Disinformers & Friends

[Yeats]

I fail to see how I levied any such attacks against any such member, here or elsewhere - even in my thread, which was indeed derailed from its original intent, as any reader can plainly see. But, given my original topics points, does this surprise anyone?, I'm not shocked.

Yes. Yes. I know.

"Help! Help! I'm being attacked because of my theories, and not because I subtly attempt to attack those who disagree with me!"

I've heard this kind of thing before -- and from those who, quite frankly, are much better at it than you appear to be.

Perhaps the following quotes will correct your "failure to see":

"Please tell us, how did you develop your ESP?" -- Of course, you were aware that ESP was not required. Only an objective reading of source material.

"Finally, someone who can explain the meaning of life to all of us. I always thought I'd meet a water walker, but not on THIS website!" -- In other words, "this person disagrees with me, therefore he thinks he's Jesus Christ."

"What I find curious is the the tactic of declaring it racist to question the official narrative of human history, it's baseless nonsense of course, but its clever and grants license to color all sorts of things as wrong-think." -- Very subtle, this one -- but not enough.

"Being an egoistic troll looking for petty kicks on a website is besides the point, he learned it somewhere, is this a tactic being employed elsewhere?" -- When you can't argue the facts, just call them a troll. Works every time. Except for this time.

"Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend your religious sentiments, I myself do not attend church." -- Nice straw man there.

"I'm sorry, I dont reference white nationalist website content when doing my research into megalithic structures. Since you admit to doing that, I'll keep you mind as a reference for future crypto-nazi research however." -- Or, simply put: "I'm not the racist! You're the racist!" Then again, Harte never said that you were a racist, did he?

These are your quotes, are they not?

Although you may believe so, I doubt that many here will give you debating points for such behavior. Perhaps it would be best if you simply stated your theories and allowed others the freedom to disagree with them.

You may now respond, if you wish, but I have nothing more to say on this matter.

 

[solderjunkie]

Yes. Yes. I know.

"Help! Help! I'm being attacked because of my theories, and not because I subtly attempt to attack those who disagree with me!"

I've heard this kind of thing before -- and from those who, quite frankly, are much better at it than you appear to be.

Perhaps the following quotes will correct your "failure to see":

"Please tell us, how did you develop your ESP?" -- Of course, you were aware that ESP was not required. Only an objective reading of source material.

"Finally, someone who can explain the meaning of life to all of us. I always thought I'd meet a water walker, but not on THIS website!" -- In other words, "this person disagrees with me, therefore he thinks he's Jesus Christ."

"What I find curious is the the tactic of declaring it racist to question the official narrative of human history, it's baseless nonsense of course, but its clever and grants license to color all sorts of things as wrong-think." -- Very subtle, this one -- but not enough.

"Being an egoistic troll looking for petty kicks on a website is besides the point, he learned it somewhere, is this a tactic being employed elsewhere?" -- When you can't argue the facts, just call them a troll. Works every time. Except for this time.

"Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend your religious sentiments, I myself do not attend church." -- Nice straw man there.

"I'm sorry, I dont reference white nationalist website content when doing my research into megalithic structures. Since you admit to doing that, I'll keep you mind as a reference for future crypto-nazi research however." -- Or, simply put: "I'm not the racist! You're the racist!" Then again, Harte never said that you were a racist, did he?

These are your quotes, are they not?

Although you may believe so, I doubt that many here will give you debating points for such behavior. Perhaps it would be best if you simply stated your theories and allowed others the freedom to disagree with them.

You may now respond, if you wish, but I have nothing more to say on this matter.

Comradeship and loyalty. I'm just glad to see people so close to one another, almost like it's one person with two accounts!.

 

[Harte]

Comradeship and loyalty. I'm just glad to see people so close to one another, almost like it's one person with two accounts!.

There's another one for your list Yeats.

Seems this poster can't stand the thought of possibly being wrong.

Look Soldierjunkie, why don't you try to find some of these idiotic fringe claims about the ancient past that can't be construed as racist?

How many such claims are made concerning (for example) Europe, and how do those differ from the ones concerning the rest of the world?

List them. We'll go over them for you.

Harte

 

[Harte]

"What I find curious is the the tactic of declaring it racist to question the official narrative of human history, it's baseless nonsense of course, but its clever and grants license to color all sorts of things as wrong-think." -- Very subtle, this one -- but not enough.

Subtle? Maybe. But this is a complete straw man. The claim railed against in this statement was never made.
Just pointing that out.

Harte

 

[Yeats]

Subtle? Maybe. But this is a complete straw man. The claim railed against in this statement was never made.
Just pointing that out.

Harte

You are correct, of course, but what I meant was the use of the word "tactic" in that context -- as well as "baseless nonsense", the obviously sarcastic use of the word "clever", and the assertion that the statement (which, granted, you never made) was powerful enough to "color all sorts of things as wrong-think".

Also, I wanted to return at the same time as you in order to prove to this person that we are two different people, but I doubt he would be convinced even of that.

 

[solderjunkie]

Subtle? Maybe. But this is a complete straw man. The claim railed against in this statement was never made.
Just pointing that out.

Harte

Anyone can visit the thread and see for themselves, you certainly did say that my hypothesis was racist - something I of course reject entirely.

---Quote below---

Right. Everything is misrepresented so that you can continue your sparkly fantasy existence.

Harte

Sorry about that, touchy subject for me.
The fact is, as was stated (obliquely,) it is at its core a racist hypothesis.

---

There's another one for your list Yeats.

Seems this poster can't stand the thought of possibly being wrong.

Look Soldierjunkie, why don't you try to find some of these idiotic fringe claims about the ancient past that can't be construed as racist?

How many such claims are made concerning (for example) Europe, and how do those differ from the ones concerning the rest of the world?

List them. We'll go over them for you.

Harte

For me to be upset at being wrong, I would have to make an assertion, I asked questions and presented a hypothesis for discussion - I thought it might be an interesting topic.

I don't care what some OTHER person says on ANOTHER website in ANOTHER context to support a bigoted ideology, it has nothing to do with me or my hypothesis.

Considering how posting here has gone in my short time, I'm going to bid you guys farewell. I thought maybe this was a friendly community, it certainly is not.

 

[Yeats]

Considering how posting here has gone in my short time, I'm going to bid you guys farewell. I thought maybe this was a friendly community, it certainly is not.

I have heard this before. In fact, I have said this before -- twice.

I, for one, hope that you will remain, and will continue to espouse your theories. My only objection was to your unnecessary sniping at those who disagree with you. That, I am sure you will agree, is not very friendly either, and I am sorry for angering you for my calling you out concerning it. However, I do not apologize for defending Harte and for believing that your attack upon him was both unfair and immature.

 

[lamdo263]

I recently had a run in with someone who made the assertion it's was racist to question official pre-human history writ large, I'm not talking about recorded human history here, I'm talking about anthropology and the like. I paused to reflect upon the ridiculousness of the assertion, and while it is silly at face, much more silly things have now become mainstream or at least legitimized in recent years, so it's worth taking seriously.

Anyone whose spent any time at all studying propaganda knows that while propaganda operates at the tactical level it is employed strategically for the aim of halting a given line of inquiry or otherwise steering the logos onto the proverbial rocks of inanity and thereby castrating free discussion. The idea is to get those they seek to affect upon to engage with them on a topic of their choice and tangle them up in debate, in the above example the goal would be to tangle the discussion up surrounding racism and therefore derail discussion of the original point - inanity is the end goal, not to win the argument, see?. Walk up, throw accusations, debate the accusations - goodbye original discussion.

The answer to why this new application of accusation is being levied is simple - it's worked elsewhere, maybe it will work here. The reason it's being done however isn't at all murky, its crystal clear that there are those who wish to see the status quo - and its financial and power structure - preserved for their benefit, these are the thought leaders in official space. The low-end bad actors we encounter at the periphery are simply aping what they hear from scared official sources and they gladly regurgitate it in an effort to shut down discussion.

I'm curious what you guys see going on in paranormal space in general, is this trend picking up, what other applications of propaganda methods do you see?

Note, on the time scope your referring to. The following unfolds within your primary statements. One is sources and arability of food. 2.In later times, because the object of food or any other needed items falls into the relegation of significance, the need for one tribe or grouping of humans or animals, to have either noted genetic differences, such as in anatomy, or clothing, locations or odors from where they come from. Secondary note. Geopolitics or development of civilizations into cities, changes the perception of types of tribalisms.

The change from true dated perceived anthropological basis claims, changed in the American south, due to the Kennedy eras say, of both progress during the space and military adjusted eras of time, to coin the term racism. The deeper set of complaints at the time, in general were how people of color or other ethnic extractions had been treated at that time.

So there's a very complex allegorical interweaving to just the statements that were put out here.

There still is extreme prejudice among natives located off the southern tip of India, to where they don't want you on their island and will attack and kill you, if you're not from their numbers, simply because they don't desire the populations of their island to be, "as they perceive", to be contaminated, or unwanted.

The term your using here, is lucid. This series of statements might hold as much values, as "I bought a plaid shirt, a candy bar and performed a dance, then called my mom". Not trying to be trite here, but you might engineer what your trying to say, into more relatable terms that mean exactly what and who you're talking about. No challenge to the veracity of what you say, but just saying.

 

[Harte]

Anyone can visit the thread and see for themselves, you certainly did say that my hypothesis was racist - something I of course reject entirely.

---Quote below---


Sorry about that, touchy subject for me.
The fact is, as was stated (obliquely,) it is at its core a racist hypothesis.

---

The statement you made WAS rooted in a racist hypothesis - exactly as I said and as Yeats implied earlier:

For me the most paranormal thing in existence is sitting there in plain sight - megalithic structures. The fact the largest and most durable structures made by man in our entire history were supposedly made by primitive peoples makes no sense.

And:

The major grievance I have against those who espouse such theories is that they assume that our ancestors were too stupid to have, for example, constructed such things as the Great Pyramid or Stonehenge.

You do understand the term "obliquely," don't you?

You went on to make several other statements rooted in the same hypothesis which, as I stated, is at its core quite racist. To wit:

Firstly, I am including pyramids writ large and all structures which defy conventional explanations in general in this, I do not for a moment believe the Egyptians built most of the pyramids, nor the Aztecs, nor the Incas and so on.

You make this silly statement in complete ignorance of why it is known that these cultures are, in fact, responsible for the heritages they left behind and think nothing of robbing them of their own accomplishments in favor of a supposedly "superior" (yet entirely unevidenced) one that MUST have cut and stacked all that stone, and this apparently without even knowing anything about the structures you claim they didn't build.

Afterwards, you went on with a monologue displaying some (hopefully all) of the extent of your utter ignorance of the past, of Biology, Genetics, fossilization, Anthropology and of Physics itself - concluding with what must have been a feigned desire for comments from others since, after receiving exactly that, you were unable to accept any.

Harte

 

[Mayhem]

@solderjunkie around these parts you have to have a hard neck sometimes and not get too wound up.

There are some that talk loud, and one speaking here is lucky to even be present after his antics last year.
( a name change is not enough to forget what occurred).

So as some members do say "ive had enough" but take your time and reflect.