From: Vincent Boudreau <vincentboudreau.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 15:35:19 -0400 Archived: Sat, 12 Oct 2013 12:15:45 -0400 Subject: Re: The Conspiracy Of Conspiracy Theorizing >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:32:46 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Conspiracy Of Conspiracy Theorizing >>From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 09:36:31 -0400 >>Subject: Re: The Conspiracy Of Conspiracy Theorizing >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>>To: post.nul >>>Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 16:10:30 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: The Conspiracy Of Conspiracy Theorizing ><snip> >>>There is a considerable literature, written by historians, >>>psychologists, folklorists, journalists, and others, on >>>conspiracy theory and its pathologies. You should read some of >>>that, but I know you won't, alas. I guess you prefer demonology. >>At this point, anybody who has any ideas at all about why things >>happened on 9/11 is a conspiracy theorist. That includes >>adherents to the officially sanctioned theory, since evidence in >>its favour was never provided. >The all-purpose site for such. >http://debunking911.com/ But have been a SM fits, but debunking911.com features the use of at least 277 instances where the word "conspiracy" is used, coupled with the same words: conspiracy theorists, conspiracy theories, conspiracy sites, conspiracy stories... This is quite funny. http://debunking911.com/links.htm features a piece title "911 Case Study: Pentagon Flight 77" where a 3D animation allegedly explains all the holes in the "conspiracy theorists" ' theories about the Pentagon. Hilarious to say the least: half a dozen electric poles are knocked down and torn apart by the plane's wings, the latter remaining pristine all the way to the Pentagon wall where the plane simply vaporizes and disappears. Hmm... Nevermind that the hole the plane is supposed to produce in the wall does not match the in situ documented observations. But the best on this site tells it all: http://debunking911.com/conspiracy.htm Titled "The Real Conspiracy", it starts with: "What a real conspiracy looks like. Real conspiracies have very few players and even then, they are usually exposed. Enron, Watergate, Iran/Contra and the rest have few people involved and someone always comes out to blow the whistle." Two sentences, one contradiction: "usually exposed" means, in plain English, "not always" and, thus, there are conspiracies that are never, or not yet, exposed. It is clearly in conflict with the next idea "someone _always_ comes to blow the whistle." The authors of this website, obviously have not visited: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment "The Tuskegee syphilis experiment was an infamous clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the U.S. Public Health Service to study the natural progression of untreated syphilis in rural African American men who thought they were receiving free health care from the U.S. government." Fourty years for crying out loud. "The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, cited as arguably the most infamous biomedical research study in U.S. history (...)'"' This just proves that conspiracies can last a long time before they get discovered. If you think that this was then, and that now this wouldn't be possible, think again. The UFO paradigm has been going on for, what?, 66 years now, if we count from 1947? "Conspiracy theory" has no place in any serious discussion. Vincent Boudreau Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp