Conspiracy Competition. I lay down the gauntlet.

sufi

sufi

lala
tbf, my bottom line is that i'm intrigued and attracted to a rare issue where i seem not to agree with eden (keeping rank company there john)
if you are prepared to write off all conspiracy theories as meritless, you are perpetuating the work of the genuine conspirators, (as i almost got you to admit on teh other thread i think john.)
I've given lots of good examples whenever you ask for them, but you all (the a-c bloc) seem to be caught in a cycle of "they are CTs so it can't possibly be true because they are CTs", and so your examples tend to be toss
no hint in your dogma that there may be true or false CTs, which would be the first step in admitting the error of your oppressive ways 🔫:poop:🔥
 
sufi

sufi

lala
firefinga said:
And then there is the aspect of conspiracies as a well-working business. Types like Alex Jones are just the tip of the iceberg of a very busy industry.
Click to expand...
erm i think you have your iceberg upside down, or else where is the rest of your fantasy monetised conspiracy theory industry then? or is it a secret conspiraceeeee?
 
sufi

sufi

lala
firefinga said:
The 9/11 truther industry alone. Meetings, DVDs, books - some of which were bestseller etc. etc.
Click to expand...
o is that all? that's a piffling and top-heavy iceberg. I know some of the UK troofers (IRL, as opposed to in your and their online shared fantasies) and they are a motley and skint bunch
 
firefinga

firefinga

Well-known member
So the bestseller books about the 9/11 conspiracies don't exist? The "truther" dvds don't exist? The chem trail conspiracy doesn't exist? The books about the Illuminati don't exist? Yeah all made up by myself. I see it now, I am a victim of my own conspiracy!


And just one other example of the conspiracy industry: Germany's "Kopp - Verlag" publishers, made 10 million euros alone in 2013 with books about well, you guessed it, conspiracies.
 
Last edited:
luka

luka

Well-known member
sufi said:
tbf, my bottom line is that i'm intrigued and attracted to a rare issue where i seem not to agree with eden (keeping rank company there john)
if you are prepared to write off all conspiracy theories as meritless, you are perpetuating the work of the genuine conspirators, (as i almost got you to admit on teh other thread i think john.)
I've given lots of good examples whenever you ask for them, but you all (the a-c bloc) seem to be caught in a cycle of "they are CTs so it can't possibly be true because they are CTs", and so your examples tend to be toss
no hint in your dogma that there may be true or false CTs, which would be the first step in admitting the error of your oppressive ways 🔫:poop:🔥
Click to expand...

theres basically no point. they arent' discussing theyre shutting down discussion. its a circular thing where conspiracy theory is bad and if its not bad its not really a conspiracy theory so you cant get anywhere with them total waste of time if people argue in bad faith
 
luka

luka

Well-known member
Mr. Tea said:
It's absolutely a strawman. You appeal, over and over and over, to this idea that I'm in thrall to THEM, to THE MAN. My position is just that it's well to bear in mind the same skepticism you might apply when reading something in the dreaded "MSM" when you ingest information from "alternative" sources, and to recognize that it's extremely easy to be sucked in by anti-establishment rhetoric that appears revolutionary but actually serves the most reactionary causes possible. I mean, fuck, I can't believe I'm having to explain this (again). Gah.
Click to expand...

i suggest you stop trying to 'explain' things
 
sufi

sufi

lala
firefinga said:
So the bestseller books about the 9/11 conspiracies don't exist? The "truther" dvds don't exist? The chem trail conspiracy doesn't exist? The books about the Illuminati don't exist? Yeah all made up by myself. I see it now, I am a victim of my own conspiracy

And just one other example of the conspiracy industry: Germany's "Kopp - Verlag" publishers, made 10 million euros alone in 2013 with books about well, you guessed it, conspiracies.
Click to expand...
But 911 was a conspiracy, so of course there are lots of books about it. Murderers conspired to blow up planes and buildings.Are you saying that the alternative theories have too much weight, or money? I think you are bigging them up out of proportion. With your talk of icebergs. I think you got lost on the internet.
 
firefinga

firefinga

Well-known member
sufi said:
But 911 was a conspiracy, so of course there are lots of books about it. Murderers conspired to blow up planes and buildings.
Click to expand...

You know very well I was referring to the "alternative theories" regarding 9/11 aka "truthers".


Here's something that is supposed to help against the chemical trail conspiracy:


There's plenty of other stuff available in that vain (of course, it's just imagined by me :crylarf:)
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
luka said:
of course it does.
Click to expand...

No, it really doesn't. Research means finding stuff out for yourself. That's fundamentally not the same thing as absorbing information that's been collated and processed - or made up - by someone else. Doctors all over the world now shudder at the words "I've done my research..." from a patient who then attempts to woke them up about a simple home-made cure for cancer that's been hushed up by Big Pharma, or the terrible side-effects of some widely used and universally safe medicine.

But just reading a load of research done by other people is called a metastudy or meta-analysis, and over-reliance on it is a major problem in the social sciences. Look up (or research!) the 'woozle effect' if you want to learn more - it's actually fascinating. And while there *can* be useful information derived from meta-analysis, *if* the person doing it is aware of the difference between that and original research, most people aren't aware of the distinction and have no real way of distinguishing between reliable and unreliable sources. In fact many people have such an instinctive distrust of anything that smells of The Man or The Establishment (e.g. research published by a public university or government-funded laboratory or research organization) that they go completely the other way and place implicit trust in any person or group that seems fringe or maverick. And these people are very likely to be some combination of mercenary charlatans, awful reactionaries and shills for actual conspiracies, such as the petrochemical or private healthcare lobbies. I mean look at Breitbart, for fuck's sake.
 
sufi

sufi

lala
Fake news has cooked the critical faculties and blocked up the filters. People just come up with extreme vilification about mass mureders and crackpots and so on cos they cant be bothered to exercose moral judgement.
I mean eden (good to cite him while he's probably commuting;)) mentioned Hillsborough, a real event. But it's not good at all that it takes the exposure of a coverup of this magnitude to get any sort of acknowledgement.
 
luka

luka

Well-known member
Mr. Tea said:
No, it really doesn't. Research means finding stuff out for yourself. That's fundamentally not the same thing as absorbing information that's been collated and processed - or made up - by someone else. Doctors all over the world now shudder at the words "I've done my research..." from a patient who then attempts to woke them up about a simple home-made cure for cancer that's been hushed up by Big Pharma, or the terrible side-effects of some widely used and universally safe medicine.

But just reading a load of research done by other people is called a metastudy or meta-analysis, and over-reliance on it is a major problem in the social sciences. Look up (or research!) the 'woozle effect' if you want to learn more - it's actually fascinating. And while there *can* be useful information derived from meta-analysis, *if* the person doing it is aware of the difference between that and original research, most people aren't aware of the distinction and have no real way of distinguishing between reliable and unreliable sources. In fact many people have such an instinctive distrust of anything that smells of The Man or The Establishment (e.g. research published by a public university or government-funded laboratory or research organization) that they go completely the other way and place implicit trust in any person or group that seems fringe or maverick. And these people are very likely to be some combination of mercenary charlatans, awful reactionaries and shills for actual conspiracies, such as the petrochemical or private healthcare lobbies. I mean look at Breitbart, for fuck's sake.
Click to expand...

Babbling on like a lunatic as usual. Imagine mr tea wanted to learn about literature beyond his usual fare of Terry pratchett and lovecraft but had no access to a library. He could go on the internet and read reams and reams of primary material from piers ploughman to the cantbury tales from hamlet to the prelude
 
luka

luka

Well-known member
And lots of people i know, including my mother and a cousin of mine have had to educate their gps, essentially diagnosed themselves, for which the gp was very grateful (both have very unusual rare conditions)
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
luka said:
Babbling on like a lunatic as usual. Imagine mr tea wanted to learn about literature beyond his usual fare of Terry pratchett and lovecraft but had no access to a library. He could go on the internet and read reams and reams of primary material from piers ploughman to the cantbury tales from hamlet to the prelude
Click to expand...

Reading for pleasure is 'research' now? According to what definition?

You're just embarrassing yourself at this point. Research is fundamentally a concept from science and by your own admission you hate science and know nothing about it. You telling me what research is would be like me lecturing you on the history of urban music.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top