Monster Audiochat-Mark Sargent, Hoi Polloi, et al

Be the 1st to vote.


Who? Mark Sargent, Hoi Polloi, Farcevalue, Ro11o, Conscious Vegan, Tom Dalpra, Psyopticon, Delcroix, Geo-Free

<12:59:06> 0;Mark Sargent”:…
<17:22:29> “hoi.polloi”:…
<17:30:24> “hoi.polloi”:…
<17:38:44> “hoi.polloi”:….
<17:47:58> “hoi.polloi”:…
<17:57:56> “hoi.polloi”:…
<18:07:18> “hoi.polloi”:…
<21:03:22> “Dal Tampra”: just listening
<23:01:27> “psyopticon”: good night guys!
<23:34:54> “Conscious Vegan”:
<23:58:39> “Geo-Free”: fgghjyytrdfgdxccesdadowdjwiojq[riiy0
<23:59:04> “Geo-Free”: im having troubles
<23:59:06> “Geo-Free”: hold on
<00:39:37> “Conscious Vegan”:…

No tags for this post.

4 thoughts on “Monster Audiochat-Mark Sargent, Hoi Polloi, et al

  1. Master of None

    I have not yet heard this show, but will listen. I am writing a comment now because it seemed like the best place to put a timely comment regarding a recent interview I heard with Mark Sargent on Jonathan’s (don’t know his last name) new radio show, Perceptions, on Truth Frequency radio. You can hear it here:…

    It’s currently show number 31, however I think the show number was different (the Patricia Steere (sp?) interview seems to have disappeared since I listened.

    Anyway. I have always enjoyed Mark’s work. I don’t know if it’s flat or has a surface like an egg crate or like a roulette wheel or a pear, but it would not be hard to convince me at this point that it is not in fact a ball or globe, as we have been told. All government entities lie about everything, to the benefit of the elite and should never be given a pass for ANYTHING.

    Back to Mark. I don’t mind that he doesn’t use math or do his own experiments. I think that the way he describes the flat earth is another helpful piece that complements the other approaches the other flat earth theorists use. If they all used the same explanations or explanatory approach, well, that would be a little redundant, wouldn’t it? That to me, would seem like the form of mind contra that just repeats and repeats until it penetrates.

    There are several different ways individuals best learn and once they have a basic foundation the other ways can further inform their foundational knowledge. If information only makes sense when portrayed in one way, it’s probably not real, i.e. only through complex math formulas or only through ancient myths, or only through NASA footage, etc. I appreciate his approach and do not think it suggests deception.

    As I have said before, up until now, the things that have concerned me most about Mark (and I have listened to every piece of media featuring him I am aware of) are the following:

    • He uses humor and that can disarm people and make them vulnerable to nonsense. I think it’s premature to use so much humor. In contrast, I think Jeran uses humor differently and is less problematic.

    • He blames us, the common man, not the elite for lie crappy circumstance. I think that suggests a NOW mindset, and creates a void that yet another control system will fill, still screwing us, the average peon. Yet another “new and improved” control system. He constantly uses the following contradictory/illogical concept. He claims the elite know the truth about the earth and space and have seen proof that there is a god, which is why they won’t lie under oath (astronauts), yet the elite continue to do whatever they want without any fear of retribution. The average man is not certain there is a god and causes an infinitesimal percentage of the crime we experience, so if they learned there was a god and they did behave better, we would hardly notice, because it’s the elite who are the biggest criminals.

    • Even though the above (everyone would be so much better behaved of we knew for certain there was a god), he predicts total chaos provides a free survival guide for the crazy times to come. So what is it Mark? Are we entering a new, magical age or Armageddon?

    Finally, the reason for my post. Mark has always limited his comments to the flat earth. He has also always maintained that he looked at all the big conspiracies, one by one, until he was satisfied with his assessment of what really happened in each one. Only then did he pursue the flat earth question.

    In the show I linked to above, he for the first time he briefly commented on a few of these other major conspiracies. He implied that JFK wasn’t what we were told, it did not elaborate further. He commented on how many people died building the Panama Canal (not a conspiracy, but do we even know for sure?). And, that 3,000 people died on 9/11. No elaboration there either.

    So here is the rub for me. He researched all the big conspiracies to his satisfaction and he believes that 3,000 people died on 9/11? And he slips it in now, after amassing a huge following? NOW I smell a rat.

    I would love to hear other’s thoughts on this.

Leave a Reply

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