The Truth Movement: Finally, Lost in Space

Clayton Moore said:
My point was that once you learn how to talk you don't go back to pointing and grunting.
Click to expand...

An interesting metaphor. I'd say there were three key stages, though; not communicating at all, rudimentary communication (pointing and grunting), and language. Individuals or species can go from the first to the second to the third, or can stick at some particular point, but are unlikely to go backwards (except temporarily between the ages of 13-19 years).

I've pointed out in the past that there are three stages of understanding of 9/11. These are, in order, (1) Unquestioning acceptance of the generally accepted narrative, (2) rejection of the accepted narrative and acceptance of one or more (often a mutually exclusive group) of alternative narratives, and (3) critical understanding of the events of 9/11 leading to a realisation that the generally accepted narrative, while imperfect in some respects, is substantially true. It's extremely common for people to remain at stage 1 or to progress from 1 directly to 3, not uncommon to progress from 1 to 2 to 3 or to start from 2 and progress to 3, and also to reach stage 2 either directly or via stage 1 and to remain there. However, conspicuous by their absence are people who have progressed from stage 3 to stage 2; in other words, who have critically assessed the evidence, initially accepted the conventional narrative, but then found on closer inspection that some evidence is inconsistent with the conventional narrative. I refer to this type as the debunker-turned-truther, and they seem about as easy to track down as Bigfoot. I even held a poll a while back, on the fairly reasonable grounds that this is the place the debunker-turned-truther is most likely to be found, and there were no credible takers - that is to say, nobody identified themself as a debunker-turned-truther who had not previously identified themselves very strongly as never having critically accepted the conventional narrative.

And this is strange. If truther arguments had any merit at all, one might expect that people formerly convinced they were wrong, rather than just the initially undecided, would change their minds to accept them, as many truthers have done with the conventional narrative. The absence of anybody who's followed this sequence, while in no sense a proof of right or wrong, is at the very least strongly indicative that one narrative has a fundamentally greater justification than all the others.

So we have three stages, always in the same order, and debunker is the final stage, not truther. One might ask, then, who are really the ones pointing and grunting?

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
An interesting metaphor. I'd say there were three key stages, though; not communicating at all, rudimentary communication (pointing and grunting), and language. Individuals or species can go from the first to the second to the third, or can stick at some particular point, but are unlikely to go backwards (except temporarily between the ages of 13-19 years).

I've pointed out in the past that there are three stages of understanding of 9/11. These are, in order, (1) Unquestioning acceptance of the generally accepted narrative, (2) rejection of the accepted narrative and acceptance of one or more (often a mutually exclusive group) of alternative narratives, and (3) critical understanding of the events of 9/11 leading to a realisation that the generally accepted narrative, while imperfect in some respects, is substantially true. It's extremely common for people to remain at stage 1 or to progress from 1 directly to 3, not uncommon to progress from 1 to 2 to 3 or to start from 2 and progress to 3, and also to reach stage 2 either directly or via stage 1 and to remain there. However, conspicuous by their absence are people who have progressed from stage 3 to stage 2; in other words, who have critically assessed the evidence, initially accepted the conventional narrative, but then found on closer inspection that some evidence is inconsistent with the conventional narrative. I refer to this type as the debunker-turned-truther, and they seem about as easy to track down as Bigfoot. I even held a poll a while back, on the fairly reasonable grounds that this is the place the debunker-turned-truther is most likely to be found, and there were no credible takers - that is to say, nobody identified themself as a debunker-turned-truther who had not previously identified themselves very strongly as never having critically accepted the conventional narrative.

And this is strange. If truther arguments had any merit at all, one might expect that people formerly convinced they were wrong, rather than just the initially undecided, would change their minds to accept them, as many truthers have done with the conventional narrative. The absence of anybody who's followed this sequence, while in no sense a proof of right or wrong, is at the very least strongly indicative that one narrative has a fundamentally greater justification than all the others.

So we have three stages, always in the same order, and debunker is the final stage, not truther. One might ask, then, who are really the ones pointing and grunting?

Dave
Click to expand...

Insightful...
 
Hate to revive a thread that's gone dormant but I will not give the conspiracy movement the grace period that the OP was kind enough to offer. It was interesting for a couple of years to talk about the engineering and architecture topics but as the OP suggests none of the topics I see these days are new. I can say from experience that 9/11 conspiracies involving controlled demolitions, magical pentagon flyovers, and the like will be relegated to the fringe for the remaining life time that they persist.

The reason I ridicule these theories is for their utter incompetence in performing research to the standards that are academically satisfactory both in my area of study and in multiple other disciplines.

I'm happy to report that I will finish a six year architecture program within four months, and in the last six years at the architecture school I've seen no reference whatsoever to controlled demolition theories. The WTC disasters have been used instead as case studies in our work to understand better ways of designing buildings for the future.

It will be to the utmost honor to be called a shill, government operative, "truster," "bedunker," "beetard," Mossad agent, NWO officer by the the 9/11 conspiracy movement as I move into my professional career in the next several months. My aim is to become a competent professional that helps design buildings that are not only appealing to the occupants but also safe. My humblest regards go out to the truth movement and rather, all 9/11 conspiracy topics that will continue for the next several decades, albeit in a progressively more crippled state (I tend to believe that 9/11 truth is like the women in the movie Death Becomes Her; immortal, yet not quite invulnerable, and last but not least screwball funny). As I'm becoming increasingly less patient with the 9/11 CT discussions, I think that's my queue to move on from this ongoing cycle of repeat topics :)
 
Last edited:
Down to 35 days now...

What's amusing is that, while this thread has been running (almost a month now), the Truthers have been posting in dozens of other threads. Yet, they're collectively unable to provide any responses to this thread.

In other words, they are flat out admitting that all of their discussion, all of the crap they're posting elsewhere is old, tired, and useless.

Yet they do it anyway.

Fascinating.

Still waiting for signs of life.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
I'm happy to report that I will finish a six year architecture program within four months, and in the last six years at the architecture school I've seen no reference whatsoever to controlled demolition theories. The WTC disasters have been used instead as case studies in our work to understand better ways of designing buildings for the future.
Click to expand...
Congratulations. I hope you have a long and fruitful career as an architect.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
I'm happy to report that I will finish a six year architecture program within four months, and in the last six years at the architecture school I've seen no reference whatsoever to controlled demolition theories. The WTC disasters have been used instead as case studies in our work to understand better ways of designing buildings for the future.
Click to expand...
"Beauty from ashes..."

Speaking of which, why do truthers never acknowledge that NIST's "fraud" of a report actually helped save buildings? That wouldn't be the case if explosives caused the collapse.
 
Last edited:
UNLoVedRebel said:
Congratulations. I hope you have a long and fruitful career as an architect.
Click to expand...

Many thanks! I still have have to register with NCAARB, start my IDP progress but I'll get to those things soon enough. In the short term between now and August we have a major project underway, it's one of the other things weighing in right now as it'll be a major time investment once things ramp up later next month. I'll likely be involved with it for a period after graduation :)
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
DC found out that some of the people propagating CD are frauds and threw the baby out with the bathwater. I don't blame him for it. He moved on and doesn't hang around here calling me a doo-doo head.
Click to expand...
DC is an intelligent person who can take facts, evidence, knowledge and form rational conclusions. Something CIT will never do.


The Platypus said:
Which people propagating CD aren't frauds??? How does one tell the difference???
Click to expand...

Doubt she he knows.
 
Last edited:
I have a development to report, which just might edge over the threshold to restart the clock. It's the now-apparent direction of the argument that Major_Tom (and perhaps femr2) have been glacially unfolding for more than a year.

The crux is total mystery. That is, Tom's argument is that all the major truther "theories" as well as the "official theory" are wrong. And in their place, Tom offers not a better theory, but the revelation that what actually happened is a total mystery.

What is still to be revealed is where and how to proceed from there. If the end result of examining all of the available evidence is total mystery, and there is no more evidence available, then the logical reaction should be "well, that was weird" and move on. But Tom clearly does have something more in mind, because he is quite insistent that a certain set of highly selected yet seemingly trivial observations is critically important for everyone to not only understand, but affirm the importance of. He is exerting every ounce of his limited powers of persuasion to get people to agree to those two things: that the picked observations are fundamentally important, and that 9/11 remains a total mystery even when the picked observations are taken into account.

He has also assured us that until we do so, we will not be able to perceive the true nature of reality because we are living in a dream world.

I interpret this as the attempted invention and introduction of a new full-blown form of occultism. The list of picked observations is the nascent cult's arcana. By "arcana" I mean the set of lore, symbols, and manipulations that an occult practice is built around. (As examples of arcana, consider the intricate rules of casting horoscopes, the progressively layered revelations of Scientology, or the full rules set of Pokemon including the stats and characterstics of all the creatures.) It is the barrier of learning the arcana, rather than (in this day and age) outright secrecy, that makes occult practices occult, that is to say, hidden from (not understandable by) outsiders.

I doubt that total mystery can be the final revelation; even if accepted in full it leads nowhere. Rather, total mystery must be only the first stage. The acolyte who has mastered the arcana will be ready to begin learning the deeper revelations beyond total mystery that Major_Tom is holding in reserve. Of course, as in any occult practice those deeper mysteries can only be revealed to those who have committed and progressed far enough to be ready. No one has, nor even really begun, so Major_Tom has plenty of time to think those up, if he hasn't already.

Many of these elements aren't new. Some have been calling the Truthers a "cult" for years, for instance, and they themselves have been talking about "waking people up" and making lame Matrix analogies. But this is the first time I've seen all the pieces needed for full-blown outright occultism explicitly and unashamedly assembled in one place. A promise to wake people up to reality, a path to do it via learning and affirmation of arcana, and at least the first level of revelation (total mystery).

Which doesn't mean that this new occult form is likely to succeed. Not everyone has L. Ron Hubbard's talents.

Links:

You are living in a dream world, but Major_Tom can help you
Arcana: The List
Arcana: Pretty Colors
Arcana: There Will Be A Quiz On This, In The Afterlife
The First Revelation: It's a Total Mystery
First draft of the cult's symbol for outsiders
More iconography
The Diagram of the Beast

There appear to be three open questions regarding this qualifying for a timer reset: is it original enough, is it insightful, and is it actually related to the Truth Movement in any way? The third question might be the toughest.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Myriad said:
The crux is total mystery. That is, Tom's argument is that all the major truther "theories" as well as the "official theory" are wrong. And in their place, Tom offers not a better theory, but the revelation that what actually happened is a total mystery.

[...] I interpret this as the attempted invention and introduction of a new full-blown form of occultism. The list of picked observations is the nascent cult's arcana. By "arcana" I mean the set of lore, symbols, and manipulations that an occult practice is built around. (As examples of arcana, consider the intricate rules of casting horoscopes, the progressively layered revelations of Scientology, or the full rules set of Pokemon including the stats and characterstics of all the creatures.) It is the barrier of learning the arcana, rather than (in this day and age) outright secrecy, that makes occult practices occult, that is to say, hidden from (not understandable by) outsiders.
Click to expand...

Eeeenteresting.

If your observation is true, this would be a new development. However, what you've presented isn't something new with the Truth Movement but rather your inference thereof -- unless you're right. I've been slowly working up a competing hypothesis, one with somewhat less mystical consequences. It won't be ready for review for a while, though.

Tell you what: If Major Tom confirms your interpretation, then I will indeed accept this as a new, if baffling, development. Sound reasonable?
 
R.Mackey said:
Eeeenteresting.

If your observation is true, this would be a new development. However, what you've presented isn't something new with the Truth Movement but rather your inference thereof -- unless you're right. I've been slowly working up a competing hypothesis, one with somewhat less mystical consequences. It won't be ready for review for a while, though.

Tell you what: If Major Tom confirms your interpretation, then I will indeed accept this as a new, if baffling, development. Sound reasonable?
Click to expand...

I find it extremely unlikely that Major_Tom will even acknowledge the existence of that post.
 
R.Mackey said:
Eeeenteresting.

If your observation is true, this would be a new development.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a new development. From the beginning, if a truther with any intelligence at all is cornered into saying what he believes happened on 9/11, he would always say that there's no way of knowing without a new investigation. In other words...a mystery.

(Although what they really mean is, "I'd rather not say because it sounds stupid.")
 
I agree that it's not a new development. But there is an interesting parallel between the truthers perception of the NWO (as a convenient tag for the perpetrators of various conspiracies) and God.
Both work in mysterious ways. Neither is ever actually seen. Both are all-powerful. Both leave clues easily interpretable by the faithful. Indeed, so easily interpretable that anyone who disagrees with the interpretation could only be part of an active opposition to the faithful.
The one difference seems to be that the religious take comfort in the belief they're sheep, and the truthers take comfort in the belief everyone else is.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom