How many times do I get to say “I told you so” in this thread? :rolleyes:
Some day I’m a-gonna buy you a beer. 
Okay; you’ll still need to rent a copy … I want you to consider what “Morrison” says during their mescalie trip. (“It’s a monster devouring consciousness…”)
#2, when Morrison is thrown up against the wall (after performing “The End”), he says something to the owner of the Wisky-a-Go-Go. Listen very carefully to what he says several times, as it’s a little hard to make out. Then tell me what you heard, okay?
#3, when Morrison is being hauled away from the Miami show by cops, outdoors, he says something to them. Again, it’s hard to hear, so listen carefully and tell me what it is. (Okay, because I don’t have my notes right in front of me, because you surprized me with your quick read of MR, and because I’m not 100% sure it’s the MIami scene, I’ll tell you what he says, “It’s happening to you and to me!” There, keep THOSE words in the back of your head …)
#4, at the end of the film,as the credits roll, there’s a mention about a jaw. Please tell me what that is.
Two things: 1) The movie is based on Densmore’s great book “Riders on the Storm.” It was a movie that Densmore and Kieger said was factual, even though the other guy, keyboarder (I forget his name…sleeping pill is getting me!) disputed it. 2) It’s my contention that Morrison was/is apart of the many millions that are involved in the satanic conspiracy, and as we move along you’ll see what I mean.
Please hang onto MR, as we’ll be referring to it often.
Lastly, listen to “The End” in the movie or via CD, keep the song’s message in the back of your mind as we go through this. 'cause it DOES relate.
The sleeping pill is taking over my system. I’ll get back with you tomorrow! Thanks for having the balls to follow me along with all of this; you’re going to go down in history!!!
I still don’t understand, if those lines are so important and convincing, why can’t you just tell us what they are? What exactly is the difference between presenting an argument and “laying it out”? If I and other posters are asking you to present an argument, why continue “laying it out” instead?
Crap. Does anyone own the Doors movie on tape or DVD? I did the legwork on that book but I’m not going to actually spend money for this exercise.
Here’s some quotes. http://imdb.com/title/tt0101761/quotes
I’m hunting for something helpful.
Try finding the book? Riders On The Storm
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments/2181/P60/
The name of the keyboardist for the Doors is Ray Manzarek.
Diogenes, I take back at least two or three of the nasty things I’ve said about you in the past.
Well, D Cynic petered out before we even got started; so now it’s done. I can’t help but wonder if all the whiners and complainers influenced him.
There was a lady I read about in the paper some months back in which it was told that she had for a period of one year tried in desperation to let someone know that she had been kidnapped by a trucker. In her efforts to let someone know, she’d use lipstick to write on restroom mirrors her plight, leaving the truck’s license number and begging for SOMEONE to call the cops.
No one took her seriously, no one wanted the hassle, no one had the time to waste … until someone finally did have the guts and the time to care enough to take a chance. Do you see any parallels here???
You ask why it’simportant to see and hear the references instead of my just writing about them. Well, haven’t you heard that SEEING IS BELIEVING?
It’s too bad that so many people looked at the claims I was making and seeing that I was willing to revamp their understanding of the world in which they live (for the ultmate purpose of making things know too many, as it would have caught fire) and I would have done so without charging a cent. But there’s a lot to be said for laziness and cynical people chiming in to make sure everyone can see how clever they can be with cutting remarks. And so as a result, those people that are in line to be harmed by the satanic woman in question will be harmed. And THAT’S the really sad thing about all of this.
Have a nice day.
I would simply like to point out that there is not a thing about proof that is subjective. A proof by definition provides an objective basis by which to judge whether a particular claim is true or false. GrahamWellington, the very basis of intellectual curiosity and proof is total transparency about your sources, what your sources say, and how they are relevant to your claim. You seem to have a pretty serious misunderstanding about what constitutes evidence and proof. When I see someone asking me to follow their instructions TO THE LETTER and to go read this book and watch that movie and listen to this tape and read this other book and connect all the dots! - then I am less inclined to believe that there is transparently visible evidence for your claims than I am to believe that you are kooky or trying to maliciously lead people on a wild goose chase. I am unconvinced that there is any end point to this connect-the-dots game - tell me, what are all your sources? If you can provide an actual finite list, I can see reason to believe that you have no malicious intent. What possible reason could there be for keeping your sources secret? If we follow your path, you’ll reveal them eventually anyway.
Actually, I had to address this question, too: no. There are no parallels here.
Well, I don’t believe GrahamWellington has malicious intent here. Now, I DO believe that there are serious mental problems involved on his part, which is what leads me to believe that he is sincere and therefore not malicious. He’s WRONG, but he honestly believes otherwise, and that the only way to convince people of “reality” is to lead them on this journey of discovery.
So even if he can’t provide a list, I believe he has no malicious intent. He’s just nutty as a Baby Ruth.
… and this thread is now being tossed off to Great Debates forum, where they’re used to dealing with [del]fruitcakes[/del] um, discussions based on belief rather than fact.
Two questions:
First, folks, we’re not in the Pit yet, are we? Graham may have paranoid delusions, but calling him nutty seems a bit out-of-place.
Second, Graham, I asked you a question earlier, a question that you did not answer. Imagine, for a long moment, that the inferences you’re drawing are incorrect. YOu’re not married to this concept, but please try to imagine it, experience it, roll around in it.
If you’re incorrect, what does that mean you need to do to take care of yourself?
Daniel
LHoD, agreed. I apologize for calling you nutty, Graham. I do believe that his beliefs are sincere, but totally unrelated to reality and therefore delusional.
You’ll pay for this, Dex.
Now that this thread is here, let me point out that I agree (somewhat) with Doc Cathode. I see no purpose in poking sticks through the bars. Personal insults are still not permitted in GD, so if you find that your only appropriate response to a post is one of insult, go open a Pit thread.
(Where I disagree with Doc is that I doubt that there is any appropriate response. We’ve been letting Kat Hak Sung post his diatribe at Fathom (cf.) for a couple of years, now, and neither flaming nor serious attempts at compassionate intervention have had any effect.)
[ /Moderator Mode ]
So I’m clear, Kat Hak Sung is a different guy from this one, right?
A question, Graham: does this woman have any clue that you’re onto her? If so, surely, if you were correct, she would have taken action against you by now. If she’s not taken action against you, doesn’t that suggest that there’s at least a chance that the facts you’ve seen have an alternate and benign explanation?
Let’s say I link to this thread (NOTE TO MODS: I AIN’T GONNA DO THIS, DON’T WORRY) from a Satanism messageboard. How much danger do you believe this would place you in?
If this Satanic conspiracy is truly widespread, isn’t there a decent chance that a member of it has already read this thread?
I’m not trying to freak you out. Rather the opposite: nothing has happened to you, despite your having taken actions that (if the conspiracy were real) would be exceedingly dangerous. This points to a strong likelihood that, while you may be able to construct a consistent theory utilizing the various facts you’ve looked at, it’s not a correct theory: it’s internally consistent, but inconsistent with your present wellbeing.
And this is of a piece with your disinterest in the facts regarding Castaneda. You’ve not insisted on his veracity, that’s true; but nor have you expressed any interest in the question of the ethics of his actions, or any interest in discovering for yourself whether he’s been honest.
One more question. Would it be fair to say that, when you’re evaluating whether you believe in something, you place a high priority on that something’s making for an exciting, interesting world?
Daniel
Yes, Kat is a contributor to a large number of newsgroups and message boards, (from most of which he eventually gets banned or killfiled). (He lasted about three days on the SDMB.) I am not equating Kat and Graham, only discussing the similarities of approach to a type of poster as raised by Doc Carthode.
Hello people.
I read all your comments and there are some very good comments and questions among the other crap. Anyway, I’m very tired and need to get some rest for several hours. When I return I will sort through it all and give you my best responses. And believe me, I’m looking forward to it!
Isn’t that exactly what Jack Chick has done with his obnoxious comic book tracts?