It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ghost Raven Hoax admission - Patently odd

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Once again I wish to point out that I am making no accusations at all and I may be achieving nothing more than wasting your time with a humorous coincidence. But, having read GhostRaven’s posts a number of times I remembered that upon reading the Hoax admission that the word “patently” stood out and kept popping into my thoughts; so much so that I was compelled to investigate further.

I believe the reason this word stood out to me is that due to my previous profession as a journalist and Deputy Editor I am sensitive to words that are uncommon, or more so, sentences that use uncommon words to convey a meaning.

The reason for this is simple; professional writers are a nightmare. Massively inflated egos and one-up-man-ship is a very real problem and part of the role of an Editor is to maintain the “tone” of the publication. The reality is that the language of an article has to be able to be accessible to the demographic of your publication because the readership are paying for information and entertainment, not to be made to feel inferior because they have to keep looking up words in a dictionary, or worse, not being able to keep up with the document, losing interest in the publication and subsequently affecting sales.

For days now I have been unable to shake an observation that there was something odd about the tone (meaning word use) of GR’s admission and after a little bit of research the answer was staring me, darest I say, patently in the face.

From the disclaimer on page 1 Link

The following "story" is the produce of an unethical, patently flawed attempt at a study that exudes the lowest form of deceit.


And then from the first paragraph of GR’s admission:

Heck, I even picked a storyline that would be patently absurd.


Uncommon word usage is akin to a type of written fingerprint because it takes repeated use for it to enter into one’s vocabulary. Now if that word is not “commonly” accessible to the general population, who get most of their adult vocabulary through conventional media, then the word requires an environment where it can be used regularly to become established.

Curiously, the “tone” of GhostRaven’s posts indicates a vocabulary that is reinforced by general media and although his writings are professionally written and well structured you aren’t going to expand your vocabulary from it.

And yet this word appears in very close proximity from the hoax admission warning to the admission email itself. Yet, the number of times that GR uses this word in his writings is zero, which is …patently odd.

Please understand though, this is not an accusation, nothing of the sort. It is just information that I felt should be shared. I certainly do not wish to cast aspersions on Springer and certainly don’t wish to feel his wrath. I’m hoping that if I am in error he will get a chuckle out of a coincidental connection.

Although I have no means of establishing the author of the hoax warning on the False Flag thread, were we to assume that the author was “Springer” then the following data becomes interesting.

Link

Originally posted by Springer
Number two, that is a direct and libelous accusation that is patently FALSE and offensive.


Link

Originally posted by Springer
Not to mention is patently FALSE.


Link

Originally posted by Springer
That is patently FALSE as well.


Link

Originally posted by Springer
Number two, that is a direct and libelous accusation that is patently FALSE and offensive.


Link

Originally posted by Springer
The notion that something I, SkepticOverlord or Simon Gray wrote years ago is still what we think today is or that it is an "Official ATS position" on a subject is patently false.


Link

Originally posted by Springer
Number two, that is a direct and libelous accusation that is patently FALSE and offensive.


Pokey Oats




posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Interesting analysis.
I must mention that it's also very common for one person to "pick-up" on the phraseology of another.
I see it happen all the time. Especially if the word or phrase is particularly fitting for the subject at hand.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Spacedoubt, thank you because you are absolutely correct and I knew that there was a point I intended to add but forgot.

This is certainly a very valid explanation as to the close proximity of the word.

But if I may add the ubiquitous however; the use of the word by GR remains uncharacteristically odd.

Pokey Oats



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 05:48 PM
link   
i think its patently obvious that you are on to something!!



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 05:52 PM
link   
I use the word patently fairly often when talking about something being noticeably false or inaccurate.

Different people use different vocabulary. It doesn't necessarily inherently mean anything IMHO...

Typing is a much different medium than speaking, as when you are talking it's easy to emotionally convey meaning without having to use various words. While typing you are forced to solely rely on words...

Big & well defined words can do wonders for textual expressions... Plus the medium gives people more opportunities to use larger words, as text is easily fixable and more thought out than speech...



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 06:01 PM
link   
I wonder how many of us aren't going to touch this one with a ten foot pole.

I will be the first to say, I like Springer and don't think he would do such a thing.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Aren't you forgetting it was put to members as to whether GR should come back and do his little after hoax show? The answer was a resounding no but they couldn't have known that. When I saw that offer I was very bothered people would clamour for him to extend his yakkety yak. And then the fallacy would have had to have been maintained and under serious scrutiny.

PLus GRs message to Springer had all the usual arrogance and self-stroking as his other posts.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Funny, very funny...

Guess (I'm a bit new here), this is the first time in the history of ATS that ATS itself has been dragged in the loop of a grand hoax.

I stayed clear of GR's thread, but I'm posting here just to see the reaction of Springer hehe... Good work BTW Pokey KIU !



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 06:43 PM
link   
The whole idea is patently absurd. Springer obviously likes to use the phrase "patently false" to express his indignation at accusations against ATS. That's part of his idiolect. To suggest that because GR used the word once in a different context altogether does not make a connection. I do think these kinds of comparisons can be useful, but the contextual analysis has to be far broader than a single word. If you were to show a great many phrases that were similar, show how both still used a plural verb after a conditional statement, showed their similar use of semi-colons, or similar ways of turning a phrase by the juxtaposition of adverbs, or showed similar and consistent mistakes, and showed all these things were glaringly apparent, then I think you'd have something. Think of the 'Francis Bacon wrote Shakespeare' analysis, which is far more detailed, and still hasn't proved anything.

If we're doling out large leaps of faith over a single word, I noticed GR used the word "anyways." I am of the opinion that Springer would never use the word "anyways," which is way too low-brow. He would use the phrase, "in any case" to say the same thing.

The word's use by GR, however, does show something interesting. He said the scenario he had constructed was 'patently absurd.' Most ATSers would disagree with him; it's right up their alley. It would seem GR's purpose in life is to bait the conspiracy theorist crowd, particularly after his boast that 'practice makes perfect.' I don't think we've seen the last of him.


[edit on 6/29/2007 by schuyler]



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocksolidbrain
Funny, very funny...

Guess (I'm a bit new here), this is the first time in the history of ATS that ATS itself has been dragged in the loop of a grand hoax.


Actually not. It has been inferred and suggested and even accused several times that I can recall, that ATS was possibly behind a hoax. Not that it has any bearing on the truth, though. What would ATS gain? I think they would have too much to lose, if this were in the least bit true, which I have no reason to believe.

As far as the evidence given here, it's not enough. Usage of one single word, although the OP may not find it in common use, is no reason to cry wolf just yet. It is an interesting observation, but I wouldn't read too much into it.

I wouldn't sat that the research into this is "patently absurd", but rather maybe a stretch.



2 cents



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 06:49 PM
link   
I don't think patently is a very unusual word, I use it fairly often.

I'm sure I've used it on ATS before...



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacedoubt
Interesting analysis.
I must mention that it's also very common for one person to "pick-up" on the phraseology of another.
I see it happen all the time. Especially if the word or phrase is particularly fitting for the subject at hand.


I believe this is also the case.

I don't think Springer would do such a thing, and ATS doesn't need to make up hoaxes to get more attention, it already gets plenty on its own merit.

I'm sure Springer (and the other mods) won't be offended by this thread. It just proves that the users of this forum have an inquisitive mind, and are on the look out for every detail.

After all, the users are ATS' own "checks and balances" so to speak.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Pokey Oats, you said:



Please understand though, this is not an accusation, nothing of the sort. It is just information that I felt should be shared. I certainly do not wish to cast aspersions on Springer and certainly don’t wish to feel his wrath. I’m hoping that if I am in error he will get a chuckle out of a coincidental connection.


... and this is not an accusation?? My foot! Your little touch of fake magnanimity sez it all and I smell the 'stench of mendacity' in everything you are presenting here because first and foremost, all you are really trying to do is present YOURSELF as someone who's better than everyone else here in terms of who can who can split an infinitive with the best of them, carry an ironic argument over a few short paragraphs, ask rhetorical questions that echo from the abyss -- the abyss, btw, at least in your case, is of your own mind which is chock full of blithe prattle about your own superiority in the grammar and writing dept.!

Pokey Oats, please, oh, please... it's time for you to step back and take a fresh look at your REAL motives for starting up this thread in the first place. And also, whether you can accept this or not, ATS members include some of the best writers and thinkers you will find anywhere else on the web. If you have a problem with this, I'm sorry -- But to base your argument on 4 short words that Springer once said where you are saying that GH and Springer ARE ONE AND THE SAME because GH said them too is PATENTLY ABSURD! (lol, thanks schuyler for that one)

PS... Oh, and btw Pokey, just hoping to nip this one at the bud but I'm not Schuyler nor, for that matter, am I Tennessee Williams!




[edit on 29-6-2007 by Palasheea]



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Interesting find, Pokey Oats, I'm new here, pulled in by the GR festivities and the whole thing has had an odd feel. I've read every comment and for a group of folks who claim to keep an open mind on things, I've never seen doors shut so quickly on ideas, go figure. There is a reason Ghost Raven has made such a splash on this site, but I haven't quite figured out what it is, but when the puzzles pieces don't fit, they don't fit.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacedoubt
Interesting analysis.
I must mention that it's also very common for one person to "pick-up" on the phraseology of another.
I see it happen all the time. Especially if the word or phrase is particularly fitting for the subject at hand.


Thats right i also steal words from people too!

At the end of the day stranger things have happened



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:43 PM
link   
What would be the motivation for Springer to make a fake post? Or are you implying that Springer was GR all along? I think the word usuage is only a coincidence (sp?).



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 09:34 PM
link   
The thing is GR wrote his hoax with such "big words" and explaining it well or writing it so good and that caused fooling some ,interested some ,some knew it was a hoax from the start ..

You write just as well as he does ..tbh i think better as it's your job so with your great writing and "theory" your post could very well have the same affect ..but now we have to look at you as a Editor with a theory ..or read your speculation saying it could be that they are one person.

I have only seen Springer posting in the hoax thread & do not know him ..but one question why would admin (he is admin ..if not then moderator & apology) take on such a strategy ? To get more people on ATS ? And in the end take a chance to lose much more members in the long run if getting caught out ? I just cannot see it

Reasons as to why i do not believe..if it was Springer he would have had other admin/mods reply in "hoax thread" by stating which GR IP address issue in confirming it was from a library or secure location ..well imo he would not post such a hoax behind other admins backs just to be caught out by them and lose his admin status
I have read the word "patently" so so many times in forums ..it is a word some use and me being Afrikaans/Dutch are quite familiar with the use of it.

Not dissing you please as you said i say ..Do not take my opinion in a wrong way as you are entitled to have your say and i just replied with mine.

Cheers!



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vikturtle
There is a reason Ghost Raven has made such a splash on this site, but I haven't quite figured out what it is, but when the puzzles pieces don't fit, they don't fit.


Theory: he made such a splash because he had confederates helping, postulating his claims were believable, or saying "lets hear him out etc"

just a theory. I'm one of those "I knew it was a hoax but didn't bother to post that info" people
the thread was already going when I joined.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 10:38 PM
link   
I believe that Springer was quite miffed over the entire episode with GR and repeatedly used GR's quote of "patently" to bust his chops.

Nothing more. No ATS conspiracy to hoax the members, no hidden agenda's, nothing more than Springer bascially making fun of this guy for jerking our chains for 80 pages.

Thats my opinion. Could be totally wrong but thats how I see it.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Pokey;

That was a very interesting analysis that you put together linking the words used in the different posts.

I can see how, in your profession, that you would be able to pick up on these nuances so quickly.

However, I also have noticed in my own writings, primarily for my work, that I will quite often pick up on others' choice of word usage and start using those types of phrases myself. I usually do not even notice right away that I am doing this. It's quite possible that this is what happened in the GhostRaven post.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join