WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

[Renton 21605]

2 minutes ago, wolfy said:

I don't rightly know what happened that day, except for what we were told happened of which some of it makes little to no sense.

Mentioning cluesforum gives you no extra bullets to fire so save them in your chamber to unleash as and when you can literally prove that what I'm saying is wrong.

You appear to be arguing from a backed up official stance.

Basically you have everything official at your fingertips.

It means you are arguing against me based on mass opinion and nothing more than that.

So you won't answer my two yes or no VERY SIMPLE questions?

 

I'll leave others to make up there own minds about that. I'm not going to argue with you Wolfy, we've done all this before. You've nowt new. 

[Alex 35077]

2 minutes ago, Renton said:

So you won't answer my two yes or no VERY SIMPLE questions?

Alreet, Leazes

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3892]

26 minutes ago, wolfy said:

Yes I do, but not in the way we've been told.

 

Explain please?

[wolfy 12]

13 minutes ago, Renton said:

So you won't answer my two yes or no VERY SIMPLE questions?

 

I'll leave others to make up there own minds about that. I'm not going to argue with you Wolfy, we've done all this before. You've nowt new. 

Ok, no problem.

[wolfy 12]

3 minutes ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

Explain please?

What's your idea on them?

[Alex 35077]

[Andrew 4748]

I'm starting to suspect wolfy is actually a bot.

 

He's the next Siri.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3892]

15 minutes ago, wolfy said:

What's your idea on them?

 

I think they are extinct (evolved?) animals which existed many millions of years ago.

[wolfy 12]

Just now, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

I think they are extinct (evolved?) animals which existed many millions of years ago.

I think they existed a few thousand years ago.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3892]

1 minute ago, wolfy said:

I think they existed a few thousand years ago.

 

How many?

[wolfy 12]

Just now, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

How many?

Not too sure on any of it. Maybe 5 , give or take.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3892]

2 minutes ago, wolfy said:

Not too sure on any of it. Maybe 5 , give or take.

 

For how long did they last?

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3892]

4 minutes ago, wolfy said:

Not too sure on any of it. Maybe 5 , give or take.

 

So at the end of the Neolithic age then?

[wolfy 12]

Just now, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

For how long did they last?

I don't know.

Maybe a thousand years or so. 

[Alex 35077]

Not even attempting to hide the trolling now tbh

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3892]

[wolfy 12]

1 minute ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

So at the end of the Neolithic age then?

I don't follow the history we are told about as far back as this. I think it's all basic Chinese whispers and a mixture of truth's, potential triuth's, fantasy and blatant lies.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3892]

31 minutes ago, wolfy said:

I don't follow the history we are told about as far back as this. I think it's all basic Chinese whispers and a mixture of truth's, potential triuth's, fantasy and blatant lies.

 

See above.

[wolfy 12]

It's absolutely amazing how easily we can be manipulated into believing anything, no matter what it is.

History can be anything but the entire truth and ancient history even more so.

 

They're decent story lines in many cases and a lot of truth can be mixed in with fantasy. Who really knows?

We get fed  a lot of stuff that is told as a fantasy that could be anything but. Then we get told a lot of stuff that is supposedly the absolute truth which could actually be the fantasy.

 

Picking through it isn't simple but it's pretty clear that a lot of this stuff requires serious questioning by people, whether they are brave enough to do it among a group or for their own investigative minds.

Those who actually take the time to look into stuff will open a massive can of worms which will change their entire mindset on basically everything.

 

 

[The Fish 10856]

Wolfy seems to think that if any of the official story is suspect (the 9/11 atrocity e.g.) all of the official story must be suspect. It seems that he believes if the masses believe thousands of innocent victims died, the masses also must believe the official story about the agents of that atrocity.

 

He seems to believe that if you agree the world is a globe, that gravity exists, that space is real, you're only doing so because you haven't challenged the status quo. 

 

Now, I'm fairly certain the overwhelming majority of us on here were right ornery shits at school. Challenging the teachers, seeking knowledge for ourselves and when all evidence (empirical and otherwise) supports the claims, we have the wherewithal to accept the reasoning for that particular instance. 

 

E.G. Parky has often spoken about chemtrails and the dangers of them, he's no doubt researched it, read conflicting reports, put the two sides together with his own interpretation and come up with his own answer. Most (if not all) of the rest of us thinks that's lunacy. He has, however, put his case across with clarity (on the whole), with articles, with videos, with argument, all of which stand up to scrutiny (to a point for me). 

 

 

We all question the official line, some more than others, so the arrogance to say we're blindly following while you're some kind of free thinker is staggering, and then to have nothing to back it up with is horseshit.

 

Edited May 24, 2017 by The Fish

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3892]

10 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Wolfy seems to think that if any of the official story is suspect (the 9/11 atrocity e.g.) all of the official story must be suspect. It seems that he believes if the masses believe thousands of innocent victims died, the masses also must believe the official story about the agents of that atrocity.

 

He seems to believe that if you agree the world is a globe, that gravity exists, that space is real, you're only doing so because you haven't challenged the status quo. 

 

Now, I'm fairly certain the overwhelming majority of us on here were right ornery shits at school. Challenging the teachers, seeking knowledge for ourselves and when all evidence (empirical and otherwise) supports the claims, we have the wherewithal to accept the reasoning for that particular instance. 

 

E.G. Parky has often spoken about chemtrails and the dangers of them, he's no doubt researched it, read conflicting reports, put the two sides together with his own interpretation and come up with his own answer. Most (if not all) of the rest of us thinks that's lunacy. He has, however, put his case across with clarity (on the whole), with articles, with videos, with argument, all of which stand up to scrutiny (to a point for me). 

 

 

We all question the official line, some more than others, so the arrogance to say we're blindly following while you're some kind of free thinker is staggering, and then to have nothing to back it up with is horseshit.

 

 

Horseshit makes good fertiliser ergo is useful, Wolfy's theories on the other hand.

[tooner 243]

2 hours ago, Park Life said:

 

these guys are playing my local festival this august!

 

Edited May 24, 2017 by tooner

[tooner 243]

6 hours ago, The Fish said:

 

Gravity is weak or strong depending on mass, distance and force. (I think)

 

Which makes sense just like the visible effects of an electromagnet are shown to be weak or strong depending on the magnet's mass, distance and factor.

yes

[wolfy 12]

3 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Quote

Wolfy seems to think that if any of the official story is suspect (the 9/11 atrocity) all of the official story must be suspect. It seems that he believes if the masses believe thousands of innocent victims died, the masses also must believe the official story about the agents of that atrocity.

If a person tells you lies or you believe a person is telling lies, then you will be very sceptical of anything that comes out of their mouths.

It's no different with anything for those who are sceptical.

The issue is in how and why a person becomes sceptical or thoroughly untrusting in the first place.

All normal people like to believe they're intelligent and above naivety/gullibility but the truth is that very few, if any are beyond it.

It all comes down to trusting the genuine salesman or the snake oil salesman.

Take your pick.

3 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Quote

He seems to believe that if you agree the world is a globe, that gravity exists, that space is real, you're only doing so because you haven't challenged the status quo. 

It's the truth.

 

3 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Quote

Now, I'm fairly certain the overwhelming majority of us on here were right ornery shits at school. Challenging the teachers, seeking knowledge for ourselves and when all evidence (empirical and otherwise) supports the claims, we have the wherewithal to accept the reasoning for that particular instance. 

We are naturally inquisitive from child to adult and especially child. This is why children learn so fast and take in new concepts so easily that many adults struggle with. the old dog and new tricks scenario.

However, this is the massive problem with it, because the supposed real education is firmly ingrained by mass indoctrination, so it is kept throughout life by most.

Unless mass indoctrination alters, then people will stay with the same mindset from being a child.

It doesn't stop inquisitive kids believing in Santa and spending many hours wondering how he manages to deliver presents to homes and how he can get down chimneys with being so fat.

The issue is, they don't question whether he's real, in any serious way, because to do that will render their Christmas present pile and empty one.

How can you make a kid grow out of a belief in Santa?

Basically by not being reliant on that specifically set out present area and also realising that what was told to you was really just your parents giving the credit to some fat bloke in a red and white suit, hidden behind a big white tache and beard.

Weirdly though, NASA do a sleigh tracking program for kids, near Christmas, so they can seee where he is when delivering presents.

 

Of course we were always challenging, but to challenge and be that one person at any specific time challenging the big teacher, who reels off a load of tosh to back you into your seat whilst the rest of the class look at you as if you've just flung a brick at your indoctrinator, then you are not so keen to challenge as time goes on.

Mass indoctrination to follow protocol.

3 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Quote

E.G. Parky has often spoken about chemtrails and the dangers of them, he's no doubt researched it, read conflicting reports, put the two sides together with his own interpretation and come up with his own answer. Most (if not all) of the rest of us thinks that's lunacy. He has, however, put his case across with clarity (on the whole), with articles, with videos, with argument, all of which stand up to scrutiny (to a point for me). 

He may have researched it and he may be correct that some planes do spray.

They might spray all the nasty stuff or they might spray something else.

All of what he's doing is speculating whilst investigating and coming to conclusions about what he's reading up on, etc.

The fact is, he's questioning stuff and what he's questioning is denied by official authority, or side stepped, or answered to as to be something quite normal.

The main thing is he's putting forward his thoughts and I am doing the same.

The fact that he might throw a book cover or a video up is no more of a guarantee of anything than me just explaining my stance to people for them to actually go and investigate for themselves.

Whether you agree with what I say or oppose it 100%, is entirely up to you.

3 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

We all question the official line, some more than others, so the arrogance to say we're blindly following while you're some kind of free thinker is staggering, and then to have nothing to back it up with is horseshit.

 

We're all free thinkers that just happen to be coaxed into following a set pattern in life by mass following.

The people who question what is accepted by mass opinion are labelled nuts and are basically set aside by those that believe they actually know what's what.

 

 

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3892]

3 minutes ago, wolfy said:

If a person tells you lies or you believe a person is telling lies, then you will be very sceptical of anything that comes out of their mouths.

It's no different with anything for those who are sceptical.

The issue is in how and why a person becomes sceptical or thoroughly untrusting in the first place.

All normal people like to believe they're intelligent and above naivety/gullibility but the truth is that very few, if any are beyond it.

It all comes down to trusting the genuine salesman or the snake oil salesman.

Take your pick.

It's the truth.

 

We are naturally inquisitive from child to adult and especially child. This is why children learn so fast and take in new concepts so easily that many adults struggle with. the old dog and new tricks scenario.

However, this is the massive problem with it, because the supposed real education is firmly ingrained by mass indoctrination, so it is kept throughout life by most.

Unless mass indoctrination alters, then people will stay with the same mindset from being a child.

It doesn't stop inquisitive kids believing in Santa and spending many hours wondering how he manages to deliver presents to homes and how he can get down chimneys with being so fat.

The issue is, they don't question whether he's real, in any serious way, because to do that will render their Christmas present pile and empty one.

How can you make a kid grow out of a belief in Santa?

Basically by not being reliant on that specifically set out present area and also realising that what was told to you was really just your parents giving the credit to some fat bloke in a red and white suit, hidden behind a big white tache and beard.

Weirdly though, NASA do a sleigh tracking program for kids, near Christmas, so they can seee where he is when delivering presents.

 

Of course we were always challenging, but to challenge and be that one person at any specific time challenging the big teacher, who reels off a load of tosh to back you into your seat whilst the rest of the class look at you as if you've just flung a brick at your indoctrinator, then you are not so keen to challenge as time goes on.

Mass indoctrination to follow protocol.

He may have researched it and he may be correct that some planes do spray.

They might spray all the nasty stuff or they might spray something else.

All of what he's doing is speculating whilst investigating and coming to conclusions about what he's reading up on, etc.

The fact is, he's questioning stuff and what he's questioning is denied by official authority, or side stepped, or answered to as to be something quite normal.

The main thing is he's putting forward his thoughts and I am doing the same.

The fact that he might throw a book cover or a video up is no more of a guarantee of anything than me just explaining my stance to people for them to actually go and investigate for themselves.

Whether you agree with what I say or oppose it 100%, is entirely up to you.

We're all free thinkers that just happen to be coaxed into following a set pattern in life by mass following.

The people who question what is accepted by mass opinion are labelled nuts and are basically set aside by those that believe they actually know what's what.

 

 

 

Making up bollocks with zero basis of empirical evidence is not being inquisitive, in fact it's the opposite. It is lazy I can't be arsed shite to gain attention since your wife fucked off with the science teacher.