4 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

and he is afforded the same respect as you on many issues.

Thank you.

1 hour ago, gamb00ler said:

Since you share opinions with RFK, perhaps your family is as embarrassed of you as his family is of him.

You can do better than that, come on.

3 hours ago, kwilco said:

nothing I can do about that

Actually, there is, stop posting FB videos because people who don't have an account can't watch them.

4 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

and he is afforded the same respect as you on many issues.

See how far we've come? From the darkest corners of the Internet to the political epicentre of the world. I told you, we're everywhere.

On 1/5/2026 at 12:53 PM, rattlesnake said:

No claim is too ridiculous for those who must have the last word. 😆

I don't think you know even a single scientist. So this opinion like all your others is merely what you prefer to believe.

I can hardly wait to see what your crawling around in the muck of the internet will produce as you 'get in the last word'. LOL

This even includes flat-earthers and other conspiracy theorists – say "cheese"!

https://scontent.flhr10-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/613427502_914272187943063_2529970124386794102_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=833d8c&_nc_ohc=S7UDIhujyk4Q7kNvwG2Pf_T&_nc_oc=AdkTlRvILREg53Q4K2R0fIOEm1umWKtIPlSXp_-UuWC-_tU_hSVfXXipWRMaHiuLTAKMEHMUNtcto-zwJSmGN98F&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent.flhr10-2.fna&_nc_gid=jcY3chDBu5Hg-BBs_MbjCg&oh=00_AfoD_OaqfCpvQy-VcKj9vCUZoHHIEQUew3EUkTtTSUWY8A&oe=6969D881

On 12/31/2025 at 3:09 PM, Red Phoenix said:

@save the frogs Here 4 threads posted 6 to 12 months ago on the Off-the-Beaten-Track sub-forum, which make it clear that the Climate Change narrative is a fraud/hoax/con/lie, which has been rammed through for the profitable agenda behind it.

> https://aseannow.com/topic/1364442-net-zero-for-dummies-the-folly-of-net-zero-explained-in-eight-charts/

> https://aseannow.com/topic/1362844-the-fraud-of-global-warming/

> https://aseannow.com/topic/1362614-mit-emeritus-professor-richard-lindzen-there-will-be-no-climate-catastrophe/

> https://aseannow.com/topic/1346744-the-profitable-global-climate-change-hoaxconlie/

In case you might still have any doubts that Climate Change is a giant fraud/hoax/con/lie...

What do scientists who have left the IPCC (Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change) have to say?

This was posted on former UK Member of Parliament Andrew Bridgen's Telegram channel today < https://t.me/ABridgen >

These are the words of the first 16 scientists of 46 that have left the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) due to the corruption of science within the organisation.

Dr Robert Balling: The IPCC notes that “No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected.” This did not appear in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers.

Dr Lucka Bogataj: “Rising levels of airborne carbon dioxide don’t cause global temperatures to rise…. temperature changed first and some 700 years later a change in aerial content of carbon dioxide followed.”

Dr John Christy: “Little known to the public is the fact that most of the scientists involved with the IPCC do not agree that global warming is occurring. Its findings have been consistently misrepresented and/or politicized with each succeeding report.”

Dr Rosa Compagnucci: “Humans have only contributed a few tenths of a degree to warming on Earth. Solar activity is a key driver of climate.”

Dr Richard Courtney: “The empirical evidence strongly indicates that the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis is wrong.”

Dr Judith Curry: “I’m not going to just spout off and endorse the IPCC because I don’t have confidence in the process.”

Dr Robert Davis: “Global temperatures have not been changing as state of the art climate models predicted they would. Not a single mention of satellite temperature observations appears in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers.”

Dr Willem de Lange: “In 1996 the IPCC listed me as one of approximately 3000 “scientists” who agreed that there was a discernible human influence on climate. I didn’t. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that runaway catastrophic climate change is due to human activities.”

Dr Chris de Freitas: “Government decision-makers should have heard by now that the basis for the long-standing claim that carbon dioxide is a major driver of global climate is being questioned; along with it the hitherto assumed need for costly measures to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. If they have not heard, it is because of the din of global warming hysteria that relies on the logical fallacy of ‘argument from ignorance’ and predictions of computer models.”

Dr Oliver Frauenfeld: “Much more progress is necessary regarding our current understanding of climate and our abilities to model it.”

Dr Peter Dietze: “Using a flawed eddy diffusion model, the IPCC has grossly underestimated the future oceanic carbon dioxide uptake.”

Dr John Everett: “It is time for a reality check. The oceans and coastal zones have been far warmer and colder than is projected in the present scenarios of climate change. I have reviewed the IPCC and more recent scientific literature and believe that there is not a problem with increased acidification, even up to the unlikely levels in the most-used IPCC scenarios.”

Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen: “The IPCC refused to consider the sun’s effect on the Earth’s climate as a topic worthy of investigation. The IPCC conceived its task only as investigating potential human causes of climate change.”

Dr Lee Gerhard: “I never fully accepted or denied the anthropogenic global warming concept until the furore started after NASA’s James Hansen’s wild claims in the late 1980s. I went to the [scientific] literature to study the basis of the claim, starting with first principles. My studies then led me to believe that the claims were false.”

Dr Indur Goklany: “Climate change is unlikely to be the world’s most important environmental problem of the 21st century. There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.”

Dr Vincent Gray: “The [IPCC] climate change statement is an orchestrated litany of lies.”

= = =

2 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

In case you might still have any doubts that Climate Change is a giant fraud/hoax/con/lie...

What do scientists who have left the IPCC (Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change) have to say?

This was posted on former UK Member of Parliament Andrew Bridgen's Telegram channel today < https://t.me/ABridgen >

These are the words of the first 16 scientists of 46 that have left the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) due to the corruption of science within the organisation.

Dr Robert Balling: The IPCC notes that “No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected.” This did not appear in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers.

Dr Lucka Bogataj: “Rising levels of airborne carbon dioxide don’t cause global temperatures to rise…. temperature changed first and some 700 years later a change in aerial content of carbon dioxide followed.”

Dr John Christy: “Little known to the public is the fact that most of the scientists involved with the IPCC do not agree that global warming is occurring. Its findings have been consistently misrepresented and/or politicized with each succeeding report.”

Dr Rosa Compagnucci: “Humans have only contributed a few tenths of a degree to warming on Earth. Solar activity is a key driver of climate.”

Dr Richard Courtney: “The empirical evidence strongly indicates that the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis is wrong.”

Dr Judith Curry: “I’m not going to just spout off and endorse the IPCC because I don’t have confidence in the process.”

Dr Robert Davis: “Global temperatures have not been changing as state of the art climate models predicted they would. Not a single mention of satellite temperature observations appears in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers.”

Dr Willem de Lange: “In 1996 the IPCC listed me as one of approximately 3000 “scientists” who agreed that there was a discernible human influence on climate. I didn’t. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that runaway catastrophic climate change is due to human activities.”

Dr Chris de Freitas: “Government decision-makers should have heard by now that the basis for the long-standing claim that carbon dioxide is a major driver of global climate is being questioned; along with it the hitherto assumed need for costly measures to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. If they have not heard, it is because of the din of global warming hysteria that relies on the logical fallacy of ‘argument from ignorance’ and predictions of computer models.”

Dr Oliver Frauenfeld: “Much more progress is necessary regarding our current understanding of climate and our abilities to model it.”

Dr Peter Dietze: “Using a flawed eddy diffusion model, the IPCC has grossly underestimated the future oceanic carbon dioxide uptake.”

Dr John Everett: “It is time for a reality check. The oceans and coastal zones have been far warmer and colder than is projected in the present scenarios of climate change. I have reviewed the IPCC and more recent scientific literature and believe that there is not a problem with increased acidification, even up to the unlikely levels in the most-used IPCC scenarios.”

Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen: “The IPCC refused to consider the sun’s effect on the Earth’s climate as a topic worthy of investigation. The IPCC conceived its task only as investigating potential human causes of climate change.”

Dr Lee Gerhard: “I never fully accepted or denied the anthropogenic global warming concept until the furore started after NASA’s James Hansen’s wild claims in the late 1980s. I went to the [scientific] literature to study the basis of the claim, starting with first principles. My studies then led me to believe that the claims were false.”

Dr Indur Goklany: “Climate change is unlikely to be the world’s most important environmental problem of the 21st century. There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.”

Dr Vincent Gray: “The [IPCC] climate change statement is an orchestrated litany of lies.”

= = =

Good for these guys to speak up.

Obviously human activity has an effect locally. But add them all together and I doubt if there would be any global changes because of them.

But hang on there. What happened to the Ice Age of 40+ years ago?

They grew grapes in Yorkshire way back. Bloody cold when I was last there.

IMO. it's all part of the banking system's paranoia. Put Climate Change alongside instigated wars, pandemic hoaxes and the need to control the masses. And if it all goes Pete Tong for them, will there then be invasions from aliens? Is this what AI is all about?

You will own nothing and be happy.

Nothing to fear, but fear itself.

In the title to this forum it says "no proof required, just open minds!" - do they realise that is an oxymoron?

15 hours ago, kwilco said:

In the title to this forum it says "no proof required, just open minds!" - do they realise that is an oxymoron?

Invoking the shadowy pronoun "they" to make an argument now, are we? You're starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist…

2 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

Invoking the shadowy pronoun "they" to make an argument now, are we? You're starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist…

referring to those who make the headlines for this forum -

"Off the beaten track

Forum for exploring alternative ideas, theories, and perspectives outside the mainstream. Share, question, and discuss freely—no proof required, just open minds! "

I'm suggesting the Asean Now editorial team – they may be "shadowy"; I haven't tried to find out who they are.

Best to keep this in mind when talking to science deniers....

https://www.facebook.com/reel/864068802932525

if you don't have FB account you can still watch

this guys got it!!

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1430661501753932

“Mum, what is a conspiracy theorist?”

“A mentally challenged person who lacks critical thinking, thrives on paranoia and fearmongering and gets duped very easily into believing anything – such as a pervert called Donald is the new Messiah come to save the working-class people of the USA.”

14 hours ago, kwilco said:

“Mum, what is a conspiracy theorist?”

“A mentally challenged person who lacks critical thinking, thrives on paranoia and fearmongering and gets duped very easily into believing anything – such as a pervert called Donald is the new Messiah come to save the working-class people of the USA.”

You might be interested (or not) in a less black-or-white assessment of conspiracy theories.

The late political scientist Michael Parenti spent decades answering the question what a "conspiracy" actually is.

His conclusion was blunt: “’Conspiracy’ refers to something more than just illegal acts. It serves as a dismissive label applied to any acknowledgment of ruling-class power, both its legal and illegal operations.” The term functions not as a descriptor but as a weapon—a thought-terminating cliché that protects the powerful from scrutiny by pathologising those who scrutinise them.

This quote from the "Conspiracy Denial" article I just posted on this Forum and which can be accessed here: > https://aseannow.com/topic/1385966-conspiracy-denial/

On 1/27/2026 at 12:50 PM, kwilco said:

a pervert called Donald

What's your take on this?

A diary authored by U.S. President Joe Biden's daughter, Ashley Biden, describes showers taken with her father when she was a child as "probably not appropriate." Rating: True.

An often cited page from that "leaked diary," which chronicled its author's addiction recovery in intimate detail, makes reference to sexual trauma and poses questions in search of an explanation for being "hyper-sexualized at a young age." Along with mentions of not liking to visit a certain family's house, "being sexualized" with a female friend, and "having sex with friends at a young age," the author noted taking "showers with my dad (probably not appropriate)."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-posts-claim-contents-181600349.html

Here's something to think about regarding MMCC...

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/19BrfhTu6q/

I notice that conspiracy theorists have gone very quiet on several posts since Trump waged war on Iran

On 3/22/2026 at 8:10 PM, kwilco said:

I notice that conspiracy theorists have gone very quiet on several posts since Trump waged war on Iran

Are you implying that 'conspiracy theorists' are de facto Trump supporters? There is just as much – if not more – Donald derangement and hatred amongst them than in other categories.

Anyway, what do you want to know?

On 1/29/2026 at 6:29 PM, rattlesnake said:

What's your take on this?

A diary authored by U.S. President Joe Biden's daughter, Ashley Biden, describes showers taken with her father when she was a child as "probably not appropriate." Rating: True.

An often cited page from that "leaked diary," which chronicled its author's addiction recovery in intimate detail, makes reference to sexual trauma and poses questions in search of an explanation for being "hyper-sexualized at a young age." Along with mentions of not liking to visit a certain family's house, "being sexualized" with a female friend, and "having sex with friends at a young age," the author noted taking "showers with my dad (probably not appropriate)."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-posts-claim-contents-181600349.html

@kwilco, how about giving your insights on Biden's naked showers with his daughter, instead of a thumbs down (or a 'digital grunt of the illiterati' as you once so eloquently put it to describe what you saw as a propensity to compensate rhetorical mediocrity with an emoji)?

2 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

Are you implying that 'conspiracy theorists' are de facto Trump supporters

Not all conspiracy theorists are Trump supporters but all Trump supporters are conspiracy theorists

2 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

@kwilco, how about giving your insights on Biden's naked showers with his daughter, instead of a thumbs down (or a 'digital grunt of the illiterati' as you once so eloquently put it to describe what you saw as a propensity to compensate rhetorical mediocrity with an emoji)?

Seriously, how does that fit with the topic?

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

Seriously, how does that fit with the topic?

It is called an insurmountable contradiction. It places the interlocutor in a binary position: make an honest concession or ignore/deflect.

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

Not all conspiracy theorists are Trump supporters but all Trump supporters are conspiracy theorists

77 million people in the US alone. You are screwed.

Conspiracy theories themselves aren’t a mental illness — but they’re not exactly a sign of healthy thinking either.

 

Research shows they tend to arise from a mix of anxiety, loss of control, low trust, and a need for simple answers in a complicated world. They offer something emotionally attractive especially to those with mental health problems e.g. - certainty, a sense of being “in the know,” and belonging to a group that thinks it has special insight. A kind of unsupervised therapy group.

 

That’s why people who buy into one conspiracy often buy into many — it’s not about the topic, it’s about the mindset. Traits like paranoia, overconfidence, poor analytical thinking, and “jumping to conclusions” all play a role. In extreme cases, this thinking can overlap with psychological distress or even delusional patterns — but most of the time it’s shared, socially reinforced belief, not clinical illness.

 

The problem is, these beliefs don’t actually solve anything. Studies show they feel empowering but tend to increase anxiety, distrust, and disengagement from reality. In some cases, they lead to harmful decisions — from rejecting medical advice to justifying extreme behaviour.

 

Increasingly it is being shown that people with certain kinds of mental illnesses are drawn towards conspiracy theories and the comfort they seek from them along with others who share similar problems.

 

With these people we’re dealing with a mindset that values certainty over truth.

That’s why logic alone rarely works — but it’s also why it’s still necessary. Maybe some will recognise this in themselves and seek to address the problem?

here's a little image to highlight the problem...

On 3/24/2026 at 10:26 PM, kwilco said:

Conspiracy theories themselves aren’t a mental illness — but they’re not exactly a sign of healthy thinking either.

 

Research shows they tend to arise from a mix of anxiety, loss of control, low trust, and a need for simple answers in a complicated world. They offer something emotionally attractive especially to those with mental health problems e.g. - certainty, a sense of being “in the know,” and belonging to a group that thinks it has special insight. A kind of unsupervised therapy group.

 

That’s why people who buy into one conspiracy often buy into many — it’s not about the topic, it’s about the mindset. Traits like paranoia, overconfidence, poor analytical thinking, and “jumping to conclusions” all play a role. In extreme cases, this thinking can overlap with psychological distress or even delusional patterns — but most of the time it’s shared, socially reinforced belief, not clinical illness.

 

The problem is, these beliefs don’t actually solve anything. Studies show they feel empowering but tend to increase anxiety, distrust, and disengagement from reality. In some cases, they lead to harmful decisions — from rejecting medical advice to justifying extreme behaviour.

 

Increasingly it is being shown that people with certain kinds of mental illnesses are drawn towards conspiracy theories and the comfort they seek from them along with others who share similar problems.

 

With these people we’re dealing with a mindset that values certainty over truth.

That’s why logic alone rarely works — but it’s also why it’s still necessary. Maybe some will recognise this in themselves and seek to address the problem?

Okay, so we are mentally ill. The question is, what to do with us? Especially as we are now the majority (c.f. your own claim that all Trump supporters are conspiracy theorists, that's 77 million people in the US alone).

Being in the minority of sane people, what do you suggest as an actionable remedy?

26 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

Okay, so we are mentally ill. The question is, what to do with us? Especially as we are now the majority (c.f. your own claim that all Trump supporters are conspiracy theorists, that's 77 million people in the US alone).

Being in the minority of sane people, what do you suggest as an actionable remedy?

Critically thinking is healthy, but there is a crossing point where it turns in to unhealthy when all you can focus on is all the craziness and how it links up one way or another. Conspiracy have often some truth connected to it, but also creates unrealistic reaction patterns, where all suddenly lines up as truths without proofs.

1 hour ago, Hummin said:

Critically thinking is healthy, but there is a crossing point where it turns in to unhealthy when all you can focus on is all the craziness and how it links up one way or another. Conspiracy have often some truth connected to it, but also creates unrealistic reaction patterns, where all suddenly lines up as truths without proofs.

I would suggest that most 'conspiracies' of thelast100 years, are true.

The most obvious ones for me are the atom bombs that fell on Japan at the end of WW11; JFK, 9/11; and the London tube bombings. The official stories of these events were blatant fabrications.

Secrecy runs the western world.

1 minute ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I would suggest that most 'conspiracies' of thelast100 years, are true.

The most obvious ones for me are the atom bombs that fell on Japan at the end of WW11; JFK, 9/11; and the London tube bombings. The official stories of these events were blatant fabrications.

Secrecy runs the western world.

The biggest problem is the certainty of people who cannot support their claims, and that weakness makes us easy targets for false facts, myths, pseudo-science, false prophets, and manipulative politicians.

So everything I read from you comes across with the same sureness and certainty, and that makes it hard for me to give you full credibility. Even though I have doubts in some cases and scenarios, I still value facts, solid facts, and science. And while even science can sometimes be biased, it is still what we need to lean toward instead of opinions, myths, assumptions, or confident claims without evidence.

The society we live in is built on trust, and on the hope that people, or at least most people, are moving in the same direction toward a better tomorrow. When that trust breaks down, and we allow ourselves to be divided into smaller and smaller factions, the result is chaos.