Member Info for HeadInTheSand

"The evidence for greatly outweighs the evidence against"... really?

The SOLE "evidence for" comprises multiple repeated assurances from the same single individual. Yep, just one individual - so it is merely and purely a case of "because Amit said so". There is literally no other independently verifiable evidence.

Okay, so all one can do is then gauge the plausibility, credibility and veracity of that individual - and to do that, the only rational starting point is to look at said individual's track record of issuing accurate and/or truthful statements.

As has been long picked over, literally everything ABH has ever said relating to Cloudtag that could be disproved has been disproved. Even if one limits oneself and only looks at at the website announcements made over the last 2 1/2 years (and there have been 39 of those), every single one of those that has mentioned something that either is or becomes easily checkable - such as a deadline date or the name of a bank - has turned out to be categorically and provably false.

In fact the naming of the bank where the $50 million licence funds were deposited and its subsequent rapid deletion from the 22/03/24 update is probably the most recent large red flag. Here just as a reminder is how that very recent particular website update originally started:

"22 Mar 2024 — The licensing fees have been deposited with CIBC Bank, located in Chicago, Illinois...."

So the single individual issuing assurances about Cloudtag has a literally undeviating track record of putting out information and promises that so far have all turned out to be false. I would say that is is therefore pretty easy to gauge this source's plausibility, credibility and veracity.

"The evidence for greatly outweighs the evidence against"... not in this reality, I'm afraid.

A negative cannot be proven in empirical contexts. This from Wikipedia, which puts it rather more succinctly than I could:-

"In formal logic and mathematics, the negation of a proposition can be proven using procedures such as modus tollens and reductio ad absurdum.

In empirical contexts (such as the evaluating the existence or nonexistence of unicorns), inductive reasoning is often used for establishing the plausibility of a claim based on observed evidence. Though inductive reasoning may not provide absolute certainty about negative claims, this is only due to the nature of inductive reasoning; inductive reasoning provides proof from probability rather than certainty. Inductive reasoning also does not provide absolute certainty about positive claims."

The only evidence to support a positive outcome can be boiled down very simply to "Because Amit said so"... and the plausibility of this is not supportable by any inductive reasoning. Therefore, back to David Icke and the Windsor multi-dimensional lizards, I'm afraid.

"...a logical impossibility to prove a negative..."

Again Whispering, you're totally relying upon the fact that it is a logical impossibility of proving a negative.

Although in very strict and ring-fenced logic terms that may be a tenable position, when it comes to adopting a reasoned and/or reasonable view on Cloudtag, it simply does not stack up.

A reductio and absurdum may assist in making the point. I cannot disprove the assertion from the likes of David Icke that the British Royal Family is in fact a cadre of multi-dimensional lizard people intent upon world domination. However, the fact that I cannot disprove this does not make it true - irrelevant of how often or how stridently said assertion may be made.

CatSteffan is of course absolutely correct in what he says.

has nailed it. For the second time in just a couple of months, Sando is using the same tactic to quite literally stack the deck against PIs.

The belated AGM will of course contain resolutions to allow him to issue God knows how much more confetti (solely to enable the company to meet existing incurred financial liabilities in ever more worthless paper). He obviously realises that he needs a self-controlled bloc of 10% of votes to get these resolutions over the line and keep his personal gravy train running just that little bit longer.

Needless to say it is bitterly amusing that at no point in its history has UKOG ever given a rat's ass about its Employee Benefit Trust, until Sando started to get nervous about not being able to scrape up the support he needed on votes.

I suppose I could find a grudging admiration for a really cleverly executed scam... but this is just the most blatant rigging possible.

Whispering states "Are you really sure you want to hear (?) given your recent prolific postings, are you really open to the opinions of others, do you really want a balanced perspective?"

For the record and having long been a fan of devil's advocacy as a significantly enlightening tool, my POV is that opinions of others - and especially counter-opinions - are potentially the most useful opinions of all...

...BUT ONLY if backed up by a) reason and b) evidential justification. Otherwise they're just facile contradictory noise and don't represent "balance" in even the slightest way.

Whispering then goes on to say "Then you can be full of your own convictions to your hearts content … perhaps it’s exactly what you aim to achieve?"

Two words. Pot... kettle.

Geez... does anyone give a rat's behind about what ANGS may burble on about on Twitter?

A question that is perhaps a teensy bit more relevant would be:-

"Will the ANGS BoD manage for once to do something... anything... that stops the ANGS SP from endlessly circling the drain?"

The Ocebot's clearly running out of material in his/her/its ongoing attempts to polish the unpolishable and is having to resort to copy n pasting previous pompom waving (which did nothing first time round, either).

The company had better remobilise the Ocebot as soon as possible, with his/her/its ramptastic nonsense.

Not that this would make a blind bit of difference at this advanced stage. The cold, hard crashing waves of reality can only be held back for so long...

It's also significant that Amit posted (then very rapidly deleted) the details of the Chicago bank that was allegedly holding funds.

"At times"?

Part of the latest in an apparently endless series of updates is indeed believable. Amit seems to have forgotten (or never bothered) to log who he was flogging shares to post the company's delist.

That would certainly be in character.

Nope, it's 10 day old news and the same lot - or else a further RNS would have needed to be issued.

Mr Herbert's recent £25k purchase is currently worth less than £19k. Mind you, that's a lot smaller than longer-term PIs' losses.

The failed attempt to use "misogynistic" as an insult did amuse me. I guess he/she/they/xe objected to having the ginger ringlets of Lil Orphan Annie called into play again.

Nothing even faintly misogynistic about that. In the eponymous musical, I think I can safely surmise that the composer intended that the lead should be seen as what I believe might these days be called a cissexual female? Anyhow, gender is irrelevant in the comparison between Whispering's and Annie's world views - as anyone with an IQ larger than their shoesize would instantly have grasped, the relevance is instead all about hope without foundation.

"Tomorrow, tomorrow

I love ya tomorrow

You're always, a day away

Tomorrow, tomorrow

I love ya tomorrow

You're always, a day away."

Whispering, the inalienable fact remains that literally the only foundation for your particular point of view is "Because Amit keeps saying so".

So you and your ginger ringlets are solely relying upon statements from someone who to date has not uttered a truthful word - but plenty of mendacious ones.

This is simply bound to result in the justification underlying your strenuous pompom exertions being called into doubt, no?

"The agents now have monies".

Presenting that statement as if it were a categoric fact is bizarre, given that the sole source of that information has repeatedly and undeviatingly demonstrated itself not to even have an imperceptibly nodding acquaintance with any form of truth.

Literally the only justification underpinning the ginger-ringleted pompom wavers (you know who you are) remains "Because Amit said so". Just a tad of a flimsy foundation, I'd say.

I'm afraid so. PIs' investments are Down The Dustpipe, after having fully financed Scamderson to be able to be Living On An Island.

As for PIs being able to join Salmon Slacks, all he's paid out for is tickets on a Paper Plane.

Hans Christian "1.5p minimum by end of March 2024" Andersen is back, I see.

Ocelot is really having to reach into more ridiculous realms than usual in his/her ongoing efforts to polish the unpolishable.

I wonder what he/she gets paid, given that his/her posts do precisely - and unsurprisingly - nothing to stop the cold, harsh tides of reality crashing into this ever more fragile collection of farcical fairytales.

With Amit's record of spotless trustworthiness and truthfulness, I wouldn't be surprised if since delist, he's been selling people shares without logging those sales in the register book.