It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Arek
That's an excellent read. Now I'm gonna go look for material by Bob Dobbs. Any other materials related to this?
Originally posted by Leveller
This is the guy who believes that the whole world population was replaced by holograms in 1945 and that he and his wife are the only "real" people on the planet?
Originally posted by esther
wow, i was born in '73. so that means i'm a hologram? funny, those labor pains and the two "holograms" that i gave birth to seemed pretty real at the time. i remember breaking a nurses hand. illusion? just ask her.
Originally posted by Earthscum
Aaahhh... good ol' Bob Dobbs!
All I gotta say is:
[edit on 6-7-2004 by Earthscum]
Originally posted by billybob
We look at the present through a rear-view mirror. We march backwards into
Originally posted by badkitty
Holey Moley! This has the power to suck me in and twist my brain in the same way the theory of quantum physics does! Just when I think I've got it and I'm having an epiphany - suddenly someone turns the whole thing inside out and I have to start over again.
Originally posted by Woodside
Seriously though, this guy and anyone who TRULY belives him needs to find better ways to spend their research time (in my opinion, and who am I?). I mean, if you are into this kinda stuf that's fine. I agree that it's a good read, but I do not agree with this theory. Maybe I need to read about it more, but I doubt it.
If this were all true, wouldn't EVERYONE be trying to get into the media? Sure, a lot of people do, but let me ask everyone this. How many people do you know? Out of those people. how many have tried to get on TV, in the papers, etc.? I would assume a small percentage, but of course I could be wrong.
Originally posted by WoodsideFor argument's sake, say this theory is correct. By reading the original article, that makes you a member of the audience, correct? However, by then posting the link to the article on this message board and "double dar(ing)" us to read it and understand it, isn't that turning you, who was previously the audience, into, or at least the desire to be, the actor (since the internet is a form of media)? By this rational, the "wool" is still over your eyes.
Originally posted by WoodsideRappoport's statement that "(T)his passage from audience to actor is not always a bad thing. What is the Internet? To a degree, it is composed of people who were part of the faceless audience for news and then stepped out of the shadows," is just a clever way for him to justify getting his, and his "followers' (for lack of a better word)" beliefs across to the masses.
Originally posted by WoodsideMy mother will not let me watch football in the house when people are sleeping because I tend to wake them up. We may get carried away sometimes, but passion will do that to you.
Originally posted by WoodsideWhat we DO or what we LOOK LIKE may lump some together, but it is what is on the inside that makes us all special and unique. It is from this reasoning that I cannot buy into this.
Originally posted by Jamuhn
I think the biggest flaw in this article is the assumption that anyone who watches mass media will be affected is such a way as to gain control, lose control. Many members here at ATS most exemplify the exception in the campaign for denying ignorance even if it does come through mass media.
Originally posted by Jamuhn
Everything is relative, you must understand the relativity before you change other's relativity. The author may believe in this, but it wasn't relfected in the article.