Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadChannel
1) Yes it is. Like, by definition.
2) Can you give me a concise version of what the theory actually is? Ideas seem to be scattered about the thread, but I'm having trouble parsing some of it.
3) The problem with most conspiracy theories is that they seem to be rooted in a sort of pseudo-ecclesiastical faith rather than evidence. Most of them are more focused on making the evidence match the facts rather than the other way around, which is why you get these sketchy, tenuous links.
|
Hmm I wish right now could post a youtube clip of some psychologists discussing YOUR problem, but I'm stuck on 4 posts. The last people to do that to me were JREF and I blew them away too. They banned me four times such was the strength of my argument in the face of vicious personal attacks that should have gotten those people banned if the forum rules had been adhered to. It only reinforces my conviction when my opponents stoop so low as to run away rather than fight their corner.
It ceases to become a theory when you have proof beyond reasonable doubt. The problem is that the reasonable doubt threshold is dependent of people's deep seated beliefs they have acquired from being brought up from birth inside the envelope.
Quote:
|
Most of them are more focused on making the evidence match the facts rather than the other way around, which is why you get these sketchy, tenuous links.
|
You mean like the THEORY that 19 emaciated Arabs took over four planes and flew around for hours unmolested? Like that CONSPIRACY THEORY you mean?