What if ?

What if ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Aneirin -> What if ? (6/6/2010 4:59:47 PM)
What if all those people who are ridiculed and named conspiracy theorists for their findings or beliefs are in fact correct in what they have come to believe and what everyone else sees as a conspiracy theory is in fact wrong and there are devilish plans afoot in this world, would this world be any better for it or worse ? What if all the education we receive through media outlets is doctored versions of a truth, do you think it is possible the people who have access to media are being hood winked into believing things might be very different from what they actually are ? Exactly, just what is wrong with someone having a belief contrary to what we are told, could it be those who are ridiculed and forced into dark corners have more grasp of the truth of what is happening than those who are told what is happening ? Just what exactly has become of our past skill of going with the gut feeling, is it media has taken over what we ourselves are able to discern from events and there tell us what to believe ?

DomKen -> RE: What if ? (6/6/2010 5:29:30 PM)
One thing everyone should know and take to heart, gut feelings, just like eye witnesses, are often wrong. Modern conspricay theories tend to be ridiculously large in scope. Both the birther and truther groups have theories that require the participation of tens of thousands of people, none of whom ever brag in a bar. That's why people dismiss the claims. Human nature makes them impossible. You don't like reality but that doesn't change reality.

littlewonder -> RE: What if ? (6/6/2010 5:37:15 PM)
the problem with most conspiracy theorists is that their info cannot be backed up, there is no scientific or historical basis. Most of it is speculative at best. They ignore any facts given to them.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: What if ? (6/6/2010 5:43:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder the problem with most conspiracy theorists is that their info cannot be backed up, there is no scientific or historical basis. Most of it is speculative at best. They ignore any facts given to them. And the conspiracy they're braying about is almost invariably far, far more complicated than what actually happened. In every single conspiracy theory I've ever seen, the true story was many times simpler and more rational than the conspiracy theory that the nuts made up.

flcouple2009 -> RE: What if ? (6/6/2010 5:46:43 PM)
Let me tell you a story. I knew someone in South Louisiana. His brother was out one day with a friend and was just coming in from a fishing/trapping trip. He had his boat on the trailer, hooked up to the truck, along with all of the guns and gear he owned. They were approached by a Game Warden. His brother panicked. They had some pot on the boat and all he could think of was zero tolerance. He was going to have everything confiscated. When the Game Warden stepped one foot up on the boat he shot him in the chest with a .357 magnum. They then took the body out into the swamp and lost it. Nobody had any idea what happened to the Game Warden. One evening the friend is in a bar drunk and starts bragging to these girls about how they killed the Game Warden. That's all it took. They are both now sitting in Angola State Penitentiary. Two people and they can't keep this quite. Now the conspiracy freaks want you to believe that scores of people can conduct events spread out across the country and somehow everyone keeps these things quite. No one ever talks. There are all of these people running around who participated and have knowledge of the events and everyone of them stays quite for eternity. No proof is proof, no matter how silly the idea is.

Level -> RE: What if ? (6/6/2010 6:22:52 PM)
So, the cops snuffed the GW out, and framed the brothers. Ummmmmhmmmmm. [:D] There is wrongdoing in the world. We had a sheriff here that was something out of a bad novel; he ran drugs and whores, and threatened lives, but finally was taken down. People didn't want to believe it at first, but there was too much evidence.

Aneirin -> RE: What if ? (6/6/2010 6:26:49 PM)
The trouble is with what is reported to us, is it the complete story, all the evidence, even the stuff that doesn't tie up, do we get to see it, or is it we only get to see that ties up. Are those that report honest in their reporting.

Level -> RE: What if ? (6/6/2010 6:41:42 PM)
I would guess that it falls all along the spectrum. There are things we know, and there are things we'll never know the truth of. Some of it is due to human fallibility, some of it is intentional. I was stunned when I first learned that the media kept FDR's use of crutches a secret.

LadyEllen -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 3:00:44 AM)
What if its all true? Well you have to ask the question - what you gonna do about it? If those behind all this stuff truly are as all powerful as they should need to be to plan and execute such schemes, the answer is nothing unless you want it reported on every channel and in every paper that youre a child abuser or similar. E

Moonhead -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 6:51:16 AM)
Even if he's right, David Ike is still barking mad.

laurell3 -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 6:57:06 AM)
Media is most definitely often doctored versions of the truth. That's not a secret or conspiracy. The media doesn't get all "the evidence" either. In the US we call that a fair trial and a constitutional right, not a conspiracy. Have you never been involved in something that becomes publicized? The media version is usually colored by the reporter/agency's viewpoint and the facts they obtain are limited or based on information received from people not really involved in the event. However, eventually some version of the truth usually gets out. And it doesn't follow from this statement that none of it is true. You just don't get to have all the information and no, you don't actually have a right to it at all, period. Don't believe everything you read. It's not difficult.

Aneirin -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 7:49:41 AM)
Oh, I certainly don't believe everything I hear and with that only an decreasing amount of what I see these days, as the cyber war aided by the on the spot digital image is fuelling more than we care to think about. The Aphorism attribute to Mark Twain; Believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see is particularly pertinent these days as it seems everyone has an agenda. Of news, I tend to read medialens, it itself thought by some to be a conspiracy site reporting on conspiracy in the news. http://www.medialens.org/alerts/index.php

FirmhandKY -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 12:41:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 Media is most definitely often doctored versions of the truth. That's not a secret or conspiracy. The media doesn't get all "the evidence" either. In the US we call that a fair trial and a constitutional right, not a conspiracy. Have you never been involved in something that becomes publicized? The media version is usually colored by the reporter/agency's viewpoint and the facts they obtain are limited or based on information received from people not really involved in the event. However, eventually some version of the truth usually gets out. And it doesn't follow from this statement that none of it is true. You just don't get to have all the information and no, you don't actually have a right to it at all, period. Don't believe everything you read. It's not difficult. Great post, and so true. Just in the last few weeks, I've read in-depth news articles about subjects that I'm an expert in, or have first hand knowledge, and the story and info presented is sometimes so wrong that I want to laugh. There is a highly respected technical and regulatory expert that I know personally, who, in one of his columns, made some claims about a recent event that is well documented. I went and looked up all the documents. How he got some of the stuff he claimed is beyond me, because what the actual documentation said happened wasn't even close. Firm

bighappygoth39 -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 2:07:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 Media is most definitely often doctored versions of the truth. That's not a secret or conspiracy. The media doesn't get all "the evidence" either. In the US we call that a fair trial and a constitutional right, not a conspiracy. Have you never been involved in something that becomes publicized? The media version is usually colored by the reporter/agency's viewpoint and the facts they obtain are limited or based on information received from people not really involved in the event. However, eventually some version of the truth usually gets out. And it doesn't follow from this statement that none of it is true. You just don't get to have all the information and no, you don't actually have a right to it at all, period. Don't believe everything you read. It's not difficult. Great post, and so true. Just in the last few weeks, I've read in-depth news articles about subjects that I'm an expert in, or have first hand knowledge, and the story and info presented is sometimes so wrong that I want to laugh. There is a highly respected technical and regulatory expert that I know personally, who, in one of his columns, made some claims about a recent event that is well documented. I went and looked up all the documents. How he got some of the stuff he claimed is beyond me, because what the actual documentation said happened wasn't even close. Firm Well, he might have got his info from Wikipedia, and we all know how reliable that is... [8\|]

rulemylife -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 2:16:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin What if all those people who are ridiculed and named conspiracy theorists for their findings or beliefs are in fact correct in what they have come to believe and what everyone else sees as a conspiracy theory is in fact wrong and there are devilish plans afoot in this world, would this world be any better for it or worse What if there are just a number of people who are bat-shit crazy?

rulemylife -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 2:22:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin The trouble is with what is reported to us, is it the complete story, all the evidence, even the stuff that doesn't tie up, do we get to see it, or is it we only get to see that ties up. Are those that report honest in their reporting. No, they went into journalism and decided to become reporters because they really are pathological liars who find their fun in reporting lies and misleading the public.

Moonhead -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 2:27:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin What if all those people who are ridiculed and named conspiracy theorists for their findings or beliefs are in fact correct in what they have come to believe and what everyone else sees as a conspiracy theory is in fact wrong and there are devilish plans afoot in this world, would this world be any better for it or worse What if there are just a number of people who are bat-shit crazy? Is it a prime number, though?

Aneirin -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 2:29:36 PM)
Hmmm, maybe, but all newspapers have their own agenda, if employed the employee has to tow the party line or get fired. Now which is, do you think a journalist will stand behind their own morals and risk their employment, or do what the boss says ? http://www.sfu.ca/media-lab/archive/2009/326/Readings/McCombs_Agenda%20_Setting_1972.pdf

rulemylife -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 2:32:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin Hmmm, maybe, but all newspapers have their own agenda, if employed the employee has to tow the party line or get fired. Now which is, do you think a journalist will stand behind their own morals and risk their employment, or do what the boss says ? I think most would stand behind their principles.

Moonhead -> RE: What if ? (6/7/2010 2:35:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin Hmmm, maybe, but all newspapers have their own agenda, if employed the employee has to tow the party line or get fired. Now which is, do you think a journalist will stand behind their own morals and risk their employment, or do what the boss says ? http://www.sfu.ca/media-lab/archive/2009/326/Readings/McCombs_Agenda%20_Setting_1972.pdf A question from that posit: do you think you get (to pick the two obvious examples) a lot of Marxists applying for jobs with Murdoch owned redtops or neo-Nazis applying for a job on the Grauniad in the first place? I'd suspect that most papers with a political bias employ very few hacks who don't share that bias in the first place.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

9.399414E-02