Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

I smell a conspiracy!

Options
12346»

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    Heineken Helen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 636 ✭✭✭Heineken Helen


    bonkey wrote: »
    There is a distinction between "having some evidence" and "having sufficient evidence to establish truth".

    Regarding which CT I stated?

    The Svalbard one... well the earthquake WAS there within a week of the vault opening. And there's been a bigger one since on an island which never got them. I just stated facts there. They are connected cos they are both on Svalbard.

    The Australian primeminister DID mention satellite surveillance straight after the bushfires.

    6TH stated at the beginning that it was a good idea for a thread. If I thought it didn't meet the requirements, I really wouldn't have started it. So can you confirm whether it's allowed to suggest somewhere there MAY be a conspiracy or not please?


  • Options
    #153
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    jackiebrown wrote: »
    Can I have your definition of the real world please?

    Well the difference between a good story like in the books we all read, the dreams we have and what actually happens in practice, in like, the real world.
    jackiebrown wrote: »
    Whats wrong with dreaming, if you cant imagine something how can you make it real.

    As I keep saying there's nothing wrong with dreaming. But this isn't the fantasy forum and it's not the dream interpretation forum nor is it the creative writing forum. So would it be too much to ask to actually explain why something is a CT.
    jackiebrown wrote: »
    The OP has said many times this thread was a bit of fun which your trying interpret with logic. So what if its illogical to you.? The OP smells a rat and so do I. For us its a conspiracy and in its rightful home.

    I have no proof.

    I didn't even ask for real proof just some sort of sense. People think all sort of things, some of it very rational and some of it very irrational. So I don't think it's too much to ask for some explanation in a CT forum as to why it's a CT to begin with.


  • Options
    #154
    Undergod
    Registered Users Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Undergod


    Heineken Helen wrote: »
    again, if I had evidence it would be the truth and it would bypass this forum altogether.

    Evidence does not make something true. Proof does.


  • Options
    #155
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Heineken Helen wrote: »
    Regarding which CT I stated?

    I'm not talking about your CTs. I'm referring specifically to your statement that equated evidence with truth, which you offered as some sort of reason for offering no evidence of anything whatsoever.
    6TH stated at the beginning that it was a good idea for a thread.
    I agree with 6th. Its a good idea for a thread.

    I'd have no problem with you taking the position that you're not going to offer evidence, because thats not what this thread is about, although I also don't think its beyond reason to ask someone if they have more than "something about this whole this sets my spidey senses tingling", and can actually narrow it down....because otherwise I see this idea also becoming prime trolling land.

    I do have an issue with the notion that you're refusing to offer evidence because if you had any at all, you'd know what the truth was....which is what the statement I quoted directly implied.
    So can you confirm whether it's allowed to suggest somewhere there MAY be a conspiracy or not please?
    Of course it is.

    However, that doesn't make you immune from having logical flaws in your statements exposed.

    If I said that I think there's a conspiracy afoot to corrupt the results of hte 2007 American Presidential Elections, I couldn't really complain if someone pointed out that there was no presedential elections in 2007.


  • Options
    #156
    Heineken Helen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 636 ✭✭✭Heineken Helen


    bonkey wrote: »
    I'm not talking about your CTs. I'm referring specifically to your statement that equated evidence with truth, which you offered as some sort of reason for offering no evidence of anything whatsoever.


    I agree with 6th. Its a good idea for a thread.

    I'd have no problem with you taking the position that you're not going to offer evidence, because thats not what this thread is about, although I also don't think its beyond reason to ask someone if they have more than "something about this whole this sets my spidey senses tingling", and can actually narrow it down....because otherwise I see this idea also becoming prime trolling land.

    I do have an issue with the notion that you're refusing to offer evidence because if you had any at all, you'd know what the truth was....which is what the statement I quoted directly implied.


    Of course it is.

    However, that doesn't make you immune from having logical flaws in your statements exposed.

    If I said that I think there's a conspiracy afoot to corrupt the results of hte 2007 American Presidential Elections, I couldn't really complain if someone pointed out that there was no presedential elections in 2007.

    Fair enough, thank you :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    thecommander
    Registered Users Posts: 2,537 ✭✭✭thecommander


    Is there any update on the 150,000 year ago nuclear war?


Advertisement