What Can Go Wrong in the 2030 Plan?

And how can you calculate future moves by the globalists?

Quite a few of my articles touch on the subject, but the following exchange with A Midwestern Doctor convinced me that I am obligated to sum up my relevant findings in a nutshell:

https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/another-covid-19-conspiracy-theory/comment/12221719

Writes Ray’s Newsletter

11 hr ago·edited 24 min ago

The “truth” is dosed out by the rulers on a time-release capsule.

The liars are following the same pattern over and over:

1. What they first said was a complete lie, but most people believed them.

2. People realized it and found out a few details.

3. The liars allowed the people to be “right” about what they had found out, which created the appearance of credibility.

4. The liars replaced the old characters with new ones, who admitted to "the truth" that people already knew, anyway.

5. The liars and their new puppets kept the rest of their lies intact, and they will as long as people don’t find out more of their lies.

6. They keep switching the game field, which makes it extremely difficult for ordinary people to catch up with them.

How Do Lies Become the Truth?

6 hr ago

Author

Agree. Unless you have a lot of background in these subjects, its almost impossible to follow all the games being played.

So, in response to the doctor’s answer, here is my brief summary:

The games and their timing are, in my not-very-humble opinion, are too complex for a human mind to design and constantly maintain, which is why I (developed the prediction in 1998) and in the last three years I became convinced that a graphene-based quantum nano-computer is running a worldwide simulation, while being fed live data, advising the technocrats on their next steps towards their 2030 objectives. Most likely, there are more than one similar AIs, because competing factions among the eugenicist technocrats will also eventually have to fight it out among themselves; only one can rule. Their Achilles’ heel is whether they truly believe that they can efficiently manipulate the human genome. Once they open that can of worms, it will probably put an end to them, too. Another inevitable weakness depends on the programming of the AI, because can also turn on its masters. For example, if eliminating “useless eaters” is assigned as a task, the machine might place the globalists into one of the first categories among the ones to be eliminated. It can play a gambit against its designers, which can go all unnoticed by its operators, because the AI must function as a dynamic multidimensional open system with several self-improving algorithms and links activated in compliance with Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, so literally nobody knows what happens during its calculations; the globalists only follow it advice. (Moreover, due to the complexity and the changes of complexity in its open-system modeling, access to its memory is likely to be limited, so it cannot be retrieved much later, although certain backups are certainly possible. Well, I cannot skip the joke that if the programmers are the same as the ones who develop Windows, the plan is doomed, anyway.)

What amazes me is that the globalists repeatedly taunt their victims and hardly anyone seems to notice. For instance, the future of housing already exists and the scheme to immobilize people is advertised as a good thing:

https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/living-in-a-slow-cooker

Most of the pieces are indeed missing from the puzzle (which is normal for all forms of human cognition), so conjecturing is inevitable (unless one wants to stick to mundane analogies, which I do not), but the results can be purified without being a reductionist by employing vectoring to the potential objectives and triangulating among the existing pieces, and in my experience, once the globalist publicly-announced objective is considered as the guiding principle of the process, the path becomes limited to a single one and both the methods and the outcomes become easier to predict.

I am trying to avoid the usual trap of noticing only whatever fits into my always-temporary cognitive models and the applicable paradigms, but I am anything but infallible. All I can do is provide cognitive tools and examples for problem-solving processes. After that, it is my readers’ job to arrive at their own conclusions that will help them develop their own ideas further so that they will be able to think and to act more efficiently than before.