Chinese Women, Asian Women, Online Dating & Things Chinese and Asian
Thread
Anonymous1762

Seeking Your Help (part 1 - introduction)

@Anonymous1762 Time : 2019-07-01 11:46:31

Seeking Your Help   (part 1)



Hello, my name is Ian Bridgemaker. Well, that is only partially true. Bridgemaker is not the name printed on my birth certificate but my middle name is Ian and I have always been called by my middle name. My adopted surname Bridgemaker sits very comfortably with me because I have been a bridge builder all my life.



Whether it be sport, work or community projects I have always worked to bring people together to make a better world. I was a full-time researcher at a pharmaceutical company until I experienced a mental breakdown towards the end of 2010. I miraculously discovered a way of combining a group of five different chemical substances to make a cure for cancer. Unfortunately for my research three of these compounds occur naturally in cannabis. I was heavily pressured by my company not to publish.



My ability to publish was extinguished when a fire destroyed my laboratory and all my records. I knew it was not an accident but I was fifty-five years old, blind in one eye and was at serious risk of my retina detaching in the other eye. I couldn’t take anymore. I gave up and accepted the substantial retirement package that they offered me.



I was heartbroken and a lost soul from 2010 until 2017 when it became necessary for me to provide full-time care for my ten-year-old grandson for nearly six months. His name is Ian. He was named after me. Love for my grandson and the enormous responsibility of looking after him properly brought me back to life. I owe him big time. We have a very special bond but I greatly fear for his future. I don't want there to be any chance of what happened to me, happening to him. I am now determined to do what I can to help create a fairer and more just world for him to live, grow and reach his full potential. A world that is worth living in. One that replaces lies, deception and greed with true humanity. 



The last two years have been a revelation to me. I firmly believe it is possible to create a better world but the lies, deception and greed are more widespread and deeply entrenched than I could have ever imagined. There are many people like me who have considerable insight into the darker side of our modern world but they are not making an effective difference. Why not? They just don't work together. Even worse, they often oppose each other. How do we go about making an effective difference to this world of lies, deception and greed? The forces that crushed me in 2010 are even stronger now. What hope do we have? I think I now have the answer.


Comments to Thread
(Showing 1 to 14 of 46) 1 2 3 4 More...
Anonymous26523
@Anonymous26523 Time : 2019-07-14 14:00:24 #1

I am highly introverted, so it is against my nature to publicly speak out. However, I now feel compelled and driven to speak out for the future my grandson deserves. I am now starting to think I could become a voice for a better world through the use of the following five compelling drivers -

 

1. My life as a carer -this would be the foundation of my exploration of identity – it would also give me the edge over other conspiracy theorists with attracting female followers.

 

2. Reluctant messenger - I am an introvert. I hate being in the spotlight. However, once I accept the challenge to make a better world for my grandson, there is no way that I will back off from that challenge. The “message” is everything. Relative to the “message” the “messenger” has no importance. I may stumble but I will still hold the “message” up and out of the water. I will make the change that he needs. The change the whole world needs.

 

3. Science – I would avoid trying to explain things scientifically. It takes far too long and loses many more people than it wins.

 

4. Connection – regardless of the way the world appears we are all connected.

 

5. Respectful soft critique of other conspiracy theorists – I would try to extract every “positive” that I could out of all the conspiracy theorists that have some semblance of coherence.


 

This 5 pronged strategy by me has some serious holes it as far as scientists are concerned but who really listens to the voices of leading scientists? That would be an easy problem for me to get around because scientists are not being taken seriously by the media.

 

I would take advantage of the general population’s belief that anyone can be bought, sold and manipulated. I would channel “the everyday person’s” thinking about corruption. (I would hide the reality that scientists who are leaders in their fields do not believe this. Real genuine scientists are not for sale. While it may be possible for a real scientist to be silenced like I was, it is not possible to force a real scientist to tell a scientific lie. There is little point in expending a lot of effort to get other scientists on board because that approach is very cumbersome and time is short. If it happens that will be a bonus, but it is not essential for me to succeed.)


 

Anonymous26524
@Anonymous26524 Time : 2019-07-14 14:16:12 #2

This forum thread is a practice attempt. What does it really take to get off the ground in the internet world of conspiracy theories? For those people who have spent considerable time looking at Max Igan youtube clips, there is a good chance that you will have noticed strong parallels between the Max Igan story and the Ian Bridgemaker story.

 

Yes, they are both unbelievable.

 

Both use fictitious names and work hard at making their own history uncheckable. My “Ian Bridgemaker” story is my adaptation of the “Max Igan” story. It is fiction. I haven’t put enough time or work into the story to get it to the “Max Igan” level of storytelling but probably another 1000 hours might get me close to the mark. My late father was a great storyteller and a fraud all of his life. His life motto was “It's not what you know but who you know that really matters in this world”(and make sure you bleed them dry). The world of Conspiracy Theorists is very much a money-making world. If you know any leading Conspiracy Theorist who is not making money from spreading conspiracy theories then please let me know who they are.

 

My father was a great liar. If you want to take lying to the highest level then you need to convince yourself that your own lies are true. I think all the leading conspiracy theorists have this trait in common. It means that they can be very indignant when they are challenged and the “unjust” challenge is just further evidence that they are right.

 

Some of you may have guessed that the author of this thread is melcyan. You could be right or maybe, just maybe "Ian Bridgemaker" is real and your world will be rescued from our "evil overlords" in part 2.

From: Australia South Australia Adelaide @melcyan Time : 2019-07-17 15:39:13 #3

This thread has been written by me, melcyan,  and it is a deliberate lie. I  deliberately tried to fabricate the background foundation needed for a new conspiracy theory. Lies are a required part of the infrastructure for most conspiracy theories. “Everything you have been told is a lie” Who has said this more than anyone else? If you answered Max Igan then you are correct. Paul Fox is a huge Max Igan fan.

 

Why did I create this thread? I constructed it so that it could be read alongside the conspiracy blog “DOUCWHATEYEC?”. The blog falls apart by itself but I thought this forum thread added extra insight to how suspect information can be created for online consumption. I modelled my creation story on that of Max Igan’s. A person’s history does matter especially when they create their own internal accountability loops and enlist the support of other conspiracy theorists like David Icke. Igan and other conspiracy theorists like Icke are very quick to throw mud at the reputations of others and major institutions. Relentless repetition is engaged in the hope that some mud will stick. They know their own reputations cannot withstand close examination. If they throw enough mud at others, then they might appear to be acceptable by comparison.

 

From: China 浙江(zhe jiang) 杭州(hang zhou ) @JohnAbbot Time : 2019-07-24 14:10:47 #4

I am reluctant to comment here because I can see that it could lead to an endless back and forth with little hope of ever reaching any form of agreement other than an agreement to disagree. But I you have made several statements that I disagree with vehemently so I am compelled to dive in a bit.

First let me say that I have heard (or read) of Max Igan and even moreso of David Icke, but I have never heard or read anything they've created. I understand they are much followed (and much respected by their followers) so called "conspiracy theorists".  In my experience, and I have considerable experience in recent years, most of the people you are labeling as "conspiracy theorists" are what are now more often referrred to as members of the "alt-media".

Because I don't know Max Igan or David Icke's work directly I cannot say this with certainty, I expect they too would now be labeled by the majority of members of the alt-media as being fellow members of the alt-media.

The reason that these people have turned to this new term to describe their work is because people like you bandy about the term "conspiracy theorist" as if that it means someone who is either willfully lieing about the subject matter they are presenting or are such low IQ naive dupes that they are willfully spreading other Conspiracy theorists lies. This is actually, in my opinion, preposterous. 

There is no reason for anyone to spread lies as conspiracy theorists or the alt-media. There's no real money in it, at least not without an incredible amount of work. It takes a ton more work to make a buck as an alt-mediast than as a mainstream propogandist with any publisher or broadcaster.

I don't blame you for tossing around the term "conspiracy theorist" as if it is a dirty word. You have simply been trained to accept your belief by the mainstream media in their "relentless repetition is engaged in the hope that some mud will stick." And they in turn have relentlessly trained you because they are told to do so by their corporate masters who are owned and operated by the richest people on Earth. You and others like you are just the countless dupes being taken in by the biggest scam ever rolled out in human history.

How's that for a conspiracy theory?

But you can't prove me wrong by calling me a liar. Just as your made up lie about your past based on Max Igan's purported past does not prove his past is a lie. Your lie doesn't prove anything except that you are a competent liar, althought the lack of comments or attention this thread is receiving might suggest you are not such a competent liar.

Likewise you can't prove conspiracy theorists are wrong by simply saying they are wrong or by calling them liars. You can only prove them wrong by producing sufficient evidence that any reasonable person reviewing it would agree that they are wrong.

But even that in no way makes them liars. These people do not do all that they do with precious little return because they are liars. They sincerely believe that the results of their copious efforts have been a new found truth that they have a duty to tell the world to protect people from harm.

If you were certain that something is damaging people and they are ignorant of that damage, would you not be compelled to tell those people and save them from the harm that is befalling them? If you are mistaken, does that make you a liar.

Frankly Melcyan, it is unworthy of you and beneath you to so loosely apply the word "liar" to anyone who is a member of the alt-media. Paul Fox maybe wrong on all counts of his claims, although I think he is not wrong on some of them. But even if wrong on all of them, he very clearly believes he is right and he very clearly is presenting his beliefs to us so we will not be duped and will thereby avoid being harmed. He has received nothing for his efforts except an overwhelming flow of ridicule, mockery and insults. 

Nobody would lie in order to be thus rewarded. People lie in oorder to gain money, or glory or some real reward. Unless there is undeniable proof someone is lieing, he or she should not be called a liar. Neither should any other member of the alt-media. They may be mistaken, they may be wrong but they are not liars.

I disagree with other things you have said within your thread and subsequent comments, but that is the most important one.

From: Australia South Australia Adelaide @melcyan Time : 2019-07-24 17:15:51 #5

@JohnAbbot There is so much to unpack in your lengthy comment here and your other lengthy comment on @paulfox1’s blog INSULARITY

 

I am very busy right now, so hopefully, I will get time to do so next week. Next week I will also answer Paul’s question here but I would have thought my answer was obvious together with Paul’s non-acceptance of that answer. Thanks for making it clear how you intend to moderate CLM comments both inside and outside of CC, both now and into the future. What I was seeking is clearly not going to be delivered.  In view of that, all of my future comments that are CC related will be restricted to this forum thread or any of the CC blogs.

 

Regardless of how many views and comments this forum thread receives I am grateful that it was published. Thank you!

 

From: China 山东(shan dong) 济宁(ji ning ) @paulfox1 Time : 2019-07-26 10:22:31 #6


@melcyan

Are you saying that the 'wonga' on the front cover of 'Little Mermaid' is a 'conspiracy theory' and that I am 'mistaken'?

Or how about the word 'sex' clearly shown in the palm tree on the Seychelles banknote. Is that a 'conspiracy theory' too?

You clearly have the inability to 'see' what is presented to you

From: China 山东(shan dong) 济宁(ji ning ) @paulfox1 Time : 2019-07-26 21:01:27 #7

I'd like to add something to my previous comment due to an e-mail conversation I had today.

The person I was communicating with reminded me of Melcyan. To him, ALL mainstream reporting is true. Despite more than 50% of the world's adult population (allegedly) believing that the 1969 Moon lamding was a hoax, he still believes it happened.Surprisingly enough he, like Mel, has a science background, so I asked him if he believed Elon had sent a car to Mars. He said he did. I asked him why, if no alterations were made to that car, the tyres didn't explode. His reply was, 'Well they must have made alterations'

I said, Ok, what about Flight 77 hitting the 77th floor of the tower 77 minutes after take-off?

'Ah, just coincidence', was his reply.

'So you still think some guy in a cave with a cellphone was responsible?'

'Yes, of course I do'

It was at that point that I realised this guy is not only delusional, he's totally in a 'coma'.

I won't bore you with details of the rest of his e-mail, but it occurred to me that this guy is so 'secure' in his own 'little world' that he is simply too scared to take a peek behind the proverbial 'curtain', in case it shatters his whole worldview - which it likely would.

I sent him a screenshot of the Dun & Bradstreet entry showing The People's Republic of China registered as a corporation and explained that left and right 'wing' politics are two wings on the same 'bird' (two cheeks on the same bum), and that 'de-mock-racy' is a joke. Voting for a 'leader' is akin to voting for the manager of your local supermarket - but this guy was defending his beliefs to the 'death'.

We MUST have a 'label'. If you don't believe in god then you're an atheist; if you are against vaccines you're an 'anti-vaxxer'; if you don't believe we live on a spinning 'testicle' then you're a 'flattard'.

I really wish people would wake up and take a look. There is a huge war on for your 'soul' - and you'd better believe it!

 

From: China 山东(shan dong) 济宁(ji ning ) @paulfox1 Time : 2019-07-29 11:29:23 #8

Once upon a time there were some fish in a tank in Melcyan's living room.

For years they had contemplated what was outside the tank, but all failed to agree.

One day, one of the fish said, "I know"......

"Beyond this glass there is some air - lots of it....and then there's an ocean"

"What's an ocean?"

"Well, it's like this tank but billions of times bigger. You can swim for hundreds of lifetimes and never reach the end"

"Oh that's crazy....you're a conspiracy theorist!"

From: Australia South Australia Adelaide @melcyan Time : 2019-07-29 12:35:37 #9

@paulfox1

 

Paul, you wrote

Are you saying that the 'wonga' on the front cover of 'Little Mermaid' is a 'conspiracy theory' and that I am 'mistaken'?

Or how about the word 'sex' clearly shown in the palm tree on the Seychelles banknote. Is that a 'conspiracy theory' too?

You clearly have the inability to 'see' what is presented to you

 

You need to do some reading on optical illusions and how the brain so easily gets duped by them. I can't help but laugh at people who can find the "image" of Jesus Christ in the anus of a dog. You obviously suffer from similar flaws in your eyes and brain. Your other comment about another science person just like me also made me laugh but the response for that will have to wait until tomorrow.

From: Australia South Australia Adelaide @melcyan Time : 2019-07-29 12:57:44 #10

@JohnAbbot

 

John, I need to explain my comment "Lies are a required part of the infrastructure for most conspiracy theories. “Everything you have been told is a lie” Who has said this more than anyone else? If you answered Max Igan then you are correct. Paul Fox is a huge Max Igan fan. " because it is obvious from your response that you did not understand what I meant by those words.

 

 Those words were meant to imply that I see lies as a necessary component of most conspiracy theories and most ( I did not say all) conspiracy theorists are liars (either "Walter Mitty" type like Max Igan or more deliberate like Alex Jones). Paul Fox, Max Igan and my father are storyteller type “liars”. The story is repeated and tweaked so many times that they eventually believe their own story. There is definitely a "Walter Mitty" part of their character in play. 

 

I understand that from your lawyer perspective, the storyteller who believes what he or she is saying is not a liar. You see a “lie” as a deliberate untruth made by the speaker or writer. I can accept that position from you. I know that the word liar is an emotive word and it should be used with care but the emergence of conspiracy talk on CLM is making it a word that is quickly losing its meaning. When I wrote my "Ian Bridgemaker" story I seriously role-played using my extensive reading of conspiracy theory material and also channelling my own father's past behaviour. It was scary. When you weave reality and fiction with enough conviction I can see that you will eventually reach a point where you can no longer unweave them. Especially when you have many believers who add their own supporting "threads to the woven fabric".

 

I hope I have explained some of the complexity of my personal understanding of the word "lie" as I see it applying to most conspiracy theorists. I am glad that I did my elaborate role-play and wrote the "Ian Bridgemaker story. If you google “Ian Bridgemaker” you will find that there is only one Ian Bridgemaker. If you google “Max Igan you will find that there is only one Max Igan.

 

My own father was not as lucky as Max Igan or Alex Jones. He was born 50 years too soon. The internet is a potent breeding ground for new conspiracy theories. As well as understanding the Conspiracy world a little better, I now think I also understand my own father a little better. I am staggered by the unusual paths that I have taken at times due to my presence on CLM. My “Ian Bridgemaker” story was definitely one of the more unusual paths. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to explore so many different paths on CLM. That is something that a lifelong learner like me particularly values.

 

I said that I would unpack and respond to your two lengthy comments. I have explored a small part of your words here but rather than spend a further 10 hours on that I will allocate that time to something more useful like writing further blogs for CLM. I may intermittently make additional responses relating to your two comments via email.

 

 

From: Australia South Australia Adelaide @melcyan Time : 2019-07-29 22:28:04 #11

@paulfox1

I have always suspected that you have difficulty following much of what I write. Members of the scientific community are just as varied as people outside of the scientific community. The key difference is that there are stronger accountability measures inside the scientific community than there are outside of the scientific community. All science experiments have to be reproducible.

 

 I gave up trusting mainstream media in the seventies. I have always discouraged students from using mainstream media as a reference. Did you check your source on “ more than 50% of the world's adult population (allegedly) believing that the 1969 Moon lamding was a hoax”?  I think your words can be traced to a survey of about 1000 people and the survey did not list how the interviewees were chosen or what methodology was used.

 

As far as Elon Musk and space missions go, all I have to go on is what I have read from you and I think you know how much I would trust that information. I don’t watch the news on TV. It seems that you are more up to date with mainstream media than I am. Is it helping you? If it isn’t helping you then don’t use it. Simple!

 

Now for your fish story, wouldn’t the fish end up crashing into the Antarctic ice shelf that completely surrounds your flat Earth? If these fish could speculate on all of the Earth outside their fishbowl then maybe they would also be able to speculate beyond the Earth. They might even have arguments about the shape of the Earth. The more intelligent fish might wonder - why would Earth be flat and not round like all the other planets?

From: China 山东(shan dong) 济宁(ji ning ) @paulfox1 Time : 2019-07-30 13:29:56 #12


@melcyan

Allow me to dissect your comment.....

I have always suspected that you have difficulty following much of what I write. Not when it makes sense, though it rarely does, lol

Members of the scientific community are just as varied as people outside of the scientific community. The key difference is that there are stronger accountability measures inside the scientific community than there are outside of the scientific community. All science experiments have to be reproducible.Science is a religion. Scientists vary on their thoughts and interpretations, just as religious scholars do. Scientists rely on theories much of the time, and a theory is simply a guess.

 

 I gave up trusting mainstream media in the seventies. I have always discouraged students from using mainstream media as a reference. Did you check your source on “ more than 50% of the world's adult population (allegedly) believing that the 1969 Moon lamding was a hoax”?  I think your words can be traced to a survey of about 1000 people and the survey did not list how the interviewees were chosen or what methodology was used. The Moon Landing hoax is 'old hat'. It never happened. Even Buzz said so to an 8-year old girl.

Besides, look at the video of the supposed 'lunar lander' lifting off on its 'return trip to Earth', and ask yourself who was fiming it.

 

As far as Elon Musk and space missions go, all I have to go on is what I have read from you and I think you know how much I would trust that information. I don’t watch the news on TV. It seems that you are more up to date with mainstream media than I am. Is it helping you? If it isn’t helping you then don’t use it. Simple! Fakestream media helps to reinforce what I already understand.

 

Now for your fish story, wouldn’t the fish end up crashing into the Antarctic ice shelf that completely surrounds your flat Earth? If these fish could speculate on all of the Earth outside their fishbowl then maybe they would also be able to speculate beyond the Earth. They might even have arguments about the shape of the Earth. The more intelligent fish might wonder - why would Earth be flat and not round like all the other planets? Yes, if the fish lived long enough they would probably reach the 'ice-wall' - just as depicted by the laurel leaves on the U.N flag. As for 'planets' being 'round', a plate is round, so is a saucer!

 

I am currently trying to put together a new blog that simply asks questions. It may APPEAR somewhat 'conspiratorial' to the likes of yourself, but I am trying to appeal to the 'scientist' in you, without being the least bit 'conspiratorial'. Therefore, my questions need to be carefully constructed. It will be submitted as a regular blog as opposed to a CC one, so we'll see if John posts it or not. it WILL be relevant to relationships, so I see no reason why he wouldn't.

From: Australia South Australia Adelaide @melcyan Time : 2019-07-31 15:32:27 #13

@paulfox1

Your understanding of science appears to be even lower than I previously thought. Forgive me for not "dissecting" your response. I will allocate that time towards my next blog.

From: China 山东(shan dong) 济宁(ji ning ) @paulfox1 Time : 2019-08-01 19:53:09 #14


@melcyan

My understanding of science is simply that scientists create their own shit in order to prove their own shit exists!

 

Comments to Thread
(Showing 1 to 14 of 46) 1 2 3 4 More...
Comments
To respond to another member's comment type @ followed by their name before your comment, like this: @username Then leave a space.
Recent
Submit Thread