Common Sense

[negativ]

Edit - bleh, duplicate post.

 

[ktesibios]

They got mesmerized
By lullabies
And limbo danced
In pairs
Please lock that door
It don't make much sense
That common sense
Don't make no sense
No more

-John Prine

 

[GlennB]

Now, back to counter intuitive examples...come on people, we need lots to throw at the next troofer to come here full of it.... common sense, that it.

Well, clearly a big strong animal like an elephant will cope with a 6' drop much better than a feeble little cat eh? Common sense, innit?

 

[Darth Rotor]

Isn't psychology fascinating? I made a very keen observation some time back... about how I didn't think all of you were acting like real skeptics because you weren't skeptical of the official story when it has a million holes in it.

I love when I have an original idea or notion that is beautifully echoed with other research and analysis. Pseudoskeptics - yes, what a perfect nomenclature for this bunch of habitual debunkers.

What strawman official story line do you assume I, for example, ascribe to?

DR

 

[28th Kingdom]

Common sense would dictate:

...that the sun rotates around the earth.

What commonly known information are you applying to this situation - that would lead you to believe this?

...that if I drop a 1 lb iron ball and a 10 lb iron ball from the same height at the same time, that the 10 lb would hit the ground first.

What pertinent common knowledge about the world are you applying to this event? i.e. If a is like b...than a must be like c.

...that the earth is flat.

Common Sense is not about believing what your eyes tell you. Common Sense is a sense beyond your five senses... although it uses certain information from those (5) senses in order to form a higher intuitive-like sense.

...nothing could live at the bottom of the ocean

What are you applying to this scenario? The common belief that humans need oxygen to live, thus everything must need oxygen to live? But, fish aren't human...and neither are deep-sea creatures. Humans, can't breathe underwater, but we know fish can... You are so far from reality.

...that the seasons are caused by the shape of earth's orbit around the sun

Do huh? Dude, get yer head out of Uranus.

...rockets can't work in space because there's nothing to push against

Oh boy...

Common sense should never be used in any type of scientific investigation because it leads to false assumptions which invalidate the investigation.

Common sense ideas tend to relate to events within human experience, and thus commensurate with human scale. Thus there is no commonsense intuition of, for example, the behavior of the universe at subatomic distances or speeds approaching that of light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/commonsense

 

[Darth Rotor]

I think this is a poor attempt at sarcasm... but you never know.

Would a kid be able to drive a 18-wheeler at high speed into a building? Heck yeah!
oh that's a lot of surely. And I get to be on your prestigious ignore list! Oh joy!
Heh... you're projecting.

The word you seek in describing 28thKlutzdom is "manure" not "maneur." Just thought I'd help out, given the multiple iterations.

I offer you my condolences, no, my congratulations, that 28thKumStain has put you on ignore. Lucky you.

DR

 

[slingblade]

Common sense ideas tend to relate to events within human experience, and thus commensurate with human scale. Thus there is no commonsense intuition of, for example, the behavior of the universe at subatomic distances or speeds approaching that of light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/commonsense

I see you read it, but could not comprehend it. I am not surprised.

Now, look at what is bolded and please tell me how you apply commmon sense to an event which had never happened before.

 

[ConspiRaider]

In the Northern Hemisphere, since it's warm in the summer and cold in the winter, then the Earth must be closer to the Sun in the summer than it is in the winter. Common sense, dude!

 

[uk_dave]

When I die.. I shall soar with angels. And, when I die to the angels.. what I shall become - you cannot imagine.

Oh yes I can

 

[Kochanski]

Isn't psychology fascinating? I made a very keen observation some time back... about how I didn't think all of you were acting like real skeptics because you weren't skeptical of the official story when it has a million holes in it.

I love when I have an original idea or notion that is beautifully echoed with other research and analysis. Pseudoskeptics - yes, what a perfect nomenclature for this bunch of habitual debunkers.

I am very glad I wasn't drinking my coffee at the moment I read this or I would have sprayed my monitor while I was LMAO.

 

[Curnir]

The word you seek in describing 28thKlutzdom is "manure" not "maneur." Just thought I'd help out, given the multiple iterations.

Actually I was not trying to describe 28, I was looking for a synonym for the title of Penn & Tellers tv show. Come to think of it I could have used 'Humbug'.
*Curnir sighs*
Hindsight is 20/20.


Thanks anyway.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Actually I was not trying to describe 28, I was looking for a synonym for the title of Penn & Tellers tv show. Come to think of it I could have used 'Humbug'.
*Curnir sighs*
Hindsight is 20/20.


Thanks anyway.

P&T Bulls Hit

 

[Darth Rotor]

Actually I was not trying to describe 28, I was looking for a synonym for the title of Penn & Tellers tv show. Come to think of it I could have used 'Humbug'.
*Curnir sighs*
Hindsight is 20/20.


Thanks anyway.

Well, much of what 28thKowDung posts is a steaming pile of manure.

You could use "bullspit." A number of others use that.

DR

 

[defaultdotxbe]

What commonly known information are you applying to this situation - that would lead you to believe this?

and what commonly known information lets you understand how 110 story skyscrapers collapse? is it s common enough evoent to apply common sense?

 

[CHF]

....in order to espy the truth about 9/11 you need the ability to piece together information in a way that forms a big picture.

Oh boy! Does this mean that you're the first twoofer EVER to take all his 9/11 "proof" and tally it all up into a logical narrative?

This I gotta hear!

 

[Gravy]

Common Sense is not about believing what your eyes tell you. Common Sense is a sense beyond your five senses... although it uses certain information from those (5) senses in order to form a higher intuitive-like sense.

Do try not to babble.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Common Sense is not about believing what your eyes tell you. Common Sense is a sense beyond your five senses... although it uses certain information from those (5) senses in order to form a higher intuitive-like sense.

Equivocation. This is like saying, "I've got lots of sense; in fact, I've got 50 cents in my pocket right now."

What are you applying to this scenario? The common belief that humans need oxygen to live, thus everything must need oxygen to live? But, fish aren't human...and neither are deep-sea creatures. Humans, can't breathe underwater, but we know fish can... You are so far from reality.

It is not common sense that humans need oxygen to live; we know that from study and experimentation. Common sense tells us that we need AIR to live, and that fish need WATER to live. It is science that tells us that we both need OXYGEN to live.

Common sense ideas tend to relate to events within human experience, and thus commensurate with human scale. Thus there is no commonsense intuition of, for example, the behavior of the universe at subatomic distances or speeds approaching that of light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/commonsense

Nor of millions of pounds of concrete and steel falling onto an immense man-made structure.

 

[Gravy]

Here, 28K, let me help.

Let's take a different event and reveal how it was an inside job. I'm sick of the 9/11 nonsense, so let's take something in which there are now no living survivors.

For this example, I claim the sinking of the RMS Titanic was a conspiracy.

The current Troother system is to make endless lists of either unsupported claims or so-called questions that attack a million tiny bits of the official story. A) isn't big enough. Why is B) ten degrees off center. I heard that C) said such and such. There's no coherence and often contradiction in their questions. Not enough body parts versus no plane at all versus drone/missile in your current gruesome example.

Instead, form a logical argument that takes all evidence into account.

I claim that the discovered wreck of the Titanic shows unmistakable signs of a torpedo hit. I present pictures of that hole and compare it to other torpedo holes in that era. I find experts in iceberg and torpedo damage. I do not entertain the possibility that it was a magic torpedo or a German beam weapon designed to create a hole that looks like a torpedo. I do not make claims that it cannot be an iceberg if the vast consensus of experts say it was an iceberg. I do not claim later that by "torpedo" I meant "mine" or "bomb" or "guy in steerage with a pickaxe". I do not attack the iceberg believers or experts and claim they've been paid off by the bottled water industry. I do not create long lists of vaguely iceberg related questions. I do not bring the motives of the Captain into question when he's dead and has nothing to say on the matter. I do not mention the movie Titanic, the stage play or the book written by Cussler.

Even if this, just this is all you can prove (not who shot the torpedo or why) then you've successfully shown a flaw in the official theory. The problem with every Truther I've been exposed to is that they stop at the first sentence of the above paragraph.

Tirdun, I appreciate this post and have nominated it for The Language Award. (Although the bottled water lobby is stronger than you know.)

 

[28th Kingdom]

Has a false flag operation ever happened in the world? Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag


Has a country ever killed it's own people as a pretext to fight an external enemy? Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukden_incident


Has Israel ever engaged in any false-flag operations? Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_Bombing


Any of those against the US? Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair


Has the US ever been involved in any false-flag operations? Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladio


Has the US ever considered engaging in false-flag operations against its own people? Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods


Now, does everyone (CTist and/or Gov Shills) believe that planted explosives could have brought down the towers? Yes. Had explosives ever brought down a steel structured high-rise pre 9/11? Yes. Had a plane impact ever brought down a steel structured high-rise pre 9/11? No. Had a fire ever brought down a steel-structured high-rise pre 9/11? No. Had hurricane-like (debris) exterior damage ever made a steel-structured high-rise totally collapse in a symmetrical fashion at quasi-free fall speeds? No.

What are the odds that 19 amateur pilots with box cutters and plastic knives could have hijacked four commercial airliners with a 100% success rate, and then proceeded to maneuver these aircraft (past the world's most elite and advanced military defense system) to three exact destinations while hitting 100% of their targets? 1 in an inconceivable number

What are the odds that Israel, backed with the fourth largest funded military in the world, could have had some agents plant explosives in a privately owned building complex, that is owned by a Zionist? 1 in 1

What are the odds that elements (the highest ranking officials) within the USG government could hand down orders that effectively disarm NORAD? 1 in 1

What are the odds that a commercial size airliner can be hijacked via remote control and flown to exact locations. 1 in 1

Another technology devised by the U.S. military for remote control of huge airplanes is named Global Hawk. On April 24, 2001, four months before "'9/11,'" Britain's International Television News reported: "A robot plane has made aviation history by becoming the first unmanned aircraft to fly across the Pacific Ocean."

The former Minister of Technology said: '"The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s, whereby they could rescue hijacked planes by intervening into the computer piloting."'

http://www.911review.com/means/remotecontrol.html


Now... start piecing everything together... and then tell me which theory is more far fetched.

 

[Gravy]

Good one, UK_Dave.

Docking In Earth Orbit:
If 2 vehicles are in the same orbit, and the guy 5 miles behind needs to dock with the guy up ahead, common sense says that the trailing guy hits the accelerator so he can catch up. But it's the opposite. He actually has to slow down to catch up. Slowing down drops him into a lower orbit, causing him to move faster around the earth.

Now that's just crazy talk. Are you some sort of Warlock?