Who are some of the most influential cranks?

Influential but not so well known, in that their *cough* work has been used many times by others

Renato Vesco, whose book Intercept But Don't Shoot has been taken as unquestioned truth by many (including, unfortunately, Nick Cook) who follow the Nazi UFO myth (despite the fact that the guy lied about his experience and qualifications...)

Vladimir Terziski, the "president" of the American Academy of Dissident Sciences. Another promoter of Nazi UFOs, as is

Ernst Zündel, who at least had the "grace" to admit later that he invented much of the Nazi UFO stuff in order to promote sales of his pro-Nazi Holocaust Denialism.

And following closely (and prolifically on the 'net) is Rob Arndt, who goes so far as to invent from whole cloth "recently unearthed" German documents giving new "insight" into their inventions and projects.

Igor Witkowski, a reasonably good military tech journalist, but given to extrapolation and uncritical belief. His book The Truth About the Wunderwaffe varies from hard technical analysis to blatant credulity (or invention). This guy is also used as a "source" and "reference" in Nick Cook's book.

Joseph Farrell, yet one more Nazi-secret technology crank and conspiracy theorist.
 
Last edited:
John99 said:
I figured they went through with it
Click to expand...
In other words you did your usual trick: posted without checking or actually thinking.

seemed likely.
Click to expand...
Likely? Because you're oh-so-familiar with how we do things here in Britain?

Scientology is a practically non-existent sect, I haven't got the figures yet from this year's census, but the last one showed we had fewer than 2,000 of the idiots - hardly worth banning.
 
To my knowledge, Germany's ban was based upon identifying it as not being a true religion and they should therefore pay TAX. It seems for some reason countries still give tax relief to religions, while Charity work might well be a decent tax exemption reason, I really do thing religions that can accumulate money or own land should still be taxed. If their religion is that well supported by the people that believe in it, then taxation on these things shouldn't be problem.
 
Stryder said:
To my knowledge, Germany's ban was based upon identifying it as not being a true religion
Click to expand...

Compared to what?:wallbang:

It seems for some reason countries still give tax relief to religions, while Charity work might well be a decent tax exemption reason, I really do thing religions that can accumulate money or own land should still be taxed. If their religion is that well supported by the people that believe in it, then taxation on these things shouldn't be problem.
Click to expand...

Then poor religions will die out and wealthy keep building more "holy temple".
 
John99 said:
So what does he mean by "real Religion"?
Click to expand...
As opposed to, say, a purely-for-profit corporation.
You mean you haven't actually looked at the background of the German decision before spouting crap?
Why am I not surprised?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top