Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-05-2013, 10:38 PM
Re: RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(19-05-2013 02:14 AM)DanDare Wrote:  
(15-05-2013 12:31 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  What would the purpose of releasing footage of something be? Its not the job of them to convince or give evidence to people of something. That's a waste if time because obviously there will always be a chuck of people disbelieving ideas. When does it end to show all evidence that can be found. It serves no benefit.

Realistically, ClydeLee, a government having footage of such an event should by default release that footage for the sake of transparency. The only time they would legally be permitted to withhold that footage is if it would endanger national security or, if other reasonable evidence was already available, it would unnecessarily impinge on someones rights.

Why would you say transparency should be default? Realistically.. When is that ever an organizational default. It does nothing for aiding a nation.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2013, 10:43 PM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(28-05-2013 10:38 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(19-05-2013 02:14 AM)DanDare Wrote:  Realistically, ClydeLee, a government having footage of such an event should by default release that footage for the sake of transparency. The only time they would legally be permitted to withhold that footage is if it would endanger national security or, if other reasonable evidence was already available, it would unnecessarily impinge on someones rights.

Why would you say transparency should be default? Realistically.. When is that ever an organizational default. It does nothing for aiding a nation.

I guess one's position on transparency depends on whether you value human life more than you do a colored rag on a pole.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2013, 10:49 PM
Re: RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(28-05-2013 10:43 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(28-05-2013 10:38 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Why would you say transparency should be default? Realistically.. When is that ever an organizational default. It does nothing for aiding a nation.

I guess one's position on transparency depends on whether you value human life more than you do a colored rag on a pole.

If you're talking ideally, that's fine and dandy..

When it comes to things realistically as was said, what do organizations get by making transparency default?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2013, 10:59 PM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(28-05-2013 10:49 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(28-05-2013 10:43 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  I guess one's position on transparency depends on whether you value human life more than you do a colored rag on a pole.

If you're talking ideally, that's fine and dandy..

When it comes to things realistically as was said, what do organizations get by making transparency default?

They get the opportunity to walk around no looking over their shoulders. But you moved the goal post. Your original word was nation, not organization.

Never the less, the answer is the same.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2013, 11:09 PM (This post was last modified: 28-05-2013 11:12 PM by ClydeLee.)
Re: RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(28-05-2013 10:59 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(28-05-2013 10:49 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  If you're talking ideally, that's fine and dandy..

When it comes to things realistically as was said, what do organizations get by making transparency default?

They get the opportunity to walk around no looking over their shoulders. But you moved the goal post. Your original word was nation, not organization.

Never the less, the answer is the same.

I said when is that ever an organizational default... In my post before your first to mine.. How am I moving the goalpost? My point is it implies to government or any business/group of power.

So you believe they would have less fear. I don't get that if that's your point. They have info exposed to those opposing them unnecessarily.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2013, 11:22 PM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(28-05-2013 11:09 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(28-05-2013 10:59 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  They get the opportunity to walk around no looking over their shoulders. But you moved the goal post. Your original word was nation, not organization.

Never the less, the answer is the same.

I said when is that ever an organizational default... In my post before your first to mine.. How am I moving the goalpost? My point is it implies to government or any business/group of power.

So you believe they would have less fear. I don't get that if that's your point. They have info exposed to those opposing them unnecessarily.

This is the operative part of the text I responded to: "It does nothing for aiding a nation." What came before was vague and non descriptive, which is (I presume) why you added the part I quoted. If you meant all organizations, that could have been redacted down to one short sentence.

Perhaps I read it wrong. But again, in either case it doesn't matter.

Also, who has power over others, if not nation states? Can the guy who owns the gym you attend throw you in a cage for not renewing your contract? Can your insurance company force you to sign up for another year?

Will they pull out a gun and try?

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-05-2013, 06:44 AM
Re: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
It's not about who had power, they both do. Of course there's differences if degrees it's not a matter if extremities.

But if there was a gym that locked members in the cages. Transparency is going to hurt their business, the gym down the street(that may do the same but don't announce it or don't do it) is likely to get more members.

As people we should desire and demand transparency from governments and business but from their perspective. It's not something that should be default.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2013, 04:01 AM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
Still no explanation as to why people believe a plane hit the pentagon?

Off topic, in one second of film containst 24 frames, that is 24 pictures for each second. How many frames are in the video with the blur hitting the pentagon? I know I know, it's the camera that was used by the convenient store across the street. Of course they are shitty, which begs the question why are there no Pentagon camera angles released?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2013, 07:45 AM
Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(31-05-2013 04:01 AM)I and I Wrote:  Still no explanation as to why people believe a plane hit the pentagon?

Off topic, in one second of film containst 24 frames, that is 24 pictures for each second. How many frames are in the video with the blur hitting the pentagon? I know I know, it's the camera that was used by the convenient store across the street. Of course they are shitty, which begs the question why are there no Pentagon camera angles released?

I have no idea. Tell us, won't you?

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2013, 09:56 AM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(31-05-2013 04:01 AM)I and I Wrote:  Still no explanation as to why people believe a plane hit the pentagon?

Off topic, in one second of film containst 24 frames, that is 24 pictures for each second. How many frames are in the video with the blur hitting the pentagon? I know I know, it's the camera that was used by the convenient store across the street. Of course they are shitty, which begs the question why are there no Pentagon camera angles released?
Maybe they believe the eyewitnesses, the debris, and the coincidence with other hijacked aircraft attacks. All of which was no doubt planted evidence involving the coordination of thousands of people and would have been unnecessary anyway since the WTC attacks alone would have precipitated the same American response. No?

What was it, then?

If it wasn't AA flight 77 then what happened to the damn plane?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: