird dir gut tun. Und Sie sind auch das Beispiel dafür, wie viel Straffreiheit wir heutzutage haben, hauptsächlich in den USA und in den Ländern des globalen Nordens …“”
    “Da: Dumugian A: Godmitsuru “Sei uno psicopatico, fatti aiutare! Ed è un peccato che Tellonym sia così simile a Quora a un livello che i rapporti non fanno letteralmente nulla e i contenuti dannosi come il tuo profilo, Godmitsuru, sono ancora su di esso. Qualcuno dovresti davvero ritagliarti il ​​tuo fottuto fegato e strapparti la carne, cazzo, perché sei così pedofilo, narcisista, complesso divino, psicopatico, sociopatico, clinicamente pazzo, criminalmente pazzo, delirante, psicotico, bipolare, schizofrenico, antiteista, ateo, fascista, nazista, nazifascista, genocida, maniaco e malato di mente come te. Vai a chiedere aiuto ed entra in un fottuto ospedale psichiatrico o in un ospedale psichiatrico forense. È un vero peccato che anche gli USA siano il Paese dell’impunità, non diverso dal Brasile, e tu ne sei la prova. Non dovresti nemmeno essere autorizzato a usare i social media e nemmeno ti è permesso usare Internet, personal computer, smartphone ed elettronica in generale. Sei pazzo e sei uno spreco di vita e tu sono condannati per sempre per quello che sei e per quello che sei sempre stato, maniaco psicotico. Qualcuno dovrebbe davvero porre fine alla tua vita perché vuoi porre fine alla vita degli altri, come in “Preferisco ritagliarti il ​​tuo fottuto fegato” e “L’unico che sentirà qualcosa qui sei tu quando ti strappo la carne a pezzi”. E Lylo è il tuo complice ed entrambi siete entrambi pazzi clinicamente e pazzi criminalmente.” che… Tu, Godmitsuru, sei anche peggio di quei ladri e criminali brasiliani che vengono mostrati in programmi come Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… Sei una delle persone più malate che abbia mai incontrato e visto prima su Internet. E mi fa concludere che non è solo il Brasile a soffrire di questo problema di impunità, nonostante io pensi seriamente che tu sia una persona inestimabile, poiché hai tutte le caratteristiche per l’impunità e sei criminalmente pazzo. Questo è ciò che sei. E come mi piacerebbe se gli Stati Uniti avessero più persone come Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… Invece di quelle persone di merda di Fox News Channel, MSNBC e CNN. Godmitsuru, per favore, chiedi ai tuoi genitori di farti visitare da uno psichiatra e iniziare a fare un po’ di terapia e prendere delle medicine, ti farà bene. E anche tu sei l’esempio di quanta impunità abbiamo oggigiorno, principalmente negli Stati Uniti e nei paesi del Nord del mondo…””
    “Van: Dumugian Aan: Godmitsuru “Je bent een psychopaat, zoek hulp! En dat is jammer dat Tellonym zo Quora-achtig is dat rapporten letterlijk niets doen en schadelijke inhoud zoals je profiel, Godmitsuru, er nog steeds op staat. Iemand zou echt je verdomde lever moeten uitsnijden en je vlees verscheuren, want je bent zo’n pedofiel, narcist, godcomplex, psychopaat, sociopaat, klinisch krankzinnig, crimineel krankzinnig, waanvoorstellingen, psychotisch, bipolair, schizofreen, antitheïst, atheïst, fascist, nazi, nazifascistisch, genocidaal, maniak en geestesziek als je bent. Ga hulp halen en ga naar een fucking psychiatrisch ziekenhuis of naar een forensisch psychiatrisch ziekenhuis. Het is zo jammer dat de VS ook het land van straffeloosheid is, niet anders dan Brazilië, en jij bent daar het bewijs van. Je zou niet eens de toelating moeten krijgen om sociale media te gebruiken en zelfs niet het internet, personal computers, smartphones en elektronica als geheel te mogen gebruiken. Je bent gek en je bent een verspilling van je leven jij ook zijn voor altijd gedoemd voor wat je bent en wat je altijd was, psychotische maniak. Iemand zou echt je leven moeten beëindigen omdat je het leven van anderen wilt beëindigen, zoals in “Ik snij liever je lever eruit” en “De enige die hier iets zal voelen, ben jij wanneer ik je vlees verdomme uit elkaar scheur”. En Lylo is je partner in crime en jullie zijn allebei even klinisch gestoord als crimineel gestoord.” “Ik kan ook niet geloven dat een pedo als jij niet achter de tralies zit… Het laat alleen maar zien hoezeer de VS net als Brazilië is op dat… Jij, Godmitsuru, is nog erger dan die dieven en criminelen uit Brazilië die te zien zijn in programma’s als Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… Je bent een van de ziekste personen die ik ooit heb ontmoet en gezien eerder op internet. En het doet me concluderen dat niet alleen Brazilië last heeft van dit probleem van straffeloosheid, ondanks dat ik serieus denk dat je een onaantastbaar persoon bent, aangezien je alle kenmerken voor onaantastbaarheid bezit en je crimineel gestoord bent. Dat is wat je bent. En wat zou ik het leuk vinden als de VS meer mensen hadden zoals Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… In plaats van die shitmensen van Fox News Channel, MSNBC en CNN. Godmitsuru, vraag alsjeblieft aan je ouders om een ​​bezoek aan een psychiater te brengen en wat therapie te gaan doen en medicijnen te nemen, het zal goed voor je zijn. En u bent ook het voorbeeld van hoeveel straffeloosheid we tegenwoordig hebben, voornamelijk in de VS en in de Global North-landen…””
    “От: Думугиан Кому: Годмитсуру “Ты психопат, помоги! И это позор, что Теллоним настолько похож на Quora, что отчеты уровня буквально ничего не делают, а вредоносный контент, такой как твой профиль, Годмитсуру, все еще в нем. Кто-то действительно должен вырезать твою гребаную печень и, блядь, разорвать твою плоть на части, потому что ты такой педофил, нарцисс, комплекс бога, психопат, социопат, клинический невменяемый, криминально невменяемый, бредовый, психотический, биполярный, шизофреник, антитеист, атеист, фашист, нацист, нацифашист,геноцидник,маньяк и психически больной как и ты.Иди за помощью и попади в гребаную психушку или в судебно-психиатрическую больницу.Такая обида,что США еще и Страна Безнаказанности,ни чем не отличающаяся от Бразилии, и вы тому доказательство.Вам даже нельзя разрешать пользоваться соцсетями и даже не разрешать пользоваться интернетом,персональными компьютерами,смартфонами и электроникой в ​​целом.Вы невменяемы и вы пустая трата жизни а вы обречены навеки за то, кем вы являетесь и кем вы всегда были, психотический маньяк. Кто-то действительно должен покончить с твоей жизнью, как ты хочешь покончить с жизнью других, как в «Я предпочитаю вырезать твою гребаную печень» и «Единственный, кто здесь что-то почувствует, это ты, когда я, блядь, разорву твою плоть на части». А Лайло — ваш соучастник в преступлении, и вы оба одинаково психически ненормальны и психически ненормальны». «Я также не могу поверить, что такой педофил, как вы, не сидит за решеткой… что… Ты, Годмитсуру, даже хуже тех воров и преступников из Бразилии, которых показывают в таких программах, как Marcão do Povo, Gotino, Daneta, Bacci… Ты один из самых больных людей, которых я когда-либо встречал и видел раньше в Интернете. И это заставляет меня сделать вывод, что не только Бразилия страдает от этой проблемы с безнаказанностью, несмотря на то, что я серьезно считаю, что вы безупречный человек, поскольку у вас есть все характеристики безупречности, и вы преступно безумны. Это то, что вы есть. И как бы я хотел, чтобы в США было больше таких людей, как Маркао ду Пово, Готино, Данета, Баччи… Вместо этих дерьмовых людей из канала Fox News, MSNBC и CNN. Годмитсуру, пожалуйста, попроси своих родителей навестить тебя у психиатра и начать лечиться и принимать лекарства, тебе будет хорошо. А еще вы являетесь примером того, сколько безнаказанности у нас сейчас, в основном в США и в странах Глобального Севера…””
    “From:Dumugian To:Godmitsuru「あなたはサイコパスです、助けを求めてください!そしてそれはTellonymがQuoraに非常に似ていることを残念に思います-レベルレポートは文字通り何もせず、あなたのプロフィール、Godmitsuruのような有害なコンテンツはまだそこにあります。誰か本当にあなたのクソ肝臓を切り分けて、あなたがそのような小児性愛者、ナルシシスト、神コンプレックス、サイコパス、ソシオパス、臨床的に正気でない、犯罪的に正気でない、妄想的、精神病的、双極性、統合失調症、反社会的、無神論者、ファシスト、ナチであるためにあなたの肉を引き裂くべきですナルシシスト、虐殺、躁うつ病、精神病の状態です。助けを求めて、クソ精神病病院または法医学精神病病院に行きましょう。米国が免責国でもあり、ブラジルと同じように、あなたはその証拠です。あなたはソーシャルメディアを使用するために吹き飛ばされるべきではなく、インターネット、パーソナルコンピュータ、スマートフォン、および電子機器全体を使用することさえ許可されるべきではありません。あなたは正気ではなく、人生の無駄です。あなたもあなたが何であるか、そしてあなたがいつも何であったか、精神的なマニアックのために永遠に運命づけられています。あなたが他の人の人生を終わらせたいので、誰かが本当にあなたの人生を終わらせるべきです。そして、リロはあなたの犯罪のパートナーであり、あなたはどちらも同じように臨床的に正気ではなく、犯罪的に正気ではありません。それは…あなた、ゴッドミツルは、マルコス・ド・ポボ、ゴティーノ、ダネタ、バッキなどのプログラムで見られるブラジルの泥棒や犯罪者よりもさらに悪いです…あなたは私が会って見た中で最も病気の人の一人です以前はインターネットで。そして、あなたは不処罰のすべての特徴を備えており、犯罪的に正気ではないので、あなたは不処罰の人だと真剣に考えていますが、この不処罰の問題に苦しんでいるのはブラジルだけではないと結論付けます。それがあなたです。そして、アメリカにマルコス・ド・ポボ、ゴティーノ、ダネタ、バッキのような人々がもっといたらいいのにと思います… Fox News Channel、MSNBC、CNNのたわごとの人々の代わりに。ゴッドミツル、お願いします、あなたに精神科医を訪ねて、いくつかの治療といくつかの薬を服用し始めるようにあなたの両親に頼んでください、それはあなたにとって良いでしょう。また、あなたは、主に米国と南北諸国で、私たちが今日どれほどの免責を持っているかという例です…」”
    “来自:Dumugian 至:Godmitsuru “你是一个精神病患者,寻求帮助!这是一种耻辱,Tellonym 与 Quora 如此相似,以至于报告实际上什么也没做,而且像你的个人资料 Godmitsuru 这样的有害内容仍在上面。有人真的应该切掉你他妈的肝脏,他妈的撕开你的肉,因为你是这样的恋童癖者,自恋者,上帝情结,精神病患者,反社会者,临床精神病,犯罪精神病,妄想,精神病,双极,精神分裂症,反神论者,无神论者,法西斯主义者,纳粹,纳粹法西斯,种族灭绝,疯子和精神病患者。去寻求帮助,进入他妈的精神病院或法医精神病院。真可惜,美国也是有罪不罚的国家,与巴西没有什么不同,你就是证明。你甚至不应该被允许使用社交媒体,甚至不被允许使用互联网、个人电脑、智能手机和电子产品。你疯了,你是在浪费生命和你因为你现在和你一直以来的样子,精神病疯子,注定要永远。真的应该有人结束你的生命,就像你想结束别人的生命一样,比如“我更喜欢把你他妈的肝脏切掉”和“当我他妈的撕开你的肉时,唯一能感觉到这里的人就是你”。 Lylo 是你的犯罪伙伴,你们俩在临床上和犯罪上都同样精神失常。” “我也不敢相信像你这样的小伙子没有被关进监狱……它只表明美国在多大程度上就像巴西一样那……你,Godmitsuru,比那些来自巴西的小偷和罪犯还要糟糕之前在网上。这让我得出结论,不只是巴西遭受有罪不罚的问题,尽管我认真地认为你是一个不可归责的人,因为你具有不可归责的所有特征,而且你是犯罪上的疯子。那就是你。如果美国有更多像 Marcão do Povo、Gotino、Daneta、Bacci 这样的人,我会多么希望……而不是那些来自福克斯新闻频道、MSNBC 和 CNN 的烂人。 Godmitsuru,拜托,请你的父母带你去看心理医生,开始做一些治疗和服用一些药物,这对你有好处。而且,你是我们现在有多少有罪不罚的例子,主要是在美国和全球北方国家……””

  7. Edward M.
    1 review 10 helpful votes
    Ex-Quora Administrator and Moderator: Quora is now an intentionally abusive site.
    April 15th, 2021
    I am a former Quora site Administrator and moderator. Yet, they still list me as active. Quora has dramatically changed from what it once was. There’s an ungodly amount of hackers. Complaints about hackers, pedophiles, and Quora’s recorded attempts to alter member contents are well documented. Many of the site admins deny they break their own so called rules and policies. It is definitely not a safe place for kids or any humane human being. Complaints intentionally ignored and USPS snail mail not responded to. Allegedly they are moving their home office from Mountain View, CA. The site “management” routinely follows IP addresses to engage and block complaints. I, myself, have documented proof. NEVER provide links or pics of any sort. They have a nasty habit of altering profiles while insisting you be truthful. Truths and facts are routinely ignored and flagged if it goes against their new normal of intentional cyber hacking and whatever they consider truth. The 13 and over policy is routinely ignored. Most all the hackers and nasty persons are telemarketers and paid posters. There are people pretending to be ex-officers and federal agents. The FBI does indeed ignore evidence presented as proof. And proof is extremely hard even when you know what to look for. I am a veteran USN intelligence who served in Submarines as well. Gaslighting and willful encouragement of such is common theme. I have personally met with Atlanta FBI of DOJ and was turned away being told they don’t investigate “singular” cyberstalking despite me stating and having tremendous amount of evidence this is a world wide racketeering site of the worst sort as well as evidence on other sites to include FB and twitter. Most specifically a now unsafe site known as Literotica. A handful of us have been fighting back; but the Quora site is not the place to do it. I no longer check to see how much of my data has been intentionally changed. Got all I need. The worst part is the site is now heavily toxic with political agendas and misinformation in areas and topics that have expressly forbid it. No, I will not provide any links or pics of any sort. It’s so bad in my area, that other Quora members are physically stalking persons they disagree with and engaging in scams of all sorts from real estate to falsified reports of people unaware of such scams. I personally have had 3 phones this past year been hacked and shut down every time I complain. I brought a lot of people to Quora and not a single one of them participate today. Several were hacked and their laptops or phones were shutdown remotely after heavy bombardment of telemarketing calls to private and restricted #s. The membership numbers are heavily inflated.

    Tip for consumers:
    I suggest avoiding Quora and placing heavy restrictions such as blocking the site. This Quora Administration now blocks and follows as many negative truthful reviews as it can. I know and have intimate knowledge of at least 4 persons who are site administrators that heavily engage in stalking any Quora members that don’t follow some absurd narrative. Including cars, license plates, and addresses. 2 of those persons have made many attempts to hack financial data, including stimulus checks.


    Eduardo M.
    1 avaliação 10 votos úteis
    Ex-Administrador e Moderador do Quora: O Quora agora é um site intencionalmente abusivo.
    15 de abril de 2021
    Eu sou um ex-administrador e moderador do site Quora. No entanto, eles ainda me listam como ativo. O Quora mudou drasticamente em relação ao que era antes. Há uma quantidade ímpia de hackers. Reclamações sobre hackers, pedófilos e tentativas registradas do Quora de alterar o conteúdo dos membros estão bem documentadas. Muitos dos administradores do site negam que quebram suas próprias regras e políticas. Definitivamente não é um lugar seguro para crianças ou qualquer ser humano humano. Reclamações intencionalmente ignoradas e correio tradicional do USPS não respondido. Alegadamente, eles estão mudando seu escritório de Mountain View, CA. O “gerenciamento” do site segue rotineiramente os endereços IP para engajar e bloquear reclamações. Eu mesmo tenho provas documentadas. NUNCA forneça links ou fotos de qualquer tipo. Eles têm o péssimo hábito de alterar perfis enquanto insistem que você seja sincero. Verdades e fatos são rotineiramente ignorados e sinalizados se forem contra o novo normal de hackers cibernéticos intencionais e o que eles consideram verdade. A política de 13 anos ou mais é rotineiramente ignorada. Quase todos os hackers e pessoas desagradáveis ​​são operadores de telemarketing e cartazes pagos. Tem gente se passando por ex-oficiais e agentes federais. O FBI de fato ignora as evidências apresentadas como prova. E a prova é extremamente difícil, mesmo quando você sabe o que procurar. Sou um veterano da inteligência da USN que também serviu em submarinos. Gaslighting e encorajamento voluntário de tal é um tema comum. Eu me encontrei pessoalmente com o FBI de Atlanta do DOJ e fui recusado ao saber que eles não investigam cyberstalking “singular”, apesar de eu declarar e ter uma tremenda quantidade de evidências de que este é um site mundial de extorsão do pior tipo, bem como evidências em outros sites para incluir FB e twitter. Mais especificamente, um site agora inseguro conhecido como Literotica. Um punhado de nós tem lutado de volta; mas o site Quora não é o lugar para fazer isso. Já não verifico quanto dos meus dados foram alterados intencionalmente. Tenho tudo que preciso. A pior parte é que o site agora está fortemente tóxico com agendas políticas e desinformação em áreas e tópicos que o proíbem expressamente. Não, não fornecerei links ou fotos de qualquer tipo. É tão ruim na minha área que outros membros do Quora estão perseguindo fisicamente pessoas com as quais discordam e se envolvem em golpes de todos os tipos, de imóveis a relatórios falsos de pessoas que não sabem desses golpes. Eu pessoalmente tive 3 telefones no ano passado que foram hackeados e desligados toda vez que eu reclamo. Eu trouxe muitas pessoas para o Quora e nenhuma delas participou hoje. Vários foram hackeados e seus laptops ou telefones foram desligados remotamente após intenso bombardeio de ligações de telemarketing para #s privados e restritos. Os números de membros são fortemente inflacionados.

    Dica para os consumidores:
    Sugiro evitar o Quora e colocar restrições pesadas, como bloquear o site. Esta administração do Quora agora bloqueia e segue o maior número possível de comentários verdadeiros negativos. Eu conheço e tenho conhecimento íntimo de pelo menos 4 pessoas que são administradores de sites que se dedicam fortemente a perseguir qualquer membro do Quora que não siga alguma narrativa absurda. Incluindo carros, placas e endereços. Duas dessas pessoas fizeram muitas tentativas de hackear dados financeiros, incluindo verificações de estímulo.


    eduardo m
    1 reseña 10 votos útiles
    Ex administrador y moderador de Quora: Quora es ahora un sitio intencionalmente abusivo.
    15 de abril de 2021
    Soy un ex administrador y moderador del sitio de Quora. Sin embargo, todavía me listan como activo. Quora ha cambiado drásticamente de lo que era antes. Hay una cantidad impía de hackers. Las quejas sobre piratas informáticos, pedófilos y los intentos registrados de Quora de alterar los contenidos de los miembros están bien documentados. Muchos de los administradores del sitio niegan haber violado sus propias reglas y políticas. Definitivamente no es un lugar seguro para los niños ni para ningún ser humano humano. Las quejas se ignoraron intencionalmente y el correo postal de USPS no se respondió. Supuestamente están mudando su oficina central de Mountain View, CA. La “administración” del sitio sigue rutinariamente las direcciones IP para participar y bloquear quejas. Yo mismo tengo pruebas documentadas. NUNCA proporcione enlaces o fotografías de ningún tipo. Tienen la desagradable costumbre de alterar los perfiles mientras insisten en que seas sincero. Las verdades y los hechos son rutinariamente ignorados y marcados si van en contra de su nueva normalidad de piratería cibernética intencional y lo que sea que consideren verdad. La política de mayores de 13 años se ignora de forma rutinaria. La mayoría de los piratas informáticos y las personas desagradables son vendedores telefónicos y carteles pagados. Hay personas que se hacen pasar por ex oficiales y agentes federales. De hecho, el FBI ignora las pruebas presentadas como prueba. Y la prueba es extremadamente difícil incluso cuando sabes qué buscar. Soy un veterano de la inteligencia de la USN que también sirvió en submarinos. Gaslighting y aliento deliberado de tal es tema común. Me reuní personalmente con el FBI del Departamento de Justicia de Atlanta y me rechazaron porque me dijeron que no investigan el acoso cibernético “singular” a pesar de que yo dije y tuve una gran cantidad de evidencia de que este es un sitio de crimen organizado mundial del peor tipo, así como evidencia en otros sitios para incluir FB y twitter. Más específicamente, un sitio ahora inseguro conocido como Literotica. Un puñado de nosotros hemos estado luchando; pero el sitio de Quora no es el lugar para hacerlo. Ya no reviso para ver cuántos de mis datos han sido cambiados intencionalmente. Tengo todo lo que necesito. La peor parte es que el sitio ahora es muy tóxico con agendas políticas y desinformación en áreas y temas que lo han prohibido expresamente. No, no proporcionaré enlaces ni fotos de ningún tipo. Es tan malo en mi área, que otros miembros de Quora acechan físicamente a personas con las que no están de acuerdo y participan en estafas de todo tipo, desde bienes raíces hasta informes falsificados de personas que desconocen tales estafas. Personalmente, he tenido 3 teléfonos el año pasado que han sido pirateados y apagados cada vez que me quejo. Traje a mucha gente a Quora y ninguno de ellos participó hoy. Varios fueron pirateados y sus computadoras portátiles o teléfonos se apagaron de forma remota después de un fuerte bombardeo de llamadas de telemercadeo a números privados y restringidos. Los números de membresía están muy inflados.

    Consejo para los consumidores:
    Sugiero evitar Quora y poner fuertes restricciones como bloquear el sitio. Esta administración de Quora ahora bloquea y sigue tantas críticas negativas veraces como puede. Conozco y tengo conocimiento íntimo de al menos 4 personas que son administradores del sitio que se dedican mucho a acechar a los miembros de Quora que no siguen una narrativa absurda. Incluyendo autos, matrículas y direcciones. 2 de esas personas han hecho muchos intentos de piratear datos financieros, incluidos los cheques de estímulo.


    Edouard M.
    1 avis 10 votes utiles
    Ancien administrateur et modérateur de Quora : Quora est désormais un site intentionnellement abusif.
    15 avril 2021
    Je suis un ancien administrateur et modérateur du site Quora. Pourtant, ils me répertorient toujours comme actif. Quora a radicalement changé par rapport à ce qu’il était autrefois. Il y a une quantité impie de pirates informatiques. Les plaintes concernant les pirates, les pédophiles et les tentatives enregistrées de Quora de modifier le contenu des membres sont bien documentées. De nombreux administrateurs du site nient avoir enfreint leurs propres soi-disant règles et politiques. Ce n’est certainement pas un endroit sûr pour les enfants ou tout être humain. Plaintes intentionnellement ignorées et courrier postal USPS sans réponse. Apparemment, ils déménagent leur bureau à domicile de Mountain View, en Californie. La “gestion” du site suit régulièrement les adresses IP pour engager et bloquer les plaintes. Moi-même, j’ai des preuves documentées. Ne fournissez JAMAIS de liens ou de photos de quelque sorte que ce soit. Ils ont la mauvaise habitude de modifier les profils tout en insistant pour que vous soyez honnête. Les vérités et les faits sont systématiquement ignorés et signalés s’ils vont à l’encontre de leur nouvelle norme de cyberpiratage intentionnel et de tout ce qu’ils considèrent comme la vérité. La politique des 13 ans et plus est systématiquement ignorée. La plupart des pirates et des personnes malveillantes sont des télévendeurs et des affiches payantes. Il y a des gens qui se font passer pour d’anciens officiers et agents fédéraux. Le FBI ignore en effet les preuves présentées comme preuves. Et la preuve est extrêmement difficile même lorsque vous savez ce qu’il faut rechercher. Je suis un vétéran du renseignement de l’USN qui a également servi dans des sous-marins. L’éclairage au gaz et son encouragement délibéré sont un thème commun. J’ai personnellement rencontré le FBI d’Atlanta du DOJ et on m’a dit qu’ils n’enquêtaient pas sur le cyberharcèlement “singulier” bien que j’aie déclaré et avoir une énorme quantité de preuves qu’il s’agit d’un site de racket mondial de la pire sorte ainsi que des preuves sur d’autres sites pour inclure FB et twitter. Plus précisément, un site désormais dangereux connu sous le nom de Literotica. Une poignée d’entre nous ont riposté; mais le site Quora n’est pas l’endroit pour le faire. Je ne vérifie plus la quantité de mes données qui a été intentionnellement modifiée. J’ai tout ce dont j’ai besoin. Le pire, c’est que le site est désormais fortement toxique avec des agendas politiques et de la désinformation dans des domaines et des sujets qui l’ont expressément interdit. Non, je ne fournirai aucun lien ou photo d’aucune sorte. C’est tellement grave dans ma région que d’autres membres de Quora traquent physiquement des personnes avec lesquelles ils ne sont pas d’accord et se livrent à des escroqueries de toutes sortes, de l’immobilier aux rapports falsifiés de personnes ignorant ces escroqueries. Personnellement, l’année dernière, 3 téléphones ont été piratés et éteints à chaque fois que je me plains. J’ai amené beaucoup de gens à Quora et pas un seul d’entre eux ne participe aujourd’hui. Plusieurs ont été piratés et leurs ordinateurs portables ou téléphones ont été arrêtés à distance après un bombardement intensif d’appels de télémarketing vers des numéros privés et restreints. Le nombre de membres est fortement gonflé.

    Astuce pour les consommateurs :
    Je suggère d’éviter Quora et de placer de lourdes restrictions telles que le blocage du site. Cette administration Quora bloque et suit désormais autant de critiques négatives véridiques que possible. Je connais et j’ai une connaissance intime d’au moins 4 personnes qui sont des administrateurs de sites qui s’engagent fortement dans le harcèlement des membres de Quora qui ne suivent pas un récit absurde. Y compris les voitures, les plaques d’immatriculation et les adresses. 2 de ces personnes ont fait de nombreuses tentatives pour pirater des données financières, y compris des contrôles de relance.


    Eduard M.
    1 Bewertung 10 “Hilfreich”-Wertungen
    Ex-Quora-Administrator und Moderator: Quora ist jetzt eine absichtlich missbräuchliche Website.
    15. April 2021
    Ich bin ein ehemaliger Site-Administrator und Moderator von Quora. Trotzdem listen sie mich immer noch als aktiv auf. Quora hat sich von dem, was es einmal war, dramatisch verändert. Es gibt eine gottlose Menge an Hackern. Beschwerden über Hacker, Pädophile und Quoras aufgezeichnete Versuche, Mitgliederinhalte zu ändern, sind gut dokumentiert. Viele der Site-Administratoren bestreiten, dass sie ihre eigenen sogenannten Regeln und Richtlinien brechen. Es ist definitiv kein sicherer Ort für Kinder oder andere menschliche Wesen. Beschwerden wurden absichtlich ignoriert und USPS-Schneckenpost nicht beantwortet. Angeblich verlegen sie ihr Home Office von Mountain View, CA. Das Site-“Management” verfolgt routinemäßig IP-Adressen, um Beschwerden zu bearbeiten und zu blockieren. Ich selbst habe dokumentierte Beweise. Stellen Sie NIEMALS Links oder Bilder jeglicher Art zur Verfügung. Sie haben die unangenehme Angewohnheit, Profile zu ändern, während sie darauf bestehen, dass Sie ehrlich sind. Wahrheiten und Fakten werden routinemäßig ignoriert und gekennzeichnet, wenn dies gegen ihre neue Normalität des absichtlichen Cyber-Hackings verstößt und was auch immer sie für Wahrheit halten. Die Richtlinie über 13 wird routinemäßig ignoriert. Die meisten Hacker und bösen Personen sind Telemarketer und bezahlte Poster. Es gibt Leute, die vorgeben, ehemalige Offiziere und Bundesagenten zu sein. Das FBI ignoriert in der Tat Beweise, die als Beweis vorgelegt werden. Und der Beweis ist extrem schwierig, selbst wenn Sie wissen, wonach Sie suchen müssen. Ich bin ein erfahrener USN-Geheimdienst, der auch in U-Booten gedient hat. Gaslighting und vorsätzliche Ermutigung solcher ist ein häufiges Thema. Ich habe mich persönlich mit dem FBI des DOJ in Atlanta getroffen und wurde abgewiesen, als mir gesagt wurde, dass sie “singuläres” Cyberstalking nicht untersuchen, obwohl ich feststellte und eine enorme Menge an Beweisen habe, dass dies eine weltweite Erpressungsseite der schlimmsten Sorte ist, sowie Beweise für andere Websites, die FB und Twitter enthalten. Insbesondere eine jetzt unsichere Website namens Literotica. Eine Handvoll von uns hat sich gewehrt; aber die Quora-Site ist nicht der richtige Ort dafür. Ich überprüfe nicht mehr, wie viele meiner Daten absichtlich geändert wurden. Habe alles was ich brauche. Das Schlimmste ist, dass die Seite jetzt stark vergiftet ist mit politischen Agenden und Fehlinformationen in Bereichen und Themen, die dies ausdrücklich verboten haben. Nein, ich werde keine Links oder Bilder jeglicher Art bereitstellen. In meiner Gegend ist es so schlimm, dass andere Quora-Mitglieder Personen körperlich verfolgen, mit denen sie nicht einverstanden sind, und sich an Betrug aller Art beteiligen, von Immobilien bis hin zu gefälschten Berichten von Menschen, die sich solcher Betrügereien nicht bewusst sind. Ich persönlich hatte im vergangenen Jahr 3 Telefone, die gehackt und jedes Mal abgeschaltet wurden, wenn ich mich beschwerte. Ich habe viele Leute zu Quora gebracht und keiner von ihnen nimmt heute teil. Mehrere wurden gehackt und ihre Laptops oder Telefone wurden nach einem schweren Bombardement von Telemarketing-Anrufen an private und eingeschränkte Nummern aus der Ferne abgeschaltet. Die Mitgliederzahlen sind stark überhöht.

    Tipp für Verbraucher:
    Ich schlage vor, Quora zu vermeiden und strenge Einschränkungen wie das Blockieren der Website vorzunehmen. Diese Quora-Administration blockiert und folgt nun so vielen negativen, wahrheitsgemäßen Bewertungen wie möglich. Ich kenne und kenne mindestens 4 Personen, die Site-Administratoren sind und sich intensiv damit beschäftigen, Quora-Mitglieder zu verfolgen, die keiner absurden Erzählung folgen. Einschließlich Autos, Nummernschilder und Adressen. 2 dieser Personen haben viele Versuche unternommen, Finanzdaten zu hacken, einschließlich Stimulus-Checks.


    Eduard M.
    1 beoordeling 10 nuttige stemmen
    Ex-Quora-beheerder en moderator: Quora is nu een opzettelijk beledigende site.
    15 april 2021
    Ik ben een voormalig Quora-sitebeheerder en -moderator. Toch vermelden ze me nog steeds als actief. Quora is drastisch veranderd van wat het ooit was. Er is een ongoddelijke hoeveelheid hackers. Klachten over hackers, pedofielen en de geregistreerde pogingen van Quora om de inhoud van leden te wijzigen, zijn goed gedocumenteerd. Veel van de sitebeheerders ontkennen dat ze hun eigen zogenaamde regels en beleid overtreden. Het is absoluut geen veilige plek voor kinderen of andere menselijke wezens. Klachten opzettelijk genegeerd en USPS snail mail niet beantwoord. Naar verluidt verhuizen ze hun thuiskantoor uit Mountain View, CA. Het “beheer” van de site volgt routinematig IP-adressen om klachten in te dienen en te blokkeren. Ik heb zelf gedocumenteerd bewijs. Geef NOOIT links of foto’s van welke soort dan ook. Ze hebben de nare gewoonte om profielen te wijzigen terwijl ze erop staan ​​dat je eerlijk bent. Waarheden en feiten worden routinematig genegeerd en gemarkeerd als het indruist tegen hun nieuwe norm van opzettelijk cyberhacken en wat zij als waarheid beschouwen. Het beleid van 13 jaar en ouder wordt routinematig genegeerd. Bijna alle hackers en vervelende personen zijn telemarketeers en betaalde posters. Er zijn mensen die zich voordoen als ex-officieren en federale agenten. De FBI negeert inderdaad bewijs dat als bewijs wordt gepresenteerd. En bewijs is extreem moeilijk, zelfs als je weet waar je op moet letten. Ik ben een ervaren USN-inlichtingendienst die ook in onderzeeërs heeft gediend. Gaslighting en moedwillige aanmoediging hiervan is een veelvoorkomend thema. Ik heb persoonlijk een ontmoeting gehad met de Atlanta FBI van DOJ en werd afgewezen omdat ze te horen kregen dat ze “enkelvoud” cyberstalking niet onderzoeken, ondanks dat ik beweerde en een enorme hoeveelheid bewijs heb dat dit een wereldwijde afpersingssite van het ergste soort is, evenals bewijs over andere sites om FB en Twitter op te nemen. Vooral een nu onveilige site die bekend staat als Literotica. Een handvol van ons heeft teruggevochten; maar de Quora-site is niet de plaats om het te doen. Ik controleer niet langer hoeveel van mijn gegevens opzettelijk zijn gewijzigd. Ik heb alles wat ik nodig heb. Het ergste is dat de site nu zwaar giftig is met politieke agenda’s en verkeerde informatie in gebieden en onderwerpen die dit uitdrukkelijk hebben verboden. Nee, ik zal geen links of foto’s van welke soort dan ook verstrekken. Het is zo erg in mijn omgeving dat andere Quora-leden fysiek mensen stalken met wie ze het niet eens zijn en zich bezighouden met allerlei vormen van oplichting, van onroerend goed tot valse rapporten van mensen die zich niet bewust zijn van dergelijke oplichting. Persoonlijk heb ik het afgelopen jaar 3 telefoons gehad die zijn gehackt en elke keer als ik klaagde afgesloten. Ik heb veel mensen naar Quora gebracht en niemand van hen doet vandaag mee. Verschillende werden gehackt en hun laptops of telefoons werden op afstand afgesloten na hevig bombardement van telemarketingoproepen naar particuliere en beperkte #s. De ledenaantallen zijn zwaar opgeblazen.

    Tip voor consumenten:
    Ik stel voor Quora te vermijden en zware beperkingen op te leggen, zoals het blokkeren van de site. Deze Quora-administratie blokkeert en volgt nu zoveel mogelijk negatieve, waarheidsgetrouwe beoordelingen. Ik ken en heb grondige kennis van ten minste 4 personen die sitebeheerders zijn en zich intensief bezighouden met het stalken van Quora-leden die geen absurd verhaal volgen. Inclusief auto’s, kentekenplaten en adressen. Twee van die personen hebben veel pogingen ondernomen om financiële gegevens te hacken, waaronder stimuluscontroles.


    Edoardo M.
    1 recensione 10 voti utili
    Ex amministratore e moderatore di Quora: Quora è ora un sito intenzionalmente offensivo.
    15 aprile 2021
    Sono un ex amministratore e moderatore del sito Quora. Eppure, mi elencano ancora come attivo. Quora è cambiato radicalmente da quello che era una volta. C’è una quantità empia di hacker. I reclami su hacker, pedofili e tentativi registrati di Quora di alterare i contenuti dei membri sono ben documentati. Molti degli amministratori del sito negano di violare le proprie cosiddette regole e politiche. Non è sicuramente un posto sicuro per i bambini o per qualsiasi essere umano umano. I reclami sono stati intenzionalmente ignorati e la posta ordinaria USPS non ha ricevuto risposta. Presumibilmente stanno trasferendo il loro ufficio a casa da Mountain View, in California. La “gestione” del sito segue regolarmente gli indirizzi IP per coinvolgere e bloccare i reclami. Io stesso ho documentato la prova. NON fornire MAI link o immagini di alcun tipo. Hanno la brutta abitudine di alterare i profili mentre insistono sul fatto che tu sia sincero. Verità e fatti vengono regolarmente ignorati e segnalati se vanno contro la loro nuova normalità di pirateria informatica intenzionale e qualunque cosa essi considerino verità. La politica 13 e oltre viene regolarmente ignorata. Quasi tutti gli hacker e le persone cattive sono venditori di telemarketing e manifesti a pagamento. Ci sono persone che fingono di essere ex ufficiali e agenti federali. L’FBI ignora infatti le prove presentate come prove. E la prova è estremamente difficile anche quando sai cosa cercare. Sono un veterano dell’intelligence USN che ha prestato servizio anche nei sottomarini. Il gaslighting e l’incoraggiamento volontario di questo tipo è un tema comune. Ho incontrato personalmente l’FBI di Atlanta del Dipartimento di Giustizia e sono stato respinto quando mi è stato detto che non indagano sul cyberstalking “singolare” nonostante io affermi e abbia un’enorme quantità di prove che questo è un sito di racket mondiale del peggior tipo, nonché prove su altri siti per includere FB e twitter. Più specificamente un sito ora non sicuro noto come Literotica. Alcuni di noi hanno reagito; ma il sito di Quora non è il posto giusto per farlo. Non controllo più per vedere quanti dei miei dati sono stati modificati intenzionalmente. Ho tutto ciò di cui ho bisogno. La parte peggiore è che il sito è ora fortemente tossico con agende politiche e disinformazione in aree e argomenti che lo hanno espressamente vietato. No, non fornirò alcun link o foto di alcun tipo. È così brutto nella mia zona, che altri membri di Quora stanno perseguitando fisicamente persone con cui non sono d’accordo e si impegnano in truffe di ogni tipo, dal settore immobiliare alle segnalazioni falsificate di persone ignare di tali truffe. Personalmente ho avuto 3 telefoni nell’ultimo anno che sono stati violati e spenti ogni volta che mi lamento. Ho portato molte persone su Quora e nessuna di loro partecipa oggi. Molti sono stati violati e i loro laptop o telefoni sono stati spenti da remoto dopo il pesante bombardamento di chiamate di telemarketing a #s privati ​​e con restrizioni. I numeri dei membri sono fortemente gonfiati.

    Suggerimento per i consumatori:
    Suggerisco di evitare Quora e di porre pesanti restrizioni come il blocco del sito. Questa amministrazione Quora ora blocca e segue quante più recensioni veritiere negative possibile. Conosco e ho una profonda conoscenza di almeno 4 persone che sono amministratori del sito che si impegnano pesantemente nello stalking di qualsiasi membro di Quora che non segue una narrativa assurda. Comprese auto, targhe e indirizzi. 2 di queste persone hanno fatto molti tentativi di hackerare i dati finanziari, compresi i controlli di stimolo.


    Edwarda M.
    1 recenzja 10 podziękowań
    Ex-Quora Administrator i Moderator: Quora jest teraz witryną celowo obraźliwą.
    15 kwietnia 2021
    Jestem byłym administratorem i moderatorem witryny Quora. Mimo to nadal wymieniają mnie jako aktywną. Quora radykalnie zmieniła się od tego, czym była kiedyś. Jest bezbożna ilość hakerów. Skargi na hakerów, pedofilów i zarejestrowane przez Quora próby zmiany treści członków są dobrze udokumentowane. Wielu administratorów witryn zaprzecza, że ​​łamią własne tak zwane zasady i zasady. Zdecydowanie nie jest to bezpieczne miejsce dla dzieci ani żadnej ludzkiej istoty. Skargi celowo zignorowane, a poczta USPS nie odpowiedziała. Podobno przenoszą swoje domowe biuro z Mountain View w Kalifornii. „Zarządzanie” witryną rutynowo śledzi adresy IP w celu angażowania i blokowania skarg. Sam udokumentowałem dowód. NIGDY nie podawaj żadnych linków ani zdjęć. Mają nieprzyjemny zwyczaj zmieniania profili, jednocześnie nalegając, abyś był prawdomówny. Prawdy i fakty są rutynowo ignorowane i oznaczane, jeśli jest to sprzeczne z ich nową normą celowego hakowania cybernetycznego i cokolwiek uznają za prawdę. Zasada 13 i więcej jest rutynowo ignorowana. Większość hakerów i nieprzyjemnych osób to telemarketerzy i płatne plakaty. Są ludzie, którzy udają byłych oficerów i agentów federalnych. FBI rzeczywiście ignoruje dowody przedstawione jako dowód. A dowód jest niezwykle trudny, nawet jeśli wiesz, czego szukać. Jestem weteranem wywiadu USN, który również służył na okrętach podwodnych. Gaslighting i umyślne zachęcanie do takich to wspólny temat. Osobiście spotkałem się z Atlantą FBI z Departamentu Sprawiedliwości i odesłano mnie, gdy powiedziano mi, że nie prowadzą dochodzenia w sprawie „pojedynczego” cyberstalkingu, mimo że stwierdziłem i mam ogromną ilość dowodów, że jest to ogólnoświatowa strona haraczy najgorszego rodzaju, a także dowody na inne witryny zawierające FB i Twitter. W szczególności niebezpieczna obecnie strona znana jako Literotica. Kilku z nas walczyło; ale strona Quora nie jest miejscem, w którym można to zrobić. Nie sprawdzam już, ile moich danych zostało celowo zmienionych. Mam wszystko, czego potrzebuję. Najgorsze jest to, że strona jest teraz bardzo toksyczna, jeśli chodzi o programy polityczne i dezinformację w obszarach i tematach, które wyraźnie tego zabraniają. Nie, nie będę udostępniać żadnych linków ani zdjęć. W mojej okolicy jest tak źle, że inni członkowie Quora fizycznie prześladują osoby, z którymi się nie zgadzają i angażują się w różnego rodzaju oszustwa, od nieruchomości po sfałszowane raporty osób nieświadomych takich oszustw. Osobiście miałem 3 telefony w zeszłym roku zhakowane i wyłączone za każdym razem, gdy narzekam. Sprowadziłem na Quorę wielu ludzi i ani jeden z nich nie uczestniczy dzisiaj. Kilka z nich zostało zhakowanych, a ich laptopy lub telefony zostały zdalnie wyłączone po ciężkim bombardowaniu połączeń telemarketingowych z prywatnymi i zastrzeżonymi numerami. Liczby członków są mocno zawyżone.

    Wskazówka dla konsumentów:
    Proponuję unikać Quora i nakładać poważne ograniczenia, takie jak blokowanie strony. Ta administracja Quora blokuje teraz i śledzi jak najwięcej negatywnych, prawdziwych recenzji. Znam i mam gruntowną wiedzę o co najmniej 4 osobach, które są administratorami stron, którzy mocno angażują się w prześladowanie członków Quora, którzy nie podążają za jakąś absurdalną narracją. W tym samochody, tablice rejestracyjne i adresy. Dwie z tych osób podjęły wiele prób włamania się do danych finansowych, w tym kontroli bodźców.


    私は元Quoraサイトの管理者およびモデレーターです。それでも、彼らはまだ私をアクティブとしてリストしています。 Quoraはかつての状態から劇的に変化しました。信じられないほどの量のハッカーがいます。ハッカー、小児性愛者、およびメンバーのコンテンツを変更するQuoraの記録された試みに関する苦情は十分に文書化されています。サイト管理者の多くは、いわゆるルールやポリシーに違反していることを否定しています。子供や人道的な人間にとって安全な場所ではありません。苦情は意図的に無視され、USPSカタツムリメールは応答しませんでした。伝えられるところによると、彼らはカリフォルニア州マウンテンビューからホームオフィスを移転しています。サイトの「管理」は、定期的にIPアドレスを追跡して、苦情を処理およびブロックします。私自身、証拠を文書化しました。いかなる種類のリンクや写真も絶対に提供しないでください。彼らはあなたが真実であると主張しながらプロファイルを変更するという厄介な習慣を持っています。真実と事実は、意図的なサイバーハッキングの新しい通常の方法や彼らが真実と見なすものに反する場合、日常的に無視され、フラグが立てられます。 13以上のポリシーは日常的に無視されます。ほとんどすべてのハッカーと厄介な人はテレマーケティング業者と有料のポスターです。元役員や連邦政府の代理人になりすました人々がいます。 FBIは確かに証拠として提示された証拠を無視します。そして、あなたが何を探すべきかを知っているときでさえ、証明は非常に難しいです。私は潜水艦でも活躍したベテランのUSNインテリジェンスです。そのようなガス灯と意図的な励ましは共通のテーマです。私はDOJのアトランタFBIと個人的に会いましたが、これは最悪の種類の世界規模のラケットサイトであり、他の証拠もあると述べ、膨大な量の証拠を持っているにもかかわらず、「特異な」サイバーストーキングを調査しないと言われました。 FBとツイッターを含むサイト。最も具体的には、Literoticaとして知られる現在は安全ではないサイトです。一握りの私たちが反撃しています。しかし、Quoraサイトはそれを行う場所ではありません。意図的に変更されたデータの量を確認する必要がなくなりました。必要なものはすべて手に入れました。最悪の部分は、サイトが現在、それを明示的に禁止している分野やトピックの政治的議題や誤った情報で非常に有毒であるということです。いいえ、いかなる種類のリンクや写真も提供しません。私の地域では非常に悪いので、他のQuoraメンバーは、彼らが同意しない人をストーカーし、不動産からそのような詐欺に気付いていない人々の偽造された報告まで、あらゆる種類の詐欺に従事しています。個人的には、昨年3台の電話がハッキングされ、文句を言うたびにシャットダウンされました。私はたくさんの人をQuoraに連れてきましたが、今日は1人も参加していません。いくつかはハッキングされ、彼らのラップトップまたは電話は、プライベートおよび制限された#へのテレマーケティングコールの激しい爆撃の後にリモートでシャットダウンされました。会員数は大幅に膨らんでいます。



    एडवर्ड एम.
    1 समीक्षा 10 उपयोगी वोट
    Ex-Quora एडमिनिस्ट्रेटर और मॉडरेटर: Quora अब एक जानबूझकर गाली देने वाली साइट है।
    15 अप्रैल, 2021
    मैं Quora साइट का पूर्व प्रशासक और मॉडरेटर हूं। फिर भी, वे अभी भी मुझे सक्रिय के रूप में सूचीबद्ध करते हैं। Quora पहले की तुलना में नाटकीय रूप से बदल गया है। हैकर्स की एक अधर्मी राशि है। हैकर्स, पीडोफाइल और Quora द्वारा सदस्य सामग्री को बदलने के रिकॉर्ड किए गए प्रयासों के बारे में शिकायतें अच्छी तरह से प्रलेखित हैं। कई साइट व्यवस्थापक इनकार करते हैं कि वे अपने तथाकथित नियमों और नीतियों को तोड़ते हैं। यह निश्चित रूप से बच्चों या किसी भी इंसान के लिए सुरक्षित जगह नहीं है। शिकायतों को जानबूझकर अनदेखा किया गया और यूएसपीएस घोंघा मेल का जवाब नहीं दिया गया। कथित तौर पर वे अपने गृह कार्यालय को माउंटेन व्यू, सीए से स्थानांतरित कर रहे हैं। साइट “प्रबंधन” शिकायतों को शामिल करने और ब्लॉक करने के लिए नियमित रूप से आईपी पते का अनुसरण करती है। मैंने, स्वयं, प्रमाण का दस्तावेजीकरण किया है। कभी भी किसी भी प्रकार के लिंक या चित्र प्रदान न करें। आपको सच्चे होने पर जोर देते हुए प्रोफाइल बदलने की उन्हें बुरी आदत है। सच्चाई और तथ्यों को नियमित रूप से नजरअंदाज किया जाता है और अगर यह जानबूझकर साइबर हैकिंग के उनके नए सामान्य के खिलाफ जाता है और जो कुछ भी वे सत्य मानते हैं, उसके खिलाफ जाता है। 13 और उससे अधिक की नीति को नियमित रूप से अनदेखा किया जाता है। अधिकांश हैकर्स और घटिया व्यक्ति टेलीमार्केटर और पेड पोस्टर हैं। ऐसे लोग हैं जो पूर्व-अधिकारी और संघीय एजेंट होने का नाटक कर रहे हैं। एफबीआई वास्तव में सबूत के तौर पर पेश किए गए सबूतों की अनदेखी करती है। और सबूत बेहद कठिन है, तब भी जब आप जानते हैं कि क्या देखना है। मैं एक अनुभवी यूएसएन इंटेलिजेंस हूं जिसने पनडुब्बियों में भी काम किया है। इस तरह की गैसलाइटिंग और जानबूझकर प्रोत्साहन आम विषय है। मैं व्यक्तिगत रूप से डीओजे के अटलांटा एफबीआई से मिला हूं और कहा गया था कि वे “एकवचन” साइबरस्टॉकिंग की जांच नहीं करते हैं, मेरे कहने और जबरदस्त सबूत होने के बावजूद यह सबसे खराब प्रकार की एक विश्वव्यापी रैकेटियरिंग साइट है और साथ ही अन्य पर सबूत भी है। एफबी और ट्विटर को शामिल करने के लिए साइटें। सबसे विशेष रूप से अब असुरक्षित साइट लिटरोटिका के रूप में जाना जाता है। हम में से कुछ मुट्ठी भर लोग वापस लड़ रहे हैं; लेकिन Quora साइट ऐसा करने की जगह नहीं है। मैं अब यह देखने के लिए जांच नहीं करता कि मेरा कितना डेटा जानबूझकर बदला गया है। मुझे जो चाहिए वह सब मिल गया। सबसे बुरी बात यह है कि साइट अब राजनीतिक एजेंडा और उन क्षेत्रों और विषयों में गलत सूचनाओं के साथ भारी जहरीली है, जिन्होंने इसे स्पष्ट रूप से मना किया है। नहीं, मैं किसी भी प्रकार का कोई लिंक या चित्र प्रदान नहीं करूंगा। यह मेरे क्षेत्र में इतना बुरा है कि अन्य Quora सदस्य शारीरिक रूप से उन लोगों का पीछा कर रहे हैं जिनसे वे असहमत हैं और रियल एस्टेट से लेकर ऐसे घोटालों से अनजान लोगों की झूठी रिपोर्ट में हर तरह के घोटालों में लिप्त हैं। पिछले साल मेरे पास व्यक्तिगत रूप से 3 फोन हैं जिन्हें हैक किया गया है और हर बार जब मैं शिकायत करता हूं तो बंद कर दिया जाता है। मैं Quora पर बहुत से लोगों को लाया और उनमें से एक भी आज भाग नहीं ले पाया। निजी और प्रतिबंधित #s पर टेलीमार्केटिंग कॉलों की भारी बमबारी के बाद कई को हैक कर लिया गया और उनके लैपटॉप या फोन दूर से बंद कर दिए गए। सदस्यता संख्या भारी फुलाया जाता है।

    उपभोक्ताओं के लिए युक्ति:
    मेरा सुझाव है कि Quora से बचें और साइट को ब्लॉक करने जैसे भारी प्रतिबंध लगाएं। यह Quora प्रशासन अब जितनी हो सके उतनी नकारात्मक सत्य समीक्षाओं को ब्लॉक और फॉलो करता है। मैं कम से कम 4 लोगों को जानता हूं और जानता हूं जो साइट प्रशासक हैं जो किसी भी Quora सदस्यों का पीछा करने में शामिल हैं जो कुछ बेतुके कथन का पालन नहीं करते हैं। जिसमें कार, लाइसेंस प्लेट और पते शामिल हैं। उन लोगों में से 2 ने प्रोत्साहन चेक सहित वित्तीय डेटा को हैक करने के कई प्रयास किए हैं।


    إدوارد م.
    تعليق واحد 10 أصوات مفيدة
    المسؤول والمدير السابق لـ Quora: أصبح Quora الآن موقعًا مسيئًا عن عمد.
    15 أبريل 2021
    أنا مسؤول سابق ومدير موقع Quora. ومع ذلك ، ما زالوا يسجلونني على أنه نشط. لقد تغير Quora بشكل كبير عما كان عليه من قبل. هناك عدد غير شرعي من المتسللين. تم توثيق الشكاوى حول المتسللين ومحبّي الأطفال ومحاولات Quora المسجلة لتغيير محتويات الأعضاء بشكل جيد. ينكر العديد من مسؤولي الموقع أنهم يخالفون القواعد والسياسات الخاصة بهم. إنه بالتأكيد ليس مكانًا آمنًا للأطفال أو لأي إنسان. تم تجاهل الشكاوى عمدًا ولم يتم الرد على بريد الحلزون USPS. يُزعم أنهم ينقلون مكتبهم الرئيسي من ماونتن فيو ، كاليفورنيا. تتبع “إدارة” الموقع بشكل روتيني عناوين IP للتعامل مع الشكاوى وحظرها. أنا نفسي لدي دليل موثق. لا تقدم أبدًا روابط أو صور من أي نوع. لديهم عادة سيئة تتمثل في تغيير الملفات الشخصية مع الإصرار على أن تكون صادقًا. يتم تجاهل الحقائق والحقائق بشكل روتيني والإبلاغ عنها إذا كانت تتعارض مع وضعها الطبيعي الجديد المتمثل في القرصنة الإلكترونية المتعمدة وأيًا كان ما يعتبرونه حقيقة. يتم تجاهل سياسة 13 وأكثر بشكل روتيني. معظم المتسللين والأشخاص السيئين هم من المسوقين عبر الهاتف والملصقات المدفوعة. هناك أشخاص يتظاهرون بأنهم ضباط سابقون وعملاء فيدراليون. يتجاهل مكتب التحقيقات الفيدرالي بالفعل الأدلة المقدمة كدليل. والإثبات صعب للغاية حتى عندما تعرف ما الذي تبحث عنه. أنا مخضرم في المخابرات الأمريكية خدم في الغواصات أيضًا. إن الإنارة الغازية والتشجيع المتعمد لمثل هذا هو الموضوع المشترك. لقد التقيت شخصيًا بأتلانتا مكتب التحقيقات الفدرالي من وزارة العدل ، وتم إبعادني عن هذا الأمر قيل لي إنهم لا يحققون في مطاردة إلكترونية “فردية” على الرغم من أنني ذكرت وجود قدر هائل من الأدلة على أن هذا موقع للابتزاز في جميع أنحاء العالم من أسوأ أنواعه بالإضافة إلى أدلة على أخرى مواقع تشمل فيسبوك وتويتر. على وجه التحديد ، أصبح الآن موقعًا غير آمن يُعرف باسم Literotica. قلة منا كانت تقاوم. لكن موقع Quora ليس المكان المناسب للقيام بذلك. لم أعد أتحقق لمعرفة مقدار التغيير المتعمد من بياناتي. حصلت على كل ما احتاجه. أسوأ جزء هو أن الموقع أصبح الآن شديد السمية بالأجندات السياسية والمعلومات الخاطئة في المناطق والمواضيع التي تحظره صراحة. لا ، لن أقدم أي روابط أو صور من أي نوع. إنه أمر سيء للغاية في منطقتي ، أن أعضاء Quora الآخرين يلاحقون جسديًا أشخاصًا يختلفون معهم وينخرطون في عمليات احتيال من جميع الأنواع من العقارات إلى التقارير المزيفة لأشخاص غير مدركين لمثل هذه الحيل. أنا شخصياً تعرضت 3 هواتف في العام الماضي للاختراق وإغلاقها في كل مرة أشتكي فيها. أحضرت الكثير من الأشخاص إلى Quora ولم يشارك أحد منهم اليوم. تم اختراق العديد منها وتم إغلاق أجهزة الكمبيوتر المحمولة أو الهواتف الخاصة بهم عن بُعد بعد قصف مكثف لمكالمات التسويق عبر الهاتف إلى الهواتف الخاصة والمقيدة. أرقام العضوية مبالغ فيها بشكل كبير.

    نصيحة للمستهلكين:
    أقترح تجنب Quora ووضع قيود شديدة مثل حجب الموقع. تقوم إدارة Quora الآن بحظر ومتابعة أكبر عدد ممكن من المراجعات الصادقة السلبية. أعرف ولدي معرفة حميمة بأربعة أشخاص على الأقل من مديري المواقع الذين يشاركون بشدة في مطاردة أي من أعضاء Quora الذين لا يتبعون بعض الروايات السخيفة. بما في ذلك السيارات ولوحات الترخيص والعناوين. قام 2 من هؤلاء الأشخاص بمحاولات عديدة لاختراق البيانات المالية ، بما في ذلك عمليات التحقق من التحفيز.


    אדוארד מ.
    1 חוות דעת 10 הצבעות מועילות
    מנהל ומנחה לשעבר של Quora: Quora הוא כעת אתר פוגעני בכוונה.
    15 באפריל, 2021
    אני לשעבר מנהל ומנחה אתר Quora. עם זאת, הם עדיין מציינים אותי כפעיל. Quora השתנה באופן דרמטי ממה שהיה פעם. יש כמות מרושעת של האקרים. תלונות על האקרים, פדופילים וניסיונות מוקלטים של Quora לשנות את תוכן החברים מתועדות היטב. רבים ממנהלי האתר מכחישים שהם מפרים את מה שנקרא חוקים ומדיניות משלהם. זה בהחלט לא מקום בטוח לילדים או לכל אדם אנושי. התלונות התעלמו בכוונה ודואר חילזון USPS לא נענה. לכאורה הם מעבירים את המשרד הביתי שלהם ממאונטן וויו, קליפורניה. “הנהלת” האתר עוקבת באופן שוטף אחר כתובות IP כדי להפעיל ולחסום תלונות. אני, בעצמי, יש לי הוכחה מתועדת. לעולם אל תספק קישורים או תמונות מכל סוג שהוא. יש להם הרגל מגעיל לשנות פרופילים תוך התעקשות עליך להיות אמת. אמיתות ועובדות מתעלמות באופן שגרתי ומסומנות אם זה נוגד את הנורמלי החדש שלהם של פריצת סייבר מכוונת וכל מה שהם מחשיבים לאמת. באופן שגרתי מתעלמים ממדיניות 13 ומעלה. רוב ההאקרים והאנשים המגעילים הם אנשי טלמרקטינג ופוסטרים בתשלום. יש אנשים שמעמידים פנים שהם קצינים לשעבר וסוכנים פדרליים. ה-FBI אכן מתעלם מראיות המוצגות כהוכחה. וההוכחה היא קשה ביותר גם כשאתה יודע מה לחפש. אני מודיעין ותיק של USN ששירת גם בצוללות. הדלקת גז ועידוד מכוון לכך הוא נושא נפוץ. נפגשתי באופן אישי עם אטלנטה ה-FBI ממשרד המשפטים, ונאמר לי שהם לא חוקרים מעקב אחר רשת “יחיד” למרות שציינתי ויש לי כמות עצומה של ראיות שזה אתר סחיטה עולמי מהסוג הגרוע ביותר כמו גם ראיות אחרות אתרים לכלול FB וטוויטר. ליתר דיוק, אתר לא בטוח, המכונה Literotica. קומץ מאיתנו נלחם בחזרה; אבל אתר Quora הוא לא המקום לעשות את זה. אני כבר לא בודק כדי לראות כמה מהנתונים שלי השתנו בכוונה. יש לי את כל מה שאני צריך. החלק הגרוע ביותר הוא שהאתר כעת רעיל מאוד עם אג’נדות פוליטיות ומידע מוטעה בתחומים ובנושאים שאסרו זאת במפורש. לא, אני לא אספק קישורים או תמונות מכל סוג שהוא. זה כל כך רע באזור שלי, שחברי Quora אחרים עוקבים פיזית אחר אנשים שהם לא מסכימים איתם ועוסקים בהונאות מכל הסוגים, מנדל”ן ועד דיווחים מזויפים של אנשים שלא מודעים להונאות כאלה. לי אישית היו 3 טלפונים בשנה האחרונה שנפרצו ונסגרו בכל פעם שאני מתלונן. הבאתי הרבה אנשים ל-Quora ואף אחד מהם לא משתתף היום. כמה מהם נפרצו והמחשבים הניידים או הטלפונים שלהם נסגרו מרחוק לאחר הפצצה כבדה של שיחות טלמרקטינג למספרים פרטיים ומוגבלים. מספרי החברים מנופחים מאוד.

    טיפ לצרכנים:
    אני מציע להימנע מ-Quora ולהציב מגבלות כבדות כמו חסימת האתר. הנהלת Quora זו חוסמת כעת ועוקבת אחר ביקורות אמיתיות שליליות רבות ככל האפשר. אני מכיר ויש לי ידע אינטימי של לפחות 4 אנשים שהם מנהלי אתרים שעוסקים רבות במעקב אחר חברי Quora שאינם עוקבים אחר נרטיב אבסורדי כלשהו. כולל מכוניות, לוחיות רישוי וכתובות. 2 מאותם אנשים עשו ניסיונות רבים לפרוץ נתונים פיננסיים, כולל בדיקות גירוי.


    1. Edward M.
      1 recension 10 hjälpsamhetsröster
      Ex-Quora administratör och moderator: Quora är nu en avsiktligt kränkande webbplats.
      15 april 2021
      Jag är en före detta Quora-webbplatsadministratör och moderator. Ändå listar de mig fortfarande som aktiv. Quora har dramatiskt förändrats från vad det en gång var. Det finns en ogudaktig mängd hackare. Klagomål om hackare, pedofiler och Quoras registrerade försök att ändra medlemsinnehåll är väldokumenterade. Många av webbplatsens administratörer förnekar att de bryter mot sina egna så kallade regler och policyer. Det är definitivt inte en säker plats för barn eller någon mänsklig människa. Klagomål ignorerade avsiktligt och USPS snigelpost besvarades inte. De påstås flytta sitt hemmakontor från Mountain View, CA. Webbplatsens “hantering” följer rutinmässigt IP-adresser för att engagera och blockera klagomål. Jag har själv dokumenterade bevis. Ge ALDRIG länkar eller bilder av något slag. De har en otäck vana att ändra profiler samtidigt som de insisterar på att du är sanningsenlig. Sanningar och fakta ignoreras och flaggas rutinmässigt om det strider mot deras nya normala av avsiktliga cyberhacker och vad de än anser vara sanning. 13 och över-policyn ignoreras rutinmässigt. De flesta hackare och elaka personer är telefonförsäljare och betalda affischer. Det finns människor som låtsas vara ex-officerare och federala agenter. FBI ignorerar verkligen bevis som presenteras som bevis. Och bevis är extremt svårt även när du vet vad du ska leta efter. Jag är en veteran USN-underrättelsetjänst som också tjänstgjorde i ubåtar. Gaslighting och medvetet uppmuntran av sådant är ett vanligt tema. Jag har personligen träffat Atlanta FBI från DOJ och blev avvisad och fick höra att de inte undersöker “singular” cyberstalking trots att jag påstår och har enorma mängder bevis att detta är en världsomspännande utpressningsplats av värsta sorten samt bevis på andra webbplatser som inkluderar FB och twitter. Närmare bestämt en nu osäker webbplats känd som Literotica. En handfull av oss har slagit tillbaka; men Quora-webbplatsen är inte platsen att göra det. Jag kontrollerar inte längre för att se hur mycket av min data som har ändrats avsiktligt. Har allt jag behöver. Det värsta är att sajten nu är mycket giftig med politiska agendor och desinformation inom områden och ämnen som uttryckligen har förbjudit det. Nej, jag kommer inte att tillhandahålla några länkar eller bilder av något slag. Det är så illa i mitt område att andra Quora-medlemmar fysiskt förföljer personer som de inte håller med om och deltar i bedrägerier av alla slag, från fastigheter till förfalskade rapporter om människor som inte är medvetna om sådana bedrägerier. Jag personligen har haft 3 telefoner det senaste året som blivit hackade och stängda varje gång jag klagar. Jag tog med många människor till Quora och inte en enda av dem deltar idag. Flera hackades och deras bärbara datorer eller telefoner stängdes av på distans efter kraftig bombardering av telemarketingsamtal till privata och begränsade #s. Medlemssiffrorna är kraftigt uppblåsta.

      Tips till konsumenter:
      Jag föreslår att du undviker Quora och lägger tunga restriktioner som att blockera webbplatsen. Denna Quora-administration blockerar och följer nu så många negativa sanningsenliga recensioner som den kan. Jag känner och har intim kunskap om minst 4 personer som är webbplatsadministratörer som är mycket engagerade i att förfölja Quora-medlemmar som inte följer någon absurd berättelse. Inklusive bilar, registreringsskyltar och adresser. Två av dessa personer har gjort många försök att hacka finansiell information, inklusive stimulanskontroller.


      Edward M.
      1 anmeldelse 10 nyttige stemmer
      Tidligere Quora-administrator og -moderator: Quora er nu et bevidst misbrugssted.
      15. april 2021
      Jeg er tidligere Quora-webstedsadministrator og moderator. Alligevel angiver de mig stadig som aktiv. Quora har ændret sig dramatisk fra, hvad det engang var. Der er en ugudelig mængde hackere. Klager over hackere, pædofile og Quoras registrerede forsøg på at ændre medlemsindhold er veldokumenterede. Mange af webstedets administratorer benægter, at de bryder deres egne såkaldte regler og politikker. Det er bestemt ikke et sikkert sted for børn eller noget menneskeligt menneske. Klager ignoreret med vilje, og USPS snail mail blev ikke besvaret. Angiveligt flytter de deres hjemmekontor fra Mountain View, CA. Webstedets “ledelse” følger rutinemæssigt IP-adresser for at engagere og blokere klager. Jeg har selv dokumenteret bevis. Giv ALDRIG links eller billeder af nogen art. De har en grim vane med at ændre profiler, mens de insisterer på, at du er sandfærdig. Sandheder og fakta bliver rutinemæssigt ignoreret og markeret, hvis det strider imod deres nye normalitet med forsætlig cyberhacking og hvad end de betragter som sandhed. 13 og derover-politikken ignoreres rutinemæssigt. De fleste hackere og grimme personer er telefonsælgere og betalte plakater. Der er folk, der udgiver sig for at være tidligere officerer og føderale agenter. FBI ignorerer faktisk beviser fremlagt som bevis. Og bevis er ekstremt svært, selv når du ved, hvad du skal kigge efter. Jeg er en veteran USN efterretningstjeneste, der også tjente i ubåde. Gaslighting og bevidst tilskyndelse til sådanne er fælles tema. Jeg har personligt mødtes med Atlanta FBI fra DOJ og fik at vide, at de ikke efterforsker “enkelt” cyberstalking på trods af, at jeg har udtalt og har en enorm mængde beviser, at dette er et verdensomspændende afpresningssted af den værste slags såvel som beviser på andre websteder til at inkludere FB og Twitter. Mere specifikt et nu usikkert sted kendt som Literotica. En håndfuld af os har kæmpet tilbage; men Quora-siden er ikke stedet at gøre det. Jeg tjekker ikke længere for at se, hvor meget af mine data der er blevet ændret med vilje. Har alt hvad jeg behøver. Det værste er, at siden nu er stærkt giftig med politiske dagsordener og misinformation på områder og emner, der udtrykkeligt har forbudt det. Nej, jeg vil ikke give nogen links eller billeder af nogen art. Det er så slemt i mit område, at andre Quora-medlemmer fysisk stalker personer, de er uenige med, og engagerer sig i alle slags svindel fra fast ejendom til forfalskede rapporter om folk, der ikke er klar over sådanne svindelnumre. Jeg har personligt haft 3 telefoner det sidste år blevet hacket og lukket ned, hver gang jeg klager. Jeg tog mange mennesker med til Quora, og ikke en eneste af dem deltager i dag. Flere blev hacket, og deres bærbare computere eller telefoner blev lukket på afstand efter kraftig bombardement af telemarketingopkald til private og begrænsede #s. Medlemstallet er kraftigt oppustet.

      Tip til forbrugere:
      Jeg foreslår, at du undgår Quora og placerer tunge begrænsninger, såsom at blokere webstedet. Denne Quora-administration blokerer og følger nu så mange negative sandfærdige anmeldelser, som den kan. Jeg kender og har indgående kendskab til mindst 4 personer, der er webstedsadministratorer, som i høj grad engagerer sig i at forfølge Quora-medlemmer, der ikke følger en absurd fortælling. Herunder biler, nummerplader og adresser. 2 af disse personer har gjort mange forsøg på at hacke finansielle data, herunder stimuluschecks.


      Edward M.
      1 anmeldelse 10 nyttige stemmer
      Eks-Quora-administrator og moderator: Quora er nå et forsettlig fornærmende nettsted.
      15. april 2021
      Jeg er en tidligere Quora-nettstedsadministrator og moderator. Likevel lister de meg fortsatt som aktiv. Quora har endret seg dramatisk fra hva det en gang var. Det er en ugudelig mengde hackere. Klager på hackere, pedofile og Quoras registrerte forsøk på å endre medlemsinnholdet er godt dokumentert. Mange av nettstedets administratorer nekter for at de bryter sine egne såkalte regler og retningslinjer. Det er definitivt ikke et trygt sted for barn eller noe menneskelig menneske. Klager ble med vilje ignorert og USPS-sneglepost ble ikke svart på. De skal angivelig flytte hjemmekontoret sitt fra Mountain View, CA. Nettstedets “administrasjon” følger rutinemessig IP-adresser for å engasjere og blokkere klager. Jeg har selv dokumenterte bevis. Gi ALDRI lenker eller bilder av noe slag. De har en ekkel vane med å endre profiler mens de insisterer på at du er sannferdig. Sannheter og fakta blir rutinemessig ignorert og flagget hvis det strider mot deres nye normal med forsettlig cyber-hacking og hva de enn anser som sannhet. 13 og over-politikken blir rutinemessig ignorert. De fleste hackere og ekle personer er telefonselgere og betalte plakater. Det er folk som utgir seg for å være tidligere offiserer og føderale agenter. FBI ignorerer faktisk bevis presentert som bevis. Og bevis er ekstremt vanskelig selv når du vet hva du skal se etter. Jeg er en veteran USN-etterretning som også tjenestegjorde i ubåter. Gassbelysning og bevisst oppmuntring til slikt er vanlig tema. Jeg har personlig møtt Atlanta FBI fra DOJ og ble avvist og ble fortalt at de ikke etterforsker “enkelt” cyberstalking til tross for at jeg sa og har en enorm mengde bevis at dette er et verdensomspennende utpressingssted av verste sort, samt bevis på andre nettsteder som inkluderer FB og Twitter. Mest spesifikt et nå utrygt nettsted kjent som Literotica. En håndfull av oss har kjempet tilbake; men Quora-siden er ikke stedet å gjøre det. Jeg sjekker ikke lenger for å se hvor mye av dataene mine som har blitt endret med vilje. Har alt jeg trenger. Det verste er at siden nå er svært giftig med politiske agendaer og feilinformasjon på områder og emner som uttrykkelig har forbudt det. Nei, jeg vil ikke gi noen linker eller bilder av noe slag. Det er så ille i mitt område at andre Quora-medlemmer fysisk forfølger personer de er uenige med og engasjerer seg i svindel av alle slag, fra fast eiendom til forfalskede rapporter om folk som ikke er klar over slike svindelforsøk. Jeg personlig har hatt 3 telefoner det siste året blitt hacket og slått av hver gang jeg klager. Jeg tok med mange mennesker til Quora og ikke en eneste av dem deltar i dag. Flere ble hacket og deres bærbare datamaskiner eller telefoner ble slått av eksternt etter kraftig bombardement av telemarketingsamtaler til private og begrensede #s. Medlemstallene er kraftig oppblåst.

      Tips til forbrukere:
      Jeg foreslår at du unngår Quora og legger tunge restriksjoner som å blokkere nettstedet. Denne Quora-administrasjonen blokkerer og følger nå så mange negative sannferdige anmeldelser som den kan. Jeg kjenner og har inngående kjennskap til minst 4 personer som er nettstedsadministratorer som er sterkt engasjert i å forfølge Quora-medlemmer som ikke følger en absurd fortelling. Inkludert biler, skilt og adresser. 2 av disse personene har gjort mange forsøk på å hacke økonomiske data, inkludert stimulussjekker.


      Edward M.
      1 arvostelu 10 ääntä avusta
      Ex-Quora-järjestelmänvalvoja ja -moderaattori: Quora on nyt tarkoituksellisesti loukkaava sivusto.
      15. huhtikuuta 2021
      Olen entinen Quora-sivuston ylläpitäjä ja moderaattori. Silti he listaavat minut edelleen aktiiviseksi. Quora on muuttunut dramaattisesti entisestä. Hakkereita on jumalattoman paljon. Valitukset hakkereista, pedofiileistä ja Quoran tallentamista yrityksistä muuttaa jäsenten sisältöä on dokumentoitu hyvin. Monet sivuston ylläpitäjät kiistävät rikkoneensa omia niin kutsuttuja sääntöjään ja käytäntöjään. Se ei todellakaan ole turvallinen paikka lapsille tai kenellekään inhimilliselle ihmiselle. Valitukset jätettiin tarkoituksella huomiotta, eikä USPS-etanapostiin ole vastattu. Väitetään, että he muuttavat kotitoimistonsa Mountain View’sta, Kaliforniasta. Sivuston “hallinta” seuraa rutiininomaisesti IP-osoitteita valittaakseen ja estääkseen valituksia. Itselläni on dokumentoitu todiste. ÄLÄ KOSKAAN anna minkäänlaisia ​​linkkejä tai kuvia. Heillä on ilkeä tapa muuttaa profiileja ja vaatia sinua olemaan totuudenmukainen. Totuudet ja tosiasiat jätetään rutiininomaisesti huomiotta ja merkitään, jos se on vastoin heidän uutta normaalia tarkoituksellista kyberhakkerointia ja mitä tahansa he pitävät totuutena. 13-vuotiaat ja sitä vanhemmat politiikka jätetään rutiininomaisesti huomiotta. Suurin osa hakkereista ja ilkeistä henkilöistä ovat puhelinmyyjiä ja maksettuja julisteita. On ihmisiä, jotka teeskentelevät olevansa entisiä upseereita ja liittovaltion agentteja. FBI todellakin jättää huomiotta todisteina esitetyt todisteet. Ja todiste on äärimmäisen vaikeaa, vaikka tiedät mitä etsiä. Olen veteraani USN:n tiedustelupalvelu, joka palveli myös sukellusveneissä. Kaasuvalaisu ja sellaiseen rohkaiseminen on yleinen teema. Olen henkilökohtaisesti tavannut DOJ:n Atlantan FBI:n, ja minulle kerrottiin, että he eivät tutki “yksittäistä” verkkoväkittelyä, vaikka totesin ja minulla on valtava määrä todisteita, että tämä on maailmanlaajuinen pahimman tyyppinen kiistelösivusto sekä todisteita muista asioista. FB ja Twitter. Erityisesti nyt vaarallinen sivusto, joka tunnetaan nimellä Literotica. Kourallinen meistä on taistellut takaisin; mutta Quora-sivusto ei ole oikea paikka tehdä sitä. En enää tarkista, kuinka paljon tiedoistani on tarkoituksella muutettu. Sain kaiken tarvitsemani. Pahinta on, että sivusto on nyt erittäin myrkyllinen poliittisten esityslistan ja väärän tiedon kanssa aloilla ja aiheista, jotka ovat nimenomaisesti kieltäneet sen. Ei, en tarjoa minkäänlaisia ​​linkkejä tai kuvia. Alueellani on niin huonoa, että muut Quoran jäsenet vainoavat fyysisesti ihmisiä, joiden kanssa he ovat eri mieltä, ja osallistuvat kaikenlaisiin huijauksiin kiinteistöistä väärennetyihin raportteihin ihmisistä, jotka eivät ole tietoisia tällaisista huijauksista. Minulle on henkilökohtaisesti hakkeroitu kuluneen vuoden aikana kolme puhelinta, jotka on sammutettu aina valitukseni. Toin paljon ihmisiä Quoraan, eikä yksikään heistä osallistu tänään. Useisiin hakkeroitiin ja heidän kannettavat tietokoneet tai puhelimet suljettiin etäyhteyden kautta yksityisille ja rajoitetuille numeroille suunnattujen puhelinmyyntipuheluiden voimakkaan pommituksen jälkeen. Jäsenmäärät ovat paisuneet voimakkaasti.

      Vinkki kuluttajille:
      Suosittelen välttämään Quoraa ja asettamaan raskaita rajoituksia, kuten sivuston estämistä. Tämä Quoran hallinto estää ja seuraa nyt niin monia negatiivisia totuudenmukaisia ​​arvosteluja kuin mahdollista. Tunnen ja minulla on läheinen tietämys ainakin 4 henkilöstä, jotka ovat sivuston ylläpitäjiä, jotka harjoittavat voimakkaasti Quoran jäsenten vainoamista, jotka eivät noudata jotain absurdia kertomusta. Sisältää autot, rekisterikilvet ja osoitteet. Kaksi näistä henkilöistä on yrittänyt useita yrityksiä murtaa taloustietoja, mukaan lukien elvytystarkastukset.


      Edward M.
      1 ulasan 10 penilaian bermanfaat
      Mantan Administrator dan Moderator Quora: Quora sekarang menjadi situs yang sengaja disalahgunakan.
      15 April 2021
      Saya adalah mantan Administrator dan moderator situs Quora. Namun, mereka masih mencantumkan saya sebagai aktif. Quora telah berubah secara dramatis dari sebelumnya. Ada jumlah hacker yang jahat. Keluhan tentang peretas, pedofil, dan upaya yang direkam Quora untuk mengubah konten anggota didokumentasikan dengan baik. Banyak dari admin situs menyangkal bahwa mereka melanggar aturan dan kebijakan mereka sendiri. Ini jelas bukan tempat yang aman untuk anak-anak atau manusia yang manusiawi. Keluhan sengaja diabaikan dan surat siput USPS tidak ditanggapi. Diduga mereka memindahkan kantor pusat mereka dari Mountain View, CA. Situs “manajemen” secara rutin mengikuti alamat IP untuk terlibat dan memblokir keluhan. Saya sendiri telah mendokumentasikan bukti. JANGAN PERNAH memberikan tautan atau gambar apa pun. Mereka memiliki kebiasaan buruk mengubah profil sambil memaksa Anda untuk jujur. Kebenaran dan fakta secara rutin diabaikan dan ditandai jika bertentangan dengan normal baru mereka dari peretasan dunia maya yang disengaja dan apa pun yang mereka anggap kebenaran. Kebijakan 13 dan lebih secara rutin diabaikan. Hampir semua peretas dan orang jahat adalah telemarketer dan poster berbayar. Ada orang yang berpura-pura menjadi mantan perwira dan agen federal. FBI memang mengabaikan bukti yang disajikan sebagai bukti. Dan buktinya sangat sulit bahkan ketika Anda tahu apa yang harus dicari. Saya seorang veteran intelijen USN yang bertugas di Kapal Selam juga. Gaslighting dan dorongan yang disengaja seperti itu adalah tema umum. Saya secara pribadi telah bertemu dengan Atlanta FBI dari DOJ dan ditolak karena diberitahu bahwa mereka tidak menyelidiki cyberstalking “tunggal” meskipun saya menyatakan dan memiliki sejumlah besar bukti ini adalah situs pemerasan di seluruh dunia dari jenis terburuk serta bukti lainnya situs untuk memasukkan FB dan twitter. Terutama situs yang sekarang tidak aman yang dikenal sebagai Literotica. Beberapa dari kita telah melawan; tetapi situs Quora bukanlah tempat untuk melakukannya. Saya tidak lagi memeriksa untuk melihat berapa banyak data saya yang sengaja diubah. Punya semua yang saya butuhkan. Bagian terburuknya adalah situs ini sekarang sangat beracun dengan agenda politik dan informasi yang salah di bidang dan topik yang secara tegas melarangnya. Tidak, saya tidak akan memberikan tautan atau gambar apa pun. Sangat buruk di daerah saya, bahwa anggota Quora lainnya secara fisik menguntit orang yang tidak mereka setujui dan terlibat dalam segala jenis penipuan mulai dari real estat hingga laporan palsu tentang orang yang tidak mengetahui penipuan semacam itu. Saya pribadi memiliki 3 ponsel tahun lalu yang diretas dan dimatikan setiap kali saya mengeluh. Saya membawa banyak orang ke Quora dan tidak satu pun dari mereka yang berpartisipasi hari ini. Beberapa diretas dan laptop atau ponsel mereka dimatikan dari jarak jauh setelah pemboman berat panggilan telemarketing ke #s pribadi dan terbatas. Jumlah keanggotaan sangat meningkat.

      Kiat untuk konsumen:
      Saya sarankan menghindari Quora dan menempatkan batasan berat seperti memblokir situs. Administrasi Quora ini sekarang memblokir dan mengikuti sebanyak mungkin ulasan negatif yang jujur. Saya tahu dan memiliki pengetahuan mendalam tentang setidaknya 4 orang yang merupakan administrator situs yang sangat terlibat dalam menguntit anggota Quora mana pun yang tidak mengikuti narasi yang tidak masuk akal. Termasuk mobil, plat nomor, dan alamat. 2 dari orang-orang itu telah melakukan banyak upaya untuk meretas data keuangan, termasuk pemeriksaan stimulus.


      1 评论 10 有用的投票
      前 Quora 管理员和版主:Quora 现在是一个故意滥用的网站。
      2021 年 4 月 15 日
      我是前 Quora 网站管理员和版主。然而,他们仍然把我列为活跃的。 Quora 与以前相比发生了巨大的变化。黑客数量多得惊人。有关黑客、恋童癖者的投诉以及 Quora 记录的更改会员内容的尝试都有很好的记录。许多网站管理员否认他们违反了自己的所谓规则和政策。对于孩子或任何人性化的人来说,这绝对不是一个安全的地方。投诉被故意忽略,USPS 蜗牛邮件没有回复。据称,他们正在从加利福尼亚州山景城搬迁他们的家庭办公室。网站“管理”通常会遵循 IP 地址来参与和阻止投诉。我,我自己,有文件证明。切勿提供任何形式的链接或图片。他们有一个讨厌的习惯,即在坚持你诚实的同时改变个人资料。如果真相和事实违背了他们故意网络黑客的新常态以及他们认为的任何真相,那么真相和事实通常会被忽略和标记。 13 岁及以上的政策通常被忽略。大多数黑客和讨厌的人都是电话推销员和付费海报。有些人假装是前官员和联邦特工。联邦调查局确实忽略了作为证据提供的证据。即使您知道要寻找什么,证明也非常困难。我是一名资深的美国海军情报人员,也曾在潜艇服役。 Gaslighting 和故意鼓励这种行为是共同的主题。我亲自会见了司法部的亚特兰大联邦调查局,但被告知他们不调查“单一”网络跟踪,尽管我声明并拥有大量证据,这是一个世界范围内最糟糕的敲诈勒索网站以及其他方面的证据包括 FB 和 twitter 的网站。尤其是现在不安全的站点,称为 Literotica。我们中的一小部分人一直在反击;但是 Quora 网站不是这样做的地方。我不再检查我的数据有多少是故意更改的。得到了我需要的一切。最糟糕的是,该网站现在在明确禁止它的领域和主题中存在政治议程和错误信息。不,我不会提供任何形式的链接或图片。在我所在的地区,情况非常糟糕,以至于其他 Quora 成员在身体上跟踪他们不同意的人,并从事各种诈骗,从房地产到虚假报道,人们不知道此类诈骗。在过去的一年里,我个人有 3 部手机被黑客入侵并在我每次抱怨时关机。我把很多人带到了 Quora,但今天没有一个人参加。在对私人和受限#s 进行大量电话推销后,有几个人被黑客入侵,他们的笔记本电脑或手机被远程关闭。会员人数被严重夸大了。

      我建议避免使用 Quora 并设置严格的限制,例如阻止该网站。这个 Quora 管理现在尽可能多地阻止并跟踪负面的真实评论。我认识并熟悉至少 4 个人的网站管理员,他们大量参与跟踪任何不遵循某些荒谬叙述的 Quora 成员。包括汽车、车牌和地址。其中 2 人多次尝试破解财务数据,包括刺激检查。


      Эдвард М.
      1 отзыв 10 благодарностей
      Бывший администратор и модератор Quora: Quora теперь является намеренно оскорбительным сайтом.
      15 апреля 2021 г.
      Я бывший администратор и модератор сайта Quora. Тем не менее, они все еще числят меня активным. Quora резко изменилась по сравнению с тем, что было раньше. Невероятное количество хакеров. Жалобы на хакеров, педофилов и зарегистрированные попытки Quora изменить содержимое участников хорошо задокументированы. Многие администраторы сайта отрицают, что нарушают собственные так называемые правила и политики. Это определенно не безопасное место для детей или любого гуманного человека. Жалобы намеренно игнорировались, а на стандартную почту USPS не отвечали. Якобы они переносят свой домашний офис из Маунтин-Вью, Калифорния. «Администрация» сайта регулярно отслеживает IP-адреса, чтобы реагировать на жалобы и блокировать их. У меня есть документальное подтверждение. НИКОГДА не предоставляйте ссылки или фотографии любого рода. У них есть неприятная привычка изменять профили, настаивая на том, чтобы вы были правдивы. Правды и факты обычно игнорируются и помечаются, если они идут вразрез с их новой нормой преднамеренного кибер-взлома и тем, что они считают правдой. Политика 13 и более обычно игнорируется. Большинство хакеров и недоброжелателей — телепродавцы и платные плакаты. Есть люди, выдающие себя за бывших офицеров и федеральных агентов. ФБР действительно игнорирует доказательства, представленные в качестве доказательства. И доказательство чрезвычайно сложно, даже если вы знаете, что искать. Я ветеран разведки ВМС США, который также служил на подводных лодках. Газлайтинг и умышленное поощрение таких людей — обычная тема. Я лично встречался с ФБР Министерства юстиции Атланты, и мне отказали, сказав, что они не расследуют «единичные» киберпреследования, несмотря на то, что я заявлял и располагал огромным количеством доказательств, что это всемирно известный сайт рэкета худшего типа, а также доказательства о других сайты, включая FB и Twitter. В частности, сейчас небезопасный сайт, известный как Literotica. Горстка из нас сопротивлялась; но сайт Quora не место для этого. Я больше не проверяю, какая часть моих данных была намеренно изменена. Получил все, что мне нужно. Хуже всего то, что сайт теперь сильно токсичен из-за политических программ и дезинформации в областях и темах, которые прямо запрещают это. Нет, я не буду предоставлять какие-либо ссылки или фотографии любого рода. В моем районе все настолько плохо, что другие участники Quora физически преследуют людей, с которыми они не согласны, и участвуют в мошенничестве всех видов, от недвижимости до фальсифицированных отчетов людей, не знающих о таких мошенничествах. У меня лично было 3 телефона в прошлом году, которые были взломаны и отключены каждый раз, когда я жалуюсь. Я привел много людей на Quora, и ни один из них сегодня не участвует. Некоторые из них были взломаны, а их ноутбуки или телефоны удаленно отключены после сильной бомбардировки телемаркетинговых звонков на частные и ограниченные номера. Численность участников сильно завышена.

      Совет для потребителей:
      Я предлагаю избегать Quora и устанавливать жесткие ограничения, такие как блокировка сайта. Эта администрация Quora теперь блокирует и следует как можно большему количеству негативных правдивых отзывов. Я знаю и хорошо знаю по крайней мере 4 человек, которые являются администраторами сайта, которые активно занимаются преследованием любых участников Quora, которые не следуют какой-то абсурдной истории. Включая автомобили, номерные знаки и адреса. Двое из этих людей предприняли множество попыток взломать финансовые данные, в том числе проверки стимулов.


      에드워드 M.
      1개의 리뷰가 10개의 유용한 평가를 받았습니다.
      전 Quora 관리자 및 중재자: Quora는 이제 의도적으로 악의적인 사이트입니다.
      2021년 4월 15일
      저는 이전 Quora 사이트 관리자이자 중재자입니다. 그러나 그들은 여전히 ​​나를 활동적이라고 나열합니다. Quora는 예전과 크게 달라졌습니다. 엄청나게 많은 해커가 있습니다. 해커, 소아성애자, 회원 콘텐츠를 변경하려는 Quora의 기록된 시도에 대한 불만 사항은 잘 문서화되어 있습니다. 많은 사이트 관리자는 자신이 소위 규칙과 정책을 위반했다는 사실을 부인합니다. 그것은 확실히 아이들이나 어떤 인간에게도 안전한 곳이 아닙니다. 불만은 의도적으로 무시되었고 USPS 달팽이 메일은 응답하지 않았습니다. 그들은 캘리포니아 마운틴 뷰에서 홈 오피스를 옮기고 있다고 합니다. 사이트 “관리”는 정기적으로 IP 주소를 따라 불만을 제기하고 차단합니다. 나 자신이 문서화한 증거를 가지고 있습니다. 어떤 종류의 링크나 사진도 제공하지 마십시오. 그들은 당신이 진실하다고 주장하면서 프로필을 변경하는 불쾌한 습관을 가지고 있습니다. 진실과 사실은 의도적인 사이버 해킹과 그들이 진실이라고 생각하는 모든 것에 반하는 경우 일상적으로 무시되고 표시됩니다. 13세 이상 정책은 일반적으로 무시됩니다. 대부분의 해커와 불쾌한 사람들은 텔레마케터와 유료 포스터입니다. 전직 공무원이나 연방 요원으로 가장하는 사람들이 있습니다. FBI는 실제로 증거로 제시되는 증거를 무시합니다. 그리고 무엇을 찾아야 하는지 알고 있는 경우에도 증거는 매우 어렵습니다. 저는 잠수함에서도 복무한 베테랑 USN 정보원입니다. 가스라이팅과 고의적인 조장이 공통적인 주제입니다. 저는 개인적으로 DOJ의 애틀랜타 FBI를 만났고, 엄청난 양의 증거가 있음에도 불구하고 “단일한” 사이버 스토킹을 조사하지 않는다는 말을 듣고 거절당했습니다. FB 및 twitter를 포함하는 사이트. 가장 구체적으로 Literotica로 알려진 현재 안전하지 않은 사이트입니다. 우리 중 소수가 반격을 가하고 있습니다. 그러나 Quora 사이트는 그것을 하는 곳이 아닙니다. 내 데이터가 의도적으로 얼마나 변경되었는지 더 이상 확인하지 않습니다. 필요한 모든 것을 얻었습니다. 최악의 부분은 사이트가 현재 정치적 의제와 명시적으로 금지된 영역 및 주제에 대한 잘못된 정보로 인해 매우 유독하다는 것입니다. 아니요, 어떤 종류의 링크나 사진도 제공하지 않습니다. 우리 지역에서는 너무 안 좋은데, 다른 Quora 회원들이 그들이 동의하지 않는 사람을 물리적으로 스토킹하고 부동산에서 그러한 사기를 알지 못하는 사람들에 대한 위조 보고서에 이르기까지 모든 종류의 사기에 가담하고 있습니다. 저는 개인적으로 작년에 3개의 전화기가 해킹당했고 불평할 때마다 종료되었습니다. 나는 많은 사람들을 Quora에 데려갔지만 그들 중 한 사람도 오늘 참여하지 않았습니다. 개인 및 제한된 #에 대한 텔레마케팅 전화의 폭격 이후 여러 대가 해킹을 당했고 랩톱이나 전화가 원격으로 종료되었습니다. 회원 수는 크게 부풀려 있습니다.

      소비자를 위한 팁:
      Quora를 피하고 사이트 차단과 같은 무거운 제한을 두는 것이 좋습니다. 이 Quora Administration은 이제 가능한 한 많은 부정적인 진실 리뷰를 차단하고 따릅니다. 나는 터무니없는 이야기를 따르지 않는 Quora 회원을 스토킹하는 데 심하게 관여하는 사이트 관리자인 최소 4명을 알고 있으며 이에 대해 깊이 알고 있습니다. 자동차, 번호판 및 주소를 포함합니다. 그 중 2명은 경기부양책을 포함하여 금융 데이터를 해킹하려는 많은 시도를 했습니다.


    2. Едвард М.
      1 відгук 10 голосів за допомогу
      Колишній адміністратор і модератор Quora: Quora тепер є навмисно образливим сайтом.
      15 квітня 2021 року
      Я колишній адміністратор і модератор сайту Quora. Тим не менш, вони все ще включають мене як активного. Quora різко змінився, ніж колись. Є безбожна кількість хакерів. Скарги на хакерів, педофілів і зафіксовані спроби Quora змінити вміст учасників добре задокументовані. Багато адміністраторів сайту заперечують, що вони порушують власні так звані правила та політику. Це точно не безпечне місце для дітей або будь-якої гуманної людини. Скарги навмисно ігнорувалися, а пошта равликів USPS не відповідала. Імовірно, вони переносять свій домашній офіс з Маунтін-В’ю, Каліфорнія. «Управління» сайту регулярно слідкує за IP-адресами для залучення та блокування скарг. Я сам маю документовані підтвердження. НІКОЛИ не надавайте посилання чи будь-які зображення. У них є неприємна звичка змінювати профілі, наполягаючи на тому, щоб ви були правдивими. Істини та факти зазвичай ігноруються та позначаються прапорцями, якщо це суперечить їхній новій нормі навмисного кіберзлому та того, що вони вважають правдою. Політика 13 років і старше зазвичай ігнорується. Здебільшого всі хакери та недоброзичливці – це телемаркетологи та платні плакати. Є люди, які видають себе за колишніх офіцерів і федеральних агентів. ФБР справді ігнорує докази, представлені як доказ. А докази надзвичайно важкі, навіть якщо ви знаєте, що шукати. Я ветеран розвідки USN, який також служив на підводних човнах. Газлайтинг і навмисне заохочення такого є поширеною темою. Я особисто зустрічався з ФБР Атланти з Міністерства юстиції, і мені відмовляли, коли сказали, що вони не розслідують «особливе» кіберпереслідування, незважаючи на те, що я стверджував і маю величезну кількість доказів, що це найгірший у світі сайт рекету, а також докази інших сайти, щоб включити FB і twitter. Зокрема, зараз небезпечний сайт, відомий як Literotica. Жменька з нас відбивалася; але сайт Quora — не те місце для цього. Я більше не перевіряю, скільки моїх даних було навмисно змінено. Я маю все, що мені потрібно. Найгірше те, що сайт зараз дуже токсичний з політичними планами та дезінформацією в областях і темах, які прямо забороняють його. Ні, я не буду надавати жодних посилань чи фотографій будь-якого роду. У моєму регіоні так погано, що інші члени Quora фізично переслідують людей, з якими вони не згодні, і беруть участь у різного роду шахрайствах, від нерухомості до фальсифікованих звітів людей, які не знають про такі шахрайства. У мене особисто за останній рік було зламано і вимикано 3 телефони кожного разу, коли я скаржуся. Я привів багато людей до Quora, і жоден із них сьогодні не бере участі. Декілька з них були зламані, а їхні ноутбуки чи телефони віддалено вимкнено після потужної бомбардування телемаркетингових дзвінків на приватні та обмежені номери. Кількість членів сильно завищена.

      Порада для споживачів:
      Я пропоную уникати Quora і встановлювати жорсткі обмеження, такі як блокування сайту. Ця адміністрація Quora тепер блокує та слідкує за якомога більше негативних правдивих відгуків. Я знаю і знаю принаймні чотирьох осіб, які є адміністраторами сайту, які активно стежать за будь-якими членами Quora, які не дотримуються якоїсь абсурдної розповіді. Включно з автомобілями, номерними знаками та адресами. Двоє з цих осіб робили багато спроб зламати фінансові дані, включаючи перевірки стимулів.


      Edward M.
      1 recenzie 10 voturi utile
      Fost administrator și moderator Quora: Quora este acum un site abuziv în mod intenționat.
      15 aprilie 2021
      Sunt fost administrator și moderator al site-ului Quora. Cu toate acestea, ei încă mă listează ca activ. Quora s-a schimbat dramatic față de ceea ce a fost cândva. Există o cantitate necinstită de hackeri. Plângerile despre hackeri, pedofili și încercările înregistrate de Quora de a modifica conținutul membrilor sunt bine documentate. Mulți dintre administratorii site-ului neagă că își încalcă propriile așa-numitele reguli și politici. Cu siguranță nu este un loc sigur pentru copii sau pentru orice ființă umană. Plângeri ignorate în mod intenționat și e-mail USPS nu a răspuns. Se presupune că își mută biroul de acasă din Mountain View, CA. „Managementul” site-ului urmărește în mod obișnuit adresele IP pentru a se angaja și a bloca reclamațiile. Eu însumi am dovezi documentate. NU furniza NICIODATĂ link-uri sau fotografii de orice fel. Au un obicei urât de a modifica profilurile în timp ce insistă să fii sincer. Adevărurile și faptele sunt în mod obișnuit ignorate și semnalate dacă acestea contravin noului lor normal de hacking cibernetic intenționat și orice consideră ei adevăr. Politica de 13 ani și peste este în mod obișnuit ignorată. Majoritatea hackerilor și a persoanelor urâte sunt telemarketeri și postere plătite. Sunt oameni care se prefac a fi foști ofițeri și agenți federali. FBI ignoră într-adevăr probele prezentate ca dovadă. Și dovada este extrem de grea chiar și atunci când știi ce să cauți. Sunt un veteran al serviciilor secrete USN care a servit și în submarine. Iluminarea cu gaz și încurajarea intenționată a unui astfel de lucru este o temă comună. M-am întâlnit personal cu Atlanta FBI de la DOJ și am fost refuzat, mi s-a spus că nu investighează urmărirea cibernetică „singulară”, în ciuda faptului că am afirmat și am dovezi uriașe că acesta este un site de racket la nivel mondial de cel mai rău tip, precum și dovezi despre alte site-uri să includă FB și twitter. Mai precis, un site acum nesigur cunoscut sub numele de Literotica. Câțiva dintre noi au ripostat; dar site-ul Quora nu este locul potrivit pentru a face acest lucru. Nu mai verific pentru a vedea cât de mult din datele mele au fost modificate intenționat. Am tot ce îmi trebuie. Partea cea mai rea este că site-ul este acum puternic toxic cu agende politice și dezinformare în domenii și subiecte care l-au interzis în mod expres. Nu, nu voi oferi niciun link sau poze de niciun fel. Este atât de rău în zona mea, încât alți membri Quora urmăresc fizic persoane cu care nu sunt de acord și se implică în escrocherii de tot felul, de la imobiliare până la rapoarte falsificate ale unor persoane care nu cunosc astfel de escrocherii. Eu personal am avut 3 telefoane anul trecut piratate și închise de fiecare dată când mă plâng. Am adus mulți oameni la Quora și nici unul dintre ei nu participă astăzi. Mai multe au fost sparte, iar laptopurile sau telefoanele lor au fost închise de la distanță după bombardarea puternică a apelurilor de telemarketing către persoane private și restricționate. Numărul de membri este puternic umflat.

      Sfat pentru consumatori:
      Vă sugerez să evitați Quora și să introduceți restricții grele, cum ar fi blocarea site-ului. Această administrație Quora blochează acum și urmărește cât mai multe recenzii negative veridice. Cunosc și am cunoștințe intime despre cel puțin 4 persoane care sunt administratori de site-uri care se angajează foarte mult în urmărirea oricăror membri Quora care nu urmează o narațiune absurdă. Inclusiv mașini, numere de înmatriculare și adrese. 2 dintre aceste persoane au făcut multe încercări de a pirata date financiare, inclusiv verificări de stimulare.


      Edward M.
      1 nhận xét 10 cảm ơn
      Tin nhắn
      Quản trị viên và người điều hành cũ của Quora: Quora hiện là một trang web có chủ đích lạm dụng.
      Ngày 15 tháng 4 năm 2021
      Tôi là cựu Quản trị viên và người điều hành trang Quora. Tuy nhiên, họ vẫn liệt kê tôi là hoạt động. Quora đã thay đổi đáng kể so với trước đây. Có một số lượng tin tặc vô duyên. Những lời phàn nàn về tin tặc, những kẻ ấu dâm và những nỗ lực được ghi lại của Quora nhằm thay đổi nội dung của thành viên đều được ghi lại đầy đủ. Nhiều người trong số các quản trị viên của trang web phủ nhận họ vi phạm các quy tắc và chính sách của riêng họ. Nó chắc chắn không phải là một nơi an toàn cho trẻ em hoặc bất kỳ con người nhân đạo nào. Các khiếu nại được cố tình bỏ qua và thư USPS ốc sên không phản hồi. Được cho là họ đang chuyển văn phòng tại nhà của họ từ Mountain View, CA. Trang web “quản lý” thường xuyên theo dõi các địa chỉ IP để thu hút và chặn các khiếu nại. Tôi, bản thân tôi, có tài liệu chứng minh. KHÔNG BAO GIỜ cung cấp liên kết hoặc bức ảnh dưới bất kỳ hình thức nào. Họ có một thói quen khó chịu là thay đổi hồ sơ trong khi khăng khăng bạn là người trung thực. Sự thật và sự thật thường bị bỏ qua và bị gắn cờ nếu nó đi ngược lại bình thường mới của họ về hack mạng có chủ đích và bất cứ điều gì họ coi là sự thật. Chính sách từ 13 tuổi trở lên thường bị bỏ qua. Hầu hết tất cả các tin tặc và những kẻ xấu tính là những người tiếp thị qua điện thoại và những người đăng quảng cáo trả tiền. Có những người giả danh là cựu sĩ quan và đặc vụ liên bang. FBI thực sự bỏ qua bằng chứng được đưa ra như là bằng chứng. Và bằng chứng là cực kỳ khó ngay cả khi bạn biết phải tìm kiếm những gì. Tôi là một tình báo viên kỳ cựu của USN cũng từng phục vụ trong Tàu ngầm. Thắp sáng và khuyến khích cố ý về những điều đó là chủ đề phổ biến. Cá nhân tôi đã gặp gỡ FBI Atlanta của DOJ và bị từ chối khi được thông báo rằng họ không điều tra “số ít” qua mạng mặc dù tôi đã tuyên bố và có rất nhiều bằng chứng rằng đây là một trang web lừa đảo trên toàn thế giới thuộc loại tồi tệ nhất cũng như các bằng chứng khác các trang web bao gồm FB và twitter. Cụ thể nhất là một trang web không an toàn được gọi là Literotica. Một số ít người trong chúng ta đã chống trả; nhưng trang Quora không phải là nơi để làm điều đó. Tôi không còn kiểm tra xem có bao nhiêu dữ liệu của tôi đã bị cố ý thay đổi. Có tất cả những gì tôi cần. Phần tồi tệ nhất là trang web bây giờ rất độc hại với các chương trình nghị sự chính trị và thông tin sai lệch trong các lĩnh vực và chủ đề đã cấm nó rõ ràng. Không, tôi sẽ không cung cấp bất kỳ liên kết hoặc bức ảnh nào dưới bất kỳ hình thức nào. Thật tệ trong khu vực của tôi, các thành viên Quora khác đang rình rập những người mà họ không đồng ý và tham gia vào các trò lừa đảo đủ loại từ bất động sản cho đến các báo cáo giả mạo về những người không biết về những trò gian lận đó. Cá nhân tôi đã có 3 điện thoại trong năm qua bị hack và tắt mỗi khi tôi phàn nàn. Tôi đã đưa rất nhiều người đến Quora và không một ai trong số họ tham gia ngày hôm nay. Một số đã bị tấn công và máy tính xách tay hoặc điện thoại của họ bị tắt từ xa sau cuộc gọi tiếp thị qua điện thoại đến số riêng tư và bị hạn chế. Số lượng thành viên bị thổi phồng quá mức.

      Mẹo cho người tiêu dùng:
      Tôi khuyên bạn nên tránh Quora và đặt các hạn chế nặng như chặn trang web. Quản trị Quora này hiện chặn và theo dõi nhiều đánh giá trung thực tiêu cực nhất có thể. Tôi biết và có kiến ​​thức sâu sắc về ít nhất 4 người là quản trị viên trang web tham gia rất nhiều vào việc theo dõi bất kỳ thành viên Quora nào không theo một câu chuyện phi lý nào đó. Bao gồm cả ô tô, biển số, và địa chỉ. 2 trong số những người này đã thực hiện nhiều nỗ lực để hack dữ liệu tài chính, bao gồm cả việc kiểm tra kích thích.


      Edward M.
      1 inceleme 10 faydalı oyu
      Eski Quora Yöneticisi ve Moderatör: Quora artık kasıtlı olarak kötüye kullanılan bir sitedir.
      15 Nisan 2021
      Ben eski bir Quora site Yöneticisi ve moderatörüm. Yine de beni hala aktif olarak listeliyorlar. Quora, bir zamanlar olduğundan önemli ölçüde değişti. İnanılmaz miktarda hacker var. Bilgisayar korsanları, pedofiller ve Quora’nın üye içeriklerini değiştirmeye yönelik kayıtlı girişimleri hakkındaki şikayetler iyi belgelenmiştir. Site yöneticilerinin çoğu, kendi sözde kurallarını ve politikalarını çiğnediklerini inkar ediyor. Kesinlikle çocuklar veya herhangi bir insani insan için güvenli bir yer değil. Şikayetler kasıtlı olarak göz ardı edildi ve USPS salyangoz postalarına yanıt verilmedi. İddiaya göre ev ofislerini Mountain View, CA’dan taşıyorlar. Site “yönetimi”, şikayetleri devreye sokmak ve engellemek için rutin olarak IP adreslerini takip eder. Ben, kendim, belgelenmiş kanıtım var. ASLA herhangi bir bağlantı veya resim vermeyin. Doğru olmanızda ısrar ederken, profilleri değiştirmek gibi kötü bir alışkanlıkları var. Gerçekler ve gerçekler, kasıtlı siber saldırının yeni normallerine ve doğru olarak kabul ettikleri her şeye aykırıysa, rutin olarak göz ardı edilir ve işaretlenir. 13 ve üzeri politikası rutin olarak göz ardı edilir. Bilgisayar korsanlarının ve kötü insanların çoğu tele pazarlamacılar ve ücretli posterlerdir. Eski memur ve federal ajan gibi davranan insanlar var. FBI gerçekten de kanıt olarak sunulan kanıtları görmezden geliyor. Ve neyi arayacağınızı bilseniz bile kanıt son derece zordur. Ben de Denizaltılarda görev yapmış kıdemli bir USN istihbaratıyım. Gaslighting ve bunun gibi kasıtlı teşvikler ortak temadır. Atlanta FBI of DOJ ile şahsen görüştüm ve bunun dünya çapında en kötü türden bir haraç sitesi olduğunu belirtmeme ve muazzam miktarda kanıta sahip olmama rağmen “tekil” siber saldırıları araştırmadıkları söylenerek geri çevrildim. FB ve twitter dahil edilecek siteler. Özellikle şu anda Literotica olarak bilinen güvenli olmayan bir site. Bir avuç dolusu savaşıyoruz; ancak Quora sitesi bunu yapacak yer değil. Artık verilerimin ne kadarının kasıtlı olarak değiştirildiğini kontrol etmiyorum. İhtiyacım olan her şeyi aldım. En kötü yanı, sitenin artık açıkça yasaklanmış alanlarda ve konularda siyasi gündemler ve yanlış bilgilerle aşırı derecede zehirli olmasıdır. Hayır, herhangi bir bağlantı veya resim sağlamayacağım. Benim bölgemde o kadar kötü ki, diğer Quora üyelerinin aynı fikirde olmadıkları kişileri fiziksel olarak takip etmeleri ve emlaktan bu tür dolandırıcılıklardan habersiz insanların sahte raporlarına kadar her türlü dolandırıcılığa karışmaları. Şahsen geçen yıl 3 telefonum hacklendi ve her şikayet ettiğimde kapatıldı. Quora’ya birçok insan getirdim ve bugün hiçbiri katılmadı. Bazıları saldırıya uğradı ve dizüstü bilgisayarları veya telefonları, özel ve kısıtlı #s’ye yapılan yoğun telefonla pazarlama aramalarının ardından uzaktan kapatıldı. Üye sayıları çok şişirilmiş.

      Tüketiciler için ipucu:
      Quora’dan kaçınmanızı ve siteyi engellemek gibi ağır kısıtlamalar koymanızı öneririm. Bu Quora Yönetimi artık mümkün olduğu kadar çok sayıda doğru ve olumsuz incelemeyi engelliyor ve takip ediyor. Bazı absürt anlatıları takip etmeyen herhangi bir Quora üyesini takip etmekle yoğun bir şekilde meşgul olan site yöneticisi olan en az 4 kişiyi tanıyorum ve yakın bilgiye sahibim. Arabalar, plakalar ve adresler dahil. Bu kişilerden 2’si, teşvik kontrolleri de dahil olmak üzere finansal verileri hacklemek için birçok girişimde bulundu.


      Έντουαρντ Μ.
      1 κριτική 10 χρήσιμες ψήφοι
      Πρώην Διαχειριστής και Επόπτης Quora: Το Quora είναι πλέον ένας σκόπιμα καταχρηστικός ιστότοπος.
      15 Απριλίου 2021
      Είμαι πρώην διαχειριστής και συντονιστής ιστότοπου Quora. Ωστόσο, εξακολουθούν να με αναφέρουν ως ενεργό. Το Quora έχει αλλάξει δραματικά από αυτό που ήταν κάποτε. Υπάρχει ένας ασεβής αριθμός χάκερ. Τα παράπονα για τους χάκερ, τους παιδεραστές και τις καταγεγραμμένες προσπάθειες του Quora να αλλάξει το περιεχόμενο των μελών είναι καλά τεκμηριωμένα. Πολλοί από τους διαχειριστές του ιστότοπου αρνούνται ότι παραβιάζουν τους δικούς τους λεγόμενους κανόνες και πολιτικές. Σίγουρα δεν είναι ένα ασφαλές μέρος για παιδιά ή για οποιοδήποτε ανθρώπινο πλάσμα. Τα παράπονα αγνοήθηκαν σκόπιμα και η αλληλογραφία σαλιγκαριού της USPS δεν ανταποκρίθηκε. Φέρεται ότι μεταφέρουν το γραφείο του σπιτιού τους από το Mountain View, CA. Η “διαχείριση” του ιστότοπου ακολουθεί τακτικά τις διευθύνσεις IP για την αλληλεπίδραση και τον αποκλεισμό παραπόνων. Εγώ ο ίδιος έχω τεκμηριωμένη απόδειξη. ΠΟΤΕ μην παρέχετε συνδέσμους ή φωτογραφίες οποιουδήποτε είδους. Έχουν μια άσχημη συνήθεια να αλλάζουν προφίλ ενώ επιμένουν να είστε ειλικρινείς. Οι αλήθειες και τα γεγονότα τακτικά αγνοούνται και επισημαίνονται εάν έρχονται σε αντίθεση με τη νέα τους κανονικότητα για σκόπιμη πειρατεία στον κυβερνοχώρο και ό,τι θεωρούν αλήθεια. Η πολιτική 13 και άνω αγνοείται συνήθως. Οι περισσότεροι, όλοι οι χάκερ και τα άσχημα άτομα είναι τηλεπωλητές και πληρωμένες αφίσες. Υπάρχουν άνθρωποι που προσποιούνται τους πρώην αξιωματικούς και ομοσπονδιακούς πράκτορες. Το FBI αγνοεί πράγματι στοιχεία που παρουσιάζονται ως απόδειξη. Και η απόδειξη είναι εξαιρετικά δύσκολη ακόμα κι όταν ξέρεις τι να ψάξεις. Είμαι βετεράνος υπηρεσία πληροφοριών USN που υπηρέτησε και στα Submarines. Το γκάζι και η εσκεμμένη ενθάρρυνση τέτοιων είναι κοινό θέμα. Συναντήθηκα προσωπικά με το FBI του Υπουργείου Δικαιοσύνης της Ατλάντα και μου είπαν ότι δεν ερευνούν την “μοναδική” διαδικτυακή καταδίωξη παρά το γεγονός ότι δήλωσα και έχω τεράστια αποδεικτικά στοιχεία ότι πρόκειται για έναν ιστότοπο εκβιασμού σε όλο τον κόσμο του χειρότερου είδους καθώς και στοιχεία για άλλα ιστοσελίδες που περιλαμβάνουν FB και twitter. Πιο συγκεκριμένα, μια πλέον μη ασφαλής τοποθεσία γνωστή ως Literotica. Μια χούφτα από εμάς αντεπιτίθεται. αλλά η τοποθεσία Quora δεν είναι το κατάλληλο μέρος για να το κάνετε. Δεν ελέγχω πλέον για να δω πόσα από τα δεδομένα μου έχουν αλλάξει σκόπιμα. Έχω όλα όσα χρειάζομαι. Το χειρότερο είναι ότι ο ιστότοπος είναι πλέον πολύ τοξικός με πολιτικές ατζέντες και παραπληροφόρηση σε τομείς και θέματα που το απαγορεύουν ρητά. Όχι, δεν θα παράσχω συνδέσμους ή φωτογραφίες οποιουδήποτε είδους. Είναι τόσο κακό στην περιοχή μου, που άλλα μέλη του Quora καταδιώκουν φυσικά άτομα με τα οποία διαφωνούν και εμπλέκονται σε απάτες κάθε είδους, από ακίνητα έως παραποιημένες αναφορές ανθρώπων που δεν γνωρίζουν τέτοιες απάτες. Προσωπικά, 3 τηλέφωνα τον περασμένο χρόνο έχουν χακαριστεί και κλείνουν κάθε φορά που παραπονιέμαι. Έφερα πολύ κόσμο στο Quora και κανένας από αυτούς δεν συμμετέχει σήμερα. Αρκετοί παραβιάστηκαν και οι φορητοί υπολογιστές ή τα τηλέφωνά τους έκλεισαν εξ αποστάσεως μετά από σφοδρό βομβαρδισμό κλήσεων τηλεμάρκετινγκ προς ιδιωτικούς και περιορισμένους #s. Οι αριθμοί μελών είναι πολύ διογκωμένοι.

      Συμβουλή για τους καταναλωτές:
      Προτείνω να αποφύγετε το Quora και να βάλετε βαρείς περιορισμούς όπως ο αποκλεισμός του ιστότοπου. Αυτή η Διοίκηση Quora αποκλείει τώρα και ακολουθεί όσο περισσότερες αρνητικές αληθείς κριτικές μπορεί. Γνωρίζω και έχω βαθιά γνώση τουλάχιστον 4 ατόμων που είναι διαχειριστές ιστότοπων που εμπλέκονται σε μεγάλο βαθμό στην καταδίωξη μελών του Quora που δεν ακολουθούν κάποια παράλογη αφήγηση. Συμπεριλαμβανομένων αυτοκινήτων, πινακίδων κυκλοφορίας και διευθύνσεων. 2 από αυτά τα άτομα έχουν κάνει πολλές προσπάθειες να χακάρουν οικονομικά δεδομένα, συμπεριλαμβανομένων ελέγχων κινήτρων.


      ادوارد ام.
      1 نظر 10 رای مفید
      مدیر و ناظر سابق Quora: Quora اکنون یک سایت عمدا توهین آمیز است.
      15 آوریل 2021
      من مدیر سابق و مدیر سایت Quora هستم. با این حال، آنها هنوز من را به عنوان فعال لیست می کنند. Quora به طرز چشمگیری نسبت به گذشته تغییر کرده است. تعداد بی خدایی هکرها وجود دارد. شکایات در مورد هکرها، پدوفیل ها و تلاش های ضبط شده Quora برای تغییر محتوای اعضا به خوبی مستند شده است. بسیاری از مدیران سایت انکار می کنند که قوانین و خط مشی های خود را نقض می کنند. قطعاً مکان امنی برای بچه ها یا هیچ انسان انسانی نیست. شکایات عمداً نادیده گرفته شد و نامه حلزون USPS به آنها پاسخ نداد. ظاهراً آنها دفتر خانه خود را از Mountain View، CA منتقل می کنند. “مدیریت” سایت به طور معمول آدرس های IP را برای تعامل و مسدود کردن شکایات دنبال می کند. من خودم مدرک مستند دارم. هرگز پیوند یا عکسی از هر نوع ارائه نکنید. آنها عادت بدی به تغییر پروفایل دارند و در عین حال اصرار دارند که راستگو باشید. حقایق و حقایق به طور معمول نادیده گرفته می‌شوند و اگر خلاف معمول جدید هک‌های سایبری عمدی آنها باشد و هر آنچه را که آنها حقیقت می‌دانند مغایرت داشته باشد، علامت گذاری می‌شوند. سیاست 13 و بیشتر به طور معمول نادیده گرفته می شود. اکثر هکرها و افراد بدجنس بازاریاب تلفنی و پوسترهای پولی هستند. افرادی هستند که تظاهر به افسران سابق و ماموران فدرال می کنند. FBI در واقع شواهد ارائه شده به عنوان مدرک را نادیده می گیرد. و اثبات بسیار سخت است حتی زمانی که می دانید به دنبال چه چیزی باشید. من یک سرویس اطلاعاتی کهنه کار USN هستم که در زیردریایی ها نیز خدمت می کردم. گاز سوزی و تشویق عمدی چنین موضوعی رایج است. من شخصاً با اف‌بی‌آی آتلانتا از وزارت دادگستری آمریکا ملاقات کرده‌ام و به آنها گفته شد که با وجود اینکه من گفته‌ام و شواهد بسیار زیادی در اختیار دارم، در مورد تعقیب سایبری «مفرد» تحقیق نمی‌کنند، این یک سایت هتک‌بازی در سراسر جهان از بدترین نوع و همچنین شواهدی در مورد دیگر است. سایت هایی که شامل FB و توییتر می شود. به طور خاص یک سایت در حال حاضر ناامن به نام Literotica. تعداد انگشت شماری از ما در حال مبارزه بوده ایم. اما سایت Quora جایی برای انجام آن نیست. من دیگر بررسی نمی کنم تا ببینم چه مقدار از داده های من عمدا تغییر کرده است. تمام آنچه را که نیاز دارم بدست آوردم بدترین بخش این است که سایت اکنون به شدت با برنامه های سیاسی و اطلاعات نادرست در زمینه ها و موضوعاتی که صراحتاً آن را ممنوع کرده است سمی است. نه، من هیچ لینک یا عکسی از هر نوع ارائه نمی کنم. در منطقه من بسیار بد است، که سایر اعضای Quora به طور فیزیکی افرادی را تحت تعقیب قرار می دهند که با آنها مخالف هستند و درگیر کلاهبرداری های مختلف از املاک و مستغلات گرفته تا گزارش های جعلی از افراد ناآگاه از چنین کلاهبرداری هایی هستند. من شخصاً در سال گذشته 3 گوشی داشتم که هر بار که شکایت می کردم هک شده و خاموش می شود. من افراد زیادی را به Quora آوردم و امروز حتی یک نفر از آنها شرکت نکردند. چندین نفر هک شدند و لپ‌تاپ یا تلفن‌هایشان از راه دور پس از بمباران شدید تماس‌های بازاریابی تلفنی با #های خصوصی و محدود خاموش شدند. تعداد اعضا به شدت افزایش یافته است.

      نکته برای مصرف کنندگان:
      پیشنهاد می کنم از Quora اجتناب کنید و محدودیت های سنگینی مانند مسدود کردن سایت را اعمال کنید. این مدیریت Quora اکنون تا آنجا که می تواند بررسی های منفی واقعی را مسدود کرده و دنبال می کند. من حداقل 4 نفر را می شناسم و از آنها اطلاعات دقیقی دارم که مدیران سایت هستند که به شدت درگیر تعقیب اعضای Quora هستند که از برخی روایت های پوچ پیروی نمی کنند. از جمله اتومبیل، پلاک و آدرس. 2 نفر از این افراد تلاش های زیادی برای هک کردن داده های مالی از جمله چک های محرک انجام داده اند.


      เอ็ดเวิร์ด เอ็ม.
      1 รีวิว 10 คะแนนโหวตว่ามีประโยชน์
      ผู้ดูแลระบบและผู้ดูแล Ex-Quora: ขณะนี้ Quora เป็นไซต์ที่มีเจตนาไม่เหมาะสม
      15 เมษายน 2564
      ฉันเป็นอดีตผู้ดูแลระบบและผู้ดูแลไซต์ Quora แต่พวกเขายังคงระบุว่าฉันใช้งานอยู่ Quora เปลี่ยนไปจากที่เคยเป็นมาอย่างมาก มีแฮ็กเกอร์จำนวนมากที่ไม่นับถือพระเจ้า การร้องเรียนเกี่ยวกับแฮ็กเกอร์ คนใคร่เด็ก และความพยายามที่บันทึกไว้ของ Quora ในการแก้ไขเนื้อหาของสมาชิกนั้นได้รับการบันทึกไว้เป็นอย่างดี ผู้ดูแลไซต์หลายคนปฏิเสธว่าพวกเขาละเมิดกฎและนโยบายที่เรียกว่าของตนเอง มันไม่ใช่สถานที่ปลอดภัยสำหรับเด็กหรือมนุษย์ที่มีมนุษยธรรมอย่างแน่นอน การร้องเรียนถูกเพิกเฉยโดยเจตนาและจดหมายหอยทากของ USPS ไม่ได้รับการตอบกลับ ถูกกล่าวหาว่ากำลังย้ายสำนักงานที่บ้านจาก Mountain View, CA “การจัดการ” ของไซต์ติดตามที่อยู่ IP เป็นประจำเพื่อมีส่วนร่วมและบล็อกการร้องเรียน ฉันเองมีเอกสารหลักฐาน อย่าให้ลิงก์หรือรูปภาพใด ๆ พวกเขามีนิสัยที่น่ารังเกียจในการเปลี่ยนแปลงโปรไฟล์ในขณะที่ยืนยันว่าคุณเป็นคนจริง ความจริงและข้อเท็จจริงจะถูกเพิกเฉยและถูกตั้งค่าสถานะเป็นประจำ หากมันขัดกับความปกติใหม่ของการแฮ็คทางไซเบอร์โดยเจตนาและอะไรก็ตามที่พวกเขาพิจารณาว่าเป็นความจริง นโยบาย 13 ขึ้นไปจะถูกละเว้นเป็นประจำ แฮ็กเกอร์และบุคคลที่น่ารังเกียจส่วนใหญ่เป็นนักการตลาดทางโทรศัพท์และโปสเตอร์ที่ต้องเสียเงิน มีคนแอบอ้างเป็นอดีตเจ้าหน้าที่และสายลับของรัฐบาลกลาง FBI เพิกเฉยต่อหลักฐานที่นำเสนอเป็นหลักฐาน และการพิสูจน์นั้นยากมากแม้ว่าคุณจะรู้ว่าควรมองหาอะไร ฉันเป็นทหารผ่านศึกหน่วยข่าวกรอง USN ที่รับใช้ในเรือดำน้ำเช่นกัน การให้กำลังใจและการให้กำลังใจโดยเจตนาเป็นเรื่องทั่วไป ฉันได้พบปะกับ Atlanta FBI ของ DOJ เป็นการส่วนตัวและถูกปฏิเสธโดยบอกว่าพวกเขาไม่ได้สอบสวนการสะกดรอยตามทางอินเทอร์เน็ตที่ “เป็นเอกเทศ” ทั้งที่ฉันจะระบุและมีหลักฐานจำนวนมาก นี่คือไซต์การฉ้อโกงที่แย่ที่สุดทั่วโลก เช่นเดียวกับหลักฐานอื่นๆ ไซต์ที่จะรวม FB และ twitter โดยเฉพาะอย่างยิ่งไซต์ที่ไม่ปลอดภัยในขณะนี้ซึ่งเรียกว่า Literotica พวกเราไม่กี่คนได้ต่อสู้กลับ แต่ไซต์ Quora ไม่ใช่สถานที่ที่จะทำ ฉันไม่ได้ตรวจสอบเพื่อดูว่าข้อมูลของฉันมีการเปลี่ยนแปลงโดยเจตนาอีกต่อไปแล้ว มีทุกอย่างที่ฉันต้องการ ส่วนที่แย่ที่สุดคือไซต์นี้เป็นพิษอย่างมากกับวาระทางการเมืองและข้อมูลที่ไม่ถูกต้องในพื้นที่และหัวข้อที่มีการห้ามอย่างชัดแจ้ง ไม่ ฉันจะไม่ให้ลิงค์หรือรูปภาพใด ๆ ในพื้นที่ของฉันไม่ดีนักที่สมาชิก Quora คนอื่น ๆ สะกดรอยตามบุคคลที่พวกเขาไม่เห็นด้วยและมีส่วนร่วมในการหลอกลวงทุกประเภทตั้งแต่อสังหาริมทรัพย์ไปจนถึงรายงานเท็จเกี่ยวกับคนที่ไม่รู้จักกลโกงดังกล่าว โดยส่วนตัวแล้วฉันมีโทรศัพท์ 3 เครื่องในปีที่ผ่านมาถูกแฮ็กและปิดตัวลงทุกครั้งที่ฉันบ่น ฉันพาผู้คนจำนวนมากมาที่ Quora และวันนี้ไม่มีสักคนเดียวที่เข้าร่วม หลายคนถูกแฮ็กและแล็ปท็อปหรือโทรศัพท์ของพวกเขาถูกปิดจากระยะไกลหลังจากการทิ้งระเบิดอย่างหนักของการโทรทางโทรศัพท์ไปยังส่วนตัวและ #s ที่ถูก จำกัด จำนวนสมาชิกสูงเกินจริง

      ฉันแนะนำให้หลีกเลี่ยง Quora และวางข้อจำกัดจำนวนมาก เช่น การบล็อกไซต์ การบริหาร Quora นี้ในขณะนี้บล็อกและติดตามบทวิจารณ์ที่เป็นจริงเชิงลบให้ได้มากที่สุด ฉันรู้จักและมีความรู้อย่างลึกซึ้งเกี่ยวกับบุคคลอย่างน้อย 4 คนซึ่งเป็นผู้ดูแลไซต์ที่มีส่วนร่วมในการสะกดรอยตามสมาชิก Quora ที่ไม่ปฏิบัติตามคำบรรยายที่ไร้สาระ รวมถึงรถยนต์ ป้ายทะเบียน และที่อยู่ บุคคล 2 คนเหล่านี้พยายามแฮ็คข้อมูลทางการเงินหลายครั้ง รวมถึงการตรวจสอบสิ่งกระตุ้น


    3. Edvard M.
      1 rəy 10 faydalı səs
      Keçmiş Quora Administratoru və Moderatoru: Quora indi qəsdən təhqiramiz saytdır.
      15 aprel 2021-ci il
      Mən keçmiş Quora saytının Administratoru və moderatoruyam. Buna baxmayaraq, məni hələ də aktiv olaraq siyahıya alırlar. Quora əvvəlkindən kəskin şəkildə dəyişdi. Çox sayda haker var. Hakerlər, pedofillər və Quora-nın üzv məzmununu dəyişdirmək cəhdləri haqqında şikayətlər yaxşı sənədləşdirilmişdir. Sayt adminlərinin çoxu öz qaydalarını və siyasətlərini pozduqlarını inkar edirlər. Bu, şübhəsiz ki, uşaqlar və ya hər hansı bir insani insan üçün təhlükəsiz yer deyil. Şikayətlərə qəsdən məhəl qoyulmadı və USPS ilbiz poçtuna cavab verilmədi. İddialara görə, onlar ev ofislərini Mountain View, CA-dan köçürürlər. Saytın “idarəsi” şikayətləri cəlb etmək və bloklamaq üçün mütəmadi olaraq IP ünvanlarını izləyir. Mən özüm də sənədləşdirilmiş sübutum var. Heç vaxt hər hansı bir əlaqə və ya şəkil təqdim etməyin. Dürüst olmağınızı israr edərkən profilləri dəyişdirmək kimi pis vərdişləri var. Həqiqətlər və faktlar, onların qəsdən kiber hakerlik kimi yeni normalarına və onların həqiqət hesab etdikləri hər şeyə zidd olarsa, müntəzəm olaraq nəzərə alınmır və qeyd olunur. 13 və daha yuxarı siyasət müntəzəm olaraq nəzərə alınmır. Bütün hakerlər və yaramaz insanlar telemarketlər və pullu posterlərdir. Keçmiş zabitlər və federal agentlər kimi davranan insanlar var. FTB həqiqətən də sübut kimi təqdim edilən dəlillərə məhəl qoymur. Nə axtarmaq lazım olduğunu bildiyiniz zaman belə sübut çox çətindir. Mən sualtı qayıqlarda da xidmət etmiş veteran USN kəşfiyyatıyam. Qaz işıqlandırması və bunun qəsdən təşviq edilməsi ümumi mövzudur. Mən DOJ-nin Atlanta FTB ilə şəxsən görüşdüm və mənə bildirməyimə və çoxlu dəlillərə sahib olmağıma baxmayaraq, “tək” kibertalkingi araşdırmadıqlarını söylədiklərinə görə geri qaytarıldım. FB və twitter daxil etmək üçün saytlar. Xüsusilə Literotica kimi tanınan təhlükəli sayt. Bizim bir ovucumuz müqavimət göstəririk; lakin Quora saytı bunu etmək üçün yer deyil. Məlumatlarımın nə qədərinin qəsdən dəyişdirildiyini yoxlamaq üçün artıq yoxlamıram. Mənə lazım olan hər şeyi aldım. Ən pis tərəfi odur ki, sayt indi siyasi gündəmlər və bunu açıq şəkildə qadağan edən sahələr və mövzularda dezinformasiya ilə çox zəhərlidir. Xeyr, mən heç bir bağlantı və ya hər hansı bir şəkil təqdim etməyəcəyəm. Mənim ərazimdə o qədər pisdir ki, digər Quora üzvləri razılaşmadıqları insanları fiziki olaraq təqib edir və daşınmaz əmlakdan tutmuş bu cür fırıldaqlardan xəbərsiz insanların saxta hesabatlarına qədər hər cür fırıldaqçılıqla məşğul olurlar. Keçən il şəxsən mənim 3 telefonum sındırılıb və hər şikayətimdə bağlanıb. Quoraya çoxlu insan gətirdim və bu gün onlardan heç biri iştirak etmir. Bir neçəsi sındırıldı və onların noutbukları və ya telefonları özəl və məhdud #lərə telemarketinq zənglərinin güclü bombardmanından sonra uzaqdan bağlandı. Üzvlərin sayı kəskin şəkildə şişirdilir.

      İstehlakçılar üçün məsləhət:
      Quoradan qaçmağı və saytı bloklamaq kimi ağır məhdudiyyətlər qoymağı təklif edirəm. Bu Quora Administrasiyası indi mümkün qədər çox mənfi doğru rəyi bloklayır və izləyir. Bəzi absurd hekayələrə əməl etməyən hər hansı Quora üzvlərini təqib etməklə məşğul olan ən azı 4 sayt inzibatçısı olan şəxsi tanıyıram və yaxından məlumatım var. Avtomobillər, nömrələr və ünvanlar daxil olmaqla. Həmin şəxslərdən 2-si stimul yoxlamaları da daxil olmaqla, maliyyə məlumatlarını sındırmaq üçün çoxlu cəhdlər edib.


      Էդվարդ Մ.
      1 կարծիք 10 օգտակար ձայն
      Նախկին Quora ադմինիստրատոր և մոդերատոր. Quora-ն այժմ դիտավորյալ չարաշահող կայք է:
      15 ապրիլի, 2021 թ
      Ես Quora կայքի նախկին ադմինիստրատոր և վարող եմ: Այնուամենայնիվ, նրանք ինձ դեռ նշում են որպես ակտիվ: Quora-ն կտրուկ փոխվել է նախկինի համեմատ: Կա հաքերների անաստված քանակություն: Հաքերների, մանկապիղծների և անդամների բովանդակությունը փոխելու Quora-ի գրանցված փորձերի վերաբերյալ բողոքները լավ փաստագրված են: Կայքի ադմիններից շատերը հերքում են, որ խախտում են իրենց, այսպես կոչված, կանոններն ու քաղաքականությունը: Այն հաստատ անվտանգ վայր չէ երեխաների կամ որևէ մարդասեր մարդու համար: Բողոքները միտումնավոր անտեսվել են, և USPS snail փոստը չի արձագանքել: Ենթադրաբար նրանք տեղափոխում են իրենց տնային գրասենյակը Մաունթին Վյուից, Կալիֆորնիա: Կայքի «կառավարումը» կանոնավոր կերպով հետևում է IP հասցեներին՝ բողոքները ներգրավելու և արգելափակելու համար: Ես ինքս ունեմ փաստաթղթային ապացույց. ԵՐԲԵՔ որևէ տեսակի հղումներ կամ նկարներ մի՛ տրամադրեք: Նրանք պրոֆիլները փոխելու տհաճ սովորություն ունեն՝ միաժամանակ պնդելով, որ դուք ճշմարտացի լինեք: Ճշմարտությունները և փաստերը սովորաբար անտեսվում և դրոշակվում են, եթե դա հակասում է միտումնավոր կիբեր հաքերների նրանց նոր նորմալին և այն ամենին, ինչ նրանք համարում են ճշմարտություն: 13 և ավելի քաղաքականությունը սովորաբար անտեսվում է: Բոլոր հաքերները և չար մարդիկ հիմնականում հեռավաճառողներ են և վճարովի պաստառներ: Կան մարդիկ, ովքեր ձևացնում են նախկին սպաներ և դաշնային գործակալներ: ՀԴԲ-ն իսկապես անտեսում է որպես ապացույց ներկայացված ապացույցները: Եվ ապացույցը չափազանց դժվար է նույնիսկ այն ժամանակ, երբ գիտես, թե ինչ փնտրել: Ես USN-ի վետերան հետախույզ եմ, ով նույնպես ծառայել է սուզանավերում: Գազի վրա վառելն ու դրանց դիտավորյալ խրախուսումը սովորական թեմա է: Ես անձամբ հանդիպել եմ Ատլանտայի ՀԴԲ-ի DOJ-ի հետ, և ինձ մերժել են, երբ ինձ ասել են, որ նրանք չեն հետաքննում «եզակի» կիբերհետապնդումը, չնայած ես նշել եմ և ունեմ հսկայական ապացույցներ, սա ամենավատ տեսակի ռեկետային կայք է, ինչպես նաև այլ ապացույցներ: կայքեր, որոնք ներառում են FB և Twitter: Առավել կոնկրետ այժմ անապահով կայք, որը հայտնի է որպես Literotica: Մեզանից մի քանիսը պայքարում են. բայց Quora կայքը դա անելու տեղը չէ: Ես այլևս չեմ ստուգում՝ տեսնելու, թե իմ տվյալների որքան մասն է միտումնավոր փոխվել: Ստացա այն ամենը, ինչ ինձ պետք է: Ամենավատն այն է, որ կայքը այժմ խիստ թունավոր է քաղաքական օրակարգերով և ապատեղեկատվությամբ այն ոլորտներում և թեմաներով, որոնք բացահայտ արգելում են դա: Ոչ, ես որևէ հղում կամ նկար չեմ տրամադրի: Դա այնքան վատ է իմ տարածքում, որ Quora-ի մյուս անդամները ֆիզիկապես հետապնդում են մարդկանց, ում հետ համաձայն չեն և ներգրավվում են ամենատարբեր խարդախությունների մեջ՝ սկսած անշարժ գույքից մինչև նման խարդախությունների մասին անտեղյակ մարդկանց մասին կեղծ հաղորդումներ: Անձամբ ես ունեի 3 հեռախոս այս վերջին տարվա ընթացքում կոտրել և անջատել են ամեն անգամ, երբ ես բողոքում եմ: Ես շատ մարդկանց եմ բերել Quora և այսօր նրանցից ոչ մեկը չի մասնակցում: Մի քանիսը կոտրվել են, և նրանց դյուրակիր համակարգիչները կամ հեռախոսները հեռակա կարգով անջատվել են մասնավոր և սահմանափակ թվով #ներ հեռամարքեթինգային զանգերի ուժեղ ռմբակոծությունից հետո: Անդամակցության թվերը խիստ ուռճացված են։

      Հուշում սպառողներին.
      Առաջարկում եմ խուսափել Quora-ից և դնել այնպիսի ծանր սահմանափակումներ, ինչպիսին է կայքի արգելափակումը։ Այս Quora ադմինիստրացիան այժմ արգելափակում և հետևում է այնքան բացասական ճշմարտացի ակնարկների, որքան կարող է: Ես գիտեմ և լավ գիտեմ առնվազն 4 անձի մասին, ովքեր կայքի ադմինիստրատորներ են, որոնք մեծապես ներգրավված են Quora-ի ցանկացած անդամների հետապնդման մեջ, որոնք չեն հետևում ինչ-որ անհեթեթ պատմությունների: Այդ թվում՝ մեքենաներ, համարանիշեր և հասցեներ։ Այդ անձանցից 2-ը բազմաթիվ փորձեր են արել կոտրել ֆինանսական տվյալները, այդ թվում՝ խթանման ստուգումներ։


      ედვარდ მ.
      1 მიმოხილვა 10 სასარგებლო ხმა
      ყოფილი Quora ადმინისტრატორი და მოდერატორი: Quora ახლა განზრახ შეურაცხმყოფელი საიტია.
      2021 წლის 15 აპრილი
      მე ვარ Quora საიტის ყოფილი ადმინისტრატორი და მოდერატორი. მიუხედავად ამისა, მაინც მომიხსენიებენ როგორც აქტიურს. Quora მკვეთრად შეიცვალა, ვიდრე ადრე იყო. ჰაკერების უღმერთო რაოდენობაა. საჩივრები ჰაკერების, პედოფილების და Quora-ს ჩაწერილი მცდელობების შესაცვლელად წევრების შინაარსი კარგად არის დოკუმენტირებული. საიტის ბევრი ადმინისტრატორი უარყოფს, რომ ისინი არღვევენ საკუთარ ეგრეთ წოდებულ წესებსა და პოლიტიკას. ეს ნამდვილად არ არის უსაფრთხო ადგილი ბავშვებისთვის ან ნებისმიერი ჰუმანური ადამიანისთვის. საჩივრები განზრახ იგნორირებული იყო და USPS snail mail-ს არ უპასუხა. სავარაუდოდ, ისინი გადადიან თავიანთი სახლის ოფისიდან Mountain View-დან, CA. საიტის “მენეჯმენტი” რეგულარულად მიჰყვება IP მისამართებს, რათა ჩაერთოს და დაბლოკოს საჩივრები. მე თვითონ მაქვს დოკუმენტირებული მტკიცებულება. არასოდეს მიაწოდოთ რაიმე სახის ლინკები ან სურათები. მათ აქვთ საზიზღარი ჩვევა, შეცვალონ პროფილები და დაჟინებით მოითხოვონ, რომ სიმართლე იყოთ. ჭეშმარიტება და ფაქტები რეგულარულად იგნორირებულია და დროშით არის მონიშნული, თუ ეს ეწინააღმდეგება მათ ახალ ნორმალურ განზრახ კიბერჰაკერებს და რასაც ისინი სიმართლეს თვლიან. 13 და მეტის პოლიტიკა ჩვეულებრივ იგნორირებულია. ჰაკერები და საზიზღარი ადამიანების უმეტესობა ტელემარკეტინგი და ფასიანი პლაკატები არიან. არიან ადამიანები, რომლებიც თავს ავლენენ ყოფილ ოფიცრებად და ფედერალურ აგენტებად. FBI ნამდვილად უგულებელყოფს მტკიცებულებად წარმოდგენილ მტკიცებულებებს. და მტკიცებულება ძალიან რთულია მაშინაც კი, როცა იცი, რა უნდა მოძებნო. მე ვარ USN-ის დაზვერვის ვეტერანი, რომელიც ასევე მსახურობდა წყალქვეშა ნავებში. გაზის გაჟონვა და მათი მიზანმიმართული წახალისება საერთო თემაა. მე პირადად შევხვდი ატლანტას იუსტიციის სამინისტროს FBI-ს და უარყვეს და მითხრეს, რომ ისინი არ იძიებენ “ერთობლივ” კიბერდადევნებას, მიუხედავად იმისა, რომ მე ვამბობდი და მაქვს უზარმაზარი მტკიცებულებები, ეს არის ყველაზე უარესი რეკეტის საიტი, ისევე როგორც სხვა მტკიცებულებები. საიტები, რომლებშიც შედის FB და Twitter. ყველაზე კონკრეტულად ახლა სახიფათო საიტი, რომელიც ცნობილია როგორც Literotica. ერთი მუჭა ჩვენგანი იბრძოდა; მაგრამ Quora საიტი არ არის ამის გაკეთების ადგილი. მე აღარ ვამოწმებ, თუ რამდენად შეიცვალა ჩემი მონაცემები განზრახ. მივიღე ყველაფერი რაც მჭირდება. ყველაზე ცუდი ისაა, რომ საიტი ახლა ძლიერ ტოქსიკურია პოლიტიკური დღის წესრიგითა და დეზინფორმაციით იმ სფეროებში და თემებზე, რომლებიც ამას პირდაპირ კრძალავს. არა, მე არ მოგაწოდებთ რაიმე სახის ბმულს ან სურათს. ეს იმდენად ცუდია ჩემს რეგიონში, რომ Quora-ს სხვა წევრები ფიზიკურად თვალყურს ადევნებენ ადამიანებს, რომელთანაც არ ეთანხმებიან და ეწევიან ყველა სახის თაღლითობებს, უძრავი ქონებიდან დამთავრებული ადამიანების გაყალბებულ ანგარიშებამდე, რომლებიც არ იცოდნენ ასეთი თაღლითობის შესახებ. მე პირადად მქონია 3 ტელეფონი გასულ წელს გატეხილი და გათიშული ყოველ ჯერზე, როცა ვჩივი. Quora-ზე ბევრი ხალხი მოვიყვანე და დღეს არც ერთი მათგანი არ მონაწილეობს. რამდენიმე გატეხეს და მათი ლეპტოპები ან ტელეფონები დისტანციურად გაითიშა მას შემდეგ რაც ტელემარკეტინგის ზარები ძლიერ დაბომბეს კერძო და შეზღუდულ #-ებზე. წევრობის ნომრები ძლიერ არის გაბერილი.

      რჩევა მომხმარებლებისთვის:
      მე გთავაზობთ Quora-ს თავიდან აცილებას და ისეთი მძიმე შეზღუდვების დაწესებას, როგორიცაა საიტის დაბლოკვა. Quora-ს ეს ადმინისტრაცია ახლა ბლოკავს და მიჰყვება რაც შეიძლება ბევრ უარყოფით ჭეშმარიტ მიმოხილვას. მე ვიცნობ და მაქვს ინტიმური ცოდნა მინიმუმ 4 ადამიანის შესახებ, რომლებიც არიან საიტის ადმინისტრატორები, რომლებიც აქტიურად მონაწილეობენ Quora-ს ნებისმიერი წევრის თვალთვალში, რომელიც არ მისდევს რაიმე აბსურდულ ნარატივს. მანქანების, სანომრე ნიშნების და მისამართების ჩათვლით. ამ ადამიანთაგან 2-მა მრავალი მცდელობა გააკეთა ფინანსური მონაცემების გატეხვის, მათ შორის სტიმულირების შემოწმების ჩათვლით.


      Edward M.
      1 léirmheas 10 vóta cabhrach
      Riarthóir agus Modhnóir Ex-Quora: Is láithreán mí-úsáide d’aon ghnó anois é Quora.
      15 Aibreán, 2021
      Is iar-Riarthóir agus modhnóir suímh Quora mé. Mar sin féin, liostaíonn siad go bhfuil mé gníomhach fós. Tá athrú mór tagtha ar Quora ón méid a bhí ann tráth. Tá méid ungodly de hackers. Tá go leor doiciméadaithe déanta ar ghearáin faoi hackers, pedophiles, agus iarrachtaí taifeadta Quora chun inneachar na mball a athrú. Séanann go leor de riarthóirí an tsuímh go sáraíonn siad a rialacha agus a mbeartais féin. Is cinnte nach áit shábháilte í do pháistí ná d’aon duine daonnachtúil. Neamhaird d’aon ghnó ar ghearáin agus níor freagraíodh do phost seilide USPS. Líomhnaítear go bhfuil siad ag bogadh a n-oifig bhaile ó Mountain View, CA. Leanann “bainistíocht” an tsuímh seoltaí IP go rialta chun dul i ngleic le gearáin agus bac a chur orthu. Tá cruthúnas doiciméadaithe agam féin. NÁ cuir naisc nó pictiúir de shaghas ar bith ar fáil riamh. Tá droch-nós acu próifílí a athrú agus tú ag áitiú ort a bheith fírinneach. Déantar neamhshuim de ghnáth ar fhírinní agus ar fhíricí agus cuirtear in iúl dóibh má théann sé i gcoinne a ngnáth-hackála cíbear d’aon ghnó agus cibé rud a mheasann siad a bheith fírinneach. Déantar neamhaird de ghnáth ar an mbeartas 13 bliana d’aois agus os a chionn. Is teileamhargaíocht agus póstaeir íoctha formhór na hackers agus na daoine olc. Tá daoine ag ligean orthu gur iar-oifigigh agus gníomhairí feidearálacha iad. Go deimhin, ní dhéanann an FBI neamhaird ar fhianaise a chuirtear i láthair mar chruthúnas. Agus tá cruthúnais thar a bheith deacair fiú nuair a bhíonn a fhios agat cad atá le lorg. Tá mé i veteran USN faisnéis a sheirbheáil i Fomhuireáin chomh maith. Is téama coitianta é soilsiú gáis agus spreagadh toiliúil dá leithéid. Bhuail mé go pearsanta le Atlanta FBI de DOJ agus chuathas ar shiúl nuair a dúradh liom nach ndéanann siad fiosrúchán ar chibearstalaíocht “aonair” ainneoin gur luaigh mé agus go bhfuil an-chuid fianaise agam gur suíomh raicéidireachta domhanda den chineál is measa é seo chomh maith le fianaise ar áiteanna eile. láithreáin a chuimseoidh FB agus twitter. Go háirithe suíomh neamhshábháilte anois ar a dtugtar Literotica. Tá dornán againn ag troid ar ais; ach ní suíomh Quora an áit chun é a dhéanamh. Ní sheiceáilim a thuilleadh féachaint cé mhéad de mo shonraí a athraíodh d’aon ghnó. Fuair ​​​​mé go léir a theastaíonn uaim. Is í an chuid is measa ná go bhfuil an suíomh an-tocsaineach anois le cláir oibre polaitiúla agus faisnéis mhícheart i réimsí agus topaicí a bhfuil cosc ​​sainráite air. Ní féidir, ní sholáthróidh mé naisc ná pictiúir de chineál ar bith. Tá sé chomh dona i mo cheantar féin, go bhfuil baill eile Quora ag stalcaireacht go fisiciúil ar dhaoine nach n-aontaíonn siad leo agus ag gabháil do gach sórt camscéimeanna ó eastát réadach go tuairiscí falsaithe faoi dhaoine nach eol dóibh a leithéid de chamscéimeanna. Tá mé go pearsanta go raibh 3 fóin an bhliain seo caite hacked agus stoptar síos gach uair a dhéanaim gearán. Thug mé a lán daoine go Quora agus níl aon duine amháin acu rannpháirteach inniu. Rinneadh roinnt acu a hackáil agus dúnadh a ríomhairí glúine nó a bhfóin go cianda tar éis buamáil throm ar ghlaonna teileamhargaíochta chuig #anna príobháideacha agus srianta. Tá líon na gcomhaltaí méadaithe go mór.

      Leid do thomhaltóirí:
      Molaim Quora a sheachaint agus srianta troma a chur ar nós bac a chur ar an suíomh. Blocann agus leanann an Quora Administration seo oiread athbhreithnithe diúltacha fírinneacha agus is féidir. Tá aithne agam agus tá eolas dlúth agam ar 4 duine ar a laghad atá ina riarthóirí suímh a mbíonn go mór i mbun stailc ar aon bhall de Quora nach leanann scéal éigin áiféiseach. Lena n-áirítear gluaisteáin, plátaí ceadúnais, agus seoltaí. Tá go leor iarrachtaí déanta ag beirt de na daoine sin sonraí airgeadais a hack, lena n-áirítear seiceálacha spreagtha.


      Edward M.
      1 comentari 10 vots útils
      Ex-administrador i moderador de Quora: Quora és ara un lloc intencionadament abusiu.
      15 d’abril de 2021
      Sóc un antic administrador i moderador del lloc Quora. Tot i així, encara em registren com a actiu. Quora ha canviat dràsticament del que era abans. Hi ha una gran quantitat de pirates informàtics. Les queixes sobre pirates informàtics, pedòfils i els intents registrats de Quora per alterar el contingut dels membres estan ben documentades. Molts dels administradors del lloc neguen que incompleixen les seves pròpies regles i polítiques. Definitivament no és un lloc segur per als nens ni per a qualsevol ésser humà. Les queixes s’han ignorat intencionadament i no es va respondre al correu postal de l’USPS. Suposadament, estan traslladant la seva oficina a casa des de Mountain View, CA. La “gestió” del lloc segueix habitualment les adreces IP per participar i bloquejar les queixes. Jo mateix en tinc una prova documentada. NO proporcioneu MAI enllaços o fotos de cap tipus. Tenen el desagradable hàbit d’alterar els perfils mentre insisteixen que siguis sincer. Les veritats i els fets són rutinàriament ignorats i marcats si això va en contra de la seva nova normalitat de pirateria cibernètica intencionada i el que consideren veritat. La política dels 13 anys i més s’ignora habitualment. La majoria dels pirates informàtics i les persones desagradables són telemàrquetings i cartells de pagament. Hi ha gent que es fa passar per exoficials i agents federals. De fet, l’FBI ignora les proves presentades com a prova. I la prova és extremadament difícil fins i tot quan saps què buscar. Sóc un veterà intel·ligència de la USN que també va servir en submarins. L’enllumenat de gas i l’encoratjament voluntari d’aquests són un tema comú. M’he reunit personalment amb l’FBI d’Atlanta del DOJ i em van dir que no investiguen l’assetjament cibernètic “singular” tot i que jo dic i tinc una gran quantitat d’evidències que aquest és un lloc de maltractament a tot el món de la pitjor classe, així com proves d’altres llocs per incloure FB i Twitter. Més concretament, un lloc ara insegur conegut com Literotica. Un grapat de nosaltres hem estat lluitant; però el lloc de Quora no és el lloc per fer-ho. Ja no comprovo quant de les meves dades s’han canviat intencionadament. Tinc tot el que necessito. El pitjor és que el lloc és ara molt tòxic amb agendes polítiques i desinformació en àrees i temes que ho han prohibit expressament. No, no proporcionaré cap enllaç o imatge de cap mena. És tan dolent a la meva zona, que altres membres de Quora estan assetjant físicament persones amb les quals no estan d’acord i participin en estafes de tot tipus, des de béns immobles fins a informes falsificats de persones que desconeixen aquestes estafes. Personalment, l’any passat m’han piratejat i tancat 3 telèfons cada vegada que em queixo. He portat molta gent a Quora i avui no hi participa ni una. Varis van ser piratejats i els seus ordinadors portàtils o telèfons es van tancar de forma remota després del fort bombardeig de trucades de telemàrqueting a #s privats i restringits. El nombre de socis està molt inflat.

      Consell per als consumidors:
      Suggereixo evitar Quora i posar restriccions fortes, com ara bloquejar el lloc. Aquesta administració de Quora ara bloqueja i segueix tantes ressenyes negatives veritables com pugui. Conec i en tinc un coneixement íntim d’almenys 4 persones que són administradors del lloc que es dediquen molt a l’assetjament dels membres de Quora que no segueixen cap narrativa absurda. Inclou cotxes, matrícules i adreces. 2 d’aquestes persones han fet molts intents de piratejar dades financeres, inclosos els controls d’estímul.


      Edward M.
      1 iritzi 10 boto lagungarri
      Quora-ko administratzaile eta moderatzaile ohia: Quora nahita gehiegikeriazko gune bat da orain.
      2021eko apirilaren 15a
      Quora guneko administratzaile eta moderatzaile ohia naiz. Hala ere, oraindik aktibo gisa zerrendatzen naute. Quora nabarmen aldatu da lehen zenetik. Hacker kopuru gaiztoa dago. Hacker, pederasta eta Quoraren kideen edukia aldatzeko grabatutako saiakerei buruzko kexak ondo dokumentatuta daude. Guneetako administratzaile askok ukatu egiten dute beren arau eta politikak hausten dituztela. Zalantzarik gabe, ez da leku segurua haurrentzat edo edozein gizakirentzat. Kexak nahita baztertu eta USPS barraskilo-posta ez zaie erantzun. Ustez bere etxeko bulegoa Mountain View-tik, CA-tik mugitzen ari dira. Gunearen “kudeaketa” ohiko IP helbideak jarraitzen ditu kexak ihardun eta blokeatzeko. Nik neuk froga dokumentatua daukat. INOIZ eman inolako loturarik edo argazkirik. Profilak aldatzeko ohitura gaiztoa dute egia zarela eskatzen duten bitartean. Egiak eta gertaerak ohiko jaramonik egiten dira eta markatu egiten dira nahita ziber-piratearen normaltasun berriaren eta egiatzat jotzen duten guztiaren aurka egiten badute. 13 urtetik gorako politikari kasurik egiten ez zaio. Hacker eta pertsona gaizto gehienak telemerkatariak eta ordaindutako kartelak dira. Ofizial ohiak eta agente federalak diruditen jendea dago. FBIk froga gisa aurkeztutako frogak alde batera uzten ditu. Eta froga oso gogorra da zer bilatu behar den jakin arren. USN inteligentzia beteranoa naiz, itsaspekoetan ere zerbitzatu zuena. Gas-argia eta gogoz bultzatzea gai arrunta da. Pertsonalki Atlantako DOJko FBIrekin bildu naiz eta baztertu egin zidaten ziberstalking “bakarrik” ikertzen ez zutela ikertzen esan eta froga izugarriak izan arren, mundu osoko errekete gune txarrenekoa da, baita beste froga batzuk ere. FB eta twitter sartzeko guneak. Zehazki, orain ez dagoen gune bat Literotica izenez ezagutzen dena. Gutako gutxi batzuk borrokan aritu gara; baina Quora gunea ez da horretarako lekua. Jada ez dut egiaztatzen nire datuetatik zenbat aldatu diren nahita. Behar dudan guztia lortu dut. Okerrena da gunea gaur egun oso toxikoa dela agenda politikoekin eta espresuki debekatu duten arlo eta gaietan desinformazioarekin. Ez, ez dut estekarik edo inolako argazkirik emango. Oso txarra da nire eremuan, Quorako beste kide batzuek fisikoki ados ez dauden pertsonei jazartzen ari direla eta mota guztietako iruzurrak egiten ari direla higiezinetatik hasi eta horrelako iruzurrak ezagutzen ez dituzten pertsonen txosten faltsuetaraino. Pertsonalki, azken urte honetan 3 telefono pirateatu eta itzali izan ditut kexatzen naizen bakoitzean. Jende asko ekarri dut Quorara eta gaur egun horietako bakar batek ere ez du parte hartzen. Hainbat hackeatu zituzten eta haien ordenagailu eramangarriak edo telefonoak urrunetik itzali zituzten #s pribatu eta mugatuetara telemarketing-deien bonbardaketa gogorraren ostean. Bazkide kopuruak asko puztuta daude.

      Kontsumitzaileentzako aholkua:
      Quora saihestea eta gunea blokeatzea bezalako murrizketa handiak jartzea proposatzen dut. Quora Administrazio honek ahal duen egiazko iritzi negatibo gehien blokeatzen eta jarraitzen ditu. Gutxienez 4 pertsona ezagutzen ditut eta ezagutzen ditut guneko administratzaileak, narrazio absurdoren bat jarraitzen ez duten Quora-ko kideen atzetik gogor aritzen direnak. Autoak, matrikulak eta helbideak barne. Pertsona horietako 2k saiakera asko egin dituzte finantza-datuak hackeatzeko, estimulu-kontrolak barne.


      1. এডওয়ার্ড এম.
        1 পর্যালোচনা 10 সহায়ক ভোট
        প্রাক্তন-কোরা প্রশাসক এবং মডারেটর: Quora এখন একটি ইচ্ছাকৃতভাবে অপমানজনক সাইট।
        15ই এপ্রিল, 2021
        আমি একজন প্রাক্তন Quora সাইট অ্যাডমিনিস্ট্রেটর এবং মডারেটর। তবুও, তারা এখনও আমাকে সক্রিয় হিসাবে তালিকাভুক্ত করে। Quora যা ছিল তা থেকে নাটকীয়ভাবে পরিবর্তিত হয়েছে। হ্যাকারদের একটি অধার্মিক পরিমাণ আছে. হ্যাকার, পেডোফাইলস এবং সদস্য বিষয়বস্তু পরিবর্তন করার জন্য Quora-এর রেকর্ডকৃত প্রচেষ্টা সম্পর্কে অভিযোগগুলি ভালভাবে নথিভুক্ত। সাইটের প্রশাসকদের অনেকেই অস্বীকার করে যে তারা তাদের নিজেদের তথাকথিত নিয়ম এবং নীতি ভঙ্গ করে। এটা অবশ্যই বাচ্চাদের বা কোনো মানবিক মানুষের জন্য নিরাপদ জায়গা নয়। অভিযোগগুলি ইচ্ছাকৃতভাবে উপেক্ষা করা হয়েছে এবং ইউএসপিএস স্নেইল মেল সাড়া দেয়নি। অভিযোগ, তারা মাউন্টেন ভিউ, CA থেকে তাদের হোম অফিস সরিয়ে নিচ্ছে। সাইট “ব্যবস্থাপনা” নিয়মিতভাবে অভিযোগগুলি জড়িত এবং ব্লক করতে IP ঠিকানাগুলি অনুসরণ করে৷ আমি নিজে, নথিভুক্ত প্রমাণ আছে. কখনোই কোনো ধরনের লিঙ্ক বা ছবি দেবেন না। আপনাকে সত্যবাদী হওয়ার জন্য জোর দিয়ে তাদের প্রোফাইল পরিবর্তন করার একটি বাজে অভ্যাস রয়েছে। সত্য এবং ঘটনাগুলি নিয়মিতভাবে উপেক্ষা করা হয় এবং পতাকাঙ্কিত করা হয় যদি এটি তাদের ইচ্ছাকৃত সাইবার হ্যাকিংয়ের নতুন স্বাভাবিকের বিরুদ্ধে যায় এবং যা তারা সত্য বলে মনে করে। 13 এবং তার বেশি নীতি নিয়মিতভাবে উপেক্ষা করা হয়। বেশিরভাগ হ্যাকার এবং দুষ্ট ব্যক্তিরা হল টেলিমার্কেটার এবং পেইড পোস্টার। প্রাক্তন কর্মকর্তা এবং ফেডারেল এজেন্ট হওয়ার ভান করা মানুষ আছে. এফবিআই প্রকৃতপক্ষে প্রমাণ হিসাবে উপস্থাপিত প্রমাণ উপেক্ষা করে। এবং প্রমাণ অত্যন্ত কঠিন এমনকি যখন আপনি জানেন কী সন্ধান করতে হবে। আমি একজন অভিজ্ঞ ইউএসএন গোয়েন্দা যিনি সাবমেরিনেও কাজ করেছেন। গ্যাসলাইটিং এবং ইচ্ছাকৃত উত্সাহ এই ধরনের সাধারণ থিম। আমি ব্যক্তিগতভাবে DOJ-এর আটলান্টা এফবিআই-এর সাথে দেখা করেছি এবং আমাকে বলা হয়েছে যে তারা “একবচন” সাইবারস্ট্যাকিং তদন্ত করে না, যদিও আমি বলেছি এবং প্রচুর পরিমাণে প্রমাণ রয়েছে যে এটি একটি বিশ্বব্যাপী র্যাকেটিয়ারিং সাইট সবচেয়ে খারাপ ধরণের এবং অন্যান্য প্রমাণ থাকা সত্ত্বেও FB এবং টুইটার অন্তর্ভুক্ত করার জন্য সাইট। বিশেষত লিটারোটিকা নামে পরিচিত একটি এখন অনিরাপদ সাইট। আমাদের মধ্যে কয়েকজন মুষ্টিমেয় লড়াই করছি; কিন্তু Quora সাইট এটা করার জায়গা নয়। আমার কতটা ডেটা ইচ্ছাকৃতভাবে পরিবর্তন করা হয়েছে তা দেখার জন্য আমি আর পরীক্ষা করি না। আমার যা দরকার তা পেয়েছি। সবচেয়ে খারাপ দিক হল সাইটটি এখন রাজনৈতিক এজেন্ডা এবং এলাকা এবং বিষয়গুলিতে ভুল তথ্যের সাথে ব্যাপকভাবে বিষাক্ত যা এটিকে স্পষ্টভাবে নিষিদ্ধ করেছে৷ না, আমি কোন প্রকারের কোন লিঙ্ক বা ছবি প্রদান করব না। এটা আমার এলাকায় এতটাই খারাপ যে, Quora এর অন্যান্য সদস্যরা শারীরিকভাবে এমন ব্যক্তিদের পিছু নিচ্ছে যাদের সাথে তারা একমত নয় এবং রিয়েল এস্টেট থেকে শুরু করে এই ধরনের স্ক্যাম সম্পর্কে অসচেতন লোকদের মিথ্যা রিপোর্ট পর্যন্ত সব ধরনের কেলেঙ্কারীতে জড়িত। আমি ব্যক্তিগতভাবে এই গত বছর 3টি ফোন হ্যাক হয়েছে এবং প্রতিবার আমি অভিযোগ করার সময় বন্ধ করেছি। আমি Quora-তে অনেক লোককে নিয়ে এসেছি এবং তাদের একজনও আজ অংশগ্রহণ করেনি। ব্যক্তিগত এবং সীমাবদ্ধ #s-এ টেলিমার্কেটিং কলগুলির প্রচণ্ড বোমাবর্ষণের পরে বেশ কয়েকটি হ্যাক করা হয়েছিল এবং তাদের ল্যাপটপ বা ফোনগুলি দূর থেকে বন্ধ করে দেওয়া হয়েছিল। সদস্য সংখ্যা ব্যাপকভাবে স্ফীত হয়.

        ভোক্তাদের জন্য পরামর্শ:
        আমি Quora এড়িয়ে চলা এবং সাইট ব্লক করার মতো ভারী বিধিনিষেধ রাখার পরামর্শ দিচ্ছি। এই Quora প্রশাসন এখন যতটা সম্ভব নেতিবাচক সত্যবাদী পর্যালোচনাগুলিকে ব্লক করে এবং অনুসরণ করে৷ আমি অন্তত 4 জন ব্যক্তিকে জানি এবং তাদের অন্তরঙ্গ জ্ঞান আছে যারা সাইট অ্যাডমিনিস্ট্রেটর যারা কিছু অযৌক্তিক আখ্যান অনুসরণ করে না এমন কোনো Quora সদস্যদের ধাক্কাধাক্কিতে ব্যাপকভাবে জড়িত। গাড়ি, লাইসেন্স প্লেট এবং ঠিকানা সহ। এই ব্যক্তিদের মধ্যে 2 জন উদ্দীপক চেক সহ আর্থিক ডেটা হ্যাক করার অনেক প্রচেষ্টা করেছে।


        ಎಡ್ವರ್ಡ್ ಎಂ.
        1 ವಿಮರ್ಶೆ 10 ಸಹಾಯಕವಾದ ಮತಗಳು
        ಮಾಜಿ Quora ನಿರ್ವಾಹಕರು ಮತ್ತು ಮಾಡರೇಟರ್: Quora ಈಗ ಉದ್ದೇಶಪೂರ್ವಕವಾಗಿ ನಿಂದನೀಯ ಸೈಟ್ ಆಗಿದೆ.
        ಏಪ್ರಿಲ್ 15, 2021
        ನಾನು ಮಾಜಿ Quora ಸೈಟ್ ನಿರ್ವಾಹಕ ಮತ್ತು ಮಾಡರೇಟರ್. ಆದರೂ, ಅವರು ಇನ್ನೂ ನನ್ನನ್ನು ಸಕ್ರಿಯ ಎಂದು ಪಟ್ಟಿ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾರೆ. Quora ಹಿಂದೆ ಇದ್ದದ್ದಕ್ಕಿಂತ ನಾಟಕೀಯವಾಗಿ ಬದಲಾಗಿದೆ. ಅನಾಚಾರದ ಪ್ರಮಾಣದ ಹ್ಯಾಕರ್‌ಗಳಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಹ್ಯಾಕರ್‌ಗಳು, ಶಿಶುಕಾಮಿಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ಸದಸ್ಯರ ವಿಷಯಗಳನ್ನು ಬದಲಾಯಿಸಲು Quora ದಾಖಲಿಸಿದ ಪ್ರಯತ್ನಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ದೂರುಗಳನ್ನು ಉತ್ತಮವಾಗಿ ದಾಖಲಿಸಲಾಗಿದೆ. ಅನೇಕ ಸೈಟ್ ನಿರ್ವಾಹಕರು ತಮ್ಮದೇ ಆದ ನಿಯಮಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ನೀತಿಗಳನ್ನು ಮುರಿಯಲು ನಿರಾಕರಿಸುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಇದು ಖಂಡಿತವಾಗಿಯೂ ಮಕ್ಕಳು ಅಥವಾ ಯಾವುದೇ ಮಾನವೀಯ ಮಾನವರಿಗೆ ಸುರಕ್ಷಿತ ಸ್ಥಳವಲ್ಲ. ದೂರುಗಳನ್ನು ಉದ್ದೇಶಪೂರ್ವಕವಾಗಿ ನಿರ್ಲಕ್ಷಿಸಲಾಗಿದೆ ಮತ್ತು USPS ಸ್ನೇಲ್ ಮೇಲ್ ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯಿಸಿಲ್ಲ. ಅವರು ತಮ್ಮ ಹೋಮ್ ಆಫೀಸ್ ಅನ್ನು ಮೌಂಟೇನ್ ವ್ಯೂ, CA ನಿಂದ ಸ್ಥಳಾಂತರಿಸುತ್ತಿದ್ದಾರೆ ಎಂದು ಆರೋಪಿಸಲಾಗಿದೆ. ದೂರುಗಳನ್ನು ತೊಡಗಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಮತ್ತು ನಿರ್ಬಂಧಿಸಲು ಸೈಟ್ “ನಿರ್ವಹಣೆ” ವಾಡಿಕೆಯಂತೆ IP ವಿಳಾಸಗಳನ್ನು ಅನುಸರಿಸುತ್ತದೆ. ನಾನು, ನಾನೇ ಪುರಾವೆಗಳನ್ನು ದಾಖಲಿಸಿದ್ದೇನೆ. ಯಾವುದೇ ರೀತಿಯ ಲಿಂಕ್‌ಗಳು ಅಥವಾ ಚಿತ್ರಗಳನ್ನು ಎಂದಿಗೂ ಒದಗಿಸಬೇಡಿ. ನೀವು ಸತ್ಯವಂತರಾಗಿರಿ ಎಂದು ಒತ್ತಾಯಿಸುವಾಗ ಪ್ರೊಫೈಲ್‌ಗಳನ್ನು ಬದಲಾಯಿಸುವ ಅಸಹ್ಯ ಅಭ್ಯಾಸವನ್ನು ಅವರು ಹೊಂದಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಅವರ ಹೊಸ ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯ ಉದ್ದೇಶಪೂರ್ವಕ ಸೈಬರ್ ಹ್ಯಾಕಿಂಗ್‌ಗೆ ವಿರುದ್ಧವಾಗಿ ಮತ್ತು ಅವರು ಸತ್ಯವನ್ನು ಪರಿಗಣಿಸಿದರೆ ಸತ್ಯಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ಸತ್ಯಗಳನ್ನು ವಾಡಿಕೆಯಂತೆ ನಿರ್ಲಕ್ಷಿಸಲಾಗುತ್ತದೆ ಮತ್ತು ಫ್ಲ್ಯಾಗ್ ಮಾಡಲಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. 13 ಮತ್ತು ಅದಕ್ಕಿಂತ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ನೀತಿಯನ್ನು ವಾಡಿಕೆಯಂತೆ ನಿರ್ಲಕ್ಷಿಸಲಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಎಲ್ಲಾ ಹ್ಯಾಕರ್‌ಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ಅಸಹ್ಯ ವ್ಯಕ್ತಿಗಳು ಟೆಲಿಮಾರ್ಕೆಟರ್‌ಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ಪಾವತಿಸಿದ ಪೋಸ್ಟರ್‌ಗಳು. ಮಾಜಿ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ಫೆಡರಲ್ ಏಜೆಂಟ್ ಎಂದು ನಟಿಸುವ ಜನರಿದ್ದಾರೆ. FBI ಪುರಾವೆಯಾಗಿ ಪ್ರಸ್ತುತಪಡಿಸಿದ ಪುರಾವೆಗಳನ್ನು ನಿರ್ಲಕ್ಷಿಸುತ್ತದೆ. ಮತ್ತು ಏನನ್ನು ನೋಡಬೇಕೆಂದು ನಿಮಗೆ ತಿಳಿದಿದ್ದರೂ ಸಹ ಪುರಾವೆಯು ತುಂಬಾ ಕಠಿಣವಾಗಿದೆ. ನಾನು ಜಲಾಂತರ್ಗಾಮಿ ನೌಕೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿಯೂ ಸೇವೆ ಸಲ್ಲಿಸಿದ ಅನುಭವಿ USN ಗುಪ್ತಚರ. ಗ್ಯಾಸ್ ಲೈಟಿಂಗ್ ಮತ್ತು ಉದ್ದೇಶಪೂರ್ವಕವಾಗಿ ಪ್ರೋತ್ಸಾಹಿಸುವುದು ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯ ವಿಷಯವಾಗಿದೆ. ನಾನು ವೈಯಕ್ತಿಕವಾಗಿ DOJ ನ ಅಟ್ಲಾಂಟಾ ಎಫ್‌ಬಿಐ ಅನ್ನು ಭೇಟಿ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದೇನೆ ಮತ್ತು ಇದು ವಿಶ್ವವ್ಯಾಪಿ ದರೋಡೆಕೋರರ ತಾಣವಾಗಿದೆ ಎಂದು ನಾನು ಹೇಳಿರುವ ಮತ್ತು ಅಪಾರ ಪ್ರಮಾಣದ ಸಾಕ್ಷ್ಯಗಳ ಹೊರತಾಗಿಯೂ ಅವರು “ಏಕವಚನ” ಸೈಬರ್‌ಸ್ಟಾಕಿಂಗ್ ಅನ್ನು ತನಿಖೆ ಮಾಡುವುದಿಲ್ಲ ಎಂದು ಹೇಳಿ ತಿರುಗಿಬಿದ್ದರು. FB ಮತ್ತು ಟ್ವಿಟರ್ ಅನ್ನು ಸೇರಿಸಲು ಸೈಟ್‌ಗಳು. ವಿಶೇಷವಾಗಿ Literotica ಎಂದು ಕರೆಯಲ್ಪಡುವ ಈಗ ಅಸುರಕ್ಷಿತ ಸೈಟ್. ನಮ್ಮಲ್ಲಿ ಬೆರಳೆಣಿಕೆಯಷ್ಟು ಜನರು ಮತ್ತೆ ಹೋರಾಡುತ್ತಿದ್ದಾರೆ; ಆದರೆ Quora ಸೈಟ್ ಅದನ್ನು ಮಾಡಲು ಸ್ಥಳವಲ್ಲ. ನನ್ನ ಡೇಟಾವನ್ನು ಎಷ್ಟು ಉದ್ದೇಶಪೂರ್ವಕವಾಗಿ ಬದಲಾಯಿಸಲಾಗಿದೆ ಎಂಬುದನ್ನು ನೋಡಲು ನಾನು ಇನ್ನು ಮುಂದೆ ಪರಿಶೀಲಿಸುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ನನಗೆ ಬೇಕಾಗಿರುವುದು ಸಿಕ್ಕಿತು. ಕೆಟ್ಟ ಭಾಗವೆಂದರೆ ಸೈಟ್ ಈಗ ರಾಜಕೀಯ ಅಜೆಂಡಾಗಳೊಂದಿಗೆ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ವಿಷಕಾರಿಯಾಗಿದೆ ಮತ್ತು ಅದನ್ನು ಸ್ಪಷ್ಟವಾಗಿ ನಿಷೇಧಿಸಿರುವ ಪ್ರದೇಶಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ವಿಷಯಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ತಪ್ಪು ಮಾಹಿತಿಯಾಗಿದೆ. ಇಲ್ಲ, ನಾನು ಯಾವುದೇ ರೀತಿಯ ಯಾವುದೇ ಲಿಂಕ್‌ಗಳು ಅಥವಾ ಚಿತ್ರಗಳನ್ನು ಒದಗಿಸುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ನನ್ನ ಪ್ರದೇಶದಲ್ಲಿ ಇದು ತುಂಬಾ ಕೆಟ್ಟದಾಗಿದೆ, ಇತರ Quora ಸದಸ್ಯರು ದೈಹಿಕವಾಗಿ ಅವರು ಒಪ್ಪದ ವ್ಯಕ್ತಿಗಳನ್ನು ಹಿಂಬಾಲಿಸುತ್ತಾರೆ ಮತ್ತು ರಿಯಲ್ ಎಸ್ಟೇಟ್‌ನಿಂದ ಹಿಡಿದು ಅಂತಹ ಹಗರಣಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ತಿಳಿದಿಲ್ಲದ ಜನರ ಸುಳ್ಳು ವರದಿಗಳವರೆಗೆ ಎಲ್ಲಾ ರೀತಿಯ ಹಗರಣಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ತೊಡಗುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಕಳೆದ ವರ್ಷ ನಾನು ವೈಯಕ್ತಿಕವಾಗಿ 3 ಫೋನ್‌ಗಳನ್ನು ಹ್ಯಾಕ್ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದೇನೆ ಮತ್ತು ಪ್ರತಿ ಬಾರಿ ನಾನು ದೂರು ನೀಡಿದಾಗ ಮುಚ್ಚಲಾಗಿದೆ. ನಾನು ಬಹಳಷ್ಟು ಜನರನ್ನು Quora ಗೆ ಕರೆತಂದಿದ್ದೇನೆ ಮತ್ತು ಅವರಲ್ಲಿ ಒಬ್ಬರೂ ಇಂದು ಭಾಗವಹಿಸಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಖಾಸಗಿ ಮತ್ತು ನಿರ್ಬಂಧಿತ #ಗಳಿಗೆ ಟೆಲಿಮಾರ್ಕೆಟಿಂಗ್ ಕರೆಗಳ ಭಾರೀ ಬಾಂಬ್ ಸ್ಫೋಟದ ನಂತರ ಹಲವಾರು ಹ್ಯಾಕ್ ಮಾಡಲಾಗಿದೆ ಮತ್ತು ಅವರ ಲ್ಯಾಪ್‌ಟಾಪ್‌ಗಳು ಅಥವಾ ಫೋನ್‌ಗಳನ್ನು ದೂರದಿಂದಲೇ ಸ್ಥಗಿತಗೊಳಿಸಲಾಯಿತು. ಸದಸ್ಯತ್ವ ಸಂಖ್ಯೆಗಳು ಭಾರೀ ಪ್ರಮಾಣದಲ್ಲಿ ಉಬ್ಬಿಕೊಂಡಿವೆ.

        ಗ್ರಾಹಕರಿಗೆ ಸಲಹೆ:
        ನಾನು Quora ಅನ್ನು ತಪ್ಪಿಸಲು ಮತ್ತು ಸೈಟ್ ಅನ್ನು ನಿರ್ಬಂ