It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Sandy Hook, and the end of the world.

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 05:31 PM
I've relayed a lot of the info I've seen on this site, and undoubtedly looked like a cook, and now I see why. There are many of the same people who believe that sandy hook was staged so that gun reform could be passed or that obama won reelection so he could pass martial law... and on the same breath it's these people that are saying that the world is going to end tomorrow?... I don't understand how you can have that big of a discrepancy in your thought pattern and not choose that SOMEWHERE you are wrong. If the world is ending, how can you say sandy hook had an ulterior motive when it won't matter. You can't believe both. If you can, please enlighten me as to how it's possible. After thinking about what I've just said, I've concluded sandy hook was real, and the end of the world is not tomorrow. A negative and Negative always make positive

posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 05:35 PM
it depends who youre talking to ..
are you speaking to a specific person ... and generally everyone as a whole ?

if you are speaking generally to everyone as a whole ... then your question kinda becomes illogical .. cos generally speaking .. there are people that have argued both, none, and either one of those points ...
If you're speaking to someone specific .. then who ?

posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 06:58 PM
reply to post by Maskander


I didn't see this yesterday, and was redirected here from another thread where the OP asks if Sandy Hook was a setup by the government to take minds off the end of the world. Ugh it hurts to even try to consider that in a logical sense, the insufferable stupidity of it.

But you describe the EXACT thing I've tried to, but most likely failed to relay as I'm often tied up in suffocating thoughts of "WTF" at some of the things I read here.

How can some of these same candidates offer the same reasoning for everything, when half the time they conflict with each other. You can't have one scenario that is 100% reality to someone, and then go on 100% about something else which either partially disproves the former thing, OR cannot both exist together.

It's like they get all excited to describe some fantastic scenario, they get their jollies, and then move onto the next one, forgetting about the last one.

And this, this is just the tip of the ice berg. If you really examine the amount of evidence that is discarded in the search for that illogical fallacy that must be true, it's bewildering how some people function in life without bumping into closed doors every day.

A million Rainbow Sprinkler Ladies.. that's how insane it is...

new topics

log in