> > Feeling big and brave, are we?
> Yes, you are - its called Psychological Projection
> SOP for shills.
Clearly a concept alien to you, if you think it needs capitals—but you are engaged in it, with your fondness for that word:
Many would have you down at this point as some kind of Fundie Christian shill.
> > Funny how you echo the words of another person.
> I was returning the favor - shills like you try to
> discredit people by introducing pseudo science and
> insinuating the target believes it - so I just
> returned the favor.
Now why would I go to the trouble, when you’ve done it for me? (See link above.)
> Yeah - its called sarcasm, genius[.]
Lamest attempt at it I’ve seen recently. Now try spotting mine. Not so very good at this, are you?
> > Social media? Try looking at the “Views”
> > figures.
> Try looking at Reddit - don't worry, some of your
> buddies are already over there trying to muck
> things up by, oh I don't know, getting me to swear
> to get me banned, etc.
Ah, yes, Reddit, whose major achievement to date has been Pizzagate. Why don’t you take this there, if you like it so much?—but I see that even Reddit has standards.
> > And what’s with the faux naïf of “Mr
> > Graham” (as also nellyjesus28)? If you want
> > Graham Hancock’s attention, try (1) getting his
> > name right and (2) addressing him direct.
> Its called a typo and I started the thread first
> to start the ball rolling. And, note on
> vocabulary - I think you meant directly.
A typo? Misspelling it would be a typo.
No, I meant “direct”. This may help:
> > Do you really believe he reads all this stuff?
> Gee, he probably only reads the things that catch
> his eye hence the catchy title to this thread -
> guessing by your attitude you don't get much of
> his attention.
I revise my question. Do you really believe he reads any of this stuff?
> > Futile at
> > this point in any case: your behaviour on this
> > self-started thread has already torpedoed any
> > chance you might have had of being taken
> > seriously.
> Certainly not by you anyways! But, you certainly
> let everyone who reads this know what your goal
> was and that is getting me banned. But its
> already been determined you are a shill so no one
> cares. By the way, how else does one start a
> thread other then by self?
Getting yourself banned or not is in your hands.
Self-started as opposed to started by another.
> > Moon hoax? Conspiracy theory is more your kind of
> > thing:
> The Moon Hoax is a conspiracy theory which then
> begs the question as to why you introduced it - we
> have already determined that.
As an analogy—but perhaps you weren’t alive and watching at the time. Live feed claimed to be fake.
> > http://theoferrum.activeboard.com
> Thanks for the publicity - but you might want to
> check with your supervisor first next time.
> > It seems to be largely (if not entirely) you
> > talking to yourself.
> Yeah - its called censorship which you know all
> about - as do revisionists I might add. It is
> common knowledge to people who agree with Mr.
> Hancock that the Establishment has a tendency to
> sweep anomalous artifacts under the rug which
> brings your opening statement into question.
And I was thinking lack of interest.
> > Doubtless this accounts for
> > your delusion that you own and speak for this
> > board also.
> Oops - there is your Psychological Projection
> again - you really aught to get that checked cause
> you keep blowing your cover.
No, it’s a diagnosis. Phrases such as “check with your supervisor” and “blowing your cover” may have diagnostic implications also.
> Don't bother replying any more since you are
> obviously not interested in this project and
> therefore don't have anything of value to add...
Suggest you don’t give me instructions. That’s for my supervisor to do. Oops, I’ve blown my cover.
Apologies if I’m mocking someone unwell.