Welcome to PatsFans.com

Why Conspiracy Theories Suck

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Wildo7, May 19, 2009.

  1. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,845
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +31 / 2 / -0

    My Jersey:

    This is a really great article that sums up exactly why I can't stand conspiracy theories, specifically the 9/11 nonsense:

    3 Good Reasons (and 1 Bad One) Why I Don't Buy Into Your Conspiracy Theories | Media and Technology | AlterNet

  2. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,845
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +31 / 2 / -0

    My Jersey:

    1)

    2)

    3)

    4)

  3. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

  4. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,845
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +31 / 2 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Yes, an actual conspiracy involving actual suspects, evidence and facts (along with Occam's razor), not a wild and silly conspiracy theory cooked up after the fact in an attempt to validate somebody's fantasy

    Semantics anyway.
    Last edited: May 19, 2009
  5. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I would consider myself a skeptic, who doesn't discount any thoery, as long as the conclusion to the mystery is still up for debate.

    having said that, I think this person and most take liberties with the term "Conspiracy Theory" and pervert it.


    I'm very litteral when it comes to such things, a conspiracy theory, in my book, is the exact definition of the two words together...nothing more....nothing less.


    a Theory (Hypothesis yet to be proven , but open for debate) that one or more people CONSPIRED a specific event.

    who conspired to do what is the debate. So anyone who discounts a theory as being bogus without debate on the topic, is an idiot.




    you know...according to the old testament, the sun revolves around the Earth. Poeple who theorised that it was the other way around were told their theory was BOGUS. today we would call those people conspiracy theorists. Galileo Galilei...that kooky-dude!
    Last edited: May 19, 2009
  6. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Such things are not useful because they are generally not convincing or well-argued. Conspiracy theorists put the conclusions before the facts.
  7. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,845
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +31 / 2 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Well, I think you clearly understand the distinction, but if you'd like to substitute "vast, government conspiracy theory held by a minority of the population" for "conspiracy theory" then be my guest. You're harping on a very wide-ranging definition of the term in order to undermine what the author is talking about because you are a fan of conspiracy theories.

    And if there was anything worthwhile in "debating" such dumb fantasies then I'd be glad to talk about them, But there isn't, and the author articulates exactly why they are deleterious to the national discourse on substantive issues.

    No offense, HD, but people who think 9/11 was an inside job are going to believe that no matter what evidence they are shown, because they want to believe it. The second it happened they decided that that's what they were going to believe and selected small snippets of "evidence" in order to confirm their entertaining story.



    No, we'd call them scientists because they discovered something about our planet through careful observation and a proponderance of evidence. And we'd call the people who denied it ignorant, because they didn't know. Regardless, that analogy doesn't strain common sense to the lengths that 9/11 "truthers" do.
  8. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,845
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +31 / 2 / -0

    My Jersey:

    They're a lot like religion in that regard.
  9. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

  10. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    no surprise here, but I'll be chiming in on this in more detail when my work duties are finished...

    i respect your views, Wildo, and I will keep this cordial... but i have three questions for you, Wildo, before I pontificate:

    1) do you believe the only official investigation into 9/11 was legit and uncompromising?

    2) do you recognize the profound difference between made it happen on purpose theory, and let it happen on purpose theory?

    3) was precedent not set long ago (in terms of sinister ambition and capacity) considering events like Tuskeegee, Northwoods, Tonkin, the Maine, and a number of other historicals?
    Last edited: May 19, 2009
  11. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you there. The "theories" I subscribe to arrive at a conclusion long after sorting out facts.
  12. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,527
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    If you've never seen the full episode, I highly recommend it :)

    Plug These Leaks - Clips - South Park Studios


    Holy Diver: the burden of proof is on the theorist, full stop. You don't say "witches and goblins cast an evil spell, you can't prove otherwise," and expect it to be taken seriously. Similarly, you don't posit a wild-azz theory and tell people that until they can disprove it, it stands as fact.

    PFnV
  13. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    True...

    But you also don't absorb factual evidence in exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y and Z that shows a new, uncompromised investigation (with subpoenas this time) is warranted, yet then just keep parroting "i'm not convinced!! show me more, show me more!!!" ... At least, you can't do so without appearing profoundly obtuse.
    Last edited: May 19, 2009
  14. Leave No Doubt

    Leave No Doubt PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Exactly. And sometimes it takes a long time for these facts to emerge and be backed up by some evidence. Plus history itself will often back up at least the fact that world leaders don't always have the agenda we'd like them to have.

    Just the word conspiracy has such a negative connotation in and of itself; I don't consider alternate 9/11 thinkers to be conspiratorial anymore anyway, varying degrees of that thinking is way too prevalent now.


    There was a time when people who thought the govt was watching them or listening to them or trying to poison them were considered insane. Now maybe not so much:confused2:
  15. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,527
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    I would have no problem with the "9/11 truthers" getting another bite at the commission apple, except that it dignifies a lot of pretty specious speculation with a response. I mean, a variety of "9/11 truther" points have been publicly and pretty convincingly debunked. So we could raise debunking to the visibility level of the original commission, but that simply perpetuates the bunk. You won't like that report either, rinse, repeat.

    If, for instance, one is convinced that the twin towers could only vertically pancake with a controlled demolition, despite a perfectly plausible "theory", publicly available via thousands of hours of footage from news networks, personal videos, etc., that said towers were hit by freaking passenger jets, and has no desire to believe otherwise despite quite public explanations, what is the point of demanding that government sources convene a commission and issue more quite public explanations coming to pretty much the same conclusion?

    I think the point of demanding "do-overs" is that people want to believe 9/11 was a "false flag" operation, and it will be more likely that others will believe this, if another commission is convened to do the same thing the first one did. To the conspiracy theorists, it will mean "ooooh there's enough evidence that they had to open up another commission... where there's smoke, there's not just fire, there's government-planted explosives etc etc etc."

    Me, I'm moving on.

    PFnV
  16. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    You seem to be conflating Loose Change "inside job" theory with "let it happen" theory. The latter is the honest truth movement. Unfortunately, the irrational side of 9/11 Truth has effectively muddied the waters.

    What we want is full subpoena power, with Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld questioned separately and under oath. We want NORAD to be asked the relevant questions of who was in charge that day and how common it is for simultaneous war game simulations to be effect in one morning, leaving the entire northeast sector unguarded. We want a commission directed by someone OTHER than a Bush WH policy writer for the Iraq occupation. We also don't want commissioners fired who demand those questions be asked (Cleeland).

    I don't believe that is too much to ask, and any uncorrupted investigation would have answered those questions the first time. It also wouldn't have made a book deal and narrative out of the report, hoping to pin it all on Bill Clinton.
    Last edited: May 19, 2009
  17. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,527
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    Eh, "let it happeners" would be fine, but really --once again -- they have only questions, and again, there will be answers the "Let it happeners" won't like. It would end up being an exercise in declaring "Ha ha Neocons, you lost, now you have to look uncomfortable on TV."

    I really don't think you'll turn up a smoking gun e-mail or memo saying "What the hell, let's let these guys through. It would be cool to get a patriotic blank check of that size."

    And of course, the wacky "inside jobbers" will be along for the ride -- or, the "inside jobbers" will label the "let it happeners" as "in on it," per the OP... and we'll need Commission Number 3.

    Just seems like an incredibly distracting dead-end.

    PFnV
  18. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ~~~Out of Order~~~ PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    36,491
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +23 / 1 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #87 Jersey
  19. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    .


    Huh, who'd a thunk: I always thought it was 'cause conspiracy theorists sucked. ;)



    As you were.

    :singing:

    //
  20. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,742
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    If they were capable of planting enough explosives in each tower and rigging them and wiring them etc, why weren't they able to plant some WMD's in Iraq? I don't know anything about shooting buildings besides what I've seen on TV; but TV presents the process as days or even weeks long and very obvious to anyone walking through the building, while I have to assume burying some bombs in the desert would be much easier to keep secret. I can't see how they'd be capable of the first act without being capable of the second.
    Last edited: May 20, 2009
  21. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:



    :steamed:

    Now why'd you go and spoil a really great conspiracy theory!!!!!! You bahstid!!! You no good, slimy, low-down, right-wing, bought-off, shuck-and-jive weaseling little minion of Geo W. Bush and his entire family, lineage going back to 1395!!!! You sc*mbag!!!!!


    :D.........................:D................................:D


    :singing:

    //
  22. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I don't believe in planted explosives in the towers... however...

    Google "WMD plant Iraq" and choose from a vast array of indy media reports that suggest they DID try to do just that...

    portland imc - 2003.06.21 - CIA and DOD Attempted To Plant WMD In Iraq

    or, better:

    Sources say the Office of Special Plans deployed several extra-legal and unapproved task force missions prior to and after combat operations began. Under the supervision of Doug Feith, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, the OSP ran largely unsupervised and operated in secrecy. According to those familiar with the plans, the off-book missions were approved by Feith -- himself currently under investigation by the FBI for allegations of passing US secrets to Israel and Iran -- Cambone and then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley.

    <snip>

    During the summer of 2003 through the fall of 2003, the team, whose members who were not named by sources, is said to have interviewed many Iraqi intelligence and former intelligence officers. The UN source says that the political problem discussed had more to do with solving the lack of WMD than anything else.

    “They come in the summer of 2003, bringing in Iraqis, interviewing them,” the UN source said. “Then they start talking about WMD and they say to that ‘Our President is in trouble. He went to war saying there are WMD and there are no WMD. What can we do? Can you help us?’”

    The source said intelligence officers understood quickly what they were being asked to do and that the assumption was they were being asked to provide WMD in order for coalition forces to find them.

    more...
    The Raw Story | Secretive military unit sought to solve political WMD concerns prior to securing Iraq, intelligence sources say
    Last edited: May 21, 2009
  23. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Do yourself a favor... "Stop talking for a while... Take the next couple of plays off, Champ"
  24. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:



    If I do that I'll pull a Papi and hit a dinger out in your bleacher seat. Might land in your lap ... then bounce away for some 12-year old to take it from you. :eek:


    :D

    I'm having too much fun to leave now, dude. But nice try!!!

    :yeeha:...................:yeeha:........................................:yeeha:

    //
  25. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,582
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    That clearly suggests then that the administartion was indeed suprised not to find any WMD's doesn't it?
    Last edited: May 21, 2009
  26. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:



    "Sources" say .... "he said, she said"..... Dr. Z and Brooklyn Decker...... What is this, Rickey Lake??? Give it a rest, already.

    The theme to Twilight Zone stays alive!


    //
  27. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    But that's the gospel truth when that kind of language comes from the Washington TImes, isn't it hypocrite?

    Run along, clergyman.... Rational adults are talking geopolitics and energy now. Isn't there a religion thread somewhere for your to pontificate about? Maybe regarding child molestation in Dublin churches?
    Last edited: May 21, 2009
  28. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:


    What's your problem?? You are one sick motherf*cker.

    You're the biggest double-speaker I've ever seen: you demand sources and proof from anyone who challanges what you say, but when YOU try to back up YOUR wild-ass hysteria the best you can come up with are "unnamed sources"..... "he said......".... "she said....." ... "reliable (???) sources said.....". WTH. We're talking about YOUR story here, NOT any Washington Times story. If you are so much better than the WT then let's see the pudding, dude.


    Other than that, you're a GREAT journalist!!!! :D


    //
  29. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    The personal attacks continue without consequence.. there are no limits or rules for the Fogman.. unbelievable..
  30. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:


    I can give as well as I can take. If you can't handle it, just stay home and don't start shiit.

    Nobody needs your hypocritical religious bigotry, anyway.


    //

Share This Page