Archive

Posts Tagged ‘coast to coast am’

Anti-fundamentalist George Noory Makes A Fool of Himself Again

November 17, 2012 Comments off

A snippet of a conversation from Coast to Coast AM tonight:

Betsey Lewis: I believe the Miracle of Fatima was a UFO mother ship.

George: I do too.

BL: You do?

George: (With the tone of someone clearly caught of guard): Yes, miracle or not if that were the sun coming down, I don’t care what, the sun would have burned everyone alive.

No, George wasn’t joking, he was caught off guard by Betsy (unintentionally) making another one of his careless agreements with guests, and I do mean CARE-less, meaning he didn’t care what was coming out of his mouth except to as he always does, sound friendly, wise and fill in air time till he got to the end of the show. His response was so strange that I’m not sure anymore if George is a conartist, as in makes up arbitrary lies or really believes angels or angelic events are really aliens. The comment besides being silly and childish, was also nonsensical: a miracle is supernatural, so if the sun were really brought down, obviously God could have prevented it from burning anyone, and had it come down the whole world would have known. If he did believe it was a UFO, why did he struggle to respond and make such a foolish response? Was it because she said “mothership” rather than simply a UFO? But if that is why, why didn’t he do the adult thing and say, “Well not a mothership, it might have been, but I have no way, sorry about that”?

George often agrees with guests including callers no matter what absurd thing they say. One example was a show in which a guest was on who claimed to be a former military person who was in contact with the Grays, aliens, and helped one escape. A caller called in with some nonsensical question or claim that Soviets had put secret spywear on American hard drives (which had nothing to do with the topic) and George replied to the caller with a strong emphatic agreement, and obviously hadn’t listen to the bizarre rant, and then asked the x-military guy, “What do you think?” And that x-military guy was making sense during the whole show, even if the story was fake, and wasn’t someone like Noory, sloppily winging it. George is one of the most unprofessional workers I’ve ever known in life, it’s no wonder he gets no prestigious worldly awards of any kind, like the Marconi or a Nobel for peace. The day he does will be a shameful day for the world, and I would bet would provoke God to move swiftly and furiously.

But he was caught off guard by this Betsy “Leaps of Logic New Ager” Lewis. George wasn’t joking either, he was giving a serious reply. This is how UNWISE this man is, that despite having been taught the Bible’s wisdom to be careful when listening and with your speech at a young age, and being surrounded with its wisdom and people everyday, that after decades and decades of being immersed in the world, having chosen to live life as a casual entertainment experience rather than a serious and precious gift given by God, still decides to behave and think like a child. Yes, George has the voice of an adult male, and can pull off some very witty replies, but those are rare moments, the rest of him is stunted and shallow.

Sometimes I wonder if George is a narcissist, as in truly mentally ill. He seems to have a “hankering for questions” as the Bible puts it, yet he’s a pandering liar who in my opinion cares more about money that truly knowing anything, or perhaps neither are mutually exclusive. I remember on the show he once asked someone, “Do you truly want to know (how they built the pyramids)” because he enjoyed the mystery and would no longer care if he found out, I think he was asking the narcissist Richard C. Hoagland.

Update 12-20-2012: A new bizarre phrase for agreement from George: George was doing open lines and a foreigner called in at the end and started talking about how aliens are coming from such and such planet and that it takes them 24 minutes to get to Earth, to which George replied, “That’s not bad at all.”

Signs Noory is a narcissist:

1) Conniving/cruel and immature: his enjoyment of wasting time and enjoying the mockery of fundamentalist Christians via J.C.’s mockery (the guest caller who seems to pretend to be a fundamentalist Christian without ever saying if he’s pretending to be a mentally ill and/or stupid one, or if that is how he thinks they all are, let alone admit to pretending at all,

2) Shallow: for example his repeatedly having on extremely shallow guests like “Glynnis Mccants, the numbers lady”, that stupid sun coming down and burning everyone comment and his fixation with John Titor), talks about his opinions often after having said he never gives his opinions because listeners don’t listen to the show to hear his, but the guests’ (wow, try saying guests’), uses something that is nearly a neologism, “dimensional” by misdefining (by the way he uses it) as apparently (to me at least) “Not regularly seen because they are from an unseeable dimension” (yet George never explains what he means by “dimensional”. He also repeatedly, and I mean repeatedly, says that “people these days are acting weird” and “strange”, but doesn’t say in what way,. or when they never were acting that way? And sometimes also pairs that with “people sense something is coming”, like another earthquake, a tsunami, a mass murder, another war, and that matters because? And who can’t figure out yet another disaster is coming?

3) Arbitrary: agrees that the universe was created, which would require an all powerful all knowing God, doesn’t believe in the Big Bang or evolution, yet readily reads mainstream scientology articles claiming such and such is billions (or millions) of years old, starting out stating it like this at times, “Scientists have discovered the bones of a 30 million year old” or “Scientists have found the oldest galaxy, 12 billion years old” as if it’s a fact that these scientists are right, never giving a disclaimer that what he reads he doesn’t necessarily believes

4) Vain: keeps injecting his worthless opinions, uses the cheap shot of condemning murderers and “pedophiles” in order to make himself look morally superior. When he says “pedophiles” he means “child molesters”, which shows more of his disingenuous concern for people, as that word simply means kid-lover or sexually attracted to kids”, and by condemning that all as being such, risks their lives, because there are many people who are also vain and self-righteous, who are willing to become a murderer (and George even stated his approval of murdering a pedophile) if they believe someone to be a pedophile. He also says he would never forgive someone who murdered someone of his own family, yet never sees it from the other side: would he forgive his own kin if they murdered someone else, who necessarily was the kin of someone else’s family? And such lack of an obvious thought shows again him to be arbitrary (picking his own family as important, but not someone else’s and not considering exceptions at all for forgiving a murderer) and shallow. If that doesn’t do it enough for you (and vanity is the key sign of a narcissist), perhaps you might remember hearing George, at least twice, saying he would not quit hosting Coast to Coast AM and would continue till he was dead. No doubt to me that would not help the national suicide rate in the long run, especially not hearing George shrink dumber over time, think slower, and talking with a raspy phlegmy voice, and seeing his prune face on the Coast homepage for the next (I hope not) 50 years. My guess is America won’t exist anymore by then anyways.

5) Hypocritical: George claims to be a Catholic, which whether he likes it or not is a type of Christian, a false one, but regardless, a Christian is supposed to forgive and love everyone (until perhaps Judgment Day, when all Christians would reach moral perfection and so would no longer be hypocritical in any way).

6) Lying and exaggerating: George repeatedly embellishes the reputation of the liar and narcissist Richard C. Hoagland, and it seems to me that he pretends that John Titor was time traveler, if he’s not pretending then he’s truly gullible and stupid (and being gullible) is another sign of narcissism). There is a clip on YouTube of George lying to a caller about being psychic.

7) Gullible: George, though not falling easily or at all for global warming, vaccines, world government aspirations, the belief that being a police officer or scientist makes you necessarily honest/good, does fall for the claim that Earth is millions and billions of years old without bothering to see if those dating methods are correct, although he did have on a few creationists, and one recently, and supported him a little at first, but when his guest Giorgio Tsoukolous said that it was crazy to believe the universe was 6,000 years old (which is short by about 500 years by the way) he agreed with him (once again his agreeing with whatever and his pandering). See sign 6 too.

8) Rambling ranting/talking over others often: This isn’t necessarily the sign of a narcissist I think, but if it’s there it is an additional piece of evidence. George sometimes talks over guests, but usually doesn’t, and when he does he immediately stops. As for ranting or rambling or both, this is the most difficult to find sign about George, because, though being vain, he does amazing to me, allow guests to go on and on. However he did publish a book, supposedly by himself, something about dead people, which I would bet contains plenty of ranting. This isn’t always a sign of a narcissist.

9) Hatred of criticism against oneself: George actually stated during his show that people shouldn’t criticize him if they dislike what he says.

10) Violent outbursts: I only know of one moment where George, unprofessionally, had not just a violent outburst, but to me, a cranky sounding one, in which he rebuked Richard C. Hoagland for not allowing Zubrin, another guest, to talk. It would have been mature if George had simply and gently said when Richard did it the first or second time, to stop, instead George allowed it to go on for a long while, which made him responsible in way for Richard’s rambling. It may be that George is able to control his anger well because he is wealthy, and is able to satisfy himself mostly from his wealth, and with millions of listeners is able to get the high he wants. The Bible makes it clear that people like George are violent inside however.

11) Hatred of work: George once asked someone how anyone could live on minimum wage and working long hours, the way he stated it he made it sound as if he couldn’t believe people could exist like that without starting a war or killing themselves or just dropping dead after living like that for a while. The appropriate mature response would have been to praise hard working people and condemn the rich who are stingy with their workers, and say that he wishes he could somehow help.

12) Stingy with the poor/detesting the poor: George once said he saw someone who seemed to be grieved over the amount of money they had to spend on gas, implying or describing them as struggling or poor I think, but gave no indication of having helped this person, despite himself being obviously wealthy. I remember this one because someone made this point on the Internet somewhere. It’s not hard to imagine that George hates most of his listeners, being that he pulls off obvious and boring deceptions almost every night with his show and by having put out a needless book about life after death, as if he were a scholar or expert on the subject, he isn’t, or even had good stories to listen to, but he doesn’t.

13) Narcissists often are in high up job positions because they use flattery and pandering to get there (which anyone can see/hear George does often).

14) Immature: There is a clip on YouTube of George lying to a caller about being psychic, his violent outburst, his obsession with John Titor, his having extremely shallow people as regular guests including J.C., his playing the UFO Phil song at the end of his shows, whic is a very horrid and immature-sounding song, not being professional by trying to follow up on guests with interesting and potentially ground-breaking stories let alone simply asking where the event being spoken of took place (which could also count as being arbitrary and lazy/hating work).

I’m not saying that George never tells the truth, is never mature, has never done a little or a lot of hard work, but as Jesus and anyone would say, liberal or conservative, slave or free, black or white, that when a person does these things regularly, they are these things. Not everyone is willing to point them out, for fear or retaliation or being wrong or out of hatred for God, but I have no problem with it, since I fear God more than men.

These are all the basic signs of a narcissist, and George fits them all well enough for me, so after having wondered for a long time, I now safely conclude he is a narcissist, and should be treated as one, meaning, someone to avoid listening to. Listening to narcissists can destroy appropriate pride, a healthy judgment of yourself, self-esteem I suppose you can call that, which leads to depression and violence and can even cause narcissism in youths.

“Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger” – James 1:19

“The tongue of the wise presents knowledge appropriately, but fools belch foolishness.” – Proverbs

Categories: George Noory, narcissistic personality disorder Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ian Punnet Insults Martyred Christians Everywhere

November 12, 2012 Leave a comment

Wow, false Christian and heretic Ian Punnet is a very evil moron: a soldier gave his personal experience and factually stated Muslims murder Christians often in the Middle East/Africa area, which is common knowledge, and the soldier also mentioned the verse that says to kill Christians and Jews where ever you find them and Ian then said that he didn’t know that to be true, said that the Quran calls the Jews and Christians the “people of the book” then kept talking over the soldier in a rambling fashion, and said it was the soldier’s opinion. Why does Ian always do this whenever someone tells him there are evil religions, and Ian then play casual friend to the world by saying there are only lunatic fringes?

Moron Ian, Ian the God-hating idiot: Muslims, ALL MUSLIMS, in general, repeat the line that the Bible has been corrupted, therefore modern Muslims believe that the Jews and Christians today who are “of the book” are of a corrupt version/versions of the Bible. On top of that idiot, the soldier was citing a verse, so of course there will regular be Muslims who practice it, and as any idiot, massive idiot who pays attention to the news, as every idiot liberal knows but you’re narcissist self MUSLIMS ARE KILLING CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS REGULARLY YOU MORON. HOW DO YOU NOT KNOW ABOUT SUDAN YOU IDIOT? How do you not know about the Copts being persecuted by Muslims regular in Egypt? How do you not know about Muslims in Saudi Arabia who will kill a Muslim who turns to Christ, or in Iran or in Pakistan? IF MUSLIMS ARE REGULARLY KILLING THEIR OWN DAUGHTERS, DAUGHTERS YOU MORON, AND THEIR WIVES FOR THE SMALLEST OFFENSES, POURING AND THROWING ACID ON THEIR FACES TO KILL OR HUMILIATE THEM NONSTOP FOREVER, HOW CAN YOU NOT CONSIDER THEY WOULD KILL THOSE WHO OPENLY OPPOSE THEIR ENTIRE RELIGION AND WHOM THEY ASSOCIATE AS PEOPLE TRYING TO DESTROY THEIR COUNTRY ON TOP OF THAT!? WHY ARE YOU SO OBLIVIOUS AND DUMB!? You should be executed you moron, for insulting all the tens of thousands of Christians both true and false who died without denying Christ!

AS YOU SAID IDIOT: YOU DON’T KNOW, WHY THEN MORON DID YOU SAY IT WAS THE SOLDIER’S OPINION, AND ON A VETERAN THEMED SHOW? DUMMY? YOU’RE AN EVIL IDIOT AND SHOULD GET OFF THEIR AIR FOR GOOD AND STOP PRETENDING TO BE A DEACON WHEN YOU’RE AN ARROGANT HERETIC WHO INSULTS CHRISTIANS EVERYWHERE! JUST BECAUSE YOU TALK CALM YO IDIOT DOESN’T MAKE YOU A GOOD PERSON. LIKE CHRIST SAID, OUTWARDLY YOU ARE A SHEEP, BUT INSIDE YOU ARE A WOLF!

Get off the air you fringe heretic! You make liberals look extremely stupid!

11-12-2012, 7:32 PM:

A few minutes ago, I just remembered having a strange dream, about 30 minutes ago I think (yes, I sleep during the middle of the day now as my depression is back from my psoriasis having flared up again). It was a short one, and I forget the first part for now, but after, I think, not sure, getting rejected by some girls, I was in a restaurant sitting down near its open oven, a raised square oven with no enclosure, and there was at least one person next to me. Someone put a small squat woman like a dwarf into the oven. I didn’t know what was going on at first, and didn’t even know I was in a restaurant (if you’d had a lot of dreams you know they seem to have a life of their own and seem to be made up as they progress). She didn’t talk as the heat began to make her hot. Someone then said to pour water on her to keep her from getting hot to keep the pain away she would be in (till she died). I poured a little water on her and blew on her face (to use the air to keep her cool), but she started to show she was uncomfortable, as if burning, so I just lifted her out. She wasn’t some beautiful woman at all. She looked a little Mexican, and a little like a troll, so I didn’t save her because I thought she was beautiful. Then a black woman came from around the cooking area I guess and went in through the entrance and said to me angrily, I guess something like, “Why did you take her out?” and I think she also said, “Now they people will have nothing to eat,” and I replied calmly and without fear, “She’s human.” I think then I yelled things at her, but I don’t know what, it may have been complete nonsense since I don’t remember saying anything specific, just an angry outburst.

Someone sitting next to me then said, quietly, “I learned they were human too.”

The interpretation of the dream:

I think “they” meant “pygmies”, like the ones in Africa, and that my anger at Ian Punnet, that false Christian leader who insulted the Christians in Africa and Mideast who die for their religion were represented in my dream by the oppressed pygmies, and the oven part was a reference to how one boy was set on fire by Muslims when he wouldn’t denounce Jesus as his God. The first and last part of my dream had something to do with women I was interested in, big surprise there. I got no where with them though, as usual. It wasn’t a useless dream to me, it let me know for myself that I wasn’t a fake, as I’d wondered before sleeping if I was angry at Ian merely for being a pathological liar about the Bible and religion in general, or really was concerned for the lives of anyone in general. Now I know.

Wikipedia’s article on the Persecution of Christians
<a href="http://voiceofthemartyrs.com“>News On Martyred Christians

A Letter to Eben Alexander, on his NDE experience

October 31, 2012 5 comments

I am to the point person, one, because I’m in chronic pain, two, I don’t like wasting time, not that I risk rudeness. But this is what I want you to know, I’m a scholar, 20 years long, in theology, that is, the study of morality. That exceeds what you were talking about on Coast, and no doubt your book: feelings. You have given the same kind if description of your NDE, as you yourself acknowledged others have given of theirs (which would include how their philosophy of life was affected, including God).

Things you have apparently not considered, or at least seriously, apparently because you weren’t aware of it, at least not well:

Scripture teaches that Satan can affect memory, by suppressing it, thereby “blinding” a person, and implies he can also affect our emotions, hardening our hearts (making us stubborn), and reincarnation, if the Bible is true, which I and millions of others have studied sincerely, with fervent prayer, to God, to understand clearly and correctly, if that book which claims to be his word is true, than reincarnation is clear evidence that Satan can create false memories so real, that the person thinks they are true. Consider that seriously, not lightly.

Second: you have clearly dismissed in your bias based on your experience, and your way of life, that those who have experienced Hell are people whose testimony are not worth time considering. That is clearly biased. Consider Angie Fenimore’s experience then.

You said that you were told while in your coma and in this paradisaical place you described, that you were there to learn. You didn’t say necessarily to learn everything at once at that place or everything there at all. So now that you’ve “returned” consider that you were meant to learn about your experience from those who are here, including me, including from the Bible, and that your experience was a verification of the Bible. You yourself said that your dad was not there. Then where was he? If he wasn’t in Heaven with you, where was he? Someone might argue, “He was on a special mission” and/or “And it may have been a test to see if Eben would turn against God”. But what kind of test is that? But if on a special mission why didn’t even the lowest of the angels or humans that had passed on say, “You’re dad’s okay,” or “too busy to say ‘hi'”? And as for a test, that would be one weak and odd test, that just because you didn’t see your dad during a Heavenly or Heaven-like visit, to see if you’d hate God over that or not, and while or remembering the feeling of supernatural love and seeing glorious sights. Rather, as Eben sensed, it was like glaring error of some sort. And consider, what being is known for getting love wrong and using shallow attempts to deceive through strong emotions, through passion? The one and only, Satan. Demons are known for not getting human psychology right when it comes to being good, understanding and loving towards them, but rather, being just the opposite, and arbitrary. That would explain why some demon or Satan overlooked something so obvious as to show Eben his dad well and happy, or even tell him, “You’re dad decided to reject God, so he won’t be with you forever, but don’t be angry at God for this, lest the same happen to you, or lest you be punished for a while.” And perhaps Satan or whatever demon was working with him didn’t add that on, because, as is the case for some demons it seems, like when they encountered Jesus, they fear the thought of punishment, or, whoever it was deceiving Eben was afraid that that message would be too close to fundamentalist Christianity, which is the true religion. Perhaps they chose not even to try the “obey God or you will go to Hell” line, either due to being tired of that misleading message (as a message of how to be saved/forgiven it is) or were afraid Eben which his high intelligence, might figure out that that message was misleading and realize the true way with some study of the situation, and instead wanted to lead him down some sort of New Age reincarnation path in the end. It seems more plausible to me however that the demon either forgot about family for the moment, or perhaps was expending so much energy creating the false illusion that it had no mental energy or power left to create anything further at the moment, like a fake image of his dad, and perhaps no other demons were around to help out because angels or God was directly preventing any further deception. Regardless, it was still a test, a test to see if Eben would continue to seek the truth, or make an assumption: that God was the one communicating with him, and not something with potentially evil intent using positive feelings to blind Eben and mask the evil intent. People try and deceive each other like this all the time. Something else to note is New Agers never, in my many years of studying them, ever consider that an “ascended master” type human or some alien being of that type, would even be evil, or turn evil, or like in the Star Wars world, master supernatural powers and use them for evil rather than gaining them through good deeds or at least without any intention of hurting anyone. To me that is just another evidence that there really is a Satan who is supernaturally blinding the world in various ways (though not every single person) so that they don’t think of obvious things like that. There are evil humans, even evil people know that, even a so called nihilist might admit that though denying evil exists, and if spirits can exist, why wouldn’t there be an evil spirit? Why would simply being a spirit automatically make it good? And if humans have a good spirit, wouldn’t they all be good if that were so, or struggling to do so? Yet clearly, far from all humans desire to do good, but are only bent on doing evil.

Perhaps you will know at least where he will go from reading the rest of this letter to you and others who believe the version of God you believe in:

Feelings alone are not any kind of teaching that is specific on what is right or wrong, anymore than nature is, with few exceptions. There is the instinct, and conscience, and minor things that can be learned from observation, common things, like that it is natural for a woman to wear her hair long, to have hair on her head at the very least, which helps make it easy to identify she is a female, and which helps to attract males, in order to procreate. However notice how I had to explain that, it is not self explanatory. The same is true concerning right from wrong, morals, as well as right and wrong methods in order to accomplish goals not directly related to morality, like how to walk through a door. No amount of “amazing love” can teach you how to open, and walk through a door. No amount of anger can either, or curiosity. It can motivate you, and that’s the point in part, but love doesn’t say, “Walk through this door” that is rather a subjective interpretation. Now also I will tell you I am a scholar of philosophy, specifically the most important part: informal logic. Both informal logic and theology, specifically morals and God, are the most important sciences, or systems of knowledge. Without either there can be no understanding of truth, of true from false, determining what love is or hate. You seem to have become puffed up to some degree based on your NDE. It is similar to how the Bible talks about those who have become puffed up because they saw an angel or angels. The same is true for many things, UFOs, bigfoot (there is more than one type, just as with monkeys), seeing a famous singer at a concert, and so on. They are tests from God, to see, as he said in the Old Testament, if you will follow things other than him.

In your talk you gave an illogical description of Hell, calling it an imperfection. However there is no basis for calling it that. You called it that as you yourself said, because you experience great love, that is nonsensical: great love doesn’t define what Hell is or describe it as an imperfection. That is a baseless subjective claim, an opinion. Great love, nor love period, cannot speak words. Some people wrongly take the Bible out of context and say, “God is love” to refute any claim that God would ever harm anyone or get angry. But clearly God is not an emotion, but as you said, has thoughts, and knows everything. It is also illogical to exclude verses which do not elicit the emotion of love in you. Is it wrong for God to be angry at evil? Why, if so? If it isn’t, why then can he not be angry at an evil person, someone who is evil? You made another error concerning that:

You said, “We have free will” but did not explain yourself, so then committed the fallacy called “Begging the Question.” Free will is not a justification for doing evil, nor is learning. God still holds those who do wrong accountable for what they do wrong, morally, regardless of whether or not they were meant to learn a lesson. The same applies for those he forgives. Punishing a person or being angry at them for doing wrong does not negate “learning” anything, whether by those observing that which was wrong, or by those who did wrong, nor does having a free will make everything “not evil, but just learning”. That is clearly not true when abusing a child, murdering, and doing any evil act that is not in retaliation against anyone for a wrong, but for there mere pleasure of it, as psychopaths are known to do.

Furthermore, you, unlike me, clearly don’t know anything about psychology, specifically anti-social personality disorders. You claim that God wouldn’t make imperfect things, and he doesn’t, but how then do you suggest, you an imperfect person who believed what was false about God, even that he didn’t exist, what would you suggest to the all knowing God with unfathomable love do to deal with permanently mentally warped people, warped in an evil way? As Scripture says, “The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers.” Will a being that can be described as love and truth itself, subject itself to the endless evil thoughts of a narcissist or psychopath, or a hateful-filled arrogant person who has grown to be twisted at old age and is set in their ways forever? Remember you said we have a free will, and therefore isn’t God allowed to allow a person to remain permanently evil, or to become as bad as Satan is described, a person who has dedicated himself to doing everything wrong, whenever he feels like it, if he can do so? So then, again: will God be with such people, will he let them stand next to the good forever? Will he reward Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Mohammed, and other mass murderers and anyone who is hateful, with “Paradise”? Will he have a child stand forever next to the one who raped and abused her brutally, repeatedly till she died before becoming twelve? Will God have them be in the same Paradise together, or have that evil one next to anyone who is good? As God said, “Don’t be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, “I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you, and I will be a father to you, and you shall be sons and daughters to me, says the Lord Almighty.”

Now how can an evil person, someone who has lived their life like Satan: doing as the felt rather than searching for the truth and goodness with all their heart, who reject the command of love:

“Do to others as you would have them do to you,” and to Christians, “Love one another as I have loved you.”? I explained it here: https://eternian.wordpress.com/life, the link is also above my journal at all times.

Denise Siegal – Fraud Psychic

September 21, 2012 Leave a comment

I’m listening to Coast to Coast AM right, now, to Denise Siegal, a supposed skeptical psychic and an astrology. She confuses prophecy with being psychic. That says a lot about her level of knowledge, no offense. And afterwards, George Noory, a moron, just caught her on what he thought was her contradicting herself it seemed to me, when she said she thought and felt we’re on the verge of WW3 (that’s not a prediction if you hadn’t noticed), although it wasn’t because you can do both. AND UGH: WHO IN THEE HELL NEEDS TO BE PSYCHIC TO THINK OR FEEL WE ARE?! What a stereotypical fraud psychic. Then George said after some other exchanges: “I don’t care about your opinions,” as if to be funny or rather meaning, “I only want your predictions.” After some other words she said that she FELT again that there’d be another world war sometime in the next THIRTY YEARS. WOW, AGAIN, STEREOTYPICAL VAGUE “PSYCHIC”: GIVE A BROAD AMOUNT OF TIME FOR YOURSELF TO BE RIGHT OR WRONG. What a joke. And incredible that a person like this gets a long line of comments on her about me page while someone like me, who actually teaches logic and truth, and gives evidence for what I say, clear evidence, is ignored. She doesn’t even show a picture of herself on her about me page or homepage (maybe because she knows it would be a bad idea if she wanted to get a real job, if her face became well known for for her scam). It’s shameful that liberals cheer each other on while Christians, the true ones, are usually silent.

A Resonating Insight Into Negative New Age Positivity

March 17, 2012 2 comments

To Tina Fiorda and Tilde Cameron:

Hi, I’m a logician. I don’t like to waste time so I will go right to the point:

You made a false claim that God, because he “is love” wouldn’t punish. God isn’t literally love, if so, he’d not be God, he’d be an emotion, which makes no sense, because emotions aren’t alive, they are are response of living beings. Further, if God could only love, he wouldn’t have a free will, he’d be a slave to love so to speak (supposing there was such thing as living love that could be God at the same time, but he’s not. It’s too convenient and wishful thinking.

So, major error there. Also, it’s common knowledge you punish for two reason: justice and to teach, just as you said, to teach. Is God NOT teaching by causing pain? Or is he not teaching when he exercises justice? Using your logic, no one should punish, people should get away with crimes, no one should be restrained even. Your logic is one sided and biased too, because you’re saying God shouldn’t have the right to exercise his truly free will.

Your second error: You said he gave us free will. Free will doesn’t justify doing wrong, it’s not a free ticket to do wrong or to try and do whatever we want.

Third error: You said, in response to the Christian who corrected you with the Bible, that “we feel” such and such. Feeling is inferior to reasoning. It’s by following your feelings over reasoning that is the main reason for fights (not as others say in a vague way, “religion” as in, “being religious.”) Simple example: children fighting, bad marrying decisions, unprepared pregnancy, leading to endless baby-murders, divorces and wrecked lives.

Fourth error (though is the same as the third one): Does that “resonate” with you? You said that your message “resonates” with you. What does that mean? It’s a vague statement that explains nothing. You also said that spirits can also be positive and not negative, and asked, “Why must they only be negative”? However your question is a rhetoric fallacy: your question doesn’t prove that spirits communicating in a way forbidden by the Bible won’t always be negative.

Fifth error: You’re use of the word “negative” is also vague. It has multiple meanings that don’t match. Negative can mean, “Displeasing”, “not having messages or an attitude conveying happiness” or “being unthankful and/or having a fault-finding attitude out of hatred”. The first two aren’t necessarily bad, the third is, so these definitions are not all compatible. Your question therefore could not be understood, it was meaningless. If you hadn’t used that deliberately deceptive New Age term and instead used the biblical “evil”, you would have been understandable and not teaching and spreading confusion.

The Bible makes it clear that consulting a spirit will have negative consequences because God forbade it, and sin (going against his command/s) leads to punishment, or what you might vaguely call “negative consequences.” That is why you will always. if “a spirit” really is speaking to you, get a deceptive message over all (not that every single thing said is going to be a lie). It’s also not the same as a sin like theft, in which you may have a temporary “positive” as you might call it, result, like getting a bottle of aspirin and getting rid of a headache. A demon doesn’t do anything beneficial, nothing significantly beneficial, not usually at least. It’s intent is always to deceive or facilitate some deception, including just by being silent if that’s all it feels like doing or was told to do by Satan. A demon is not like a genie in a bottle. It’s like an angry tormented snake covered in sharp thorns that wants to relieve its pain and is willing to harm you if it thinks it can ease its pain by doing so.

Sixth error: You’re use of the word “spirit” is also deceptively vague. You’re purposely avoiding specifying angels and demons and attempting to make people think that you can also talk to dead humans. There is no evidence, with the exception of one debatable verse in the Bible, that humans, especially unforgiven ones, will communicate after dying.

Seventh error: You said God unconditionally loves. Who says that, and what is the evidence for that? The Bible certainly doesn’t teach that, and if it did, it would be a major contradiction using your interpretation. You’re picking and choosing which verses you want to believe, and simply going with what is convenient and sounds most pleasing to your ears.

Eighth error: You can’t create a reality and there is no such thing as more than one. That’s an incorrect usage of the word. The way in which you use it goes opposite of one of the only definitions, which is, “The state of the world as it really is rather than as you might want it to be.” So you’re midefining it, completely going against it, by saying there is more than one reality. The word has not been used that way till New Agers started misusing it. It’s a delusional use of the word and sets people up for a fall and can get people killed because you are teaching people that they can literally cause dangerous things to be safe just by wishing or that lies can be true just by wishing, like making child abuse a good thing that directly helps children, or driving on the wrong side of traffic something that will improve safety, or jumping off a cliff something that will be a positive experience that leads to enlightenment and immorality rather. It’s an extremely against common sense delusion. It could even cause children to become mentally ill if they were repeatedly taught to believe in imaginary things and told that they can wish things into reality or wish things away, like the sun, and are later traumatized into a permanent mentally deluded state when someone abuses them, by endlessly responding with delusional defenses like pretending that the abuse is good, and even becoming worse by becoming addicted to abuse. Your reality creating fallacy is actually one of the roots of all logical fallacies: denial of absolute truth or rather, that there are absolute lies. And to deny that leads to endless confusion and mistakes. Your claim that we can create realities therefore refutes your very claim, because I can, according to you, create a reality in which you are completely false (and yet that can’t be true either because you deny that there is anything that can be completely true), hence why I said your reality is unworkable. An analogy of your teaching would be if we lived in a completely red universe, yet you say, “The universe is blue, but not truly, really, it’s red, but not really; because we can see blue if we want too, because we have free will. Just imagine you’re seeing red only?” And of course you ignore the test: just check to see if anyone is able to see red only using something other than your feelings and imagination.

So, you’ve created a life-wrecking, false and contradictory reality if anything, one that isn’t loving as you repeatedly insisted during your interview by Noory. And your using vague words makes it harder for the ignorant, gullible and stupid to realize that.

I hope you appreciate my patience in using my “free will” and valuable time to correct your mistakes for the benefit of all. You can learn how to be saved via the salvation link above.

Categories: George Noory, New Age teachings Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

New Ager Lori Tove and Her ”I Am America Map”

February 23, 2012 1 comment

Lori Tove with her was on Coast to Coast AM yesterday night, promoting her New Age life style and her I Am America Map. She said the ascended masters (demons) that she talks to and consults are always wrong about the dates (prophecies) they give for when disasters will happen, and was emphatic about that. She also claimed to have knowledge of what happened to Atlantis and how the people lived, from the ascended masters.

Why if they are always wrong about their prophecies (and repeatedly lying to her then), and therefore not trustworthy, does she promote her map that she drew up from them and claim to know what happened to Atlantis? This is just more obvious evidence that anti-fundamentalist New Agers are not good, immoral, hypocrites, deceivers and confused.

“Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving” – 1 Timothy 4:1-4

Hypocrite and False Scholar Jan Irvin Blinded By Shrooms

December 29, 2011 5 comments

Post link: http://shrooms.tk

On Coast to Coast Am is an annoyingly nasal and fake historical expert on Christianity named Jan Irvin (pronounced “Yan”). This person claims that behind Judaism and Christianity is nothing more than mushrooms, forget history, forget the accomplishments of Christians and Jews, thousands of years of work, whether or not they accomplished anything of value, forget about anything specific the Bible says, forget about if any of it makes sense or is useful for anything, like telling people not to lie, murder or be angry at each other in hypocrisy or judge one another in hypocrisy, just say, “It was the mushrooms, because it mentions the color red sometimes.” He claims that there’s very little evidence that Jesus was a historical person, as in a real person, and more evidence that he was a myth. Using that logic, his claim that mushrooms are behind Judaism and Christianity is also a myth, a lie, made up, because there is only very little tenuous highly subjective evidence that mushrooms are behind these religions. An example of one of his evidences is that Santa Claus is red, and that red presents are left under a Christmas tree, and no doubt I’d guess that Rudolph’s nose is red. Jan Irvin, you are an idiot. First, since when do Mushrooms grow in the winter!!!!!!? So much your for your expertise on mushrooms! Second, RED?! How about THE BLOOD OF CHRIST?! HELLO: “CHRIST-MAS”!? Or how about HOLLY BERRIES? ROUND HOLLY BERRIES! Guess where Holly berries come from genius? THE HOLLY TREE. I imagine if he saw white spots on a red-wrapped BOX under a Christmas tree he’d think “SHROOMS!”. No: squares aren’t shrooms, and white dots can be explained away as SNOW, and red as HOLLY BERRIES. He is truly stupid and arbitrary. That would mean that he’s also stereotyping and lumping, meaning calling all Catholics Christians and all Christians Catholics, showing that he is ignorant of the distinction between the different types of Christians. It’s a hypocritical oversight too since atheists arbitrarily trump up the differences while at the same time saying that all (fundamentalist) Christians are the same. He also brought up a supposedly hidden ancient comment that Jesus was born on the same day as other deities and therefore Christ was just a myth. Besides that making no more sense then saying, “People ate apples that day therefore apples are mythical,” this Jan obviously is nothing more than a shallow researcher, because if he looked up that argument he would have found this: http://web.archive.org/web/20111104005406/http://kingdavid8.com/Letters/LetterThousand.html

This Jan was also questioned on Coast by a guest caller asking him what he thought about the Shroud of Turin, and he said that the arguments made for it are “arbitrary” and “salacious”. LOL. A guy who argues that the color red, and shapes and a spurious single comment disproves Christianity talks about arbitrary and salacious? He also claimed that many shrouds appeared in Europe and that it’s been well debunked. HUH? Since when? He also claimed with a very annoyed tone that it’s merely “arguing the arbitrary” when people bring up “all these little questions” (DAMN THOSE PESKY LITTLE QUESTION ASKERS!) and that the “onus is on them” to prove these things, and that he can’t prove a negative (wrong) and yet said they need to “study logic”. Wow, what a hypocritical evidence-hater. A caller merely asked his opinion on it and he gets angry a few minutes later. And studying logic? He didn’t even know that it’s a fallacy that you can’t disprove a negative, and yet he himself ARBITRARILY thew up false arguments against the Shroud. What a hypocrite. When another caller brought up Josephus, he claimed that some flow of Josephus’ writing was, uh, unflowed? where Jesus is mentioned, and that if you remove it (oh wouldn’t he love to remove ANCIENT text? just like that supposedly hidden comment about Jesus being born on a day of other deities? Talk about arbitrary and hypocrisy!) that it would flow again. Oh but that’s not all of the arbitrary logic of Jan: During the above statements at some point he also made this nonsensical argument against the Shroud (and it shows how arbitrary he was being), “…unless you want to study the History Channel, and it’s credentials have been damaged by all the questionable stuff they’ve been putting out over the years” OH BUT NOT COAST TO COAST AM THE VERY SHOW YOU ARE SPEAKING ON? JAN: GIORGIO TSOUKALOUS HAS BEEN A REPEAT GUEST ON COAST TO COAST AM AND ENDORSED BY GEORGE NOORY, ART BELL AND GEORGE KNAPP, all of whom are hosts of the show. They’ve also had the other “UFO experts” on Coast BEFORE they were on the History Channel. And how is it a valid argument to merely say, “Oh they had some questionable stuff on there over the years.” BUT YOU’RE SILLY CLAIMS THAT CHRISTIANITY IS BASED ON SHROOMS ISN’T? SO THE HISTORY CHANNEL DOESN’T PUT OUT ANYTHING HISTORICALLY RELIABLE IN COMPARISON TO YOU!? SHUT UP!!!!!! THERE WAS AN GLOBAL WARMING SCAREMONGER ASTROLOGER FALSE PROPHET ON COAST JUST BEFORE YOU GOT ON! Can anyone give me a “WOW”!? Who in the world doesn’t know that Coast to Coast AM is a mouth for New Age babbling idiots and every arbitrary ranting parrot and ignorant out there? The History Channel is miles away from Coast to Coast AM! Though sadly the gap is closed a little by putting on Giorgio Tsoukalos, who claims that UFOs are what is behind the Bible. Now if Jan were more intelligent, he would have said, “Well UFOs look like mushroom because they are round and dome-shaped, so clearly the writers of the Bible were seeing mushrooms while high on mushrooms.” But instead he decided to get angry right away and shoot himself in the foot with an arbitrary argument. And as if YOU were more credible than Tsoukalos? TSOUKALOS IS LIGHT YEARS MORE CREDIBLE THAN YOU! At least he does come up with evidence for some of his theories, but you, asking, “Why are presents put under a Christmas tree,” think you are spurious with a stupid “proof” like that, that you should be taken seriously?! You’re either an arrogant liar or blind.

Oh but that’s not all: after giving a speech about the JFK assassination, he criticizes those who don’t think it’s a conspiracy for “not having critical judgment and not being able to see when someone is trying to deceive them.” Jan, “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.”

I have a question for you Jan: If Christianity was based on Shamanism and mushrooms, why does Christianity, all the way back to when it was supposedly “Judaism” (which is a myth that you perpetuate), why then does it forbid magic? Second: why did you laugh when a moron caller called in saying that he WAS going to make a religion (as if he knew the future) based on shrooms and listening to Jimmy Hendrix, Pink Floyd and the Beatles, and that he wasn’t going to include doctrine because it was creepy. You laughed and said “really” in agreement, but then after the host, Rob Simone mentioned recreational drug use, contradicted your arbitrary hatred by then saying that recreational drug usage, which you implied was bad, was bad because it was devoid of religion which it had been stripped of? As for “the owness” is on us, Jan, another question: the owness is also on you to prove your claim that Christianity is based on the visions of people who hate psychedelic mushrooms, and you haven’t come up with any except for a little of your opinions which you speak of as facts.

A few minutes later, still going on about the JFK assassination still 40 minutes away from the end of the show (wow: nothing more to say about the theory of Christianity and shrooms? Big surprise!” he said concerning someone’s conspiracy theory on JFK’s murder: “I would need more proof before I would settle on anything positive about that.” But with the most subjective evidence and nonsensical evidence you’ve decided that Christianity is just babble from people high on mushrooms, and that the Shroud of Turin is just a cloth that was made by lying it on someone’s body (lol, hence why it’s been controversial and repeatedly attempted to be shown to be not miraculous for decades?! HUH?)

Another question for you Jan: how are you credible when you advise people to have false visions (hallucinations) based on drugs? Can the truth be based on lies and imaginary things? How about using “critical thinking” and “studying logic” which you advise with your mouth but refuse to do yourself when it comes to the Bible and the usefulness of having hallucinations? Write after I asked that question I’ve now heard him say to a caller, “unless you have evidence coming in through your five senses you’re arguing the arbitrary”. And you have evidence coming in through all five of your senses that the Bible is false? You can smell that the Bible is false?! Are you high on shrooms? And no, arguing something without having evidence “coming in” through all five of your senses isn’t defined as “arbitrary”. Wow: as I was typing that previous sentence Jan mentioned “logical fallacies”. What in the world does Jan know about logical fallacies? You can’t make sense when arguing against the greatest most time-tested book in the world yet speak like you have knowledge of logical fallacies? What astounding arrogance. What a blasphemer. … Wow, now he said that if you read the work of some guy, who went line by line over the evidence for the historical Jesus, and, “If we remove the logical fallacies” that we’ll know the truth, which is that Jesus wasn’t real. Wow, stupid. So it’s logical to selective take the work of one obscure man, and say, “Therefore that’s evidence Jesus wasn’t real.” You can’t present any strong evidence of your own? No you can’t, hence why you have to weasel your way out of arguing against Jesus being real. It is you who are being ARBITRARY with your logic and your “proof”.

THE OWNESS IS ON YOU, not the other way around, because hundreds of millions of people who’ve died promoting real evidence for Christ and hundreds of millions more who are living who promote the same and more outnumber your “many” fake scholars. And this man you say who went through the proof for Christ by going through it “line by line” (and Christians don’t go through the Bible line by line, or arbitrary arguments from morons like you – I’ve been through 500 of them Jan, I wrote them down, no matter how stupid and grammatically nonsensical), Jan: the entire Bible is evidence for Christ, he endorsed it all, it’s not just “the gospels” as you seem to believe. You seem to believe it’s just the gospels and a few historical references to him: NO IT’S NOT. And you really think that one many can disprove thousands of years of scholars and the hundred thousand archeologists and theologians living today? The evidence is the entire Bible and all the historical references to him outside the Bible, and the archeological evidence, and the prophecies that have come true, and the experiences of all those who have been saved by him, and the miracles that still occur today. Haven’t you ever heard of “Evidence That Demands a Verdict”? For someone to say that one many going “line by line” through the evidence and having found evidence against it all, is utterly stupid and a plain lie. You have to know you are lying, and if not, you’re extremely ignorant and argue out of ignorance, which is what you say is, “arbitrary arguing.”

And Jan: the prophecies are clear, that the Old Testament spoke of him. Only someone stupid and deluded who after CAREFULLY examining the evidence for these prophecies would deny that they are true. And why wouldn’t you believe being that you believe in magic and religion? And you refer to “many” scholars who side with you: WHO? AND WHAT IS THEIR MAIN AND/OR SECONDARY FIELD OF STUDY? Who Jan? Carl Sagan? Julia Childs? Martha Stewart? Paris Hilton? Ted Turner? Bill Gates? Donald Trump? There are more scholars in opposition to yours, real scholars of Biblical archeology, real scholars of the Shroud of Turin, real theologians, who don’t get high on drugs as a main method of learning the truth, who stay in their right mind and don’t rely on false visions and hallucinations, yet you act like because you merely say “many” that that is proof enough. The Bible says not to be filled with wine, but with the Spirit, not “mushrooms”. The “owness” is on you, you “owe” us the proof that mere mushrooms are at the core of Christianity.

May God unblind him, remove his hypocrisy from him, and save him.

More Information:

The Shroud of Turin (This site is very extensive).
Evidence That Demands a Verdict, Volume 1: Historical Evidences for the Christian Faith