Replies to post #150618 on Tornado Alley (PROG)

[StephanieVanbryce]

I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist..with 'FEW' exceptions I find most (NOT ALL) people attracted to them are somewhat needy and they grasp at things when horrible events happen .. it appears most, - desperately need that sense of control back and placing the blame on nefarious people, places and things, WHICH can RARELY ever be proved provides them with a sense of 'knowing' ....& restores that 'sense of control' .. .let's face it ! ..there's nothing better in the world to believe that 'we' are NOT responsible and ultimately we blame unknown dark shadows and mirrors .... that - just so satisfys the ego and best of all ... we had no part in it and could do NOTHING to prevent it..... conspiracy theories totally exonerate 'us/we' from being able to prevent events ...and then we strive to give the dark shadows and mirrors personalities..names...companies ..etc. .etc..and the stories continues...as they have for centuries...............

[StephanieVanbryce]

OH....I GET it NOW.......Did you ever figure out why JFK was assassinated?

........didn't have to figure it out ..My Mom told me it happened in Texas...nuff said.

My oldest sister told me ..it was because of Bobbie ..going after Hoffa ..

I BELIEVED my MOM..

[F6]

otcbargains -- re Jefferson:

(linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=65775498

also -- you owe me an answer to http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=65958298

[fuagf]

Conspiracy theorists

AKA 'conspiraloons', 'tinfoil hatters', 'loonspuds', 'fruit'n'nut jobs' etc.

Updated 29th April 2009.

Note from editor: because of the high profile nature of the external linkurban75 bulletin boards, we often suffer obsessive conspiracy theorists or (guffaw) 'truth seekers' filling up the boards with fact-free claims, evidence-untroubled epilogues and vast reams of tedious cut'n'paste, invariably regurgitated from some dubious internet site.

We hope this information will be of use if you encounter a conspiraloon while on the boards.

10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists .. A useful guide by Donna Ferentes

1. Arrogance. They are always fact-seekers, questioners, people who are trying to discover the truth: sceptics are always "sheep", patsies for Messrs Bush and Blair etc.

2. Relentlessness. They will always go on and on about a conspiracy no matter how little evidence they have to go on or how much of what they have is simply discredited. (Moreover, as per 1. above, even if you listen to them ninety-eight times, the ninety-ninth time, when you say "no thanks", you'll be called a "sheep" again.) Additionally, they have no capacity for precis whatsoever. They go on and on at enormous length.

3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make.

4. Fondness for certain stock phrases. These include Cicero's "cui bono?" (of which it can be said that Cicero understood the importance of having evidence to back it up) and Conan Doyle's "once we have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the truth". What these phrases have in common is that they are attempts to absolve themselves from any responsibility
.............................................
Insert .. consider again ..

I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist..with 'FEW' exceptions I find most (NOT ALL) people attracted to them are somewhat needy and they grasp at things when horrible events happen .. it appears most, - desperately need that sense of control back and placing the blame on nefarious people, places and things, WHICH can RARELY ever be proved provides them with a sense of 'knowing' ....& restores that 'sense of control' .. .let's face it ! ..there's nothing better in the world to believe that 'we' are NOT responsible and ultimately we blame unknown dark shadows and mirrors .... that - just so satisfys the ego and best of all ... we had no part in it and could do NOTHING to prevent it..... conspiracy theories totally exonerate 'us/we' from being able to prevent events ...and then we strive to give the dark shadows and mirrors personalities..names...companies ..etc. .etc..and the stories continues...as they have for centuries............... http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=65992898
.............................................
to produce positive, hard evidence themselves: you simply "eliminate the impossible" (i.e. say the official account can't stand scrutiny) which means that the wild allegation of your choice, based on "cui bono?" (which is always the government) is therefore the truth.

5. Inability to employ or understand Occam's Razor. Aided by the principle in 4. above, conspiracy theorists never notice that the small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any alternative account.
.............................................
Insert: see also .. Conspiracy Theories .. oh well .. Masons and the New World Order .. http://investorshub.advfn.com/Boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43672538

and .. Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor), entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, is the principle that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity" and the conclusion thereof, that the simplest explanation or strategy tends to be the best one. The principle is attributed to 14th-century English logician, theologian and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham. Occam's razor may be alternatively phrased as pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate ("plurality should not be posited without necessity").

Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible,
eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory.

The simplest answer is that the Bush administration just failed on the job. They stuffed it.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/Boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=44419529
.............................................
6. Inability to tell good evidence from bad. Conspiracy theorists have no place for peer-review, for scientific knowledge, for the respectability of sources. The fact that a claim has been made by anybody, anywhere, is enough for them to reproduce it and demand that the questions it raises be answered, as if intellectual enquiry were a matter of responding to every rumour. While they do this, of course, they will claim to have "open minds" and abuse the sceptics for apparently lacking same.

7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3. above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by "swamping" - piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond to the objections sceptics make to the previous lot.

8. Leaping to conclusions. Conspiracy theorists are very keen indeed to declare the "official" account totally discredited without having remotely enough cause so to do. Of course this enables them to wheel on the Conan Doyle quote as in 4. above. Small inconsistencies in the account of an event, small unanswered questions, small problems in timing of differences in procedure from previous events of the same kind are all more than adequate to declare the "official" account clearly and definitively discredited. It goes without saying that it is not necessary to prove that these inconsistencies are either relevant, or that they even definitely exist.

9. Using previous conspiracies as evidence to support their claims. This argument invokes scandals like the Birmingham Six, the Bologna station bombings, the Zinoviev letter and so on in order to try and demonstrate that their conspiracy theory should be accorded some weight (because it's “happened before”.) They do not pause to reflect that the conspiracies they are touting are almost always far more unlikely and complicated than the real-life conspiracies with which they make comparison, or that the fact that something might potentially happen does not, in and of itself, make it anything other than extremely unlikely.

10. It's always a conspiracy. And it is, isn't it? No sooner has the body been discovered, the bomb gone off, than the same people are producing the same old stuff, demanding that there are questions which need to be answered, at the same unbearable length. Because the most important thing about these people is that they are people entirely lacking in discrimination. They cannot tell a good theory from a bad one, they cannot tell good evidence from bad evidence and they cannot tell a good source from a bad one. And for that reason, they always come up with the same answer when they ask the same question.

A person who always says the same thing, and says it over and over again is, of course, commonly considered to be, if not a monomaniac, then at very least, a bore.

continues with .. Wikipedia: conspiracy theory guide

http://www.urban75.org/info/conspiraloons.html

The link first posted 2009 .. here .. http://investorshub.advfn.com/Boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=36855189

[ordinarydude]

"....Jackson too."

If you're referring to Andrew Jackson, then I must respectfully disagree with you. He fought against the formation of a centralized bank.

Ordinary