The knowledge frontier of the war for anons comprises a diffuse network of plausibly deniable sources plus whistleblowers. The latter can be cited as evidence, but the former require intuition to evaluate, which cannot easily be conveyed.
There is a lot of information that pushes the boundary of what is conceivable, but that is a matter of your constraints to belief due to cultural programming, not what is ultimately true. Sacred texts from other cultures seem to be some of the best ways to cross-check what we are told about the cosmos, life, this realm, and hidden forces.
Writing about these subjects is hard as it is so speculative. You can’t conduct simple experiments to test out reincarnation, for instance. Civilisations in higher dimensions may exist, but how to go there for a consciousness tourist break? Even basic stuff around electromagnetism isn’t my field of expertise. I might be discerning, yet still dumb from ignorance.
I think this is why people are told to research for themselves. When you put your hands on the work (books) or look into the work (online) and see the same patterns over and over it becomes harder to keep your mind closed to a different perspective or experience and to reject the narrative or "history". It is common in MSM to see a headline like "Here's what you need to know" and most people will not go beyond that. I have an individual who spends every conversation challenging or denying actual facts of things I observe in real time. The system works for this person and they do not want it to change and they will go so far as to convince you that you are not seeing what is happening right in front of your face. It would be comical if it was not so disturbing.
