Calling Aaron Silverman and Sam Posten. You'll have to debunk this! Crazy Canadians slander CIA and (1 Viewer)

[JParker]

If anyone can lead readers to the truth, it's you two guys, the # 1 and # 2 debunkers on this site. How can we let Canadians get away with this? What do you say, gang? Screen Propaganda, Hollywood and the CIA

Black Hawk Dawn, Zero Dark Thirty and Argo, those are only a few major recent productions showing how today’s movie industry promotes US foreign policy. But the motion picture has been used for propaganda since the beginning of the 20th century and Hollywood’s cooperation with the Department of Defense, the CIA and other government agencies is no modern trend. - All these troublesome Hollywood connections have been examined in an in-depth report Global Research published in January 2009: Lights, Camera… Covert Action: The Deep Politics of Hollywood. The article lists a great number of movies in part scripted for propaganda purposes by the Defense Department, the CIA and other government agencies. It is interesting to note that this year’s Oscar-winning director Ben Affleck cooperated with the CIA in 2002 as he starred in The Sum of All Fears. Authors Matthew Alford and Robbie Graham explain that compared to the CIA, the Department of Defense “has an ‘open’ but barely publicized relationship with Tinsel Town” which, “whilst morally dubious and barely advertised, has at least occurred within the public domain.” Alford and Graham cite a 1991 CIA report revealing the sprawling influence of the agency, not only in the movie business but also in the media where it “has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network in the nation.” It was not until 1996 that the CIA announced it “would now openly collaborate on Hollywood productions, supposedly in a strictly ‘advisory’ capacity”: - See more at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/screen-propaganda-hollywood-and-the-cia/5324589#sthash.JIa3BxgR.dpuf

 

[Sam Posten]

Politics is not a valid topic for HTF. Sorry. Neither is religion. Also, calling out users in a hostile manner is probably not a smart move either. I am not the type to complain but others are a lot less thick skinned. Here's a good place to start with tho if you question whether something is legit or bunk, science related: http://debunkatron.com/Pseudoscience.html And this book, recommended by SciAm (tho you probably consider them part of the cabal to keep your guys down): http://www.amazon.com/The-Pseudoscience-Wars-Velikovsky-ebook/dp/B0089OEOBU/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1362152468&sr=8-2&keywords=pseudoscience http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-pseudoscience Can't help you on the Hollywood stuff and we have already determined that politics and religion are out of bounds.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

I am honored to be called out! But I have disturbingly thick skin. James, I hope you aren't taking any of my wisecracks personally. I try to pepper my online discussions with humor. I think government involvement in filmmaking could be discussed without straying too far into politics -- just focus on facts and leave the opinions at home. However, we'd need a more reputable basis for discussion. That site that James linked is a festival of 9/11 truther garbage. I have to give it credit for one awesomely nutty new conspiracy idea, though: that Cheney and Rumsfeld tried to have President Bush assassinated on 9/11! More contemporary articles there talk about the rebellion in Syria as a CIA plot. Okey dokey! Sam, thanks for the Debunkatron link. I wasn't familiar with that site.

 

[Sam Posten]

Actually I found it by googling this AM, it was news to me. Contrary to Mr. Parker's belief I am not the James Randi of HTF, I don't spend all my time trying to debunk stuff. I responded to his initial inquiry about this belief system in good faith (hah, pun!) assuming he thought it was neat and worthy of discussion, but that turned out to not be the case, he was already a believer with an agenda to spread the word here at HTF. I tried to extricate myself from the conversation before it could get heated and to do my best to encourage others to just let him have his fun but no dice. Like I said, I'd like to see the pseudoscience contained into a single thread so it doesn't overwhelm AHL, but that's just me. If you have other good debunk resources I'm always interested in stuff like that. As a kid I was drawn to books and shows on the occult and unexplained phenomenon but as I grew up it became clear just how much of it was rubbish with someone trying to sell some kind of snake oil. Honestly I really don't care what anyone believes (politics, religion, or science!) until they start getting to be attention vampires about it =)

 

[Jay H]

I think Silica is a really great do-all kind of thing, Is there anything that Silica cannot fix, heal, cure, solve? I love Silica. Jay

 

[Sam Posten]

Jay: =) I know that's sarcastic and like "Cool story, bro" but I thought it fit here =)

 

[JParker]

Politics is not a valid topic for HTF. Sorry. Neither is religion. Also, calling out users in a hostile manner is probably not a smart move either. I am not the type to complain but others are a lot less thick skinned. Here's a good place to start with tho if you question whether something is legit or bunk, science related: http://debunkatron.com/Pseudoscience.html And this book, recommended by SciAm (tho you probably consider them part of the cabal to keep your guys down): http://www.amazon.com/The-Pseudoscience-Wars-Velikovsky-ebook/dp/B0089OEOBU/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1362152468&sr=8-2&keywords=pseudoscience http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-pseudoscience Can't help you on the Hollywood stuff and we have already determined that politics and religion are out of bounds.

Sam, I never "called you out" in a hostile manner, that seems paranoid to me. I think unlike the existence of metaphysical constructs such as black holes which you've commented on at length, this risible allegation, a matter of national security, was worthy of attention. Since it involved Hollywood, I didn't think the topic was forbidden, i.e., the influence of the CIA, etc. I thought it was an opportunity for witty ripostes, like the CIA was behind Gates of Heaven or Josey and Pussycats, Battleship, Transformers, Captain America, etc. Then you and Silverman could both shine with your witticisms. So much for olive branches...

 

[Stan]

I think Sam's posts are meant mainly for Sam. Look at his numbers, he's up to over 12,000 posts. I don't even read his posts any longer, 99% of the time they're simply links to other stories. If he had a comment or something interesting to say, I might pay attention. I'm not calling him a troll, he's polite and decent in his posts, but they're really not of much use.

 

[JParker]

I think Sam's posts are meant mainly for Sam. Look at his numbers, he's up to over 12,000 posts. I don't even read his posts any longer, 99% of the time they're simply links to other stories. If he had a comment or something interesting to say, I might pay attention. I'm not calling him a troll, he's polite and decent in his posts, but they're really not of much use.

LOL! Maybe that's what Sam does for a living, professional "poster" (boy)? I don't know, that doesn't sound like a fun way to make a living. Thanks, Stan. But to give Sam credit, he's precocious for his age - seven? Eight? Can't say I like the expression on his face though in his picture but it suits him.

 

[Sam Posten]

I think Sam's posts are meant mainly for Sam. Look at his numbers, he's up to over 12,000 posts. I don't even read his posts any longer, 99% of the time they're simply links to other stories. If he had a comment or something interesting to say, I might pay attention. I'm not calling him a troll, he's polite and decent in his posts, but they're really not of much use.

/shrug, we've had this conversation before. Welcome to put me on ignore it won't offend me. I've been called a bore before, and will again. It's not a big deal. I've been here for 12 and a half years and have 12k posts, which puts me at under 3 posts a day for the site I spend the most time on, talking about a wide variety of topics.

 

[Sam Posten]

Of possible interest:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2012/11/08/10-questions-to-distinguish-real-from-fake-science/

I've got a lot of heartburn with Forbes of late, but this seems solid and timely.

 

[Sam Posten]

Also, it is a mistake to believe that scientific knowledge cannot be advanced without happy accidents or serendipity:
http://io9.com/5987086/meet-the-scientific-accident-that-could-change-the-world

Obviously those occurances can and do happen, and the knowledge that results can and does sometimes challenge the so called conventional wisdom,

It's how you proceed after that which is critical. Do you send the results out for peer review and continue pushing forward, and maybe learn even more about your discovery, or do you clutch at it like a secret and lash out at all who question it? If the former, congrats, you are a scientist! If the later, you just might be a charlatan. Or worse, you could really have discovered something important but the world will never know because of your ego and actions.