Use these links to navigate through this site
Alex Jones has been researching a bunch on Obama, the NWO, Depopulation 2012 related kind of things. He has gathered up on a lot of people on Youtube. Can someone debunk him. Now he is doing a 24 hour live broadcast answering questions. Is he a hoax or is it the truth?
Also..There has been many videos about chemtrails that were recorded in their own backyard. Are these chemtrails true and are making people sick?
It's Youtube any idiot can go on there make videos say anything they want and the morons on the internet will believe it. I could shoot a video and upload it to youtube that says i crap gold and i'm sure someone would believe it.
Yeah but Alex Jones is well known for his research and determination.
Well if he's so credible why is he doing videos on Youtube the cradle of internet ignorance.
Not just youtube..he has 3 websites and 3 movies he made. He is on Google also. There are many believers =/
Hi DDIF,
To paraphrase what one of the regulars here (
TheGreatJuju) sometimes points out,
Research isn't necessary factual, and the sheer act of conducting it doesn't inherently comprise any form of evidence. The value of [what the researcher claims to have demonstrated] is commensurate with the scientific/logical rigor of the claimant and the extent to which those claims can be verified, falsified or otherwise tested.
"I was glad to be able to answer him promptly and with confidence. Without hesitation, I told him I didn't know." Mark Twain
He needs SOME money for his movies..I mean a movie costs $$ to make
Depends. Are they done on a handheld recorder or otherwise home-owned recorder? You'd be surprised how much they DON'T cost if it's handmade straight to video trash. DVD's are immensely cheap, a few cents a piece.
Let's review…
1) CD's are a few cents each. He sells his "Double Pack" For 34.99. I can promise you he's making, at least, a $30 profit. I don't consider filming time to cost anything, because splicing shit you find off google is pointless. Honestly, if this was an expensive process, ThatGuyWithTheGlasses would not be running and making movies weekly. MULTIPLE movies a week. You can EASILY pay off ALL home-made movie expenses with just GOOGLE HITS.
JUST. GOOGLE. HITS.
So no, the fact he's making movies does not mean anything. And let me just nip this in the butt with the following statement:
The Government does lie to us, because we don't have the training or understanding to grasp and handle the situations they do on a daily basis. I will not take what a non-politician says at face value, as IRONIC as that is. Ever. I bet Alex Jones can barely grasp the politics of his own house, let alone of the ENTIRE WORLD.
The man is having fun with conspiracy theories, because they are at the end of the day entertaining. He doubles this with making a buttload of cash because the world is full of stupid sheep.
Put one and one together and you get $$$. Idiots who don't understand global politics + idiot who shoves 'evidence' in front of them = BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH HAVE OUR MONIES.
The man is a wanker. Every president is given the same treatment. Seriously, do some research on that. Every president is called the next big destroyer of the U.S. It's just stupid.
The fact Obama is 'black' is just rousing both the racism and the conspiracies.
Please do not generalize in such a broad brush way about 'everyone' not understanding 'Government'. Some of your comments I agree with but statements like that are just plain silly.
Oh, I am going to continue to generalize EVERYONE as to not knowing how the Government works on an inner-working level. There is a difference between a college-trained individual in Government-tasked fields, and someone who is literally involved in it.
If you ARE involved in Government-based dealings, then you wouldn't have posted, because you would have known what I meant. The fact is, no one that is outside of the actual dealings of a country and their Government can honestly say they know exactly how it function. To do so would be ludicrous and a cause of a national security crisis.
By the way, I didn't say 'everyone' once in my above post. I was clearly taking a shot at the conspiracy theorists. But, if you'd like to paint the picture of me stating "EVERYONE" in a literal sense… yep. I still say everyone not directly involved in a Government can honestly shut their damn mouth!
By the way…
"twinklestar (guest) 13 Oct 2010, 01:30 GMT-05
Now I am not for or against Alex Jones but to discredit someone without commenting on the material directly does not seem like 'debate'."
If you have no opinion on the man's claims, you probably shouldn't comment. There's no real middle ground when it comes to this topic. You either believe that Obama is out to kill us all and take over the entire world, thus supporting Alex Jones, or you think the guy is talking out of his ass.
Ultimately, no. I'm sorry. No conspiracy theorist really has the authority to speak like they understand anything on an inner, deeper level. I don't buy their "sources", which are lies. Their 'cousin' in the military wouldn't know crap, because the military isn't really that involved in Government and Political dealings!
Anywho, sorry to offend you for over-reading my statement. But, really, if you can't voice an opinion on this 'debate', why post? You're For or Against Alex Jones. There's no middle ground.
Hi again Moo,
I have spent some time going through the other posts and it seems that you have posted quite a lot lately and in a way that is attacking, disrespectful and negative to everyone that thinks there may be some truth that there could be fundamental changes happening in our societies over the coming years.
It is also interesting that the moderator lets you do this while criticizing people whop do not agree with you.
In relation to what Alex Jones is saying some has merit, some does not. The for or against statement you would hope would of been left behind with the outing of Bush the Buffoon.
You're right, I do take the offensive! Do you know why I do? Because even if there are changes, some smhuck is going to overblow it to the extreme in the name of causing chaos. And even when nothing major happens, they proclaim they are right, and the sheep of the world believe them.
Are you defending Dharma? You're a smhuck, then. That kid was ignoring everything we said, and just kept trying to force their point on us. If you can only look at me as "The Bad Guy" there, my attitude is the least of your worries. If you aren't, let's move on.
Here? Yeah, okay. Granted. But Alex Jones is a freaking wanker who needs a reality check. Honestly, I'd love to see how ANY of these conspiracy theorists would handle the Presidential Office. Any of them. None of us can grasp the pressure and responsibility involved in it.
I won't defend Bush, because Bush was an idiot. I will defend Obama, because even if he's not doing much, he's at least trying so far. Idiots like Alex Jones will always say some truths to drag you in, and when you're corrupted, they unleash the insanity.
Thus the sheep are lured by the wolf.
Astrogeek hasn't torn into me yet because I say it in one of two ways that needs to be said. I take the offensive, everyone else takes the defensive. Believe it or not, people take comfort in the fact someone is willing to stand up and say flat out "No, sir. You're an idiot. Shut up."
We can only do so much by being passive about it, and expecting people to learn on their own, or do their own research. They really SHOULD do this, but sometimes you need a little shove in the right direction. So, while everyone else does that, I get up in the nut's face and tear down their defenses.
Then Juju comes in with the Finishing Blow.
Now then, I'll take a page out of his book and ask…
1) What are "Fundamental Changes"?
2) What are examples of 'Attacking', 'Disrespectful' and 'Negative'? Please do not cite any of my atheism-biased religious attacking. I do this simply because a good deal of the moderation IS religious, so I tell it as it is from the other point of view.
3) I don't really criticize everyone who doesn't agree with me. If you really did go through my posts, you'd see where I clearly apologize or back down when I make a key error. I even ask questions often.
Ultimately, twinklestar? I don't want anyone else going through the SEVEN years of anxiety and pissing myself fear I had to. Seven. Years. Of. My. Life. Destroyed.
So you'll bet that I won't throw the punches. I've picked up the shards of my past and have moved on. I'm not letting these corrupt individuals attempt to break more lives, just to get another person to join their 'cause'.
These con-artists have existed for as long as man-kind has. It's about time people wake up against THEM. So, believe what you want, twinklestar. This is my stance on it.
Moo,
One thing you do have to admit is that your use of profanity and calling people names like "twat" are strictly against Astrogeek's expressed policy of keeping this site G-rated, as are your occasional sexual comments.
"I was glad to be able to answer him promptly and with confidence. Without hesitation, I told him I didn't know." Mark Twain
I use mild words that generally do not reach even a 1 on the 1-5 scale of "How quickly will this send me to the principals office?"
Then again, in my schools, such things were common. I suppose I can try to tone it down a bit, but this stuff enrages me.
PS: I think twat is as hilarious a word as wanker. What definition do you take it for? I just use it in the same caliber as wanker, hilarious sounded anger-toned wording.
Both words were rated in the top 15 most severe expletives in the UK ten years ago, twt coming in at a mild 13th, wnkr way up in 4th behind the usual suspects.
While you and I might use such 'severe' words now and again to express a level of emotion or to make a point stand out (my use of the tame word sht over on one of Ivan's posts for example), we should still of course be aware of how it may be taken and seen by others.
You do however have some options available to get your words in 'safely'. There's disemvoweling, as I've done in this post, there's the $@%&!?£ comic book approach, the use of g****** asterisks (tricky though, as asterisks are used for the bold code), or the use of smeging fictional profanity.
Because no matter what we think of the words, there will always be someone who disagrees, and that person may just get very vocal about it all.
Hello Moo,
My reasons for bringing this to your attention include the following:
1. Astrogeek cautioned Raymond Mardyks several times for using the same words as you, which Astrogeek then bleeped out. I'm not looking forward to the day when Mardyks comes back here, reads what's gone on in our forums since his last visit, and rubs Astrogeek's nose in comments like these: 1, 2, 3.
2. Understanding the scientific points we try to make here requires real effort from most readers. In contrast, biased enforcement of our policies is blindingly obvious to them. I'm not a good enough writer or debater to wish to explain subtle scientific concepts to an audience that's just finished forming the opinion that we're hypocrites.
3. I used to be able to tell my friends they could send their kids here without having to worry about the language they'd encounter. I can't do that anymore. Surely saving kids' lives is important enough for us to make the minimal effort necessary to clean up our language, without needing to be told by Astrogeek.
4. I don't like to run the risk that a well-mannered man (and invaluable supporter) like Neil DeGrasse Tyson might say, "I don't think kids should be sent to this site".
5. I don't like to run the risk that parents might say, "I don't think kids should be sent to this site."
"I was glad to be able to answer him promptly and with confidence. Without hesitation, I told him I didn't know." Mark Twain
Not that i'm a mofrtsor but i have no problem with what Moo says even if some of it is Anti Religious i have no problem with it it makes for a more interesting topic honestly. As for Dharma for what i saw in that thread Dharma was attacking people as much as Moo attacked him/her/
PS: he only needs to make copies of the box and the DVD's if he has a confirmed sale. Which means he spends no money until he earns money. This is how all the 2012 dorks sell their products too. The item is not made until ordered.
So… yeah. Merchandise =/= Credibility.
PS: I'm selling Boo, the Miniature Giant Space Hamster Mugs, T-Shirts, Hats, and Panties. He must obviously exist.
I found the truth…its in here 0_0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhqUk28OwHs&feature=related
Be careful
That proves my point. He's honestly an entertainer, really. 'cept… insane.
… So yeah…
… Nothing new…
… Moving on…
… AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!
SUPER SAIYAN COW!!!
Alex Jones is Super Saiyan Cow Better Version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j74xDi0V_4A&feature=related
:D :D Knew it all along.
Alex Jones is a tinfoil hat-wearing woo artist, but he is not a woo artist of the same make that we see in Patrick Geryl, John Major Jenkins, Nancy Lieder, Ivan Stein, Ivan Gorelik or many of the nuts from YouTube (jcattera, Warriorkinging, VonHelton, et al.). He's an NWO fantasist to be sure, but he doesn't propose doomsday on the account of impossible natural phenomena, nor does he advocate any of the more preposterous related claims such as the Annunaki, ancient astronauts or reptilian overlords.
He does apparently think the reclusive NWO wants to kill most of us. Surprise.
All I can find on his various websites even remotely connecting Jones to 2012 is some rambling about "Obamageddon" in 2012, as if one man, in four years, can be held responsible for the United States' ills. Wasn't Jones already raging against the machine more than a decade before Obama rose to power?
Much of the Alex Jones soapbox goes toward rants similar to those seen by Dane "Hand-Waver" Christensen in this thread and, more recently, the hostile, imaginative and utterly incorrigible dharma in this thread. Economic collapse is imminent, the powers that be are desperate to save themselves at your expense, and so on and so forth. I really find no utility in "debunking" that sort of talk, because 1) it is almost always speculative and 2) some of it might be true. What I oppose is the invoking of particular conditions and then extrapolating from that definitive, positive statements about doom and gloom, and I think I've made this point clearly in my exchanges with Christensen and dharma. Any attempt to dissect the claims of Alex Jones will, by and large, be a repeat of things that have already been said in the two threads linked above, and I think we've already had enough of that.
@ Doomsdayisfake
Also..There has been many videos about chemtrails that were recorded in their own backyard. Are these chemtrails true and are making people sick?
Much like Nibiru believers, proponents of so-called "chemtrails" can't even agree on what they're talking about. Some say they're from governments trying to control the weather; others say governments are trying to poison people to reduce birthrates or outright exterminate populations; others say "chemtrails" are put in place to hide things in the sky (like Nibiru).
The former is partially true in some contexts, as there is a process called cloud seeding. There's no reliable evidence whatsoever that governments are using "chemtrails" for population control, and until such peer-reviewed analysis comes to light (don't hold your breath), you can file it away under Nonsense.
The last item, hiding things in the sky, is just ridiculous. Even if something could be hidden this way, people a couple of miles in either direction will still be able to see it. To illustrate, hold your hand in front of your face so that it blocks your view of the monitor. Now, keep your hand in place and lean a few inches to one side. Poof, you can suddenly see your monitor again. It's the same principle in the sky. Start at point A, move a half-mile or a mile in any direction to point B, and what you couldn't see behind a cloud or contrail at point A will be visible. It doesn't make any sense to say the government is hiding things in the sky like this.
You really should make a new topic about Alex Jones. He is well known for making hoaxes and conspiracys.
I really don't think Alex Jones says anything that warrants a page on this site. You can loosely connect him to 2012, I guess, but right now you can loosely connect almost any conspiracy theorist to 2012.
@ twinklestar
Now I am not for or against Alex Jones but to discredit someone without commenting on the material directly does not seem like 'debate'.
When you're dealing with pure imagination, sometimes there's no debate to be had. The "NWO" has never been shown to be real. All believers have are some quotes from people they purport to be "elites," in which those individuals might mention "a new world order." Later, these words magically appear on conspiracy websites with ad hoc capitalization and acronym: New World Order and NWO. It's question-begging at its finest.
Not everything Alex Jones says is b.s., but his hysteria is often self-destructive. Whether he's right about anything or not, it's hard to take a guy seriously when he stands on the sidewalk with a bullhorn and yells at the Bilderbergs about God and America. Maybe it's impossible to tackle what Jones purports to tackle without looking like part of the tinfoil brigade, but I'm inclined to think that his hysterical methods and wild interpretations of reality are deliberate and lucrative.
(account deleted)
