Jan Irwin / Gnostic Media is considered a complete loon by anyone in MKULTRA or psychedelic research no matter which side they take. Also many later writers on these subjects after about 1990 recirculate made up hype & disinfo to sell books, seminars or YouTube/blog clickbait. Irvin was a psychedelic proponent that OD'd on DMT, went totally paranoid & started claiming everyone involved with psychedelics professionally were CIA agents, often guilt by association, etc..
This is also a problem with a few female authors on Monarch programming claiming recovered memories. Fritz Springmeier got outed as a phoney "minister" & the woman he "deprogrammed" turned on his writings about her, besides he started an affair with her when they were both married & he had children. Some "minister".
While CIA & Satanic SRA are well-documented by responsible journalists there is now a market for hype & obfuscation as marketing & clickbait as in much other conspiracy theory.
Some of the people doing useful work also without knowing recirculate hype & disinfo & the model for this was the UFO movement which model is now used throughout CT by going over the top, David Icke & Alex Jones for example, 90% truth with 10% bullshit & normals chuck the rest.
You're gonna have to bring some of your dumb shit over here cuz I don't do fakebook...
Look guys, I got all the proof in the worLD you just gotta fish through my Facebook to find it, from the mouth of the experts, on facebook, but.... "They are legit, serious researchers who get peer recognition, publishing deals, footnote their claims & don't go into slander/libel to make money." -on facebook.
Yeah.
Looks like WE'VE got a debate our voat member for 29 days. How old is the voat pizzagate subforum? 3 submissions, one on Bieber, really dude?
Your going to have to reach pretty far to dispute any of Dave McGowan's work.
I have a Facebook group based on the Acid Dreams (book) scenario with the focus on whether the CIA intentionally spread LSD to ferment the counterculture. Various psychedelic figureheads or experts are involved that were around people like Albert Hofmann, Timothy Leary, etc..
Some are published authors on psychedelics while others interviewed many principles, others are figures from conspiracy, psychology or transhumanism.
Most know of Jan Irvin, just was looking at his Facebook profile & noticed a half dozen of current members are still FB friends with him, likely haven't had confrontations though their psychedelic backgrounds would make them "CIA agents" by his definition.
My own background includes over 4 decades research in this area. My father was close & worked with The Manchurian Candidate author & the dorector of the movie, along with notables like John Lilly MD a family friend. I could go into much more depth but the point is almost everyone I respect in the subject thinks Irvin is a nutcase, also a few that knew mutual associates have made allegations of theft of a mutual friend's work.
Besides having had a nearly 3 hour diatribe with the jerk on FB Messenger I might yet publish even others I know only incidentally have stories & loath the guy.
And even IF the guy is kookie, he has a platform and works with several other researchers that cross examine each others material. You defend A DRUG that has been proven to have disastrous long term side effects and a plethora of negative social change and you want to stand here and debate legitimacy?
Actually psychedelics are being used now in new clinical trials with lots of evidence of use for illnesses like depression & PTSD.
You are entitled to your opinion but mine is based on both research & experience.
On almost any medical drug there are side effects & for example several decades' work on antidepressants is now discounted while psychedelics are being touted as getting remarkable effects.
Many natural ones have been in use 1000s of years by shamanic healers or indigenous tribes. Not out to argue the point in PG but there's plenty of evidence if you want it. Not talking about stoners partying but legit scientific research.
I don't get it, Lilly died in 2001, internet discussion forums were just coming into themselves and FB was and still is drama central. You are confusing the hell out of me.
Mentioned Facebook because Jan Irvin was highly engaged there with both his fanboys & critics. I have no dog in the fight if people like or follow him, he turns up useful background at times, it's just his conclusions based on flimsy evidence I dislike, like labelling Gordon Wasson or Terence McKenna "CIA agents" for the slightest associations.
This is more of a topic for conspiracy or MKULTRA but where people are used for sources without much background their reliability comes into question, just like as if Alex Jones or David Icke were mentioned.
Now the CIA & MKULTRA overlap with PG because children were used for unethical experiments, sexually abused and/or used in blackmail schemes. There are excellent books on the subject by good authors while there is also a new genre of sensational writers with little or no references rehashing the good work.
It's a voluminous subject I've researched for decades & Facebook was the best venue to reach people that were close to the scene, if that condemns me then write me off, though while some of you got involved in PG the last year or two I was outing pedos on AOL to the FBI in the early 90s & followed the sex-trafficking issue about the same length.
My main expertise is in the MKULTRA area but over time the cross connections came apparent with the CIA/Finders cult & Franklin Savings Conspiracy child trafficking cases.
There's no doubt that valuable evidence & leads are turned up here, I could easily just lurk for my own uses but having some depth in these areas I have little regard for certain figureheads getting recent Internet attention with questionable backgrounds & inevitably trying to make a career out of these subjects.
Many are near idolized by the noobs though not the original sources & often dramatizing or assuming facts from slightest evidence.
I read Acid Dreams. Never used drugs but lived near Hollywood at one time. So HOW do I find your FB group? I'd like to read the discussion as I have many questions.
Sounds like a pretty subjective opinion here based on my own experience watching his material. His and Outrim's work correlates well with what Dave McGowan has always said about the California 'scene'. I'll simply have to consider your opinion 'half baked'.
I call out a bunch of the "holy cows" of contemporary "pop" conspiracy theories & will go into more of my qualifications over time, but two standards apply IMO when making claims or theories in this genre. Does it pass the basic tenets of journalism & does it pass the legal definition of slander or libel. This would be akin to proof in the scientific method.
These kinds of standards are necessary or else you enter the David Icke realm of "shape shifting reptilians". Not to say Queen Elizabeth isn't one, but what is the evidence?
Now most celebs & dead people won't sue for slander for calling them "Monarch handlers" or "reptilians" because in general terms they would tie up their time & careers taking on every psycho's claims besides actual stalkers claiming they are "married" etc..
There are some in the conspiracy genre with actual mental issues besides claims of the CIA beaming thoughts at them, not that there aren't actual cases.
Learning to distinguish the difference keeps one from the Icke/Jones level of clickbait/hype while most doing that level are also trying to make money from it.
There are legit, serious researchers who get peer recognition, publishing deals, footnote their claims & don't go into slander/libel to make money.
Then there are amatuers or huxters, often with mental issues that will make the slightest association "proof" of conspiracy, which if they have fanboys like Irvin might get their innuendo taken as fact or history if it gets repeated enough despite no real proof given.
When I call out these sacred cow types I've done my homework or researched their backgrounds besides claiming far more depth & expertise on the subject matter. But time will tell.
Putin sat next to QE II while both were driven in her car. Putin called her "not human." So exactly what does that really mean? I would cast more aspersions on her husband for many different reasons including his questionable taste in humor and some of the statements he's made about the "lesser" beings of the world. He'd like to be reincarnated as WTF?
Personally I think close to 90% of conspiracy theory has some basis in truth & reality is far stranger than people assume, but whether one can say something is factual or true is another level than speculation or theory.
I've seen UFOs with others several times & evidence of whistleblowers is near overwhelming but believers can agree while all the evidence given to skeptics rarely moves them.
Much work gets accomplished in groups like PG but people have to watch the human tendencies of lynch mob or witch burning mentality or basing assumed facts on assumptions, more so if innocent parties might be targeted by mistake.
At the same time huge amount of disinfo is pumped out by shills to defame conspiracy theorists & often becomes a meme of its own such as the "flat earth" types.
view the rest of the comments →
Da-Cat ago
Jan Irwin / Gnostic Media is considered a complete loon by anyone in MKULTRA or psychedelic research no matter which side they take. Also many later writers on these subjects after about 1990 recirculate made up hype & disinfo to sell books, seminars or YouTube/blog clickbait. Irvin was a psychedelic proponent that OD'd on DMT, went totally paranoid & started claiming everyone involved with psychedelics professionally were CIA agents, often guilt by association, etc..
This is also a problem with a few female authors on Monarch programming claiming recovered memories. Fritz Springmeier got outed as a phoney "minister" & the woman he "deprogrammed" turned on his writings about her, besides he started an affair with her when they were both married & he had children. Some "minister".
While CIA & Satanic SRA are well-documented by responsible journalists there is now a market for hype & obfuscation as marketing & clickbait as in much other conspiracy theory.
Some of the people doing useful work also without knowing recirculate hype & disinfo & the model for this was the UFO movement which model is now used throughout CT by going over the top, David Icke & Alex Jones for example, 90% truth with 10% bullshit & normals chuck the rest.
ASolo ago
You're gonna have to bring some of your dumb shit over here cuz I don't do fakebook...
Look guys, I got all the proof in the worLD you just gotta fish through my Facebook to find it, from the mouth of the experts, on facebook, but.... "They are legit, serious researchers who get peer recognition, publishing deals, footnote their claims & don't go into slander/libel to make money." -on facebook.
Yeah.
Looks like WE'VE got a debate our voat member for 29 days. How old is the voat pizzagate subforum? 3 submissions, one on Bieber, really dude?
Your going to have to reach pretty far to dispute any of Dave McGowan's work.
Da-Cat ago
I've read a lot of Dave McGowan's work & think it's pretty good, didn't say anything against him, I'm referring to Jan Irvin.
ASolo ago
Umm, expressly whom considers them loons? Obviously just you.
Da-Cat ago
I have a Facebook group based on the Acid Dreams (book) scenario with the focus on whether the CIA intentionally spread LSD to ferment the counterculture. Various psychedelic figureheads or experts are involved that were around people like Albert Hofmann, Timothy Leary, etc..
Some are published authors on psychedelics while others interviewed many principles, others are figures from conspiracy, psychology or transhumanism.
Most know of Jan Irvin, just was looking at his Facebook profile & noticed a half dozen of current members are still FB friends with him, likely haven't had confrontations though their psychedelic backgrounds would make them "CIA agents" by his definition.
My own background includes over 4 decades research in this area. My father was close & worked with The Manchurian Candidate author & the dorector of the movie, along with notables like John Lilly MD a family friend. I could go into much more depth but the point is almost everyone I respect in the subject thinks Irvin is a nutcase, also a few that knew mutual associates have made allegations of theft of a mutual friend's work.
Besides having had a nearly 3 hour diatribe with the jerk on FB Messenger I might yet publish even others I know only incidentally have stories & loath the guy.
ASolo ago
And even IF the guy is kookie, he has a platform and works with several other researchers that cross examine each others material. You defend A DRUG that has been proven to have disastrous long term side effects and a plethora of negative social change and you want to stand here and debate legitimacy?
Feels like something else, obfuscation.
Da-Cat ago
Actually psychedelics are being used now in new clinical trials with lots of evidence of use for illnesses like depression & PTSD.
You are entitled to your opinion but mine is based on both research & experience.
On almost any medical drug there are side effects & for example several decades' work on antidepressants is now discounted while psychedelics are being touted as getting remarkable effects.
Many natural ones have been in use 1000s of years by shamanic healers or indigenous tribes. Not out to argue the point in PG but there's plenty of evidence if you want it. Not talking about stoners partying but legit scientific research.
ASolo ago
I don't get it, Lilly died in 2001, internet discussion forums were just coming into themselves and FB was and still is drama central. You are confusing the hell out of me.
Da-Cat ago
USENET forums started in 1980 btw: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet?wprov=sfla1
Mentioned Facebook because Jan Irvin was highly engaged there with both his fanboys & critics. I have no dog in the fight if people like or follow him, he turns up useful background at times, it's just his conclusions based on flimsy evidence I dislike, like labelling Gordon Wasson or Terence McKenna "CIA agents" for the slightest associations.
This is more of a topic for conspiracy or MKULTRA but where people are used for sources without much background their reliability comes into question, just like as if Alex Jones or David Icke were mentioned.
Now the CIA & MKULTRA overlap with PG because children were used for unethical experiments, sexually abused and/or used in blackmail schemes. There are excellent books on the subject by good authors while there is also a new genre of sensational writers with little or no references rehashing the good work.
It's a voluminous subject I've researched for decades & Facebook was the best venue to reach people that were close to the scene, if that condemns me then write me off, though while some of you got involved in PG the last year or two I was outing pedos on AOL to the FBI in the early 90s & followed the sex-trafficking issue about the same length.
My main expertise is in the MKULTRA area but over time the cross connections came apparent with the CIA/Finders cult & Franklin Savings Conspiracy child trafficking cases.
There's no doubt that valuable evidence & leads are turned up here, I could easily just lurk for my own uses but having some depth in these areas I have little regard for certain figureheads getting recent Internet attention with questionable backgrounds & inevitably trying to make a career out of these subjects.
Many are near idolized by the noobs though not the original sources & often dramatizing or assuming facts from slightest evidence.
AgainstPedos ago
I read Acid Dreams. Never used drugs but lived near Hollywood at one time. So HOW do I find your FB group? I'd like to read the discussion as I have many questions.
ASolo ago
Sounds like a pretty subjective opinion here based on my own experience watching his material. His and Outrim's work correlates well with what Dave McGowan has always said about the California 'scene'. I'll simply have to consider your opinion 'half baked'.
Da-Cat ago
I call out a bunch of the "holy cows" of contemporary "pop" conspiracy theories & will go into more of my qualifications over time, but two standards apply IMO when making claims or theories in this genre. Does it pass the basic tenets of journalism & does it pass the legal definition of slander or libel. This would be akin to proof in the scientific method.
These kinds of standards are necessary or else you enter the David Icke realm of "shape shifting reptilians". Not to say Queen Elizabeth isn't one, but what is the evidence?
Now most celebs & dead people won't sue for slander for calling them "Monarch handlers" or "reptilians" because in general terms they would tie up their time & careers taking on every psycho's claims besides actual stalkers claiming they are "married" etc..
There are some in the conspiracy genre with actual mental issues besides claims of the CIA beaming thoughts at them, not that there aren't actual cases.
Learning to distinguish the difference keeps one from the Icke/Jones level of clickbait/hype while most doing that level are also trying to make money from it.
There are legit, serious researchers who get peer recognition, publishing deals, footnote their claims & don't go into slander/libel to make money.
Then there are amatuers or huxters, often with mental issues that will make the slightest association "proof" of conspiracy, which if they have fanboys like Irvin might get their innuendo taken as fact or history if it gets repeated enough despite no real proof given.
When I call out these sacred cow types I've done my homework or researched their backgrounds besides claiming far more depth & expertise on the subject matter. But time will tell.
AgainstPedos ago
Putin sat next to QE II while both were driven in her car. Putin called her "not human." So exactly what does that really mean? I would cast more aspersions on her husband for many different reasons including his questionable taste in humor and some of the statements he's made about the "lesser" beings of the world. He'd like to be reincarnated as WTF?
Da-Cat ago
Personally I think close to 90% of conspiracy theory has some basis in truth & reality is far stranger than people assume, but whether one can say something is factual or true is another level than speculation or theory.
I've seen UFOs with others several times & evidence of whistleblowers is near overwhelming but believers can agree while all the evidence given to skeptics rarely moves them.
Much work gets accomplished in groups like PG but people have to watch the human tendencies of lynch mob or witch burning mentality or basing assumed facts on assumptions, more so if innocent parties might be targeted by mistake.
At the same time huge amount of disinfo is pumped out by shills to defame conspiracy theorists & often becomes a meme of its own such as the "flat earth" types.