07 Mar 2020 16:46:31 The only thing I have been able to find so far is this:
"Human Beings Law and Legal Definition.
There are various definitions for a human being. Biologically, they are classified as hominids of the species Homo sapiens, which are a primate species of mammal with a highly developed brain. Humans have the highest brain to body mass ratio of all large animals. They have a life expectancy approaching 80 years old in wealthy nations, walk on two feet and have opposable thumbs. Skin color ranges from almost back to pale pinkish-white. Height and weight varies, depending on locality, historical factors, environmental, and cultural factors such as diet.
Human beings are characterized by the ability to speak. They have a high capacity for abstract thinking and are commonly thought to possess a spirit or soul which transcends the physical body. The spiritual aspect of human beings is often defined in terms of rituals and religion. Theories involving the definition of the beginning of human life, evolution, and creationism are hotly debated topics in the law. " - definitions. uslegal.com.
07 Mar 2020 15:43:15 'Human' and 'human being' are not in BL7th. However, from that I looked up person.
'Person' - 1. A human being 2.An entity (such as a corporation) that is recognised by law as having the rights and duties of a human being. 3. The living body of a human being
'Artificial Person' - An entity, such as a corporation, created by law and given certain legal rights and duties of a human being; a being, real or imaginary, who for the purpose of legal reasoning is treated more or less as a human being. - also termed fictitious person; juristic person; legal person; moral person.
07 Mar 2020 10:16:30 I understand that, Ed. I Should have made the post solely about 'Blacks Law dictionary' and left the 'strawman' bit out.
What I meant was that, I brought Blacks Law Dictionary because from the research I have done and from what I have been told, 'the law' use legalese to confuse. I. e. using words with a reverse meaning to what you would expect. (like the example I gave in the OP) .
I am just stating that I have, as of yet, not found any terms that twist their meaning in said book.
It is a big book so there is still time, but I was expecting to find a lot of things that when someone (the public) acknowledges a phrase from 'the law' they are unknowingly accepting a language they do not understand and this language may have twisted what they believed the sentence to mean. If that makes sense? .
I know my mind can come across as a bit idiosyncratic at times, but I have taken on board and understand what you were telling us with the 'birth certificated person'.
I guess I am a little disappointed not to find a more twisted legalese language.
06 Mar 2020 22:14:54 Was going to post a video on the 'strawman' but in it it states.
"when a police officer says do you understand? . And you reply yes, there is (within these sentences) an agreed verbal contract that 'you' "stand under" the authority of the law. they state this is from Blacks Law Dictionary.
However, I have in front of me the 7th edition of said Blacks Law Dictionary and under 'understand' it reads what you would expect -
"to apprehend the meaning of; to know. the testator did not understand what he was signing"
I haven't found anything, as of yet, that twists words to mean other things.
I am a little perplexed with said 'strawman' though I am not stating it a lie.
Is it that usually the book is pretty expensive, the narrator is hoping no one checks up?
06 Mar 2020 19:04:09 You would of thought with Nasa's multi billion dollar budget they would have hired someone with some decent photoshop skills. Surely they would expect a few to delve deeper and see the fakery?
Standard, you still here? how do you explain this? why photoshop any images of the Earth? Why not show us the raw images? what have they got to hide?
Oh and how's the 'prove all MSBS is truth' video coming along?
We all can't wait to see it. Expecting it soon as you said it was so easy.
05 Mar 2020 19:05:30 I basically thought the 'strawman' was tied to legalese which is clearly not that case.
Thanks for the explanation. I agree with your opinion of the op video. I was just confused about the 'starwman'.
I did watch the video, was it CRow777?, where our origin is the divine spark of fertilisation. The Old Testament relating to the womb, waters and the boat (ark) . Then, at birth, the lucifereans steal the umbilical, which is 'you', before the process is completed naturally. Take it away and do whatever they want? . Was a really interesting concept. One I will probably have to listen to again.
My village vicar is popping in for a catch up tomorrow. (I don't go to church and he likes to touch base every now and then, since burying my dear Mum) . I intended to relay that to him for an opinion (point of origin), along with the Titans and giant petrified Trees and Fauna (amongst other things) .
He has always stated that as he gets older the edges of what he believes gets fuzzy, so should be interesting.
As he lives in an old rectory, I will also be enquiring on the oldest books he has in the house collection. I am sure there will be a few. Hopefully ones that I am at least able to examine and maybe gain some insight in some of the subjects we discuss on these pages.
05 Mar 2020 16:09:43 Actually it is YT that is putting Taboo Conspiracy ii on my feed. I am not subscribed to him. Most of his stuff is mirrored, but that can be handy. As you have twice the chance of finding it.
I am not sure if true or not, but I have heard that some accounts that get banned on yt also get there viewers banned too. I'm guessing the stuff I watch wouldn't lead to that, but caution never hurt.
I usually find my info by random chance. Mainly on Bitchute, and if there is a yt mirror I will use that link as you can't make the video go full screen when embedded for some reason. At least, my computer won't.
I will warn you over bitchute though. There are things on there that you will never be able to un-see. Things that I am unwilling to describe on this site, or anywhere for that matter. Truly demonic.
I guess that's the price you pay for curiously searching for truth.
03 Mar 2020 07:42:37 Peteprice, if you're going to come on here arguing MSBS then at least do you MS research and get you facts straight.
The mountains actually form as a result of the tectonic plates' movement at the earth mantle according to the MS narrative. Gravity or rather incoherent magnetism, would only restrict its height.
Standard- "Or they completely ignore physics and make up there own laws of the universe. " pretty much what the MS do then. When their theory's don't work, they make rubbish up with no proof.
Maybe it is you that should 'read' up on what is 'proof' in physics.
And have you ever thought about the half-life of facts? . You act like you have all the answers, which just shows how asleep you really are.
Here's a quote from you lord and saviour.
Einstein - "Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution. "
But 'evolution' is flawed too. Where are the inter-species? . But you've probably paper over that crack too.
Taking everything as gospel, means you're just singing in the choir of the MSBS religion.