what about shape shifting reptilians and fluoride in the water
Tu Stultus Es
For all of its bluster and bravado about a “new paradigm,” Thrive contributed very little to the conspiracy theory underground that was fundamentally new. All that was new was the packaging, which is a shiny object that can only hope to distract the masses for a limited time. Ancient aliens? Been around since 1968. Crop circles? Old news. Money conspiracies? Lyndon LaRouche was doing that in the 80s. “Global Domination Agenda”? Every Alex Jones radio show since 1998 has been about that. Far right-wing Libertarian political propaganda? Ron Paul was peddling that folderol in 2007; now, after two spectacularly embarrassing failures at running for president, he has (mercifully) been put out to pasture, and his sycophantic fan base is finally fading away.
Substantively, the only truly novel idea contributed by Thrive was the obsession with the “torus” shape. (Of course the idea existed long before, but had never been injected into the conspiracy underground before). This proved to be a non-starter among conspiracy theorists, who revel in gloom, apocalypse and disaster. If it can’t oppress you, take away your freedoms, abduct you, give you an anal probe or blow up the World Trade Center, conspiracy theorists probably won’t be interested in it. So scratch the “torus” idea.
brilliant. this guy sums up conspiracy theorist incredibly well.Conspiracy theorists are (mentally?) challenged
Kimberly Gamble later makes an “observation” about how bringing up conspiracy theory topics is a “socially challenging” and whoever does is prone of being ridiculed.
This wouldn’t be the case if conspiracy theorists didn’t show/make use of:
-Misquoting, just as Thrive does (Henry Kissinger, George H.W. Bush).
-Quote mining, just as Thrive does (see the quote from Pope Benedict).
-Circular logic, unfounded accusations, mass guessing, selective editing, and trivializing.
-Failure to understand the laws of nature (physics, math, biology and chemistry). Thrive does this too by relying on people like Nassim Haramein whose reputation is built on wildly inaccurate conceptions of physics.
-Failure to provide conclusive and observable evidence.
-Dismissing rebuttals and criticism as “trolls” or “paid disinformation agents.”
You should be an investigative journalist.
lol taiwan I saw that very same blog. I've been looking for "foster gamble" on google because I do not believe him when he says he's part of the Gamble family.
AJE is expanding into america. they just invested $500 million and took over al gore's previous channel. i know two languages fluently but a third(preferably spanish, since i'm familiar with it and it is the second most used language in the US) would definitely look good on a resume. time to break out the spanish textbooks and get back with mis amigos.Macbeth wrote:
You should be an investigative journalist.
dominican people speak ghetto spanish.
So how about that oil spill in residental Arkansas?
great, i can drive 1500 miles to do a neighborhood drive by to lube my car?Macbeth wrote:
So how about that oil spill in residental Arkansas?
Please enjoy a cigarette while there.13urnzz wrote:
great, i can drive 1500 miles to do a neighborhood drive by to lube my car?Macbeth wrote:
So how about that oil spill in residental Arkansas?
i don't smoke anymore, can i just run over a mexican closer to home to grease my car?AussieReaper wrote:
Please enjoy a cigarette while there.13urnzz wrote:
great, i can drive 1500 miles to do a neighborhood drive by to lube my car?Macbeth wrote:
So how about that oil spill in residental Arkansas?
Weird. Macbeth told me you were smoking.13urnzz wrote:
i don't smoke anymore, can i just run over a mexican closer to home to grease my car?AussieReaper wrote:
Please enjoy a cigarette while there.13urnzz wrote:
great, i can drive 1500 miles to do a neighborhood drive by to lube my car?
no, macbeth was smoking.
please check your pms.
please check your pms.
Pm's checked. He said you were smoking hot.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/11/politics/ … ?hpt=us_c2Three years after that awful day -- the day a teenager accidentally backed his car over their little girl -- Michael and Brandy Dahlen have forgiven their young neighbor.
But they're having a tougher time coming to grips with the actions of the federal government.
The source of Dahlen's frustration: the government's failure to implement a law requiring back-up cameras on new motor vehicles. Enacted in 2008, the law had a 2011 deadline. It is now two years overdue.
In a nutshell some people want the government to force car makers to install a backup camera on all new cars. I think this is nanny statism at its worst. Seriously.
Improving safety standards is a good thing.
And the cost would be low. How cheap is a webcam? Cars these days typically have a decent console. Reversing cameras can save lives.
Nanny statism at its worst? Hardly.
And the cost would be low. How cheap is a webcam? Cars these days typically have a decent console. Reversing cameras can save lives.
Nanny statism at its worst? Hardly.
and asians
It will just add cost to New cars. Should we all be wearing helmets when we drive too?AussieReaper wrote:
Improving safety standards is a good thing.
And the cost would be low. How cheap is a webcam? Cars these days typically have a decent console. Reversing cameras can save lives.
Nanny statism at its worst? Hardly.
it's won't be too much compared to the overall cost of a brand new car and this safety measure benefits people outside of the car. notably children who have very little situational awareness and are prone to placing themselves in many types of dangers.
yeah fuck the gov requiring seatbelts and airbags. tyranny.Macbeth wrote:
It will just add cost to New cars. Should we all be wearing helmets when we drive too?AussieReaper wrote:
Improving safety standards is a good thing.
And the cost would be low. How cheap is a webcam? Cars these days typically have a decent console. Reversing cameras can save lives.
Nanny statism at its worst? Hardly.
At the same time people just stare at the rear view camera and disregard their surroundings anyway and defeat the purpose. Only 200 deaths a year. Let's pass a national law over 200 people. Makes sense.13/f/taiwan wrote:
it's won't be too much compared to the overall cost of a brand new car and this safety measure benefits people outside of the car. notably children who have very little situational awareness and are prone to placing themselves in many types of dangers.
Maybe people should watch their kids.
Last edited by Macbeth (2013-04-12 09:12:38)
I agree with Mac.
Doing the right thing, jord.
install cameras and sensors covering every single angle of the car.