Jump to content

Ergo Storm

Members
  • Posts

    477
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ergo Storm

  1. Are these dinosaur skeleton purely models or do they consist of the actual bones? If models, is the modelling a theoretical projection or based on actual complete finds in situ?
  2. Not so much staged. I think Alex Belfield really is in prison somewhere, serving a real sentence. He did commit offences. It's more a case of manipulation. Staging things does happen, but it's risky and resource-intensive and requires the identification of a specific end, aim or goal that the staging will achieve. Classical methods in human intelligence are more subtle. It's about picking up on exploitable vulnerabilities in an individual. Alex Belfield was just a vulnerable individual whose weaknesses allowed him to be manipulated. They wouldn't have cared what he did. It was more about using him as a lightning rod for all the dim contrarians who now fill up social media and comment spaces repeating and parroting what a podcaster or fake personality has told them - they are a facsimile version of people on fora like this one. When Belfield is revealed for what he is, they do a 180-degree turn and say he was evil, rather like the unfortunate characters in Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four are required to hate the virtual personality they loved just yesterday and love the personality they hated just yesterday. They were taken in by him - many of them freely admit it - and have moved on to the next charlatan. That's the real aim. To foment virtual personality cults in which people congregate around charlatans, accept everything they say, hate who they are told to hate, and waste all their lives and psychic energies on pointless trivia and exaggerated narratives that are, at bottom, more or less nonsense. It doesn't matter who the charlatan is. The downfall of Alex Belfield sows confusion, which is necessary. If people are forever in a state of perplexion, self-righteous rage, anger, and disillusionment, they achieve little of constructive value in their lives. They are manipulable and can be pushed around, while gaining the adrenaline high of viewing themselves as 'rebels' and 'dissidents' against oppression. It doesn't matter who the fallen figure is. It could be Alex Belfield or Jeremy Vine or anybody. Jeremy Vine would actually serve their purposes better: 'By day, he was a mild-mannered BBC radio host, but he hid a darker side as an internet troll and bully who ruined the lives of motorists like Jimmy Petrolhead, who spoke to us on condition of anonymity. "The e-mails from Vine came out of the blue. He was calling me a 'motorist' and accused me of believing in 'motorism'. It ruined my life."
  3. I think you may be misunderstanding the point Jack is making. Nobody here is crowing over somebody going to prison. However, Belfield did go way overboard and harassed people. That raises the question of why. If I am understanding Jack correctly, I think he is suggesting that the whole thing could be manipulation to pave the way for more repressive laws and court decisions. It could be that Belfield himself didn't even realise he was being manipulated towards a larger end. He may just have a vulnerable personality that made him exploitable and manipulable.
  4. But that is literally untrue. This Forum exists, for one thing. Obviously we can't entirely trust the forces behind this Forum, even. It may be that this is just a safety valve and the authorities may also be collecting our IP addresses, for future reference. Nevertheless, a counter-narrative has been strongly espoused throughout all this nonsense and was accessible to all. I must now openly question some of the fundamental tenets of Western Christian society, which inevitably have formed the basis of my own beliefs. I should have questioned them more in the past. I was also wrong about some of what would occur. I did not believe vaccination would be made compulsory in Britain, but this came close to happening and we reached a stage when I assumed it would. It was certainly more or less mandatory for many people, whether they liked or not. There was a measure of coercion. I am still astonished by everything that occurred and by the sheer mind-numbing stupidity of most people, including people I would have credited with more astuteness, and by the impotence and cowardice of most of those who do have a bit more intelligence but went along with it. (I don't blame all of those people though - some people were effectively left with the choice of feeding their families or submitting to it, which is straightforward duress). Out of the crucible of my bemusement, astonishment and anger, I am forming the view that I was behind the curve, not ahead of it, but I'm not yet sure what the next level of understanding is. My initial thoughts are along evolutionary/Darwinian lines. It may be time to separate mere humans (animals) from human beings. An animal reacts by doing what its master on TV tells it to do. "Wear the mask because the Important Person says so". Obviously if I am working in a hazardous environment, I will wear a mask - especially if the Important Person tells me to, and even if he doesn't. But that's a different thing, as that is a situation where the need for precautions and prophylaxes is clear. Tens of millions wore masks over their faces and submitted to medical treatment simply because they were told to, without any benefit to themselves whatsoever. That's not too far removed from what animals do. I'm not suggesting anything alarming, but I see no reason why I should have a higher regard for most of the people around me than I might for other people-animals, such as chimpanzees. Chimpanzees are people, after all, it's just that they are instinctually driven, grunt instead of speaking, and are evolved to attend to their base drives within an ecological niche rather than transcend their environment and pursue civilisation.
  5. There is no tribe. None of this would be happening if it didn't work on most people. Some people argue that the willingness of the average Joe and Mary Bloggs to wear a mask and submit to an unnecessary vaccination bodes well for tribalism, or whatever communal/collectivist philosophy is being espoused, and they just need the right influences. But people who do such stupid things are not 'tribal', they are just vacant-headed animals. What has happened over the last 29 months has changed me: for the first time, I would question whether most people are actually human beings in any serious sense. Regarding the bearded Norwegian YouTuber you link to here, I wonder why he is allowed to continue posting on YouTube? How come he hasn't been banned? Does he have naked pictures from Creepy Island? Or is he one of them? Is the woodland setting just a staged set-up and he is an actor? Sounds crazy at first, but thinking about it, this is quite feasible. Or is he genuine and they have just not clocked him? Seems unlikely to me. Or is it that he's genuine but they've decided his message accidentally helps rather than hinders them? I suspect the latter. Consider: his videos are overwhelmingly doom and gloom and seem intended to put you on a downer. The man would be sponsored by Dignitas, if only they knew about him. His understanding of politics seems (broadly-speaking) in tune with what dissidents of today think, especially on the Right, including those who are here, but at the same time he has that triteness to him, as if he's just doing his best to say what he thinks a certain viewership want to hear. Like he's an entrepreneur tapping a market niche. It seems to me that the Debbie Downer approach serves the interests of the various elites well. They want you to be on a downer and negative. It induces helplessness, but the key thing is that they want you addicted to negative commentary like this and to sit there watching it instead of doing something constructive. Apart from that, to be honest after a few weeks watching him he started to get on my nerves: the voice, the exaggerated negativity, the 'staged' feel to his presentations, it just insults my intelligence and it's annoying. It doesn't really set out a practical programme for individuals and groups, which again I think plays to the elites' interests. It serves them well for you to think that the answer is to go and live in the woods. That way, you won't actually do anything at all. It's like saying to an ugly, lonely, depressed man that all his problems will be solved by living alone on an island. In a sense, this would solve his problems, but in another sense, it's not a practical solution. How realistic are his recommendations? Lots of these 'live in the woods' and 'get back to Nature' types have popped up over the last two or three years, but as I have pointed out to you all before, when you sit down and think about it coldly in practical terms, it's not a straight-forward business to give up everything and live amongst the rabbits and squirrels, or give up living in Britain and live in a foreign country, or whatever it is they recommend from time-to-time. Perhaps better to pursue a more gradual approach, changing your life little-by-little? Wouldn't a wise and genuine person be advising this and explaining practical steps you can take, eschewing all this esoteric stuff and telling you to keep your chin up and giving you a positive message (albeit while acknowledging realities)? Ironically, I was the one who brought him to the attention of this Forum as I move in that milieu. I don't regret it but critical thinking is in order when evaluating all of these talking heads. I am suspicious of all of them, but then, I am suspicious of everybody!
  6. The fear porn machine is human nature. If it didn't work, they wouldn't do it.
  7. July 2022: The wankers are trying to start it all over again.
  8. I've been away a long time, having blocked everything out and focused on work. Could somebody entertain me with a brief update on the current situation, particularly here in Britain?
  9. https://gameruprising.to/index.php?threads/ladies-and-gentlemen-david-icke.34166/
  10. This is interesting, and deserves its own thread really, but just one point: Isn't it the case that AIDS was spread almost-exclusively among homosexuals? If so, how does that fit in with the idea that the virus itself emerged as a result of mass inoculation for smallpox? Back on the thread topic, and related to this, do you think that something similar is now on the cards with the drugs they are dispensing en masse for Covid-19 and calling 'vaccines'? Was the smallpox vaccine a genuine vaccine at all? How did it work? So many questions...
  11. I NEED TO BE MORE THAN TWO METRES APART FROM THESE MORONS. I NEED AN ISLAND OF MY OWN. FUCK THIS. FUCK THESE WANKERS.
  12. Sounds like a film starring Donald Pleasance.
  13. I like the idea that I will be dubbed as a terrorist. Next time I see the local louts on the estate, I can say in a carrying voice: "Yes, of course, they've designated me as a terrorist. Yes, I'm so dangerous, I'm threat to national security. I tried to explain that I'd accept a GBH charge, but oh no, they want to throw the book at me..."
  14. Wait, hold your horses... If you're in the NHS, then there's a lot of questions we need to ask you. First, are the stories we heard in the past about hospital A& E units, wards and intensive care units being filled with Covid-19 sufferers true or not? If it was all a lie, why weren't there whistle-blowers from within the NHS coming forward to say so? What has been going on in these hospitals?
  15. 2020: Borders are bad, goyim. 2021: Borders are good, goyim. Don't cross state lines!
  16. He'll say next that he's had 666 patients with Covid-19 in the last year. They're taking the Jack Michael.
  17. And here's what I found. I think this will be removed, so suggest it's screenshotted by everybody on here who can do so: WHAT IN THE NAME OF ALMIGHTY FUCK? And here is what he said later, to explain changing the headline and content of the article:
  18. Can I make clear something important about this Dr. Campbell? He is NOT a medical doctor. He is a registered nurse by profession and his doctoral thesis was in nurse education, which is not a clinical subject. I am sure that his experience as a nurse is useful in discussions about Covid-19 and vaccines and so on, but he should be making it clear that this is the basis of his experience. Although he is an academic doctor, he should NOT be calling himself 'Dr Campbell' in the context of discussions about Covid-19, as that is a medical and public health topic, and he has no qualifications or experience whatever in those fields. He has been making these videos since about March 2020. He suddenly showed up in my YouTube recommendations and it took me not long at all to suss that he is basically a leftist authoritarian drone and his sycophantic commenters are psychotic hypochondriacs. I posted some comments critiquing his early videos and all my comments were deleted from his channel within the space of about five minutes. Basically, he is a creep.
  19. I look in now and then and I see that things have continued to worsen and mandatory vaccination is now on the table. I am party to information that suggests that voluntary vaccination coverage may not be as extensive as is being officially claimed. Officially they are saying that roughly around 80% are vaccinated. My source, who is on the inside, tells me the true figure is closer to 60% double-jabbed (lower if you factor in the under-12 population), which if true, is still very high, but nowhere near enough for civil restrictions on the unvaccinated to be viable. They are not going to let up but at this stage they would prefer to slowly turn the screws and let the percentage creep up, rather than go all out and make vaccination mandatory.
  20. Throughout this, I have maintained a realistic position (in which I am not alone on here) that, regardless of the truth or otherwise of the theories being bandied around, the outcome is the same and the response of the individual should be the same in every case - which is that you, as a free individual, must give informed consent to all medical treatments, and on that basis, you should refuse to wear face coverings, refuse the vaccine, and refuse to knowingly participate in the superstructure of medical authoritarianism, including (among other things) NHS Track and Trace, reporting others to the authorities, vaccine passports, NHS apps, and so on and so forth. Should others wish to proceed with these things, that is their affair. You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make the horse drink. Never has there been a truer aphorism. My arguments are realistic, not esoteric, and I rely on the government's own published data, but none of it has done me good, so I am left in the same place as everybody else on here. As to what action people like me will take as things worsen, it is impossible to say at this point, and there is nowhere to run to because the regime is the same practically everywhere, which also precludes any meaningful strategy - in my view. Instead, we have to take a wait-and-see approach and react intelligently as the situation develops. My view is that we should distrust anybody and everybody - EVERYBODY - who appears in social media and alternative media, with maybe the exception of David Icke himself. Remember that these people are prominent for a reason. I would also give demonstrations a wide berth, and I would recommend deleting/deactivating all social media accounts. My own plans were laid some 10 years ago, and despite living in a normal suburban home, I am now self-sufficient in practically everything except energy. That has taken me more than 10 years. It's not a quick process, but I suggest others consider this option and start making small changes. Even if the worst prognoses do not come true, being self-employed, skilled in crafts and trades, and self-sufficient for food, clothes, money and so on will probably put you in a better position than somebody who sits in a rudderless boat and just waits for events and circumstances to wash over them.
  21. Well don't look at me. I don't know. It's a very good question but the answer you will receive is a series of riddles within a paradox wrapped in a contradiction. The bottom-line is: If the vaccine either allows immunity, or if not that, at least significantly diminishes the risk of infection, then what business is it of theirs if I, as an informed adult of mature age, refuse the vaccine? They are already protected. Their answer, I think, is to point to the possibility of variant mutations among a large unvaccinated population that could then circumvent their own sterilised or effective immunity, but that argument falls down when you realise that, for virtually everybody who contracts it, the infection is not lethal or even serious in the first place. You could just as well argue against vaccination at this stage on the basis that it disrupts the natural process of immunity and viral evolution that would normally kill off the infection without any drug-based intervention. Vaccines are meant for endemic infections, and only then where the seriousness of the illness justifies the cost and expense.
×
×
  • Create New...