The case against Dr. Paul

[Suddenly]

It's interesting that in your heart you believe your beliefs in the matter are superior to those who disagree with you. Do you disbelieve in all conspiracies? What about Iran-Contra? Do you believe the CIA is as pure as the virgin snow?

(some comments for the heck of it, seeing I'm on the list of the chosen...)

Lets see here

Dash: "My personal understanding, although I haven't dug into it at all..."

v.

Tokorona: "I've made WW2 studying a hobby of mine."

Textbook woo tactic:

Woo: I'm going to hedge here by making a throwaway comment that I've not looked into it and that not really making a full on claim, but here is the claim.

Skeptic: Well, I've looked into it quite a bit, and you are wrong. It is a silly claim.

Woo: Must be nice to be mister smartypants, looking down on people who don't agree with your sheeple beliefs. I'll bet when people thought the world was flat blah blah blah.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Anyway, going back to the gold standard nonsense, something occurred to me.


Right now, we have a slew of libertarian types talking about buying gold and wanting the US to go back to the gold standard.

Now, it is obvious that if we were to do this, given the size of the economy, gold would skyrocket in value. We've covered this, Pinky and the Brain and so on.

It just didn't occur to me that we are talking about libertarians here, who are grabbing up a type of asset and are begging the Federal Government to take steps that would artificially cause the asset value to skyrocket, making them rich at the same time everyone else is suffering through a mindbending depression.

And they call mainstream politics corrupt.... jeez...

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

It's interesting that in your heart you believe your beliefs in the matter are superior to those who disagree with you. Do you disbelieve in all conspiracies? What about Iran-Contra? Do you believe the CIA is as pure as the virgin snow?

Fallacious argument. I know Iran-Contra was an example of a real conspiracy. CIA probably isn't pure.

(Incidently, Strawman)

Honestly, now, how can you really know Pearl Harbor wasn't a setup? Are you immune to bias in all evidence you read? My guess is you started out disbelieving any Pearl Harbor conspiracy from the word go, and dismissed all evidence to the contrary.

Argument to incrdiblity, ignorance. (And atm, I'm actually unable to do much research on it, my current reading is Albert Speer's memoir)

You can't know anything. You can only have opinions. In your opinion the sum total of evidence you've seen tends to a specific interpretation. It's a tactic used on these forums to call anyone who disagrees a "woo" spouter or whatever.

Argument to ignorance.

I've seen immense levels of corruption in the USA. It's everywhere. So I tend to not trust anything the USA does. You seem to trust the USA implicitly, so you accept everything at face value. I admit I don't know for sure. But you, on the other hand, know the truth about everything you care to comment on.

Ad hom + argument to incredbility. While there COULD be levels of corruption everywhere, without hard evidence, I can't just go on a gut feeling.

 

[Elizabeth I]

(Is anyone else having flashes of the guy in True Believer who was convinced that the phone company killed Kennedy because he wanted to break it up? Just me? Great movie by the way...)

I thought that was Teddy, not John.

 

[dash]

Three Thoughts

Thought #1:
I would recommend people here study the works, debates and videos of Noam Chomsky. There is a man who could crush every one of you dust-mites. An enormous amount of his material you would almost certainly label as "woo". He's a very, very intelligent and wise man. You people aren't intelligent, nor are you wise. One day you might acquire intelligence or wisdom. I hope you will.

Thought #2:
Here is an excerpt from a very good book called "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest" by Ken Kesey:

McMurphy puts his cigarette back between his teeth and folds his hands over the wooden chair back and leans his chin on them, squinting one eye against the smoke. He looks at Harding with his other eye a while, then starts talking with that cigarette wagging up and down in his lips.

"Well say, buddy, is this the way these leetle meetings usually go?"

"Usually go?" Harding's humming stops. He's not chewing his cheeks any more but he still stares ahead, past McMurphy's shoulder.

"Is this the usual pro-cedure for these Group Ther'py shindigs? Bunch of chickens at a peckin' party?"

Harding's head turns with a jerk and his eyes find McMurphy, like it's the first time he knows that anybody's sitting in front of him. His face creases in the middle when he bites his cheeks again, and this makes it look like he's grinning. He pulls his shoulders back and scoots to the back of the chair and tries to look relaxed.

"A 'pecking party'? I fear your quaint down-home speech is wasted on me, my friend. I have not the slightest inclination what you're talking about."

"Why then, I'll just explain it to you." McMurphy raises his voice; though he doesn't look at the other Acutes listening behind him, it's them he's talking to. "The flock gets sight of a spot of blood on some chicken and they all go to peckin' at it, see, till they rip the chicken to shreds, blood and bones and feathers. But usually a couple of the flock gets spotted in the fracas, then it's their turn. And a few more gets spots and gets pecked to death, and more and more. Oh, a peckin' party can wipe out the whole flock in a matter of a few hours, buddy, I seen it. A mighty awsome sight. The only way to prevent it--with chickens-- is to clip blinders on them. So's they can't see."

Harding laces his long fingers around a knee and draws the knee toward him, leaning back in the chair. "A pecking party. That certainly is a pleasant analogy, my friend."

"And that's just exactly what that meeting I just set through reminded me of, buddy, if you want to know the dirty truth. It reminded me of a flock of dirty chickens."

"So that makes me the chicken with the spot of blood, friend?"

"That's right, buddy."

Thought #3

I've decided I don't care to spend any more time on the JREF site. The level of toxicity is just beyond anything I've ever experienced before. What passes for debate is nothing of the kind. Instead of the substance of the arguments being debated, the wording and phraseology is given full attention. It's as if the words written in the letter are ignored, and the debate is on the chemical composition of the ink used. When that fails, attack the speaker with insults and derision. Also use the coward's method -- attack in groups. I'm convinced there are a fair amount of sock puppets used as well. Basically I've come to the conclusion this forum is populated with children, pretending to be adults.

If the people and behaviour of this forum are an example of how the world is going to function, I want no part of it whatsoever. What I've seen here has disgusted me more than any aspect of human nature I've seen for a long time.

Enjoy your pecking party. Goodbye!

-Dave
PS I think the underlying cause of this behaviour I see here is fear. For some reason you people are insanely afraid of something. I don't know what it is. But the only explanation I can see for the rage and anger present here is fear. Perhaps you're afraid you're wrong about some things, after all. Who knows? Keep in mind that there is a reality that exists out there, that doesn't change regardless of the outcome of debates on this forum. If the US economy is destined to collapse into an unthinkable morass, your belief that it won't will not make one iota of difference. It is this thought that fills me with a deep, deep sense of satisfaction and calm.

 

[volatile]

You come here telling us black is white and up is down and are surprised when we ask you to justify your claims? And then you invoke the good name of Chomsky as if he wouldn't also laugh you away as the crank you so clearly are?

 

[Corsair 115]

Without the dollar/oil tie, what happens? Suppose Saudi Arabia accepts any currency for their oil? Say Euros? Or Chinese Yuan? Then there is just that much less demand for dollars.

But, again, what practical difference does it make? Currencies are exchanged from one to another all the time, and the market is constantly reasessing how one nation's currency is valued against another.

As long as the ability to do foreign currency exhanging continues, where's the problem?

My personal understanding, although I haven't dug into it at all, is that the US goaded the Japanese into attacking. The US wanted the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor, or any other equivalent attack. The US knew about the attack and let it occur.

It was pretty obvious to everyone at that time that Japan and the U.S. were headed towards war; the likelihood of a diplomatic breakthrough to ease tensions were remote. The only questions were when and where war would be initiated.

Honestly, now, how can you really know Pearl Harbor wasn't a setup?

Because there is much documentary evidence and first-hand accounts from those who were involved from both sides to make the picture pretty darned certain.

The attack on Pearl Harbor to start the war, rather than an attack on the Philippines, was initiated only at the insistence of Admiral Yamamoto. He was the driving force behind getting the Pearl Harbor plan adopted. Remove him, and the raid on Pearl Harbor doesn't happen. Instead, war proceeds pretty much as both sides expected and planned for: Japan attacks the Philippines. The U.S. Navy then sails across the Pacific in response, and a pitched battle occurs in and around Japanese waters.

 

[rtalman]

Thought #1:
I would recommend people here study the works, debates and videos of Noam Chomsky. There is a man who could crush every one of you dust-mites. An enormous amount of his material you would almost certainly label as "woo". He's a very, very intelligent and wise man. You people aren't intelligent, nor are you wise. One day you might acquire intelligence or wisdom. I hope you will.

Thought #3

I've decided I don't care to spend any more time on the JREF site. The level of toxicity is just beyond anything I've ever experienced before. What passes for debate is nothing of the kind. Instead of the substance of the arguments being debated, the wording and phraseology is given full attention. It's as if the words written in the letter are ignored, and the debate is on the chemical composition of the ink used. When that fails, attack the speaker with insults and derision. Also use the coward's method -- attack in groups. I'm convinced there are a fair amount of sock puppets used as well. Basically I've come to the conclusion this forum is populated with children, pretending to be adults.

If the people and behaviour of this forum are an example of how the world is going to function, I want no part of it whatsoever. What I've seen here has disgusted me more than any aspect of human nature I've seen for a long time.

Enjoy your pecking party. Goodbye!

-Dave

Sayonara #3, for the record.
DLTDHYITAOTWO

 

[Suddenly]

I think that was goodbye #1 for the forum, #3 for the thread.

Seriously... somebody should PM him with skepticalcommunity.com's address, tell him people are much nicer over there.

Heh...

 

[David Wong]

So now that he's gone, is there a specific personality disorder attached to what he was doing, specifically the, "I have just read about this subject for a few minutes today, but I hereby declare myself an authority and must educate the world."

At no point, on any subject, could he accept that there are people here with more education on the topic than him. He came into his other thread, spouting physics stuff he skimmed from some article he had just read, and when actual working scientists rebutted him he flew into a rage about how hard it is to educate us kids these days, what with our short attention spans and all.

I haven't seen any of the other woos who wander through here adopt quite that tone, where he seemed genuinely frustrated that we, his students, were not absorbing his lesson. I mean... on some level doesn't he factually realize he doesn't have all that much information on the topics?

I admit I've gone to parties before and in the heat of conversation, pretended to know more than I actually did on some subject or another, trying to impress people. But when you run into an actual professional who works in that field you get caught, well, that's that. You're forced to admit you're a novice.

This guy's reaction was different, and in both threads he could not conceive for even one moment that there existed, anywhere in the universe, any more information on these topics beyond what he had read.

Kind of weird. I mean, lots of people are stubborn, but this was different.

 

[rtalman]

So now that he's gone, is there a specific personality disorder attached to what he was doing, specifically the, "I have just read about this subject for a few minutes today, but I hereby declare myself an authority and must educate the world."

Sounds like garden variety puberty to me.

 

[Richard Masters]

Honestly, now, how can you really know Pearl Harbor wasn't a setup? Are you immune to bias in all evidence you read? My guess is you started out disbelieving any Pearl Harbor conspiracy from the word go, and dismissed all evidence to the contrary.

You can't know anything. You can only have opinions. In your opinion the sum total of evidence you've seen tends to a specific interpretation. It's a tactic used on these forums to call anyone who disagrees a "woo" spouter or whatever.

Iran-Contra is a good example. It's difficult to believe the leaders of the United States don't adopt some Machiavellian tactics every once in a while. To dismiss Iran-Contra and our numerous coups d'etat in South America is just more evidence of the inconsistency around here. You either agree with the majority (who happen to have formed a comfy little circle of "skepticism") or you are an outsider to engages in "woo".

In my opinion, that's the very definition of a cult. Wildcat's cult, of which Tokorona is a part of, is the very definition of hypocrisy.

They ought to stop throwing around thought terminating clichés like "that's just woo" because the mindless way in which that word is used around here renders it meaningless.

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

Iran-Contra is a good example. It's difficult to believe the leaders of the United States don't adopt some Machiavellian tactics every once in a while. To dismiss Iran-Contra and our numerous coups d'etat in South America is just more evidence of the inconsistency around here. You either agree with the majority (who happen to have formed a comfy little circle of "skepticism") or you are an outsider to engages in "woo".

In my opinion, that's the very definition of a cult. Wildcat's cult, of which Tokorona is a part of, is the very definition of hypocrisy.

They ought to stop throwing around thought terminating clichés like "that's just woo" because the mindless way in which that word is used around here renders it meaningless.

You are remarkably lucky I put no one ignore. Because you're now being an [rule10] idiot. The point of it is this: He put forward no compellling arguments. Zero.

On top of that, you are nearly a lier yourself.

To dismiss Iran-Contra and our numerous coups d'etat in South America is just more evidence of the inconsistency around here

However.
I said:
Fallacious argument. I know Iran-Contra was an example of a real conspiracy. CIA probably isn't pure.

Now, I simply don't know about hte coups d'etat in South America, as it's not within my field of interest. Maybe after I take USA History II I'll know more. But to say I did that is a lie, sir.

Thought #1:
I would recommend people here study the works, debates and videos of Noam Chomsky. There is a man who could crush every one of you dust-mites. An enormous amount of his material you would almost certainly label as "woo". He's a very, very intelligent and wise man. You people aren't intelligent, nor are you wise. One day you might acquire intelligence or wisdom. I hope you will.

I've seen his works. They aren't really woo, but I disagree with his conclusions to a profound degree - the media doesn't concsiously filter them out as much now.

Thought #3

I've decided I don't care to spend any more time on the JREF site. The level of toxicity is just beyond anything I've ever experienced before. What passes for debate is nothing of the kind. Instead of the substance of the arguments being debated, the wording and phraseology is given full attention. It's as if the words written in the letter are ignored, and the debate is on the chemical composition of the ink used. When that fails, attack the speaker with insults and derision. Also use the coward's method -- attack in groups. I'm convinced there are a fair amount of sock puppets used as well. Basically I've come to the conclusion this forum is populated with children, pretending to be adults.

What. I hope you do know that even Chomsky says word choices is important. However, the JREF is toxic? What are you on, man? Sketpicalcommunity is worse, and don't get me started on the black holes that are normal debate in forums. As for groups - what, you think we coordinate this? This is a joke, right? (As for derision, again, that is a tactic when the argument presented is laughably bad.)

If the people and behaviour of this forum are an example of how the world is going to function, I want no part of it whatsoever. What I've seen here has disgusted me more than any aspect of human nature I've seen for a long time.

Enjoy your pecking party. Goodbye!

-Dave
PS I think the underlying cause of this behaviour I see here is fear. For some reason you people are insanely afraid of something. I don't know what it is. But the only explanation I can see for the rage and anger present here is fear. Perhaps you're afraid you're wrong about some things, after all. Who knows? Keep in mind that there is a reality that exists out there, that doesn't change regardless of the outcome of debates on this forum. If the US economy is destined to collapse into an unthinkable morass, your belief that it won't will not make one iota of difference. It is this thought that fills me with a deep, deep sense of satisfaction and calm.

The US economy has other issues, but the Fed is not one of them.

Ja mata ne!

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

My tone in the previous post is a bit strong, and I'd like to apologize for that.

 

[OneShotKi11]

Inflation is only good if wages rise with prices. When inflation increases because some moron decides to borrow money from the next three generations to create the illusion that we are well off, it hurts everybody, long-term.

When the man controlling the money supply thinks that it is his job to keep working people worried about their employment prospects if they don't go along with the corporate program, we have a problem.

The Fed needs to be reigned in, but not by abolishing it and letting the corporations decide the monetary policies for the country, which is what Libertarianism would lead to.

If wages rise with Prices arent you just back at where you were in the first place?

Wouldnt that just cause more inflation?

 

[OneShotKi11]

Tokorona US History II isnt going to teach anything real. It will just inform you of an event and probably the most popular belief that goes along with it.

 

[Richard Masters]

You are remarkably lucky I put no one ignore. Because you're now being an [rule10] idiot. The point of it is this: He put forward no compellling arguments. Zero.

On top of that, you are nearly a lier yourself.

Not quite.

However.
I said:
Fallacious argument. I know Iran-Contra was an example of a real conspiracy. CIA probably isn't pure.

I'm not saying that you (singular) dismiss Iran-Contra. I'm saying it's hypocritical in general to hold the view that the government does no wrong, ever.

Now, I simply don't know about hte coups d'etat in South America, as it's not within my field of interest. Maybe after I take USA History II I'll know more. But to say I did that is a lie, sir.

You took my criticism too personally. I did direct part of it at you, as you chose to call me a troll while ignoring WildCat's trolling in the same thread. So I figured your mindless defense of WildCat was an example of cultish behavior and this was my only criticism specifically relevant to you.

Other than that I was merely saying, and I clarify here: What specifically makes you certain that a particular event in history was retold correctly, when our understanding of history changes as we find new information and analyze it. And sometimes that information never comes. I personally don't know whether Pearl Harbor was an LIHOP/MIHOP type incident, but I find it plausible given our history. From a skeptical point of view, I just don't know. I would attribute greater percentage of certainty the the standard version, but the alternative LIHOP attribution, while less likely, is certainly plausible.

As for the harsh comments you allude to in a later post, no hard feelings. I can understand my criticism wasn't all that clear.

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

Eh. I imagine it woudl teach me a bit. I've been lucky so far to ahve teachers who looked at both sides of an event, and I hope it continues

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

Not quite.


I'm not saying that you (singular) dismiss Iran-Contra. I'm saying it's hypocritical in general to hold the view that the government does no wrong, ever.



You took my criticism too personally. I did direct part of it at you, as you chose to call me a troll while ignoring WildCat's trolling in the same thread. So I figured your mindless defense of WildCat was an example of cultish behavior and this was my only criticism specifically relevant to you.

Other than that I was merely saying, and I clarify here: What specifically makes you certain that a particular event in history was retold correctly, when our understanding of history changes as we find new information and analyze it. And sometimes that information never comes. I personally don't know whether Pearl Harbor was an LIHOP/MIHOP type incident, but I find it plausible given our history. From a skeptical point of view, I just don't know. I would attribute greater percentage of certainty the the standard version, but the alternative LIHOP attribution, while less likely, is certainly plausible.

As for the harsh comments you allude to in a later post, no hard feelings. I can understand my criticism wasn't all that clear.

I am.. reasonably certain the probablity closely approaches 0. I mean, I will do more research on it, just to make sure I remember correctly, but.

[/end derail?]

 

[Elizabeth I]

I'm saying it's hypocritical in general to hold the view that the government does no wrong, ever.

Which JREF Forum are you on? Who on this one has EVER said that?

 

[Mister Agenda]

Anyway, going back to the gold standard nonsense, something occurred to me.


Right now, we have a slew of libertarian types talking about buying gold and wanting the US to go back to the gold standard.

Now, it is obvious that if we were to do this, given the size of the economy, gold would skyrocket in value. We've covered this, Pinky and the Brain and so on.

It just didn't occur to me that we are talking about libertarians here, who are grabbing up a type of asset and are begging the Federal Government to take steps that would artificially cause the asset value to skyrocket, making them rich at the same time everyone else is suffering through a mindbending depression.

And they call mainstream politics corrupt.... jeez...

I must say, I think you've discovered a new subclass of ad hominem: the argument from 'you can't trust someone who takes their own advice'.

I'm not much of a goldbug myself and I'm staying out of that particular investment on the grounds that I'm not informed enough to predict what it's going to do next. However, it seems that gold goes up pretty reliably when the dollar goes down. If a currency is defined as being worth a certain amount of a particular good, doesn't that pretty much inhibit them swinging wildly in value in relation to each other? Isn't that the point?