How does Assange's arrest and Mandatory Vaccine Mandates relate?

[NotAPretender]

Don't let your feelings get in the way of your interaction here...you bring very valuable info...some of it controversial... but that's why we are here.

[Maggie]

Don't let your feelings get in the way of your interaction here...you bring very valuable info...some of it controversial... but that's why we are here.

It is the matter of where we place our energy. I am not sure that feelings are getting in the way unless it is the feeling of CRAZY when one's own information gets conflated with hoaxes, flat earth memes and Corey Goode. Do I doubt myself now that Aragorn has spoken? Nah.

OH well. I am done here. Best

[NotAPretender]

I get it...but, still an overreaction really...

[Aianawa]

Happening again Aragorn.

It is okay to be wrong, to hold n express ones own truth, to follow your gut, even if someone else believes it is a hoax.

[Fred Steeves]

Hmmm, so we're to the point where peer reviews and such are the only way to verify reality?

I guess the science is settled on most matters as of 2019, nothing more to see here folks move along...

[Aianawa]

Imo the energy pot worldwide is moving big time, micro n macro, as changing beLIEfs is hugely diffiCULTish.

[NotAPretender]

I lost my post...

How else would one substantiate a scientific claim...statement of opinions are less rigorous, of course. and then There's Trump Truth...also known as fantasy.

[Aragorn]

Happening again Aragorn.

It is okay to be wrong, to hold n express ones own truth, to follow your gut, even if someone else believes it is a hoax.

Even if only for once, try seeing things through a more holistic lens than the "I have my own truth", Vern.

And for that matter, what about my truth? Did I give up the right to have my own truth when I was appointed the administrator of this forum? No, don't even go there, because I have no personal truth that would be different from the truth.

I look at the greater picture instead ─ as is required by the responsibility of running a forum of (alleged) truth-seekers. How the hell do you expect anyone from outside of this forum to take anyone or anything here seriously if we're going to go by "Oh, I have my truth, and you have your truth, and there is no such thing as the truth" ?

We are all grownups here. So it's time for everyone to start behaving as such.

[Chris]

Even if only for once, try seeing things through a more holistic lens than the "I have my own truth", Vern.

And for that matter, what about my truth? Did I give up the right to have my own truth when I was appointed the administrator of this forum? No, don't even go there, because I have no personal truth that would be different from the truth.

I look at the greater picture instead ─ as is required by the responsibility of running a forum of (alleged) truth-seekers. How the hell do you expect anyone from outside of this forum to take anyone or anything here seriously if we're going to go by "Oh, I have my truth, and you have your truth, and there is no such thing as the truth" ?

We are all grownups here. So it's time for everyone to start behaving as such.

I think it's important to have minimum standards of Truthfulness and empirical verifiability on any forum. If it's just about people stating their opinions and beliefs, with nothing to back it up, it devalues the whole discussion and any information that is in fact backed up by verifiable facts.

I experience this on other forums that have no such standards and people just throw their often completely uninformed opinions around with no filter, which means that any serious discussion is nigh-on impossible. If I put serious time and effort into researching a topic, my efforts become futile as soon as someone who knows next to nothing about said topic throws some ignorant opinion in there as if it were fact. I would say that the ratio of ignoramuses vs actually knowledgeable people on most forums is about 10:1 and that's probably generous. The democratisation of opinion, which has been enabled by the internet, becomes a hindrance to serious discussion and stifles the ability for people to think and to come to a consensus on reality. This is why we have so many wild, unsubstantiated theories circling around the internet, most of which refuse to die, even though they've been disproven over and over again.

I agree with Aragorn, that the alternative community is seriously devalued by this and there does not appear to be anything we can do about it.

[NotAPretender]

ignorance versus 'feeling' is a hard thing to gauge. I'm as guilty of 'bias' as anyone...but i'm confident with it...

I think it was William James that said...one should be familiar with the facts before letting one's emotion run away with it... Actually, it was me that said that...but citing William James is cool

[Fred Steeves]

Even if only for once, try seeing things through a more holistic lens than the "I have my own truth", Vern.

And for that matter, what about my truth? Did I give up the right to have my own truth when I was appointed the administrator of this forum? No, don't even go there, because I have no personal truth that would be different from the truth.

I look at the greater picture instead ─ as is required by the responsibility of running a forum of (alleged) truth-seekers. How the hell do you expect anyone from outside of this forum to take anyone or anything here seriously if we're going to go by "Oh, I have my truth, and you have your truth, and there is no such thing as the truth" ?

We are all grownups here. So it's time for everyone to start behaving as such.

I think it's important to have minimum standards of Truthfulness and empirical verifiability on any forum. If it's just about people stating their opinions and beliefs, with nothing to back it up, it devalues the whole discussion and any information that is in fact backed up by verifiable facts.

I experience this on other forums that have no such standards and people just throw their often completely uninformed opinions around with no filter, which means that any serious discussion is nigh-on impossible. If I put serious time and effort into researching a topic, my efforts become futile as soon as someone who knows next to nothing about said topic throws some ignorant opinion in there as if it were fact. I would say that the ratio of ignoramuses vs actually knowledgeable people on most forums is about 10:1 and that's probably generous. The democratisation of opinion, which has been enabled by the internet, becomes a hindrance to serious discussion and stifles the ability for people to think and to come to a consensus on reality. This is why we have so many wild, unsubstantiated theories circling around the internet, most of which refuse to die, even though they've been disproven over and over again.

I agree with Aragorn, that the alternative community is seriously devalued by this and there does not appear to be anything we can do about it.

This is getting ridiculous IMO. And it all started because a valued member DARED voice an opinion about vaccines contrary to "established science" and our resident vaccine expert?

Guess what? I happen to think fluoride is not good for me, therefore I don't drink public utility water. Does this make me a kook because established science and peer reviewed publications insist it's perfectly harmless, in any given quantity, and plus, is excellent for my teeth to boot?

I also happen to think there was an ancient war in this solar system that blew one planet to bits, and ripped the atmosphere off of another, but established science and peer reviewed papers from NASA would dictate that I need to go have my damn head examined. Maybe seek professional help and initiate some needed medications to stop the delusions. I may as well be Corey fucking Goode, right?

So then, if this is the road we're going down then let's go there full swing, shall we? Let's do this:

Aragorn, I want to see some established science demonstrating to me that you descended here as an angel, for one solo incarnation, and that Bill Ryan has indeed turned the corner and is no longer dealing cards from the bottom of the alt media deck of cards just like his good buds Rick Doty and such.

Chris, I want some empirical evidence demonstrating your personal relationship with an ancient Sumerian goddess.

And just for shits and giggles: NAP, show me some empirical evidence demonstrating that most ills in this country are due *solely* to the ugly, devil incarnate republicans/conservatives.

I'm not from Missouri, but show me anyway. Otherwise, it would seem we have nothing to talk about any more.

Show me...

[NotAPretender]

temper, temper, Mr. Fred.

peer reviewed material means literally that...peer reviewed...if one has 20,000 peers and only one says vaccines and fluoride cause problems then there is a credibility gap.

that is a good question though...

Empirical evidence...

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S69qpXChJrY


Noam Chomsky credentials follow and he is far from alone among the intelligentsia:

Chomsky is voted world's top public intellectual
He is in his 70s and first became known for his theory of transformational grammar - and now he is top of the thinkers' hit parade. Noam Chomsky, the linguistics professor who has become one of the most outspoken critics of US foreign policy, has won a poll that names him as the world's top public intellectual.
Chomsky, who was underwhelmed by the honour, beat off challenges from Umberto Eco, Richard Dawkins, Vaclav Havel and Christopher Hitchens to win the Prospect/Foreign Policy poll.

NOAM CHOMSKY – ‘I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROFESSIONAL CREDENTIALS’

Noam Chomsky – linguistic, anarchist, and Professor Emeritus at MIT – was never much of a student.

Chomsky is the subject of Michel Gondry’s new documentary “Is The Man Who is Tall Happy?” The film animates Chomsky’s life and work. In a post-premiere discussion of the film, Chomsky recounts his constant absenteeism in college and his disdain for high school.

“I don’t want to be corrupting the youth,” Chomsky begins before elaborating why he feels his success was a “series of accidents.”

“The truth is I have absolutely no professional credentials, literally, which is why I’m teaching at MIT,” Chomsky notes to laughter. “It’s a science-based university, they didn’t care if you have a guild card and something or other”


He continues to recount his distaste for high school. In 1945, Chomsky went to “the academic high school” with other college-bound students. As a result, Chomsky felt the teachers “didn’t work hard” because the students would pass their exams regardless.
But Chomsky eagerly awaited college, browsing the University of Pennsylvania’s class catalogs. But it wasn’t all that it was cracked up to be.

After my first year of college, each course I took in every field was so boring that I didn’t even go to the classes. I was quite interested in chemistry, but the way I passed the chemistry course was because I had a friend, a young woman about my age, who took extremely meticulous notes…she lent me her notes so I didn’t have to go to class and I could pass the exams.”

As a result, Chomsky declares that he “never really had an undergraduate degree.”

So how does a slacker become a Professor Emeritus at MIT?

I started taking mainly a scattering of graduate courses without much background, I then was lucky enough to get a 4-year graduate fellowship…did my own work, essentially I never had much of a formal education.

…And then I was very lucky, to get to M.I.T., which was a research institution, they didn’t care about credentials. You could work on what you wanted to, and it turned out very well. It’s just a series of accidents I think. Very few people are lucky enough to have an experience like that.

[Aragorn]

This is getting ridiculous IMO. And it all started because a valued member DARED voice an opinion about vaccines contrary to "established science" and our resident vaccine expert?

There is a distinct difference between voicing an opinion and repeatedly pushing an opinion with a voice of authority, and especially so if it's an opinion that has time and again already been proven false. And if you understand the science behind it, then you will also know why that opinion is false.

Furthermore ─ and I believe I've already used the exact same wording before on this thread ─ I think it's quite a stretch of anybody's imagination to link the arrest of Julian Assange to the issue of mandatory vaccinations. But then again, Maggie is also a member at Project Avalon, where an older thread regarding vaccines and how they allegedly cause autism just happens to have been revived in the last two days, with even members of the Project Avalon staff joining the anti-vaxx vantage.

So please, Fred, don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that I am trying to censor a member for "daring to voice an opinion" that happens to go against "my" opinion. Because the innuendo in that wording would be a grotesque lie. Furthermore, like I said already, it is not my opinion that I was expounding. It was scientific fact. There's a huge difference.

So then, if this is the road we're going down then let's go there full swing, shall we? Let's do this:

Aragorn, I want to see some established science demonstrating to me that you descended here as an angel, for one solo incarnation, and that Bill Ryan has indeed turned the corner and is no longer dealing cards from the bottom of the alt media deck of cards just like his good buds Rick Doty and such.

Fine, you want to be silly? Let's be silly. You're asking for evidence on two separate and unrelated things, neither of which I have evidence of, nor did I ever claim to have evidence of them, nor did I ever speak of those things with a tone of authority.

On account of the first issue, my allegedly being an incarnated angel, it is not something I generally talk about in public anymore, even though I have in the past. I only mentioned that to you in a private message because it was somehow relevant to the discussion we were having.

But I have never claimed with a voice of authority that I would indeed be an incarnated angel. That idea came to me a very long time ago, through a series of weird experiences, and it was also corroborated by psychics. But I was also still a Catholic when that notion came to me, and it has taken me many, many years to shake off my Catholic indoctrination. In fact, I'm not sure whether I've managed to completely eradicate that programming from my psyche, because there are times that I still catch myself surreptitiously thinking along the logic of Catholicism.

When I first heard Dolores Cannon talk about the Three Waves of Volunteers ─ her original version, because her definition of the Three Wavers changed a lot over the years as the result of the information she was receiving from the people whom she put under regression hypnosis ─ it felt like I finally had the answer as to where I came from and what I was doing here on this rock. Do I still care about it? Not all that much anymore, because it doesn't really matter. All I know is that I am trying to be the best human being I can be, and that I care about truth and justice.

On account of the second issue, I have also never said with authority that Bill Ryan had turned a corner. What I may have said is that I have turned a corner on account of my vantage toward the man, and that I am now beyond the knee-jerking phase where we were all dissing on el ingles en Ecuador. It was immature and it had to end. The fact that I found myself communicating with Bill woke me up to that.

Bill Ryan is a man with flaws, just like we all have our own flaws. And only he can work on his flaws. But ─ and this I have said ─ I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, and I have also said that time will eventually tell. That's good enough for me. Nothing said with a voice of authority there, although I have slapped a few people upside the head for continuing to feed into the childish Bill-bashing.

When The One Truth was founded, it was primarily a kind of venue for Project Avalon refugees, and so the Bill-bashing was strong here at the time. I know because I've been part of it myself. Guilty as charged. But it wasn't just Bill-bashing. It was knee-jerk everything-mainstream-bashing. I even got chastised here once by Marcus (DNA) over having drunk tap water one day when I was out of beverages and too ill to go out the door. Seriously, I had been drinking tap water instead of suffering thirst, for one or two days in a row, and so now the sky was going to fall.

Well, those days are over now. The One Truth has evolved into what it was supposed to have been from the start, but which it couldn't become because of the knee-jerking egos that had come over from Project Avalon. Unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, championing kooks like Alfred Lambremont Webre and tabloid stories about baby-eating satanic pedophiles from questionable websites and opinionated YouTube talking heads. No wonder the mainstream media wouldn't take any of this conspiracy or UFO talk seriously. Those who were talking about conspiracies were all immature kooks with an attitude problem, a lack of a proper education, no sense of discernment whatsoever, and an unhealthy dose of paranoia.

The One Truth wants to be a forum for truth-seekers, and seeking the truth is seeking "the truth, wherever it takes you" ─ paraphrasing the lovely Christine Anderson from the Earth Empaths forum. And the truth is the truth. It isn't somebody's truth.

But I've already said higher up that it's not about me being the arbiter of truth. Maggie ─ the deadline of the 24-hour grace time has expired now, so I am now going to do as she requested and retire her account, hence why I'm now typing her name in slate grey ─ was pushing her already proven-false opinion with a voice of authority, and she already had quite a history of doing this, about the exact same subject. And she was even trying to disguise it as something that supposedly had to do with Julian Assange's arrest.

But wait, I'm not done yet. Because as you may have noticed, this thread has not been closed. We're still talking here. Maggie was not censored. And the thread has also not been moved to Proven Hoaxes & Misinformation yet. So much for having censored our members, stifled discussion and having abused my admin powers. I must be a real tyrant.

No, I'll tell you what I am, Fred. I am a mirror. I confront people with themselves, and I don't even have to instigate this myself. That's why many people don't like me. They are all too happy pointing out the splinter in somebody else's eye, and they don't want to be reminded of the beam in their own. And then there's the Dunning-Kruger effect, of course.

[Fred Steeves]

Well just for the record here Aragorn, I wasn't at all implying Maggie was being censored. She wasn't. I just didn't like seeing you guys going after her like that and I still think it was uncalled for.

Now also just for the record, you being the big bad admin here is irrelevant, except that when you go after someone it has that extra thud of authority behind it. But no, I'm just talking to you man to man, as equals, just like the other guys. I don't have that authority figure complex many seem to have, but I DO like to see those in authority use the utmost restraint when forced to exercise that authority. Cops would be a good example of that.

Also just to be crystal clear, if it hadn't have already been out there publicly anyway, I would never have brought up the angel thing because I respect the privacy of pm's. I don't think I was being silly with my questions, but we can agree to disagree on that.

[Chris]

Chris, I want some empirical evidence demonstrating your personal relationship with an ancient Sumerian goddess.

Show me...

That is certainly something that crossed my mind, believe you me…

But let’s be real here, proving the existence of a spiritual being, one that has no physical form, is entirely different than proving the effectiveness, side-effects, or lack thereof, of well-established medicinal substances. The latter has been done, repeatedly and in the case of most vaccines (I’ll put a question mark over flu vaccines, because I think they’re not nearly as effective or side-effect free as claimed), conclusively. I am not aware of anyone being able to present conclusive, empirically verifiable evidence for the existence of deities or spirits. Yet, billions of people not only believe in their existence, but make serious and repeated efforts to communicate with them and claim to accrue tangible benefits from their interactions with them. Are all those people (the majority of the human population) simply insane or delusional? Leading atheists seem to think so anyway, but I would not be so hasty when making a judgement.

In any case, the point is that the two are in no way comparable when seeking empirical proof, because the Spirit world doesn’t even exist, as far as science and medicine is concerned, therefore how could it possibly study something it claims isn’t even real?

Going back to the issue of deities, I have interacted with a number of them, but would it be even possible to prove empirically that any of them are real? If it were, somebody would have done it already, so I suspect this will remain outside the scope of empirical science for quite some time. It is important to note though the empirical science is a very narrow discipline and as discussed on this forum beforehand, once you expand your field of view to include theoretical science and philosophy (of which Science is just one branch) the existence of deities and spirits becomes at least a Theoretical possibility.