Lucianarchy and remote viewing

[Pyrrho]

Hmm. "Childhood Phases of Maturity" and "Children's Sexual Encounters with Adults" are the only two titles that might fit Steve's allegations. I suppose John Money's books might have something in them that qualifies.

Before you proceed with your allegations of pedophilia, Steve, I suggest you compile some genuine evidence. But, that's your problem, not ours.

 

[SteveGrenard]

I have ordered all of these titles which will be sent to FOX news with background on the company and its relationshoip as known with CSICOP. It will be their call. I know someone who has reviewed them so I trust their review and stand firm in my assertions. You seemed also to neglect the material covered in the autobiography section such as fun with bestiality, etc and so forth. You also neglected to present a case why someone like Prometheus would find it necessary to produce a monumental 7 volume directory of porno flics reviews. I understand. It could take you some time to review the abstracts on everything there and more time to review the material itself if that is something you would even want to bother doing. The descriptive material
is the primary evidence Claus asked for. Sure it has to be backed up with specifics which would require obtaining and reading the material featured.

I understand your desire to defend the goals and actions of Prometheus and CSICOP. Understand my right to question them on this aspect of their publishing program. Claus did not feel these publications tarnished their image while I did. He defends their right to publish them. I defend their right to be published but I question whether Prometheus and CSICOP should do so
as there seems to be widespread acceptance of their programs by skeptics who are not aware of these titles. So long as a CSICOP supporter or member knows about these and continues to support them with this knowledge, that is also their right. Too few people have taken the time or effort to look into this. Even I did not do so until directed about this by someone else.

 

[CFLarsen]

I have ordered all of these titles which will be sent to FOX news with background on the company and its relationshoip as known with CSICOP. It will be their call. I know someone who has reviewed them so I trust their review and stand firm in my assertions.

Let me get this straight, Steve: You complain about the content of books which you haven't bothered to read??

You seemed also to neglect the material covered in the autobiography section such as fun with bestiality, etc and so forth.

Where is that?? I have not been able to locate just one reference to "fun with bestiality".

You also neglected to present a case why someone like Prometheus would find it necessary to produce a monumental 7 volume directory of porno flics reviews. I understand. It could take you some time to review the abstracts on everything there and more time to review the material itself if that is something you would even want to bother doing. The descriptive material is the primary evidence Claus asked for. Sure it has to be backed up with specifics which would require obtaining and reading the material featured.

Ahhh...Steve, you dirty old man! You were just looking for an excuse to order dirty stuff from the Internet!

I understand your desire to defend the goals and actions of Prometheus and CSICOP. Understand my right to question them on this aspect of their publishing program. Claus did not feel these publications tarnished their image while I did. He defends their right to publish them. I defend their right to be published but I question whether Prometheus and CSICOP shoud do so when there seems to be widespread acceptance of their programs by skeptics who are not aware of these titles. So long as a CSICOP supporter or member knows about these and continues to support them with this knowledge, that is also their right. Too few people have taken the time or effort to look into this. Even I did not do so until directed about this by someone else.

Steve, why are you such a busybody? You don't give a hoot about CSICOP, you are not a skeptic, you couldn't care less. The only reason I see you doing this is malicious intent. Just like that anonymous smear campaign against JREF and Randi, you have rallied against Prometheus before. I've digged a little in the TVTalkshows-files, and here are a few of your accusations:

TVTalkshows
Thread: "THE RULES"

(sgrenard) 24.168.117.31 09-22-2002 11:34 AM
Ah Mel, would you like me to tell me why many people really fight these agents of Randi, Shermer, Kurtz, Jaroff, etc?

The trinity here are cry babies because they learn at their masters feet what to say and then when its handed back to them, they are the first to claim ad hominem. There is no double standard. They get what they give.

But the real reason has to do with the above people, the media skeptics and
organized skepticdoms support of sex with young children, kiddie porn, the confusion of free speech with these things and their manicial defense of the false memory syndrome. They are threatened by survival, they are threatened by even the thought that telepathy exists because they know these agents can be used against them and would shut down their worldviews and lifestyles. This country has lost all patience with child kidnapper/abusers as we have witnessed in recent months. I applaud this as long overdue. The trinity here may not be guilty of these things but are instead being manipulated and sent out by the Shermers, Randis and Jaroffs to do their dirty work for them. They are also, without releaizing it, defending the priests who are just people
who have flocked to the priesthood for protection, succor and opportunity to
practice their perversions.

You may sit there and think ah, Grenard has gone off his rocker and doesn't know what he's talking about. But before you do that, do some deep web searches on this. If I am being overly paranoid about this, so are a lot of other people.

(sgrenard) 24.168.117.31 09-22-2002 01:08 PM
The connections between the obvious sexual biases of people like Randi, Shermer, Jaroff et al, their pathological fervor in supporting False Memory Syndrome and the Prometheus Catalogue. In fact their editor for the section that has books on having sex with children is a card carrying member of a
Dutch kiddie porn organization. My lawsuit is no longer my lawsuit, there are so many people involved but this issue will be dealt with in the criminal courts.
....
Take a look at their poublishing arms long list of titles under the prometheus banner? Not only titles on debunking psi but titles that support sex with young children and kiddie porn. Why havent you answered my statement that the editor of the offensive titles at promtheus is a well known figure in the kiddie porn movement? This is what smacks of cultism. You are part and parcel of that and doing their dirty work. I am glad I am getting old and will leave here soon. I truly fear the world that awaits our children if this is allowed to persist. You can call me crazy but that's how I feel after I have looked at all of the above.

Oh, and I am still looking forward to learning the name of that self-admitted pedophile editor/professor, formerly of SUNY Buffalo, now in California, as well as seeing Prometheus' support for pedophilia.

 

[Pyrrho]

I have ordered all of these titles which will be sent to FOX news with background on the company and its relationshoip as known with CSICOP. It will be their call. I know someone who has reviewed them so I trust their review and stand firm in my assertions. You seemed also to neglect the material covered in the autobiography section such as fun with bestiality, etc and so forth. You also neglected to present a case why someone like Prometheus would find it necessary to produce a monumental 7 volume directory of porno flics reviews. I understand. It could take you some time to review the abstracts on everything there and more time to review the material itself if that is something you would even want to bother doing. The descriptive material
is the primary evidence Claus asked for. Sure it has to be backed up with specifics which would require obtaining and reading the material featured.

I understand your desire to defend the goals and actions of Prometheus and CSICOP. Understand my right to question them on this aspect of their publishing program. Claus did not feel these publications tarnished their image while I did. He defends their right to publish them. I defend their right to be published but I question whether Prometheus and CSICOP should do so
as there seems to be widespread acceptance of their programs by skeptics who are not aware of these titles. So long as a CSICOP supporter or member knows about these and continues to support them with this knowledge, that is also their right. Too few people have taken the time or effort to look into this. Even I did not do so until directed about this by someone else.

Whoa, pardner. Don't put words in my mouth. You're the one playing the "pedophilia" card. The burden of evidence is on you, pal.

As for this:

Grenard: You seemed also to neglect the material covered in the autobiography section such as fun with bestiality, etc and so forth. You also neglected to present a case why someone like Prometheus would find it necessary to produce a monumental 7 volume directory of porno flics reviews.

It's a free country, such as it is. Prometheus is free to publish anything that is legal to publish. This is free speech, and I, as a skeptic, willingly defend free speech. I don't have to like what someone publishes, but I don't have to feel ashamed because they're skeptics too. Their titles have valid scholarly uses, regardless of your abhorrence for the subject matter.

Good luck on your quest.

 

[SteveGrenard]

P: Whoa, pardner. Don't put words in my mouth. You're the one playing the "pedophilia" card. The burden of evidence is on you, pal.

Reply: Whoa yourself. Larsen brought up this first. He brought up my earlier debate with him this on the subject, forcing me to ressurect it. Please give credit where credit is due. I am assuring that it was Claus F. Larsen, not I, who brought this up. I want him to have full credit for this. I am merely responding.

It is more than pedophilia. It is bestiality, porn, and some things I read about those Prometheus books I frankly dont even have a clue about so won't comment. Everyone knows now where they can find this. I am not playing the card. Claus ressurected it from his deck and put it into play..................



P: It's a free country, such as it is. Prometheus is free to publish anything that is legal to publish. This is free speech, and I, as a skeptic, willingly defend free speech. I don't have to like what someone publishes, but I don't have to feel ashamed because they're skeptics too. Their titles have valid scholarly uses, regardless of your abhorrence for the subject matter.

Reply: And either do the Bill Reilly's and other commentators of our time have to like it either. It will be their choice. O'Reilly has already gone after the Boy-Man movement and I am sure he will be happy to do so again in the context of these publications from a o/w well respected academic publisher and SUNY Buffalo emeritus prof and CSICOP.


P: Good luck on your quest.

Reply: Not my quest. I really had little interest and forgot all about it until Larsen brought it up again. As above, he deserves full credit for bringing this to the surface once again. This is solely the consequence of his technique of using prior disputes, ad hominems and demands for evidence he cannot define as a means of debate. He did it with the Ed slander and lawsuit and the Corey death threat and now this. He actually believes people will forget what engendered these actions.

 

[CFLarsen]

Reply: Whoa yourself. Larsen brought up this first. He brought up my earlier debate with him this on the subject, forcing me to ressurect it. Please give credit where credit is due. I am assuring that it was Claus F. Larsen, not I, who brought this up. I want him to have full credit for this. I am merely responding.

Liar. You claimed one of the reasons I moved back to Denmark was because of (supposedly) laxer laws on pedophilia. You claimed this connection between Prometheus and pedophilia.

Still, not a shred of evidence.

It is more than pedophilia. It is bestiality, porn, and some things I read about those Prometheus books I frankly dont even have a clue about so won't comment. Everyone knows now where they can find this. I am not playing the card. Claus ressurected it from his deck and put it into play..................

Your deck, Steve.

Reply: And either do the Bill Reilly's and other commentators of our time have to like it either. It will be their choice. O'Reilly has already gone after the Boy-Man movement and I am sure he will be happy to do so again in the context of these publications from a o/w well respected academic publisher and SUNY Buffalo emeritus prof and CSICOP.

His credentials grows, it seems. Who is this person, Steve? Why won't you mention him?

Reply: Not my quest. I really had little interest and forgot all about it until Larsen brought it up again. As above, he deserves full credit for bringing this to the surface once again. This is solely the consequence of his technique of using prior disputes, ad hominems and demands for evidence he cannot define as a means of debate. He did it with the Ed slander and lawsuit and the Corey death threat and now this. He actually believes people will forget what engendered these actions.

"Little interest"?? The quotes from TVTalkshows show otherwise, Steve. I am only doing it so people will not forget "these actions" of yours.

 

[KelvinG]

Heh heh, Steve you are doing a wonderful job of backtracking while still providing no evidence for your claims.
Thanks for coming out.

 

[Ceinwyn]

I'm a little unclear on this whole Prometheus thing. I've read their "about us" page and they say nothing about being affiliated with CSICOP. They do publish a large variety of books in many different categories, some having to do with human sexuality. So ok, there are other publishing companies that do the same thing.

As far as this pedophilia thing goes, I'm rather confused since from what I can gather, neither Randi or Shermer wrote any books to do with that subject. So I guess I fail to see what the problem is here.

 

[kookbreaker]

Every noe and then I get soft and start to think Claus and other are being to harsh on Steve. Then he pulls a scumbag stunt like this and I remember why he is such a scumbag.

Shoot from the hip much, Steve? You tend to hit your own foot when you do that.

 

[kookbreaker]

I'm a little unclear on this whole Prometheus thing. I've read their "about us" page and they say nothing about being affiliated with CSICOP. They do publish a large variety of books in many different categories, some having to do with human sexuality. So ok, there are other publishing companies that do the same thing.

As far as this pedophilia thing goes, I'm rather confused since from what I can gather, neither Randi or Shermer wrote any books to do with that subject. So I guess I fail to see what the problem is here.

Purely an attempt at guilt by association. Scumbaggery at its best.

I would like to take a moment to remind people that those who do a moral crusade against a thing often end up seeking it out. Preachers and Pornography dontcha know.

 

[NoZed Avenger]

The thread has reached page 10.

Does anyone recall the last actual substantive mention of remote viewing?

Congratulations. The discussion is now over an old grudge and the publishing practices of a company that has also puiblished books from CSICOP.

 

[Lucianarchy]

The thread has reached page 10.

Does anyone recall the last actual substantive mention of remote viewing? Out of curiousity, I think I'll look.

Ladybrook.

2nd post in the thread.

Proven within an hour and a half.

 

[Pyrrho]

Ladybrook.

2nd post in the thread.

Proven within an hour and a half.

Ladybrook.

No details given, just a single word.

Post-event, claim is made by Lucianarchy that Lucianarchy experienced precognition or remote viewing.

Nothing proven at all.

 

[CFLarsen]

Ladybrook.

2nd post in the thread.

Proven within an hour and a half.

How can you prove something without a claim??

 

[renata]

The thread has reached page 10.

Does anyone recall the last actual substantive mention of remote viewing?

Congratulations. The discussion is now over an old grudge and the publishing practices of a company that has also puiblished books from CSICOP.

Yup.

 

[Lucianarchy]

Ladybrook.

Nothing proven at all.

On the contrary. It has been proven that the perception of 'ladybrook' was recorded in the 2nd post of this thread, a thread about my rv skills. It was proven that just over an hour and a half later that perception turned into the location for a terrorist attack, the location being a residential area where children were playing in the streets whilst the hijacked bus, packed with explosives, was driven through that neighbourhood and aimed at a police station.

The data speaks for itself.

 

[thaiboxerken]

On the contrary. It has been proven that the perception of 'ladybrook' was recorded in the 2nd post of this thread, a thread about my rv skills. It was proven that just over an hour and a half later that perception turned into the location for a terrorist attack, the location being a residential area where children were playing in the streets whilst the hijacked bus, packed with explosives, was driven through that neighbourhood and aimed at a police station.

The data speaks for itself.

The timing of the post is still very questionable simply because of the nature of the forum clock. However, the word itself is not a prediction or "RV", it's just a word tossed out that is irrelevant to events that happened. You simply wrote down a word, and now want to claim a prediction after something happened. You can't make your words fit into events afterwards and expect people to be impressed.

I wonder, is anyone impressed with Luci's ladybrook prediction besides Luci himself?

Does anyone else see the ladybrook claim as being valid evidence of RV?

I think you are proud of a "fact" that you alone know, Luci. Go find a shrink and tell him about your RV powers and this ladybrook thing.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Congratulations. The discussion is now over an old grudge and the publishing practices of a company that has also puiblished books from CSICOP.

I think SG's censorship motive shine right out, especially with this attempt to get CSICOP and other skeptic groups censored. It's rather pathetic, actually.

 

[Pyrrho]

On the contrary. It has been proven that the perception of 'ladybrook' was recorded in the 2nd post of this thread, a thread about my rv skills. It was proven that just over an hour and a half later that perception turned into the location for a terrorist attack, the location being a residential area where children were playing in the streets whilst the hijacked bus, packed with explosives, was driven through that neighbourhood and aimed at a police station.

The data speaks for itself.

Yes, it does. Nowhere in your post are any details such as you have listed above, except for the single word, "ladybrook".

 

[Jeff Corey]

The data speaks for itself.

And the cheese stands alone.
Wait a sec, what would be correct in English?
I like, "The data speak..."
Because of the plural agreeing rule that Miss O'Brien taught me in grade school. We called it grade school because the information was slanted.