As I would on the continental drift conspiracy. I know the Permian and Triassic geology of Australia probably better than anyone else here and I would love to see how the Illuminati influenced the composition of Permian erratics and drop stones, the provenance of Triassic sandstones, the distribution of the Glossopteris flora, and the the fit of continents.

Jon

1) Of COURSE he is calling him a liar. He's also calling my father and sister liars. And several thousand other people. That's how CTs work: everyone who disagrees is a liar, either paid or threatened by the Evil Gub'mint (TM).

2) I really am interested in this stellar parallax argument, Matt Marriott. Please come back and give us the evidence.

__________________
Aporetic

Remember the new rules. The parallax argument is certainly appropriate and the plate tectonics is fine because it relates to a planet's evolution.

Please do not post anymore 911 stuff. Period!

__________________
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

i don't know why but i have a feeling that he's not gonna give us any evidence...

now why would i think that?

__________________
There is no dark side of the moon really, as a matter of fact it's all dark - Pink Floyd, The Dark Side Of The Moon

Where is any of this claimed otherwise? I tune in to APOD every day without fail, but I have sure never had the slightest doubt that the pics are
- prettified.
- not from the Hubble
- not necessarily even current

Let me guess. The people who think they are raw also watch Chris Angel and think he's a real magician...

Why is this P.T.Barnum-esque thread being allowed to continue?

I thought we weren't allowed to flog our wares here? Surely, this contentious argument is just a bid for free publicity?

Maybe you should tell the person who posted before you (http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=65). :-)

I really hate the T.V. show "Lost". Just too darn obscure, seemingly random and incomprehensible. Annoying. But when it's all over I'll probably be very keen to read something, somewhere to tell me what it was all about.

I'm that way with posts by Matt M. I was really hoping to encourage him to finally write an understandable summary of what on Earth he's on about.

Oh well.

The last few days GLP has been popping up "virus checkers" and "system scanners"; so I think I'll have to give up on that particular car-crash rubber-necking type pastime.

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

That was my point.

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

Where oh where is Spock when we need his wisdom?

hes been scarce...

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

This is a common posting by your standard conspiracy theorist. His intention isn't to prove that something is real or something is fake. The whole purpose for postings like these by your average CTer is that they crave attention. For whatever reason, they feel that the attention they gain during thier usual lives is insufficient, and try to make up the difference via inflammatory postings such as these. Look at what he has said, and the manner and timings reguarding his messages: Each statement was designed to be as ignorant and inflammatory as possible. He made an absurd statement that he knew would make as many people angry as possible, then sat back and watched your replies. He doesn't explain anything he said, because what he said doesn't matter to him. He has all these people responding to him, and he's getting the attention he craves.

Considering that this whole thread is merely a ham-fisted trolling effort, I suggest we shut it down, and stop feeding the new troll. More might come.

I read here occasionally, but rarely post. Don't know how anyone can read some of these goofy ideas w/o going off the rails. But I was not aware there are people that seriously deluded, who are not mentally ill. (Maybe I just answered my own question).

Kennedy, OK. 9/11, goofier than Pluto on catnip. Moon landing, fun while it lasted.

But are there really people that think continental drift is a conspiracy? How do you get conspiracy out of a natural process? Especially one that is so easily observed.

Wierd how this board is such a magnet for both clear thinking and the goofiest stuff I've ever heard of.

__________________
Don of Borg - Cool, Calm, Collective.

"Within the next generation I believe that the world's leaders will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Yes, much the same sort of people who become young Earth creationists (and most if not all YECs), you know the funnymentalists who believe that god literally created the Earth and rest of the universe in seven days something like 6,000 years ago and that the Bible is an accurate account of said creation. Despite the fact that even if the Bible was directly transcribed from the word of God (and that God was actually the creator of the universe) it is at best a highly flawed account because of the limits of the knowledge of the people that he was communicating with was such that any even slightly accurate account of the creation of the universe would have ended up being larger than most libraries are capable of accommodating.

What about an accurate summary of the creation?

We can get an accurate account of the Saturn V from Chariots of Apollo, even though a complete account of the Saturn V is much larger than the CoA document.

But Stutefish!! Everyone knows a document written two thousand years ago from uneducated livestock herders that has been translated multiple times, and had sections removed and added hundreds of years afterwards has GOT to be 100% correct!

#EDIT#
In all seriousness, now, do these people even realize what the Bible is? Don't get me wrong, it's a great book and you'd do well to adapt your morality to it, but face the facts, folks! The Bible is NOT a fax from god. It was written by man, edited by man, and translated and mistranslated by man.

Mankind is VERY fallable.

I think you guys are getting a bit (dangerously?) off topic. I completely understand and agree with Farmer's original statement. How can a natural process be a conspiracy? For something to be a conspiracy, a person (or more commonly a group of people) have to be actively hiding the truth. Why would said person/people "hide the truth" about continental drift? They don't want us to know the "shocking secret" that the continents have never moved? What's their reasoning behind this? They find it funny that we think something happened that didn't? "Haha we got them thinking that earth MOVES! what losers! *secret handshake that takes three days to complete*"

Some people think anything and everything is a conspiracy. Toothpaste is an evil invention credited to the Nazi's (who no doubt traveled through time so that they could invent said evil substance years before the existence of said Nazis). Rain is a conspiracy. Shadows are a conspiracy. Etc. etc.

edit: eek forgot to run spell check. cleaned up this mess a bit.

__________________

I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.
"In order to increase awareness of the homeless, security have been given binoculars."

I was merely pointing out that accuracy does not necessarily depend on completeness, and that it is possible to accurately summarize a complex process without going into an accurate description of every detail of that process.

Thus, by implication, the summary nature of the Biblical creation story is not by itself proof that the story is inaccurate.

I think you may be trying to offer additional proof of Biblical inaccuracy, but between your argument's sarcasm and its miserable pile of strawmen, I find myself more disgusted than convinced.

Sorry for getting into dangerous territory. And Stutefish, I intended my entry to be percieved as a parody Not intended to be serious at all. I did NOT intend to offend anyone. I was merely trying to throw a little more light on the logic gap between science and the bible.

Everyone, sorry for shifting the discussion into religeon territory, that isn't normally my style.

Apology accepted. I myself apologize for getting a little testy there. All's well that ends well. Carry on!

*Shakes Stutefish's hand* Right on, man.

So what is your impression reguarding the suprising numbers of people that challange scientific evidence with strange claims? It seems far more common, these days, most likely the proliferation of the internet, I am thinking.

Personally, I don't understand it. There's people who think this lump of rock is hollow!

Heh. I believe the metaphysics of our universe are substantially as claimed by the Christian scriptures. I try not to comment on the apparent nut-jobbiness of others

Instead, I find I have learned a lot about sound techniques for applying reason to my belief system, by regularly visiting this forum.

Well, "fallible." But close, anyway. (Given the definition, I couldn't resist.)

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

fawl-u-bul, adj., of or having the tendency to capsize, keel over, hit the deck, collapse or otherwise fail to remain unfallen; usually as the result of loss of stability due to structural failure or lack of action required to remain unfallen.

__________________
Don of Borg - Cool, Calm, Collective.

"Within the next generation I believe that the world's leaders will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

For some reason this made me think along the lines of sport/recreation, with the possibility of financial gain. Is making silly claims becoming a profession in itself? I mean, has it become a vocation? Sure, only a small portion of those involved make any real money, but is it becoming like a sport? Many play, a few turn it into a career, the rest dabble with it their whole lives as more of a recreational activity. Kind of leads back to the whole belonging thing.

Just thinking out loud.

GOOOOOO TEAM!!!

__________________
Don of Borg - Cool, Calm, Collective.

"Within the next generation I believe that the world's leaders will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I think that strange thinking is actually incredibly common, and part of it might be somewhat of a culture clash. Some people just happen to view reality different than others, and mix some already strange beliefs with other strange beliefs and some new beliefs, and you have some really wacko CTs.

What it comes down to is simply that I think that weird and illogical thinking have always been common, and now the internet provides a realm for those ideas.

I mean, heck. H.P. Lovecraft thought that if you commited a crime bad enough, your child would be born with a natural propensity towards the crimes of the father. He had other intriguingly strange ideas, beyond just simple "moral eugenics"...

...And his viewpoint was relatively common, and this was before the internet.

__________________
There are few left who
Stare at the skies with wonder
Wishing to know more;
The clouds still drift by above
But the eyes below are blind.
--Laura Lundberg

Check out my writing, maybe.

Very good point. And to further this idea, I think too many people are uninformed about the nature of the internet (isn't it Gillian who has the line in her sig, "I can't believe it didn't work man, I read it on the internet!"?) I love that line, because it's sadly true. Soo many people think that if it's online it must be true.

edit: i was right on the person, but missed the quote a bit. oh well, close enough

__________________

I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.
"In order to increase awareness of the homeless, security have been given binoculars."

What it comes down to is simply that I think that weird and illogical thinking have always been common, and now the internet provides a realm for those ideas.

I agree.

Belief finds strength in numbers. You feel more confident holding and expressing an uncommon belief if you know there's someone else there who believes it too. You don't fear prejudice as much, and another's belief gives you the semblance of intellectual validation that you're on the right track.

The Internet reduces the barrier to communication. It is possible to reach a very wide audience at surprisingly little cost. It used to be that anyone who wanted a wide audience had to find the resources to do it -- either by risking one's own resources or by convincing a third party to risk his. Shouldering that risk tends to weed out improbable ideas. But now anyone can address a wide audience and have a better chance of finding a kindred spirit. At the very least, the expression of the idea becomes a matter of objective record.

The wide audience phenomenon has two facets: you get your idea out to more people, and you are in turn exposed to more uncommon ideas. A number of your ideas will be your own, but the rest will be things you heard and with which you agree. Not everyone who, for example, denies the Holocaust just had that notion pop into his head. He most likely heard it somewhere, considered it, and decided to agree with it. So you can see how uncommon ideas snowball on the Internet.

The Internet also offers anonymity. You can put an idea out in cyberspace without having it attached to you in real life. You can test the waters and avoid prejudice. So the Internet favors ideas that probably wouldn't be expressed in person.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

The quote (it's MythBusters) actually refers to one of those "increase your gas milage" thingies, I think, and it's a parody of that belief, but it's awfully appropriate.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

So what is your impression reguarding the suprising numbers of people that challange scientific evidence with strange claims?

That one's easy. Carnegie wrote that all human motivation boils down to the desire to be great. People make strange claims because by doing so they draw attention to themselves. It may be favorable attention from believers, or unfavorable attention in the form of criticism. Either way their name is on everyone's lips. Some people's fear of ridicule is outweighed by their fear of obscurity.

There's a certain physics professor at a certain university near me who has made a name for himself by attaching it to a certain popular conspiracy theory. It doesn't matter that better experts think he's off the deep end. What's important is that if you grab some random joe off the street and ask them to name any member of the faculty of that department, what do you think his answer is likely to be? Either, "I don't know any," or that one professor's name.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

I mean, heck, Fred Phelps is actually pretty darn well known. Does he have a very large congregation? No. Does he have much influence and power? Last I checked, no. I haven't met a single person that would give him any credence whatsoever.

Yet people KNOW him. Why? Because all he has to do is say something outrageous, say something shocking, DO something so shocking that it makes people... well... shocked.

Then all of a sudden he's on CNN news getting free publicity.

__________________
There are few left who
Stare at the skies with wonder
Wishing to know more;
The clouds still drift by above
But the eyes below are blind.
--Laura Lundberg

Check out my writing, maybe.