Discussion in 'The big picture' started by Roy, Dec 2, 2012.
The truth? I think not.
2 posts on wood chips, the rest have been Yank conspiracy theory
That is not what these forums are about
This is trolling
I must admit, I do find that particular article amusing. Pointless, but amusing all the same.
If you'd spend more than a brief moment perusing the links I've posted you'd find that these are not theories. The evidence is there, but it takes time and a lot of reading to come to that firm conclusion. You can't read one paragraph, or even one article and suddenly change your whole outlook, which has been very tactfully embedded in your mind. If you put the time in you'll begin to see the gaping holes in the stories covered in the mainstream news.
Apparently, in this forum you can write about politics only if it is in agreement with the majority, or the mainstream. What then is the purpose of this forum if opposing views are unwelcome?
Pointless, ecodharmamark? Have you ever seen the Back to Eden movie? This guy uses branches that are less than 3 inches (7cm) in diameter as well as wood from larger branches. He claims that God told him how to garden this way. I think it's likely that he just read about the Canadian research on ramial chipped wood. I hope you're hungry ecodharmamark, because it's time to eat your words.
You do nothing to foster Permaculture in this online community, thus you are trolling trollin trollin up a river... ..without a paddle.
Honestly, I would of temp banned you days ago.
I did post some comments on the topic titled, What is Money?, in this forum too. Please do some reading there and then explain to me in detail how what I wrote, and what a few others wrote, is just a "conspiracy theory". If what I'm writing is so incorrect, explain to the folks why that is so.
my experience with conspiracy theory it is a comfort zone for those to tuck into their boxes with, like name calling "deniers" etc.,. it is to exclude the reasoning and thoughts of others to block lateral thought. their latest theory blanket is HAARP, only need to mention the initials.
like the ethic goes "united we stand divided we fall" division rules supreme, putting peer followings above people.
It would indeed be a sad state of affairs if we try and shut people up just because they espouse views different to ones we hold as truth (and what is perceived as truth can change over time).
You don't have to agree with what some people say, and you can challenge or ignore it as you choose.
I don't particularly like religious zealots who use fear to control, but I defend their right to express their views. It's up to the individual to sort through the ideas and take what they like and leave the rest.
I remember a year 11 modern history class that I had and the unit required some lessons on coca cola capitalism and cultural imperialism. After one of these lessons, I had to take most of them for their weekly religious instruction class, just in a supervisory role. Volunteers took the class. This day a well meaning fellow taking the class proceeded to tell the students that there was no excuse for people not to take Jesus into their lives, even peasants in Russia have access to radios and ear phones whilst tilling their fields (yes I'm serious this is what he was saying). Those who were not born again in christ were condemned to hell. Well the kids near on rioted (just having learnt about cultural imperialsim) and were yelling at him, calling him names etc.
I had to calm them down and remind them that they will encounter many people in their lives that will express views very different to theirs but they can take what resonsates with them and leave the rest. Critical thinking is the key. In whose interest is this view being pushed? Why? How does it compare to factual and scientific evidence? How are these views formulated? Who benefits from this belief? What effect does this belief have on people? Can we ever know the whole truth of anything?etc.
It doesn't mean you try and restrict free speech. It's a learning opportunity.
Concerning my reference to 'pointless': It was made in relation to the article linked-to in the post immediately preceding my own.
Concerning your other recent posts: My interest in and opinion of the material you constantly link to remains the same as it was when I first commented upon it here.
Concerning your general presence here at the PRI Forum: I have no problem with it, as long as you contain your theories about conspiracies (for example, see: No. 5) to this particular thread, or at least the forum category - 'big picture' - where this and all other threads like it belong.
Wow, Roy managed to tick off the majority of the noted conspiracies, I'm very impressed with his dedication/paranoia but he needs to do a bit more work if he wants a perfect 30 out of 30.
Annette thanks for the words of reason and tolerance. Guys here is the diversity in question, isn't it?
In order to weigh one point of view over another you must take the time to learn about both. Few people bother to do that these days, and yet somehow they expect to arrive at the correct conclusion. That's the problem with putting too much faith in the media, you relinquish your responsibility to educate yourself. The elites bank on that (in more ways than one). Ignoring evidence because it doesn't fit your preconceived notions does not further your knowledge of any subject in any way, it only stifles it. I used to have very different opinions than I do now, but I, like many others, chose to investigate subjects that seemed far fetched at the time, only to discover that I didn't know nearly as much as I thought I did. I would honestly prefer it if I turned out to be completely wrong about everything I've written in this thread, but I've spent many years (not minutes) educating myself about this, and the evidence to support it is overwhelming.
Here is one more piece of the evidence. Carrol Quigley wrote a book titled, Tragedy and Hope, and in it he goes into detail about how these elites dominate the nations of the world, including their governments, via central banks. Quigley was President Clinton's professor at Georgetown University, and Bill Clinton praised him on several occasions in his speeches.
In the article I linked to above it says, "This is merely the tip of the iceberg. If you really want to understand the relevance of this quote by Clinton, I highly recommending reading the five part series entitled The Future Is Calling by G. Edward Griffin." The link to that article by Griffin wasn't working in the link above, but here it is.
Heh... and all Roy has done is divide himself from the rest of us... ..ever since he got here. I question as to weather or not he even has a garden.. or is even male at this point.
there is lots of anon's about the 'net provides excellent anonymity, you may walk past one of us in the street and never ever know.
my ethic not to judge let all have their say as happens others need not agree so post your own idea in counter.
Then all I can say is you didn't research and learn very well as basic research would point out their tenuous alignment to reality. Your reference to Carrol Quigley's work being yet another example of a mind more interested in supporting a conspiracy framework than studying the available information in an objective way.
Then point out specifically how I'm wrong or how the information in the links I posted is wrong. I haven't read any specifics yet from any of you, only broad, unsupported statements about me being wrong. Back it up.
Separate names with a comma.