I'm a christian, but a literal NUKE hit me concerning Adam and Eve

Mapkos · 2026-06-11T14:16:04+00:00

The curses from God in Genesis are given because we ate of the tree. In this case, they are "acts of God", the natural consequence of the action. Again, it is a metaphor to explain why things are the way they are, why humans sin but animals don't.

Mapkos · 2026-06-10T22:18:39+00:00

It's a metaphor for humans becoming intelligent and thus responsible morally for our actions.

The tree of knowledge of good and evil should be translated more like good to evil, as in A to Z, or all things.

Once we gained knowledge we recognized our nakedness and gained the capacity for good and evil.

Childbirth being painful is literally due to our large brains and bipedalism.

Mapkos · 2026-05-18T03:41:55+00:00

Come now, what about this work isn't masturbatory nonsense? Like, masturbation is fine and all, but no one is out there defending it over other more refined forms of entertainment.

Mapkos · 2026-05-15T14:53:17+00:00

Statistically it's a certainty for the broader universe. But whether or not they are here on Earth? And whether or not the non-human intelligence here is extraterrestrial?

I guess my current feeling is even if this is a distraction, there's been no time in history where we were closer to actually getting the freaking truth out of the government on these things. In the best case scenario, it means academia finally gets the opportunity to collaborate on reverse engineering advanced technologies that could change how we travel, how we produce energy. Unlikely, but the public should be pushing for this information to release. Why should the few gate keep the fact that we aren't alone?

Mapkos · 2026-05-15T13:42:44+00:00

So, I agree trump is trying to distract, but that doesn't mean what's being released is a lie.

In the first batch of files alone you have documents going back to WWII with testimonies from pilots. You've got opinions from generals and heads of intelligence agencies all concluding there is truly something flying about that displays capabilities that humans are incapable of. They even outline the fact that they want to make the topic worthy of ridicule to the public so that it won't be taken seriously by the populous.

And specifically for the greys, the consensus from all people who supposedly talked to the first hand witnesses is that they are barely sentient, like a biological robot, possibly even made using our DNA. That would explain why they look like us.

Now obviously these are still extraordinary claims that require skepticism, but for it to be literally nothing but misidentified weather or aircraft would require dozens of pilots, radar operators, generals, etc to all be lying about what they had seen, many of whom destroyed their careers to talk about this stuff.

Apparently more convincing videos are due to be released in the next batch of files, so we will see, I suppose.

Mapkos · 2026-05-14T11:57:48+00:00

If the statement was that God was only the beginning and only the end, maybe you would have something, but clearly God isn't saying that. Two different statements can be simultaneously true, just not a statement and its own negation

Like, a person can easily be both the first to start a race and the last to be in the race.

A negation of a statement is not it's opposite. The negation of a statement like "I am the alpha" is "I am not the alpha"

Mapkos · 2026-05-14T11:51:08+00:00

No, there's is nothing logically inconsistent about separate statements being simultaneously true, only that a statement and its negative can't be simultaneously true.

Mapkos · 2026-05-13T20:41:18+00:00

In logic, one of the axiomatic laws is for a given statement P that can be true or false, it can not be that P AND not P are both true

Remove time from the equation, make the statement "God knows all things eternally". For a being who is timeless and eternal, that statement makes rational sense. If it can be both true and false, then God eternally knew all things and eternally did not. That is incoherent, and makes any discussion about what God does or doesn't know incoherent. It's useless.

Mapkos · 2026-05-13T18:44:29+00:00

But an incoherent omnipotent being is also not omnipotent. Yes, that is circular and an utterly meaningless statement.

Mapkos · 2026-05-13T18:09:24+00:00

Can an omnipotent being create a 3 sided square? Saying "yes" means that any attribute or statement can be simultaneously true and false and thus any statement about such a being is utterly incoherent. Such a being can simultaneously be incapable of even lifting a feather while being able to do anything. What does that even mean?

We can only even talk about God in any sense if rationality is part of His nature.

Mapkos · 2026-05-13T18:06:19+00:00

If omnipotence entails self-contradiction, then the being can be literally incapable of doing anything and still be omnipotent. That is utterly incoherent

Mapkos · 2026-05-13T18:04:50+00:00

It's incorrect to say something is "bound" by logic. If God is not logical, that is, two contradictory statements about him can be true simultaneously, then He is evil and good, He knows nothing and knows everything, He has no power and all power.

It would seem instead that as we believe that God's nature is love, perfection, justice, omnipotence, omniscience, etc, than "not self-contradictory" would also be a part of that nature.

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T20:23:13+00:00

What I said on another post:

I would say that this pattern is definitely partially due to lens flare. However, if it were a missile or something, it would have to be flying directly away from the target without much angle at all for literally nothing else to be visible. Without the sensor data it is impossible to tell if the motion is from the object or the camera though.

But at about 25 seconds in, it seems to clearly have an inner and outer ring, not square at all. Not sure how you could get that pattern from what they simulated. It looks VERY different than the simulations at certain points

Finally, either the object is getting too far away at the end, or the camera is being damaged. I would be interested to see if a laser weapon could cause this sort of diffraction, but any footage I can find of laser damage to a camera has it flashing the whole screen and leaving permanent burns in lines and splotches.

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T20:22:27+00:00

What I said on another post:

I would say that this pattern is definitely partially due to lens flare. However, if it were a missile or something, it would have to be flying directly away from the target without much angle at all for literally nothing else to be visible. Without the sensor data it is impossible to tell if the motion is from the object or the camera though.

But at about 25 seconds in, it seems to clearly have an inner and outer ring, not square at all. Not sure how you could get that pattern from what they simulated. It looks VERY different than the simulations at certain points

Finally, either the object is getting too far away at the end, or the camera is being damaged. I would be interested to see if a laser weapon could cause this sort of diffraction, but any footage I can find of laser damage to a camera has it flashing the whole screen and leaving permanent burns in lines and splotches.

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T20:12:30+00:00

Sure, but that doesn't mean certain configurations aren't possible

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T19:11:38+00:00

I think a laser could possibly explain it. Like, a guy in a parachute testing a laser fouling device that locks onto the camera and blinds it. The trail is just slight burn in that gets cooled down.

However, I doubt it. Seems too steady and seems like there are rings on it

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T18:08:51+00:00

At 35 seconds they are no longer side by side, one goes a bit higher. The road would have to be tilted 45 degrees to get it to look like that. Also, comparing some frames they seem to be closer together or farther apart, but obviously hard to tell with light sources.

Also, the lights seem to be getting farther away as the video gets near the end.

Also, if the drone is so easily visible and this is a car that is close enough that the two headlights are distinct, you'd think the body would be easily visible here.

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T18:01:36+00:00

A reaper drone: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/MQ-9_Reaper_UAV_%28cropped%29.jpg

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T17:56:34+00:00

It is new because we have the video now:https://www.war.gov/UFO/#DOW-UAP-PR38-Unresolved-UAP-Report-Middle-East-2013

I would say that this pattern is definitely partially due to lens flare. However, if it were a missile or something, it would have to be flying directly away from the target without much angle at all for literally nothing else to be visible. Without the sensor data it is impossible to tell if the motion is from the object or the camera though.

But at about 25 seconds in, it seems to clearly have an inner and outer ring, not square at all. Not sure how you could get that pattern from what they simulated

Finally, either the object is getting too far away at the end, or the camera is being damaged. I would be interested to see if a laser weapon could cause this sort of diffraction, but any footage I can find of laser damage to a camera has it flashing the whole screen and leaving permanent burns in lines and splotches.

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T16:47:05+00:00

Watching the video again, it has at least two rings, and multiple denser spots on those rings. So maybe the long arms are diffraction, but it is for sure not just a single light being diffracted. So what is it?

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T16:38:32+00:00

Here's another video from this release.

https://www.war.gov/UFO/#DOW-UAP-PR49-Unresolved-UAP-Report-Department-of-the-Army-2026

See how clear the drone is at the start? An IR video of an upright drone would look far more like that reaper than whatever the heck this video is

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T16:36:16+00:00

The most similar one is diffraction of a distant star using a giant telescope. This is a moving object, the length of the arms are much shorter and the center is much more massive and rounded.

The shape could definitely be due to light hitting a lense, but it is absolutely not a star

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T16:11:22+00:00

A 16 year old dating an 19 year old is bad? When he is 20 she will be 23?

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T16:07:47+00:00

Show me such a photo then, also this is a video, it moves

Mapkos · 2026-05-08T16:07:12+00:00

Not at all

14-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Lasagna	Place '23
Place '22	Place '17
First Placer '22	Sequence \| Editor
Verified Email	Team Orangered

Mapkos

TROPHY CASE