[Images] - The Psychology of Conspiracy Theorists and Theories | Page 10 | INFJ Forum

[Images] The Psychology of Conspiracy Theorists and Theories

Rium


  • Total voters
    8
There's two problems i see with what you are saying here

First of all you are being too vague.

You are talking about 'conspiracies' in general as if they are all the same; they're not so we have to deal with each one independently

Secondly you seem to think that people haven't been exposing all the conspiracies but they have!

This is what i'm trying to tell some of the naysayers...that just because they haven't got the information it doesn't mean the information isn't out there

The information is NOT PROVIDED by the system for example through the corporate media eg the evening news or through the education system but if you follow my various threads you will see information being posted REGULARLY that shows the true story behind events



There is proof to the 911 conspiracy but the corporate media is not going to report it because it is subservient to the families who control the corporations and who orchestrated the attack



many of the public for example some of the characters who have posted in this thread won't bat an eyelid when they find out the government lied over Iraq; in fact they will continue as before abusing anyone who points this out as a 'conspiracy theorist'

But imagine if the mainstream media admitted that 911 was an inside job....what do you think would happen then?

There are some lies they can let go of without much damage to their system but the biggest lies they will cling to and cover up until their last breath to protect themselves from large scale public revolt



Try to understand what actually exists doesn't matter....the game is about what people think exists

It is easier to control what people think exists then what actually exists

What people think exists is a PERCEPTION of reality

So propaganda is about controlling the PERCEPTIONS of the public

They don't need Iraq to actually have WMD they only need the public to believe that they do

if the public do not seek any information outside of the corporate media they will never know any different

This is the principle of Platos cave. The public are in platos cave and the manipulators are controlling the images flashed on the cave walls

The iraq deception goes much deeper than the WMD lie. A few years before that war they had another war with iraq and that one started because the US sold slant drilling technology to the kuweitis who then used it to drill under the border of their neighbour Iraq in order to steal iraqs oil

Kuweit then stole iraqs oil and sold it really cheaply to the US. This drove global oil prices down which meant lower revenues for Iraq. The Iraqi economy was being driven to destruction so they asked the US if they could invade kuweit and stop the drilling. before this time Iraq had been a client of the US. The US said it was no business of theirs what Iraq did so iraq invaded kuweit

But once they did that the US sprung their trap and started demonising iraq to the world and started making a case for war. The US got a woman who claimed to be a kuweiti nurse to stand before congress and claim that the iraqis were committing atrocities to kuweiti babies in the hospitals but later on it transpired that the woman was not a nurse at all but rather the daughter of the kuweiti ambassador to the US

It was all a big deception. So the US got a group of countries together who it bribed or threatened into joining their coalition and then attacked Iraq

The US zionists ALWAYS attack and destroy soveriegn nationalist countries who are energy self reliant because they want to control them all and their resources; this is why they have destroyed iraq, libya, afghanistan and why they are seeking to destroy syria, yemen, venezuala, ukraine and ultimately Iran

You really don't see the irony in some of the things that you post to counteract what I'm saying, do you?

Yes, it is all about perception and about what people think exists. You and people like you try to control people's perceptions the same way that you accuse others of doing. It doesn't matter if what you claim is true as long as you get people to believe it. Conspiracy theorists are just as manipulative and controlling of the message as the mainstream media. You don't want us to find out the truth for ourselves, you just want us to believe what you believe. Your sources are no more trustworthy than the people you say we can't trust. It is all a big deception and you are a part of it.
 
There's a big difference between the 'whistleblowers' mentioned in most posts about conspiracy theories and real whistleblowers like Edward Snowden and even more with Republicans conceding that they screwed up. I honestly think that the republicans admitting to their mistake on the WMD and the Iraq War is one of the worst things to happen to conspiracy theorists. Wait, maybe they're just doing this to throw us off the trail...no, I don't think so, the egomaniacs in the Republican party have to be hurting big time admitting that they made a mistake.

Again, the problem is that real 'conspiracies' and real problems that need to be ferreted out and brought to the light get lost in all the false stuff being promoted by 'conspiracy theorists' who keep twisting things to fit their narrative. I'm all for finding out the truth and supporting real whistleblowers but not for blindly supporting every weird theory that comes out. It seems for conspiracy theorists you have to believe everything they claim without questioning anything. That's a huge double standard in my opinion. 'Don't believe them, they're all lying, but believe me, I'm not.' Sorry, I don't fall for that propaganda either.

So, what is the difference between the whistleblowers? The mainstream media's portrayal of them? It seems to me that they have been shown to be unreliable on more complex things than simply reporting facts in many more ways than just Iraq (both times), which get spun anyway. And how is that a blow to conspiracy theorists? Read a book or at least excerpts from people who worked for the agencies and you'll see that they do things to throw people off the trail. That's disinformation, and it does have legitimate uses, at least in today's age. Often it turns into domestic disinformation. COINTELPRO type stuff, and operations to discredit and radicalize eg the black panthers and Vietnam protest movements. The Black Panthers started out peacefully as a sort of community-building group, but were infiltrated and manipulated by people in the FBI, because they were deemed disruptive to the good order in place. They weren't the only ones in the civil rights movement to suffer such treatment. If you won't read about the Church Committee reports, MKUltra etc, then there isn't anything I can do to convince you that these things do happen and are sometimes even worse than conspiracy theorists suggested. Muir had posted a long list of conspiracies that turned out to be true. Obviously, that isn't to say that all theories are true (many are contradictory). The proper response would be to evaluate them, rather than dismiss them. Many don't hold water.

I'm not saying that the out-there theories are wrong or right, though probably more often wrong or go farther in theory than they did in reality. This is a natural when so much is hidden from the public. A lot is conjecture, but conjectures can be right, and well, politics is made of conjectures. You won't get very far if you don't make guesses about the probability of things being right or wrong because smoking guns are hard to find. Since the Church Committee, they probably found ways of eliminating paper trails. And that's a guess that I would be willing to put money on.

To think that one must dismiss or embrace them w/o more investigation is unskillful, regardless of who's doing it. I strongly dislike trying to get everything immediately into wrong or right categories because often the definition of those categories are inaccurate or lead to an inaccurate portrayal and overly emotionally charged conclusions which discourage rational thought. That applies to every side. People don't like to read about the malicious and disturbing conspiracies which have happened because it is upsetting to their world view of everything being hunky-dory. Ignoring that tendency isn't going to solve anything, but bring things to a more violent and turbulent breaking point.

Eg, one way to evaluate the accuracy of chemtrails would be look in the recent past and see if there are differences or if a point when they started appearing or appearing more frequently. Can a rough correlation be made in increased traffic or not? Could changes in the atmosphere be responsible if they are more prevalent now? What about the witnesses and supposed whistleblowers? Is their testimony based on direct observation and participation or conjectures, can they be evaluated, and what motives might they have? To dismiss or embrace w/o thinking about such things is how people come to incorrect conclusions which don't simply effect their mood of the day but have much wider implications.
 
Last edited:
It is one thing to investigate abuses of power, it is another to simply regurgitate whatever fits your fancy. I recall a college radio show in the eighties that was broadcasting events occurring in central America. I was in the studio as the reporters were putting together the broadcast. The information they had was completely unsubstantiated. That is not to say that it was not true, but the sources had no attributes and no corroboration. None, I was scorned at for asking how they knew if what they were broadcasting had occurred.

There was no doubt in my mind that there was a secret war being waged by the US, I just did not see the point if fighting lies with lies.
 
“leaked by Snowden”

Edward Snowden and the Alien Conspiracy

January 23, 2014 by Nathan Dickey

Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor who famously disclosed top secret NSA documents to several media outlets early in 2013, has reportedly revealed much more than the United States government’s mass surveillance of the public. Stories are circulating that he has also revealed an alien conspiracy.
According to a sensational report published on January 12, 2014 by an Iranian news agency called FARS, Snowden has released nearly 2 million classified documents to Russia’s Federal Security Services, incontrovertibly proving once and for all that the United States government’s foreign policy is being controlled by a “shadow government” of extraterrestrials known as “Tall Whites.” I have captured a screenshot image of the article for posterity in case it disappears from the site:

The report, a great example of modern yellow journalism, goes on to claim that documents leaked by Snowden confirms the following:
[T]he “Tall White” agenda being implemented by the “secret regime” ruling the United States calls for the creation of a global electronic surveillance system meant to hide all true information about their presence here on earth as they enter into what one of Snowden’s documents calls the “final phase” of their end plan for total assimilation and world rule.
FARS claims that these are the same Tall Whites who aided Adolph Hitler and Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Specifically, the Tall Whites helped the Nazis build technologically advanced submarines in order to support their war efforts:
Of the many explosive revelations in this FSB report, the one most concerning to Russian authorities are the Snowden’s documents “confirming” that the “Tall Whites” . . . are the same extraterrestrial alien race behind the stunning rise of Nazi Germany during the 1930’s.
In just one example of the many outlined in this FSB report, it shows that with this “alien assistance,” at the end of the 1930’s, when Nazi Germany possessed just 57 submarines, over the four years of World War II it built 1,163 modern technologically advanced submarines at its dockyards and even put them into operation.
The imaginative storytelling does not end there. The article states that the Tall Whites continued to linger on the world’s political stage after World War II and have been active on our planet ever since. They entered into secret meetings with Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1954, where the “secret regime” currently controlling America was first established. Today, the aliens who once helped the Nazis are now backing U.S. President Barack Obama, who is their leader.
It turns out that the FARS News Agency has a reputation for reporting bizarre and absurd claims as authentic. This is the same news service that also recently reported that a 27 year-old Iranian businessman invented a time machine. And just before the 2012 presidential election, FARS reposted in all earnestness what was in actuality a satirical story from The Onion which said that white rural voters in America would rather vote for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than Barack Obama. Thus, to put it very mildly, FARS is not the most truthful news source one can consult. In fact, FARS makes the likes of World Net Daily look like a serious news outlet, and this is saying a lot.
“The Hellyer Talking About?”
The FARS story is certainly not the first time the idea of aliens running the government has been entertained. The more specific notion of “Tall Whites” is not new, either. They were mentioned by former Canadian Defence Minister Paul Hellyer, who recently appeared on Russia Today for a very strange interview with Sophie Shevardnadze, host of “SophieCo.”
Hellyer is convinced that space aliens are living in our midst here on Earth. In the RT interview he maintained that the U.S. government is in league with the Tall Whites, which is but one of about 80 different alien species. He shared a very amusing anecdote in support of this claim:
First question you have to ask is how many species are there? I used to think there were between two and twelve . . . but the latest reports that I’ve been getting from various sources are that there are about 80 different species, and some of them look just like us and they could walk down the street and you wouldn’t know if you walked past one.
The Tall Whites . . . were actually working with the U.S. Air Force in Nevada. They’re able to get away with that. They had a couple of their ladies dressed as nuns go into Las Vegas to shop and they weren’t detected. I have a friend who saw one of the men walking along the street. He is somebody who can recognize that they were different, and he did.
As we all know, the best strategy aliens could adopt for blending in to human society is to go to Las Vegas for a shopping spree dressed as nuns.
In the interview, Hellyer tells another story about the Nevada aliens. A U.S. airman named Charles James Hall “rescued” the daughter of a high-ranking Tall White alien. As a result, a close friendship developed between Hall and the alien’s mother. Hellyer recommends a book written by Hall that tells the full story. The book, entitled Millennial Hospitality, “tells you how you go through these stages, of being scared out of your wits, but then, when you establish a trust and a working relationship –you can have the same kind of relationship that you would have with someone here on Earth.”
Hellyer went on to state matter-of-factly that these 80 alien species hail from all over the galaxy. They come from Venus, Mars, Saturn’s moon Andromedia, and other star systems beyond ours. He also unoriginally and predictably maintained that the aliens are responsible for giving us much of the technology we think we developed:
They are here among us and I’m not afraid because in most cases, as far as technology is concerned, they are light-years ahead of us, and we have learned a lot of things from them. A lot of the things we use today we got from them . . .
As examples of technology bequeathed to us by extraterrestrials, Hellyer cites LED lights, microchips, and Kevlar vests. Hellyer has given credit where credit is clearly not due, and in so doing he gives no credence to and places no stock in human ingenuity and intelligence.
Dubious Source Material
The assertion by the Iranian press that Snowden has released secret documents which confirm that Nazi space aliens are controlling U.S. foreign policy is very easily debunked. First, no one has ever confirmed the existence of such alien-exposing documents. If they did exist, and if such leaked NSA documents really did contain confirmation of an extraterrestrial shadow government controlling U.S. foreign policy, such a revelation would surely be the most momentous and significant news story in history. The shocking news would be covered by every major news media outlet that exists. What we find instead is that this imaginative story is only being covered by disreputable news organizations such as FARS and by crackpot conspiracy-theory blogs.
The idea of Snowden leaking information about aliens allying with the U.S. is not even an original one for our FARS pseudo-journalists. The whole premise is a long-running one, going back as far as summer 2013, when several posts and videos from conspiracy theorists appeared on the Internet. One of the most ridiculous is a YouTube video made by one Jon Kelly entitled “Edward Snowden’s Secret NSA Surveillance UFO Message.” This video plays a forty-second audio excerpt of Snowden talking to Guardian reporters. The last five seconds of the video reverses a small portion of Snowden’s speech and flashes the words “Those UFOs” on the screen, the words being what Jon Kelly, in an epic display of auditory pareidolia, believes is what he hears in the reversed speech.
Refuting the implications made by Jon Kelly’s video is a matter of refuting the notion that unintentionally-propagated subliminal messages in audio mediums can be discovered through backward masking. I have tackled this notion in-depth in my essay “The Myth of Backward Masking.”
The spurious Snowden/UFO connection also made its way to the forums of Above Top Secret, a website devoted to providing a discussion board and general information on conspiracy-theory topics. In a post written on July 8, 2013, a user who goes by the handle Bigfoot73 writes,
It would appear Snowden is revealing UFO secrets too now. I find it very hard to dismiss him as just another disinfo agent. He claims there is an alien race living in seabed colonies and using submersible spaceships. They don’t communicate and are regarded as potentially hostile.
This post includes a link to an article by Internet Chronicle, a fake-news site similar in style to The Onion, whose headline reads “Snowden Reveals UFO Documents after Receiving Asylum in Venezuela.” Apparently, the user who posted the link was not aware that the Internet Chronicle is a satire site.
Second, while the Iranian report asserts that Snowden showed the documents to the Russians, Snowden himself stated months ago that he never leaked any NSA documents to Russia in the first place. Rather, all materials were handed over in digital form to journalists in Hong Kong.
Even if some in the UFO conspiracy theory crowd tries to counter this fact by claiming that Snowden is yet another “disinfo agent” (and not many will, since this would destroy their tenuous image of Snowden as a hero who is on their side), journalists who have closely followed Snowden’s precipitous rise to populist fame would have already called him out on any such disinformation.
This has not happened. On the contrary, no serious journalist has taken the NSA/UFO conspiracy theory seriously. Alex Seitz-Wald, a journalist writing for National Journal, contacted Glenn Greenwald via Twitter and asked him for comment on the alleged documents revealing an alien conspiracy. Greenwald is the journalist who first broke the Snowden story and who, in the words of Seitz-Wald, “has spent more time poring over his documents than perhaps anyone else on this planet.” Greenwald responded with appropriate sarcasm:


The myth that Snowden has blown the lid off a conspiracy involving the U.S. and “those UFOs” is an entertaining case study in the way a mystique can quickly develop around controversial individuals. This is especially the case with Edward Snowden, who has struck a chord in the hearts and minds of paranoid people who see cosmic significance and sinister conspiracies around every corner and in every event. The name of Edward Snowden is sure to be invoked in the future by conspiracy theorists in connection with everything from chemtrails and mind control experiments to secret psychic energy demonstrations and extraterrestrials. The bogus qualifier “leaked by Snowden” will become the tag that identifies a corpus of conspiracy theories both old and new.
https://www.google.com/search?q=sno...utf-8#q=snowden+on+conspiracy+theory&start=10
 
It is one thing to investigate abuses of power, it is another to simply regurgitate whatever fits your fancy. I recall a college radio show in the eighties that was broadcasting events occurring in central America. I was in the studio as the reporters were putting together the broadcast. The information they had was completely unsubstantiated. That is not to say that it was not true, but the sources had no attributes and no corroboration. None, I was scorned at for asking how they knew if what they were broadcasting had occurred.

There was no doubt in my mind that there was a secret war being waged by the US, I just did not see the point if fighting lies with lies.


I agree with you very much. Truth is that there is no media (mainstream or alternative) that is telling the truth 100% of the times - weather is unproven information, deliberate (or not) misinformation... I am never 100% sure in anything, only change is constant (forgot who said that) even with information we get it can always change or improve...I remember old Arthur Clarke's show where he explores different phenomena, collects info from different sources and at the and gives his opinion - % how possible it is. That is exactly what I do with new information, actually first I see how it blends with things I know (or think that I know :)) and collect info from different sources and than decide how much I believe it or not. For example for 911 I am 90% sure that is cover-up if not even more but there are some informations that are probably not true and are either from attention grabbers or deliberateely put out there to 'stir the pot'.
And, for Snowden this is what makes sense to me
Edward Snowden: Controlled Opposition or Double Agent?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DawLf8AEj44
Reason more to believe it is that he was interviewd by Brian Williams...
 
Honestly….call me whatever you wish.
It’s all semantics Muir.
Let whomever think whatever they want about me or you.

Not really....

A 'conspiracy' is a conspiracy and a 'theory' is a theory

So you said you have a theory about a conspiracy...that makes you a conspiracy theorist
 
You really don't see the irony in some of the things that you post to counteract what I'm saying, do you?

Yes, it is all about perception and about what people think exists. You and people like you try to control people's perceptions the same way that you accuse others of doing. It doesn't matter if what you claim is true as long as you get people to believe it. Conspiracy theorists are just as manipulative and controlling of the message as the mainstream media. You don't want us to find out the truth for ourselves, you just want us to believe what you believe. Your sources are no more trustworthy than the people you say we can't trust. It is all a big deception and you are a part of it.

The only thing that matters is if what i'm saying is true or not and i keep being right

So everything else is just your opinion based on how you wish the world to be

And that is the problem i think with you naysayers is that you see the world how you want to see it rather than how it actually is

All i'm doing is being honest about what is actually going on
 
So, what is the difference between the whistleblowers? The mainstream media's portrayal of them? It seems to me that they have been shown to be unreliable on more complex things than simply reporting facts in many more ways than just Iraq (both times), which get spun anyway. And how is that a blow to conspiracy theorists? Read a book or at least excerpts from people who worked for the agencies and you'll see that they do things to throw people off the trail. That's disinformation, and it does have legitimate uses, at least in today's age. Often it turns into domestic disinformation. COINTELPRO type stuff, and operations to discredit and radicalize eg the black panthers and Vietnam protest movements. The Black Panthers started out peacefully as a sort of community-building group, but were infiltrated and manipulated by people in the FBI, because they were deemed disruptive to the good order in place. They weren't the only ones in the civil rights movement to suffer such treatment. If you won't read about the Church Committee reports, MKUltra etc, then there isn't anything I can do to convince you that these things do happen and are sometimes even worse than conspiracy theorists suggested. Muir had posted a long list of conspiracies that turned out to be true. Obviously, that isn't to say that all theories are true (many are contradictory). The proper response would be to evaluate them, rather than dismiss them. Many don't hold water.

I'm not saying that the out-there theories are wrong or right, though probably more often wrong or go farther in theory than they did in reality. This is a natural when so much is hidden from the public. A lot is conjecture, but conjectures can be right, and well, politics is made of conjectures. You won't get very far if you don't make guesses about the probability of things being right or wrong because smoking guns are hard to find. Since the Church Committee, they probably found ways of eliminating paper trails. And that's a guess that I would be willing to put money on.

To think that one must dismiss or embrace them w/o more investigation is unskillful, regardless of who's doing it. I strongly dislike trying to get everything immediately into wrong or right categories because often the definition of those categories are inaccurate or lead to an inaccurate portrayal and overly emotionally charged conclusions which discourage rational thought. That applies to every side. People don't like to read about the malicious and disturbing conspiracies which have happened because it is upsetting to their world view of everything being hunky-dory. Ignoring that tendency isn't going to solve anything, but bring things to a more violent and turbulent breaking point.

Eg, one way to evaluate the accuracy of chemtrails would be look in the recent past and see if there are differences or if a point when they started appearing or appearing more frequently. Can a rough correlation be made in increased traffic or not? Could changes in the atmosphere be responsible if they are more prevalent now? What about the witnesses and supposed whistleblowers? Is their testimony based on direct observation and participation or conjectures, can they be evaluated, and what motives might they have? To dismiss or embrace w/o thinking about such things is how people come to incorrect conclusions which don't simply effect their mood of the day but have much wider implications.

The problem is that the naysayers don't realise how little information they are working with

They have a little information and think they know what is going on; ''a little knowledge is a dangerous thing'' indeed!

Because they can't yet see outside the box they get all their information from within the box for example from the 6 oclock news or the educational system!

So they just end up parroting what the system tells them is the truth

'conspiracy theorists' on the other hand understand that vast amounts of information are kept secret from the public and they seek to plumb those depths

Of course not all conspiracy theories are true but with experience, knowledge and understanding comes an increased level of discearnment

The naysayers haven't invested the time and energy to develop that discearnment but still push their uninformed opinions (formed from info drip fed to them from the system within the box) on the world
 
Last edited:
The police have just admitted they are now investigating 1400 VIP's over child abuse claims: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...itician-and-celebrity-child-sex-abuse-inquiry

And who was it on the forum saying for years that there was systemic abuse in the establishment?

Me

The 'conspiracy theorist' is right again

And just to help out the naysaying ignoramous's who seem to be lagging about a decade behind me in their understanding of what's going on in the world let me help you out with some insights that haven't yet broken out into the mainstream media

First off 'chemtrailing' IS REAL and IS HAPPENING

That's right...they're poisioning YOU

And all that child abuse...what they won't tell you (yet) in the mainstream (until people like me force their hand by exposing them online) is that there is a RITUAL element to the abuse

Yeah...ritual...as in magickal ritual...black magick

That's reality

 
Last edited:
I agree with you very much. Truth is that there is no media (mainstream or alternative) that is telling the truth 100% of the times - weather is unproven information, deliberate (or not) misinformation... I am never 100% sure in anything, only change is constant (forgot who said that) even with information we get it can always change or improve...I remember old Arthur Clarke's show where he explores different phenomena, collects info from different sources and at the and gives his opinion - % how possible it is. That is exactly what I do with new information, actually first I see how it blends with things I know (or think that I know :)) and collect info from different sources and than decide how much I believe it or not. For example for 911 I am 90% sure that is cover-up if not even more but there are some informations that are probably not true and are either from attention grabbers or deliberateely put out there to 'stir the pot'.
And, for Snowden this is what makes sense to me
Edward Snowden: Controlled Opposition or Double Agent?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DawLf8AEj44
Reason more to believe it is that he was interviewd by Brian Williams...

If you believe that the official 911 narrative was a cover up then you do NOT agree with stu

You agree with me

if you are going to take sides here then take the right one!
 
If you believe that the official 911 narrative was a cover up then you do NOT agree with stu

You agree with me

if you are going to take sides here then take the right one!

I am not taking sides, I just agreed with what Stu wrote there. First step of awakening is to understand how corrupt media is and that you have to do your own research. That is hard part because than you don't know who to trust. There is so much disinformation in both, mainstream and alternative media.
On the other side you are right - I agree with you also but I think that your approach is not the best, by giving to much information you discourage people to search for themselves, which is not your intention. In other words you can't teach someone multiplying if they don't know adding...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Free
I am not taking sides, I just agreed with what Stu wrote there.

Except what stu is doing is rationalising his own unwillingness to listen to any view outside the box created for his mind by the system

First step of awakening is to understand how corrupt media is and that you have to do your own research. That is hard part because than you don't know who to trust. There is so much disinformation in both, mainstream and alternative media.
On the other side you are right - I agree with you also but I think that your approach is not the best, by giving to much information you discourage people to search for themselves, which is not your intention. In other words you can't teach someone multiplying if they don't know adding...

If you make a claim with no supporting evidence then people call you 'crazy'

if you then provide a mountain of evidence their claim of your insanity is then undermined

Also a certain amount of evidence seems to be needed to overturn peoples previously held perceptions
 
I think its a bit like an OCD. The brain cant resolve something so it keeps going back to try and resolve it. Building a story of possibliies is nothing more than the pile up of thoughts that apparently cant be resolved but also cant be flushed. I really believe that psychological help should be sought.
 
The only thing that matters is if what i'm saying is true or not and i keep being right

And who was it on the forum that has been saying this all this time?

Me

The 'conspiracy theorist' is right again

if you are going to take sides here then take the right one!

I sincerely wish that I could hug you. You matter. You don't need to tell us.
 
The only thing that matters is if what i'm saying is true or not and i keep being right

So everything else is just your opinion based on how you wish the world to be

And that is the problem i think with you naysayers is that you see the world how you want to see it rather than how it actually is

All i'm doing is being honest about what is actually going on

Muir you have been wrong by at least one thing that to this day you adamantly defend. Of this, between the two of us, I am absolutely right. Now as I have said before I do not expect you to take my word for it. I expect you to find out for yourself and yet...you still adimatley defend your position that is wrong which means your source is wrong. If you source is wrong about this its likely all your other conclusions are wrong as well.

So at this point in time I know your information is sour and yet you still defend it. This means your brain is malfunctioning on some level. Im not saying this to hurt you. I am giving you correct information that you should consider closely.
 
I sincerely wish that I could hug you. You matter. You don't need to tell us.

No need. He's already hugging himself.

image.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: La Sagna
I sincerely wish that I could hug you. You matter. You don't need to tell us.

Its a credibility issue

Its an argument over whether or not the claims are credible (i don't think it's really a debate...it's not that civil!)

So by me pointing out examples of being right it shows that i do know what i'm talking about and therefore the claims are credible

Do i really need to explain this?

Thanks for the hug, i return it!

The world needs more hugs...perhaps on that we are agreed
 
No need. He's already hugging himself.

attachment.php

lol

oh you have to love that cynical INTJ humour!

Isn't it lovely how they all leave the INTJ forum because it's a quagmire of cynicism and intellectual arrogance only to bring those same poisons over here to our feeler forum!

They clearly don't care that INFJ's are optimists who actually believe that the world can be a better place and that their cynicism is toxic to us...no they don't care do they....cos they only think of themselves (lack of empathy)

Neither do they care that an INFJ forum might be one of the only little corners of the world where INFJ's in their rareness might hope to find kindred spirits who also dream of a better world

No...the INTJ's just want to shit all over everyone
 
Muir you have been wrong by at least one thing that to this day you adamantly defend. Of this, between the two of us, I am absolutely right. Now as I have said before I do not expect you to take my word for it. I expect you to find out for yourself and yet...you still adimatley defend your position that is wrong which means your source is wrong. If you source is wrong about this its likely all your other conclusions are wrong as well.

So at this point in time I know your information is sour and yet you still defend it. This means your brain is malfunctioning on some level. Im not saying this to hurt you. I am giving you correct information that you should consider closely.

What are you talking about?

if you think i'm wrong about something then spit it out...why be so slippery?