Sonia Poulton on Murdoch's SKY News AGAIN - today (4 April 2015)

PeterMac wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:
And they still can't tell us which came first: the chicken or the egg

That one is easy.
The egg.

Ah but where did the egg come from - a chicken?

Richard IV wrote:@ Tony - "And they still can't tell us which came first: the chicken or the egg" 

Creationists can't. Well they wouldn't would they ?

On the contrary, I suggest the factual answer to the puzzle is provided by Genesis 1 vv 20-23 - which tells us that the chicken, along with most other creatures, was created on the Fifth Day of the Creation Week. But we are badly off-topic by now. Always happy to debate this issue in the Member's Lounge

Verdi wrote:

Joss wrote:

Verdi wrote:

The Slave wrote:Yes it will, Verdi. 

You can hardly dissapprove of a documentary that mentions the Fund for Amaral. Can you?

Yes The Slave, actually I can and do disapprove!  Ms Poulton promises to tell 'The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann' in an evidenced based documentary and that is precisely what I'm waiting to see, albeit impatiently.

The fund set up to assist Dr Amaral is not a mystery nor is it a secret, in fact it has been publicized by MSM, which is more than you can say for the truth about Madeleine Mccann's disappearance and the Portuguese investigation.  If Ms Poulton or anyone else wishes to plug Dr Amaral's goodwill fund then feel free, I won't complain but it is not documentary material nor the purpose of this particular documentary.

Whatever next - plug Huttons autobiography or the Summers and Swann grand exposé or the latest episode of Eastenders?  Besides, if the documentary is to be aired in the States as has been suggested (no way will the UK MSM touch it with a barge pole or anyone else with an ounce of savvy), why would they be interested?  The odd bod here and there might show interest, Pat Brown for example, but I would think US citizens have got their own priorities and problems to worry about so why should they be interested in financing Dr Amaral's legal proceedings.

ITA Verdi, All i can say is this doco. of SP's better be worth the wait Its like waiting for Halley's Comet which will next appear in mid 2061

Did the Big Bang create a parallel universe where time goes backwards?

I don't know, lol.

This is what science says

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The fuzziness of quantum physics causes a lot of problems, from maliciously changing time-of-flight calculations between satellites to mucking up Newton’s beautiful, all-seeing physical models of the universe. Yet, when it comes to topics as airy as the New Physics, incorporating genuinely insane ideas like negative mass and, yes, time travel, that very fuzziness can become a boon to researchers. Within the open and unknowable possibility space provided by the behavior of quantum particles, we can shovel in all manner of  poorly understood concepts and phenomena, and that might not actually be such an irresponsible thing to do. By taking quantum mechanics into account, some physicists think they may have solved one of the oldest puzzles in the history of abstract physical thinking: the grandfather paradox.
The grandfather paradox has a specific form, and a general. The specific: What if you went back in time to a period before your parents were conceived and, while there, killed your grandfather before he had a chance to father your parent. Logically, this would result in your never having been born — which means, you could never have existed to go back in time and kill your grandfather, which means you were born and thus could go back in time and kill your grandfather, which means… The more general form is simply this: backward time travel will necessarily interfere with the future path of the thing which travelled — be it a human being or a spinning electron — and that the inherent impossibility of this makes backward time travel impossible.
It might sound odd to have high-level physicists congratulating each other for figuring out that time travel isn’t real, but in reality it’s physicists’ slavish adherence to mathematical logic has made this conversation necessary. Looking at the most current mathematical models for time and space, there’s [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] that the arrow of time can’t be turned backwards, that you can’t enter a so-called “closed time-like curve” (CTC) and loop back around to the past. No reason, of course, except that that’s obviously impossible.
The insight published this week is that quantum superposition may offer an out, which both allows time travel and eliminates the paradox. Consider our general situational setup, with a photon going back in time to switch off the machine which first emitted it. This photon will at all times be in a superposition of states, meaning that it can have multiple, sometimes directly conflicting, states at the same time. That certainly sounds useful if we’re interesting in wiping out impossible contradictions, doesn’t it?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
In my opinion, this is the best movie about time travel.
It is slightly more complex than all that, but the math essentially boils down to that. The actual experiment claims to have confirmed a principle called self-consistency, which basically states that if a particle went back in time it would have a certain probability of emerging and self-interfering across time, and that that probability is fixed to that probability that it will enter the CTC and go back in time. The upshot is that any object traveling backward in time actually has a sort of multi-dimensional probability distribution — much like an electron is in all places within its positional probability distribution.
In the past, physicists have traditionally used the probabilistic model to say that while backward time travel is technically possible it is also functionally impossible — that the probability of being able to travel back in a CTC and self-interfere is vanishingly close to zero but, importantly, not actually zero overall. This new experiment could show a way to a more robust, and sci-fi friendly, alternative.
If you’re interested, below you can watch a (long) lecture by one of the lead researchers on the topic of time travel.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Tony Bennett wrote:

Richard IV wrote:@ Tony - "And they still can't tell us which came first: the chicken or the egg" 

Creationists can't. Well they wouldn't would they ?

On the contrary, I suggest the factual answer to the puzzle is provided by Genesis 1 vv 20-23 - which tells us that the chicken, along with most other creatures, was created on the Fifth Day of the Creation Week. But we are badly off-topic by now. Always happy to debate this issue in the Member's Lounge

Just to fox us... God created star light that looks like it traveled billions of years that shows old stars in their death throes.

He obviously doesn't want rationalists in heaven.

BlueBag wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

Richard IV wrote:@ Tony - "And they still can't tell us which came first: the chicken or the egg" 

Creationists can't. Well they wouldn't would they ?

On the contrary, I suggest the factual answer to the puzzle is provided by Genesis 1 vv 20-23 - which tells us that the chicken, along with most other creatures, was created on the Fifth Day of the Creation Week. But we are badly off-topic by now. Always happy to debate this issue in the Member's Lounge

Just to fox us... God created star light that looks like it traveled billions of years that shows old stars in their death throes.

He obviously doesn't want rationalists in heaven.

A good point, but your argument does depend on the important and unproven assumption that the speed of light has been absolutely constant since the beginning of time (whenever that was)

I do not know the ins and outs of this "dispute" but in the
interests of fairness this is what Sonia had to say about Drew McFayden.

Anyone know how expensive libel lawyers are? That's right! Way beyond my budget and the slimeballs David Icke and Drew McFadyen know it which is why they are running lies about me on David Icke's website because they know I don't have the money to address them in law. However, that's what I use FB for. So here it is. In March I ran a series of statuses about a man - I didn't name him - who I had got involved with to design the website for soniapoulton.com. He never did it. Feel free to go back to March FB status to see full story. it's grim. Instead he - Drew (who has outed himself on Icke's video) - hijacked my freelance website (I stupidly trusted him with the password because he said he needed it to do the work) and I couldn't access my own website for weeks because he literally stole it from me and re-hosted it abroad without my permission. This man also threatened on Twitter to rape and kill me (the police said even though it looked as if he was referring to me because he didn't use my name they couldn't act), he also told a well known anti-child abuse campaigner that he was coming to my house to beat me up AND he has withheld footage of me asking Kenneth Clarke about paedophiles rumours. Who is he to me? Someone I worked with at TPV. Someone I felt sorry for because he tells a big 'poor me' story and someone, so it would appear, who has been pulled in by David Icke to try and discredit me. So there it is. That's his name. That's what he has done. And I can't believe that David Icke would run this man's lies about me as part of his major headlines. Aren't there wars taking place? People need to learn that I don't ignore the lies that are said about me. One of the criticisms about Cliff Richard is people saying 'if he knew about the rumours online why didn't he tackle them.'. Well, I do tackle rumours directly. People need to ask Drew McFadyen why he is holding on to a video asking an MP about paedophiles and people also need to ask what is David Icke so worried about me exposing that he would use an abuser and liar to try and attack me. The answers could be very illuminating.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

What Sonia has just told us ,that's possably the reason ,she has had to take more time to get her work done on her film ,we are hoping to get. Now I am not going to guess and say she is making up stories ,I have no idea at all ,so I hope we might give her benefit of the doubt at this point. joyce1938

interestedobserver wrote:I do not know the ins and outs of this "dispute" but in the
interests of fairness this is what Sonia had to say about Drew McFayden.

Anyone know how expensive libel lawyers are? That's right! Way beyond my budget and the slimeballs David Icke and Drew McFadyen know it which is why they are running lies about me on David Icke's website because they know I don't have the money to address them in law. However, that's what I use FB for. So here it is. In March I ran a series of statuses about a man - I didn't name him - who I had got involved with to design the website for soniapoulton.com. He never did it. Feel free to go back to March FB status to see full story. it's grim. Instead he - Drew (who has outed himself on Icke's video) - hijacked my freelance website (I stupidly trusted him with the password because he said he needed it to do the work) and I couldn't access my own website for weeks because he literally stole it from me and re-hosted it abroad without my permission. This man also threatened on Twitter to rape and kill me (the police said even though it looked as if he was referring to me because he didn't use my name they couldn't act), he also told a well known anti-child abuse campaigner that he was coming to my house to beat me up AND he has withheld footage of me asking Kenneth Clarke about paedophiles rumours. Who is he to me? Someone I worked with at TPV. Someone I felt sorry for because he tells a big 'poor me' story and someone, so it would appear, who has been pulled in by David Icke to try and discredit me. So there it is. That's his name. That's what he has done. And I can't believe that David Icke would run this man's lies about me as part of his major headlines. Aren't there wars taking place? People need to learn that I don't ignore the lies that are said about me. One of the criticisms about Cliff Richard is people saying 'if he knew about the rumours online why didn't he tackle them.'. Well, I do tackle rumours directly. People need to ask Drew McFadyen why he is holding on to a video asking an MP about paedophiles and people also need to ask what is David Icke so worried about me exposing that he would use an abuser and liar to try and attack me. The answers could be very illuminating.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Has there ever been an instance where Sonia Poulton doesn't speak about herself being the victim of trolling?

After all, SP chose to work with Icke, left under a cloud after a few weeks and produced a youtube video all about it. Poulton occasionally sits on Sky sofas nowadays and seems happy to take the Murdoch shilling whilst being a fighter for freedom of speech. I've seen SP in action on MSM and she is such a liberal it makes me cringe. In Poulton's world everything is alright to say. Iain Duncan Smith is apparently a mass murderer.

I think this upcoming documentary will be about trolls, trolls and nothing but the trolls.

I sincerely hope I'm wrong and it has everything to do with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann but somehow I think it's going to be about trolls and freedom of speech which Sonia has already demonstrated in her allowance of Stephen Birch and another chap whose name escapes me for the moment who were given free reign to spout their garbage unchallenged by her on TPV. Sonia was in charge of that production unless she's going to claim someone else made her do it.

So, just for now I have little faith in a Poulton production that is going to produce anything other than trolling.


ETA: A new blog from Cristobell/Rosalinde Hutton all about Goncalo Amaral and the fight - complete with comments by her that it cost her everything - yet not a single financial contribution to his fund in her own name.

aquila wrote:

interestedobserver wrote:I do not know the ins and outs of this "dispute" but in the
interests of fairness this is what Sonia had to say about Drew McFayden.

Anyone know how expensive libel lawyers are? That's right! Way beyond my budget and the slimeballs David Icke and Drew McFadyen know it which is why they are running lies about me on David Icke's website because they know I don't have the money to address them in law. However, that's what I use FB for. So here it is. In March I ran a series of statuses about a man - I didn't name him - who I had got involved with to design the website for soniapoulton.com. He never did it. Feel free to go back to March FB status to see full story. it's grim. Instead he - Drew (who has outed himself on Icke's video) - hijacked my freelance website (I stupidly trusted him with the password because he said he needed it to do the work) and I couldn't access my own website for weeks because he literally stole it from me and re-hosted it abroad without my permission. This man also threatened on Twitter to rape and kill me (the police said even though it looked as if he was referring to me because he didn't use my name they couldn't act), he also told a well known anti-child abuse campaigner that he was coming to my house to beat me up AND he has withheld footage of me asking Kenneth Clarke about paedophiles rumours. Who is he to me? Someone I worked with at TPV. Someone I felt sorry for because he tells a big 'poor me' story and someone, so it would appear, who has been pulled in by David Icke to try and discredit me. So there it is. That's his name. That's what he has done. And I can't believe that David Icke would run this man's lies about me as part of his major headlines. Aren't there wars taking place? People need to learn that I don't ignore the lies that are said about me. One of the criticisms about Cliff Richard is people saying 'if he knew about the rumours online why didn't he tackle them.'. Well, I do tackle rumours directly. People need to ask Drew McFadyen why he is holding on to a video asking an MP about paedophiles and people also need to ask what is David Icke so worried about me exposing that he would use an abuser and liar to try and attack me. The answers could be very illuminating.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Has there ever been an instance where Sonia Poulton doesn't speak about herself being the victim of trolling?

After all, SP chose to work with Icke, left under a cloud after a few weeks and produced a youtube video all about it. Poulton occasionally sits on Sky sofas nowadays and seems happy to take the Murdoch shilling whilst being a fighter for freedom of speech. I've seen SP in action on MSM and she is such a liberal it makes me cringe. In Poulton's world everything is alright to say. Iain Duncan Smith is apparently a mass murderer.

I think this upcoming documentary will be about trolls, trolls and nothing but the trolls.

I sincerely hope I'm wrong and it has everything to do with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann but somehow I think it's going to be about trolls and freedom of speech which Sonia has already demonstrated in her allowance of Stephen Birch and another chap whose name escapes me for the moment who were given free reign to spout their garbage unchallenged by her on TPV. Sonia was in charge of that production unless she's going to claim someone else made her do it.

So, just for now I have little faith in a Poulton production that is going to produce anything other than trolling.


ETA: A new blog from Cristobell/Rosalinde Hutton all about Goncalo Amaral and the fight - complete with comments by her that it cost her everything - yet not a single financial contribution to his fund in her own name.

I agree Aquila, that the main content of her documentary will be about the trolling issue, and not really about Madeleine. But we will see, if it is ever released that is?

I also think it will be about trolls from both sides.

I think the social media aspect to this case is very interesting.

aquila today @ 10:05 am

"A new blog from Cristobell/Rosalinde Hutton all about Goncalo Amaral and the fight - complete with comments by her that it cost her everything - yet not a single financial contribution to his fund in her own name."

And still very selective about whose comments she publishes, clearly she doesn't appreciate anyone drawing attention to her foibles.

I recall her saying she wanted to take over where Brenda Leyland left off,  maybe that's her game plan - the grand gesture and ultimate martyr to the cause?  Extraordinary how some people who follow this case like to brag about the threats they claim to have been subjected to.  It baffles me how some are allegedly the target of abuse and threats while others just carry on posting day after day with no particular aggravation but perhaps a mention on one of the more dubious websites that promote the McCanns innocence.

Is it all in the mind, only attention seeking?

notlongnow wrote:I also think it will be about trolls from both sides.

I think the social media aspect to this case is very interesting.

Interesting maybe but on the whole not very productive.

Joss today @ 7:04 am

Perhaps she might get sucked-in by her own black hole. 

Verdi wrote:Joss today @ 7:04 am

Perhaps she might get sucked-in by her own black hole. 

May I make a request please. This is not a blog, so could you please when replying to a post quote the post and not the time of the post. It's very easy to do on this forum. Otherwise it has people scrolling through pages to understand what you are speaking about.

aquila wrote:

Verdi wrote:Joss today @ 7:04 am

Perhaps she might get sucked-in by her own black hole. 

May I make a request please. This is not a blog, so could you please when replying to a post quote the post and not the time of the post. It's very easy to do on this forum. Otherwise it has people scrolling through pages to understand what you are speaking about.

Apologies, I only do it to save clogging-up threads with repetition.  Won't do it in future.

ETA:  Thought I was being helpful but can see it must be very annoying.

Verdi wrote:

aquila wrote:

Verdi wrote:Joss today @ 7:04 am

Perhaps she might get sucked-in by her own black hole. 

May I make a request please. This is not a blog, so could you please when replying to a post quote the post and not the time of the post. It's very easy to do on this forum. Otherwise it has people scrolling through pages to understand what you are speaking about.

Apologies, I only do it to save clogging-up threads with repetition.  Won't do it in future.

You are forgiven.

aquila wrote:

Verdi wrote:

aquila wrote:

Verdi wrote:Joss today @ 7:04 am

Perhaps she might get sucked-in by her own black hole. 

May I make a request please. This is not a blog, so could you please when replying to a post quote the post and not the time of the post. It's very easy to do on this forum. Otherwise it has people scrolling through pages to understand what you are speaking about.

Apologies, I only do it to save clogging-up threads with repetition.  Won't do it in future.

You are forgiven.

Let's boogie...  

Verdi wrote:Joss today @ 7:04 am

Perhaps she might get sucked-in by her own black hole. 

Too funny Verdi.

smug. smug. aren'tcha.

The Slave wrote:smug. smug. aren'tcha.

Who's smug? Smug isn't here right now, but you could try back later,

Joss wrote:

The Slave wrote:smug. smug. aren'tcha.

Who's smug? Smug isn't here right now, but you could try back later,

I thought it was Stephenson's Rocket trundling through.

Verdi wrote:

Joss wrote:

The Slave wrote:smug. smug. aren'tcha.

Who's smug? Smug isn't here right now, but you could try back later,

I thought it was Stephenson's Rocket trundling through.

Hey Verdi, you mean this one ?,

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Joss wrote:

Verdi wrote:

Joss wrote:

The Slave wrote:smug. smug. aren'tcha.

Who's smug? Smug isn't here right now, but you could try back later,

I thought it was Stephenson's Rocket trundling through.

Hey Verdi, you mean this one ?,

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Yes the very one and what a marvelous example of 19th century engineering.

~~~~~~

Pardon me Joss, is that the Chattanooga Choo Choo?  (Yes yes, track 29)  dooby dooby do da...

When you hear the whistle blowin' eight to the bar
Then you know that Tennessee is not very far...
Shovel all the coal in, gotta keep it rollin'                     
(Choo Choo, Chattanooga, there you are)
dooby do da dooby dooby dooby do da..... yeh yeh

~~~~~~

Meanwhile any news on Poulton's documentary anyone?

Verdi wrote:

Joss wrote:

Verdi wrote:

Joss wrote:

The Slave wrote:smug. smug. aren'tcha.

Who's smug? Smug isn't here right now, but you could try back later,

I thought it was Stephenson's Rocket trundling through.

Hey Verdi, you mean this one ?,

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Yes the very one and what a marvelous example of 19th century engineering.

~~~~~~

Pardon me Joss, is that the Chattanooga Choo Choo?  (Yes yes, track 29)  dooby dooby do da...

When you hear the whistle blowin' eight to the bar
Then you know that Tennessee is not very far...
Shovel all the coal in, gotta keep it rollin'                     
(Choo Choo, Chattanooga, there you are)
dooby do da dooby dooby dooby do da..... yeh yeh

~~~~~~

Meanwhile any news on Poulton's documentary anyone?

Hi Verdi, love it, good song.   I had never heard of Stephenson's Rocket before so i looked it up, and it was a very interesting read and nothing to do with what i thought it was. I thought it was some kind of space rocket, LOL.
 No haven't read anything further about SP's doco. as yet, but maybe someone else might know.

I'm glad Tony bought this info to the forum about Poulton's bullying. Please note she only makes her contradictory claims AFTER she has been outed as the bully. Surely if she was the victim she has the platform to warn everyone about these evil people before they 'slander' her? About 12 months ago she threatened to make a documentary 'Unmasking a Messiah'. This was to be about David Icke. Guess what? Still waiting. The excuse at one point was, if I recall correctly that her legal team were going over details. Pardon Sonia? I thought you couldn't afford a legal team? But apparently the poor man she didn't pay could? How unfortunate is Ms Poulton? Enemies around every corner. Are you aware this professional victim has an anonymous site exposing trolls and by that I mean makes abusive and threatening posts/outings about anyone who criticises her. She accidently tweeted a comment from this site, purely unrelated to her you understand, but left herself logged in as Admin. She is not only a fantasist but a dangerous woman. I feel sorry for people like @slave who have fallen for her lies. Untold story of Madeleine McCann? More like the tired old story of Poulton's 'attackers', troll's r Us or worse. Am I wrong but was that Hutton at a certain duck pond made famous by Sky news? Says all we need to know.

I see Poulton's taken to twittering on about politics and sundry unsolvable world issues, when she's not re-tweeting the tweets of H-RH who is seen busily re-tweeting the tweets of Poulton.  Sweet!

Meanwhile, what's happened to the documentary? 

snook wrote:I'm glad Tony bought this info to the forum about Poulton's bullying. Please note she only makes her contradictory claims AFTER she has been outed as the bully. Surely if she was the victim she has the platform to warn everyone about these evil people before they 'slander' her? About 12 months ago she threatened to make a documentary 'Unmasking a Messiah'. This was to be about David Icke. Guess what? Still waiting. The excuse at one point was, if I recall correctly that her legal team were going over details. Pardon Sonia? I thought you couldn't afford a legal team? But apparently the poor man she didn't pay could? How unfortunate is Ms Poulton?  Enemies around every corner. Are you aware this professional victim has an anonymous site exposing trolls and by that I mean makes abusive and threatening posts/outings about anyone who criticises her. She accidently tweeted a comment from this site, purely unrelated to her you understand, but left herself logged in as Admin. She is not only a fantasist but a dangerous woman. I feel sorry for people like @slave who have fallen for her lies. Untold story of Madeleine McCann?  More like the tired old  story of Poulton's 'attackers', troll's r Us or worse. Am I wrong but was that Hutton at a certain duck pond made famous by Sky news? Says all we need to know.

   Well said!

I've deliberately tried to keep away from this thread for a few days (hours?) so only just seen your excellent observations.

"She is not only a fantasist but a dangerous woman"

That goes for Ms Duck Pond also!

Meanwhile, what's happened to the documentary? 

I exchanged tweets with Sonia on Friday. She reported that her input for the documentary is now complete - explaining her tweeting on other matters now - and the matter is now with the Production Company's PR (whatever that means). Unfortunately my lack of skill hasn't left me with the original tweets to copy here. However I am able to copy the next pair of tweets:

[list=604234183754567681]
[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Thanks for that, there are many of us waiting to see it.
0 retweets 0 favorites









[*]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] TY I believe will cause ripples but I stand by what we've covered in it and why. Too much harm been caused by misinformation
0 retweets 0 favorites









[/list]

espeland wrote:

Meanwhile, what's happened to the documentary? 

I exchanged tweets with Sonia on Friday. She reported that her input for the documentary is now complete - explaining her tweeting on other matters now - and the matter is now with the Production Company's PR (whatever that means). Unfortunately my lack of skill hasn't left me with the original tweets to copy here. However I am able to copy the next pair of tweets:

[list=604234183754567681]
[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Thanks for that, there are many of us waiting to see it.
  0 retweets     0 favorites  









[*]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] TY I believe will cause ripples but I stand by what we've covered in it and why. Too much harm been caused by misinformation
  0 retweets     0 favorites  









[/list]

Her input for the documentary is now complete?  It is now with the production company's PR?  I thought 'she' was the production company.  It's starting to look like many of us sceptics thought.

I thank you for the update but I'm ashamed to say that twitter language is totally foreign to me.  For example, what or who is TY?  Easy enough to google Poulton on twitter and read latest bits here and there but that's about where it begins and ends for me.

Best I skulk back into the corner and wait!