Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Alan Watt.

Options
«13456

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Why?


  • Options
    #3
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    This man is the best on the web. Absolute wealth of knowledge.


  • Options
    #4
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Best what?


  • Options
    #5
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    To help me answer this question, could youu let me know if you have heard any of his work?


  • Options
    #6
    Kernel
    Registered Users Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    Not a bad show at all. He's already linked in the CT resources sticky at the top though lads.

    Is it just me, or is C2C getting more rubbish these days. Seems like Noory keeps concentrating on the spiritual and the esoteric.. gathering more quacks as a result. Art Bell was better imo.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Diogenes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    To help me answer this question, could youu let me know if you have heard any of his work?

    Do people know that "the matrix" were a series of increasingly poorly thought out science fiction films, and not a blueprint for society?

    Right?





    Right?


  • Options
    #8
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Ah jesus I actually listened to some of this crap, rambling rubbish is what I heard. The usual stuff, take some half truths and staple them together into something else.


  • Options
    #9
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    To help me answer this question, could youu let me know if you have heard any of his work?
    I looked at his "chemtrails" page and saw the usual series of photographs of contrails and clouds. On that basis alone, I have no interest in listening to him.


  • Options
    #10
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I looked at his "chemtrails" page and saw the usual series of photographs of contrails and clouds. On that basis alone, I have no interest in listening to him.

    Those must have been similar chemtrails to what I have been seeing in central Dublin all morning from the office window.


  • Options
    #11
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    Diogenes wrote: »
    Do people know that "the matrix" were a series of increasingly poorly thought out science fiction films, and not a blueprint for society?

    Right?

    Never seen the matrix films, dont watch tv.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    meglome wrote: »
    Ah jesus I actually listened to some of this crap, rambling rubbish is what I heard. The usual stuff, take some half truths and staple them together into something else.

    What in particular are you refering to? or this this just another outlandish statement


  • Options
    #13
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    Those must have been similar chemtrails to what I have been seeing in central Dublin all morning from the office window.
    Almost certainly.


  • Options
    #14
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    Never seen the matrix films, dont watch tv.

    Or go to the cinema seemingly. It might help to see/read some fiction that isn't purporting to be truth.


  • Options
    #15
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    What in particular are you refering to? or this this just another outlandish statement

    Outlandish statement... he he he he he and you're choosing to believe what Alan Watt says as fact. :(

    Let's start with this one: http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/CTTM/Alan_Watt_CTTM_LIVEonRBN_65_The_Eco_Plan_of_the_Great_God_Pan_Jan212008.mp3 What the hell is he on about?


  • Options
    #16
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    meglome wrote: »
    Outlandish statement... he he he he he and you're choosing to believe what Alan Watt says as fact. :(

    Let's start with this one: http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/CTTM/Alan_Watt_CTTM_LIVEonRBN_65_The_Eco_Plan_of_the_Great_God_Pan_Jan212008.mp3

    Its a long show, what in particular?


  • Options
    #17
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    Its a long show, what in particular?

    Any of the first 20 minutes, what the hell is he talking about?


  • Options
    #18
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    meglome wrote: »
    Any of the first 20 minutes, what the hell is he talking about?

    Again he covers a lot of stuff in 20 minutes, what in particular?


  • Options
    #19
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    Again he covers a lot of stuff in 20 minutes, what in particular?

    Let's take his statement that in Britain the state owns your body because they want to bring in implied consent on organ donation. He's says it's going to happen/has happened, which it hasn't and probably won't. He's turning the fact that the British state wants to provide organs for all the people in Britain that need them to some sort of state control issue. When you're dead you presumably won't mind that your organs were used to help others. If you were to pick through and correct everything this guys says you'd be there for the next year.

    Is he not also saying that he doesn't believe Global Warming exists?


  • Options
    #20
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    Again he covers a lot of stuff in 20 minutes, what in particular?

    Which specific part of the word 'any' are you having difficulty with?


  • Options
    #21
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    meglome wrote: »
    Let's take his statement that in Britain the state owns your body because they want to bring in implied consent on organ donation. He's says it's going to happen/has happened, which it hasn't and probably won't. He's turning the fact that the British state wants to provide organs for all the people in Britain that need them to some sort of state control issue. When you're dead you presumably won't mind that your organs were used to help others. If you were to pick through and correct everything this guys says you'd be there for the next year.

    If I were to die, I can assure you that I would not want the state to have any say in what happens to my body. He said that this would be introduced, and it probably will. Look at the harvesting of organs in China, a booming trade.

    It does not sound far fetched at all.

    Continue picking, or is this the best "fault" you can find so far.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Diogenes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    If I were to die, I can assure you that I would not want the state to have any say in what happens to my body. He said that this would be introduced, and it probably will. Look at the harvesting of organs in China, a booming trade.
    .

    So you don't feel that you'd want some of your organs to be used to help prolong the life of others?

    Okay fine. The concept which is at an early stage, does have an opt out clause.

    Whats your problem with that?


  • Options
    #23
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    If I were to die, I can assure you that I would not want the state to have any say in what happens to my body. He said that this would be introduced, and it probably will.

    What is being discussing in England is the replacement of the current "opt in" system with a more inclusive "opt out" system....so that people who express no preference are assumed to have nothing against donating their organs.

    I'm going to assume that this is not what was explained on the show, nor was it mentioned that opt-out systems are already in place in some Western nations, to great effect.

    If you are British, and if this change occurs, and if - as you say - you want the state to have no say, then all you have to do is opt out.
    Look at the harvesting of organs in China,
    Why? Its got absolutely nothing to an opt-out system of organ donation. Why not look at those nations who actually have directly comparable systems in place....where typically the concept of a waiting-list for organs doesn't exist. Could it be because you want us to subliminally associate communism and the misrepresentation of the British system (i.e. the state 'owning' your body)? After all, it wouldn't have the same impact if you asked us to look at the non-existent waiting lists for organ-donation in Spain, or Austria, would it.

    Given that you're entirely against the system, I would expect that you would also refuse to accept an organ from such a system, should you ever have the misfortune to need one, or would you chose your life over your principles?
    Continue picking, or is this the best "fault" you can find so far.
    Its a pretty-damn good one, given that you've accurately misrepresented the system, and drawn an inaccurate comparison to a system which isn't what is being proposed.


  • Options
    #24
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    If I were to die, I can assure you that I would not want the state to have any say in what happens to my body. He said that this would be introduced, and it probably will. Look at the harvesting of organs in China, a booming trade.

    It does not sound far fetched at all.

    Continue picking, or is this the best "fault" you can find so far.

    It happens in India too, people sell their organs as they're dirt poor. What has that got to go with state control? Also the British system has an opt out for everyone so how is that state control? Plus it's unlikely to come in. Leaving this specific point aside he just rambles on with stuff in which I personally can't see the connection between. I really don't get what he's going on about.


  • Options
    #25
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    The concept of implied donors is not so that "The Man" can make money of your corpse. There are so many people who are ill and desperately need replacement organs, and few people have donor cards, yet many have no problems with being a donor. Lord knows why you don't want to help save someones life after you're gone, but many people do and just never get around to getting a donor card (even though it's ridiculously easy to get one).

    I honestly can't understand how this can be interpreted as a way of controlling the masses. You can't control the dead.


  • Options
    #26
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    Diogenes wrote: »
    So you don't feel that you'd want some of your organs to be used to help prolong the life of others?

    Okay fine. The concept which is at an early stage, does have an opt out clause.

    Whats your problem with that?

    The problem is when the opt out clause is removed. Everything is introduced step by step, have you not figured that out yet.

    I am not a do gooder.


  • Options
    #27
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    humanji wrote: »
    The concept of implied donors is not so that "The Man" can make money of your corpse. There are so many people who are ill and desperately need replacement organs, and few people have donor cards, yet many have no problems with being a donor. Lord knows why you don't want to help save someones life after you're gone, but many people do and just never get around to getting a donor card (even though it's ridiculously easy to get one).

    I honestly can't understand how this can be interpreted as a way of controlling the masses. You can't control the dead.

    Let the do gooders go for it. Leave the sane alone.


  • Options
    #28
    Dirty Dave
    Closed Accounts Posts: 111 ✭✭Dirty Dave


    Well,


    I listened to the first 20 minutes of that mp3 link that was posted and I read through 2 transcripts of his show and to be honest, I think he is talking complete crap.

    At no point does he provide ANY evidence for his theories, he just states them as fact - why does this make him credible?

    He mentioned in one of his shows, how the book 2001 by Arthur C Clarke alluded to 9/11. I've read that book and all its sequels and to be honest - I just dont see it.


  • Options
    #29
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    The problem is when the opt out clause is removed. Everything is introduced step by step, have you not figured that out yet.

    So you oppose the opt-in system as well? After all, its the step before the opt-out step....so it too must be evil, right?

    Isn't it amazing how you don't hear many people arguing against the evil that is "opt-in"? After all...its the first step on this slippery slope, but they're delighted to take it.

    Incidentally, my previous post contains at least one factual inaccuracy. I put it there deliberately.

    Anyone who spots it will, at the least, be somewhat informed about the facts of the issue at hand, rather than just believing what has been spoon-fed to them by someone with an agenda. Whether you share my position or not is irrelevant....if you can't spot the factual error, then you obviously aren't informed on the subject and should consider the basis on which you are making your judgement.


  • Options
    #30
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Pascal14 wrote: »
    Let the do gooders go for it. Leave the sane alone.

    Not able to make your case without insulting those who don't share your opinion?

    Shame.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Pascal14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Pascal14


    bonkey wrote: »
    What is being discussing in England is the replacement of the current "opt in" system with a more inclusive "opt out" system....so that people who express no preference are assumed to have nothing against donating their organs.

    I'm going to assume that this is not what was explained on the show, nor was it mentioned that opt-out systems are already in place in some Western nations, to great effect.

    If you are British, and if this change occurs, and if - as you say - you want the state to have no say, then all you have to do is opt out.


    Why? Its got absolutely nothing to an opt-out system of organ donation. Why not look at those nations who actually have directly comparable systems in place....where typically the concept of a waiting-list for organs doesn't exist. Could it be because you want us to subliminally associate communism and the misrepresentation of the British system (i.e. the state 'owning' your body)? After all, it wouldn't have the same impact if you asked us to look at the non-existent waiting lists for organ-donation in Spain, or Austria, would it.

    Given that you're entirely against the system, I would expect that you would also refuse to accept an organ from such a system, should you ever have the misfortune to need one, or would you chose your life over your principles?


    Its a pretty-damn good one, given that you've accurately misrepresented the system, and drawn an inaccurate comparison to a system which isn't what is being proposed.

    Cut down your essays, I don't have the time.

    I can tell you people think you live in a democracy. Surely opt out is the opposite of what should be going on in a democratic state.

    It is about free choice, thats all. Don't try to break it down any other way.


Advertisement