Zoklet.net

Go Back   Zoklet.net > Society > Conspiracies And The Paranormal

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 04-05-2012, 08:48 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Not simply discussing and arguing, but convincing another of a ideological/religious statement is the goal, is it not? How to do this best with sensitive issues? Many issues in this discourse are considered "taboo topic[s]"; hence, my thread stays here; it also has many other topics that are not all of a conspiratorial or paranormal nature. My discourse with this professor involves reasoned discussion in both a philosophical and objective manner, so I do believe that a tract of this variety would find its place here. I hope this discussion helps many of you to open your eyes to the verifiably weird around us. In particular, I hope you also understand the importance of using and not just ignoring falsehoods and improper reasoning in ascertaining the truth (sounds unreasonable/irrational, but I used a Bertrand Russel quote to explain this).

I have added a summary, but I think you should read through the discourse before having it spoiled for you:
It begins with a discussion of a charlatan who managed to hoodwink just about everyone, mentions how this occurs in the world at large with the power elite and Illuminati, and finally describes how scientists and intellectuals do this as well, knowingly or otherwise. By no means was this my intent, but meta-themes develop from themes and so on--coincidence?


Quote:
Greetings, Prof. Zoklet,

I am writing to you to propose an important reading assignment for [religious studies] students. When I took your comparative religion course a few semesters ago, the class read about the frenzied beginnings of Billy Graham's rise to influence. I had known but little of Graham prior to your course, but after reading a lucid exposť of the evidence pointing towards Graham's superficial character, I came to a significantly clearer picture of American religion and American politics in the evangelical era:

I have linked this essay here and at the bottom and will provide a short intro to it by quoting a part of it:

"This is not a pleasant story. Billy Graham has been built up to be the most respected popular person in America, Who wants to find out they have been deceived? We will try to give you the facts, or evidence, and may God grant you wisdom as you read this. "

Clearly, if Billy Graham had told us that we should accept the New World Order, this would have been anathema to his Christian message of spiritual rebirth. But tell us this he did! It thus seems to me that the Satanic aspect of Billy Graham deserves consideration, perhaps more consideration than the assignment that I joyfully read through (I had "assumed" Graham to be genuine at the time). In any case, Graham's "goodness" and moral exhortations cannot make up for his deception because both were important to his message and both were commanded to him by a higher power (i.e. Satan).

Thus, I feel this essay to be of the highest importance to today's students (given the current political/NWO landscape), particularly those who take comparative religion courses without the desire to be scholars on the topic (and yet, even in this group, oh the precious few who can profess to know even 2 of the "facts" outlined in this single essay).

To further illustrate why you should consider utilizing the uncommon truth in this essay's message, I hope you will consider the case of the AP Government teacher who was banned from an AP Gov. teaching discussion group for pointing out how recent US policies are plainly contrary to the Constitution. Critical thinking should not be thrown out of the civics classroom with regards to the Constitution, but it only takes one administrator to stop this information from entering young minds. I know that an undergraduate does not and should not have much say in deciding curricula, but I only attempt to speak as the vanguard of my generation when I say that indeed the young should be taught to think critically about everything that exists: current laws, the Constitution, Christian celebrities, and yes, Satanists, without regard for the controversy or apparent "stickiness" (i.e. religious/ideological significance) of the topic but with attention paid only to the evidence, borne out of our best interpretation of history from the people that were there.

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...lly_graham.htm

I am hopeful that this essay has, at the very least, broadened your opinion on the pastor Billy Graham and has caused you to reconsider assigning the writings of a charlatan.


I wish you all the best in your studies of religious faiths and religious people and hope that you do decide to implement my suggestion if you ever have a chance to teach this course again.
Quote:
Zok, thanks for sending this. Just so you are aware, this type of expose material is within the same genre of Maria Monk which you have the choice of reading this semester. To claim Billy Graham is a Luciferian and Illuminati, takes one into the realm that is no longer academic but fringe paranoia and conspiracy theory. I would advise you to be more wary of this type of expose material. It itself has a long history in our country. Critical thinking doesn't mean to embrace exposes, but instead to be critical of even (and especially) them. For example, notice the type of evidence used and the medium of sensationalism that is relied on. The sources are all second hand sources at best, which means the information is far removed from any real evidence. Also, the over-insistence of truth resembles forward emails more than thoughtful analysis. Also, throwing Illuminati and Satanism (both secretive) in the mix demonstrates that we are dealing with a realm that is not easily verified (which doesn't match the certainty of the argument). There are many levels to this, but I would suggest serious caution with this sort of material. It's conspiracy theory and paranoia, not a serious reflection of Billy Graham. If anything, it reveals he's more of a liberal christian than many take him for (he see's god's hand beyond the Bible). Personally, I'm not a fan of Graham, but I'm less a fan of conspiracy theory. In short, be very cautious and careful of this sort of internet literature.

Quote:
Professor Zoklet,

What sort of a liberal Christian would welcome the NWO with open arms? I would like to take this sort of theory seriously if you could mention a few arguments for it--additionally, I'm not clear on what you meant by Graham's seeing God's hand beyond the Bible in the context of that essay that tries to paint him as a Satanist.

If you still have doubts about the Illuminati, there is much serious evidence available on Youtube (I can personally recommend material related to Michael Jackson--highly entertaining information) and it is all easy to absorb as long as one steps back from the potential anxiety/"paranoia" that should not necessarily come with realizing that there is a well-connected power elite in this world. We are both aware that history is full of conspiracies and that simply to label something with such a phrase is an easy way to remove the thought process from one's brain entirely--as a historical example, this is the same sort of speech that silenced 9/11 truthers/dissenters, despite half of America's still wanting a new 9/11 Commission because the original was, quite frankly, bollocks crafted from phony-baloney (if you are a fan of analyzing language and expressions to discern truth, then I am sure you will get a kick out of this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YaFG...eature=related).

Just don't wander off and get stuck in that part of YouTube with the reptilian shapeshifting videos. :/ There, you will notice the same sort of finger-pointing and ad-hominems that are still being used against those who believe in extra-terrestrials, again about half of the population according to recent studies. Do you not wonder why so many of your fellow men believe in these wacky topics? I shall stay quiet on this topic for now; like I said, don't get stuck there!

I am linking more concentrated 9/11 truth in case you are interested in the reasons for widespread belief in a conspiracy:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0505/S00295.htm
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/wtc_fire.htm

You can also search for Dr. Judy Wood to get closer to what might have really happened--though this is more of a theory than a factual analysis as above, it is backed by far more facts than the 9/11 Commission Report. An astounding collection of evidence that I am certain you will never believe even though Judy's physics is presented clearly.

Your disagreement is not warranted by the quality of the evidence, both in that essay and in many places online, and though I do not have time to point out the primary conspiracies (perhaps to introduce the subject) or even to enumerate the important connections between the elites, I will leave you with this video which plainly demonstrates conspiratorial collaboration at high levels.
Here's a quote about the topic of this clip from Joni Mitchell (with my emphasis):
In America, the Morgellons is *always* diagnosed as "delusion of parasites," and they send you to a psychiatrist. I'm actually trying to get out of the music business to battle for Morgellons sufferers to receive the credibility that's owed to them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0_EyPwvWTY
Please don't forget: the chemtrails START AND STOP--they are being sprayed manually and no amount of "official history" or sheepish denial will convince the infected that they are delusional about their parasitosis.

I appreciate your reading/viewing through this material that I have provided; I did think of many of your criticisms as I read the essay but after acquiring data like mad for years, I have learned the important rules of how secrecy functions and was able to correlate the nature and flavor of the (secondhand) testimony with other "model explanations" and to conclude that there is precious little reason to begin a journey of massive self-deception with regards to a dead pastor.

Additionally, as a likely result of his close friendship with most recent Republican presidents, Graham has been connected to the Bohemian Grove (SRA and Illuminati ritual site), and talk of which, here is another brief video on the body language and rhetoric involved in a lie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP3cQDitQEU

I can honestly somewhat appreciate your distaste for conspiracy theories, but as a theorist familiar with the data, I have provided you with resources designed to keep your conspiracy facts in order. I hope you do consider these facts; if you start to do so, you will find that as the "wackiness factor" of the theories you encounter grows, other theories relying on different sources will start to make more sense, and eventually, you will be able to connect the small with the large and the mundane with the absolutely unbelievable.

Feel free to contact me if you could use a research pointer or if I can be of any assistance. In any case, I would like to continue communicating as long as you still feel that reading about the power elites necessitates caution due to a lack of verifiability--here, for example, is a very brief clip to help question that belief:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8zWLOnNe6o

I appreciate your commentary and urge you the same caution when reading any secretive, secondhand, or sensational information, but I also have provided you with information that has been cautiously sifted by Internet audiences, the accuracy of which can be traced through a vast web of connections that is not actually as far-fetched as it may first seem.

In short, "fringe" facts remain facts and secondhand recollections from authorities can be trusted (as a whole) if there are enough of them.

Quote:
Zok,

If I remember from looking over the initial website, it quoted Graham as saying that God works through non-Christians and even nature (it seems like this is where they begin to bring in Satanism). I'm personally not a big fan of Graham and also haven't read much of his writings or sermons, so I don't know the truth behind the quotes. I'm a little skeptical. Also, it's possible in my haste I may have misread it. If I read those quotes correctly, that's a rather liberal approach to the meaning of Christian salvation. I didn't have much time, so I could have read it wrong. Again, thanks for sending this on. I don't buy it, but I find it interesting and will see if anything supportive comes out in my own studies.

Just a quick note, I get the feeling from reading your response that you give way too much credit to youtube sources and other internet sites. Because of the nature of the internet world, its not hard to get large followings behind off-base ideas and conspiracies, thus giving them a false sense of validity.

Quote:
Professor Zoklet,

If you are short on time, you can skip to the final link. David Rockefeller's shocking confession (direct quote from his book--verified) lasts all of about 40 seconds. I hope that this video is an acceptable proof of a highly-connected power elite, but if you have any sound arguments to the contrary or critiques of the quote, I would enjoy hearing them. I do not want to hear more on how videos and websites can become popular just by citing "fringe" or shocking facts.

I can see that you like to critique the credibility of a source but do not have much else to add to your arguments. Sure, large followings have risen up around minutiae, but do mass delusions like belief in ETs and desire for a new 9/11 Commission really fit this bill with the quantity of people that believe in them? That's a matter of one's taste as well as one's belief in peoples' intentions to find the truth. Primarily, though, it is a matter of education, which is the primary leisure activity for which I use the Internet.

It provides a different medium of education in that you will have many teachers at your fingertips with many contradictory perspectives, but ultimately, one of them will say something that no other can easily refute. At this point, it can be said that we have acquired a fact (something irrefutable), something quite independent of context. For purposes of truth-seeking, it is irrelevant if it was found on an online community of cranks or on an academic site, the point is that it was not refuted by anyone with the capacity to do so. In short, if an argument is popular enough (for just long enough) and not refuted, we can accept it. This introduces a complication in that refutations that have been rebutted by proponents of the argument are not included as arguments against the original argument. However, these do serve another purpose in convincing us of the quality of the evidence, as Bertrand Russel said, "Nothing convinced me more of Plato's Theory of Forms than Aristotle's critique of it."

So as you can expect, I attempt to educate myself on both sides of an argument because I find it quite useful despite the fact that I pick up falsehoods as well as facts. I also have no prejudice for one community over another; why should anyone? All that matters is whether anyone can explain something like Morgellons without appealing to delusions or the supernatural. So far, there is only 1 such explanation and it involves chemtrails sprayed by factions of the power elite. If you disagree, I would certainly appreciate a pointer to a community that has another hypothesis that is yet unrefuted; it is always useful to point to the form of another explanation, but it appears clear to me (by the nature of synthetic organisms) that no other forms exist.

Can you cite some examples of widespread (>10% of Americans?) beliefs that have nothing to do with reality? I can only think of belief in a literal 7-day creation as an example, and this has been steadily undermined by the Internet thought there are communities for this sort of thing as well. In my experience, the degree and popularity of a belief does correlate to something akin to truth, though perhaps it can be better expressed as "passion", "excitement", or "self-righteousness" since most beliefs serve the ego.

Quote:
Zok,

You are getting into things that take up a lot of time to form much of an opinion on or to verify one way or the other. Most of what we find on the internet can't be verified, much of it is filtered, and much is distorted. I think you can appreciate that it sounds filtered to conflate Illuminati/Graham/Satanism. I think we can ignore stuff in that direction. At the same time, the internet is full of great stuff, and it sounds like its a hobby for you to go through it and sift through it all. That can be very time consuming, so I appreciate the insight you've forwarded on to me. I think it's good to be thinking over these things and encourage you to keep sending me stuff whenever you come across them.
Quote:
Professor Zoklet,

Please tell me how David Rockefeller's confession does not clearly show there is a highly-connected power elite in this world and why we should not look in that direction when analyzing people who wield influence. I am quite distraught that you are again telling me that it is hard to verify this information when it is clear that Rockefeller published a book admitting to all historical accusations that he is at the head of an international cabal. I am not clear on what the problem is here.

I think David has actually "recanted" this confession (or something) in a recent interview with Ben Fulford, but this fact is actually more like Aristotle's critique of the Theory of Forms than a true rebuttal in that Ben eventually shows us that in the right context, David truly meant what he said. In any case, David did have his quote published for the world to read, although admittedly, his target audience was primarily his peers near the top. I do not recommend that interview because it is long and not nearly as interesting as this confession; in short, Ben demonstrates that David has no qualms about lying to protect his reputation and that this is the reason for the recanting--the motive for which would have otherwise been hard to understand coming from such a reputable man of wealth.

I know that this 1 simple proof from Rockefeller might not satisfy your curiosity, but it is just a preliminary demonstration meant to introduce the idea of the power elite; something like the Morgellons phenomena (so real that some doctors enter complete denial when diagnosing it and all are stumped when faced with real cases) can show you why (please excuse my bluntness) there can be no opinion on the factual existence of a power elite so ruthless and selfish they can only be called "negative people/entities".

At this point, I would recommend you stop considering an attempt to form an opinion and dive right into satisfying any curiosity you might have about these issues with the use of search engines and the assumption that the proof is sound (perhaps you can think of some concrete objections later I do welcome them). I recommend that you do not hesitate in your pursuit of knowledge and that you feel free to ask about any mysteries that have ever puzzled you--I have not solved them all but I am generally aware of the state of the debate in these areas.

One additional thing that I will leave you with that I have recently spent much time studying and advocating and which relates closely to your field is reincarnation research, a very compelling set of evidence for the afterlife and the existence of mind outside of the body. One could fall asleep reading the wiki article on this, so instead, here is a meta-reference so that you can acquaint yourself with the many facets of this exciting but stigmatized field:

http://monkeywah.typepad.com/randis_...-research.html

Robert McLuhan introduces these references--his book on the failures of skeptics with regards to the paranormal only has 5-star reviews on Amazon due apparently to the quality of its research--another giant in a fairly short legacy of well-spoken, critically-thinking fringe researchers.

Perhaps you are like Bertrand Russell and a skeptic's critique can be useful, but in my case I found a critique of a skeptic's critique to be most useful; for this, you should seek out Robert Almender's exhaustive 28-page critique of philosopher John Edwards' book, Reincarnation: A Critical Examination in the Journal of Scientific Exploration although it does not contain many case studies which can perhaps be more convincing.

From wiki, we find that verifiability is in the eyes of the establishment: "Almeder is critical of the academic and scientific community for not taking Stevenson's work seriously because of a mistaken understanding of the nature of his work and confusing it with the diminished respect for religion that has been associated with the rise of scientism".

And yes, JSE is a real journal with real standards of experiment, repetition, and observation, often more strict than other journals simply due to the nature of the topics, i.e. the viciousness of skeptics. The journal has such a powerful drive for accuracy that it was just a matter of time until some reputable mainstream researcher started resorting to ad-hominems to question the data: here is a quote from a mainstream scientist that demonstrates (implicitly, of course) just how terrifying fringe topics like the mind-body problem are to the scientific mainstream:

"The JSE, while presented as neutral and objective, appears to hold a hidden agenda. They seem to be interested in promoting fringe topics as real mysteries and they tend to ignore most evidence to the contrary. They publish 'scholarly' articles promoting the reality of dowsing, neo-astrology, ESP, and psychokinesis. Most of the prominent and active members are strong believers in the reality of such phenomena."

Ah, but shooting the messenger has always been the last resort of those who do not have a reply.
To be updated
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-05-2012, 05:02 PM
Rust Rust is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 586
Thanked 1,714 Times in 1,121 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

I don't see where you've "convinced" the professor of anything aside from maybe your utter gullibility in your awful sources. It reads like someone politely trying to tell you your sources are full of shit, and you doubling down.

Reply With Quote
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
Tachosomoza (04-06-2012), takedrugs_killpeople (04-06-2012), Zok Jr. (04-06-2012)
  #3  
Old 04-06-2012, 07:02 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Explain Rockefeller's confession, then.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-06-2012, 07:33 AM
crazzyass crazzyass is offline
Archduke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: United States
Thanks: 1,895
Thanked 1,059 Times in 688 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
Explain Rockefeller's confession, then.
Link?
__________________
"p.s. i better not call Cory something like a filthy liberal, otherwise crazzyass could accuse me of using a slur in an off-topic manner, and ban me" - WAN
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-06-2012, 08:20 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-06-2012, 08:30 AM
WAN WAN is offline
Slightly Grander Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 197
Thanked 508 Times in 421 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

itt nshanin is being a pretentious little faggot again, trying to prove to the world of his genius level *rollseyes* intelligence

also, inb4 the facebook pic of sum ting rong
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-06-2012, 08:33 AM
Tachosomoza Tachosomoza is offline
Significantly Grander Duke
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: In a hoveround.
Thanks: 1,884
Thanked 2,278 Times in 1,745 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

nshanin sounds like the type of kid that joins one of those mass suicide cults like the Order of the Solar Temple.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-06-2012, 08:40 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Rockefeller's confession + Morgellons phenomena=Incontrovertible proof of power elite

Prove me wrong, my videos are not long,

there is sum ting wong
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-06-2012, 08:42 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Never mind, please move to half baked, thread is ruined.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-06-2012, 09:29 AM
Proots's Avatar
Proots Proots is offline
PROOTS
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Thanks: 1,215
Thanked 2,251 Times in 1,527 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

He told you that he doesn't buy into conspiracy theories and he also politely hinted that your sources are utter shit. You responded by sending him more conspiracy theories backed up by shitty sources. What exactly are you trying to prove? Seriously, I'm not trying to troll you, I do have a semi-open mind, but your goal here is a bit obscure.
__________________
PROOTS
Reply With Quote
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
crazzyass (04-06-2012), Zok Jr. (04-06-2012)
  #11  
Old 04-06-2012, 09:33 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

He also thanked me for it more than once; I'm sure you'll excuse me for calling you a silly bitch once you realize that you're trolling just like anyone else who doesn't tell me WHY my sources are shitty (I can see why people think the first one is questionable).

Quote:
It provides a different medium of education in that you will have many teachers at your fingertips with many contradictory perspectives, but ultimately, one of them will say something that no other can easily refute. At this point, it can be said that we have acquired a fact (something irrefutable), something quite independent of context. For purposes of truth-seeking, it is irrelevant if it was found on an online community of cranks or on an academic site, the point is that it was not refuted by anyone with the capacity to do so. In short, if an argument is popular enough (for just long enough) and not refuted, we can accept it. This introduces a complication in that refutations that have been rebutted by proponents of the argument are not included as arguments against the original argument. However, these do serve another purpose in convincing us of the quality of the evidence, as Bertrand Russel said, "Nothing convinced me more of Plato's Theory of Forms than Aristotle's critique of it."
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-06-2012, 09:39 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Dude man, you are a fucking wacko. When you started talking about 9/11 and ETs, I knew you were getting off track talking about shit that wasn't even relevant. Your professor tried telling you this in the first response, but you proved to be more of a paranoid wacko, and just wanted to agree with you so you can fuck off. Now when he sees you in class he's gonna know you're another internet conspiracy nutjob.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-06-2012, 09:40 AM
Proots's Avatar
Proots Proots is offline
PROOTS
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Thanks: 1,215
Thanked 2,251 Times in 1,527 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
He also thanked me for it more than once; I'm sure you'll excuse me for calling you a silly bitch once you realize that you're trolling just like anyone else who doesn't tell me WHY my sources are shitty (I can see why people think the first one is questionable).
Yes, he thanked you. He's being polite. What's he going to do? Tell you not to email you ever again? I don't know how well you act in social situations, but it's obvious from your exchange that he's politely putting you down.

In a nutshell : He explains that while he appreciates you emailing him, he isn't into to fringe/conspiracy bullshit, telling you that you should be apprehensive of it too, and he goes on to hint several times that you shouldn't believe everything you read, least of all online. In other words, your sources are shit.

Sorry, man. His words, not mine.
__________________
PROOTS
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-06-2012, 09:47 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
he isn't into to fringe/conspiracy bullshit, telling you that you should be apprehensive of it too, and he goes on to hint several times that you shouldn't believe everything you read, least of all online. In other words, your sources are shit.
Wait, why not? Why won't you get into why online sources are not credible? Is it just a matter of being "into" something and keeping your opinions to yourself? Everyone likes to try new things sometimes, you know, but you won't get far without some planning or in this case an extensive overview of these connections.

Now that I think about it, it's actually pretty shitty that I had to read something written by an avowed Satanist in the first place; is this how "liberal" colleges are now?
Reply With Quote
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
Figure-8 (04-12-2012)
  #15  
Old 04-06-2012, 09:47 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Basically, nshanin just wanted to prove to his professor how much of an extensive conspiracy knowledge he has by getting off-topic and using shitty sources. Good job, now your knows you're a little crazy.

EDIT: I bet you can't even talk to him about this face to face.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-06-2012, 09:56 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

It's not off-topic, I wanted to discuss the important connections between the religious, political, military, and ET wings of the power elite of which Graham was likely a part. All of these topics are interesting and to weave them all together is a fine way of making a point since he admitted he was ignorant about each of these although he "didn't like" Graham.

Next person who talks about shitty sources with something that sounds like an unclarified intuition will end up on my ignore list. I know you think I'm crazy, but your arguments are not sound(ing)... I cannot hear their soundness with my logical mind and have to "understand" by repetition, visualization, and/or intuition. I am replying to every one of them like my quote about online sources says, so I am at the least consistent.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-06-2012, 09:58 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

And you just sounded plain rude and disrespectful. You're not the only one to email him. He has other students with legitimate concerns.

Quote:
I do not want to hear more on how videos and websites can become popular just by citing "fringe" or shocking facts.
Seriously? You talk to your professor like this?

Quote:
I can see that you like to critique the credibility of a source but do not have much else to add to your arguments. Sure, large followings have risen up around minutiae, but do mass delusions like belief in ETs and desire for a new 9/11 Commission really fit this bill with the quantity of people that believe in them?
Please, someone define respect for nshanin.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:00 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Roll Eyes Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
It's not off-topic, I wanted to discuss the important connections between the religious, political, military, and ET wings of the power elite of which Graham was likely a part. All of these topics are interesting and to weave them all together is a fine way of making a point since he admitted he was ignorant about each of these although he "didn't like" Graham.

Next person who talks about shitty sources with something that sounds like an unclarified intuition will end up on my ignore list. I know you think I'm crazy, but your arguments are not sound(ing)... I cannot hear their soundness with my logical mind and have to "understand" by repetition, visualization, and/or intuition. I am replying to every one of them like my quote about online sources says, so I am at the least consistent.
Let me give you an example of why you're wrong. Proving that ETs exist, doesn't prove your initial point, let alone you used shitty sources that didn't even match your argument.

Me saying, "I have this orange right here" proves that your "parents are dead". Yes, I may have this orange right here and I can prove it, but that doesn't mean your parents are dead.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:04 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

What does "fringe" mean? It's an unclarified intuition resulting from a lack of education. Not that half of America's endorsing something makes something "fringe", it's just that the facts to back it are fringe since most of the 50% don't care very much or don't thing it's significant () and many do not spend the time to understand it.
Reply With Quote
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
Figure-8 (04-12-2012)
  #20  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:08 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Evil ETs have been connected with Bohemian Grove and likely with Satanists; these are all related and I was attempting the tactic of making another topic less wacky by comparison. You can't sift right from wrong so you don't know what sources are, I call you out on this like I called out my professor.
Reply With Quote
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
Figure-8 (04-12-2012)
  #21  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:09 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Roll Eyes Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
What does "fringe" mean? It's an unclarified intuition resulting from a lack of education. Not that half of America's endorsing something makes something "fringe", it's just that the facts to back it are fringe since most of the 50% don't care very much or don't thing it's significant () and many do not spend the time to understand it.
If you feel this strongly about it, you need to talk to him about this face-to-face. It sounds like you just wanted to be a smartass, you just wanted to prove how much conspiracy knowledge you have to the professor, and now the internet and zoklet.

If you really wanted a debate, you would have the courtesy to talk to him face to face like a human being, not hiding behind your computer and talking rudely. Medium is the best message, but it sounds like you already fucked that one up.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:10 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

He wouldn't be interested. It's easier when it's informal and he responds at his own pace and I can link to sources; it sure WAS about the medium.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:13 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Roll Eyes Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
He wouldn't be interested. It's easier when it's informal and he responds at his own pace and I can link to sources; it sure WAS about the medium.
You wouldn't be able to coherently argue your point if it was face to face so you'd rather just overload dumps of links hoping he'll concede.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:15 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

You haven't argued my links, my case is here and not in a speech.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:16 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Roll Eyes Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
You haven't argued my links, my case is here and not in a speech.
He wants to know what you know, not what Google knows. That's why you're afraid to talk to him face-to-face and have to hide behind a computer.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:21 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by whocares View Post
He wants to know what you know, not what Google knows. That's why you're afraid to talk to him face-to-face and have to hide behind a computer.
The course had been online, actually (last year). It takes time to know what google knows, for instance I have seen hundreds of 9/11 sources and included 2 of the best ones. Reptilian shapeshifters will convince you of ETs too, but what would I say? "Here, watch this terrifying video and tell me what you think"
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:28 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Roll Eyes Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
The course had been online, actually (last year). It takes time to know what google knows, for instance I have seen hundreds of 9/11 sources and included 2 of the best ones. Reptilian shapeshifters will convince you of ETs too, but what would I say? "Here, watch this terrifying video and tell me what you think"


So you have the chance to actually walk up to him and express yourself like a human being. Real life isn't a zoklet forum. You can talk and open your mouth, you know?

EDIT: And who are you to tell me Reptilian shapeshifters will convince me of anything?

Last edited by whocares; 04-06-2012 at 10:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:31 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by whocares View Post


So you have the chance to actually walk up to him and talk like a human being. Real life isn't a zoklet forum. You can talk and open your mouth, you know?
That's not a bad idea, maybe I will for this next round: I can tell he's getting annoyed and the sources don't help his understanding much either for reasons nobody can explain or perhaps because he thinks/feels that truth is a preference.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:35 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Just like you think truth is a preference that you don't have to explain. I would love to hear you explain the shapeshifters or whatever source you feel like pointing out but I won't keep holding my breath for your reasoning: after all, your DGAF attitude is right there in your username.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:37 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Roll Eyes Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
Just like you think truth is a preference that you don't have to explain. I would love to hear you explain the shapeshifters or whatever source you feel like pointing out but I won't keep holding my breath for your reasoning: after all, your DGAF attitude is right there in your username.
It's not that I don't want to, it's that if I wanted to, I would do it in the conspiracy forum--if I feel that strongly about something. You are just picking and choosing what you want to argue, and that's not gonna fly here, let alone that's not gonna prove your initial point that Billy Graham is a Satanist. LOL.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:44 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

I don't understand at all. You'll have to dumb it down for me. Please repeat your point?
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:49 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

You can't simultaneously say that all my sources are bullshit and that I'm picking and choosing what to argue because they are all interrelated. Bohemian Grove involves all 4 elements of the power elite and most people are skeptical about each so to prove the most difficult one (Satanists) I prove the influence of money, power, and ETs. Maybe it's not the Satanists that are spraying us, but they are still part of the cabal and we need to unite against all of them. I also know and feel that it's hard to believe this when you profit highly from the system.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:49 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Facepalm Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
I don't understand at all. You'll have to dumb it down for me. Please repeat your point?
I'll dumb it down as far as to the scientific method.

Quote:
1. Understanding - Characterization from experience and observation
2. Analysis - Hypothesis: a proposed explanation
3. Synthesis - Deduction: prediction from the hypothesis
4. Review/Extend - Test and experiment
So far, all you have is a bunch of scattered hypothesis that may or may not be proven. You have yet to connect them to make a coherent, solid final conclusion.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 04-06-2012, 11:04 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

chemtrail.jpg
satanists.jpg
illuminati.jpg
aliens.jpg

It's an obvious fact from experience that in an altruistic society the evildoers will band together and start looting. The elite loot from the top and being each of them has its advantages (power, self-service, satisfaction in spiritual corruption in the case of Satanists), they are not working together, perhaps, but in concert to ruin that which is right and just for mankind. This is not to say that they are interfering with our spirituality though because when the two polarities of selfishness and altruism clash they usually do not end up having changed at all after the exchange, so they are prohibiting our learning.

If you'd prefer to argue one subject/aspect (religious, political, military, and ET wings of the power elite) over another that is also fine but they are each control freaks in their own domain and you won't see evidence of them on the mainstream news for a reason.
Reply With Quote
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
Figure-8 (04-12-2012)
  #35  
Old 04-06-2012, 11:06 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Roll Eyes Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
chemtrail.jpg
satanists.jpg
illuminati.jpg
aliens.jpg

It's an obvious fact from experience that in an altruistic society the evildoers will band together and start looting. The elite loot from the top and being each of them has its advantages (power, self-service, satisfaction in spiritual corruption in the case of Satanists), they are not working together, perhaps, but in concert to ruin that which is right and just for mankind. This is not to say that they are interfering with our spirituality though because when the two polarities of selfishness and altruism clash they usually do not end up having changed at all after the exchange, so they are prohibiting our learning.

If you'd prefer to argue one subject/aspect (religious, political, military, and ET wings of the power elite) over another that is also fine but they are each control freaks in their own domain and you won't see evidence of them on the mainstream news for a reason.
You're not gonna convince anyone with that logic (if it's logic at all, it's more of speculation), let alone you're gonna convince your professor. Maybe in the conspiracy forums.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 04-06-2012, 11:13 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

You have no sources and cannot show how mine are unsound.

Morgellons + Rockefeller's conession=obvious proof of the ubiquity of the evil plots of the power elite

Quote:
This is not to say that they are interfering with our spirituality though because when the two polarities of selfishness and altruism clash they usually do not end up having changed at all after the exchange, so they are prohibiting our learning.
This was a paradoxical commentary designed to make you think .
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 04-06-2012, 11:15 AM
whocares's Avatar
whocares whocares is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: College of Life
Thanks: 18
Thanked 762 Times in 492 Posts
Facepalm Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Quote:
Originally Posted by nshanin View Post
You have no sources and cannot show how mine are unsound.

Morgellons + Rockefeller's conession=obvious proof of the ubiquity of the evil plots of the power elite


This was a paradoxical commentary designed to make you think .
I have this "orange" right here, but I don't see how it proves "your parents are dead". You have yet to make any connection with your scattered speculations and hypothesis. And a confession isn't proof, if he said Pokemon existed you'd believe him too.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04-06-2012, 11:18 AM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

My facts form an explanation of reality based on the evil polarity's dominance of the good polarity through subterfuge; they are all wacky but you need to understand all of them to see the theory.

He's a reputable man of wealth who wrote his own autobiography. He was director of the CFR which is the organization behind all of the reasons that anyone at all wants to attack Iran.
Reply With Quote
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
Figure-8 (04-12-2012)
  #39  
Old 04-06-2012, 09:17 PM
crazzyass crazzyass is offline
Archduke
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: United States
Thanks: 1,895
Thanked 1,059 Times in 688 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

Christ.

His "confession" was him "admitting" to working to build a better, more integrated world.

I mean shit, if that's what you're talking about, I support the NWO too. I think the world should continue to become more integrated, that borders should matter less than people do, and that we recognize ourselves as the global community that we are. If countries still exist in a few hundred years I'll be supremely disappointed in humanity. I'm pretty sure David takes the same view.
__________________
"p.s. i better not call Cory something like a filthy liberal, otherwise crazzyass could accuse me of using a slur in an off-topic manner, and ban me" - WAN
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 04-06-2012, 09:42 PM
nshanin's Avatar
nshanin nshanin is offline
Duke
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 1,029
Thanked 555 Times in 412 Posts
Default Re: A Discourse wherein I convince a Religious Studies Professor

You are a known troll and are pretending to be unaware of or are genuinely ignorant of the intentions of the NWO. The CFR is not benevolent in the least, try arguing that.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
convince, discourse, professor, religious, studies

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
convince me constantinople Better Living Through Chemistry 3 03-04-2011 09:29 PM
Short discourse on infinite sets *MUST READ* 0x29A Math, Science, and Engineering 10 01-14-2010 09:53 PM
I think I might have the hots for my professor Mor3BL7 Love, Lust, and Relationships 25 11-10-2009 11:55 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28 PM.


Hot Topics
Join our Chatroom!
Users: 8
Messages/minute: 0
Topic: "Only rule: be nice or I'll cut your fucking face off, dumbshit"
Users: 27
Messages/minute: 1.6
Topic: "http://codelove.org :: Below is above in 2 codes 1 love. :: wh..."
Users: 18
Messages/minute: 5
Topic: "http://www.literotica...."
Advertisements
Your ad could go right HERE! Contact us!

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.