Open Minds Forum

UFOs, Extraterrestrial Contact, Conspiracy, Exopolitics, Geopolitics, Paranormal, Crypto-zoology, Ancient History, Cutting-Edge Science & Special Guests.

Latest topics

» Immaterialism 6
Today at 9:40 pm by dan

» Montage grokking
Today at 3:14 pm by mion

» Livin Your Best Life
Today at 12:27 pm by smelly

» Disclosure - For U by U
Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:01 am by U

» Uncommon Thoughts on Common Things - Cyrellys
Sun Mar 17, 2019 1:22 pm by Cyrellys

» 5G phased ray antennae
Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:04 pm by hobbit

» Immaterialism 5
Fri Mar 08, 2019 12:39 pm by dan

» A Kim Jong Un Dream
Fri Mar 08, 2019 12:16 am by 99

» The Ron & Joe Disinfo Show
Thu Feb 07, 2019 7:46 am by GrandCru

Where did all the Open Minds Forum members go?

Fri Oct 19, 2012 12:29 pm by Admin

With Open Minds Forum restored now for almost half a year at it's new location with we can now turn to look at reaching out to OMF's original members who have not yet returned home. OMF's original membership was over 6,000 members strong, prior to the proboards suspension, according to the rolls of the time. We can probably safely assume that some of those accounts were unidentified socks. If we were to assume a reasonable guess of maybe as many as 30% possible sock accounts then that would leave potentially somewhere between 4800 to 4900 possible real members to locate. That is still a substantial number of people.

Who were all these people? Some were average individuals with common interests in ufology, exopolitics, globalism, corruption, earthchanges, science and technology, and a variety of other interests. Some just enjoyed being part of a vibrant and unusually interesting community. Others were representative of various insider groups participating in observation and outreach projects, while still others were bonafide intelligence community personnel. All with stake in the hunt for truth in one fashion or another. Some in support of truth, and communication. Others seeking real disclosure and forms of proof. And others highly skeptical of anything or limited subjects. The smallest division of membership being wholly anti-disclosure oriented.

So where did these members vanish to? They had many options. There are almost innumerable other forums out there on the topics of UFO's or Exopolitics, the Unexplained, and Conspiracy Theory. Did they disappear into the world-wide network of forum inhabitants? Did some go find new homes on chatrooms or individual blogs? Did they participate in ufo conventions or other public events and gatherings? How about those who represented groups in special access? Or IC and military observers? Those with academic affiliations? Where did they all go and what would be the best way to reach out and extend an invitation to return?

And what constitutes a situation deserving of their time and participation? Is the archive enough? How exactly do people within the paradigm most desire to define a community? Is it amenities, humanity or simply population size for exposure? Most of the special guests have been emailed and have expressed that population size for exposure is what most motivates them. But not all. Long-time member Dan Smith has other priorities and values motivating his participation. Should this open opportunities for unattached junior guests who have experience and dialog to contribute to the world? How best to make use of OMF's time, experience and resources?

Many skeptics would like to see the historical guardian of discourse opportunity to just up and disappear; go into permanent stasis. They think that not everyone has a right to speak about their experiences and if there is no proof involved then there can philosophically be no value to discourse. I personally would respectfully disagree with them. Discourse has always been the prelude to meaningful relationships and meaningful mutual relationships have always been the prelude to exchanges of proof. In a contentious social environment with regards to communication vs disclosure how do we best re-establish a haven for those preludes? Is it only the "if we build it they will come" answer? Well considering OMF has been largely fully functional over the last four or five months this line of reasoning is not necessarily true. So what would be the best way re-establish this? Your suggestions are sought. Please comment.

MMR Twitter News

March 2019


Calendar Calendar

Scorpion Scam


Scorpion Scam

Post by Guest on Mon Jan 02, 2017 4:51 pm

Walter O'Brien is a complete fraud, sham, hoaxer, and fantasy peddlar, and has been exposed as such (Hackers vs Scorpion - FastCoCreate.Com; Another Story of a Fake Brilliant Inventor? (obscene language warning) - TechDirt.Com; The Mythical and Almost Certainly Made Up Legend of Walter O'Brien Continues to Grow - TechDirt.Com).

Something they don't  point out is that he says that he was divorced, but don't you have to be married first? Obviously, yes, which completely contradicts his claim of being socially disfunctional or awkward. And I think his claim that most geniuses are socially disfunctional, unmarried, and have no children might be made up, too. Though it's possible there may be some who are, social disfunction is a symptom of the autism spectrum, introverted personality disorders, Bleuler-type simple schizophrenia, and negative schizophrenia, and there is no correlation between these and intelligence nor between personality type and intelligence. And Michael Kearney  has a steady girlfriend (What Are Child Geniuses Like As Adults-ABCNews.Go.Com). Greg Smith, with an IQ of 200+ has lots of friends and likes sports and going out (Boy Genius Greg Smith-HuffingtonPost). Judit Polgar (IQ of 170) is married with 2 children. Terence Tao (211) is also married with 2 children. Kim Ung-Yong (210) has 2 children. Marilyn vos Savant (228) is married. And Einstein was married twice and had 3 children.

They don't point out either the claim that he saved the world on several occasions is utter nonsense, for even if he had stopped 4 terrorists and prevented 2 regional wars (none of which he did), none of this even comes close to ''saving the world'', and is a bombastic and wildly exaggerated claim at best. Also, he appears to be unaware that most of these atrocities are false flags or fake and that the wars are orchestrated and prolonged for profit by super-rich crime families.

And he says that he has no feelings, which means he is either dishonest, deluded, or sociopathic, and he implies most high-IQ people are the same, but, of course, they're not.

Also, the show is claimed to make intellect ''cool'', but it uses the same degrading terms for intellectuals that have become institutionalized in a desensitized, radicalized, unenlightened, extreme left-wing society like ours, an institutionalization which represents and demonstrates a deep-seated, practically universal, and systemic hatred and contempt for intelligence or intellect. Certainly, with most people being prejudiced, close-minded, and irrational, especially nowadays, many who are different are going to be mistreated to some degree, but using hate speech obviously isn't going to help. On  top of that, in at least 2 episodes, the show promotes the notoriously unfeeling, antisocial, ultraleftist view  that violent sociopaths shouldn't be killed (the protection of demons, in other words, and I think we know where that comes from; it's no coincidence that the network has a Satanic symbol as its logo), a view, of course, that is inextricably linked to indifference about innocent people being killed by parolees. And it explicitly defends sexist language (the use of ''guys'' instead of ''folks'', ''people'', ''girls,'' or ''ladies'', as the case may be, which is also egregious and gratuitous misuse of semantics) and uses a nonsensical excuse for it. And it promotes misogyny (in 1 episode, where O'Brien refuses to escort his date to her car).

Also, the man pony-tail is absolutely hideous and in the worst of taste, and is a sign of gender identity disorder, a neurotic reaction to the increasing power of women, the neurotic desire to be the opposite sex, or a promotion of androgyny, and mocks women.  Another notorious hermaphodite, Penn Gillette, was a guest on one of the episodes. He has a repulsive personality, is a scurrilous and abusive ultraorthodox, skeptical extremist, and is an especially extreme case of abnormal extraversion, yet is praised by 1 of the cast that I know of, Eddy Kaye Thomas. And androgyny is part of the Cabal agenda.

Even if based on real events, it is expected a TV series will make up stories from whole cloth, like The Untouchables ('59-'63) did, but Scorpion isn't even based on real events. In one of the articles referenced above, it says the show is mediocre, which is just as silly as O'Brien's claims. It is, in fact, an amazingly exciting show, and is not sensationalistic (sensationalism is a sign of poor quality) unlike most TV shows and movies nowadays.

    Current date/time is Sun Mar 24, 2019 11:15 pm