Confessions of a "Paid Shill"

Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by fnpmitchreturns

 

You do realize that it has been found that 88 percent of cancer studies done can NOT be replicated? These are supposedly "peer reviewed" work yet it is found to be bull dung....

That statement makes it obvious that you didn't understand what you were reading.

"88 percent of cancer studies done can NOT be replicated" was determined by PEERS REVIEWING "BASIC STUDIES ON CANCER", not by peers rehashing "peer reviewed work".
You did the same damn thing the scientists in those basic studies did:
You jumped to a conclusion!

I'm not surprised that you did such though. That's quite a common among those that believe extraordinary claims.

Your second link didn't work...

See ya,
Milt

sorry but other scientists tried to replicate the peer reviewed studies and it could not be done....

so when the results of any scientific study can not be repeated by other scientists following the same exact process as published by the first scientists 47 out of 53 times ...

So, my link didn't work and I wasn't exactly clear enough for you..... tough.....

read the article ... sorry but I don't spoon feed.

Originally posted by AlchemicalBinoculars

Originally posted by ajay59
IMO, paid shills are abundant on this site...

On what do you base your opinion? Guts? You're paid? Intuition overtoned with resonance? Unicorn channeling?

What are your statements based on? I do not feel obligated to validate or substantiate my opinion to anyone! You are entitled to your opinion and I am certainly entitled mine as we all are!

Originally posted by ajay59

Originally posted by AlchemicalBinoculars

Originally posted by ajay59
IMO, paid shills are abundant on this site...

On what do you base your opinion? Guts? You're paid? Intuition overtoned with resonance? Unicorn channeling?

What are your statements based on? I do not feel obligated to validate or substantiate my opinion to anyone! You are entitled to your opinion and I am certainly entitled mine as we all are!

You see those ????? they denote questions not statements not anything you have to defend just questions.

Waiting for answers. [Sheesh overly sensitive enough?]

reply to post by fnpmitchreturns

sorry but other scientists tried to replicate the peer reviewed studies and it could not be done

See there? You still don't get it! Your source says absolutely nothing about "peer reviewed studies". It is referring to discoveries made in "basic studies on cancer". Confirming results from "basic studies" IS PART OF THE "PEER REVIEW" PROCESS. I'm sorry that you don't seem to have the capacity to understand that, but that's your problem, not mine.

so when the results of any scientific study can not be repeated by other scientists following the same exact process as published by the first scientists 47 out of 53 times ...

You seem to have gotten lost before you completed that statement, so I'll simplify that for you: 47 out of 53 times, those discoveries made in "basic studies of cancer" DID NOT SURVIVE THE "PEER REVIEW" PROCESS!

You are probably still confused, but that's just "tough"! At least I DID go to the trouble of trying to "spoon feed" you.

That said:
I'm not surprised that you have trouble completing sentences, and posting links.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by AlchemicalBinoculars

You see those ????? they denote questions not statements not anything you have to defend just questions.

Waiting for answers. [Sheesh overly sensitive enough?]

I certainly don't see any evidence that you are qualified to give lessons in grammar and punctuation!

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by Xcalibur254


One should not feel guilty for being themselves.
Especially when they are sharing their thoughts with the world.
These ideals we share together are priceless, and that is what makes them so valuable.
It is this rare simplicity that the future craves and thrives upon.
Hold fast to what is correct.

reply to post by BenReclused


no, I am not confused ... these peer reviewed and published studies did not in fact stand up to real science... I understand quite well...

so, each time someone tries to repiicate a scientific study it is a peer review? In fact if you read the article these scientists were trying to replicate a "peer reviewed and published studies ...

so, who is exactly peer reviewing the studies? certainly not those who publish their studies as fact..... not a theory!

reply to post by fnpmitchreturns

so, each time someone tries to repiicate a scientific study it is a peer review? In fact if you read the article these scientists were trying to replicate a "peer reviewed and published studies ...

You WILL NOT find the term "peer reviewed" anywhere in your source! That is something that YOU ADDED! Perhaps you should try reading the full article, without adding your imagination to it.

I'll bet that you still don't get it!

See ya,
Milt

since day one government has been working hard at discrediting

Soo many words in here. should be fairly easy I'd have thought?

"Hi, I'm Bob. I'm.. I'm - I'm a Paid shill!"

The End.

?

*...creeps back out...*

Well, I know that you and I have not agreed on everything. I don't know whether you are a paid shill or not. But if you're not, then let me tell you the difference between you and me:

When I look at a thread that someone has put together and I disagree with it, usually I don't comment at all. But sometimes I throw in my opinion or try to respectfully correct them if I think they're wrong. Then I leave the thread. I don't come back. I've said my piece and I go somewhere else.

What you do is that you stay with the thread and argue your point for as many pages as it takes until you get in the last word.

Shill? Just a jerk? Whatever. I care not. I just disagree with your method.

Peace

Of course your a paid shill.

But we still love you lol.

Hang in there and ignore it.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


At first I didn't notice the quotes around 'Paid Shill', so I was disappointed. I was expecting an article that would tell us how we could get paid too!

reply to post by Xcalibur254

I don't presume to speak for all the others who regularly get labeled shills and disinfo agents. What I do hope to achieve though is to illustrate why someone might come to this site and not support the alternative explanations on a regular basis.

You speak for me sir, in much better words than I could have attempted to provide. I come here to know, not to believe. For me to know, I need evidence. I can't just take people at their word, people are full of crap. I can't take every video of such and such as evidence when there are other, easier to swallow, explanations.

When it comes to UFOs specifically, I'd rather throw out a questionable, but real, video than promote a hoax. People jumping on every single pixel and artifact as "PROOF" all caps required, just makes all of us look silly. In fact, the influx of that type of attitude has kind of made me ignore the paranormal section here in it's entirety. It's just not worth trying to discuss any of it when all I get is "you're a shill". At this point, I've been called it so many times, I kinda wish I knew where to apply, so at least I could get paid.

It's a shame really, people let their passion get in the way of reason. It's great to be passionate about the subject, without that, we'd never push ourselves outside the current boundaries. But once that passion blinds you, it's a hindrance to us all.

I think it's a fantastic idea to try to bring some type of litmus test to the stuff we'll spend our time on, certain criteria must be met before it's worth MY time, but I'm sure my criteria are much more strict than most. Stuff that could be easily explained, shouldn't be a discussion for very long. Everything should be looked at of course, but when things start to pop out, and the "shills" start pointing out that there was editing done, or the source is unverifiable, or what people perceive to be paranormal, is standard artifacts, those things shouldn't be discounted just because it disagrees with your paranormal theory.

But we can't go overboard. At this point, movie quality cg work is at anyone's fingertips if they are willing to take the time. And you can easily get *free* copies of all of the major 3d software suites, so it's not totally about money. This brings in the argument that any and all videos are questionable. That is a true statement, but doesn't mean we should throw them all out off hand. There are very knowledgeable people here, there are signs to look for in a video to hint at editing or cg work, if a given video presents any of these it should be scrutinized, if it presents more than one, should be dismissed.

This is the type of thread a shill would start...that doesn't prove you are one, but it will make many suspicious

Originally posted by Rubinstein
This is the type of thread a shill would start...that doesn't prove you are one, but it will make many suspicious

edit on 26-4-2012 by Rubinstein because: (no reason given)

It would be impossible for someone who isn't a paid shill to start a thread like this right?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
Let's look at that word, unexplained. It means that there is no adequate explanation for the data. However much of what we discuss on here can be adequately explained away with the mainstream explanation. So what we're discussing isn't unexplained. We simply choose to ignore the explanation because it doesn't fit with our world view. This practice doesn't get us any closer to the truth. It simply makes us look like petulant contrarian children.

all earthly things are knowable and explainable simply because they were created by the hand of man or by the mind of man...

Interesting topic! I don't shoot to maim... how can I hit paydirt for being on ATS?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
I think it's safe to say at this point that I've been around here for a while. Sure I haven't been here since the beginning but I've been consistently contributing for over four years now. During that time I've been called a lot of things but the most common are things along the line of paid shill and disinfo agent. I know that some of you reading this probably still think this is the truth.

I don't think skeptics are paid shills; they generally seem quite happy to work for free. Given the level of dedication that some of you guys have shown with me recently though, I'd say you're getting a raw deal. Uncle Sam should probably slip you at least $15 an hour or so for the work you do.

I'm not really sure how to start this so I guess I'll just start at the beginning. As far back as I can remember I've always had an interest in the paranormal and the unexplained. If were to catalog all the books I own presently I would probably find more books bearing names like Regardie, Keel, and Vallee than books bearing names like Penrose, Gazzaniga, and Dawkins. Excuse me for using a cliched phrase but "I want to believe."

My opinion of you is improving.

That's why I'm here. I legitimately have an interest in the subjects that are discussed here. However, I also understand that nature of the beast. These fringe topics will never gain any kind of legitimacy as long as people will jump on every video of an orb or every rock that looks like Sasquatch as proof of the unexplained.

I'm still waiting for a sasquatch corpse, personally. Lloyd Pye gives a good talk, though. Nothing really iron clad, mind you, but lots of circumstantial evidence.

What I seek to do on here is make the community stronger. We need to stop relying on emotions when it comes to discussing topics on here and instead take a more pragmatic approach. We need to start automatically throwing out any evidence that has a mundane explanation.

I agree.

Let's take the recent MIB video as an example.

Interesting case, that one. Very interesting. I see your point, but personally I wouldn't advocate it being entirely thrown out. I would have truly loved it if those two individuals could have been detained long enough, for someone to have been able to get a good look under their hats, however.

There was something distinctly unusual about them, you must admit; or at least anachronistic. How many people have you seen who in terms of dress, look as though they're headed back to the office after just having had lunch at one of the restaurants owned by Al Capone? Definitely something to file in the WTF folder, if nothing else.

This is another thing we of this site are guilty of. As an example of this let's go with a thread from last month. I'm talking about the thread that claimed we would be invaded by aliens from the Sun this month.

Up in Nimbin, we have a saying, for when we encounter such things.

"It's either a case of too much weed, or not enough."

As I said at the beginning I don't presume to speak for all the others who regularly get labeled shills and disinfo agents.

You seem to be a lot more intelligent and civilised than most of them; but that's just the perspective of one believer in a certain inside job, of course.



Come on, kids! Sing along!

reply to post by Xcalibur254


My gosh man! You sound like you believe that we are proffessional paranormal investigators or something and that it is our duty to be honest and throw out the bullcrap. To what end I ask you? Will taking such a serious approach, lend more credit to these "fringe" topics?

Or better yet? Does the average person who does not have an interest in alternative topics actually come here? Who is it you expect to convince? Everyone here already believes!!! Or atleast has interests that are drawn toward believing there is more to the world than what is in plain sight, or what we are spoonfed.

Bottom line. The posts on this site does nothing more than educate and enlighten individuals who are already convinced....it does nothing to "sheeple". IMO that is a lost cause anyway..... The hard truth is....until the world flips upside down, giant aliens that look like us come down and demand gold and tell us they are our creators, Sasquatch is captured and gets a slot on Leno or the multi-dimensional bionic lizard vampire shapeshifters manifest in mass and attack Washington D.C. we will not be convincing anyone, that any of the content on this site is even remotely credible.

So stop trying to ruin my fun. I enjoy this site way too much to have it turned into some stale mainstream news station.

Good day!

what a shilly thread! joke

ok on topic... this thread throws up so many questions... is it a bluff or even a double bluff... Is this shill getting worried because the ats population is wising up to all the shills and this is his tactic to try and cement his position within the community as a genuine member... where's the best place to hide something? oh yeah, in plain sight!

or is he being genuine and just starting it to explain his position?.. i have no idea but I have wondered why posters such as this chap (and the other one who posts in the 2012 threads constantly, rudely and endlessly until he derails the thread, no name mentioned but you know who I mean) and others like him (of them all he is the nicest!) post in a rather arrogant, rude, condescending way that seems to derail almost every thread...

And here he is starting his own thread, stating he's not a paid shill... all rather odd.

Although I do have to say thanks op, i have often wondered why people like you post and you have answered that question... so thanks

and for the record I don't think your a paid shill and I do appreciate the amount of real info you bring.