Dragon Family lawsuit against the United Nations

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Check this out:

In a way I'm more skeptical than the ordinary skeptics, because if for example mainstream science said that mind control is real, then most skeptics would accept that claim while I would still be unsure until I can verify it for myself.

My point is that I don't even automatically trust mainstream scientific evidence. For example, I believe all evidence for Einstein's relativity is faked. In that sense I'm more skeptical than most skeptics.

His performance in this thread indicates a strong belief in mind control on his part. What he's describing here, then, isn't skepticism; it's contrarianism.

 

[Garrison]

Oh, CT is not an alternative as I see it. Conspiracy theories are a complement to ordinary science.

And you can provide a case where that has proven to be true?

 

[Anders Lindman]

When has conspiracism ever produced anything useful or helpful?

And you can provide a case where that has proven to be true?

If I hadn't learned about conspiracy theories I would probably still believe the official 9/11 story. So for me conspiracy theories have been useful.

 

[JayUtah]

If I hadn't learned about conspiracy theories I would probably still believe the official 9/11 story. So for me conspiracy theories have been useful.

So the only thing a conspiracy theory is good for is giving you something to believe in? Sheesh, even religion does that. But then many religions go on to provide some redeeming social value like feeding the poor. So conspiracism isn't even as good as religion.

A list of the things science produces to benefit mankind would clog this thread. Still think conspiracism is superior?

 

[Dancing David]

I just posted evidence in my previous posts. That should be real enough. We are not discussing Santa Claus here.

No you are quoting sources that are not the original source and from pretend psychology with no documentation, 1968 and 1951.

There are no alters, you have no evidence of alters.

 

[Dancing David]

Well, mind control experiments are a huge violation of human rights. That should give you a hint of why there are no experiments like that published in peer-reviewed science journals.

God of the gaps.

Or should I say Smurf cabal mind control of the gaps?

I bet you think that X-ray glasses are real too?

 

[Dancing David]

One of the quotes I posted was a firsthand examples of mind control. Sure, I think the meta research about mind control is valid, but I doubt that it will convince skeptics that mind control is real.

Nope, it was a ******** allegation that was undocumented or evidenced.

 

[Dancing David]

I have posted about why I doubt Einstein's relativity in other threads. But ok, it would be difficult to prove that scientific evidence about relativity has been faked.

Science is actually vulnerable to fraud. And it's very difficult to prove fraud since science is today's unquestioned religion and dogma. The scientific method is good, but it requires that it is free from fraud, manipulation and conspiracies.

And say that the Artichoke/Bluebird documents were frauds perpetrated to get money from the Feds.

 

[Dancing David]

No, no. Completely wrong. I have said all along that the Replicants in Bladerunner is NOT the type of mind control Svali and others have described.

And what evidence is there besides Svali's word. I mean really , you doubt that GPS works and that relativity exists, but you believe some undocumented source of the interwebs?

 

[R.A.F.]

If I hadn't learned about conspiracy theories I would probably still believe the official 9/11 story. So for me conspiracy theories have been useful.

Oh, my...how sad...sounds like once you "discovered" conspiracies, you chose to believe them depending on your whim.


...and that is not how the validity of an idea is determined...at least not in the real world.

 

[abaddon]

If I hadn't learned about conspiracy theories I would probably still believe the official 9/11 story. So for me conspiracy theories have been useful.

"rollin, rollin, rollin, keep those goalposts rollin, RAWHIDE"

 

[Anders Lindman]

No you are quoting sources that are not the original source and from pretend psychology with no documentation, 1968 and 1951.

There are no alters, you have no evidence of alters.

Classified documentation may exist. Or even declassified documentation, since it was from several decades ago!

 

[Tomtomkent]

Classified documentation may exist. Or even declassified documentation, since it was from several decades ago!

And if you showed us some that would be "evidence". What you have are "stories".

 

[Mojo]

Check this out:

In a way I'm more skeptical than the ordinary skeptics, because if for example mainstream science said that mind control is real, then most skeptics would accept that claim while I would still be unsure until I can verify it for myself.

My point is that I don't even automatically trust mainstream scientific evidence. For example, I believe all evidence for Einstein's relativity is faked. In that sense I'm more skeptical than most skeptics.

His performance in this thread indicates a strong belief in mind control on his part. What he's describing here, then, isn't skepticism; it's contrarianism.

See also:

I am modesty aside a super skeptic: where everyone is in the bandwagon, like taking up Buddhism or bashing acupuncture, then I will take the opposite tack.

 

[Dancing David]

Classified documentation may exist. Or even declassified documentation, since it was from several decades ago!

And the veracity of it is questionable.

 

[Anders Lindman]

And the veracity of it is questionable.

Aha! So you are saying that declassified documents about this may exist?

 

[Mojo]

The only evidence you accept is the peer-reviewed kind. Talk about self-fulfilling prophecy.

And there you go with the goalposts again. It isn't to do with "self fulfilling prophecies", it's to do with the essential non-falsifiability of conspiracy theories.

If there's no evidence, you claim that this is because of the conspiracy; if evidence is presented but is debunked it is because the conspiracy has planted it to discredit the theory.

 

[TjW]

False memories for short events, such as for covering up gaps in memory timelines may be possible to implant in people. But longer and more extensive false memories would require extreme sci-fi technology in my opinion.

Yes, that's exactly the opinion I would expect such a program to implant.

 

[Craig4]

Classified documentation may exist. Or even declassified documentation, since it was from several decades ago!

Actually you can read a great deal of that about MK ULTRA and the Army Inspector General Report as well as findings of Universities involved in the program.

 

[JayUtah]

This just shows how you cling to the scientific community like dogma.

No, he just logically refuted your approach -- correctly so. You have fallen into a false dilemma. You have asserted that were science fails, conspriacism must prevail. But you have failed to consider the case where conspiracism also fails.

Toward that end I have attempted to ask you what process exists in conspiracism to vet its findings. So far your only answer is that if the public believes it, it must be true.

That's religion and not real science.

Hardly. I argue that conspiracism is far more in line with religion, and I'm not the only author to think that.

Conspiracism serves only itself; belief is the only goal. Conspiracism contains no provision for rational disputation or review. Conspiracism is based solely on the conjectural-yet-dogmatic declaration of its author.