What, exactly, is an "idiot" ? The PSF cry out for help! How did alt.fan.art-bell begin?
DanKettler
How, why, and when did alt.fan.art-bell begin?
Who started the newsgroup?
What happened after it was started?
There is documented evidence of the true answers
to those questions linked from...
http://www.psicounsel.com/afabinfo.html
________________________________________________________
>From: "Jason Mathews" <xi...@swbell.net>
>Subject: Dan, idiot? You decide. <was: Re: Bob Officer>
>Date: 1999/11/12
>Message-ID: <HE1X3.1908$B_1....@typhoon01.swbell.net>
>References: <382aebd2...@news.compuserve.com> ><80euja$3dn$1...@nnrp1.deja.com> <80fvoj$sdg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
>X-Complaints-To: ab...@swbell.net
>X-Trace: typhoon01.swbell.net 942450343 216.61.139.27 (Fri, 12 Nov 1999 >15:45:43 PST)
>Organization: SBC Internet Services
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 15:45:43 PST
>Newsgroups: alt.paranormal,alt.astrology
> Dan Kettler <d...@psicounsel.com> wrote in message
> news:80fvoj$sdg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> <massive incoherent spoo of hate snipped>
> Dan, I'm not going to tell you to get a life. I'm
> not going to tell you to stop posting your canned
> screeds. I'm not even going to recommend you lower
> your blood pressure and stop hating those who disagree
> with you. You need do nothing.
> You don't even have to respond. Or read further.
> I'm just going to tell you that you are an idiot. Not
> a slobbering buffoon, not a person without a clue,
> because we all know you have one. Just an idiot.
> Certainly not stupid, or suffering from extended
> newbie syndrome, or brain dead. I don't think you
> are any of these. Idiot covers it all.
So, now we come to the _meaning_ of the word, "idiot."
Merriam Webster:
"a feebleminded
person having a
mental age not
exceeding three
years and requiring
complete custodial
care..."
"a foolish or stupid
person..."
In general, I have found that privacy in USENET newsgroups is of utmost
importance. For that reason, I usually keep my private life away from
that public arena. I can say this much: Nothing I've written on
USENET, and nothing in my private life comes anywhere near the above
descriptions.
From my experience, about 7 years on USENET, most
PSEUDO-SKEPTIC-FANATICS (PSF) are unable to use their native language
with much clarity.
You say I'm "certainly not stupid," but I'm supposedly an "idiot."
The nouns "idiot" and "stupid person" mean the same thing. The meaning
of "idiot" _is_ "stupid person."
> <snip> I cannot think of a single post this year that
> you have written that did not consist of pure idiocy.
I answered the above in another post today. The reader may
look at GOOGLE archives for that. GOOGLE is accessed...
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
However, I did not have the date of your post handy for reference.
Let's look at it: November 12, 1999. Other PSEUDO-SKEPTIC-FANATICS
(PSF), like parrots, have been reposting this nonsense lately. That's
two years after your original posting. I posted many times during 1999,
and you are saying that every one of those posts, for nearly _11 months_
was "pure idiocy." Do you realise that any sane, intelligent, and
unbiased person looking at my posts through GOOGLE, after filtering
through the impersonations, will not find anything nearly like "pure
idiocy" ?
Impersonation info at...
http://www.psicounsel.com/blackmail.html
<snip>
> You cannot format a post...
See my answer in another post from me today.
> <snip> You are an idiot for making pointless acronyms.
See my answer in another post from me today.
> <snip> You are an idiot for using excessive commas.
See my answer in another post from me today.
> <snip> ...You are an idiot for creating web pages...
See my answer in another post from me today.
> <snip> ...You are an idiot for avoiding...
See my answer in another post from me today.
<snip nonsense>
As I wrote in my previous post, if the first six points of a post are,
evidently, nonsense, why answer the remainder? If you entered a
courtroom as an expert witness and you planned to make 100 points, but
the first 6 were shown to be utter nonsense do you think anyone would be
required to waste their time with you to hear the other 94?
If you wrote 100 points in a book, and the potential buyer found the
first 6 nonsense and then put the book down, would you have expected the
person to read the remaining 94 to find out if there was value?
> You are an idiot for thinking the New York Times
> wrote a positive article on your postings.
As I wrote, above, 6 points is all I had to refute. I did
not have to go further, but I think I'll go through a few
more just for fun.
Since I never said the New York Times wrote a positive
article on my postings, your statement, itself, is an
error on two points.
First, it is an error since I never wrote I thought that it was
positive.
Second, it is an error since the article was about my web pages, not
postings.
All information that the reader needs, including a link to
the article, is at or linked from...
http://www.psicounsel.com/nyt.html
<snip -- See GOOGLE, using a keyword search, for my
comments regarding Robert Anton Wilson>
> You are an idiot for attacking...<snip>
I'll not repeat such names here.
> You are an idiot for attacking...<snip>
I'll not repeat such names here.
> You are an idiot for attacking Bob Officer.
Well, let's have a look, shall we?
http://www.psicounsel.com/bobofficer.html
My writing is not mainly attack. It's defense. It's documented.
It consists of real quotes and comments from myself and
others.
Let the _intelligent_ reader decide if it's main intent is
attack, or defense, and if it's "idiot [ic]."
> You are an idiot for attacking Jon Walsh.
Jon Walsh was the _head_ of SKEP-TI-CULT.
He was a _chronic_ liar, and one of the _most_
vicious people posting to USENET.
My posting was, primarily, defense.
What is SKEP-TI-CULT?
See here...
http://www.psicounsel.com/skeporg.html
> You are an idiot for alienating...<snip>
I'll not discuss that. These are people who I'd rather
not allow you to get some headway into "divide and conquer"
strategies.
> You are an idiot for saying "I love Lou Minatti".
I love you too, so how do you like that?
I have deep regard for you, and really wish you a good life.
Perhaps this posting, (especially below***) uncovering your inner
workings, will be of help to you.
I feel that way about all living things, even the most hateful,
sick, deluded, and disgusting humans and other creatures, because
there's a divine reason for all creation, and hope for fulfillment
in all life.
Thinking that's "idiotic" shows, exactly, where you
are in a spiritual frame of reference.
> You are an idiot for attacking any Skep-ti-cult member
> for saying they are a member of the Skep-ti-cult.
You are deluded. Do you really think that if someone posted, "I'm
a member of the skepticult," that would be a reason for me to
write about them?
I don't care who is, or is not, a member of anything and
posts _just_ that fact on USENET. Memberships, in and of
themselves, are meaningless.
I notice, however, there's a pattern of behavior amongst people posting
as members of skepticult, and when that pattern of ugliness shows itself
I point out what SKEP-TI-CULT _is_...
http://www.psicounsel.com/skeporg.html
<snip>
I tire of your nonsense at this point. However, I'm going to write
something
about the idiocy of PSEUDO-SKEPTIC-FANATICS (PSF).
A person who's reasoning ability is below that of a 3 year old, is,
according to
the dictionary, an "idiot."
Let's look at PSF idiocy, shall we?
One can use GOOGLE to look up message ID's like the following:
<3BCBA8A2.31F317B@kettlerenterprises_SEESIG.com>
In that one, I wrote about idiocy, and more importantly I wrote:
_________________________________________________________________
***
Now, I want to address a secret part of
all of you fanatics...
...a secret part hidden even from your
conscious self.
On one level of consciousness, this may
seem like nonsense. But listen, carefully.
Be quiet a moment. I mean quiet your
mind, not just your mouth.
Somewhere, deep inside, you know
about quietness and peace. It's a
consciously forgotten memory, though.
Almost the only thing you people know
is conflict. You fight within yourselves
a constant war and it's hell. You react
by attacking others.
I want to quote, now, from a book I've
read a few times...
" All attack is a call for help. "
It's in my repeat postings. See GOOGLE, and
use keyword searches.
*****************************************
While consciously you people think of
me as being on the "other side" of some
imaginary line built up in your deluded
minds, another part of you, deep down
inside cries to me, for help.
Another part of you knows that we are
all connected, spiritually, in love.
*****************************************
You cried to Wollmann.
You cried to Benneth.
Benneth heard you.
I hear you.
Listen to me. When I write about you
being wretched fools, it's with love.
Real hatred would be if I lied to you,
and said you were just fine.
No-one who thinks like a bigot is healthy.
If you cannot tolerate another's
differences, you are a bigot.
If everyone who is an astrologer or a
paranormalist is supposedly a "kook"
to you, then you are a bigot.
If my exposure of your intolerance and
attempts to censor and terrorize
people is supposed to be "wrong"
then your view is not in focus
with reality.
If you think you have to bring the other
person down to make yourself "right,"
you are just fooling yourselves.
-----------
END QUOTE
___________
Here's another message ID:
<3C31048B.42A16D82@kettlerenterprises_SEESIG.com>
BH: Ben Hogan
NAS: NewAgeSkeptic
DK: Dan Kettler
BH: > > > > Good post. I'm amazed at the lenghts the
BH: > > > > skeptics will go to to try to intimidate
BH: > > > > people into not posting. <snip>
<snip>
NAS: > > > What is presented as 'evidence' of the
NAS: > > > paranormal is no more than belief.
DK: > > There is evidence that you have
DK: > > completely ignored... <snip>
> > These web pages deal with evidence of the paranormal:
> <snipped commercial URL>
> Referring to your own site as authority
> doesn't impress anyone.
NAS, Sandy Sprong, or whatever you want to be
today, I don't refer to my own site as authority.
I will repeat the URLs:
http://www.psicounsel.com/scistudy.html
http://www.psicounsel.com/faqevid.html
Again and again, for years, you comment
on another's URL reference, or another's
statement, with complete error about what
was put forth by the other person.
From that often repeated act, any rational
person can see you are obviously a fool.
See GOOGLE for past posts...
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
So when I write:
DK: > > There is evidence that you have
DK: > > completely ignored... <snip>
...you proved it here, in this post,
again. Had you looked at the pages, you
would know it was not MY evidence,
but that of other people: scientists.
> > BH: > > The best thing that I've found, is
> > BH: > > to simply ignore the debunkers.
> > That, to a great extent, is a good idea. I
> > could go into greater detail about that, but
> > it's a complicated issue and I've commented
> > previously. See GOOGLE archives, and links
> > from...
http://www.psicounsel.com/news/index.html
DK: BTW, see "the truth" reference
DK: from the above for UFO data
NAS: <snip> You can't resist any opportunity
NAS: to spew your screed on netcopping and
NAS: spamming your web shite.
DK: See, there you go again. Do you know
DK: what the intelligence level of a parrot
DK: is? Parrots don't think of what they say.
DK: Parrots just repeat what they hear. That's
DK: what you are doing now, repeating the
DK: idiocy of others you read on USENET.
NAS: > > > Statements such as 'there is in fact
> > > a great likelihood' or 'mounds of evidence'
> > > are sure to draw skepticism.
DK: > > Again, this is not the issue. Comments of a skeptical
> > nature in alt.paranormal and alt.alien.visitors are not
> > the issue. Such comments from real skeptics would
> > probably be ignored. The problem is NCAT.
NAS: This newsgroup is a public forum for
NAS: discussion of the paranormal, both
NAS: pro and con.
DK: I never disagreed that if people want
to discuss both sides, no rule, or law, says
they cannot in alt.paranormal. It's not
recommended, but no-one can stop such
discussion. For further details on this
recommendation, see...
alt.paranormal FAQ - CHARTER
http://www.psicounsel.com/altparfaq.html
NAS: It is not the private domain of proponents
regardless of your and other's effort to
make it so.
DK: I never tried to make it a "private domain."
You are an idiot for saying I did try.
As I've clearly stated, I'd like to stop
NET CENSORSHIP AND TERRORISM (NCAT). That would
serve to encourage participation
from proponents, whereas up until
now, at least, proponents have been
frightened off.
DK: It's OTHER proponents who have failed to
educate themselves as to how they can
make changes, and it's OTHER proponents
who are now reaping the consequences.
DK: If OTHER proponents wish to make
changes, let THEM do so...
It's not up to me.
It's not up to Wollmann, all by himself.
It's not up to Luci, all by herself.
It's up to a multitude getting
together, and communicating with
one another in private.
HOW TO RECLAIM NEWSGROUPS
http://www.psicounsel.com/howtore.html
NAS: <snip> Your continuos effort to discourage
NAS: skepticism...
DK: There is no such effort, so
DK: the remainder of your statement
DK: is irrelevant.
DK: I have clearly stated the marked difference
DK: between skeptics and anti-paranormal,
DK: anti-astrology, and anti-ufo fanatics.
DK: I do want to discourage
DK: fanaticism in alt.paranormal, yes, but
DK: not skepticism.
DK: In nearly any search engine, type...
" skeptics what they do and why " [SWTDAW]
DK: ...and you will see the difference.
DK: Skeptics wish to discuss.
DK: Fanatics wish to censor, intimidate,
DK: and control. This happens both
DK: on, and off, the net. See links
DK: from SWTDAW.
DK: You are obviously not a skeptic.
NAS: > > > We've all seen enough fuzzy photos,
> > > jerky video, third party
> > > hearsay, and allegations of
> > > government conspiracies to
> > > last a lifetime.
DK: > > If you were not a fanatic, you would
> > continue your comments in sci.skeptic,
> > and laugh with those of similar views.
NAS: > Again another attempt to regulate.
DK: It's an observation. It's an opinion.
DK: When you look at how religious fanatics
DK: act in real life, you can see the
DK: similarity with what you do.
DK: A religious person just meets with
DK: those of like mind, in a church, or
DK: home. A religious fanatic goes to
DK: everyone's house they can, to
DK: "save" people.
DK: You are trying to "save" people.
<snip>
> > If not a fanatic, you would not, while
> > not being provoked, personally deride
> > proponents of these subjects.
> Its not derision bDan.
Parroting, again? I see the "bDan"
which someone else thought up. Can
you think, even?
What do you call CONTINUOUS
participation in a thread titled:
"Flagship is an idiot"
That's "derision," fool.
The fact is, you are an idiot. I've
shown evidence for that fact again
and again. For years you have written
like an idiot. See GOOGLE for examples.
The significant difference between
me calling you an idiot, and you and
the other sick folks particpating
in alt.paranormal, is that I show REAL,
logical, and actual evidence that you
are an idiot. All you fools do is call
people names like "idiot," "kook" etc.
I've even quoted the dictionary regarding
that word: idiot.
Do a keyword search in GOOGLE, and find
all my posts where I use the word "idiot."
<snip>
I really don't want to waste any more of
my time reading your garbage, so I snipped
it without reading. The obvious facts I've
cited above are enough to discredit, in
the mind of any rational person, whatever
you wrote that I did not read.
------------------
END QUOTE
__________________
Message ID:
<3B80EC6F.CAC3D396@kettlerenterprises_SEESIG.com>
"Lou Minatti™" wrote:
<snip>
> You are an exceptionally stupid person, Robin.
You, Minatti, are to judge who might be "stupid"?
Really?
What are PSF?
More on this, here...
http://www.psicounsel.com/pseufana.html
PSF, predominantly, are bigots.
LM: > Comparing MDs to new age quackpots is stupid,
LM: > but you're not known for your smarts.
> --
> Fly Houston Intercontinental Airport (IAH):
> http://www.watchingyou.com/houstoninter.html
Hey, "Lou" as you call yourself these days, you are supposed to be
"smart"?
Did you even know that NEW AGE PRACTITIONERS, (holistic" which
equates, in the minds of many, to "new age") in large numbers, ARE MD'S
You didn't know that, or it seemed insignificant to you,
and you call yourself "smart," I guess.
Let's see how smart you are, okay? I have been finding
you, and other PSF, are idiots. I have not been simply
_calling_ you idiots, like you call us "kooks."
No, I have, over the past few months, been
showing _evidence_ for it, from the writing
of you fanatics.
Look to GOOGLE for past posts...
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
Now, let's dissect your "reasoning" here, in _greater_
depth from a post a short time ago. See who's the
idiot, okay? Let's see who the kooks really are.
Subject: PSF -- a psychological profile of them
<was> Re: The more credible UFO reports
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:20:16 GMT
alt.paranormal
alt.alien.visitors
alt.paranet.ufo
alt.psychology
alt.alien.research
"Lou Minatti™" wrote:
> DanKettler wrote:
Look to GOOGLE for past posts...
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
In a recent post, from you, I read one of the most
ridiculous examples of a lack of logical analysis.
Greer, supposedly, is not credible because he was on
a show that was supposedly not credible: The Art Bell
Show.
Jeeeez, how can you wonder why I say so many of
you people cannot think, or read.
Let's look at what was written about Greer, what
we're referencing here:
> > Originally Broadcast Live on Wednesday, May 9, 2001
> > On Wednesday, May 9th, over twenty military, intelligence, government,
> > corporate and scientific witnesses came forward at the National Press
> > Club in Washington, DC to establish the reality of UFOs or extraterrestrial
> > vehicles, extraterrestrial life forms, and resulting advanced energy
> > and propulsion technologies. The weight of this first-hand testimony,
> > along with supporting government documentation and other evidence,
> > will establish without any doubt the reality of these phenomena,
> > according to Dr. Steven M. Greer, director of the Disclosure Project
> > > which hosted the event.
Now, let's examine what the Art Bell show _is_.
It's a media outlet, essentially. It's not the source of this data.
The source isn't even Greer. If you look, carefully, above you will
find
that THE ART BELL SHOW WAS ONLY ONE PART OF THE MEDIA OUTLET FOR THIS.
This is the source, not Art Bell:
" ...over twenty military, intelligence,
government, corporate and scientific
witnesses... "
Yet, no where, do you attempt to discredit the source, just Art Bell.
You write this idiocy:
> Art Bell - isn't he the guy who made a mint by promoting the Y2K hoax?
> The same guy who promoted the Hale-Bopp hoax that drove the Heaven's
> Gate UFOologists off the edge? THAT Art Bell? With Art's record, why
> would you treat anything he says seriously?
Entirely irrelevant -- another "red herring" logical fallacy.
You, and so many of the PSF, truly _are_ idiots!
> --
> Fly Houston Intercontinental Airport (IAH):
> http://www.watchingyou.com/houstoninter.html
_________
END QUOTE
_________
>--
>Desktop Mercenary "Dickhead" isn't a career - it's a calling.
>xi...@swbell.net -Ed Wollmann
>Paranoid Network Intruder Ministries
>Obligatory Website: http://deskmerc.simplenet.com
--
Spàmster
DanKettler wrote:
> How, why, and when did alt.fan.art-bell begin?
>
> Who started the newsgroup?
>
> What happened after it was started?
>
> There is documented evidence of the true answers
> to those questions linked from...
>
>
Wrong. Your pathetic site is not authoritative for anything except incoherent babbling and rube scamming.
Pogue Mahone
>
> What, exactly, is an "idiot" ?
>
Um, just hold up Ray's mirror of TRVTH and take a good long look.
HTH
Pogue Mahone
el...@no.spam
>> What, exactly, is an "idiot" ?
>Um, just hold up Ray's mirror of TRVTH and take a good long look.
Sometimes the BDKook makes it *so* easy!
Edmond Wollmann
...
>
> Listen to me. When I write about you
> being wretched fools, it's with love.
When I say you're an idiot, Dan, it's with love. I love calling you an idiot!
Know why? Because you ARE a fucking IDIOT!
DrPostman
sillyness snipped.
"What, exactly, is an "idiot" ?" you ask?
Why, you are!
Our very own Idiot the Bruce
DrPostman
sig file went with the Hale Bopp Companion