Baddiel sums it up?

endacl

From David Baddiel, writing in the Guardian:

"Conspiracy theory, I said in my last standup show, is how idiots get to feel like intellectuals. I still believe this: conspiracy theory is primarily a way for people, mainly men, to appear in the know, to use their collection of assumptions, generalisations, straw men and false inferences to say, effectively: ah, the wool may have been pulled over your eyes, my friend, but not mine."

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/22/conspiracy-theory-jews-david-cameron-antisemitism-extremism

I do tend to consciously avoid this forum, but this kinda sums it up for me. I'd avoid the word 'idiot'. That'd be a little close to insulting, and I save that for the Spirituality folks.

On a serious note, though, I'd be interested in reading how regulars here might react to what, for many people, might very well sum up CT's.

Disclaimer: Mid week pints. May regret starting this. Will accept consequences...

weisses

I just hate it when alcoholics take the moral high ground :P

But on a more serious note, Biggest problem here is pseudo-skepticism

ejabrod

I guess all conspiracies are theories until they are substantiated (which seems to happen on a regular basis)

Just for the record, in my opinion (which I am entitled to ) David Baddiel is an idiot

degrassinoel

Baddiel and Skinner were good fun, haven't seen much of them in about 10 years though.

He was right about one thing at least, the antisemitism in CT's (not here i mean in general) is far too common.

Torakx

If you are playing the drunk card, I'm playing the haven't sleep in 24 hours and in a zombie state card.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p54iyOrH7s0
That is one of the reasons I couldn't sleep lol
Too much thinking. But it does in some ways apply to this discussion.

To the article posted.
First of all it's mainstream. This means they can and will side on their bosses(editor) political agendas and towards profits and views. Truth and good journalism come behind those checks. (yes sounds like typical Ct paranoia, the truth sound slike that these days )



On the racism side of things. He is making out that a belief system makes someone jewish...
Am I jewish if I turn to zionism? You know I used to be a zionist...( I **** you not lol)
So yeah, the article is retarded. But honestly this kind of nonsense is what the average person easily falls prey to, which is understandable.

And who is going to tell them that zionism is not only for jews? That zionism is in many ways antisemetic in it's agenda and it's history if some of these "racists" are to be believed.

What is useful from this article is thatDavid Cameron for some reason suddenly has enough of an issue with conspiracy theories, that a newspaper has done an article on it for him.
So what have you lads been up to, ye bollixes!

I would guess his issue with conspiracy theorists might be related to the uncovering of all the pedophelia in the UK government over the last few years.
They can't attack conspiracy theorists for spreading information on ministers fiddling with kids, so the age old antisemetism card is used instead.
Good job Mr Cameron, you go get those antisemites! That will fix the issue of pedophilia..until someone remembers you forgot to look into that properly.

Granted there can be some far out theories and I have started many of them too
But then look at the mainstream media and tellme it's not waymore boring and just as much bull if not more.

Saipanne

Torakx wrote: »

If you are playing the drunk card, I'm playing the haven't sleep in 24 hours and in a zombie state card.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p54iyOrH7s0
That is one of the reasons I couldn't sleep lol
Too much thinking. But it does in some ways apply to this discussion.

To the article posted.
First of all it's mainstream. This means they can and will side on their bosses(editor) political agendas and towards profits and views. Truth and good journalism come behind those checks. (yes sounds like typical Ct paranoia, the truth sound slike thatthese days )
So I can't honestly tell if he is just a moron or a person paid to write like a moron.
There is so much twisted in the article, I don't know where to start! lol
It's actually funny! And it's probably not satire, the guy is playing serious.

Ok, ask yourself which came first, conspiracy theories or conspiracy theorists? Where did that whole "scene" come from? Who are the major players and what does their agenda look like(actions speak louder than words).

On the racism side of things. He is making out that a belief system makes someone jewish...
Am I jewish if I turn to zionism? You know I used to be a zionist...( I **** you not lol)
So yeah, the article is retarded. But honestly this kind of nonsense is what the average person easily falls prey to, which is understandable.

And who is going to tell them that zionism is not only for jews? That zionism is in many ways antisemetic in it's agenda and it's history if some of these "racists" are to be believed.

What is useful from this article is thatDavid Cameron for some reason suddenly has enough of an issue with conspiracy theories, that a newspaper has done an article on it for him.
So what have you lads been up to, ye bollixes!

I would guess his issue with conspiracy theorists might be related to the uncovering of all the pedophelia in the UK government over the last few years.
They can't attack conspiracy theorists for spreading information on ministers fiddling with kids, so the age old antisemetism card is used instead.
Good job Mr Cameron, you go get those antisemites! That will fix the issue of pedophilia..until someone remembers you forgot to look into that properly.

Granted there can be some far out theories and I have started many of them too
But then look at the mainstream media and tellme it's not waymore boring and just as much bull if not more.

This type of condescending and dismissive post is what puts people off your message.

FYI.

Torakx

If I appear condescending it is not intended and more exasperation if anything. I can't well explain everything that is wrong with that article.
I will try and edit it actually. I really don't intend any offence toanyone other than the journalist.

weisses

Torakx wrote: »

If I appear condescending it is not intended and more exasperation if anything. I can't well explain everything that is wrong with that article.
I will try and edit it actually. I really don't intend any offence toanyone other than the journalist.

No need to explain.... Baddiel is a rambling idiot who uses sweeping generalisations to whinge about peope using sweeping generalisations


Unless it's all satire ....

pueblo

endacl wrote: »

From David Baddiel, writing in the Guardian:

"Conspiracy theory, I said in my last standup show, is how idiots get to feel like intellectuals. I still believe this: conspiracy theory is primarily a way for people, mainly men, to appear in the know, to use their collection of assumptions, generalisations, straw men and false inferences to say, effectively: ah, the wool may have been pulled over your eyes, my friend, but not mine."

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/22/conspiracy-theory-jews-david-cameron-antisemitism-extremism

I do tend to consciously avoid this forum, but this kinda sums it up for me. I'd avoid the word 'idiot'. That'd be a little close to insulting, and I save that for the Spirituality folks.

On a serious note, though, I'd be interested in reading how regulars here might react to what, for many people, might very well sum up CT's.

Disclaimer: Mid week pints. May regret starting this. Will accept consequences...

After Hours was the place for this thread..

ScumLord

degrassinoel wrote: »

He was right about one thing at least, the antisemitism in CT's (not here i mean in general) is far too common.

I wonder where the anti semitism might be coming out of?

pueblo

ScumLord wrote: »

I wonder where the anti semitism might be coming out of?

Where?

Joshua J

I started to get interested in CT's about 10 years ago. At that time there was alot of talk about mass spying by the US and ritual abuse of children by celebrities and the elite amoung other things. People at that time called CT'ers the same stuff that they do now, loners, deluded, sad etc etc. And it has all been proven true. And what do people do now?. Ignore it. I know why. Can you skeptics turn a mirror on yourselves and ask why?. There's a whole Irish Skeptics forum for OP's like this. Why is it dead in the water?.

degrassinoel

@Scumlord: For the most case i'd say it's just an old fashioned racist agenda with things like that - some people just cant help themselves i guess, and internet anonymity goes a long way to enable these types of theories too

ScumLord

pueblo wrote: »

Where?

The Bible thumping Christians of the United States.

Joshua J wrote: »

I started to get interested in CT's about 10 years ago. At that time there was alot of talk about mass spying by the US and ritual abuse of children by celebrities and the elite amoung other things. People at that time called CT'ers the same stuff that they do now, loners, deluded, sad etc etc. And it has all been proven true. And what do people do now?. Ignore it. I know why. Can you skeptics turn a mirror on yourselves and ask why?. There's a whole Irish Skeptics forum for OP's like this. Why is it dead in the water?.

America has always spied on other countries and it's own citizens. It's been widely known since at least WW2 but their spying heritage goes all the way back to their own civil war. It's never been a secret that the US used spies, the countless films on the subject show that.

Joshua J

ScumLord wrote: »

The Bible thumping Christians of the United States.

America has always spied on other countries and it's own citizens. It's been widely known since at least WW2 but their spying heritage goes all the way back to their own civil war. It's never been a secret that the US used spies, the countless films on the subject show that.

I'm on about the gathering of meta-data by the US which was denied by nearly everyone 10 years ago. Only CT'ers were on about it and were called paranoid, that the US didnt care etc etc. Now its common knowledge yeah. I nget the feeling you knew where I was coming from anyway.

ScumLord

Joshua J wrote: »

I'm on about the gathering of meta-data by the US which was denied by nearly everyone 10 years ago.

What do you mean by metadata? Metadata is just a description of data. Like meta tags on your photos to say where it was taken and what settings the camera used.

Joshua J

I don't like playing silly beggers. So for all our fledgling CT'ers out there here's an Internet Discussion 101.

First rule of internet discussion is, as far as skeptics are concerned is, there is no such thing as a discussion only debate. And debates are there to be won and lost and trust me, Skeppies are master debaters. But if you know their tricks you can see them coming a mile off.

I made four points in my origional post, the data gathering/spying, child abuse, asked why people ignore these truths now and for skeptics to do some self examination of their motivations/why their own forum is dead. A discussion would involve taking all points but in a skeptic mind this is now a debate. So to win a debate they'll take a point they feel they can gain some traction in and make the debate about that single point and only that point. This is called framing and they do it ALL THE TIME.

Since the debate has now been framed around this one point you better be prepared for the long haul cause they are. Remember they are master debaters. They will debate this till you give up or are banned (all the best posters on this site have been banned, probably more to do with CT'ers not doing authority or rules very well). Now on the very rare occasion that a skeptic admits they were wrong..........don't be silly skeptics are never wrong. They may admit to a draw but this is as rare as hens teeth tbh.

So don't let the skeptics frame a debate. Don't let them dissolve a large issue into single point boring indefinite debates.

Overheal

Actually more theorists have used framing as you described than any skeptics I've seen here.

ScumLord wrote: »

What do you mean by metadata? Metadata is just a description of data. Like meta tags on your photos to say where it was taken and what settings the camera used.

metadata is who you call, how long you call them, who you email, your email address, your usernames, your facebook activities and preferences, your credit card activity, amazon order history, your publications, home address, UPS/Fedex deliveries to your home address, vehicle information - basically electronic data that can point back to you. And that's just for US citizens, which receive miles more courtesy than the rest of the world - even US citizens communication across the border can have phone call and email content intercepted. Much of that intelligence gathering was never officially sanctioned.

Joshua J

Overheal wrote: »

Actually more theorists have used framing as you described than any skeptics I've seen here.

I accept that through our own personal lenses we could see it a different way but I've been seeing these sorts of debates for years and years and it's predominately a skeptic tactic to win debates as far as I'm concerned. I don't think CT'ers in general are as interested in winning debates tbh. I dont think posters start threads to win arguments.

Dohnjoe

Joshua J wrote: »

I'm on about the gathering of meta-data by the US which was denied by nearly everyone 10 years ago. Only CT'ers were on about it and were called paranoid, that the US didnt care etc etc. Now its common knowledge yeah. I nget the feeling you knew where I was coming from anyway.

The surveillance was well known about, even casual magazines like Wired ran stories on it. Edward Snowden later gave more indepth insight into the workings, and sites like wikileaks revealed content to the public

Ironically, conspiracy theorists portray Snowden as a 'psyop' because he essentially debunks more than a few of their theories

Joshua J

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The surveillance was well known about, even casual magazines like Wired ran stories on it. Edward Snowden later gave more indepth insight into the workings, and sites like wikileaks revealed content to the public

Ironically, conspiracy theorists portray Snowden as a 'psyop' because he essentially debunks more than a few of their theories

I'd like to read some of those articles if you could find them thanks. Anything before 2005.

Re: Snowden the phrase you're looking for is "Limited hangout"

Dohnjoe

Joshua J wrote: »

I'd like to read some of those articles if you could find them thanks. Anything before 2005.

Re: Snowden the phrase you're looking for is "Limited hangout"

It was mostly print and TV.

Domestic surveillance has been happening in one form or another since 1919 in the US.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/07/us-usa-security-records-factbox-idUSBRE95617O20130607

Pre-911 we had Project Echelon

I thought "Limited hangout" wouldn't apply to Snowden because he wasn't a spy, nor was he caught. He was an insider who volunteered the information.

pueblo

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It was mostly print and TV.

Domestic surveillance has been happening in one form or another since 1919 in the US.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/07/us-usa-security-records-factbox-idUSBRE95617O20130607

Pre-911 we had Project Echelon

I thought "Limited hangout" wouldn't apply to Snowden because he wasn't a spy, nor was he caught. He was an insider who volunteered the information.

Edward Snowden: I was a high-tech spy for the CIA and NSA

Fugitive US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden has described himself as a trained spy specialising in electronic surveillance, dismissing claims he was a mere low-level analyst.
In an interview with NBC, he reiterated that he had worked undercover overseas for the CIA and NSA.
He said the US got better intelligence from computers than human agents.
Mr Snowden, 30, fled the US in May 2013 and has been living under temporary asylum in Russia.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-27598516

ScumLord

Overheal wrote: »

Actually more theorists have used framing as you described than any skeptics I've seen here.

metadata is who you call, how long you call them, who you email, your email address, your usernames, your facebook activities and preferences, your credit card activity, amazon order history, your publications, home address, UPS/Fedex deliveries to your home address, vehicle information - basically electronic data that can point back to you. And that's just for US citizens, which receive miles more courtesy than the rest of the world - even US citizens communication across the border can have phone call and email content intercepted. Much of that intelligence gathering was never officially sanctioned.

the problem with a lot of this kind of information is that it's generated regardless of if someone is using it to spy on people. I would say It's pretty hard for any intelligence agency to just ignore this easily accessible information. It's like leaving a cookie on a table with a 4 year old in the room and expecting them not to eat when you leave the room.

Saipanne

Joshua J wrote: »

I started to get interested in CT's about 10 years ago. At that time there was alot of talk about mass spying by the US and ritual abuse of children by celebrities and the elite amoung other things. People at that time called CT'ers the same stuff that they do now, loners, deluded, sad etc etc. And it has all been proven true. And what do people do now?. Ignore it. I know why. Can you skeptics turn a mirror on yourselves and ask why?. There's a whole Irish Skeptics forum for OP's like this. Why is it dead in the water?.

But what about the 1000s of predictions that turned out to be crap? I clearly remember on this forum that the world was going to end on December 2012. People here were so ****ing arrogant about that fact. Where are they now?

You simply pick and choose the correct predictions and ignore the thousands of wrong ones.

Joshua J

Saipanne wrote: »

But what about the 1000s of predictions that turned out to be crap? I clearly remember on this forum that the world was going to end on December 2012. People here were so ****ing arrogant about that fact. Where are they now?

You simply pick and choose the correct predictions and ignore the thousands of wrong ones.

Ah so the ones that were called don't matter cause others were not. I see. Is your position arrogant, no?.

Saipanne

Joshua J wrote: »

Ah so the ones that were called don't matter cause others were not. I see. Is your position arrogant, no?.

No, it isn't. Not half as arrogant as those Mayan apocalypse idiots.

My point is this. If you make a thousand predictions and you get five right. Is this something to celebrate?

Seems so, around these parts...

ScumLord

Saipanne wrote: »

But what about the 1000s of predictions that turned out to be crap? I clearly remember on this forum that the world was going to end on December 2012. People here were so ****ing arrogant about that fact. Where are they now?

You simply pick and choose the correct predictions and ignore the thousands of wrong ones.

Either pretend it never happened or keep repeating them a few months later in the hope they'll eventually come true.

Joshua J

Saipanne wrote: »

No, it isn't. Not half as arrogant as those Mayan apocalypse idiots.

My point is this. If you make a thousand predictions and you get five right. Is this something to celebrate?

Seems so, around these parts...

Treating CT'ers as a general collective i.e that because someone believes that 9/11 is a ct then they must also believe the moon landing were faked and 2012 was the end of the world, is the height of arrogance. These 1000's of wrong predictions (hyperbole by the way trying to force home your position) were made by 1000's of different people. You dismiss all because it suits your motives, even the ones that were correct. CT's happen, to dismiss them head in the sand stuff.

Saipanne

Joshua J wrote: »

Treating CT'ers as a general collective i.e that because someone believes that 9/11 is a ct then they must also believe the moon landing were faked and 2012 was the end of the world, is the height of arrogance. These 1000's of wrong predictions (hyperbole by the way trying to force home your position) were made by 1000's of different people. You dismiss all because it suits your motives, even the ones that were correct. CT's happen, to dismiss them head in the sand stuff.

Nice sidestepping.

I'm done here.

Dohnjoe

pueblo wrote: »

Fugitive US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden has described himself as a trained spy specialising in electronic surveillance, dismissing claims he was a mere low-level analyst.
In an interview with NBC, he reiterated that he had worked undercover overseas for the CIA and NSA.
He said the US got better intelligence from computers than human agents.
Mr Snowden, 30, fled the US in May 2013 and has been living under temporary asylum in Russia.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-27598516

I meant he wasn't some asset caught leaving markings on drop-boxes or taking photo's with microcameras, i.e. exposed and forced to engage in damage limitation or to become a "limited hangout"

He volunteered the info and there's nothing in there about the more colourful conspiracy theories

So he's been a bit of a double edged sword for the conspiracy community