I don't know what there is to say on this whole thing, or what so drives people like "9/11-investigator" to pedal unsupported theories in rejection of evidences. But what interests me more is the disparity there is between skeptics and “conspiracists” (so to speak).
For quite some time I had a Rene Descartes quote in my signature:
dubium sapientiae initium - "doubt is the origin of wisdom". Doubt is a central tenet of skeptical and critical thinking, doubting things based on what is supporting a given claim coincided with the realism of it. It's an analysis of a collection of evidences and making a judgement on the validity, quantity and relevance of those evidences.
But doubt is intrinsic in conspiracies everywhere. Doubting whether it was a plane that hit those historic towers and caused black plumes to raid New York's skies. Doubting if Hitler's nefarious Germany started World War 2. Doubting whether 6 million humans were systematically slaughtered at the hands of a maniacal Reich; while "9/11-investigator" will sit back and ask us for our evidence.
We could stand here and say that Hitler made his
intentions quite clear:
Once I really am in power, my first and foremost task will be the annihilation of the Jews. As soon as I have the power to do so, I will have gallows built in rows—at the Marienplatz in Munich, for example—as many as traffic allows. Then the Jews will be hanged indiscriminately, and they will remain hanging until they stink; they will hang there as long as the principles of hygiene permit. As soon as they have been untied, the next batch will be strung up, and so on down the line, until the last Jew in Munich has been exterminated.
We could stand here and say that the Nazis made their
actions quite clear:
The Führer once again expressed his determination to clean up the Jews in Europe pitilessly. There must be no squeamish sentimentalism about it. The Jews have deserved the catastrophe that has now overtaken them.
~ Joseph Goebbels
And we say that the war will not end as the Jews imagine it will, namely with the uprooting of the Aryans, but the result of this war will be the complete annihilation of the Jews.
~ Adolf Hitler
'The Jewish people is being exterminated,' every Party member will tell you, 'perfectly clear, it's part of our plans, we're eliminating the Jews, exterminating them.'
~ Heinrich Himmler
We could point to photos of malnourished skeletons with skin around them, laid in piles near gas chambers. We could walk them to Auschwitz and take them inside a concreted room with fingernail marks on the wall from where victims scratched in an attempt to get out. We could direct them to the contemporary documentation showing details of prisoner execution, or the fact that people who were once alive are now dead and gone. We could direct them to the multitudes of survivors and victims who were forced to live in hell on earth for days, if not weeks, if not months, if not years, who swear by statements as eye witnesses.
But conspiracists are not convinced, and will throw their noses to the side, put up a resolute palm and ask importunately for evidence.
Skeptics, who are acclaimed as the doubters, are being out-doubted.
The overwhelming problem is that the men who bear the onus of proof are asking for it. Skeptics will decline evidence for particular, objective reasons. Conspiracists will decline evidence based on an unstable hunch in order to support it. It becomes a whimsical crusade. The conspiracist behind wayward theories like Holocaust denial are fighting a cause, and use subjective interpretation to support their theory that they are already standing behind, as opposed to looking at the evidence and admitting an interpretation based on the analysis of it; saying that ‘until I am presented with sufficient proof otherwise, I will reside alongside the realistic version of events supported by evidence which balances the possibility of its veracity’.
A skeptic's
modus opperandi is not to doubt everything and anything and continue blindly to do so. It is to carefully place doubt in areas where the evidence does not correlate to likelihood. Contrastigly, conspiracy theories are all too often misplaced doubt. The ability to doubt does not make you smart, nor correct.
I want to say to you, “9/11-investigator”:
There is an important difference between doubt, and excessive denial of evidence. It will come down to the discretion of your decisions on which side of the line you stand on.
Alex.
