On this note I feel one of the great qualities of ATS is the fact that people can post what they feel is important to them regardless of what their
viewpoint should be. It's up to us as the members to look at that information and take it for what we can. The bottom line in all reality is that
everyone on this planet has an agenda whether hidden or not and if they want to express it they can. I'd much rather sift through whatever pro-major
industry/corporation propaganda that people post and see it for what it really is rather than not. Id rather read this stuff than the hollow earth
threads or the reptilians raped my dog threads.
Just Who is Posting on ATS?, page 1
privacy
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 08:27 AM by Kupios
I don't really know what to think about whether or not there are disinfo-agents on ATS but these other threads seem to indicate that something odd is
happening indeed. Thoughts anyone?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Please forgive me if this has already been discussed elsewhere.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Please forgive me if this has already been discussed elsewhere.
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 09:04 AM by pause4thought
reply to post by ShAuNmAn-X
Great response.
The problem is that these people are using a subtle approach, even underhand. Masquerading as open-minded participants they muddy the waters where the real evidence is crystal clear.
It makes no difference what the topic is, these people should be outed. Maybe on our profile page we should have a category for 'Participants I believe have a hidden agenda' with space for a few words concerning what we think they are about. The stats people could then produce a page showing what percentage of overall/active participants are suspected of subterfuge. You could even have a list of set categories that could be selected instead of choosing your own description of the miscriants - that way the stats page could categorise the whole phenomenon.
What do you reckon mods? Maybe you could let your hair down and join in with this one for once.
reply to post by Kupios
Thanks for the input. Very interesting to hear others are picking up on this. And thanks for backing up what you are saying with evidence!
The more people share their views the more likely we are to gain a fair impression of what is happening across the boards.
Great response.
The problem is that these people are using a subtle approach, even underhand. Masquerading as open-minded participants they muddy the waters where the real evidence is crystal clear.
It makes no difference what the topic is, these people should be outed. Maybe on our profile page we should have a category for 'Participants I believe have a hidden agenda' with space for a few words concerning what we think they are about. The stats people could then produce a page showing what percentage of overall/active participants are suspected of subterfuge. You could even have a list of set categories that could be selected instead of choosing your own description of the miscriants - that way the stats page could categorise the whole phenomenon.
What do you reckon mods? Maybe you could let your hair down and join in with this one for once.
reply to post by Kupios
Thanks for the input. Very interesting to hear others are picking up on this. And thanks for backing up what you are saying with evidence!
The more people share their views the more likely we are to gain a fair impression of what is happening across the boards.
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 09:05 AM by LateApexer313
I think that anyone who proposes to know one way or the other, that "global warming" or "Climate Change" is occurring and is a direct result of
anything that humans are doing, is full of crapola.
For every scientist or study that shows it is a direct result of humans and our pollution etc, there is one that shows that it's not and that the world is not heating up it's cooling. How can both of these things be right? Obviously they can't. But which studies and scientists CAN you believe?
What people forget to look at is the money funding these studies and volumes and volumes of data. Behind every "study" there's a source of funding.
Remember the gigantic hole in the ozone that was reported on endlessly with dire prognostications all through the 70's and 80's about people in countries "directly affected by this gigantic gaping hole getting %300 more cases of melanoma and other skin cancers and yada yada yada due to the fluorocarbons eating away at the atmosphere?
Here's a GREAT example of exactly how these announcements and studies have an effect on government policy: Read this and tell me that behind every "global warming" scare these days there isn't a financial motive behind the scare tactics!
en.wikipedia.org...
There's no telling how much cash the "chemical industry" threw into these studies behind the scenes to get the CFC's banned so that they could "market new, profitable compounds."
My point is, I am not in any way "pro-major industry" but I have a brain, and I can look behind these studies, both pro and con on "global warming" and follow the money trail. Both sides have high stakes in how the world as a whole reacts to them. The pro - major industry side wants business as usual and the whole "green movement" is a major business in itself funding other huge corporations and industries that will profit if we rush out to become "green." Where there is the potential loss or gain of billions upon billions of dollars, the truth will be damned, and the facts skewed on EITHER side.
And anyone who thinks that either side gives a damn about "global warming" is fooling themselves IMO. It's all about the cash either way.
[edit on 25-5-2008 by LateApexer313]
For every scientist or study that shows it is a direct result of humans and our pollution etc, there is one that shows that it's not and that the world is not heating up it's cooling. How can both of these things be right? Obviously they can't. But which studies and scientists CAN you believe?
What people forget to look at is the money funding these studies and volumes and volumes of data. Behind every "study" there's a source of funding.
Remember the gigantic hole in the ozone that was reported on endlessly with dire prognostications all through the 70's and 80's about people in countries "directly affected by this gigantic gaping hole getting %300 more cases of melanoma and other skin cancers and yada yada yada due to the fluorocarbons eating away at the atmosphere?
Here's a GREAT example of exactly how these announcements and studies have an effect on government policy: Read this and tell me that behind every "global warming" scare these days there isn't a financial motive behind the scare tactics!
The full extent of the damage that CFCs have caused to the ozone layer is not known and will not be known for decades; however, marked decreases in column ozone have already been observed (as explained above)
That same year, the discovery of the Antarctic ozone hole was announced, causing a revival in public attention to the issue. In 1987, representatives from 43 nations signed the Montreal Protocol. Meanwhile, the halocarbon industry shifted its position and started supporting a protocol to limit CFC production.
The reasons for this were in part explained by "Dr. Mostafa Tolba, former head of the UN Environment Programme, who was quoted in the June 30, 1990 edition of The New Scientist, '...the chemical industry supported the Montreal Protocol in 1987 because it set up a worldwide schedule for phasing out CFCs, which [were] no longer protected by patents. This provided companies with an equal opportunity to market new, more profitable compounds.'"[27]
en.wikipedia.org...
There's no telling how much cash the "chemical industry" threw into these studies behind the scenes to get the CFC's banned so that they could "market new, profitable compounds."
My point is, I am not in any way "pro-major industry" but I have a brain, and I can look behind these studies, both pro and con on "global warming" and follow the money trail. Both sides have high stakes in how the world as a whole reacts to them. The pro - major industry side wants business as usual and the whole "green movement" is a major business in itself funding other huge corporations and industries that will profit if we rush out to become "green." Where there is the potential loss or gain of billions upon billions of dollars, the truth will be damned, and the facts skewed on EITHER side.
And anyone who thinks that either side gives a damn about "global warming" is fooling themselves IMO. It's all about the cash either way.
[edit on 25-5-2008 by LateApexer313]
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 09:16 AM by pause4thought
reply to post by LateApexer313
Funnily enough I think that was a good, well-argued post, LA.
Any evidence can potentially be agenda-based or influenced - including what the eco lobby presents. I could argue that it's the boys with the mega cash we need to be most wary of, but that is not the intention here. The question is, is the integrity of ATS suffering from an influx of hidden-agenda merchants, and if so, what are we going to do about it?
Do you see this as a pivotal issue, as I am beginning to?
Funnily enough I think that was a good, well-argued post, LA.
Any evidence can potentially be agenda-based or influenced - including what the eco lobby presents. I could argue that it's the boys with the mega cash we need to be most wary of, but that is not the intention here. The question is, is the integrity of ATS suffering from an influx of hidden-agenda merchants, and if so, what are we going to do about it?
Do you see this as a pivotal issue, as I am beginning to?
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 09:25 AM by pause4thought
reply to post by DaleGribble
You are absolutely right on this. However what concerns me is that it is emerging that there may be a concerted effort from certain quarters to spread disinformation or deny good evidence (in relation to whatever cause) because such people are more interested in the outcome than the truth of a matter.
Where contributors have serious vested interests they ought to declare them in their avatar somehow. If they were honest enough to do that we would be more inclined to take them at their word and respect their integrity. Bias does not necessarily invalidate evidence. Hidden agendas do.
While ATS is all about denying ignorance these people go about creating it...
You are absolutely right on this. However what concerns me is that it is emerging that there may be a concerted effort from certain quarters to spread disinformation or deny good evidence (in relation to whatever cause) because such people are more interested in the outcome than the truth of a matter.
Where contributors have serious vested interests they ought to declare them in their avatar somehow. If they were honest enough to do that we would be more inclined to take them at their word and respect their integrity. Bias does not necessarily invalidate evidence. Hidden agendas do.
While ATS is all about denying ignorance these people go about creating it...
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 09:42 AM by LateApexer313
reply to post by pause4thought
Well, if your question is, do I think that ATS is suffering from an influx of hidden-agenda merchants, by this do you mean that there is an actual organized campaign by industries with a stake in this that tell or order employees or "agents" to set up ATS accounts and post the company based agenda on a conspiracy site trying to reach a fraction of the 100,000 or so members that are on here to "brainwash" them or muddy the waters on certain threads? If this is what you mean by that I'd have to say no.
I don't think they'd bother because they can have world-wide media coverage at the drop of a hat that reaches millions of viewers/listeners and I don't think they'd waste the time on a site like this.
Now do I think that there are every day "Joe's" on here that might work for said industries and corporations that mistakenly think they know "the facts" and are spouting off the propaganda they have been fed? Sure. I can see that happening.
I also find it interesting on here that people who are fervently "for" or "against" certain topics like the global warming issue expose the source of their information just from their fervor. You can tell they have been listening or reading the propaganda proposed by just one side and spout it off as the "gospel" in their closed-minded zeal, refusing to even read or listen to any other side but the one they believe in.
Since I listen to all sides of the propaganda I can tell what news sources they are spouting just by the information they are claiming is the "truth." So to answer your question, no I don't think there are people on here purposely sent or with a specific purpose of spewing propaganda for any specific agency or pro- major corporation agency. I could be naive or just not paranoid enough but that's my opinion
[edit on 25-5-2008 by LateApexer313]
[edit on 25-5-2008 by LateApexer313]
Well, if your question is, do I think that ATS is suffering from an influx of hidden-agenda merchants, by this do you mean that there is an actual organized campaign by industries with a stake in this that tell or order employees or "agents" to set up ATS accounts and post the company based agenda on a conspiracy site trying to reach a fraction of the 100,000 or so members that are on here to "brainwash" them or muddy the waters on certain threads? If this is what you mean by that I'd have to say no.
I don't think they'd bother because they can have world-wide media coverage at the drop of a hat that reaches millions of viewers/listeners and I don't think they'd waste the time on a site like this.
Now do I think that there are every day "Joe's" on here that might work for said industries and corporations that mistakenly think they know "the facts" and are spouting off the propaganda they have been fed? Sure. I can see that happening.
I also find it interesting on here that people who are fervently "for" or "against" certain topics like the global warming issue expose the source of their information just from their fervor. You can tell they have been listening or reading the propaganda proposed by just one side and spout it off as the "gospel" in their closed-minded zeal, refusing to even read or listen to any other side but the one they believe in.
Since I listen to all sides of the propaganda I can tell what news sources they are spouting just by the information they are claiming is the "truth." So to answer your question, no I don't think there are people on here purposely sent or with a specific purpose of spewing propaganda for any specific agency or pro- major corporation agency. I could be naive or just not paranoid enough but that's my opinion
[edit on 25-5-2008 by LateApexer313]
[edit on 25-5-2008 by LateApexer313]
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 10:04 AM by pause4thought
reply to post by LateApexer313
Please forgive me if it seemed I might be using this thread to suggest those who don't believe that global warming is a man-made phenomenon base their views on disinformation. I tried to avoid giving that impression but may have failed.
You have put over your gut feelings very clearly. In fact what you are saying is basically what I assumed would be the case on this site, so I don't necessarily disagree.
I am, however, just asking the question: do other people have concerns in this area, and do they have the impression things may be deteriorating?
Incidentally - just for the record - I am still open-minded about the whole climate change issue. It is actually closed-mindedness that concerns me. And those that argue for it. The contribution of such people doesn't necessarily have to be formally 'organised', as such, to have a significant negative impact. All it takes these days is a bit of networking, and... Bob's your Uncle.
To deny this would be disingenuous. To accept it is a long way from paranoia.
Please forgive me if it seemed I might be using this thread to suggest those who don't believe that global warming is a man-made phenomenon base their views on disinformation. I tried to avoid giving that impression but may have failed.
You have put over your gut feelings very clearly. In fact what you are saying is basically what I assumed would be the case on this site, so I don't necessarily disagree.
I am, however, just asking the question: do other people have concerns in this area, and do they have the impression things may be deteriorating?
Incidentally - just for the record - I am still open-minded about the whole climate change issue. It is actually closed-mindedness that concerns me. And those that argue for it. The contribution of such people doesn't necessarily have to be formally 'organised', as such, to have a significant negative impact. All it takes these days is a bit of networking, and... Bob's your Uncle.
To deny this would be disingenuous. To accept it is a long way from paranoia.
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 10:12 AM by LateApexer313
reply to post by pause4thought
No I didn't think that about your view at all. I understand what you mean I am pretty sure. And I think your opinions are quite valid as well.
Since we aren't getting an unbiased "just the facts" sort of truth on just about anything, something this important an issue though, it's best to err on the side of caution I think...and perhaps there really are agents or disinformation agendas going on here at ATS...and hopefully, if there are, people will use their common sense, granted, that they have any to begin with
No I didn't think that about your view at all. I understand what you mean I am pretty sure. And I think your opinions are quite valid as well.
Since we aren't getting an unbiased "just the facts" sort of truth on just about anything, something this important an issue though, it's best to err on the side of caution I think...and perhaps there really are agents or disinformation agendas going on here at ATS...and hopefully, if there are, people will use their common sense, granted, that they have any to begin with
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 02:22 PM by Sublime620
reply to post by WhatTheory
Fair enough. I don't like the "Liberal media" either (though I don't find it to be very liberal).
CNN is just Fox News with a "liberal" mask.
Fair enough. I don't like the "Liberal media" either (though I don't find it to be very liberal).
CNN is just Fox News with a "liberal" mask.
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 04:14 PM by pause4thought
reply to post by WhatTheory
I understand why my statement incensed you, but I am talking about people who are promoting vested interests, not those who are arguing from conviction. Sometimes the views of the latter will coincide with the former so it may appear I am tarring both with the same brush, which is not the case.
(With regard to the whole climate change issue I am not an expert and I am 'all ears' with regard to the arguments. I intend to go back through the whole thread in question and examine the evidence very thoroughly, then think it through.)
What has raised my suspicions is that I have noticed a large number of apparently entrenched hardline contributions that tend to support the status quo. I am therefore raising the issue to see if others have noticed increased evidence of input from propaganda merchants during their journeyings throughout the site.
Anyway, I found Kupios' evidence worth mulling over and Sublime's musings seemed insightful. The subtleties of the American media scene are beyond me, but I found your little altercation with Sublime quite amusing, anyway.
[edit on 25/5/08 by pause4thought]
It's really funny that you believe just because people have a different view from your view that they are spewing propaganda. Did it every occur to you that they are not spewing propaganda and that they might actually believe what they are saying and can think for themselves. This only proves that you are close minded and don't want to have a debate on the subject.
I understand why my statement incensed you, but I am talking about people who are promoting vested interests, not those who are arguing from conviction. Sometimes the views of the latter will coincide with the former so it may appear I am tarring both with the same brush, which is not the case.
(With regard to the whole climate change issue I am not an expert and I am 'all ears' with regard to the arguments. I intend to go back through the whole thread in question and examine the evidence very thoroughly, then think it through.)
What has raised my suspicions is that I have noticed a large number of apparently entrenched hardline contributions that tend to support the status quo. I am therefore raising the issue to see if others have noticed increased evidence of input from propaganda merchants during their journeyings throughout the site.
Anyway, I found Kupios' evidence worth mulling over and Sublime's musings seemed insightful. The subtleties of the American media scene are beyond me, but I found your little altercation with Sublime quite amusing, anyway.
[edit on 25/5/08 by pause4thought]
reply posted on 25-5-2008 @ 04:42 PM by pause4thought
reply to post by mrwupy
Not sure why you have to use a loaded term like 'baited'. I just reckon the mods know more than anyone else what is going on. Nothing weird about that, surely?
And are you suggesting I have a hidden agenda?!
Otherwise your other points seem like common sense.
Not sure why you have to use a loaded term like 'baited'. I just reckon the mods know more than anyone else what is going on. Nothing weird about that, surely?
And are you suggesting I have a hidden agenda?!
Otherwise your other points seem like common sense.
The Devil\'s Chord: The conspiracy to open the portal of consciousness and mystery of the octave
Posted 2 days ago with 150 member flags
Posted 2 days ago with 150 member flags
The Coca Cola Conspiracy: The secret cause for the U.S. obesity epidemic
Posted 13 days ago with 138 member flags
Posted 13 days ago with 138 member flags
Bank of America DOES NOT accept U.S. DOLLARS as payment on mortgages
Posted 6 days ago with 85 member flags
Posted 6 days ago with 85 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
Second most devastating oil spill? Massive oil spill in Venezuela
Fragile Earth, Posted 6 minutes ago
Fragile Earth, Posted 6 minutes ago
Iran To Reveal Nuclear Progress - "Big New" Achievements
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 9 minutes ago
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 9 minutes ago
BY POPULAR DEMAND! THE ORGONE ENERGY MEGATHREAD! DENIED TECHNOLOGY HERE!
ATS Skunk Works, Posted 37 minutes ago
ATS Skunk Works, Posted 37 minutes ago
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
Google accidentally released Maine election results early!
2012 US Elections, Posted 12 hours ago, 53 flags
2012 US Elections, Posted 12 hours ago, 53 flags
Threatened by a Ron Paul victory in Maine, GOP (insider spills beans) adds last minute caucuses.
2012 US Elections, Posted 17 hours ago, 38 flags
2012 US Elections, Posted 17 hours ago, 38 flags
Greek police union wants to arrest EU/IMF officials
Breaking Political News, Posted 16 hours ago, 19 flags
Breaking Political News, Posted 16 hours ago, 19 flags
The CIA in Australia: America's Foreign Watergate
Political Conspiracies, Posted 10 hours ago, 15 flags
Political Conspiracies, Posted 10 hours ago, 15 flags
Russia : We will take DRASTIC measures if the west doesn't stop their BS with Syria
World War Three, Posted 15 hours ago, 14 flags
World War Three, Posted 15 hours ago, 14 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
Google accidentally released Maine election results early!
2012 US Elections, Posted 12 hours ago, 77 replies
2012 US Elections, Posted 12 hours ago, 77 replies
Massive Obama Conspiracy to Kill the Second Amendment
US Political Madness, Posted 14 hours ago, 68 replies
US Political Madness, Posted 14 hours ago, 68 replies
Actor Nicolas Cage finally comes out to talk about his doppelgänger in a civil war era photo.
General Conspiracies, Posted 15 hours ago, 57 replies
General Conspiracies, Posted 15 hours ago, 57 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.254 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.254 seconds
