Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-01-2013, 07:43 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(16-01-2013 07:33 PM)kineo Wrote:  
(16-01-2013 07:21 PM)Nappa Wrote:  Oh I'm sorry, I just thought that using my life was a good basis to judge the lives of others by. I am indeed one of several billion people, but this means that I am a common person, and that my common life is shared by others.

Also I WAS TRYING to give you an example on how a group of 16 could have come about in a restaurant, I certainly don't see you trying to support any of his claims. And I certainly don't see you trying to explain anything, where as I even if I am trying to make a possibility for the opposing argument to test it's strength, you are not doing the same. Instead all I've seen you people do is believe instead of trying to rationalize.

It was ME who tried explaining how a mother could be so happy after her child died, it WAS ME who tried explaining why there was such a large group in a restaurant. It was MOMS who tried explaining who the little girl was and it was MOMS who tried explaining that maybe the guy wasn't getting into character but rather instead he was just composing himself. The rest of your lot have done nothing for this debate.

I know I said I was done, but I just can't help myself... Also, I should have clarified, you are one of over 300 million Americans. You are right, that there are several billion people worldwide.

You're not trying to explain anything- you're using your own conjecture to come up with scenarios when you have no clue. You're writing a narrative based on your personal bias, and covering it in the camouflage of "rationalization". It is a rationalization, in a way. A rationalization for why it's suspicious to you. Nothing more.

You. Are. Not. Explaining. Shit. You're making up stories. Should I make up stories too? Would that make you happy? Should we have story time here? We can create our own personal fiction. It'll be fun! Then we can share our fiction, based on real people, with the world and people will think it's real! Wouldn't that be grand?

It is useless for me to try to rationalize with you. It will make no difference.

Why didn't the man call the cops? I don't know. Maybe the bus driver with the kids already did. Maybe his wife did. Maybe he did and he just didn't mention it because that is just a given. Maybe there were cops already arriving on the scene. Maybe he heard sirens. Maybe there are a thousand other plausible explanations, but the bottom line is. I don't know. And I don't need to. But you do... you need to have some fiction you think is solid enough to rely on... but boring fiction isn't enough for you. It's more attractive that they be trained liars.

He's put forth nothing but speculation and conjecture and calls it evidence of a conspiracy that most people find completely ridiculous. It's actually quite sad. Regarding the AC/ CNN vid you posted.....I hope that professor is formally reprimanded. I don't know if he can be fired for his 'opinion' but the university can certainly censure him.

Thank you so much kineo!


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
16-01-2013, 07:45 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2013 07:53 PM by Nappa.)
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(16-01-2013 07:37 PM)kineo Wrote:  
(16-01-2013 07:21 PM)Nappa Wrote:  Also I have no qualms about seeing dead people. If you have qualms about it maybe you should visit the bestgore website. That will toughen you up reeaaaal quick.

What is this shit? Somehow I need to be tougher? I need to be more like you? That's what you're implying. You are tough, I am not. Therefore I am lesser and should desire to be more like you. Again with this self-important nonsense.




No but seriously you do need to calm down.



(16-01-2013 07:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  The claim that Sandy Hook was a conspiracy is an extraordinary claim and therefor requires extraordinary evidence.

None has been provided.

From the amount of conspiracy theories out there it seems to be a rather ordinary claim. Besides even if I wanted to, I've already dubbed this a low level conspiracy, and I don't really waste effort on low level conspiracy theories. Though I do seem to be wasting a lot of time, it's time that I am enjoying. Discussing this with you.


(16-01-2013 07:21 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  He's put forth nothing but speculation and conjecture and calls it evidence of a conspiracy that most people find completely ridiculous. It's actually quite sad. Regarding the AC/ CNN vid you posted.....I hope that professor is formally reprimanded. I don't know if he can be fired for his 'opinion' but the university can certainly censure him.

[Image: tumblr_m19pb9lcCu1qfnnjfo2_400.gif]

Moms, I don't know where you live, but this here is 'merica. We can say whatever we want and believe whatever we want.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 07:57 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
No, I'm not mad. I am annoyed. Meanwhile, between posts, I am enjoying the rest of my life- watching Sherlock, eating cheese and crackers, kicking back in my seat, petting my dogs, getting ready to fire up Guild Wars 2 for a bit.

However, in dealing with someone as bullheaded as TheArcticSage and as arrogant as Egor on a topic of high sensitivity to the rest of the nation, I'm surprisingly reserved in my emotion and posts.

Most of the time I'd have a laugh and ignore you. But this time I felt compelled to address the absurdity you've put forth as if it were some sort of exceptional and insightful evidence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 08:15 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(16-01-2013 07:57 PM)kineo Wrote:  No, I'm not mad. I am annoyed. Meanwhile, between posts, I am enjoying the rest of my life- watching Sherlock, eating cheese and crackers, kicking back in my seat, petting my dogs, getting ready to fire up Guild Wars 2 for a bit.

However, in dealing with someone as bullheaded as TheArcticSage and as arrogant as Egor on a topic of high sensitivity to the rest of the nation, I'm surprisingly reserved in my emotion and posts.

Most of the time I'd have a laugh and ignore you. But this time I felt compelled to address the absurdity you've put forth as if it were some sort of exceptional and insightful evidence.
My lack of emotional understanding is one of my major setbacks. I can never see how something could be so sensitive to a person if it did not happen to them personally. The only thing I can compare it to is religion. When you attack a person's god they take it personally as if you were attacking them. I have been trying to understand the concept of perspective and the damaging effects emotion can have on rationalization but I don't know where exactly I should begin. Perhaps I should commit myself to finding subjects to study?

As for my 'evidence' I've told you before that if it outweighs what I am originally brought then my mind is willingly open to change. My mind has been changed, and now if you or the government are able to bring forth counter-evidence that outweighed my current knowledge my mind would be subject to change yet again. In the course of rationalization one can not stay like a rock in a river, but instead has to flow with the water of information.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 08:26 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(16-01-2013 08:15 PM)Nappa Wrote:  
(16-01-2013 07:57 PM)kineo Wrote:  No, I'm not mad. I am annoyed. Meanwhile, between posts, I am enjoying the rest of my life- watching Sherlock, eating cheese and crackers, kicking back in my seat, petting my dogs, getting ready to fire up Guild Wars 2 for a bit.

However, in dealing with someone as bullheaded as TheArcticSage and as arrogant as Egor on a topic of high sensitivity to the rest of the nation, I'm surprisingly reserved in my emotion and posts.

Most of the time I'd have a laugh and ignore you. But this time I felt compelled to address the absurdity you've put forth as if it were some sort of exceptional and insightful evidence.
My lack of emotional understanding is one of my major setbacks. I can never see how something could be so sensitive to a person if it did not happen to them personally. The only thing I can compare it to is religion. When you attack a person's god they take it personally as if you were attacking them. I have been trying to understand the concept of perspective and the damaging effects emotion can have on rationalization but I don't know where exactly I should begin. Perhaps I should commit myself to finding subjects to study?

As for my 'evidence' I've told you before that if it outweighs what I am originally brought then my mind is willingly open to change. My mind has been changed, and now if you or the government are able to bring forth counter-evidence that outweighed my current knowledge my mind would be subject to change yet again. In the course of rationalization one can not stay like a rock in a river, but instead has to flow with the water of information.
And you stay, like a rock in a river. Playing as though you float on a current.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 08:27 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(16-01-2013 08:26 PM)kineo Wrote:  
(16-01-2013 08:15 PM)Nappa Wrote:  My lack of emotional understanding is one of my major setbacks. I can never see how something could be so sensitive to a person if it did not happen to them personally. The only thing I can compare it to is religion. When you attack a person's god they take it personally as if you were attacking them. I have been trying to understand the concept of perspective and the damaging effects emotion can have on rationalization but I don't know where exactly I should begin. Perhaps I should commit myself to finding subjects to study?

As for my 'evidence' I've told you before that if it outweighs what I am originally brought then my mind is willingly open to change. My mind has been changed, and now if you or the government are able to bring forth counter-evidence that outweighed my current knowledge my mind would be subject to change yet again. In the course of rationalization one can not stay like a rock in a river, but instead has to flow with the water of information.
And you stay, like a rock in a river. Playing as though you float on a current.
You have but to change the flow in which direction the water goes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 08:32 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2013 08:37 PM by Momsurroundedbyboys.)
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(16-01-2013 07:45 PM)Nappa Wrote:  Moms, I don't know where you live, but this here is 'merica. We can say whatever we want and believe whatever we want.
You're right, this is America and yanno what? You do have the right to say whatever you wish and believe what you want....but don't forget I have the same rights as you, which includes calling your ideas or beliefs, ridiculous, specious and bat-shit crazy. I think we're done here. I know I am.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 08:40 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(16-01-2013 08:32 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  You're right, this is America and yanno what? You do have the right to say whatever you wish and believe what you want....but don't forget I have the same rights as you, which includes calling your ideas or beliefs, ridiculous, specious and bat-shit crazy. I think we're done here. I know I am.
According to president George Bush sr. we atheists aren't americans/patriots, and shouldn't be considered citizens, and therefore devoid of rights. All because of our beliefs. And yet here you condemn a blasphemer in the very same regards a christian would condemn a heretic.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 11:50 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(16-01-2013 07:39 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-01-2013 07:35 PM)Nappa Wrote:  I said an eye-witness testimony wasn't going to change my mind, which even afterwards I still watched your interview and it proceeded to make me quite peeved at how a mother can be so happy when she just so recently lost the life of her daughter. I then proceeded to explain why happiness is an irrational response to the loss of a loved one. The problem is you haven't provided me with any evidence! all you have are eye-witness testimonies and a few guns. That's ALL YOU HAVE. If we're going to believe things just like that then I should believe in Jesus Christ, Buddha, and Muhammad with all their divinities attached. Because they have a shit ton more witnesses and a shit ton more physical evidence.


The claim that Sandy Hook was a conspiracy is an extraordinary claim and therefor requires extraordinary evidence.

None has been provided.

That is the beauty of conspiracy theories.

They look at the media and say they don't trust media, so the more the media says the more the conspiracy nutjobs distrust what is being said. Then they turn around and quote-mine the (untrustworthy) media as proof of their theory; somehow they can disregard everything the media says except the points that they believe support their "proof".

They look at evidence and say they don't trust the evidence, it's all made up, so the more evidence the authorities "make up" the more the conspiracy nutjobs distrust the evidence. They then turn around and latch onto small, random bits of evidence, usually taken out of context and poorly reported or presented, as proof of their theory; somehow they can dismiss all evidence except the bits that they believe support their "proof".

Then they put on their tinfoil hats and ignore everything anyone says to try to steer them back toward reason.

You won't get any evidence, extraordinary or otherwise, but you will still get the extraordinary claims - the more extraordinary the claim is, the more they believe it.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Aseptic Skeptic's post
16-01-2013, 11:58 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(16-01-2013 11:50 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  
(16-01-2013 07:39 PM)Chas Wrote:  The claim that Sandy Hook was a conspiracy is an extraordinary claim and therefor requires extraordinary evidence.

None has been provided.

That is the beauty of conspiracy theories.

They look at the media and say they don't trust media, so the more the media says the more the conspiracy nutjobs distrust what is being said. Then they turn around and quote-mine the (untrustworthy) media as proof of their theory; somehow they can disregard everything the media says except the points that they believe support their "proof".

They look at evidence and say they don't trust the evidence, it's all made up, so the more evidence the authorities "make up" the more the conspiracy nutjobs distrust the evidence. They then turn around and latch onto small, random bits of evidence, usually taken out of context and poorly reported or presented, as proof of their theory; somehow they can dismiss all evidence except the bits that they believe support their "proof".

Then they put on their tinfoil hats and ignore everything anyone says to try to steer them back toward reason.

You won't get any evidence, extraordinary or otherwise, but you will still get the extraordinary claims - the more extraordinary the claim is, the more they believe it.
Pardon me sir, but I am not ignoring you. As for my 'small evidence' used to discredit this event, it is still more evidence than that which the government supplied me with. Pardon me twice sir, but I would not say that a story told by an eye-witness that changes over time can be just dismissed so lightly. If this were a murder trial, and the eye-witness said it was a different person than what he originally said. That's a pretty big consequential factor do you not agree? Pardon me thrice sir, but I would not say that a persons emotional state can be dismissed either, from laughing to crying in just mere seconds, or a permanent sunny disposition at the tragic loss of one of their children. These things can not be overlooked as easily as you would like them to be.

Perhaps sir, if you will excuse me for saying this, perhaps it is you who chooses to intentionally shrug off the things that don't add up? Maybe if you contemplated on them seriously you might find why such errors can lead a person to doubt the integrity of this event?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: