THE DERAILING ROOM
Re: Richard Branson - and Spaceport America
My most humble apologies. If I'da known I was steppin outa line, boys, I nevva woulda said nothin' about dat crazayyy ass Voldermort. But come to think of it, I didn't. Now I know y'all know I gots alzheimers, but I reckon clearly that I seen with my own two eyes dat was the Meathead and Rosanne Barr's fatass husband in dat Sandy Hook nonsense. I think that's what got K all bent outa shape and 'hysterical.' My fault. And if my brain is shit my eyes is worse, so I suggest you pay no furtha mind to the ramblings of dis old woman. Why, just the other day I swore I saw a ghost. Fact, I was shore it were Elvis. But da damndest thing is......he was standing next to Celine Dion!!!
-
hoi.polloi
- Member
- Posts: 5060
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
gwynned, is this you on this thread here? http://ronaldwederfoort.blogspot.com/20 ... on-of.html
Richard Branson doesn't even look like David Icke. The chin is totally different, for one. The eye placement is also very different. You are probably banned from sites for being uselessly gullible — or is it usefully? Just hoping to trump people's own perceptions with sheer peer pressure and insistence?
And when you don't get your (assigned?) target site of people to be fooled by this pathetic attempt to discredit the forensics research, you act as though you are right simply because people disagree with you? You are right because you have a snotty attitude that makes people groan? Wow. You do not understand what constitutes the truth. It isn't people marginalizing you. It is something that really takes time and patience and good communication, which as a consequence of its conflict with social norms, ends up marginalizing you.
People don't dislike Dallas Goldbug because he supposedly tells unpopular truths. People dislike Dallas Goldbug because he truly doesn't have a firm grasp of the truth. He mixes up things — seemingly on purpose — in order to cause anger and outrage and gain followers that do not require logic or critical thinking or a deep inherent drive to do their own research.
You said:
If you really cared about these things, you would stop posting Goldbug's shoddy work and produce your own, superior work that actually makes the points Goldbug claims to be making, but actually fails to make over and over. For example, Simon has made a good guess about Rudy Giuliani being the fake female body guard from a video. But he did not go onto other forums and say, "this is definitely the case, and if you disagree with me, ban me and that makes me right!"
Do you see the difference between that behavior and your own? I certainly do.
The fact that you come on here thinking that it's "truth" because you are obstinately failing to do your own original research with clear ability to answer questions about it, because your text acts as a parody of what the truly painful experience of being ousted from society for asking questions is really like tells me you not only don't care that Dallas Goldbug's arguments are full of holes and deceptions; you actually actively work to destroy, hide or minimize the authenticity of those people who really seek truth. You undermine truths that have been usefully found out about modern methods of deception. You are acting like an enemy of truth, deliberate or not.
Why do you do this? Please show some sign of reflection or intelligent response. Are you going to try to make some sense, or are you just going to post more angry, sarcastic gibberish?
I just wonder if you plan on telling anyone who will listen to your nonsense that we are an "official conspiracy site" because the mods disagree with the shit of Dallas Goldbug.kaliyuga2758
It's so obvious, isn't it? To think I paid $75 to a billionaire to hear him talk nonsense. Fool me once, and then again and again....but I'm starting to get it. I got my first 'warning' from the DI moderators when I tried to expose Lady Di as David Furnish. Seems they don't like Dallas Goldbug anywhere on the official conspiracy sites.
Richard Branson doesn't even look like David Icke. The chin is totally different, for one. The eye placement is also very different. You are probably banned from sites for being uselessly gullible — or is it usefully? Just hoping to trump people's own perceptions with sheer peer pressure and insistence?
And when you don't get your (assigned?) target site of people to be fooled by this pathetic attempt to discredit the forensics research, you act as though you are right simply because people disagree with you? You are right because you have a snotty attitude that makes people groan? Wow. You do not understand what constitutes the truth. It isn't people marginalizing you. It is something that really takes time and patience and good communication, which as a consequence of its conflict with social norms, ends up marginalizing you.
People don't dislike Dallas Goldbug because he supposedly tells unpopular truths. People dislike Dallas Goldbug because he truly doesn't have a firm grasp of the truth. He mixes up things — seemingly on purpose — in order to cause anger and outrage and gain followers that do not require logic or critical thinking or a deep inherent drive to do their own research.
You said:
Whereas this is a forum to suggest exactly those things, it is not a forum to post the most idiotic and visually wrong ideas that similar people are necessarily the same person. While not diminishing the fact that we are dealing with actors, make up and digitally altered people along with totally digitally invented people-like imagery, Dallas Goldbug's evidence is very very weak and does not hit on all the true layers of the fakery; it does not discuss the concept that Icke might just be a liar without a need to be another liar or famous face. It doesn't discuss augmented reality or make up. It doesn't even seek to prove which is being used in a particular instance, whereas that should be what we should be trying to do. And seemingly this is deliberate omission on Goldbug's part, whomever or whatever they are.By the way, I am learning the hard way that suggesting anyone in the public eye is in fact a named actor or not who they say they are is the surest way to earn a warning from the moderator along with several posts ridiculing you and your idea, or if one persists, get completely banned.
If you really cared about these things, you would stop posting Goldbug's shoddy work and produce your own, superior work that actually makes the points Goldbug claims to be making, but actually fails to make over and over. For example, Simon has made a good guess about Rudy Giuliani being the fake female body guard from a video. But he did not go onto other forums and say, "this is definitely the case, and if you disagree with me, ban me and that makes me right!"
Do you see the difference between that behavior and your own? I certainly do.
The fact that you come on here thinking that it's "truth" because you are obstinately failing to do your own original research with clear ability to answer questions about it, because your text acts as a parody of what the truly painful experience of being ousted from society for asking questions is really like tells me you not only don't care that Dallas Goldbug's arguments are full of holes and deceptions; you actually actively work to destroy, hide or minimize the authenticity of those people who really seek truth. You undermine truths that have been usefully found out about modern methods of deception. You are acting like an enemy of truth, deliberate or not.
Why do you do this? Please show some sign of reflection or intelligent response. Are you going to try to make some sense, or are you just going to post more angry, sarcastic gibberish?
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
I don't truly understand this. I posted ONE photo from Dallas Goldbug's blog. However, the truth is that I was tipped off to the Icke/Branson lookalike by Pete Shea who messaged me an RT video purportedly of Sir Richard Branson, but clearly David Icke. When I posted the above, I googled the two and thought Goldbug's photo the more convincing.
Further, since the 'havoc' at the Fakeologist was mentioned, I have to further point out that AT NO TIME AND IN NO WAY did I mention Dallas Goldbug, or post links to his site. In my conversation with K, I mentioned only that I personally identified both Goodman and Reiner in the Sandy Hook Hoax. When that absurd video was posted with my voice, I posted links to several videos by Dave J.
If you were to look at the sites I have visited over the last several years you will see that, until this recent episode, I had not stopped by the Goldbug site in probably 3 years and then only briefly. That I am a more frequent visitor there is, oddly, due to my friends at the Fakeologist who called my attention to it.
Further, since the 'havoc' at the Fakeologist was mentioned, I have to further point out that AT NO TIME AND IN NO WAY did I mention Dallas Goldbug, or post links to his site. In my conversation with K, I mentioned only that I personally identified both Goodman and Reiner in the Sandy Hook Hoax. When that absurd video was posted with my voice, I posted links to several videos by Dave J.
If you were to look at the sites I have visited over the last several years you will see that, until this recent episode, I had not stopped by the Goldbug site in probably 3 years and then only briefly. That I am a more frequent visitor there is, oddly, due to my friends at the Fakeologist who called my attention to it.
-
hoi.polloi
- Member
- Posts: 5060
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
Okay, well that's fair. Thank you for the civil evidence that you are not, in fact, a shill.
Please, though, let me warn you about Pete Shea and his bad hunches. He is also the character that initiated with pysopticon the "Pshea vs. Evil Edna" debacle that seemed like an attempt to (quite successfully) cause confusion and anger within the Fakeologist community. Even if psyopticon/Evil Edna was the fall guy for that little act, Pshea was no squeaky clean character himself.
He also claims that Simon's name and my name can be made into relevant references to the subject of our research — what name cannot be forced into such a position when isolated and targeted with the goal to create such things? He harasses us about this, and I believe this is a distraction. But I am biased because I happen to trust Simon and myself.
He also sent me a parody web site of scientific skepticism in a private message. I believe his "role" in this affair is to act like a spiritual "buddy" and lead people all over the place, while dismissing good research. That is precisely what he does; he even targets people on the fence about Simon's points because they cannot actually understand Simon's points and then he exploits that and herds them to any other limited hang out. Dallas Goldbug much?
You may have 'fallen in' with the 'wrong crowd' in my opinion, and allowed yourself to pre-conclude a singular path toward achieving the truth having to do with people like Pete Shea, but please don't bring that particular exploration here. On our site, it is a waste of time and does not fulfill our purpose. Just go back to what you were doing before here, which is posting good original stuff of your own opinion and explanation. And forgive our site for not being convinced of the Goldbug angle or all the Fakeologist characters. We have been doing this for years now, and we have come to recognize that the shills do not mind finding any sort of convoluted way to just get people to shut off their minds to doing personal forensic research.
They know it's an exhausting personal effort to do it, and so they find every single human resistance to one's own propensity to do research, every single way we as a species save time and effort from having to do something important. They find these things and exploit them. There are hundreds, thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of years of advertising and religious psychological study to thank for that kind of research into debilitating healthy minds, bodies and spirits — forcing them back into servitude to the "someone else" who will "solve it all" for you.
It doesn't mean there are no actors playing other actors. It just means Dallas Goldbug's "evidence" is very poorly constructed and he leaves far too much to the imagination to serve as a specific, documented evidence of his claims. He acts more "Alex Jones" than scientist. It saddens me that people of good intent and character can so easily jump on board this Dallas Goldbug bandwagon and then cry out "fraud" at we who ask for better, or even just more specific and well-documented evidence than he is willing to provide. It doesn't help that his followers do occasionally act like martyrs for such worthless points.
If you are going to yell at people about something, at least try to make a slam dunk case for it. Don't leave all the dangly bits and holes hanging all over your theory and then declare that you just don't care that it's unconvincing. That makes it seem like you want to just cause a stir rather than actually give people self-defense tools for the mind.
Please, though, let me warn you about Pete Shea and his bad hunches. He is also the character that initiated with pysopticon the "Pshea vs. Evil Edna" debacle that seemed like an attempt to (quite successfully) cause confusion and anger within the Fakeologist community. Even if psyopticon/Evil Edna was the fall guy for that little act, Pshea was no squeaky clean character himself.
He also claims that Simon's name and my name can be made into relevant references to the subject of our research — what name cannot be forced into such a position when isolated and targeted with the goal to create such things? He harasses us about this, and I believe this is a distraction. But I am biased because I happen to trust Simon and myself.
He also sent me a parody web site of scientific skepticism in a private message. I believe his "role" in this affair is to act like a spiritual "buddy" and lead people all over the place, while dismissing good research. That is precisely what he does; he even targets people on the fence about Simon's points because they cannot actually understand Simon's points and then he exploits that and herds them to any other limited hang out. Dallas Goldbug much?
You may have 'fallen in' with the 'wrong crowd' in my opinion, and allowed yourself to pre-conclude a singular path toward achieving the truth having to do with people like Pete Shea, but please don't bring that particular exploration here. On our site, it is a waste of time and does not fulfill our purpose. Just go back to what you were doing before here, which is posting good original stuff of your own opinion and explanation. And forgive our site for not being convinced of the Goldbug angle or all the Fakeologist characters. We have been doing this for years now, and we have come to recognize that the shills do not mind finding any sort of convoluted way to just get people to shut off their minds to doing personal forensic research.
They know it's an exhausting personal effort to do it, and so they find every single human resistance to one's own propensity to do research, every single way we as a species save time and effort from having to do something important. They find these things and exploit them. There are hundreds, thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of years of advertising and religious psychological study to thank for that kind of research into debilitating healthy minds, bodies and spirits — forcing them back into servitude to the "someone else" who will "solve it all" for you.
It doesn't mean there are no actors playing other actors. It just means Dallas Goldbug's "evidence" is very poorly constructed and he leaves far too much to the imagination to serve as a specific, documented evidence of his claims. He acts more "Alex Jones" than scientist. It saddens me that people of good intent and character can so easily jump on board this Dallas Goldbug bandwagon and then cry out "fraud" at we who ask for better, or even just more specific and well-documented evidence than he is willing to provide. It doesn't help that his followers do occasionally act like martyrs for such worthless points.
If you are going to yell at people about something, at least try to make a slam dunk case for it. Don't leave all the dangly bits and holes hanging all over your theory and then declare that you just don't care that it's unconvincing. That makes it seem like you want to just cause a stir rather than actually give people self-defense tools for the mind.
-
OpticalIllusion
- Member
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 10:19 pm
Re: CHEMTRAILS and HAARP - mystery solved?
I have noticed "chem trails" being added to older movies where they were not noticeable say from an original hard copy. i.e VHS from the late 80's. These movies are now being enhanced or being brought out in digital formats like blu ray where normal cloud formations are now showing trails all over the sky. I have noticed this on different types of recently re released films including children's movies.
One scene was in a early 90's version of the Little Rascals where on the blu ray version there are noticeable trails when it goes to a sky shot. Now if you look at the VHS copy that was released when the movie originally was released the trails were added sometime during the "conversion".
I think the reason for this is to get all current and future generations to never think back to when these trails didn't exist. I don't have many older physical copies or the time to really look into this farther but maybe some of the members here can start looking at movies especially the "new to blu ray" and compare them to original releases before the re touches.
One scene was in a early 90's version of the Little Rascals where on the blu ray version there are noticeable trails when it goes to a sky shot. Now if you look at the VHS copy that was released when the movie originally was released the trails were added sometime during the "conversion".
I think the reason for this is to get all current and future generations to never think back to when these trails didn't exist. I don't have many older physical copies or the time to really look into this farther but maybe some of the members here can start looking at movies especially the "new to blu ray" and compare them to original releases before the re touches.
Last edited by brianv on Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: typical chemmie claptrap not pertinent to the discussion - brianv
Reason: typical chemmie claptrap not pertinent to the discussion - brianv
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
I've also noticed this "chemmie claptrap" (as brianv put it). Whether it was added to the films later or not I couldn't say. I've even seen it in old westerns such as the 1972 Clint Eastwood movie "Joe Kidd" and one can see crisscross trails in the sky during the opening credits of "The Philadelphia Experiment" of 1984. I've seen it in films made as far back as the 1960s or even earlier.
But, that would imply that the movie industry is involved with mass social engineering and we all know that couldn't possibly be true because too many people would have to be involved and, Shirley, somebody would have squealed by now.
But, that would imply that the movie industry is involved with mass social engineering and we all know that couldn't possibly be true because too many people would have to be involved and, Shirley, somebody would have squealed by now.
Last edited by lux on Tue Jan 06, 2015 1:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
Why not start a blog about it and you can share your stories with the chemmie truther crowd!
This is exactly the type of discussion that Simon's Grand Theory of Everything does NOT need!
This is exactly the type of discussion that Simon's Grand Theory of Everything does NOT need!
-
hoi.polloi
- Member
- Posts: 5060
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
Although I agree the chemtrail discussion can easily be diluted, I want to point out (here in the Derailing Room where it belongs) that I have also noticed an obnoxious amount of trail-like clouds in popular media where they stand out as crude incongruities. The presences of the trails in children's movies and TV shows, particularly from the 'connected' spheres like Disney and network sponsored productions, seem to almost have a desperate quality to their frequency and ugliness. It makes me wonder if we aren't missing other even dumber "product placements" having to do with the world we are all meant to accept.brianv wrote:Why not start a blog about it and you can share your stories with the chemmie truther crowd!
This is exactly the type of discussion that Simon's Grand Theory of Everything does NOT need!
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
Perhaps if brianv gave us a detailed list of what types of comments he considers acceptable vs unacceptable as regards Simon's Chemtrail/HAARP thread it would serve to help us avoid having our posts relegated to the derailing room thus saving much time.
lux wrote:...
Simon has reopened the old "Chemtrails" thread, I didn't know we had one
You can post away here to your hearts content!*******************************
Admin notice (simon): Please be nice to each other, Lux and Brianv!
Last edited by simonshack on Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:47 pm, edited 6 times in total.
Reason: moved to correct thread - added link to our old chemtrail thread
Reason: moved to correct thread - added link to our old chemtrail thread
Re: SANDY HOOK Newtown,Ct School Shooting 14 dec 2012
Thank you for your correction, i think i have said before i am somewhat dyslexic and the spell checker i have did not highlight that spelling error.brianv wrote:Sorry to be a "grammer nazi", but please check you're spelling!!Pilgrim wrote:Also consider the agenda to re-frame non believers in the MSM narrative not only as nutters but actually as non violent extremists and that this "extremism" is the root cause of terrorism. This is exemplified by David Cameron's speech to the UN in 2014 here. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/ ... embly-2014
So no matter how stupid, arbitrary, irrational and illogical this "connection" between questioning the media and also actually observing or finding real evidence against the MSM narrative is, it seems they have already have plans in place to deal with us. Your not only a nutter, your dangerous and just as bad as terrorists and must be dealt with.
Free speech? Roll on the floor laughing unless your a Charlie boy cartoonist of course.
So do they make these ridiculous hoaxes more obvious to separate the wheat from the chaff for future use? Will we be soon be experiencing dissenting views as national security threats and labeled as terrorism? Sadly this seems the way things are going.
Perhaps they don't care if you question 9/11 but still believe in NASA, space travel, nuclear arms etc for example, who can truly know the mind of these collective psychopaths and sycophants but we have have been shown a new hand being played, that you can easily be called an "extremist" and linked to terrorism if they don't like you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn8kB1WK-7c
I would hope that for those of us who who don't have perfect English grammar and spelling for whatever reason are not to be dismissed and that the spirit and rational logic of our posts can be still be considered. Even Trolls, Perps, Doctors, Professors, Scientists and the massed brainwashed and Psychopaths can spell and be grammatically correct but still be full of bullshit and believe in hoaxes which i don't.
Last edited by Pilgrim on Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
HonestlyNow
- Member
- Posts: 474
- Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm
Re: SANDY HOOK Newtown,Ct School Shooting 14 dec 2012
From Guidelines for the good forum memberPilgrim wrote:Thank you for your correction, i think i have said before i am somewhat dyslexic and the spell checker i have did not highlight that spelling error.
I would hope that for those of us who who don't have perfect English grammar and spelling for whatever reason are not to be dismissed and that the spirit and rational logic of our posts can be still be considered. Even Trolls, Perps and Psychopaths can spell and be grammatically correct but still be of full of bullshit.
You could always use the Preview button to check your work before submitting.4) Always check your spelling and grammar, even if English is your mother tongue. Ungrammatical or confused writing turns off readers and gives them a lower opinion of this forum. It also associates thinking persons with anti-social handicaps like illiteracy. . . .
Re: SANDY HOOK Newtown,Ct School Shooting 14 dec 2012
Believe me, in my case the preview button does not make any difference. We also don't want to lose people either by ignoring what they say if it's not presented as being grammatically perfect and thus presenting ourselves as being the grammar police and don't you dare comment or join our elitist club if you can't. The argument cuts both ways.HonestlyNow wrote:From Guidelines for the good forum memberPilgrim wrote:Thank you for your correction, i think i have said before i am somewhat dyslexic and the spell checker i have did not highlight that spelling error.
I would hope that for those of us who who don't have perfect English grammar and spelling for whatever reason are not to be dismissed and that the spirit and rational logic of our posts can be still be considered. Even Trolls, Perps and Psychopaths can spell and be grammatically correct but still be of full of bullshit.
You could always use the Preview button to check your work before submitting.4) Always check your spelling and grammar, even if English is your mother tongue. Ungrammatical or confused writing turns off readers and gives them a lower opinion of this forum. It also associates thinking persons with anti-social handicaps like illiteracy. . . .
Let's face it, those who can see through hoaxes need all the help and support from our fellows who also can also see, be they high brow, low brow, autistic, dyslexic or whatever. Evidence, rationality, logic and seeing things without the filter of mass media brainwashing will always trump over the trivial fact of being grammatical correct and spelling errors in comparison to those who are genuinely seeking the truth who are are probably less than 5% of the population anyway.
Re: SANDY HOOK Newtown,Ct School Shooting 14 dec 2012
Really?Evidence, rationality, logic and seeing things without the filter of mass media brainwashing will always trump over the trivial fact of being grammatical correct and spelling errors in comparison to those who are genuinely seeking the truth who are are probably less than 5% of the population anyway.
-
hoi.polloi
- Member
- Posts: 5060
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
Hi, Pilgrim, thanks for your contributions. It is difficult for us to ask someone as passionate as you to step away from the forum or take some time to present things more legibly. I don't doubt your authenticity, but I do doubt your willingness to improve your grammar and spelling. Someone close to me, who has dyslexia, would not accept your level of writing either.
I do apologize. This is not a rejection of you or your contributions in any way. Your own legitimacy or illegitimacy will stand on its own aside from this particular issue. And we regrettably have to manage it this way. Please improve or do not post here. I would be happy to read a blog of yours.
I do apologize. This is not a rejection of you or your contributions in any way. Your own legitimacy or illegitimacy will stand on its own aside from this particular issue. And we regrettably have to manage it this way. Please improve or do not post here. I would be happy to read a blog of yours.