Skeptic Project

(space)
(space)
(space)
(space)
(space)
(this is so the quote works properly, ignore it)

@Pendrokar:

Why don't you get pissy at them for claiming that you are one of us, only on their forums to stir up trouble?

Most productive way is to criticize both sides.

Only if you're right.

You just mocked me for thinking you were on my side, when I never said that, the ZGM Admins ACCUSED YOU of that.

Doesn't it bother you that your questions were deemed to be so unreasonable to them that they implied you were were a troll, one of us, only there to cause trouble? If you get upset with that and continue to ask difficult questions like you were doing, I guarantee THEY would ban you for breaking the rules and being what they class as a troll.

I don't know what you're talking about, what email confirmations?

No, no not from anyone of CS. Outer sources. Don't have the estimates on when I'm going to receive them though.

No you don't understand, I have no idea what you are talking about. What emails? Confirmations of what?

So how long do you think we will have you here before we ban you like Voice of Reason claims we would? As you can see that was a complete lie he just made up out of nothing

I know. He was stressed, happens. Though his claim was "banned after trying to reason with CS".

Wow, you're actually saying Voice of Reason just slipped up, and thats why he lied?
He didn't slip up, he specifically said that if you question us we ban you. That is a complete lie that he pulled out of his ass and easy debunked by anyone who has at all paid attention to what has happened on this forum.

And I know what his claim is, Voice of Reason hasn't even been apart of this forum as far as I recall and as Edward said only a few people have been banned, most weren't even ZGM members and they were banned for spamming and trolling. One was even a past ZGM troll which had been banned multiple times on the ZGM.

Even VTV has been apart of this forum and we all had long arguments with him, why isnt he banned? Surely being the official spokesmen for the Movement he would have been banned straight away, right?

There is not a single way Voice of Reason is correct, not a single justification for him making it up, literally, out of nothing.

And you already raise that question before anything has even happened.

Yes, Im raising the question because Voice of Reason claims you cant come here and debate with anyone and if you do we will ban you. Just pointing out how stupid that is, because for some reason you're still defending someone who lies.

EDIT: Almost forgot about this:

BTW Ed where you interested in TVP/RBE when you joined TZM and are you still interested today?

Short answer is that I did, then after a while I started to question how competent Jacque Fresco was and that their approach was completely wrong. Then after I decided to "leave" the Movement I started to properly question the RME notion itself and now I think its completely unworkable, or at least, its completely unworkable in the way the Venus Project suggests but I also cant see a way it can work.

So yes I was supportive of the Venus Project and I did give advice on how they could do things better despite Peter's lies claiming I was only interested in talking about 911. But then I realised that after 50 years of making absolutely no progress Fresco is either an incompetent designer or he is too incompetent to ever listen to how to get anything done or people like Matt are right and he really is just in it for the money. I cant see any other way to justify his approach, even if his concept of an RBE was doable.

As I said on the other thread that is stickied, the reason I talked about 911 so much is because I was correcting all the lies promoted on the forums by others. But Peter doesn't care about people promoting conspiracy theories he believes in so long as no one is debunking them - they are just tolerated. I was very polite in the thread he banned me as well, it wasnt about 911 it was about quotes and how Peter just uses any old quote without checking if its fabricated, out of context or misattributed because he is a typical conspiracy theorist that doesnt check any of his "facts". So him claiming I'm never polite about it is just another lie, he just hates it that I question him.

Guys, I didn't mean to tell lies. I was just stressed out. ;_;

I am so stressed out that I am unable to go back and correct my lies too.

"Guys, I didn't mean to tell lies. I was just stressed out. ;_;

I am so stressed out that I am unable to go back and correct my lies too. "

Aww you poor thing, it's this damned monetary system!

I wonder how many others think it's Edward that was posting on the ZGM this whole time?

Pendrokar:

Still, I dont see how that changes anything even if you were directing your responces to Edward Winston thinking he was me.

Can I change my name to Eddy?

how about we all go by some form of Ed

The Cult of Ed

All Hail!

"Would be nice if you could show where, if, you have expressed your concerns about TVP/RBE."

http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/topic/scientific-american-babies-are-not-tabula-rasa-or-blank-slate<br /> http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/topic/so-i-watched-future-by-design<br /> http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/topic/tvp-more-shitty-3d-renderings-of-buildings-without-doors-and-toilets<br /> http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/topic/how-an-rbe-will-fix-illegal-immigration<br /> http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/topic/arcosanti-beat-tvp-to-the-punch<br /> http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/topic/okay-rbe-proponents-convince-me

I'm not anticultist you freak.

Why did you ignore the first link and focus on the second?

OH SNAP NICE EDIT SON

What does that mean? Does that mean my words carry more weight than Scientific American?

These are my words from the thread you are ignoring:

Zeitgeisters rely on an obsolete, pseudo-scientific theory to explain why there would be no crime or violence in an abundant paradise. People are born as blank slates, and only through the competition of money do people then become evil and selfish.

Sort of like claiming that there will be no backaches in the abundant future because there will be robot chiropractors. Or that there will no diseases because everyone will have abundant homeopathy.

-----

By all means, refute them.

So wait, you can rely on videos you didn't make to make your point but others cannot rely on articles they didn't write to make theirs?

You don't do this in good faith, sir. Why you expect others to escapes me.

Took you a whole three minutes to work through that cognitive dissonance, huh?

Might be some hope for you yet.

Okay well, you don't get to use a video you didn't make as a rebuttal after making the rule that no one can use articles they didn't write to make a point.

This is absurd. Why am I having to explain this to you? Do you honestly not see the inconsistency here?