Be the 1st to vote.


Topics: Unreal’s comments and contributions to fakeologist.com. I like to give a voice and extra dimension to our members.

Record time: Sunday, June 15, 2014 6:11am


Appeared before on ep60-Fakeologist Radio Raw


L’incroyable imposture signée Thierry Meyssan



topic created in Forum “Nuclear Sub’s – Do you think so ?”

Zach on U-Boats: freetofindtruth.blogspot.com/2…
topic created in Forum “PsyOp Histogram”
topic created in Forum “Decapitation Magic”
(forum replies page:fakeologist.com/forums/users/u…)

comment on show “ep103-Allan Weisbecker”
comment on show “ep96 with Columjaddica and Hoi Polloi”
comment on show “ep80-Armunn and Jan Erik”
comment on show “ep64b-Pay for truth?”
comment on show “Ep24:Jesuit Jewish Debate”

comment on article “Gapped on Utøya
comment on article “The Joos did it – so what?”



[yoorey-nee-uhm] Show IPA

noun Chemistry .

a white, lustrous, radioactive, metallic element, occurring in pitchblende, and having compounds that are used in photography and in coloring glass. The 235 isotope is used in atomic and hydrogen bombs and as a fuel in nuclear reactors. Symbol:  U; atomic weight:  238.03; atomic number:  92; specific gravity:  19.07.
[C18: from New Latin, from Uranus ²; from the fact that the element was discovered soon after the planet]

comment on article “Sandy Hoax Deconstructed”
comment on article “What happened to Steve Jobs?”
comment on article  “Rebranding of Nelson Mandela”
comment on article  “How a sim is named”
comment on article  “INXS’ Michael Hutchence and the DCP”
comment on article  “Science subversion”

No tags for this post.

17 thoughts on “ep112-Unreal

  1. Blue Moon

    Finally had a chance to listen to this show- I’m glad to hear someone else considering the guillotine as legerdemain in regards to things like the French Revolution- I think the hot needle administered to death row inmates serves a similar function- Timothy McVeigh, if even a real person, got taken out by such slight of hand- Submarines are real- My brother did a short stretch on one while in the navy- Even so, great conversation-

  2. UNreal

    @elbuggo: i’ll agree to disagree, you have many reasonable arguments.

    my point of view still is that our “owners” knowingly poison our food and water through various means and in various amounts.

    would you eat “just some” of this at any dose ?

    i can only speculate, as i do on 9/11, Spacetravel, Submarines, Dinosaurs, etc,,,, but if they poison the food we eat and water we drink, would they not poison the air we breathe, if they could ?

    1. elbuggo

      I fail to see this: that our “owners” knowingly poison our food and water through various means and in various amounts

      I would be more concerned with the pollution they put in peoples heads, via the public school system and TV – that is something that I can see and is really significant.

      I’ll eat up to about 1 quadrillion atoms (1mm3) of that hamburger substance, free of charge, just to calm you. If I notice any adverse health effects, I’ll eat my own keyboard too, If that could please you.

      I suspect you too are suffering from Chemophobia – an unfounded and irrational fear of the potential adverse effects of synthetic chemicals. It is something way to common. Maybe you could read something more by Bruce Ames?

      Re: would they not poison the air we breathe, if they could ?

      I cant see that unfortunately, and I really don’t understand why they should on a daily basis. If that was so, I would only buy Kosher stuff (cant get that brand around here though).

      Was I too strict to you here? Can you handle this message?

      1. UNreal

        no trouble getting your point of view, nor am i “sensible” in the way you might suspect.

        homeopathy has served me well (allergies, wounds, colds, etc) so i guess my view on the scale of things differs from your view that seems more scientifically based.

        you seem aware of the devious behavior of the “nutwork” as you suspect them to poison us through school and tv/media, but that they would stop there (out of kindness?) and not use any other means with the same intentions (ie food/medecine/water/air,,…
        my view is that our masters/owners would not stop at anything; neither vaccines, water, food or air.
        it is just a simpler and more effective way to rule us, “by any means necessary“.

  3. Jim Hollander

    Unreal, great show so far, the submarine myth theory, is brilliant.

    The also have an anti submarine movement because the sonar is suppose to killing whales and dolphins.

    1. UNreal

      agree 100%.

      One can also see the myth of scarcity being reinforced by this “opposition” as we are led to believe that there are so few fish in the ocean left,,,,
      the ocean is covering 72% of the earths surface with an average depth of 3,790 meters (12,430 ft) and an estimated two million species (230,000 known to man).
      that’s big.
      it could contain more fish than starving humans would like to hear about,,,

    2. Shady Pica

      I won’t say that submarines do not exist but after listening to your show and a little internet browsing I would say their capabilities are definitely exaggerated by media outlets.
      If you take the second photo in the article below and put it into Photoshop and increase the size by 2 or 3 times, you’ll see that the image was manipulated. The white water looks fake as well as the fire which is purportedly the result of a launching torpedo. There are also some sort of white scales or measuring lines (not sure what this is) that are visible at the front of the first two subs (maybe the others too). The pixelation increases at the top where the men and flags/posts are. It’s just not consistent. There are probably other discrepancies you guys can find.


  4. FauxCapitalist

    Ab, at 23 minutes in, you said you don’t focus so much on the who, but the what, in a macro sense.

    How are you different than Judy Wood in that regard? She should be moving onto the who, after she correctly says that you have to find out first what happened, then how it happened, and then investigate who did it. She has presented what she thinks happened, and has said it is evidence for how it happened (directed energy weapons), yet she refuses to get into the who, showing her own inability or refusal to proceed according to her own logical steps.

    34 minutes in, you said you aren’t trying to sway others with your research, but instead, you want others to sway you. So I ask, why not now focus on the who? By understanding the who, we can get to know their motives, and importantly, their strengths and weaknesses, which we can then respectively neutralize and exploit.

    1. elbuggo

      Re: why not now focus on the who?

      This is risky business as I see it. Many direct attacks on the Nutwork (code word, insert your own favorite suspect) have had severe and even horrible blowbacks the last 100 years. And when you get close to the correct answer, the resistance will be skyrocketing.

      Many excellent Fakeologists aren’t very good on the man behind the curtain question, and some are even horrible. I fear that if we bring up who is running the Nutwork, it will create so much resistance and noise that we will be unable to discuss and promote the Fakeology at all. There are lots of other places that are looking into that man-behind-the-curtain question all day long, but very few if any successes.

      And whether it is the international jews, supported by the rest of the tribe, or the Jesuits controlled by the babilonians (?) etc, that is running the Nutwork, that shouldn’t change our reasoning on the substantial parts of the Fakeology very much.

      As I see it, the Nutwork is the gang who is controlling the MSM (among other things) and can create or manufacture peoples perception of the World. I cant see that we have to agree on who that gang is, to end the effect and the power of their (the Nutwork’s) Weapons of Mass Deception. Just by creating an opposition to their synthetic World view will reduce the power of the tool (see Asch Conformity Experiment below). And most people don’t even know that the Nutwork exists at all. They don’t even know that fake news exists. We can do much more there in a fairly short time. To get people to kick out their TV would have an enormous effect – simple as that – much more efficient strategy.

      As I see it, we don’t have to attack the gang behind the Nutwork at all to get their influence disabled, and this direct attack strategy may be an horrible strategy. Do we have any good results we can present? Like where?

      Here is another (hard core) guy explaining why he doesn’t want to engage or promote a hunt on the man behind the curtain (very hard core stuff for some) – example: ***https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UEsVrVbXKg

      I reserve the right to revise and extend my remarks.

      1. FauxCapitalist

        @elbuggo, I have seen that video you shared, and it’s of Jared Taylor, and he does make the valid point, depending on the context, that you don’t want to be perceived as a heretic on too many issues in order to retain credibility.

        His context in saying that is as a journalist and author who is appealing to the masses.

        Ab, and others writing on this forum are not public figures, nor are we appealing to the masses. Discussing the who can be divisive, but the message of significant fakery is divisive to the masses, and that doesn’t stop Ab from posting and hosting shows. If you approach the analysis of the who in the methodical way, then the division can be limited as best as possible. If the who isn’t discussed, then it’s not a complete analysis of fakery.

  5. UNreal

    Bitsynk Key (read) for the audiofiles mentionned on ep 112:


  6. elbuggo

    Democracy is a war of everybody against everybody forever. It is clamoring over who gets to wield the club of Government to force others to be what you want them to be – that is not OK.

    The State Is Not Great: How Government Poisons Everything

    If you can create the biggest group for an idea or concept, the majority will instinctly support that group, and as we know, the majority rules over everyone and everything, No one is in a better position to create the biggest group than the gang who control the media. So just by being able to create the biggest group, they indirectly are able to rule everyone and everything. This system is so perfect for the media that it is almost like they should have invented this system for themselves in the first place.

  7. elbuggo

    Chemtrails: If they are spraying metals, that should be extremely easy to detect with radar. I have never understood what stuff they allegedly are spraying, and what the concentration should become down on the ground and what the lowest concentration any biological effect has been demonstrated with this substance. Chemtrails is an undemonstrated problem as far as I can tell. Lets keep it real.

    1. UNreal

      Lets keep it real (elbuggo)

      i see these “trails” most days personnally, and this phenomenon is very real where i live. it also leaves more & more dust on my windows & balcony than ever before.

      a quick reality-check on the how and why could be useful:
      -the physics of a normal “trail” is simple: the air-compression made by an aircraft engines or wing tips produce crystalized water vapor @ a high altitude and it will disappear after a minute or so due to evaporation, because it’s just water…not supposed to be forming clouds or stay in the air for hours.
      -the purpose of airtravel is to fly from point A to point B, mostly between the big city’s airports. this flypattern is concentric, and does not in any way constitute a grid. just look at an airliners own itinerary map and compare to the grids in the sky. no match @ all.

      what these chemtrails are made out of is up to debate for sure, and i do not know.
      but they’re there imho, just as we have fluoride in the water & pesticides on the ground.

      Geoengineering is a science described as “the deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth’s natural systems to counteract climate change”

      1. elbuggo

        I understand that you are seeing something. In the relevant altitude, I don’t find these cross patterns or grids unexpected. If chemtralis are piling up on you balcony, it should be really easy to figure out what that mysterious substance is for any chemist.

        As I understand it, when the air is supersaturated, soot particles can cause water drops to form. Watch some videos on cloud chambers?

        But I don’t want to spend my time on proving that Chemtrails have a very natural explanation. I have asked several prominent chemtrail believers what this alleged substance they are spraying is, but never received any useful answer. Are we supposed to build this conviction on faith only? Shouldn’t be so hard to detect this terrible substance they are spraying in these enormous amounts, but it seems that we can’t get that done.

        The atmosphere itself is very huge and lively. 1/5 of the CO2 is washed out each year (130 billion tons). Slightly more is evaporating from the oceans. And there is about 10 tons of air on every m2 of the ground – adds up to quite a huge pile. So a few thousand or millions tons up in the atmosphere would soon be washed out and diluted to no effective levels. I guess this Geoengineering is something that is not a small task. Even local weather modifications is hard enough as I understand it. Fred Singer hade a paper on Global Warming and air traffic, but I can’t find that now and it was not a very convincing concept to me.

        Re: fluoride in the water & pesticides on the ground

        I hope you have taken into consideration how tiny these atoms are. A sheet of paper is about 0.1 mm thick, or about 100 000 atoms. 0.1 cubic mm contains about 100 000 x 100 000 x 100 000 atoms, or about 1 trillion. So a dust you can barely see, can theoretically pollute the entire globe with thousands of it atoms per square meter. Well, that is not enough to get me scared, no matter what the substance is.

        99.99% of all pesticides are natural. How do you think the flowers are defending themselves from bugs and creeps?

        Short quote from Bruce Aimes:

        Of all dietary pesticides that humans eat, 99.99 percent are natural: they are chemicals produced by plants to defend themselves against fungi, insects, and other animal predators.

        We have estimated that on average Americans ingest roughly 5,000 to 10,000 different natural pesticides and their breakdown products. Americans eat about 1,500 mg of natural pesticides per person per day, which is about 10,000 times more than the 0.09 mg they consume of synthetic pesticide residues.

        Maybe you will watch some short videos here on the very fundamental “The Dose Makes the Poison”? It is not the name of the substance that should scare people, but the dose.


        Again, what is this substance they are praying, and what will the concentration be down at the ground level and what is the lowest dose where any biological effect have been detected?


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

wp-puzzle.com logo

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.