It really is all or nothing

uk_dave · 29th November 2006, 03:21 PM

OK here's the thing: Can a Conspiracy Theorist believe in just a little bit of conspiracy, or does it have to be the whole nine yards?

For example:

CT: 911 was an inside job!!!

Cynic: Oh really? So you believe all that stuff about new world orders and the illuminati and....

CT: No NO! Don't lump me in with those weirdos! Some of us have genuine concerns about 9/11

Cynic: Such as?

CT: Well..... there's the fact that the towers came down ....first time steel framed buildings....

Cynic: Yes yes we know all that. But why isn't this all over the news?

CT: I don't follow....

Cynic : Well why isn't the worlds media jumping all over your conspiracy theories and carrying out proper investigative journ....

CT: Yeah well, you can't trust the media...you know? I mean, they're all owned by a handful of people and.....

Cynic : So the media barons are in on the conspiracy?

CT: Wellllll no necessarily in on it but.....

Cynic : But why aren't they investigating it?

CT: Well, some are!

Cynic: Such as?

CT: Oh I can show you hundreds of websites where....

Cynic: Real Media! Not bloody websites! Why isn't the BBC investigating your claims? Or CNN? Or even al jazeera? Don't you think they'd be only too happy to debunk the claim that muslims carried out 9/11?

CT: Yeah but.... but.... you're naive. The media is in the hands of big corporations and those corp....

Cynic: So the media is in on the conspiracy!

CT: Well, some.... maybe

Cynic: So you DO believe in all those whacko theories about the illuminati..

CT: I didn't say that!

Cynic: Well you just included the majority of the WORLDS news media in it! So who is controlling it all?

CT: The media aren't covering it because....because they can't .... can't get at the truth! It's the government obstructing them which...

Cynic: Well that in itself sounds like a pretty bloody big story. Why don't they run with it?

CT: Because.... because the news media is owned by....

Cynic: Including the BBC?

CT: ...by the corp..... the BBC is owned by the British Government!! How'd you expect them to be impartial?? eh?

Cynic: So all those rows between the BBC and the UK govewrnment are just a ruse eh?

CT: Well.....

Cynic: OK so you don't believe in all the paranoid conspiracy theorising of the likes of alex jones, but you do believe that the worlds media is not impartial or independant, right?

CT: Well.... sort of...it's the corpor....

Cynic: OK, well what about the Democrats?

CT: What about them?

Cynic: Well, where's the congressional investigations, the calls for impeachment?

CT: Yeah well they're all politicians.....

Cynic: So they're in on it too?

CT: I didn't say that.....

Cynic: So why aren't they taking your claims seriously?

CT: Well....because

Cynic: Are they an opposition or not?

CT: Of course they're an opposition, but...but they're just wolves in sheeps clothing.....

Cynic: Meaning?

CT: They are just as bad as the ones in power...you know that clinton had people murdered in waco....

Cynic: Ah ha! So clinton and the dems are part of the conspiracy!

CT: Yes...but not 9/11

Cynic: Why not 9/11?

CT: Well....because bush was in power and....

Cynic: But didn't clinton try to get OBL? Didn't he try to get him because he knew he was a dangerous terrorist?

CT: Yeah...so?

Cynic: Well if clinton knew OBL was a dangerous terrorist and tried to get him and had sanctions against afghanistan because they wouldn't hand him over....

CT: Yeah but that was before 9/11

Cynic: So OBL was a dangerous terrorist before 9/11 but..... not on 9/11?

CT: Yes!

Cynic: Does Clinton believe this?

CT: I don't know

Cynic: Well if he did believe that OBL wasn't responsible for 9/11....dontcha think he would have said something?

CT: He's a politician...

Cynic: No he's not

CT: Well Hilary is and she wouldn't let him

Cynic: So Hilary Clinton is stopping her husband from revealing a crime committed by the US government?

CT: Yes...it's not in her...

Cynic: Does Bill have a track record for doing things always in the best interest of his wife?

CT: Don't start with that

Cynic: So, the media, the democrats and Bill Clinton all know that 9/11 was an inside job, but none of them are prepared to say so, but to you that doesn't make them part of the conspiracy?

CT: It's complicated

Cynic: Damn right it is.

CT: They don't want to rock the boat

Cynic: Over 3000 people died

CT: I know

Cynic: You don't think that's good enough reason to 'rock the boat'?

CT: I just don't believe all this NWO nonsense

Cynic: But you do believe that 9/11 was an inside job?

CT: Yes, of cour....

Cynic: And you do believe that the worlds media is being stopped from investigating it...

CT: Yes

Cynic: ...and that the loyal opposition is not prepared to investigate it.....

CT: Yes

Cynic:.... and that a former president is not prepared to speak out about it....

CT: Yes

Cynic: ...... but you don't believe they are part of it?

CT: ermmmmm... no

Cynic: You're not very bright, are you?

CT: ummmmmmmm

maccy · 29th November 2006, 03:32 PM

Nominated!

T.A.M. · 29th November 2006, 03:42 PM

Wonderful Dialogue.

IMO you can describe the vast majority of CTers view on things without words, but rather with a "feeling". The impression I get from most of them, is that something doesnt quite sit right with them wrt the official version, so they are not unlike someone watching something at the theatre that makes them uncomfortable...you know, squirm in their seat...

CTers are seat squirmers.

TAM

NickUK · 29th November 2006, 04:10 PM

Brilliant post Dave

Oliver · 29th November 2006, 04:37 PM

Same discussion with a LIHOP´er, please!

stateofgrace · 29th November 2006, 06:57 PM

Fantastic post Dave. It just puts it all into perspective so well.

joobz · 29th November 2006, 07:38 PM

It's an interesting take, but i don't like the argument by fake conversation method. It always comes off as a morality play to me. Kinda like those cartoon pamphlets that some christians hand out and atlas shrugged. Of course free market works so well in her book, she wrote the book.

Anyway, to your point, I think you are right. When you pick apart the whole thing, it doesn't make sense. BUt a CTer can make any insane argument to justify their beliefs. They could easily say that the media is just incompetent. But I do request that you try your argument out on some CTers. See how it goes.

Trigood · 29th November 2006, 07:50 PM

Originally Posted by maccy

Nominated!

Now if that post doesn't make it into the Top Ten this month, then it's all a conspiracy!!!!

LashL · 29th November 2006, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by Trigood

Now if that post doesn't make it into the Top Ten this month, then it's all a conspiracy!!!!

Well, since you put it that way, I'll have to nominate it, too

P.S. Nicely done, uk_dave.

uk_dave · 29th November 2006, 09:37 PM

Awwww shucks! Cheers people!

I feel the same way as TAM on this issue, in that I've read the posts of some of the less committed CTers here and on the LC board and it strikes me that the average, fairly rational CTer just believes something aint right without believing the specifics of the CT claims, which basically boil down to a massive world conspiracy.

Avery and crew had better be careful not to put too much stock in numbers because once people start considering the implications of a 911 govt conspiracy then their belief in it is likely to evaporate as they realise the absurdity of it.

(oh and typos are all my own and cherished as such)

NickUK · 29th November 2006, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by uk_dave

(oh and typos are all my own and cherished as such)

You mean you left them in on purpose so we'd research them ourselves?

PerryLogan · 30th November 2006, 03:52 AM

The typos in my posts are caused by alien viruses.

Fascinating and totally cool--but you obviously had to use a lot of artistic license to bring this off. In reality, your CT interlocutor would:

--not use sentences
--not give a straight or coherent answer to any of your questions
--call you a government shill (or sheeple, or Nazi, or Mason, or scum, or whatever) at the first sign of trouble
--start cussing at you, accusing you of weird things, saying things about your mother, etc.
--cut you off (ban you from the forum, hang up the phone, bullhorn you, shout you down, change the subject, run away)

Optional extra reaction:
--go around the web making false accusations against you.

P.S.: Weird YouTube video debunks all 9/11 conspiracy thoeries.
(I mean "theories." It's the virus again.)

CurtC · 30th November 2006, 07:29 AM

I object to the reasonable person being labelled as "cynic." The CTs are the cynical ones!

I'd recommend doing an s/Cynic/Skeptic/.

uk_dave · 30th November 2006, 07:45 AM

I've always liked the phrase:

A cynic is what a fantasist calls a realist

defaultdotxbe · 30th November 2006, 07:49 AM

with CTers its all, then some, the some more, then all, then some again, whatever suits their mood

CTers: Only 12 people would have to be involved

Skeptic: What about X Agency?

CTer: They're in on it.

Skeptic: What about Y Company?

CTer: They're in on it.

Skeptic: What about Z Group?

CTer: They're in on it.

Skeptic: How are these hundreds of people ALL keepign quiet?

CTer: I told you, only 12 people needed to be involved...

uk_dave · 30th November 2006, 07:57 AM

similar to the CD claim:

CT: the towers were controlled demolition

Skeptic: No they weren't, a plane flew into the tower and destroyed major structural elem....

CT: Nah! Those planes couldn't cause enough damage to lead to a collapse...had to be CD

Skeptic: You have any idea how much explosive and time it would have taken to CD those towers?

CT: It wouldn't have had to been much

Skeptic: How so?

CT: Well the damage caused by the planes......

Skeptic: You're not very bright are you?

29th November 2006, 03:21 PM	#1
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,866	It really is all or nothing OK here's the thing: Can a Conspiracy Theorist believe in just a little bit of conspiracy, or does it have to be the whole nine yards? For example: CT: 911 was an inside job!!! Cynic: Oh really? So you believe all that stuff about new world orders and the illuminati and.... CT: No NO! Don't lump me in with those weirdos! Some of us have genuine concerns about 9/11 Cynic: Such as? CT: Well..... there's the fact that the towers came down ....first time steel framed buildings.... Cynic: Yes yes we know all that. But why isn't this all over the news? CT: I don't follow.... Cynic : Well why isn't the worlds media jumping all over your conspiracy theories and carrying out proper investigative journ.... CT: Yeah well, you can't trust the media...you know? I mean, they're all owned by a handful of people and..... Cynic : So the media barons are in on the conspiracy? CT: Wellllll no necessarily in on it but..... Cynic : But why aren't they investigating it? CT: Well, some are! Cynic: Such as? CT: Oh I can show you hundreds of websites where.... Cynic: Real Media! Not bloody websites! Why isn't the BBC investigating your claims? Or CNN? Or even al jazeera? Don't you think they'd be only too happy to debunk the claim that muslims carried out 9/11? CT: Yeah but.... but.... you're naive. The media is in the hands of big corporations and those corp.... Cynic: So the media is in on the conspiracy! CT: Well, some.... maybe Cynic: So you DO believe in all those whacko theories about the illuminati.. CT: I didn't say that! Cynic: Well you just included the majority of the WORLDS news media in it! So who is controlling it all? CT: The media aren't covering it because....because they can't .... can't get at the truth! It's the government obstructing them which... Cynic: Well that in itself sounds like a pretty bloody big story. Why don't they run with it? CT: Because.... because the news media is owned by.... Cynic: Including the BBC? CT: ...by the corp..... the BBC is owned by the British Government!! How'd you expect them to be impartial?? eh? Cynic: So all those rows between the BBC and the UK govewrnment are just a ruse eh? CT: Well..... Cynic: OK so you don't believe in all the paranoid conspiracy theorising of the likes of alex jones, but you do believe that the worlds media is not impartial or independant, right? CT: Well.... sort of...it's the corpor.... Cynic: OK, well what about the Democrats? CT: What about them? Cynic: Well, where's the congressional investigations, the calls for impeachment? CT: Yeah well they're all politicians..... Cynic: So they're in on it too? CT: I didn't say that..... Cynic: So why aren't they taking your claims seriously? CT: Well....because Cynic: Are they an opposition or not? CT: Of course they're an opposition, but...but they're just wolves in sheeps clothing..... Cynic: Meaning? CT: They are just as bad as the ones in power...you know that clinton had people murdered in waco.... Cynic: Ah ha! So clinton and the dems are part of the conspiracy! CT: Yes...but not 9/11 Cynic: Why not 9/11? CT: Well....because bush was in power and.... Cynic: But didn't clinton try to get OBL? Didn't he try to get him because he knew he was a dangerous terrorist? CT: Yeah...so? Cynic: Well if clinton knew OBL was a dangerous terrorist and tried to get him and had sanctions against afghanistan because they wouldn't hand him over.... CT: Yeah but that was before 9/11 Cynic: So OBL was a dangerous terrorist before 9/11 but..... not on 9/11? CT: Yes! Cynic: Does Clinton believe this? CT: I don't know Cynic: Well if he did believe that OBL wasn't responsible for 9/11....dontcha think he would have said something? CT: He's a politician... Cynic: No he's not CT: Well Hilary is and she wouldn't let him Cynic: So Hilary Clinton is stopping her husband from revealing a crime committed by the US government? CT: Yes...it's not in her... Cynic: Does Bill have a track record for doing things always in the best interest of his wife? CT: Don't start with that Cynic: So, the media, the democrats and Bill Clinton all know that 9/11 was an inside job, but none of them are prepared to say so, but to you that doesn't make them part of the conspiracy? CT: It's complicated Cynic: Damn right it is. CT: They don't want to rock the boat Cynic: Over 3000 people died CT: I know Cynic: You don't think that's good enough reason to 'rock the boat'? CT: I just don't believe all this NWO nonsense Cynic: But you do believe that 9/11 was an inside job? CT: Yes, of cour.... Cynic: And you do believe that the worlds media is being stopped from investigating it... CT: Yes Cynic: ...and that the loyal opposition is not prepared to investigate it..... CT: Yes Cynic:.... and that a former president is not prepared to speak out about it.... CT: Yes Cynic: ...... but you don't believe they are part of it? CT: ermmmmm... no Cynic: You're not very bright, are you? CT: ummmmmmmm
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,866

29th November 2006, 03:32 PM	#2
maccy Dalek-Reptilian Hybrid Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Leeds, UK Posts: 2,094	Nominated!
	__________________ "To the rational mind, nothing is inexplicable, only unexplained." Doctor Who: Robots of Death by Chris Boucher. Also, Stop Sylvia Browne; and all the 9/11 Conspiracy links you could ever need.

29th November 2006, 04:10 PM	#4
NickUK Critical Thinker Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Manchester, UK Posts: 498	Brilliant post Dave
	__________________ LUCUS @ LCF "that is a popular misconception or LIE...not saying you are lying, just saying that is not true..."

29th November 2006, 04:37 PM	#5
Oliver ~The Rascal~ Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Cologne Posts: 17,369	Same discussion with a LIHOP´er, please!
	__________________

29th November 2006, 07:38 PM	#7
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: That's how you get ants Posts: 17,493	It's an interesting take, but i don't like the argument by fake conversation method. It always comes off as a morality play to me. Kinda like those cartoon pamphlets that some christians hand out and atlas shrugged. Of course free market works so well in her book, she wrote the book. Anyway, to your point, I think you are right. When you pick apart the whole thing, it doesn't make sense. BUt a CTer can make any insane argument to justify their beliefs. They could easily say that the media is just incompetent. But I do request that you try your argument out on some CTers. See how it goes.
	__________________ What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser

29th November 2006, 03:42 PM	#3
T.A.M. Keeper of the Kool-Vax Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Far East...of Canada Posts: 20,816	Wonderful Dialogue. IMO you can describe the vast majority of CTers view on things without words, but rather with a "feeling". The impression I get from most of them, is that something doesnt quite sit right with them wrt the official version, so they are not unlike someone watching something at the theatre that makes them uncomfortable...you know, squirm in their seat... CTers are seat squirmers. TAM

29th November 2006, 06:57 PM	#6
stateofgrace Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Scotland Posts: 3,847	Fantastic post Dave. It just puts it all into perspective so well.

29th November 2006, 07:50 PM	#8
Trigood Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 994	Originally Posted by maccy Nominated! Now if that post doesn't make it into the Top Ten this month, then it's all a conspiracy!!!!
Trigood Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 994	__________________ Many of us spend our whole lives running from feeling with the mistaken belief that you cannot bear the pain. But you have already borne the pain. What you have not done is feel all you are beyond that pain. - Kahlil Gibran

29th November 2006, 07:55 PM	#9
LashL Goddess of Legaltainment™ Administrator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 26,180	Originally Posted by Trigood Now if that post doesn't make it into the Top Ten this month, then it's all a conspiracy!!!! Well, since you put it that way, I'll have to nominate it, too P.S. Nicely done, uk_dave.

29th November 2006, 09:37 PM	#10
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,866	Awwww shucks! Cheers people! I feel the same way as TAM on this issue, in that I've read the posts of some of the less committed CTers here and on the LC board and it strikes me that the average, fairly rational CTer just believes something aint right without believing the specifics of the CT claims, which basically boil down to a massive world conspiracy. Avery and crew had better be careful not to put too much stock in numbers because once people start considering the implications of a 911 govt conspiracy then their belief in it is likely to evaporate as they realise the absurdity of it. (oh and typos are all my own and cherished as such)
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,866

29th November 2006, 09:44 PM	#11
NickUK Critical Thinker Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Manchester, UK Posts: 498	Originally Posted by uk_dave (oh and typos are all my own and cherished as such) You mean you left them in on purpose so we'd research them ourselves?
	__________________ LUCUS @ LCF "that is a popular misconception or LIE...not saying you are lying, just saying that is not true..."

30th November 2006, 03:52 AM	#12
PerryLogan Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: In the earth's deep core Posts: 980	The typos in my posts are caused by alien viruses. Fascinating and totally cool--but you obviously had to use a lot of artistic license to bring this off. In reality, your CT interlocutor would: --not use sentences --not give a straight or coherent answer to any of your questions --call you a government shill (or sheeple, or Nazi, or Mason, or scum, or whatever) at the first sign of trouble --start cussing at you, accusing you of weird things, saying things about your mother, etc. --cut you off (ban you from the forum, hang up the phone, bullhorn you, shout you down, change the subject, run away) Optional extra reaction: --go around the web making false accusations against you. P.S.: Weird YouTube video debunks all 9/11 conspiracy thoeries. (I mean "theories." It's the virus again.)
	Last edited by PerryLogan; 30th November 2006 at 04:05 AM.

30th November 2006, 07:29 AM	#13
CurtC Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 4,758	I object to the reasonable person being labelled as "cynic." The CTs are the cynical ones! I'd recommend doing an s/Cynic/Skeptic/.

30th November 2006, 07:45 AM	#14
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,866	I've always liked the phrase: A cynic is what a fantasist calls a realist
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,866

30th November 2006, 07:49 AM	#15
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Dark Side of the Sun Posts: 7,482	with CTers its all, then some, the some more, then all, then some again, whatever suits their mood CTers: Only 12 people would have to be involved Skeptic: What about X Agency? CTer: They're in on it. Skeptic: What about Y Company? CTer: They're in on it. Skeptic: What about Z Group? CTer: They're in on it. Skeptic: How are these hundreds of people ALL keepign quiet? CTer: I told you, only 12 people needed to be involved...
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

30th November 2006, 07:57 AM	#16
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,866	similar to the CD claim: CT: the towers were controlled demolition Skeptic: No they weren't, a plane flew into the tower and destroyed major structural elem.... CT: Nah! Those planes couldn't cause enough damage to lead to a collapse...had to be CD Skeptic: You have any idea how much explosive and time it would have taken to CD those towers? CT: It wouldn't have had to been much Skeptic: How so? CT: Well the damage caused by the planes...... Skeptic: You're not very bright are you?
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,866