₦airaland Forum

budaatum:
Your signature befuddles. Where it say 30 men?

I actually had to read the Quran under orders during my deployment in Afghanistan — hardly voluntary. Yet somehow, you’re upset about 30 grown men and not the kids. That says plenty.

steadygo:
You are the only one who has given any sign that you are prone to delusions. It does not mean much to me that you served in Afghanistan. You do not me or my life experiences, nor do I feel the need to share them with you. You are not being attacked because you are "from another country", you are entitled to say whatever you want and I am entitled to reprimand. And indeed, I WILL reprimand it when a foreigner of this land settles here then goes on to call Yoruba men 'rapists who want to be worshipped'. If it displeases you, then Mr. Foreigner, my aim is NOT to please you! As for the matter of you following me, you have replied to almost all my topics. Even topics I made before my encounter with you, you have replied to them. And all your responses started coming in only after my encounter with you. I am not sure how you wish to claim it is coincidental, hence why I suggest you are prone to delusions.

I know I am safe, I cannot be scared merely because you follow me around on an Internet forum.

You’re overestimating your importance here. Yes, I started replying to your threads after your first accusation — deliberately. You made wild statements, and I decided to respond. It’s a public forum, not your private property. You don’t own any topic here, and you have no authority over who comments or where. If my presence annoys you, that’s your problem, not mine.

Now, let’s get something straight: I am not against Yoruba people. What I oppose is the distortion of Yoruba identity and history, and the arrogance that comes with shouting “tradition” every time someone dares to question hypocrisy. Not every old habit is sacred. Some things called “tradition” are just outdated behaviour being forced on others. Culture is meant to be lived, not weaponised.

And if discussing sexual violence upsets you, that says more about your priorities than mine. These are verifiable facts, not insults:

Lagos State: 24,009 sexual and gender-based violence cases were officially recorded between January 2019 and December 2023.

Lagos (Aug 2022 – July 2023): The DSVA handled 5,624 cases — 90 rapes, 72 sexual assaults, 235 defilements.

Lagos (Aug 2024 – July 2025): 8,692 new cases, including 243 defilements, 99 rapes, and 25 sexual assaults by penetration.

Oyo State: UNFPA data shows 17.1 % of women aged 15+ have suffered physical violence, 3.2 % sexual violence.

Ekiti State: The Moremi Clinic recorded 139 GBV cases in a single year — victims as young as 6 months and as old as 85 years.

Osun State: Ranked fourth nationally for SGBV prevalence. Among its cases: a 95-year-old woman raped, and a 65-year-old attacked while caring for her sick husband.

These are Yoruba communities — and these are the realities. Quoting facts is not “hate.” It’s awareness. Pretending these things don’t happen doesn’t make the community look stronger — it makes it look dishonest.

So, before you cry about being “followed,” remember this: disagreement is not harassment, and debate is not delusion. If my responses shake your comfort, maybe it’s because they hit too close to truth.

This is a public space. You talk, I respond. That’s how discussion works. If you can’t handle that, the problem isn’t me — it’s your ego.

steadygo:
Since it was in your mind you conjured up your half-baked truths, you should dismantle them in your own mind. However, Mr. Foreigner, I will give you a response - Nobody here is offended by your post. Nobody has insulted your post and it remains here unblemished for anyone to read. Nobody here has also shown to be looking unanimous agreement. Your attitude is like a child who feels he must be welcome in every space. You know very well, the issue is you and not your post - you have been following me around on Nairaland after I reprimanded you for your bio and gave you my opinion on your presence in Nigeria. Now you are continually "surprised" why you are not meant with the greatest warmth each time.

Your message says far more about you than it does about me. You’ve constructed an entire story in your mind and now seem determined to defend it, no matter how detached it is from reality. That’s exactly why rational discussion with you quickly turns pointless.

And for the record, my bio is absolutely entitled to say what I want it to. I fought in Afghanistan for the rights of innocent women and children — for people who couldn’t speak freely in their own country. So you’ll have to excuse me if I’m not particularly moved when someone who’s never faced that kind of struggle tries to lecture me on what I can or cannot say.

If you feel compelled to attack someone simply because they’re from another country, that isn’t patriotism — it’s insecurity disguised as pride. No intelligent person uses nationality as a weapon in debate.

You can keep telling yourself I’m “following” you if it helps you feel important, but let’s be honest — you’re not nearly that interesting. I engage in open discussions, not personal vendettas.

I’ve met far more dangerous people in far worse places than this forum, so don’t flatter yourself — you’re quite safe. What you should really worry about is how small-mindedness looks when it’s laid bare for everyone to see.

steadygo:
I don't have time for your half-baked truths. A non-Nigerian perspective does not make me feel "uncomfortable", it is simply not relevant to me in this scenario.

Relevance isn’t something decided by emotion, it’s earned by contribution — and right now, Nigeria needs every honest perspective it can get, whether it’s comfortable or not.

You talk about “Nigerian intelligence,” yet react to a simple discussion like it’s a personal insult. That’s not intelligence — that’s insecurity dressed as pride.

If you only want Nigerians to agree with you, you’re not having a discussion, you’re holding a mirror. And the irony? The world you reject opinions from is the same world Nigeria depends on for validation, technology, and investment.

So maybe the “irrelevant” foreign view isn’t the problem — maybe it’s the refusal to face uncomfortable truths.

steadygo:
Indeed, they are the most intelligent. You are Mr. Foreigner to me.

You asked for “thoughts,” not passports. When we discuss something as universal as intelligence, the methodology and interpretation are open to everyone — that’s how knowledge works.

If hearing a non-Nigerian perspective feels uncomfortable, perhaps that’s worth examining, because insight doesn’t lose value based on who offers it. I didn’t comment to “fix” Nigeria, only to add reason to a discussion you invited.

True intelligence — the kind no test can measure — is the ability to hear a different view without taking offense.

steadygo:
Mr. Foreigner it is a thought question intended for fellow Nigerians. I do not believe Nigerians really have low IQ, indeed I believe we are of the smartest people in the world. But thanks for your contribution, nonetheless.

And think the term you are looking for is "thought experiment"

steadygo:
Mr. Foreigner it is a thought question intended for fellow Nigerians. I do not believe Nigerians really have low IQ, indeed I believe we are of the smartest people in the world. But thanks for your contribution, nonetheless.

I’ve said it many times — Nigerians are among the most intelligent people on the planet. The problem isn’t a lack of brilliance; it’s how that brilliance is used. Too often, it’s turned inward, to compete and step over one another, instead of being harnessed to lift each other up.

And my name is sven not mr foreigner.

steadygo:
My people, when do we take back our country and build a Nigeria where we can live with dignity? It seems we do not even have the goal to make a great nation for ourselves. Are we of the mindset that the government who has already stolen billions from us and driven us into a kind of poverty many people around the world cannot even comprehend, that this government will now suddenly change? Or are we to wait until our government has stolen everything there is to steal from us, before we then can reclaim the country? It is sad because a man must present this terrible country as his fathers land. Whatever tribe someone is from, I do not think there is any figure in all our histories that has done to our land what these people in charge have done today. All over the world we looked at as mentally colonized victims unable to liberate ourselves. When do we make a great nation for ourselves?

What you’re describing sounds noble, but the truth is that kind of unity isn’t possible in Nigeria as things stand. The country isn’t a single people — it’s 371 distinct cultures, each with its own history, priorities, and sense of identity. You can’t unite a nation that hasn’t yet agreed on what “nation” even means.

When people spend more time arguing over who’s right than celebrating the fact that they’re all different, division becomes the default. That’s the real fracture — not borders, but mindset. Even the NYSC was meant to help bridge that gap, to give young Nigerians a shared purpose, but that vision has long since faded.

Until something new comes along that unites everyone — not just university graduates, not just one tribe or faith — it’s difficult to imagine real change. You can’t build strength on resentment, and soldiers can’t hold a line when they’ve stopped believing in what they’re protecting.

Unity will only happen when people start seeing difference as strength, not threat. Until then, the idea of “taking back the country” remains just that — an idea.

AkinwaleJJ:
Communication with the spirit realm could be called any name if your own god call it one way and another call it something else the Koko is communicating with the spirit realm which all religionists are doing.

So your lies doesn't add up!

I don’t even think he’s lying. I think he genuinely believes all this, which makes it a medical issue, not a moral one.

I hope I got this one right

Fella, even your spirit go tire to explain this one. You don enter realm we never register for.

Fella, I respect your creativity, but at this point you’re writing fiction and calling it revelation.

Fella, I truly admire your confidence — most people would need medication to think like that.

Fella, your imagination deserves a research grant — reality clearly couldn’t keep up.

Fella, you’re really in a world entirely your own — I just hope the rest of us get visitor passes someday.

lawani:
Lying to you? Who do you think you are? And what am I to gain?
If President Bush adopted me it won't be in the headlines if it is top secret. What I gain is protection until the job is done
I said I am a self taught Babalawo with no Oluwo. A self taught person can't be an initiate. I hope you get that?
You have got so many things wrong

You’ve made a lot of claims across multiple platforms. Taken together, they don’t add up. Here are the clear contradictions and unverifiable statements from your words:

Charging vs. “never collected money”

You publicly listed a fee (₦20,000) in your profile for consultancy.

Later you said you’ve “never collected money from anybody for consultancy” and might edit your profile.
→ Either you have been charging clients (as advertised) or you haven’t — both statements cannot be true at once.

“Self-taught Awo/Babalawo” vs. initiation claims

You called yourself a “self-taught Babalawo” and said you “communicate with the spirit world with the 256 signs of Orunmila.”

When challenged you asked “Can you show where I said I was initiated?”
→ Calling oneself a Babalawo normally implies initiation/lineage. Saying both “self-taught” and denying initiation is inconsistent.

“Owned by a spirit” vs. personal agency

You said “I have one spirit that owns me” and that your spirit “has utmost control over you” and can “reactivate incarnations.”

You also post and engage as if you are an autonomous researcher and teacher.
→ If your spirit “owns” you and controls answers, you cannot simultaneously claim independent authorship of research or be the impartial agent running tests.

Research language vs. unfalsifiable method

You call your process “research” and say there are “256 possible answers,” but verification relies exclusively on private divination and spirits.
→ Research, by standard definition, requires methods others can inspect, repeat and potentially falsify. A method that only believers can perform is not independent research — it’s private revelation.

“60 billion spirits” and detailed cosmology (God-grid, 300-year terms, food harvesting)

You present detailed numeric claims and bureaucratic spirit structures (60 billion spirits, God-grid, spirits’ “three hundred year” terms, “food farms”).
→ These are extraordinary, specific claims with no cited sources, odu references, or external documentation. Extraordinary claims require verifiable evidence — none has been provided.

George W. Bush “adoption” claim

On LinkedIn you claimed President George W. Bush “adopted” you and that his daughter “waits for you.”
→ A claim of that magnitude would have public records or media coverage; none exists and it is easily verifiable. Without evidence, this is a highly implausible personal claim.

Profile / platform inconsistency

You use the same profile image, name and contact details across platforms, yet the stories differ drastically between Facebook, LinkedIn and forum posts (fees advertised → later denied; grand political-family claims; spirit bureaucracy).
→ When the same identity posts mutually contradictory claims in multiple public places, credibility collapses unless you provide clear evidence.

“Peer review” redefinition

You equate multiple people doing private divination with peer review.
→ True peer review requires independent methods and standards that can be applied and tested by outsiders. Multiple believers agreeing privately is not the same as independent verification.

What would satisfy reasonable verification? (simple, concrete asks you can post now)

If you want people to take the “research” claim seriously, provide at least one of the following, verifiably:

• A documented transcript / dated recording of a divination session with a named, independent witness who does not share your prior beliefs; or
• An Odu/odu verses citation that explicitly supports a specific, unusual claim you made (with the exact phrasing and traditional source named); or
• One verifiable, public piece of evidence that supports your extraordinary external claim (e.g., any record confirming the Bush adoption claim).

Until you produce verifiable evidence, the only reasonable conclusion from your own words is that these are personal beliefs and narratives, not independently testable research.

Fella, you really shouldn’t try lying to someone like me.
I’m ex-military — trained to investigate, verify, and see through deception.
And with multiple PhDs that, when combined, are basically qualifications in understanding human behaviour, I can tell the difference between genuine insight and a well-polished story.

This was fun though 😊

Fenrir:
You’ve said a lot across different platforms, but your own words tell the full story better than anyone else could.

On your LinkedIn, you claim that President George W. Bush adopted you as his son, and that his daughter Barbara “waits for you” — yet there’s not a single public record, news report, or legal document anywhere to verify that. A presidential adoption, especially across continents, would be global news.

On Facebook, you call yourself a “self-taught Awo Orunmila” and describe a system where humans are “food farms for spirits,” ranked by “God-like managerial ability” and “empathy scores.” You say spirits harvest food from Earth and spend “three hundred years in the God grid.” That’s not research — that’s your own mythology.

Here, on this forum, you’ve also said you’re not affiliated with any diviners or elders, that you charge ₦20,000 for consultations, and that your spirit owns you. You even compare your “spiritual research” to academic science, while dismissing evidence, peer review, and falsifiability — the very foundations of research.

When all of this is taken together, it’s clear there’s no consistency or external validation anywhere in your claims. The only constant is that you declare your ideas as truth, charge for them, and then redefine “research” whenever questioned.

That isn’t spiritual enlightenment — it’s self-invention.

You’ve said a lot across different platforms, but your own words tell the full story better than anyone else could.

On your LinkedIn, you claim that President George W. Bush adopted you as his son, and that his daughter Barbara “waits for you.” Yet there’s not a single public record, news report, or legal document anywhere to verify that — a presidential adoption would make international headlines.

On Facebook, you call yourself a “self-taught Awo Orunmila” and describe a system where humans are “food farms for spirits,” ranked by “God-like managerial ability” and “empathy scores.” You say spirits harvest food from Earth and spend “three hundred years in the God grid.” That isn’t research — that’s mythology.

Here, you’ve said you’re not affiliated with any diviners or elders, that you charge ₦20,000 for consultations, and that your spirit owns you. You compare this to material science, yet dismiss evidence, peer review, and falsifiability — the cornerstones of what research actually is.

And it’s not hard to verify any of this — you use the same profile image, name, and email across all your accounts. That’s what real research looks like: traceable, verifiable evidence. The only thing consistent in your story is how you keep redefining truth whenever questioned.

That isn’t revelation or science. It’s self-invention wrapped in mysticism.

You’ve said a lot across different platforms, but your own words tell the full story better than anyone else could.

On your LinkedIn, you claim that President George W. Bush adopted you as his son, and that his daughter Barbara “waits for you” — yet there’s not a single public record, news report, or legal document anywhere to verify that. A presidential adoption, especially across continents, would be global news.

On Facebook, you call yourself a “self-taught Awo Orunmila” and describe a system where humans are “food farms for spirits,” ranked by “God-like managerial ability” and “empathy scores.” You say spirits harvest food from Earth and spend “three hundred years in the God grid.” That’s not research — that’s your own mythology.

Here, on this forum, you’ve also said you’re not affiliated with any diviners or elders, that you charge ₦20,000 for consultations, and that your spirit owns you. You even compare your “spiritual research” to academic science, while dismissing evidence, peer review, and falsifiability — the very foundations of research.

When all of this is taken together, it’s clear there’s no consistency or external validation anywhere in your claims. The only constant is that you declare your ideas as truth, charge for them, and then redefine “research” whenever questioned.

That isn’t spiritual enlightenment — it’s self-invention.

Or is “George W. Bush” the name of the spirit that owns you?

lawani:
Yes President George W Bush and even others adopted me as their son because they knew getting me out of the mess would take a long time.

If a sitting or former U.S. President had legally or even symbolically adopted you, it would be publicly documented — official records, press coverage, or at the very least, international media reports.

There’s absolutely no record of that anywhere. Not a mention in U.S., Nigerian, or international archives. A presidential adoption isn’t a private, hidden matter — it would make global news instantly.

This isn’t about faith or spirituality; it’s about verifiable fact.
When someone claims events of that scale without evidence, it crosses from personal belief into clear fabrication.

So if we’re talking about truth, the burden of proof isn’t on others to believe it — it’s on you to show even one credible source.

lawani:
Can you show where I said I was initiated?

You asked me to point out contradictions, so let’s look at your own statements and profiles side by side:

1️⃣ In this very thread, you said:

“I am a self-taught Babalawo. I communicate with the spirit world with the 256 signs of Orunmila.”
“According to the research I did with Ifa there are over 60 billion spirits and each of us are owned by one spirit.”
“When you use a diviner you have to pay them what they ask you.”
“I charge twenty thousand naira only for consultancy.” (from your public profile)

So — by your own words, you:

Call yourself a Babalawo, meaning initiated Ifa priest.

Claim to perform research with Ifa (which itself presumes practice).

Say diviners charge money, and even list your own fee.

2️⃣ But later, when challenged, you said:

“I may need to edit my profile because I have never collected money from anybody for consultancy.”
“Can you show where I said I was initiated?”

That’s your first contradiction. You publicly call yourself a Babalawo (which by definition means initiated), claim to communicate with Orunmila and the spirit realm, yet now deny being initiated or charging anyone. Both cannot be true.

3️⃣ Then your LinkedIn profile says something completely different again:

“When I got into the Pastor Adeboye mess which led me into psychiatry, my biological family abandoned me, leaving me for dead, and at that point President George W. Bush adopted me as his son… His daughter Barbara Jr. is waiting for me which is why my marital status reads MARRIED.”

That directly contradicts your current story of being a spiritually guided researcher. It shows a pattern — personal fantasies presented as fact, then denied when questioned.

4️⃣ You also said here:

“God wants everyone to be a diviner.”
but then you added,
“I said every human should be, not every human are.”

That’s not spirituality — that’s circular reasoning.

So the contradictions aren’t my opinion; they’re your documented statements across multiple posts and platforms.

If your position changes every time someone questions you, that isn’t divine mystery — it’s inconsistency.
A true scholar or priest can stand by their words, not rewrite them after every comment.

lawani:
My charge is 20k and you or anyone are welcome to be the first client to pay

You’ve just proven my point.
A moment ago, you said you’ve never collected money and that the fee on your profile was “just there.”
Now you’re inviting me to be your first paying client.

That’s not spirituality — that’s salesmanship dressed as revelation.
And it perfectly illustrates why people question your credibility.

lawani:
You appear not to know the meaning of contradiction.

Profile | LinkedIn https://share.google/iOMaBu99KKZNpoXmF

lawani:
You appear not to know the meaning of contradiction.

A contradiction is when two statements from the same person cannot both be true.

For example:

You said you charge twenty thousand naira for consultancy, then later said you’ve never collected money from anyone.

You said you’re self-taught with no Oluwo, yet also claim to be an initiated Awo Orunmila.

You said you don’t “hear voices,” yet you also said George W. Bush adopted you as his son and his daughter waits for you.

Each of those statements cancels out the other.
That’s the literal definition of contradiction — and you’ve provided several.

lawani:
Can you give me an example of the contradictions?

You asked for examples of contradictions, so here they are — directly from what you yourself have written:

🔹 LinkedIn profile

“When I got into the Pastor Adeboye mess which led me into the psychiatry, my biological family abandoned me, leaving me for dead and at that point President George W. Bush adopted me as his son… He also asked his first daughter Barbara Jr to wait for me which is why my marital status reads MARRIED.”

This directly contradicts:

Your claim on this forum that you are a serious researcher of Ifa philosophy — because no credible researcher claims adoption by a foreign president.

Your repeated insistence that you “do not believe in hearing voices” — yet you say George W. Bush, a living man with no connection to you, is your father and authority.

🔹 Forum Profile vs. Your Later Statements

“I am a self-taught Awo Orunmila. I have no Oluwo… I charge twenty thousand naira for consultancy.”

Later you said:

“I have never collected money from anyone and may need to edit my profile.”

That’s another contradiction — either you charge or you don’t. You can’t advertise spiritual consultancy and then deny it when challenged.

🔹 Your Own Teachings vs. Ifa Tradition
You claim:

“I taught myself. I have no Oluwo but I found out via divination that I am the incarnate of Orunmila.”

That violates Ifa orthodoxy, which requires initiation and mentorship.
No genuine babalawo claims to be Orunmila incarnate or self-taught — that’s a personal invention, not Ifa philosophy.

So yes, the contradictions are easy to verify — because you wrote them.
When someone’s story changes this often across platforms, it’s not research or revelation — it’s fabrication.

lawani:
There is nothing I said that I am countering on any platform. I guess you now want to discuss me? Right?

It’s not about “discussing you,” it’s about verifying claims.
When someone presents spiritual ideas as factual research — while their public profiles contain contradictory, unverifiable stories — it naturally raises questions of credibility.
That’s not personal; it’s about honesty.
If your words don’t align across platforms, then what you’re doing stops being spiritual discussion and starts looking like misrepresentation, and that’s the polite term for fraud.

lawani:
Don't make this about what is on my profile. If you want me to work for you now, I will take 20k but I have not yet gotten any client. I hope that is clear.

It’s interesting how your statements here differ so completely from what’s written on your own LinkedIn profile.
There, you describe being “adopted by President George W. Bush” and “married to his daughter,” which makes it difficult to treat your claims of research and revelation as credible or consistent.

When someone’s personal narrative shifts this dramatically between platforms, it stops being spiritual discussion and starts looking like a pattern of invention presented as revelation.
That’s why people are sceptical — not because they “don’t believe in spirits,” but because your own record contradicts itself at every turn.

lawani:
I may need to edit my profile because I have never collected money from anybody for consultancy. I just put it there because I can do it and I left my job in 2022.
If you are doing research in material science too nobody will gather data for you. It is the exact same way

That’s exactly the problem — your own words keep shifting.
Your profile explicitly says you “charge twenty thousand naira for consultancy,” but now you claim you’ve never taken payment and only “put it there.”
That kind of inconsistency would disqualify any serious researcher — in material or spiritual science alike.

You can’t claim to do “research” when your definitions, claims, and methods all change depending on who’s asking.
That’s not research — that’s improvisation.

lawani:
If you ask IFA the questions I asked you will get the same responses UNLESS you are monkeying around

Your own profile says, “I am a self-taught Awo Orunmila. I have no Oluwo but have been learning since 2012… I charge twenty thousand naira for consultancy.”
That statement alone confirms that no one else is involved in your so-called “research.”
You’ve been developing personal interpretations since 2012 and presenting them as divine communication — essentially a one-man belief system packaged as consultancy.

lawani:
Even in material science you do everything on your own before publishing for peer review.
I did everything on my own. Yes. Others can verify by divination as well. Little difference.

That’s not how research works.
In science, findings must be observable, measurable, and repeatable by anyone — not just those who already share your beliefs.
If “verification” only happens through divination, that’s not independent review; it’s circular confirmation within your own conviction.

At that point, it stops being research and becomes personal revelation presented as scholarship — which is exactly how well-meaning mystics and the less well-meaning “spiritual entrepreneurs” end up sounding alike.