Information icon.svg Our policy on articles on living people is under review. Your comments and inputs are welcome on the relevant project talkpage.

Talk:The Aetherius Society/Archive1

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive page, last updated 3 May 2016. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page:   , (new)(back)

Takedown request[edit]

I am insanely, absurdly busy right now, but have received several e-mails demanding a take down on this article. If someone could just review it carefully making sure quoted material and images are well within fair use, and any criticism isn't skirting the line into clear libel I would be greatfull. tmtoulouse 09:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

If we are getting complaints than we are doing something right, nutjobs hate it when you point out their stupidity. - π 09:03, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I agree completely, all I am asking is that we make sure we are in the clear, it makes my position stronger behind the scenes if we aren't actually infringing on anything. tmtoulouse 09:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any obvious problems:
  1. Drking.jpg‎ - Should be fair use. A picture of a person we are critiquing on serious grounds. No current copyright stuff. Could do with a source?
  2. 'so riddled with bullshit that it makes your eyes bleed' - maybe a bit much? On the other hand I thought 'bullshit' was fine as far as libel goes. I'm not an expert.
  3. 'he was sitting alone in his London apartment one day, fooling around with god knows what' - 'what' is a link to LSD. Not having read the source, I don't know if this is speculation.
  4. The 'cosmic masters' section quotes largely from a website which is '© 2006'. I think this is fine as fair use.
  5. strikethrough 'cult' - pretty obviously humor.
The rest is just normal descriptions of things. Nothing copyrighted or insulting. I hope this is at least a little bit useful. -- =w= 09:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I wrote this whole article and thought I was pretty careul. I am pleased I made some waves. Should be all fine. Acei9 09:23, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I think I have found the source of our recent complaints. - π 09:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

18 vs 19 mountains[edit]

"These 18 mountains, plus an additional one that was charged in another way" [1]

Did they quickly add that once they realized their mistake? -- Nx / talk 09:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

the list from the website shows 19, one charged by Master Jesus and one by a Saint ??? Hamster (talk) 23:21, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
One was charged by saint goo-ling. Who I'm not even sure existed. Mindme (talk) 23:11, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Protect?[edit]

Whoever this bloke is trying to whitewash the article (and I think it is just one man), should we stop him in his tracks or just rollback every half hour? Totnesmartin (talk) 21:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Let's see just how committed he is. Give him another hour. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 21:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
He's back. 23:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast

Green Lanterns Power Lantern[edit]

any relationship with the prayer battery ? Hamster (talk) 23:23, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Taxi driver[edit]

Berating people about their spiritual health makes a nice change from the usual rants about Asylum Seekers, and how 'fooking marvellous' the royals are. Scherben 22:56, 14 December 2011 (UTC)Scherben

Going to incorporate my blog research[edit]

I did an extensive 2 part blog on the AS after hearing a talk given in Toronto. Part 1 starts here:

http://www.skepticnorth.com/2012/01/toronto-aetherius-society-jesus-venusians-and-some-bad-astronomy-part-1/

After part 2 runs I'm going to incorporate my research into this page.

It's really sad that their evidence constitutes "King predicted this although everyone knew about it 3 days before as it appeared in the New York Times".

The AS claims a bunch of titles like Knighthoods but they're either awarded by people who don't seem to exist or people who have been sent to jail for fraud.

Mindme (talk) 21:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

So done, and a fascinating tour of King's many, many, many bullshit titles. Holy cow. As I indicated in the w/u it seems the society around 2005 really tried to scrub crap about him being a lord, prince, knight, etc. It's a trivial exercise with google to figure out his various titles are self awarded or acquired from bogus sources and, in one case, it appears like he bought a title from a fraudster. I'd not be surprised if the society realized people would google on some of this crap and find out it's bullshit. And while all these royal titles might have impressed people in the 70s and 80s, they're not so fashionable today and just make King seem like he's a crazy old coot wearing tin pot medals. Mindme (talk) 14:22, 13 February 2012 (UTC)