This is an excellent example of how strong a case can apparently be made gathering mountains of cherry-picked evidence. No matter how much evidence there appears to be for it, you shouldn’t believe theories like this without fairly investigating the counter-arguments.
It’s a pity we’re unlikely to hear any now this post has been banned. The subject could have used a bit of rational analysis. Instead, we’ve provided one more piece of confirming evidence to the cherry mountain.
Everybody believes that their pet cause would benefit from rational thought, and indeed it would though not necessarily in the direction they hope, so by this measure practically nothing is off-topic. If we are to have any hope of keeping this site useful, removing stuff like this from the list of posts is essential.
Thanks, but I’m not really curious in this specific debate. I’m just curious about conspiracy theories in general that appear to have huge amounts of evidence for them, and about quick rational methods for distinguishing true conspiracy theories (eg. Bay of Pigs, Watergate, Iran-Contra...) from false ones (moonshot, JFK, 911...)
A little learning is a dangerous thing; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, And drinking largely sobers us again.
This is an excellent example of how strong a case can apparently be made gathering mountains of cherry-picked evidence. No matter how much evidence there appears to be for it, you shouldn’t believe theories like this without fairly investigating the counter-arguments.
It’s a pity we’re unlikely to hear any now this post has been banned. The subject could have used a bit of rational analysis. Instead, we’ve provided one more piece of confirming evidence to the cherry mountain.
Everybody believes that their pet cause would benefit from rational thought, and indeed it would though not necessarily in the direction they hope, so by this measure practically nothing is off-topic. If we are to have any hope of keeping this site useful, removing stuff like this from the list of posts is essential.
If you’d like, we could talk about it elsewhere. I’m castlezzt@gmail.com on google chat, and TheMetapuzzle on aol instant messenger.
That goes for anyone, really. Please, drop me a line.
Thanks, but I’m not really curious in this specific debate. I’m just curious about conspiracy theories in general that appear to have huge amounts of evidence for them, and about quick rational methods for distinguishing true conspiracy theories (eg. Bay of Pigs, Watergate, Iran-Contra...) from false ones (moonshot, JFK, 911...)
A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.
This could have been a good article, had it ended at
“If the data has a regularity in its form, we can collect it in a database and organize it and do a statistical analysis. But what if it doesn’t?”
And actually had a stab at answering the general question.
Just testing if this post is still alive since it was dropped down a memory hole.