Talk:William Cooper

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon conspiracy.svg

This Conspiracy theories related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Copperbrain.png

It requires...[edit]

It requires tremendous stupidity to declare someone a wing nut who told listeners constantly not to believe him ever, but to verify everything for themselves. Rationalism is also pretty stupid, so it isn't all that surprising that one would be a rationalist and make such a categorization. — Unsigned, by: Tsadi / talk / contribs 2013-12-23T23:02:23‎

Which idiot is allowing the idiot to post such nonsensicle bull shift![edit]

Wow oh wow. I really dont know the fellow that well but just by the way the writer is portraying william cooper leads me to think he really hates this guy. How can we get non biased and accurate information if the writer is portraying and assembling words together in which he terms a phrase of a grade level child. It really seems as if a child wrote this. I just had to say I read a couple of articles and that was enough for me. Was any research done. I mean real digging and not just finding propagated phrases that you cut and pasted to another page. The part at the end where the writer says something about william will fire at any law enforcers and not being like fired upon, the enforcers returned fire and blah blah blah. That part was so funny. "Not being liked fired upon,".. Laughing out of the forum. Thanks again for the laugh. And has more intell7ginle writers please, for others to fain interest. As for me, never using this site again, ever.— Unsigned, by: This BoN guy / talk / contribs

Okay. Brutal \m/ESSIAH 12:16, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Behold a Pale Horse[edit]

Should not be confused with 'The Pale Horse' (which has saved lives). 82.44.143.26 (talk) 15:29, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

This Agatha Christie book. 82.44.143.26 (talk) 17:28, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Under construction[edit]

@Bongolian Your analysis, when complete, deserves its own article. I suggest that you consider forking this out of the main Bill Cooper article at some point.

As an aside, I have a large and unique collection of cassette tapes of Cooper's radio show, part of my bigger project to preserve and curate the WBCQWikipedia archives. Many of the audio archives originated from Cooper himself and are studio recordings, and the station also managed to record hundreds of hours of his live broadcasts. His show on WBCQ continued for several years after his death, and was regularly recorded by the station staff. I am slowly going through this archive and at some point in the future will use this material to improve the article here. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 03:24, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, @Cosmikdebris. If you want to contribute to writing Behold a Pale Horse, I'll remove the WIP template and we can work on it together. I mainly put it there just to alert people that it would get filled out eventually. I have not read the whole book: it looks like quite a slog. Fortunately, the pdf from Archive.org is searchable. Bongolian (talk) 03:31, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
I have the book in dead tree format, and of course there is the archive.org pirate copy. You're right, it is quite dense and isn't something anyone would try to read straight through. I'll try and make some time to contribute to the book analysis you started. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 03:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
@Cosmikdebris Is the copy that you own the 1991 edition of this book? If so, can you tell me whether 'Top Secret' is printed on the footer of most of the pages? I got a copy of the 2019 edition from the library mainly to see what was deleted from the original. Bongolian (talk) 20:49, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
@Cosmikdebris Just FYI, I think I'm done going through Cooper's book. — Unsigned, by: Bongolian / talk / contribs
Yep, the 1991 edition I have has "top secret" at the bottom of most pages. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 23:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Bipolar disorder portion in the text[edit]

I don't like the sexist sentence connecting violent bipolar disorder only males, as I know of a female who has massive aggression problems and is violent due to untreated bipolar disorder. Change this ignorant and aggrevating sentence asap sc Benham — Unsigned, by: 94.109.44.111 / talk

The study was for males only, hence the statement applies to males such as Cooper. If you have a citation of a similar study that includes bipolar females we could perhaps modify the text. Otherwise, it looks like concern trolling. Bongolian (talk) 00:56, 7 February 2022 (UTC)