Spirit Science: A New Age Cult (Part 1)

I like to cover cults and it's particularly interesting to me when I can catch one forming right in front of me I've known about this one for a while and I even covered this exact video a long time ago but I felt like it was time to revisit spirit science is a YouTube channel and a new-age cult that's run by a guy named Jordan Duke Nix but he goes by Jordan Pearce I just want to point out that that's a common marker of a cult the cult leader changes his name they also commonly use amorphous undefined terms like energy or spirituality watch for that kind of thing I'll be pointing it out throughout this video here we go [Music] man I love the moon would you say the moon is masculine or feminine spiritually speaking most often heard that it embodies female energy what does female energy mean the definition of energy is as follows power derived from the utilization of physical or chemical resources especially to provide light and heat to work machines nothing about gender for energy and nothing about how a celestial body can embody energy of a specific gender it doesn't make any sense but it appeals to our mystical nature let's continue me too but we have mother nature full of life and creation yeah you might think so however our celestial father is most definitely the son it's because of our Father above and our mother below that allows all of this life to exist the moon is actually neither which makes me think it must be more like a cousin where is he getting this information is there any kind of substantiate proof of this and what does he mean by our celestial father the son mother nature is a common colloquialism so it's easy for you to accept that the earth is female without knowing anything about what that means because you've heard the earth loosely referred to with a female pronoun and a commonly used slang term what he's saying right now is meaningless and has no proof of any kind to back it up but perhaps what's more curious about old lady Luna is that her insistence has actually never been explained by modern science who needs science to explain things right I mean I know you don't but isn't it interesting that using science we can build nuclear weapons but cannot even explain this most ancient entity that floats at our doorstep I'm gonna dismiss the brazen disregard for our centuries-old method of gaining knowledge about the world around us but what does he mean we can't explain it we can explain plenty of things about the moon we can explain its density we can explain what it's made of and we can even explain how it got there pretty accurately science is always subject to change when we gain new information but we can have a very high degree of confidence about a lot of things with regards to our knowledge about the moon what's stranger the moon is actually far too big to be a natural satellite of the earth if I'm not mistaken there is not a single other planet in our solar system whose moon compares in ratio to our own earth moon ratio our moon is actually larger than Pluto I'm not sure what relevance that has that's why Pluto was downgraded to a dwarf planet because it's not big enough to be a real planet notice how he said if I'm not mistaken he's setting himself up as an authority through this whole video but at certain parts he shows himself to be fallible thus making himself appear more trustworthy that's another cult mind-control tactic it seems insignificant but this kind of thing adds up the current leading theory in science is that something like a mars-sized planet like rock came out of nowhere and hit the earth and then it became the moon and when those physics didn't work out they came up with a new theory that said that the same planet like rock like thing hits the planet bounces around and then hits it again and then becomes the moon needless to say still didn't work okay so they said the current leading theory is that a planet slimmed into Earth but it didn't work so they came up with a new theory if that's the case then it isn't the current leading theory the second theory they presented was exactly the same as the first except it bounced into it again this isn't making any sense for reference the actual leading theory isn't quite what they depicted here did you notice how they depicted something slamming into the earth the earth shattered implying it's hard and brittle that is not what it was like at the time here's a video of what we suspect happened when the earth was forming there wasn't as much hard material on it as there is now it was more viscous when something very large slammed into it large pieces melded together with the giant asteroid or whatever it was and it began circling the earth we have to remember that at this time there was no atmosphere as a side note this is real artwork to me imagine what it would have been like if the Catholic Church hadn't been the driving motivation for Michelangelo's paintings on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel it's a goddamn shame that we lost out on so much potential well what the hell is them all well now that you ask have you ever heard anything about it being hollow hello yeah I've got the details somewhere here okay now we have officially debarked for crazytown let's see here it is in November of 1969 Nassau crashed a lunar module into the moon causing the equivalent of one ton of TNT NASA said that the moon reverberate it like a gong for half an hour then they did it again causing an impact and it rang like a bell for over four hours it vibrated in a way as if it were hollowed out with giant hydraulic damper struts inside of it lousy Weezy none of that is true NASA never said any of that it didn't reverberate like anything we have tested its density and we found that it's three point three four grams per cubic centimeter for prospective waters density is one gram per cubic centimeter and granite it's 2.75 grams per cubic centimeter so it's pretty dense and by the way I wanted to point a couple things out here a cult will twist facts like they did by depicting the earth as shattering when something ran into it or flat-out make them up just like claiming NASA said it reverberate it like it had giant struts inside of it want to know something else always the surface of the Moon contains minerals like titanium but also processed metals like brass and mica you'd also contain something called uranium 236 and nip dominion which are both minerals that have never been found to occur naturally uranium 236 is a long-lived nuclear waste that appears and spent nuclear fuel and Knepp iminium is a radioactive byproduct of nuclear reactors when plutonium is being created maika isn't a processed metal it's a mineral see they aren't even sitting there heavily researching this information if they had they would have been far less likely to confuse a mineral with a processed metal also Neptune minium isn't an element it doesn't exist I assume they were referring to neptunium neptunium does occur naturally we find it in uranium mines all the time oh and by the way uranium occurs naturally too we find it in rocks we have uranium mines just like we have coal mines but they were talking about a very specific isotope of uranium uranium 236 that doesn't usually occur naturally it's found in spent fuel rods from nuclear reactors so does that show up on the moon I don't know it's impossible to tell because every search result was titled something like irregularities showing Earth's moon was engineered or is this the real reason NASA never returned to the moon shocking claim over what stops us I couldn't find any scientific research papers claiming it was found on the moon not to say they don't exist I just couldn't find them so I'm going to withhold belief until proven otherwise and by the way if anybody's interested in finding out for yourself you can go to scholar.google.com and search through that it's a search engine for scholarly articles let me know in the comments or on Twitter if anybody finds the answer this means at least some of the rocks in the Moon are most likely synthetic and while it's only a theory I wouldn't say it's a logical to come to the conclusion that it could be artificially created that's really intense he's misusing the word theory here a theory is when we take a bunch of facts compiled them into an idea about why those facts are happening and test things to see if the idea actually stands up to become a theory it has to be falsifiable for example we could prove the theory of evolution wrong tomorrow if it could be shown that mutations don't occur or if we found a rabbit in the Precambrian era or if it could be shown that organisms with identical DNA have different genetic traits evolution has not been falsified yet but the fact that those things have not been demonstrated means that if evolution is false fied whatever replaces it will almost certainly be extremely similar ie evolution is here to stay it's subject to tweaking and change as we learn more but it Sun extremely solid ground also you know the craters on the moon intimately well craters should vary in depth due to the size and impact of the various space rocks that hit them right we can tell that there was a difference in the meteor sizes that hit the moon by the diameters of each crater and yet how come all of them across the board are the same depth Mother of God an impenetrable shell that's not true they do vary in depth wildly the deepest crater is the Aitken Basin which is about 1,600 miles in diameter and eight miles deep they're just making vacuous claims again completely void of substance once again showing their masters and manufacturing propaganda oh oh here read this part here David Ickes research led him to shaman around the world zulu tribes speak of the moon being an egg they symbolize it to be an egg for good reason that ancient African and Sumerian legends talk of two brothers Wow Wayne and Mo Penghu that emptied out the yolk and rolled the moon across the sky to the earth and caused cataclysmic events hundreds of generations before our time David Icke is that dude who believes that the world is being run by lizard people automatically discredit anything he says it's like going to an eye doctor who believes in the stork theory of reproduction I'm sure he's great at his job but I'm gonna question its judgment on literally everything from that moment on aside from that why would I want to believe anything an ancient culture from 6000 years ago had to say about our universe they have nothing credible to say on the subject we have tools and methods far beyond what they had we know far more about our reality than they ever could hmm not sure how it fits but this says here that the rocks on the moon are older than the earth itself heavens sure that's because we have tectonic plates which basically recycle the rock on the surface that doesn't prove your theory that some dudes put it there for us keep trying are you guys starting to see a trend here generally discrediting what we think we know about to create doubt in people so that we're more willing to accept basically anything they say on the subject another cult mind control strategy oh my god I have to research like every other sentence they say I'm splitting this into two videos part two will be out soon thanks for watching guys [Music]

Channel: Telltale

Views: 159,720

Rating: 4.7986512 out of 5

Keywords: christian, christianity, faith, religion, church, god, jehovah, yahweh, bible, believe, belief, jesus, christ, naturalism, naturalist, scientist, science, telltale, telltale atheist, telltail, jehovahs witnesses, witnesses, JW, spirit, spirit science, patch, moon, spirit science a new age cult, part 1, spirit science a new age cult part 1, jordan pearce, jordan duchnycz, new age, woo, hollow moon, david ike

Id: 9QO6GG-rCwk

Length: 11min 38sec (698 seconds)

Published: Sun Oct 01 2017

Reddit Comments

[u/[deleted]]

This is like the weirdest cult I've ever seen.

And I was not surprised to see this conspiracy seems to have come from the soviet union/Russia, like so many others:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow_Moon

n 1970, Michael Vasin and Alexander Shcherbakov, of what was then the Soviet Academy of Sciences, advanced a hypothesis that the Moon is a spaceship created by unknown beings.[2] The article was entitled "Is the Moon the Creation of Alien Intelligence?", and was published in Sputnik,[10] the Soviet equivalent of Reader's Digest.[1][14]

Their hypothesis relies heavily on the suggestion that large lunar craters, generally assumed to be formed from meteor impact, are generally too shallow and have flat or even convex bottoms. They hypothesized that small meteors are making a cup-shaped depression in the rocky surface of the moon while the larger meteors are drilling through a rocky layer and hitting an armoured hull underneath.[15]

The authors reference earlier speculation by astrophysicist Iosif Shklovsky, who suggested that the Martian moon Phobos was an artificial satellite and hollow; this has since been shown to not be the case. Sceptical author Jason Colavito points out that all of their evidence is circumstantial, and that in the 1960s the atheistic Soviet Union promoted the ancient astronaut concept in an attempt to undermine the West's faith in religion.