So i was having a written exchange with a couple of conspiracists. They were posting links ranting on and on about FEMA camps, martial law, something about foreign troops being trained to disarm Americans . . . yada, yada, yada.
You know, the same old crap.
This whole conspiracy thing seems cyclical. A new generation of conspiracy theorists stumble upon the same old, worn out, decades old conspiracy theories for the first time in their paranoid lives and they think they’ve discovered something completely new, true and worth preaching. And so they begin their new mission – running around trying to wake up the “sheeple” to their new found “truth.”
These newly stamped conspiracists then go on to spend many years spinning their wheels in the same conspiratorial muck that their conspiratorial predecessors did all those decades before.
Some of these newbies will remain in the Lost Forest for many years – beyond the reach of reason. Then there are the newbies that wise up to the con(spiracy) money game being played on them by those reaping huge profits regurgitating the same old tales of paranoia – Alex Jones comes to mind.
Every conspiracy being preached today has been preached before in some shape or form. This is the point i try to make in my exchanges with my conspiratorial friends:
- How urgent can your message be today if it’s the same “urgent” message that has been screamed for (at least) the last 20 years?
- Can you continuously scream “FIRE!” for decades and be taken seriously when the fire has never materialized?
As an example of what i’m talking about i have posted some screenshots below that came from the InfoWars website, October 1999. Note the similarities to today’s InfoWar headlines. Same sh**, different year.
I’ll give Alex Jones credit for one thing – he has an amazing ability to sell and resell the same crap over and over again.
Mason I. Bilderberg
Elon Musk just seems like a slick con artist to me. He gets billions of $$$$ in government subsidies, his company is bleeding money and all he does is make bigger and bigger promises he never fulfills.
monoraill….. MonoRail… MONORAIILLL!!!! Blow your mind how many times Elon Musk has promised revolution, and delivered nothing!
These two videos are absolutely brutal to watch. I love it. I enjoy watching these con artists fail at their con game.
Part 1 –
Part 2 –
“It is no surprise that about half of the students who attended the speech walked out . . .”
The world may be coming closer to an end when The University of Florida paid Vani Hari, aka Food Babe, to speak on its campus as part of the “The Good Food Revolution” last Monday, October 21. Why would a prestigious university — home of the Gators — hire a self-proclaimed food “expert” to give students “a clear plan of action for making positive food choices” instead of more qualified professionals, such as one of their food science professors? The $16,000 fee that Food Babe received to speak is quite a hefty amount to spread false information. This prompted Dr. Kevin Folta, Professor and Chairman of the Horticultural Sciences Department, to write his thoughts about the event on his blog. After Food Babe spoke at the university, Professor Folta may have a somewhat challenging task of undoing the damage.
“The problem is that giving non-experts a forum to spread outright lies and bad information just pollutes the discussion. There are important issues in farming, diet and food science,” explained Dr. Folta in an online interview with Guardian Liberty Voice. “We need to acknowledge them, and get students excited about participating in solutions. Hari’s tactics are to use social media as a means to essentially blackmail corporations into changes she mandates, not based on science.”
Folta’s blog highlights some of the claims Hari made, such as GMO labeling in other countries, transgenic crops linking to cancer and autism, and the increase use of pesticides in crops. “She coordinates elaborate smear campaigns against companies that [she feels] use ingredients that should not be used. Teaching students that achieving your goals by harming the reputations of others is something that should not be tolerated, let alone endorsed as part of an ‘expert’ series.”
It is no surprise that about half of the students who attended the speech walked out . . .
by Gordon Bonnet via Skeptophilia
There’s an odd tendency of conspiracy theorists to eat their young.
Not literally, of course. I wouldn’t want that to get out as some kind of meta-conspiracy-theory. But I’ve noticed that although the conspiracy theories themselves never seem to die, the conspiracy theorists seem to have a relatively short half-life before they implode.
Again, not literally. Don’t get your hopes up.
I think the reason for this is that once you abandon logic and evidence as the sine qua non of understanding, you are out in some kind of netherworld of lies, suppositions, and paranoia, and it’s only a matter of time before you become victim to the same foolishness you were perpetrating. You give people the impression that no one is to be trusted, that anyone and everyone could be part of the conspiracy, and before you know it, your followers have decided that you’re right… and include you in the assessment.
Icke was outed, fittingly enough, in a YouTube video in which he is caught “shape-shifting into a Reptilian.” Odd, isn’t it, that these Reptilian overlords of ours are brilliant enough to infiltrate themselves into every level of government, break into the sanctum sanctorum of military intelligence, and then can’t remember to keep their costumes in place when they’re on the air? But yes, you heard it here first: Icke, who said that Reptilians are in control of everything from the CIA to the U.S. public education system, is himself a Reptilian.
Even more wryly amusing is the fact that Alex Jones had the whistle blown on the site Before It’s News, because they’re about the only website that is even more bizarrely paranoid than Jones’s own site InfoWars. Here’s the exposé about Jones . . .
MORE – – –
Also See: Who are the Anunnaki? What is the Planet Nibiru? (iLLuMiNuTTi.com)
Discovery Channel’s “Shark Week” is misleading the public again this year with several documentaries. So why are scientists allowing themselves to be featured in these pseudoscience disasters? There’s a simple reason: Shark Week producers have been lying to them.
Jonathan Davis, who now works for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, was studying the bull sharks in the Gulf of Mexico for his Masters research when he was approached by a Shark Week film crew. “They were interested in the sharks in Louisiana, and I was the person doing the research there,” Davis says. He agreed to take the film crew into the field, but quickly became concerned by their refusal to answer his questions.
I asked a few of the crew members, including the producer, what the show was going to be about. I never got a straight answer and the producer seemed to avoid the question. I was just told it would be combined with some other filming to make one show about Louisiana shark research.
Davis was shocked to find that his interview aired during a 2013 Shark Week special called Voodoo Shark, which was about a mythical monster shark called “Rooken” that lived in the Bayous of Louisiana. The “other filming” his interview was combined with featured a Bayou fishermen, and the clips were edited together to make it seem like a race between his team of researchers and the fishermen to see who could catch the mythical voodoo shark faster. In reality, Davis was barely asked about the voodoo shark at all. His answers from unrelated questions were edited together to make it seem like he believed in its existence and was searching for it.
Davis explained how the hoodwinking was done . . .
Celebrity “ghost-hunter” Ryan Buell cancels appearances and fans say they aren’t getting refunds.
RALEIGH (WTVD) — The I-Team Troubleshooter reports the story of a celebrity ghost-hunter who has cancelled appearances and fans say they aren’t getting refunds.
Paranormal expert Ryan Buell appeared on the cable TV series “Paranormal State” looking for ghosts or trying to prove that life after death is real.
Buell claims to be based here in the Triangle; however the ghost hunter has a pretty big following nationwide.
Teresa Harrell paid over $400 to get special VIP tickets for her and her husband and drove six hours to Chicago to see Buell’s “Conversations with the Dead Tour.”
“I watched all of Ryan Buell’s movies that were on the TV and I also read his book,” Teresa said.
However, just days before the show, she got the bad news it was postponed.
“They rescheduled the event for like three weeks later and didn’t tell anybody what was going on,” Teresa explained.
According to Buell’s Facebook page, there were scheduling conflicts with venues. Teresa didn’t buy it.
“What I did was call the venue directly and I spoke with the manager and he told me that they had not spoken with him since they had rescheduled the event. He had no deposits or anything and couldn’t get a hold of them,” she said.
The rescheduled shows never happened. Instead, the entire tour was cancelled and fans wanted their money back.
A follow up investigation of celebrity ghost hunter Ryan Buell, whose long-time friend is speaking out about fans’ missing money.
RALEIGH (WTVD) — The I-Team Troubleshooter follows up on the investigation of a celebrity ghost hunter, whose long-time friend is speaking out about fans’ missing money.
We heard from a lot of former fans of Ryan Buell who were angry that they paid a lot of money for his lecture tour and never got refunds when it was canceled. One even traveled all the way from Denmark.
One of the headliner’s for Buell’s tour, a long-time friend, said thousands of dollars are at stake.
Chip Coffey is a well-known psychic and medium who was once part of the cable TV series “Paranormal State” with Buell.
Coffey was scheduled to team up with the ghost hunter again for his “Conversations With The Dead Tour.”
He says Buell and his team, the Paranormal Research Society, based here in the Triangle organized the tour and were in charge of all the details.
“Venues weren’t booked. Airline tickets weren’t booked,” Coffey said.
He says it was so unorganized, he had to bail on the U.S. tour in April, just days before it was supposed to start.
Additionally, he says while he has no access to the ticket sales, he knows a lot were sold.
Coffey said, “I know that the last accounting I had, with regards to ticket sales for the ‘Conversations with the Dead Tour,’ it was in excess of $80,000.”
That doesn’t even include the tickets that were sold for the seven shows in Canada that were all canceled.
Now that Buell canceled the U.S. and Canadian tours, Coffey says he doesn’t understand why ticket holders aren’t getting refunds.
One of the most important, and least considered, questions about belief is, “What would it take to convince you that you were wrong?”
It is something we should always keep in the front of our brains, whenever considering a claim. We all have biases; we all have preconceived notions. These only become a problem when either (1) they are unexamined, or (2) we become so attached to them that nothing could persuade us to abandon them.
I’m very much afraid that for some people, belief in the power of psychics is one of those unexamined, immovable ideas. I say this because of the response people have had to a catastrophic faceplant performed last week by Skeptophilia frequent flier “Psychic Sally” Morgan.
“Psychic Sally,” you may remember, is the performance artist who has thousands of people convinced that she can communicate with the dead. She bills herself as “Britain’s favorite medium,” and fills halls with people who have purchased expensive tickets to her shows. This is despite the fact that in a previous show she was caught “communicating” with a fictional character, and was once accused by a journalist of receiving information from a helper through an earpiece.
None of this diminished her popularity. The first incident was only revealed in a newspaper article after the fact, and in the second, the journalist was actually sued by Psychic Sally for libel — and she won. There was no proof, the judge ruled, that the Sally had cheated. The journalist, and the newspaper he worked for, were forced to pay reparations. But this time it is to be hoped that things are different, because Sally did her monumental kerflop right in public. Here’s how blogger Myles Power, who was there that night, describes it:
Sally came to Middlesbrough on Friday night and her show started off very well. Even though she was getting the vast majority of what she was saying wrong the audience did not seem to mind and seemed to be having a good time. The point at which the audience became disillusioned with the performance was quite specific. One aspect of the show is that audience members can submit photographs of dead loved ones, in the hope that Sally will select theirs, and give a psychic reading from it. Sally pulled out of a box on stage one of these pictures. She held the picture up to the camera and it was projected on the large screen behind her. The picture was of a middle-aged woman and by the clothes she was wearing and the quality of the image, I guessed it was taken some time in the 1990s. Sally immediately began to get communications from beyond the grave from a man holding a baby named Annabel……or was it Becky. Noticing that no one in the audience was responding, Sally asked the person who submitted the photo to stand up. A rather small chunky woman at the centre of the hall stood up and Sally once again began to get messages from the afterlife. She was informed that this man and baby were somehow linked to the lady in the picture. However the woman in the audience (who was now also projected behind Sally) disagreed and started to look increasingly confused as, presumably, nothing Sally was saying made any sense to her. Sally then decided to flat out ask her if the woman in the picture had any children who passed and, when informed that that she hadn’t, responded by saying “I will leave that then.”
Sally then became in direct contact with the woman in the photo who began to tell her that there was a lot of confusion around her death and that she felt it was very very quick. She later went on to say that the day Wednesday has a specific link to her death and that she either died on a Wednesday or was taken ill that day. As the woman in the audience was not responding to any thing Sally was saying, she decided to ask how the woman in the photo was related to her. It turns out the woman in the audience got the whole concept of submitting a picture of someone you wanted to talk to from the afterlife completely wrong – and for some unknown reason submitted a younger picture of herself.
So there you have it. “Psychic Sally” has now been caught not only summoning up the spirit of a fictional character, she has gotten into psychic communication with the ghost of a person who is still alive and sitting right there in the audience.
Apparently the hall erupted in laughter when it became evident what had happened, and Psychic Sally never really did recover. A number of people walked out. People wouldn’t answer her leading questions. The audience, for that night at least, was a lost cause.
But here’s the problem:
By Joanne Nova via JoNova
We could spend hours analyzing the new IPCC report about the impacts of climate change. Or we could just point out:
- Everything in the Working Group II report depends entirely on Working Group I. (see footnote 1 SPM, page 3)
- Working Group I depends entirely on climate models and 98% of them didn’t predict the pause.
Working Group I, remember, was supposed to tell us the scientific case for man-made global warming. If our emissions aren’t driving the climate towards a catastrophe, then we don’t need to analyze what happens during the catastrophe we probably won’t get. This applies equally to War, Pestilence, Famine, Drought, Floods, Storms, and Shrinking Fish (which, keep in mind, could have led to the ultimate disaster: shrinking fish and chips).
To cut a long story short, the 95% certainty of Working Group I boils down to climate models and 98% of them didn’t predict the pause in surface temperature trends (von Storch 2013) . Even under the most generous interpretation, models are proven failures, 100% right except for rain, drought, storms, humidity and everything else (Taylor 2012). They get cloud feedbacks wrong by a factor 19 times larger than the entire effect of increased CO2 (Miller 2012). They don’t predict the climate on a local, regional, or continental scale (Anagnostopoulos 2010 and Koutsoyiannis 2008). They don’t work on the tropical troposphere (Christy 2010, Po-Chedley 2012, Fu 2011, Paltridge 2009). The fingerprints they predicted are 100% missing.
Even the IPCC admits in the fine print that the models don’t work.