Doomstead Diner Menu => Doom Psychology & Philosophy => Topic started by: RE on August 26, 2017, 10:21:02 PM

Title: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: RE on August 26, 2017, 10:21:02 PM
Nicole told me about this shit a couple of years ago, but she wasn't prepared at the time to go public with it.  Now she has.  It was published on The Wrong Kind of Green (http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2017/08/26/statement/) website.  Thanks to RandyC for making me aware of it.

Edit: I incorrectly attributed this Statement to Nicole Foss due to its parallel to a narrative Nicole told me 2-3 years ago.  It is correctly attributed to Cory Morningstar.

RE

STATEMENT

Wrong Kind of Green Aug 26, 2017 Neo-Liberalism and the Defanging of Feminism

August 26, 2017

To all-

It has come to our attention that a respected leader of our small online enclave has betrayed the trust many people have instilled in him over the past years.  We are stunned at these revelations like everyone else.  It was with much internal debate and emotional pain that we decided as a group that we had to release the information to the community.  Although this form of information is not our usual forte as we are collectively concerned about overriding issues, such as leaving some form of a natural world above all else, it was something so stunningly vile that we had no other choice but to present it to the community as our conscience would not allow us to conceal this from the public.

Since this decision, which is something we thoroughly debated due to its seriousness, there is much online discussion regarding to what degree his transgressions can be described as terrible and even if they should be in the public due to the personal nature of the correspondence.  From this perspective, this person and his supporters have pointed to the fact that the behavior between himself and the woman in question was of a consensual, private nature, and should be of no concern to the wider community.  We believe this argument falls short for three critical reasons which should be considered both separately and collectively.

The first reason is one of ethics, which is separate from legality.  The word ethics is defined as “a branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct.”  Most professional organizations have codes of ethics, which participants must adhere to in order to remain in good standing.  In regards to its specific ethical standards, the American Psychological Association states “your psychologist shouldn’t also be your friend, client, or sex partner.  That’s because psychologists are supposed to avoid relationships that could impair their professional performance or harm their clients. One type of relationship that’s never acceptable is a sexual relationship with a current client.“

This person has taken on several roles, which in combination provide the framework for producing potentially serious ethical concerns.  As a recognized authority in the field of climate science, this person’s words contain the weight of authority for many.  His carefully worded prognostications of a coming end of human existence on the planet, though backed by his scientific understanding,  nonetheless have the ability to produce a state of anxiety, uncertainty, and despair in those who accept his perspective.  This person acknowledges this on his website, stating that “Because the topics of his presentations sometimes induce despair, Guy became a certified grief-recovery specialist in January 2014.”

The combination of his pursuits, as a climate scientist predicting the end of life as we know it, and grief counselor, puts him in the unique role of both producing or exacerbating the effect of anxiety or despair in an individual, as well as creating the context through which that despair is then addressed.  His audience, of which we have been a part, consists of individuals often marginalized by our larger society that ignores the very real warnings of catastrophic  climate change.  The views shared by many in our Near Term Human Extinction (NTHE) group have produced not simply a sense of despair about the future, but also a sense of isolation from our immediate communities and families.  Solace is then sought out within the NTHE community, under the banner of this person’s scientific findings.

While in many ways natural responses warranted by our current situation, this combination of despair, confusion, and isolation, none the less set up the potential for the exploitation of those who acutely feel the desperation and disorientation of abrupt climate change, and have nowhere else to turn for answers.

And this is the reason for the need for ethics and ethical boundaries.  This person is in a position of authority with direct influence over the mental, emotional, and in some cases physical and monetary lives, of those who exist in a state of vulnerability.  This is a state which he has helped to facilitate and of which he profits from in his personal life.  To then use that position, as this person has done, to engage in sexualized relations with women by way of administering a self-serving “healing” to individuals who are going such traumatic personal experiences, is a violation of ethical boundaries.  From a purely ethical perspective within a narrowly focused context of a professor/student and grief therapist/client context, the exact content of these relations, which will justifiably elicit revulsion in many by themselves, is not the primary concern.  The mere existence of these relations under such power dynamics, whether consensual or not, is at best ethically compromised, simply because of the potential  for abuse that exists, even if no actual abuse can be conclusively identified.  As the revelations of women who have come forward and expressed their pain with regard to these relationships continues to grow, this strongly indicates that emotional abuse and the abuse of power were at play and their claims should be taken with utmost seriousness. At the most basic level, it is because these abuses could take place that professional boundaries and codes of ethics are established and why we should reject this person‘s behavior.

In that vein, the truth of the matter is that whatever grey area there may potentially be is no longer up for debate due to his repeated and lengthy record of attempting and succeeding in taking advantage of women in a vulnerable position emotionally due to the disheartening mental and social effects of personally accepting the ongoing Sixth Great Extinction (of which humanity will be one of its victims, as well as its singular cause).  As one of the admittedly unfiltered and honest voices concerning this present set of circumstances with few people having the sphere of influence that he has in our small community,  the unethical manner in which he used this trust for nefarious sexual ends repeatedly has left us no other recourse but to do everything in our power to stop him from continuing the same behavior.

This then leads to the second critical point.  While the argument has been made that in regard to his relations with one particular woman, the content is irrelevant because of its consensual nature, this defense rings hollow.  To use an analogy: while living in a free society one may be legally permitted to hold racist beliefs and freely associate with other racists, a member of the NAACP would  nonetheless rightfully oppose its leader if they were later discovered to be a member of the KKK.  Such an association would clearly violate the spirit and mission of an organization promoting racial justice, and in the duplicity of core beliefs in the leadership, it would  also indicate a threat to the structural integrity of the organization and potentially its members.  It would not matter whether the current leader had joined the KKK after being first approached by a klansman, or if the leader started a chapter on his own.  The compromise would be clear.

Similarly, the content of his interactions with one woman in question, no matter how they came about, indicated the willingness of this person to engage in, perhaps initiate, rape fantasies  and other degrading and sexually objectifying dialogues that are not congruous with the core values of a significant number of members of the Near Term Human Extinction Support Group and its associated community.  This incongruity is borne out in the fact that he has spoken out specifically against patriarchy on his regular online radio program and in innumerous public forums and presentations, but has engaged in fantasies of rape and sexual enslavement, which represent the most extreme form of patriarchy, regardless of how that interaction began.   Therefore, the problems surrounding the content of his interactions are twofold.  They are contained in both the degrading, misogynist verbiage itself and the fact that such interactions represent a betrayal of trust relating to the public image of a respect for life and an opposition to patriarchy that he has cultivated in the public eye to his personal benefit.

The destruction of the Earth, the underlying concern of the NTHE support group, is the direct result of human and environmental exploitation, a core element of which is the domination of women where females are treated as property to be used  like much of the natural world, mere objects for male gratification.  Thus the move from more egalitarian, hunter gatherer societies into stratified agricultural and industrial societies, which culminated in today’s planet devouring global civilization which this person critiques, entailed the objectification and commodification of women.  To participate in such objectification and fantasies of female subjugation with a potential member of the NTHE group no less, goes beyond hypocrisy.  It signifies that in regard to what this person believes and values, he cannot be trusted.  And given the context, as suggested in the above analogy, this duplicity threatens both group integrity and potentially the safety of its members.

Perhaps some would say that the way in which the information was obtained makes us no better and even worse than the perpetrator, as there are many online accusations of this being the case.  However, we didn’t go out seeking this information, even if we are greatly appreciative of it since it allows us the opportunity to stop any future manipulations by someone in a leadership position.  It was brought to us and we made the difficult decision to use it for the greater good of stopping any further occurrences – our decision superseding any disparaging things said about us individually or collectively.

Ultimately, the fact of the matter is that none of the individuals who became privy to this information have an axe to grind with this person. Actually, this is quite the contrary.  We are all people who had a great amount of respect and admiration of him as a scholar and a person.  It wasn’t until recently that those who possessed such a tremendous amount of respect for this man started questioning his motives outside of the irrefutable science and his singular desire to provide it to the public.  Sadly, this recent incident dispelled any doubts in our minds regarding much of his endeavors.

We are a small community of activists.  Most of what we know to be true in this world in regards to the state of affairs of the planet are things that are not accepted by the mainstream world, even though they are playing out in real time and disaffecting humanity at this very instant and with growing intensity.  As it is difficult to find any sources of solidarity, be it local or globally, once this disparate group of human beings find comrades or leaders (of which there are even less), we tend to cling on to them in great desperation as they are truly few and far between.

As this is the case, the people who come to us and try to find a community of some sort to explain to them what is going on or just commiserate about the ongoing travails of this global society are the picture of vulnerability during their greatest hour of need.  Hence, it is unethical, even predatory, for anyone to take advantage of these people while they are most defenseless.  As some people are trying to construe this as just a single, solitary case,  the fact of the matter is that this has been an ongoing pattern for awhile now and has reached a point where someone must step in and stem the tide of abuse this man is committing on this tiny yet venerable group.

As such, it begs the question how long can people righteously withhold  what they know to be the truth when it comes to this man’s interaction with the members of such a small group, an already victimized sect who find very little acceptance in general society?  Can we, as supposedly moral people, just sit back idly and allow this type of behavior to continue unabated since it is the path of least resistance to stay silent?  As the response from this tight knit community has ranged from outrage to acceptance, the outcome of this revelation is of no real importance as biases abound as to the acceptance of this information.  Since that is the case, the only thing of barometric significance is apprising the people of the truth to keep them from harm, which was our singular reason for the release of this information.

Although we are cognizant that all of us have personal transgressions and no one is perfect, the predatory nature of this individual makes him a threat to both those who may be accepting of his advances and, most importantly, those who are not.  If the interaction is one of consent amongst equals, it is not the business of us as individuals or as a group to intercede at all.  But, when there is a blatant disregard for the welfare of the people  in an attempt to serve the lascivious desires of one man, then that is something that must be addressed by those who are in power to do so by any means necessary.

This brings us to the third and final critical point.  Not only was there a sordid psycho-sexual aspect of what took place that was against everything this man professed to be of a personal nature as a leader of a social movement, he also betrayed the confidence and trust of another intellectual leader and comrade in the movement, where, based on his documented language, it is a legitimate concern as to whether or not he would have been an actual physical threat to her if he had the opportunity.  With this third and final critical piece, his actions go beyond purely professional ethical violations and public misrepresentations of core values which demonstrate a willingness to degrade and objectify women.  His discussion moves into the realm of creating a physical environment that justifiably feels unsafe to core members.  As previously mentioned, there are other cases of women who have begun to voice their own troubling experiences, which at this time we cannot provide further details.

Therefore, even though we have all had an immense amount of respect for this man over the years, the recent events show he isn’t worthy of being in a position of influence and power over others, as he has abused it in the past, is abusing it presently and will assuredly continue this behavior in the future if no one attempts to at least stop him.

Although we are understanding that people will still hold their opinions about the veracity of the evidence against this man and come away absolving him of all guilt in this series of events, the primary thing we hope to accomplish is to warn those who are in the community about the ulterior motives of this man.  Once people are provided all the evidence, it is up to them to make a personal decision if they wish to continue their relationship with this person, be it personal and/or professional.  We aren’t here to tell anyone what to do in any aspect, as freedom of thought and choice is something we believe in and respect.  However, we would be remiss if we didn’t provide people the total knowledge they need to make informed decisions.

As we know that many people will consider our revelation as being divisive and a planned attack for some fantastical reason that has no basis in reality, we can only say we received this information through no attempt on our part and will receive no reward for releasing it.  Once we became aware of it though, there was no other recourse but to bring it to the public sphere, as the ongoing pattern of behavior was spiraling out of control. There will be those who will cast aspersions against our character and accuse us of somehow profiting in some way from this event, even though this is anything but the case.  Still, there will be many people who will consider us turncoats, paid informants, subversives and every other form of accusation as to our motives.  Yet, we will almost assuredly lose more favor and receive heightened scorn through providing this information than any other outcome.  No matter what blowback we receive though, it is worth it to us to receive a mountain of negative response rather than live with the unconscionable act of staying silent in the face of knowing malfeasance.

We welcome all queries about the veracity of the information since the specific evidence is part of the public domain and not under our supervision.  We have nothing to hide and will vociferously defend our decisions in this matter since to be silent in this regard is criminal, if not legally, then definitely morally.

We are greatly appreciative of the support from our online community in bringing this to the fore.

Thank you.

Michael  Sliwa, Host of the radio show Nature Bats Last from August 2014 to May 2017

Derrick Jensen, Deep Green Resistance

Lierre Keith, Deep Green Resistance

Cory Morningstar, Wrong Kind of Green

Forrest Palmer, Wrong Kind of Green

Luke Orsborne, Wrong Kind of Green

 

+++

Psychiatrist, researcher, teacher, and author Judith Herman:

“Authoritarian, secretive, sometimes grandiose, and even paranoid, the perpetrator is nevertheless exquisitely sensitive to the realities of power and to social  norms. Only rarely does he get into difficulties with the law; rather, he seeks out situations where his tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired. His demeanor provides an excellent camouflage, for few people believe that extraordinary crimes can be committed by men of such conventional appearance.  The perpetrator’s first goal appears to be the enslavement of his victim, and he accomplishes this goal by exercising despotic control over every aspect of the victim’s life. But simple compliance rarely satisfies him; he appears to have a psychological need to justify his crimes, and for this he needs the victim’s affirmation. Thus he relentlessly demands from his victim professions of respect, gratitude, or even love. His ultimate goal appears to be the creation of a willing victim. Hostages, political prisoners, battered women, and slaves have all remarked upon the captor’s curious psychological dependence upon his victim. George Orwell gives voice to the totalitarian mind in the novel 1984: “We are not content with negative obedience, nor even with the most abject submission. When finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will. We do not destroy the heretic because he resists us; so long as he resists us we never destroy him. We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him. We burn all evil and all illusion out of him; we bring him over to our side, not in appearance, but genuinely, heart and soul.”

 The desire for total control over another person is the common denominator of all forms of tyranny. Totalitarian governments demand confession and political conversion of their victims. Slaveholders demand gratitude of their slaves. Religious cults demand ritualized sacrifices as a sign of submission to the divine will of the leader. Perpetrators of domestic battery demand that their victims prove complete obedience and loyalty by sacrificing all other relationships. Sex offenders demand that their victims find sexual fulfillment in submission. Total control over another person is the power dynamic at the heart of pornography. The erotic appeal of this fantasy to millions of terrifyingly normal men fosters an immense industry in which women and children are abused, not in fantasy but in reality.”


FINAL-STATEMENT-AUGUST-26-2017-final-revision (http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/FINAL-STATEMENT-AUGUST-26-2017-final-revision.pdf)
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Surly1 on August 27, 2017, 06:18:51 AM
Nicole told me about this shit a couple of years ago, but she wasn't prepared at the time to go public with it.  Now she has.  It was published on The Wrong Kind of Green (http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2017/08/26/statement/) website.  Thanks to RandyC for making me aware of it.

RE

I saw some discussion of this on The Panic room, Gail Zawacki's FB page. Was wondering WTF was going on. If this is accurate, a lot of things make more sense as they fall into place.

ICK.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Eddie on August 27, 2017, 06:55:32 AM
Was not aware of the "psycho-sexual" angle. WTF is Nicole talking about? Sounds a bit far-fetched, imho.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Randy C on August 27, 2017, 07:20:27 AM
There is more information on Facebook.  I was not aware of the nature of the problem until a week ago.  It first surfaced when Robin Westenra of Seemorerocks blog made comments that a woman had accused Guy of taking advantage of her.  Guy claims it was among consenting adults, but the problem is one of ethics, taking advantage of vulnerable people as a grief councilor.

Also, take a look at the people who added their names to the bottom of the statement, Mike Sliwa lived near Guy in New Mexico and co-hosted his radio show.  The two were friends!  I doubt very much that this is just a personal attack because Cory Morningstar and Derrick Jensen co-signed it as well as three other people.  I hardly think they would do that and risk their reputation and position in the collapse community without good reason.

Take a look at Guy's more recent posts on NBL.  He is taking a break from his public presence due to "professional trolls" and the "deep-state."

https://guymcpherson.com/2017/08/im-mostly-done/#more-14549

Something is clearly wrong here. 

Finally, Nicole and Guy had a falling out several years ago because Guy was rather rude to her, as well as others analysts in the collapse community because he didn't think they were taking a strong enough stand on the coming collapse.  He has been banned from The Automatic Earth for some time now, it is not even acceptable to speak his name on that web site.

If you want access to the Facebook feed, send Robin Westerna a friends request so you can read what people are saying.  Friend Nicole Foss as well as she posted it shortly after Wrong Kind of Green posted it.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Randy C on August 27, 2017, 07:29:49 AM
From Facebook, Robin Westenra's reaction to the letter from Mike Sliwa.

Robin Westenra
9 hrs ·

Todays reflections.

Yesterday I went to the funeral of a beloved cousin who was, amongst other things was bit of a character especially when it came to his relations with the ladies. What impressed me was the acceptance of his occasional waywardness amongst those who knew him.

Then I woke up this morning to a very public statement about my friend, Guy McPherson,more- or-less comparing him with a man taking advantage of a helpless young woman.

There are several things desperately wrong (and that is putting things mildly) with this.

The first is acting as judge, jury and executioner without knowing all the facts.

I am someone with somewhat old-fashioned values and do not take kindly to this publc shaming over something that is very private?

Who can honestly, hand-over-heart tell me they are perfect?

Imagine how people would have reacted in the not-so-distant past if, in the midst of a dsiagreement I took my love letters and without consultation went and photocopied them and mailed them out to all my friends.

You’d all be quite correctly outraged.

Yet, this is exactly what happened here from what I can see. I have seen enough of the correspondance to be able to say that the young lady in question was far from innocent. In fact the correspondance shows that this person was strongly into BDSM and rape fantasies and actually initiated the correspondence.

What induced her to turn and release the equivalent of photocopied private correspondence I have no idea but I can hazard some guesses.

I am well aware of sexism that is becoming MORE, not LESS rampant,pushed largely by a media-driven agenda.

It is many years since I watched a Hollywood movie but I am told that in films women are being relegated once again to being sex objects.

All the while every form of ‘identity politics’ is being pushed so that every form of sexual perversion is put on a pedestal while ‘red-blooded heterosexuals’ (women as well as men) are being castigated in the present toxic, febrile environment, especially, it seems, in America.

There is a climate of blame.

Somebody, ALWAYS, has to be to blame. Whatever happened to acceptance of human nature.

If there was a crime in this case it was of being naive and too trusting of people one doesn’t know personally.

Nobody was truly taken advantage of. Nobody was raped. It was all consensual in an environment that should have remained strictly private.

But I can bet that every word Guy McPherson writes, publically or privately, every word on Messenger will be being read in realtime by the Masters of the Universe.

In case you ask, NO, I will not share the documents that have been shared with me in confidence. That is a strictly private affair that has nothing to do with me or the people that have been loud in their condemnation.

I am angry, very upset and almost through with Facebook, and with the toxicity of the people that inhabit it. It encourages people to rush off to post their opinions even when these are at odds with the evidence.

I am contemplating giving up on Facebook and managing without it. I am not far off wanting to exit from all this shit.

If I disappear off Facebook I may well have decided to do just that.

Want to disagree? That’s fine but I doubt you will remain a Facebook “friend” longer than 5 minutes.

End of sermon.

Kevin Hester, Lisa Stewart, Pauline Panagiotou Schneider,
LikeShow more reactions
CommentShare
30 Robin Westenra, Pauline Panagiotou Schneider and 28 others
1 share
19 Comments
Comments
Kevin Hester
Kevin Hester Remember Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli whistle-blower who was caught in a Mossad 'Honeytrap' , kidnapped and imprisoned for blowing the whistle on Israhell's nuclear weapons program?
Guy like us all has made mistakes but I suspect this was a well plann...See More
Free Mordechai Vanunu
Public Figure
East Jerusalem
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
11
· 9 hrs · Edited
Manage
Lisa Stewart replied · 2 Replies · 1 hr
Kevin Hester
Kevin Hester http://nymag.com/.../climate-change-earth-too-hot-for... (http://nymag.com/.../climate-change-earth-too-hot-for...)
When Will the Planet Be Too Hot for Humans? Much, Much Sooner Than You…
nymag.com
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
3
· 9 hrs
Manage
Maree Conaglen
Maree Conaglen Trial by social media is so wrong. Guy's personal life is his own business.
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
11
· 9 hrs
Manage
Deejay Rebel
Deejay Rebel Well said Robin!
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
7
· 9 hrs
Manage
Gargi Gogoi
Gargi Gogoi I suppose this is how it is even though all was consensual and one's private life is no one else's business . But despite the Social Media trial now , it is still Guy's private life and people in near future will have to find something else to talk about.
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
7
· 9 hrs
Manage
Elli Xydias
Elli Xydias Sounds fishy as I mentioned on Mike Sliwa's page.

I read there also that Sliwa was using Guy's internet? At the Mud Hut? ...See More
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
7
· 8 hrs
Manage
Elli Xydias
Elli Xydias Maybe this is whats happening with the Serena cult followers?
Image may contain: 2 people, text
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
3
· 8 hrs
Manage
Heike Ngan
Heike Ngan This sounds like the nasty work of a gas lighter...a very common tactic among those caught or questioned for lying. A dreadful tactic, and points squarely at the moral bankruptcy of the perpetrator. Everything we do can be twisted by a determined narci...See More
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
8
· 8 hrs · Edited
Manage
Pauline Panagiotou Schneider replied · 2 Replies · 38 mins
Robin Westenra
Robin Westenra "Mike Sliwa is right now using Guy's internet at the Mud Hut.

Talk about hypocrisy. And ethics."
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
7
· 8 hrs
Manage
Torstein Viddal
Torstein Viddal Don't give up on face, Robin! This, too, will pass. And anyway, we need you! :)
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
9
· 7 hrs
Manage
Robin Westenra
Robin Westenra I am contemplating moving away from work and the blog - only Facebook
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
4
· 7 hrs
Manage
Gargi Gogoi replied · 1 Reply
Torstein Viddal
Torstein Viddal Sounds reasonable. Blog is a lot of work and sort of yesterday's platform.
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
2
· 7 hrs
Manage
Gina Webb
Gina Webb Beautifully put Robin, I have been more than disappointed by the personal attacks, disheartened even. Seems to be a mad witch hunt. I really appreciate your level headed perspective Robin, I would miss your posts if you weren't about.
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
7
· 6 hrs
Manage
Peter Choyce
Peter Choyce There is something all too unholy sanctamonius about the hangin jury. I hope they don't find my diary cuz they'll read it and publish it and it will be me that has to pay for the sins of man
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvK1n6ArYMc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvK1n6ArYMc)
Jim & Jean - Crucifixion
Lyrics: Phil Ochs
youtube.com
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
4
· 6 hrs
Manage
Diane Steele
Diane Steele Hateful people are everywhere. Either ignore, or delete and block. I enjoy reading your posts as well as Guy's. Don't let the haters bring you down.
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
2
· 3 hrs
Manage
Pauline Panagiotou Schneider replied · 1 Reply
Liz Brennan
Liz Brennan Being in the US, at first when I read the original post slamming Guy, I was appalled that someone would do something like that to another person. Then I thought more about it and was angry that it happened and like you, Robin, thought there was more to...See More
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
3
· 2 hrs · Edited
Manage
Pauline Panagiotou Schneider
Pauline Panagiotou Schneider Thank you for using your brain and heart, Robin.

This is such an obvious smear campaign. I heard that Bobcat Cole is determined to bring Guy down. ...See More
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
3
· 40 mins
Manage
Pauline Panagiotou Schneider
Pauline Panagiotou Schneider The putz with lame threats.
Image may contain: 1 person, beard
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · 40 mins
Manage
Pauline Panagiotou Schneider replied · 3 Replies · 22 mins
Karolina O'Donoghue
Karolina O'Donoghue Thanks for doing this, Robin. Several FB groups with admin I had thought trustworthy seem to be still allowing crazy speculation and gossip. I havent done much, in an attempt not to feed the trolls.

At the moment I am just distressed that certain influential members of the radical climate movement appear not to be able to see the wider stakes here.
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
2
· 26 mins
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 07:43:25 AM
WTF?  Seriously?  I read the entire article.  They never even said what supposedly happened.  It was all just insinuated.  Rape!  That is a strong word to use for consensual sex amongst adults. 

It sounds like complete bullshit to me.  Sounds like two people had some kinky sex, then somebody got their feelings hurt and went public to smear Guy's name.  It's nobodies fucking business is what it is, unless there was actually a rape.  Looks to me like this is a publicity stunt for Nicole. 

The world is burning and we're supposed to get all in arms about some consensual sex? 

I don't know much about Guy as a person.  I just know his angle on NTHE, which I disagree with.  However, it appears to me that this is hitting below the belt.  If it's consensual than it's nobodies business accept the participants in the consensual act.  If it's rape, than it's a police matter. 

This is one good reason why I refer to facebook as "swampbook" and avoid it like the plague. 
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 09:04:20 AM
I don't know what occured in this incident with this woman, I only know about the behavior patterns that Nicole observed over a couple of years and told me about in confidence.  I promised not to reveal any of this stuff.

What we are talking about here is not physical rape. Nicole said most of the time no physical sex is involved at all, although sometimes it may be.  What Guy apparently gets his jollies from is to take emotionally weak women and make them psychologically dependent on him.  He uses his whole NTHE shpiel as a lever to accomplish this task.  This is not "illegal" in any code of law you could find, so I doubt there is any "crime" here you could prosecute.  It is however if true quite unethical.

During the time Nicole observed the behaviors, Guy was married and together with his wife, I don't know if he still is.  So his wife was either unaware of it at the time or if aware she tolerated the behaviors.  Nicole herself is quite the ardent Feminist, so you have to take her opinions of what was going on with a grain of salt as well here.  Feminists tend to see male predation on females everywhere (particularly among WHITE males), so you never get a truly unbiased opinion from them.  For me though, Nicole's opinions hold more weight than what Guy says and does, and this critique rings true to his personality that I have observed.

It will be interesting to see what the Blowback is from this inside the Collapse Community, which as we all know is quite small overall.  I imagine Guy will take a Low Profile position for a while, although I don't think he will disappear completely.  It will be interesting also to see how this affects his speaking tours if he continues to do them.  One would expect Gail Zawacki to show up and try to disrupt them, she is not shy about pulling that shit.

Like Sands through the Hourglass, these are the Days of Our Collapse Lives.  ::)

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Collapse-Days-of-our-Lives.png)

RE
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: jdwheeler42 on August 27, 2017, 09:09:38 AM
I don't know much about Guy as a person.  I just know his angle on NTHE, which I disagree with.  However, it appears to me that this is hitting below the belt.  If it's consensual than it's nobodies business accept the participants in the consensual act.  If it's rape, than it's a police matter. 
For a Prophet of Doom, consensual sex is purely a private matter.

If Guy wants to call himself a Grief Counselor, though, he needs to follow their Code of Ethics.  If their code of ethics states that he can't have sexual relations with a current client, then he should have told her that he couldn't be her counselor effectively because he was sexually attracted to her.  Then he would have been free to pursue a relationship with her, if she consented.
Title: Nicole Foss is a Fossil Fuel Shill attacking a messenger of truth
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2017, 09:12:55 AM
Nicole Foss is a deceitful propagandist for the fossil fuel industry.  Her claim to being an "energy expert" was BULLSHIT from the moment she SAID, "I know, but there is money to be made.", when I pointed out to her in 2012 that Fracking is an obscenity.

She IGNORED the FACT that there were, and still are, MASSIVE costs to the biosphere in general, and people in particular, that make the Fracking ERoEI happy numbers a total fossil fuel funded fabrication (that Foss would happily repeat over and over (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013200859.png) ).

ANYONE (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-030817202100.gif) that has ANY respect for the Foss fossil fuel SHILL is worthy of pity, if not outright disdain.

I don't agree with much of what Guy says, but it is crystal clear to anyone with a modicum of objectivity and critical thinking skills that FOSS (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013200859.png)
 is out to undermine
(i.e. attack the messenger - fallacious debating technique) Guy's message simply because he has cited irrefutable evidence that the fossil fuel industry (and other polluters) are RESPONSIBLE for the biosphere degradation and the Sixth Mass Extinction Event we are now experiencing.

As usual, Nicole Foss is SHILLING for the fossil fuel industry, nothing more.

Guy is RIGHT that BUSINESS AS USUAL IS KILLING US.

(http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110217171320.png)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-270716175152.png)

Title: Nicole Foss BS meter reading
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2017, 09:26:56 AM
I don't know much about Guy as a person.  I just know his angle on NTHE, which I disagree with.  However, it appears to me that this is hitting below the belt.  If it's consensual than it's nobodies business accept the participants in the consensual act.  If it's rape, than it's a police matter. 
For a Prophet of Doom, consensual sex is purely a private matter.

If Guy wants to call himself a Grief Counselor, though, he needs to follow their Code of Ethics.  If their code of ethics states that he can't have sexual relations with a current client, then he should have told her that he couldn't be her counselor effectively because he was sexually attracted to her.  Then he would have been free to pursue a relationship with her, if she consented.

With all due respect, that is irrelevant to the issue at hand. Foss is engaging in an attack the messenger operation. If you cannot see that, I suggest you look deeper. She would like nothing more than for people to engage in arguing abut  the ethics of this, that or the other, just as long as the issue of biosphere destruction from the polluting business as usual status quo is not brought up. You are playing right into the Foss Fossil Fuel Shill's con.

It probably won't be long before Gail Tverberg weighs in with some added tear jerking distraction to defend Foss.  (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg)

When Foss talks, I always check the BS meter (see below for the reading on her latest effluent).


(http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817121829.png)


 
Title: Nicole Foss is credibility challenged
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2017, 09:40:03 AM
I don't know what occured in this incident with this woman, I only know about the behavior patterns that Nicole observed over a couple of years and told me about in confidence.  I promised not to reveal any of this stuff.

What we are talking about here is not physical rape. Nicole said most of the time no physical sex is involved at all, although sometimes it may be.  What Guy apparently gets his jollies from is to take emotionally weak women and make them psychologically dependent on him.  He uses his whole NTHE shpiel as a lever to accomplish this task.  This is not "illegal" in any code of law you could find, so I doubt there is any "crime" here you could prosecute.  It is however if true quite unethical.

During the time Nicole observed the behaviors, Guy was married and together with his wife, I don't know if he still is.  So his wife was either unaware of it at the time or if aware she tolerated the behaviors.  Nicole herself is quite the ardent Feminist, so you have to take her opinions of what was going on with a grain of salt as well here.  Feminists tend to see male predation on females everywhere (particularly among WHITE males), so you never get a truly unbiased opinion from them.  For me though, Nicole's opinions hold more weight than what Guy says and does, and this critique rings true to his personality that I have observed.

It will be interesting to see what the Blowback is from this inside the Collapse Community, which as we all know is quite small overall.  I imagine Guy will take a Low Profile position for a while, although I don't think he will disappear completely.  It will be interesting also to see how this affects his speaking tours if he continues to do them.  One would expect Gail Zawacki to show up and try to disrupt them, she is not shy about pulling that shit.

Like Sands through the Hourglass, these are the Days of Our Collapse Lives.  ::)

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Collapse-Days-of-our-Lives.png)

RE

I always have liked you, RE. But the fact that you have given Foss the time of day and even praised her knowledge of "energy" over the years shows a serious flaw of judgement on your part. It appears that you have been in friendly communication with her over the years. That too, is a blunder on your part.

But it's your life. Just don't be surprised when 99% of EVERYTHING that you thought made sense about energy ERoEI from Foss is proven to be TOTAL BULLSHIT on behalf of the fossil fuel industry.

I am your friend, RE. But I have not forgotten how you consistently sided with that SHILL Foss over energy issues when I severely criticized her. Yes, you defended my right to write my thoughts (that she and her side kick Ilargi attacked, undermined and refused to answer), but you never actually stated she's WRONG about energy and I'm RIGHT.

You probably still feel that way. You will probably never admit it, but you will learn I was right about the solution to our energy problems from the start.

Argue away. I am not in the mood to argue. Like I said, it's your life. If you want to befriend evil, lying people like Foss, that's your problem, not mine.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss BS meter reading
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 09:41:33 AM
When Foss talks, I aleays check the BS meter (see below for the reading on her latest effluent).

On the BS Meter, Nicole usually puts it at about 80%.  Guy pegs it.

RE
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Eddie on August 27, 2017, 09:52:53 AM
Counselors of all kinds are notorious for ethics violations. Seen that movie about the life of Carl Jung and his patient who had to be spanked to get off?

This reeks of the usual Social Justice Warrior/Uber-feminist BS. Another reason I refuse to do FB at all.
 
Conformity 2.0.....

Day of our Collapse Lives indeed! Oh, the drama.

I don't like Guy McPherson much for reasons I've stated many times. But this is some sad, silly shit.

True? Dunno, but completely irrelevant to my collapse life.
Title: Nicole Foss is the champion BS meter pegger
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2017, 09:53:17 AM
When Foss talks, I aleays check the BS meter (see below for the reading on her latest effluent).

On the BS Meter, Nicole usually puts it at about 80%.  Guy pegs it.

RE

The difference is not that significant, but it is interesting that you do not enter into the "20%" from Foss that you think is "acceptable". Guy does not bullshit about ERoEI happpy talk for fracking or any other fossil fuel. Guy cites scientific studies on extinction rates. Foss plays math games and cites fossil fuel industry stats like they were handed down to Moses on the Mountain while consitently ignoring pollution costs. Guy consistently points out the pollution costs.

Yeah, Guy is a super doomer and into some hyperbole about how soon it all comes crashing down. So? What part of the peer reviewed scientific studies he cites are not truthful or accurate? At least he doesn't pretend fossil fuels are God's gift to humanity. To claim, as Foss has done, that we will all die without fossil fuels is really pegging the BS meter!

Guy just states we will die BECAUSE we pollute, which is scientifically irrefutable (See: Do not industrially shit where you eat).


(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tKBsTGeWsKc/VznRUcnfo1I/AAAAAAAAyok/paDRwKq7pxQvOB0MOBc7Y7FOeBpjxwj6wCLcB/s1600/fracked%2Bgas%2Bis%2Ba%2Bbridge%2Bto%2Bnowhere.PNG)

Tell me WHO iis the REAL BULLSHITTER.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-220815161550.png)
Title: Re: Nicole Foss BS meter reading
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 10:05:12 AM
When Foss talks, I aleays check the BS meter (see below for the reading on her latest effluent).

On the BS Meter, Nicole usually puts it at about 80%.  Guy pegs it.

RE

Yep, this whole incident is bullshit.  It's a publicity stunt for Foss IMO.  Guy may be a sexual deviant.  And?  Who gives a fuck.  I certainly don't.  I agree that if he's a "grief counselor" then he shouldn't be fucking his clients.  However, WTF is a grief counselor?  Did he go to college and get a doctorate in psychiatry?  Probably he went and sang kumbyeya with some hippies and got a certificate in grief counseling?  Good grief...really?  Maybe I should go be a grief counselor for money? 

I've got no interest in wasting my time dealing with people who likely just need a good fuck.  Hell, sounds like Guy probably did that woman a favor.  Maybe part of his grief counseling is to give the gift of orgasm?  Who knows?  I, for one, don't give a shit.  Guy Mcstinkshin isn't selling me anything that I'm going to buy.  Nor is Foss.  This whole incident is just high school drama in the collapse-o-sphere. 

Consenting adults can fuck each other, yes?  If they want to put clothes pins on their balls and pretend that they are being raped, and they all consent, then what's the difference if their foreplay was talking about NTHE and how hard it is to deal with?  Sounds like NTHE, Nihilism, and S&M should be great bedfellows. 

"Oh yes, fuck me Guy, fuck me in the ass while I scream and squirm and yell rap, we're all going to die next year anyways...oh yeah Guy, fuck me with your little prick." 

"Fuck you guy, you hurt my feelings with your little prick...I'm telling the stupid little collapse-o-sphere that you're a rapping asshole." 

I'm not buyin' any of it. 
Title: Re: Nicole Foss is the champion BS meter pegger
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 10:28:18 AM
Tell me WHO iis the REAL BULLSHITTER.

In measuring Bullshit, IMHO Dr. McStinksion wins hands down.  There simply is no way every last Homo Sap will be dead by 2026.  Utter bullshit, he is out of his mind or using it to manipulate females who are depressed about the situation..

RE
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2017, 10:30:10 AM
When Foss talks, I aleays check the BS meter (see below for the reading on her latest effluent).

On the BS Meter, Nicole usually puts it at about 80%.  Guy pegs it.

RE

Yep, this whole incident is bullshit.  It's a publicity stunt for Foss IMO.  Guy may be a sexual deviant.  And?  Who gives a fuck.  I certainly don't.  I agree that if he's a "grief counselor" then he shouldn't be fucking his clients.  However, WTF is a grief counselor?  Did he go to college and get a doctorate in psychiatry?  Probably he went and sang kumbyeya with some hippies and got a certificate in grief counseling?  Good grief...really?  Maybe I should go be a grief counselor for money? 

I've got no interest in wasting my time dealing with people who likely just need a good fuck.  Hell, sounds like Guy probably did that woman a favor.  Maybe part of his grief counseling is to give the gift of orgasm?  Who knows?  I, for one, don't give a shit.  Guy Mcstinkshin isn't selling me anything that I'm going to buy.  Nor is Foss.  This whole incident is just high school drama in the collapse-o-sphere. 

Consenting adults can fuck each other, yes?  If they want to put clothes pins on their balls and pretend that they are being raped, and they all consent, then what's the difference if their foreplay was talking about NTHE and how hard it is to deal with?  Sounds like NTHE, Nihilism, and S&M should be great bedfellows. 

"Oh yes, fuck me Guy, fuck me in the ass while I scream and squirm and yell rap, we're all going to die next year anyways...oh yeah Guy, fuck me with your little prick." 

"Fuck you guy, you hurt my feelings with your little prick...I'm telling the stupid little collapse-o-sphere that you're a rapping asshole." 

I'm not buyin' any of it. 

Yep. But look deeper, Lucid. Go back to Randy C's post above and NOTICE when the "problem" began beween Foss and Guy (her stance on POLLUTING ENERGY SOURCES).

Then go back to the post further up with the psychology lesson from some learned poobah about the despicable behavior of people who wish to manipulate others. Oh it reads so serious and caring, doesn't it?

But they left out the FACT that the Automatic Earth website that Foss and Ilargi run BANS everybody that doesn't sing their tune. WHO is out to manipulite WHO, eh? WHO is out to propagandize and USE the vulnerable for the sake of polluting energy? WHO is trying to MAKE MONEY off of people who believe fossi lfuel happy talk? WHO is INTOLERANT of criticism and/or opposing views to the point of banning them?

Foss is GUILTY as sin of being a world class manipulator. The possible argument on her behalf that she manipulates greedy people instead of the "vulnerable" is a rather strange defense, don'tcha think?

So here we have a mean spirited bit of gossip dressed up in psychobabble while the incredibly mean spirited greed based push by foss and friends to defend the polluting status quo is totally ignored as if that has no bearing on the lives and health of ALL life forms on  this planet.


(http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2009/347/2/6/WTF_Smiley_face_by_IveWasHere.jpg)

Title: Re: Nicole Foss BS meter reading
Post by: Surly1 on August 27, 2017, 10:33:19 AM
I don't know much about Guy as a person.  I just know his angle on NTHE, which I disagree with.  However, it appears to me that this is hitting below the belt.  If it's consensual than it's nobodies business accept the participants in the consensual act.  If it's rape, than it's a police matter. 
For a Prophet of Doom, consensual sex is purely a private matter.

If Guy wants to call himself a Grief Counselor, though, he needs to follow their Code of Ethics.  If their code of ethics states that he can't have sexual relations with a current client, then he should have told her that he couldn't be her counselor effectively because he was sexually attracted to her.  Then he would have been free to pursue a relationship with her, if she consented.

With all due respect, that is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

AG, with the greatest affection and respect, it IS the matter at hand. JD has framed the issue perfectly. All other agendas, and Foss' role vis a vis energy, are irrelevant to the main issue, which is the Guy is accused of abusing a counselor relationship.

"Why now" remains a valid question, for which I have answer and less interest.

I content myself in knowing that three billion Chinese don't care.
Title: Nlicole Foss is a pollution pushing gossiping liar
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2017, 10:35:54 AM
When Foss talks, I aleays check the BS meter (see below for the reading on her latest effluent).

On the BS Meter, Nicole usually puts it at about 80%.  Guy pegs it.

RE

The difference is not that significant, but it is interesting that you do not enter into the "20%" from Foss that you think is "acceptable". Guy does not bullshit about ERoEI happpy talk for fracking or any other fossil fuel. Guy cites scientific studies on extinction rates. Foss plays math games and cites fossil fuel industry stats like they were handed down to Moses on the Mountain while consitently ignoring pollution costs. Guy consistently points out the pollution costs.

Yeah, Guy is a super doomer and into some hyperbole about how soon it all comes crashing down. So? What part of the peer reviewed scientific studies he cites are not truthful or accurate? At least he doesn't pretend fossil fuels are God's gift to humanity. To claim, as Foss has done, that we will all die without fossil fuels is really pegging the BS meter!

Guy just states we will die BECAUSE we pollute, which is scientifically irrefutable (See: Do not industrially shit where you eat).


(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tKBsTGeWsKc/VznRUcnfo1I/AAAAAAAAyok/paDRwKq7pxQvOB0MOBc7Y7FOeBpjxwj6wCLcB/s1600/fracked%2Bgas%2Bis%2Ba%2Bbridge%2Bto%2Bnowhere.PNG)

Tell me WHO iis the REAL BULLSHITTER.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-220815161550.png)

Tell me WHO iis the REAL BULLSHITTER.

In measuring Bullshit, IMHO Dr. McStinksion wins hands down.  There simply is no way every last Homo Sap will be dead by 2026.  Utter bullshit, he is out of his mind or using it to manipulate females who are depressed about the situation..

RE

Nice dodge of the real issues here.  ;) :evil4: Nice effort to keep peddling unproven assertions of manipulation of vulnerable females while ignoring all the harm Foss has caused by peddling polluting crap. Well done. (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013200859.png)

Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 10:44:17 AM


Foss is GUILTY as sin of being a world class manipulator. The possible argument on her behalf that she manipulates greedy people instead of the "vulnerable" is a rather strange defense, don'tcha think?

So here we have a mean spirited bit of gossip dressed up in psychobabble while the incredibly mean spirited greed based push by foss and friends to defend the polluting status quo is totally ignored as if that has no bearing on the lives and health of ALL life forms on  this planet.


(http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2009/347/2/6/WTF_Smiley_face_by_IveWasHere.jpg)

Well I'll willingly admit that I'm out of the Foss "Automatic Earth" loop.  Last time I read that shit Ashvin still had his own blog...as in before he started working for Foss. 

I was just reading AE to try to make sense of economics.  Then I read JMG's The Wealth of Nature and closed the book on the case of economics.  JMG is right about economics and all of that other shit is a bunch of smoke and mirrors in "this is too complicated for the layman to understand" equations and algorithms.  Modern day economics is based entirely on energy.  That is the limiting factor.  Digibits are not limited by anything but energy.  That's why this global economy hinging on BAU will continue until the Earth catches fire, we run out of petroleum, or somebody pushes the nuke button. 

Foss and Guy are both out to make money on collapse issues.  End of story. 

Guy likes to fuck around on his wife and play S&M with "helpless" females and Foss apparently likes to use assholes like Guy to further her own message.   

Personally I have no tolerance for feminism.  That's an entire other debate though.  However it is tied up in the accusations towards Guy.  I come to his defense just because he's a man, and I think if the liberal feminist had their way we'd all be castrated.  They've been actively setting up a world where men are only needed for sperm banks.  That's bullshit.  Yin and Yang after all.  And what's wrong with a caring mother who stays at home and raises children and keeps a healthy household?  Women have estrogen and oxytocin after all.  They are wired to care about little children and their childish complaints about toys and feelings and attempting to understand the cruel world.  Mom is supposed to hold the child and nurse him, tell him it's all going to be okay, and be a refuse from the cruel world.  Dad is not supposed to do that.  Dad is supposed to kill shit, sweat his ass off, and protect the nest.  He's supposed to kill something, rip it's guts out, skin it, and feed it to the family.  Touchy feeling doesn't kill an animal and rip it's guts out.   

Shit...I went off and went on a rant.  I'm just saying...fuck wearing pink shirts and "feeling" for some dumb bitch who just got off on some rough little pricking. 

The bigger issue for me, in this story, is the emasculation of the archetypical father that the feminist are all up in arms about.  They want to cut Zeus's dick off and pretend like he doesn't wield the power of creation with his...ummm...lightning bolt. 
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: monsta666 on August 27, 2017, 10:45:31 AM
I never knew Guy was a grief councillor. Now whether he has had sex with his patients is one thing but what these facts demonstrate is he is using his theory as a means of gaining clients for his business. Since there is a monetary as well as emotional incentive towards pushing his narrative one has to wonder how impartial he is when making statements. I never believed his theory on near-term human extinction and took whatever he said with a large pinch of salt. With these revelations I am even less inclined to believe what he says as I can see he is using his theories to make money and take advantage of vulnerable people. Now whether the more extreme accusations of rape or even sex are true or not is another matter but what he is doing is quite dubious and unethical... Even if we ignore the more extreme allegations. Now the issue here is there is no direct accusations and it is all insinuated so it is really quite difficult to decide on the veracity of the claims.
Title: Re: Nlicole Foss is a pollution pushing gossiping liar
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 10:52:49 AM
Nice dodge of the real issues here.  ;) :evil4: Nice effort to keep peddling unproven assertions of manipulation of vulnerable females while ignoring all the harm Foss has caused by peddling polluting crap. Well done.

I just call 'em as I see 'em AG.  You may not like it, but Guy Struck Out in my book and he is out of the Batter's Box for me.

If you wish to be a Dr. McStinksion supporter, this is your choice.  I can't buy that shit, but apparently you can.

(http://dailyfantasysportsreviews.info/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Umpire-Strike-Out.png)

RE
Title: Nicole Foss is credibility challenged
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2017, 10:55:01 AM
I don't know much about Guy as a person.  I just know his angle on NTHE, which I disagree with.  However, it appears to me that this is hitting below the belt.  If it's consensual than it's nobodies business accept the participants in the consensual act.  If it's rape, than it's a police matter. 
For a Prophet of Doom, consensual sex is purely a private matter.

If Guy wants to call himself a Grief Counselor, though, he needs to follow their Code of Ethics.  If their code of ethics states that he can't have sexual relations with a current client, then he should have told her that he couldn't be her counselor effectively because he was sexually attracted to her.  Then he would have been free to pursue a relationship with her, if she consented.

With all due respect, that is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

AG, with the greatest affection and respect, it IS the matter at hand. JD has framed the issue perfectly. All other agendas, and Foss' role vis a vis energy, are irrelevant to the main issue, which is the Guy is accused of abusing a counselor relationship.

"Why now" remains a valid question, for which I have answer and less interest.

I content myself in knowing that three billion Chinese don't care.


I personally do not like Guy McPherson. I consider him arrogant and totally disagree with his take on evolution and HOW SOON we will go extinct from fouling our nest with suicidal behavior. But he does not now, or ever has, lied about any fo the scientifc studies he cites. In contrast, Foss DOES have a track record of polluting energy ERoEI  bold faced mendacity. 

You may think  I am fixated on the pollution issue and see a pollution defending agenda where there is none. I considered that possibility and, after thinking it through, have rejected it.

You are a knowledgeable writer and know EXACTLY how the propaganda industry "works" and how a hit piece is formulated. You understand  defamatory innuendo and can smell it a mile away.

But HERE you are flat refusing to engage in the key question, Surly. The key question is CUI BONO? This is a DOG WHISTLE for limousine liberal tear jerking distraction!

You don't see that.

You want to stand up and defend vulnerable females everywhere. Me too.

But FOSS DOES NOT GIVE A TINKER'S DAMN ABOUT vulnearble females. Foss is about SHILLING FOR FOSSIL FUELS.

If you wish to claim that Foss's "energy expert" MO has no bearing on this particular issue, I will respectfully continue to disagree. EVERYTHING that Foss does publicly has to do with making money. And if you have not studied, in depth, HOW she has "made her money" over  the last decade, I suggest you do.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 10:59:46 AM
I never knew Guy was a grief councillor. Now whether he has had sex with his patients is one thing but what these facts demonstrate is he is using his theory as a means of gaining clients for his business. Since there is a monetary as well as emotional incentive towards pushing his narrative one has to wonder how impartial he is when making statements. I never believed his theory on near-term human extinction and took whatever he said with a large pinch of salt. With these revelations I am even less inclined to believe what he says as I can see he is using his theories to make money and take advantage of vulnerable people. Now whether the more extreme accusations of rape or even sex are true or not is another matter but what he is doing is quite dubious and unethical... Even if we ignore the more extreme allegations. Now the issue here is there is no direct accusations and it is all insinuated so it is really quite difficult to decide on the veracity of the claims.

I agree with you 100% Monsta. 

Guy is most certainly an asshole.  If it's all true then he is definitely abusing his power as a "grief counselor" and he's most certainly creating a market for his new certificate of power.  He's doing that to make money.  He's also, if the allegations are true, most certainly doing it to get laid...and if he's married he's a philandering bastard on top of that.  Which...Zeus was the achetypical philandering asshole...I'll admit...and that's immoral as well, but it doesn't warrant castration of the male role in this world. 

Guy is an asshole and Foss is a bitch. 

And so the human tragicomedy continues perpetuating on down through the ages. 

For the record, if Guy did set up the conditions just to take advantage of sensitive females then he definitely deserves public scorn.  However, it's not Foss's job to make sure nobody else suffers from another pretend rape pricking at the hands of Dr. Mcstinksion.  How does being vulnerable because you believe we're all going to die in the next couple of years mean that you don't want to fuck anyways?  What do the two have in relation to one another? 

That's the part I don't get.  You're vulnerable because you are upset that we're all supposedly going to die in the next couple of years?  You're vulnerable about NTHE?!!!  If we're all going to die then we might as well all be fucking each other!!!!  Why not?  As Walter in The Big Lebowski said so poetically "8 year olds dude."   
Title: Nicole Foss and the Automatic Enema
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2017, 11:01:39 AM
Nice dodge of the real issues here.  ;) :evil4: Nice effort to keep peddling unproven assertions of manipulation of vulnerable females while ignoring all the harm Foss has caused by peddling polluting crap. Well done.

I just call 'em as I see 'em AG.  You may not like it, but Guy Struck Out in my book and he is out of the Batter's Box for me.

If you wish to be a Dr. McStinksion supporter, this is your choice.  I can't buy that shit, but apparently you can.
(http://dailyfantasysportsreviews.info/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Umpire-Strike-Out.png)

RE

When logic is not on your side, you  twist the words of the debater and resort to insults. That's beneath you and  sad.  :( Foss, a serial liar on behalf of polluting energy sources, is your friend. You are being loyal, not logical. I get it.  Have a nice day, RE.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss is credibility challenged
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 11:09:46 AM
In contrast, Foss DOES have a track record of polluting energy ERoEI  bold faced mendacity. 



What are you talking about here Agelbert?  Can  you spell it out for me how she's a shill for the fossil fuel industry?  I don't need links and shit, just splain it to me please! 

Is she saying that without fossil fuel energy we're all fucked?  As in our fossil fuel powered global civilization won't work any longer without fossil fuels? 

I happen to agree with that if it's the case.  Our civilization rose up and was engineered and created around petroleum energy after all.  All of our infrastructure requires petroleum inputs fro our roads and bridges to the mining of metals for water pipes to the making of solar farms and massive wind turbines.  We are quite simply FUCKED without petroleum. 

Could there be another way?  Sure, there most certainly could have been...like less 6 billion people ago.  To think that we keep this whole shebang going on alternative energy is impossible.  Not without 6 billion or so people dying miserable deaths. 

Here's the thing I've learned in the last year.  Idealism is delusion.  Especially in a global economy perpetuated by fossil fuel BAU.  Respectfully, Agelbert...I'm not trying to piss you off...but I'm not buying renewable energy saving our civilization either.  In my mind, we've got a better chance of colonizing mars. 
Title: Re: Nicole Foss and the Automatic Enema
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 11:27:40 AM
Nice dodge of the real issues here.  ;) :evil4: Nice effort to keep peddling unproven assertions of manipulation of vulnerable females while ignoring all the harm Foss has caused by peddling polluting crap. Well done.

I just call 'em as I see 'em AG.  You may not like it, but Guy Struck Out in my book and he is out of the Batter's Box for me.

If you wish to be a Dr. McStinksion supporter, this is your choice.  I can't buy that shit, but apparently you can.
(http://dailyfantasysportsreviews.info/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Umpire-Strike-Out.png)

RE

When logic is not on your side, you  twist the words of the debater and resort to insults. That's beneath you and  sad.

Where is the "insult"?  ???  :icon_scratch:

All I said was you choose to place the words of Guy McPherson over those of Nicole Foss.  I choose to put those of Nicole over Guy.

Do not accuse me of insulting you.  If I want to insult a person, I can do it a whole lot better than that.  I am insulted by the fact you are accusing me of insulting you!  I did not do that, and you need to apologize to me for insinuating that I did.

RE
Title: Evidence That Foss is a Fossul Fuel Industry Shill
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2017, 12:10:21 PM
In contrast, Foss DOES have a track record of polluting energy ERoEI  bold faced mendacity.



What are you talking about here Agelbert?  Can  you spell it out for me how she's a shill for the fossil fuel industry?  I don't need links and shit, just splain it to me please! 

Is she saying that without fossil fuel energy we're all fucked?  As in our fossil fuel powered global civilization won't work any longer without fossil fuels? 

I happen to agree with that if it's the case.  Our civilization rose up and was engineered and created around petroleum energy after all.  All of our infrastructure requires petroleum inputs fro our roads and bridges to the mining of metals for water pipes to the making of solar farms and massive wind turbines.  We are quite simply FUCKED without petroleum. 

Could there be another way?  Sure, there most certainly could have been...like less 6 billion people ago.  To think that we keep this whole shebang going on alternative energy is impossible.  Not without 6 billion or so people dying miserable deaths. 

Here's the thing I've learned in the last year.  Idealism is delusion.  Especially in a global economy perpetuated by fossil fuel BAU.  Respectfully, Agelbert...I'm not trying to piss you off...but I'm not buying renewable energy saving our civilization either.  In my mind, we've got a better chance of colonizing mars.



Well, my friend, it is difficult to begin with your stated assumption that I am delusional. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817122018.gif) You know enough about me to realize I do ALL the math, not simply what is convenient to our polluting self serving suicidal status quo. And hyperbole about the probabilities of colonizing mars versus running our civilization on renewable energy makes it crystal clear that you do not respect what I have posted, even though you may respect me personally.

Lucid, I appreciate and am grateful for your respect, but this energy discussion has NEVER been about me or you or Foss or RE.

Yes, Foss is a shill for the fossil fuel industry. My assertion is based on the fact that she advocates happy talk ERoEI numbers for Fracking and petroleum. Yes, she admits coal is bad news and nuclear power is horribly expensive and polluting as well. So?

Her defense of Fracking amounts to shilling, period. If you want the long explanation, just ask. I will repost my polite letter to her several years ago tearing every single point she made about fossil fuels in general (and Fracking in particular) to tiny shreds. I made it clear that fossil fuels had a MUCH LOWER ERoEI than the fossil fuel industry shills like Charles Hall (Monsta's hero  (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg)) claimed.

The response was ZERO on energy. There was no discussion of pollution costs. There was no discussion of my assertion that Energy Return on Energy Invested was actually CAPITAL RETURN on CAPITAL INVESTED (thanks in part, but not all, to subsidies coerced from we-the-people INCLUDED in the ERoEI happy talk Foss and Hall peddle) because fossil fuels are energy NEGATIVE when all the costs are included.

Ilargi "responded" by claiming I did not write with the "caliber" that was "acceptable" at the Automatic Enema Earth. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/ugly004.gif)

RE went to bat for me, but they were not interested, and neither was Ashvin, who was an admin there at the time.

I will continue to disagree with you about our inability to survive without fossil fuels, and will continue to claim the "delusional" view, according to you, that, on the contrary, we guarantee our extinction by continuing to use fossil fuels.

But that has nothing to do with the Foss fossil fuel shilling MO. It is delusional to think we can continue to foul our nest and survive the sixth Mass Extinction. Why can't you understand that?

(https://d3pcsg2wjq9izr.cloudfront.net/files/40866/images/Edison-solar-energy.jpg)
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 12:16:54 PM
I am still waiting for the apology for you accusing me of insulting you AG.

RE
Title: Re: Evidence That Foss is a Fossul Fuel Industry Shill
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 12:41:11 PM

Well, my friend, it is difficult to begin with your stated assumption that I am delusional. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817122018.gif) You know enough about me to realize I do ALL the math, not simply what is convenient to our polluting self serving suicidal status quo. And hyperbole about the probabilities of colonizing mars versus running our civilization on renewable energy makes it crystal clear that you do not respect what I have posted, even though you may respect me personally.

That's not true.  I do respect what you have posted (although I have not seen a lot of it...admittedly).  I just don't believe we can keep our current BAU petroleum heavy way of life going for 7 billion people and counting on renewables. 


Quote
Yes, Foss is a shill for the fossil fuel industry. My assertion is based on the fact that she advocates happy talk ERoEI numbers for Fracking and petroleum. Yes, she admits coal is bad news and nuclear power is horribly expensive and polluting as well. So?

Like I said earlier, I don't know what she says or advocates.  I just know that she is part of the PO blogosphere.  I'm not disputing that she may be a shill for the fossil fuel industry.  I'm just saying that if she is I don't know how.  That's what I was asking for you to elucidate for me.  Just don't assume I've read everything that you have written here on the Diner. 


Quote
Her defense of Fracking amounts to shilling, period. If you want the long explanation, just ask. I will repost my polite letter to her several years ago tearing every single point she made about fossil fuels in general (and Fracking in particular) to tiny shreds. I made it clear that fossil fuels had a MUCH LOWER ERoEI than the fossil fuel industry shills like Charles Hall (Monsta's hero  (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg)) claimed.

The response was ZERO on energy. There was no discussion of pollution costs. There was no discussion of my assertion that Energy Return on Energy Invested was actually CAPITAL RETURN on CAPITAL INVESTED (thanks in part, but not all, to subsidies coerced from we-the-people INCLUDED in the ERoEI happy talk Foss and Hall peddle) because fossil fuels are energy NEGATIVE when all the costs are included.

Ilargi "responded" by claiming I did not write with the "caliber" that was "acceptable" at the Automatic Enema Earth. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/ugly004.gif)

RE went to bat for me, but they were not interested, and neither was Ashvin, who was an admin there at the time.

So she defended fracking?  How so?  That seems pretty stupid from a pollution point of view.  As in, it's highly polluting.  It's also a bandaid on the problem of fossil energy depletion.  It's only viable due to gullible investors and government subsidies.  I had no idea that she was saying that fracking was a good idea. 

Quote
I will continue to disagree with you about our inability to survive without fossil fuels, and will continue to claim the "delusional" view, according to you, that, on the contrary, we guarantee our extinction by continuing to use fossil fuels.

Understand, I agree that we likely guarantee our extinction by continuing to use fossil fuels.  Also, I never said we could not survive without fossil fuels.  Good try though.  What I said was that our fossil fuel dependent global civilization will not survive without fossil fuels.  It was built up and designed around fossil energy and resources after all.  However, man was around long before fossil energy was discovered.  Entire civilizations rose and fell before fossil energy.  Given that we don't burn the Earth down we'll have more civilizations that don't require petroleum energy.  What I AM SAYING is that this particular civilization is FUCKED without fossil energy.  What I AM SAYING is that renewable energies are not going to continue this particular civilization unabated. 

I figure something like 80% of the population is going to parish in the next couple of decades.  That is going to happen because fossil energy is why that 80% is here in the first place.  Can we build a renewable energy civilization up after that?  Sure...I see no reason why not.  It's not as if we're going to run out of fossil fuels to continue creating renewable energy gewgaws after all.  We may very well use the remaining fossil energy, after an 80% die off, to engineer an ecotechnic world. 

Quote
But that has nothing to do with the Foss fossil fuel shilling MO. It is delusional to think we can continue to foul our nest and survive the sixth Mass Extinction. Why can't you understand that?

I do understand that.  Why can't you understand that I understand that?  Fossil fuel burning is going to kill us.  A civilization dependent on a limited resource is doomed.  Renewable energy is based on the energy of the SUN, and we've got billions of years of that left (I think). 

Can you demonstrate how we make one of those massive wind turbines without fossil energy?  I mean from mining the material to constructing the turbine?  Ditto with PV.  Honestly, that's the piece I'm missing in your renewable energy revolution story. 

Title: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2017, 12:58:07 PM

Well, my friend, it is difficult to begin with your stated assumption that I am delusional. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817122018.gif) You know enough about me to realize I do ALL the math, not simply what is convenient to our polluting self serving suicidal status quo. And hyperbole about the probabilities of colonizing mars versus running our civilization on renewable energy makes it crystal clear that you do not respect what I have posted, even though you may respect me personally.

That's not true.  I do respect what you have posted (although I have not seen a lot of it...admittedly).  I just don't believe we can keep our current BAU petroleum heavy way of life going for 7 billion people and counting on renewables. 


Quote
Yes, Foss is a shill for the fossil fuel industry. My assertion is based on the fact that she advocates happy talk ERoEI numbers for Fracking and petroleum. Yes, she admits coal is bad news and nuclear power is horribly expensive and polluting as well. So?

Like I said earlier, I don't know what she says or advocates.  I just know that she is part of the PO blogosphere.  I'm not disputing that she may be a shill for the fossil fuel industry.  I'm just saying that if she is I don't know how.  That's what I was asking for you to elucidate for me.  Just don't assume I've read everything that you have written here on the Diner. 


Quote
Her defense of Fracking amounts to shilling, period. If you want the long explanation, just ask. I will repost my polite letter to her several years ago tearing every single point she made about fossil fuels in general (and Fracking in particular) to tiny shreds. I made it clear that fossil fuels had a MUCH LOWER ERoEI than the fossil fuel industry shills like Charles Hall (Monsta's hero  (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg)) claimed.

The response was ZERO on energy. There was no discussion of pollution costs. There was no discussion of my assertion that Energy Return on Energy Invested was actually CAPITAL RETURN on CAPITAL INVESTED (thanks in part, but not all, to subsidies coerced from we-the-people INCLUDED in the ERoEI happy talk Foss and Hall peddle) because fossil fuels are energy NEGATIVE when all the costs are included.

Ilargi "responded" by claiming I did not write with the "caliber" that was "acceptable" at the Automatic Enema Earth. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/ugly004.gif)

RE went to bat for me, but they were not interested, and neither was Ashvin, who was an admin there at the time.

So she defended fracking?  How so?  That seems pretty stupid from a pollution point of view.  As in, it's highly polluting.  It's also a bandaid on the problem of fossil energy depletion.  It's only viable due to gullible investors and government subsidies.  I had no idea that she was saying that fracking was a good idea. 

Quote
I will continue to disagree with you about our inability to survive without fossil fuels, and will continue to claim the "delusional" view, according to you, that, on the contrary, we guarantee our extinction by continuing to use fossil fuels.

Understand, I agree that we likely guarantee our extinction by continuing to use fossil fuels.  Also, I never said we could not survive without fossil fuels.  Good try though.  What I said was that our fossil fuel dependent global civilization will not survive without fossil fuels.  It was built up and designed around fossil energy and resources after all.  However, man was around long before fossil energy was discovered.  Entire civilizations rose and fell before fossil energy.  Given that we don't burn the Earth down we'll have more civilizations that don't require petroleum energy.  What I AM SAYING is that this particular civilization is FUCKED without fossil energy.  What I AM SAYING is that renewable energies are not going to continue this particular civilization unabated. 

I figure something like 80% of the population is going to parish in the next couple of decades.  That is going to happen because fossil energy is why that 80% is here in the first place.  Can we build a renewable energy civilization up after that?  Sure...I see no reason why not.  It's not as if we're going to run out of fossil fuels to continue creating renewable energy gewgaws after all.  We may very well use the remaining fossil energy, after an 80% die off, to engineer an ecotechnic world. 

Quote
But that has nothing to do with the Foss fossil fuel shilling MO. It is delusional to think we can continue to foul our nest and survive the sixth Mass Extinction. Why can't you understand that?

I do understand that.  Why can't you understand that I understand that?  Fossil fuel burning is going to kill us.  A civilization dependent on a limited resource is doomed.  Renewable energy is based on the energy of the SUN, and we've got billions of years of that left (I think). 

Can you demonstrate how we make one of those massive wind turbines without fossil energy?  I mean from mining the material to constructing the turbine?  Ditto with PV.  Honestly, that's the piece I'm missing in your renewable energy revolution story. 

Once again you are avoiding the central issue here of Foss's shilling for fossil fuels. Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013, while there probably WAS enough time to solve this mess.

Lucid, I am NOT trying to convince you that Renewable Energy is our only way out. I am trying to convince that that, whether it is or not, THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION. Why can't you understand that? When you are in a hole, it is customary to quite digging.

I'm done trying to convince you. RE insults me and then wants an apology! You claim to respect what I write yet you never cite the NUTS AND BOLTS of the GRADUAL transition from polluting energy that I point to in my numerous posts.

I think I'll have a cup of coffee and pretend I do not exist.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-041115022304.png)
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 01:19:00 PM


Once again you are avoiding the central issue here of Foss's shilling for fossil fuels. Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013, while there probably WAS enough time to solve this mess.

Lucid, I am NOT trying to convince you that Renewable Energy is our only way out. I am trying to convince that that, whether it is or not, THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION. Why can't you understand that? When you are in a hole, it is customary to quite digging.

I'm done trying to convince you. RE insults me and then wants an apology! You claim to respect what I write yet you never cite the NUTS AND BOLTS of the GRADUAL transition from polluting energy that I point to in my numerous posts.

I think I'll have a cup of coffee and pretend I do not exist.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-041115022304.png)

First of all, RE is an asshole.  Don't worry about his need for an apology.  It's ridiculous. 

Secondly, it seems to me that you are responding to things that I have not said, and not responding to things that I have. 

I fail to see how we get a renewable energy revolution that will support BAU.  BAU, by it's very nature, is unsustainable.  BAU is about continual growth in GDP.  It's about continual growth in the supply of money so that the fractional reserve bullshit can be paid back to continue giving the plutocrats their continual bolus of profit for profits sake. 

The entire system is destructive and unsustainable.  What I don't understand is why you advocate for a renewable energy revolution that will sustain this unsustainable mess?  It's unsustainable for a reason.  Our population is at least 80% bigger then it should be, and that due to fossil energy.  Our civilization was designed for fossil energy usage.  To make money. 

As far as I can tell, Agelbert, we agree on everything, with the caveat that I think renewable energy is not a solution to this predicament we have.  There is no solution to it.  That's the hard cold bitch of the truth.  There is no solution to a civilization that was built on the energy of fossil fuels, and that requires that same energy to continue to function. 

Further, I'm not convinced that we are facing an extinction event.  Obviously a lot of organisms are going extinct.  Everyday more of them go extinct.  I don't think humans will go extinct until the sun burns out.  We're facing apocalyptic ties, no doubt about that.  We're facing those times just as a drunk faces a hang over. 

I'm not saying that fossil energy is a good thing.  I'm saying that it's the thing that our civilization requires.  Without it, we don't go extinct, but most of us die.  What rises up from those ashes is anyone's guess.  I'm guessing that some type of ecotechnic future rises from it.  I don't think we lose the technologies and knowledge we have gained as a species.  I just think that most of us perish.  Just like the events of the black plague.  This is the new black death.  After a large percentage of the population dies we'll have a new golden age. 

We're in the middle of the crisis period of the black death.  Nothing anyone does is going to change the momentum of BAU at this point.  President Dump is the president after all. 
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 01:24:29 PM
First of all, RE is an asshole.

I have NEVER denied being an asshole.  However, I am a well experienced one and good at it.  You are piss poor as an asshole.  Don't quit your day job.

RE
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 01:38:38 PM
First of all, RE is an asshole.

I have NEVER denied being an asshole.  However, I am a well experienced one and good at it.  You are piss poor as an asshole.  Don't quit your day job.

RE

LOL!!!

For real RE? 

 :D

I guess I'll take that as a compliment.  Thanks for the compliment RE.  I never have thought that I was an asshole.   :laugh:
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: Surly1 on August 27, 2017, 01:41:25 PM
First of all, RE is an asshole.

I have NEVER denied being an asshole.  However, I am a well experienced one and good at it.  You are piss poor as an asshole.  Don't quit your day job.

RE

LOL!!!

For real RE? 

 :D

I guess I'll take that as a compliment.  Thanks for the compliment RE.  I never have thought that I was an asshole.   :laugh:

Quote from: The Head Asshole Around Here
You are piss poor as an asshole.  Don't quit your day job.

Take it from an expert, LD. You'e no asshole.
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 01:42:37 PM
I never have thought that I was an asshole.

Then you are not being very realistic in your self-assessment.

RE
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 01:45:23 PM
I never have thought that I was an asshole.

Then you are not being very realistic in your self-assessment.

RE

Have you lost your mind RE...LOL  :icon_scratch:

You do realize that you basically said I was not an asshole.  If I'm not good at being an asshole, then It's probably because I'm not an asshole.  If I'm not an asshole, then how can I be an asshole? 

Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 01:47:42 PM
First of all, RE is an asshole.

I have NEVER denied being an asshole.  However, I am a well experienced one and good at it.  You are piss poor as an asshole.  Don't quit your day job.

RE

LOL!!!

For real RE? 

 :D

I guess I'll take that as a compliment.  Thanks for the compliment RE.  I never have thought that I was an asshole.   :laugh:

Quote from: The Head Asshole Around Here
You are piss poor as an asshole.  Don't quit your day job.

Take it from an expert, LD. You'e no asshole.

LOL  :D :roll2:

One would think the head asshole would stop while he's behind.  But not RE, he'll just double down.   ;D

Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 01:49:30 PM
Further, I will wear my badge of "least of an asshole around here" proudly.  And sleep good at night knowing that I suck so bad at being an asshole that I'm almost not even an asshole! 

How did I get so lucky? 
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 01:50:08 PM
You do realize that you basically said I was not an asshole. 

No, what I said was that you are an incompetent asshole.  Please read for comprehension.

RE
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 01:56:39 PM
You do realize that you basically said I was not an asshole. 

No, what I said was that you are an incompetent asshole.  Please read for comprehension.

RE

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what I did RE.  What is to comprehend here is that I'm incompetent at being an asshole?  Right, so I'm not good at being an asshole...because I'm not one. 

You're just using this as a way to say I'm incompetent and no good at something.  You are slinging insults at me.  I was just stating the obvious, you are an asshole, and you agreed that you are not only an asshole, but a very competent and expert asshole.  I agree with you on that count.  However, you are such an asshole that you can't even see that you are attempting to insult me by saying that I'm not an asshole.

Really, RE, you need to get a grip.  Also, since I know you must have the last word, go ahead, but I'm not going to continue with this now extremely immature exchange. 

You are an asshole, you agree, I agree, everyone agrees.  I am incompetent as an asshole, fine...that's cause I'm not trying to be one.  I was just trying to have an intelligent debate with Agelbert.  I was trying to get to the bottom of our misunderstanding.  You decided you needed an apology, and then you agreed you were an expert asshole.  So why should one apologize to the "head asshole around here"?   :laugh:
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 01:59:34 PM
Basically, RE, you are saying that you deserve an apology for being an asshole.

The world does not work that way homey.  Assholes do not deserve apologies.  They deserve public ridicule.  So now you have something in common with the original intent of this thread.  You and Guy are both assholes. 

Congratulations.   :emthup:
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 02:11:22 PM
I am incompetent as an asshole, fine...that's cause I'm not trying to be one.

You do not have to try.  It comes naturally to you.  So far though, you have not cultivated this aspect of your personality well, so it makes for confusing prose.

RE
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 02:18:30 PM
So far though, you have not cultivated this aspect of your personality well, so it makes for confusing prose.

RE

Yeah?  How's that?  Care to elaborate? 
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Randy C on August 27, 2017, 02:23:23 PM
I hate to have to be the one that points this out, but how did this conversation become about Nicole Foss????

All she did, in this case, was post an open letter that she didn't write or sign to her facebook page where I saw it.  I thought that the community should know that six people who are a part of the NTE community thought it necessary to call him out in public over what he has been doing.

That's all.  I passed it on to RE for him to decide what to do with it.  It certainly was not my intention to get you guys all up in a shit storm with each other fighting over who was the bigger "ass hole," or over what you may think of Nicole Foss.

Wasn't the point guys.  Just thought you should all know that there are some potentially real issues off in NTE land with McP's behavior.  Foss had nothing to do with the open letter other than posting it.  I'm not saying that to defend Foss or what she may or may not believe.

Okay?
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: RE on August 27, 2017, 02:24:56 PM
So far though, you have not cultivated this aspect of your personality well, so it makes for confusing prose.

RE

Yeah?  How's that?  Care to elaborate?

No, because if I did it would drive an even bigger wedge between us now than already exists.

RE
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Randy C on August 27, 2017, 02:38:23 PM
https://deepgreenresistance.blogspot.com/2017/08/statement-on-guy-mcpherson.html

More from Mike Sliwa.
Title: Re: Go to my news channel. I just posted the letter I sent her on October 4, 2013
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 03:17:42 PM
So far though, you have not cultivated this aspect of your personality well, so it makes for confusing prose.

RE

Yeah?  How's that?  Care to elaborate?

No, because if I did it would drive an even bigger wedge between us now than already exists.

RE

Go for it RE.  I don't much care for assholes and you are an asshole.  I don't see how you telling us all what you think about my prose is going to make our relationship worse. 

I use then/than, to/too wrong, I do the same with other words, I'm not educated enough, I never graduated from college.  I use "I" too much. 

Say what you will RE.  I can communicate well with words.  Maybe its an uneducated "gonzo" style.  So what?  How is my non-cultivation of asshole status making my prose confusing?  I'm still here.  You pissed me off saying I was a martyr and self-centered.  Both of which are not true.  Now my prose is confusing? 

Go ahead:

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/prose?s=t (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/prose?s=t)

Quote
noun
1.
the ordinary form of spoken or written language, without metrical structure, as distinguished from poetry or verse.

Bring it on "head asshole around here." 
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: monsta666 on August 27, 2017, 03:31:47 PM
This whole tirade about assholes/incompetent assholes, whatever was unnecessary and childish RE. I do not consider LD an asshole but it is a pity that yet another thread got derailed for pettiness.

I would say to agelbert that I, like LD, agree with most of your statements. However my issue is I do not think our society is sustainable with ANY energy platform. I say this for the same reason mentioned previously: our economic system is designed only for perpetual growth. It cannot exist any other way. Therefore even if we made the assumption that renewable energy could replace fossil fuels 100% (a big assumption) due to the nature of growth we would soon hit some other limiting factor be it resources or pollution. It was one of the main points raised in the Limits to Growth book. Would you disagree with the topics raised in limits to growth that at some point economic growth is ultimately constrained by one of three limiting factors be it energy, resources or pollution? I think in this area there could be agreement.

The second big point is can we sustain seven billion (and counting) people using only renewable sources? Again in this one I would say no because it is dependent on fossil fuels for transportation and basic inputs for large scale industrial farming such as fertilizers or irrigation. Now I could be wrong and you could be right. But I think, we are reasonable people and even with disagreement it can be done amicably. I think the point I would agree with your philosophy is making a commitment towards sustainability. Even if ultimately unsuccessful there are secondary benefits that can be derived by following this course of action faithfully. The bigger emphasis has to come from reducing our overall consumption and following the ideas of the 3R's which in order of importance are Reduction, Reuse and Recycle with massive emphasis on the reduction bit. Caveat that should be mentioned even if it is obvious is that a serious attempt to reduce consumption will destroy our global economy. It is why no politician or mainstream environmental group is serious about reducing consumption on the aggregate level. This destruction of the economy is the uncomfortable truth and side-effect of reducing consumption. We are hooked like a heroin addict and like all bad drug addictions the decision to go cold turkey could kill us. Even with a slow taper it can still be a long nightmare that never really ends and even when it does end you (humanity) are never the same as before you took the drug. The after effects will haunt us for a long time...
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: luciddreams on August 27, 2017, 04:26:28 PM
This whole tirade about assholes/incompetent assholes, whatever was unnecessary and childish RE. I do not consider LD an asshole but it is a pity that yet another thread got derailed for pettiness.

I would say to agelbert that I, like LD, agree with most of your statements. However my issue is I do not think our society is sustainable with ANY energy platform. I say this for the same reason mentioned previously: our economic system is designed only for perpetual growth. It cannot exist any other way. Therefore even if we made the assumption that renewable energy could replace fossil fuels 100% (a big assumption) due to the nature of growth we would soon hit some other limiting factor be it resources or pollution. It was one of the main points raised in the Limits to Growth book. Would you disagree with the topics raised in limits to growth that at some point economic growth is ultimately constrained by one of three limiting factors be it energy, resources or pollution? I think in this area there could be agreement.

The second big point is can we sustain seven billion (and counting) people using only renewable sources? Again in this one I would say no because it is dependent on fossil fuels for transportation and basic inputs for large scale industrial farming such as fertilizers or irrigation. Now I could be wrong and you could be right. But I think, we are reasonable people and even with disagreement it can be done amicably. I think the point I would agree with your philosophy is making a commitment towards sustainability. Even if ultimately unsuccessful there are secondary benefits that can be derived by following this course of action faithfully. The bigger emphasis has to come from reducing our overall consumption and following the ideas of the 3R's which in order of importance are Reduction, Reuse and Recycle with massive emphasis on the reduction bit. Caveat that should be mentioned even if it is obvious is that a serious attempt to reduce consumption will destroy our global economy. It is why no politician or mainstream environmental group is serious about reducing consumption on the aggregate level. This destruction of the economy is the uncomfortable truth and side-effect of reducing consumption. We are hooked like a heroin addict and like all bad drug addictions the decision to go cold turkey could kill us. Even with a slow taper it can still be a long nightmare that never really ends and even when it does end you (humanity) are never the same as before you took the drug. The after effects will haunt us for a long time...

I agree with all of that, wholeheartedly. 

It is a shame that the thread was derailed, and I take responsibility for that.  I flung the first arrow by calling RE an asshole.  Granted, I didn't think it would be a problem since he's a self proclaimed expert asshole, but I suppose that's besides the point. 

Maybe Agelbert should consider apologizing to RE for not allowing him to be an asshole without taking offense? 

I'm not sure how that works out...it's preposterous.  We're in doublethink land here.  After all, it's an insult to be told that you are an incompetent asshole. 

My apologies...I'll stop with the nonsense now.   :(
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Surly1 on August 27, 2017, 05:10:35 PM
I hate to have to be the one that points this out, but how did this conversation become about Nicole Foss????

All she did, in this case, was post an open letter that she didn't write or sign to her facebook page where I saw it.  I thought that the community should know that six people who are a part of the NTE community thought it necessary to call him out in public over what he has been doing.

That's all.  I passed it on to RE for him to decide what to do with it.  It certainly was not my intention to get you guys all up in a shit storm with each other fighting over who was the bigger "ass hole," or over what you may think of Nicole Foss.

Wasn't the point guys.  Just thought you should all know that there are some potentially real issues off in NTE land with McP's behavior.  Foss had nothing to do with the open letter other than posting it.  I'm not saying that to defend Foss or what she may or may not believe.

Okay?

-A couple of clarifying points. You did nothing wrong, and contributed materially to the discussion.
-AG has a hard-on for Nicole Foss and TAE stemming from several years back. Her name is akin to a red flag waved at a bull.
-No one here is capable of not taking something personally when the personal is not intended, or possesses the restraint necessary to not derail a thread in pursuit of an agenda. (With the exception of Eddie, with whom I sometimes disagree, but respect as an honest broker.)
-A reminder that Nicole mentioned this behavior to RE several years ago, and that he respected her wishes to not speak/write of it. So whatever has been dogging Guy has been rumored for some time. And where there is smoke there is usually fire.
-Guy's attitudes and behavior have done much to diminish the value of his analysis. This latest set of mutterings is just another log on the fire.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: K-Dog on August 28, 2017, 12:11:37 AM
I hate to have to be the one that points this out, but how did this conversation become about Nicole Foss????

All she did, in this case, was post an open letter that she didn't write or sign to her facebook page where I saw it.  I thought that the community should know that six people who are a part of the NTE community thought it necessary to call him out in public over what he has been doing.

That's all.  I passed it on to RE for him to decide what to do with it.  It certainly was not my intention to get you guys all up in a shit storm with each other fighting over who was the bigger "ass hole," or over what you may think of Nicole Foss.

Wasn't the point guys.  Just thought you should all know that there are some potentially real issues off in NTE land with McP's behavior.  Foss had nothing to do with the open letter other than posting it.  I'm not saying that to defend Foss or what she may or may not believe.

Okay?

I just read the so-called letter.  My expert opinion concludes that Nichole is a cunt for posting it if she did.

We learned recently that Guy McPherson, with whom DGR has collaborated in the past, has been accused by multiple women of sexually predatory behavior. We have seen screenshots of comments where he calls women vile names (e.g., he calls one woman a "cum-gargling whore"). These accusations have been corroborated from several sources.

At the time we collaborated with Guy McPherson, we had no idea that he was treating women so poorly. Deep Green Resistance has an absolute zero-tolerance policy for abuse and will stand against any predators being allowed access to the movement or anyone who could be harmed. Our hearts go out to his victims.

'multiple women' who have no names have accused is totally unacceptable.  If you are going to accuses a man of sexual impropriety you need to have a name or your name could just as well be the CIA, or Homeland Security a spurned lover or whatever.

Screen-shots of comments is totally unacceptable.  This is quoting trolls.

For Nicole to have posted this on her website (if she did) would make her a cum-gargling whore.  Consider the fact that someone else posted it to make her look bad as well.  Ignore the letter unless at least one of the 'multiple women' grows a name.

Shooting the messenger would be more honorable.

My apologies to Nicole if she has nothing to do with this and a pox on whomever the mud slinger is.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Surly1 on August 28, 2017, 08:36:40 AM
Color me reassured to know the planet is NOT in crisis? And that we are free to concentrate on what's important here: a really small shitstorm of judgement and self-righteousness rather than the collapse of the biosphere. And does it come with a t-shirt?

This issue seems to be captivating the Sliwas, Jensens, Westenras and Zawackis of the world. At least it lifts our gaze from Trump, if only for a moment.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: RE on August 28, 2017, 08:37:42 AM

I just read the so-called letter.  My expert opinion concludes that Nichole is a cunt for posting it if she did.

I don't know if Nicole posted this letter.  I assumed it was her because the story is so similar to the one she told me 2-3 years ago.

I agree that if there are "multiple women" involved in this at least a couple of them should come forward with first-person testimony.  It is however often difficult for women to do this, particularly ones who are emotionally fragile to begin with.  Without such testimony though, it remains just a rumour.

As a means to attack Guy's credibility, it's a very good one because a decent number of his fans are women.  If it is untrue, he needs to come out with a self-defense blog and respond to it, not ignore it or shrink away from it.  He should try to find out who actually posted the letter and who the women are who are making this complaint against him.  He needs to confront these women directly.

RE
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Ashvin on August 28, 2017, 01:10:42 PM
Anyone who doesn't recognize how serious this issue is for the "collapse community" is in serious denial of what they have become a part of. It is THE issue - how easy it is to let extreme Doomerism become a means of exploitation. In this case it happens to be exploitation of vulnerable women seeking counseling, in other cases it could be anyone. I don't think the author of the post about Guy, Nicole or whoever it was, even realizes how seriously that aspect of career collapse preaching affects everyone in its path. We shouldn't need someone to be a licensed counselor before we hold them to a code of ethics, as we should also hold ourselves.

Nicole wrote this as a hit piece on a bonafide climate scientist to discredit his facts and distract from her endless promotion of the fossil fuel industry? I'm sorry but that is grade A delusional. None of these people have enough clout to even be worthy of a major fossil fuel company's payroll. I'm sure they would admit that as well. Whether Guy did this stuff or not, the IDEA of what he is alleged to have done and/or be doing is appalling. The fact that some people here instantly felt the need to change the topic and attack Nicole or whoever else speaks volumes about their priorities and their unwillingness to confront this horrendous IDEA.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: K-Dog on August 28, 2017, 01:34:39 PM
Innocent till proven guilty and it is a foundation stone of American jurisprudence that one has the right to face one's accuser.

If women have experienced sexual harassment from Guy they need to come forward or forever hold their tongues.  That they might feel embarrassed is of no concern for the damage done to a mans reputation by such allegations far overshadows any temporary embarrassment felt by a few delicate flowers.

The fossil fuel industry has billions by which to sway public opinion.  That they would fabricate rumor to discredit an opponent is a given.  Guy may be wrong in the degree of warming Arctic  methane will cause, but he is not wrong in saying warming will result because of Arctic methane.  The that we know for sure.  Knarf posted a article this week proclaiming such a relationship and that article had nothing to do with Guy.  The only question is only how much warming will result and not will it happen.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Ashvin on August 28, 2017, 01:56:05 PM
Innocent till proven guilty and it is a foundation stone of American jurisprudence that one has the right to face one's accuser.

If women have experienced sexual harassment from Guy they need to come forward or forever hold their tongues.  That they might feel embarrassed is of no concern for the damage done to a mans reputation by such allegations far overshadows any temporary embarrassment felt by a few delicate flowers.

The fossil fuel industry has billions by which to sway public opinion.  That they would fabricate rumor to discredit an opponent is a given.  Guy may be wrong in the degree of warming Arctic  methane will cause, but he is not wrong in saying warming will result because of Arctic methane.  The that we know for sure.  Knarf posted a article this week proclaiming such a relationship and that article had nothing to do with Guy.  The only question is only how much warming will result and not will it happen.

Clearly collapse forums aren't, nor have they ever been, courts of law with high burdens of proof, nor have they ever intended to be them, and they probably shouldn't be. If they were, most (often legitimate) accusations of banksters and politicians in our system would fall short. We aren't trying people with a full corpus of constitutional protections here.

I would definitely feel sorry for the Guy if none of the accusations turned out to be true, but as of now he has been indicted to a degree that is not common among collapse bloggers with shared goals (unless of course you believe they are all bought). Furthermore, there is no doubt that the IDEA of using grief over collapse as a means of undue influence and exploitation is real and increasingly common IMO.

One could even say Trump is an example of this, albeit in a different sort of way.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: K-Dog on August 28, 2017, 02:18:55 PM
Ashvin,

I can respect your opinion that a preponderance of evidence should be considered but 'multiple women' none of whom have a name is more evidence of innocence than of guilt.  We have a preponderance of nothing.  If the alleged accusations had any substance there would be a line of women vying for the limelight.  Women love attention.  As there is no attention stronger than sympathy for a victim of sexual harassment be the victimization real or made up from thin air lack of an identifiable accuser speaks to innocence.

In the case of Bill Cosby women rightly feared a backlash.  He was an iconic black man with a reputation many would defend until enough truth could come out.  Guy in contrast is powerless and someone many love to hate.  There is no backlash to fear.

The willingness of some to post accusation without substance knowing that Guy is not popular enough for anyone to come to his defense and thus find fault with hurtful and baseless accusation demonstrates there is no fear Guy will be defended.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Ashvin on August 28, 2017, 03:34:13 PM
Ashvin,

I can respect your opinion that a preponderance of evidence should be considered but 'multiple women' none of whom have a name is more evidence of innocence than of guilt.  We have a preponderance of nothing.

If we're continuing on with the legal analogy, then this post is like an opening statement. It says that people should send them queries and they will provide evidence in support of their claims, so I don't think we can evaluate the case until that is done.

But again, even a preponderance of the evidence standard is asking too much. Most of the evidence of claims presented through online forums would not be allowed in a court of law, since most of it is hearsay not falling under any recognized exception.

Quote
If the alleged accusations had any substance there would be a line of women vying for the limelight.  Women love attention.  As there is no attention stronger than sympathy for a victim of sexual harassment be the victimization real or made up from thin air lack of an identifiable accuser speaks to innocence.

That's a bold assumption. I think real victims of sexual abuse may very well choose to remain silent. But beyond that, I think the point was that some of the women involved may not even realize how they had been victimized, but the people working with and around Guy could see it develop over years.

Quote
In the case of Bill Cosby women rightly feared a backlash.  He was an iconic black man with a reputation many would defend until enough truth could come out.  Guy in contrast is powerless and someone many love to hate.  There is no backlash to fear.

The willingness of some to post accusation without substance knowing that Guy is not popular enough for anyone to come to his defense and thus find fault with hurtful and baseless accusation demonstrates there is no fear Guy will be defended.

I'll admit I don't follow collapse bloggers anymore, so I have no idea how popular Guy is compared to other ones. I always had the impression he had a decent following, though.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Randy C on August 28, 2017, 04:55:34 PM
How about a little simple research.  Nicole did not post this open letter, other than to her facebook page where I saw it and passed the link on to RE.  RE said that Nicole had told him a similar story in confidence two years ago.  The letter in question was posted to the blog "Wrong Kind of Green" and was signed by Michael  Sliwa, Host of the radio show Nature Bats Last from August 2014 to May 2017, Derrick Jensen, Deep Green Resistance, Lierre Keith, Deep Green Resistance, Cory Morningstar, Wrong Kind of Green, Forrest Palmer, Wrong Kind of Green, Luke Orsborne, Wrong Kind of Green.

All these people were working with McP until recently when they withdrew their support from him.  Cory Morningstar stated on Facebook that McP told her he was going to do unspeakable things to her two daughters when they came to visit him in Belize.  Go on Facebook and ask Sliwa to friend you so you can see for yourself what she said.  In my opinion, McP's conduct in this matter has destroyed his credibility.  Ethics matters to me regardless of what others might think.  That is why I directed this open letter to RE for consideration on the Diner.

Again, this recent event has nothing to do with Nicole Foss other than she mirrored the open letter from "Wrong Kind of Green" onto her Facebook page.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Randy C on August 28, 2017, 05:06:01 PM
Seriously, can we get the basic story right and stop running around attacking the wrong person???

Nicole Foss did NOT write the letter in question. 

RE made a mistake in how he worded the title of the thread.  It was not Nicole Foss going public, it was Cory Morningstar going public.  She is the one accusing McP, as well as several other women, not Foss.  Again, send a friends request to Sliwa and see what Morningstar said for yourself.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Randy C on August 28, 2017, 05:25:14 PM
Cory Morningstar
8 hrs ·

You have the audacity to play victim, to pretend that myself and others have betrayed you – when you have betrayed not just women, not just me, but an entire community. Your behaviour has caused both pain and anguish. Do you really think we, who have wholly trusted and supported you for years, could enjoy this in any way? It has been excruciating for myself and others. It is surreal. Yet again, you offer no apology. You could care less. You justify your misogyny. Apparently, I had no idea who you really were, whatsoever.

I am horrified that I actually was planning to, at one point, bring two of my girls with me to see your "sanctuary" project in Belize.

Know this. If ever you so generously "indulged" any of my daughters in such "playful" rape fantasy and misogyny, it is very possible that both myself and their father would actually hunt you down and kill you. I think most mothers and fathers would do the same.

Know this. Today, you would have to walk over my dead body to have any access to my daughters.

If I could post what you said about me and by extension what you would undoubtedly attempt with my daughters, I would... But the system being what it is, they will align moreso with protection of your male rights than mine or my daughters and I will be even further victimized – thus, at this time, I will act accordingly on not placing your sick mind on display to the masses to prove how truly depraved you are.

#KnowThis

Cory Morningstar's reply to Guy McP posted to Sliwa's FB page today.  I didn't write it nor did Foss.... Cory, one of McP's accusers wrote it.
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: RE on August 28, 2017, 05:38:49 PM
Seriously, can we get the basic story right and stop running around attacking the wrong person???

Nicole Foss did NOT write the letter in question. 

RE made a mistake in how he worded the title of the thread.  It was not Nicole Foss going public, it was Cory Morningstar going public.  She is the one accusing McP, as well as several other women, not Foss.  Again, send a friends request to Sliwa and see what Morningstar said for yourself.

The confusion is my error.  Because this story matched the one Nicole told me a few years ago so closely, I assumed she was the author.  Apparently she is not.  I am g going to retitle the thread.

RE
Title: Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
Post by: Randy C on August 28, 2017, 05:51:22 PM
Seriously, can we get the basic story right and stop running around attacking the wrong person???

Nicole Foss did NOT write the letter in question. 

RE made a mistake in how he worded the title of the thread.  It was not Nicole Foss going public, it was Cory Morningstar going public.  She is the one accusing McP, as well as several other women, not Foss.  Again, send a friends request to Sliwa and see what Morningstar said for yourself.

The confusion is my error.  Because this story matched the one Nicole told me a few years ago so closely, I assumed she was the author.  Apparently she is not.  I am g going to retitle the thread.

RE

Thanks RE, I should have made it really clear what the source was.
Randy
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: RE on August 28, 2017, 06:09:16 PM
I have retitled this thread and added an Edit to the OP explaining how & why I misattributed this letter to Nicole Foss rather than the actual author, Cory Morningstar.

RE
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: K-Dog on August 28, 2017, 09:59:31 PM
I confess I saw no need to clarify the authorship.  It appeared baseless regardless the author and I'd need concrete proof to accuse anyone of writing it.

87 degrees on my drive home at 6:30 today.  Wherever Guy McPherson is you can bet it is hotter.  Way hotter!

By the way, when I met him he acted quite married.  He talked about his wife and he did not travel to Seattle alone.  He was a man with a message that nobody wants to hear.  Convinced is he that we will soon be extinct.

Quote
And like the baseless fabric of this vision,
The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces,
The solemn temples, the great globe itself—
Yea, all which it inherit—shall dissolve,
And like this insubstantial pageant faded,
Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff
As dreams are made on, and our little life
Is rounded with a sleep.

Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: K-Dog on August 28, 2017, 10:52:55 PM
(http://www.albertaschoolofdoggrooming.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Dog-Detective.png)

Whoa, hold up!


Quote
Cory Morningstar
8 hrs ·

I am horrified that I actually was planning to, at one point, bring two of my girls with me to see your "sanctuary" project in Belize.
...

Mcpherson has a sanctuary project in Belize or he doesn't.  If he does it is pretty strange for someone who says we are all going to cook to move down on top of the damn equator.  Not the smart place to put a sanctuary project considering his message.  Seems to me you would want young nymphs feeding you grapes in Alaska if you had an ounce of decency!




Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: RE on August 28, 2017, 11:28:30 PM
I confess I saw no need to clarify the authorship.  It appeared baseless regardless the author and I'd need concrete proof to accuse anyone of writing it.

Well, somebody must have written it and apparently it was not Nicole.  The title I had used misattributed the authorship to her and needed to be corrected.  According to RC, the author was Cory Morningstar, he follows the FacePalm messaging that appears to be ongoing on this subject.

Whoever the author is, these accusations have been dogging Dr. McStinksion for years, since I first heard of them more than 2 years ago.  Why they are surfacing now for a wider audience to read about is an open question.  There isn't much to be gained here in these revelations even if they are true, although unethical there is no criminal behavior I can discern.  Guy does make a lot of enemies because of his message, and when Feminists get on your case for being in some way abusive to women they can become quite annoying and tenacious.  You can't Mansplain anything to them at this point and they just rant at you. lol.

As others have said here though in this thread, this is pretty ridiculous Collapse Community Soap Opera overall, nobody has stepped forward to actually accuse Guy of physical rape or anything like that.  He basically has NTHE Groupies who are often depressed women who were part of the environmental movement from the 1970s onward.  Some of these women apparently feel betrayed by Guy in some way.  Whatever he did do, however he did abuse his position as a Grief Counselor, it has to be better specified and the offended individuals need to come forward.

RE
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: RE on August 28, 2017, 11:48:10 PM
(http://www.albertaschoolofdoggrooming.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Dog-Detective.png)

Whoa, hold up!


Quote
Cory Morningstar
8 hrs ·

I am horrified that I actually was planning to, at one point, bring two of my girls with me to see your "sanctuary" project in Belize.
...

Mcpherson has a sanctuary project in Belize or he doesn't.  If he does it is pretty strange for someone who says we are all going to cook to move down on top of the damn equator.  Not the smart place to put a sanctuary project considering his message.  Seems to me you would want young nymphs feeding you grapes in Alaska if you had an ounce of decency!

Belize has to be one of the WORST places on Earth to set up a "Sanctuary".  ::)  Exceeded perhaps only by Saudi Arabia.  If Guy actually set up a Doomstead there, he is definitely Bat Shit Crazy.

RE
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: alaskadronelife on September 02, 2017, 03:18:44 PM

Belize has to be one of the WORST places on Earth to set up a "Sanctuary".  ::)  Exceeded perhaps only by Saudi Arabia.  If Guy actually set up a Doomstead there, he is definitely Bat Shit Crazy.

RE

Depends on what the penalties are for grief counselors hooking up for a little doomsday happy time with partners, friends, sheep, or anyone else who can be talked into "loving it up" before the world ends?

His gofundme campaign, in case no one else has noticed. Stardust Sanctuary! No mention of a dungeon or anything kicky. Not so sure of what to think of the idea that children are involved.

"This private retreat center is located in the Cayo district of Western Belize. Here extreme poverty prevents many teenagers from attending high school. School in Belize is not free. As a result, children aged 13 to 17 miss out on continuing their education at a critical age."

Does anyone think they will be "taught" that they won't see their 30th birthday, and might as well live it up in the meantime under the supervision of well meaning, and very LOVING adults? This entire thing just creeps me out.

https://www.gofundme.com/4d6kr8g (https://www.gofundme.com/4d6kr8g)
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: azozeo on September 02, 2017, 03:27:28 PM
Don't forget, the dude "walked" from a cushie tenure at UofA.
What does that tell you right out of the gate. Bat shit crazy is old news RE....
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: RE on September 02, 2017, 04:21:05 PM
Don't forget, the dude "walked" from a cushie tenure at UofA.
What does that tell you right out of the gate. Bat shit crazy is old news RE....

Plus he didn't even have to work!  They weren't giving him any classes to teach!

RE
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: Randy C on September 14, 2017, 04:11:10 AM
The latest in the McP saga...

More from Palmface...courtesy again of Nicole Foss' facebook page.

"This has to be the creepiest GoFundMe page ever. McPherson, whose history as a serial sexual predator has recently been revealed by multiple women, is now threatening to sue anyone who spoke out. He's fundraising for a libel suit, even though he predicts human extinction in the short term (short term as in this month). The pic that comes up with the preview has been replaced with rows of skulls on shelves."

https://www.gofundme.com/4fbh9ns (https://www.gofundme.com/4fbh9ns)

Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: RE on September 14, 2017, 04:53:06 AM
The latest in the McP saga...

More from Palmface...courtesy again of Nicole Foss' facebook page.

"This has to be the creepiest GoFundMe page ever. McPherson, whose history as a serial sexual predator has recently been revealed by multiple women, is now threatening to sue anyone who spoke out. He's fundraising for a libel suit, even though he predicts human extinction in the short term (short term as in this month). The pic that comes up with the preview has been replaced with rows of skulls on shelves."

https://www.gofundme.com/4fbh9ns (https://www.gofundme.com/4fbh9ns)

Nice 2 C U RC.  :icon_sunny:

I wonder how much money Dr. McStinksion will raise for his lawsuit and who he is going to sue here?

RE
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: azozeo on September 14, 2017, 05:07:33 AM
The latest in the McP saga...

More from Palmface...courtesy again of Nicole Foss' facebook page.

"This has to be the creepiest GoFundMe page ever. McPherson, whose history as a serial sexual predator has recently been revealed by multiple women, is now threatening to sue anyone who spoke out. He's fundraising for a libel suit, even though he predicts human extinction in the short term (short term as in this month). The pic that comes up with the preview has been replaced with rows of skulls on shelves."

https://www.gofundme.com/4fbh9ns (https://www.gofundme.com/4fbh9ns)


2 weeks left, that's it ? Or less perhaps.
Such short notice.
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: Randy C on September 14, 2017, 11:42:08 AM
$675 at last count to sue people living in the US, Canada and Australia....

And times a wast'in  better get on that, only two weeks to go!

I don't think $70,000 would cover all that but we'll see....

:)
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: K-Dog on September 14, 2017, 01:35:09 PM
Before anyone gets sued someone has to come forward and describe his state of 'collapse' in detail first.  Did he emit copious amounts of methane gas at the magic moment?  Did you find it warming?  Inquiring minds want to know.

I think I need a go fund me page.  Maybe I could get the money back on the Mercedes repair.  I have not molested anybody so I don't need to raise money to sue anybody in defense.  I think I'll go with a simple 'help K-Dog get rich theme'.

Donate now before TEOTWAWKI.  Before it is too late!
Title: Re: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor
Post by: azozeo on September 14, 2017, 04:15:36 PM
Before anyone gets sued someone has to come forward and describe his state of 'collapse' in detail first.  Did he emit copious amounts of methane gas at the magic moment?  Did you find it warming?  Inquiring minds want to know.

I think I need a go fund me page.  Maybe I could get the money back on the Mercedes repair.  I have not molested anybody so I don't need to raise money to sue anybody in defense.  I think I'll go with a simple 'help K-Dog get rich theme'.

Donate now before TEOTWAWKI.  Before it is too late!

Be sure to include Bit Coin. It tanked today on Chinese newz.