Troll Examples

High quality forum - Link guides to videos & evidence - Website notes - Nuclear revisionists vs nuke liars

Troll Examples

Postby rerevisionist » 27 Oct 2011 15:47


December 2019: Here's an actual example of Jew censorship, in Facebook.

I found a group named World War One full of old photos, pictures of soldiers who died, speculations on battles omitting everything on politics and Jewish money and freemason-style collaboration with traitors.

I posted comments on Jewish money and its effects post-1913 (such as: the Federal Reserve, Income Tax, Death Duties in Britain, violent subversion by 'Anarchists' and fake Suffragettes, and Jew-controlled unions). These were removed fairly quickly!

At any one time, Jews run frauds by country, by class, by religion, by news sources, by economics. There are so many that it's difficult for them to be kept updated. But the general seriousness of their frauds is in a rough pecking-order. Already the 'Holocaust' fraud is wearing thin. My best guess is that secret Jewish networking is their closest-guarded fraud; they do not want people to know that Jews were behind deaths of their ancestors.


Mod note, added one year later: We didn't discuss, in one place, forums and websites set up as noise and disinformation: infowars, cluesforum, beyondtopsecret, JREF, skeptics, VNN, steampowered, senseaboutscience, hackforum... However, there are of course notes dotted about here, on these sites, and others.

[Use the search engine to poke round in the forum - added Nov 2013.]
Trolls
Reproduce standard behaviours [examples: criminals being quizzed, children, people caught out making mistakes, people suspected of fraud, witnesses in difficult circumstances, media people who lied etc - added later] in the real world: they are not interested in truth, and go through all the rather tedious repertoire of tricks which have been discussed for millennia. Apart from this, it's generally not worth the effort to see if such people have any genuine knowledge, and if so if they'll reveal it - it's standard policy to waste peoples' time for months, and then finally say "oh, it's not really my subject." Or to waste space with postings to increase clutter and 'noise'.

CODOH is a good example of a site which tries to have well-developed rules: one topic only, the 'Holocaust'; one topic per thread, with no diversions permitted; an answer expected, with no evasions. In practice, they can't adhere to that, because the subject has been allowed to develop with tentacles all over the place. So this site is planned with wider scope: anything related to nukes, however remotely, is allowed, though there are obvious topics such as Hiroshima and Nagasaki which are fairly well-defined.

We may as well use actual examples here. 'Ranb', 'Apollognomon' [science], and RealityWall and Wroclaw [Holocaust - yawn]. All postings are still present on this site. Trying to analyse, we see something like

[1] Repeated assertions of discredited information.
[2] Repeated omissions of important information.
[3] Repeated refusal to look at evidence.
[4] Repeated refusal to produce evidence.
[5] Failure to understand concepts.
[6] Other material.

[1] Repeated assertions of discredited information.
** 9/11 'as caused by 'the Taliban'' is mentioned several times by 'ranb' who seems not to know of the conclusivce proof this was not the case
** "Apparently there is little fear of retaliation if our armies are constantly fighting a conventional war somewhere" is used by RANB as evidence - the wars he is talking about by 'our armies' are against virtually defenceless people

[2] Repeated omissions of important information.
** Ranb never once refers to the 'Samson Option', a clear nuclear threat
** Ranb never comments on the clear proof of Jewish involvement in nuclear fraud
** Ranb does not mention the faked film evidence

[3] Repeated refusal to look at evidence.
** "I read a portion of it already and found nothing even remotely convincing." All he had to do is list a few, and give his reasons for being unconvinced. This applies to all the film evidence, all the Hiroshima evidence, all the historical evidence, and for that matter the news evidence. Ranb doesn't seem to even have checked NASA's supposed moon photos.

On the subject of ignoring evidence—or being incompetent to deal with it—this posting, apparently from an Australian computer techie, nicknamed etfb, might amuse some of you:-

etfb [in Hacker News. ycombinator dot com, c. Jan 2014]
There's a PDF there of Programming The PET/CBM, by Raeto West. I loved that book - read it from cover to cover, drained it of all its knowledge. I can still tell you random things about the CBM-8032's memory map and ROM code, twenty five years after the last time I touched one.

I looked up Ray West recently, wondering if he's still alive. Turned out he was until recently, but he'd turned into a mad, racist, tinfoil-hat-wearing crackpot, paranoid about Jewish conspiracies and government hoaxes. Fluoride, fake moon landings, the whole nine yards. So sad. That guy was my hero, and he just went off the rails and, as far as I could ever find, completely disappeared.


[4] Repeated refusal to back up claims.
** The supposed lunar module material and backpack design was made available in popular books soon after the supposed landings and returns. Ranb makes no attempt to analyze these - not surprisingly as they could never work.
** When challenged on measurements of radiation, Ranb simply refers to websites.
** The physics of fission, real or supposed, involves changes in temperature, pressure, metal structure and so on which Ranb obviously has no mental model that can handle them. He doesn't begin to realise how difficult it is to model such things, nor does he show any inderstanding of the need for experiment.

[5] Failure to understand concepts.
An essential part of this site is a revisionist attitude to science and related topics. Since the films of 'nuclear tests' are faked, as was the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombing, some persons must have lied about the physics and/or the backup story. Therefore the whole morass is suspect. Ranb repeatedly parrots material, without being able to grasp that it's suspect.

[6] Other material - Examples
** Ranb's absurd barometer examples, show he doesn't understand air pressure, or that the link between pressure and alltitude is not a simple linear one
** The claims re submarine work and checking radiation aren't helpful (and remind me of the British man who claimed nuclear power must exist because he worked on a computer simulation). It's perfectly possible Ranb has walked round parts of submarines/ 'nuclear power plants' with some sort of device. He doesn't seem able to understand the counter-evidence.

[Warning note added 30 August 2014] 'RanB' was a persistent troll on this site. Here's an entry (about three years later) in James Randi's disinfo site. Habitual liars find it hard to tell the truth...]
Added June 2012: another junk site is VNN, 'Vanguard News Network'
User avatar
rerevisionist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Is there room for dissent?

Postby MartinL » 23 Feb 2012 04:06

Mod note: the following set of posts illustrates a clearly unhelpful person/persons ... Watch the technique. Moved from another thread.

I first heard about this forum at work. The main thing said about it was that the forum administration does not allow opposing views and bans anyone who disagrees with the dissident community. I told my co-workers that a group of people that only allow one point of view eventually becomes irrelevant to the community at large.

Anyway I thought I would check out the forum for myself. Is any debate allowed here? Or are there certain rules I have to follow to remain a member in good standing? Thanks.
MartinL
 
Posts: 19
Joined: 20 Feb 2012 05:08

Re: Is there room for dissent?

Postby rerevisionist » 23 Feb 2012 04:10

If you actually read the material, rather than talking about it to people who seem to know nothing about it, you'll see there's a wide range of opinion. However, unlike most forums, we don't want to be choked with spam, weak jokes, and general rubbish. We prefer people who are informed, although there aren't many - and those who are, are usually cowards. I hope that's clear. We're trying to get at the truth, and also discuss issues such as whether the truth is a good thing.

Before posting, I would plead that you either search the site (the searcher works well), or look at the forum headings to find similar material to what you have in mind; it might be here already.
User avatar
rerevisionist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Re: Is there room for dissent?

Postby Exorcist » 23 Feb 2012 12:36

MartinL wrote: I told my co-workers that a group of people that only allow one point of view eventually becomes irrelevant to the community at large.


I presume you are talking about the Jewish controlled media. Good opening point!...Well said!
Last edited by Exorcist on 24 Feb 2012 00:00, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Exorcist
 
Posts: 73
Joined: 08 Jan 2012 14:21
Location: UK

Re: Is there room for dissent?

Postby NUKELIES » 23 Feb 2012 15:49

Rerev's right on the money again. Still in our first year, we are already showing ourselves to be one of the more truly open forums on the internet. This is in large part to due to my insistence on free speech truly being allowed on NUKE LIES Forum.

Check out the posts on nuclear submarines - we've got a military guy who states that he works on a nuclear submarine and that they're real.

If you haven't noticed yet - but I'm sure you have - take a look through Holocaust and Judaism-related posts. You'll notice rather different takes on those issues - one could say opposing opinions in many circumstances. Many members of the Truth Movement regard anyone as a coward who doesn't call out the Jews as culprits of every conspiracy theory ever imagined - but not here - Oh NO! - You don't have to jump on the anti-Semitic bandwagon to post here, sir! You might accept that as proof that this is an open forum.

Check out the debate about atoms. Check out the debate about nuclear power.

Another good example is chemtrails - I think they are probably bunk. Even if they are spraying metals or whatever out of airplane engines it would be all but totally dissipated by the time it hits the ground.

I will maintain this site as an open forum whether you like it or not. That goes for mainstream sheeple and for tin-hat conspiracy theorists alike. If you want to come on here and proselytise mainstream lies then go ahead - it won't phase us.
User avatar
NUKELIES
Site Admin
 
Posts: 302
Joined: 17 Mar 2011 15:53
Location: UK/USA

Re: Is there room for dissent?

Postby MartinL » 24 Feb 2012 02:08

Exorcist wrote:I presume you are talking about the Jewish controlled media. Good opening point!...Well said!


No, I was at the time referring to forums like Loose Change and September Clues that do not allow a different point of view and ban those who do not agree with the "in-crowd".
MartinL
 
Posts: 19
Joined: 20 Feb 2012 05:08

Re: Is there room for dissent?

Postby MartinL » 24 Feb 2012 02:22

Are the nuke-myth proponents on this forum able to bring real world experience and actual personal accounts to the forum as evidence that nuclear power does not exist as is generally believed by most of the population? So far most of what I am seeing on the forum seems to be limited to what a person can get online. Are there any scientists or industry professionals that post here?

I checked out the submarine thread as requested. There were three people who claimed to work on subs, two shipyard workers and a Sailor. One of those names no longer is linked to anything and the other two when clicked go to a page that says that member does not exist anymore. One of them (ranb) was referred to as a troll in another thread for various reasons.

What am I expected to bring to the forum to continue to debate the merits of your claims? I am more interested in personal experiences than anything on youtube. Thanks.
MartinL
 
Posts: 19
Joined: 20 Feb 2012 05:08

Re: Is there room for dissent?

Postby Sorensen731 » 24 Feb 2012 04:55

What are you expecting MartinL?
That a nuclear plant designer will post on-line patented and national security classified plans?

You know how hard is it to change paradigms in science, with only your career at stake, imagine your life at stake!

Why is it necessary to have someone who claims to work for nuclear related organization?

That line of thought seems to me like "I won't believe in such until it's on TV and by a press conference of the President".

Dissent? Sure.

Please, open organized alternatives like;

- Ok, they didn't work then, but later they managed it.
- They thought they could get it, but not on time, so they fake it, but it never worked.
They kept the facade as it was useful or embarrassing to go back after publicizing it, after that it's a hot potato and it was decided to hide it from new Presidents, or entered the geo-strategic arena as useful tool and was kept for propaganda, economic, military reasons. Only a few knowing the truth.
- Or, they do have an incredible weapon but for security reason they give to the public a bogus theory so no other nations or "terrorists" can achieve that power.

And on nuclear plants, I kept the possibility they work on a different theory, they steal a lot of patents, in wars, in "national security concerns", they could have finally put a small part of it to use, but closely watched and covered with a facade to protect from competition and stop civilians from using that power freely.

It's similar to the Moon, they could have reached it, but through other ships and technology, not that junk.
I can't say they never reached it.
Only that the official explanation is bogus, they couldn't have reach it that way, not that that year, not with that junk and tech, not with this "heroes" and this "descriptions" and "pictures".

See? There is room for dissent.
As long as you stop the biggest bullshit, then, we can debate what really happen.
But not with incredibly insulting lies on the table passing as honorable facts.
And not with their creators escaping as if nothing happened with their reputation and honor unharmed.
They lie once, so they will be checked throughly every word afterwards.
User avatar
Sorensen731
 
Posts: 87
Joined: 24 May 2011 14:37

Re: Is there room for dissent?

Postby Sorensen731 » 24 Feb 2012 05:09

MartinL wrote:Are the nuke-myth proponents on this forum able to bring real world experience and actual personal accounts?

On weapons, which one are you expecting?

- Yes, I was a terrorist, we stole it all, kidnapped famous techies, worked hard for years, got it all correctly but didn't worked, damn!

- Yes, I was part of a coup in a nuclear silo, we took the codes, launched it correctly, but it didn't explode!

- I hear it, near, through, accidentally X secret society. What would happen then? Will you ask him to sign an autograph?
They would kill you if they knew you heard, saw or read anything. And they would never accept they said that!

If some people knew it, they surely believe it's a good lie, it stops wars (MAD), it shows mankind we need to work together in peace (for a world government), we need more regulation and oversight.

There was no danger in the hoax, they could say, and soon, we will appear as heroes when we ban nukes forever in a mighty treaty!
What better gift/sacrifice for the coming world government?
User avatar
Sorensen731
 
Posts: 87
Joined: 24 May 2011 14:37

Re: Is there room for dissent?

Postby Sorensen731 » 24 Feb 2012 05:58

MartinL wrote:Are there any scientists or industry professionals that post here?

If you had checked the forum, you could have seen a post I made;

chile-ambassador-said-nuclear-weapons-mythical

Where an IAEA representative confessed in his book he was told Nukes are a hoax.

He used his contacts and influence (he supported the germans in the war) to gain support of German Scientists for the wanted nuclear development of his country.
He was told in confidence nukes don't work.

In his last years, he put that in paper, loud and clear. 20 Years as ambassador, representing his country in the IAEA...

I'm sure, if one has the time, more confessions can be found in the memoirs of diplomats.
User avatar
Sorensen731
 
Posts: 87
Joined: 24 May 2011 14:37

Re: Is there room for dissent?

Postby MartinL » 24 Feb 2012 06:27

Sorensen731 wrote:What are you expecting MartinL?
That a nuclear plant designer will post on-line patented and national security classified plans?
You know how hard is it to change paradigms in science, with only your career at stake, imagine your life at stake!
Why is it necessary to have someone who claims to work for nuclear related organization?

Divulging secrets is not really necessary. Not all nuclear tech is classified.
When was the last time a scientist lost their life because he or she changed the way the we view the world? Usually accolades are in order.
It is not necessary for a person in the nuclear field, but it could lend weight to an argument.

Sorensen731 wrote:If you had checked the forum, you could have seen a post I made;
chile-ambassador-said-nuclear-weapons-mythical
Where an IAEA representative confessed in his book he was told Nukes are a hoax.

Your link just seems to be an amusing anecdote written by a Chilean diplomat recalling a conversation with a scientist.

Sorensen731, What do you consider your best piece of scientific evidence that nuclear bombs or nuclear reactors do not work or exist?
MartinL
 
Posts: 19
Joined: 20 Feb 2012 05:08

Re: Is there room for dissent?

Postby rerevisionist » 24 Feb 2012 13:06

MartinL - why not dicsuss with your supposed co-workers whether you have anything to say? I'll give you 24 hours to come up with something. If you don't I'll delete this entire time-wasting thread. - No, I'll move it to the troll section.
User avatar
rerevisionist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Return to Welcome to "Nuke Lies" Forum! Do Nuclear Bombs Exist?


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest