• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Dragon Family lawsuit against the United Nations

With powerful technology for example. Such as ground-penetrating radar from orbit. Such technology maybe doesn't exist yet but anyway.

How would that prove the non-existence of something rather than just your inability to detect it?

ETA: And why wouldn't the existence of "powerful technology" simply provide a better and more effective means for someone to hide the thing in question?
 
Last edited:
So you claim. I'm asking you to prove that your entire daily life is not mind-controlled. How would you know it if it were? Would you be mind-controlled to believe that whatever you're doing is what you chose to do?

Because I'm consciously aware! And I'm aware of NOT working for any cabal. The real mind controlled members are not consciously aware when they are in their mind controlled personality. They are then unconscious! Like robots. They then have no self-awareness. Pretty scary stuff.
 
How would that prove the non-existence of something rather than just your inability to detect it?

ETA: And why wouldn't the existence of "powerful technology" simply provide a better and more effective means for someone to hide the thing in question?

It's not possible as a general case to prove the nonexistence of something. In the case of proving the nonexistence of huge amounts of gold claimed to exist, then that may be tricky but maybe not impossible to prove. I don't know.
 
It's not possible as a general case to prove the nonexistence of something.

So if proving a story to be made up requires proving the non-existence of something, and the non-existence of something can't be proven, then it's unreasonable to require proof for the proposition that a story was made up. Follow me?

In the case of proving the nonexistence of huge amounts of gold claimed to exist, then that may be tricky...

Weasel words. The only way you could think of to prove non-existence was by speculating about magical technology. You didn't say how you'd be able to distinguish between the non-existence of something and the inability to detect it.

I don't know.

Clearly. That's why I'm right and you're wrong.
 
That's impressive. What were you doing at 3:27pm on June 12, 1990?

I meant as a general continuous memory of my past. Exact details I don't remember. Hardly anybody does. It's enough to remember a continuous daily life. Some people are mind controlled to be activated only for short periods of time, and then even with false memory implanted. That kind of mind control is probably very difficult to disprove, but I meant the continuous cabal member kind of total mind control. I can guarantee that I don't work for any secret cabal at least in the total sense of being a member of such cabal.
 
Because I'm consciously aware!

Asked and answered. Prove that your mind-controlled mind was not simply programmed to give you that impression.

And I'm aware of NOT working for any cabal.

Asked and answered. A mind-controlled mind would be programmed not to be aware that it was working for whatever controlled it. That's the essence and goal of mind control, otherwise they'd just hire you.

The real mind controlled members are not consciously aware when they are in their mind controlled personality.

Therefore you cannot know yourself whether you've ever been in a mind-controlled state or not. By your own argument here, your previous two arguments are negated.

Pretty scary stuff.

Not half as scary as the notion that you might actually believe some of the nonsense you spew.
 
So if proving a story to be made up requires proving the non-existence of something, and the non-existence of something can't be proven, then it's unreasonable to require proof for the proposition that a story was made up. Follow me?

Still, the claim that the story is made up just because evidence wasn't mentioned, doesn't make the claim true! That's the logic we are discussing.
 
Exact details I don't remember. Hardly anybody does.

Agreed. Therefore I assert that you cannot know whether you have been, or are currently being, mind-controlled.

It's enough to remember a continuous daily life.

Continuous means without gaps. You admit to gaps. Therefore you cannot claim to have a memory of continuous life.

Some people are mind controlled to be activated only for short periods of time, and then even with false memory implanted.

Prove that any memory you may have is not simply an implanted false memory.

...but I meant the continuous cabal member kind of total mind control.

Straw man. I didn't limit my question. Kindly don't limit your answer.

I can guarantee that I don't work for any secret cabal at least in the total sense of being a member of such cabal.

Prove to us that you don't.
 
Not half as scary as the notion that you might actually believe some of the nonsense you spew.

I'm still very doubtful about the lawsuit and the claim of huge amounts of gold and so on, but there could be some truth to it. At least there must be SOME reason for filing such an outrageous lawsuit. Hardly BOTH Keenan and Sale are completely crazy for example.
 
Round and round in circles we go. How would you prove the highlighted claim true?

I don't need to! The logic is already complete in this case: The claim that the story is made up just because evidence wasn't mentioned, doesn't make the claim true.

What Craig4 did was to claim David Sale was making up his story if he didn't supply evidence. That's flawed logic. It's as simple as that (to use a phrase Sale used in the interviews :D).

Maybe we could go around and around, but that too would be illogical so I will drop this topic now (lest we will appear as quibbling little children).
 
I don't need to!

That wasn't the question. The question was how would you?

...that too would be illogical so I will drop this topic now (lest we will appear as quibbling little children).

Oh, how charitable of you! We keep going round and round because your defense is circular and you won't admit it.

Anders resigns, Jay wins.
 
That wasn't the question. The question was how would you?

But that's another question not related to the original issue. Ha! You are trying to divert the topic. Nice try, buddy. Doesn't gonna work on me. I notice that you are not afraid of making a fool of yourself. That's at least a good sign that you are not too worried about your 'status' or whatever.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom