₦airaland Forum

Fenrir:
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 😊

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

Fenrir:
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.

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.

Fenrir:
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.

Can you show where I said I was initiated?

Fenrir:
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.

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

Fenrir:
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.

You appear not to know the meaning of contradiction.

Fenrir:
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.

Can you give me an example of the contradictions?

Fenrir:
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.

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

I got into trouble for trying to save Nigeria by writing. I lost my business and was locked up in psychiatric hospitals like seven times but a US led coalition waded in even before the trouble started to save me. The initiative belong to late President George H W Bush

A private company is supposed to make profit by selling a product or providing a service.
A main way the government can help a private company or private companies within its jurisdiction is by securing the local market by tariffing imported goods coming from competitors.
Where do corporate welfare come in?

A nation is supposed to fix minimum wage high enough so that two people on minimum wage can say marry and even support a kid.
Where do food stamps come in?

Fenrir:
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.

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.

Fenrir:
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.

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

Fenrir:
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.

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

Fenrir:
You’re describing revelation, not research.
Research requires independent verification — others must be able to repeat your method and get the same results without sharing your beliefs.
If that’s impossible, it isn’t research by any academic, scientific, or philosophical standard.

There’s nothing to debate here — that’s just the definition of the word.

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.

Fenrir:
Exactly. You’re getting your “knowledge” from social media posts and recycled memes, while I’m referencing books and verifiable sources.
You literally screenshot Google results that point back to Facebook — while I sent you direct, credible links you could actually check.

Let us leave it at that then. I have family that descend from this Benin that you are debating me about.

Fenrir:
That comparison actually proves my point.
If you write letters to someone and no one else can see the replies, verify the sender, or confirm the messages are real, it isn’t research — it’s correspondence.

If the “someone” you’re writing to exists only in your belief system, then it’s private revelation, not public knowledge.
Research requires independent verification. Revelation requires faith.
They’re both experiences, but only one can stand up to scrutiny — and it’s not the one that lives entirely in your head.

Calling it just revelation is too simplistic in my opinion because I know what I went through before getting it. I agree it is revelation but it was gotten by research.
If a Babalawo were with me they would be able to see the codes as they appear on the tray and be able to read it

Fenrir:
The difference is simple:
I base my points on verifiable knowledge — books, evidence, and sources anyone can cross-check.
You’re repeating claims pulled from social media posts and Facebook memes, then calling it “research.”

I was referring to my post about someone defining cult on Quora😊

Fenrir:
You’re still confusing research with revelation.

When a scientist does research, they gather evidence from independent sources that others can check and repeat. When you “ask your spirit questions,” no one else can access that source — it exists only in your own mind and belief. That makes it personal experience, not research.

Calling it spirit science doesn’t change that; it just means your evidence is invisible, private, and impossible to test. That’s fine for faith, but not for knowledge.

And about obedience — if your spirit “has a better plan than you” and you must always consult it, that’s not partnership; that’s submission.
Even by your own logic, the moment your “research” can’t be questioned, it stops being research and becomes doctrine.

It is actually like writing letters to someone and receiving replies then using the data to write a report. No difference.

Fenrir:
I prefer using a dictionary and thesaurus for definitions — you, on the other hand, proved this morning that Facebook is your go-to for history lessons.

Maybe description instead of definition then

AkinwaleJJ:
And who told you others aren't talking to their spirits?
Are you seeing their minds or you must be the one to tell them how they should talk to their spirits?😂

Divination is the only way to seamlessly communicate with your spirit and divination is banned ab initio in Christianity and Islam.

Fenrir:
You’re describing a belief system, not a research process.
When someone says “my spirit owns me and gives me answers from 24 incarnations”, that’s theology, not data collection.

Research has three essentials:

Evidence that others can inspect.

Methods others can repeat.

Results that could prove the idea wrong.

Your model has none of those. No one can test your spirit, verify its 24 incarnations, or confirm whether a “deleted incarnation” was reactivated. That makes it unfalsifiable — like saying “God told me so.” You can’t disprove it, but you also can’t prove it.

And when you say a spirit “owns” you, that’s not teamwork; that’s surrender of agency. It turns you from investigator into messenger.
If your spirit controls both the questions and the answers, then there’s no research — just revelation, and only you can hear it.

So let’s call it what it is: a personal faith. There’s nothing wrong with that — but it’s not scholarship, and it’s certainly not science.

In your own framework:
If your Ori Inu truly seeks wisdom, it should welcome scrutiny instead of retreating behind mystery.
Truth, even in Ifá, is confirmed through iwa pele — gentle character and honesty — not ownership or fear.
A spirit that demands obedience instead of understanding is not guiding you; it’s using you.

You can't use the exact rules of material science in spirit science. Spirits are not material people but they are people.
Why do you say the spirit demands obedience?. It will help you as much as it can as if it were your servant but it does not tolerate being unserious and it is not your servant. It will always aid you and it always has a better plan than you which is why it is good to always consult it.
I asked my spirit interesting questions and got interesting answers in detail. I still don't see why it is not a research. When people fill questionnaires for you, is that not a research?

Fenrir:
There’s something I don’t quite understand in your position.
You’ve said you’re guided by the 256 signs of Orunmila and by a spirit that “owns” you — but you’ve also referred to Christian concepts like God, Jesus, and divine punishment in earlier posts.

How do you reconcile those?
Christianity explicitly forbids divination and spirit consultation (Deuteronomy 18:10–12, Acts 16:16–18), while Ifá is built entirely on communication with spirits. The two systems contradict each other at the foundation.

If your spirit directs you, that’s not the Holy Spirit of Christian theology — and if it’s Orunmila, that’s an entirely different framework.
So which one defines your faith?

You can’t logically claim both, because their rules about revelation, authority, and truth cancel each other out.

Holy spirit is not the same concept as spirit that incarnates for food.
God has always been there before Christianity so it is not a Christianity alone concept. Christianity does not believe in reincarnation.
There is no divine punishment as such but you can be knocked out of existence by constant evil doing

AkinwaleJJ:
The way you keep lying and trying to cover one lie with ten lies has exposed you!
If each person has his or her own spirit then why are you saying other people are wrong?
Each person has a spirit that's guiding him or her and according to you just one question is to have 200+ answers which will surely come with contradictions so no one supposed to teach another you should have left everyone for their spirits to guide them and not the other way around!😟

That you have spirit does not mean you are communicating with it seamlessly by divination. You can have spirit and still be an atheist for instance not believing at all in communication with your spirit by divination

Fenrir:
You said “I have one spirit that owns me.”
That’s a very revealing statement — and it raises a serious question about agency.

If your spirit “owns” you, then who exactly is speaking when you post here — you, or your spirit? And if your spirit dictates your answers, how can you claim independent thought or objective research?

Ownership implies subservience. It means you’re not the researcher; you’re the research subject. That’s the opposite of what scholarship — or even responsible divination — requires.

In most spiritual systems, a person is meant to collaborate with guiding forces, not surrender identity or autonomy to them. The moment you say you’re owned, you stop being a seeker and start being a spokesperson for something you can’t verify.

So before we talk about 256 signs, maybe clarify one thing:
Are you in charge of your beliefs — or is your “owner” writing them for you?

Our spirit own us. It incarnated in order to harvest food for sustenance in heaven.

When I post here it is my incarnation. It is not everything that my spirit knows that it tells me but it is my higher self or Ori Inu as you called it. Though Ori Inu means inner head literally. I ask questions and get damned sometimes

You and your spirit are a team but we can say it owns you too since you are making food for it.

Fenrir:
So the “proposal stage” means no lineage, no verification, and no peers — just a personal system of yes/no questions directed at invisible auditors who “don’t like monkeying around.”
That’s not research; that’s an improv session with your subconscious.

And let’s be honest — when every check and balance still depends on you and your spirits, the only thing being reviewed is your imagination.

If I ask any question, there are 256 possible answers. That is more than a Yes/No session. It is research. Yes/No queries can however come in handy as would be expected.
I don't have spirits. I have one spirit that owns me. If I ask it a question it will check the 24 incarnations it has access to for answer and if it requires reactivating a deleted incarnation it will do so with support from relevant spirits. It can also get information from other spirits
What is research to you?
Yes spirits don't like monkeying around. They want you to genuinely seek.

Fenrir:
Peer review doesn’t mean a crowd invents an idea — it means other qualified people test your claim against shared standards to see if it actually holds up.
In proper divination, that would mean elders or trained practitioners checking your readings and comparing them with the odu and lineage teachings.

It’s not groupthink; it’s quality control.
Without that, anyone could declare themselves a prophet, or even claim to be He-Man shouting “I have the power to piss on a flower!” — and call it divine revelation.
It might sound impressive, but it’s still just one person talking to himself.

You are right and right now I am still at the proposal stage because I am not presently affiliated with any body of diviners but you as a person if you believe in divination can even establish a divination system and use yes or no questions and etc to check my claims. Any group of assembled elders will have to do it that way too but only ask sincere and genuine questions because the spirit does not like monkeying around

HeatSeeker:
They are far better than radical Islamist that feel going on a murderous rampage will please God.

In the long run or on the overall they are not better. Civilization can only be advanced by joining hands together and any group against that should be condemned

Fenrir:
What you’ve described isn’t peer review — it’s consensus-seeking among people who share the same unverifiable method.
Peer review, whether in science or structured divination, involves accountability to shared standards that allow claims to be tested, corrected, or rejected.
Multiple opinions don’t create verification; they only multiply subjectivity.

If ten people throw dice and each claims the numbers came from the spirit world, comparing their guesses doesn’t make the process objective — it just shows they all believe the same premise.

My disbelief isn’t the obstacle here; your framework would remain untestable even if everyone involved believed in spirits.
The issue isn’t faith — it’s methodology. A system that cannot fail a test can never pass one either.

Can you explain what you mean by peer review in structured divination?
A group of people can't come up with an idea. Ideas come from individuals before they are accepted by the general public whether in the spirit or material sector

Fenrir:
Resorting to condescension isn’t a substitute for explanation.
When someone’s argument collapses into “you’re too innocent to understand,” it usually means there’s nothing left to defend.

You claim to offer spiritual knowledge, yet recoil the moment that knowledge is questioned. That’s not enlightenment — that’s evasion dressed as superiority.

Real teachers don’t hide behind mystery or mock curiosity; they welcome scrutiny because truth remains intact under examination.

There is peer review or and quality control in the spirit sector.
Let's say you want to marry or start a business then you check the prospects with many spiritual counselors and compare the results. That is a form of peer review or rather quality control but how can I help you if you are an atheist who don't believe in such? That is the point

Fenrir:
You clearly don’t understand what “atheist” means — it isn’t someone who refuses to ask questions of the unseen; it’s someone who withholds belief until there is verifiable reason to grant it. That’s an intellectual position, not a spiritual disability.

If the only method of verification is to use the same untestable process, then nothing is ever truly verified — it is simply reaffirmed.
That is the problem with self-contained systems: they protect belief, not truth.

When you say “everyone must ask their own spirit,” that is the equivalent of saying “everyone must use my language to prove my point.” It ensures agreement, but eliminates independent evaluation.
A process that cannot be questioned from outside itself is not a discipline — it’s a closed loop.

In Ifa, diviners indeed consult the spiritual realm, but their readings are checked by peers, elders, and corpus. That communal cross-reference is what distinguishes a tradition from a personal cosmology.
You’ve removed that safeguard and replaced it with personal interpretation — and then attached a fee to it.

Calling that “non-material academics” doesn’t make it academic. It makes it a belief economy, where conviction is traded as knowledge.

Then I can't help you in your childlike innocence

Svoboda:
That's why they were banned by Russia years ago. If your brother ever concerts to JW, he's lost for good because their loyalty and commitment isn't to blood or matrimony but creed.

Very sad

Fenrir:
The distinction you’re drawing doesn’t change the underlying point. Whether you call it “a vision,” “spirit liaison,” or “interviewing your spirit,” the entire process occurs within your own internal experience. There is no method for independent verification, replication, or cross-examination by others.

When communication happens solely through one person’s unseen intermediaries, the information remains non-verifiable. It can be sincere, but it cannot be treated as evidence. That is the difference between experience and knowledge.

If your spirit “liaises with other spirits,” that still depends on you as the interpreter of what those spirits allegedly say. Therefore, the conclusions are yours — entirely mediated through your perception, language, and bias.

So, whether it’s called vision, inspiration, or interview, the category remains the same: private revelation.
And private revelation, while often meaningful to the individual, acquires authority over others only when presented by someone seeking belief rather than understanding — especially when money is involved for access to what are, in essence, personal interpretations.

The only way to verify is to ask your own spirit. This is non material or spirit academics. If you consult a diviner they will still have to ask their own spirits. You can even establish a divination system and ask your own spirit right away