re: Stolen History - Lifting the Veil of Deception (Doc Part 1 - Introduction)

quote:

---

We know for instance they weren’t there in 1940.

So they were around for about 50 years or as you say they were around way longer as some Sort of ancient one world civilization.

But when they were torn down there were thousands of Parisians old enough to remember either when they were built or if they were there way longer than the alleged date they were built.

Why would those people lie? And this is recent enough that the generation in talking about is would be a good many of our great grandparents. Not that far removed.

Why would they lie to their kids about the world expo?

---

Legit questions, Sammy

Look up the 1855, 1867, 1878, 1889, and 1900 Paris World's Fair photos and lithographs -- see which buildings remain from one fair to the next.

Don't forget WW1 and WW2 was used as an excuse to demolish a lot of this Olde World architecture in Europe.

You're asking me to understand why our leaders, politicians and Controllers are psychopaths ad pathological liars. (Something about POWER. And $$$$.) Some things NEVER change.

I agree. Many Parisians would be around to witness the changes, demolitions, the weird, contradictory timing.

And yes, even our grandparents might have been affected.

So what could have "re-calibrated" or "stolen" the collective memory?

tPTB have explained a lot of it this way:

Buildings were "damaged"...(WE RE-BUILT IT.) They were "destroyed." (WE RE-BUILT IT.)

Beautiful olde buildings were allowed to fall into disrepair for 20+ years. There was purposeful negligence. (Once people sorta forgot. Or mis-remembered. Or the buildings and memories were swept out of sight, out of mind. Wars came and went (1914-1918...1940-1945). 1919 Spanish Flu. Financial hardship and Depressions. ALL of it contributed to "Stolen History" and Revised History.

By the time the new Timelines are create, the people who still "remembered" were so thinned out in ranks that they were marginalized or considered "eccentric" or gaslit.

Memories get re-shuffled during times of Trauma.

Even now when pictures, lithographs and occasional true narratives emerge from the past that prove a different past, psychologically they become...almost mythical. Or just a "mistaken false memory."

Hope this rambling theory helped make some sense out of our vandalized past.

my dad served in ww2. flew L2 grasshoppers, which would make him army intel. he NEVER talked about the war, and never voted, or participated in the governing process, when asked would mumble under his breath, and change the subject.

many ww2 vets were like this.

instead, he buried himself in little league football coaching for almost 40 year until he died

I absolutely feel he saw/knew things that were too painful to talk about or admit

instead tried to make the world a better place teaching 8 year olds to play, and enjoy football

but, there was something there unsaid,

I think many with first hand knowledge couldn't come to grips with what they saw vs told

...home brew experiments to simulate mud flood dirt coverage...[and] a giant version of the dust bowl, world wide

OUT-standing! Legos?? Very creative.

Dust-bowling. Mud-flooding. At a micro-scaled at your "lab." Good enough experiment to justify the twin-theories of how and why entire civilizations could possibly have been buried 15-60 below our feet.

We know so little about our recent cataclysmic history.

There are the theories on how the Pacific Northwest (near and around Puget Sound) was flooded not so long ago. Underwater tree still stand underwater in a restricted area of course.

Then there are the olde maps....showing NO Great Lakes in the 16th (?) century. Massive lakes in upper Canada melt off and break loose of a giant dammed glacier to create them? Including Niagara Falls? Creating and carving the Mississippi River all the way down to the Gulf? Rushing across the Plains States, creating the fertile flat plains?

Who really knows. And when. All theories must stay on the table.

quote:

---

Buildings were "damaged"...(WE RE-BUILT IT.) They were "destroyed." (WE RE-BUILT IT.) Beautiful olde buildings were allowed to fall into disrepair for 20+ years. There was purposeful negligence. (Once people sorta forgot. Or mis-remembered. Or the buildings and memories were swept out of sight, out of mind. Wars came and went (1914-1918...1940-1945). 1919 Spanish Flu. Financial hardship and Depressions. ALL of it contributed to "Stolen History" and Revised History.

---

Again, that doesn’t make sense. If you are a Parisian woman born in 1875. You’re be in your 20s when these buildings were supposed to be built, and jn your 60s when they were torn town.

The women weren’t being sent to the front line for WWI. And looking at both WWI and WWII, Paris did well as a city. It wasn’t getting hammered like London or Dresden.

So again, every 60 year old French woman was gas lit in 1930s?

Official history Photography wasn't really a scientific endeavor. I find it rather colorful, little tinkerers and big companies mostly in France USA and Britain stealing and trying to one-up each other with the next big thing. They didn't have this conception of this grand scientific method, they certainly didn't document it and not with any academic rigor, not as a rule. But it's just common logic and sense, the "scientific method". Many, like Daguerre, were uneducated tradesmen. It was an endeavor of craft, art and capitalism. They were trying to make money more than anything.

quote:

---

Official history Photography wasn't really a scientific endeavor. I find it rather colorful, little tinkerers and big companies mostly in France USA and Britain stealing and trying to one-up each other with the next big thing. They didn't have this conception of this grand scientific method, they certainly didn't document it and not with any academic rigor, not as a rule. But it's just common logic and sense, the "scientific method". Many, like Daguerre, were uneducated tradesmen. It was an endeavor of craft, art and capitalism. They were trying to make money more than anything.

---

That is correct and many didn't share the formulas that worked
nor did painters for pigments
a lot of knowledge was lost this way to discover the same thing over and over

oh my, look at this

1357 - Shroud of Turin contains what appears to be a sepia negative. Nobody’s sure how it was made or with what technology, but this is technically the earliest example of negative photography in the world.

how could that be??

hhmmm...

care to retract your statement NC?

quote:

---

Official history Photography wasn't really a scientific endeavor.

---

Development of image reproduction absolutely was. e.g., Niepce.

quote:

---

why did the one building at the fair COMPLEX NOT

---

(1) It was not one building. Nitwit. Several survived. As has been posted for you far too many times.
(2) It was several hundred yards from buildings that burned.
(3) It wasn't a "plaster structure" again, as has been posted for you far too many times. The venier was plaster. You don't read, so I posted pictures for you of the decimated venier. But apparently those didn't register with you either.

Niepce died young and left records, he is the exception to prove the rule

I just think the Eastman Kodak brownie is the most incredible leap in technology history. We had a Polaroid in the 1880s? Are you kidding me? Do you understand we spent decades experimenting with different formulas and plates, this one is a little crisper but worse coloration, this one requires less exposure time etc but it was all large separate pieces of equipment with plates and chemicals, and then boom we instantly get at least three major innovations all in one:
1) first use of film (worked wonderfully and Edison and the Frenchies would use Eastman's film to invent movies a few years later)
2) first self-contained portable consumer-use camera
3) first self printing camera
How was this all came upon suddenly, no slow transition to any of these along the way? No intermediate products from anywhere. shite is wild. Wouldn't Eastman Kodak's crack team of scientists have innovated these things separately and wouldn't the boss have wanted to show off their incremental innovations along the way? It's like going to the moon while the Wright Brothers are still figuring it out





How insane is it that the miniaturized automatic development dark room was invented before the actual dark room?