Michael Shermer, Skeptic Magazine - Lying narcissistic bi-faced coward
I use the word 'hate' too frequently in my life and i ... hate that, but i assure you i'm not being overly dramatic when i say that i pretty much hate Dr. Michael "The Squirmer" Shermer of Skeptic Magazine. Shermer is a weak minded narcissistic ass-clown who will dispose of facts, evidence, logic and ethics at the drop of a hat when it suits him. He reminds me of the Energizer Bunny; an ego-stuffed robot whose sole purpose is to promote his self-endowed worth. Following are a sampling of incidents from which i drew my opinion of Michael Shermer.
The Donahue fiasco
It seems a lot of people don't like David Cole/Stein, the "self-hating Jew" with the quintessential Jewy voice i've come to have grown quite fond of over the years. David is an extraordinarily sharp, intelligent and witty guy with an extensive knowledge regarding the alleged Jewish holocaust and that's where his problem lies. Cole, you see, is a bona fide historical revisionist and that places him squarely at odds with the mainstream historians regarding one of the most taboo periods of history known to man.
Holocaust revisionists David Cole and Bradly Smith appeared on a 1994 episode of the Phil Donahue Show along with Michael Shermer, the "professional skeptic" whose role was to counter the claims of the two crazy "holocaust deniers" as they are labeled. Problem was, Shermer figured out that Cole wasn't the dimwitted, racist Neo-Nazi he apparently envisioned. Prior to the Donahue show, Cole tells us he spoke with Shermer multiple times while simultaneously burying him in an avalanche of information, thus causing Shermer to begin to realize that there might be some major dump truck sized holes in the mainstream historical record. With the show's deadline fast approaching and Shermer's stagnant views having been challenged with the facts, he found that he was now ill equipped to counter the two revisionists and so he reached out to the top brass of the orthodox holocaust historians. Well, the days and weeks passed according to Cole and... nothing. Apparently the "historians" tried desperately to avoid David's questions which Shermer presented to them because they didn't have any answers, or at least not any they wished to make public.
The episode was a disaster from Donahue's perspective. Shermer squirmed, David ducked out, and Donahue, Jewish himself, was apparently ready to strangle both of the revisionists, allegedly going so far as to call David the anti-Christ during a commercial break.
Video: 1994 Donahue Show with David Cole, Bradley Smith, Michael Shermer
Shortly after the debacle aired, David revealed the behind-the-scenes drama regarding his discussions with Michael Shermer during an Institute for Historical Review (IHR) conference. By all means, watch it. It's quite entertaining in a way that only Cole could manage.
Video: David Cole speech at the 1994 IHR convention
David knocks the hell out of Shermer and does so with ease, but there was one coup de grace that caught my ear and that was the mention of a recorder phone call between Shermer and another party. It took me a long time to find a segment of that recording, but i eventually i ran across the clip on one of David's now suspended websites. It's buried in the article, Michael Shermer Tries to Ban My Book; Demands I Recant! : Big Infidel. Have a listen.
David has since mended his revengeful ways, making a video in 2015 where he solicited help in raising $500 to attend a dinner party at Shermer's house in order to "bury the hatchet" (in Shermer's head where it rightly belongs i assume). Here again is the one and only David Cole:
Video: Send David Cole to Michael Shermer's Dinner Party!
Clueless on DarkHorse
Video: On Skepticism: Michael Shermer & Jeremy Rys on DarkHorse
Michael Shermer is the Founding Publisher of Skeptic magazine, the host of the podcast The Michael Shermer Show, and a Presidential Fellow at Chapman University where he teaches Skepticism 101. For 18 years he was a monthly columnist for Scientific American. He writes a weekly Substack column. He is the author of New York Times bestsellers Why People Believe Weird Things and The Believing Brain, Why Darwin Matters, The Science of Good and Evil, The Moral Arc, Heavens on Earth, and Giving the Devil His Due: Reflections of a Scientific Humanist.
Jeremy Rys has a B.S. degree in Physics from Bridgewater State University and is a co-founder of APEC the Alternative Propulsion Engineering Conference an academic think tank of scientists, engineers, and inventors who explore the potentials of new physics and technologies including metamaterials, warp drives, ion thrusters, laser induced plasmas, invisibility cloaks, and other "Alien" technologies. - He is also an avid researcher of alternative history and the history behind classified programs and covert operations. He also enjoys researching scientific controversies and conspiracy theories.
The discussion opens with the legitimacy of UFOs and secret advanced technology which is Jeremy Rys' area of expertise. Unfortunately the subject isn't addressed in any depth before Bret Weinstein changes the topic to COVID where he makes some interesting points regarding the COVID "vaccines" and the dangers they present. All three miss the bigger picture however, that being the question of whether viruses actually exist, likely because none of them are aware of the science which proves otherwise.
The topic then moves to the John Kennedy assassination where Shermer immediately exposes himself as the ignorant pawn he is when he states that Oswald acted alone, an utterly untenable fairy tale even the House Select Committee disagreed with. As a "professional skeptic", Shermer's comments regarding the assassination are important because they expose him as a fraud, thus undermining the rest of his work, not that he always gets everything wrong. I use the word fraud because it is simply not possible for anyone other than a fraud to maintain such a patently ludicrous position in light of the plethora of evidence to the contrary. Shermer even recommends a book by Vincent Bugliosi who, not entirely dissimilar to Shermer, was a criminally corrupt media whore who did anything to fortify his position and protect his reputation, including beating his mistress half to death for refusing to have an abortion and manipulating evidence during the Charles Manson trial that caused people to be put on death row who otherwise may not have been. And, once again, all three ignore the elephant in the room which is Israel's motives for wanting Kennedy dead, they being his position on Dimona, which Israel was using to build 'the bomb', and his attempt to force the Jewish lobby (AIPAC) in the U.S. to register as a foreign agent, which they are legally required to do and which would have hindered their ability to influence U.S. politics. This is not to say that Israel alone was responsible for the assassination, but the Israeli government certainly had motives, as did the CIA and other entities.
The discussion then turns to 9/11 where Shermer immediately posits that the only conspiracy theory shared by researchers is that the Bush administration was responsible, thus dismissing, once again, overwhelming evidence of Israeli involvement whose fingerprints, along with those of the U.S. intelligence community, are found all over the attacks. When Shermer begins promoting the official government fairy tale and mentions an insurance company investigation of the collapse of building 7 as evidence why it wasn't a demolition, Rys jumps in and informs him of an AIG insurance scam and it's connection to the CIA and the World Trade Center complex. The ignorant Shermer, who couldn't remember the name of the insurance company he referred to, cuts Rys off and changes the subject to the attack upon the Pentagon by displaying an image from his book which he began searching for while Rys was still talking about the critically important role of AIG in the attacks, a subject Shermer wanted to avoid.
In comparing 9/11 to the attack upon Perl Harbor, Shermer later posited that the U.S. government had no advanced knowledge of the Perl Harbor attack which is, once again, flatly contradicted not only by creditable evidence, but by his own words when he later admits to a small portion of that evidence. The reason for placing a large number of warships at Perl, closer to Japan and without the protection they would normally have been afforded, was almost certainly to provoke the attack and force the U.S. into a war which the public, prior to the event, wanted to avoid.
Throughout the conversation between the three participants, Shermer constantly avoids explaining his flawed reasoning and contradictions when he's challenged with evidence, instead resorting to condescending smiles and changing the subject, or simply ignoring the challenge altogether.
Shermer vs. Hancock
During a 2017 discussion on the Joe Rogan podcast regarding ancient megaliths and geology, Shermer's often simplistic and mainstream opinions are continuously challenged with refuting evidence or that which presents potentially viable alternatives, in some cases to an embarrassing degree. For the first two hours of this very interesting three-and-a-half hour discussion, Shermer, who is somewhat out of his depth, plays his usual game, often refusing to acknowledge that there may be problems with his opinions and choosing instead to derail the discussion or put forth some goofy analogy to support his opinion. What i found most interesting is his steadfast ability to persistently deflect any and all arguments, regardless of their validity, while maintaining a cool exterior no matter how heated or passionate the discussion becomes at times, a quality--or defect, depending your point of view--which i attribute to an impenetrable ego.
Among other subjects, Graham Hancock argues that the knowledge required to construct of some of the worlds ancient megaliths, such as Gobekli Tepe, was likely not possessed by the people whom mainstream archaeologists tell us were responsible for their construction. Shermer, meanwhile, argues that sites like Gobekli Tepe, which appears to have been purposely buried somewhere around 12,000 years ago and built some time before that, were constructed by primitive hunter-gathers with primitive tools, thus refusing to seriously consider any alternative views. Unfortunately for Hancock, i don't believe the nail-in-the-coffin evidence in the form of thousands of precision vases discovered in Egypt was available in 2017, the knowledge of which would have again seriously challenged Shermer's mainstream views.
Video: Joe Rogan Experience #961 - Graham Hancock, Randall Carlson & Michael Shermer
Graham Hancock is an English author and journalist, well known for books such as "Fingerprints Of The Gods" & his latest book "Magicians of the Gods". Randall Carlson is a master builder and architectural designer, teacher, geometrician, geomythologist, geological explorer and renegade scholar. Michael Shermer is a science writer, historian of science, founder of The Skeptics Society, and Editor in Chief of its magazine Skeptic.
The Egyptians seem to have been capable of some extremely good work given the tools they had. They built some amazing structures, though not the pyramids i don't think, and they made beautiful statues and other items, including vases. There's only so much one can achieve with primitive tools however and so the dynastic Egyptians often used soft stone to make things, such as alabaster. They didn't have computer driven CNC machines like we have today and so, from a machinists perspective, the vases they made were crude and highly imperfect, even if they look stunning to the naked eye. The problem is that, along with these vases, there also exist highly precise vases that could not have possibly been made with primitive tools. Analysis of these objects by historians, machinists, aerospace engineers and other experts in their field have revealed that the tolerances on these vases was held to just a few thousandths of an inch, an accuracy which is clearly not achievable with copper tools and pounding stones. Furthermore, these vases were made from extremely hard stone, such as granite and dolomite, and in some cases the wall thickness is thin enough that light passes through.
Hancock hypothesizes that structures which exhibit a similar level of precision required technology and skills that may have been possessed by a civilization which predates the earliest humans we know of and thus this knowledge was essentially handed down to them as we might provide technology to hunter gathers living in remote places today. Hancock, along with others, posit that, with the exception of the existing structures, the evidence of this lost civilization may have been largely erased due to a catastrophic geological event which mostly wiped them out, such as a large comment or asteroid smashing into the Earth. His hypothesis is given credence by Randall Carlson who seems to be very knowledgeable regarding geology and Earth impacts.