"Puzzling People" by Thomas Sheridan - a puzzling person

Niall

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Chirpy said:
I now wonder if the on-line sexual humour and flirting was done in an deliberate attempt to wind up and separate himself from judgmental puritans. I don't blame him if that was his main reason.

What he wrote was neither humorous nor flirtatious. The guy is, going by his own writing and the lies he continues to tell to cover up for these "comedic" chestnuts, an absolutely disgusting creature.
 

Gimpy

The Living Force
I was referring to real life situations where we cross other people's boundaries as we get to know them but healthy people know when they have done this and try to make sure they don't do it again. To deny that you do this is being unrealistic and living in a fantasy world. To suggest only psychopaths do this makes you very naive and at the same time judgmental. The impression I get of this forum and the whole Cassiopaean movement is that its based on a mixture of mumbo jumbo, new age channeling and Puritan Christianity.

This is pure 'duck logic'...skimming the surface. Its as if you're standing at a kitchen sink, playing with a rubber duckie and talking to yourself. Your entire posting history reads this way...talking to no one but yourself.

I was only here to find out what was going on with Thomas and to be a voice of reason.

Which you did not do. At all.


Yes, he did let me down but I am grateful to him for his books and videos as they were easy to read and made sense. Yes he did plagiarise a bit but don't all the truthers and writers of books on psychopathy as they exchange ideas in order to present the bigger picture.

What would that bigger picture be? Seriously....what is it?

I am absolutely disgusted that nearly all of you here are judging him as a psychopath. He is NOT even though he did behave badly at times both in real life and on-line.


That tells me you know he's a creep, you just don't want to hear anyone talk about it. Good luck with that.


Much of the blame could be placed on the sycophants for flirting with him and messing with his mind. It was no wonder he started lashing out with all the pressure he got from idiots attacking him and putting pressure on him to believe in UFO's or Jesus. It was also somewhat his fault for not slowing down after his sudden and unexpected success and taking time out for himself to lie low for a while. I now wonder if the on-line sexual humour and flirting was done in an deliberate attempt to wind up and separate himself from judgmental puritans. I don't blame him if that was his main reason.

So far you're not doing Thomas Sheridan any good by posting here. All you've done is reveal yourself to be a shining example of everything you've leveled at me, and this forum.
 

Guardian

The Living Force
Trooper3 said:
Yes, I have read the guide lines more than once. I have come to the understanding that unless one allows themselves to be doctrinated here to the exact beliefs that everyone else has according to their leader, you will be banned. From what I have been able to gather (as I try as hard as I can to sound as intelligent and intiminating as possible by using big words and flowery MIT phrases) the core principles of this site are based on a metal condition called psychosis, which in a sense is an over endulgence in a fantisy world made to appear real in the avoidance of one's true reality.
I hear by ban myself. With great pleasure and relief to be away from this place. I think the arrogance and sense of superiority some of the members here display is sickning. The last couple of posts here were extremely patronizing and very condesending. It was insulting to my intelligence and intent by being to here and it was insulting to the intelligence of the other people whos views were simliar to mine.

Don't even BOTHER to rebuttal to this post. You'll be waisting your time.

"big words and flowery MIT phrases"

I'm guessing they don't teach "Spellchecker 101" at MIT? :lol:
 

Buddy

The Living Force
Trooper3 may have been damaged to the point of Masochism. I hope not, but it seems it does happen. I wish Trooper3 well and maybe a possibility to rethink the value of this place.
 

durabone

Jedi Council Member
Thanks for bumping this up again name.

Laura said:
At the low end you might find people who are very much like psychopaths only they are "made that way" by abuse, physical injury at any point in their lives, drug induced brain dysfunction, etc. These would be Charateropaths of various sorts.

A hopefully low noise question. I have read a lot about psychopaths that leaves me with the taste that their lack of empathy makes them like cold rolled steel. But they still exist within the confines of flesh and blood like the rest of us. The above quote now has me wondering and trying to think of examples. Does anyone think that the opposite might be possible? Could a natural-born psychopath respond to say long-term abuse/trauma by assuming the mantel of being 'nice' as a survival tactic? And then could they go on to live it out despite their dark inner nature? Would this be another way of saying that they can possibly be "potty trained?" If so how?

Thanks
 

ScarletBegonias

Dagobah Resident
Potamus said:
as
Does anyone think that the opposite might be possible? Could a natural-born psychopath respond to say long-term abuse/trauma by assuming the mantel of being 'nice' as a survival tactic? And then could they go on to live it out despite their dark inner nature? Would this be another way of saying that they can possibly be "potty trained?" If so how?

Thanks
Since they are manipulators and controllers by nature this scenario could make sense. But I wouldn't think they would be able to keep such an act up in the long run or with everyone they meet. Being nice to others doesn't feed them the way it feeds normal people.
 

Psalehesost

The Living Force
Scarlet said:
Potamus said:
as
Does anyone think that the opposite might be possible? Could a natural-born psychopath respond to say long-term abuse/trauma by assuming the mantel of being 'nice' as a survival tactic? And then could they go on to live it out despite their dark inner nature? Would this be another way of saying that they can possibly be "potty trained?" If so how?

Thanks
Since they are manipulators and controllers by nature this scenario could make sense. But I wouldn't think they would be able to keep such an act up in the long run or with everyone they meet. Being nice to others doesn't feed them the way it feeds normal people.

They would quite simply adapt their behavior according to what they could get away with. A psychopath can be nice and charming in order to manipulate, gain advantages, or avoid adverse consequences, but this mask drops whenever it isn't needed.
 

Cosmos

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
The self anounced "Punk Rock Psychologist" has puplished a new book:
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKk0-8cm1vQ
 

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Pashalis said:
The self anounced "Punk Rock Psychologist" has puplished a new book:
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKk0-8cm1vQ

Could not listen past this part:

Issues like Gaza do not have any relevance to Irish people’s lives…what goes on between the Israelis and the Palestinians, and it is between those two groups of people to sort those things out….blah, blah
:nuts:
 

Guardian

The Living Force
voyageur said:
Could not listen past this part:

Issues like Gaza do not have any relevance to Irish people’s lives…what goes on between the Israelis and the Palestinians, and it is between those two groups of people to sort those things out….blah, blah
:nuts:

Which would be EXACTLY the kind of thinking that has gotten where we are today. What a self centered idiot! :mad:
 

Cosmos

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
It seems Thomas Sheridan is back on Facebook: _https://www.facebook.com/thomas.sheridan.547
 

Chad

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Hi All, this is my first post/response so bear with me. :halo:

I signed up recently after having read the Wave, utilising this as a resource for my studies and have found it very helpful which is why i am here, on the Sheridan post in particular.

I became familiar with Thomas Sheridan via the usual channels: podcast interviews, randomly on youtube, then he featured in some 'roundtable' discussions as i believe has been mentioned with John Lamb Lash - who's work i do like and Jay Weidner who i was quite partial too having only heard him really speak on 'Archons'. I have also listened to his solo radio shows he puts out, read a few blog posts and i was following him on twitter!

I added Thomas Sheridan on facebook in the hope of following his work, he may have mentioned it to be ok to add him in an interview. Over the past few months i have vaguely interacted with him with 'likes' and maybe a one liner here or there. But nothing i can even recall.

Today i posted the article called Fire and Ice saying "if you read one thing today make it this" and almost immediately Thomas Sheridan responded saying i shouldn't follow articles from a 'doomsday cult'.

I did not screenshot this and i deleted it once he 'unfriended' me - i know, silly mistake, but i'll outline it below and happily answer any questions, because i realise you have to take my word for it.

Now, i'm no newbie and i'm no shaman but i am confident enough to catch basic fallacies and at the very least i will attempt to highlight why I may be misunderstanding the retort. So i responded saying something like "isn't all information of value and to be read first?" (baby with the bath water).

He followed expounding on this with ad hominems against 'channelled material' and again 'doomsday cult'.

I am also familiar with the issues with the police 'miviludes' (sp? i'm going from memory) so i simply proposed that considering they were found innocent, there must be something missing otherwise the police would certainly have acted no?

He replied furthering his comment, this time 'suspected murder' and something about how Sott/Cass finances itself.

I got the feeling he was quite aggravated, which was so strange considering the subject matter he writes about, plus i've put together an idea of him from his very very many posts and interactions on his profile (more of which later), and i had caught some obvious fallacies that i presumed he wasn't thinking as logically or clearly as perhaps he normally does.

But in my response i said he was not only launching assumptions on Sott/Cass but he began pushing them onto me, something about "if i want to follow that religion" so in my reply.. in a gentle enough way said I was not 'into it as a religion' and the catastrophes they speak of are cited with scientists who speak of cyclical events. I then said, because it literally fell into my head "Is this something to do with Weidner?"

I had tried to reason with him (though by now not enjoying the accusations! for myself or those empty and baseless directed here) i got the feeling it was not about reason and more personal - as any facts or even logic were yet to be produced!

He responded something like "what about Weidner" then ended with him saying something about Cass thinking there is a comet coming, driven by aliens but if it's my religion then i can go and enjoy it, or some very weak insult. I mean not even cutting or clever. Again, surprising.

I went to respond, this time i was to call him out, but again lightly using debateable comparisons of Graham Hancock talking about his interactions 'Mother Ayuahasca' but he had unfriended me!


I was quite taken aback considering i expect no one to 'believe' any thing, however i do expect, from apparently alternative researchers (and the first to deign me with attention *flutter*), almost impeccability in 'entertaining an idea' and any outright belittlement of a 'quirky' topic was THE red flag for me. I've made the mistake of dispelling something too fast, hence why i gave him opportunity to reconsider, by giving him the error in his logic but as you saw he went for the playground basics. Again, wow.

Which brings me to a suspicion i had of him, the instances i noted were his interactions on facebook which were very much based on him, him on stage playing an instrument, his paintings, even regular rotation of profile pictures.. (and i'll let my zen slip here, he aint a pretty profile!!!! which ironically made me permit such vanity!!!!!! ).

That was that. But i tweeted about it..

1)ThomasSheriden just 'unfriended' after asserting 'my belief in doomsday cult' when i asked for proof... Researcher extraordinnaire!!
2)He was defending his friend Wiedner (tho kept his reasons quiet) preferring empty assertions and ad homs. Bladdy ell.
3)He accepts 'archons' (appara) BUT lawd forbid 'aliens' or channeling. Thats just bonkers. Who said i 'beweaved'??
4)*makes comment* *furiously taps UNFRIEND, dammit, ¡¡¡¡HURRY!!!!* - and thats adult debate.
5)For a narcissisit/psycho researcher he curiously ego status updates/profile pic daily AND unfriends whn u disagree! Teehee.

My tweets didn't post till later because i did pop out and had no internet connection. Oh, and yes i imagine you're all glad you're not on twitter reading the spelling errors and crap in them tweets. I know, forgive me.


I see that there could be much more to this than a bad day and overlooked information in defence of a friend. And i will continue to 'entertain' that assumption for now. I do not tend to permit that behavour amongst 'learned people' i respect.

Lessons... :cool2:
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Interesting encounter... but not surprising as you will find from reading this entire thread.

If there is any "cult" going on, it appears to be the cult of Thomas Sheridan who seeks "true believers" in his delusions.
 

Gawan

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Thanks for sharing itellsya. And yes, that is him.

itellsya said:
He responded something like "what about Weidner" then ended with him saying something about Cass thinking there is a comet coming, driven by aliens but if it's my religion then i can go and enjoy it, or some very weak insult. I mean not even cutting or clever. Again, surprising.

Thats again a total twist of facts by Sheridan. Sott.net took a stand against these assumptions about comet Elenin made up by Richard Hoagland.


And if you like you could further introduce yourself (also when you stated already some things here) in the newbies section and tell us how you found this place, though nothing personal has to be shared.
 

Chad

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Thanks Gawan i'll be sure to do that, in a funny way this incident prompted me to post and I'll probably practice writing a blog post, so i see the benefit of it already! And perhaps the exposure will assist others.

If told correctly it's a funny story: 'author' on psychopathy is psychopath' - something for a slow family gathering i guess.


It was about 3am last night when i posted so i happened to only got to the speculative discussion about him and it was only later - page 10-15 here - where i saw the sadist stories; i would not have been so shocked yesterday had i seen that!! (i skimmed and still felt polluted)


It's a real shame i didn't save our exchange, i was more concerned that his comments and subsequent 'unfriend' would put off my, erm, suspicious friends (more prone to believe an accusing stranger than their long time pal... ) and therefore negate the post entirely, hence why i just removed it before i left. His argumentation would have exposed him for what he is so I'll know better for next time.

I quite easily disputed his accusations and am fully aware of how he was attempting to twist it, so i am under no illusions.

If anything it has reaffirmed my understanding of the knowledge i have acrued from places like here, including the recommended reading.
Life changing for me.

Appreciate the ear and the work everyone :flowers:
 
Top Bottom