Originally posted by blueorder
reply to post by jameshawkings
and how do YOU know, do share?
Look at a missing persons website, people go missing all of the time, most do not get on BBC News or CNN
Originally posted by blueorder
reply to post by jameshawkings
and how do YOU know, do share?
Originally posted by jameshawkings
Originally posted by blueorder
reply to post by jameshawkings
and how do YOU know, do share?
Look at a missing persons website, people go missing all of the time, most do not get on BBC News or CNN
Originally posted by blueorder
Originally posted by jameshawkings
Originally posted by blueorder
reply to post by jameshawkings
and how do YOU know, do share?
Look at a missing persons website, people go missing all of the time, most do not get on BBC News or CNN
But specifically on this case you are most insistent, can you provide some actual evidence?
Originally posted by blueorder
reply to post by jameshawkings
fair enough, I can dig that, and your theory may have legs![]()
Originally posted by AceWombat04
reply to post by jameshawkings
You could conceivably be right. That scenario does seem like a more probable candidate for persuading the general populace to use such technology in their children. And implanting them in children from birth or at least from an early age does seem more benign and likely to be accepted than making it mandatory for adults following another large terrorist attack or what not.
There are still a lot of questions and holes surrounding this hypothesis in my opinion, so I'm highly skeptical. But it is within the realm of the possible, and would make a twisted sort of sense.edit on 1/21/2012 by AceWombat04 because: (no reason given)