Empire of the Odd

Some time ago we started receiving some strange and alarming emails from a Mr. Laruence Litetowler in Sarasota Florida. Alarming because of their content and the strident tone of the sender.

**

“to The Odd Empire
From Laruence Litetowler litetol@#####.com

Odd Emeperor

I saw your write up on the time cube site that Eugene stole from me. He’s thinks that by getting his theory on the intranet he can destroy the TRUE and COMPLETE STUPENDUS TIME CONE which is NOT a theory but a FACT and only if I could get the STUPENDUS TIME CONE into the intranet then the whole would see my excessive genius.

You are obviously a dumb jerk who cant see the excessive genius of I the MOST GENIUS HUMAN who has figgurrd out the STUPENDUS TIME CONE, you think that idiot Eugene with his DUMB time cube is more enlightened than me. WHAT A SAD PATHETIC MORON YOU ARE!!!!!

Laruence L

**

From The Odd Emperor, oddempire@oddempire.org
To Laruence Litetowler litetol@#####.com

Greetings!

Thanks for the “nice letter.”

Have a great life, (dork!)

Sincerely;
The Odd Emperor

**

“to The Odd Emporoe
From Laruence Litetowler litetol@#####.com

You think you are so damn smart? You don’t have my EXCESIVE GENIUS because you never thought of the STUPENDUS TIME CONE and I have! You may have just this intranet site but I have the STUPENDUS TIME CONE truth and you witsh you had it. If I could do this intranet web page comuter thing I would publish the TRUTH and not the stupid intranet page that you make. You are frade of putting the TRUTH of the STUPENDUS TIME CONE on your comuter intranet page because you are just a lousy COUWARD!!!!1

Laruence L
**

Hi Mr. L;

You intrigue the Odd Emperor. If you send me your time cone information I could host a time cone (er) “intranet computer web pageust for you. Then the ENTIRE WORLD will see just what a dufus (er genius) you REALLY ARE!

How about that?

Sincerely;
The Odd Emperor.

**

I never received an answer. I forgot about the whole thing. The letters ended up in the Imperial Files and I went on to other things.

But, one morning the Imperial post came with a manila envelope, addressed to the Odd Emperor. inside was an ordinary disk with the words “PROOF!!!!” written in a shaky hand on the disk itself. On the floppy was a web page, (sort of.) It was in that same oddball style that Gene Ray uses for his time-cube page. Lots of random fonts, some photos and crazy ranting.

The next day another floppy arrived with more ranting.

Not knowing what to do I asked my Imperial technoflunkis to go ahead and publish the whole mess. After all, I did promise!

The Odd Emperor

The Time Cone page from the first disk.

I’m not sure where I picked this up, probably UFO Update (I’m catching up on my reading this week.)

This neatly crystallizes the idea that most (if not all) UFO abduction stories are regurgitated plots from popular media, mostly bad science fiction films of the bug eyed monster variety. If true it’s going to be interesting to see what the next crop of alien abduction tales will be like. With the recent crop of “humans go into space but don’t find aliens (Firefly, Battlestar Galaictica,) will the new abductors be time traveling humans or sinister government agents? Will the machine like Deros of Richard Shaver make a comeback? (Outside the writings of Icke or Mott that is.)

Anyway, enjoy!

http://www.talkingpix.co.uk/ArticleGaucheEncounters.html

Some of you may have noted that the Odd Emperors been missing for a couple of weeks. We were doing important work, reviewing the front lines and fighting the good fight. I noted that Paul Kimball made some nice comments on his weblog about the Odd Empire. Thanks Paul! It’s gratifying that someone out there gets where the Odd Emperor is coming from.

I was perusing around among the usual suspects when I ran across this piece.

“The DOPler Effect
Do objects disappear around your home, then inexplicably reappear? You might be a victim of DOP, or Disappearing Object Phenomena. What could be the cause?

This is so obviously a parody. Its written in that strange pseudo- intellectual style, so appealing to the pseudo scientific community.
One passages really stood out at me.

We must remember that any paranormal investigation must first rule out the most likely, if pedestrian, explanations for what seems like an unexplainable event. Only then can we consider more unusual possibilities.

My inner jackass started braying the moment that I saw that, for a number of reasons.

It’s so completely foolish! FIRST rule out the most likely explanations? Only than can you conclude that a ghost misplaced your ball point pen or some other stupid thing? And yet this is exactly how many people think the paranormal should be approached.

In real science you never completely eliminate possibilities, you weight them in order of probability. Lost pen? I probably sat it down somewhere and forgot about it or a ghost took it from me. You can consider the ghost but that’s such a complex (thereby unlikely) explanation that it’s not seriously equated. At least most sane people would never give it a second thought.

Many believers seem weigh possibilities conversely proportional to their un-reasonability. Coupled with a general ignorance of how the physical world operated this can lead to amusing conclusions. “The pen flipped through another dimension. Aliens took it to examine.” Etc.

The third reason my inner jackass got a good belly laugh from this?

Well! I originally found this article posted on a certain page run by a fellow who apparently has no clue that the piece WAS a parody. He posted it as just an interesting news item.

Or perhaps he knows its a parody an he wanted to test his readers.

Or perhaps the piece is not a parody at all!.

BWAAAA HAAAHA HAAAAAA!!!!!

From this…

This is pretty funny and illustrates the *perception* many believers have regarding skeptics. The real funny thing is that, if anyone on the skeptical side uttered an inanity like that they would be severely trounced by the regulars. I’ts not ironic at all that this illustration comes from Chick Publications, people who also believe in eternal hellfire, angels with wings and demons with pitchforks.

Likewise, people who believe in this vision of a ,“typical” skeptic also believe in aliens, bigfoots and chupa-what-do-you-call-ums. It’s too bad, some are very smart people but they’ve gotten themselves in something of a Fortian trap. One that allows no quarter and no dissent of any kind. It gives them so little wiggle room that they *always* resort to passionate, illogical argument and nearly always descend into rude ad-hominem fallacies.

You can’t talk to these people sometime, they fear communicating with a real skeptic more than they fear aliens. The reason they try to make skeptics into that Chick illustration is because they *want* to fear that which they don’t agree with. They make up things just like they make up aliens and Bigfoot.

I just pulled this off of ARS. Although the Odd Emperor has never given an interview on Scientology, these rules might be good to keep in mind whenever encountering any militant believer.

***quote

“To all critics of Scientology who give interviews to the media.

I listened to a number of your interviews on xenutv.com and have heard
a number of other your interviews, and have read the posts on this
newsgroup.

I have agreed with ALL of your critisisms of the CoS — and I am NOT a
Scientologist — however, I do routinely advise clients on interviewing
techniques and provide media training. Having worked with a number of
folks in academics (mostly MDs), and other professionals, I’ve learned
that while most experts know their subject inside and out, they’re too
close to their subject, and they often forget that their listeners
don’t share their insight. The CoS-ers who submit to interviews are
clearly trained — and very often, their interviewers were “handled.”

In the interviews I’ve heard, the CoS Critics are so hung up on
specifics, that the “Big Picture” is lost.

So I’d just like to offer the following observations and suggestions:

The best way to approach these CoS folks is NOT to attack them as
“criminals, liars & thieves.” This requiers getting the interviewers
and listeners to buy-in to your emotions and belief systems — and
that’s hard — and it takes time…and understandin…to get them on
your side.

INSTEAD, take a path that will immediately “hook” the listeners and
interviewers with something simpler: THE TRUTH — what the CoS-ers
believe, and how just plain stupid it is. It’s a whole lot easier to
make your point impactfully if the interviewers and listeners ARE ON
YOUR SIDE, BECAUSE THE OTHER SIDE SOUNDS SO DUMB…and most people
would rather be considered SMART than DUMB. So paint the CoS for what
it is…JUST PLAIN DUMB…FOOLISH…and most importantly, LAUGHABLE.

Next, make your points short and impactful. Examples:

1) Media Question: So tell me, what is Scientology all about?

Answer: “Simple, It’s a FAKE RELIGION invented by a FAILED SCIENCE
FICTION WRITER in the 1950s…AND GET THIS…They ‘BELIEVE’ that we’re
all infested with the spirits of THOUSANDS OF DEAD SPACE ALIENS, and
the only way to find ‘TRUE HAPPIENESS’ (mockingly), is to get rid of
them — thu Scientology. Because they’re the ‘ONLY ONES’ who can teach
you how to ‘TALK’ to these DEAD ALIENS and convince them to LEAVE YOUR
BODY! And Scientology will be HAPPY to ‘TEACH’ you how to do this —
FOR ABOUT $300,000!”

Again, mockingly — but to the point — AND you’ve told the truth. But
remember, avoid terms like “dangerous cult, criminals, fraudulent” etc.
It’s not the time — that’s for later — and it’s better for the
interviews to come to these conclusions on their own and comment on it.
This is the time to illustrate CoS’s lunacy and destroy their
credibility by using CoS’s own beliefs.

2) Media Question: What? (a likely response) They believe in THAT? (by
now, somewhat in disbelief)

Answer: “Yeah, It seems at about 75 million years ago, this evil
galactic overlord named Xenu…(quickly and mockingly tell the
story)…and their dead souls STILL HAUNT US…and Scientology tells us
that they’re the cause of ‘ALL THE EVIL IN THE WORLD.’ That’s why
they’re SOOOO against psychology…YOU DON’T NEED A SHINK OR
ANTIDEPRESSANTS…IT’S THOSE PESKY DEAD ALIENS CAUSING ALL YOUR
PROBLEMS! AND SCIENTOLGY IS HERE TO HELP YOU GET RID OF THEM…Again,
For about $300 GRAND!” (A knowing and mockingly sarcastic delivery is
key here)

This immediately strips them of all credibility. They look like the
idiots they are…and you get the interviewers and the listeners
laughing and on your side — HOW COULD THEY SUPPORT THIS LUNACY?

3) Media Question: So if I go to one their Churches…they’re gonna
tell me this stuff, right?

Answer: “First of all, don’t call it a “Church”…It’s not a religion,
it’s a BUSINESS and THEY WANT YOUR MONEY. And NO, you won’t learn that
stuff right away — are you kidding? People would run off laughing
hysterically if they told ’em that right off the bat…No, that stuff
is ‘SUPER SECRET INFORMATION!’ And that’s ONLY for the ‘UPPER’
levels…AND it’s gonna take you about TWENTY YEARS and COST ABOUT
$300,000 — OR MORE! — TO FIND THAT STUFF OUT. SEE…It’s not a
‘Church’ — What kind of ‘CHURCH’ makes you cough up 300 GRAND before
you can learn about Jesus or Mohammad or Bhudda? Scientology ISN’T A
RELIGION…IT’s A SCAM to get ALL YOUR MONEY!…GIVE EM TWENTY YEARS
AND 300 GRAND, and they’ll ‘TEACH’ you about XENU AND THE DEAD ALIENS!”

Now, the CoS-ers are starting to look even more idiotic, and their
‘Church’ greed and criminal nature begins to come to light. Hopefully,
the interviewers and listeners will now be inclined to question the
CoS-ers in a likewise mocking approach.

Then you can (quickly) talk about L Ron’s insanity, Lisa McPherson, CoS
mind control, e-meter & auditing foolishness, pattern of lies, black
ops, Narconon, battle agaisnt psychology…etc…etc…Whatever subject
works within the context of the interview.

DON’T get bogged down by specifics — obscure names, dates, court
cases, CoS lingo, etc. Be simple, hard hitting, and to the point. AND
DON’T BE AFRAID to jump in on answering the questions the intviewers
ask them.

NOW, after these idiots’ true nature has been cemented, THIS is when
you get to the Lisa McPherson story: “IN FACT, there was a case in
Florida…” (hit it hard and quick)

Unfortunately, it was clear the CoS folks who were on that most recent
radio interviews I have heard had media training, and their answers
were scripted and well rehearsed. And they sounded fairly credible to
both the hosts and listeners (as I was one).

In dealing with these CoS flacks, always be courteous, BUT NOT
RESPECTFUL — They’ll try to talk over you, so respond likewise. DO
RIDICULE their beliefs — LAUGH AT THEM. ATTACK their history, belief
systems and actions (that’s what they’re gonna do to you). But DON’T
attack them personally — in fact, “FEEL SORRY” for them, because YOU
DO, and want to help them see the LUNACY of their brainwased beliefs —
which is THE TRUTH.

DON’T ASK THEM QUESTIONS: BECAUSE THEY WON’T ANSWER. Because they’ll
turn it back on you.This gives them more air time, and allows them to
push your buttons.

DON’T ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS; Because they’re set-up, designed to
derail you and take you off-point. RATHER, dismiss their questions, and
go bact to your point.

L Ron supposedly said something about “never defend, always attack” —
(Sounds a bit like Sen Siu, but then he “borrowed” most of his works).
BUT that’s the only way to deal with them…Attack them with THE TRUTH.
They can’t fight that.

YOU WANT THE INTERVIEW TO BE ON YOUR TERMS — with the hosts and
listeners backing YOU up. Stay on point. Don’t get sidetracked. Don’t
put yourself in a position of defending yourself. Make an outline. And
rehearse. This way, you can effectively communicate to the interviews
and listeners a view of the CoS-ers to for what they are: Greedy
mind-controlled zombie idiots.

I applaud your work…and hope these suggestions will help you and
other CoS critics in your noble battles.

BUT REMEMBER THIS: It wasn’t debate or getting people on your side that
made people see that the Emperor had no clothes. It was a lone,
enlightened voices who responded with laugher, mocking and ridicule.
And within no time, everyone was laughing, mocking and ridiculing the
Emperor’s naked stupidity. And he ran off in shame, never to seen
again.

These are the strategies and tactics to take against Scientologists….”

****

I look at the UFO Updates list when I’m in need of a chuckle. Not that most of the posters there are to laugh at. Many are sober, reasonable people. Folks I would be happy to hoist a beverage with at a local watering hole or get into a deep conversation about most anything. Some *are* folks that I’ve gotten into conversations with, in various places on the Internet.

Others? To judge some people by their writing? Well; it’s to imagine them at some Zoo for frustrated UFOlogests. Behind stout bars of reason and logic they shake their fists uselessly at the world and fling brown malodorous chunks of fantasy and unreason at the passing patrons.

For example.

In a thread entitled; ÓUfology’s Internal War.”

Eugene Frison writes, responding to a call from Robert Frola
for all UFOlogests to stand together irregardless of their beliefs.

I can’t agree with your closing sentence. Having differences of
opinion (but staying objective and using proper scientific
methodologies) is one thing, but believing/propagating unfounded
speculation is another.

The biggest obstacle this field has to making progress (whether
that is understanding the nature of the UFO phenomenon or
getting acceptance by the public, media, scientific community,
etc.) is – to quote Richard Hall in a recent post – “the cancer
that has invaded this field.”

To stand united with this group is to ensure that Ufology continues to
be ridiculed and on a path that could bring it to its doom. Only by
somehow seperating disciplined Ufology from the foolishness – and having
the public, media, and scientific community understand and recognize
this seperation – does the field have any hope.

Standing collectively with the con men, frauds, psychotics,
wild-eyed believers, channellers, etc. that comprise a hugh part
of this field is the worst possible approach in attempting to
make ufology accepted and successful.

Ed Gehrman replies;

These different persuasions have one common factor:

The ‘other’. Are there ‘other’ intelligent alien (outsider) life
forms in our vicinity?

We – ufology – can disagree about particulars, but we might
agree that the ‘other’ exists. Then we might begin discussing
the nature of the “other”.

Also, as Eleanor suggested, why not make a list of the
discredited cases?

William Bolt responds.

Eugene and List

I agree with you completely, until the seriously dedicated
Ufologist distant themselves from those who’s only interest in
the field is for what profits and attention can be harvested
from people such as myself who can afford barely an occasional
book or ticket to attend a local convention, Ufology will never
receive the acceptance it deserves. I will support the real deal
Ufologist and can spot those who are snake oil salesmen.

But stand together you will because until a Stanton Friedman, a
Nick Pope, Dr. Maccabee, I would even give a thumbs up to George
Filer if he produced a live Martian Wabbit (on a leash of
course) can lay hold of a craft or living gray or reptilian from
an off world planet and delivers it to the White house lawn for
the world to see, main stream science and the media will
continual to roll their eyes whenever UFOs are mentioned.

Alfred Lehmberg… flings.

Let me just close with a bunch of ebullient raspberries, and
rude gestures. You’ve mistaken the problem, don’t have a
solution, and are no adept at prophesy. Take your ball and just
go home. Everything you’ve said has been said before and
discounted. Ironically, I suspect, _you’re_ the chronic
intellectual cancer of metaphor endured since 1947, Sir. You
are, decidedly, not the cure, and your tedious ethic has not
moved us a centimeter in 50 years.

My best, and all respect, to Mr. Hall, who may yet be part of
the conjectured ‘cure’ and who has paid abundant dues for same,
regardless. He’s produced the single work that is _all_ the
excuse Mr. Frison’s mythic science mainstream would need to
begin a passionate investigation of UFOs… yet that
investigation is _not_ forthcoming. Woo-woos are thoughtless
excuse… they are, in no way, the reason.

The entire thread can be viewed at http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/
..As usual it’s not necessary to comment. : )

I just watched the US Space Shuttle launch. Pretty impressive performance! They ran live camera shots from the external tank including a fantastic view of the Shuttle separation.

Now, how many self proclaimed experts out there are going to declare the paint chips and junk going through that shot are following UFOs?

Let’s see!

From: Greg Boone
To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 02:11:05 EDT
Subject: Illegal Aliens?

Here’s one story I’ve been reluctant to relay but a pal who is
an old time Ufologist bade me do so.

He had asked me about what was going on in Mexico as he had read
the reports of the never-ending sightings down there.

Then I had to ‘fess up to something several Mexican neighbors of
mine told me.

Since I can walk out my front door, take a few steps and ask any
number of folks from Mexico, that I know, about anything
Mexican. I of course asked about the UFO flaps.

As the conversations segued back and forth about the controversy
about the mass border-crossings, one chap looked at me sternly
and said,

“Jobs ain’t the only reason we come here. It’s to get away from
all those UFOs!”

He had a word they use for UFOs and ETs, but I forgot it. The
others acknowledged him and at first I thought he was joking, but
I asked another group of the guys who hang out in the parking
lot of one of the hardware stores nearby.

Yep, same thing. They said UFO stories, news reports and close
encounters of all kinds have folks in Mexico quite stirred up.
Again they reiterated that that was another main reason they
make it to the U.S.

Best,

Greg

Now this is interesting. I made a couple of comments to the effect the Richard Hoagland is being a bit er- ingenuous about his criticism of the Deep Impact probe and NASA in general. He suggested that the bombing of Baghdad was about as difficult as smacking a comet with a space probe I.E.

The entire thread can be seen here.

(Hoagland)
There are many ways I could answer your criticisms of our latest blog — sincere … sarcastic … ironic … with humor …. Or–

Seriously.
Let’s try serious:

For starters, it is obvious you are telling the absolute truth when you state, you “can’t even imagine ….” You seem somewhat easily impressed with “big numbers,” but apparently lack the context to put them in perspective. You have obviously “bought” with little independent thinking (or research) another consistent NASA mis-direction: “this is the FIRST time we’ve EVER done this …. This space business is S-O-O-O-O difficult ….”

Fortunately, you don’t have to “imagine.” We have excellent, INDEPENDENT examples of precisely what the Deep Impact Team accomplished the other night, and how “difficult” it was — and in the public domain.

To begin with: the “extreme difficulty” of what the Deep Impact Team accomplished — “steering by radio control an object, traveling at many thousands of miles per hour, into another object … all the while televising in ‘real time’ a stream of television images back …” — WAS REPEATEDLY, SUCCESSFULLY CARRIED OUT OVER TEN YEARS AGO … AND BEFORE AN ENTIRE WATCHING WORLD.

It was called “The Gulf War,” and featured EXACTLY this type of “remotely-monitored, computer-controlled, terminal guidance technology …” — in the form of guided SMART BOMBS and CRUISE MISSILES … which were used with clear success to devastate Saddham’s air force, command and control facilities, communications networks, etc., etc.

….That’s serious? I guess I’m just a seedy-podunk poor gum chewing sod. Hoagland proclaims it so it MUST be so! He uses a lot of ALL CAPS when he writes too, that must mean something important!
I replied;

Whew! You are certainly good at painting a succession of wonderful pictures. Let’s just assume for a moment that I don’t comprehend the huge difference between the example you cite and the achievement of the Deep Impact probe.

No hang that sir! I am an experienced radar technician, I worked on high powered tracking and terminal guidance semi-active homing radar sets for the US military. Our job was to bring a payload moving around 900 MPH to within several yards of a moving target(around 400-500 MPH relative) at around sixty miles distance. What we did was about 100 times more difficult to accomplish than your example and we used 1960s technology (this was in the early 1980s.)

They were steering a missile around the same mass as ours, into an object that was around 536,800 miles away around four miles across moving at a relative velocity of about 6 miles a second. I would say that this much more difficult than what we used to do and thousands of times more difficult than just dropping a dumb bomb on a fixed structure. People shooting notwithstanding.

In other words Mr. Hoagland. You may think this is like falling off a log, I know better.

(this was corrected for typos, I bashed it out too fast apparently.)

He replied.

I didn’t say this was “easy,” I said it was “state-of-the-art.” Big difference.

I’m honestly impressed with your personal, technical experience in this type of endeavor … and must say, it TOTALLY proves my point.

If you could do something like that — using ’60’s technology (WOW!! My hat’s truly off to you …) — and in 1980 (or, thereabouts), with Moores Law alone just extrapolate what could be done NOW …. [I have friends at Raytheon, setting up similar experiments back then, using such “60’s technology,” so I KNOW what you accomplished …. 🙂 ]

The “big numbers,” “closing velocities,” “size of target,” etc., are all bigger … yes … but NOT … compared to the vast improvements in computer size, power consumption, processing power, sensor technology, thruster capabilities, etc., etc., etc.

And, the BIG factor I tried (gently) to underscore: with Deep Impact (except for those last 30 minutes) they had ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD (~ six months in “cruise”)to track the spacecraft, refine the trajectory, update the on-board guidance computer, burn, track again, update, etc., etc., etc.

Like you, I’m NOT a novice at this stuff (check my bio). And, I know when NASA is, again, practicing “artful mis-direction.”

Frankly, compared to actually HITTING the Comet, acquiring the information we’re all (still) waiting for was MUCH, MUCH harder — with NO ROOM for a “second go around” …).

For which I give A’Hearn’s Team full credit.

Now, if they would only SHOW us what they’ve got! Because, again, once this data’s on the ground, analyzing it is NOT (sorry …) “rocket science.” (I mean, look at all the OTHER teams — including those downlinking satellite numbers — which have managed to put up ACTUAL data on their websites … including SPECTRAL data …). 🙂

No, there is something definitely fishy going on here, which “wowing the public with Big Numbers” only serves to obfuscate.

To which I replied

“I’m honestly impressed with your personal, technical experience in this type of endeavor … and must say, it TOTALLY proves my point.”

Sarcasm noted. ) ; )

(check my bio). And, I know when NASA is, again, practicing “artful mis-direction.”

Um, Sir, these were not experiments. This was a long range SAM system mounted on a US Navy vessel. We did live fire shoots about twice a year and simulations daily. The Military does not work under Moore’s law–like NASA as you know, more like Murphy’s law. For example; the Space Shuttle still uses relatively primitive computers compared with that thing sitting on our desks.

I’ve never accused you of being a novice. You have written several popular books on the subject and ‘ve read the claims on your web page many times. I would submit however that, you probably have as much experience with sending a probe to a comet rendezvous as I’ve had.

That aside, I’m more concerned with the common thread that runs in all of your writings, that of suggesting huge government conspiracies in the space program and many other things. Deep impact is just a recent example, you really think that two weeks is a long time for data to trickle out of the program? Is that unusual? How long did it take for chemical data to emerge from the recent Mars landers? What about the Titan lander? Did spectrograph data get released instantly? Perhaps you could compare the relative time-flow of information because truly (even though I’m ‘jest’ a novice.; )) I really don’t see the big problem with waiting a few weeks.
20/7/05 9:34 AM