Post by anony 4 on Sept 20, 2016 16:20:42 GMT
1) Actually that's incorrect. I'm not a conspiracy theorist by any margin. And I am enough of a thinker to know that conspiracy theories are real. Absolutely real.
Then you simply dont know what a conspiracy theorist is.
A conspiracy theorist is someone who theorises about conspiracies. Not whatever nutcase you imagine when someone uses the term.
===
There have been several in the past for sure. But that doesn't mean everything is a conspiracy.
I never suggested everything is a conspiracy, and it isnt necessary for someone to beleive everything is a conspiracy to be a conspiracy theorist.
===
2) Not everyone with a thinking mind is a conspiracy theorist. As a matter of fact, I would hold the exact opposite to be true.
Thats only because you dont even know what conspiracy theorist means.
===
Anybody who actually knows how to think won't be looking at everything as a conspiracy
Once again, looking at everything as a conspiracy is not the threshold for being a conspiracy theorist.
Theorising about conspiracies is.
===
and will know how to decipher what real evidence is and isn't.
Socrates highlighted centuries ago that reality is not knowable. Noone can discern reality. Just credibility.
And people who know how to think have worked this out for themselves.
===
3) Most importantly, the vast majority of conspiracy theories fail scientific peer review time and time again and their supporters fail to oust that very peer review time and time again as well.
I've never studied any conspiracy theory beyond 9/11 , 7/7 and JFK. and of those, only 9/11 attempted peer review to my knowledge. And it passed it. To say vast majority, you must have access to all the peer review attempts for every conspiracy theory ever. Where did you find them?
Despite the fact that 9/11 conspiracy passed peer review, what makes peer review so reliable? Qualified experts are known to commonly lie for whoever is paying them and the US government has vast control over wealth, finance and power.
4) Although many conspiracy theorists actually are college educated people, even they fail to prove their cases and almost always make their assertions on bad evidence, on absence of evidence, and on fabricated evidence.
Since you dont know what a conspiracy theorist is, lets just stick to 911 arguments. David Chandler and Neils Harrit use mutually corroborated publicily avaibale video footage and chemicals collected at the scene. Both of these are real evidence. And proves their cases. Eyewitnesses Barry Jennings, WIlliam Rodriguez, Anthony Saltalamacchia, among many many others, all witnessed explosions in places that cannot have been caused by planes. They provide seperate proof.
5) The vast majority of conspiracy theorists simply have a failed understanding of basic secondary school Science and the scientific method.
Quite the opposite.
raw video footage and newtonian laws are all that is necessary to prove the 911 conspiracy. Only someone who doesnt understand what those laws imply would not know this once hed seen the WTC7 collapse footage chandler prepared.
Then you simply dont know what a conspiracy theorist is.
A conspiracy theorist is someone who theorises about conspiracies. Not whatever nutcase you imagine when someone uses the term.
===
There have been several in the past for sure. But that doesn't mean everything is a conspiracy.
I never suggested everything is a conspiracy, and it isnt necessary for someone to beleive everything is a conspiracy to be a conspiracy theorist.
===
2) Not everyone with a thinking mind is a conspiracy theorist. As a matter of fact, I would hold the exact opposite to be true.
Thats only because you dont even know what conspiracy theorist means.
===
Anybody who actually knows how to think won't be looking at everything as a conspiracy
Once again, looking at everything as a conspiracy is not the threshold for being a conspiracy theorist.
Theorising about conspiracies is.
===
and will know how to decipher what real evidence is and isn't.
Socrates highlighted centuries ago that reality is not knowable. Noone can discern reality. Just credibility.
And people who know how to think have worked this out for themselves.
===
3) Most importantly, the vast majority of conspiracy theories fail scientific peer review time and time again and their supporters fail to oust that very peer review time and time again as well.
I've never studied any conspiracy theory beyond 9/11 , 7/7 and JFK. and of those, only 9/11 attempted peer review to my knowledge. And it passed it. To say vast majority, you must have access to all the peer review attempts for every conspiracy theory ever. Where did you find them?
Despite the fact that 9/11 conspiracy passed peer review, what makes peer review so reliable? Qualified experts are known to commonly lie for whoever is paying them and the US government has vast control over wealth, finance and power.
4) Although many conspiracy theorists actually are college educated people, even they fail to prove their cases and almost always make their assertions on bad evidence, on absence of evidence, and on fabricated evidence.
Since you dont know what a conspiracy theorist is, lets just stick to 911 arguments. David Chandler and Neils Harrit use mutually corroborated publicily avaibale video footage and chemicals collected at the scene. Both of these are real evidence. And proves their cases. Eyewitnesses Barry Jennings, WIlliam Rodriguez, Anthony Saltalamacchia, among many many others, all witnessed explosions in places that cannot have been caused by planes. They provide seperate proof.
5) The vast majority of conspiracy theorists simply have a failed understanding of basic secondary school Science and the scientific method.
Quite the opposite.
raw video footage and newtonian laws are all that is necessary to prove the 911 conspiracy. Only someone who doesnt understand what those laws imply would not know this once hed seen the WTC7 collapse footage chandler prepared.