What makes a conspiracy theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Skillganon
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 31
  • Views Views 5K
Status
Not open for further replies.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But an opinion can not be formed by looking at one side of the coin only. Nor can it be formed by asking one side of the coin about the other side. You have to look at both sides, and form your own opinion. Sadly this is where many of us are lacking. If X and Y have a fight, we can not get a complete picture by asking only X, we have to ask both X and Y. We can not say "X says that Y is bad, so Y must be bad".
 
That's very true. Which is why you find news sources, reporting FACTS, from either side. You don't get some crazy's blog saying, 'Ehh, I saw those towers fall... It wasn't the airplanes. It was beauty killed the beast. That's right. NAOMI WATTS DID IT!'
 
But the fact remains that if you ONLY use mainstream news, you are ONLY going to get the mainstream viewpoint.
 
No one says you can't use non-mainstream news agencies. There's just a prohibition on conspiracy theories as cojecture benefits no one.
 
I have posted a definition of the word 'Cojecture'. Please read it. :)

I'm not referring to any theories in particular, I'm just saying this is how one can spot a conspiracy theory.
 
Muezzin said:
I have posted a definition of the word 'Cojecture'. Please read it. :)

I'm not referring to any theories in particular, I'm just saying this is how one can spot a conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...


Oh! than how do you discern what is a conspiracy theory from what is not? Everything is based on conjecture's and thought's put together!

What if the theory is scientifically viable, and it is based on scientific enquiry and truth, would that be still considered a conspiracy theory because it does not take the mainstream attitude (theory)? which verily well is based on inconclusive evidence, because the matter for further investigation is being supressed. Is anyone aware that.

There is something we describe in science as the "MOB culture", and that is if you wan't to get good grade you have to conform to their dogma, their way of thinking, and usually any other methodology or thought's that is a threat to this Dogma is supressed.


I don't think when such enquiry is being made people should attach blame to any particular group until full investigation is made, and that is take in consideration every observation pertaining that matter.
 
The only conjecture that "conspiracy theorists" make is that they don't make the conjecture that BIG BAD BIN-LADEN was responsible as they don't make the conjecture that Bush & co are telling the truth.
 
Question: are you going to accept any explanation I try to give? :p
 
A conspiracy theory also comes about in the following manner.

A given fact that appears to falsify the given description of a given event..............

Thus the nature of the conspiracy fact must be drawn into scrutiny as often or not the explanation can be explained.

Example

Faked moon landings and no stars in the background:

later proven to be incorrect, scientific test showed stars would not be viisible in the image. Thus the conspiracy data (in this case stars) at first appeared to falsify the theory (ie the landings were real).

Below. (image taken by voyager) Where are the stars?

sat-departure-pia00335.jpg
 
:sl:
What qualifies and what does not qualify, what is appropriate to post and what is not appropriate to post, is subject to the moderator's discretion. If the staff sees no benefit in the discussion of a particular topic we will act accordingly, bi'idhnillah.

:w:

:threadclo:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top