Skeptic Project

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUtv5E6CkLE

I'll fact check the shit Merola says that's even remotely coherent.

I'm not an Austrian and haven't been for about a year or so now. Even when I was an Austrian, there's a lot that I disagreed with Stef on. I saw it as we both reached the same conclusion even though his road went astray.

http://www.divorce.usu.edu/files/uploads/Lesson3.pdf
Researchers have identified the most common reasons people give for their
divorces. A recent national survey79 found that the most common reason given for divorce
was "lack of commitment" (73% said this was a major reason). Other significant reasons
included too much arguing (56%), infidelity (55%), marrying too young (46%), unrealistic
expectations (45%), lack of equality in the relationship (44%), lack of preparation for
marriage (41%), and abuse (29%). (People often give more than one reason, so the
percentages add up to more than 100%.) A recent survey of Utah adults found results
similar to this national survey.80 Looking at this list, some believe that it is possible to
fix many of these problems and prevent some divorces. Couples can learn how to avoid
destructive arguments and solve their differences better; they can create more realistic
expectations for their marriage; and they can create more equal partnerships. Even such
damaging problems as infidelity (affairs) sometimes can be overcome, especially with
professional and/or religious help. (We discuss recovering from infidelity later in this
chapter.)
It is interesting to note that a significant number of divorced individuals--maybe
about half--report to researchers that they wished they or their ex-spouse had tried
harder to work through their differences.81 When Utahns were asked this question,
31% of men who had divorced said they wished that they had worked harder to save
their marriage (and 74% said they wished their ex-wife had worked harder to save the
marriage); 13% of women who had divorced said they wished that they had worked
harder to save their marriage (and 65% said they wished their ex-husband had worked
harder to save the marriage).82 As we mentioned in Chapter 2, researchers estimated that
about one in three couples who actually divorce later try to reconcile.83 This suggests that
they ended up regretting their decision to divorce. You might benefit from doing exercise
3.1, "Thinking About Your Reasons For a Possible Divorce" at the end of this chapter.

I'm not sure about his claim that MLK was opposed to the inherent racism in "the system," because there's a lot of murky waters when it comes to information about this. MLK was on the left of the political spectrum but there was a lot of time and effort trying to find communist connections to him, and a lot of effort of people opposed to his activism that tried to paint him as a communist.

One thing is for sure, Gandhi was by no means a defender of racial equality. His time in South Africa makes that pretty clear and he had never recanted his blatant racist views against black people. Gandhi made the case that Indians should no be confused with blacks. He considered them subhuman animals and would espouse a lot of hatred for native Africans while defending his pro-Indian equality stances. He made very strong remarks against racism, even then, but it was clear that he was talking about people who were not black as he regarded them as non-humans. He also was a fervent defender of the caste system. If you want to talk about brutal inequality or "structural violence," one need not look further than the caste system. Merola, Fresco, TZM, and TVP often try to portray global capitalism is if it was an inelastic caste system where income mobility were things of myths, yet here he is propping up someone who actually does want that sort of system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4_u7veGPA0
Merola's "post-debate analysis"

Few things:

1. He realized he was being a shitcock during the interview and blames it on people who disagree with him and TWOLLS wearing him out. However, he pulled the same shit during the Alex Jones interview so he's just making excuses because this time he got called out.

2. He never mentions the divorce statistics he made up. Gee, I wonder why. He could of just pulled it up during the interview while Stef was talking.

3. He said that in his interview with Joe Rogan that he didn't say Ferrari is the best car they can come up with, but that he was talking in terms of overall efficiency. This is incorrect. Merola was talking in terms of planned obsolescence where things are built to be weaker, slower, and prone to early failure. The Ferrari he was talking about he says it's not the best car Ferrari can make. He asks if any of them are electric, when Rogan says they're working on them, he goes into NASA technologies that Ferrari isn't implementing proving that cars aren't as fast as they should be and everything is weaker.

Sorry Merola, The reason why Ferarri isn't using NASA technology (assuming they aren't) is because they haven't found a way to impliment it. Lamborgini, Ferarri, Porsche...etc. even Shelby are constantly trying to develop the fastest car so people will buy them over the compitition. BUT I GUESS IT'S A CONSPIRACEEE TO KEEP FAST CARS SLOW SO RICH PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO BUY IT BECAUSE IT WILL BECOME OBSOLETE

Here's it in context which Merola doesn't show. Gee, I wonder why.
http://youtu.be/IU7_JbWQZAg?t=1h5m53s

4. He finally gives the definition of structural violence. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqQ99s4Ywnw

Quote from anticultist

For Mr Peter Joseph Merola: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gcYK1V2Ogs

Dr. Peter Joseph Merola Esq. *****

Yea. VTV did a better job debating Stef, and that's just sad.

Stef uploaded a video talking about the Merola debate and it's pretty good. Even if you don't agree with him (and I don't on a lot of things, especially that the NAP is tied to the market) he does break down how Merola is a terrible debater but a head chef at the Word Salad Bar. If not the whole thing, the last 17 minutes are pure gold. Sums up what we've been saying about TZM/TVP since day 1.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5jh_lN9TWw

And of course, you can't criticize the great and ever knowing leader of TZM Dr. Peter Joseph Merola Esq. without him single handedly debunking everything you say with a healthy dose of ad-hom word salad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cnuRRWZxSE

He ends up blaming Peter Josephs behaviour on his lack of love from his parent as a child essentially. While this is very funny, and in fact probably has some vein of truth in psychology fields with respect to some human behaviours and learned beliefs. I think he has just gone too far with this claim here to be taken seriously.

It is true that zeitgeisters/venusians are inherently looking for free stuff given to them from authority figures/society/scientists/whatever, much like children do from their parents. The expectation of free stuff, free time and no worries does come across as a needy child wanting to extend their childhood, and avoid all social responsibilities for hard work. For instance the cult members afore mentioned would love to just kick back with the bong on a beach or in their own free house, and let computers and robots do everything for them. Meanwhile they can watch the made for tv disney version of tolstoy fruits of enlightenment on their free 96 inch wall mounted flat screen tv, admiring how self referential its context is.

So I can see why he concluded that these people have mummy and daddy issues, blaming society for their hardships, it does appear to be transferable in a general sense. However his conclusion is false, you can't attribute the concept to everyone, it has to be case by case.

More importantly though he does appear to be correct, zeitgeisters do come across as freeloaders, they wouldn't fit in well with the general workforce due to their anti cultural tendencies, they probably don't strive to be high financial achievers, and they do in fact blame everyone or everything else for the general unhappiness in our/their lives. The solution to it all, free stuff and no essential labour to get by in life.

I don't necessarily see this as translating to psychological problems stemming from childhood though, I see it as a general lack of motivation and a tendency to be easily defeated by tasks and long term plans that require your constant efforts to succeed. I think the truth is this, zeitgeisters/venusians are from an element of society that has given up on the idea that hard work and long term goals produce rewards. They have lost sight of this and are looking for instant gratification, or the most gratification with the least effort. So if they can drop out of society and simply fly post zeitgeist/venus project on the internet and on street corners, it's an easy way to convince themselves they are making a change. They can keep doing as little as possible until the miraculous tipping point happens, then get everyone else to do the hard work building and designing. Conveniently this means they can just sit back waiting for the free deliveries and products from the people who know how to create what they want out of life. Much like the satisfying glow a dope head gets after tooting the bong and solving all of lifes problems from their couch, zeitards follow this kind of thought process.

To me it just stinks of unmotivated people expecting to be treat like lifes winners.

Quote from anticultist


So I can see why he concluded that these people have mummy and daddy issues, blaming society for their hardships, it does appear to be transferable in a general sense. However his conclusion is false, you can't attribute the concept to everyone, it has to be case by case.

I'm not exactly sure he was saying this was a tabula rasa thing. I think what he's really saying is that these people just haven't matured out of childhood.

When I see VTV whine about his McJob, it wreaks of exactly what Molynuex says about their work ethics. It's only myopic and pessimistic outlooks on his career, and it's because of that he'll never escape the turmoil he puts himself though. It's the same vibe I get not just from Zeitgeisters, but a lot of those on the extreme left. I was a pretty far left when I was younger but I never saw work like EXPLOITATION! DICTATORSHIP! I would of scoffed if I heard that shit.

Another long post

I watched the response from Stefan and the response of the response from Peter and I LOL at both. That said I think Stefan had valid points within his video when pertaining to the free market as well as did a slow down of things Peter said that had no bases and were in fact insulting (I agree) to Stefan.




Onto Stefan's video
At 1:04:25 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5jh_lN9TWw#t=64m25s ) in the video Stefan said Peter is trying to recreate certain phase/notion in his childhood at which money was not needed, he even suggested that Peter has a childhood type of mindset. Although I found that funny and laughed out loud I also thought that Stefan really was attempting to conduct himself in a serious manner by psychoanalyze someone over the internet. Stefan trying to psychoanalyze anybody in this manner I do not agree with although in certain circumstances I have done so such as with VTV though I can justify in doing this. Yes Peter is weird person I get that but Stefan has no clue how Peter conducts himself in his personal life and to attempt to psychoanalyze someone and uses personal things with PEter life as the bases of that over the internet is overreaching and simply unfounded accusations or general assumption that is basically a logical fallacy and insulting.

My point is though if you want to be insulting don't do it in a video where Peter is not directly present do it when your talking with the guy to his face so he has a chance to respond at least. I'm just saying Peter has certainly said word salads, is insulting, and various other logical fallacies but you should not stoop to his level in a academic sense on such public academic venues. However if you want to insult Peter make a video and basically give the audience a heads up that your going to be talking not necessarily on a academic level but from a gut/from experience feeling or something to that nature.

I thought Stefan got his points across in a clear and coherent manner but if he's going to talk on a academic level then he need not resort to general assumptions. I want to note that I don't think Stefan recommending Peter see a therapist to address particular issues is bad or insulting because that's what Stefan honestly thinks, however again making such general assumptions based on some knowledge about a persons personal life or family is never the way to go from a academic or professional sense.

Also Peter as done some pseudo online psychoanalyzation of members on SP.com as he precedes to diagnose people as mentally ill.



References that Peter diagnosing people with mental illness over the internet:

Dr. Peter Joseph Merola Justifies why he calls people mentally ill
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/1055/dr-peter-joseph-merola-justifies-why-he-calls-people-mental/#post-17175

Dr. Peter Joseph diagnose culture, Edward L. Winston, and members of SP.com as mentally Ill
http://conspiracyscience.com/citations/0/09044c7bb23a492ebca8c528ef98b2b154c08b66/
http://conspiracyscience.com/citations/5/54d66bc4d7818b79cf7b739ef71edead5cf22b8c/
http://conspiracyscience.com/citations/5/5d7d88c603a73890c3f90dd35edf9cdb8d1317ca/


Dr. Peter Joseph Merola calls CS members a bunch of monkeys who throw poop!
http://other.skepticproject.com/forum/1460/dr-peter-joseph-merola-calls-cs-members-a-bunch-of-monkeys-who-throw-poop/#post-20836

Responding back to Merola calling SP.com a bunch of poop throwing monkeys
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/1466/about-that-response-topic-by-merola-the-cs-throws-poop-topic/

TZM member saying I'm mentally Ill (FYI I now don't think TVP or TZM is a cult)

from choppy
I can't believe you would give credit to conspiracy science. Why would you agree with a site that says 9/11 isn't a inside job? I heard about you in TZM and from what I hear you seem like a sensible person Billll but I am beginning to see why you were banned if you won't even accept that 9/11 was a inside job. It's not your fault it's your environmental conditioning that makes you think in these ways. You are mentally ill like the rest of society and when the Zeitgeist movement reaches critical mass and begins to start the Venus Project we will at first have to recondition people like you who do not fit into society because in fact you are a danger to our planet.

http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/1605/facebook-popularity-contest-fresco-vs-merola-vs-insane-clown-posse/#post-22138


Peter says we get paid to troll TZM because he has inside information
http://web.archive.org/web/20120302033833/http://muertos.blog.com/2011/08/23/the-nadir-of-paranoia-zeitgeist-confronts-its-paid-critics/
originally posted here http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/4752/peter-merolas-latest-conspiracy-theory/


Some reference links Stefan should look at as far as accusation that peter isn't a capitalist though I understand it's hard to see why you would make such accusation because Peter actually tries to hide such things from his audience and the outside world he's preaching that money is bad too.




References for Stefan on Peter being a capitalist making money off his movement (I have no problem with people making money including Peter however he is a bit of a hypocrite for what he preaches versus his actions. It comes in line with if someone else does it it's wrong if Peter does it it's right because it's Peter):

Peter through a joint venture with Gravitas is selling his movies at walmart and other online retail chains, the very retail chains he says are bad and not to shop there.
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/5519/australian-tzm-member-david-zwolski-upsets-the-leaders-of-tz/#reply-2caede87

Selling t-shirts, and dvd's.
http://www.gentlemachineproductions.com/
Zeitgeist - Cost of Movie
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/articles/zeitgeist/cost/

More on Peter Josephs Gentle machine company
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/5539/archiving-anticultist-blog-on-sp/#reply-935522dc

Peter Joseph Selling his music on amazon.
https://archive.org/details/PeterJosephMerolaAmazonSelling

TVP raising $200,000 for a big budget movie
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/5349/the-venus-projects-100000-big-budget-movie-scam-prediction/#0

Peter Josephs makes money off the movement as he uses TZM material for a black sabbath video.
http://www.metalinsider.net/video/black-sabbaths-video-asks-us-god-is-dead
black sabbath youtube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhhOU5FUPBE

Peter is selling t-shirts for his culture in decline videos.
http://www.cultureindecline.com/support.html


Conclusion on Stefan's video:

I didn't agree with the way Stefan made generalized accusation however I agreed a lot with his ideas on the free market (though not everything and I don't subscribe to a totally stateless society or that fact there isn't really a free market within society today).




Onto PEter's video

Into Peter's video in response to Stefan response to Peter's older response video of the Stefan and Peter discussion. I will first agree that Peter should of felt insulted on a lot of levels by Stefans response mostly because from my perspective Stefan trying to psychoanalyze Peter over the internet basing his thoughts on some information on Peter's personal life is a bit of a reach. Not that Peter hasn't psychoanalyze people and labeled them mentally ill.

With that said Peter used various forms of logical fallacies and at one point insulted his audience and said he refused to change the way he speaks and that people who will not take the time to google are ignorant. I found that totally arrogant and egocentric to say and I would of felt insulted if I hadn't if already known what Peter was about before hand. If you can't communicate to make coherent thoughts then your not communicating and you are putting out very obscure thoughts that not everybody can connect to. I can't speak for everybody but I'm not willing to look up what you say when the majority of it is total word salad garbage because I know it would not make any sense if I tried to look it up.

To add when Peter cannot say 1 coherent thought his stuff is up to interpretation as much so as the bible. People will interpret and spread the message of what Peter says in there own understanding and interpretation and not being clear and clean as possible in your speech will lead to problems for these people when they misinterpret meaning down the road (as we have seen the many problems within TZM when it comes to interpretations everybody's interpretation is different).

Peter does in fact contradict himself several times one being about money being a major result in divorce as in a RBEM there would be no marriage and at that Peter has stated in the past that there will in fact be relationship problem even in a RBEM referring to crimes of passion.

Does Peter really have a child mentality when it comes to his RBEM fantasy land and his outlook on the current market? I'd say I have no clue. I will say that a RBEM seems like a fantasy land utopian idea based on communism. Peter's outlook on the market seems to be entirely based on his personal experiences rather than actually hard data. Peter has no clue why or how the market works yet he's preaching against it. Peter also still uses planned obsolesce as the bases of his ideology though by the strict definition of planned obsolesce there has never been a true form of planned obsolesce implemented at least by strictly going by the definition line by line and if not going by the definition so strictly but loosely it's not been implemented. Planned obsolesce is simply not a good or viable way to conduct business because if a business uses that strategy the consumer will go somewhere else to buy a better product.

Peter was in the right for feeling insulted by Stefan response video but that does not justify Peter's video. The way Peter conducted himself in this video is the standard MO from Peter which is to use a series of logical fallacies for the bases of his argument (Peter was not in the right to say what he said in the video not only is it bad PR to him but also for TZM, his RBEM ideology, and to the outside audience).Stefan conducted himself fairly well in all the videos I saw for the most part as Peter was doing the majority of the insults, I just think Stefan should know better then respond back via another video to conduct any logical fallacies on a academic level. I'm not giving Peter a pass but there is no reason for someone who actually uses logic and reason (stefan) to stoop to Peter's level when they are speaking academically about a particular subject. We know Peter's a conspiracy nut bag no reason to add insult to injury, if you want to insult do it in ideas and poke holes in Peter's logic and lack of understanding. No one is perfect I get that and I'm not claiming nor should Stefan be perfect/mature at all times (I've not watched much of any of Stefans videos) but it's just a way one should conduct themselves to get there points across and point out fallacies people make when they speak on a academic/experience/professional level.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX




My views on free market and on TVP/TZM's RBE or RBEM aka communism

My view on the free market is kind of simplistic. I understand the market economy has way to many variables as it's ever changing and getting ever so more complex. With that said I have always thought of our system as more of a game like a board game where the rules of the game is to follow the laws and at that one can conduct market operations within this game within reason. People who choose to play the game can do anything they want and it's entirely a voluntary operation. People can sell goods and services toanybody they want. It's more probable within this game that innovation can occur and thrive as well. This game is even flexible enough that people can change the rules if need be to make the game work more optimal for the current culture.

I personally think we need less government in the market but I don't advocate getting rid of the government though. Within this game I see the government as maintaining order and when bad stuff happens the government jumps on it immediately.

The free market is currently the best system we have to date it's not perfect but please show me something in communism, socialism, or any place else that's perfect as well (This argument was raised by Milton Friedman as well)? The free market is strong as it can work local and globally, it allows for innovation, gives incentives for work, and is flexible. Peter has to be able to make a argument that his RBEM is better than the above but he has to prove it in the real world. Saying a RBEM is based on science, suggesting it's better than the current system without implementing in the real world will not pass. Just because you say it does not make it so.

In the end from my very simplistic perspective if Peter designs a better board game that is proven and works then people will support it. People are rational they will back up anything if it works. Instead of Peter criticizing the current system why not design your own board game and prove it works instead of telling how bad our system is (which all of his arguments are not valid). When Peter or TVP/TZmer give excuses of why there particular game won't work it show's to me at least how weak structurally their RBE or RBEM is and how much confidence they lack in there actually ideology in actually making it into reality. Simply said, put up or shut up.




Other references:

Peter has botted and raised his rating and veiws on his youtube videos. Take a look at number of subscribers versus views. Take a look at none decline videos versus decline videos views and ratings. Investigate a bit you'll see what I'm saying.
http://www.youtube.com/user/CultureInDecline/videos

Charles Robinson is Peter Joseph exposed videos
https://myspace.com/charlesrobinsonfilms/videos

@CyborgJesus instead of having debates wouldn't it be easier to actually try out whatever economic structure they think is superior and then see if there is any success or fail with whatever economic structure they go with. After testing then have a debate and see if people can show weaknesses and or possibly enhance the idea.

I'm almost certain there are going to be variables no one can account for because it's simply to complex. I suppose developing a system that is flexible and able to react to change fast but also hardy in the sense that this particular economic system would need to be able to function on a local as well as global level if need be.

@CyborgJesus we should make a rough draft manifesto?

Also I didn't know these two places even existed which are http://www.neweconomics.org/ and http://ineteconomics.org/. Just checked them out they seem interesting.

The difference between Joe Stiglitz and Merola is that Stiggy likes to talk about real problems not just made up bullshit like "If you don't work you starve to death" and Stiggy doesn't try to make 10 dollar word salad incoherent messes. I can understand what Stiggy says when he says it, even when I disagree.

Quote from The Real Roxette

you see this is what i call the continuum of cromulence and assal horizontology which just embiggens people like stefan to amilurate their ideas to unbeholden masses. go dr. merola!

THE DISMAL AND TRUNCATED INHERENT VIOLENCE OF THE FREE-MARKET SYSTEM UNDER DEGLUTITION BY SO-CALLED "MORAL ACTIVISTS" IS PURELY PETULANT. ACERBIC VERBIAGE IS ONLY AN AFFIRMATION OF QUIXOTIC MALIGNANT HEMORRHAGING OF SYSTEMATIC DECAY. SO I OBJURGATE THIS SYGIAN, SUPEREROGATORY PARADIGM FOR DEAR LEADER FRESCO'S ENVISIONMENT OF AN EGALITARIAN TECHNOCRATIC REGIME.

@CyborgJesus interesting. I might through up a manifesto topic on SP and we can all pound out ideas for what we think a good economic system would be.

@Anticultist Muertos knows just as much "big words" as Peter but he doesn't talk like this at all. Matter in fact when Meurtos uses big words in talk or in text he does it in a way that a individual can still understand his basic premise and the big works used add value to what he says basically. I understand no one is like Meurtos I get that he could say or write anyone under the table if he wanted to but Muertos vocabulary and writing style is the best I've seen, Muertos manages to get a particular understanding across crystal clear as eloquently as possible. Reading and or hearing Muertos work is like drinking fine wine and eating cake. FYI Peter is nowhere near the level on Muertos not even close, heck I'd say vocabulary wise Peter is pretty bad in the context he uses, heck Peter isn't even close as to SP.com members write. I'd say Matt, Jim, Cyborg and a few other people on SP.com have more of a advanced vocabulary then Peter does and they are able to use this vocabulary but still are coherent in the message they give using big words in a coherent context.