Our resident shill

Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 2012-03-06 22:44

Berkeley Radiological Air and Water Monitoring Forum

Stalks other forums also. Just fyi.
For example, Democratic Underground, under the pseudonym "Pam W"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1127&pid=8476
Exact style and wordings. Some cut and pasted into this forum. Busy little bee.

Add new comment

Evidently you are losing the argument on the merits.

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2012-03-10 21:18.

When people go stalking on the Internet for someone's identity or to shame them in some way; it usually means the stalker is losing the argument on the merits.

Thanks original poster!

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2012-03-10 20:26.

This thread is awesome! Shillery exposed!

Creepy

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 2012-03-08 08:13.

Kind of creepy sleuthing the Internet for the identity of the poster. I wonder what would drive someone to indulge in such conduct. I guess that's what one does when one is losing the argument on the merits.

"Kind of creepy sleuthing the

Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 2012-03-09 23:22.

"Kind of creepy sleuthing the Internet for the identity of the poster."

You know what's creepy? Are you familiar with the behavior of this person on this forum? The creepy stalking from thread to thread, even resurrecting very old threads... Spending inordinate amounts of time here. THAT"s downright creepy. And if you notice, many here have called him out, that he is an obvious special interest person and to stop hiding behind "anonymous". His weird hostility is rather psychotic. He's the creep. And a coward.

Actually posting in many

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 2012-03-07 12:56.

Actually posting in many forums is NOT stalking!
But keeping track of someones posts in those forums IS!!
Who is the stalker? YOU ARE!!

I prefer the term "agenda

Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 2012-03-09 23:30.

I prefer the term "agenda hunter" or "exposer of bullies". LOL!!

So how many posts will the shill make in this thread alone?

Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 2012-03-09 23:14.

"Who is the stalker? You are"
No, moron. Our annoying forum stalker often uses the phrase "the eminent Dr. Boice", and since the good doctor has special interest ties, I wanted to find out where our R.S. (resident shill) was getting the wording.
So I googled the exact phrase and it brought me to democratic underground immediately.
Now have ya'll noticed that our resident shill has posted several times in this thread alone? A tell tale sign, posing as individual people.
My "friend", I promise you, you have very few readers on this forum fooled.

Is that all you are going on?

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2012-03-10 11:56.

Is that all you are going on; that a poster called Dr. Boice eminent? I would think that many people would call Dr. Boice eminent. He's a former president of the Health Physics Society, and he's the person that Congress called to testify when they wanted to know about Fukushima. I see nothing wrong, or unusual about calling Boice eminent.

Why do think that someone "was getting the wording" from someplace else? Calling an distinguished person "eminent" doesn't require another person to wordsmith.

If you look through the

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2012-03-10 21:36.

If you look through the forum, most of the time the "good" Dr.'s name is used by the RS it is prefaced by "eminent". I noticed the pattern and looked it up. So what? I am a researcher and patterns reveal themselves. It's quite fundamental.

You stalk here and won't reveal your obvious industry ties? Then people will start getting curious. Don't pretend you're some innocent anonymous person. Worse, you are very dysfunctional, and a bully.

Lastly, follow the money with his "eminence". Due diligence is critical regarding the lauded leaders on both sides of this argument.

This is the problem with the anti-nukes; LOGIC!

Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 2012-03-11 13:01.

You stalk here and won't reveal your obvious industry ties?
=========================

I have ZERO ties to the nuclear industry. My passion is SCIENCE, not money; and my goal / intent here has been to DISPEL the DISHONESTY and LIES of the anti-nukes.

I know the anti-nukes can't believe that anyone would support the nuclear industry unless they were paid, and the money is the root of all support for nuclear power.

However, the self-righteous, ignorant, and scientifically illiterate anti-nukes keep telling LIES and EXAGGERATING, like the two anti-nuke shills Mangano and Sherman who wrote that FRAUDULENT paper; are the ones that are plying the public with MISINFORMATION. As loudly as they decry that lying to the public is bad when it is done by the nuclear industry; they engage in it themselves. HYPOCRITES, every last damn one of them.

I don't want to see good science trashed by these hypocrites; and so I expose their LIES and MISINFORMATION every time I find it. For that, they label me a "bully" and "resident shill". I can't prove a negative. I can't prove that I don't have industry ties. It's insufficient in logic just to say that if someone supports nuclear power; then they have to have industry ties.

NO - my quest is to get good, scientifically based information to the public; in spite of the efforts of the lying anti-nuke bastards.

I wouldn't put too much stock in this

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 2012-03-07 08:06.

Many here I guess are too young to remember the early days of Usenet.

During the early days of Usenet; before software that offset quotes, it was quite common to use ======= as the separator between a quoted passage and the start of original material.

You've only discovered someone else that is old enough to have grown up with the early Usenet.

Nope, that's not it. I

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 2012-03-07 09:01.

Nope, that's not it. I checked it out. Exact style of writing. as well as the use of the =====. In some posts, the exact wording that he/she is posting here.
It's the same shill.

I don't understand the Cromack comment though?

Judge for

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 2012-03-07 09:50.

Judge for yourself:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1127&pid=5713
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1127&pid=6144
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1127&pid=5717
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1127&pid=5720
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1127&pid=5723
Not as verbally abusive, but, if it quacks like a duck...

This is totally off topic,

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 2012-03-08 09:51.

This is totally off topic, but I have decided to start using the whole WRONG WRONG WRONG thing in my everyday life. I am sure that it will add to my already significant charm.

At home:

"Hey honey, how about we open a bottle of wine, light some candles, and go sit by the fireplace?"

"Oh not tonight dear...I've got a headache..."

"WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!"

At work:

"Hey pal, could you work this Saturday? We're a little shorthanded."

"WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!".

If you all will pardon the use of the expression, I see it as "the nuclear option" for all scenarios.

BC 3/8/12

Love it! Thanks for making

Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 2012-03-09 23:25.

Love it! Thanks for making us laugh.

Takes the cake

Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 2012-03-11 20:53.

Dear Pam pleeeze don't stop solar!
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/11277895#post8

Wrong, wrong, wrong

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 2012-03-08 10:48.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCUzYwnEgvk

Excellent detective work.

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 2012-03-07 10:44.

Excellent detective work. That is one sick puppy.

What pray tell is so "sick"

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 2012-03-07 13:47.

What pray tell is so "sick" about the posts you link to?

If anything, I'm more impressed having read through Pam W's comments. She at least seems well-informed, thoughtful, and articulate, unlike some others I could mention.

Why is it so necessary to play detective and track down people's "real" identities, anyway? Would knowing what a contributor's name is, where they live, what they do for a living, what they studied, how old they are, etc., change the import of their statements? Or does it just make it easier for you and others like you to browbeat, bully and intimidate them into silence?

WHO is the menace here: them, or YOU?

"If anything, I'm more

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2012-03-10 00:18.

"If anything, I'm more impressed having read through Pam W's comments."

Of course you are.

"WHO is the menace here: them, or YOU?"

LOL!! Who's "them"? You mean there's more than one?! Gee, I naively thought it was just Pam. That's the only pseudonym I stumbled on... Hey thanks for YOUR detective work! or inadvertent disclosure.

Yea, we'd best leave all the

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2012-03-10 00:05.

Yea, we'd best leave all the "browbeat, bully and intimidate" stuff to "Pam", who does it so well HERE. If an OBVIOUS industry person is going to stalk a forum with an agenda, and refuse to identify, people will eventually start trying to put 2 and 2 together. Too bad you don't like it. I say it's self defense.

Be nice "Pam"

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2012-03-10 09:41.

Somewhere 0n DU "Pam" notes working for the DOE on NPP design, if so, are her posts here are a reflection of job security? Is "Pam" blogging from work and does the DOE support such activities? One thing that is apparent is that on the moderated blog, DU, "Pam" is less abusive and can be civil. What the posters here are asking "Pam" is simple and straightforward: be civil here.

If we use the correlation is causation ie. all anti-nukes are stupid mindset, it could be said as well that all anonymous pro-nukes bloggers are rude and abusive, which is equally untrue and can be seen in the DU posts. It would seem that "Pam's" efforts here are aimed at discrediting and disrupting this blog.

I've stated more than once..

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2012-03-10 12:24.

Is "Pam" blogging from work and does the DOE support such activities?
==================

I've stated more than once here that I'm retired.

You are the one that is making unsubstantiated suppositions that I blog from work.

I blog from home, and have plenty of time to do so now that I'm retired.

It also means I don't have an agenda. I'm not working for an industry.
My finances are guaranteed by my retirement plan and pension; and I don't control how the pension fund invests its money. I don't know whether the fund is heavily invested in nuclear utilities or not.

I look for the constant lying propaganda by the anti-nukes and dispel or correct it. The fact that some may be old posts doesn't concern me. There's no statute of limitations on bad science. If the anti-nukes tell one of their big lies and fabrications and nobody calls them on it for a month; that doesn't mean they get a "pass" and nobody can correct their self-serving lies. I correct their lies and falsifications wherever and whenever I find them.

That's just good science and in the interest of truth. Of course, the anti-nukes don't like that because they are not truth seekers. They have their own ill-conceived parochial agenda, and they promote that agenda and honesty be damned.

Whatever, Rick Cromack / Pam

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2012-03-10 14:55.

Whatever, Rick Cromack / Pam W / Resident Shill. Just keep spinning those lies. You are nothing but EVIL!!

Yes

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 2012-03-08 08:54.

The desire is to get the best, most accurate information into the open for the public's education and discourse. That also means pointing out erroneous data that is presented as factual.

I think some here are looking for a connection to the Nuclear Energy Institute, a group that nuclear critics believes is all powerful, and omnipresent. They believe they can discredit their adversaries by connecting them to NEI. Of course, they have their own activist organizations, but the people there walk on water.