www.3atalk.com

Really, AdventTalk (AT) is so pathetic. If anyone tries to post the truth of the matter, the moderators REMOVE THEIR POSTS from the board so that the public cannot know the real story. You would think AT had something to hide. Well, of course they do! It is a shame those membership at AT who are against 3abn continue to doggedly pursue their evil course because when they find out they are wrong, it will hit them like a ton of bricks.

Oh but then the truth would spoil their "fun" wouldn't it? Yes readers, those over on AT enjoy bad-mouthing 3abn and those who work there for the Lord. They ENJOY making up any DIRT they can on anyone involved with 3abn and then making it public. They are "enjoying the pleasures of sin for a season." It is hard to imagine a Christian acting or talking the way these evil-minded people do over on AT.

Remember, those people: Snoopy (Lynette from California), Gailon Joy, Robert Pickle, have never set foot at 3abn. Because there are some who were FIRED from 3abn for being lousy workers were there, they are believing all the evil one-sided reports from these angry people because they were FIRED. Well duh....doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. There is also reports from someone with problems with serious sins that was at 3abn who was fired too. He likes to bad-mouth 3abn too. And the rest on AT believe it all hook-line and sinker. Sounds like lots of griping people.

But I do happen to have permission from Sam over on AT to print here something he posted over on AT that was quickly removed (as fast as possible) and you can see why from his post. Sam finally got fed up with the ugliness going on over on AT, the gossip, the innuendo and FALSE reports--backbiting, judging and every other talebearing thing they seem to come up with over there. Most of what AT reports is TOTAL LIES. Then there is a tiny percent that has a small element of truth to it, but they have put evil motives to everything.

But readers, you may come here for the truth. AT does not believe in reporting the truth or they wouldn't delete our posts over there.

Below is Sam's post. I thought everyone might like to know the REAL Snoopy.

SAM wrote: Snoopy get over it...to any certified accountant, to any christian and to any moral person...you are a laughingstock. You go to 3abn to spy for the people they are in litigation with, you give out confidential information and add to it whatever fits your fancy. You gossip and spin the truth on these internet sites and then when your identity is exposed, you become furious. You then vow to "spill your guts" so to speak against 3abn. Imagine, you are the spy, you put yourself out there but when you are exposed you're mad at 3abn.

If all of that isn't a big enough joke, you then submit consulting bills to pickle and joy that in turn they want to submit to the court. Why? To try and get 3abn to compensate all of you!!!!!!! You want 3abn to pay you for spying on them under the pretense of helping!!! Ohhh what a web we weave when we first practice to deceive.

According to you, you were only there for 10 weeks, every other week so you really must have the scoop on all. LOL I could be wrong but wasn't it about the same time you were volunteering/spying that you were dealing with your stalker situation? Seems like your mind might have been on too many things at once to know much of anything.

Without a doubt, your license should be taken away, you should be disfellowshipped from the church....if you hadn't already backslidden....and then you should be asking 3abn's forgiveness instead of asking them for money.

Oh well, we can always hope that if enough people find out what you've done, you will never be hired by any credible firm. People like to be able to trust their accountants.

Someone over on AT asked some questions (of course you know they won't allow anyone to post answers over on AT as most are banned or they delete their posts)....

What I'm interested in is the question Crystal (sister: Kris Fiscalini) has "suggested" about Danny Shelton. I happen to know the answers to those questions.

Most answers to any infidelity/affairs/fathering any children other than his own: NO
Is that a short enough answer for all of you? NO NO NO--maybe you will sit up and pay attention if it is said THREE times?

But let's spell it out just in case some do not "get" it.

NO: affairs with anyone EVER (including cousins, girls on sports teams, Brenda and anyone else mentioned)
NO: infidelity with anyone EVER (ditto above)
NO: adultery with anyone EVER (ditto above)
NO: fathering any children other than his own legitimate children EVER (ditto above)
NO: breaking the 7th commandment in ANY shape WAY or FORM. (ditto above)

I'd say Kris F. has an over active imagination! Some SO desperate over on AT want to find some horrible dirt on Danny Shelton. What a shame that they can't. I'm sure what I've written won't stop them for they enjoy their dark work.

I cannot speak to what Dan Shelton has or has not done. However, how AT really works is a very complex and quite fascinating subject.

During political campaigns the subject of rumor and lies often come up. When is something a rumor? When does it become a lie if it is not truthful? What is the responsibility of someone that repeats a rumor that their personal POV wants to believe is truthful (for a number of reasons including that they do not believe the person that told them the rumor could lie) even when they have been assured it is not?

I found the following article from the op-ed page of the NY Times quite interesting (the emphasis added is mine) .....


June 27, 2008
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Your Brain Lies to You

By SAM WANG and SANDRA AAMODT
FALSE beliefs are everywhere. Eighteen percent of Americans think the sun revolves around the earth, one poll has found. Thus it seems slightly less egregious that, according to another poll, 10 percent of us think that Senator Barack Obama, a Christian, is instead a Muslim. The Obama campaign has created a Web site to dispel misinformation. But this effort may be more difficult than it seems, thanks to the quirky way in which our brains store memories — and mislead us along the way.

The brain does not simply gather and stockpile information as a computer’s hard drive does. Facts are stored first in the hippocampus, a structure deep in the brain about the size and shape of a fat man’s curled pinkie finger. But the information does not rest there. Every time we recall it, our brain writes it down again, and during this re-storage, it is also reprocessed. In time, the fact is gradually transferred to the cerebral cortex and is separated from the context in which it was originally learned. For example, you know that the capital of California is Sacramento, but you probably don’t remember how you learned it.

This phenomenon, known as source amnesia, can also lead people to forget whether a statement is true. Even when a lie is presented with a disclaimer, people often later remember it as true.

With time, this misremembering only gets worse. A false statement from a noncredible source that is at first not believed can gain credibility during the months it takes to reprocess memories from short-term hippocampal storage to longer-term cortical storage. As the source is forgotten, the message and its implications gain strength. This could explain why, during the 2004 presidential campaign, it took some weeks for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign against Senator John Kerry to have an effect on his standing in the polls.

Even if they do not understand the neuroscience behind source amnesia, campaign strategists can exploit it to spread misinformation. They know that if their message is initially memorable, its impression will persist long after it is debunked. In repeating a falsehood, someone may back it up with an opening line like “I think I read somewhere” or even with a reference to a specific source.

In one study, a group of Stanford students was exposed repeatedly to an unsubstantiated claim taken from a Web site that Coca-Cola is an effective paint thinner. Students who read the statement five times were nearly one-third more likely than those who read it only twice to attribute it to Consumer Reports (rather than The National Enquirer, their other choice), giving it a gloss of credibility.

Adding to this innate tendency to mold information we recall is the way our brains fit facts into established mental frameworks. We tend to remember news that accords with our worldview, and discount statements that contradict it.

In another Stanford study, 48 students, half of whom said they favored capital punishment and half of whom said they opposed it, were presented with two pieces of evidence, one supporting and one contradicting the claim that capital punishment deters crime. Both groups were more convinced by the evidence that supported their initial position.

Psychologists have suggested that legends propagate by striking an emotional chord. In the same way, ideas can spread by emotional selection, rather than by their factual merits, encouraging the persistence of falsehoods about Coke — or about a presidential candidate.

Journalists and campaign workers may think they are acting to counter misinformation by pointing out that it is not true. But by repeating a false rumor, they may inadvertently make it stronger. In its concerted effort to “stop the smears,” the Obama campaign may want to keep this in mind. Rather than emphasize that Mr. Obama is not a Muslim, for instance, it may be more effective to stress that he embraced Christianity as a young man.

Consumers of news, for their part, are prone to selectively accept and remember statements that reinforce beliefs they already hold. In a replication of the study of students’ impressions of evidence about the death penalty, researchers found that even when subjects were given a specific instruction to be objective, they were still inclined to reject evidence that disagreed with their beliefs.

In the same study, however, when subjects were asked to imagine their reaction if the evidence had pointed to the opposite conclusion, they were more open-minded to information that contradicted their beliefs. Apparently, it pays for consumers of controversial news to take a moment and consider that the opposite interpretation may be true.

In 1919, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes of the Supreme Court wrote that “the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.” Holmes erroneously assumed that ideas are more likely to spread if they are honest. Our brains do not naturally obey this admirable dictum, but by better understanding the mechanisms of memory perhaps we can move closer to Holmes’s ideal.

Sam Wang, an associate professor of molecular biology and neuroscience at Princeton, and Sandra Aamodt, a former editor in chief of Nature Neuroscience, are the authors of “Welcome to Your Brain: Why You Lose Your Car Keys but Never Forget How to Drive and Other Puzzles of Everyday Life.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/opini ... nted=print

At BSDA Occam's Razor was used several times.

Another device I have seen used frequently is the opposite of Hanlon's Razor.

Hanlon's Razor says "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity," a variation on a quote from Napoleon Bonaparte.

Observations on the sway of human error over malice occur in various works. Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774) mentions "...misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice. At any rate, the last two are certainly much less frequent."

A probably apocryphal quote from Albert Einstein deals with the power of stupidity: "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe."

It seems to me that anything and everything done by those associated with 3abn is viewed as having been done out of malice or an attempt at trickery. Many of the comments made by Bob Pickle in regards to the lawyers representing 3abn seems to fall in this category as well. There seems to be absolutely no room for human error rather than malice.

This is not an attempt to rationalize what has or has not been done by Dan Shelton or 3abn or its BOD. IT is an observation of the mindset of those attacking and why I believe so much of what has been posted is sufficiently flawed to raise serious questions.

I was impressed with the following statement on a blog that is discussing the tensions between gays and christians over the marriage issue.

"The gays and Christians are acting out. Neither side is taking the time to engage on personal and human levels, possibly because once you do that - once you force yourself to break out of the comfortzone of your own convictions, to hear the other side - more is asked of you, of your reason, of your understanding, of your humanity and your heart. It’s that damned devil, vulnerability, again."

http://theanchoressonline.com/2008/11/2 ... osition-8/

How many on either side of the 3abn issue have been willing to "break out of the comfortzone" of their own convinctions to hear the other side?

Breezy wrote:Someone over on AT asked some questions (of course you know they won't allow anyone to post answers over on AT as most are banned or they delete their posts)....

It should be fairly obvious to all that the above statement is true.

What I'm interested in is the question Crystal (sister: Kris Fiscalini) has "suggested" about Danny Shelton. I happen to know the answers to those questions.

The issue with crystal,whoever she is,has sunk to an all time low. If in fact this is the young woman in question or she has given her permission she has doomed any chance she may have had for using her own experience to help and support others as well as making herself someone not worthy of even thinking about.
I happen to believe Duane Clem. I also believe the biggest mistake he made was in tying his own reputation and integrity to Bob and Gailon. I know from what happened in my own family and others I have come to know in the past five years that many times vulnerable adults are the victims of abuse. Most that I have spoken with ,and I am not saying it is large numbers,and watching for sometime the reaction or non reaction to Duane have little time or inclination to support "someone like him" because of these two men



Breezy,the problem with your defense is that on some of these issues only DS could answer and I am sure has no intention of doing so. There are very few that someone can feel confident in stepping out and saying NO didn't happen. I have come to know only one man (using man as that is a man who is in question) the past few years that I could feel safe in saying No,it never happened in complete confidence without even asking him.

I don't think even the admin team could explain how adventtalk works. Respectful discussion is listed as a definition of behaviour. Yet when this happens it takes something similar to a UN convention. Can someone say disrespectful to.......
You are stupid,you are ignorant,as ignorant as a redneck. Gailon's calling on God's wrath to smite his enemies. If that can't be determined without a lengthy "investigation" how are members to know.
We have all seen members from here banned for saying far less. It is a privately held forum and they certainly are entitled to make up what ever rules they wish. However it would be nice if the "we are unbiased and attempt to be fair routine" and just plain spell it out. Pretty simple I would think

Well I'll be jiggered--I actually made a real mistake. An honest one even.

But as usual, AT is making a big deal of it. You know--people can't make ANY mistakes. We HAVE to be perfect.

In a previous post I said Snoopy (Lynette from California) and Joy and Pickle had never set foot at 3abn. Well, the name I meant to type instead of Snoopy was "Artiste (Dr. Louetta Westphal from California).

WOOPS I got the name wrong. String me up and hang me.....

by Daryl
I am in full agreement that they all should be renumerated for all their troubles for the reason that they were the defendants of the lawsuit.

Why were they defendents? And what was the cause of this again......... remunerated for all their troubles ??

Nobody should be able to both launch and dismiss a lawsuit without paying the price for having it dismissed instead of taking it to the trial and decision stage.

Might come as a shock to everyone of the anti 3ABN crowd, legally most don't give a fig what you or others think. It is what is law. Besides isn't this where many and I think you were previouslyone, spoke in quite a definitive way that...... God would take care of these issues and you should not be looking to the secular courts for your answers. My how ideas have changed. Do you think this is so big that God needs a little help?

Shouldn't about now Bob and Gailon "suffer themselves to be defrauded" Isn't that somewhere in the good book. That thought was applied to my son and granddaughters for several years. Are Bob and gailon exempt from such instruction?
Had they meekly allowed themselves to be defrauded they would not have to look for renumeration. They could have continued to speak out just like the reformers of old. This day and age they wouldn't have to worry about being burned at the stake,maybe a little contempt of court penalities but no one would have cut their tongue out.

by Bob
Breezy said over on 3Atalk: "I knew the bottom line was MONEY! Always follow the money trail. These liars will blast on the worldwide web the work God Himself has set up and now wants MONEY for it. Lots of money!!!"

Now if asking 3ABN to pay for the time they made me waste by filing their frivolous lawsuit against me means I had them sue me because I wanted money, I wonder what Breezy thinks about Greg Simpson and company. Greg charges $350 an hour, 14 times what I charge folks in my community. Does Breezy think that Simpson and company took this case simply for the money, motivated 14 times as much by greed as supposedly I was motivated?

Ian may have to come and slap my fingers and delete this but that is about the most jello brained imbecilic reasoning.
Poor Bob seems to have himself confused with Perry Mason. Bob,just something that may have missed your observation,you are not an attorney,Simpson is. Simpson was asked to insert himself as a legal counsel,you bulldozed your way in and are not n the payroll of 3ABN.

What is it Bob charges his community for legal services? The area he lives is not the highest paying employment around,but I think even that far north they would not hire a Perry Mason wannabe. They would hire an attorney


Bob you were motivated by the vision of your name being recognized as this fearless crusader who brought 3ABN down along with gailon who mistakes himself as a messiah. You have forgone employment to help support your family so now you seem to think you can demand it from 3abn. You don't get to decide that.
Those are the breaks when you step forward and do something on this level. If you were not ready to pull up your big boy pants and take it on the chin, then you should have SHUTUP.

Bob,
I have the answer for you. It was staring me in the face all the time.....

Maybe you should stop taking offense and claiming you being persecuted
and slandered by DS and 3abn and just ignore and pray for them??

Nothing that says you must engage in a lawsuit. Pray and it goes away, just ask "some" of those that support you.

Some of you people here have en ingenuous way of ascertaining what is true and what is false. Here you prove the "pathetic" falsehood of AdventTalk by maintaining a certain post has been removed - the one you quote here below. You must be counting on that nobody checks the facts, because if they do they will find that post right there on AdventTalk.

Your method is not a new one. It has been used all the way through in so many instances since this saga started about March/April of 2004, initiated by President Danny Shelton himself and thoroughly copied by a number of people defending his false accusations of his wife, Linda. I know, because he had me fired because I would not honor his false statements because I was there and had experienced his falsehood.

Same old story.

Breezy wrote:Really, AdventTalk (AT) is so pathetic. If anyone tries to post the truth of the matter, the moderators REMOVE THEIR POSTS from the board so that the public cannot know the real story. You would think AT had something to hide. Well, of course they do! It is a shame those membership at AT who are against 3abn continue to doggedly pursue their evil course because when they find out they are wrong, it will hit them like a ton of bricks.

Oh but then the truth would spoil their "fun" wouldn't it? Yes readers, those over on AT enjoy bad-mouthing 3abn and those who work there for the Lord. They ENJOY making up any DIRT they can on anyone involved with 3abn and then making it public. They are "enjoying the pleasures of sin for a season." It is hard to imagine a Christian acting or talking the way these evil-minded people do over on AT.

Remember, those people: Snoopy (Lynette from California), Gailon Joy, Robert Pickle, have never set foot at 3abn. Because there are some who were FIRED from 3abn for being lousy workers were there, they are believing all the evil one-sided reports from these angry people because they were FIRED. Well duh....doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. There is also reports from someone with problems with serious sins that was at 3abn who was fired too. He likes to bad-mouth 3abn too. And the rest on AT believe it all hook-line and sinker. Sounds like lots of griping people.

But I do happen to have permission from Sam over on AT to print here something he posted over on AT that was quickly removed (as fast as possible) and you can see why from his post. Sam finally got fed up with the ugliness going on over on AT, the gossip, the innuendo and FALSE reports--backbiting, judging and every other talebearing thing they seem to come up with over there. Most of what AT reports is TOTAL LIES. Then there is a tiny percent that has a small element of truth to it, but they have put evil motives to everything.

But readers, you may come here for the truth. AT does not believe in reporting the truth or they wouldn't delete our posts over there.

Below is Sam's post. I thought everyone might like to know the REAL Snoopy.

SAM wrote: Snoopy get over it...to any certified accountant, to any christian and to any moral person...you are a laughingstock. You go to 3abn to spy for the people they are in litigation with, you give out confidential information and add to it whatever fits your fancy. You gossip and spin the truth on these internet sites and then when your identity is exposed, you become furious. You then vow to "spill your guts" so to speak against 3abn. Imagine, you are the spy, you put yourself out there but when you are exposed you're mad at 3abn.

If all of that isn't a big enough joke, you then submit consulting bills to pickle and joy that in turn they want to submit to the court. Why? To try and get 3abn to compensate all of you!!!!!!! You want 3abn to pay you for spying on them under the pretense of helping!!! Ohhh what a web we weave when we first practice to deceive.

According to you, you were only there for 10 weeks, every other week so you really must have the scoop on all. LOL I could be wrong but wasn't it about the same time you were volunteering/spying that you were dealing with your stalker situation? Seems like your mind might have been on too many things at once to know much of anything.

Without a doubt, your license should be taken away, you should be disfellowshipped from the church....if you hadn't already backslidden....and then you should be asking 3abn's forgiveness instead of asking them for money.

Oh well, we can always hope that if enough people find out what you've done, you will never be hired by any credible firm. People like to be able to trust their accountants.

Johann wrote:Some of you people here have en ingenuous way of ascertaining what is true and what is false. Here you prove the "pathetic" falsehood of AdventTalk by maintaining a certain post has been removed - the one you quote here below. You must be counting on that nobody checks the facts, because if they do they will find that post right there on AdventTalk.

Yes, I just saw that it is there, at the same time as I noticed that Joy just posted a reply to it with his usual ranting,and chest thumping, of course I saw you reading it and then obviously approving it as it is still there also...

I have no idea, and so am not sure what the deal is here??? However it does seem weird, as in unusual, to me that Sam posted on the 20th and for 5 days and 5 nights no one bothered to reply nor criticize nor attack Sam since the usual response is a group tackle. Even Snoopy who the post was written to, and who posted the next sequential post in that thread acted as if it wasn't even there...

Johann wrote: Your method is not a new one. It has been used all the way through in so many instances since this saga started about March/April of 2004, initiated by President Danny Shelton himself and thoroughly copied by a number of people defending his false accusations of his wife, Linda. I know, because he had me fired because I would not honor his false statements because I was there and had experienced his falsehood.

Same old story.

Yes that is the same old story, and an offtopic one. Also a ridiculous one. From day one all the private emails you and your group published from Danny shelton and even Linda Shelton were in agreement, Danny found out about the planned trip to Florida with the Doctor and so Linda did not go on the dates the tickets had been reserved for.

Your claim that you were with the Doctor and he went nowhere on that date is therefore smoke and mirrors and matters not at all. Thus your claim that this is why you were fired is equally absurd.

If you wish to discuss this or any further claims on your part, please bring it up in a new topic here and I will gladly join you and point out all the inconsistencies and falsehoods on your part which I have found.

--ian