Jump to content
Science Forums

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, A-wal said:

You're far more similar than either of you would like to admit. You're both extremists who have no interest in learning because you think you already know and are only interested in evidence that can be used to support your position while rejecting any contrary evidence on the basis of it either being mainstream propaganda or a conspiracy theory.

 

That is painting the kettle black in not interested in learning. Give me an example on how I am an extremist. I have lots of evidence on the things I post or I wouldn't be posting them. If I am shown proof otherwise then I will start to look at that. So I really don't know how you come to that conclusion.

The truth is the mainstream is an arm of the cabal and pure propaganda and mind control. Unless they are talking about little puppies. It's not my fault you don't see that and think I am an extremist for actually looking for the truth in all avenues. I have been studying these things for a long time. And to those that don't know the truth may think that the person finding and telling the truth is an extremist. So I think you are being a bit over the top with your estimate with really nothing to support your theory on me being some kind of extremist. The fact is there are conspiracies going on all around us and if you don't see that, that isn't my fault at all. You don't have to believe what I say but I do suggest doing better research on these subjects not coming from the propaganda networks.

Great quote here but I think this goes for most of the world:

Most Americans have no idea that what we are fed by the news media is nothing more than a portrayal of what powerful corporations want us to believe, that what happens to pass as education is as often as not mere propaganda, that what we learn in church may have very little or nothing to do with the truth, that what our parents teach us may be nothing more than an accumulation of their own personal biases, no doubt a rather subtle modification of what they were taught by their parents. And through such a process, governments and nations around the world wield control as to what their citizens, believe, value, and do."
 Doug Soderstrom

And A-wal if we are talking extremist here. You were supporting BLM who is an extremist group that goes around torching small business's and beating up old white people. They even did that close to my hometown. They came in and torched the place and ripped people out of restaurants while eating. So if anyone is extremist here it is you because you support extremist groups. I would not be surprised if you support the terrorist group Antifa also.

 

Edited by Thoth101
Add
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Your hero David's surname reflects his quality as a scientist beautifully. As it does the reaction of any rational scientist to his nonsensical work.

I think Mars hasa weak magnetic field so maybe it got hit with a CME while you were looking at it and it reacted to produce a tail. No idea if that's possible, just a wild guess.

Very possibly. I thank you for actually contributing to the topic, instead of picking fights like Montgomery over here.

11 hours ago, montgomery said:

I would be delighted if anchovy became your friend and fellow sympathizer. You would have an ally and then you would lose all caution and really spill it out. 

Right now you're much less fun as paranoia is setting in. Remember the comma?

Apparently according to Anchovy and A-wal we are the same somehow.😄 What do you think of that Monty?🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Thoth101 said:

Apparently according to Anchovy and A-wal we are the same somehow.😄 What do you think of that Monty?🤣

On several different ocassions while in Mexico I have observed Iguanas sitting out in conspicuous public places. They have given me an uncomfortable feeling that they are watching me especially. For this reason  Thoth, we may have something in common with your feeling on lizard people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Anchovyforestbane said:

Even if that is correct, it was wise of you to choose the word "report" and not "observe". Maybe there is still some sense in that noggin.

What are you trying to say? I'll change it to 'observe' for your sake so you can explain further. As for it being something between your eyes and Mars, that would be remotely possible but the possibility of it happening twice makes it almost infinitely impossible. I think you can throw that explanation out.

Do you wear glasses? Were you using binoculars or a telescope the first time or both times?  Do you find it a little unusual that you've witnessed a phenomenon twice which hasn't been seen by anybody else, and especially not astronomers?

Can we put this to bed by coming up with a reason for only you witnessing it twice?

Everything is on the table, including the psychological shock of seeing Mars so conspicuously bright. How about you go out in the evening while Mars is so close and see if you can duplicate the effect again?

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, montgomery said:

On several different ocassions while in Mexico I have observed Iguanas sitting out in conspicuous public places. They have given me an uncomfortable feeling that they are watching me especially. For this reason  Thoth, we may have something in common with your feeling on lizard people.

I can't believe you actually left your basement to go to Mexico. I think you are telling another tall tale now Monty.😄

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Thoth101 said:

I can't believe you actually left your basement to go to Mexico. I think you are telling another tall tale now Monty.😄

I don't live in my room in the basement anymore and I did go to Mexico. The iguanas I 'seen' were real and they sat still and stared at me. I'm not saying they're the lizard people but I'm not saying they aren't. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2020 at 10:34 PM, Thoth101 said:

The truth is the mainstream is an arm of the cabal and pure propaganda and mind control. Unless they are talking about little puppies. It's not my fault you don't see that and think I am an extremist for actually looking for the truth in all avenues. I have been studying these things for a long time. And to those that don't know the truth may think that the person finding and telling the truth is an extremist. So I think you are being a bit over the top with your estimate with really nothing to support your theory on me being some kind of extremist. The fact is there are conspiracies going on all around us and if you don't see that, that isn't my fault at all. You don't have to believe what I say but I do suggest doing better research on these subjects not coming from the propaganda networks.

 

The truth is, the mainstream media is a friend of the people fervently dedicated to the facts. It's not their fault you don't see that and think that they are extremists when they are actually pursuing the truth in all avenues. They have been reporting for a long time, and those biased towards distrusting the media may think that the people uncovering and reporting the truth are extremists. The fact is all the distrust towards the media is nothing but a big conspiracy theory, and if you can't see that, that isn't my fault at all.

If your logic, when reversed, is equally as true (which is to say, in this case, equally as ludicrous), there's a good chance your argument is flawed. 

 

 

On 10/24/2020 at 12:53 PM, montgomery said:

What are you trying to say? I'll change it to 'observe' for your sake so you can explain further.

I meant exactly what I said. Should it have simply been a phenomenon of perspective as I've proposed, it would be foolish of you to assume I'm the only person on the planet who would've seen it, even if no astronomers with an ability to report the finding happened to be around that perspective point. 

 

 

On 10/24/2020 at 12:53 PM, montgomery said:

As for it being something between your eyes and Mars, that would be remotely possible but the possibility of it happening twice makes it almost infinitely impossible. I think you can throw that explanation out.

You seem to have a habit of not listening too well. Seems to be a consistent characteristic of yours. If you were paying attention, you'd have realized that the phenomenon was different the second time. This would make sense if, as I've proposed, it were a phenomenon of perspective.
And it would sure be nice if you used this thread for exploring what that phenomenon could be, rather than exploiting it to quench your thirst for petty bickering. 

 

 

On 10/24/2020 at 12:53 PM, montgomery said:

Can we put this to bed by coming up with a reason for only you witnessing it twice?

Everything is on the table, including the psychological shock of seeing Mars so conspicuously bright. How about you go out in the evening while Mars is so close and see if you can duplicate the effect again?

You sure seem eager to end it on this notion of having fantasized the phenomenon which you're so steadfast in. Which is very strange, given that a few posts ago you insisted that you were not asserting that it must necessarily have been in my head. Were you simply saying that to cover your humiliatingly fallacious posterior, I wonder? Sure would make sense, given your recent behavior.

Edited by Anchovyforestbane
misspelling
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anchovyforestbane said:

The truth is, the mainstream media is a friend of the people fervently dedicated to the facts. It's not their fault you don't see that and think that they are extremists when they are actually pursuing the truth in all avenues. They have been reporting for a long time, and those biased towards distrusting the media may think that the people uncovering and reporting the truth are extremists. The fact is all the distrust towards the media is nothing but a big conspiracy theory, and if you can't see that, that isn't my fault at all.

If your logic, when reversed, is equally as true (which is to say, in this case, equally as ludicrous), there's a good chance your argument is flawed. 

 

I didn't say that. A-wal said that. Don't go assuming some ideonomic alliance between us all of a sudden. 

 

I meant exactly what I said. Should it have simply been a phenomenon of perspective as I've proposed, it would be foolish of you to assume I'm the only person on the planet who would've seen it, even if no astronomers with an ability to report the finding happened to be around that perspective point. 

 

 

You seem to have a habit of not listening too well. Seems to be a consistent characteristic of yours. If you were paying attention, you'd have realized that the phenomenon was different the second time. This would make sense if, as I've proposed, it were a phenomenon of perspective.
And it would sure be nice if you used this thread for exploring what that phenomenon could be, rather than exploiting it to quench your thirst for petty bickering. 

 

 

You sure seem eager to end it on this notion of having fantasized the phenomenon which you're so steadfast in. Which is very strange, given that a few posts ago you insisted that you were not asserting that it must necessarily have been in my head. Were you simply saying that to cover your humiliatingly fallacious posterior, I wonder? Sure would make sense, given your recent behavior.

Twice you made up little lies to get attention. Was it your glasses the first time that were glaring back at you? And was it tears of anger the second time you made it up?

Let it go *******! The only other remedy for you it to get the mods to let me go for you. whining baby cksker you'all poser! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, montgomery said:

Twice you made up little lies to get attention. Was it your glasses the first time that were glaring back at you? And was it tears of anger the second time you made it up?

Let it go *******! The only other remedy for you it to get the mods to let me go for you. whining baby cksker you'all poser! 

Reported once again.
In your desperation and embarrassment, you only exacerbate your problem. 
The more one makes you out to be the unstable loser that you are, the more you go and prove it yourself. 
I would tell you that you have my pity, but frankly you don't deserve it.

Edited by Anchovyforestbane
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mars is still there and nearly as bright as it ever was. Can you put a tail on it one more time? 

Have you reported your sightings to NASA yet? Why haven't you? 

You saw a tail on Mars two times?

You imagined a tail on Mars two times?

You saw something that looked like a tail on Mars two times.

You just made up a story about the tail because you didn't understand you were looking at Mars and your brain created the tail? You created your own UFO? Twice? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, montgomery said:

Mars is still there and nearly as bright as it ever was. Can you put a tail on it one more time? 

Have you reported your sightings to NASA yet? Why haven't you? 

You saw a tail on Mars two times?

You imagined a tail on Mars two times?

You saw something that looked like a tail on Mars two times.

You just made up a story about the tail because you didn't understand you were looking at Mars and your brain created the tail? You created your own UFO? Twice? 

How amusing, reduced to a broken record of obstinacy.

If you're so butthurt about this that you can't leave it alone, here's a question for you.

What evidence have you to assert this slander that I'm lying for attention? If you care anything about science, you should have plenty, otherwise you wouldn't be so insistent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anchovyforestbane said:

How amusing, reduced to a broken record of obstinacy.

If you're so butthurt about this that you can't leave it alone, here's a question for you.

What evidence have you to assert this slander that I'm lying for attention? If you care anything about science, you should have plenty, otherwise you wouldn't be so insistent.

If you're not lying then you're going to have to offer an explanation for what you claim to have seen. TWICE! Very big tactical mistake when you told us you saw it a second time! You've now received much more attention on this bullsh-t than you deserve, or even wanted.

I've got you in a box now and so I don't have to twist the knife anymore. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can capitalize on my slamdunking of the Anchovy on this forum in that it's to my benefit on the credibility front. That doesn't matter very much on this obvious attempt he's made to get his talltale accepted but it does add to my credibility on the case I'm making on the UFO's and aliens issues.

People like to believe in the supernatural and most won't hold back from making claims on the supernatural so they can become a part of the conversation with some credentials. This is what Anchovy tried to do here but he became too anxious to be seen as a participant and then made his careless claim of witnessing the supernatural twice.

Anyone who still wants to stand with the little rascal now, needs to hear his explanation for why he's not lying. Is there any story that can fill the bill for him? 

Dare he try to turn to binocular glare or eyeglasses glare at this late date? How about a cold wind that made his eyes water?  Can anybody bail his sorry a-s out? 

Thoth? You're an original thinker! 

Blahhhhhhhhhhhhhahahahaha.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, montgomery said:

If you're not lying then you're going to have to offer an explanation for what you claim to have seen. TWICE! Very big tactical mistake when you told us you saw it a second time! You've now received much more attention on this bullsh-t than you deserve, or even wanted.

I've got you in a box now and so I don't have to twist the knife anymore. 

 

Guess what, Monty? That's what this thread was about before you started picking fights. Imagine that! If you were less concerned about affirming your self-perceived superiority, we might've all learned something.

Besides, you haven't answered the question. That may be because you have no evidence, and you're desperately clinging to your foolish ideas with insults and denigration alone.

 

 

24 minutes ago, montgomery said:

I can capitalize on my slamdunking of the Anchovy on this forum in that it's to my benefit on the credibility front. That doesn't matter very much on this obvious attempt he's made to get his talltale accepted but it does add to my credibility on the case I'm making on the UFO's and aliens issues.

Your slamdunking, eh? How amusing; are you simply trying to convince yourself that you haven't been completely embarrassed with every post you've antagonized me with? Whoever else you might be trying to convince, they can quite easily find that you haven't managed to lay a single successful point on me. You're only making it worse for yourself, Monty, but perhaps you can't help it. 

 

24 minutes ago, montgomery said:

People like to believe in the supernatural and most won't hold back from making claims on the supernatural so they can become a part of the conversation with some credentials. This is what Anchovy tried to do here but he became too anxious to be seen as a participant and then made his careless claim of witnessing the supernatural twice.

Humanoid extraterrestrials do not exist, let alone with technology resembling that of humans. To think as much, scientifically speaking, is unfounded and foolish to a laughable degree. To assert as much and still consider yourself a scientist is an object of ridicule. 
The last thing I would want is to associate myself with the likes of you or Thoth who buy into such nonsense. This is a position I've always held and likely always will.
As I've said (but as always, you aren't that good at listening) I do not assert that I've witnessed anything supernatural. You, Monty, are the one making that assertion. 

 

24 minutes ago, montgomery said:

Dare he try to turn to binocular glare or eyeglasses glare at this late date? How about a cold wind that made his eyes water?  Can anybody bail his sorry a-s out? 

If you want to propose a trick of the eye, similar to that of squinting one's eye at a lightbulb, you could've just made that proposition rather than making a fool of yourself. Y'know, actually contribute to the scientific discussion. But having been suspended twice before, likely for similar reasons to this, I get the feeling that isn't the reason you're here; is it, Monty?

Perhaps you're here to try to "slamdunk" on "the rascals", or perhaps you're here to affirm your pseudoscientific notions and venomously retaliate to any criticism.
Or perhaps... you're just a troll.
In any case, you clearly don't care about science. You haven't practiced any of it since our paths have crossed.

Edited by Anchovyforestbane
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2020 at 2:43 PM, Anchovyforestbane said:

The truth is, the mainstream media is a friend of the people fervently dedicated to the facts. It's not their fault you don't see that and think that they are extremists when they are actually pursuing the truth in all avenues. They have been reporting for a long time, and those biased towards distrusting the media may think that the people uncovering and reporting the truth are extremists. The fact is all the distrust towards the media is nothing but a big conspiracy theory, and if you can't see that, that isn't my fault at all.

If your logic, when reversed, is equally as true (which is to say, in this case, equally as ludicrous), there's a good chance your argument is flawed. 

 

I didn't say that. A-wal said that. Don't go assuming some ideonomic alliance between us all of a sudden. 

 

I meant exactly what I said. Should it have simply been a phenomenon of perspective as I've proposed, it would be foolish of you to assume I'm the only person on the planet who would've seen it, even if no astronomers with an ability to report the finding happened to be around that perspective point. 

 

 

You seem to have a habit of not listening too well. Seems to be a consistent characteristic of yours. If you were paying attention, you'd have realized that the phenomenon was different the second time. This would make sense if, as I've proposed, it were a phenomenon of perspective.
And it would sure be nice if you used this thread for exploring what that phenomenon could be, rather than exploiting it to quench your thirst for petty bickering. 

 

 

You sure seem eager to end it on this notion of having fantasized the phenomenon which you're so steadfast in. Which is very strange, given that a few posts ago you insisted that you were not asserting that it must necessarily have been in my head. Were you simply saying that to cover your humiliatingly fallacious posterior, I wonder? Sure would make sense, given your recent behavior.

Wow, are you confused.😄 What reality are you living in thinking the mainstream media is the friend of the people dedicated to facts?🤣 All I can say is wow! Unbelievable that there are still people that believe this. Are you kidding me? I think you better do some research not coming from the mainstream media.

About a third of the whole CIA budget went to media propaganda operations. ...We're talking about hundreds of millions of dollars a year just for that.....close to a billion dollars are being spent every year by the United States on secret propaganda.

http://www.whale.to/b/schaap.html

Operation Mockingbird

https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKmockingbird.htm

 

One of the most important journalists under the control of Operation Mockingbird was Joseph Alsop, whose articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers. Other journalists willing to promote the views of the CIA included Stewart Alsop (New York Herald Tribune), Ben Bradlee (Newsweek), James Reston (New York Times), C. D. Jackson (Time Magazine), Walter Pincus (Washington Post), Walter Winchell (New York Daily Mirror), Drew Pearson, Walter Lippmann, William Allen White, Edgar Ansel Mowrer (Chicago Daily News), Hal Hendrix (Miami News), Whitelaw Reid (New York Herald Tribune), Jerry O'Leary (Washington Star), William C. Baggs (Miami News), Herb Gold (Miami News) and Charles L. Bartlett (Chattanooga Times). According to Nina Burleigh, the author of A Very Private Woman, (1998) these journalists sometimes wrote articles that were commissioned by Frank Wisner. The CIA also provided them with classified information to help them with their work.

We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected the promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National autodetermination practiced in past centuries.-- David Rockefeller in an address to a Trilateral Commission meeting in June of 1991

"Media manipulation in the U.S. today is more efficient than it was in Nazi Germany, because here we have the pretense that we are getting all the information we want. That misconception prevents people from even looking for the truth." - Mark Crispin Miller

I could keep going but I think you get the point. Or maybe you don't.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Thoth101 said:

Wow, are you confused.😄 What reality are you living in thinking the mainstream media is the friend of the people dedicated to facts?🤣 All I can say is wow! Unbelievable that there are still people that believe this. Are you kidding me? I think you better do some research not coming from the mainstream media.

I suppose, just like your buddy Monty, you also don't listen too well. 
If you had been you would have picked up on my saying "which is to say, in this case, equally as ludicrous". Anyone with an objective, unbiased stance would've seen that I was not expressing an opinion about the media, but rather criticizing your point about the media.
Yes, many mainstream media outlets are biased, in many of those cases against that which is true. Given that this wasn't the topic of my criticism, however, I would encourage you to pay further analysis to opposing arguments.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Anchovyforestbane said:

I suppose, just like your buddy Monty, you also don't listen too well. 
If you had been you would have picked up on my saying "which is to say, in this case, equally as ludicrous". Anyone with an objective, unbiased stance would've seen that I was not expressing an opinion about the media, but rather criticizing your point about the media.
Yes, many mainstream media outlets are biased, in many of those cases against that which is true. Given that this wasn't the topic of my criticism, however, I would encourage you to pay further analysis to opposing arguments.

Well, touché then and I apologize if I misunderstood what you were trying to say. Well, I was actually on the other side of the argument at one time when I believed the government cared for me and I believed the media was there to tell us the truth. When I tried to prove they did, I came to find out that wasn't true at all.

I actually signed up for the US Air Force in 2001 when I actually believed what the media told me and government that it was Arabs in a cave that blew up the WTC. So when you say to give further analysis to opposing arguments, I have because I was part of those opposing arguments at one time when I was a mind controlled and asleep fool. Taught by the government American edumacation system. And yes, I spelled education wrong on purpose. So Monty, you can refrain from your spell check.😆

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...