Conspiracy Theories

[Brentastic]

The term you're looking for is cognitive dissonance. It's far easier to dismiss a conflicting idea or person than to objectively view something you're biased/predisposed to thinking is absurd. The conspiracy-bashers may claim that we "want to believe", but even if there were overwhelming undeniable evidence to support our claims, alot still would deny it because they simply don't want to believe it's possible...

 

Probably the one good piece of insight from that shallow "science of why we don't believe in science" article is that most people seek to prove by deducing upon the hypothesis they already believe, rather than working inductively from evidence up to form a conclusion/hypothesis.

 

Us "truthers" don't claim to have the answers, just the things that we don't think add up. None of us went in with this same attitude of insisting we're right (in fact, I was biased against the possibility before I looked into it). We examined the evidence to come to these questions, which is something that I don't think the most of the bashers here are really willing to do...

I gotta give you your props too I haven't seen many posts by you in the past but you're bringing your A+ game in this thread. Nice work.

 

I'd say responding to Bushwacked is pointless at this point. Of everyone on the huddle, he has proven to be the most close-minded and least factual. He brings no 'evidence' yet always says we 'truthers' dismiss a mountain of it (evidence). At least guys like Az and Ursa have some ability to reason, even if they don't get it in the end.

[Brentastic]

a list of those who would have to be involved

 

C'mon man! You don't really believe this do you? I mean, that is the most absurd list of people that 'MUST HAVE BEEN IN ON IT'.

 

You found a list therefore it MUST be true

[Ursa Majoris]

a list of those who would have to be involved

Exactly my point. It's telling that our conspiracy guys are avoiding the question about how the plane parts got scattered around the Pentagon.

[rattsass]

Exactly my point. It's telling that our conspiracy guys are avoiding the question about how the plane parts got planted around the Pentagon.

fixed

[rattsass]

Exactly my point. It's telling that our conspiracy guys are avoiding the question about how the plane parts got scattered around the Pentagon.

But seriously, the answer to that question is as simple as the answer to the question of how a plane with a huge wingspan leaves only a circular hole in a building, and where the black box went.

[Ursa Majoris]

Why? Just to go into war with Iraq? You don't think if that was the end goal it could have been done with a much smaller type of cover up? So they were so dang good and smart that they would kill 3,000 people and make it look like a terrorist attack but they couldn't even handle hiding a few WMD's in Iraq to make the war look a little better???

That's a very good point. A government that can plan, execute and keep silent about 9/11 can't plant some WMDs that they already own?

[Pope Flick]

But seriously, the answer to that question is as simple as the answer to the question of how a plane with a huge wingspan leaves only a circular hole in a building, and where the black box went.

 

 

Of course, if we're going to play "where did something go" in regards to a commercial airliner slamming into a brick and mortar building at disintegration speed can I ask where did the 77 passengers and crew from that plane go and how many people did it take to land the plane somewhere else, exterminate everyone and hide the bodies? At least a hundred people? Brent laughs at the hundreds number, but it adds up fast, just as fast as a govt conspiracy to make this happen collapses. You guys don't touch that, but expect us to believe someone ran around the pentagon sprinkling plane parts in the grass before news crews arrived.

 

You might be onto something with the 'they let it slide' angle after they found out about it, but it wasn't orchestrated by anyone here. Get real.

[Brentastic]

That's a very good point. A government that can plan, execute and keep silent about 9/11 can't plant some WMDs that they already own?

Why do you make the assumption that the whole government (or any part of it) planned this event? You're making too many assumptions to be thinking critically.

 

See my post here.

[BeeR]

I don't mean to interrupt the 9/11 thing which this thread has become completely about, but there are others worth talking about and in fact IMO CNN's list is pathetically weak. Who gives a flying flip about half of those? And how is something like (eg) Roswell excluded for them? (PS no I don't think it was anything more than some top secret gov't stuff going on that they tried so poorly to hide, but still...).

 

Also I'm still not buying the JFK lone guy bit. I see people here talking about 9/11 and if this or that is so, why do so many eye witnesses say otherwise.....well how about JFK? Many heard gunshots from more than one location eg the infamous grassy knoll. Now maybe it was just Lee H.O. being a freaking loon and deciding to wax the president (speaking of loons, Oliver Stone is a moron who should be taken about as seriously as the "bible codes"). But I think that sounds far too neat and there are too many loose ends/unexplained things.......and if that's all it was, why nearly FIFTY years later, is everything still covered up? CIA and/or mob involvement would not surprise me in the tiniest.

 

Well at least I got a good laugh from CNN's brilliant "the Warren commission said this, therefore case closed" bit.

Edited April 26, 2011 by BeeR

[borge007]

I don't mean to interrupt the 9/11 thing which this thread has become completely about, but there are others worth talking about and in fact IMO CNN's list is pathetically weak. Who gives a flying flip about half of those? And how is something like (eg) Roswell excluded for them? (PS no I don't think it was anything more than some top secret gov't stuff going on that they tried so poorly to hide, but still...).

 

Also I'm still not buying the JFK lone guy bit. I see people here talking about 9/11 and if this or that is so, why do so many eye witnesses say otherwise.....well how about JFK? Many heard gunshots from more than one location eg the infamous grassy knoll. Now maybe it was just Lee H.O. being a freaking loon and deciding to wax the president (speaking of loons, Oliver Stone is a moron who should be taken about as seriously as the "bible codes"). But I think that sounds far too neat and there are too many loose ends/unexplained things.......and if that's all it was, why nearly FIFTY years later, is everything still covered up? CIA and/or mob involvement would not surprise me in the tiniest.

 

Well at least I got a good laugh from CNN's brilliant "the Warren commission said this, therefore case closed" bit.

I thought the Warren commission report wasn't going to be opened until 2064.

[Azazello1313]

I say the same thing about Obama....he has a certificate of birth, but they won't show a birth certificate....

 

I don't even question that he's born in the US....I think that something else is being hidden..

 

nothing is being hidden. if anything, obama's people probably see this as an opportunity to allow his critics to make themselves look like buffoons. sorta like how the truther idiots and people like michael moore probably helped bush in the 2004 election. the best way to look "serious" is by sitting across the table from a clown, so maybe that's why they don't release as many documents as they could theoretically if they wanted to. release enough to convince any reasonable person beyond a reasonable doubt, and sit back and laugh while the loonies chase their tails.

[rattsass]

Well at least I got a good laugh from CNN's brilliant "the Warren commission said this, therefore case closed" bit.

It's funny, all these years later and it has been my experience though my life that the majority of people I have discussed Kennedy with don't buy the Warren report. Most everyone believes someone else was involved. Calling it case closed is comical I agree. I suspect that the questions surrounding 911 will linger just the same.

[Ursa Majoris]

It's funny, all these years later and it has been my experience though my life that the majority of people I have discussed Kennedy with don't buy the Warren report. Most everyone believes someone else was involved. Calling it case closed is comical I agree. I suspect that the questions surrounding 911 will linger just the same.

The biggest question in the JFK case for me is why did Jack Ruby shoot Oswald?

[rattsass]

The biggest question in the JFK case for me is why did Jack Ruby shoot Oswald?

Definitely.

[BeeR]

I think the partly line goes that he was "upset" about the JFK killing or some such. A bit on the weak side IMO.

Edited April 26, 2011 by BeeR

[delusions of grandeur]

FYI, the video I watched that led me to investigate is 9/11 Mysteries (which makes very few assumptions like Loose Change, mostly questions the official story). There's the full 91 minute version on Google Videos. Great video even if you think its BS

Edited April 26, 2011 by delusions of granduer

[Azazello1313]

The biggest question in the JFK case for me is why did Jack Ruby shoot Oswald?

 

yeah that's always seemed a bit fishy. I suppose my best guess is that oswald was the shooter (probably the only one, but maybe not), but that maybe someone else "connected" hired him or at least knew what he was doing. probably mafia, and probably very few people knew about it, which could allow it to be kept secret for a long time. still though, any sort of conspiracy seems less likely as time goes by and the other shoe never drops.

[bushwacked]

The John F Kennedy conspiracy theories vs 9-11 was an inside job is apples to oranges, IMO.

[Ursa Majoris]

The John F Kennedy conspiracy theories vs 9-11 was an inside job is apples to oranges, IMO.

Agreed but this thread is supposed to be about conspiracy theories in general.

[rattsass]

Not really all that different from a public psyche standpoint. Those were the two most traumatic events over the last half century. And the distrust that sprang from the assasination/Warren report certainly is a factor in why people might be inclined to believe that all is not as it seems with 911. I guess it depends on how narrow a view one takes.

[peepinmofo]

resistance held the building up for 8 hours, once a key pressure point buckled, it initiated a collapse.

 

are all the scientists and civil engineers who looked at the evidence and concluded that fire and structural damage brought down wtc7 lying?

What about the same amount of scientists and civil engineers that saw the evidence and concluded that there was no way they were brought down by anything other than demolition? Again, for the last f'ing time, watch the damn videos and you will have ALL your questions answered.

[WaterMan]

I find it funny that it took the NIST 3 years to come up with explanations on how the WTC collapsed.

[matt770]

Watched Loose Change last night. If what they are saying is true, then it seems clear that the official explanations at all 3 scenes don't add up. Pretty disturbing.

[Azazello1313]

What about the same amount of scientists and civil engineers that saw the evidence and concluded that there was no way they were brought down by anything other than demolition?

 

bold-faced liiiiieeeeee. same amount? come on, man. a handful of crackpot "architects and engineers for truth" is all you've got. well, that and a bunch of clueless dolts who probably never took a college science class babbling about "micro thermate" and such.

[SEC=UGA]

Doesn't matter how you look at it... Illegal immigrants are killing Americans at an alarming rate. It is by desing, the government is trying to kill the "American" working class so that they can import cheap labor from other parts of the globe.