I couldn 't even read to the end of this dribble, so many false quotations it can't be taken seriously, it seems to be an attempt to create conflict where there is none, It just seems as if someone doesn't like people with opposing, non mainstream ideas - I am always amazed at how some people just like to argue - I am not wanting to argue, not wanting to change anyone's world-view - you keep asking for clarification or evidence to support my claims, this is absurd, this is an Internet forum and definitely not a suitable place to throw up the reams of information required to convert the masses towards the truth - if you truly want more information, there is a new invention called the Internet with a powerful tool called Google, and it's relatively cheap to get access too and they have a large collection of knowledge on there called wikipedia, this may be a good starting point. Like I said, I don't care what you believe, you can believe in your naive indoctrinated world view, it means nothing to me - I don't wish to convert anybody to my worldview.
CASE FILE #1
Test subject: E-Kul
Objective: See if conspiracy theorist is capable of critical thinking
Experiment: Ask conspiracy theorist to clarify theory/provide any sort of evidence for theory
Hypothesis: I hypothesize that the subject will be unable to think critically, providing no evidence for his conspiracy theory and displaying fundamentalist, cult-like thought patterns in response to basic questions about the theory in question.
STATUS: Hypothesis confirmed. Subject unable to provide (or even hint at, for that matter) a single piece of corroborating information for his conspiracy theory. Instead refers me in a general sense to wikipedia and to google. Suitably unimpressed. Peppers response with extremist thinking, attacking me for having an "indoctrinated worldview" despite his not having any idea what my worldview actually is, pretending to be victimized when all that has happened is that he has been queried about his worldview (see bolded segment for 'acting like a victim' behavior), dissociating himself from all further inquiry by pretending that he has no obligation to provide any hint of justification for his claims despite constantly rubbing those claims in others' faces and calling them "indoctrinated," "sheep," and so forth, and displaying zero ability to critically examine the asserted claims in light of his inability to muster any evidence for them.
Conclusion: Subject has been thoroughly owned. Pet conspiracy theory has had zero argument in its favor and thus until such argument can be provided, must be assumed to be false.
Recommended course of action: Continue owning subject wherever his drivel is spilled, hoping that the accumulated ownings will force him to critically examine his own beliefs for perhaps the first time in his life.
CASE FILE CLOSED