Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-06-2013, 06:56 PM
Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
The hijackers passport surfing intact enough to be identified laying on the street sounds like the JFK magic bullet bullshit. The goal in pulling a 9-11 off is t to convince everyone, it is to convince enough people along with these people being soldiers of belief, attacking and ridiculing any story that goes against the official version.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2013, 08:59 PM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
Passport surfing...ooooh that sounds fun.

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude. Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 11:04 AM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(31-05-2013 10:08 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  The point is that I don't have to determine that it's correct or incorrect. Again, I argue within the constraints of reality and no human has ever been known to jump over about five feet from a flat footed position. To assume that one human all of a sudden can jump 800% higher than the very best athletes on the planet would be as absurd as putting power lines on the moon.
...
No. It requires knowing that humans can't jump 40 feet high. A dog can catch a frisbee in flight but we don't assume he understands the physics principles in play when he times his jump just right.
...
No. All we have to know is that humans can't jump forty feet high. We don't have to know the biology and physics of why humans can't jump forty feet high.

In other words - you have quite a bit of prior knowledge about how these types of situations work. I think the difference is that for a man jumping the prior knowledge is so utterly fundamental (when I said physics I wasn't talking biomechanics necessary to impel the com! just a toddler's understanding of how objects move and how people move, but that's still physics) that it's not comparable to a more complicated scenario.

It's also that
"How did you get up there?"
"I jumped."
"No, you didn't."
stops there. If it matters to you in any way that he's up there, then surely it's of at least some interest to consider how and why?

Quote:I'm not interested in returning to the minutia of the Pentagon crash. I merely pointed out that one doesn't have to provide an alternate explanation of an event in order to denounce a claimed explanation.

And the reason why I won't comment on the details of the event is that they are inconsequential. We know for a fact that the US federal government has been caught in thousands of lies over the past century or so. We also know that the military purposefully puts out false information as a part of its war games. So who gives a shit, really? So what if we find out the government orchestrated the entire chain of events on 911?

Nothing will change. There will just be a new group of sociopaths elected in by people who think "their" guys will do it right. And... their guys will go on lying, stealing and cheating just like the ones before them. The only difference will be a letter after their names. Oh and, the color of their lapel buttons. Oh wait... and the kind of critter on their lapel buttons too. Tongue

So you're enough of a cynic that you don't care why the man's 40 feet in the air. That's fine, but...

Even that's self-contradictory. You say 'the US federal government' (if 20-odd administrations with massively varying size and scope of powers and technologies available are a singular 'they', and the military and civil service with only slightly less turnover) been caught out lying literally thousands? I'm not an American, so maybe it's just things I haven't heard of, but the examples of collusion or illegal activities I do know of are the ones where there are, y'know, mountains of evidence came to light and it was acknowledged. A successful conspiracy is by definition the one we don't know about (more on that in just a bit).

(01-06-2013 06:56 PM)I and I Wrote:  The goal in pulling a 9-11 off is t to convince everyone, it is to convince enough people along with these people being soldiers of belief, attacking and ridiculing any story that goes against the official version.

No, because that's still stupid. "We did it to make some people believe our story" isn't an answer. FFS, why would they want people to believe their story? What makes it worth the risk of failure and/or discovery?


See, the thing with conspiracy theories is that if you buy it then you've got to simultaneous believe that governments (or other powers that be as applicable) have vastly more power and influence than is superficially apparent - AND YET uncovering their actions is a trivial matter for any dude with an internet connection and some spare time. Right.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 11:26 AM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(04-06-2013 11:04 AM)cjlr Wrote:  So you're enough of a cynic that you don't care why the man's 40 feet in the air. That's fine, but...

Even that's self-contradictory. You say 'the US federal government' (if 20-odd administrations with massively varying size and scope of powers and technologies available are a singular 'they', and the military and civil service with only slightly less turnover) been caught out lying literally thousands? I'm not an American, so maybe it's just things I haven't heard of, but the examples of collusion or illegal activities I do know of are the ones where there are, y'know, mountains of evidence came to light and it was acknowledged. A successful conspiracy is by definition the one we don't know about (more on that in just a bit).

What contradiction?

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
04-06-2013, 12:06 PM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(04-06-2013 11:26 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  What contradiction?

They keep secrets and are found out.

It suggests they're either pretty bad at keeping things secret, or that the number of unexposed actions dwarfs the number of exposed actions. One of these seems likelier than the other...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 01:08 PM
Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(04-06-2013 11:04 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(31-05-2013 10:08 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  The point is that I don't have to determine that it's correct or incorrect. Again, I argue within the constraints of reality and no human has ever been known to jump over about five feet from a flat footed position. To assume that one human all of a sudden can jump 800% higher than the very best athletes on the planet would be as absurd as putting power lines on the moon.
...
No. It requires knowing that humans can't jump 40 feet high. A dog can catch a frisbee in flight but we don't assume he understands the physics principles in play when he times his jump just right.
...
No. All we have to know is that humans can't jump forty feet high. We don't have to know the biology and physics of why humans can't jump forty feet high.

In other words - you have quite a bit of prior knowledge about how these types of situations work. I think the difference is that for a man jumping the prior knowledge is so utterly fundamental (when I said physics I wasn't talking biomechanics necessary to impel the com! just a toddler's understanding of how objects move and how people move, but that's still physics) that it's not comparable to a more complicated scenario.

It's also that
"How did you get up there?"
"I jumped."
"No, you didn't."
stops there. If it matters to you in any way that he's up there, then surely it's of at least some interest to consider how and why?

Quote:I'm not interested in returning to the minutia of the Pentagon crash. I merely pointed out that one doesn't have to provide an alternate explanation of an event in order to denounce a claimed explanation.

And the reason why I won't comment on the details of the event is that they are inconsequential. We know for a fact that the US federal government has been caught in thousands of lies over the past century or so. We also know that the military purposefully puts out false information as a part of its war games. So who gives a shit, really? So what if we find out the government orchestrated the entire chain of events on 911?

Nothing will change. There will just be a new group of sociopaths elected in by people who think "their" guys will do it right. And... their guys will go on lying, stealing and cheating just like the ones before them. The only difference will be a letter after their names. Oh and, the color of their lapel buttons. Oh wait... and the kind of critter on their lapel buttons too. Tongue

So you're enough of a cynic that you don't care why the man's 40 feet in the air. That's fine, but...

Even that's self-contradictory. You say 'the US federal government' (if 20-odd administrations with massively varying size and scope of powers and technologies available are a singular 'they', and the military and civil service with only slightly less turnover) been caught out lying literally thousands? I'm not an American, so maybe it's just things I haven't heard of, but the examples of collusion or illegal activities I do know of are the ones where there are, y'know, mountains of evidence came to light and it was acknowledged. A successful conspiracy is by definition the one we don't know about (more on that in just a bit).

(01-06-2013 06:56 PM)I and I Wrote:  The goal in pulling a 9-11 off is t to convince everyone, it is to convince enough people along with these people being soldiers of belief, attacking and ridiculing any story that goes against the official version.

No, because that's still stupid. "We did it to make some people believe our story" isn't an answer. FFS, why would they want people to believe their story? What makes it worth the risk of failure and/or discovery?


See, the thing with conspiracy theories is that if you buy it then you've got to simultaneous believe that governments (or other powers that be as applicable) have vastly more power and influence than is superficially apparent - AND YET uncovering their actions is a trivial matter for any dude with an internet connection and some spare time. Right.

What would you call a conspiracy theory? I ask because most people use examples of anti govt theories, implying that pro-government stories aren't and never ate conspiracy theories. Example: during the lead up to the Iraq war certain government officials colluded and coordinated a false idea that Hussein had wmd's. do you believe in that conspiracy theory?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 02:03 PM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(04-06-2013 01:08 PM)I and I Wrote:  What would you call a conspiracy theory? I ask because most people use examples of anti govt theories, implying that pro-government stories aren't and never ate conspiracy theories.

Ascribing an event or course of events to the coordinated and concealed actions of a small number of people. That is, a secret plot to influence things. I'm not entirely sure how you're using pro- and anti-government here; do you mean, in support of or against publically admitted explanations?

Quote:Example: during the lead up to the Iraq war certain government officials colluded and coordinated a false idea that Hussein had wmd's. Do you believe in that conspiracy theory?

That the Bush administration's claims of Iraqi WMDs were wrong is obvious (especially in hindsight!). That that was the avowed official story, and that there was a lot of pressure from above to come up with the 'right' evidence, well, that's true too. But do I think it was a conspiracy?

No, because I don't think it was a deliberate effort to mislead people. I think a combination of factors caused people to misinterpret things - a true convinction in some of the higher-ups and a little of the old institutional blindness for those under them (statements going from "possible" to "likely" to "near-certain" as they work their way up...). I think those beliefs were genuine but unfounded. And that's not a conspiracy, it's just plain old incompetence Big Grin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 02:51 PM
Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(04-06-2013 02:03 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(04-06-2013 01:08 PM)I and I Wrote:  What would you call a conspiracy theory? I ask because most people use examples of anti govt theories, implying that pro-government stories aren't and never ate conspiracy theories.

Ascribing an event or course of events to the coordinated and concealed actions of a small number of people. That is, a secret plot to influence things. I'm not entirely sure how you're using pro- and anti-government here; do you mean, in support of or against publically admitted explanations?

Quote:Example: during the lead up to the Iraq war certain government officials colluded and coordinated a false idea that Hussein had wmd's. Do you believe in that conspiracy theory?

That the Bush administration's claims of Iraqi WMDs were wrong is obvious (especially in hindsight!). That that was the avowed official story, and that there was a lot of pressure from above to come up with the 'right' evidence, well, that's true too. But do I think it was a conspiracy?

No, because I don't think it was a deliberate effort to mislead people. I think a combination of factors caused people to misinterpret things - a true convinction in some of the higher-ups and a little of the old institutional blindness for those under them (statements going from "possible" to "likely" to "near-certain" as they work their way up...). I think those beliefs were genuine but unfounded. And that's not a conspiracy, it's just plain old incompetence Big Grin.

Do you know that I once said that some people here believe exactly what you said about the lead up to the Iraq war and some people here thought I was being mean. The idea that the bush government didnt coordinate a misinformation campaign to get people to support a war is quite idiotic to believe at this point. But I will remember that you said what you said so I can show others here that there are people here that believe what you do about the lead up to the Iraq war.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 02:59 PM
RE: Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(04-06-2013 02:51 PM)I and I Wrote:  The idea that the Bush government didn't coordinate a misinformation campaign to get people to support a war is quite idiotic to believe at this point.
It's not misinformation if they bought into it. That's the distinction.

The incompetent joke of a "reconstruction" only makes sense in light of that. The alternative is a master plan no more sophisticated than 1) invade 2) ??? 3) profit. I'd credit anyone who could successfully manage a deliberate and wide-ranging misinformation campaign with more planning sense than the underwear gnomes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 04:13 PM
Believing in something without needing evidence.....conspiracy theory?
(04-06-2013 02:59 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(04-06-2013 02:51 PM)I and I Wrote:  The idea that the Bush government didn't coordinate a misinformation campaign to get people to support a war is quite idiotic to believe at this point.
It's not misinformation if they bought into it. That's the distinction.

The incompetent joke of a "reconstruction" only makes sense in light of that. The alternative is a master plan no more sophisticated than 1) invade 2) ??? 3) profit. I'd credit anyone who could successfully manage a deliberate and wide-ranging misinformation campaign with more planning sense than the underwear gnomes.

What makes you think they really believed what they were saying? And like I said, people here didnt believe me when I said that people here believe what you believe about the build up to the Iraq war.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: