>>2626606

All stories are just stories, even the ones we are fed up with right now by (((them))). The majority of human history is unknown or hidden from the public, and there are a lot of "impossible" knowings and stories in cultures and tribes around the world (the Dogons for example, any MANY more). Figure that about 95% of history is "known" by the mainstream science, what chances does that get you of being right on what you know?

Open your mind, this is gonna be a hell of a ride (when Kansas goes bye bye).

>>2626861

Sorry, about 95% is "unknown".

>>2626911

What irrefutable evidence exists of what you believe history is? Basically none.

"Scientist" haven't even figured out how ancient structures and pyramids where built, or why, don't know the history of ancient civilizations and always paint them as "stupid and barbaric tribes", when it doesn't seem that way. The evidence of a lot of actual theories that make much more sense have already been posted here, even threads have been made, but anons won't "believe" them, or call them "satanist". This board is already very sleep when it comes to a lot of things, we are still in Kansas…