Best Conspiracy Thoeries

[Falmer]

What's the point, you will just say that it is government fabricated evidence.

9/11 Passenger phone calls - Wikisource

so how can you argue against want the conspiracy theories say?

 

[brightn'ove]

so how can you argue against want the conspiracy theories say?

How can you argue for what the conspiracy theories say?

 

[Falmer]

How can you argue for what the conspiracy theories say?

which means i have every right to say and believe what I want without you telling me i'm looney.

 

[Acker79]

which means i have every right to say and believe what I want without you telling me i'm looney.

No. You're free to say and believe whatever you want (in keeping with various laws, and any restriction on message boards you may choose to join etc.).

Others are also free to say and believe whatever they want, including if they think you're a looney. Or fishing.

 

[brightn'ove]

which means i have every right to say and believe what I want without you telling me i'm looney.

Of course you have the right to believe in what you want to. But you are alluding to what a theory needs to be credible. How can you argue for a theory when it is not backed up by any cold, hard, evidence? I don't want to tell you you're looney, I'd much rather discuss with you why it is that you believe these 'theories'. Currently you are using the defence that religious advocates use, the 'God exists, disprove' line, without backing up your ideas with real evidence.

 

[Gwylan]

my friend was assulted in the US by a police officer at Wall Street. She was pregnant at the time which resulted in a miscarriage. The governement have still yet to respond to her. The officier is still in duty carrying on as normal and we are all supposed to accept thats democracy!?

ps do you not realise that alot of people believe right now that the governments are lying conning scum bags. Why should we believe what Obama shows us? The man got a noble peace prize for invading Syria!

Marvellous.


'I played for Aberavon in 1898,' said a stranger to Enoch Davies.
'Liar,' said Enoch Davies.
'I can show you photos,' said the stranger.
“Forged” said Enoch Davies.
And l'll show you my cap at home".
"Stolen".
"I got friends to prove it", the stranger said in a fury.
"Bribed", said Enoch Davies
(Dylan Thomas - Quite Early One Morning)

 

[Falmer]

Of course you have the right to believe in what you want to. But you are alluding to what a theory needs to be credible. How can you argue for a theory when it is not backed up by any cold, hard, evidence? I don't want to tell you you're looney, I'd much rather discuss with you why it is that you believe these 'theories'. Currently you are using the defence that religious advocates use, the 'God exists, disprove' line, without backing up your ideas with real evidence.

Well if your someone who can't live without 100% fact! then how do you justify living in a christian dominated society?

 

[Falmer]

Marvellous.


'I played for Aberavon in 1898,' said a stranger to Enoch Davies.
'Liar,' said Enoch Davies.
'I can show you photos,' said the stranger.
“Forged” said Enoch Davies.
And l'll show you my cap at home".
"Stolen".
"I got friends to prove it", the stranger said in a fury.
"Bribed", said Enoch Davies
(Dylan Thomas - Quite Early One Morning)

How old are you just out of interest?

 

[brightn'ove]

Well if your someone who can't live without 100% fact! then how do you justify living in a christian dominated society?

Ok let me set this straight, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but that does not mean I am not cynical of what the government says or does. Not once did I mention the word fact.

 

[Mellotron]

Of course you have the right to believe in what you want to. But you are alluding to what a theory needs to be credible. How can you argue for a theory when it is not backed up by any cold, hard, evidence? I don't want to tell you you're looney, I'd much rather discuss with you why it is that you believe these 'theories'. Currently you are using the defence that religious advocates use, the 'God exists, disprove' line, without backing up your ideas with real evidence.

I'm sorry but that one works both ways. Atheists say "God doesn't exist" and show no proof, religious people say "God exists" and show no proof.

There is NO proof incontravertible proof for OR against the existence of God, and that's exactly why that debate will run and run and run, because there is no way for either side to get the other to see what they're saying.

 

[perseus]

There are spies on the Shoreham Roundabout. They are Spies.

Who are they spying and where are they from? They are radioactive. Why else would they be green?

What are they doing there?

Who put them there?

Why are they there?

Why are they green?

 

[perseus]

I'm sorry but that one works both ways. Atheists say "God doesn't exist" and show no proof, religious people say "God exists" and show no proof.

There is NO proof incontravertible proof for OR against the existence of God, and that's exactly why that debate will run and run and run, because there is no way for either side to get the other to see what they're saying.

The Absurdists say they can prove God exists, God is Absurd.

Sheep are just silly.

 

[brightn'ove]

There is NO proof incontravertible proof for OR against the existence of God

But evidence does exist to back up one side of the debate, be it in favour or against the existence of God, but in my experience the debate over religion tends to heavily rely on evidence given by the atheist side rather than the theist side.

 

[readingstockport]

I'm sorry but that one works both ways. Atheists say "God doesn't exist" and show no proof, religious people say "God exists" and show no proof.

There is NO proof incontravertible proof for OR against the existence of God, and that's exactly why that debate will run and run and run, because there is no way for either side to get the other to see what they're saying.

The difference is mello, I know EXACTLY what will prove to me that god exists and will cause me to change my mind.

Bunnies in the pre-cambrian. Any person who can show me a bunny in the pre cambrian layer will get me to worship the sky daddy. It may not be theirs though, it may be any one of the 600 or so current deities I know aboutand certainly not the xian one.

 

[Gangsta]

Of course you have the right to believe in what you want to. But you are alluding to what a theory needs to be credible. How can you argue for a theory when it is not backed up by any cold, hard, evidence? I don't want to tell you you're looney, I'd much rather discuss with you why it is that you believe these 'theories'. Currently you are using the defence that religious advocates use, the 'God exists, disprove' line, without backing up your ideas with real evidence.

Is that scientific evidence or what? ( See Dylan Thomas quote ). I would say that a more reasonable approach would be to ask if in front of a normal court of law the "evidence" available was presented, what would be the chances of a conviction. In some cases I believe there would be charges to be answered. In most criminal cases where "conspiracy" between two or more parties is deemed to have been committed, the so called hard evidence you demand, is not available but reasonable people use the information they do have to join up the dots. The problem is that as soon as an issue gains the "conspiracy theory" moniker, it is derided to foolish and can be put to bed for all bar the loonies. Western Governments actaully already use the device of calling an issue "conspiracy theory" to bury it by scaring people off for want of looking foolish. Many conspiracy theories turn out to have some truth in them, and almost all are less whacky than the rubbish pumped out by organsied religions.

 

[brightn'ove]

Is that scientific evidence or what? ( See Dylan Thomas quote ). I would say that a more reasonable approach would be to ask if in front of a normal court of law the "evidence" available was presented, what would be the chances of a conviction. In some cases I believe there would be charges to be answered. In most criminal cases where "conspiracy" between two or more parties is deemed to have been committed, the so called hard evidence you demand, is not available but reasonable people use the information they do have to join up the dots. The problem is that as soon as an issue gains the "conspiracy theory" moniker, it is derided to foolish and can be put to bed for all bar the loonies. Western Governments actaully already use the device of calling an issue "conspiracy theory" to bury it by scaring people off for want of looking foolish. Many conspiracy theories turn out to have some truth in them, and almost all are less whacky than the rubbish pumped out by organsied religions.

I don't really agree with tarring all people that are pro-conspiracy theories with the same brush, obviously for them to even come about there must have been somebody who interpreted a set of evidence differently to another. But what gets me is when people blindly feed you anti-establishment statements which are completely void of any sort of reasoning, logic and evidence.

 

[beorhthelm]

Why should we believe what Obama shows us? The man got a noble peace prize for invading Syria!

are you from the future or a seer? He's going to get another peace prize? and you know when the invasion of Syria will occur?

 

[Falmer]

are you from the future or a seer? He's going to get another peace prize? and you know when the invasion of Syria will occur?

This above message summarises the suppression UK citizens are under. It's now more shocking than I thought!


BBC NEWS | Europe | Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21092.htm

 

[Questions]

are you from the future or a seer? He's going to get another peace prize? and you know when the invasion of Syria will occur?

Its happened man, they`re just not telling us.

 

[beorhthelm]

I'm sorry but that one works both ways. Atheists say "God doesn't exist" and show no proof

thats not quite true. an atheist will say they dont believe in god. thats it. some of us will engage in debate for sport and if needed can easily prove most tenets to be false (ie evil disproves the omniscient, benevolent ideal of what god is). you cannot proof something doesnt exist, be that god, the unicorns or the missing FA Cup money.

but with done religion to death (and resurection?) lately, lets stick to more nutty conspiracies.