It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Did Duchess Kate fake her pregnancy and use a surrogate mother for the royal baby?

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by NotAnAspie
Even if she did use a surrogate, it's not THAT conspiratorial. Rich people do stuff like that. Pregnancy can take a serious toll on the body and there are many people who want children but have those reservations. It could be kept secret because there are plenty of understanding potential surrogates in the world who don't want to be hounded by British royalty... and would no doubt be taken care of in life for their services. It's really not that dastardly to think about... which of course does not mean it's true but it's certainly a possibility. Regardless, I doubt they would be that offended and probably love this type of controversy.


I don't think so. Even Diana herself said in her own autobiography that she was required to have a gynecological exam prior to the engagement and wedding to be certain of her virginity and her ability to bear children. I do not think the queen would tolerate William using a surrogate as heir to the throne. I just do not see that. I'm pretty certain that Kate was vetted on all levels prior to this wedding. The queen would not have a barren woman marrying the heir to the throne.




posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by jcutler12888
 

Yes I agree....apologies (obviously Kate not Camilla).
edit on 28-7-2013 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 06:17 AM
link   
OP, Calm down.

I was wondering when the first Royal Baby conspiracy would pop up and this one does not fail to meet my expectations of craziness




If you look at the Duchess of Cornwall (Kate Middleton) when she and Prince William presented their son to the media you will notice that a) she still appears to be fully pregnant


Most women still have a bit of a "baby bump" after they have given birth its not uncommon.




he did not appear to gain weight in her pregnancy


No, she did, just pick up any woman's magazine and you will see that she did put on weight.

Also this quite clearly contradicts your first point where you say "looks she still looks pregnant" yet you then say "how comes she didn't put on any weight during her pregnancy". Point A and B contradict each other OP.




in the presentation of the baby Prince William implied (24 hrs post birth) that this was the first time that they really got to see the baby and that they had some "catching up" to do


Again its not uncommon that parents and their child struggle to get even a few hours together as a family in the first day after birth, Kate would have gone for tests, the baby would have gone for tests, William might have nipped of home to his palace and so on.



First, one of the parents could be sterile


Well Kate wont be because she would have to have proven she could have children to marry the second in line to the thrown. As for William its possible he might be but again very unlikely to have had problems to the extent they could not have produced a child.




Second, since Kate was a commoner they may have wanted the mother to be of royal


This doesn't matter, if it did William would have just been forced to marry a royal.




would have probably required a C Section


No it wouldn't, there are other much safer ways to induce child birth.

...

As for the Numerology, its just a load of guff, 2012 didn't happen and there was no false flag at the Olympic game's and so on.

Sorry OP but the Royal baby is ligit



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 

It would not be the first time that a surrogate was used by the royal family. If a woman has a narrow pelvis then a
C Section may be the only alternative (otherwise why are they used at all if other less surgical methods are available?). Also the Price could have a fertility problem and being 2nd in line to be King would not want the public stigma of being infertile and Kate could have objected to carrying someone else's baby (but ok with the surrogate route). I am that the truth will come out if this "conspiracy" is true.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 06:49 AM
link   
In the spirit of other ridiculous fake this and fake that theories that riddle these pages whenever something big (and seemingly, when something moderate happens now, too) I will share a link to a product called "Empathy Belly", where one can simulate being pregnant.

www.plannedparenthood.org...

Since this product exists, it must mean she really wore one of these and faked it all.

Such a tenuous link was used with the whole actors BS, so why not this?




posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logos23
reply to post by Knobby
 


reply to post by boymonkey74
 


They were obviously implant's....all part of the deception
lol


Well, to be fair, even the baby is an implant. I mean, someone put it in there. They don't grow on trees you know!

Oh lordy, OP, are you serious?

"Quick quick fake a baby, we must be seen to be pregnant."

You know, they could have just done it the old fashioned way. Bit of the ol' in out in out..

Nah, it's the royals. They're clones. Infertile. All teeth and no dna. Got it.

And oprah winfrey has a million tiny little skinny women inside her controlling her like eddie murphy. Question everything!



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


A surrogate that was royal wouldn't change the fact that the mother was a commoner. It would still be all the mothers DNA, they would just implant the fertilized egg. I actually wouldn't be surprised because they are rich and they could afford a baby without her having to go through the physical pain annd change,but they would keep it secret because the mother would be celebrity, likely NOT royalty carrying a royal baby, and lastly it would further separate them from the civilians.

Btw I could care less about the royal family and I think most Americans are the same. We have our royalty, but they are Hollywood film stars. I actually read an interview with an actor where he calls his non celebrity girlfriend a civilian, so there is definitely that attitude... I don't care about celebrities either.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


Vats are not the preferred way to nurture a babies growth, they need contact, warmth, the sound of mothers voice, and afterwards, they shouldn't be separated, but be held, snuggled, loved nonstop. Thats what is best for babes. 5 intense pregnancies that I wished some men could have experienced, but wouldn't have opted for a vat for any of them.
edit on 27-7-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)


So, no robots then.

Blast, my dystopia will never arrive at this rate.

Grrr..



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 07:50 AM
link   
reply to post by winofiend
 


Don't worry our plan is still going forward Wino and Shhhhhhh!



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 





It would not be the first time that a surrogate was used by the royal family


And i presume you have evidence of this?




If a woman has a narrow pelvis then a C Section may be the only alternative (otherwise why are they used at all if other less surgical methods are available?)


Unless you know the intimate details of the Duchesses vagina (lucky you if you do) i fail to see why this point even matters



Also the Price could have a fertility problem and being 2nd in line to be King would not want the public stigma


Again unless you have evidence that Prince Willy's swimmers don't swim upstream i cannot see any significance to this.




Kate could have objected to carrying someone else's baby


Lots of "what if's", "could have's" "maybe's" and " possibility" in this thread but with very little evidence of any of it. I could say that I Am actually the baby's dad and my claims would have just as much credibility (none) as yours do.



I am that the truth will come out if this "conspiracy" is true.


Really....

edit on 28-7-2013 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 

It would not be the first time that a surrogate was used by the royal family. If a woman has a narrow pelvis then a
C Section may be the only alternative (otherwise why are they used at all if other less surgical methods are available?). Also the Price could have a fertility problem and being 2nd in line to be King would not want the public stigma of being infertile and Kate could have objected to carrying someone else's baby (but ok with the surrogate route). I am that the truth will come out if this "conspiracy" is true.


It's not a conspiracy, it's speculation. There's no evidence at all for it, not even a shred.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Am I the only one who finds the Duchess of this and Duchess of that a grotesque representation of human ego and superficiality? I can't wait for the day when enough people have had enough of their meaningless # that they fade away from any importance in the minds of society. I see the prince of this or the Duchess of that with a big smug smile on their face, who are not famous because of the wonderful things they've done for others, but are famous only because they were born into a specific family, I want to vomit bullets into their eyes..
edit on 28-7-2013 by libertytoall because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Did Duchess Kate fake her pregnancy and use a surrogate mother for the royal baby?


Obviously not. She had severe sickness during most of her pregnancy AND she has gained weight all around .. making her look a lot healthier than her pre-pregnancy stick figure. She looks healthy and glowing now instead of starving ...



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 

British Royalty Use of Surrogate Mothers;
theflowofperceptions.blogspot.com...
There is probably more on the use of surrogates in more ancient times but this is the first link that popped up.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 

British Royalty Use of Surrogate Mothers;
theflowofperceptions.blogspot.com...
There is probably more on the use of surrogates in more ancient times but this is the first link that popped up.


Right. So, no actual proof then?



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


I asked for proof and that is not proof,

additionally even if we can accept for a moment that the Royal Family have been using surrogates in the past that still in no way would actually prove that our new Prince is from a surrogate. That would imply that some other women held him through out the gestation and that is simply not true. We know that Kate went in for morning sickness, we have seem pictures of her being pregnant and even you admit that she still has a bit of a baby bump.

again you have not yet actually proved anything this is just all speculation just like i can speculate that I will win the lottery tomorrow.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 

As some posters have speculated....apparently american pop royal Beyonce faked her pregnancy and used a surrogate mother to carry her child.
www.examiner.com...=42053886



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


Good conspiracy, but no I don't believe it was fake I believe Kate had a pregnancy.

And as for gain weight well My daughter was born 7 pounds 6 ounces, I was 112 pounds at the beginning of the pregnancy during the time only gaining 14 pounds, all baby, that made me look skinny with a big belly.

so yes you can be pregnant and no gain that much weight, is just that in the US women this days are a big bigger this days and hard to tell if they already had a baby or are still pregnant.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Haha yeah they definitely made the world's biggest show out of her morning sickness. I didnnt think about how ridiculous it was at the time.. but why the HELL should it be news to me in the US that a rich woman in the UK. Had morning sickness. If anything I would take that as evidence that they were really really trying to sell hher pregnancy to the public.

Again, I don't really care or want to argue. I'm just bored at work. Think about it though. How hugely ridiculous that whole "morning sickness is international news" saga went. Millions of dollars went into spreading that word and taking away from more popular stories.

To people from the UK.. why do you guys care?



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join