8 thoughts on “AC-JLB responds to MQTA

  1. John le Bon

    @Unreal: During the audiochat in question, I explained that personal criticisms of me are useless unless they include reference to where my evidence and/or logic is lacking or in error. Your post fails on this count.

    Indeed, your post above is no different to the one I responded to from MQTA; it is tantamount to, ‘I don’t like how you make me feel so now I will say nasty things about you’. Who cares how I make you feel or that you don’t like me? Only the people who feel the same way as you.

    Even then, they only ‘care’ insofar as they feel good that somebody agrees with them.

    You can say all of the nasty things you like about me. I don’t care, and neither does anybody who is seriously interested in learning more about the world in which we live.

    I remain embarrassed that I mistook feelings-based believers for evidence-based researchers, though. What I was thinking, I don’t know.

    1. UNreal


      Thank you for proving my point : you can’t handle criticism.

      Further, you choose to attack me and accuse me of being solely emotional and nonsensical* which is unfortunate, but i expect nothing less from your type of self-centred truthers of which there are many, but of whom you represent a young and very articulate kind.

      Now, as your role seems to be one of an agitator, i do hope you’ll agitate more often on your own website than here at Fakeologist where you do have some supporters – but not as many as you might self-delusionally think, your sophistry bring little insight and a lot of infight.

      *nonsensical as defined by your comparison of first MQTA, then me by inference, to ‘epsilons’ with reference to the eugenicist and supremacist work of Aldous Huxley

      1. John le Bon

        ‘Can’t handle criticism’? I actively encourage people like yourself to present your criticisms to me live on the air, where I will be happy to respond to any valid criticisms you have to make.

        Except none of you seem willing to take part in such a discussion.

        Because none of you have any valid criticisms to make.

        Which is why you resort to name-calling and slander.

        Let’s pretend your paranoid delusions about me being a ‘paid shill’ are correct. Wouldn’t the easiest way to expose me (and whatever group is paying me) be to present your case that my evidence and/or logic is fallacious? Am I not offering you a perfect opportunity to prove your ‘paid shills’ case by offering to answer your criticisms live on the air?

        By all means, keep the ad hominem attacks coming. You only further prove my point about what most ‘truthers’ are really here for, and it isn’t the truth.


        1. UNreal


          You further prove my point : you do not know how to handle criticism. As to your invitation to go on air and discuss the criticism around your person – no thanks – i’m not really interested in your research and i find your personality quite unlikeable.

            1. UNreal

              Sorry JLB – you didn’t get it, but i expected as much coming from you.

              The only feeling you provoke in me by your behaviour and repetitive argumentation is disinterest. Unwittingly or not, your attitude is elitist and repellent, which makes you come across as immature and clumsily eager for attention.

  2. UNreal

    To “strike back” at MQTA on audio making an inflammatory depiction* of his person and indirectly of other active Fakeologist members is out of place and proportion*.

    The supremacist attitude you display when you convince yourself there is such a thing as an eugenicists reality or Brave New World with “epsilons” present unfortunately well demonstrate your lack of empathy and social intelligence.

    When anyone choose to appear in public the evident consequence is critique and to only be attentive to positive reviews and not be able to handle negative feedback (and dislike) is quite immature & vacuous and/or a conscient choice to not learn from what you are engaged in and those concerned by it. Both options are equally bad.

    “When people tell you something’s wrong or doesn’t work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what they think is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong.”
    – Neil Gaiman

    *regarding MQTA you make an imaginary non-factual depiction of him/her as a person without support of your claims

    *normally you have your own website where you can express your ills enduring wrongful criticism of which you seemingly very often feel to be a victim

    1. el sushi de la mancha

      JayElBee at one point during your rather pedantic AC you even claimed that very few people have read Aldous Huxley’s ” A Brave New World ” the right way, well, I then guess that makes yourself another privileged and blessed individual, congrats.

Leave a Reply

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