• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Recovered Memories

Colin - reading your posts and trying to understand you but there appears to be some form of disconnect - it’s as if there are links in your chain or reasoning missing - perhaps you assume knowledge that most people won’t have?

It makes it seem like you are conflating different things which shouldn’t be conflated.

This is what I’ve got so far:

1) Recovered memories aka false memories

You agree with the current science that these are indeed false?

2) The claim of widespread, co-ordinated “satanic ritual abuse” of children

You believe this happens?
 
Collin237 said:
I'm not the one conflating atheism and Satanism. It's the Satanic Temple that claims they are atheists, which I doubt.
Click to expand...

You really need to do a bit more research into what the Satanic Temple is. You appear to know nothing about them other than the name.
Go back to their website, from which you got those tenets, and read the FAQs. It might help to clear up your obvious misunderstandings here.

Collin237 said:
This was "thoroughly done over" until Katie Heaney brought up, out of the blue, a supposedly newly revealed allegation about the FMSF. I had never before heard of either Katie Heaney or the FMSF, and it appears the allegation, and discreditation of the FMSF, was actually made a long time ago, and duly recorded, by the psychiatric establishment. So why is Katie Heaney suddenly making news of it now? The same Katie Heaney who observed the U.S.'s first-ever coup and wrote an article featuring a photo of the terrorists, on the same day, on the same website thecut.com. The only person I've seen write anything about this is Rebecca Watson. And curiously enough, one of the commenters on her article identifies himself as a leader of the Satanic Temple.
Click to expand...

Like Darat, I confess myself unable to make sense of this.
Some kind of detail, a coherent statement of the points you want to make, and some kind of evidentiary support, would be helpful.
 
1. I believe that recovered memories are false. However, I believe the reports of therapists creating the false memories are probably true. On the gripping hand, I believe the claims made in defense of probable abusers that witnesses are victims of such therapists are probably false.

2. I do not believe that SRA happens. However, I believe there is a widespread, co-ordinated defense of individual, usually religious, child abusers, shielded behind staged debates about the SRA myth.
 
Last edited:
I'm late to the game on this but....

I have a hypothesis about the Satanic Panic and Q anon. So, the satanic panic and claims of ritual satanic abuse were circulating among some extreme christian churches through the 70s but then exploded into the public consciousness in the 80s. Probably related to the movement of women into the work place. I think it then went underground again but never went away and Q Anon's vast pedophile conspiracy seems like it came out of nowhere but it is probably built on something that never went away.

Also, SRA is not an acronym that most folks(normies) are familiar with. I though normies was a term normies were familiar with though. It basically means anyone not in the in what ever subculture is currently being discussed.

I watched Rebecca Watson's video but I have not read the article. I was pretty unimpressed with her take though. The headline is BS, she doesn't actually change her mind about false memories just about the one organization mentioned in the article.
 
Last edited:
Collin237 said:
1. I believe that recovered memories are false. However, I believe the reports of therapists creating the false memories are probably true. On the gripping hand, I believe the claims made in defense of probable abusers that witnesses are victims of such therapists are probably false.

2. I do not believe that SRA happens. However, I believe there is a widespread, co-ordinated defense of individual, usually religious, child abusers, shielded behind staged debates about the SRA myth.
Click to expand...

1: Yes, we know this happened: Loftus' work, for example, is well known. Is this still happening? If so, some evidence please?

2: Can we have some support for that one as well, please? It's not one I've actually come across (my earlier suggestion about the RCC and CoE, for avoidance of doubt, was sarcastic).

Thank you.
 
Collin237 said:
You think the Satanic Temple is so innocuous? Consider this:

"Let us stand now, unbowed and unfettered by arcane doctrines born of fearful minds in darkened times."
A license to terrorize people who live according to their own local traditions?

"Let us embrace the Luciferian impulse to eat of the Tree of Knowledge and dissipate our blissful and comforting delusions of old."
A license to stop fighting for justice because knowledge of past events makes it seem impossible?

"Let us demand that individuals be judged for their concrete actions, not their fealty to arbitrary social norms and illusory categorizations."
A license to allow people to spread hate and incite violence as long as it isn't done concretely?

"Let us reason our solutions with agnosticism in all things, holding fast only to that which is demonstrably true."
A license to ignore dangers that are known with high probability long before they're demonstrable? Like the climate chaos resulting from global warming?

"Let us stand firm against any and all arbitrary authority that threatens the personal sovereignty of One or All."
A license to rebel against your country?

"That which will not bend must break, and that which can be destroyed by truth should never be spared its demise."
A license to ignore social contracts? E.g., This isn't a number of dollars and cents. It's just pieces of paper and metal. Why should I give it to you?

No more of a stretch than the way I've seen Skeptics interpret holy books.
Click to expand...

I think I see where you were going with this.

First I'd argue that your versions are more of a stretch than most widely held criticisms of religion. You'll find individuals making specious arguments in any community.

But more importantly, most critiques around religion are centered around the actions taken in the name of the religion. When that religion's texts are brought up, it's generally as a lens for talking about how those actions are encouraged by the religion.

The interpretations you've made of the text of the TOS don't really correspond to actions taken in the name of the organization.

When your interpretations are a stretch, and they don't line up with any actions we've seen, it would be fairly safe to say you don't have a good reason for holding those interpretations.
 
CFK: I haven't seen anything that I consider evidence of actual events. Just a lot of contradictory suggestions. It was the lack of reasonable information that I was complaining about.

Cavemonster: That's good to know. I hope it stays that way.
 
What's wrong with a license to rebel against your country? As far as I'm concerned, it's a fundamental human right. If the COS or whatever endorsed it openly, they'd get no complaints from me.

That said, your interpretations seem way off. It's like you have a blank space where understanding of parody should be, and you're filling that space with arbitrary woo.
 
While everyone is talking the big concepts, I'd like to discuss to basic issue of repressed memories because they are a real condition. For children they are a survival reflex, or the event(s) they experience are beyond what their young brains can process. They don't know what happened, they just know they didn't like it, or it was frightening/embarrassing/humiliating.

Here's a personal example:

On my 8th birthday I had party where all of my friends came. We were having fun. Then my stepfather, who was drunk, got mad, and beat me in front of everyone. My stepfather had been released from prison a year before after serving three years for child molestation (the great thing about that was he was frequently beaten himself while in Soledad because nobody like pedophiles).

I have no memory of this whatsoever.

The event came up at my 20-year high school reunion where three of my friends recounted that day to me. As I said, I have no memory, but for all of my life I don't like to celebrate my birthday. I never tell people when my birthday is, and one of the few bright sides of my mother having dementia is that I can go the entire day without being reminded. This event explained why I was suddenly unwelcome at most of my friend's homes.

This really happened to me. I suppose if I went to a psychiatrist I could work to unlock this memory, but I don't see the need. I'm grateful that I learned about it at the reunion, and I feel that is more than enough to function. I suspect there are more things from that time that my mind has locked away, or washed from my brain cells.

I am certain none of them have anything to do with Satanic cults, and this is what angers me. There are people who need help, and here is a prime example of how conspiracy theories hurt, and in some cases through suicide - kill people.
 
The Atheist said:
That would be science.

Satanic abuse/recovered memory is more busted than dowsing. If only a small number of people bother trolling the True Believers, it's no surprise. I thought it had all died out, so I'm pleased someone is keeping an eye on the nutters.

As an aside, we have a dead bloke in NZ who died while still convicted under recovered/false memory. Thanks to our peculiar laws, the case for his exoneration is still ongoing.

Those filth destroyed many lives, and put an indelible blight on male teachers of young kids for at least an entire generation. ******* them with Baphomet's horns would be too good for them.
Click to expand...


Some years ago, just about 10 years after the Peter Ellis/Christchurch Civic Creche case of which you speak, my daughter graduated Early Childhood Education at Christchurch College of Education. Along with her at the capping ceremony were about 170 other ECE students graduated... only two of them were male.

This is one of the legacies that the SRA bollocks has left for us.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom