i had a hunch a variation on this discussion would come up as we are seeing today. hence why i dropped this with no particular context. by the distinction I make below, I'd say thomas is creating applied knowledge because it is driving forward to an end point. to use a metaphor when is said and done he is driving to be abke to throw a datum down of such that he can say look here! and we are with that datum one step closer to moving beyond this current phase of the operation. one step closer to closing

>>6070047

>at the same time I want to share a distinction I bear in mind with such epiphanies and drops. I file this away as something of an overlay. knowing that there is a 2 tiered system helps me make sense of events and fact patterns. its something of an underlying type of useful. in contrast there is applied knowledge. information or realization that can be instrumental in furthering task. For instance if we had knowledge of the wherabouts of a smoking gun that would be practical knowledge in that it would push this endeavor forward. thats all i just wanted to throw out that distinction in case useful for others

>>6121791

I'm just gonna throw this out there. this thread sure did seem to have crew waiting for thomas to leave. as soon as he got gone, the posts on forged history started piling in like they hadnt in a minute. my guess is he pissed some people off by taking issue with some of the assertions made by thought leaders in that camp, and so retaliation ensued. some real bad blood grudge shit. if I am right, and I certainly could be wrong, the one issue that bothers me is that the work on forged history started before q appeared and we will likely be sorting it out after the qanon affair comes to a close. but the shit thomas is working on is applicable specifically to the digs q pointed us to, and only because q asked us to do the digging on such. i cant convince people that valid critiques of an argument arent to be taken personally (thats one of the reasons adhominem is its own type of faulty logic) because some people cant separate themselves from the ideas that influence their views. but i can say, if I am not wrong, getting thomas off this thread should be victory enough and raiding a thread related to the topics he is digging on is counterproductive to the very purpose we are here in qresearch.

>>6129993

i dig the fomenko shit to. i ended up reading his argument on the maps in britannica of new world were incorrect forgeries and found his case well beyond compelling. so dont think i am knocking. Its more likely that i was wrong in my hypothesis. lots of changes around here with plenty of anamolies going on at same time? related? i got no way to prove. easily just shitheads got word of tumultuous times and defided to flood the place and shill and divide.

tbh since early on ive been following thomas and your analysis isnt off by any mark. i am seeing in the text he provides though that he is holding back because to he cant prove it yet. therefore does he really know it? would we nom it up without sauce if he just threw it out as conjecture? anyway. i wont shit the bread up i just wanted to reply since you werre kind and respectful enough to do same