Audiochat-John le Bon

Be the 1st to vote.

John responds to his critics.


No tags for this post.

14 thoughts on “Audiochat-John le Bon

  1. Henkus

    I just want to say that I love the ball earth skeptic series. Still listening to it…I am at part 8 now.

    All (most) of the discussions i hear, are all with people who took the same path as I did,
    like you get to question 9/11 first then, apollo > all that is from tv > all that you know from ‘school’.
    At least that’s how I went.

    So this is just an I thank you to especially Ab for making this topic known to me.
    And to John le Bon and his guests ofcourse.

  2. Tom Dalpra

    I thought this take from Bob of Jeranism’s Globe Buster show 6 ( youtube comments) was worth adding to the discussion.

    ”+John le Bon Thank you for your comment John! We do occasionally stretch the envelope when we theorize but Jeran and I agree that it is important to keep an open mind and give every posited scenario its due consideration.
    I have followed CluesForum.Info for years and I tend to bring up their research quite often because IMHO there is no finer investigative forum anywhere on the web.
    You are correct that Simon (the Clues Forum creator and admin) is not a proponent of the FE model and has in fact dedicated a thread called “NASA’s Flat Earth DBA (Discredit By Association) Strategy in which he started off by talking about Jeranism.
    To me it seems like Simon (Simon Shack) has taken a rather odd departure from the typically methodical and analytical technique CF is famous for in his approach to this subject. I especially find this puzzling because in previous topics and posts Simon has indicated rather strongly several viewpoints consistent with that of a geocentrist. His recent arguments against FE seem skewed and the data he presents dubious.
    I have nothing but the greatest respect for Simon and his monumental intelligence but on this subject Simon just does not seem to be Simon.
    Fortunately the other primary CF admin – hoi.polloi – is taking a much more reasoned approach to the FE model. Hoi is a genius in his own right and this is a rare departure where Simon and Hoi do not seem to see eye to eye on things.
    I have been saying for years that I want to join CF but haven’t only because the caliber of intellect represented by the investigators at CF intimidates me – especially Simon & Hoi.
    This is pure speculation on my part but what I think might be going on there is this. I know that Simon is absolutely brilliant and he has worked very hard to establish the credibility of Clues Forum to the point that when CF starts a thread on a particular subject, the elite appear to react directly to the assertions being made there to debunk that particular topic. I won’t go into specifics about this but there is plenty of evidence to backup that assertion. So, Simon being the crafty individual that he is starts this thread as sort of the devil’s advocate against the FE model. He has confidence in his investigators to come out with their excellent rebuttals, thus giving the debate solid credibility without putting himself as the leader of the forum – and the integrity of the forum into the position of being ridiculed as a bunch of tinfoil hat wearing idiots. People can follow along with the logic of the arguments being presented and then make a considerably more rational and informed decision on the FE model. As the ‘devil’s advocate’, Simon maintains credibility and avoids labels while he gently steers the discussion to a logical conclusion that at the very least indicates there is something substantial to the FE model. Again, this is just my opinion but I have followed Simon for years ever since his epic 9/11 documentary ‘September Clues’ and I think he would be a grandmaster level chess player because he is always several steps ahead of the opposition and even a few ahead of his team of investigators.
    Perhaps the time has come for me to write my entrance essay for Clues Forum and join the ranks of the investigators there so I can do my best to represent my thoughts and beliefs about the FE model.
    It is my belief that if the investigators at CF can be influenced to bring their considerable intellect to bear on the FE topic in a logical, methodical, and balanced way (like they do on everything else) and posit ideas to explain some of the seemingly incongruent aspects of it, then it won’t be long before this granddaddy of all conspiracies goes down in flames.
    On a separate note, I love your show and I think you have an awesome ability to see through the flotsam. You are a natural as a talk show host and IMHO you leave Art Bell and George Noory in the dust when it comes to intelligent contribution to the subject matter and questions for your guests.
    I for one am glad to have you on the team!
    – Bob”

  3. Tom Dalpra

    All I can say, if you’re gonna try and weigh the Earth with a massive pair of balls, make sure you’ve got a strong cross-beam. Hey, you might accidentally find the gravitational constant, like they say Cavendish did.
    However, a warning. Though it may, at first, feel like the exciting climax to an episode of World’s Strongest Man as you maneuver a huge pair of balls, it could get tiring and it might not be worth it.
    On the gravitational constant, or G. It’s all very simple and clear.
    Anyone knows what that is don’t they ? It’s simply approximately </em>6.674×10 – 11 N m2/kg2

    simple as that. 🙂

    The official story explanation is :
    Gravitational constant is an empirical physical constant involved in the calculation(s) of gravitational force between two bodies. It usually appears in Sir Isaac Newton’s law of universal gravitation, and in Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity. It is also known as the universal gravitational constant, Newton’s constant, and colloquially as Big G. It should not be confused with “small g” (g), which is the local gravitational field (equivalent to the free-fall acceleration).

    Oh yeh ? Big G ? Sir Isaac Newton? Albert Einstein ? These are dodgy characters, I’ve met before.

    We hear:
    ‘G is quite difficult to measure, as gravity is much weaker than other fundamental forces, and an experimental apparatus cannot be separated from the gravitational influence of other bodies. Furthermore, gravity has no established relation to other fundamental forces, so it does not appear possible to calculate it indirectly from other constants that can be measured more accurately, as is done in some other areas of physics. Published values of G have varied rather broadly, and some recent measurements of high precision are, in fact, mutually exclusive. This led to the 2010 CODATA value by NIST having 20% increased uncertainty than in 2006.”

    Haha! We hear in 2010 NIST was 20% less certain about the exact measurement than it was four years ago! Who the feck cares, then ? Round it up, or get a bigger pair of balls.

    NIST, I notice too. They’re trustworthy aren’t they ? Yeh, okay they were a bit flakey about 9/11, but that was then. Surely we can rely on them for this ? Or is it balls ?…

    1. smj

      “Furthermore, gravity has no established relation to other fundamental forces, so it does not appear possible to calculate it indirectly from other constants that can be measured more accurately, as is done in some other areas of physics.”

      the thing is the strong force and the weak force (fermi’s force) are obvious bullshit as well. shit, maxwell gave us the electromagnetic force. maxwell ran the cavendish at cambridge of course. the cavendish was a psi-hustlers’ paradise……

      …you got the x-ray crystallography/dna and the nuclear/particle physics scams.

      and narrative device psientists like jj thomson who discovered the “corpuscles” we call electrons, mass spectrometry (a scam perfected at berkeley of course), and he gave us the “plum pudding model” for feck’s sake……

      … jj’s boy would win the hustlers’ academy award, the nobel, of course. he was a diffraction hustler……

      jj’s student was rutherford, the father of nuclear physics……

      another father and son nobel-winning team, the braggs, shared a nobel for giving us the x-ray crystallography scam. the son was running the cavendish when watson and crick resolved or solved (whatever bullpsience term is proper) the supposed structure of our supposed hereditary mechanism at the cavendish we’re told……

      these high g factor types in one place is remarkable, isn’t it? all at a place called the cavendish. if i didn’t know better i’d think somebody wrote this bullgoo.

      the cavendish makes berkeley blush.

      1. Tom Dalpra

        ” As of 2011, 29 Cavendish researchers have won Nobel Prizes”
        That says a lot.

        This place is maybe a mile and a half away from me, as I sit.…

        This ‘original’ Cavendish turns out to be quite a lad.

        Not only did he manage to discover the gravitational constant, he also discovered hydrogen, which he called ”inflammable air”.
        This guy was a ‘genius’. He was also connected: the family traces its lineage across eight centuries to Norman times and is closely connected to many aristocratic families of Great Britain.…

        Remarkable indeed smj, but perhaps now even predictable to us, as, true to form, we find the hidden hand, once more. Quite a thing.

  4. ab Post author

    This audio confirmed why I like JLB. He’s clear, concise, and polite. You’re smart and a good speaker, and introduce, discuss, and conclude your talks eloquently. Perhaps being too smooth is suspicious, but you’ve done nothing to confuse or deceive me. You handled the BES beautifully, and this fakeologist has nothing but respect for you. Thank you JLB for contributing.

  5. Thereason

    I like ‘Captain slow’ he is one of my favourite presenters, and the voice recognition software confirms it.

  6. Tom Dalpra

    Mmm Gravity. G-Force…

    There’s another G in Science. Courtesy of ex military man, turned PhD student in experimental psychology turned statistician and ‘father of modern Psychology’ – Charles Spearman. He came up with the theory that disparate cognitive test scores reflect a single General intelligence factor. The G -factor.
    ( I think it’s normally written in lower case these days but I’ve read Spearman using the capital G )…

    ‘Lies, damn lies and statistics’, comes to mind, but of course, if you can classify something, you can work with it. ”Just do the fuckin’ maths.” .makes you think, doesn’t it ?

  7. Thereason

    May I first start by congratulating you John, on your your ball earth skeptic series, which is a very interesting format/presentation, one could reach the conclusion that you are a shill, quite easily, by your articulate well executed mediating skills.

    I am sure you are not interested in my views of Ziller, they are of course, if they choose to be, worthy of further investigation or perhaps not..!

    1. Tom Dalpra

      Perhaps not Thereason ! Haha. Ziller is not James May, is he ? ( he might be! )
      I can laugh because I’ve had moments like that. I can’t deny it. I think that’s why the shills use the old Dallas Goldbuggy ”this-celebrity-is-also-that-celebrity” tactic.
      We can fall for it. It can seem intuitive. I reckon it’s an innocent mad moment 🙂
      James May would be a complete dupe for Science ( I’d think ) too and he does sound a bit like him.

      I agree with you on the Ball Earth Skeptic series which I found very interesting and well presented.

      1. khammad


        Your response to my critiques was courteous and thoughtful, thank you. A response back is forthcoming.

      2. khammad

        Now that I think about it, we have not seen hide nor hair of that Dallas Goldbuggery. Where has it all gone to? Guess that campaign is over for a while, good, let that nonsense rest for a bit. Assuredly it will be back. This flat earth business will die down too. And now that it has established itself so strongly on the internet, my prediction is that it will now get in line for it’s next turn, right behind Dallas Goldbug. Seems like these campaigns come in waves of about 2 years.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. logo

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.