About the idea that conspiracies are all nonsense?

[josephpalazzo]

It is fine to dismiss the 9/11 conspiracy theories based on lack of evidence. No problem with that. Some scientists will dismiss the multiverse idea because the evidence is just not there. I don't understand this stuff very well, but from what I do know, I would say there's a decent chance the multiverse idea is correct, and there's a decent chance the idea is not correct. Other scientists, despite the lack of evidence, will talk about what may be the case. They will say there may be a multiverse, or other dimensions, or extra-terrestrials, or that we may be living in a computer simulation. Should we completely dismiss these ideas out of hand because of a lack of evidence?

Many scientists study these things as toy models. IOW, it's a what-if scenario to gain insights into a simpler problem. There may be some scientists who believe in that stuff but none of them will ever win the Nobel prize in physics. OTOH, CTers are not proposing a toy model, but really believe that the government is behind 9/11.

I value evidence just like anyone else, but evidence is not all there is.

What else is there besides evidence? Your gut feelings? But how reliable is that? You might as well flip a coin. The probability of you being right by flipping a coin is the same as gut feeling could be right.

I understand that it's MSNBC and others job to push the White House's line they want to be pushed, but I really have a problem with people like Rachel Maddow calling the 9/11 questions and questioners "dangerous". Some of the parents of victims of the WTC collapse ripped Rachel Maddow a new one for demonizing them for having questions, when their children were murdered. Their freaking children were murdered, and Rachel Maddow calls them dangerous for asking questions about the murder of their sons and daughters? These parents have the right to ask questions

I don't know if she demonized anyone. She did remind that the 9/11 commission report as facts.

the White House who dictates what MSNBC and Maddow are to say.

Where's the evidence for that?

[Gerard]

The fact that a scenario you can think of is possible, doesn't provide us with any useful information whatsoever.

Gerard

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Help me out, who is that says ALL conspiracies are anything, please? Ray Bolger?

[Baruch]

The fact that a scenario you can think of is possible, doesn't provide us with any useful information whatsoever.

Gerard

Just like the Zapruder film proves nothing about the Kennedy assassination.  The one or more assassins were out of frame, and the grassy knoll was too fuzzy.

And of course people who want to believe everything the government says are useful ...

[Gerard]

I understand that it's MSNBC and others job to push the White House's line they want to be pushed, but I really have a problem with people like Rachel Maddow calling the 9/11 questions and questioners "dangerous". Some of the parents of victims of the WTC collapse ripped Rachel Maddow a new one for demonizing them for having questions, when their children were murdered. Their freaking children were murdered

It is the task of professional news organizations to point out to people what is substantiated and what is bullshit. It is not their task to just tell people what they like to hear. Not even parents of victims.

Gerard

[Baruch]

It is the task of professional news organizations to point out to people what is substantiated and what is bullshit. It is not their task to just tell people what they like to hear. Not even parents of victims.

Gerard

The professional journalists are complete Pravda bullshitters ... including Walter Cronkite.  During WW II, the Cold War, and since the USSR had a coronary ... all journalists are processed by the FBI and CIA to say only the things that the government wants them to say.  The free press only exists for people who have a press to print with.  This is pre-Internet ... to be a professional journalist, you had to be vetted and part of an official news organization (all of which are fellow travelers of their respective national governments).  A press pass stuck into the ribbon around your fedora.

We still have such people, in the age of the gonzo journalism of the Internet ... and they are to journalism what the DINOs and RINOs are to politics.  Some are more disruptive like Drudge, who is the Trump of the Internet.  Just ask to be invited to the next White House press conference ... just because of how wonderful you are.  Back in the day when there were only three TV stations ... this was easy.  Now the media is flooded with government trolls stirring everything up, so that people don't know what to believe.  This prevents public consensus.

[Johan]

I value evidence just like anyone else, but evidence is not all there is.

Yes it is. See my earlier post about my neighbor. Women get raped all the time. My neighbor has a penis and I don't know for certain where he was last week. Therefore my neighbor could be a rapist and we need to question this.

See how batshit crazy that is? That is what you're suggesting. 'Well I know there's no evidence of what I'm saying could have happened, but you shouldn't tell me STFU just questioning it.' Yes we should. You either have evidence or you can STFU. And why do I say this? Because otherwise we end up in a world where every fucking jackwagon who is taking up space and using up oxygen can just make any kind crazy claim he or she wants with no consequences. For instance:

These parents have the right to ask questions, and calling them dangerous is beyond a cheap shot/ low blow by the White House who dictates what MSNBC and Maddow are to say.

Ahem... Evidence or STFU.

[FaithIsFilth]

Ahem... Evidence or STFU.

You can't be serious right now. You're serious, aren't you? Holy shit. You are actually being serious right now, aren't you? Are you? I find it hard to believe you could really be that blind. Are you shitting me?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwZPYgBjZGw

In b4 "That's not evidence. He doesn't know how tv news works"

[Baruch]

Most people swallow both the red and blue pills.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

Most people swallow both the red and blue pills.

When someone mentions that, all I can think of is the shit that comes out of /r/theredpill. I know it's originally from The Matrix, but that community has ruined the analogy for me.

[Johan]

You can't be serious right now. You're serious, aren't you? Holy shit. You are actually being serious right now, aren't you? Are you? I find it hard to believe you could really be that blind. Are you shitting me?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwZPYgBjZGw

In b4 "That's not evidence. He doesn't know how tv news works"

Nice. Reminds me of the all those theists who come here and present their evidence that god exists by posting this:



And I will now tell you the same thing I tell them. I see absolutely no point in wasting any more of my time engaging in a discussion of evidence with a person who clearly hasn't the slightest grasp what the word evidence really means. Nice try kiddo. Better luck next time.

[Baruch]

When someone mentions that, all I can think of is the shit that comes out of /r/theredpill. I know it's originally from The Matrix, but that community has ruined the analogy for me.

Another version .. people who go retard, shouldn't go full retard!

[Baruch]

Funny Christian saying about evidence ...

If G-d became incarnate and walked among us, not only would we not believe in him, we would crucify him.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

People believe used car salesmen, so this isn't all that crazy.

[Hakurei Reimu]

Conspiracy theorists would do well to keep their conspiracies within realistic limits. It is simply not realistic that any building in the WTC fell except by fire. Bush the Stupid wanted his war with Iraq (it was no secret) and didn't need a specific reason to attack Iraq, and if it was Iraq he wanted to attack, why use Al Qaeda (Afghanistan-based terrorist cell with a beef against Saddam) as his false flag? Asking why we couldn't defend ourselves against a surprise attack would also prompt the same question of every other successful surprise attack against an unprepared nation, not just the US, but in the entire history of war.

To attribute any of this to a concerted malice that is the grand conspiracy theory rather than the summation of the usual bog-standard little incompetencies and oversights over many people is really quite incredible. Hence the maxim, "Never attribute to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity." We're simply not as smart as we think we are. The upshot is that conspiracies have always been revealed sooner or later, because people are stupid.