View Single Post
Old 06-12-2013, 12:27 PM   #20
Senior Member
Max Brawn
Tannhauser's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,408
Training Exp: 30+
Training Type: Other
Fav Exercise: Anything overhead
Fav Supp: Creatine. C'est tout.
Reputation: 425360
Tannhauser is one with Crom!Tannhauser is one with Crom!Tannhauser is one with Crom!Tannhauser is one with Crom!Tannhauser is one with Crom!Tannhauser is one with Crom!Tannhauser is one with Crom!Tannhauser is one with Crom!Tannhauser is one with Crom!Tannhauser is one with Crom!Tannhauser is one with Crom!

Linden - There are so many incorrect assertions, non sequiturs and logical errors in your post that I literally wouldn't know where to start with it.

Here's an example in the very first line:

Originally Posted by LindenGarcia18 View Post
I agree. I think that its shortsighted to dismiss allot of these conspiracy theories.
OK, by quoting Seventy-Seven, and then saying you agree that it's short-sighted to dismiss conspiracy theories, you're making exactly the same straw-man argument he did. Once again, disbelieving that there is a conspiracy to suppress evidence about aliens does not imply a disbelief in aliens. It's not a difficult distinction.

With regard to research: I became interested in conspiracy theories around 1978 (about 18 years before you were born ) and I've been reading about them and other fringe beliefs since then. I would like to think I do have some awareness of the research behind these ideas. My overall view is that the quality of that research is usually incredibly poor. Of course, this varies depending on which fringe belief we're talking about, but generally speaking, they are laughably naive. There is a great deal of uncritical acceptance of eye-witness testimony, and a lot of 'but he was a trained [whatever] and emeritus professor of blah blah blah.' And a dearth of physical evidence.

The latter problem is dealt with by suggesting that if there is no evidence, that's because it's been hidden from us. It's what the philosopher Karl Popper called an unfalsifiable hypothesis: you can't ever win arguing with a conspiracy theorist because an absence of evidence is still seen as evidence.

I think what lies behind conspiracy theories are two things. Firstly, a basic need to believe in something shadowy and mysterious, that is beyond the world of mortgages and other mundane crap that constitutes adult life. The other is the sense of having a key to a secret knowledge, a truth that other people don't have access to. It must be fun, I guess, to think that other people are sleepwalking through their lives. I'm sure these feelings don't apply to every conspiracy theorist, but I believe it's part of the general appeal of these ideas.

Read the documents, watch the speech, and then tell me I'm crazy
You're not crazy, that was a joke. You're just mistaken (in my view). I'm not going to read the documents or watch the video, because as interesting as I find this stuff, I have seen it all before, and many times. Conspiracy theorists are at least environmentally-friendly, because they recycle the same crap year after year after year.

Incidentally, you might enjoy Jon Ronson's Them, which describes his time spent with Bilderberg chasers, arch nut-job Alex Jones, and others.
230 strict press @ 220; bodyweight+187 X 4 dips @ 180; 403 front squat @ 210; 10 000 push-ups.

Ignoring irrelevant credentials since I was 17.

Last edited by Tannhauser; 06-12-2013 at 01:31 PM. Reason: to make sense
Tannhauser is online now   Reply With Quote