|  Author | Topic: The Reptillian FAQ (Read 6,662 times) |
CDsNuTz
new member
member is offline
Joined: Nov 2001
Gender: Male 
Posts: 2
|  | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #75 on Nov 20, 2007, 8:48pm » | |
Quote:Well Socrates yet another worthless post full of innuendo and lacking substantive fact as usual: http://www.debatebothsides.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=878145
In regard to your remarks about myself, I say the following:
“I responded to your initial photographic exposition on the basis of reference to MODIS images which were duly linked to the source for all to see. Your pathetic reply was to capture selected images and suggest that these images were representative of the photographic exposition you had constructed. They weren’t – I know that, you know that and so do the guests and members of Mega. I have never suggested that Taiwan was not affected by Trails – I have said that your photographic exposition doesn’t equate with the satellite images on the relevant dates. I remind you that your proxy (for want of a better word) set the date range and the location – I didn’t. As for your dismissive remarks about the Peoples Republic of China, it is quite clear that you don’t understand the geopolitics of the region. If you did, you would not be so keen to lay the responsibility for the trails at the feet of the USAF.
Now, apparently, Chem11 confirms the story about Trails over Yuanlin. There is one problem with these posts. The photographs I took issue with were purportedly taken from April 19, 2006 through to May 5, 2006. However, Chem11’s remarks were in regard to February 9, 2007. Of course, I’ll now be accused of telling a story – however, if you are going to tell a yarn, Socrates, at least get the dates right.”
In regard to another issue, apparently you are running around the Forums accusing me of COINTELPRO practices amongst other things. It seems to me that you are in fact the one who could be accused of this:
According to Brian Glick, in War at Home, COINTELPRO used a broad array of methods, including:
1. "Infiltration: Agents and informers did not merely spy on political activists. Their main purpose was to discredit and disrupt. Their very presence served to undermine trust and scare off potential supporters. The FBI and police exploited this fear to smear genuine activists as agents."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
I suppose now I’ll be accused of all manner of sins. However, it remains that it is you, Socrates, who is running around, accusing all and sundry who dare hold an opinion contrary to your own, of being trolls, fakes and disinformation agents. Maybe its time you looked in the mirror.
|
|
You couldn't have said it any better. He's been at this crap for nearly 2 yrs now.. Think about that for a minute..
| |
|
Big Bunny
Admin
member is offline
![[avatar]](http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/7415/eye4xn4.jpg)
Joined: Apr 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 37,705
Location: Sydney, Australia
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #76 on Nov 24, 2007, 11:01pm » | |
These Forums that we frequent can be fascinating snapshots of society. As of today, CTC has banned an honest man for daring to defend himself against relentless attacks by Cyberstalkers.
But in all fairness to the Moderating collective at CTC not all of the Moderators were advised, let alone permitted to have any say in this ban should be implemented. Remarkably the defence offered by the offending Moderator was a twisted atack on the banned member. It seems that this Moderator genuinely lacks the testicular fortitude to do to these Cyberstalkers that which we have done at M3GA - i.e. ban them ad infinitum. The innocent should never be brutalized for the wrongs of the offenders.
Then we have the identical behaviour at my favourite exercise in stupidity, DBS, where the Cyberstalkers are again given free rein at the expense of legitimate posters. And again the Moderators continue to support the Cyberstalkers.
All of these shenanigans make me wonder who is the true enemy - the Cyberstalkers or the Moderators that support them. Here at M3GA as many of you will have noticed , generally speaking, the ratbag element has to work hard at being banned. However, once the ban is in place, that is the way it stays. It seems that some Forums are unable to discern the need for protection of members against these Cyberstalkers who are plaguing us at the moment. Possibly in time and with the intervention of other institutions these problems will become a distant memory.
|
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
"In the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet, breathe the same air, and we all cherish our children’s future."
John F. Kennedy |
|
Big Bunny
Admin
member is offline
Joined: Apr 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 37,705
Location: Sydney, Australia
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #77 on Nov 26, 2007, 6:54pm » | |
I note that CTC has finally seen the light. However its doubtful that it will stop the Trodons any time soon.
|
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
"In the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet, breathe the same air, and we all cherish our children’s future."
John F. Kennedy |
|
Big Bunny
Admin
member is offline
Joined: Apr 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 37,705
Location: Sydney, Australia
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #78 on Feb 16, 2008, 11:15am » | |
You know, if the Trodons (& the Reynolds' twins - see Reply #61) had become the dominant species on this planet, the Apollo 11 mission may have looked like this:
![[image]](http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/8825/qmanbeggahor357forallwhmh1.jpg)
|
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
"In the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet, breathe the same air, and we all cherish our children’s future."
John F. Kennedy |
|
Big Bunny
Admin
member is offline
Joined: Apr 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 37,705
Location: Sydney, Australia
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #79 on Feb 24, 2008, 9:44am » | |
Did you know that the ZDHHC9 is a novel gene mutation common amongst Trodons, including our favourite examples. Apparently it can lead to significantly below-normal global intellectual capacity in adulthood which goes a long way to explaining their exhibited behaviour, doesn't it?
|
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
"In the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet, breathe the same air, and we all cherish our children’s future."
John F. Kennedy |
|
Chem11
admin
AUGSBB3CM
member is offline
![[avatar]](http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/6725/avaspherexl7.jpg)
Joined: Nov 2001
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,781
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #80 on Feb 25, 2008, 1:36am » | |
For those to lazy to look it up, an artist's rendering of the creature described above.
![[image]](http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/dinosaurplanet/dinos/gallery/na_troodon_vzoom.jpg)
The ZDHHC9 gene mutation BB refers to is associated with hereditary mental retardation. Poor dumb in-bred animals.
Thankfully nature put an end to their family's suffering and rendered them extinct.
One by one.
|
Looks like you got it wrong again, Jimbo! Sulfur content 'has been increasing'! - J. Reynolds
Obviously there is now an opening for us rank and file both to defend the environmental benefits of air pollution.. what about some comment on whether the "air pollution is good" line is utilisable, perhaps in rallies? - Wayne Hall
What we're able to do now is inadvertent.- Patrick Minnis, NASA |
|
Big Bunny
Admin
member is offline
Joined: Apr 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 37,705
Location: Sydney, Australia
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #81 on Feb 26, 2008, 9:44am » | |
Chem wrote:
Quote:| Thankfully nature put an end to their family's suffering and rendered them extinct. |
|
Unfortunately, not quite all of them - there are at least 2 of them still lurking carrying, and regularly exhibiting, this unfortunate genetic flaw of intellectual retardation.
|
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
"In the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet, breathe the same air, and we all cherish our children’s future."
John F. Kennedy |
|
Big Bunny
Admin
member is offline
Joined: Apr 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 37,705
Location: Sydney, Australia
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #82 on Apr 17, 2008, 2:49am » | |
The Reptilian (Trodon) Brain - a short explanation of the neurological basis for Trodon (aka the Reynolds' Twins) behaviour:
Reptilian complex
Reptilian complex or R-complex is a part of the triune brain model ('tri', as in 3 part) proposed by Paul D. MacLean. This theory seeks to explain brain function through the evolution of existing structures of the human brain.
The triune brain consists of:
1. The R-complex (also known as the "brainstem"),
2. The Limbic system and
3. The neo-cortex.
The theory, observable not only through fossil records and animal phylogeny, but notably during the stages of all mammalian and human prenatal development as well, explains that the evolution of the mammalian brain depended on and was enhanced in both its structure and function by a series of evolutionary plateaus. These evolutionary plateaus correspond closely with the phylogenic grouping of animals throughout the history of life on Earth.
Mammalian brain structure exists in the outer, most recently developed sphere of the brain, where evolution is newer and younger. These areas are the Limbic systems and neo-cortex. The Limbic system, which was first introduced by MacLean in a paper in 1952, is similar to the brain of the more primitive mammals and is the source of emotions, some aspects of personal identity, and some memory functions. The Limbic system is composed of the amygdala and the hippocampus. The neo-cortex, also known as the cerebral cortex, resembles the brain of more recent mammals in that it controls more highly evolved mentation such as reason and speech. Memory; the concepts of culture, art and literature; a prolonged childhood wherein learned behavior, vital to survival, is acquired along with generational recognition and care of family members are some of these more evolutionarily advanced brain activities which mammals have used to rise to such global prominence in so short a period of evolutionary time.
The brainstem and older, atavistic areas of the Central Nervous System control normal involuntary behavior that the conscious mind does not, such as the cardiac and respiratory functions. These are found in all vertebrates. In between these two brains, lies the R-complex.
The R-complex is named for the most advanced part of the brain higher mammals share with reptiles. It is responsible for rage, xenophobia, and basic survival fight-or-flight responses. Often, the R-Complex can override the more rational function of the brain and result in unpredictable, primitive behavior in even the most sentient of creatures, humans included. A well developed and healthy neo-cortex can monitor R-Complex activity in sentient beings. The Reptilian complex is the most ancient part of a very successful brain scheme, evolutionarily speaking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptilian_brain
|
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
"In the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet, breathe the same air, and we all cherish our children’s future."
John F. Kennedy |
|
Big Bunny
Admin
member is offline
Joined: Apr 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 37,705
Location: Sydney, Australia
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #83 on May 31, 2008, 5:20am » | |
May 29, 2008
Character Attacks: How to Properly Apply the Ad Hominem
A new theory parses fair from unfair uses of personal criticism in rhetoric
By Yvonne Raley
A doctor tells her patient to lose weight, and the patient thinks: “If my doctor really believed that, she wouldn’t be so fat.” A movie aficionado pans the latest Tom Cruise flick because Cruise is a Scientologist. A homeowner ignores a neighbor’s advice on lawn care because the neighbor is a ... you name it: Democrat, Republican, Christian or atheist. These examples illustrate classic uses of ad hominem attacks, in which an argument is rejected, or advanced, based on a personal characteristic of an individual rather than on reasons for or against the claim itself.
Putting the focus on the arguer or person being discussed can distract us from the issues that matter. Rather than concentrating on an individual’s character, we should, in these cases, be asking ourselves questions such as, Is the doctor’s advice medically sound? Is the Cruise film entertaining? Is the neighbor’s lawn healthy? Meanwhile ad hominem attacks can also unfairly discredit an individual, especially because such critiques are often effective.
Although ad hominem arguments have long been considered errors in reasoning, a recent analysis suggests that this is not always the case. In his new book, Media Argumentation: Dialectic, Persuasion, and Rhetoric, University of Winnipeg philosopher Douglas Walton proposes that fallacies such as the ad hominem are better understood as perversions or corruptions of perfectly good arguments. Regarding the ad hominem, Walton contends that although such attacks are usually fallacious, they can be legitimate when a character critique is directly or indirectly related to the point being articulated.
If Walton is right, distinguishing clearly between these cases is important to evaluating the validity of statements people make to us about others. Good or fair uses of ad hominem critiques should, in fact, persuade us, whereas unwarranted uses should not.
Corruptions
Which ad hominem arguments should we aim to ignore? In the so-called abusive ad hominem, someone argues that because a person has a bad character, we should not accept that person’s claims. For instance, during the presidential campaign of 1800, John Adams was called “a fool, a gross hypocrite and an unprincipled oppressor.” His rival, Thomas Jefferson, on the other hand, was deemed “an uncivilized atheist, anti-American, a tool for the godless French.” Accusations like these can easily foreclose on intelligent political discourse about what might make either candidate a good president.
Another illegitimate form of the ad hominem is the tu quoque, or “you, too” version, which is an attempt to discredit a person’s claims because the person has failed to follow his or her own advice. The example of the overweight doctor prescribing weight loss falls into this category. Its use is unfair because, after all, there are good reasons for losing weight, and the fact that a doctor has not managed to heed her own advice should not dissuade others from trying to follow it.
The Cruise attack, on the other hand, exemplifies “poisoning the well,” another brand of ad hominem attacks in which the character assault is launched before the listener has a chance to form his or her own opinion on a subject—in this case, Cruise’s film. If successful, the reminder that Cruise is affiliated with Scientology will bias the listener against the movie. This partiality is unjustified, because Cruise’s religious affiliation is not germane to his acting abilities or the entertainment value of his movie.
Fair Use
What types of ad hominems might then be justified? Walton argues that an ad hominem is valid when the claims made about a person’s character or actions are relevant to the conclusions being drawn. Consider, for example, former New York governor Eliot Spitzer, who was caught on a wiretap arranging to hire a prostitute for $4,300. Because this behavior ran counter to Spitzer’s anticorruption platform, its unveiling would prevent Spitzer from governing successfully; thus, criticizing this aspect of his character was relevant and fair. In an earlier scandal, in 1987, televangelist Jimmy Swaggart was seen at a motel with a prostitute. Because his behavior undercut his preaching and status as a Christian role model, a character attack based on this incident would have been spot-on.
In another case, when President Bill Clinton fibbed on national television about his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky, accusations that he was a liar were not entirely unjust. Although a supporter might argue that Clinton’s sex life was not directly relevant to his ability to govern, his ability to adhere to the truth could certainly be, and his willingness to lie on this occasion could call into question the veracity of his remarks on other subjects.
Of course, we should not discount everything any person says, no matter how badly he or she has been discredited. The fact that a person lies or behaves improperly on one occasion does not mean that he or she lies or behaves inappropriately all the time. Again, a critique of a person’s character should not prevent further examination of the arguments at hand. After all, which position is right is usually independent of a person’s character or conduct.
Being aware of how the ad hominem attack works can help us evaluate which instances of its use we should ignore and which we should consider. Ask yourself: How relevant is a political candidate’s character or action to his or her ability to perform in office? How pertinent is any person’s past or group affiliation to the claims that person makes or to that individual’s expertise in a specific domain? If the character-based attacks are not relevant to these larger issues, then they are best ignored. Instead we should attend to what is really important: What is a person asserting? Why does he or she offer a particular view, and is the view defensible?
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=character-attack
|
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
"In the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet, breathe the same air, and we all cherish our children’s future."
John F. Kennedy |
|
Chem11
admin
AUGSBB3CM
member is offline
Joined: Nov 2001
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,781
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #84 on Jul 30, 2008, 4:17am » | |
You can add ET In Arcadia Ego (whoever the hell that is) to the list of highly evolved reptillian caretakers.
http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board/vi....er=asc&start=15
Some mod at a promotional site for a professional conspiracy commentator by the name of Jeff Wells, apparently... he's not a bad writer, but gods, you should see the nonsense people post there (check out the 'Momma Mia - Mumia Abu-Jamal' conspiracy thread... ABBA is apparently at the center of the reptoid conspiracy).
Eh.. nevermind.. part of that post-CO9 crowd at CTC. More concerned with the Virgin Mary appearing in a bowl of Bigfoot's oatmeal than spending five minutes looking at a white paper (but a self-proclaimed 'pro' on the subject nonetheless).
Anyway, this is why the better part of CT community parted ways with the conspiracy-porn crowd long ago... they simply aren't happy unless the planes are remote-controlled by Al Bielek and chemical trails are designed to ward off the return of Cthullu.
|
Looks like you got it wrong again, Jimbo! Sulfur content 'has been increasing'! - J. Reynolds
Obviously there is now an opening for us rank and file both to defend the environmental benefits of air pollution.. what about some comment on whether the "air pollution is good" line is utilisable, perhaps in rallies? - Wayne Hall
What we're able to do now is inadvertent.- Patrick Minnis, NASA |
|
Big Bunny
Admin
member is offline
Joined: Apr 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 37,705
Location: Sydney, Australia
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #85 on Aug 1, 2008, 4:06am » | |
Its strange really. ET In Arcadia Ego seemed to be reasonably intelligent and level-headed but after reading his 'opinion' of CTs at Rigorous Institution, it seems to me that yet another one has fallen off his perch.
Simply put, engaging in 3 years of research and having actually purchased scientific texts on atmospheric science during this time doesn't support the notion that CTs don't exist. There is no evidence that ET actually understood the research he undertook nor does he explain the persistence of observed phenomenon in a global context.
I suppose its a case of another 'shape shifter' coming clean.
|
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
"In the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet, breathe the same air, and we all cherish our children’s future."
John F. Kennedy |
|
Chem11
admin
AUGSBB3CM
member is offline
Joined: Nov 2001
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,781
| | Re: The Reptillian FAQ
« Reply #86 on Aug 1, 2008, 6:20am » | |
It was the erroneous claim that the multiple-personality curiosity Socrates was 'first generation' and that Footsoldier was somehow complicit in that Dave Stewart nonsense that got my dander up, originally (after I stopped laughing), BB.
Otherwise, if you claim not to have an interest in the geoengineering pollution debate... or don't see the point in talking about it, then kindly stop spreading mistreatments of fact on the subject.
I understand how being part of that electronic environment could lead to a rocky relationship w/ journalistic standards, but please, let's keep the fabrications and public meltdowns to a minimum, mmmkay RI?
Otherwise, I could care less how you steer your boat's passengers and crew.
TIA
|
Looks like you got it wrong again, Jimbo! Sulfur content 'has been increasing'! - J. Reynolds
Obviously there is now an opening for us rank and file both to defend the environmental benefits of air pollution.. what about some comment on whether the "air pollution is good" line is utilisable, perhaps in rallies? - Wayne Hall
What we're able to do now is inadvertent.- Patrick Minnis, NASA |
|
Chem11
admin
AUGSBB3CM
member is offline
Joined: Nov 2001
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,781
| | Reptillian Intuition
« Reply #87 on Mar 20, 2009, 12:08am » | |
Come for the self-indulgent schizophrenic breaks, stay for the Calvin & Hobbes cartoons:
http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board/viewtopic.php?t=23214
Yeah, it's a popcorn thread, but it does illustrate the risk involved when you decide to willfully turn your back on observable reality. I've lost track of how many people I've seen go down this road, and it always, always, always ends the same. Anyway.
ET in Arcadia ego, despite his or her's lack of discernment and stubborn insistence on being breathtakingly stupid, does get points for the following final observation:
Don't you realize that you have lost your minds? Don't you care?
Then again, maybe that's what happens when you pump people's heads full of misinformation, slander, and conspiracyporn... while advising them to ignore the sky over their own empty craniums.
|
Looks like you got it wrong again, Jimbo! Sulfur content 'has been increasing'! - J. Reynolds
Obviously there is now an opening for us rank and file both to defend the environmental benefits of air pollution.. what about some comment on whether the "air pollution is good" line is utilisable, perhaps in rallies? - Wayne Hall
What we're able to do now is inadvertent.- Patrick Minnis, NASA |
| |
|
![[Search This Thread]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/search2.gif)
![[Send Topic To Friend]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/sendtopic.gif)
![[Print]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif)
Logged