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.

 

To Alex Collier Believers: What do you say about this?

page: 7
7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Speaking of cherry picking, you purposefully ignored where I stated it is not an indictment of the UFO phenomenon as a whole.


No, I was dealing with that when I said you were again doing what I had pointed out earlier - trying to conflate the supernatural and the world of angels and prophets with claims of ET contact. Your claim that it was not a sweeping 'indictment' was clearly nonsense as you then immediately went on to do the very thing you claimed not to be doing. (Unless you and cripmeister meant to 'indict' only all claims of contact with ETs, while those who merely see UFO's will, mercifully, escape your dismissive and baseless generalizations?) Forgive me for not giving your doublespeak as much attention as you think it observes.


And yes, they are the same. They receive a message from on-high...


Let me stop you there. I have nothing to say because that is not worth responding to. I just have to stop you there.


You would be very hard pressed to tell us the difference between prophesying contactees and those experiencing similar religious phenomenon.


Strange, as I seem to have spent several posts explicitly doing exactly that, while you have come up with precisely nothing to prove your claim that they are the same - other than that they both come from "on high" (Do spiritual beings actually live 'on high' in 'the sky'?').

That you refuse to acknowledge the vast difference between claims of encountering flesh and blood beings from other planets with access to greatly advanced technology and the world of prophets and angels is ridiculous. I know you know better. You and others want these two subjects to be seen as the same, whereas people like Collier do not, yet you want to hold him accountable to the role you assign him, which he never claimed, within an irrelevant paradigm you introduce! You try to set him up as supposed 'prophet', so that you can tear him down as one.


You don't even realize that you yourself are treating Collier differently, applying a double-standard wherein Collier is excused.


Nope, and I note you don't mention how. In fact my argument has consistently been that they should be treated exactly the same.


The difference is that everyone in the examples you cited are wrong and Collier is never wrong. Those scientists and experts are unequivocally wrong. They would have to acknowledge this, as would any supporters. No excuses are being made. However, Collier and his supporters never acknowledge he is wrong.


Don't try to conflate Collier with the posts of members. He's not responsible for them. This is about Collier. Stick to the subject.

As I thought, you introduce a supposed difference which, even if it were true, is absolutely irrelevant to the discussion of whether or not Collier should be seen as completely discredited because of failed predictions, when others who did so are not, or whether or not Collier was acting as a prophet, when others who made outrageous predictions are not accused of this. Absolutely irrelevant. No wonder you delayed spitting it out for so long. Talk about bluffing.


So, the difference between Collier and those previously listed who made failed predictions - the difference you suggested was relevant to We have witnessed six pages, post after post of excuses. Collier's supporters have performed amazing feats of logical contortions, trying convince us Collier is right by virtue of being wrong.


Ahhhh, so Collier should be completely discredited, all his claims of contact should be dismissed and everything he said should be ignored because some ATS members supposedly made excuses for him? Of course, he should be penalized with consequences far greater than others who made the same mistake because of the actions of others that he has no control over and had nothing to do with! That makes....no sense at all. That's called mindless vindictiveness.

I've never argued Collier was 'right'. I've referred to it as a failed prediction. But what I won't accept is distortions and hypocrisy about what his failed predictions supposedly signify. They don't signify very much at all. He never claimed to be a prophet of a static future. What you're upset about is that you and others are having difficulty pinning a trumped up charge on the guy (the strawman of Collier as 'failed prophet') and are having trouble justifying him being unfairly vilified for something many respectable and respected people have done.


Collier may not say it in such explicit terms, but he behaves that way. His followers and supporters, including you, treat him as such...


Utter BS. I've already answered this point. And I've just written post after post pointing out he has no ability to predict the future and that he doesn't claim to, so how can I possibly be treating him like a prophet. You make no sense. As for me being a "follower and supporter", please go HERE and note what I said and also refute the point I made - which pretty effectively punctures this particular bag of hot air - if you can.


Whenever his predictions do not come to pass, it is not because he or his alien friends are wrong but for whatever variety of excuses. Collier and his alien friends are never wrong in the eyes of his followers and supporters.


Rubbish. You're misrepresenting people - myself, certainly. I've repeatedly said his prediction was wrong - just as those listed were also wrong. What I don't agree with is that his 'crime' is special or more consequential or more significant that those listed previously, so that it somehow means that everything Collier says must be dismissed (as the OP suggests). That's the part you are squirming about. You want Collier to be treated differently than the scientists who stridently made predictions which failed spectacularly - yet you cannot justify this.

And I'm afraid that when someone categorically does not believe that the future is static and explicitly says so then that has to be taken into account when assessing the significance of their predictions. It's not 'an excuse' it's a legitimate factor to be borne in mind. It's irritating I know, when you want to hang the guy, but the facts simply don't justify it. You don't take that into account because you want the failed prediction to have far more of a damaging impact than is warranted and than you would expect of others who have done similarly.


[edit on 21-1-2010 by Malcram]




posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 12:21 AM
link   
Your obtuseness is astounding...


Originally posted by Malcram
No, I was dealing with that when I said you were again doing what I had pointed out earlier - trying to conflate the supernatural and the world of angels and prophets with claims of ET contact.


At no point did I make a sweeping generalization conflating the two. I was explicit in what I was talking about. You however, refuse to see how the two are alike, because you are sympathetic to people like Collier, all because he mentions "aliens."


You would be very hard pressed to tell us the difference between prophesying contactees and those experiencing similar religious phenomenon.



Originally posted by Malcram
Strange, as I seem to have spent several posts explicitly doing exactly that, while you have come up with precisely nothing to prove your claim that they are the same - other than that they both come from "on high" (Do spiritual beings actually live 'on high' in the sky?').


Do you not understand what a figure-of-speech is?

At no point have you told us how the two are different beyond window-dressing; what is the difference between Collier and religious prophets beside who they are getting their prophecies from?


Originally posted by Malcram
That you refuse to acknowledge the vast difference between claims of encountering flesh and blood beings from other planets with access to greatly advanced technology and the world of prophets and angels is ridiculous.


What is ridiculous is your inability and refusal to see the similarities between the two phenomenon. What is this vast difference you keep mentioning?


Originally posted by Malcram
Nope, and I note you don't mention how. In fact my argument has consistently been that they should be treated exactly the same.


Actually, I mention it in the very next paragraph. You are too obtuse to notice they are related. You are applying a double-standard; whereas these scientists are wrong, Collier is never wrong. Sure, you will say he is wrong, but you will give us excuse after excuse of why he isn't really wrong. Your above post was nothing but that.


Originally posted by Malcram
Don't try to conflate Collier with the posts of members. He's not responsible for them. This is about Collier. Stick to the subject.


That is exactly what Collier does. You yourself have used his words and logic on this very matter to defend him. You use his same excuses, telling us over and over why his prophecies are unfalsifiable; your above post is full of them. So do not tell us Collier doesn't do this.


Originally posted by Malcram
As I thought, you introduce a supposed difference which, even if it were true, is absolutely irrelevant to the discussion of whether or not Collier should be seen as completely discredited because of failed predictions, when others who did so are not, or whether or not Collier was acting as a prophet, when others who made outrageous predictions are not accused of this. Absolutely irrelevant.


Because those others are not engaging in the same logic contortions you are. They acknowledge they are wrong. Collier and his followers, including you, refuse to do the same.


Originally posted by Malcram
Ahhhh, so Collier should be completely discredited, all his claims of contact should be dismissed and everything he said should be ignored because some ATS members supposedly made excuses for him?


That is not what I said at all. You are doing a lot of work twisting words and claiming we are saying things we never said. You have done this multiple times in this thread, attempting to make it about us instead of Collier. You reflect your signature; you are the embodiment of it.

But as it were, Collier's failed prophecies is one of several reasons he should be discredited. They are his excuses, his attempts to make himself infallible. And not to mention the fact he has no proof of any of his claims.

But since he mentions "aliens" that is all you need, isn't it? No need for critical thinking. Your above post proves that.


Originally posted by Malcram
I've never argued Collier was 'right'. I've referred to it as a failed prediction. But what I won't accept is distortions and hypocrisy about what his failed predictions supposedly signify. They don't signify very much at all. He never claimed to be a prophet of a static future.


This is his excuse. This is nothing more than an attempt to make his predictions unfalsifiable. Collier knows his predictions will not come to pass, or at least does not have the courage of his convictions to stand by them, so he provides an excuse about how they may not come true. He tells us if they don't come true, it doesn't mean he was wrong.

What is the hypocrisy? Do you even know what that word means?


Originally posted by Malcram
Rubbish. You're misrepresenting people - myself, certainly. I've repeatedly said his prediction was wrong - just as those listed were also wrong.


And you've told us repeatedly why he isn't really wrong. Sure, his predictions might not come true, but it's not his fault, it's not because he's wrong, it's because the "future changed," it's because his prediction changed the future. Or whatever amount of crap you want to try to feed us.

Your mental contortions are pathetic and laughable, Malcram. There is very little discussing this, or much of anything, with you further. You've shown that if someone mentions the word "aliens" you will vehemently defend them without a thought. This is religion to you, Malcram. But you are too obtuse to recognize it as such, all because of the window dressing.

[edit on 22-1-2010 by DoomsdayRex]



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 08:21 AM
link   
I have said many times that i dont believe this guy at all, it dont mean i dont believe in alien visitation etc. But this guy is full of #!



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by theflashor
 


According to our deep-thinking friend Malcram, you cannot believe one without believing the other. So if you say Collier is full of bunk then you must mean the whole UFO phenomenon is bunk.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
 


LoL thats like saying because my sister is a lier i must be. LoL no it really dont mean that at all. Alex Collier is not the holy grail of UFOS.

That last post just dont make any sense!



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by theflashor
 


Of course I know what you mean. But do not be surprised if to see it twisted...



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 07:09 PM
link   
It doesn't matter wheter the so called predictions he made came all true or not. It's the essence and message he has to share. I've watched both the 94' and 09' interviews and not knowing anything about him prior to that, i believe him. It just makes sense to me together will everything else i've learned over the years. Peace.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Do you not understand what a figure-of-speech is?

At no point have you told us how the two are different beyond window-dressing; what is the difference between Collier and religious prophets beside who they are getting their prophecies from?


So the only support you offer for the ET contactee phenomenon supposedly being "the same" as the paradigm of religious prophets serving gods and angels is a figure of speech - they both come from "on high" - and you get antsy about it when that's pointed out? Seriously?

So, if as you now claim it's just a "figure of speech" when you say that both phenomena originate from "on high", then that can't be used as evidence of their supposed similarity as you tried to do earlier - after all, it's just a "figure of speech" not a valid similarity, right? Do make up your mind.

That they were the same was your claim - you are obliged to prove it. As a professed 'skeptic' you should know that. Yet here you are making a sweeping claim - that they are "the same" - without providing any evidence and you expect that claim to stand as some supposed truth and insist that it's actually my responsibility to disprove it? LOL. That's not how this works, my friend. You have to put in work and prove your own claims.

But, as a concession, I'll bite, briefly.

Points of similarity can be found pretty much anywhere, between anything. That proves nothing and doesn't mean that two things are "the same". A few reasons why the contactee phenomenon of the type described by Collier is not "the same" as the supernatural paradigm of prophets serving gods in association with angels etc are:

- Prophets claim to be prophets, Collier doesn't.

- Prophets believe in a fixed future with fixed future events which they predict, Collier doesn't.

- Prophets serve deities which they believe have absolute knowledge of this future, Collier doesn't

- The supernatural paradigm of prophets involves deities which the prophets serve as gods, Collier doesn't view his contacts as gods or as representatives of gods.

- Gods and their angelic representative are perfect spiritual beings, in contrast, Colliers claims his contacts are, as far as I am aware, flesh and blood, mortal, fallible, with a physical location in which they reside.

- Prophets see their service to their supernatural masters as a moral imperative, they must do so, because they are gods and thus arbiters of right and wrong, Collier sees his contacts as advanced physical beings and as the ultimate arbiters of nothing.


I could go on, and on, but I'm even boring myself. In short, the two are not at all "the same". I'm sure you can pull out a few points of similarity - I'm sure I could too. But you'll never successfully prove that they are "the same" because they are radically different in countless key areas. There, I've done your work for you. But if you actually feel like trying to prove your own claim at any point, be my guest.



That is exactly what Collier does. You yourself have used his words and logic on this very matter to defend him. You use his same excuses, telling us over and over why his prophecies are unfalsifiable; your above post is full of them. So do not tell us Collier doesn't do this...This is his excuse. This is nothing more than an attempt to make his predictions unfalsifiable.


This is really quite funny. Yes, it's unfalisifiable and that's what really irritates you. You want it to be falsifiable so that you can 'falsify' Collier and it drives you wild that the belief system he has consistenly operated within doesn't allow you to do that and to condemn him and to say "See, he's wrong! Proof he's not what he claims to be!".

But in fact, this aspect of Collier's belief system - regarding a changeable, unfixed future, this unfalisifiable model which so irks you - is shared by many eminent scientists. Oh, if only Collier proposed a nice old style classical paradigm regarding the future so that you could pin him down and condemn him as you want to. Unfortunately, he doesn't and nor do many very well respected scientists. It is unfalsifbiable. Get used to it. It's not an excuse, it's a valid scientific perspective. So Collier and others are quite right to dismiss excessive accusations such as yours regarding the implications of failed predictions. It's quite appropriate for them to say "Well, hang on, the future isn't fixed". You just don't like the fact that this understanding of the future doesn't allow you to legitimately condemn him to the exorbitant extent that you would like to and that others refute your over the top accusations.

Now, for someone such as Collier who holds that belief to make strongly worded statement's about what they feel is going to happen, based on the data they have, seems to me to be rather rash - just as the predictions of many eminent scientists in the past have also been rash - but the appropriate consequence for speaking rashly is mild embarassment, not total disgrace and discredit. But you want to see him totally disgraced and discredited. Your game is 'Blitzkrieg', swift and total destruction. LOL.

Sorry, no can do.


You have done this multiple times in this thread, attempting to make it about us instead of Collier.


It is about you, or at least it becomes so when your bias compels you to call for inappropriate and excessive consequences for Collier for something you easily forgive in others (as long as they are not professed contactees).


And you've told us repeatedly why he isn't really wrong.


His prediction was clearly wrong, I've said that repeatedly. And I think it was unwise of him to express his strong personal belief regarding future events. But, so what? Many well respected people have done this, as I showed earlier. What I resist is your fantastical interpretation of just how "wrong" he supposedly was and the excessive consequences that it is insisted must result from it as well as the obvious bias which motivates this campaign. I have no time for that. You claim I am acting like a devotee, but such campaigns are an expression of your religious zeal.


You've shown that if someone mentions the word "aliens" you will vehemently defend them without a thought.


LOL. No, I resist pseudo-skeptics on a witchhunt - and I put a lot of thought into it.

PS You do realize that I'm not a Collier believer, and that this is on record at ATS, don't you? So please don't try to cast me in the role of crazed "believer" defending my Guru. Such misrepresentation is a kindergarten level stunt.

I have no problem with legitimate, well earned attacks on people in the UFO and ET contact community - and many are well earned - and you generally don't find me defending them constantly in every whacky Alien and UFO thread (my posting history makes that clear). But I have no time for illegitimate attacks and tend to speak up when the excesses of pseudo-skepticism get just too irritating for me to to ignore. There is more than enough fodder for legitimate criticism to keep the ATS piranhas busy without them resorting to dishonesty and distortion in order to 'justify' an attack, as in this case. And it's pretty clear by the thread title and OP that it was intended to bait.

Anyway, our only point of agreement appears to be that our discussing this further will be pointless. We're just going in circles now, repeating ourselves. It's clear neither you nor I are going to change our perspective.

So, I'll leave it here and let you have the last word, if you want it. Make it good.



[edit on 22-1-2010 by Malcram]



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reevster


Question the things you do on a daily bases and ask yourself , does this feel right?

Why do we buy cheap clothing at say wallmart knowing that some 8 to 12 year olds working in a sweat shop in another country getting paid peanuts or less . Does this feel right to you?

Why do we walk past the homeless and pretend we dont see them. Does this feel right to you?

Why are we fighting in unjust wars. Does this feel right to you?

Why is nasa covering up pictures or blurring portions of them of the moon and mars. Does this feel right to you?

Ask yourself questions and be honest with your self , dont let your ego take over . Just because your were taught that something is a certain way most of your life does not mean its the only way, or even really true.

Open your minds.







I agree with this.
In fact this is what free will is about.
Not the kind of free will we think we get with freedom and liberty in a country, But the free will to think for ourselves and determine for ourselves.

Right now in the U.S Government as the constitution is slowly being stripped away we are slowly loosing our individual rights.
But that will never take away our individual free will to think.

I have listened to Alex Collier, much of what he says sounds good.
But we should never give up on learning as much as possible about a person or idea before we can say it is true or not. If we do then we have only hurt ourselves.

Free will is the ability to question ourselves and our daily activities and to change those beliefs if our knowledge and understanding lead us in the path of doing so.

When we become brain washed is when we lose our free will and the ability to see clear enough to make the changes.

Alex Collier may only be a piece of the whole picture.




Remember that we have been given the gift of free will and we are not created as robots.



posted on Feb, 11 2010 @ 01:36 AM
link   
OMG so your saying that New York did not turn into ashes around the year 2000? did you forget about about 911 already??

But of course, this guy has to give you the exact date with hours of precision for you to give him some credit ... wow



posted on Feb, 11 2010 @ 04:28 AM
link   
so, he made a mistake? and plenty of them...



posted on Feb, 11 2010 @ 05:09 AM
link   
He wasn't far off for new york, at least partially.

who's this guy ?



posted on Feb, 11 2010 @ 05:13 AM
link   
Collier was actually correct about New York.

Aside from it not being there... There WAS a sacrifice, and there WAS a lot of ash, and it WAS "terrorism", and he was only off by a year.

As for California disappearing into the ocean... could still happen.

[edit on 11-2-2010 by avatar01]



posted on Feb, 11 2010 @ 05:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Diplomat
Oh, and events cease to happen all because 1 single small little carbon human unit spoke about them? That's a stretch.


They way you refer to human beings says a lot about your personality.

Are you sure you're not a reptilian?



posted on Feb, 11 2010 @ 07:41 AM
link   
I think when they go on about mind altered children from 70 programs they are talking about themselves,
Ever noticed how they are slow serpent like when on stage they even talk like they are instilling fear like master story tellers of the 9th degree.
they= most, of project camelot interviews. ive about done a 180 on the whole subject. of zeitguiest . the anunaki.prohecy camps. good find op

s+f

p.s.
I think we need to save little snippets like the failed predictions so we can tell the younger newly duped members the truth before they spend hard earned cash on said persons dvd/book



[edit on 2/11/2010 by dashar]



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 10:33 AM
link   
Of course Alex Collier is a story teller, we are all telling stories, We blur the line between fiction and fact in each word said and action made. Just think our ancestors who built the great country of the USA thought the world was flat. 500 or so years later we are calling it a sphere... And it was not normal to talk to yourself 15 years ago now you will have to squint at the bus/train stop to see who has a handsfree. All matter and thought is in flux sometimes we focus on concrete realities when the majority are driven to construct them into habitable and negotiable realities. Anybody for the reaping? Or would you much rather the Alter-destiny?



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by mystiq
 


Collier has addressed this issue, so he got a few dates wrong, big deal. I'd be more concerned if he gave vague ambiguous predictions and then claimed that they had eventuated.
This is a phenomenon that many people in Collier's position use to OUR i.e. Humanity's advantage.
When people receive portents of terrible disasters in the future, a lot of the time actually giving a specific date affects whether or when or IF its going to occur at all.
We are far more powerful, when we use our minds, than the self imposed masters want us to believe, this is an example of this time/space/mind phenomenon.



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightVision

Originally posted by Diplomat
I notice a lot of people on this board blindly believe Alex Collier's BS for some reason. The only evidence for believing that I ever see is stuff like "Well he really SEEMS like he is telling the truth, " or "He doesn't SEEM like he's lying." lol, gimme a break...


At first it might seem that you have presented a valid inquiry into Alex Collier's off the mark predictions, however your assessment of Alex Collier as a fraud has some flaws in some areas and strengths in others:

Strengths:

A) Not all of Alex's predictions have come true

B) Lack of physical evidence to back his claims of contact

C) Lack of eye witness testimony to substantiate his contacts.

Weaknesses:

A) Alex Collier has nothing for sale and to date has given less than 5 lectures.

B) Alex openly admits before your posted youtube video that the audience is free to disbelieve, in fact, he gives the disclaimer before every lecture.

C) Historically, many predictions have been given so that they can be avoided. It is not yet known whether this method works.


----------------------

As a skeptic, it is your responsibility to look at both sides of a case without bias. Given your immediate willingness to hurl names and insults, it is clear to me, that you simply (at this point) lack the investigative skills to quietly observe both sides of a case before making a determination. Therefore, your final conclusions cannot hold weight under true skeptical inquiry.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by NightVision]


"C) Historically, many predictions have been given so that they can be avoided. It is not yet known whether this method works."

I strongly believe this has worked for the better and i highly thank the books and the Internet.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Red earth painted with milk.

All energy flows according to the whim of the great magnet.



posted on Nov, 6 2010 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Diplomat
 


What is your problem my friend? Why are you wasting such unnecessary energy in trying to discredit this man? Is he an enemy of yours or perhaps you are paid to display this page? Mr. Collier is neither my god nor my father, but if I were you I would leave everyone to evaluate things for himself and use your energy in more constructive means to be of help to others. Don't you agree?

Love and light



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join