Guide In-depth Primal Diet database/guide (Very High IQ) (1 Viewer)

[Idec]

I honestly don't have the time right now. But, I will say this:

Vonderplanitz's Diploma Compared To DiplomaXpress:

View attachment 37448View attachment 37448

Shared the SAME layout, SAME font, SAME signature, and SAME seal as confirmed fake diplomas from known diploma mills. You could literally buy the same credential from DiplomaXpress.com. It's know for openly selling novelty diplomas.

LMFAO.

If you watched the hour long video I made and sent in this thread you will see my defense of it

 

[Idec]

If you watched the hour long video I made and sent in this thread you will see my defense of it

the whole PHD thing means nothing since its predicated on the idea he used it to get work which he didnt, the three outcomes are this: 1. the diploma mill faked a real university diploma - 2. he knew it was fake but did nothing with it - 3. he really did get a hon ph.d

 

[Lord]

If you watched the hour long video I made and sent in this thread you will see my defense of it

I'm not watching an hour-long video of YOUR defense on behalf of Aajonus's terrible defense/explanation towards his credibility. That's absurd.

3. he really did get a hon ph.d

The image I posted literally eliminates this option. Richmonds University (no "h") doesn't exist as an accredited institution, the layout matches DiplomaXpress templates exactly, and actual honorary doctorates from real universities don't come with "magna cum laude" designations.

For context, "magna cum laude" is an undergraduate Latin honor.

An actual honorary degrees don't grade your "original research." The document is internally incoherent as a credential regardless of where it came from.

he used it to get work which he didnt,

...No. He absolutely did use it. He published under the title "Dr. Aajonus Vonderplanitz" and his books and interviews leaned on that framing to establish authority over nutritional claims he was making to sick people. The credential was load-bearing in how he presented himself. How is this not already obvious?

2. he knew it was fake but did nothing with it

This just concedes the point anyway. If he knew it was fake and kept displaying it, that's still deliberate misrepresentation.

Also:

https://aajonus.net/aajonus-responds-to-mike-adams

He admits he got it in 2005 and calls it "just an ornament"

Calling it "just an ornament" after the fact, and reframing the wording to mean something other than what a PhD normally means, is retrofitted justification. If it was always just decorative, why was it displayed at all, why did he use the title, and why did he feel the need to explain the phrasing when challenged? People don't explain ornaments.

 

[Idec]

I'm not watching an hour-long video of YOUR defense on behalf of Aajonus's terrible defense/explanation towards his credibility. That's absurd.



The image I posted literally eliminates this option. Richmonds University (no "h") doesn't exist as an accredited institution, the layout matches DiplomaXpress templates exactly, and actual honorary doctorates from real universities don't come with "magna cum laude" designations.

For context, "magna cum laude" is an undergraduate Latin honor.

An actual honorary degrees don't grade your "original research." The document is internally incoherent as a credential regardless of where it came from.



...No. He absolutely did use it. He published under the title "Dr. Aajonus Vonderplanitz" and his books and interviews leaned on that framing to establish authority over nutritional claims he was making to sick people. The credential was load-bearing in how he presented himself. How is this not already obvious?



This just concedes the point anyway. If he knew it was fake and kept displaying it, that's still deliberate misrepresentation.

Also:

https://aajonus.net/aajonus-responds-to-mike-adams
View attachment 37461
View attachment 37462

He admits he got it in 2005 and calls it "just an ornament"

Calling it "just an ornament" after the fact, and reframing the wording to mean something other than what a PhD normally means, is retrofitted justification. If it was always just decorative, why was it displayed at all, why did he use the title, and why did he feel the need to explain the phrasing when challenged? People don't explain ornaments.

you men are pathetic, you dont understand my contention so I wont rehash it. All this is if i conceded is just you whining about him claiming to be a authority in a field where people appeal to authority, I completely understand why he would do it even if i concede what you are saying is true

 

[Idec]

you men are pathetic, you dont understand my contention so I wont rehash it. All this is if i conceded is just you whining about him claiming to be a authority in a field where people appeal to authority, I completely understand why he would do it even if i concede what you are saying is true

at the end you are just attacking is character which is completely reprobated

 

[Lord]

you men are pathetic,

Cool.

you dont understand my contention so I wont rehash it.

Uh huh.

in a field where people appeal to authority,

Not how that works and is actually self-defeating. Your whole argument was that the PhD didn't matter because Aajonus didn't use it for professional gain. Now you're saying it's fine that he used it because everyone appeals to authority in nutrition. Those two can't both be true. Either the credential was inconsequential and unused, or it was a tool for establishing authority. Pick one.

you are just attacking is character

Pointing out that someone fabricated credentials they then used to sell dietary advice to sick and dying people is not me whining about character. Credentials are the entire epistemic basis on which people trusted his claims.

If the foundation of that trust was manufactured, that's directly relevant to whether his advice should have been followed. It's quite literally central to the argument.

"Ad hominem" as a deflection also can ONLY work when the character observation is genuinely disconnected from the claim being evaluated.

If, say, you argue that a particular investment is sound and I actually discover you've been convicted of securities fraud, pointing that out would not be a logical fallacy. The credibility of the source matters when the source is the primary reason people accepted the claims in the first place. That's exactly Aajonus's situation.

 

[Mandy]

you men are pathetic, you dont understand my contention so I wont rehash it. All this is if i conceded is just you whining about him claiming to be a authority in a field where people appeal to authority, I completely understand why he would do it even if i concede what you are saying is true

Son give up he’s the biggest fish

 

[Idec]

Cool.



Uh huh.



Not how that works and is actually self-defeating. Your whole argument was that the PhD didn't matter because Aajonus didn't use it for professional gain. Now you're saying it's fine that he used it because everyone appeals to authority in nutrition. Those two can't both be true. Either the credential was inconsequential and unused, or it was a tool for establishing authority. Pick one.



Pointing out that someone fabricated credentials they then used to sell dietary advice to sick and dying people is not me whining about character. Credentials are the entire epistemic basis on which people trusted his claims.

If the foundation of that trust was manufactured, that's directly relevant to whether his advice should have been followed. It's quite literally central to the argument.

"Ad hominem" as a deflection also can ONLY work when the character observation is genuinely disconnected from the claim being evaluated.

If, say, you argue that a particular investment is sound and I actually discover you've been convicted of securities fraud, pointing that out would not be a logical fallacy. The credibility of the source matters when the source is the primary reason people accepted the claims in the first place. That's exactly Aajonus's situation.

A nice plate of word pasta, add me on discord and vc I dont have time for you mental maturbation on text and misunderstanding what a hypothetical either or is for a argument, john.8.32 is my discord, add me and lets talk, you cant say I am running.

 

[Idec]

Son give up he’s the biggest fish

if you have to tell yourself that to make yourself feel better then go ahead, I am waiting for both of you to add me

 

[Circadex]

Lord Read my post on your sleep guide

I've tracked down your precise location; do you know how easy it is to bribe privatised water? I'm one phone call away from flooding your houses water with mk-ultra dosages of LSD. I've subliminally conditioned your mind to have a split personality; you, and a 80-IQ retarded bigot who sits on Facebook all day (literally all day; your ass will be glued to a seat) reposting AI maga slop on Facebook while half-arsedly recreating trumps famous dance. The best part? You're fully conscious. Yes, you'll be trapped in your own mind while a retard takes control. Don't test me

 

[Circadex]

You have until my patience runs thin

 

[Lord]

add me on discord and vc I dont have time for you mental maturbation on text and misunderstanding what a hypothetical either or is for a argument

Fortunately, I'm not on Discord. Still, I would never hop on a data-harvesting shit-hole to debate with someone for minutes about another person's credibility. I'd rather face the end of a double barrel shotgun.

A nice plate of word pasta

You have yet to refute it.