1. deejay

    deejay Banned Banned

  2. Ross Marsden

    Ross Marsden Senior Member

    I don't know you. I wasn't "referred", and no one pays me.
  3. cloudspotter

    cloudspotter Senior Member

    "I wanted to post this on Godlike Productions at first, but they have banned me from even viewing that site for some reason"

    Godlike in their omniscience too apparently.
  4. Steve Funk

    Steve Funk Senior Member

    Why would pro-Israel lobbyists, of all people, hire an apolitical outsider? There are millions of people who care passionately about Israel and will do that for free. And why would they waste time on conspiracy websites? The Israel lobby focuses on liberals, evangelical christians and politicians of all stripes. Why would anyone believe that "I was a paid internet shill," is anything but a not too clever work of fiction?
  5. deejay

    deejay Banned Banned

    "Why would anybody write an article like this?" Because more than you know is happening in the Great Big World outside your window, that's why.

    Call it conscience or regret, because these are verifiably paid jobs. I saw the "visitors logs" to the CT sites I used to frequent myself, and it was FORMIDABLE. Myself having been a target of these shills on many occasions, I found the article compelling.

    These people are operatives, whether they realize the meaning of that word or not: Individuals, hired or acquired by agencies/firms, some skilled and some just dweebs (like the fellow who wrote the article), loosely defined and organized as "public relations/public opinion subcontractors", so that neither the firms used nor the money allocated can be directly traced back to it's original source - that last part is called "shade" and deniability, and it's done this way to cover the true identity of the client/s, in case there's ever a problem of "outing" or "public notariety".

    Hell, just search YouTube - there are highly trained PR professionals at "push", "social" and "soft" marketing firms just DYING to show you what they can do for you/your firm/your product/your cause, just dying to sell you their wares and services, all of whom are operating quietly and very discreetly in the open, well below the "personal radar" of almost anyone in the general public.

    That's a fact. That's how business works. Money. Politics. Business. Technology. Intelligence. Perception. Counterintelligence. Espionage.

    And as per the article, this is just effing TEXTBOOK, diddle-for-brains, paint-by-number disinformation and domestic/industrial spying and perception management which the author is describing - that's all, nothing more or less - and all done in the open using hired stooges (with deniability of course, to protect clients).

    While occasionally occupying a gray area of the law (as when operating in violation of self-applied corporate ethics, transparency or spending guidelines), it is at present time PERFECTLY LEGAL.

    Question: Has anyone at this board ever known a corporate lawyer to advise a client NOT to do something that might be in their interests, purely for the reason that IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL? I didn't think so.

    BTW, I was not speaking of anyone who's posted at this thread (yet), unless you were "working the CT circuit" for hire from 2001-2005 or so. Yet amazingly enough, I do recognize several names at this board from that time. The posts and deniability have even taken on an air of professionalism - which in the early efforts of those individuals, was sadly lacking.

    If the shoe fits, wear it.
  6. MikeC

    MikeC Senior Member

    Who pays you to spend time shilling for Big chemtrails?
    • Like Like x 3
  7. Belfrey

    Belfrey Senior Member

    It sounds as though you believe the article is real not because there is verifiable evidence that it is so, but rather because it fits with your expectations and beliefs. This is consistent with the belief in "chemtrails" and other conspiracy theories in general. The question is, whether you think that debunkers are "shills" or not, what bearing does that have on the substance of the discussion? Does that change the fact that the primary claims behind the chemtrails belief are either provably false or simply unsupported?

    I've said it many times: if anyone knows how I can get paid for this geeky hobby, please PM me with the details!
    • Like Like x 1
  8. HappyMonday

    HappyMonday Moderator Staff Member

    Top quality shills or 'public opinion subcontractors' that use the same identifiable names for years.
  9. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Actually, Deejay, there is a complete network of conspiracy shills who feed fake videos, misattributed photos, false claims, and articles all over the net.
    Some of them offer products, information, medicines, etc, and some seem to be simply pushing traffic towards their sies for click-through ad revenue.
    Would you like me to mention their names?
    John Hammel
    Michael J. Murphy
    G. Edward Griffin
    Anthony Hilder
    Alex Jones
    Rosario Marciano
    plus many many more....
    Do you deny these people and tactics are being used?

    Please answer the question.....!
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Stupid

    Stupid Senior Member

    I kind of believe what Jay says....
    There quite a few that profit off people's fears.
    There are some that question this site's intentions (metabunk).....but look...I see no ads here.
  11. deejay

    deejay Banned Banned

    Belfrey: are you denying that push marketing exists? are you denying that corporations use PR firms to do the work of 'changing public opinion' wihtout identifying the client? B/c if you are, you are truly ignorant of a nearly billion dollar B2B market. (yeah, go ahead and look that up: "B2B", and then move to the front of the class)
  12. Belfrey

    Belfrey Senior Member

    This is what's known as a "red herring". That "push marketing" exists does not demonstrate that the government is paying people to post online about "chemtrails". The question I asked you was:
  13. TWCobra

    TWCobra Senior Member

    Where's my cheque Mick?.... Jay???

    Off topic, on stumbleupon today I read a quote I feel i'll be able to use one day soon ...... " His ignorance was encyclopedic!"

    I laughed till I stopped....

    Carry on. (But seriously Mick..... the cheque?)
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    It's rather strange that conspiracy theorists can't conceive of why someone might want to debunk for free.

    I do this because it's fun, and it might do some good.

    I suppose the reason is that the people who accuse us of being "shills" are so convinced that they are right and science is wrong, that the only possible explanation they can come up with is that the people promoting science are these "shills".

    The thing is, they are REALLY convinced that we are shills. Actually genuinely 100% convinced. So you can't just tell them that you are not, because that's just what a shill would say.

    Some people, when I actually meet them, realize I'm just some guy. But then there's also some who I've tried to talk to and they just blank out, and smile knowing "I see your tricks" smiles at me. Totally ignoring everything I say.

    Of course, all the above is just what a shill would say.

    If there's any of y'all in Los Angeles, I'd be happy to meet you and demonstrate I'm a real person.
    • Like Like x 2
  15. RolandD

    RolandD Active Member

    I thought that if you asked a person if they were a shill, they had to tell you, by law. ;)
  16. HappyMonday

    HappyMonday Moderator Staff Member

    It's just straightforward kneejerk fascist tendencies to me.

    "Disagree? You work for my enemy,"

    That's why CT believers of a certain ilk are as likely to accuse each other of being shills as debunkers. I suspect cience is just the bugbear when they're dealing with those who advocate it,in many cases.It could just as easily be colloidal silver vs river clay,or whatever.
  17. George B

    George B Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member Staff Member

    Doom is a profit center ask History Channel, Discovery Channel, etc. . . . why get upset at the small fry and not criticize the big boys ????
  18. HappyMonday

    HappyMonday Moderator Staff Member

    Was this a response to somebody in particular George?
  19. George B

    George B Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member Staff Member

    No, just a general response to this and other discussions on the Forum . . . I rarely see anyone acknowledge that the major media groups play a significant role in the perpetuation of fear and doom . . . doubt that the alternate media people could sustain their market share without the influence of the big boys . . . seems they aren't criticized for making a profit for the same activities as the small guys . . . the big guys' influence IMO is ignored and the small hucksters are castigated as irresponsible, unethical and immoral . . . Lol!!!
  20. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Just look at Snopes. Back before the turn of the century it was just a man and a woman named Barbara and David Mikkelson. In those days most of the stuff was coming through emails and they just started a website to check stuff out. They do ads now but have become considered a reliable and popular place to check out rumors and the like.

    They've been called shills plenty of times before, but that's the way some people do the ad hominem.
  21. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Discovery channel, et al, are entertainment channels. They frame things as "imagine if...", or "these guys say". Their ads are for car insurance, eyeglasses, detergent.

    Alex Jone, et al, frame things as "you ARE all going to be stuck in FEMA camps". Their ads are for gold, survival gear, and fear DVDs.
  22. Critical Thinker

    Critical Thinker Senior Member

    I am of the opinion that the people shilling for the conspiracy websites, needed to find a way to dismiss the debunkers and their 'book-learning and critical thinking'. As we have seen, the people that encourage people to go solely conspiracy websites for their 'news', also are making claims that the mainstream media (MSM in conspiracy lingo) and the scientific community are part of the wide ranging conspiracy and are not be be trusted. In the Wikipedia article on "Conspiracy theory' they cite a study with the following findings.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory



    To summarize, since they conspire to dupe others, they are more likely to assert and believe that others are likely to do so as well.
    • Like Like x 1
  23. HappyMonday

    HappyMonday Moderator Staff Member

    I see.That's a different discussion to the one I was having,but I take your point.
  24. George B

    George B Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member Staff Member

    So if Discovery Channel sold gold, silver, freeze dried food, etc. you would be more suspect of their motives??

    Seems who, what and where something is advertised is based on economic considerations of scale, market share, and cost not morality or ethics . . .
  25. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Here is a leader of the chemtrails movement instructing his followers on the art of deception.

    ‚Äč
  26. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I imagine they do occasionally sell those things. And I AM suspicious of their motives - well, not really suspicious, their motives are to make money. They promote pseudoscience, but they are really just a symptom, repeating stuff that was formed elsewhere. I've done various debunking pieces on their stories.

    But the type of thing we are talking about here is a different kettle of fish.
  27. George B

    George B Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member Staff Member

    They have the research staffs and resources to do adequate research and vetting . . . I would hold them ethically to a higher standard . . . seems to be a "to big to fail syndrome" excuse to me . . . just saying . . .
  28. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Give an example.
  29. George B

    George B Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member Staff Member

    How about the HAARP and Dr Begich . . . on the History Channel . . . I just cannot find a video on YouTube right this minute . . . his credentials are very suspect . . .
  30. deejay

    deejay Banned Banned

  31. MikeC

    MikeC Senior Member

    I wonder if any of those "transparent lies" being "spewed" by us "debunking spies" have ever been identified, and the evidence they are lies put forth to prove that is the case??
  32. David Fraser

    David Fraser Senior Member

    I keep on Googling "Shill jobs" but the only ones coming up involve something to do with scrolls for a place called Skyrim.
  33. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    deejay, I am new here, but not new to debunking. I have been debunking the hoaxes and misinformation about the BP oil spill for almost 3 years now. Everything from the 'sea floor is going to collapse' and that will cause a tsunami that will kill everyone on the Gulf Coast to Corexit is a neurotoxin, to mutated seafood (the pictures turn out to be stock photos of varieties of shrimp and fish that don't live in the Gulf/those of diseased aquarium shrimp/fish and even fish that had been preyed on after they were caught.

    There is a small group of activists (driven by everything from 'true believers' to egos to scammers) that have called me a shill for BP, a lawyer for BP, a social media expert for BP or for Ogily or any of several others. When in fact, I have no connection to BP. I am a jewelry artist with a geology/physics background and I have a low tolerance of ignorance, and nonsense.

    The shill accusation is used for one and only one reason--when the facts that person posts disagrees and shows that a set of beliefs are false.

    Last night someone shared that photoshopped photo of Pres and Mrs Obama, saluting the flag with the wrong hand. I went to Snopes and posted their link. Then one of friends asked "Are you sure, snopes is wrong a lot' I go back find other sources that agree with snopes and one of those guides me to the original picture. I post all that. The last comment that one of them posted was "I don't care, it still shows how they don't have any respect for the flag.' In spite of multiple proofs, her dislike overwhelmed the TRUTH
  34. Rico

    Rico Active Member

    It's true. The main conspirators are known as Graybeards. Almost no one gets to see them, which is strange. Local law enforcement all share the same stories, such as having suffered knee injuries from so called "arrows."
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page