jump to navigation

Censored for impact May 21, 2006

Posted by dr. gonzo in Space.
trackback

Censored in cyberspace by antiscience, we have been.

A former French air traffic controller, Eric Julien, who has erroneously predicted that on Thursday May 25 a fragment of comet will slam into the Atlantic Ocean and cause a tsunami is now engaging in censorship of anyone who opposes his “cause” to save lives on May 25.

With the prediction came a split with Exopolitics and the development of a website and forum dedicated to a “world-wide alert” for the impending doom he predicted after communing with extraterrestrials and consulting such reliable sources as crop circles and his all-knowing dreams.

Naturally, I am miffed at the anti science folks who exploit their lack of knowledge to take advantage of others. Bad Astronomer Phil Plait talks a bit about that here. So, I joined Julien’s forum and set forth to debating this ridiculous notion with other members.

I even sent a Julien a personal message seeking explanation, his response was less than encouraging when he said in response:

“Who are you ? What do you believe you are ?

Amitiés, Eric Julien.
Merci d’être ce que vous êtes.”

I checked back to the forum today, to find that no one is allowed to post or reply to posts. I couldn’t figure out why until I stumbled upon this recently started thread, “Banned Members.”

Eric started off the thread with this post:

Aloha All,

There is time for all things. Time to think, time to speak, time to act.

Now is the time to act. We have not the time to play with the children. So, I have decided to ban SYSTEMATICALLY any member disturbing the energy involved for preventing the death of millions of people. No one is forced to be here, the door is largely opened if you disagree. Many other forums will welcome your participation. If we are only 50 members, or less, it is well enough to do what we need to do. WE DON’T NEED DISTRACTION, WE NEED TO INFORM, even with opposite points of view. That is why some members are already banned. I am a kind guy but I do not respect the potential murderers.

If you don’t believe, you don’t trust, you don’t anything… I really don’t care. This is your free will. The only way to think about MAY 25th is : “better SAFE than SORRY”.

You can spend (waste ?) your time to speak about science or history, about probabilities and facts, this is your choice and I respect it. But do not stop the ones who have a higher sense of responsability for the very near future. Any personal attack implies to be banned. There is no more negociation for the remaining time before MAY 25 and so. After MAY 25, there will be thousands to come.

Regards, Eric.

Amitiés, Eric Julien.
Merci d’être ce que vous êtes.

And so if he doesn’t like your opinion, no matter how fact based and true it is, then he won’t let you talk. Not only is Eric Julien anti science but he is also anti-free speech.

Even better, the forum is now shut down until May 26, so everyone has to shut up now. It would appear that Julien intended to shut out dissenters for no other reason than they disagreed with him. This flies in the face of the entire point of the Internet and free speech.

Advertisements

Comments»

1. Brian - May 22, 2006

If I may – what Mr. Julien is engaging is might be distastful but it’s not censorship.

Properly, censorship is something only the state can engage in, and covers acts between the State and the individual. If Julien is closing down a forum it is not censorshp .. it’s time to mock him and move on.

Which isn’t a big deal but (my opinion of course) crying censorship over matters like this devalues the meaning of the word. Censorship should be the big gun in the arsenal, trotted out to fire at the State, not loopy guys like Julien.

2. dr. gonzo - May 22, 2006

I was pointing out his “banning” of certain members more than his shutdown of the forum, which could have been for any reason, though it would surprise me if it was for any other reason than to shut out his dissenters.

And not everyone sees Julien as loopy. The damage this guy does goes unseen. BA has a good example on his last post.

The outright banning of members he disagrees with is censoring. It doesn’t have to be perpetrated by the governement to qualify.

3. dr. gonzo - May 22, 2006

Another thought: Doesn’t the advent of information technologies such as the internet allow anyone to engage in censorship. Think of Google or Yahoo! and their ilk bowing to pressure from regimes that want to suppress information about ideas they deem detrimental.

By the same token another individual can now engage in censorship, words are not fluid as technology isn’t. For instance, I could have deleted your post if I was so inclined (not that I would).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: