Loading...

Monday, 21 July 2014

The cure to ignorance is good information, even for conspiracy theorists?

I often speak to a friend who is a very devout JFK conspiracy theorist, he believes in it, he happens to be a big Bill Hicks fan, also a guy with facebook pals who are conspiracy fear monger, not that he believes all he hears.  he said he did not want a debate about JFK, my response was fine, But.
The But is 'which way did kennedy's brain matter splatter?'

He wasn't sure, but it was a gotta ya moment, and if you look at the footage the burst of Kennedy's brain material being forward, NOT BACK, is evident of a shot from the rear, not the foreground, not the famed grassy knoll.  I know I am far the first skeptic to say this, but most conspiracy theories are hinged on ideas and arguments, not serious facts.
I even joked with another friend, a friend I helped out of New Age last year, that maybe JFK was killed by a cop, who may have been an invisible gun man, since no one noticed.



P.S. I love some of the work of Bill Hicks, but if there is a heaven he is chatting to Kennedy saying are you sure it wasn't a magic bullet.

Bill Hicks on JFK, funny, but some more anarchic mates of mine take this view like it's totally true.



Keep it real, look up the facts, and if it's your cup of tea, go look at Penn & Teller's Bullshit, o the Conspiracy Theories episode they tested out this...




don't run on auto.


Sunday, 20 July 2014

Ban anything that scares you? Bossy Femo-nazi, N-word, UKIP, Gay, Retarded

battle ignorance by teaching people the facts, don't take the easy route and trying banning things when it probably isn't enough, and may help, but not as much as education. 

we have a great culture in some ways, diverse, open to new ideas, even if a few moans are the constant theme of this not quite utopian present, and some want to push an agenda.  Throughout our history, this nation has had various groups out to be heard or make a mark, to paint a portrait on a corner of society, and this has allowed great leaps, such a feminist leaps in fighting for equal rights, yet we hear from time to time far more than a sane expression of ideas.  I am referring to those who think it solve an issue, an imbalance in rights and social issues, the best method, or easiest, is to ban words, if offended by the term 'miss', so then rally the activist army, and try to shut down the use of the term.
Sadly, such ideas are not always useful, the banning of a word I need not even type to refer to black people, and I need not refer to as the "N-word", it has been of use, sure, right on, we all now think the word 'nigger' when ever someone says 'N-word', and even me typing it once on a blog scares the shit out of google.  Words don't always cause offence, even the word I referred to, after all in black culture it is often used, and so its about context, plus if you have friends who use the word they may use it when talking to you, or even more oddly to say your a nigger, maybe the mould of politically corrected language is broken at the edges, or maybe some assholes are seriously over the top?!

A recently issue that come up, recent as in earlier this year, was some well known celebrities talking about the word 'bossy', with their hashtag '#banbossy', and like banning a word would change minds a lot of impulse cattle jumped on that bandwagon.  Imagine your a young women called bossy, and it put you off doing more in your life, lowers motivation, we can agree that's a shame, yet is it wise to ban words, or maybe educate people, even children, that women can lead too?!  If we are able to deal with the issue then change it done, if we start banning words in cases such as this then guess what, some one will use another word, a new word maybe, or just leave a "bossy" girls out of the social group.  Banning bossy is like changing torture to intensive interrogation methods, the meaning is still there when you water-board someone but at least it sounds nicer when someone speak of
interrogations than torturing someone, words change and the issue can remain, nice words don't cover well hard facts.  I'm off point, oh well, happens to me a lot.   The issue is a changing of language used does not cut the root of the problem, you trim the branches and think the tree will change, but these are deeply rooted and high grown forests, not a single bonsai.

I am often a little to the left of politics, I'm not married to a party, unlike many people, like a life long Labour voter, or the ever belonged Liberal Democrat, yet I am annoyed by those who jump to conclusions, they give a hand to a right-wing nut by being far from sceptical.  I one recent case, the election for the EU parliament, the issues around UKIP, not totally the same as banning, using a number of selected issues to call all the worse case, namely racist, when it actual fact most probably aren't, just most can seem pro-bigotry, it's an important distinction.  I don't need to support UKIP to say this, in fact I wont vote for that party, probably ever, but it has to be said the easy dismissal of calling them racist turned into an own goal for the politicians and the media alike.  It is worth pointing out that the previous "new fourth party", the BNP, was hit by the same media stories and was openly racist and thus easily defeated by cheap news media responses that just were not as effective on UKIP.  It turns out that just calling a party that is anti-immigration racist is the cheapest trick, that now many people wouldn't believe, even if UK Independence Party renamed itself the UK Fascist League.  Some people try to ban groups of this kind, BNP, UKIP, and activist groups that are no better, like the EDL, however we should remember once you ban them they just start a new group with a new name and leader, as well a few Muslim Extremist groups in the UK in recent years.




this picture does not relate, but looks rude and a bit funny.



When someone says a word is so bad as to be banned, they had best have good reasons to say ban it even in context, another recent example is the way the term 'gay' is used to say dumb or silly, or something to that effect, much like 'retard', or retarded, was used in this way.  So some people get offended that a word that has many dimensions is used in a context void of other contextual meaning and thus want to cut it away to be used in their chosen realm.  This is the real point, how it breaks down, context, and other context situations that may swing to offence on one front and just same ol' on the other side, really simple to see how teaching differences, and that can include a wider vocabulary, will solve this word wars.



Bottom line, informing people about issues works better than banning words or ideas.



Thursday, 17 July 2014

New Age ATLANTIS NEVER EXISTED - a few thoughts

All the evidence as we know is that not place called by that name or fits the legends/myths ever existed, so as an Atheist has a lack of belief in a god, I would be "Aatlantist"?!?!

The roots of myths, a starting point that fits somewhat a tale is not proof for any of the claims other than similarity, sadly New Agers can't seem to understand that point, to them if Minoa was the root of Atlantian legends then it proves Atlantis and what their spirit guides were right.  facepalm.

The best evidence for a lost cultures, some on islands, is not evidence for the esoteric myths made up by mystics who thought they were channelling ancient beings who knew about this lost civilisation.
The facts pan out the logic that the Atlantian myth of a vast land mass that sank is simply nonsense, the fact the experts seem to disagree says a lot, the fact that some say south on India, some say east of America, others say Antarctica, and NONE of them have provided scientific evidence for such reasons to assume ancient Egyptians heard of them to pass on to the Greeks as legends that were possibility translated very poorly, and seem to speak of one or more smaller disasters in the eastern Mediterranean.

So in my humble way, I only wish to add, in this short blog, which made be extended, that if a New Age Atlantis had existed it is not evident, and it's legend is based on the Culture of New Age and Not the facts of Archaeology or any discipline regarding the possible history of an Atlantis-like civilisation or land-mass.








UJames1978 epic videos on SpiritScience and all other closed minded beliefs

I have know James on youtube for a number of years, almost always agreed, and his insights in refuting irrationally is of great usefulness.

Spirit Science is a New Age nut who made a cartoon character and uses it as an avatar while a pitch adapted version of this nuts voice is played, so animated new age propaganda from a young New Age man called Jordan.  TheSpiritScience is his channel on youtube, look it up for the sake of laughter.   

Please check out these videos


p1



p2
p3

Ujames Pwned TheSpiritScience Spirit Science

Extremist Feminist Liar busted by ThunderF00t - Anita Sarkeesian- BUSTED!

Extremist Feminist Liar busted by ThunderF00t - Anita Sarkeesian- BUSTED!


I'm a gamer, not anti-feminist, but thunderf00t's video is worth adding here to express how dishonesty is poison, and damages serious mainstream feminism and equality activism in general.  


Wednesday, 16 July 2014

Eckhart Tolle is a cult leader? or a poet with issues?

Well, not all that much of a cult leader...

Where else may you find the traits we see in cult devotion, where could we find such treats of nonsensical reasoning, one such place is a mental landscape in which an aloof guru may ply a trade in platitudes for a more than generous profit.  One such Guru is Eckhart Tolle.

The Guru find him or her self as a poetic speaker of little intellectual note, a person who can carry hearts on wings of philosophy, inspirations that offer flight to the imagination, yet as to their truth, the factors by which we judge, an absence of foundation.  By my words, I need only express a gentle breeze to may the branches sway, and so be as a guru, and to offer a reality beyond a sense of wonder is another realm altogether, since hopes and feeling are not guide posts to a reality that seems to have not been made for our comfort or pleasure. 

How else may a man stand as a voice of reason other than a man of truth?
A: by talk to those who may not know better, or can be converted by the sales pitch rather than the broader principles and knowledge.

Can an answer come from a person who has learned to say the right things?
Can truth come from the desire to be enlightened?
Can we find reason in unreason, and unreason in reason, and nothing is total, no absolutes?
Are we looking at a few ideas of truth that are quite general and those draw you in, and at the same time other things that are mostly meaningless are accepted as true, as part of the package?

The Cult, is a culture, a belief in a poetic former depressive, who got over a back patch in his life, created his own religion that gave him purpose, this faith in a neutral idea "Now", is a construct that can be used like the term "god", "infinity", or anything, to offer scope to one's hope as lenses to a telescope.  Magical words gather magical thinkers, those who wish on a star, but the stars are not able to give them liberation.  To create an idea and pass it on as truth, the great wisdom, that which offers liberation, freedom from a self-manifested sense of not being whole or happy, or directed, to be free by belief of responsibility, and the only liberation is in your mind, and if you just get real you can reach it regardless of New Age daydreams.

The followers in chains they make, and labour is not really required, just a neo-theology of simple ways that don't make my sense of pressure rise, to avoid stress by simplifying the way you perceive reality, but it is not reality that is moved, it is you alone.  The revelation to you seems great, and you seem to take on great ideas, yet the feeling does not last, the placebo passes by, and you must try again, re-read, buy a new book, practice the system to gain personal power Now, maybe go to a lecture, try to re-spark interesting and the sense of reality.  In most cases this fails, some move on to new and great gurus, from 'The Power Of Now' to a different cult of faith, 'The Secret' and power of attraction maybe?  It is easier to find peace, and many of us are busy finding those who offer promises instead, but hey, it works somewhat, and if you lose you high and quit the belief it's your fault?!

If only people knew they need not be servants to beliefs, if they just pause and consider for a few moments, slow their thoughts, and the fog clears, that is all they need do.  Maybe easier said than done?  It is worth considering philosophy, how your world can be meaningful even if seemingly less than perfection, and why not read a book like The Power Of Now, and remind yourself the worlds just offer and excuse to do what you know you need, or want, to do, it is just more than you doing more than dwelling in a rut.

In all fairness Eckhart is not a cult leader, just a man who makes easy money on simple ideas, ideas so limited a child could do it, a system that simply says think calmly and do what you really should sort out for your self-betterment.

I have found, as have many of you, that reading any good book, a novel, maybe, will help you step away from stress and person problems, and so you may as well read the hobbit or harry potter to step away from your issues, you need not find a wondrous solution, just a way to step from stress and allow yourself to get a grip on your life.  It's not as easy as a new religion of "Now", but it's worth more to you to find real self-value beyond a construct that is based on devotion to a blindly positive belief.

Excuse my ramble if you found it a bit incoherent, I just had an inspiration while working on a video project, and though I could share it, see what people reckon, and I do see Eckhart's Teachings are a new extra-soft religious teaching, like if you got a holy book and cut out all the bad stuff, it would sound good, but good does not mean it's true.



my recent videos on Eckhart Tolle, followed by my rebuke to the false copyright claim. 




Tuesday, 15 July 2014

why do mild videos get taken down? [since this blog it has be reinstated]

my video that was false DMCA'd is on another channel and will be back soon

now this is very clear, mild mannered, fair, and even critical of eckhart tolle's critics, such as crazy fundies, so what was the reason for it to be taken down by a copyright notice?

maybe his neo-lama-ness had an issue with showing on the video the price tag for his spiritual truths? as in the fact that it costs a bomb to buy into a retreat?



 the message is easy to understand, and it's that they get flag happy on content that is critical, considering others who support eckhart and mirror videos of his get no copyright claims against then, connection?

so yes, i have to get a bit vendetta on Eckhart's ass, but it's worth doing for the sake of free speech.


reality bites if you try to fcuk with my liberties!

Monday, 14 July 2014

Ackhart Tolle' Power is Now my own! False DMCA-er on behalf of Eckhart Tolle hits Robertwlester Video 14th july 2014

so I made a mild mannered video on the spiritual teacher called Eckhart, this I will show you, but presently it is not viewable due to a false copyright claim, and on my birthday, july 14th, what a pisser ;)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T64nQsvMrT8

so the claim against me was i used material that was copyrighted and so a claim was thrust upon me, yet the elementary error was to assume that any material no matter how small was worth filing a copyright claim over, and obviously the fact that my video had the exposure of Eckhart's teachings are a cheap philosophy freak show had no baring. ;)  I could have simply quit the debate of fair use by not doing a new video or not countering the claim, but instead I chose to stand up for the right to criticise and use limited material under fair use, so where's my medal? ;)


don't get me wrong, i do not want flame wars like i had in 2010-2012 with selfhelp false flaggers and false dmca-ers, but if you bring it to the party then expect responses.


Sunday, 13 July 2014

Extremism being criticised by UK Muslims is good?

so many UK Muslims have been radicalised beyond usual levels within Islam, some by extremist preachers who may be in the UK for one reason, dominion, and others, probably most, by internet radicalization.  How many in all, no one can be 100% sure, many are fooled by half truths, selected arguments, arguments from authority, which guides them to do crazy things, like go to war in a war they know little about and may become stuck in, unless they die first.  Sadly it's easy for some Muslim preachers to radicalise young men to stand against the foe, the enemy at the gates, these internet extremists and those who radicalise young men in some UK mosques are cult leaders, but the traditions of Islam make calling them out a very dangerous move and not part of the faith in most cases. 

Thankfully some UK Muslims do speak out, and Imams are speaking out too, letting the Muslim community hear a sane voice, and letting us all know that we are not dealing with silence that may as well be silent agreement with extremists.

Sadly, I large percentage of Muslims are conspiracy theorists, they watch the videos I criticise, the crazy ones that say Satan rules the earth, and unlike me they don't laugh at them, no wonder when Imams often remind Muslims of god's laws, Satanic deceptions all around us, and many other aspects that the extremists have used to turn Muslims away from integration and liberalisation of their communities.  I don't like to be the one who rain on this parade, but you have to admit this issue is much larger than two sides, many poor Muslims may feel an axe to grind against the man, much as many black people have in the past, but if someone tells you the man to hate then it's gone from frustration to irrational hatred.

So it is good to agree that Muslim Criticism of Muslim extremism is helpful, but this issue goes deep into Muslim communities and the religion of Islam. 















.

Ancient Astronauts were horny aliens?

if we have learnt anything from ancient aliens TV series and a great many books on the ancient astronaut theory, it is the aliens could have used scientific means to breed with humans, but if they special evidence of the bible and other ancient texts are acceptd it was probably good old FUCKING.
so much more super advanced beings from beyond the realm of man and our animal ways, these guys who were may giants in some cases like taking the young ladies for sexual joy, or the ancient alien TV series was wrong, and it non-skeptic ranks of experts were full of crap, and the fact there is not evidence other than stories and hearsay for any aliens coming to earth it's just evident to most people that myths from ancient cultures were probably just that, or so far from the reality as to make them useless.


The reason why so many use the idea of sex between aliens and human girls is because the Torah, as with some other holy books, speak of Nephilim/Nefilim who were giant and bred with human women, legend says they were fathered by sons of god(s) or (fallen)angels, opinions differ in different faiths, and the daughters of men.  This obviously does not fit well with Aliens, the easy job of goal post moving is to debunk an obvious improbable idea, like angels and gods, and add in more finite forms like aliens, who would have evolved like us, and came to earth to for various sane reasons, it doesn't make it true, the virtue of being more probable than other stories is not enough.




In fact the best argument, the most rational, based on the facts, is ancient people had myths and the Ancient astronaut theorists are liars who have been debunked time and time again for their inability to provide proof or to wikipedia most of their claims, since most are obvious deception for selling their poorly written books.



and if Aliens came to earth they had more on their mind than where is the nearest female, odds are that aliens would not look like us anyway or be able to have sex at all.





Robert W Lester & fake New Age Dr racket? (LOL)

Fake PhD or other fake or non-value qualifications are just a covering for bullshit salesmen, from New Age nutjobs to Young Earth Creationists who use a doctrine from a diploma mill to spread ignorance that poisons future generations. 



I notice most new age gurus and spiritual teachers have some nonsense qualification, and Doree Virtue, an angel nut, she has a fake PhD, so would it give my reasoned criticism of this people to buy a fake qualification too?  No!  the fact is, even though it sounds cool, Doctor Lester has not come into being, nor will.  I see no value in the quacks fake qualifications, and I, and other critics of new age, would rather be an ill-educated freethinker than a fake educated arrogant fraud, as many New Age kingpins are just conmen who make many thousands every year, or in the case of the famous ones it's millions.

Fake Doctorate Blogspot

Anyone can buy a fake PhD, and that Doctor of philosophy stamp mark may look good on a book cover, yet if you claims are on the multi-verse, quantum mechanics,and other advanced scientific issues then you can take you PhD and shove it where the sun doesn't shine.  How often may you find with a quick bing or google search another new age yahoo saying they can cure all ills with energy and that they can be trusted because they spent a few years getting a sociology degree, odd how some Medical Doctors claim similar things, yet are just general practitioners, not specialists, and often make claims beyond their expertise.  so it's a problem of fake degrees and those qualifications that are not relevant, but it all comes down to arguments from authority, trust me I am a doctor. ;)






Psychic/Mediumistic Proof ?!?!?!




What is any psychic/mediumistic worth, the faithful seem very poor in their skill, the tricksters can out do them, the rare cases of the objectively amazing seem so rare that it is less than chance, which says a whole lot.
I would guess that the read of this may have seen a psychic, or some other reader, who taps into a higher source or power, so it must be up to you on that personal level, how you have come to feel about your experiences, yet the subjective world can miss the reality as they focus on one region of it.

Many years past since I was a trainee medium, having gone to many workshops, having spent hundreds of hours meditating over the course of years, my faith was mighty, let if i was to not focus on the parts that i could take from others, or that others could take from me, in readings/communication, I found it was as holy as I had believed.  I had seen over the years many mediums work from stages and many more in spiritualist churches, as well as visiting psychics and new age teachers, and the best ones were showmen(or show-women), they had not power to impress but spoke well and with a skill, they offered no clear information, yet out of the general ideas expressed they made it fit with a charismatic abilities.

I have often lacked such skills, and my depressive feeling were made worse during my various periods of religious faith throughout my life, I found I could give good bits from time to time, but it was usually very general, this kept me in my belief, even though over time this seen through.  I could imagine much, and when influenced these imagined ideas seems so real, crystals, chakras, healing, spiritual guides and ETs, and hauntings, how odd it all seems to me now looking back, faith in god and all maybes, gifts from above which were just illusions of truth.

The "evidence" I could offer was stuff like saying 'Thomas' 'Cook' to an old lady who know a Thomas who was a chef/cook, or in another case saying I get 'b', and 'it feels like aunt, to which the sitter said (during in a meditation class) that her aunt was called Be, short for Beatrice, but everyone called her Auntie B.  Now, I dare not say this is proof, not that I often gave this out, nor that most mediums do, but it sounds clever, if very limited.  In actual fact, now that I ponder such things, I notice it is how I told to give things, a name and connection technique that I was once told how to do in a spiritualist church just outside of Birmingham, to get a name of the "spirit", and then how they link to the sitter(the person being read/having message from spirits).  It is in fact a good trick, you learn from other faith spiritualists that a spirit will come close, your to try to sense who it is, ask for a name, and how they link in to that persons life, so most people give common names and common links, statistically it's easy to get hits.

The tricks of the trade are told to the believers as tools for truth, not as contricks, and yet they are just that, I was told how to imagine a person in mind in very, very general terms, believe it was real, and accept it was real, and pass on this imagined information to another person as from the otherside.  I over simplify, in essence what I am saying is that the tricks to see or sense ghosts are, well, tricks, and not objective experiences of truth, after getting over some bad times in my life I began to wake up to how it was false, it was a slow realisation in the final few years of my time in spiritualism, until I realised that it was not right for me. 

When a medium tells you something you may finds it fits somewhat, in some way, or ways, but is it proof that a spirit is in the room, or in some way in touch of with the medium, or even that it's mind reading, all you have is a hand full of mildly true things, information often without full context, if any, and your expected to find the connections.  A medium or psychic will often throw out generality that fits most of us, if it was more general they would just say you were born and drink water, but to look at an old woman and say I sense mother is almost sure to hit.

The psychics and Mediums really seem to love giving out Barnum statements, the general statements that fit most of us, and you can always make it fit if you fail, a good example was a fat mediums call Sandra, she operated locally to me, he trick at the start of a show was to say a person lost to every audience member. It worked like this, she would just do a service in a spiritualist church, start with a hymn, prayer, ect.  To start he work she would just say what she thought people lost by doing each row, an old lady would get mother, a young lady grandmother, and if you disagree then she would just go back a generation, so if grandmother was not yet dead then she would say it must be great grandmother, after twenty or so people in a small church had this she would move on to doing readings for a few individuals.  Her technique was clearly not magical, just judging each person by age and doing an educated guess, so she was ether a cheap fraud making her living off cheap tricks, or alternatively deluded that this act was in anyway convincing.

I have had many such experiences with mediums, where they use contricks like they work, and as i say i was once fooled by this fraudulent level of reasoning, I, like many, got into Spiritualism, Psychics, and New Age after rejecting religion in general, yet not moving beyond the ignorance that my wishful/magical thinking flourished in.  I was a fool, and this I accept, and to be stupid at one point of your life hold no shame, just as long as you realise the error in your ways as you learn from the mistake, I learnt over the last five years that there is much more in philosophy that religion, that there is more in the cosmos than a psychic could dream up if sat at a typewriter for all eternity.

Final thought, an open mind in all things is good and well, yet to find out if a thing is factually true reasoning must be applied to work out if a thing is as believed or if reality is more than wishful delusions.