Jul 26, 2014 11:06 PM

I find it extremely difficult not to immediately discredit information like this when it contains a link to infowars.com at the bottom of the document, and the originating site's main page consists mostly of bullshit Mayan calendar/Nibiru/end of the world links.

Always consider the source...

Lol... :-D

The subject focus is on the Delphi Technique and Hegelian Dialect methods used to manipulate groups and crowds, not the source of the document itself.

It's irrelevant what the subject matter is, if the author of said document is a delusional whackjob. That sort of taints ANYTHING else that they might have to say. :p

Ceit: The subject matter is the key to the post. Have you had any first-hand experience and observations with the operation of the Dephi Method and Hegelian Dialect? We have on several occasions, as well as possessing formal social science credentials on the subject, otherwise, we would not have posted it.

I know about the jerky method, but that's about it....

This are the sites being promoted by this document: 1- www.freedom-force.org - Doesn't connect to anything, not even a 404 comes up. 2- www.prisonplanet.com -Alex Jones bullshit. 3- www.prisonplanet.com - more Alex Jones bullshit. 4- www.conspiracycentral.net- A scam, it links you to a different download site each time you try it. 5- www.pilotsfor911truth.org - An actual site, but looks very similar to Alex Jones' stuff. 6- www.tulsatruth.org - Is all in Chinese... Not lookin' very... Tulsa-ey. 7- www.anomalicresearch.com/ - Doesn't exist. 8- www.nutrimedical.com - A doctor-run "Buy my miraculous health products!" site. And #9 is actually a site on Islamic terrorists.

So, that makes...1 out of 9? I don't know about you, but I wouldn't bet on those odds.

Then take 5 minutes, employ a little Google-Fu and find a COMPETENT source.

You know that "thinking wrong" thing that Scott's always going on about? Well, this would be an example of that. If you find information that seems credible, ALWAYS examine the source FIRST! If the info seems good, you then search for OTHER documented and verifiable sources.

When I search jerky, jerking, jerk, on google, I end up in a huge amount of reliable sources....

Well, would you look at that? Google's FIRST link when queried (which only took 0.57 seconds, so my estimation of 5 minutes was EXCEEDINGLY generous :p) is to PEER-REVIEWED, SCHOLARLY ARTICLES. https://www.google.ca/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=The+delphi+technique+and+hegelian+dialects&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gfe_rd=cr&ei=yVTUU7jaAoSN8Qew8IHYDw

Whodathunkit? :p

So do we ... perhaps we should not have included those other sites ... we only included them so readers could critique what was posted.

Ok, so what about this jerky method and lesbian dialect anyway ? 8-|

"So do we ... perhaps we should not have included those other sites ... we only included them so readers could critique what was posted."

Critique what is posted where, on the other sites?

If this document was written by you, then that just makes it worse. You cited NO credible sources and instead, included links to unrelated sites, half of which were bogus links. This shows that you employed ZERO effort in researching them or you would have noticed that for yourself and excluded the dead sites.

I'm not even going to touch on the fact that listening to ANYTHING that Alex Jones says is a sign of some seriously corrupted thought processes. Hmm, I guess I sort of just touched on it, didn't I. My advice? Defrag your "hard drive", asap. ;)

The Delphi Technique was developed by the Rand Corporation in the 1950s Cold War era to arrive at concensus on how many atomic bombs would be needed against Russia ... it was originally intended as a psychological weapon. However, it was soon recognized that the steps of Delphi could be very valuable in manipulating ANY meeting toward a predetermined end. In other words, to manipulate concensus. We suggest also reading a paper written by Albert V. Burns, with an extensive knowledge of the conspiracy which has been working so hard to destroy this nation and incorporate it into a one world government. http://www.vlrc.org/articles/110.html Hegel, on the other hand, a Maxist, developed a technique, the Helegelian Dialectic, to manipulate a group to choose what change they wanted from a choice, for example, but the group were not given the option of whether a change was actually wanted. Almost all major events in history employ the Hegelian Dialectic of: Problem — manufacture a crisis or take advantage of one already in place in order to get the desired Reaction of public outcry whereby the public demands a Solution which as been predetermined from the beginning. The Thesis-antiThesis dialectic.

A classic example is 9/11 ... Red Flag. http://www.cf.ac.uk/socsi/undergraduate/introsoc/hegel.html

Consequently, what we originally posted was a summary of those 2 theories and how, we the people, can recognise and how to defeat them.

The links opened for us. We will not continue any further on this matter.

Oh.... o_O

Excellent! You'll notice that not once have I criticized the information? My point is the links at the bottom. Why would you put those there? THAT is what throws the rest of the document into question.

You discredited everything that you had written by including the bottom sites. Two spam redirects, a natural health store, two dead links and Alex Jones. I'll ask again, what was the point in adding those?

Okay KnownAs Colin, I know I'm "The Girl", and all, but the "when an Admin asks a question" rule still applies. Save the hurt feelings for later (there's a form for that), and answer the questions. I am not just "being mean", or "picking on you", I am trying to make a point and you appear to be missing it.

It shouldn't be this hard, it's a point that Scott has made MANY times. It was even the subject of a recent article! Perhaps you'll recall:

https://www.facebook.com/notes/scott-duncan/its-all-natural/975442759188863

Which says, specifically: "Places like "Natural News" tend to point to an obscure blog or Fox News...and if they're really desperate, The Alex Jones Channel (If you can't support bullshit, point to yourself. :D Alex Jones = "Natural News". Same company/owners ). You see it doesn't matter if you're an expert in the field or not. If you cannot reproduce the results, it's not science."

The fact that you cite Alex Jones means that you rely on BELIEF, trusting without evidence. The fact that you linked to dead sites shows that you don't bother with accurate research. I'd say that these are fairly serious issues, wouldn't you? And seeing as how this group is really about learning HOW TO THINK, wouldn't you want to be made aware of such things and discuss them, so as to ditch that particular piece of programming?

Also, just speaking for myself personally, in light of "The Great Purge" approaching, I think that I would be doing more thinking and giving less attitude if I was in your position.

Another question to add to the queue: Is this YOUR website that the document is posted on? Not that choosing to post it there is really any better.

We do not have a web site, per se, just the FB Wall site.

Since you appear to want to dance around the questions, let's make this nice and simple. First, did you write the article, yes or no?

No, we are not the author.

Okay, and how did you come across the article?

I suppose it's possible that you made your way directly to the document through a Google search and chose to stop your research there, there's a chance that you missed out on the front page. Allow me share with you the source of my ire: http://www.nogw.com/

Take a minute, scroll aaaaaall the way to the bottom, really take in the company with which this document keeps.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Defeating+the+Delphi+Technique

http://www.nogw.com/documents/_07_defeating_delphi.pdf

http://science.eccellio.com/?cx=013750418607274062422%3Aekbrbietuam&ie=UTF-8&cof=FORID%3A9&q=Defeating+the+Delphi+Technique&lr=&site=&app=&as_qdr=&sa=Search#928

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:ac.uk%20Defeating+the+Delphi+Technique&gws_rd=ssl

Okay. After reading it, did you do any further research on the source of the document, the main site?

There's no way that you found a link to THAT article through scholar.google.com. How did you find the SPECIFIC site that you first posted here?

We found it in the garden tool shed. Now, for fuck sake, give it a break. What is the object of your discourse; a purile attempt of character assassination?

No, as always in this place, the point is to make you think.

....um.

KnownAs Colin. a couple of things:

1: Ceit has a message, since you blocked her -

"The fact that you are either wilfully ignoring my point, or are simply too butt-hurt to see it only compounds the issue. If it were one of "the boys" having this conversation with you, I'm sure it would have gone VERY differently.

Whether Scott is saying it or I'm saying it, the message is the same; CITE CREDIBLE SOURCES. The fact that you would say something as idiotic as this: "KnownAs Colin: The subject focus is on the Delphi Technique and Hegelian Dialect methods used to manipulate groups and crowds, not the source of the document itself."

...evidences that you haven't been paying attention to ANYTHING that Scott or Tara have EVER said. They each put tremendous effort into the things that they write, trying to get us all to think a little more, to see things clearly. Your blind ignorance belittles the time that they've invested in this group.

I'm a hard person to offend, but, this offends me deeply."

2: What the fuck is the matter with you, you coward. You block her because you cite bullshit sources and get called on it?

That's pathetic. Kill yourself.

Thanks Scott ... who ever Ceit is, they just kept going on and on and on, ad nauseum, which came across to us as attempted character assassination and/or engratiating themself with Admin. We blocked them for obvious reasons ... we said to give it a break, but NO!, they continued. We provided them with the required information, supported by results from other search engine enquiries. It was a pdf so the "bullshit" web sites could not be deleted. We don't have the time to kill ourself.

" which came across to us as attempted character assassination and/or engratiating themself with Admin."

This only serves to further prove my point regarding your lack of attention. I AM an Admin, as well as being Crew on the Tycho Brahe, and have been for well over a year now.

You didn't not "provide them with the required information", rather, you blatantly ignored my point and threw a tantrum.

:P

ProTip: If you find yourself in a hole...

...stop digging.

Yes.

who is this WE plural (somone we know as) Colin keeps refurring to?

"They" like to play the plural personal pronoun game, I'm really not sure why, so no "I", "she" or "he".

jerking :-D

I get he mean't well. But so do all the religious folk. Look where that got us :D.

ROFL!